Class ZB 1.1^ Book 1^:2^. GopvTiglttN" COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. / /" w^ THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED OR THE ROMAN GOVERNMENT AND RELIGION AND THEIR RELATIONS TO BRITAIN. \ BY / ALEX. DEL MAR NEW YORK PUBLISHED BY THE CAMBRIDGE ENCYCLOPEDIA CO. 62 Reade Street 1900 {All rights reserved) 'TWO COPIES He:«.;t.i v j^jD, Library or Cf&ngretfb m^'-^ 1909 Keglstsr of Copyrighifb 5Gvri.i COPYRIGHT BY ALEX. DEL MAR 1899. SECOND COPY, THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED OR THE ROMAN GOVERNMENT AND RELIGION AND THEIR RELATIONS TO BRITAIN. CHAPTERS. PAGE. Preface, . . ix Bibliography, xi I. — Ancient Astronomy, Astrology, and Religion, . i II. — Eastern and Western Incarnations, .... 8 III. — The Worship of C^sar, ........ 26 IV. — Defective Theories of the Feudal System, . 58 V. — Hierarchical Origin of Feudalism, .... 77 VI. — First Institutes of the Sacerdotal Empire, . 99 VII. — Other Institutes of the Sacerdotal Empire, 119 VIII. — Christianization of the Roman Institutes, . 143 IX. — Rise of the Medieval Empire, 166 X. — The Lost Treaty of Seltz, 192 XI. — Constitution of the Medieval Empire, . . . 203 XII. — Destruction of the Sacerdotal Empire, . . 238 XIII. GUELF AND GhIBELLINE WaRS, 249 XIV. — England a Province of the Empire, . . 253 XV. — The Sacerdotal Character of Gold, . . 273 XVI. — Clues Derived from the jT^. s. d. System, . 295 XVII. — Vassalian Position of the Anglo-Normans, 308 XVIII. — Eariest Exercise of certain Regalian Rights, . 314 XIX. — Gradual Developement of English Nationality, 332 XX. — Vassal Kings of England, 347 XXI. — Birth of the Independent Monarchy, . . . 353 Index, 367 Appendices, 371 Corrigenda, 371 PREFACE. V, The Roman government and religion and their relations to Britain are themes upon which there cannot be thrown too much light. The Constitution of the old Empire,thechristianizationof itsinstitutes,and the position of the medieval empire and the provinces, until the lat- ter became independent kingdoms, is not only the Key to all modern history, it has its practical importance and conveys its lessons for the future. What if it can be shown that John was only among the last of a long line of vassal kings who bowed the knee to Rome and sad- dled upon the people of Britain a responsibility for institutes which they had no hand in framing and which were utterly opposed to their racial aptitudes and tendencies ? In weighing the evidences which throw light upon these questions the author was compelled to trace the ancient systems of mythology and religion. He would gladly have avoided a subject of so much contention, but this was found impracticable. Society is to some ex- tent the product of accepted history, while such history is to some extent the product of religious belief. To appreciate the spirit of the laws under which we live and must act, it is necessary to follow the evolution of religious systems. We have entered the arcana of the Sacred College not to profane its mysteries, but to fill our pitchers at its holy fount. When civil strife had so much exhausted the Romans that they were unable to prevent the overthrow of their republican institutes or re- sist the erection of the Hierarchy, they accepted from their tyrants a form of religion so impious and degrading as to speedily disgust the better classes of citizens and turn them against a government in whose establishment they had formerly taken an active and patriotic part. This feeling found popular echo in distant provinces, like Judea and Britain, and it led to those frequent insurrections which distin- guished the first century of our sera. The religion which led to these insurrections was the worship of Caesar as the Creator. This is the X PREFACE. pivot upon which turned the history of the Roman world for many centuries; yet only the faintest allusions to it will be found in our standard works of reference. In the present treatise the subject will be brought into relief. It will then be perceived that the true grandeur of Christianity and the moral lessons of its conquest over paganism, have been hid from sight by a false history of the Roman religion and its developement. No greater struggle has ever been fought, and none so belittled by petty conceits and fables. Not only this, but if the edifice by which the aims of civilization are supported continues to be poised upon the flimsy foundations which the medieval monks con- structed, it is exposed to the risk of falling beneath the blows that criticism and satire may reserve for its more vulnerable elements. The accepted origin and spirit of the feudal system will also be chal- lenged. It is in vain that the constitutions of certain modern states have forbidden feudalism, so long as the essential nature of feuds is misunderstood, or their origin is overlooked. Feudalism is not yet wholly extirpated from the European world. It has been cut down in some states, it has been removed from tenures of land in others; but its seeds survive, and it may flourish again. So too are the rights of assemblage, aye, even of religious liberty, jeopardized, so long as we remain but imperfectly acquainted with their historical developement and the means by which they have been and therefore may again be subverted. Even after these subjects are rightly determined the hierarchical version of Roman history will be found protected by formidable de- fences. Not merely literature, but the fine arts have been largely employed in its support. Painting, sculpture, the drama, music, and architecture, all sprang up within the sacerdotal enclosure and in a certain sense they all belong to it still. The medieval and modern works of art which perpetuate the ecclesiastical myths of antiquity are to be numbered by the million and are scattered broadcast; those which refute them are few and but little known. A wholesome and purer catholicity demands that the employment of these methods in re- ligious systems should be discouraged ; and that the arts shall be left free to enjoy the advantages of secular encouragement and develope- ment. BIBLIOGRAPHY. The following list of books is to be read in connection with the lists pub- lished in the author's previous works. The numbers at the end of each title are the press marks of the British Museum library. Abbay (Richard). Restoration of the Ancient System of Tank Irrigation in Ceylon. Printed in the London " Nature " of Oct. ii, 1S77. Abu Mashar {See Albumazar). ACHERY (Luke D'). Spicilegium; sivo collectio veterum aliquot scriptorum qui in Gal- liae biblothesis delituerant. Paris, 1723, 3 torn. fol. 10. e. 1-3, Adam of Bremen. Historia Ecclesiastica ejusdem auctaris libellus de situ Danige, 1706, fol. 158. h. 14. Adams (Alexander), Rev. Roman Antiquities, i8th ed., Edinburgh, 1854, 8vo. (This popular work was originally published in 1791, and has passed through numerous editions, both in England and America. It omi..s or conceals much more than it discloses concerning the religious be- lief and ceremonies of the Romans, and must therefore be consulted with discretion.) Albiruni (Mohammad Ibn Ahmad). Chronology of Ancient Nations. Trans, by C. E. Sachau. London, 1879, 8vo. 752. 1. 24. Institutes and Customs of India in the eleventh century. Trans, by C. E. Sachau. London, 1888, 2 vols. 2318. h. 4. Albumazar (Jafar Ibn Muhammad, commonly known as Albumazar, Albumasar, or Albumashar). Flores Astrologie. Trans, from the Arabic by J. B. Sessa, Ven- ice, 1485, 4to. 718. f. 2. (2,) Alison (Archibald), Rev. "Essays," political, historical and miscellaneous. London, 1850, 3 vols, 8vo. Kl.'LKH {]o\\vi). Alaster of Duhvich College. Inquiry into the Growth of the Royal Prerogative in England. London, 1849, 8vo. 2238. e. i. (A short performance, whose reputation exceeds its merit. It holds that "homage" is a custom derived from the ancient Germans; that modern sovereigns add to their titles, "by the grace of God," because the Sa.\on hlaford was sacred to the churl; and that the king, instead of the Augustus, is the Fountain of Honour. The author has advanced no evidences to support these assertions.) Allmer (A). Les Gestes du Dieu Auguste d' apres 1' inscription du Temple d' An- cyre. Vienne, 1889, 8vo. 7705. ee. (17.) Alviella {See Goblet.) America. Recopilacionde Leyes de los Reynos de las Indias. Madrid, 3d edicion, 1774, 4tomos, fol. Anthropology. Journal of the Anthropological Society of Bombay. Vol. II, pp. 164-224. Fawcetton "Festivals to Village Goddesss." London, 1886, 8vo. Ac. 6242. Aratus (of Soli). The Phsenomena and Diosemeia, trans, by J. Lamb. London, 1848, 8vo. There is another trans, by J. H. Voss. 1348. c g. Aristotle. Works. Trans, by T. Taylor, London, 1812, 9 vols., 4to. 2052. h. Arrian (Flavins). The Anabasis of Alexander; literally trans, by E. J. Chinnock, London, 1884, 8vo. 9026. ff. 18. Voyage round the Euxine sea. Tr. W. Falconer, Oxford, 1805, 4to. 200. e. 18. Voyage of Nearchus and Periplus of the Erythraean sea. Gr. with Eng. Trans. by W. Vincent, O.xford, 1809, 4to. 570. g. 16. Ashley (W. J.) Essay on Feudalism. London, 18S7, 8vo. Atwood (William). Barrister at Law and Chief fustice of New York. Funda- mental Constitution of the English Government. London, 1690, fol. Aurelius Victor (Sextus). De origine gentis Romance, 1826, 8vo. Origine du Peuple Romaine, a French translation of the same work, by N. A. Dubois. 11,306. K. 9. xii BIBLIOGRAPHY. Ayliffe (J.) Rev. A new Pandect of Roman Civil Law. Vol. I. (The only volume published). 1734, fol. 500. g. 14. Bailly (Jean Sylvain). Histoire de I'Astronomie ancienne depuis son origine jusqu'a I'establissement de TEcole d' Alexandria, 2nd ed., Paris, 1781, 4to. 8562. e. 14. Traite de rAstronomie Indienne et Orientale. Paris, 1787, 4to, 59. h. 5. Ancient History of Asia; a series of letters to Voltaire. London, 1814, 8vo. I137. b. 21, 22. Baluze (Etienne). Histoire des capitularies des Rois rran9ois de la premiere et seconde race. Paris, 1779, 8vo. 708. a. 12. Banqueri (Josef Antonio). Libro de Agricultura.traducion de Abn Lakariya. Madrid, 1802, 2 vols, fol. 441. !• 2. 3. Bauer (Bruno). Christus und der Casaren, Berlin, 1879, 8vo. 4534- cc. (7.) Beal (Samuel) Rev. Buddhist Travels in the West. London, 1890, 2 vols, 8vo. Beausobre (Isaac de). Histoire Critique de Manichee et du Manicheisme. Amster- stam, 1734-9, 2 vols, 4to. 678. e. 11-12. Beck (Ludwig). Die Geschichte der Eisens. Brunswick, 1884, 8vo. 7104. d. Bede. Ecclesiastical History of England and Anglo-Saxon Chronicle. Trans, by J. A. Giles, London, 1847, 8vo. Bell. Historical Studies of Feudalism, 1852. Belon (Peter). Travels. Trans, by J. Ray, 1693, 8vo. 978. g. (i.) Belot (E.) De la revolution economique a Rome au millieu du Ille siecle, A. C. Paris, 1885, 8vo. 8226. eee. (24.) Benjamin of Tudela. Itinerary; Heb. with Eng. Trans, by A. Asher. London, 1840-1, i2mo. 1938. c. II. Bentley (John). Hist. Rev. of the Hindu Astronomy. London, 1825, Svo. 531. i. (21.) Bernard (Jacques). Recueil de Traitezde Paixde Treve, etc., de A. D. 536, jusqua A. D. 1700. Amsterdam, 1700, fol. 589, i, 8. Beudoin. Etude sur lesorigines du regime feodal. Grenoble, 1889, Svo. 6005. f. 4,(1.) Bezold (Carl). Oriental Diplomacy. London, 1893, 8vo. 7704. aaa. 54. Bhagavat-Gita; known also as Christna's Gospel, the Divine Song, Christna's Rev- elation, etc. Trans, from Sanscrit into English, by Sir Charles Wilkins. London, 1785, 4to. 14060. f. I. Birch (Samuel), (formerly of the British Museum.) Records of the Past; being Eng- lish translations of the Assyrian and Egyptian monuments. London, 8vo, Old Series, in 12 vols., 1873-81; New Series, in 4 vols., 1880-92. 2258. a. 3. This work is published anonymously. The late Dr. Birch's name is attached to it in the catalogue •f the Museum Library, but does not appear in the title page of the work. On theother hand, the name which does appear there is that of the editor, not the author. It is printed under the sanction of the So- ciety of Biblical Archaeology. Black (W. H.) The Calendar of Palestine reconciled with the Law of Moses, against the theory of Michaelis. London. 1865, 8vo. 43J2. g. 18(9.) Blanchet (J. Adrien). Nouveau manuel de numismatique du Moyen Age et mod- erne. "With Atlas. 1890, 2 torn, 8vo. 12208. b. Blavatsky (Helena Petrovna). Isis Unveiled. New York, 1877, 2 vols, 8vo. 2212. c. BoECKH (Augustus). Corpus InscriptionumGraecorum, Berlin, 1828, 4vols, fol. Catalogue Desk. K. Boissier (Gaston). La religion Romaine d' Auguste aux Antonines. Paris, 1874, Svo. 2212. g, BONWICK (James). Egyptian Belief and Modern Thought. London, 187S, Svo, 22i2.b. Bouche Leclerc (A.) Les Pontiffes de I'ancienne Rome; etude historique sur les institutions religieuses de Rome. Paris, 1874, Svo., pp. 435. 4506. d. (i.) Boulainvilliers (Count Henri de). Histoire de I'ancien gouvernement de France, Amsterdam, 1727, X2mo. S97. a. 14. History of the ancient Parliaments of France. Translated from the French by C. Forman, London, 1754, 2 vol., Svo. 5424. c. The Life of Mahomet. Trans, into Eng. London, 1752, i2mo. -Etat de la France. London, 1727, 2 vols, Svo. 1S57. a. Bow^er (Archibald). History of the Popes. Dublin, 1749-6S, 3 vols, Svo. 4855. bb. Another ed. Phila., 1S44-5, 3 vols, Svo. 4855.6. Bowker and Iles (R. R. and Geo.) Reader's Guide in Economic, Social and Polit- ical Science. New York, 1S91, Svo. 11,900. bb. 54. BIBLIOGRAPHY. XIU Brady (John), Clavis Calendaria, or a compendious analysis of the Calendar. Lon- don, 1815, 2 vols, 8vo. Bramsen (W.) Japanese Chronological Tables. Tokio, 1S80, 8vo. 11,099.5.1. Brantome (Pierre de Bourdeilles). Seigneur de Br antome. Memoirs. Leyde, 1722, i2mo. 630. a. (25.) Another ed. Paris, 1876, i2mo. 8415. df. (2.) Brerewood (Edward), Rev. De Ponderibus et pretiis vetorum nummorum, etc. (Edited by R. B.) 1614, 4to. 602. e. 19. (2.) Britannica. Monumenta Histonca. (Passages in classical authors relating to Britain.) Brown (Alex.) F. R. H. S. The Genesis of the United States . . . movement in England 1605-16, which resulted in the plantation of North America, etc. Lon- don, 1890, 2 vols, 8vo. 9602. i. (i.) Bruce (J. Collingwood,) Rev. The Roman Wall; a description of the Mural Barrier of the North of England. London, 1867, 4to. (Chiefly a description of Serverus', properly Hadrian's Wall and the antiquities found in the vicinity.) 2258. f. Bruce (Philip Alex.) Economic History of Virginia in the 17th Century. London, 1896, 2 vols, 8vo. 9605. c. (22.) Brugsch (Heinrich), History of Egypt. Trans, by Philip Smith. London, 1881, 2 vols, 8vo. 2069. a. Brunnemannus. {See Justinian.) Bryant (Jacob). Ancient Mythology. 3ded. London, 1807, 6 vols, 8vo. 86. f. 11-16. This work is an elaborate effort to reconcile all the mythos, in which effort it fails ; not, however, without incidentally furnishing a large fund of valuable information. Bryce (James). The Holy Roman Empire. 4th ed. London, 1873, 8vo. Brydone (Patrick). Sicily and Malta. London, 1776, 2 vols, 8vo. 10,151. d. 21. Buchanan (George), The historian. See Macfarlan. BucKMAN and Newmarch. Illustrations of the Remains of Roman Art in Cirences- ter, by Prof. Buckman and C. H. Newmarch. London, 1850. Burigny. {See Levesque.) Burke (Luke). "The Principles of Mythonomy", (Laws of Mythology, Systems of Zodiacs, etc.) " Hebrew Chronology ", " Egyptian Chronology ", "Discovery of America, by the Northmen", etc.; a number of articles on these and kindred topics published in the London Ethnological for 1S48, 1854, and 1865-6, these being the only years of its publication. 8vo. PP. 3862. a. and 295. Callimachus. Hymns, Epigrams, etc. Trans, by Revd. J. Banks. Bound with Hesiod. London, 1856, 8vo. 2500. f. Candolle (Alphonse de). Histoire des Sciences et des savants depuis deux siecles, suivre d'autres etudes ... en particulier sur la selection dans I'espece humaine. Geneve, Bale, Lyon, 1S73, 8vo. 8707. ee. (15.) Capella (Martianus Mineus Felix). De Nuptiis Philologise et Mercurii. (On the accord of Bacchus and the Logos). Ed. Kopp, Frankfort, 7836, 4to. 718.1.(25.) Carew (George), Sir. Pacutu Hibernia, or History of the late wars of Ireland under Sir George Carew and compiled by his direction. 1663, fol. 186. d. (8.) History of Ireland. 601. m. 6. -Letters to Sir Thomas Roe. Ac. 8113-71. Carev/ (George), Earl of ToUiess. Report of the Master of the Rolls upon the Carte and Carew Papers. 1864, 8vo. 2075. c. i. Calendar of the Carew Mss. 1867, 8vo. 2075. c, Carlile (Richard), The Deist; containing theological Essays by Baron de Holbach, Voltaire, and others. London, 1819-20, 2 vols, 8vo. 4015. f. Carranza (Alonso). El adjustamento y proporcion de las monedas de oro, plata y cobre, y la reducion distros metales, etc. Madrid, 1629, fol. 504. g. (6.) Caton (W.) Abridg. of the Chronol. of Eusebius. London, 1661, i2mo. 4530. aa. Charton (Edouard). Voyageurs, anciens et modernes. Paris, 1854, 4 vols, in 2,8vo. 2060. Christna (Isvara), The. Trans, by H. T. Colebrooke, Oxford, 1837, 4to. 752. 1. i. Christna. {See Christna's Gospel, or the Bhagavat-Gita), Churchill (Chas. Henry.) Mount Lebanon. London, 1853, 3 vols, 8vo. 10,075. d. The Druzes and the Marionites. London, 1862, 8 vo. 10,075. d. Clarke (Edward), Rev. Letters concerning the Spanish Nation (including Coins). London, 1763, 4to. 179. d. 18. XIV Bir.LIOGRAPHY. Clarke (G.) "Pompeii." London, 1831, 2 vols, i2mo. 1157.3.21-2. Codex Argenteus. Quator D.N. Jesu Christi evangeliorum, versiones per antiquse duee Gothica scilicet et Anglo-Saxonica: Quaruam illam ex celeberrimo Codice Argenteo nunc primum depromsit, Franciscus Junius F. F. hanc autem ex co- dicibus MSS. collatis emendatius recudi curavit, Thomas Mareschallus, Anglus, etc. Dordrechti, 1665, 4to. 218. g. COLEBROOKE (Henry T.) Miscellaneous Essays, containing " Religious Ceremonies of the Hindus." London, 1873, 3 vols, 8vo. 14085. e. 6-8. Columella (L. J. M.) Husbandry; in XII Books. French trans, by Nisard; Eng. trans, by M.C. Curtius. London, 1745, 4to. 34. d. i. Constitution and Present State of Great Britain. {See Great Britain.) COOTE, The Romans in Britain, London, 1878, 8vo. 2394. e. (A work of merit, the materials being chiefly drawn from the Roman laws relative to land and the archaeological remains of Britain.) CoRsiNO (Edoardo). Fasti Attici, in quidus Archontum Atheniensium series, Philo- sophorum, oriorumque Illustrium Virorum astas, etc. 4tom. Florentias, 1744-56, 4to. _ 673. h. (4.) Coulanges (Numa Denis Fustel de). The Ancient City; a study on the religion, laws, and institutions of Greece and Rome. Trans, by \V. Small. Boston, 1874, 8vo. 2259. t>. (e.) The Origin in Property by Land. Trans, by M. Ashley. London, 1891, 8vo. 08276. e. (9.) Histoire des institutions politiques de I'ancienne France. Paris, 1891-2, 6 vols. 8vo. 2390. d. Coutzen (Adamus). Politicorum libri decern in quibus de perfectse reipubl. forma, virtutibus et Vitiis, etc. Moguntiae, 1621, fol. C. 24. d. The plot of Coutzen the Moguntine Jesuit to cheat a church of the religion es- tablished therein and to serve in Popery by Art, etc. London, i64i,4to. 702. d. 8.(2.) Creech (Thomas). The Five Books of Marcus Manilius, containing a system of the Ancient Astronomy and Astrology, together with the Philosophy of the Stoics. Done into English verse, with Notes. London, 1697, 8vo. {See Manlius and Shirburn for othereditionsof the Five Books called the Astronomicon.) ii385.b. b. Creuzer (George Frederich). Religions d' antiquite refondu, etc., par G. D. Guigniaut, L. F. A. Maury, and E. Vinet. Paris, 1825-51, 4 vols. 8vo. 2212. b. Cyprian, Bishop of Carthage, A. I). 248-58. Unity of the Church, a Sermon. Trans, by Revd. J. Fell, Bishop of Oxford. London, 1681, 4to. 3805. a. Daremberg et Saglio. Dictionnaire des Antiquites Grecques et Romaines. Paris, 1873, 2 vols, 4to. In progress: In 1897 it was completed to " E." Cat. .Desk 1. De Sacy. {See Silvestre.) Deuber (F. H. A.) Geschichte der Schiffahrt in atlantischen Ozean, zum Beweis das. . der Compass . vor F. G. entdeckt worden sey. Bamberg. 8vo. 1424. c. Didron (Adolphe N.) Christian Iconography, or the History of Christian Art in the Middle Ages. Trans, by E. J. Millington. London, 1849, 2 vols, 8vo. 2502. b. Dietrichson (L.) Stavkirker; or an illustrated treatise on the church architecture of Norway. Christiania, 1892, 8vo. Diodorus Siculus. History. Trans, by G. Booth. London, 1600, fol. 2068. g. Dion Cassius. Rerum Romanarum, libri octoginta, ab Immanuel Bekkero. Greek text. Lipsise, 1849, 2 vols, 8vo. 2052. e. Histoire Romaine. Paris, 1845-70, 10 torn., 8vo. 1307. i. (12-19.) An oration ... to Octavius Csesar Augustus, against monarchy, taken out of the Xllth book of Dion. London, 1657, 4to. E. 972. (3.) The History of D. C. abridged by Xiphilinus. Done from the Greek by Mr. Manning. London, 1704, 2 vols, 8vo. 293. f. (28, 29.) DiONYSius 0/ I/a/icarnassus. Antiquities of Rome. Trans, by Spelman. London, 1758, 4 vols. 4to. 196. b. (1-4.) DiTTENBERGER (William). Corpus Inscriptionum Atticarum. Berlin, 1878, fol. 2068. g. Drummond (W.) Zodiacs of Esne and Denderah. London, 1821, 8vo. 1140. d. 7. Du Bos (Jean Baptiste). Histoire Critique de I'establissementde la monarchic Fran- 9ois. Amsterdam, 1734, 3 vols, 4to. 182. b. 8-10. Du Choul (Guillaume). Religion de los Antiguos Romanes. Traducion en Castel- lano, por Baltasar Perez. Leon, 1579, 4to. BIBLIOGRAPHY. XV DuMONT d'Urville. (See d'Urville.) DUNCKER (Max). History of Antiquity. Trans, from the German by Evelyn Abbott, M.D. LL.D. London, 1879, 6\g1s, 8vo. DUPIN (Andre M.J. J.) Father. Manuel du droit public ecclesiastique fran9ais. Paris, 1844, i2mo. ■ 5424. aaa. 5. Dupuis (Ch. Fr.) Origine de tout les Cultes. Paris, 1794, 3 vols, 4to. Plates. Another ed. 7 v., 8vo. Plates. Paris, 1795. 483- a. 1-7 & 484. c. 22. An abridgment of the same. Paris, 1822, i2mo. 4503- a. 33. On the connection of Christianity withSolar worship. London, 1793, 8vo. An abbreviated edition of the above work, 1877, 8vo. 8632. ccc. 4. (4.) Bureau de la Malle (A. J. C. A.) Economic Politique des Romains. Paris, 1840. 2 vols, 8vo. 7702, bb. (7.) D'Urville (Dumont d'). On the Venus de Milo, contained in an official periodical entitled " Recueil des Lois relatives a la Marine et aux colonies, etc., edited by M. Bajot. Paris, 1821, 8vo., part IL P.P. 1365. DuRUY (Victor). Histoire des Romains. Nouvelleed. Paris, 1879, 7 vols, 8vo. 9039. e. An English translation by Miss Clarke. London, 1883, 6 vols, 8vo. 2382.5. DuTT (Romesh Chunder). Barrister of the Middle Teinple. A History of Civiliza- tion in Ancient India, based on Sanscrit literature. London, i8qo. Duvergier (G. B. Paul). La Banque Internationale. Paris, 1865, 8vo. 8227. h. 35. (7.) DuvERGiES (Jean Baptiste). Revue Etrangere(et Francaise)de legislation, etc. 1834, etc., torn. 7. P- P- 1275. • De r effet retroactif des lois. Paris, 1845, 8vo. 5405. d. Dyer (L.) Studies of the gods in Greece. London, 1891, 8vo. 4506. bb. 25. Eggleston. English Antiquities. London, 1847. (5^^ Del Mar's " Money and Civ- ilization," p. 3i« for reference to this work.) Elton. Origins of English History, by C. J. Elton. London, 1882, 8vo. Eunapius. Vitae Philosophorumac Sophistarum. Gra;ca, et Latine. 1849, 8vo. 2051. h, Lives of Ancient Philosophers. 1702, 8vo. 275. g. (8.) Faber (Geo. S.) Origin of Pagan Idolatry. London, 1816, 3 vols, 4to. 4504. g. 12. Though its argument, that all religions sprang from the worship of the earth and moon,'raay not be convincing, its descriptions of ancient rites and symbols are useful. Fawcett (Fr.) {See Anthropology.) Ferguson (Rob't) River names of Europe. 1863, 8vo. 12901, c. 24. • The Northmen in Cumberland. London, 1856. FiRMlCUS (Julius Maternus). Alleged cera; fourth century. De Erore Profanarum Religionum. Printed in the Biblotheca Patrone at the end of Cyprian. Paris, 1666. The Astronomicorum was printed in 1499, folio, and is bound in the same volume, (Astron. veterus) withthe Astronomiconof Marcus Manilius. 715-k.i. Fisher and Soetbeer (E. W. F. and A. S.) Greichische und Romanische Seitta- feln. Altona, 1840, 4to. 584. h. (25.) FiSKE (John). Assistant Librarian Harvard University. The Discovery of America, with some account of Ancient America and the Spanish Conquest. Boston, 1892. 2 vols, 8vo. 9551. bb. (13.) FosBROKE (Thos. Dudley). British Monachism. 3d ed. London, 1843, 8vo. 2003.6. Freeman (Edward). A History of the Saracens. London, 1876, 8vo. English Constitution. London, 1873, 8vo. Freheri. {See Gr^^jvius, tom. xi). Freinsheim (Johann). Alex. Mag. daobustomisreprsesentatus . . . complectitur, alter (J. F.) com. Q. Curtii, libros superstites exhibet. 1640, etc. Svo. 584. a. (9.) Freret (Nicolas). Defense de la Chronologic. Paris, 1758, 4to. 216.3.4. Froissart (John). Chronicles. (5^^ 1337 for the title Lieutenant of the Emperor.) Frontinus. {See Nisard.) Froude (James Anthony) Nemesis of Faith. A second edition. London, 1849, i2mo., is the only one now in British Museum Library. 2206 a. Caesar; a Sketch. London, 1879, ^^o- 10,606. f. (3.) Short Studies on Great Subjects London, 1878, 4 vols., 8vo. 2342. a. Fuller (Thomas) Rev. History of the Holy War. Cambridge, 1639, fo'- (Mentions a bank established in Tyre during the Crusades.) 488. g. 2. FUSTEL {See COULANGES). xvi BIBLIOGRAPHY. Gall^US ServatIUS. Dissertationes de Sibyllis. Amst., 1688, 4to. 704. d. 22. Gardthausen (V.) Augustus und seine Zeit. Leipzig, 1891, 8vo. 9041. f. Garrault (Fran5ois). Sieur des Gorges. Les recherches des monnoyes, poix, et maniere de nombrer des premieres et plus renommees nations du monde. . . . Reduictes et rapportees aux monnoyes, poix, et maniere denombres des Fran9ois, etc. Paris, 1576, 8vo. 522. b. (4.) Recueil des principaux advis donnez es assemblees ... en I'abbaye Sainct Ger- main des prez, etc. . . . Paradoxe sur le faict des monnoyes. Paris, 1578, 8vo. Des mines d'argent trouvees en France. Paris, 1834, Bvo., (included in M. L. Cimber's "Archives Curieuses.") 805. b. (3.) Gaubil (Antoine). Chronologic Chinoise. Paris, 1776, 4to, 146. b. 20. L' Astronomic Chinoise, Paris, 1729, 4to. 50. d. 10. Geikie(JohnC.)j'?^z/. Life and words of Christ. London, 1877, 2vols,8vo. 48o7.eee.6, Germany, Empire of. Entwurf einer Grundbuch Ordnung und Entwurf eines Gesetzes betreffend die Zwangsvoll streckung, etc. Berlin, 1889, 8vo. 5604. g. 14. Germany, Empire of. Laws relating to Bills of Exchange. 1879, ^^o- 5606. b, II. GiNisTY (Paul). "De Paris a cap Nord." Paris, 1892, 4to. Gnecchi (Ercole). Saggio di bibliografia numismaticadellezecchi italiane. 1889, 8vo. GNEisT(Heinrich R. von). Hist, of the Eng. Parliament. Tr. by A.H. Keane. London, 1889, 8vo, 2394. f. Hist. Eng. Constitution. Tr. by P. A. Ashworth. London, i89i,8vo. 2394. f.(i.) Goblet (Eugene). La Migration des Symboles. Paris, 1891, 8vo. 4503. cc. (19.) Godefroy (Jacques). De Mutationeset Augmento monetae aurese. Helmstadii, 1732. Legum Xn. 1671, 8vo. 877. i. 4. Goodwin (F.) The XII Tables, (of the Roman Law,) London, 1886, 8vo. 5205. aa. 17. Gould (Baring). Rev. Origin and Development of Religious Belief. N. Y., 8vo., 1863. GRj*:vius (Johannis Georgius). Theosaurus Antiquitatem Romanarum, Lug. Batavo- rum, 1694-9, 12 torn. fol. Tome viii contains several Roman calendars; tome xi contains the numismatic treatises of Freheri and Gronovius. 2068. e. Graziani (A.) Storia della teoria del Valore en Italia. Milano, 1S89, 8vo. 08229. f . (21.) Great Britain. Statutes at Large (which see.) Greek Inscriptions, Ancient, in the British Museum. Oxford, 2 vols, fol. 1874-93. Edited by Rev. E. L. Hicks, C. T. Newton, and Gustav Hirschfeld. 2068. 9. (Including the inscriptions from Ephesus obtained by J. T. Wood in 1863-74.) Greswell (Edw.) Fasti Temporis Catholici. Oxford, 1852, 4 vols, 8vo. 581.6.(22-26.) Origines Kalendarise Italicse. Oxford, 1854, 4 vols, 8vo. 8561. d. (31) Origines Kalendarice Hellenicoe. Oxford, 1862, 6 vols, 8vo. 8560. ee. (10.) Greuber (Erwin). The Roman Law of Damage to Property. (Lex Aquiliam, Digest, IX, 2.) Oxford, 1886, 8vo. 5205. bb. 20. Gross (J, ^^ Rev. The Heathen Religion. Cambridge, Mass., 1856, 8vo. 4504.5. Hale (Matthew). Sir. The InroUing and Registering of all conveyances of Land. 1694, 4to. E. 1973. (4.) Haliburton (Robert G.) New Materials for the History of Man. Halifax, N. S., 1863, 8vo. 4503. bb. (5.) Hallam (Henry). Literature of Europe in the 15th, i6th, and 17th centuries. Lon- don, 1839, 3 vols, 8vo. Europe during the Middle Ages. London, 1869, 8vo. Hamilton (Sir William). Ambassador to Naples. Discoveries at Pompeii, with Plates, London, 1717, 4to. 662. h. 18. Hampson (R. T.) Dates, Charters and Customs, (including Calendars of the Middle Ages.) London, 1841, Bvo. 2085. b. Origines Patriciae; or a Deduction of European titles of nobility from their original sources. London, 1846, 8vo. 1327. g. Hannay (Robert). History of the Representation of England, and of the jurisdic- tion of the House of Commons. London, 1831, 8vo. 8og. g. 15. Harduini (Joannis). Jesuite. Antirrheticus de Nummis Antiquis Colonarium et Mu- nicipiorum. Parisiis, 1689, 4to. 602. h. 8. An apology for Homer, wherein the true nature and design of the Iliad is ex- plained and a new system of his theo-mythology proposed. Tr. from the French. London, 1717, 8vo, Ii.3i5- c. 5. Chronologia Veteris Testamenti, and same in French, Paris, 1677, 4to. BIBLIOGRAPHY. XVii Harlez (C. de) Le Calendrier Avestique. Paris, 1882, 8vo. 4503. f. 30.(2.) Harnack (Adolf). History of Dogma. Tr. by Neil Buchanan. 1894, 8vo. 3605. k. Harris (S. F.) Elements of Roman Law summarized. 1889, 8vo. 2228. d. Helmoldus. Chronica Slavorum. Lat. and Fr. 1793, 4to. 158. i. 18. Helvetius (Claude A.) Treatise on Man. London, 1810, 2 vols, 8vo. Henry (Robert). Rev. History of Britain. London, 2nd ed., 1795, 8vo., 12 vols in 7. Herbert (Henry H.M.) Earl of Caernarvon. Revolutions of the Druids (or Druses) of Lebanon. London, i860, 8vo. 10,076. c. Herbert (The Hon. Algernon). " Nimrod; " a Discourse on certain passages of His- tory and Fable. London, 1828-30, 4 vols, 8vo, 800. e. 20-3. Britannia after the Romans. London, 1836, 4to. 806. g. 3. Hesiod. The Theogony; also Works and Days. Trans, by Rev. J. Banks. (Bound with CalHmachus and Theognis). London, 1856, 8vo. 2500. f. HiGGiNS (Godfrey). Horse Sabaticas. London, 1826, 8vo., pamph. 480. b. 27. An argument that the Jewish Sabbath was unknown to the Patriarchs, was not instituted until the time of Moses and is nowhere enjoined to be observed in the New Testament. HiGGiNS (Godfrey). The Celtic Druids. London, 1829, 4to. 2072. d. RR. A work of much learning, besides containing many valuable materials from Faber, Bryant, Vallancey, and other antiquarians, concerning ancient alphabets, mythology and Druidical remains. Anacalypsis; an enquiry into the origin of Languages, Nations and Religion. London, 1836, 2 vols, 4to. 2072. Hoare (R. C.) Ancient Wiltshire. London, 1838, 8vo. HOLINSHED (Raphael). Chronicles of England, Scotland, and Ireland, from the ed. of 1577. London, 1807, 6 vols, 410. 194. c 3-8 HoLWELL (William). Mythological Dictionary. London, 1793, 8vo. 696. g. 3 Homer, The Iliad. I-VIII, Tr. by C. W. Bateman: IX-XXIV, Tr. by R. Mongan London, 1848, i2mo. The Odyssey. Tr. by R. Mongan. London, 1848, i2mo HooppELL (R. E), Vinovium, the Roman City of Binchester. London, 1879, 8vo Horace. Works. Tr. by Samuel Lee. London, 1873, 8vo. 2282. a HoRSLEY (John). Britannia Romana, or the Roman Antiquities of Britain. London 1732, fol. A valuable antiquarian work; comprehensive and concise. 806. 1. i Hov^TELL (R). Rev. History of the World. (For Dignities of Rome, See II, 24-77.) HUEFFER (Francis). Life of the Greeks and Romans. Tr. from the German by F. H. etc. London, 1875, 8vo. 2031. a. Another Tr. by Ernst Guhl and W. Koner. (Not in the British Museum.) Humbert (G.) Les finances chez les Remains. Paris, 1886, 2 tom, 8vo. 8228. h. (28.) Humboldt (F. H. A. Von) Baron. Researches concerning the Institutions and Monu- ments of the Ancient Inhabitants of America; with description and plates of scenes in the Cordilleras. The "Vues des Cordilleras," Trans, by Helen M. Williams. London, 1814, 2 vols, 8vo. 1050. k. 13. Fluctuations of Gold. (Berlin, 1838.) New York, 1900, 8vo, Cambridge Encyclopedia Publishing Company. Hyde (Th.)v?fz/. Historia ReligionisVeterum Persarum. O.xonii, 1700, 4to. 703. d. 4. Ibn Batuta. Travels into Asia. Tr.by Rev. Sam'l Lee. London, 1829, 4to. 752. 1. 1. Indian Antiquary (The). Bombay, 1872, 4to. (In Progress.) 14096. e. Ingram (J.) Rev. The Saxon Chronicle, with Eng. Tr. London, 1823, 4to. 2070. Ishtar and Izdubar. The Epic of Babylon, etc. 1884, 8vo. 11652. k. (12.) Isvara Christna. {See Chrishna.) Jamieson (John, of Edinburgh). Rev. Hermes Scythicus, or the radical affinities of the Greek and Latin Languages to the Gothic, illustrated from the Moeso-Gothic, Anglo-Saxon and Prankish; and a Dissertation on the historical proofs of the Scythian origin of the Greeks. Edinburgh, 1814, 8vo. 71. a. 20. Jastrow (Ignaz). Handbuch zu Litteraturberichten im Auschluss an die Jahresbe- richte der Geschichtswissenschaft. 11 899. f. 47. John I., Bishop of Antioch. Epistolae. Greek and Latin. In J. P. Migne's Patro- logiae. Series Grascse, 1857, tom. 77, 4to. 2011, d. Jornandes. De Gothorum Origine. Lat. and Fr., the latter by F.Fournierde Monjan, included in the "Collection des Auteurs Latins." Paris, 1850, 8vo. 5^ Tac. Ann., iv, 38. T,6 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. another, that he was a god, and they added, ' Be thou merciful to us, for though we have hitherto reverenced thee only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to mortal nature.'" Unfortu- nately for this would-be deity, he was shortly afterwards taken with a colic and died in great pain, perhaps poisoned by some obscure Brutus of Judea. " It is not necessary to account for such a worship by recalling the depravity of the age. A country could be named where similar de- pravity exists to-day, yet where there is no worship of the reigning sovereign. It was due to faith, habit, custom, example, in short, to the fact that the Romans lived nearly two thousand years nearer to the Brahminical myth of the Incarnation than we do. Our task is to relate the historical fact; we leave to others the less invidious bur- den of its explanation; only let them take heed, in such explanation, of other phases of religion; of the Hanging Fakirs, the Stylites, the Chainwearers and Grasseaters of the imperial sera; of the Agapemonae of England, the Shakers and Mormons of America, and the other strange rites or beliefs that mankind have practised or endured. " *^ This story of Agrippa, or Herod, is briefly told in Acts xii, 22, where the scene, however, is changed to Tyre. The following example of human-worship belongs to the present time : Calcutta, June 20, 1894. — Yesterday the Queen's statue at Madras was smeared (annointed) with Hindu religious marks on the forehead, neck and breast. The police inquiry has resulted in the opinion being expressed that it was the work of a Hindu who desired to worship the statue. This is not the first time that such a smearing (annointing) has taken place. Some time ago a carpenter was caught in the act of decorating the statue with garlands, and marks similar to those now found were detected on that occasion. He said that he was worshipping the Great Maharanee, who, he hoped, would protect him and give him plenty of work. The Inspector of Police, in whose division the statue is situated, says that he himself has noticed people burning incense, breaking cocoanuts, and prostrating themselves in worship before it. Correspondence London Times. *^ See my Essay on " The Druses of Galilee." Materials for a history of the Druses will be found in Ezekiel, Josephus, Pausanias, De Sacy, Didron, Churchill and other works. The Jezites, an ancient "Christian sect "in Persia, are described by Noel, ar- ticle " Jezd." The Stylites, Grasseaters, and other "Christian " sects of a later period are mentioned in most of the early ecclesiastical "histories." The Galilean Chainwearers are described by the Emperor Julian, in the fragment preserved by Cyril of Alexan- dria. A modern incarnation of the deity in the kingdom of Ava is mentioned by Upham. A re-incarnation of Salivahana was to "come off" in 1895. So late as 1781, Sir William Hamilton, the English ambassador to the Court of Naples, found that phallic symbols were publicly worshipped in the Christian churches of Isneria and Daniano. Meredith's pages are crowded with evidences on this subject. The images of the Sibyls were retained in the Christian church of Sienna. Bell's Pantheon, li, 237. The Agapemonae was an English Christian sect of the present century, whose abom- inable rites are alluded to by the Rev. Mr. Baring-Gould. For the blasphemous monkish tale of the marriage of St. Dunstan's mother to the Almighty, see Brady's Clavis Calendaria, i, 388. THE WORSHIP OF C^SAR. 37 As in the case of other successful deifications or apotheoses, that of Julius Caesar was made the beginning of a new sera. This one be- gan with the date of his deification in the temple of Jupiter Ammon, on the winter solstice of the year B. C. 48. As it coincided closely with the date of the battle of Pharsalia, Tacitus and other pagan dis- senters from Julianism, who could not change the sera, called it, or have been made by their redactors to call it, the sera of that battle; and as it also coincided within a year or two of the alleged freedom of Antioch, the Christian monks, who could not change it, called it by the name of that event. As such it was employed by the putative Evagrius, in the sixth century, and explained away by Pope Gregory XIII. in the i6th century. " Even after the deification of Julius was ratified by the senate of Rome, two years later, the Julian sera was reckoned from the original deification, and, as such, it was introduced into all parts of the em- pire, with, possibly, the exception of Antioch, for this exception is by no means certain. This subject, as well as the absence of all men- tion of the Christian sera by the Christian writers down to the pontifi- cate of Gregory II., has received attention in another place. The worship of Divus Julius was encouraged and supported both by the Triumvirate, who assumed the government of the Roman world after his death, and by Octavius, the Augustus, who succeeded the Triumvirate. Nay more, Augustus had the address to cause his own worship to be added to that of Julius. The latter was now impiously addressed as the Supreme Being, the former became the Son of God, and as such he is announced upon his coins and other monuments. But this did not last long. Even the Son of God did not appear to be a title sufficiently exalted to suit the devotees of the Augustus; and in numerous contemporary inscriptions, both in Rome, Greece and Asia, he is termed Deos, or Theos, which means not the Son of God, nor one of the gods, but the living god, the Creator, Optimo Maximo. However, Divus Filius, ^sar and Quirinus seem to have been the titles by which Octavius himself preferred to be called. *■* Says Gregory: " Antioch, in honour of the emperor, fixed its sera in Caius Juli'JS Caesar and made this year of grace, the first," "Works," London, ed. 166=;, p. 156, cited in Evagrius, note to li, 12. The Holy father then admits some instances of its use (as though such instances were rare) and ascribes its adoption to the free preroga- tives of the city, secured to it by Julius Ccesar. If the granting of such freedom to cities was sufficient to cause a change of the oera it may be asked why is it that Antioch stands almost alone in this respect, and why is it that nearly all other aeras are those of prretended incarnations or deifications, and not of freedom conferred upon cities? 38 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. The worship of Augustus was not, as the ecclesiastical schools have insinuated, a mere lip-service, a meaningless mode of saluting the sovereign-pontiff, an effusive form of adulation or flattery to the emperor of Rome ; it was the worship of a personage who was believed to be supernatural, omniscient, all-powerful and beneficent, the re- incarnation of Quirinus, the Son of the god Apollo and of the wife- virgin Maia; "the god whose coming was foretold by the Cumaean Sibyl; whose sway was to extend over the whole earth; whose Con- ception and Birth were both miraculous ; and whose Advent was to usher in the Golden Age of Peace and Plenty and to banish Sin for- ever. Such was his character in Rome. In Greece he was worshipped as Dionysos; in Egypt as Thurinus; in Iberia and Gaul as .^sar, or Hesus; and in Germany as Baldir; for all of these titles and many others will be found on his monuments, or have been preserved by his biographers. The most effective reply that can be made to those historians who have ignored the worship of Augustus — and who, when they have not concealed its evidences, have passed them over, or sought to belittle them — is to read a letter from one of the worshippers of this god, written from Tomis, a Roman outpost, near the mouths of the Dan- ube ""^ addressed to Graecinus, in Rome, and dated, according to our chronology, A. D. 15, or shortly after the death and Ascension of Augustus. The writer of this letter was no less a person than the poet Ovid, or Publius Ovidius Naso, a nobleman of the equestrian order, then 58 years of age and, as his other writings testify, in the full possession of his faculties. "Nor is my piety unknown: this distant land sees a shrine of our Lord Augustus erected in my house. Together with him stand his son and wife (his priestess), deities scarcely less than our Lord him- self ... As oft as the day arises, so often do I address my prayers to them, together with offerings of frankincense. Shouldst thou enquire, the whole of Pontus will confirm my words, and attest my sincerity; nor is my religion less known to strangers . Though fortune is not equal to my inclination in such duties, I will- ingly devote to this worship such means as I command . Caesar. Thou, who art summoned to the gods above, thou too, from whom nothing can be concealed, thou knowest this to be true! ■•^ For Maia, Atia, etc., see the author's monograph on " The Mother of the Gods.'' ■*^ The Danube was originally called the Issus; afterward, the Matous. Malte- Brun's Geog. THE WORSHIP OF CiESAR. 39 In thy place among the stars, fixed in the arch of the skies, thou hearest my prayers, which I utter with anxious lips!" This evidence does not stand alone. Throughout all of Ovid's Letters, of which 36 remain to us, throughout all of his Elegies, of which 50 remain, throughout all his Fasti, of which six entire books remain, he repeatedly addresses the then living Augustus as God, or the Son of God, the Great Deity, the Heaven-born, the Divine, the Omniscient, the Beneficent, the Just, the Long-suffering, the Merciful God. It may serve the purposes of perversion to explain this away, it may afford a refuge for obstinacy or delusion to dismiss it with affectations of incredulity or contempt; but this is no answer to the fact; for fact it unquestionably is, not alone upon the testimony of Ovid, but upon that also of numerous other intelligent, respectable and even illustrious witnesses, that is to say, the testimony of Virgil, Horace, Manilius, Pliny, Suetonius and others. What is insisted upon is that, Augustus Caesar, by his contemporaries, was believed to be, and was actually worshipped as a god; with bell, book, candle, steeple, frankincense, rosary, cross, mitre, temples, priesthood, ben- efices and ritual; in short, with all the outward marks of superstition, credulity, piety and devotion. There is nothing impossible about this; and the evidence of this worship is so valid, circumstantial and overwhelming, that to refuse assent to it, is to put reason out of court altogether. The witnesses are not phantoms, the wild cre- ations of credulous minds; their writings are not anonymous patch- works, undated, unlocated and unsigned; they do not stand unsup- ported by archaeology, inscriptions, coins, calendars, or popular customs; on the contrary, they are corroborated and buttressed by all these classes of evidence. The witnesses are men of reputation, their writings are among the masterpieces of the world, which it would be impossible to imitate and difficult to alter without detection, whilst the monuments which support them are numbered by myriads and found in every conceivable locality, from the Roman slabs in the mosque of Ancyra, to the coins rescued from buried Pompeii; both of which, as well as a vast number of other inscriptions and coins, proclaim the divinity and universal worship of Augustus throughout the Roman world. And mark this: that in actual history great events do not occur alone. They appear neither unheralded nor unsung. Minor events start forth to presage them; others proclaim their occurrence; still others attest and exalt their significance; whilst a numerous progeny of facts remain behind to corroborate their appearance upon the 40 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. world's Stage and to definitely mark their sera. The presages of the Augustan incarnation were the previous assumptions of divinity by Alexander the Great, the Ptolemies, the Selucidee, Demetrius Pol- iorcetes, the Arsacidse, Titus Quinctius Flamininus, the abortive at- tempts of Scipio, Sylla, Sertorius and Pompey, and the successful one of Julius Caesar. It was the bestowal of Csesar's empire, Spiritual and Temporal, upon his adopted son Augustus, that directly led to the worship of the latter. The assumption of divinity by the various sovereigns and heroes mentioned, are historical facts which no amount of sophistry can belittle or set aside ; they are the historical circum- stances that presaged and led up the worship of Augustus. In false history and false philosophy there is no such evolution. Take for example the incarnations of Nebo-Nazaru, Hesus and Salivahana. What preceded these fictions? Nothing. What accompanied them? Nothing. What followed them? Nothing, but other fictions. What evidences of their occurrence exists within two hundred years of the time assigned to them? None whatever. What valid evidence, at any time? None at all. They were myths of the cloisters, uncon- nected with any real event, fabricated centuries after the date as- signed to them; and supported only by forgery, imposture and alter- ations of the calendar. When the tremendous commotion caused by the assassination of Julius Caesar had spent itself in civil wars and in the firm establish- ment of the Messianic religion and ritual, when Actium waswon, and Egypt and Asia were reconquered, Augustus ascended the throne of his martyred Sire and was in turn annointed, addressed and worship- ped as the Son of God; whilst Julius was tacitly worshipped as the Father. Most of the ancient books were now destroyed; the writers of the old school were executed or banished; the republican calendar was altered; and a conclave of historians and mythological poets was encouraged and rewarded, who re-wrote the history of Rome and erected for posterity a body of elegant fiction and imposture, which nineteen centuries of time have not yet sufficed to wholly overthrow or eradicate. These statements are not mere opinions; they are based upon evi- dences so valid, so numerous and so convincing that they would tri- umphantly withstand the severest scrutiny of a court of law. According to the received chronology, Caepius, or, he who was af- terwards called Caius Julius Caesar Octavianus, and still later the Augustus, was born September 23, A. U. 692, began to reign Feb- ruary 26, A. U. 711 and died August 29, A. U. 768, aged 76 years THE WORSHIP OF C^SAR, 4I lacking one month. " He was the son of Maia, as she was called by- Horace and the inscription at Lyons, while Suetonius says her name was Atia, a niece of Julius Csesar. His putative father was Caius Octavianus; a citizen of Rome and the son of a baker. At the age of four years Augustus lost his father. He was then adopted by Phillipus and afterwards at the age of puberty by Julius Caesar, as his *' The chronology is based on the dates which appear in the Testament of Augustus, engraved on the walls of his temple at Ancyra. According to Mr. John M. Kinneir's "Journey through Asia Minor," ed. 1818, p. 70, this monument has been tampered with, therefore until the dates are corroborated by some valid monument, as yet not exposed to the work of forgers, they must not be regarded as conclusive, especially as Josephus says that Augustus died at the age of seventy-six, while Eutropius, vii, 8, says that he died at the age of eighty-six. The monument says "I am now in my seventy-sixth year," which, if Josepus is right, was the year of his death. Of course this is possible; but in view of the testimony of Eutropius and Kinneir, it looks sus- picious. The Ancyran monument says that Augustus was nineteen years of age when Hirtius and Pansa were consuls and when — after their mysterious death during the same year — he got his first consulship. This was the year following the assassination of Julius Caesar, or (by our chronology) A. U. 711, As it is from this year that the reign — not the Advent, nor the Apotheosis, nor the Ascension, but the reign — of Au- gustus is commonly reckoned and, as according to Josephus, he died at the age of seventy-six years, therefore he died in 768 and was born in 692. If the student will take the trouble to compare these dates with those in any modern date-book, he will observe several discrepancies and he will have to choose between the monument and the chro- nologists, Suetonius says that Augustus was born the day when the conspiracy of Catiline was debated in the Senate, but this does not help us, for the year of Rome is wanting, as indeed it is in most of the ancient works which have been submitted to the scrutiny of the Sacred College. Josephus evidently counts Augustus' reign from February 26 of the year, when, according to Tacitus, Hirtius and Pansa were con- suls. As it does not appear that Augustus succeeded Hirtius and Pansa on February 26, Josephus probably derived this particular day from that of the Apotheosis of A.U. 738. This last was the New-Year day of the Augustan Aera, which was observed during the lifetime of Augustus, but was afterwards superceded by an jera, the year, (not the day,) of which, was counted from the Ascension. It will be observed that Eutropius, Josephus and the Treatise on Oratory which is commonly ascribed to Taci- tus, all count the reign of Augustus from his first consulate, or, which is practically the same thing, from the deaths of Hirtius and Pansa. Although Augustus does not claim so much in his Testament, he begins its chronicles at the same time. Strictly speaking, he was at that time a consul of the republic, and that, too, with Pedius for his colleague. The Triumvirate had yet to be formed and dissolved; Greece, Africa and Asia had to be conquered; and the empire organised. Until these objects were achieved Augustus did not reign; and when he did reign he was careful rather to claim less than more authority than he had really acquired. With regard to his Aera, there is no evidence that it was employed earlier than his return from Syria and the celebra- tion of the Ludi Saeculares and Ludi Augustales. The date, February 26, is from the "six months and two days " of Josephus, reckoned backward from the day of Augus- tus' death. 42 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. own son. When Caesar was assasinated, Augustus was still in his teens. When, in accordance with the Treaty of Brundusium, Au- gustus divided the world with Marc Antony, giving to the latter the Eastern, and retaining for himself Rome and the Western Empire, he had but barely attained the age of manhood. After the departure of Marc Antony, one of the first acts of Augustus was the destruction of Perugia, a city which refused to acknowledge his authority. The fall of this place was followed by the sacrificial Placation of Julius the Father. In this atrocious rite, some authors allege that the con- sul, Lucius Antony, (brother of Marc) besides Cannutius C. Flavins, Clodius Bithynicus, and the principal magistrates and council of Perugia, together with 300 senators and knights, were immolated as human sacrifices, upon an altar of Julius, erected for the occasion. " The greater part of the abominable auto da fe was executed in the presence of Augustus himself, whose only reply to those who im- plored and shrieked for mercy, was: "You must die." Let those who contend that the worship of Julius and Augustus was merely a form, ponder over this horrible event. So soon as the gruesome business was over, Augustus prepared for his own elevation to the godship. Such of the ancient literature as was not destroyed, was perverted, the Sibylline books " being among those preserved, because they were found to contain the prophecy of his Advent, which, according to the subservient interpretation of Virgil, was to occur this same year, that is to say, in the consulate of Pollio, A. U. 713, when the world would be at peace, the temple of Janus closed, and the Golden Age would begin. Unfortunately for this pretty scheme, Marc Antony, grown jealous of Augustus, made war upon him; and the temple of Janus had to be re-opened; so that the god of the Western world was fain to postpone his intended elevation until the god of the East was subdued. The memorable victory of Actium was won in A. U. 723. It was in this year that Herod is said to have paid a relief of 800 talents to Augustus, who confirmed him, for the second time, in his vassal kingdom of Judea; an act, which the Ro- •*^ Suet., in Aug. *^ There were ten Sibyls and ten books and ten decemviri to take charge of them. In Roman legend the books are mentioned in connection with Tarquin the Proud; in Roman history they first explicitly appear in the consulate of Lucretius, A. U. 292, although they are alluded to as nothing new. Livy, i, 7; iii, 10; v, 13, etc. In the Augustan age it was pretended that they had been destroyed during the Marsic war A.U. 670, whereupon new copies were collected from the Sibylline oracles throughout the empire and deposited by Augustus under the statue of Apollo on the Palatine Hill. Suet., Aug., 31; Dio., 17. THE WORSHIP OF CAESAR. 43 mans called "the Grace of God," but which the Jews attributed to bribery at court. In the following year Augustus entered Asia and Egypt at the head of an immense army ; when Antony and Cleopatra, in despair, committed suicide. In this year the conqueror pretended to have opened the Suez Canal and thus placed Rome in direct com- munication with India; whereas, it was in fact done several years previously by Julius Caesar; although in the meanwhile the canal may have filled up with sand and have required dredging. The monument of Ancyra asserts that in his seventh consulate Octavius was recog- nised as the Augustus, or Holy one; a statement that agrees with Censorinus, who says that he received the title of Augustus in A. U. 726. This was probably true as to the Orient, but it does not appear that the title was assumed in Rome until the year known to us as A. U. 738. '' In A. U. 730 Herod is said to have rebuilt the temple of Jerusalem and dedicated it to Jehovah. In the upper city he erected another edifice of greater magnitude, which he called the Caesarium, and dedicated it to Augustus. He also built a temple to Augustus in Strato's Tower, "which," says Josephus, "was excellent, both for beauty and size; and therein was a colossal image of Augustus, not less than that of Jupiter Olympus, which it was made to resemble." Herod rebuilt Samaria, renamed it Sebastos, the Greek form of Au- gustus, and erected therein a temple to the worship of that god. In- deed he repaired many places and erected temples and statues of Augustus in them, and called them Caesarea, Augusta and the like. In the 192nd four-year Olympiad, answering to A. U. 745, Herod even went so far in his homage of Augustus, as to revive the pana- geia of Jasius, or the fifty-months each of 36 days, or five-year ^^ According to the monument at Ancyra, which was erected after Octavius had been consul 14 times, imperator 20 times and tribune 38 times, therefore according to our chronology, after A. U. 762, Octavius had been named Sebastos (at least in the Orient) in his sixth consulate. According to the chronology which has been supplied to us, this was in A. U. 724; yet Eutropius, vii, 8, says that Augustus returned to Rome in the 12th year from his first consulate, which agrees with A. U. 723. Cen- sorinus says the title of "Augustus, D. F.," was conferred by the Senate, January 16, in the year of his seventh consulate, when his colleague was M. Vipsanius Agrippa, Cos., III. This answers to our A. U. 725, or 726; so that, like Julius Caesar, Octa- vius appears to have been deified in Egypt first, and in Rome two years later. Some authors make a difference of three years between these dates. The Roman deification seems to have been immediately followed by the Triumph and the Scecular games of A. U. 73S (Censorinus), yet there are 14 or 15 years between the two dates, during which the history of Octavius is barren of events. 44 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. Olympian games and to call them " Caesar's games." For the expen- ses of their observance he devoted certain revenues in perpetuity. (Josephus, Wars, xxi.) His coins were stamped with the Buddhic or Osirian sacred monogram p which was afterwards appropriated by the medieval historians of Christianity. After the subjection of Egypt, Augustus, at the head of vast forces, visited Tyre, Sidon, Samos, Ancyra, Cyzicus and other places in Asia; in all of which he received a homage due alone to gods. To crown these supernal triumphs, he recoveredfrom the Parthian king, Phraa- tes, the Roman standards, captured years before from Crassus: and thus relieved the arms of Rome from the only stain that rested upon them. According to the Ancyran inscription, Augustus returned from Syria to Rome during the consulship of Q. Lucretius Vispillo. The day was afterwards celebrated as Augustalia, October 12. The chro- nologists place this consulship in A. U. 737, whereas Eutropius says that Augustus returned 12 years after his first consulship: a discrep- ancy of 14 or 15 years. The conqueror brought with him the acknowl- edged empire of the world. He was therefore fully prepared to as sume that divine elevation for which every preparation had been made during his absence from the capital. According to the chronology arranged for the occasion, it was just seven cycles, each of no years, from the apotheosis of Romulus, by whose sacred name of Janus Quirinus, Augustus desired himself to be called. The pretension was that Augustus was the reincarnation of Janus Quirinus, or Romulus; therefore, the temples erected to his worship in the west were commonly dedicated to Augustus and Roma ; the images of the latter being merely those of a beautiful matron. With the street effigies of Augustus, of which Ovid informs us there were a thousand in Rome alone, the members of Augustus' family, the Holy Family, as Ovid calls it, namely, his wife, Livia, and one of his adopted sons, Drusus — both of whom were canonized — were sometimes associated. Many of these effigies continued in use for centuries, and some of them are possibly doing service yet. From the year of the apotheosis, that is to say, A. U. 738, began a new sera. It was in this year, says Lenormant, that Augustus assumed those rights of coinage which ever afterwards remained the preroga- tive of the sovereign-pontiff. " The new year day of this aera was originally February 26. This was eventually altered to December 25. 5' It was in A. U. 738 that Augustus assumed those rights of coinage which ever afterwards remained the prerogative of the sovereign-pontiff. Lenormant, li, 214. THE WORSHIP OF CAESAR. 45 Except in the Iberian peninsular, where the custom of employing the Julian ^ra prevailed down to a recent period, the Augustan aera, since masked under other names, served for the dates of the Roman world, until some time after the reign of Justinian II., when, without any unnecessary disturbance of recorded dates, the years, which were formerly reckoned from A. U. 738, were reckoned from A. U. 753. " When the chronology of the Augustan period is closely examined it wili be found to have been altered by the Latin Sacred College to the extent of 15 years. Proofs of this alteration of the calendar appear upon examining the Timsean and Ciceronian aera of Romulus; the dates of the Ludi S^culares given by Censorinus; the erroneous aeras ascribed by modern chronologists to Augustus' principal Triumph; the conflicting dates ascribed to the consulates of Augustus by Sue- tonius and Eutropius, or inscribed on the monuments at Ancyra and elsewhere; the dated coins of Rome audits provinces; besides other circumstances, which it would be tedious to rehearse in this place. To prepare for the Apotheosis of A. U. 738, the Augustan histo- rians and poets — bearing in mind the slaughter of Perugia; the un- grateful murders of Cicero and Lucius Antony; the tragic death of Marc Antony and Cleopatra; the mysterious banishment of Ovid; the condemnation of Afidius Memla, and many other similar circum- stances — now tuned and struck anew their mendacious lyres. Let us listen to some of their strains, first disposing of the too premature pgeans of Virgil, which he sang in his Fourth Eclogue: "The last Great yEra foretold by the Cumaean Sibyl is now ar- rived; the Cycles begin anew. Now returns the Golden Age of Saturn, now appears the Immaculate Virgin. (This was Maia, the virgin mother of Augustus). Now descends from Heaven a divine Nativity. O! chaste Lucina, (this was the goddess of maternity), speed the Mother's pains, haste the glorious Birth, and usher in the reign of thy Apollo. In thy consulship, O! Pollio, shall happen this glorious Advent, and the great months shall then begin to roll. Thenceforth whatever vestige of Original Sin remains, shall be swept away from earth forever, and the Sea of God shall be the Prince of Peace!" As before intimated, this strain was sung too prematurely, and the battle of Actium had yet to be fought and won before the Messianic and Apotheosis project could be realised. Meanwhile no glorious Advent is recorded, no great months began to roll, no Great ^ra was commenced, no Cycles were renewed, the peace was postponed, *^ See Appendix on " Chronology of Augustus." 46 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. the temple of Janus was reopened, and Original Sin has retained its place in the liturgy of the Roman church to the present day. The Pollio alluded to in this Eclogue was Caius Asinius Pollio, born A. U. 678, died A. U. 757, an orator, poet, historian, politician, warrior, governor of Gaul, courtier and time-server. He was with Julius Caesar when he passed the Rubicon and again at Pharsalia. Pollio was named as consul with Cn. Domitius Calvinus, for the year 713, but, although the year goes by their names, such was the con- fusion of the times that neither of them actually filled the consular chair. After the death of Caesar, Pollio took sides with Marc Antony, but, either from the desperate circumstances of the latter or because he was bribed with the consulship, Pollio, before the slaughter of Perugia, went over to Augustus. It was he, who, introducing Virgil to Maecenas, procured for the poet the restitution and enlargement of his landed estates and earned for himself the immortality conferred by the mention of his name in the Eclogues. His own works, of which there were several, have all disappeared. The capitulation of Perugia, the holocaust of human victims sacrificed upon the altar of Julius the Father, the Treaty of Brundusium, and the departure of Antony for the east, all occurred during the nominal consulship of Pollio, and they marked both the advent of Augustus Caesar and the assumed restoration of peace to the Roman world. " We now begin with the literature of the triumph, deification and Apotheosis, which followed Augustus' return from Asia. In pursu- ance of the astrology which Rome had gathered from Etruria, Greece, Pontus, Galilee, Syria, Egypt, Spain and Gaul, indeed from every source whence came the heterogeneous materials which now com- posed her military forces and her millions of slaves, it was necessary to show that the Incarnation was connected with previous incarna- tions; that it occurred at the beginning of a new divine cycle; that it was the issue of a divine father and mortal mother; that the mother was a wife-virgin; that the birth happened at the end of ten solar months; that it occurred in an obscure place; that it was foretold by prophecy or sacred oracle; that it was presaged or accompanied by prodigies of Nature; that the divinity of the child was recognized by sages; that the Holy One exhibited extraordinary signs of precocity and wisdom; that his destruction was sought by the ruling powers, whose precautions were of course defeated; that he worked miracles; that he exhibited a profound humility; that his apotheosis would ^* Appian, de Bell. Civ.; Dio. Cass.; Livy, Ep., 126; Suet., in Aug. THE WORSHIP OF CESAR. 47 bring peace on earth, and that he would finally ascend to heaven, there to join the Father. Accordingly, the Augustan writers furnished all these materials. The first day of the Apotheosis, February 26, was that of the Nebo- Nazarene nativity; whilst the year was that of the Ludi Sseculares, dating from the Apotheosis of Romulus, Suetonius tells us concern- ing the Nativity that Atia or Maia having, in the absence of her hus- band, gone to the temple of Apollo at midnight, there fell asleep; and in that condition was approached by a serpent. Upon awaken- ing, she seemed, for reasons stated by the chronicler, to be aware of what had happened. In the tenth month she was delivered of Augustus, who became known as the Son of the god Apollo. The birth occurred in Velitre, a village some twenty miles from Rome, and in a small and humble cottage, which ever afterwards was held Sacred. Even the owner of the house, having incautiously approached it, was blasted by lightning from heaven. The birth of Augustus was foretold not only by the Cumasan Sibyl, it was predicted by a divine oracle delivered in Velitre and by a prodigy that had happened pub- licly in Rome five or six months before the Nativity and was the oc- casion of the intended Slaughter of Innocents presently to be men- tioned. Before the Nativity, Maia dreamt that her body was scattered to the stars and encompassed the universe. After the Nativity, Oc- tavianus, her earthly husband, dreamt he saw the bright beams of the Sun emanate from her person; and when he sacrificed, where Alexander the Great had formerly sacrificed and had seen a miracle, namely, at a temple of Dionysius or Bacchus in Thrace, Octavianus saw a similar miracle: a sheet of flame ascended from the altar, en- veloped the steeple and mounted high to heaven. On the following night Octavianus dreamt he saw the Infant Augustus grasping the Thunderbolt and wearing the Sceptre and Robe of Jupiter, his head surrounded by a radiance of glory, and his chariot decked wi.h laurel, while yoked to it were six steeds of purest white. When, before the Nativity, the divine oracle at Velitre predicted that "Nature was about to bring forth a Prince over the Roman people," the Senate passed an Act, A. U. 692, ordering that "No male child born that year should be reared or brought up." Thus, every boy born within the Roman pale was devoted to destruction, and a frightful Slaughter of Innocents would have ensued, had not those who expected chil- dren, removed the tablets of the law from the walls of the serarium; and thus defeated the atrocious edict. When the sage and astrologer, P, Nigidius, learnt that Atia had been delivered of Augustus, he 48 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. openly proclaimed that the Lord of the Universe was born. While Augustus was yet an infant, he arose from his cradle at night and next morning he was found upon the roof of the house, facing Apollo, or the rising Sun. On the city side of the house a multitude of frogs maintained a deafening clamour. So soon as Augustus was old enough to speak, he commanded these animals to keep silence, and from that moment they were completely hushed. When, at a later period, Augustus went with M. Vipsanius Agrippa to the study of Theogenes, the astrologer, at Apollonia, and there divulged the hour of his nativity, Theogenes fell down and worship- ped him as God, (adoravitque eum). ^* At a later period he was worshipped by Lepidus, the Pontifex Maximus of Rome. " Among the miracles that Augustus wrought, his merest touch was sufficient to cure deformity or disease; and so universally was his divine origin and attributes acknowledged that many people, in dying, left their entire fortunes to the Sacred fisc, in gratitude, as they themselves expressed it, for having been permitted to live during the incarnation and earthly sojourn of this Son of God. Suetonius (Aug. 100) in- forms us that in the course of twenty years private individuals be- queathed to Augustus no less than 35 million aurei, equal to about 40 million sovereigns or half-eagles of the present weight and standard. In addition to these legacies, numerous vassal princes left their en- tire patrimonies to this Messiah. To evince his humility, once a year, Augustus, veiled in the sacred peplum, stood at the porch of the Regia and received alms from the pious. His Apotheosis not only brought profound peace to the Ro- man world, so that the temple of Janus was permanently closed, it marked a new ^ra. At his death, concludes Suetonius, " there v/as not wanting a person of praetorian rank who saw his spirit ascend to Heaven." The name of this privileged witness was the senator Numericus Atticus. The Ascension of Augustus is engraved upon the great cameo, from the spoils of Constantinople, presented by Baldwin II., to Louis IX., and now in the Cabinet of France. A fac- simile of it is published in Duruy's " History of Rome." Having thus briefly sketched the history of the Augustan worship, it is next in order to call those contemporary witnesses who attested this worship, or who sang its praises. We have already heard Ovid, Virgil and Suetonius. We v/ill now turn to a later work of Virgil; and also to Horace, Manilius, Tacitus and others. ** Snet., in Aug. The Roman term for astrologer was " mathematician." " Manning's Xiphilinus, i, 114. THE WORSHIP OF C^SAR. 49 Says Virgil (^neid VI, 789-93): This is Cresar and the Holy Family Spanning the spacious axle of heaven, This is He, whom thou hast oft heard prc 58 CHAPTER IV. DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. Disagreeiaent of eminent historians regarding the character and sera of the feudal system — Viewed by some as a condition of society — By others as a system of caste — By others as a species of land tenure — Opinions of Hallam — Robertson — Guizot — Buckle — and Stubbs. THE extraordinary diversity of opinion which still prevails, with regard to the nature, the limits, and even the aera, of the Feudal System in Europe, suggests the difficulties which have at- tended the elucidation of this abstruse subject. By some historians the feudal system has been regarded as the general condition of so- ciety during the medieval ages, by others as a system of social ranks or caste ', and others as the law or custom governing lands held on condition of military service. Budseus, Zazius and De Coulanges trace the system to the institutes of pagan Rome, Guizot bases it upon the Christian ecclesiastical benefices of the fifth century, Rob- ertson first discerns it in the seventh, Hallam in the tenth, Draper postpones its establishment until the eleventh century, and Gibbon shirks the enquiry altogether. All of these eminent authors unite in the admission of a feudal system, and some of them treat it at great length, but no two agree as to what it was, nor when, nor where, nor under what circumstances, it was adopted. In short, the feudal system is an apparition, which everybody has seen, but nobody has cared to follow beyond the mysterious portals whence it emerged and into which, as we shall prove, it afterwards happily faded. Those who have regarded the feudal system merely as a form of society or as a system of caste, have never proceeded with their ex- planations far enough to enable the feudal form of society or the ' Caste is from casta, a Portuguese word signifying colour. It was applied by the early Portuguese commanders to the system of social ranks which they found in In- dia. The Hindu word is varna, with precisely the same meaning. Hence it is probable that originally the Brahmins were the whitest of all the Indians. However this may be, caste no longer proceeds from colour, and throughout the present work it will be used to designate the various orders or ranks of society. DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 59 feudal arrangement of caste to be distinguished from others, nor to furnish a guide to the origin of such institutes, nor the reasons for their adoption. These are defects which render such definitions practically valueless. Some writers have, indeed, attributed the medieval system of caste to the relative importance of Franks and Romans, as measured by the retts or were-gild of the Salic law; but the explanation is insufficient, for this were-gild only accounts for the difference between a ''common Frank " and a " Roman possessor of lands," and between "landowners" and " culti'vators. " These differences may have betokened no distinction at all in caste, or, as- suming that they did, the distinction may not have been universal. Even if universal, this were-gild only vaguely establishes two or three grades of social rank, of whose legal rights or obligations to the state, or to one another, we are left substantially in the dark, and are therefore not warranted in basing upon them any supposed system of caste. The common description of feudalism, that one which has been adopted by the legal profession, is a system of tenures by military or other services, chiefly military. This explanation is even less satis- isfactory than the previous ones. It is like describing man as an animal that wears clothes. True, that man wears clothes, true, also, that man is the only animal that does wear clothes. Yet, was he not man, before he wore clothes, and has he, even now, no other nor more important function than that of wearing clothes? As an expe- dient for economising thought, by limiting the enquiry to the Car- lovingian aera and to a single accidental mark, which leads to the dis- covery of no essential characteristic of feudalism, the theory of military tenures is a happy one. As a means of ascertaining com- prehensively the nature of the feudal system, as an instrument for determining the characteristic features of a feud, as a mark to denote the beginning or end of feudal government, or feudal tenures, it is of no use whatever. In those causes, now of the rarest occurrence, which turn upon the essentials of a feud, the Bench may hereafter find it necessary to assume a totally different basis, for the origin of feudal obligations and customs, than military or other services. For we trust to be able to show that the feudal system was con- nected and necessarily connected with the church; that it was a de- velopment of the Sacred constitution of the Roman empire and legally expired with it; that it began with that constitution and its requirements; that it existed long before the establishment of the military tenures referred to ; that there were many other feudal in- 6o THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED, stitutions and customs, such as the feudalisation of church revenues, which had no connection with mihtary services; and that feudal es- tates of land were not founded upon military services, but upon the inalienability of lands belonging to the church, the use of which was granted as a favour — bcneficio — by the church for produce or for ser- vices, which, whether civil or military, was of no essential importance. Many of these circumstances and relations were observed by the very writers who were constrained to shunt the whole subject into the petty cul de sac of military tenures. That they made so little of them can only be ascribed to the inadequate importance which they ac- corded to the Sacred constitution, or else to the vice of verbalism and the misleading etymology of feoh. This is a Gothic word mean- ing a cow, and, by metonym, a payment, reward, or fee. It is hardly too much to say that, hitherto, this word has successfully resisted every attempt made to discover either the origin, the eera, or the na- ture of the feudal system in Europe. Respect for those who have treated this difficult subject, render it proper that their opinions shall be consulted and briefly discussed at the outset. The ablest of these writers, at least in the estimation of English readers, was Mr. Hallam, and we shall begin with the argu- ments set forth in his deservedly popular "View of the state of Eu- rope during the Middle Ages." I. Mr. Hallam does not define the feudal system, nor does he men- tion any characteristics by which it may be always distinguished (/. e., at any and all stages of its development) from a system of government which is not feudal. His treatise begins with a descrip- tion of "benefices, or in other words, fiefs." Avoiding all mention of inalienable property and the origin of benefices, he skips over several centuries of time and conducts the reader at once to the ma- turity of feudalism, which he describes as a system of land tenures, that obliged the tenant to "serve his sovereign in the field." Thus, "to render military service became the essential obligation which the tenant of a benefice undertook, and out of these «««>«/ grants there grew up in the tenth century, both in name and in reality, the system of feudal tenures." If the obligation to serve the sovereign, or the state represented by the sovereign, in the field, is the essen tial obligation or characteristic of the feudal system, then there is nothing peculiar about it. The duty of the subject or citizen to render military service to the sovereign or state is essential to communal life, or societary existence; and it has prevailed and still prevails and must continue to prevail, in all communities. DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 6l That military service, either to the sovereign or to anybody else is not the essential characteristic of feudalism, appears, the moment we retrace our author's too rapid steps and revert to the nature of those benefices which he has acknowledged to be, as indeed they were, the same as fiefs, but which he has apparently forgotten all about. In the first place these benefices, when they consisted of landed estates, all emanated from the church. In the second place, few or none of them were granted to, or by, the church, upon con- ditions of military service. In the third place, many benefices or fiefs had no more to do with lands than with military services. Princes sometimes granted in fief the offices of state, the running of water, the profits of coinage, or the tolls of roads and ferries, while pre- lates granted in fief the profits of the holy mass, the profits of bap- tism, of the churchings of women, or of the sacred winds of heaven. * II. Still absorbed with the notion that a benefice or fief was neces- sarily and always an estate of land, Mr. Hallam, in another place, says: "The essential principle of a fief was a mutual contract of support and fidelity." To this it may be replied that such is the na- ture of the social contract in all states. Surely there is no suspicion of feudalism in the absolute ownership or allodial tenures of the United States of America, at the present time. Yet every landowner there, as well every man who is not a landowner, is under an im- plied, if not an express contract, to be "faithful" to the govern- ment, which in return, undertakes to "support" him in his political rights. III. Mr. Hallam incidentally observes that during the height of the feudal system in France, vassals never hesitated to serve their lords even against the sovereign, "nor do they appear to have in- curred any blame on that account." Having said this much, the illustrious author dismissed that portion of his subject which merited the greatest attention. The respect, fidelity or allegiance due from the subject, not directly to the head of the state, but to the subject's patron, or the noble placed next above him in the social scale, and by the latter to his lord, and so on upwards to the throne, was one of the most characteristic marks of feudality; far more characteristic than the holding of land upon condition of performing military ser- vice to a patron or sovereign. The latter mark is only to be observed after feudalism had made considerable progress; the former can be discovered whenever and wherever the feudal system prevailed. It * Robertson's Charles V., note H; Guizot, i, 66; Beckman, Hist. Inv., art, "Corn- mills." 02 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. is true that the mark of feudal ordination was not so plain when Ju- lius and Augustus first applied the organization and discipline of the pagan church to the civil and military systems of the empire, as it was, when under Hadrian IV., the church, now Christianized, had become all-powerful and its influence all-pervading; but, though only faintly impressed, it is to be seen from the outset. The organization of ecclesiastical ranks and powers was feudal; the charters of the Augustan period, which Josephus has preserved, are feudal; the vi- cariously applied powers of the proconsuls and propraetors during the whole of the pagan imperial sera was feudal; and the arrangement of social ranks, which, beginning in the first century, grew to ma- turity by the fifth — the nobillissimi, illustres, spectabiles, clarisimi, and perfectisimi — were also feudal. These powers and ranks were feudal from the moment that they ceased to be related directly to the state or the head of the state and became related to other powers and other ranks which stood between them and the state. Mr. Hallam employs an erroneous term when he calls the king of France the "sovereign of the vassals." He was nothing of the sort. He was the suzerain of the nobles. The latter were the sovereigns of the vassals, and to them alone, as Mr. Hallam himself admits, was vas- salic allegiance due. IV. Our author regards "fiefs holden on terms of military service as the most ancient and regular " fiefs, forgetting that, in another place, he found fiefs still more ancient in those ecclesiastical bene- fices which had nothing to do with military service. V. Mr. Hallam regards investiture as a characteristic mark of feudalism. This is again like regarding the wearing of clothes as the characteristic mark of men. The reply is that although there may have been no investiture without feudalism, there certainly was feu- dalism without investiture. Among those duties of the vassal which commenced with investiture, duties which our author unfortunately finds it "impossible to define or enumerate," was the duty "never to conceal from the lord, the machinations of others." This is ad- mitted to be a mark of feudalism, but denied that it is only to be discerned in the customs of investiture; for it will be found expressly set forth in the Judean charters already cited. These preceded in- vestiture by several centuries. VI. A similar reply may be made with regard to reliefs, which Mr. Hallam confines to the middle ages and describes as "sums of money (unless where charter or custom introduced a different tribute) due from everyone, of full age, taking a fief by descent." During the DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 6 >> Triumvirate the Senate granted to Herod his fief of Judea, which he claimed by descent from Antipater, to whom it had been granted by Julius Caesar. The money which Herod paid on this occasion (B. C. 40) as well as what he paid ten years later, when he obtained a confirmation of his fief and transferred his oath of allegiance to Augustus, was according to Mr. Hallam's definition, a relief. There- fore reliefs are not to be confined to the middle ages. It may be added that they are not to be confined to medieval fiefs. Augustus not only exacted a relief from Herod, he exacted one from every heir, whether the incumbent of a feudal estate or otherwise. This exaction, known as vigesima hgereditatum, or the twentieth of all in- heritances, was a tax of purely ecclesiastical origin, the entire pro- ceeds of which were probably devoted to the support of the church. VII. Mr. Hallam closes his enumeration, not of feudal character- istics, but of what he calls "feudal incidents," with a description of the "partial customs " concerning wardships and marriages (such as feudal servitudes) which distinguish "the maturity of the system." This softening of phrases and qualification of terms distinguishes every writer on the subject of feudalism, but in Mr. Hallam it is most marked. They all appear to be afraid to commit themselves to any positive language on the subject: than which there can be no surer token of doubt and uncertainty. In this sort of euphemism, "char- acteristics" are softened into "incidents," "customs" into "partial customs," and "feudalism" into "matured feudalism." The reader never knows what he has gained. After fancying the argument to be safely anchored in port, he finds it, to his surprise, still tossing about, upon an ocean of indefinite phraseology. If a description of the feudal system is to be limited only to those characteristics or inci- dents which marked its maturity, how are we to determine its origin, how long it prevailed, how far it extended, or what mischief it wrought? VIII. Mr. Hallam — still looking for the channel and never letting go of the sounding-line for a moment — parts with his readers by warning them against false lights, "against seeming analogies (to feudal incidents) which vanish away when they are closely observed. " * Among these he enumerates the relation of patron and client, be- cause it was not founded upon tenures of land nor military service. Yet, according to his own terms, these essential "incidents" of ^Mr. Hallam's objections to what he regards as "seeming analogies" (Mid. Ages, p. 96,) are sharply criticised by Hampson, Origines Patriae, p. 61. 64 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. feudalism only pertained to the maturity of feudalism and may not have distinguished its beginning. His objection to be guided by the light of patron and client has therefore, no discernible foundation. Another light about which he is very doubtful, is emphyteusis, which he accuses the medieval Italian lawyers of wrongly mistaking for a feudal tenure, "modes of property somewhat analogous in appear- ance, but totally distinct in principle," (p. 95). Yet, in another place, he admits that feodum and emphyteusis were often used interchange- ably, and that, .for example, under the edict of Peter II., of Aragon, 1210, it was not always possible to determine whether emphyteusis meant a "regular fief," or not. His explanation is that although emphyteusis resembles a fief in being an estate of land held upon conditions, it differs from a fief in the essential respect that those conditions were not military service. It is therefore very evident that military service is the sign by means of which this obscure chan- nel is attempted to be traced by Mr. Hallam. When it is remem- bered that Mr. Hallam himself had shown that fiefs and benefices were the same, that benefices were not military, that fiefs were not always military, and that, in some instances, it was impossible to distinguish emphyteusis from a feudal tenure, the retention of this clue is very remarkable. Any further examination of Mr. Hallam's views on this subject would be futile. It is quite clear that both this author and the sev- eral other authors whose opinions he discusses and rejects, were conscious of the great difficulty which attended their search for the origin of the feudal system in Europe, and of the uncertainty in which they were compelled to leave the enquiry; that they never sus- pected, at all events never disclosed, any connection between it and the Sacred constitution; that, for them, the feudal system possessed no necessary relation to the ecclesiastical system; that they never regarded the Roman and medieval arrangement of civil, military, and ecclesiastical ranks, as peculiarly feudal, or as of sacerdotal origin, or as being impossible of achievement and perpetuation with- out the consent and co-operation of the church ; that they did not regard the inalienability of church-lands as having anything to do with the origin of feudal estates; that, excepting Guizot, they saw no evidences of the existence of feudalism in the pagan Roman empire, or indeed at any earlier period than the Carlovingian sera; and that, to all of them, the sign, the mark, the buoy, the clue, the finger-post to feudalism, was the hoiding of lands upon condition of military service. DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 65 Whilst we may decline to accept the conclusions drawn by this eminent author we are compelled to acknowledge the great value of his observations. In this respect, Mr. Hallam's chapters on feudal- ism are all that can be desired. The numerous marks and soundings of the subject which he has brought together have evidently been investigated with care and impartiality. If read closely, it will be found that the historian does not altogether deny the Roman origin of feudalism; his view seems rather to be that it did not attain the maturity of a system until the Carlovingian sera. So far, there is no essential disagreement between this view and the one upheld in these pages. It is not intended to be maintained that feudalism ripened at once into a complete form of government, but that it arose out of, and began its development under, the Sacred constitution, was marked by precisely the same territorial limits, and received its death blow when that constitution expired. So far as feudalism is concerned, Mr. Hallam's work leaves the Dark Ages entirely out of view. In the present work this period is attempted to be brought into relief. The essential difference in the two theories relates to the origin of feu- dalism. Mr. Hallam can only discover this in the supposed military tenures of the Goths; the search-light of the Sacred empire enables us to discern it in the necessities and institutes of the Romans; among which were military tenures granted before the Goths domi- nated Europe. The Gothic clue led Mr. Hallam to base a limited structure of feudalism upon certain eccentric and (from his point of view) unaccountable tenures of land. The sacerdotal clue not only accounts quite readily for these tenures, it affords a much broader and more ancient foundation for the superstructure, and enables us to perceive and admit fuller and more varied proportions to the latter. Read by the light of the Sacred empire even the materials brought together by Mr. Hallam point to the Roman origin and the broader features of feudalism to which we have alluded. For example, Mr. Hallam distinctly asserts of the Franks under Clovis that the Romans, or rather the provincial inhabitants of Gaul, were not only possessed of lands, but that they were governed by the Roman law and admit- ted to the royal favour and the highest offices; that the bishops and clergy, who were usually Romans, grew continually in popular esti- mation, in riches and in temporal sway and authority; that while one class of Romans retained estates of their own, another class, scarcely raised above the condition of praedial servitude, were tributaries upon estates owned either by the former or by Franks; thus proving that Frankish chieftains did not monopolise the offices of state; nor 66 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. Frankish priests the profits of the church; nor Frankish owners the fruits of the land; nor Frankish judges the tribunals of justice. The fact that the Salic law was grafted upon the Roman, lends great sig- nificance to Mr. Hallam's recognition of numerous other orders of nobility, beside those which appear in the were-gilds, such as patrician, antrustion, conviva regis, commoner, bishop, abbot, duke, count, and knight. He also recognizes commoners, landowners, freemen, fideles, leudes, tributaries, servi, coloni, fiscalini, and other social grades, and avers that the feudal system was characterized by "long graduations and numerous duties." He admits that every man both in France and Italy had the right to choose by which law, whether Roman or Gothic, he would be governed; that so early as 570, the Lombard dukes of Spoleto and Benevento embraced in their newly founded duchies " a sort of feudal aristocracy ;" that fideles and leudes were favourite subjects or royal vassals of the Frankish kings upon whom benefices for life had been bestowed out of the lands of the fisc, and who, in common with the antrustions, took oaths of fidelity to their prince; that in the Salic and Lombard codes favorable ex- ceptions were made in favour of such vassals; that the benefices of the antrustions were hereditary and the language of the treaty of Andely, A. D. 587, implied the existence of other hereditary bene- fices (we suggest that these were of ecclesiastical lands) ; that "who- ever possessed a benefice (within our author's meaning) was bound to serve his sovereign in the field; " that the beneficiary " naturally carved out portions of his land to be held of himself by a similar tenure " and so on, in turn, down to the last holder; and in the in- stance of Sunegisilius and Gallomagnus, two favorites of Childebert, their benefices were confiscated for neglect or refusal to perform military service; that the estates of counts were usually co-extensive with episcopal dioceses (this implies the confiscation of the pagan church lands by the secular authority) ; that the counts grievously oppressed the poorer proprietors (this would be the natural complaint of the church when, having fastened " the yoke of the Gospel " upon the barbarians, it demanded the restoration of these confiscated lands) ; that Salvian, a priest who died about A. D. 500, mentions the custom of commendation as existing "even before the invasion of the Franks; " that commendation resembled the Roman relation of patron and client ; that it enabled the lower classes of freemen, upon payment of homage and tribute, to secure the protection of the no- bles and exemption from military service; that both Frankish and Anglo-Saxon laws of Christian dates provided that every man should DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 67 own a lord; that the "essential principle" of a fief was a mutual con- tract of support and fidelity, and that the sanctions of religion were employed to strengthen the tie; but that the "real principle" of a fief was an arrangement of land holders "in degrees of subordina- tion according to their respective capacities of affording mutual sup- port; " that prelates and abbots were, ex-officio, feudal nobles; that military service was not reserved in grants of land made by the State to the Church; that many private persons conveyed their lands, and even their persons as slaves to the church in return for its blessing, and, (it may be added,) exemption from military service; that mili- tary service was not reserved in the beneficiary grants made by the church; that the feudal system in Europe was strictly confined to the limits of the Roman empire; that it did not exist in Norway, Sweden, Finland, Denmark, Saxony, Hungary, Venice, old Bohemia, Poland, or Russia; that the Milanese lawyers claimed it was of Roman origin and the Argonese fiefs were often granted, to use their own word?, "according to the custom of Italy." It is remarkable that with all this evidence pointing to the Roman origin, the sacerdotal nature and the varied composition, of the feu- dal system, Mr. Hallam should have permitted his views upon the subject to be limited by the verbal clue of feoh. This course is still more remarkable when it is remembered that he had already traced feudal tenures back to Roman benefices, a clue far more suggestive and promising than feoh, and totally unconnected with it, and that he cites Sweno, one of the earliest of Gothic writers, to prove that feoh was not a fief, but an "honour or government." But most re- markable does Mr. Hallam's course seem when he must have discov- ered that the adoption of feoh led to nothing but barren conjectures concerning the polity of tribes who had no polity and the useless elevation into gospel of thatpleasingbutimpossible Germania, which Tacitus, the accomplished priest and historian, constructed out of some Roman log-book and designed rather for a homily to his heret- ical and degenerate countrymen, than a serious and actual descrip- tion of barbarian manners. The prepossession which appears to have misled Mr. Hallam was still more pronounced with Dr. Robertson, for it induced that eminent scholar to reject the plainest marks of the Roman origin of feudalism and to accept a totally improbable theory in place of it. Says the author of the Life of Charles the Fifth: "Though the barbarous na- tions which framed the feudal system settled in their new territories 68 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. at different times, came from different countries, spoke various lan- guages and were under the command of separate leaders, the feudal policy and laws were established with little variation in every king- dom in Europe. This amazing uniformity (amazing indeed if feu- dalism was of barbarian origin!) hath induced some authors, for example Procopius, to believe that all these nations, notwithstand- ing so many apparent circumstances of distinction, were originally the same people. But it may be ascribed with greater probability to the similar state of society and of manners to which they were accus- tomed in their native countries and to the similar situation in which they found themselves on taking possession of their new domains." A weaker argument could hardly have been advanced. It does not account for the fact that there was no feudalism among those bar- barians whohad not previouslybeen conquered by the Romans; norfor the fact that its extinction synchronised with that of the Roman em- pire; nor for the fact that feudal systems in other countries were all connected with hierarchies and all hierarchies with feudal systems; nor for the feudal charters of Roman Judea; nor for the identity of fiefs and benefices and the origin of benefices in the inalienable lands of a church; nor for the ecclesiastical nature and ancient origin of feudal ranks and feudal government; nor for numerous other facts pertaining to feudalism. And what are we offered in place of a theory that should account for these facts? The assumption that Goths, Huns, Franks, and Sclavs all lived in a similar state of society in their own countries and found themselves in a similar situation when they set- tled in Europe: an assumption which the historian himself flatly con- tradicts on another page of his work, where he says that " while the barbarous nations remained in their original countries they had no fixed property in land and no certain limits to their possessions." It is a pity that this familiarity with the ancient customs of the barbarians — who had and who hadn't a fixed property in land, who did and who didn't hanker after lands whose tenures were burdened with dangerous and often degrading conditions, and who were and who weren't the inventors and introducers into Europe of the feudal system — it was a pity that all this information was not communicated to M. Guizot, for that other eminent writer on the same subject says: "The customs and social condition of the barbarians have completely perished." As Dr. Robertson who wrote in 1785 appeared to know all about them and M. Guizot who wrote in 1824 could learn nothing about them, the knowledge of these customs must have all perished during the interval. DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 69 In describing the mode by which, in accordance with his theory, the barbarians transplanted their foreign feudal system into Europe, Dr. Robertson says : ' ' Every freeman upon receiving a portion of the lands, which were divided, bound himself to appear in arms against the enemies of the community." No evidence is offered to prove that lands were so divided. On the contrary, the facts are that a vast number of the estates, certainly all the ecclesiastical ones, which were in the possession of Roman owners before the revolts of the barbarians, remained in the possession of Roman owners after the termination of such revolts, and that those barbarians, who were not merely Roman vassals or subjects in revolt, such as the Norsemen and Norse-Saxons, cared little or nothing about lands or other spoil that was not portable. " The obligation to appear in arms against the enemies of the community — even if admitted to have existed under a system which was distinguished by personal obligations, and which rarely provided for any of a communal character — was not peculiar to feudal states, for it is common to all communities, indeed we would prefer to say that it is common to all systems of society except the feudal system. For the purpose of accentuating that mili- tary obligation which he assumed to lie at the basis of feudalism, the historian says of the holders of fiefs: "They were exempt from every other burden," an assertion in support of which he offers no proof at all. In another place and to further illustrate his theory, he com- mences by dividing all the lands of the Roman empire among the bar- barians whom he assumes to have conquered such lands. Then, in order to account for that subordination of estates which according to his view first makes its appearance after this event, he divides the land again, this time not among the barbarians generally, but only among the chieftains, so that the latter may "distribute portions of their lands among their dependents, annexing the same conditions (of military service with no other burden) to the grant." This redistri- * Instead of fancying from the barbarian origin of the word feoh that the barbarians brought feudalism into Europe, Dr. Robertson might have easily discovered that they had no feudal elements whatever in their social structure. The Eddas and Sagas would have given him the communal organizations of the herad and the fylki, and had he suspected that these had been altered, as no doubt they had been by contact with the Romans, he might have found the original institute still flourishing in Russia under the name of mir. It was with this Mongolian institute and not the selection of a patron, or suzerain, (which the Romans taught him,) that the barbarian thrall pro- tected himself against the oppression of the jarl; and it is in this institute that his descendants still find, in the absence of a better one, some sort of a refuge from tyranny. 70 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. bution among chieftains of lands that had once been parcelled out among the conquering rank and file is hardly supported by the story which our author quotes from Gregory of Tours, of the vase which Clovis coveted, over and above his share of spoil, but which one of his men shattered to pieces before his eyes, saying j "There is noth- ing for you here beyond your share. " Fancy Dr. Robertson proposing redistribution to a warrior of this stamp! * A more serious objection to this theory is the consideration that the existence of a class of dependents not entitled to a share of the lands in the first place and of chieftains with power to annex conditions of military service to subsequent grants of such lands, bespeak the institution of a feudal system anterior to the one for whose origin the historian endeavours to account. In one place (p. 15) he says that "the names of a soldier and of a freeman were synonymous," in another (p. 20) that these soldiers had "superiors" to whom they were bound by feudal obli- gations, and in a third that feudal institutions destroyed both equality and independence; positions which are evidently so contradictory as to deprive his general argument on the subject of all force. The views of M. Guizot, where they differ from those which have herein been discussed, are certainly very peculiar. In his first allu- sion to feudalism (Hist. Civ., I, 41,) he very justly calls it an " aris- tocratical organization " derived from "hierarchical subordination." Then, wholly ignoring the meaning of hieras, sacred, he traces this form of society to the attachment of man to man, and therefore, ac- cording to his reasoning, feudalism to the barbarians. In one place he says that wherever barbarism appeared within the empire there arose feudalism, in another (p. 66) he says "wherever barbarism ceased^ everything took the feudal form." In one place, (p. 70), he says that the importance of a Roman patrician was due to the law, while "that of the possessor of a fief was purely individual, it was not derived from any one, all his rights, all his power came to him from himself." In another place, (p. 75), he says that "every one ' The Story of the Vase as told by Almoin of Aquitaine, Hist, of France, (lib. i, c. 12,) is very different from the version of the Croniques de St. Denis. The former says: " Clovis, in 486, took Rheims and plundered the church of its plate. The bishop requested him to restore a silver chalice to the church, and Clovis assented, subject to the advice of his council. Calling the principal barons and knights together he asked their decision, when one of them stepped forward and cut the chalice in two with his sword, saying: ' You have no concern with anything here but what belongs to you by lot.' " Hampson's Origines Patricije, pp. Iviii, 9. This little drama might easily have been arranged beforehand. DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 71 knows that feudalism desired legally to determine what were the services due from the possessor of the fief towards his suzerain." In one place the tendency and result of feudalism is separation and social isolation; in another place, (p. 79), the idea of feudalism was in fact, that of a federation; for example, "like the United States of Amer- ica. " In one place the feudal system is the most complex of all sys- tems of society, one for which "a very advanced degree of civiliza- tion is evidently requisite ;' in another, it was invented and introduced by ignorant and savage barbarians. However, the crowning effort of this illustrious author is reserved for the mention of that material criterion by which the existence of the feudal system is always susceptible of being determined with certainty. This is castles. Feudalism and castles are always found together. The presence of one betokens the other. "Feudalism constructed them," and "their elevation was, so to speak, the decla- ration of its triumph." Then because, as he believed, "nothing of the kind (that is, castles,) existed on the Gallo-Roman soil before the German invasion," he argues that there could have been no feu- dalism before the occurrence of that highly mythical event. It would certainly be instructive to learn what sort of castles the "Germans," that is, the Goths and Huns, erected in the countries from which they imported feudalism into Europe, and how they managed to main- tain the feudal system in the interval of abandoning one set of castles and erecting the other; but our author does not enlighten us on these points, nor does he appear to remember that long before the so-called "German Invasion" the Romans built or reconstructed castles on the Gallic soil and by these very means held it as a province of Rome ; that many of the ancient castles of the Rhine whose picturesque de- cay render that stream so interesting to the modern traveller, were built by the Romans; ® that they built numerous castles in Britain; ^ that Josephus describes many Roman castles in Syria; that the ruins of others have been found in all of their provinces, and in some in- stances beyond them, as the Roman castles in the Desert of Sahara; and indeed that the more ancient Greeks constructed castles in My- cenae, Tiryns, Troy and other places. As for the tiresome argument which M. Guizot repeats, that feu- dalism must be of barbarian origin because feud is from feoh and the latter is the Gothic word for a cow, it is hardly worth refutation. In addition to being grotesquely illogical, it is wholly irrelevant. Feu- * Sir F, Palgrave, i, 353 ; Tacitus, Annales, iv, 73. ' Juvenal, xiv, 19''. 72 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. dalism is an institution, a thing; not a mere word. It is the origin, not of the word, but of the thing that we seek, and that origin in the Western world we find to be Roman. Whether the thing afterwards got a barbarian name or not, does not seem to us — with all respect for M. Guizot — to be of the slightest possible consequence. Next we turn to Mr. Buckle. This justly eminent author believed neither in Dr. Robertson's cow nor M. Guizot's castles. In place of these historical theories he proposes a new one. Feudalism according to this view, was an unfolded plan of government, based on an indefi- nite relation of land and services, which arose in no stated place, out of a rebellion of the intellect, that occurred during some unmentioned portion of the tenth century. Briefly, our author regards the feudal system to be an entirely secular plan of government which emerged from the medieval Rebellion of the Human Intellect that, he asserts, occurred against the rottenness of the Christian church. The proofs relied upon to sustain this theory of feudalism are as follows: First, "the basis of the whole arrangement was merely the possession of land and the performance of certain military and pecuniary services." Second, in the feudal polity the spiritual classes, as such, had no recognized place. Instead of looking up to the head of the church, men looked up to the nobles. Thus, by the feudal revolution, the nobles gained and the bishops lost, at least so we are assured, says Mr. Buckle, by the abbe Mably. Third, after the occurrence of the feu- dal revolution (in other words, the rebellion of the human intellect against the corruption of the church) priests and monks were no longer exempt from military services. "Under the feudal system this immunity was lost, and in regard to performing services, no sep- aration of classes was admitted." Mr. Buckle has added such a mass of valuable information on other subjects to the general stock of our knowledge, that it seems almost impious to roughly handle anything that he has touched; but as it is impossible to build anew, whilst old materials cumber the ground, so must even those which he has left behind, be removed, though ever so reverently, from the site of the proposed Edifice. I. Mr. Buckle asserts that the basis of the whole arrangement was land. If the ' ' whole arrangement " within our author's meaning was land, it is evident that its basis must also have been land, but as he has not defined nor described the " whole arrangement " it is impos- sible to discern with precision what relation it bears to the feudal system. The inference of the entirely secular character of the latter DEFECTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 73 therefore falls to the ground. If, by the whole arrangement is meant the whole feudal system, the notion that it was merely a system of landed estates, is so fully refuted elsewhere in these pages that the argument needs no further elaboration. II. Our author asserts that in the feudal polity the spiritual classss, as such, had no recognized place. This is an assertion that flies in the face of all history. In the feudal polity the spiritual classes not only had a recognized place, they made all the places, reserving for themselves the best ones. They not only stood behind the throne of the emperor, they placed their feet upon it and employed it to work all those feudal puppets whom they did not choose to work directly from the papal throne. The church was the parent of feu- dalism, and dutifully imitatingits own Jupiter, lived upon its progeny; for feudalism kept communities and princes apart, and in that con- dition rendered them more amenable to ecclesiastical avidity and control. It was the pontifex-maximus that, by veiling his sacred person from the world, created those numerous social ranks and that peculiar subordination which distinguished the feudal system of caste; it was the church that by fastening the yoke of the gospel upon the necks of the northern and western barbarians saved the empire from that complete overthrow which it suffered at the hands of the eastern and southern barbarians, and having saved it, at once proceeded to rule it; it was the church that, having acquired spiritual control of the northern and western princes, immured many of them in the monastic tombs of Rome in order that it might more readily direct the policy and grasp the revenues of the others; it was the church that having gained temporal possession for the Lord, of more than half of northern and western Europe, stocked its estates with white slaves, sometimes more than 20,000 to a single abbot, and leased or granted these estates as benefices or fiefs for the ultimate advantage, not of the Lord, but of the Lord's annointed ; it was the church which so organized the ranks of nobles and ecclesiastics that, after the people " looked up to the nobles," the latter were obliged to look up to the readers, exorcists, clerks, priests, vicars, abbots, prelates, electors, legates, cardinals, and pontifex-maximus who surrounded or filled the throne of Rome and dispensed its favours or anathemas; finally, it was the church that first held inalienable landed estates, which, because they belonged to the Lord, could not be sold, and therefore had to be leased out, or granted for a term of years, or for a life time, or forever, on conditions of an annual payment of pro- duce or services, and constituted those benefices or fiefs or feuds, 74 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. which our author supposes to have been derived from some fancied rebellion of the medieval intellect. * III. Mr. Buckle asserts that after the introduction of the feudal system, an event which he assigns to the tenth century, ecclesiastics were no longer exempt from military service. It would be interesting to know who had the power and opportunity to repeal a millennium of Sacred law on this subject, or having such power and opportunity, dared to make use of it. Was it any of the petty princes of the tenth century, whether already immured in priestly dungeons, or liable to be so immured, whenever the priests gave the signal? Was it Otho, the suzerain of these princes, who received his crown upon his knees from the pope and whose empire was called the Holy Roman? Was it Henry who stood barefooted without the pope's door at Canossa, abjectly soliciting the forgiveness of his Holiness? Or was it the pope himself, who subjected the ecclesiastical to the temporal power by repealing the military exemption, or the priests, who voluntarily renounced the spiritual and took up the temporal sword? These questions at once indicate the improbability of Mr. Buckle's theory. It is inconceivable that the church repealed, or permitted the repeal of, a privilege which formed the main support of its authority and one which if abandoned to its enemies might have been employed for its destruction by sending all its adherents to the front. As a matter of history, so far was this privilege from any danger of being repealed, nobody ever suggested such a measure, and the privilege exists at the present day in every state that has issued from the prolific womb of Roman civilization. It is true that it has long since lost its import- ance, but so also has the feudal system and the Sacred empire, and many other institutes of antiquity. The spirit in which Bishop William Stubbs approaches the study of the subject would hardly entitle his views on feudalism to considera- tion in this place were it not that as a teacher of history he happens to occupy the foremost place in England. In his "Lectures on Medieval and Modern History " he disinguishes (p. 15) between "one sort of truth " and another, between ordinary truth, and Christian truth, evidently regarding the latter as of a much superior quality. At the same time he fails to discern the difference between philoso- phy and "philosophic sciolism " (p. 8). He maintains that history is a religious training, but inferior as such to theology, because the ^ Brady, Clavis Calendaria, shows where a priest claimed his order to be superior to the gods. DEFFXTIVE THEORIES OF THE FEUDAL SYSTEM. 75 latter "rests on a divine revelation" (p. lo); that "the principle of freedom was brought into the world and proclaimed and made pos- sible by the church " (p. i8) ; that the church is " the soul and spirit of all true civilization, of all true liberty, of all true knowledge" (p. i8); that there is no unity or continuity of ancient and modern history, (p. 98,) except in religion and in that only because the Christian dispensation connects the Flood (p. 134) and other be- liefs of "the ancient Hebrew isolation, with the great Catholic church life" (p. 99); that "except as a matter of culture the an- cient world is dead to us" (p. loS); that as a field for fresh and remunerative exploration it is useless to search the classical his- torians, "every bone of the great (historical) skeleton having long been put into its place " (p. 88) ; that "ancient history exercises the critical faculty in a comparatively exhausted field" (p. 109); that modern nations inherit no political institutes but only ecclesiastical culture from the Roman empire (p. 99); that "the ideas of medieval and modern life are of medieval and modern growth, or if connected with antiquity, connected by a new birth of culture, a re-discovery, a re-creation, not a continuous impulse of vitality " (p. 99) ; and that the twelfth century "originated the forms in which our national and constitutional life began to mould itself" (p. 136). After this astonishing prelude it occasions no surprise to be told in his "Constitutional History of England," that "feudalism was of distinctly Frank growth. The principle which underlies it may be universal, but the historical development of it . . . may be traced under Frank influence from its first appearance on the conquered soil of Roman Gaul to its full development in the Middle Ages" (p. 250); that "feudalism in England was brought full grown from France" (p. 25 1 ;/) ; that the growth of the feudal system is correctly explained only by Dr. Waitz, who lucidly accounts for it "on the theory of a conjunction and interpenetration of the beneficial system and the vassal relation, both being fostered by the growth of immunities" (p. 251 n); that "this institution (feudalism) had grown up from two great sources, the beneficiumand the practice of commendation and had been specially fostered on Gallic soil by the existence of a sub- ject population which admitted of any amount of extension in the methods of dependence" (p. 252); that "the beneficiary system originated partly in gifts of land made by the kings out of their own estates to the kinsmen and servants, with a special understanding to be faithful . . . (and) partly in the surrender by land owners of their estates to churches or powerful men to be received back again and 76 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. held by them as tenants for rent or services" (p. 252); that "the union of the beneficiary tie with that of commendation completed the idea of feudal obligation " (p. 253) ; that "a third ingredient wassup- plied by the grants of immunity by which, in the Frank empire, as in England, the possession of land was united with the right of judi- cature" (p. 253); that "the rapid spread of the system thus origi- nated may be regarded as the work of the tenth century, but as early as A. D. 877 Charles the Bald recognized the hereditary character of all benefices and from that year the growth of strictly feudal juris- prudence maybe held to date" (p. 253); that "the beneficium is partly of Roman, partly of German origin" (p. 254); and that, "in the form which it reached at the Norman conquest, it (feudalism) may be described as a complete organization of society through the medium of land tenure" (p. 251). With all respect for the accomplished Regius Professor of Modern History, it is submitted that these views, most of which are confess- edly borrowed from a German writer, Dr. Georg Waitz, wholly fail to account for the origin of the feudal system or to describe any other phase of it than the matured one which it reached during the middle ages, and that even as to that one the description lacks both clearness, completeness, and precision. It does not explain the re- semblance and connection of hierarchical and feudal governments, the sacerdotal origin of feudal rank, the involution of feudal castes, the similar ordination of nobles and priests, the inalienable tenures of ecclesiastical lands, nor the existence of feudalism in America before the Spanish conquest, in England before the Norman conquest, in Gaul before the Frankish conquest, in Egypt and Asia Minor before the Roman conquest, or in the various countries of the Orient. Nor is Dr. Stubbs consistent. On one page (251 n) he tells us that Montesquieu's view, (namely, that the bond of amity in feudalism was the connection of classes in subordination to one another) though accepted by the learned Eichhorn, has since been entirely refuted by Dr. Waitz, whilst, on another page (256), he describes "feudal gov- ernment (as) a graduated system of jurisdiction based on land tenure, in which every lord judged, taxed, and commanded the class next below him;" and thus contradicts himself and discredits his author. In short, the opinions of Dr. Stubbs as to the origin and nature of feudalism, seem very much confused and contain but little that had not already been said and said much better by the illustrious Hallam, Robertson and Guizot. 77 CHAPTER V. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. Feudal systems of Asia, Africa and Aboriginal America — They all sprang from hierarchies — Were all associated with inalienable lands consecrated to the Church — Synchronism in the rise and fall of all hierarchies and feudal systems — Recent case of Japan — Feudalism always marked by vicarious government — European feudalism be- gan with Julius Caesar and ended with the Reformation — It was strictly confined to the Roman empire — The deification of Julius C;Esar rendered it necessary to surround him with descending ranks of nobles and priests — Such involved systems of caste pecu- liar to all hierarchies — Roman nobles and priests were similarly ordained: a proof of their hierarchical connection — The Roman hierarchy and feudalism rose and fell and flourished and faded together — Benefices, their origin, nature and history — Avidity and great wealth of the pagan church — Its lands, tithes and slaves — Gratian confis- cates them — Theodosius bestows them on the "christian " church — The Barbarian Con- quest, an invention by the monks — The barbarians did not destroy; they conserved the Roman empire — Gradual growth of feudalism — Proconsuls, who under the Com- monwealth, were merely imperial officers; under the empire, became feudal monarchs — Clovis, Theodoret, Sigismund, Athaulf — Ancient roots of certain customs of feudal- ism — Renewals and reliefs — These found in the Julian charters — Patron and Client — Land grants — Military service to nobles — Slavery — Emphyteusis. PHYSICAL science has taught us the advantage which is sometimes to be gained by examining the spectrum of an object, rather than the object itself. It is in photographs that we now study the glimpses of the moon and from the analysis of light and the nature of gases, that we gather the story of the stars. In somewhat similar manner let us endeavor to read the riddle of European feudalism by examining such accounts as have reached us of feudalism in other countries. These comprise India, China, Japan, Persia, Babylon, Syria, Egypt, and Mexico, whose feudal systems are mentioned elsewhere.' A striking discovery rewards us at once. It is impossible not to notice that in all these countries the government was a sacred one, that it promulgated sacred laws, that it exercised ecclesiastical powers, and that the chief magistrate was a priest, usually the high-priest, and in some instances was worshipped as a god. Thus feudalism and ' See Appendix A and the authorities therein adduced. Some of these, (for instance, Prescott,) are unwilling witnesses. It is therefore to the facts they narrate and not the opinions they advance that reference is here made. 78 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. sacred government are found together. Nor is this connection merely- accidental, but natural and inevitable. Take the case of a feudal benefice in Ceylon described by Fa-hian, who visited that country about A. D. 400. He says that the king ordered the clergy to repair the roads and decorate them for a religious procession in honour of a relic tooth of Buddha; that he (the king) took charge of another religious ceremony relative to the death of an arhat; that he had the right of access to the sacred depositories; and that he was a devout follower of Buddha ; from all of which it is evident that he was a priest, probably the high-priest, as well as a king, and that his government was a sacred one. Having determined to consecrate a new vihara for a community of priests: "First of all he provided for them a grand banquet, then selecting a pair of strong working-oxen, ornamenting their horns with gold, silver, and other precious things and seizing a beautiful gilded plough, the king ploughed the outlines of an allotted area (about fifteen acres) and ceding all right over the land, houses and people, within such area, he presented the whole to the priests, with a metal plate, containing the following inscription : — ' From this time and for all generations hereafter, let this property be handed down from priest to priest and let no one dare to alienate it or change the character of this grant.' " A similar ceremony was observed by the pontifex-maximus of Rome at the consecration of temples, monas- teries and cities;^ a similar character of inalienability is found at- tached to the earliest Roman benefices; and a similar disposition was made of the people dwelling upon property granted to the church. The sovereign of Rome, like the monarch of Ceylon, virtually ' ' ceded all right over them;" they became attached to the land; and thence- forth belonged to its sacred beneficiary, as feudal vassals. They could not even be conscripted for the military service of the empire. Altars, temples, monasteries, shrines, sepulchres, cemeteries, eccle- siastical lands and all other things consecrated by the Roman pontiff, were inalienable. The ownership of them vested in the church and could not be transferred. Whatever was thus consecrated was ever afterwards inapplicable to profane uses. That which belonged to the- gods could not become the property of a mortal.^ ■ Adams, Roman Antiq., 61. 62. ^ Pliny, Epist. ix, 39, x, 58, 59, 76; Macrobius, Sat., in, 3, In respect of Cicero's house and in some other exceptional cases, the property, after being forfeited to the church, was restored to its former owners; but this could only be done after the formal- ity of a successful appeal to the Sacred College and a Unanimous vote of the Senate in its favor; both of them very rare and difficult processes. Cicero, pro Domo sua; Ferg., HI, 43. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM, 79 In searching for that substantial synchronism between hierarchical government and feudalism, which if our conclusions be well founded, should attend both their establishment and overthrow, the historical evidence, except in a single instance, is either confused or lost. Arabian feudalism submerged that of India; Mantchu feudalism that of China; Roman feudalism that of Asia Minor and Egypt; and Spanish feudalism, the feudal systems of Mexico and Peru. The exceptional case relates to Japan, where the native feudal system, instead of being mingled and confused with other feudal sys- tems, or lost in the unknown institutes of an ancient government, perished in recent times and from an obvious cause. The feudal sys- tem of Japan fell in the domestic revolution of Meiji, it perished on the day that the Mikado abjured Bramo-Shintoism, renounced his claim to divine origin and authority, and became a Tenno, or tem- poral sovereign, armed only with mortal powers and professing the more ancient and simple creed of Buddhism. The daimios and higher clergy were compelled to surrender to the imperial crown their usurped prerogatives of private war, justice, spiritual dictation, mili- tary control, subinfeudation, revenues, coinage, etc., their troops or retainers were dismissed, their strongholds were occupied by impe- rial forces, their lands became vested in the imperial government, and their mints were closed forever. The synchronism in the fall of a sacred government and a feudal system, which this case presents, corroborates the theory of their interdependence, and renders it unnecessary to search any farther for the nature and origin of European feudalism. It is now seen to have been that condition of society (and it may be added, of land tenures,) which naturally and inevitably results from hierarchical government. It was an implied article in all sacred constitutions. The character- istics by which it has hitherto been identified, are accidental and not essential. They are derived from institutes older than feudalism, but adopted and altered by feudalism until they became identified with it. The essential characteristic of feudalism everywhere, is hierarchical, and therefore vicarious, government ; with which it always, and without which it never, existed. The deification of man is an insult to Nature, who avenges herself by branding the impious worship with a lasting de- fect. The unnatural character of an hierarchy is manifested in its contin- ual tendency to govern vicariously, and therefore to govern badly. It is a form of government which is born with a fatal disease. It is the product of a blasphemous fiction, to maintain which it is always obliged to exercise its powers indirectly. The resulting proctorage 8o THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED, and sub-proctorage of authority and the multiplication and subordina- tion of titles, ranks, offices and landed estates, constitute what is known as a feudal system. " The history of Roman feudalism accords with this view. It began, in point of time, with the Sacred government established by Julius Caesar and is unmistakedly manifested in the charters of government and rights of coinage granted by that pagan divinity and his divine son Augustus. ^ It ended, in point of time, with the protestant refor- mation of the i6th century. It was limited in territorial extension by the actual boundaries of the Sacred empire. It prevailed in every country which that empire included and was nowhere to be found be- yond its confines. Certain extrinsic or accidental forms which it took, were due to those peculiar roots — such as patron and client, emphyteusis, Roman slavery and the Roman military system — which lay in the ground before feudalism was planted. Its hierarchical origin is betrayed in every feature. Its inalienable lands, its benefices, fiefs, or feuds, were all of ecclesiastical origin: its systems of civil and religious subordination of ranks, were organized upon a common basis and connected together. Indeed the prayers, confessions, fast- ings, baths, vigils, vows, red-robes, tonsures, and other ceremonies and observances of knighthood, often render it difficult to determine where the priest ended and the noble began. * If it be asked why feudalism is regarded as the natural embodiment or outcome of a Sacred constitution, the answer is that while temporal monarchs are enabled to strengthen their power by direct personal * Grants of land on condition of performing military services are of the highest an- tinquity. Lycurgus made grants of this character in vSparta. Pinkerton, " Origin and Progress of the Ancient Goths," p. 139. Similar grants are attributed to Romulus and Alexander. Sylla settled his veterans upon the lands of Fsesulse, Cortona and Arretium. Julius Cresar granted the lands of Capena and Volaterra to his veterans upon condition of military service. Augustus made similar grants. Alexander Severus granted lands upon a similar tenure to the duces limitaris, or dukes to whom he com- mitted the safety of the limits, or frontiers. Probus made grants of land in Isauria to his veterans on condition of military service, Vopiscus, in Prob., xvi. Selden, 298, regards these grants as feudal. Grants of like nature, made by this emperor in Gaul and Britain, are alluded to elsewhere in the present work. ^ Lenormant, who brought an intimate knowledge of coins and great learning to the elucidation of the Right of Coinage, tried hard to avoid admitting that the sovereign- pontiff of Rome was the lawful suzerain of the European princes, but at last conceded the point by having to employ the terms " I'emperor suzerain et les rois vassaux." See " Monnaie dans I'Antiquite," 11, 197. * In a moment of inspiration Sir Francis Palgrave almost hits upon the truth. " The first chapters of the history of feudality must be sought in the decrees of the Senate and the rescripts of the Csesars." Eng. Com., 1, 77. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 8l contact with, and influence over, their subjects, sacred monarchs are obliged, by the loftiness of their supernatural pretensions, to withdraw from the public gaze and forego the advantages of contact and pop- ularity. They dare only deal with that exalted classs; the kings, cardinals, or comes palatini, whom they have placed'*next to them- selves in rank. The deified Julius appears in his statues and coins covered with a veil. Augustus was repeatedly absent in the prov- inces, whence he returned to Rome always in a secret manner. In the city he dwelt in a retired portion of his palace, a lofty chamber, which he'called Syracuse, and he commonly supped alone. ' Tiberius, though he found it necessary to protest himself only a mortal, retired from public observation to the shades of Capri. To the last, the em- perors of Constantinople lived in seclusion, governed the empire by proxy, and were to be approached only with difficulty, mystery and the most servile homage. * The exclusive relations thus established between the sacred mon- arch and the nobles or priests who surrounded his person, soon came to be repeated between those nobles and the rank next below them. For the same reason that the monarch dared only govern through his paladins, the paladins could not permit themselves to be ap- proached too closely by the people. Another barrier between the artificially exalted monarch and the artificially degraded people, an- other social rank, thus had to be formed; and so it went on, until the lowest substratum of the civil order was reached. This involution of rank, which included both the laity and clergy, was soon followed by an involution of political powers and obligations, which, being thus de- prived of all centripetal and centrifugal force, now only extended downward to the vassal, or upward from the vassal, through an in- volved succession of superiors, ending with the supernally exalted monarch. Such involution of rank, political powers and obligations, is peculiar to feudal systems. It is born of Sacred government, grows with its growth, weakens with its decay and disappears with its over- throw. ' ' Suet. Aug., 72-76. * Julius Caesar introduced the kissing of the foot in Rome and wore a golden slipper for the ceremony. ^ Suetonius in Galba 10, informs us that that prince surrounded himself with a privi- leged body of evocati. Anothername for privileged persons was beneficiarii. Evagrius, book II, chap, x, states that the Sacred emperor Leo (the Thracian) about A.D. 458, sent Diomedes, "the Silentiary," upon a mission to Timotheus, bishop of Alexandria. Here- upon his commentator explains that Silentiarii, ordomestici, or protectores, or cubicu- larii.were "officers of the highest honour about the emperor," that is to say, similar to 82 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. Social arrangements of this character not only naturally result from an hierarchy, they never can be fully enforced or perpetuated without the aid of an hierarchy. Thus feudal subordination requires the as- sistance of sacred sovereignty, no less than sacred sovereignty needs the support of feudal subordination. These institutions are comple- mentary to each other, and where one is found the other is seldom far off. To look for either of them in a social system utterly desti- tute of the other, for example, to look for feudalism among the pagan Goths of Scandinavia, is a pursuit which can be attended with no profit- able result. No Gothic chieftain ever governed by proxy. At the very outset of the Roman imperial constitution, a tendency is to be observed toward the creation of an involved system of caste. The pagan ecclesiastical establishment, so far as its details can be gathered from the meagre evidences left to us, was already organized in this manner. The pontifex-maximus, the patrician flamines, of whom the flamen dialis was distinguished by a lictor and the right to enter the senate, the twelve palatini or patrician priests of Mars, the plebian flamines or minores, and the ministri, were thus related to each other. '" The ancient involved castes of patrician, plebian and freedman furnished the basis of this relation which distinguished the orders of imperial nobility. Both the ecclesiastical and temporal sys- tems of aristocracy were matured and developed by the Sacred con- stitution, whose Sacred emperor furnished the connecting link between them. Mr. Bryce notices the analogy between medieval priesthood and knighthood and very shrewdly suspects its source. Says that accomplished author: "Knighthood was constructed on the analogy of priesthood and knights were conceived as being to the world, in its secular aspect, exactly what priests, and more especially the monastic orders, were to it in its religious aspect; to the one body was given the sword of the flesh, to the other the sword of the spirit; each was universal, each had its aristocratic head. Singularly too, were these notions brought into harmony with the feudal polity. Csesar was Lord Para- mount of the world; its countries great fiefs, whose kings were his the evocati of Galba. They occupied in ,he palace an apartment next to the emperor's inmost chamber. The Silentiarii were so called by the reason of the silence they kept in reverence of the emperor. Beyond them, in a further apartment, was a lower rank of siientiaries, through whom it was necessary to approach the clarissimi or higher grade. "In this divine hierarchy (for such it is frequently styled) every rank was marked with the most scrupulous exactness and its dignity was displayed in a variety of trifling and solemn ceremonies which it was a study to learn and a sacrilege to neglect." Gibbon, ii, 24. '" Auctoratos, in tertia jura ministros. Manilius, v, 350. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 83 tenants in chief, the suitors of his court, owing to him homage, fealty, and military service against the infidel." " The sovereign pontiff of Rome in his capacity of high-priest com- municated his instructions to the parish clergy or curates through the successive intermediation of the Sacred College, the legates, and local bishops. In a similar manner, in his capacity of emperor, he reached the citizens usually by expressing his wishes to the consuls, or the privy council, who communicated with the senate, who directed cer- tain equites or knights ** to make known the pleasure of the prince to the people. When these communications were addressed to the people of the provinces they passed through several other interme- diaries, the number of whose ranks always tended to increase and never to diminish. For example, Galba, in addition to the Twelve consuls, or councillors, or Counts of the Palace^ appointed a special and privileged corps of equites, evocati, or beneficiarii, to surround his person. '^ Constantine added many new ranks of nobility. When- ever a prince, like Nero, was too human to sustain the unnatural character of Sacred emperor and disregarded the super-imposed castes and social barriers which had been created to protect it, he brought the empire a step nearer to that dissolution which was its inevitable destiny. '* From the moment of the establishment of the Sacred empire oc- curred an exaltation of the superior orders, a relative degradation of the lower ones, and a continual addition of new intermediate grades to the social system. The patrician was drawn closer to the sover- eign and the plebian nearer to the slave. '^ Colquhoun, after a care- ful investigation of the laws that determined the status of the various social grades, declared that the plebian of the empire was hardly better off than the peasant of the medieval age; while Reitemeier states that in some districts or provinces of the empire the native in- habitants were doomed to a vassalage which enabled their persons to be bargained or conveyed away, together with the mines, to the no- bles who farmed the revenues of the latter. One is the opinion of a " " Holy Roman Empire," p. 251. ^^ Previous to the establishment of the empire the equites were only distinguished by wealth and (generally) good birth, '^ See a previous note; also Die, XLV, 12. •* Sometimes the streams of proctorship intermingled, as when the pontifex-maximus communicated his decisions through the Sacred College, the Senate, and the civil mag- istrates; but the principle was the same; government by proxy. '^ So early as the reign of Tiberius, there were already three grades of counts. Selden, Titles of Honor, 296; Suet., in Tiberius. 84 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. lawyer; the other of a miner. The history of the pagan College, from the sera of J^ilius Csesar to the beginning of the fourth century, has perished; but if we are to credit the intimations of Cyprian or the re- searches of Dupin or Mosheim, a similar movement marked the eccle- siastical orders of the empire. The change of religion had no effect upon it. Many of the early Christian presbyters were promoted to be bishops, and the bishops to be primates, who were to stand next in rank to the high-priest; whilst on the other hand and even before the time of Tertullian, the laicus was distinguished from the clericus and taught to duly venerate a profession, the humblest menber of which derived his official warrant from Heaven. Indeed the feudal system of caste, as well as of land tenures, is so interlaced with the Roman ecclesiastical organization, that, after both are regarded with attention, it will be found to be quite impracticable to describe them apart. The principle of vicarious control coloured them both alike. Hierarchies in a primitive state, which governed only a small or scattered population, may have existed in the absence of such a sys- tem of caste; but no important or populous hierarchies have been without one. At the outset, such systems were commonly sustained by the force of that superstition which permitted the creation of the hierarchy. As time advanced and the superstition declined, the caste system usually sought for other support, and found it in those mutual relations or obligations between approximate classes,which had sprung up in the meanwhile. These relations were the favour of church or palace, procured by the superior, and of service, performed by the inferior. As the former declined in value and the innumerable slaves of the empire were gradually liberated by the barbarian revolts, the caste system, though somewhat shaken, slowly but surely regained its footing, through those grants of ecclesiastical property which the church had made upon usufructuary tenures. In the remoter provinces, for example in Britain, the break in this system, that is to say, in Roman imperial government, lasted a longer time than in Italy, or the provinces near to it. This break or inter- val is to be measured from the termination of the pagan to the begin- ning of the christian hierarchy ; an interval that always increased with the distance from Rome. Feudalism existed in both hierarchies. No feudalism is to be perceived during the interregnum, where any in- terregnum occurred between them. It therefore seems difficult to avoid the conclusion that the essential cause of feudalism was hier- archical government ; that involved social castes and involved tenures of land were characteristics of feudalism, due to its hierarchical ori- HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 85 gin ; and that the accidental or extrinsic forms of the already involved land tenures, so much dwelt upon by writers on feudalism, are attri- butable merely to the peculiar circumstances and social relations of ancient Rome, out of which they sprang. The lands of the church, or ecclesiastical organization, were not alienated by grants conveying absolute or allodial tenures.'^ They belonged to that Lord of Heaven who was ready to receive uncon- ditionally, but never to unconditionally grant. Such lands could not be sold. Mortmain held them; they were inalienable; their usufruct alone was negotiable; the grant or conveyance of such usufruct con- stituted a benefice or fief; and in after times, when this was paid for with the services of freedmen, instead of money, it was called a feud." Originally, beneficiaries — beneficiarii — far from being bound to military service, were especially those who were exempt from it, or from some feature of it ; and who had obtained this benefit or favour, by privilege, indulgence or purchase.'* During its three or four cen- turies of constantly declining vitality, the pagan imperial church was usually the framer and always the custodian, of wills and testaments. Many pious or priest-ridden pagans appointed the pontifex-maximus their soul heir, or, together with their children, the joint heir, of all their possessions. In the reign of Augustus some dying persons pro- vided by will that an offering should be made to the church in grati- tude for the signal favour that the Son of God, as they esteemed their emperor, had appeared on earth during their own lifetime.'^ From these and other superstitious sources the pagan church acquired im- mense landed estates in every part of the empire. These estates were worked by slaves; who by reason of their civil condition and the service in which they were employed (both priests and slaves being alike privileged) were exempt from military service.'"* The attempt which Gratian made to confiscate this vast possession '® Higgins, while hunting for a solution of the feudal system, made a curious stumble; but in truth his intellectual power here seems to have failed him; and he died before this part of his work was printed. " Muratori, cited in Robertson's Charles V., i, 225. Note H, sec. iv. '8 Festus, Caes., B. C. I, 75; Tacitus, Annals, i, 17; Hist., I, 46; Pliny, Ep., X, 32. '^Ferguson's Roman Republic, v, 133. From Suetonius. ^° In his chap, xxvi (vol. 11, p. 593,) Gibbon, writing of the reign of Valens, alludes to the " immense sums of gold supplied by the provincials, to compensate their annual proportion of recruits." When such military service was demanded by provincial no- bles and made the condition of holding lands, it was evidently of feudal character. Such a noble was Maximus, who was then duke (dux) of Thrace. 86 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. cost him his throne and life.^' Theodosius was more successful. In vain did Symmachus protest that the estates which had been sacredly- devoted to the temples, the vestal virgins, and the ofificers of relig- ion, were now "withheld by the Treasury." The Senate had received its instructions; and when it formally adopted Christianity as the religion of the empire, and by virtue of this legislation, the pagan hierarchy was instantly superceded by a christian hierarchy, the latter became the lawful heir to the possessions, livings, and revenues, of the former. Instead of being steeped in poverty, as some have sup- posed, the christian church, when it began its official career, was the owner de jure of probably one half of the lands and one fourth the entire population of the Roman empire. No wonder that, as Dr. Taylor intimated" the pagan priests followed the livings and reve- nues, and declared themselves christians, that they might continue to enjoy them. Nor did this vast wealth diminish with time. Said Chilperic some two centuries later: " Our exchequer is impoverished, and all our riches are transferred to the clergy; none reign now but the bishops, who live in grandeur; while we are quite eclipsed." Charles Martel found all the landed estates of the kingdom in the hands of the clergy. They had even acquired "a great part of the allodial estates." To remedy this, he proceeded at first to strip the altars and release the estates; afterwards he made a friendly compact with Pope Gregory III., thus verifying Chilperic's maxim about the monks: "Crows do not pluck out each other's eyes." " Pepin, unable to get back for the church all the property confiscated by Martel, issued precaria. They had previously been issued by Obroin, Mayor of the Palace. In this manner the new monarch loaded the church with benefits. " So great were the donations made to the clergy that under the three races of our kings they must have received the full value of all the lands of the kingdom several times over." This avidity of the church was a continual source of dissension between the temporal and ecclesiasti- cal powers/* It was the desire of exemption from military service and ecclesias- tical vassalage, on the part of the provincial population, rather than *' Nero had previously sacked the churches at Rome to rebuild the city after the g^eat fire. Tacitus Annals, xv. 45. Diocletian and his imperial coadjutors (except Constantine Chlorus) demolished the now so-called christian and other heretical tem- ples, sold their properties at public auction and covered the proceeds into the imperial fisc. Gibbon, chap. xvi. ^^ Diegesis, 147. ** Gregory of Tours, vi, 46. "^ Montesquieu, (London ed.), 11, 339, 340, 342. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 87 any rage for lands on the part of the Goths, which resulted in the disloyal coalitions and revolts that have been erroneously regarded as a Barbarian Invasion. The right of choice between the hastily con- structed barbarian laws and the mature Jus Romanum proves the coalitions,^^ while the acceptance of christian hierarchical castes and titles by the barbarous Gothic chieftains who had rebelled against im- perial investiture, proves that no conquest took place; for how can that be regarded a conquest in which the victors became the vassals of the vanquished? Although the church was gradually induced to emancipate its rebel- lious slaves, it always held on to the title of its lands. Its usufructuary grants of these lands — employed as bribes to sustain its popularity or to satisfy the demands of vassals preferring to wear its yoke rather than submit to imperial investiture — were called benefices. The es- tates thus granted were known as fiefs. If they acquired this name, as some have contended, from the Latin word fides, meaning faith- fulness or fidelity, ^^ it is quite as likely to have meant fidelity in religion as in war. The holders of ecclesiastical lands, to which many allusions are made in the Lombard and other barbarian codes, paid for their use, not with military services, but with produce or money. "'' Their military services were due to the Gothic chieftain, by whose assistance they had been emancipated from ecclesiastical or other slavery. Thus Chilperic, king of Soissons, exacted a fine, bannos jussit exigi, from certain vassals who had neglected or refused him military service. Childebert II. , king of Austrasia and Orleans, levied similar fines for a similar refusal. ^^ These vassals could hardly have been unromanised Franks, because this class served their chiefs vol- untarily and for the sake of glory, plunder, or revenge. They prob- ably belonged to the class of Roman freedmen, who were willing to pay allegiance and tribute to the church, so long as they could choose their own priests. If it be doubted that the possessions of the church were vast enough and its usufructuary grants numerous enough to create a system of land tenures which prevailed for many centuries, it is only necessary to briefly recall the circumstances of its growth. During the Com- monwealth the priests served for glory and without pay; the expenses of the ecclesiastical system were very slight; and they were met by the sacred share of the spoils of war, by voluntary contributions, or else by a portion of the ordinary revenues of the state. The worship " Robertson, i, 314. ^* Cicero, De Off., i, S. ^'' Du Cange, voc. Beneficium. '^^ Gregory of Tours. 88 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. of Julius and Augustus added a vast number of new temples, shrines, sanctuaries, monasteries, and religious houses to those which pre- viously existed. '' Before Gratian commenced his work of religious reformation there were in the city of Rome alone no less than four hundred and twenty-four pagan temples or chapels. ^° All these temples necessarily possessed lands, and these in the midst of so rich a city must have been exceedingly valuable. A similar multiplication of religious temples occurred in all parts of the empire. A common mode of propitiating the deified emperor was to erect a temple con- secrated to his worship. " The number of religious rites, ceremonies, and festivals was also greatly increased, and these required a vast addition of prelates, priests, and clerks, whose numbers, owing to their exemption from military service, never failed to overflow the bounds of requirement. Neither the offerings of the pious, nor the sacred share of the spoils of war, were any longer competent to meet the cost of such a gigantic establishment. Many patricians and wealthy citizens, disgusted with the worship of Julius and Augustus, or fear- ing persecution under the lex crimen majestatis, withdrew to secluded places, where there were neither temples nor deified emperors. In this manner the church lost a portion of the offerings which it had been accustomed to receive from this class There were no more kingdoms to conquer; the temple of Janus was thrice closed by Au- gustus; the spoils of war greatly declined; and the sacred share had dwindled to almost nothing. "^^ During the Commonwealth the priesthood got little or no emolument and served the public "for the bare honour of their dignities." Nor were they exempt from mili- tary service. After the subversion of the Commonwealth and erection of the hierarchy, Augustus and Tiberius "were forced to settle large appointments upon the clergy, ut dignatio sacerdotibus acciderat, to give authority and reputation to the order." Moyle, I, 39, 49, citing Suet, in Aug. 31 and Tac, iv, 17; Livy, iv; 59, and Dionys., p. 66. Moreover, they obtained the privilege of military exemption — beneficio. During the Commonwealth the magistrates took especial care to prevent religion or superstition from becoming a source of profit to priests or diviners; gifts or bequests to the clergy were forbidden or regulated; and those who sought to evade these restrictions were known by the opprobrious name of eeruscatores (swindlers). Moyle, I, 40, citing Cicero de Legg., 11, 19; Livy, iv, 30; xxv. i; Ovid de Pont. ,11; Aul. Gel., xiv., i; Phaed., 3; and Fab., 20. After the subversion of the Commonwealth these restrictions were re- moved, with the result that the land and territories of the people became rapidly absorbed by the priesthood (consecrated to the gods), after which they could not be alienated. Diod. Sic, p. 425. ^"Gibbon, in, 72. ^' Nero had a daughter by Poppaea. This infant died at the age of four months; " she was canonized for a goddess, a temple was decreed to her with an altar, a bed of state, a priest, and religious ceremonies." Tacitus, Annals, xv, 23. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 89 To make good these deficiencies it was natural that the sovereign- pontiff should seize every opportunity to endow the church with conquered lands, abandoned and confiscated properties, and the pos- sessions of intestates. The agency of the hierarchy in the preparation and preservation of wills, also afforded it opportunities to influence the granting of legacies by private persons for the support of religion. Bequests to the church in gratitude for the favour of the testator's having breathed the same air as the divine Augustus, have already been cited, and when it is remembered that even after the light of the gospel was thrown upon the darkness and superstition of these ages, men voluntarily enslaved themselves to churches, and, to save their souls, degraded their persons to the ranks of sensuales or min- isteriales, it cannot be doubted that bequests of lands and slaves to the pagan church, were common." In these and in other ways the occasional tithes of war were supplanted by the regular tithes of superstition, and these, augmenting during four centuries of time, could hardly have resulted else than in making the pagan church the wealthy proprietor described. Montesquieu's array of evidence on this subject must be regarded as conclusive. That the feudal system of Europe was of Roman hierarchical origin is thus proved by the invariable connection found to exist in coun- tries outside of Europe between hierarchical governments and feudal systems; by the synchronism of their rise and fall, as illustrated in Japan; by the reason of their connection, which is due to the neces- sity of artificially axalting the sacred monarch, a proceeding which results in government by proxy and in the creation of an involved system of caste; finally, it is proved by the usufructuary grants of ecclesiastical property. No such system as this, no government by proxy, no feudal system, existed among any of the barbarous tribes who are credited with the destruction of the Roman empire; it was foreign to the simplicity of their social organisation; it did not fit their wandering life; it could neither have been established or maintained without the assistance of that art of writing, of which, until after the period of their imag- inary conquest of the Roman empire, they appear to have been sub- ^^ The oblati placed themselves and their effects under the protection of a particular temple or monastery, binding themselves to defend its privileges and property against all comers; the censuales paid an annual quit-rent out of their estates to a temple or monastery, and, besides this, bound themselves to perform certain services in return for its protection; the ministeriales became absolute slaves "in the strict and proper sense of the word." Robertson, Note xx; Potgiesserus, de statu servorum; Du Cange, voc. Oblatus, etc. 90 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. stantially ignorant. Long before the barbarians compiled those codes of law in which marks of the feudal system have been observed, long before the barbarians had practically mastered the art of writing, and in some instances, before they had any existence at all as separate communities, the elements of feudalism had been established within the Roman hierarchy, awaiting only the effects of time to mature them into a complete system. The characteristics by which feudalism is to be distinguished from any other social system are now before us. These are hierarchical government; vicarious control and vicarious allegiance; involved arrangements of temporal and ecclesiastical castes; involved tenures of land; inalienable property; and usufructuary grants. The first two marks attend feudalism from the outset; the others grow out of them, and become attached to it as the system matures. After the affairs of an empire are caste into new forms and relations by the establish- ment of an hierarchy, every incident of social life, though previously free from feudal taint, assumes a feudal form. In other words, feudal- ism breeds feudalism, and continues to breed it, until the hierar- chical cause is removed. Feudal marks are therefore endless; and as they belong to various ages of the system and derive local colour from local peculiarities, their employment as criteria is often per- plexing and misleading. The mark of vicarious control and allegiance is however a tolerably sure guide in all cases. It begins at the begin- ning and does not disappear even when the system is destroyed; but survives for ages in forms and customs that convey no suspicion of their remote and impious origin." It is because the mark of vicarious government is found in the Judean charters and not on account of the presence or absence of provisions for military service, that we have ventured to regard them as feudal. The kingdom which Herod held of Caesar was granted by the Roman emperor for the same reason and substantially upon the same terms that Charlemagne afterwards granted a government to John of Pontes: "In order that the said John and his descendants may enjoy it without trouble or rent so long as they remain faithful to our crown." Fidelity to the crown here implies military service. In the case of Herod such service was actually accorded, and when the Herodian princess of Judea sought the favour of the reigning em- peror of Rome, they never forgot to remind him that Antipater had furnished one thousand five hundred troops to the deified Julius during ^^ The title by which a British chieftain was permitted to rule the Regni, namely, I.egatus Augusti, implies a feudal tenure. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 9I ■his campaign in Egypt and that they remained in a similar manner amenable to the requirements of the crown.** Yet it was not this military service that made a fief of Judea, any more than it was military service which proves the feudal fief of Fontarabia. The proconsuls of Rome governed provinces larger and more populous than Judea, or Fontarabia; they were appointed at Rome; their powers included the levy and command of the legions and the administration of justice, imperium et potestatem, as well as the collection and disposal of the revenues : they were obliged to furnish such military service as the government at Rome required. Whatever they might have become after the accession of Julius Csesar, no one pretends that before that event the proconsuls were feudal officers, or that the Roman provinces were feudal fiefs. What mark is it then that distinguishes Herod's charter from that of a proconsul under the Commonwealth? The mark of vicarious government. In the case of Herod the military service or tribute reserved by and due to Caesar was not owing by the inhabitants of Judea, but by Herod. The fidelity, or military service, reserved by Charlemagne and the rent which he renounced, were not owing by the inhabitants of the Spanish March, but by John of Fontes. Herod was a king by favour — benefice — of Caesar: John was a marquis by favour of Charlemagne. This is proved by the necessity mentioned in both cases, of their having to obtain confirmation or renewal of their charters. Herod and his successors were obliged periodically to obtain a renewal of their kingship; John and his successors were compelled to obtain similar confirmations of their marquisate. This ceremony was intended in both cases to remind the incumbent that his paramountship was incomplete, that he was merely an agent or vicar of the supreme sovereign, and that he must pay a relief upon each renewal of his vicarship. In both cases the government of the people was vicarious. In the first case Caesar governed Herod, and Herod governed the Jews; in the second, Charlemagne governed John and John governed the Fontarabians. After the granting of Herod's charter, Csesar had no more legal right to enact laws or levy troops in Judea, than Charlemagne in Fontarabia. The proconsular governments of the previous period were con- ducted upon a far different theory. The provincial law was the same as the law of Rome; and even when modified by the proconsul, to meet local requirements, the modification was made conformably to Roman law. The proconsul was an officer of that law; he could be ^* See Appendix B. 92 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. impeached, degraded, or recalled at pleasure of the Senate; the powers which he exercised, whether military, judicial or fiscal, were exercised for and by the Roman government, which had the right, at any moment, to modify them or take them back into its own hands. Under the empire, the proconsul gradually became a feudal mon- arch, he appointed a privy council, consilium, he created contuber- nales or counts and other (lower) orders of nobility. Under a Julian law, coeval with the very origin of the empire, the proconsuls laid military or other charges upon cities or lands. '^ The navicularii per- formed services which descended to their sons and heirs, and enjoyed estates and privileges in return.'^ These are clearly feudal services and feudal marks. Under the Commonwealth the government of Rome had nothing vicarious about it, and always sought to be in touch with the people, whether of Italy or the provinces. Republican proconsular government grew out of the vast extension of the empire and the impracacability of governing it from a single capital. Feudal proconsular government grew out of that Sacred constitution which placed the emperor so far above the people, that he could only gov- ern them vicariously." Reluctant to admit the validity of the proofs herein advanced in favour of the Roman origin of the feudal system, there are some writers who persist in repeating that no system of government could have outlived the destruction occasioned by the Barbarian Conquest of the empire, and that therefore the feudal system ot the medieval age must have been of later or barbarian origin.^* This kind of logic would make the Civil Law itself a product of barbarism. The reply to it is that, in the sense of overthrow or destruction of the Roman empire, there was no Barbarian Conquest. Except Attila, the Hun, there was no destroyer among the barbarians. On the contrary, they conserved all they could; institutions, government, laws, temples, arts, and even titles and ceremonies.'* Clovis exulted in his Roman proconsulship; his son Theodoret received Provence, which the monks inform us was the fruit of his battle-axe, as the gift of Jus- tinian; Sigismund, the Burgundian king, who was created a Patrician and Count by Anastasius, professed the deepest gratitude and strong- ^* Cicero, Att., v, i6, 21. ^^ Code Theod.,and Commentary of Valesius appended to Evagrius, bk., 11, chap. 9. *' In another place it is shown that as the feudal system matured, another grade of nobles was created between the Roman court and the proconsuls. These powerful ofiScers were known by the title of pranorian prcefects. ** " The Drama of Empire," by W. Marsham Adams, B. A., London, 1891, p. 128. ^* Lanciani's " x\ncient Rome." HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 93 est fidelity to that Eastern court, which, we are informed, was pow- erless either to help or hurt him. Said Sigismund, writing to Anas- tasius, by the hand of the bishop Avitus ; ' ' My people are yours, and to rule them delights me less than to serve you. The hereditary de- votion of my race to Rome has made us account those the highest rewards which your honorary titles convey. We have always preferred what an emperor gave, to what our ancestors could bequeath. In ruling our people we hold ourselves only your legates. You, whose Divinely appointed empire no barrier bounds, whose light radiates from the Orient to distant Gaul, employ us to administer in your name the remoter regions of the Empire. Our fatherland belongs to your World."" Said Athaulf, the Visigoth, brother-in-law to Alaric: " It was at first my wish to destroy the Roman name and erect in its place a Gothic empire, taking to myself the rank and authority of Caesar Augustus. But when experience taught me that the untamea- ble barbarism of the Goths would not suffer them to live beneath the sway of law and that the abolition of the institutions on which the state rested would involve the ruin of the state itself, I preferred the glory of renewing and maintaining by Gothic strength the gov- ernment of Rome, desiring to go down to posterity as the restorer of the Roman authority, which it was beyond my power to replace. " "' These few words are like a phonographic message from the men whose motives and principles we are discussing. They are more val- uable than a thousand volumes of windy commentary. After their emphatic testimony it seems unnecessary to adduce any further evi- dence on the subject. However, if any be wanting, it will be found in the titles assumed, the powers and prerogatives exercised, and the authority and rights universally conceeded, during the middle ages, to both the Roman state and the Roman church. The conquest and destruction of the empire by the barbarians is a tale which was in- vented by the monks to account for the ignorance and mischief which their pagan predecessors, in the church, themselves had brought about. When the Chinese-pilgrims viewed the ruins of those Indian cities which had been overthrown in the religious wars incited by the Bramo- Buddhist monks, the latter charged the mischief to those wicked peo- ple, the barbarians. Such is human nature. It is always somebody else that did it; and the somebody else of the Roman monks, was the barbarians." *"Bryce, 18. The original is printed in Migne's " Patrologia," vol. Lix, p. 285. ^' Orosius, VII, 43. *" Numerous and overwhelming evidences that the Goths spared, and the monks 94 THE IMIDDLE AGES REVISITED. That the feudal system was the product of the hierarchy finds ad- ditional confirmation in the fact that whenever the supremacy of that hierarchy was interrupted, the feudal system began to die away; and contrariwise, whenever the power of the hierarchy was restored, the feudal system revived. Thus, when the see of Roman revolted from the Sacred empire and combined with Pepin to form the Medie- val empire, the hierarchy, so far as Western Europe is concerned, was temporarily suspended. The empire of Charlemagne, as its emblem indicates, had two heads, not one. The superior and governing head was Charlemagne; the inferior and governed head was the Pope. During the reign of Charlemagne feudalism everywhere commenced to give way; but no sooner did the church regain its ascendancy and restore hierarchical government to the west, than feudalism took a new lease of life. Indeed it alternately flourished and faded, as its hierarchical source of life shone out in splendour, or underwent eclipse. The Roman hierarchy not only split the empire into pieces, it de- tached itself, by seceding, from the emperor. It was always the ecclesiastical interest and endeavor to keep apart those political fragments which the pontificate had separated, but the emperor might reunite. This policy it promoted by actively supporting feudalism." The feudal system was entirely opposed to the customs an.inclina- tions of the Gothic race; it was unsuitedto its freshness, its strength, its virility, its tendency to increase in numbers, and to its coarseness of thought and language. Nor did feudalism harmonise any better with the physical circumstances of the continent, than it did with the temper of the barbarians. Europe was comparatively new: its lands were scarcely cleared ; its resources were substantially undeveloped ; it contained scarcely forty millions of people, whereas to-day it easily supports ten times this number. What it needed, to encourage growth, was unity and peace. After the reformation of the sixteenth century, when such unity and peace became possible, Europe soared at once long afterwards destroyed, the temples, statues, and other works of Roman art and religion, will be found in the reluctant pages of Lanciani. *^ If the Church ever mistook its friends for its enemies it was during the disturbed period which followed the death of Charlemagne and in which it found itself face to face with the strange institutes established by that eccentric monarch. In this novel situation, wholly without precedent, the Church, instead of seeking support from the feudal lords, made the mistake, not of condemning, but rather of leaning against, some of the features of a system, which in fact was of its own creation and without whose support it could not hope to maintain its supremacy. But it had the sagacity to soon perceive its blunder and reform its policy. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 95 from ignorance to invention, and from indigence to wealth. But such unity and peace did not suit the interests of the sort of ecclesiasticism that governed the dark ages. The policy of that period was feudal separation and private war. The church was quite conscious that the unity of kingdoms meant its own downfall. Accordingly it exerted all its powers to prevent such unity and to foment intestine wars." There is scarcely a quarrel of the dark and medieval ages that can- not be traced to the machinations of the clergy, who derived a profit both from the spoils of war, from the negotiation of truces, which their address and knowledge of letters enabled them to monopolise, and from the dissensions of hundreds of petty and jealous states. The means adopted to destroy an edifice sometimes afford a clue to its origin, proportions, and character. When the Roman hierarch- ical government came to an end, what were the measures employed to destroy that edifice of feudalism which it had erected and propped up so long? Was it the abolition of Mr. Hallam's land tennures based upon military services? Not at all. It was the termination of vica- rious government; it was the curtailment of intermediate relations between the sovereign and the people. Long after feudalism was substantially dead, the military tenures and castles survived; though now bereft of all political use and soon doomed to be engulfed in the ruins of the mighty social structure of which at no time did they form more than an incidental or insignificant landmark. Before we take a final leave of the subject of feudalism, it is nec- essary to justify an opinion which has been more than once brought forward in this connection. This is that some of the extrinsic forms or marks of Roman feudalism, as distinct from other feudal systems, were due to certain peculiar institutions or the peculiar form of cer- tain institutions, of antefeudal, or scarcely yet feudal, Rome. Among the most ancient of these was the obligation of every ple- bian to choose a patron from among the patricians. The relations of patron and client were reciprocal, their duties mutual; even cities and nations were under the protection of noble families; as the Sicil- ians under the Marcelli, Cyprus and Cappadocia under Cato's family, the Allobroges under the Fabii, the Bononienses under the Antonii, Lacedsemon under the Claudii, the Puteolians under Cassius, the Capuans under Cicero, etc. The principle of this system is to be ob- served in the constitution of the Medieval empire. In 858 the bish- ops wrote to Louis II., of Germany: "We bishops, sacred to the Lord, are not, like the laity, obliged to attach ourselves to any patron. "** *'' See Appendix E. *^ Guizot, iii, 36. 96 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. When, upon this very ancient foundation of patrician and plebian, or patron and client, there was erected the superstructure of an hier- archy, the feudal edifice was almost complete. To the two ranks of Roman citizens which this system supplied and to the tribunes and equites of a later origin, were now added the various orders of ec- clesiastical aristocracy, capped by a divinity whose tremendous power could easily regulate their various claims to precedence and social rank. These claims naturally adjusted themselves to the demands of that vicarious form of government which flowed from the sacerdotal character of the emperor. Hence followed that involved system and those numerous orders of nobility which distinguished feudalism. The ancient systems of land-grants and slavery, furnished, in a similar manner, the foundations of feudal military vassalage. In granting conquered lands to its citizens, the Roman government had naturally bound the grantees to provide for the subsistence of the indigenous population " and resolved the right to enlist the latter in the army. Thus Tacitus relates*^ of the Thracians (A. D. 26) that "they saw the flower of their youth carried off to recruit the Roman armies." When under the influence of vicarious government the Roman grantees of lands became feudal lords, and the government, instead of dealing directly with the peasantry, dealt with them through these lords, the latter were obliged to exact from the peasantry the same conditions of military service to which they themselves had been subjected by the government, under the penalty of forfeiting their estates. Under the Commonwealth, vast numbers of slaves were held by Roman partricians upon distant estates. That these slaves (chiefly captives) gained the good will of their masters, seems to follow from the fact that at that period, they were usually permitted to bear their given names. The masters, on the other hand, found it their interest to grant them easy terms of emancipation, such as those of remaining upon the soil as tributaries. Cicero informs us that in his time few sober and industrious slaves of the captive class, remained such be- yond a term of about six years, which time appears to have been sufficient to enable them to work out their freedom in the manner described. The danger of servile insurrections and the safety of the *^ A similar provision, doubtless copied from some ancient law, occurs in the capitu- lary of A.D. 794: " Whoever holds a benefice from us must take care that none of the slaves die of hunger and must not sell the crops until he has provided for the subsist- ence of such slaves." Baluze, torn., i, col. 264; Guizot, iii, 29. *' Annals, iv, 46. HIERARCHICAL ORIGIN OF FEUDALISM. 97 republic promoted that policy of the patricians, which induced them to bind such freed slaves to the soil, as in Russia at the present, or at a very recent day. When under the empire the necessities of the government com- pelled it to call upon these patricians for troops, the latter were obliged to commute the tribute or produce, due to them as rent, and accept, in place of it, the military service of their tenantry; and this exchange, the latter were glad to make, because it promised promo- tion, pay and spoil, while on active service, and social freedom, after- wards. Such appears to have been the origin of that military vassal- age which has been so strangely mistaken for the whole feudal system. Emphyteusis — or that tenure of land which requires the tenant not only to pay rent for the estate but also to continually improve it, failing which double obligation, it shall revert to the original owner — was adopted by the Commonwealth with respect to its public lands about B. C. 146. At this period Greece was a Roman province, the third Punic war was ended, Carthage was destroyed, and Rome was troubled with agrarian agitation. In the course of a single genera- tion this tenure was introduced into the various provinces of the republic; Italy, Carthage, Spain and Syria, as well as Greece. All tenures short of complete ownership have been found to weaken the peasant's incentive to improve the land, but not so efficaciously as this one; which nevertheless was designed especially to promote such improvement."® However, it is not to this feature of emphyteusis but to its easy descent into a feudal form, that attention is here invited. There are many circumstances, such as bad crops, absence, illness, or death, under which continual improvement becomes impracticable, and the temptation to exchange an uncertain, for a certain, tenure, even though the latter be burthened with services as well as rent, becomes irresistible. The disappearance of Roman emphyteutical tenures in Gaul, which was conquered a century later than Greece, bespeaks such an exchange of tenures in that province. The circum- stances indicate that emphyteusis was carried by the Romans into that province — as it had been into all their other provinces — where it was afterwards, that is to say, before the time of Clovis, exchanged for feudal tenures. There are evidences of its having lingered in some parts of the province so late as the sera of Charlemagne.*' *^ This subject has been treated at some length by the author, in his Essay on " Portu- gal," Lippincott's Magazine, 1872. *^Capit., A.D. 813; Bal. t., i, col. 507; Guizot, ill, 29. Another feudal feature, the right of heriot, may also be traced to the declining days of the Commonwealth. g8 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. Briefly as it has been attempted to treat the subject of feudalism, it already occupies more space in this volume than can well be spared for the purpose; but as it is chiefly upon this system of government and the artificial relations which it maintained between the empire and the provinces or kingdoms of the Middle Ages that the entire history of the latter turns, it has been deemed better in this instance to lean toward amplification, than to risk obscurity. It must be remembered that the first article of the Sacred consti- tution of the Roman empire was the deification and worship of Julius the Father, and Augustus the Son, and that this impious article was observed with more or less fidelity by the Roman world until it was undermined by the introduction of the christian faith. The second article was feudalism, or vicarious government, and an involved sys- tem of caste or estates. The principal remaining articles will be briefly dealt with in the next chapter. " As priests, the patricians exercised other vexations over the people. . . . Under pretext of sacrifices, they took the finest ram, the best bull, from the plebian." Michelet, Hist. Rome, p. loi. 99 CHAPTER VI. FIRST INSTITUTES OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE, Informality of the Constitution — After the deification of the emperor and the re- sulting feudalization of the government, its principal institutes were as follows : The Sacred College and Pontifex-Maximus — Monachism — Cononization — Sanctuaries — Sacred Scriptures — Succession to the throne — Infallibility of the sovereign-pontiff — Crimen majestatis — Inquisition — Excommunication — Legislature — Judicial system — Education. THOUGH the Romans never possessed a formal Constitution, yet during tlie Commonwealth such was the simplicity and direct- ness of the government, such the explicitness of its institutes, such the publicity given to its affairs, that to describe the constitution of that period would be a comparatively easy matter. On the contrary, to depict, ever so rudely, the constitution of the Hierarchy, is a task Ipeset with the greatest difficulties. First, because the organic law flowed ^rom the acts of the sovereign-pontiff, many of which acts, though apparently of a secular character, really emanated from the Sacred college of which he was the head, and were made to fit the preexist- ing laws and traditions of that organization. Some of these originated in Etruria, others in Greece, Cimmeria, Media, Assyria or Egypt, and are not fully known to us. Second, because under the influence of an hierarchy and of that ever increasing tendency to govern vicari- ously, which is inseparable from an hierarchy, the operation of the law continually changed, and therefore it cannot be correctly de- scribed in reference to any considerable period of time. Third, be- cause notwithstanding their sacerdotal origin the acts of the imperial government were modified by the usages, customs and opinions of the many barbarous nations which Rome had conquered and now in- cluded within her boundaries. Lastly, in respect of those exceptional acts of government which did not proceed either from the Sacred college or the Common law, they were of so personal, arbitrary and despotic a character as to be incapable of reduction to rule or insti- tution. Yet it is upon these personal actions, these whims, caprices, and eccentricities, of often merely ephemeral sovereigns, that history has lOO THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. hitherto been grounded; the pagan canon law and common law being left entirely out of view. In relating the annals of the hierarchy, Tacitus said: " The constitution had long been annihilated, the functions of the magistrates were wrested out of their hands, the will of the prince was the law;"* and this, coupled with the false assumption that the empire had a secular constitution — a constitution apart from the church — has been the keynote of all subsequent historical writings. But the empire had no such constitution. It was an hierarchy from the day when Julius Caesar was deified in the Serapion, nay almost from the period of his long proconsulship of Gaul, from whose Druid sages he learnt the potency, without perceiving the defects, of a priestly rule. The constitution regretted by Tacitus is the same one that was deplored by Cicero, who forfeited, in a vain attempt to re- store it, what would have been the crowning years of a brilliant life: it was the constitution of the Commonwealth. Nor was the constitution of the hierarchy an absolute despotism. Cicero in one place clearly points out the fact that as C^sar ruled the state, so was Csesar in turn ruled by the circumstances of the state, and in another, he indicates the nature of some of these cir- cumstances, for he says'' that the state was obliged to obey not only the will of the conqueror but " the will also of those who helped him to power," chief amongst whom were the permanent priesthood, the new aristocracy and the soldiery. Tacitus also admits of Tiberius that "the prince knew the public eye was upon him and resolved, for that reason, to wait. " There was therefore a public opinion to restrain that "will of the prince which was the law " and such public opinion in turn largely rested upon the ancient laws and customs and upon none of them so solidly and securely as upon the laws of religion, the Sibylline books, the traditions of the Sacred college, the laws of au- gury, the sacred rites and privileges of the priesthood — in short the pagan canon law. In attempting to delineate the institutes of the hierarchy, we are therefore attempting a difficulty, not an impossibility. There was an organic law, not merely a lex non scripta, but also a lex scripta, and although this law has been lost or destroyed, it has left such a deep imprint upon the history of mankind that it is still possible to re- cover, if not its outlines, yet something of its spirit, tendency and operation. The deification and worship of the sovereign-pontiff and the sys- • Annals, xi, 5. ' Letters, iv, 141. FIRST INSTITUTES OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. lOI tern of inalienable estates granted by the hierarchy, in its character of emperor, to the hierarchy in its character of pontiff, have already formed the subject of separate chapters. The other principal articles of the Sacred constitution maybe conveniently considered under the several heads mentioned in the summaries placed at the beginning of this and the chapter following. The minor articles of the constitu- tion are not essential to the present work. For the sake of conven- ience, the date of the Sacred constitution has been assumed to coin- cide with the advent of Augustus A. U. 713, though in point of fact, the hierarchy originated with Julius Csesar and continued in process of formation during his reign and that of Augustus, and indeed for some time afterwards. The Sacred College and Pontifex Maximus. — Down to the last | quarter of the fourth century, when it suddenly vanished from those \ pages of history which the monks have chosen to spare, there existed in the capital of the Roman empire, first at Rome, afterwards at Constantinople, a pagan ecclesiastical college, or corporation, whose origin was traced, by the pious, back to the mythical Numa, while some have even extended its antiquity to the still more myth- ical Romulus. The functions of this college were the superintendence of religion, the custody of the Code of Procedure, the trial and de- termination of ecclesiastical causes, the regulation of public wor- ship, the erection and custody of religious temples, shrines and sanctuaries, the appointment, government and reward or punish- ment of legates, bishops, priests, curates,^ chaplains, augurs, ves- tal virgins, monks and other ministers and servants of religion, the control regulation and custody of the calendar, the regulation of money, and of weights and measures, (Lanciani,) the educa- tion of youth, the direction and observance of religious rites, con- secrations, festivals, plays, games and ceremonies, the solemnization of birth, baptism, (or nundination,) puberty, purification, confession, adolescence, marriage, divorce, death, burial, excommunication, can- onization, deification, adoption into families, adoption into tribes and orders of nobility, also the registration or custody or both of wills and testaments, conveyances, religious images, paintings, sym- * The priests of Maia were called curetes. This name was derived from the Greek term for tonsured. The curetes were eunuch-monks, who lived in common and had charge of the Maian schools. They swayed their bodies and ambled, or danced, in the processions of Maia. Their heads were tonsured, leaving scalp-locks, crests, or cristas, to top them. Lucretius, 11, 629; written about B. C. 55. See also Virgil, Georgics, 151. I02 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. bols, scriptures, relics and sepulchres, and of consecrated lands and treasures. The construction of bridges and other public works, which in ancient times had been entrusted to the pontifex-maximus,^ was during the Commonwealth divested of a religious character and placed in charge of the censors ^ and at a latter period committed to the sediles {a cura cedium) especially when there were no censors ^ and af- terwards to the quaestors. The same may be said of the custody of conveyances. With the triumph of Julius Cjesar, the ecclesiastics again secured control of municipal affairs, this time in every city of the empire except Rome and Constantinople, which for a time re- mained in the hands of a local prsefects or governors.' Yet so early as the reign of Claudius the paving and repairing of the streets of Rome was taken from the quaestors and the prsefects were probably only premitted to superintend such functions and offices as were not not especially renumerative.® The ecclesiastical title to these lucrative prerogatives will be found in those institutes of ancient Rome which rendered sacred, and there- fore remitted to the care of the pontifex-maximus, the walls and ram- parts of cities and the boundaries of lands; so that the former could neither be erected nor repaired, nor the latter altered, without his authority. Under these institutes the construction and repair of all public works in cities, whether established, or to be established, was claimed for the church. Such works included ports, acqueducts, bridges, castles, walls, temples, baths, roads, streets, sewers, and the repair and cleaning of the same.^ So long as these lucrative prerogatives remained with the chief- pontiff, who was also the emperor, the latter had no need to summon either legislature or " estates " for the purpose of granting him sup- plies. When the sovereign-pontiff ceased to be such, these lucrative prerogatives remained with the chief-pontiff. This compelled the emperor, and, after the 13th century, the proconsuls or provincial kings who assumed the emperor's now lost authority, to summon the owners of the estates (and livings) within their respective realms, not, ■* The first bridge, pons, pontem, over the Tiber (a sacred river) is said to liave been constructed by or under the pontifex-maximus; it was placed in his custody and he exacted tolls for its use; circumstances which have been held to sufficiently explain the singular title of his office. Juvenal, vi, 520; Varro, 1., v, 83, 180; Plutarch, in Numa, p. 75. But this is very doubtful. On this subject consult a note in "The Worship of Augustus Csesar." * Livy, IX, 29. * Cic. de Legg., in, 3. ' Gibbon, chap. xvii. *Suet., Claud., 24. ^Cod. Just. I, I, tit. IV, § 26; Ibid, 30; Ibid, tit. lv. § 8, etc.; Guizot, i, 36. FIRST INSTITUTES OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE, IO3 as at a still later period, to deliberate and legislate upon national af- fairs, but merely to grant him supplies. Such was not the origin but the immediate cause of the medieval revival of the Comitia or House of Commons. The connection of modern vestries with municipal works, repairs, etc., has also its remote origin in the prerogatives of the pontifex-maximus. A succession of reforms has swept away the ecclesiastical character of English vestry boards. Their members are now elected by the parochial suffragists, nevertheless the chair- man of such bodies, is still the parish priest, ex officio; the tail of a kite whose head is lost in the clouds of the remotest antiquity. *" During the Commonwealth, the Sacred college was subject to the civil power " and mainly relied for popular compliance with its de- crees and regulations, upon that general assent which superstition or veneration induced in the public mind. In addition to this, it man- aged to obtain the enactment of laws, from time to time, which con- ferred upon it important privileges, concerning the exercise of which it frequently came into collision with the civil magistrates. Toward the end of the Commonwealth these disputes commonly ended in favour of the ecclesiastical power. Nevertheless until the accession of Julius Caesar an appeal could always be made to the people. The ecclesi- astical power was commonly manifested in the infliction of fines and penalties, but occasionally as in trials for heresy it extended to life and death. The pontifex-maximus, even the augurs, at one time, could control the Senate, through the privilege of interdicting their as- semblage and vetoing their laws. '^ Whilst it should not be forgotten that Cicero himself was an augur and a member of the college of augurs, and — for this reason as well because he had been deprived of every other public office, may not have been indisposed to exaggerate its powers or prerogatives, — it should also be remembered that what- '" In the United States, although the Constitution is itself a protest against hierarch- ical government, these lucrative functions in many of the large cities, are now in fact, under the control of a single powerful sect. The practice would be equally objection- able and dangerous were these advantages in the hands of any other sect. " In A, U. 449 Caius Flavins, curule jedile, " made public the Rules of Procedure in judicial cases, hitherto shut up in the closets of the pontiffs and hung up to public view round the forum the Calendar on white tablets; so that all might know when busi- ness could be transacted in the Courts." Livy, ix, 46. For this assertion of popular rights this intrepid magistrate was called a thief, the son of a slave, a contemptible cur, a polluted person, and many other hard names, by the pontiffs whose monstrous monopoly of the Code and the Calendar he had broken down. Moyle's exposition of this subject is one of the few that have been written from, I will not say the popular, but the anti-aristocratic point of view. ^'^ Cicero de Legg., 11, 12. I04 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. ever powers the augurs possessed in his time, they all fell soon after into the hands of the pontifical college. With the subversion of the commons, the tribunes, and the other institutes of ancient liberty, and the elevation of the Sacred college and pontificate to temporal power, the republican limits to the author- ity of the Roman church, were swept away. The right of appeal to a jury of the people was altogether lost; and what technical shred remained of it was abrogated by Augustus. The power of the pontifex- maximus being united in the same person with that of the emperor, it extended to temporal as well as ecclesiastical matters and became as ample in one as the other. '^ Even its vicarious exercise, which in the end broke it down entirely, at the beginning conferred upon it additional strength; for it afforded the sovereign-pontiff relief from the cares of a too extended government and enabled an immediate improvement to be made in the local administration of the more dis- tant provinces. The sovereign-pontiff appointed the members of the Sacred college and conferred upon them powers to ordain bishops. The latter in turn, appointed the inferior priests, and this involution of offices and powers continued downward to the lowest stratum of ecclesiastical rank. Even were there no traditional and other evidences to connect the ecclesiastical organization of the fourth century with the remote pe- riods assigned to Romulus and Numa, the power, the influence, the re- spectability, the numbers, the social ties and connections of the priest- hood, the extent and completeness of their organization, the vast number of temples and other edifices and landed estates under their control in all parts of the empire, their numerous benefices, some of them dating as far back as the history of the empire, the vast wealth of the church and the substantial support it derived from taxation, whether the government was monarchical, or imperial, the widespread belief in its tenets, mythology, superstitions, rites, festivals, sacri- fices, miracles, auguries, oracles and relics, all these and many other circumstances, combine to attest its venerable character and high antiquity. That Rome was not built in a day is an axiom that ap- plies as well to its ecclesiastical organization as to its walls and temples. In the most ancient times the Sacred college had consisted of four pontifices, bishops, flamens, or priests, appointed by the Sacred rex or king, who himself was the pontifex-maximus. During the Com- monwealth their number was increased, but they were appointed by '^ To appeal from the emperor to the Sacred College "was a mockery that turned all religion to a jest." Tacitus, Annals, i, lo. FIRST INSTITUTES OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. 105 the Comrrrons. At first the College, afterwards the Commons, elected the chief-priest, who had his office for life, one of the conditions of his incumbency obliging him never to remove out of Italy. '* In A. U. 453 the number of pontifices was increased to eight, in 672 to 15, and at the instigation of Julius Caesar, to 16, he, himself, soon after, becoming the i6th and the pontifex-maximus. After the death of Caesar and the battle of Actium, the Senate granted formal permis- sion to the Prince of the Senate, Augustus, to add to the Sacred college as many pontiffs as he deemed proper: also to increase and provide for the regulation of the subordinate fraternities of priests. This act enabled Augustus to complete and render more perfect than before, that involution of ecclesiastical ranks and livings, which had already received a powerful impetus during the pontificate of Julius Caesar. Further details concerning this subject will be found in Appendix H. The religious fraternities governed by the Sacred college included the augurs, the decemvirs or quindecemvirs, the septemvirs, the various subordinate religious colleges, such as theLuperci, (including the Juliana, Augustines, etc.,) theSalii and Galli already mentioned, the parish-priests and local curates stationed in various parts of the empire, amounting in number to many thousands; also numerous bodies of monks, clerks and ecclesiastical virgins and slaves. The entire organization, except perhaps with reference to certain nominal imposts levied at times upon the inferior clergy and monks, was ex- empt from military service, civic duties, and taxation. The property and revenues of the church were deemed to be sacred or consecrated to the gods, and appear to have been entirely exempt from taxation. " After the death of the chief-pontiff Lepidus, A. U. 741, Augustus himself assumed the office of pontifex-maximus, held it until his death and transmitted it to his imperial successors. Although the chief- priesthood thus remained a pagan office, marked by pagan rites and sacrifices, down to the day when the state religion was changed by vote of the Senate, yet it was filled, between Constantine and Gratian, by no less than seven so-called Christian emperors. Gibbon's remark that they were invested with more authority over the religion they had deserted, than the one they professed, is only true in the sense that their pagan authority extended to lands, temples, and lucrative '* Livy, XXVIII, 38-48. One reason for thus confining the pontifex-maximus to Italy, may have been the danger of exposing the vocal and bleeding images (Livy, xxvii,4) the relics, calendars, and other impostures of the pagan Sacred College, to the inspec- tion of a doubting multitude. ^^ Gibbon, in, 74, quoting Symmachus. Io6 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. offices, over which as yet the "Christian " priests had n3 legal au- thority. Zosimus, a writer of the fifth century, says that Gratian was the first emperor who declined to officiate as pontifex-maximus.'" Unfortunately for the historian's correctness in this particular, an issue of Gratian's coins is extant which plainly attests his acceptance and exercise of the office. " As an alternative theory, Gratian's modern apologists have advanced the unlikely notion that he accepted the title, whilst he repudiated the functions, of the pontifex-maximus. '^ The truth seems to be that at the period of Gratian the dividing line between Roman paganism and Roman Christianity was not always well marked. " Gratian's father, Valentinian, though he is claimed to have been a Christian convert, filled the office of apaganpontifex, gave no preference or advantage to any sect, forbade the Roman ec- clesiastics from appropriating any testamentary bequests but such as came to them as next of kin, and issued a general edict permitting the practice of polygamy. Gratian's counsellor, the famous Augus- tine of Hippo, was twice a pagan before he became once a Christian, and Gratian himself dismissed the priests of one religion to appoint in their places, those of another, himself remaining pontifex-maximus and emperor of both. The belief that it was justifiable to devote to Christian, those riches, powers and privileges, which had been origin- ally consecrated to pagan beneficiaries, had now apparently spread far enough from its source, to warrant Gratian in confiscating them to the fisc. The revolt of pagan Britain and Gaul, and the tragic fate of Gratian, merely prove that in this belief he was mistaken. During the Commonwealth, the Roman ecclesiastical organization was largely supported by voluntary contributions and the offerings of the pious; but it possessed no livings and commanded no tithes. Ante, Deos homini quod conciliare valeret, Far erat, et puri lucida mica salis. — Ovid, ^'Fasii," i, 337. According to their several means, the people vowed temples, shrines, games, (whence ludi votivi) jewels, food, or flowers, to the gods. Ver sacrum, or the young of all edible animals, born from the beginning of the year (in March) to the end of the month of April, was a com- mon offering to the church. So was a tenth of the spoils, taken in war, and in later times, the golden crowns displayed in military tri- umphs. These and other voluntary offerings were the relics of com- ^^ Zosimus, IV, 249-50. '' This is admitted by Guizot. '^ Bell's Pantheon, i, 19. '® The commonest mark of distinction was between those who did, and those who did not, sacrifice. FIRST INSTITUTES OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. 107 pulsory dues that had gone before, and the progenitors of others that were to appear in future. Thus, Lucian says that a tithe of the spoils of war were devoted by the Greeks to the temple of Mars, whilst Xenophon relates that a tithe of the produce of certain lands was an- nually devoted to the priests of Diana, ^" and Sillius, that the Gaditan chaplains or parasites exacted corn and other tithes for Hercules, which they gathered into the temple. ^^ The first may have been a voluntary offering, the other examples have all the appearance of a t-ax. Herodotus, viii, 46, relates that the Siphnians reserved a tithe of the produce of their gold mines for Apollo, but omits to say whether it was an offering or a tax. In some countries, at the present day, it is necessary to reserve a tithe, or more, of the produce of gold- mining for the local priesthood ; not that the law commands, but that policy and experience advise it. The Siphnian tithe may have been of this character. The Brahmin, Buddhist, Assyrian, Egyptian, Hebrew" and other ancient hierarchies, all exacted tithes from the people for the support of the church. The imposition of tithes by Julius or Augustus was therefore no novelty. The latter not only increased the authority and emoluments, commoda, of the bishops, priests, and vestal virgins, he also devoted to their support the tithes, decumse, of certain landed estates, which tithes he vested in the church. His imposition of a twentieth, vigesima hcereditatum, upon inheritances, is also, without doubt, an ecclesiastical tax: because the church had authority over the framing and registration of wills and testaments, and would hardly have risked the loss of such authority by submitting inheritances to secular taxation, at least not without interposing the most formidable objections and obstacles. The real or assumed piety of Augustus, which was so great that once a year he used in person, to publicly solicit alms for the church, affords an assurance, apart from all other considerations, of his repugnance to any measures which would have neglected to strengthen the resources of the Sacred college. ^^ Tiberius erected 12 villas in Caprse which he consecrated to the principal gods of ancient Rome. The rentals of these villas, if any, must have gone to the church, because it would have been sacreligious to divert them to any other purpose. Speaking generally, the pagan church of the empire received from the consecrated lands and the public revenue an ample stipend, which liberally supported the splen- dour of the priesthood and all the expenses of the religious worship 20 De Exped. Cyri., lib., v. ''^ Taylor, 232. ^^ I Sam., VIII, 15-17. ^^Suet., Aug., 49; Dio., LV, 25. Io8 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. of the State. ^* Not only was the religion of Rome supported from the public coffers, it was the lawful duty of the Senate to maintain it, and of the prjetors and sediles to enforce such of its observances as the priesthood declared to be essential. " In A. U. 327, "the sediles were instructed to see that no other deities should be worshipped than those acknowledged by the Romans, nor even these, in any other modes than those established by the custom of the country."*® In A. U. 540, the worship of les having been introducted into Rome, the sediles and criminal judges were sharply rebuked by the aristo- cratic Senate for tolerating the votaries of this popular deity and the city prffitor was ordered to suppress their assemblages, burn their scriptures, and forbid the practice of their rites without special per- mission of the Senate. " In A. U. 548 the worship of Maia was brought to Rome from Gala- tia by authority of the Senate. In 566 the rites of les were again introduced into Rome and supported by "false witnesses, counter- feited seals, forged wills, false evidences and pretended miracles." One of the consuls thereupon cited to the Senate, "numberless de- cisions of the pontiff, decrees of the Senate, and answers of the aruspices," concerning the right to deal with this subject, and the "frequent charges that had been made to the magistrates to prohibit the performance of any foreign religious rites, to banish strolling priests and soothsayers from the city, to search for and burn books of divination and to abolish every mode of sacrificing that was not conformable to the Roman practice. " The result was that he obtained the enactment of a decree " prohibiting the performance of any the like rites in Rome or in Italy," and providing for the exercise of other religious rites only after the express authority of the Senate had been obtained therefor and when not less less than 100 members should be present, and also on condition that the persons so authorized "should have no common stock of money, nor any presiding officer of cere- monies, nor any priests." *^ " Does not the religion of the Romans come under the protection of the Roman laws? " asked Symmachus, in a later age, confident that there was but one reply to such a ques- tion. It results from these premises that down to the year A. D. 394, when, as alleged, the Senate reformed the national religion, there was but ^* Gibbon, iii, 71, *^ Among these, according to Livy and Tacitus, was the worship of images. ** Livy, IV, 30. ^'' Livy, xxv, i. Moyle's Works, vol. i. ** This appears to have remained the law to the last. Livy, xxxix, 8, 18. FIRST INSTITUTES OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. IO9 one chief-pontiff, and one set of priests with lawful power to superin- tend or perform the functions of religion in Rome, and that these priests were pagans. It is conceivable that there existed a secret so- ciety of chrestos or christianos, which gradually increased in num- bers, until, venturing to exercise its rites openly, it filled the aimy, the senate, and the church; that at length it took part in choosing the emperor; and that it finally succeeded in acquiring control of the ancient hierarchy; but any theory which asks us to believe that two popes, of antagonistic creeds, the one polytheistic, the other Chris- tian, the one armed with almost unlimited power, the other with none, existed contemporaneously and exercised similar functions over the same community, lawfully and publicly, is simply incredible/" During the three centuries which elapsed between the establish- ment of the hierarchy and the reign of Aurelian, the pagan church had acquired, through testamentary gifts, etc., a large proportion of all the private estates embraced in the empire. As the number of priests and their requirements, together with the habits of indulgence which such a system engendered, increased even more rapidly than the con- secrated lands, it is quite probable that while the church and the bish- ops grew ^ich, the common priests and ecclesiastical servants became poor. Yet, if we may believe Vopiscus, a single temple of Rome was enriched by Valerian with fifteen thousand pounds weight of gold, while all the others were resplendent with the richness of his offer- ings.'" Vast as were the property and revenues of the pagau church, the edict of Valentinian proves that they were still increasing, when they were all confiscated to the imperial fisc during the brief reign of Gratian." Constantine had already made a breach in this ancient and towering edifice, which his sons Constantius and Constans had been importuned to v/iden ; but Gratian attempted to overthrow it with one blow, an attempt that cost him his life. When Theodosius had duly avenged the death of this martyr, he granted the ecclesiastical estates ^^ Valesius himself, in several passages, admits that there were no christian " popes " until near the fifth century. He says that at the council of Antioch, Paul of Samosata was condemned without the participation of Dionysus, bishop in Rome. Julius, bishop in Rome 337-52, "who was neither ignorant of his privileges nor disposed to relin- quish any right " . . . " disclaimed everything beyond the courtesy of being in- vited to attend and being consulted with the other bishops." Socrates, Ecc. Hist. Pref., vi. For list of Pagan popes see Appendix H herein. ^^ Vop. in Aur., xli. ^' Sir Henry Maine in one of his lectures delivered at Oxford, said that (similarly) the m^oslem church was endowed with the lands and livings of the pagan church which it supplanted. no ■ THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED, and livings of the church to incumbents of the true faith. Such of the bishops and priests as had not embraced Christianity (for many of the latter had done so already) were expelled from their offices and re- placed by others/^ The members of the pagan Sacred College wore a white linen robe, bordered with purple, and a conical cap. The chief pontiff and the augurs wore a similar costume, with the addition of a crooked staff, called lituus. Such a staff appears in the hands, both of Romulus and Julius Csesar, as they are depicted on contemporanous, at all events very ancient, altars, gems and medals.'^ The Romans wor- shipped with their heads covered and facing toward the east. A head- covering was also worn by deified personages and was called peplum. These or similar customs were common with all races who derived their religion from India and are practised by the Jews to this day, who call their sacred head-covering, talith or tallas. On the eve of the battle of Issus, Alexander summoned Aristander, the hierophant, who, habited in white and with his head veiled, joined the king in praying to Jove for victory.^* Vitellius, his head covered with a veil, prostrated himself before Caligula and adored him as god.^^ In addition to the details already mentioned, the Roman pagan college and ecclesiastical organization was characterised by a pecu- liar observance in the appointment of priests. The priests of the Brahmins, Assyrians, Egyptians, '® Israelites, Greeks and other na- tions of a remote antiquity, other than Buddhists, were selected from sacerdotal or aristocratic classes. To this day, after the repeated dispersion of their defenceless communities and religious congrega- tions, the Jews will not permit certain of their public ceremonies to be performed, by any, except members, real or supposed, of the sacer- dotal class known as cohanes or cohens. " The ancient Greek priests obtained their offices variously by inheritance, lot, appointment or election, but except during the republic they always came from sacred tribes. '* On the contrary, the priests of Rome were drawn from all classes of the people. Monachism. Philo and other Platonists, renounced their patri- monies and lived in common, " the Greek priests of Hercules practised ^^Zosimus, IV, 249; v, 38; Code Theod. de Pagan Sacrif. et Templis. ^*Livy, I, 18,41; XXXIII, 28; Festus; Varro, vi, 3; Virg, ^n.,ii, 683; vii,6i2; viii, 664; x, 270; Cic. Legg., I, i; Cic. Fam., 11, 16; Att., 11, 9: Divin., i, 17. 34 Q. Curtius. IV, 13. ^^ Suet. Vitellius, 2. 3« Herodotus, Euterpe. " See Coenobites, below. 3« Eustathius, ^^ Sozomen, i, 12. FIRST INSTITUTES OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. Ill celibac3% the Greek sect of Perfectionists strove to overcome their natural tendencies by drinking the juice of hemlock and strewing; the herb agnus castus in their beds, while the priests of Maia and other ascetics shaved their heads and, like Atis the Mediator, made themselves " eunuchs for the Kingdom of Heaven's sake."" The Therapeuts withdrew from the world, buried themselves in monas- teries, and passed their time in religious contemplation, seasoned by discipline, self-mortification, fastings, prayers, hymns, canticles, vig- ils and genuflexions. Monks abounded in India from the remotest times, also in ancient Assyria, Egypt, Greece, Gaul, Galatia and Rome. According to Sozomen, the Therapeuts and Essenes were the same. Their "monasteries were established before the Christian sera," some in Palestine, and, in the place of one of these, afterwards arose the fraternity of Carmelite monks and nuns. " We may see some traces of these people (monks) among the Druids. They existed be- fore Christianity, lived in monasteria or monasteries, and were called "coenobites," because they lived in common. " In A. U. 566 the Roman Senate passed a law against religious brotherhoods whose members lived in common. " Josephus in early life was a monk. ** Mark, the Evangelist, was regarded as an ascetic. " "As many as were possessors of lands or houses sold them and brought the prices (proceeds) of the things that were sold and laid them down at the apostle's feet, and distribution was made to every man according as he had need. " ^^ " Many (monks) dwelt in each city and the provider for the faction is especially discernible among strangers by his engage- ment in storing up clothing and necessary articles. " "' " They lived in monasteries, maintained a perfect community of goods and an equality of external rank, deeming vassalage a violation of natural law."" These evidences are deemed sufficient to establish the great an- tiquity of monachismand its practice under the constitution erected by Julius Caesar and before the adoption of Christianity. Canonization. It was the duty of the pagan pontifex-maximus, as- sisted by the Sacred college over which he presided, to appoint and register the public holidays and festivals. In this registry or canon *" Compare Matthew xix, 12; Leviticus, xxi, 5, 20; Herodotus, Thalia, 8; Kennedy, Hindu Mythology, p. 263. *^ Livy, xxxix, 18; Higgins' Celtic Druids; Eusebius, Ecc. Hist., Ii, 16. ^^ Celtic Druids, 125. ^^ Livy, xxxix, 18. ^■* And lived in the desert on figs and nuts. See his autobiography. *^ Eusebius, 11, 16, 23. ** Acts, iv, 35. •*'' Josephus, Wars, 11, 4. *** Marsh's Michaelis, iv, 83. 112 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. was also inscribed (adscriptum est) the most remarkable occurrences. Thus on Lupercalia it was noted in the canon that Antony had offered the crown of empire to Julius. To have one's name inscribed or canonized was deemed by the Romans an honour of the rarest charac- ter, a most sacred and exalted distinction. Julius, Augustus and many of their successors were canonized in the fasti of the Sacred college. Other persons besides emperors of Rome were canonized, and vows, wishes, oaths, offerings and sacrifices were made in their names. " Sanctuaries. Altars and temples were regarded by both Greeks and Romans as places of refuge or asyla, some of them, as previously mentioned, being clothed with peculiar sanctity. Here slaves found refuge from the cruelty of their masters, children from inhuman fathers, debtors from creditors, and the accused from the officers of the law. From these sanctuaries it was deemed impious to attempt their removal. ^° Suetonius says that Tiberius "abolished the privi- leges and customs of asyla in all parts of the world," while Tacitus, with more reason, says that he only regulated and reformed their abuse. ^' Sacred Scriptures. Among other functions the Quindecemvirs or Holy Fifteen " had the care of the ludi sseculares and the custody of the Ten ^' Sibylline books, or gospel of the pagan Romans, which contained the prophesies and revelation relating to the fate of the empire and also (according to Niebuhr) the religious ceremonial. In conformity with aregulation of Augustus, two thousand "spurious" gospels were burnt by the praetor urbanus, while the "genuine " books were preserved in two gilt caskets deposited under the statue of Apollo in the temple of that god on the Palatine. " One of the of- *^ Nero deified his dead wife Poppsea Sabina and erected a temple to her in which she was worshipped as Sabina dea Veneris, or Sabina, the goddess Venus. He also obtained a decree of the Senate deifying the infant daughter whom she bore him, namely, Claudia entitled Augusta. The inscription on her medals is Diva Claudia Neronis Filia, or the goddess Claudia, daughter of Nero. On the antiquity of this custom consult Ovid, Fasti, i, 9; Tac. Ann., i, 15; iii, 17; Cic. Ep. ad Brut., 15; Cic. Sext., 14; Pis., 13; Verr., 11, 53; iv, fin.; and the numerous authorities in " Nim- rod " (Herbert). ^''Cic. Tusc, I, 35; Nat. D., iii, 10; Dom., 41; Nep. Paus., 4; Ovid, Trist., v, 2, 43; Tac, Ann., in, 60; iv, 14; Virg. JEn., i, 349; il, 513, 550. ^' Suet. Tiberius, 37; Tacit. Ann., iii 60-3, *^ Originally, duumviri (2); in A.U. 387 decemviri (10); in tempo Sylla, quindecem- viri (15); and according to some authors, in tempo Julius Caesar, sexdecemviri (16); alluding to their numbers. ^^ Some authors say there were nine or even a fewer number of Sibylline books; but Varro distinctly says there were ten books. =■* Suet. Aug., 31. FIRST INSTITUTES OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. I 13 fices of the Holy Fifteen wasMercia ; Tosti and Morca, dukes of Northumberland, and Harold, duke of East Anglia. We are assured that the two last named were created dukes by Edward Confessor; but this is doubtful. These titles were probably all self-assumed, as was that of the duke of Brittany, until the king of France, by the fall of the Sacred empire, acquired the right to create a duke, and until (so far as the Breton title is con- cerned) it was legalized by Phillip III., in 1297. " Slavery. The principal classes of slavery which existed under the Sacred constitution continued to exist under that of the Medieval empire. Such modification as occurred in the condition of the slaves has already been noticed in the chapters on the Feudal system. " It has been held by some writers that the introduction of Christian- ity ameliorated the condition of slavery in the Roman empire. There is no evidence whatever to support such a view. On the con- trary, the clergy, when they adopted that form of religion which in the dark ages passed for Christianity, took over all the real and per- sonal effects of paganism: temples, treasure, land and slaves. The institutes of the pseudo-Christian Justinian are filled with provisions designed to protect slavery, while the latter was maintained by the church for its own advantage. *^ Instead of discouraging it, the evi- dence goes to prove that the pseudo-Christians of the period zealously encouraged slavery. In the eighth century Alcuin, an English bishop at the court of Charlemagne, held no less than twenty thousand per- sons in bondage ; and scarcely fewer numbers were held by some other prelates. It was not uncommon for free men to surrender their lib- erty to bishops or abbots, that they might be taken under the pro- tection of the saints. *^ These oblati were so numerous that they were divided into three classes, vassali, censuales and ministeriales. At the beginning of the eleventh century the greater part of the com- ** Brady, 11, 132, 182; Henry's History of Britain, 11, i, 27S. ^ The institution of Patronage in the ninth century is mentioned elsewhere in the present work. *^ See Dr. Robertson, Note xx, and Fustel de Coulanges, passim. *^ Du Cange, voc. oblatus, iv, 12S6; Mabillondere Diplomat., vi, 632; Potgiesserus de statu servorum, i, i, 6, 7. 228 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. monalty in France were slaves. " The same was the case in England. " The representations of Charlemagne to the pope and the capitulary of his brother Carloman, ut mancipia Christiana paganis non vendan- tur, may have had some effect in abating the sale of Christian slaves to pagans, but even this is doubtful, for as a matter of fact the Vene- tian trade consisted largely of Christian slaves in exchange for oriental merchandise. " In England it was very common even after the Con- quest to export slaves to Ireland."*' William of Malmesbury and Giraldus Cambrensis prefer a still more serious indictment against the Christian nobility of England. They are charged with selling to foreigners their female servants, after they had themselves made them pregnant. It was only in later times, after Christianity had undergone so vast a process of evolution that it no more resembled the Christianity of the dark ages than that did the original worship of idols which sur- vives in the names of our week-days, that the church discouraged slavery and endeavoured to extirpate it. Ecclesiastical mystery and egotism is reluctant to admit evolution, last of all will it admit that the church, aye, even that religion itself, is subject to such a law of nature; yet for all that, Christianity evolves. It is this evolution which constitutes its main basis, its chief glory and the real source of its increasing universality and ever extending conquests; and without which it would utterly fail to meet the religious aspirations of an ad- vancing civilization. The Provinces. Throughout the whole of the period from the es- tablishment of the hierarchy by Julius Caesar to the christianization of its laws by Justinian, the feudalizing process, which is the necessary consequence of such a form of government, had continually removed the provinces further and further away from central control. When the pontificate seceded from the Basileus and the Medieval empire arose, the western provinces, though lawfully subject to the latter, were, by the feudal process, so far removed from its practical control, that it was only on important occasions that their true relation was manifested. Still more distant had the provinces become removed from the Sacred empire of Julius, which now seemed to them but a speck on the distant horizon of time. Yet though faint, the marks of their ancient relationship were still to be discerned Until the year 1204 we shall find that the Medieval empire, whether personated by pope or emperor, respected certain prerogatives of the Sacred empire, " Montesquieu, xxx, 11. ** Brady, Pref. to General History. ■** Hallam, chapter ix, part I, fin. CONSTITUTION OF THE MEDIEVAL EMPIRE. 229 and that the provinces acknowledged and respected the prerogatives and suzerainty of both empires, the Sacred and the Medieval. Free Cities. During the medieval ages certain cities, whose privi- leges or immunities became the subject of legal investigation, proved before the courts of law that they had enjoyed them "from the times of the Romans. " '" This fact alone negatives the notion that the Sacred empire had perished, or that, as Mr. Bryce suggests, the people of western Europe were ignorant of its existence. The right to establish cities and grant municipal privileges, which Pfeffel's imaginary con- stitution confers upon the ecclesiastical Diet and the emperor of the West, must therefore in reality be limited by the extent to which municipal privileges had previously been granted by the Sacred, and acknowledged by the Western, empire. It is plain that the same privileges could not legally be conferred by both empires, and that, for example, had the Sacred empire anciently chosen to grant free- dom to all the municipalities then extant, the power of the Western emperor to make such grants must have been limited to such new cities as he himself constructed or established. Fairs, Weekly or church-day fairs, or wakes, were held during the Medieval ages, as in pagan times, under the auspices of the church, to which they yielded a revenue." Originally these were held on the ninth day ; afterwards on the seventh. Appleton mentions fairs during the reign of Dagobert in France, while Dr. Henry treats those of the heptarchical period in England. '^^ The Smithfieldfair was established during the twelfth century for the benefit of the priory and hospital of St. Bartholomew in Smithfield. Church-day fairs were not abol- ished until the fourteenth or fifteenth century. In England they were forbidden by 27 Henry VI., c. 5 (1448), except as to four Sundays in harvest time. This last vestige of a custom which began in the very dawn of history was not swept away until 1850.^^ Great fairs are men- tioned in extant texts as having been established by the emperors (among other places) in Italy during the fifth century, at Aix-la-Cha- pelle and Troyes in the eighth century, in Saxony and Flanders about 960, "* and in Novogorod about 1050. "^ At these fairs slaves were sold, as well as merchandise. Fairs were regulated by the emperor Charle- magne in 800, and by pope Gregory VII. in 1078. It is quite evident that both as to church-day fairs and great fairs the Medieval empire ^^ De Bos, 11, 333; Robertson, Note xvi. *' Guizot, Hist. Civ., vol. ni. ^"^ History Britain, ii, i, 261. ^^ Act 13 Victoria, c. 23. "AnnalesFiandrige year 958, printed at Frankfort, 1580; Anderson's Hist. Com.. 1,98. " Flateyjar-bok, i, 577. 230 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. simply continued the provisions of the Sacred constitution. Brussel ^* informs us that in the tenth century the rents of fairs were commonly feudalized. In fact throughout many parts of the empire this process had taken place ages before; in some parts it did not occur, so far as is now known, until after the tenth century. The fairs of Wessex were regulated by Alfred in 886, and of England by William I., in 107 1. In the former case the regulation was probably made with, and in the latter without, imperial or pontifical authority. Right of War, Peace and Treaties. These prerogatives, though they properly belonged to the Medieval emperors, were far more often exercised by the popes. Notwithstanding the prophecies of Daniel, the Sibyls, Virgil, etc., peace and good-will among men seemed as distant during the Medieval age as ever. Western Christendom was surrounded by heretical Spain, Gotland, Saxony, Hungary and Sar- matia. " Within, it was governed by princes more intent upon strength- ening their own local power than fortifying and extending the domain of Christ. In seceding from the Basileus the pontificate had assumed a responsibility which can only be measured by the danger of again seeing Europe revert to the abominable worship of the emperors; a danger that always haunted the Christian church and from which it could only hope to escape by undermining the imperial throne, weak- ening its power, dividing its dominions, and encouraging the disobe- dience of its vassals. If the papal history of Christianity is true, if Christianity was predicted by inspired prophets and descended from the Jews, then its government during the dark and Medieval ages (we refrain from any more sweeping characterization) has no apology. But if, as indicated by the more reliable testimony of archaeology, it was essentially a moral revolt against Caesarism, then there is much to palliate the transactions of this period. If the mission of Christianity was to improve the religion of such men as Cicero, Pliny and Marcus Aurelius, or to keep alive the ancient Greek hatred for non-conform- ists, there is no plea to mitigate the manifold crimes which were com- mitted or instigated by the Medieval popes. It is only upon the theory that the pontificate honestly feared a resurrection of Csesarism that the end justified, even to those ages, the bloody and execrable means, which were too often employed to uphold the new religion. To main- tain continual discord between the vassals of the Western empire, to prevent their uniting in its support, to dethrone and intern them in ^^ Usage General des Fiefs, i, 42, cited in Guizot, iii, 37. *' Spain and Portugal were in the hands of the Moslem; Saxony had been recovered by the Goths, and Hungary by the Avars. CONSTITUTION OF THE MEDIEVAL EMPIRE. 23 1 convents, aye, even to mark them out for slaughter, while openly play- ing the part of peacemaker and accepting rewards for composing quar- rels which itself had fomented, these were some of the functions of the Latin pontificate. Among the means necessary to the performance of these functions (there are others which are known to historical stu- dents, but over which charity prefers to draw a veil) were the right to declare war, peace and alliances. Trial by Jury. The essence of this institution is the determination of questions at law by a body selected from among the people for that purpose, who, after their work is done, return to the people without retaining permanent office. The number of jurymen is of no essential consequence. No such custom appears in the Asiatic codes. The in- stitudes of Solon provided for a large body of dicasts selected by the archon from among the freemen of Athens, and actions-at-law were heard and determined by a smaller body of dicasts selected from the whole body for this purpose. This smaller body we would now call a petit, traverse, or trial jury. The dicasts were sworn to discharge their duty faithfully, and during trials were presided over by a permanent magistrate. The Roman system of judices, evidently copied from the institutes of Solon, was of precisely the same character. Such judices determined not only the facts, but sometimes also the law; although this was usually laid down to them, at the outset of the trial, by the presiding magistrate, in explaining the consequences that would fol- low their verdict. The smaller body selected to try a cause was usually composed of ten men. Under the Sacred constitution this system sub- stantially expired, yet that some shadow of it remained is attested in the numerous allusions of Tacitus, Suetonius and other authors of the Augustan period. This was the time when most probably the few cases now referred to a jury were adjudged by twelve, instead of ten judices, as formerly; for it was partly during the Augustan period that twelve assumed the mystic importance previously accorded to ten. Twelve was the number of compurgators or guarantors (juare duodecima manu) who were required to swear to the innocence of the accused under the canon law of the sixth century.'^ The system of compur- *^ Sir Francis Palgrave fancies he sees the twelve jurymen in the twelve headmen of Asgard, whom Woden nominated to " doom the land's law." But it is quite evident that many of the mysteries found in the Sagas are either, like Gothic coins, architec- ture, etc., mere barbarian distortions of Greek or Roman originals, or else that they were all derived from a common Oriental source. The jury system was so unfamiliar to the Goths that it was only introduced into Norway about the year 1890, and it is by no means well established there yet. 232 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. gators also essentially differed from that of the judices. The compur- gators were witnesses, not judges; they constituted a body of twelve persons who were supposed to know the facts of the case, or who, whether they knew them or not, were ready to testify concerning them, and who alone were permitted to do so. This institution of wit- nesses prevailed throughout the Roman empire, including Britain, down to the thirteenth century, when, in common with many other canonical institutes, it began to undergo modifications in the several states which now first asserted their independence. Glanville, who wrote during the reign of Henry II. , ascribes some modifications then made in the witness system to the ' ' goodness " of the reigning prince ; but it is well ascertained that down to the fifteenth century the so- called jury of twelve were themselves the witnesses and the only wit- nesses permitted in the trial ; so that the modification alluded to could hardly have been of essential importance. In Magna Charta the ju- dicium parium "^ meant the well-known feudal custom of the lord and a body of his vassals trying disputes between other of his vassals ; -and did not mean a trial by jury in either the ancient (or most modern) sense, juratores being mentioned elsewhere in that instrument. It is quite possible that the alternate phrase, per legem terrs, was intended to include trial by jury of actual witnesses, and was in fact the modifica- tion to which Glanville alludes. In such case it was not overridden by the compurgator practice of the common law, until the sera of free- dom inaugurated by Edward III., rendered the ancient Roman system of jurymen a permanent institution of English law."" The Calendar. The Sacred prerogative to fix or alter the sera and calendar descended in an unbroken line from thepontifex "Numa"to the pontifex Julius Csesar, and from the pontifex Julius Csesar to the pontifex Isaac II. It was afterwards picked up by the Latin popes, of whom Gregory XIII. was the last to exercise it. Foreign Ambassadors, The Benedictine compilers of L'art de Veri-^ fier les dates claim that the Jus Legationis was exercised by Pope Greg- ory III., and the statement has been carelessly repeated by all sub- sequent chronologists. This prerogative belonged to and was exercised by the sovereign-pontiff of the empire. In the reign of Charlemagne it was assumed by that monarch. His embassy sent to Haroun al Ras- chid is an instance of its exercise. It was not until after the pontificate had usurped the throne and prerogatives of Charlemagne, that it ex- ^'Nisi per legale judicium parium suorum vel per legem terras, i. f., " Unless by lawful trial of his peers," not trial by jury. *** For further information on this subject see my " Ancient Britain." CONSTITUTION OF THE MEDIEVAL EMPIRE. 233 ercised the power to treat with foreign nations and to send to them legates or ambassadors. Under the Medieval constitution the pope and emperor, sometimes alternately, sometimes conjointly, exercised this prerogative, until the Fall of Constantinople, when the tie that bound them to the Sacred empire having been destroyed, the western princes found themselves free to appoint ambassadors, each on his own account. Among the earliest foreign embassies appointed by any of the subsidiary Christian powers was that headed by William de Rubruquis, a Franciscan monk, who was sent in 1253 by Louis IX., of France, to treat with the Mongol princes Batu and Mangu Khan. An account of this mission appears in the first volume of Hakluyt. Trade Corporations. The evolution of trade corporations from the period assigned to Numa, their sacerdotal government under the early Monarchy, their secularization and suppression by the Commonwealth, and their restoration and subjection to sacerdotal authority under the Empire, has been treated in previous chapters. They retained the last named position in the laws of the Medieval empire. As the Sacred empire drew to its close, trade-guilds are said to have made their ap- pearance in the Italian republics; in the history of the free city of Hamburg they are mentioned so early as 1 135 ; but it is by no means certain that these dates are not founded merely in the vain but com- mon desire of historians to exaggerate the antiquity of their national institutes. That the pagans created trade-guilds is not denied, but since within the Roman empire their creation was a prerogative of the sacerdotal function, it is difhcult to see whence proceeded the au- thority to constitute a corporate body in a Christian state until after the Fall of Constantinople. Whatever may have been the case in the *' republics " of Venice or Hamburg, it remains the fact that no Chris- tian prince, other than the emperor or pope, ever created a corpora- tive body until after that period. The earliest trade-guilds of London were authorized by Edward III. Navigation Laws. The Roman navigation acts were repeated in the Laws of Oleron, which have been ascribed to a period so early as the reign of Richard I., but it is more likely that in point of time they followed the Consolato del Mare which was promulgated at Barcelona early in the thirteenth century. In 1379 Richard II. enacted a statute which prohibited the king's subjects from iinporting or exporting mer- chandise except in English ships, probably only the repetition of an ordinance of one of the Edwards. To the reign of the latter must therefore, with the greatest probability, be ascribed the earliest of those acts, which, following the example of Rome, had for their most 234 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. for their most important object, the monopoly of the coasting and colonial trade. ^^ Public Notaries. Both the civil and ecclesiastical lawyers of the Medieval age agreed in the belief that all public notaries throughout the Western empire, in order to render their records, writings and at- testations valid, should hold their commissions from either the emperor or the pope. This continued to be the legal practice in Scotland until the reign of James III., 1460-87. Even after that time the public no- taries of that country continued to style themselves " Ego M. auctori- tate imperiali [or papali) notarius. " " Doctors of Law: Bankers. Irnerius, an Italian jurisconcult of the twelfth century and chancellor to the emperor Lotharius, is frequently described as the ' ' restorer of the Roman law. " This is saying too much. He was the first of the glossators and in that capacity he did much to restore the corrupted text of the law. But the restoration of the Civil law, meaning its re-instatement as the rule of action for the inhabi- tants of the Western empire, was the result not of any one man's ef- forts: it was a great political event, the consequence of the Fall of Constantinople and of the assertion of their independence by the nu- merous western princes who thitherto had remained in vassalage to Rome. Down to that time the law which had substantially governed the Western "kingdoms," ever since the death of Charlemagne, was not the Civil law, but the ecclesiastical statutes invented or formu- lated by Dionysius Exiguus, forged by Isidore of Metz, amplified by the Latin popes and codified in 115 1 by the Tuscan monk Gratian, in the "Concordantia Discordantium Canonum." This code covered or was construed to cover nearly every incident of social life; so that when a man was asked, as he was in France and Italy, by what law he would prefer to be governed, whether Longobardian, Salic, or Ger- man (Alemannorum) the question was almost a sarcasm, seeing that the canon law left him but little to choose. ^^ The papal registers of this period have not been permitted to see the light; but for the cen- tury which followed it, Mr. Bliss and other writers have been kindly supplied with materials by the clever gentlemen who control the Vati- can collection. *' Their object in permitting this publication is evi- dently with the view to establish the claim that the almost absolute control of the Western "kingdoms" exercised by the papacy began *' Bryce, i88«; Selden, Titles of Honour, part i. chapter ii. *^ See my "Ancient Britain," chap, vni, g. ^* " Calendar of Entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain and Ireland, 1198-1304," edited by W. H. Bliss, B. C. L., London, 1894. CONSTITUTION OF THE MEDIEVAL EMPIRE. 235 in a remote past and continued onward into an indefinite future. But that is precisely what it did not do. It began with the papal usurpa- tion of Charlemagne's prerogatives and it definitively ended with the Fall of Constantinople in 1 204. Its exercise after this date was a con- tinual diminuendo ; and so far as England is concerned but feeble traces of it remained after the accession of the Plantagenets. Among the many false institutes and legal fictions that fell with the Empire was the canon law of Rome and the empty choice which it left to the free- man of living under codes of law which it had divested of any force. When Constantinople fell, the whole of Christendom, as though by concerted action, took refuge under the Civil law; and until this was modified by the numerous statutes which each kingdom now proceeded to enact for itself, ®* it remained the only law which governed the states of the Western world. It was the enactment of these local stat- utes that demanded a legislature and that led to the creation of par- liaments, which, as to any period before the year 1204, claim existence only in the imagination of those patriotic writers who would manu- facture parliaments, without power either to make laws or to enforce them. It is the same with lawyers. Until the Fall of the Empire there was no Civil law and consequently there were no civil lawyers." The law was divine and infallible; its interpreters and executioners were alike divine and infallible and there was little place either for reason or reasoners. The early teachers of the Civil law, like Ivan of Char- tres; Irnerius, of Bologna; Theobald, of Normandy; Vicarius, of Bo- logna ; and Placentius, of Montpelier, were doctors or professors, rather than advocates or attorneys; and when the rehabilitation of the civil law had proceeded so far as to require the services of practical men, the Empire was /lors de combat diud the attorneys were appointed by the royal power in each state for itself. The earliest attorneys in Eng- land are mentioned in the Court Rolls of 14 Henry III., (A. D. 1225,) but it does not appear from the rolls whether they were professional attorneys, that is to say, officers of the Court, or merely friends of the persons cited to appear. In 52 Henry III., '' John de Bayliol con- stituted before the king two persons to be his attorneys, ad lucrandum vel perdendum, in a plea depending before the barons (of the Ex- ^^ The remarkable synchronism of these great events does not seem to have arrested the attention of historians. The Etablissements of St. Louis, 1226-70, the Siete Partidas of Alfonso X., 1256-75, and the statutes of Edward I., DeReligiosis (statute of mortmain) De Donis and Quia Emptores.were all enacted about the same time; i. e., shortly after the Fall of Constantinople. *^ In 1220 Pope Honorius III. forbade the delivery of lectures on the civil law in Paris. 236 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. chequer) between the said John and John de Somerleyton and others named in the original writ for a debt of XI libras, which the said John de Bayliol demanded of them, therefore the king commands the bar- ons that they do admit the said persons or either of them (if both of them cannot be present) to be attorneys for the said John de Bay- liol." "" Notwithstanding the phrase adlucrandum vel perdendum the fact that these attorneys had to be appointed especially for this case by the king, proves that they were not officers of the court. The ear- liest instance of persons thus qualified occurs in the reign of Edward I. Their designation was apprentices and counsellors at law. The latter are mentioned in the statute of 1284. (jj Edward I.) These officers were followed in 1391,(20 Edward I.,) by barristers, or persons qual- ified to plead within the bar. With regard to bankers, so long as the power of the Basileus re- mained, no banking seems to have been permitted throughout the empire; for his control of the monetary system made him the banker of Christendom, and it is not likely that he voluntarily relinquished so valuable a monopoly. The Camera degli Imprestidi of Venice was the only institution that had the appearance of a bank which was erected before the fall of the Basileus ; after that event, banks became numerous. But the Camera of Venice, though it afterwards became a bank, was essentially not a bank at the period in question: a fact which the author has sufficiently demonstrated in another work. *' For these reasons there seems to be warrant for the belief that the ap- pointment of bankers or the granting of permission to receive deposits of money and to lend the same upon interest, was an imperial pre- rogative, which only fell to the royal houses of Europe after the de- struction of the Roman imperial power in 1204. Such were the principal features of the Medieval imperial Consti- tion previous to the Fall of Constantinople; not as drawn by Guelph or Ghibelline, nor as depicted in forged or mutilated scriptures, but as indicated in the powersactually exercised by the two sovereigns — emperor and pope — who conjointly or alternately, openly or secretly, swayed its sceptre. Behind this anomalous empire stood the shadow of the ancient one, a shadow which daily grew shorter and vanished altogether when the power and splendour of the Roman pontificate reached its short-lived zenith. However, so long as the Eastern empire actually lasted, it claimed and exercised a powerful influence upon the affairs of Christendom, an influence which the Church would fain ignore, but which science, having no false pride of origin, will try and restore *^ Madox, II, 79-81. " " Money and Civilization," p. 31. CONSTITUTION OF THE MEDIEVAL EMPIRE. 237 to its proper place in history. When this Constitution is compared with that of the empire of Augustus it is impossible not to be con- vinced that both relate to the same body-politic, that both are essen- tially one, and that they only differ as the same individual differs in the journey from manhood and virility to old age and decrepitude. In short, the Medieval empire was simply an evolution of the Sacred empire erected by Julius Caesar and established by his adopted son. Jewry. The right to deal with the Jews, to withhold or grant them charters permitting them to enjoy and practice the rites of their peculiar religion, with or without conditions, the right to tallage or tax them, or to banish them from the empire, seems also to have been retained in the hands of the emperor of Rome,althongh on these points the author is not able to speak with confidence. Such rights were cer- tainly exercised by all the emperors of Rome from Julius to Hadrian, and probably by succeeding emperors down to the eighth century. At a later period they were exercised by the emperors of the Western or Medieval empire, while they do not appear to have been claimed by the various potentates of the disrupted Roman empire until after the Fall of Constantinople. There are numerous instances of Jewish per- secution and massacres previous to 1 204, but no case of Jewish banish- ment until after that date; so that it would appear that this unhappy people were, in a measure, protected by imperial charters until after the empire itself had fallen. Should this view prove to be correct, it would still further corroborate the position that the kings of the Eu- ropean states were not independent sovereigns. This is an interesting topic and worthy of much greater attention than the author has been enabled to devote to its elucidation. 238 CHAPTER XII. DESTRUCTION OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. The pope resolves to destroy the empire of Augustus — League with the Normans of Apulia — Robert Guiscard marches upon Constantinople — Upon learning his design, Henry IV. besieges Rome — The pope recalls Guiscard to Italy, and the attempt upon Constantinople is temporarily abandoned — A second attempt is frustrated by the Venet- ians — The design is subsequently revived — Pretext — Story of Alexis III. — Schism — Means employed — The Fourth Crusade — Last view of the Sacred empire — Its territory — Wealth — Population — Army — Revenues — The papal armament — Attack upon Con- stantinople — Fall of the Sacred empire. IN the course of that dark struggle between pope and emperor which characterized the interval between the Treaty of Seltz and the con- quest of Italy by Otto I. , both the combatants had become exhausted. The pontificate had broken up the Prankish empire, while the Prankish empire had broken up the pontificate. This was the period when the guilty lovers and offspring of the infamous Theodora and Marozia pol- luted the pontifical chair. With Otto's assumption of the imperial title and prerogatives the struggle was renewed. The fact that the sover- eigns of the Medieval empire were now no longer Franks but Germans had nothing whatever to do with the merits of this contest. So long as the empire remained an empire at all, and this was certainly the case down to the thirteenth century, its contests with the pontificate arose out of their mutual claim to the hierarchical crown of Julius Caesar, Augustus and Constantine, all of whom had been both em- perors and high-priests of Rome. Many modern writers, misled by the anachronical literature which has been created on this subject, have represented the Medieval emperors as little better than lunatics, whose lives and opportunities were wasted in attempts to grasp the sceptre of an useless and shadowy empire. But in fact there was nothing shadowy about it. The throne of the West meant not merely an additional title for the kings of France or Germany who might fill it; it meant the practical suzerainty of all western Christendom; and until this idea is fully grasped by historians we may expect no altera- tion of the old impossible pictures of idiotic monarchs riding to the devil after ghostly sceptres and mythical crowns. DESTUCTION OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. 239 In the contest for this suzerainty, which the emperors claimed by right of conquest and the Treaty of Seltz, and the popes claimed under the Forged Decretals, it became a settled conviction of the pontificate that no permanent victory could be achieved until the Sacred empire was destroyed. Two centuries had been spent in breaking up the em- pire of Pepin, yet here in 962 was the pope compelled to crown Otto as emperor of the West and to acknowledge himself his vassal. The power which impelled the pontiff to this humiliating attitude was not brute strength, not merely military superiority. Of that sort of power, be it said to the credit of Christ's champions, they rarely had any fear. They possessed weapons which, in ages of ignorance and credulity, were far more effective than swords and spears, and they well knew how to use them. What they did fear was the tripartite Settlement of Seltz : the rights which the emperors of the West had lawfully acquired from a source whose legitimacy no pontiff had ever ventured to ques- tion. The fruits of conquest had been and might again be feudalized and subdued, but the Settlement was a fruit which could never be dis- posed of until the tree that bore it was levelled to the ground.' Hence the encouragement which the popes, at first secretly, then openly, extended to those Norman heretics, adventurers and dare- devils who, in the eleventh century, invaded and conquered Apulia and other portions of the Byzantine possessions in Italy. The good under- standing between these strange allies was only interrupted once, and then soon resumed. When Robert Guiscard, after having made a pris- oner of the pope, kissed his captive's feet, we may well believe that the price of this degrading submission had been satisfactorily arranged in advance. Ostensibly, Guiscard vowed fealty to his enemy and agreed to pay him an annual tribute of twelve Pavian pence upon each pair of oxen in Apulia, a territory which was already his own by right of conquest and possession.^ Secretly, we may believe, this was but the prelude to the conquest of Constantinople. To the priest, this meant the empire of Christendom; to the soldier of fortune, plenty of spoil. One had secured an instrument upon whose credulity he might play and upon whose valour and fidelity he might rely; the other, a warrant for a conquest, which might enable him to indefinitely multiply his resources. Both may have been well satisfied with the bargain and the ' When Godfrey of Bouillon's army of Crusaders arrived near Constantinople on its way to Palestine, bishop Monteil, the pope's legate, who accompanied the army, strenu- ously urged Godfrey to besiege "that city which was the residence of the Chief of all the Christian princes." Voltaire, General History, i, 270. ^Voltaire, General History, i, 161. Year A. D. 1059. 240 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. prospect. At all events, the pontificate immediately afterwards re- nounced the tripartite treaty which had been made with the Eastern and Western empires, and thus threw open to the eager Normans the coveted road to Constantinople. Though Guiscard was but a blind instrument in this vast design, Henry IV. was no dupe to it and fully understood its significance. The Eastern had all along formed a buffer to the Western empire against the ambitious designs of the Roman pontificate. The suppression of the Basileus would exalt the lawful authority and power of the pope to a point where it might remain forever secure from molestation or restraint. The fall of the Eastern empire meant the irrevocable sub- jection of the Western. There was no time to lose. Hastily explaining the crisis to his vassals, Henry summoned an army together, mounted the Alps, descended into Italy, laid siege to Rome, and attacked that lofty tomb of the pagan emperor Hadrian, within whose strong walls the pontiff had now sought refuge. The immediate consequence of this move was the recall of Robert Guiscard, who had all but succeeded in reaching Constantinople, and who was now wanted in Italy to beat off the emperor. After great exertions by the tireless pope and his Norman mercenaries, this task was finally accomplished, and by the year 1 084 the latter were prepared to again march upon Constantinople. On this occasion we have more positive evide.nce of the understanding between the papacy and the Norman chieftain. The former agreed to confer upon Guiscard noth- ing less than the kingdoms of Greece and Asia, and to exact nothing more in return than the formality of feudal submission. ' But Guiscard, although he knew too little of Roman history to understand the sig- nificance of the undertaking to which he had devoted his arm, was not so innocent of the arts of duplicity as to walk blindly into this trap. His objects were not a desolated land, a barren throne and a feudal dependence, which would probably be greatly aggravated by succes- sive popes, but plenty of spoil in hand for himself and his hardy fol- lowers. The Norman's estimation of the imperial crown, like his estimation of the imperial money, was limited strictly to the metal of which it was composed. Accordingly, his operations were directed not so much against well-defended Constantinople, as the ill-garrisoned but rich islands of the Archipelago. This time a new defender appeared on behalf of the Sacred empire. The Basileus in his despair invoked the assistance of his Venetian ^ Anna Comnena, Alexiad, lib. i, p. 32. The Apulian, lib. iv, p. 270. " Romani regni sibi promisissi coronum Papa serebatur." Gibbon, v, 623. DESTRUCTION OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. 241 Vassals. Lying between the Eastern and Western empires, Venice had profited by their separation and thriven upon their quarrels. Though she had never failed to acknowledge her submission to the Basileus, she had more than once profited by his necessities. The price de- manded on the present occasion, though something enormous, re- ceived the assent of the Sacred court; it was no less than permission to share in that coveted trade of the Orient which the Greeks had hitherto unwillingly divided with the Arabians. For this considera- tion, to be paid after the repulse of the Normans, the Venetians, in 1085, despatched an armed fleet to the Archipelago, which soon put an end to the marauding expedition of Guiscard and with it, for the present, to the designs of the pope. But, though laid aside, this design was not relinquished. Men die, but corporations live. Guiscard died, Henry died, Gregory died, but the Latin See continued; and it only awaited a favourable opportunity to exorcise that apparition of the Sacred empire, which was still strong enough, both in arms and in documentary proofs, to prevent it from claiming the suzerainty of Christendom.* Such an opportunity occurred toward the close of the following cent- ury. There was a crime to punish, an exiled prince of the Sacred line to restore, the Holy Land to redeem from infidels, a schism to heal in Christianity, and an empire to sack. The pretext of a crusade, though insufficient to convince men like Matthew Paris, who lived on the ecclesiastical stage and sometimes lent a hand in shifting the scenic * The Roman fable of Prester John, which was promulgated in the eleventh century, the appearance of Dominican monks in Tartary during the twelfth century, the irrup- tion of the Mongols shortly after the opening of the thirteenth century, the sack of Constantinople by the Latin forces in 1204, the Mongol invasion and subversion of the caliphate of Baghdad by the grandson of Genghis Khan in 1258, all suggest that the pope used pressure from the eastward; in other words, that the Tartar and Turkish invasions were promoted by the Latin See. Indeed, the monk Carpini, in 1246, was instructed to invite these barbarians to attack the Moslems; and it is quite probable that at an earlier period they were in like manner invited to attack the Greeks. It was the pope, (Benedict VIII.,) who encouraged the Normans in Italy, and there isastrong suspicion that it was also the pope who summoned the Mongols to destroy the Sacerdotal empire. The object in both cases was the same; and this object the Latin College omitted no means to accomplish. Peter of Leon, the son of a wealthy Jew, was elected pope of Rome in 1 130, and remained on the pontifical throne until 1138, when he died. His sacramental title was Anacletus II. His wealth and the sword of Roger, king of Sicily, proved his palladium. His rival, afterwards known as Innocent II., fled to the court of Lothaire II., and bribing him with the usufruct of the domains granted to the papacy by the Countess Matilda, secured a champion who, upon the death of Anacletus, placed him upon the papal throne. The deed executed by Innocent II. bears the date of June 13, 1133. Voltaire, I, 212. 242 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. illusions, were enough for the rest of the world and more than enough for the Normans, to whom the word sack always had the effect of a galvanic battery. The crime which had enlisted the benevolent interest of the Latin pope was that of Alexis III. While the Sacred emperor, Isaac II. , was absent in Thrace the crown was usurped by his brother, Alexis Angelas, who, after securing the throne, seized, blinded and thrust his brother into a monastic dungeon. The sufferer's son, afterwards Alexis IV., then a boy of twelve years of age, escaped on board of an Italian vessel to Sicily, whence he made his way to Rome and narrated his case to pope Innocent III. To that astute and unscrupulous politician it was a lever by which the Western world might be moved. A treaty was at once drawn up between the high contracting powers, by which the Latin See undertook nothing and the friendless boy promised every- thing. " Restore my father to his throne," wrote the lad, "and we promise to submit ourselves and our people, in fine, the Eastern empire, to the pope, as well as the succour of the Holy Land and a present con- tribution of two hundred thousand marks. " As a shibboleth to recruit the legions and the treasury of superstition, the Holy Sepulchre, though much played-out, had not entirely lost its efficacy. It is true that the chivalrous Saladin had thrown open the road to Jerusalem without toll or hindrance, and that he had, upon condition of demol- ishing the Christian fortress of Ascalon,even granted to the Christians the freedom of the coast from Jaffa to Tyre, so that, whatever their real object was, they might either visit the sacred relics, or obtain some share of the overland trade to India. But these indulgent terms were subject to revision. New caliphs might enact new measures. The in- fidel banner of the Prophet still waved over the holy city; and, with these arguments, all Europe could be invoked to haul it down.* The nature and extent of the so-called schism in the Christian church and the hopelessness of uniting the Greek and Latin religions had by this time become so plain to those in authority, that all attempts to bring about such unity must be regarded by the modern student rather as political expedients, than the efforts of unsophisticated piety. The current which separated these religions bore them farther and farther apart. To the doctrines "Substantiality," "Natures" and * Notwithstanding all the blood and treasure wasted in the crusades, the banner of Mahomet still waves there. On the Saladin tax and tenths levied by the pope in behalf of the fourth crusade, see Selden on Titles, ill. ii, 1083. The religious motives which induced the Venetians to establish themselves at Tyre will appear more fully as we proceed. t DESTRUCTION OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. 243 "Will," which distinguished them in the fourth century, and the dis- similar rites and festivals which they celebrated in the seventh, had now been added a race hatred, which nothing could hope to reconcile. The Greeks had come to regard the Franks with a contempt that amounted to loathing. Anna Comnena, represents the Greek abhor- rence for the Latins and Franks as due to their filthy habits.^ The language of Cinnamus and Nicetas is still more vehement. During the Second Crusade the Latin priests had, by permission, offered sacrifices upon the altars of the Greek churches. Upon their retirement, the Greek priests deemed it necessary to wash and purify the fanes thus desecrated by the touch of foul hands. Yet even such offences were venial compared with the hideous crimes which the Latins daily com- mitted. Dirt is an expiable offence, but not heresy. The Latins, it seems, thought nothing of eating the flesh of animals that had been killed by strangulation; they consumed blood; they fed on milk and cheese during Lent; the infirm of their monasteries were even in- dulged in the taste of meats; they cooked with lard instead of oil; they fasted on Saturdays; their bishops, like the pagan knights, wore rings ; their priests shaved their heads and faces; and the rite of bap- tism was performed as in the ancient pagan days.' The hatred of the Latins for their Greek brethren, if not based upon similar refinements, was none the less vigorous. The latter were not Romans, but Asiat- ics; they were not descendants of the gods, but base Scythian and Galatian nomads, polished with the veneer of a stolen empire; they were cowardly, perfidious, voluptuous and effeminate; their religion was little better than the foul worship from which it sprang, and whose Mithraic temples and ceremonials still masqueraded under the thin veil of so-called Christianity. The indulgence which the clergy of the respective races accorded to these popular prejudices moulded them into instruments well fitted to the hands of jealousy or ambition. In 1054 the pope of Rome sol- emnly excommunicated Michael Cerularius, the patriarch of Constan- tinople, and instructed his legates to deposit upon the altar of St. Sophia a direful anathema, which, after enumerating the seven mortal heresies of the Greeks, devoted their guilty teachers and their unhappy sec- taries to the eternal tortures of hell." During the reign of Alexis II., the Latin inhabitants of Constanti- nople, who lived in a quarter especially assigned for their residence, were attacked and slaughtered without mercy, neither age nor sex being spared. Their houses were reduced to ashes, their clergy burnt * Alexiad, i, 31-33. 'Gibbon, vi, 123-4; 126M, ^Gibbon, vi, 126. ,^ 244 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. in the churches, and their sick murdered in the hospitals. Four thou- sand Roman Christians were sold in perpetual slavery to the Turks. In this horrible transaction the Greek priests and monks were active ringleaders, and they joined in chanting a hymn of thanksgiving to the Lord Jesus when the head of a Roman cardinal, the pope's legate, was severed from his body, fastened to a dog's tail, and dragged with sav- age mockery through the city.^ Greatly as the Sacred empire had been contracted by the encroach- ments of the Moslems, it was still one of the most extensive and opulent in Europe. It embraced the whole of Greece, Cyprus, Rhodes, Crete and the fifty islands of the ^gean Sea ; its inhabitants numbered some seven or eight millions; the daily revenues of the crown, according to Benjamin of Tudela, amounted to 20,000 besants, a quantity of gold more than equal to that contained in 10,000 British sovereigns of the present day ; it monopolized through its emperors the lucrative prerog- ative of coining gold for the circulation of the entire christian world, which gold it exchanged for western silver at 12 and re-exchanged for Oriental gold at 6 for i ; until the twelfth century, it also monopolized the production and manufacture of silk; it shared with the Arabs the entire trade with the Orient; its capital city was a veritable mine of gold and silver furniture, priceless vestments, and inestimable gems, the stored wealth of an hundred Caesars, derived from endless con- quests, exactions, and oppressions. Speaking of the Eastern empire in the twelfth century, Voltaire (i, 260) says: "Notwithstanding so many losses, notwithstanding the vices and revolutions in the govern- ment, the Imperial city, declining indeed, but yet immense, populous, opulent, and voluptuous, was certainly, in its own estimation, the first city in the world. The inhabitants called themselves Romans, not Greeks; their state was the Roman Empire; and the people in the West, whom they called Latins, were, in their opinion, barbarians, who had revolted from them." In summoning the Fourth Crusade there was a brilliant prospect for all the participants; the sceptre of Christ for the pope, a recovered kingdom for the aged Isaac and the youthful Alexis, the Holy Sepulchre for the devout, the union of the Greek and Latin churches for the Roman ecclesiastics, the Oriental trade for the 'Gibbon, vi, 129. In 1891 a French vSwiss pilgrim, fresh from the elevating influence of the Holy Coat of Treves, visited Rome, attended the pope's mass at St. Peter's, and thus reinforced with religious zeal, went to the Pantheon and spat upon the register containingthenameof Victor Emanuel. In the following year an author and a publisher at Treves, whose book alluded to these circumstances and declared the coat to be an imposture, were both sent to prison. And yet there are people who dream of philosophy, science, truth and the Golden Age! DESTRUCTION OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. 245 Venetians, and for the Normans and old crusaders — well, as it might happen. Notwithstanding her subsequent claims to political independence it can scarcely be doubted that Venice remained a fief of the Eastern empire down to the period of its fall. In 523 Cassiodorus reminded the tribunes of Venice not to neglect their annual tribute to the ex- arch of Ravenna. In 697 they began to elect their own chief magis- trates and even ventured to confer upon them the title of duke or doge, assuming what was afterwards regarded as a republican form of government; but this mode of appointment was followed in many of the provinces hitherto never suspected of being republics; only, in such cases, the appointment was subject to the approval of the Em- pire. As a matter of fact, the Venetians continued to pay tribute and acknowledge vassalage to the Eastern empire, even after the seces- sion of the West. The Treaty of Seltz probably left the Venetians in the same position. Their attitude in 807 has been depicted in another place. In opening a commerce with them at Alexandria the Arabians admitted them to a portion of the vast profits of their Indian trade. The crusaders augmented their wealth and power, by enabling them to give up Alexandria and establish emporia of their own at Antioch and Tyre. On the other hand, they were exposed to continual danger both from the claims of suzerainty preferred by Frederick Barbarosa, the intrigues of the Latin See, and the commercial rivalry of Genoa and Pisa; so that it seems probable that they remained, at least nomi- nally, subject to the Eastern empire until the reign of Manuel Com- nenus. By this time the military protection of the crusaders over Antioch and Tyre was abandoned ; the Venetian share of the oriental trade hung upon the profits of a factory which they were permitted to conduct at Constantinople ; and unless this precarious footing was soon bettered there was grave danger that the trade would be lost to them altogether. The war of 1 1 50 must be regarded as an attempt of this char- acter, but it had ended in 1 1 75 without importants results, and at the moment when the benevolent pope of Rome espoused the cause of the tender Alexis, the commercial preponderance of Venice trembled in the scale of fortune. In preparing for this crusade, the cooperation of Venice was indis- pensable; its promise of reward was proportionately munificent. The terms were arranged by six commissioners, deputed by the feudal princes who had devoted themselves to the Cross, and who met in Venice to confer with the aged and pious doge, Henry Dandolo. Venice was to receive 85,000 marks in advance, one-half of the spoil, and THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. one-half of all conquests by sea and land. Nothing was said about the Oriental trade, which was worth more than all the rest. On her part, Venice was to provide 120 polanders capable of conveying 4, 500 horses and 9,000 squires or grooms, also 24 transports to carry 4,500 knights and 2,000 foot-soldiers and a convoy of 50 galleys, all pro- visioned for nine months, or provisions enough to fill 70 store-ships. Every preparation having been made, this expedition set sail in the spring of 1203 and in due time it came to anchor in the harbour of Constantinople. Its mere appearance was the signal for the flight of the cowardly usurper, the deliverance of the blinded emperor, and the restoration of himself and the youthful Alexis to their lawful throne. When the services of the allies in this bloodless war came to be paid for, great difficulties arose. The crusaders and Venetians were im- portunate, the public treasury of Constantinople contained at the time but a few besants, and the people of the city were filled with holy in- dignation at the promised submission of the Sacred empire to the pope of Rome. The youthful Alexis began to perceive that he had prom- ised much more than it was possible for his father to perform. During the embarrassment which ensued, the holy tumult into which the city was thrown, enabled a new usurper named Ducas, or Mourzoukle, (Alexis V.,) to gain access to the palace, murder both Isaac and Alexis, proclaim himself sovereign of the Sacred empire, and address the allies in a tone of lofty superiority. Nothing more was wanted to goad the latter to madness. Whatever respect for the traditions of the past had hitherto restrained their avidity for the treasures which surrounded them on all sides, whatever sentiments of awe or super- stition in the presence of the relics and memories sacred to the name of Roman or Christian, had to this moment stilled their rude passions, were now entirely swept away. The citadel was at once besieged. In 1204 it was carried by assault, set on fire, and sacked. ' ' In St. Sophia the silver was stripped from the pulpit, an exquisite and highly prized table of oblation was broken in pieces, the sacred chalices were turned into drinking cups, the gold fringe was ripped off the veil of the sanctuary. Asses and horses were led into the churches to carry off the spoil. A prostitute mounted the patriarch's throne and sang with indecent gestures a ribald song. The tombs of the emperors were rifled and the Byzantines saw, at once with amaze- ment and anguish, the embalmed corpse of Justinian — which even de- cay and putrefaction had for six centuries spared in his tomb — exposed to the violation of the mob. It had been understood among those who instigated these atrocious proceedings that the relics were to be DESTRUCTION OF THE SACERDOTAL EMPIRE. 247 brought into a common stock and equitably divided among the con- querors; but each ecclesiastic seized and secreted whatever he could. The idolatrous state of the Eastern church is illustrated in some of these relics. Thus the Abbot Martin obtained for his monastery in Alsace the following inestimable articles: A spot of the blood of our Saviour; a piece of the true cross; the arm of the apostle James; part of the skeleton of John the Baptist; and a bottle of the milk of the Mother of God. In contrast with the treasures thus acquired, may be set the relics of a very different kind, the remains of ancient art, which at the same time they destroyed, namely, the bronze chariot- eers from the Hippodrome; the she-wolf suckling Romulus and Re- mus; a group of a sphinx, river-horse and crocodile; an eagle tearing a serpent; an ass and his driver, originally ordered to be cast by Au- gustus in memory of the victory of Actium ; Bellerophon and Pegasus ; a bronze obelisk; Paris presenting the apple to Venus; an exquisite statue of Helen ; the Hercules of Lysippus and a Juno, (or Bona Dea,) formerly taken from the temple at Samos. The bronzes were melted into coins, and thousands of manuscripts and parchments were burned. From that time the works of many ancient authors disappeared alto- gether " and Rome began to write its fabulous history anew. " With well-dissembled regret. Innocent took the new order of things in the city of Constantinople under his protection. The bishop of Rome at last appointed the bishop of Constantinople. The ac- knowledgement of papal supremacy was complete. Rome and Venice divided between them the ill-gotten gains of their undertaking. If anything had been wanting to open the eyes of Europe, surely what had thus occurred should have been enough. The pope and the doge — the trader in human credulity and the trader of the Adriatic — had shared the spoils of a crusade meant by religious men for the relief of the Holy Land. The bronze horses, once brought by Augustus from Alexandria, after his victory over Antony and transferred from Rome to Constantinople by its founder, were set before the Church of St. Mark. They were the outward and visible sign of a less obvious event that was taking place. For to Venice was brought a residue of the literary treasures that had escaped the fire and the destroyer; and while her comrades in the outrage were satisfied, in their ignor- ance, with fictitious relics, she took possession of the poor remnant of the glorious works of art, of letters, and of science. Through these was hastened the intellectual progress of the West.'"" Thus fell the empire of the Caesars ; and thus perished, by the hands ^^ Draper's " Intellectual Development of Europe," 11, 56. 248 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. of Christians, the city holiest of all others to the Christian religion. The Franks and Venetians, after slaughtering and stripping the in- habitants, robbed the altars of their sacred vessels and even dug up the bodies of the dead from the cemetaries, to plunder from them the gifts of sorrow and piety. Upon a division of the spoil, the Venetian share was valued at 900,000 marks of silver, a sum so trivial and in- adequate, as to suggest enormous sequestration on the part of the soldiers. The share of territory was of far more importance to the new republic, for it secured to it the coveted trade to India. The pont- ificate, under whose auspices this expedition had been organized, was too well aware of the stupendous consequences that might arise from its success, to take an active part in the matter, and even affected some show of displeasure at the zeal displayed by the allies. Never- theless, in accepting from the Latin emperor Baldwin, what that pup- pet of the hourchoosed to style "the restoration of his (the pope's) authority in the East," but what was in reality the entire sovereignty of Christendom, it accepted and enjoyed its share of the profits. Nor was this sovereignty a mere name. The claims of Caesar were now hushed forever; and the pontifex-maximus, freed from his faded but still tenacious suzerainty, could lay lawful hands not only upon the benefices and livings of the East, not only upon the lucrative prerog- atives hitherto enjoyed by the Basileus throughout both east and west, but also upon that crown of the Sacred empire which proclaimed its wearer to be the veritable King of Kings and Lord of the Earth. 249 CHAPTER XIII. GUELPH AND GHIBELLINE WARS. Brief triumph of the Holy See — The Empire takes alarm — Frederick II. — Renewal of the Guelph and Ghibelline wars— Contest for the bones of the Sacred empire — Out of this contest arises the independence of the feudal princes — The Empire is lost to both contestants. BUT these hopes proved illusive, for with the Sacred empire fell also that Medieval creation which the pope had intended should usurp its place. The constitution of the latter empire had not been that of a state, but of a struggle. An hierarchy with one head has a tendency to slowly feudalize and disintegrate; an hierarchy with two heads is a government born to destructive civil wars and rapid decay. The peaceable existence of such a monstrosity is impossible. The Med- ieval hierarchy owed its creation neither to Buddha, Julius Caesar, nor the Donation of St. Peter ; but like the "restored " statues of our arch^ological museums, it was a graft of one upon the other,a Christ- ian head stuck upon a pagan body. Impious as the ancient constitution had been in its demand for the worship of Csesar it had at least the merit of being congruous and har- monious in all its parts. All powers began and ended with the Sacred College, an organization so ancient, so complete, so respectable, that from the assumption of the high priesthood by Caesar, down to the schism out of which the Medieval empire emerged, the Church was enabled to retain the management of all the affairs of state, not only benefices, fiefs and revenues, but also marriages, divorces, adoptions, burials,testaments, slavery, manumission, and an hundred other insti- tutions and incidents of social life, down to the holding of markets and fairs, the grinding of corn, and the digging of sewers. So long as the emperor and high-priest were one, these prerogatives of the ec- clesiastical organization contributed to sustain his power ; the moment they became two, the same prerogatives were turned into bones of con- tention. In the Medieval constitution this lack of unity and harmony came into high relief. Like the religion, the history, the scriptures, the statues, the paintings, the coins, the architecture of that age, it 250 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED, was a mere copy of the Sacred constitution, with all the finer parts erased. The triumph of the Latin See over the fall of Constantinople was short-lived. No sooner was the astounding news disseminated through- out the Western empire than the latter was thrown into the most vio- lent agitation and the contest between emperor and pope was renewed. This time Guelph and Ghibelline met to decide the sovereignty not merely of the West, but of the entire Roman world, both east and west. They met to affirm or condemn the act of Julius Caesar, which had converted the republic of Europe into an hierarchy. They met to settle the feuds which had arrayed Clovis against Symmachus, Ethelbert against Gregory, Charlemagne against Hadrian, and Henry against Hildebrand. It was a contest between monarchs who were determined to rule a secular state, and pontiffs who saw no salvation for mankind but through the medium of an hierarchy. In front of this historical background were arrayed the prizes which awaited the victors: dominion, authority, the right to govern, to tax, to im- pose royalties, to exact seigneurial dues, to reserve the profits of coin- age, to buy with one scale and sell with another, the right to lands, escheats, mortmain, inheritances, donations, benefices, investitures, livings — these formed an array tempting enough to incite the western world to the bitterest warfare it had ever undertaken. After a preliminary skirmish, in which the pontificate, resorting to its ancient tactics, sought to play off Otto against Philip, and only es- caped defeat through the mysterious assassination of its enemy, the real contest commenced with the advent of Frederick II. This was a monarch whom neither the threats nor the wiles of ecclesiastical hatred could terrify or deceive. " Out of the long array of the Ger- manic successors of Charles, he is, with Otto III., the only one who comes before us with a genius and a frame of character that are not those of a Northern or a Teuton, There dwelt in him, it is true, all the energy and knightly valour of his father Henry and his grandfather Barbarosa, But along with these, and changing their direction, were other gifts, inherited perhaps from his Italian mother and fostered by his education among the o-range groves of Palermo — a love of luxury and beauty, an intellect refined, subtle, philosophical. Through the mist of calumny and fable it is but dimly that the truth of the man can be discerned and the outlines that appear, serve to quicken rather than appease the curiosity with which we regard one of the most ex- traordinary personages of history. A sensualist, yet also a warrior and a politician ; a profound lawgiver and an impassioned poet ; in his GUELPH AND GHIBELLINE WARS. 251 youth fired by crusading fervour, in later life persecuting heretics while himself was accused of blasphemy and unbelief; of winning manners and evidently beloved by his followers, but with the stain of more than one cruel deed upon his name; he was the marvel of his own genera- tion; and succeeding ages looked back with awe, not unmingled with pity, upon the inscrutable figure of the last emperor who had braved all the terrors of the Church and died beneath her ban; the last who had ruled from the sands of the Ocean to the shores of the Sicilian sea. But while they pitied, they condemned. The undying hatred of the papacy threw around his memory a lurid light; him,and him alone, of all the imperial line, Dante the worshipper of the empire, must per- force deliver to the flames of hell." ' In vain did the council of the Lateran, (12 15,) declare the supre- macy of the pope above all earthly sovereigns; in vain did the pont- ificate circulate the numismatic proclamation of its newly fledged authority, whereon Christ is depicted holding in his left hand a book inscribed with the legend : ' 'The vow of the Roman senate and people : Rome the Capital of the World! " * To its dismay the Latin See dis- covered that it could no longer charm with the name of the Sacred empire. Not only had Frederick learnt many things during his sojourn in the East, so also had the other crusaders. The Treaty of Seltz was buried in the ashes of Constantinople, but its ghost stalked through the land and awakened the feudal princes to the consideration of the rights it had embodied. So long as the Basileus remained, his authorty i« certain matters was never questioned, either by them or by their suzerain, the emperor or pope, whichever he had been. But now the case was different, and those who were not actually in the struggle be- tween these great powers merely awaited its final issue to assume that complete independence of both, which they had long desired but had never ventured to assert against the traditional policy and superstitious veneration of Christendom for the sacred prerogatives of the Basileus. In the assertions and proclamations of his claims to supremacy Fred- erick was not a whit behind the pope. He called himself Ever Augustus and Sacred Emperor ; he alluded to his empire as that of the Ceesars ; the peculiar prerogative of supreme rulers, the freedom of cities, which Innocent III. , had granted to the municipality of Rome, he sold to that of Lubeck f and either to anticipate or match the pope's sacred coins of gold, he issued during the same year the magnificent augustals, boldly stamped with theeagle of Rome, which constituted thefirstgold ' Bryce, 207-8. ^ An issue of gold coins. Muratori, 11, 559-69; Gibbon, vi, 537. ^In 1226, for 60,000 marks a year. Anderson, i, 202. 252 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. coinage of any Christian prince, except the Basileus, for upwards of four hundred years. * The brilliant treatises of Gibbon, Hallam, Bryce and others render it superfluous to pursue the story of this memorable struggle any farther. In each step of the contest between pope and emperor, the coinage of gold will be found, like a park of artillery, behind the front rank of the combatants. Its sacerdotal and political significance were never lost sight of. Gold coinage was the mark of supreme authority. The prince who struck silver might be a vassal to some distant pontifex or emperor; but he who struck gold was an ab- solute monarch, a sovereign by the grace of God. To sustain their respective claims, the contestants also invoked the Civil Law ; the school of the learned Bartolus resounded with the doc- trine that the emperor of the West was the rightful sovereign of the earth, from the rising to the setting of the sun; that he alone could lawfully confirm, confer, create or withhold kingdoms, dukedoms, and principalities ; and these claims were popularized in the ' ' Saxon Look- ing Glass," a work of the twelfth century, but copied m vast numbers during the thirteenth and widely circulated and accredited throughout northern Europe. On the other hand, Boniface VIII., claimed that * ' God had set him over kings and kingdoms, "and that, for example, he possessed the right to deprive Philip le Bel of the throne of France and confer it upon Albert of Hapsburg. " John XXII., even assumed the right to shift the imperial crown from the head of Louis IV. , to that of Frederick of Austria; and in response to the Ghibelline theory of empire, the see of Rome issued the "Suabian Looking Glass, " which became of equal credit in southern .Europe. It maintained that the earth was given by God to Christ, by Christ to Peter, and by Peter to the pope, who was therefore its lawfully appointed sovereign. This was the same pretty doctrine that Pizarro afterwards preached to Ata- hualpa, and that was swallowed up and lost in the mighty canyons of the Cordilleras. * These augustals were struck about 1225, and therefore preceded the Italian florins. The former contained 81 to 82 English grains, the latter 56 grains each. The speci- mens of augustals in the British Museum appear to be of fine gold. * See this Pope's bull in Henry, History Br., iv, ii, 40. Also in Haydn, voc. "Pope." '> 5: CHAPTER XIV. ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. In the Fifth Century Britain was a sub-province of Roman Gaul — Revolt of all the western provinces against vicarious government — Restoration of Roman authority under Justinian — Breaking down of the colonial system of government — Steps in the severance of Germany from the Roman empire — Supreme sovereignty pretended to have been assumed by the pope after the assassination of Maurice — Secession of Italy in the reign of Leo the Isaurian — Peter's pence or Rome-scat paid by Ina, papal patrician of Wessex — Papal tribute of Ethelred I. — Offa refuses homage to the pont- ificate — Crowning of Charlemagne — General acknowledgment of his claim to the suzerainty of the Medieval empire — Homage paid him by Offa, Eardwulf and other English and Scotch princes — Canute assists at the coronation of Conrad II. — The suzerainty of the Medieval empire wielded alternately by emperors and popes — The pope confers the Roman province of Britain upon William of Normandy — Stephen, Richard I., and John Lackland, all acknowledge vassalage to the Papacy — Crowning of Louis VIII., at London — Vassalage of Henry III. to the Papacy — Edward III., the last English vassal of the Medieval empire — Vassalage of the Medieval kings of France, Spain, Italy, Germany and other provinces of the Medieval empire — Collapse of the Roman system in the thirteenth century. LONG before the final departure of the Roman legions from Britain, that country, without counting Britannia Barbara, was divided into six ' petty provinces, and these provinces were embraced in the proconsular government of Gaul; so that, true to its vicarious form, the Eastern empire ruled the Western, the Western empire ruled Gaul, Gaul ruled Britain, and Britain was split into six, or seven, sub-prov- inces. The capital of Britain was fixed at Treves so early as the reign of Maximus, and it was fixed at Aries so late as that of Maurice; for it is alleged that in 598 Pope Gregory directed the archbishop of Aries to appoint Augustine as bishop to Britain. ^ From these circumstances it follows that whatever political relations can be shown to have ex- isted between the Basileus and the proconsuls, praetorian praefects, or dukes, of Gaul, at least down to the secession of the Latin See from ' Britannia Prima, Secunda, Maxima Csesariensis, Maxima Flaviensis, Valentia and Vespasiana. The last is from Richard of Cirencester as quoted by Stukeley. Sir F. Palgrave, i, 350. Britannia Barbara made a seventh province. '^ Sir F. Palgra\re, I, 354-9; Guizot; Wright; Dr. Henry, 11, 193. 254 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. the Empire, must be extended to those of Britain, as being subsidiary to Gaul. Under Augustus, Trans-Alpine Gaul, excluding the two provinces of Germany, vi^as divided into four provinces, Narbonensis, Aquitania, Lugdunensis,and Belgica. In the third century, Gaul was united with Germany, Spain and Britain, into one province. By the fourth cent- ury, the influence of feudalization had split it into twenty-seven or more provinces or dioceses, of which Gaul retained seventeen, Britain had seven, and Spain three. One proconsul, praetorian prjefect,or duke, ruled the whole of these dominions, and held his court at Treves. He held directly from the Sovereign-pontiff of Byzantium, paid him hom- age, and coined (silver) money in his name. Under this praetorian praefect was a vice-praefect to each one of the twenty-seven or more sub-provinces mentioned. The vice-prsefect, or governor, controlled the military forces, lands, treasury, posts and administration of justice. Originally his functions also included the regulation of public worship, but this was gradually taken from his hands by ecclesiastics sent from Rome, a policy that greatly weakened his control. The free cities, of which there were a few, also held direct from the Sovereign-pontiff of Byzantium, and (except as to ecclesiastical control when the pontiff became separated from the sovereign) they were not answerable to any other authority. After the establishment of Christianity, an officer called a defensor, was established in most of the towns, whose au- thority was independent of the governor or sub-praef ect. This further tended to weaken the latter's authority. Toward the end of the fourth century, the civil administrations of the sub-provinces began to fall, one after another, into provincial or barbarian hands. Toward the end of the fifth century, the only portion of Gaul that seems to have retained a Roman governor was the central portion from the Somme to the Loire, then, (A. D. 496,) under the command of the vice-prae- fect Siagrius. Belgium was governed by Salian Prankish chieftains, Burgundy by Ripuarian-Frankish chieftains, Aquitania by Visigothic chieftains, Armoricaby an administration of confederated cities, and Britain by half a dozen Gothic konungs. ^ ^ It is entirely misleading to regard tiiese chieftains as Icings in the modern sense of the term. Knung was the Mongol name for a military chieftain of the second rank. Du Halde, History China. Kung in Chinese and Kahn in Afghanese have the same mean- ing. A chieftain, or, to use a Roman term, a centurion, commanding one hundred men, sometimes only fifty men, was called a king. Hampson. Orig. Patricise; Ainsworth, Die. , voc. Rex. " Of so little significance was the title of king compared with the ideas which it now suggests, that it graced the names of all kinds of petty chieftains and con- ferred the denomination of kingdom upon the people of territories of no greater space ENGLAND. A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 255 The feudalization of the provinces having proceeded to the point where it became impossible for the boroughs to communicate with the imperial throne, either to obtain justice, or to seek relief, it gave rise to that upheaval of the sub-provinces which swept away the prsetorian praefects and left their government in the hands of sub-praefects, gov- ernors, or "kings," some of whom were Italians, but the most of whom were provincials, aided by barbarian bondsmen, or allies. This up- heaval against a previous feudalism has been curiously perverted into a Barbarian Conquest, from which it is claimed that feudalism took its origin some centuries later. On this subject we have already given the evidence of the monuments. Except perhaps during a brief in- terregnum which followed the accession of a rebel governor in each sub-province, when success and readjustment temporarily encouraged the chieftains to exercise independent power, they all governed in the name of the Roman (Byzantine) emperor or Basileus, they paid to him homage and tribute, they respected his prerogatives, they stamped the imperial effigies upon their coins, and they compelled their sub- jects to obey the imperial laws. Clovis, after having defeated Siagrius at Soissons and after ten years of abortive attempts to govern a Roman province with Prankish laws, accepted, in 496, his diploma, his purple robe, and the ceremony of baptism, from the Christian emissaries of the Basileus. Theodoric, a barbarian, exhorted the Roman people, his subjects, to emulate the virtues of their (Roman) ancestors; while Athanaric the Ostrogoth never ventured to address the Conscript-Fathers but with respect, reverence and submission. * "The Goth, the Frank and the Lom- bard, copied the state and assumed the dignity of the former masters of the world," says Sir Francis. The masters whom they knew, were not the emperors, but the proconsuls. That the interval of provincial than an English park of average dimensions." Hampson, 199. When Eric Blodoxe was slain in Northumbria, five kings shared his fate. Hakonar Godakin's Saga, c. 4. In a similar way the petty Danish leaders were called kings. " There lay on the field five young kings with swords appeased." Battle of Brunanburgh, A. D. 938. The laird of a clan in the Hebrides was called a king. Hampson, 201. The barbarian " kings" were in fact merely chieftains. The name and office of king were unknown to them. Allen, on the Royal Prerogative, p. 11. " It is evident that Anglo-Saxon chieftains of minor power were denominated kings, and hence it may be argued that the title had no particular importance." Sir F. Palgrave, 11, 342. Cortes gave similar titles to the chieftains of petty tribes. Help's, Conquerors of America. For further remarks on Anglo-Saxon " kings " see the Index. The title of Kong is still employed by the sovereigns of Den- mark, Sweden and Norway. * Sir F. Palgrave, i, 360; see also Cassiodorus, Var. i, 4, 31; 11, 24, 32; iv, 6;v, 4; Du Bos; Montesquieu; Savigny, etc. 256 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. independence was brief, appears from the narrative of Procopius,who mentions the indignation of the Basileus toward a Prankish king for daring to strike gold. This was Clothaire, son of Clovis,who at once admitted the suzerainty of the Basileus, by refraining from any fur- ther commission of the offence, and by striking his silver coins under the authority of that Sacred sovereign. Such, too, was the practice of all his successors, until the secession of Rome from the empire put an end for a time to their reverence for the Basileus. Rome did not sever its relations with the Eastern empire in a day, but by a series of events which, commencing in the seventh century, did not quite terminate until the thirteenth. It was Pope Gregory who threw down the gauntlet, by sweeping away Maurice and worship- ping Phocas; it was Theodorus who announced himself a sovereign- pontiff; Leo II. who assumed the right of investiture; and Constantine who first compelled the western princes to pay him homage and kiss his sacred feet. Finally, it was Gregory II., who seceded from the em- pire, and Leo III. , whose bargain with Charlemagne substantially com- pleted the rupture. Then it was that the homage which the western princes had formerly accorded to the Basileus and for a brief interval had rendered to the Latin See, was transferred to the German em- peror, to whom, or to his alternate the pope, this homage continued to be paid, until the Fall of Constantinople completely severed the relations of Rome to the Basileus and at the same time ended the sub- ordination of the western princes to Rome. These feudal relations it is now proposed to prove by four different classes of evidence: First, the claims of suzerainty and prerogative on the part of the Basileus; Second, the claims of the German emperor, or else the pope; Third, the vassalian acts of English princes; and Fourth, those of other west- ern princes. First. — The jealous watchfulness of the Vatican has permitted no documentary evidence to remain of the suzerainty claimed by the Ba- sileus, but it is submitted that the evidences already adduced, drawn from archseology , laws, customs, religion and a variety of other sources, are sufficiently ample, indeed that the prerogative of the gold and bronze coinages alone prove the case. Second. — If we turn to those claims of empire which were made either by the pope, or the German emperor, and sometimes by both, we shall find further corroboration of the broad view that, down to the Fall of Constantinople and for some time afterward, the kingdoms of the West were generally regarded as — and that they admitted them- selves to be — fiefs of the empire. In the Frankish constitution, which ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 257 he fondly hoped would permanently govern the empire, Charlemagne had provided for the collection of tithes from the western princes; and there can be little question that the submission to such an impost was tantamount to an act of homage to his empire. ^ The Peter's- pence remitted by Ina of Wessex was paid to and upon the demand of the pontificate, after the popes had renounced their allegiance to the Basileus and declared themselves to be the sovereigns of Christen- dom. The homage and tribute paid by Offa has already been com- mented upon. Whichever way it is viewed, it implies vassalage. After the Norman conquest all tithes went to Rome; a fact that implies homage to the pontificate. It is true that similar tithes to Rome were paid by English princes down to the reign of Henry VIII., but these were voluntary and not compulsory. The payment of such compul- sory tithes constitute an act of homage on the part of the English kings. They ceased with Edward III, Among other evidences of German imperial claims of dominion over the western provinces are the following: In 1042, Ferdinand of Cas- tile, proud of his Moorish conquests, took upon himself the title of Emperor of Spain. This was resented by the emperorHenry III., who, as the "successor of Honorius," claimed "indelible " supremacy over all the western provinces of Rome ; and who in the council of Florence 1053, called by Pope Victor II., complained of Ferdinand's presump- tion. Messengers were accordingly sent to Spain to demand obedience and homage to the empire. The matter being submitted to Ferdi- nand's council, (called the Cortes,) and to the Castillian generalissimo the Cid Campeador, it was resolved to resist the claims of the em- peror Henry, and ten thousand men, besides a detachment of "trib- utary Moors," were placed in the field and marched to Toulouse, there to await the pope's decision in the matter. After some altercation, Ferdinand yielded his pretensions to independent power, and the pope received a solatium for settling the dispute. " Here was a claim of temporal empire on the part of Henry, dating from the Roman em- perorHonorius, and extending over all the western provinces, inclu- ding not only Spain, but also Gaul and Britain, a claim that so far as it affected the independence of Spain, was settled in favour of the Ger- man emperor. In A. D. 1000 Stephen, duke of Hungary, adopted the Roman Cath- * Bryce, 67, says these tithes were payable to the Latin pontificate, but this is incom- prehensible, when and so long as the pontificate was subject to the empire, that is, during the reign of Charlemagne and at some other periods. ^ Callcott's Spain, i, 280. 258 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. olic religion and received from the pope the title of king, paying the latter homage. His successor, Peter the German, 1036-41, paid hom- age and tribute to the emperor Conrad II., the Salic. ' In 992 Bores- las I., of Poland paid homage to the emperor Otho III., and received from him the title of king. In 1082 the pontificate degraded the king- dom of Poland to the rank of a dukedom and continued this degra- dation for more than two hundred years. ® In 1 181 the emperor, Fred- erick I., banished Henry the Lion of Brunswick to England, where he remained at the court of Heary II. for nine years, and until after Frederick's death. The implication of suzerainty on the part of Fred- erick and of vassalage on the part of Henry of Brunswick, contained in this transaction, depends of course upon whether the authority exer- cised by the former was submitted to as lawful, or from military ne- cessity. When it is proved that Henry II. was avowedly a vassal of the empire, the like political relation of Henry of Brunswick almost follows as a matter of course. The opposite view that Henry the Lion, (who was the brother-in-law of Richard, afterwards King Rich- ard I.,) voluntarily submitted to remain a prisoner with one of the emperor's vassals, is hardly tenable. In 1 192 the emperor Henry VI. ordered Leopold I., duke of Austria, as a vassal of the empire, to detain as a prisoner Richard I., of Eng- land, who had been shipwrecked at the head of the Adriatic gulf. This act has been variously imputed to revenge on the part of Leopold, to the emperor's desire of ransom, to jealousy on the part of Philip II., to envy on the part of John Lackland, and to a variety of other reasons suited to patriotic and popular tastes. However this may be, it cannot be disputed that Richard formally acknowledged himself a vassal of the Medieval empire, and that after his release and the death of Henry VI. he voted as a prince of such empire at the election of the emperor, Frederick 11, In 1213-16 Pope Innocent III., treating the kings of Aragon as his vassals forbade them to further lower their coins, a command to which they submitted by a declaration included in their coronation oath. ' However, when Gregory X., at the Council of Lyons, 1274, refused to acknowledge Don Jayme as king of Aragon, unless he would pay tribute to the Latin See, Jayme replied that it would be an unworthy act for him to pay tribute for a kingdom which he and his ancestors had wrested from the infidel Moors. " In 1237 the emperor Frederick II., by special messengers and im- ' Voltaire, 11, 192. ^ Anderson's History Com., i, 121. ' Bodin, contra Malestroict, MS. trans., p. 134. '" Calcott's Spain, i, 456. ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 259 perial letters summoned "all the great princes of the World to assem- ble on the day of St. John Baptist's nativity at Vaucouvers, * * * there to discuss some difficult matters concerning the empire." " King Henry III. of England responded to this invitation by sending an em- bassy of lords and prelates headed by his brother Richard, earl of Cornwall He intended to include the bishop of Winchester, but the latter successfully excused himself by alleging the impolicy of send- ing one of whom "the king had lately made complaint before the em- peror." The claim of sovereignty here set up by Frederick is clearly allowed by Henry, both in preparing the embassy and admitting the validity of the bishop's excuse. In 1241 the emperor wrote to King Henry that God had "decreed that the Machine of the World is to be governed not alone by the priesthood, but by sovereignty and priest- hood together." *" In 1241 the emperor wrote to the king of England and the other princes of the Roman empire, attributing the Tartar Invasion to the dissensions of Christendom created by the pope; he entreated them to sustain "the victorious eagles of the puissant Euro- pean empire " and exhorted " Germany (Almaine), Dacia, Italy, Bur- gundy, France, Spain, England, Apulia, Ireland, Scotland, Norway, the Islands of the Sea, and every noble and renowned country lying under the Royal Star of the West," to rally to the defence of the em- pire. '^ In 1 25 7 both Richard, duke of Cornwall, and Alonzo the Wise, king of Castile, were elected emperor. This "may be construed to imply that the Spanish kings were members of the empire, " says Bryce, 186; but he seems unwilling to apply the same rule to the English princes. In 1344 during the reign of Edward III., the pope, Clement VI., created Louis of Spain prince of the Fortunate Islands. The English legate at the papal court supposing that by this term was meant the British Islands, immediately informed the king of the dan- ger that awaited him. " The belief that the pope had the right to make such an appointment proves that the king of England was not yet free from the suspicion of his being still a vassal of the empire. In 1347 Edward III., king of England, was actually elected emperor against Charles I. , king of Bohemia, but was prevented from accepting the now empty office, owing to the objections of his parliament, where- upon the king of Bohemia ascended the Medieval imperial throne and occupied it until 1378.'° So late as the sixteenth century,John,king of Denmark and Sweden, subdued a revolt in the last named country, degraded its principal men, " M. Paris, I, 53. '^ M. Paris, I, 355. " M. Paris, I, 347. '* Seven Ages of England, p. 109. '* Bryce, 223, 225. 26o THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. seized their estates, caused these acts to be confirmed by a subservient " Senate, " and then solicited the approval of the emperor Maximillian. The latter wrote in 1505 to the states of Sweden "that they should obey, otherwise he would proceed against them according to the laws of the empire." '" Third. — We now come to the direct evidences of homage paid by English princes to the emperor. M. Guizot has shown that at the be- ginning of the fifth century the western empire was governed, in the name of theBasileus, by a prsetorian praef ect, whose court was atTreves, and whose authority was exercised through some twenty or thirty-odd sub-prsefects — either consuls or presidents — each of whom governed a sub-province and in turn exercised his authority through a great num- ber of other officers. But he has omitted to show in the same connec- tion that in the course of a few years the whole of this fine system tumbled to pieces and had to be reconstructed upon the basis of more Direct Government, the sub-provinces being now in the hands of pro- vincial, or "barbarian," princes and paying their Rome-scat or tribute direct to the Basileus. Such, in fact, was the position of affairs at the beginning of the sixth century, a position that enabled Justinian to declare, with some justice, that the provinces were "restored once more to the dominion of Rome, our Empire, after so long an interval, " and that furnished him his warrant for assuming, among others, the proud titles of "Alamannicus,Gothicus,Franciscus, Germanicus, Ant- icus, Alanicus, Vandalicus and Africanus. " But an hierarchy cannot long continue to rule directly, and in the course of another century this colonial system broke down, and then followed another interval of anarchy, during which the western provinces neither paid taxes nor derived from the imperial government those advantages of law-courts, police and administrative control, which they had been wont to receive in return. It was during this interval that Rome seceded from the Bas- ileus and laid the foundation of the Medieval empire. One of the first measures of the secession was the re-imposition of those taxes which formerly had been remitted to Constantinople. The secession took place in 726 ; the imposition of Peter's pence began in England during the year following. There cannot be the least doubt that the imposi- tion and payment of this tax amounted to an exertion of sovereignty on the one part and an admission of vassalage, on the other. It was in lieu of the taxes or tribute which had previously been paid to the Basileus ; it was not requested as a favor, but demanded as a right; failure or neglect to pay it was invariably punished by such means as the pope '^ Puffendorf; also Voltaire, Gen. Hist., in, 183. ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 261 had at the time the power to exercise; and alacrity in discharging it was rewarded in a corresponding manner. Thus, Ina of Wessex, who commenced to pay Peter's pence in 727, was at once appointed a Pat- rician of Rome, the acceptance of which title, as well as the payment of the tax, proclaiming him a vassal of the Western empire. But although the pope's assumption of imperial authority and his treasury drafts on the western feudatories were honoured by the Chris- tian, they were repudiated by the pagan, princes. Ina and Alfred " ac- knowledged the suzerainty of the pope and paid his tribute-drafts, but Offa (at first) and Desiderius (always) repudiated both. It was pre- cisely this refusal of the pagan princes that rendered necessary the military arm of Pepin. Had the western world been entirely Christian, neither Pepin nor Charlemagne would probably ever have been heard of; there would have been no obstacle to the ambition of the Latin pope, and he might have conducted his campaign against the rule of Constantinople single-handed. Hence between the pope's abortive secession in 642 and his practical secession in 7 26 — or rather the crown- ing of Pepin in 754 — the acts of homage offered to Rome were confined to the Christian princes, whilst between the crowning of Pepin and the death of Charlemagne, similar marks of homage were one after an- other yielded by all the princes within reach or under the influence of those conquerors. Afterwards, except when the two heads of the im- perial eagle edified the feudatories by picking at one another, feudal subordination to Rome became so general, both by Christian and pa- gan princes, that the chroniclers of the times seldom deemed it neces- sary to mention them. However, a sufficient number of instances has been recorded, to place the fact and the custom beyond dispute. During the reign of Charlemagne homage was paid to the empire by Eardwulf and other kings of Northumbria, by the kings of Kent, who applied to the emperor for aid against Offa. Like homage was paid by the Scottish kings.'* There are modern patriots who have tried to destroy the significance of these acts by attacking them when sepa- rated from the main body of evidence on the subject ; but none as yet have had the courage to face them in column. Among the pagans who held out longest against submission to the Medieval empire, was Offa of Mercia, the most powerful of the various chieftains who at that pe- riod ruled the provinces or " kingdoms " of Britain. The aid afforded " It will be remembered that the epithet of Great was always reserved for those princes who were most useful or beneficial to the church, t".^., Alexander, Quintus Fabius Con- stantine, Theodosius, Charlemagne, Alfred, etc. In fact " Great" is nearly always an ecclesiastical title. '^Eginhard; Palgrave, i, 484; Freeman, i 40. 262 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. or threatened to be afforded against him, by Charlemagne, to the hos- tile kings, north and south of his frontiers, appears to have decided him, and he seems to have sent in his allegiance before the year 790. Three years previously, the second council of Nicsea had approved the adoration of images. Without waiting to call a council on the subject, this form of idolatry was at once disapproved by Charlemagne, and notice of his displeasure, together with the reasons therefor, was sent out to all the princes of the west, among others to Offa.'" This would hardly have been done unless Offa had previously acknowledged his vassalage to Charlemagne. In 790 Offa sent Alcuin to Charlemagne charged with the renewal of his homage and vows of fealty; and such was Charlemagne's gratification at this further mark of submission that he retained the messenger in his imperial service and loaded him with benefits. In 792 Ethelbert, king of East Anglia, was killed at the court of Offa, and the crime being, fixed upon the latter by the clergy, they made so much of it as to excite the nobles and induce Offa to re- pair to the court of Rome. While there (793) he made, or it is claimed that he made, the following concessions : to pay homage to the pope, to enforce the payment of tithes throughout his kingdom, to support an ecclesiastical establishment, to pay Rome-scat or Peter's-pence an- nually, and to pay 365 mancusses down.''" In return for these conces- sions Offa was elevated to the dignity of Roman patrician. Assuming this account to be true, Offa must have soon repented of his bargain, for in the following year, after the Council of Frankfort had issued its condemnation of image-worship, he struck those heretical mancusses or dinars which are described at length in another part of this work. If Offa ever transferred his allegiance to Rome, as is alleged by the church, he must have retransferred it to Charlemagne, when he re- turned to England. '^^ Offa's ordinances have all been destroyed." During the ninth century Egbert of Wessex paid homage to Charle- magne. His son Ethelwolf was brought up as a priest and paid his homage to the pope. Upon his return from Rome, being then a wid- ower, he was induced to marry Judith (daughter of Charles the Bald of France), a devotee of the church. Alfred, (the Great,) the son of Ethelwolf by his first wife, was anointed by the pope of Rome when " Timpson's Ecclesiastical History. ^'^ Longperiergivesa full accouut of this transaction. Timpson's " Ecclesiastical His- tory," p. iio.says 365 marks, but this is evidently a blunder. The dinars, or mancusses, struck by Offa constituted substantially the only gold coinage of England during a period of four hundred years. " On this subject consult John of Wallingford, p. 529; Freeman, i, 40, 625; and Collier, Ecc. History, i, 142. ^'^ Palgrave, 47. ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 263 he was but five years of age, and, under the care of his pious mother- in-law and ghostly uncle (St. Noet), was carefully trained in that de- votion to the pontificate which he had been taught to vow in his child- hood. For this he was afterwards rewarded with an heroic history and a glorious title. Some further details touching the vassal condi- tion of these princes are mentioned in another place." Ethelredl.,king of Kent, granted to the pope (when the latter had wrested the em- pire from the weak hands of Charlemagne's sons) one-tenth of his lands, measured by metes and bounds — free from the Three Necessi- ties. These were taxes on the land; the bridge and fort taxes; and military service. This act may be fairly regarded as one of homage to the pontificate. ^* At the council of Gratanlea assembled by Athel- stan king of Wessex in 928, the first canon provides for the payment of tithes, both of cattle and corn, and in one of the copies, (the second canon,) provision is made for the payment of Peter's-pence. " In 938 Athelstan married his daughter, or sister Eadgith, to Otto I. This was the emperor who was crowned at Aix-la-Chapelle in 936 and at Rome in 962, after he had subdued one pope and set up another of his own making. Over this pope (Leo VIII.,) he claimed and exer- cised the rights of a suzerain. These circumstances afford corrobora- tion, were any needed, concerning the relation of vassal and suzerain which it is claimed existed between Athelstan and Otto; for unless such feudal relations existed and were intended to be acknowledged by the English prince, he would hardly have compromised his position with the pontificate by consenting to a matrimonial alliance with the eiT>peror, the nature of which at that period was so susceptible of being misconstrued. ^^ The constitutions of Odo issued in the name of the pope, by Odo, archbishop of Canterbury, during the reign of Edmund I,, (A. D. 943,) contain the following language: " I command the king, the princes and all in authority to obey." ^'' In the second canon of the council of London assembled in 944 by Edmund I., all persons were com- manded to pay tithes and Peter's-pence to the pope. ^^ Canute king of England, together with numerous other western princes, assisted at the Roman coronation of the emperor Conrad II., an act which in the medieval ages was taken to imply an admission of vassalage. Says ^^ Consult also Asserius, vita Alfredo; Henry, 11, 55-66; Bryce, 70; Timpson, 117. ** Palgrave, 15S. -^ Spelman, Concil., torn, i, pp. 401-2. ^® Not only Otto I., but also Henry V., and Frederick II. ^married Englisli princesses. "Spelman, Concil., i, 416; Willvin, Concil., i, 212. *^ Henry, History of Britain, 11, i, 265. 264 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. Wippo (c. 16) of this transaction : " His ita peractis in duorum regum prsesentia Rudolfi regis Burgundi£e et Cunatonis regis. Anglorum di- vine officio finito imperator duorum regum medius ad cubiculem suum honorifice ductus est." Mr. Bryce, to whom we are indebted for this quotation, regards Canute's assistance at this function to be a mere act of courtesy, an opinion which is not confirmed by the use which that author makes of similar "courtesies" from the countries other than his own, for example, Denmark, Burgundy and Poland. (Holy Roman Empire, p. 186.) Edward Confessor was a Saxon by name, a Norman by education and a Roman by adoption; an unnatural son, an impotent husband, and an heirless king; a monk and a confessed vassal of the pope, to whom he owed his elevation. He was placed upon a throne which he neither merited, inherited, nor won, and there he sat whilst the true heir was exiled in foreign lands where he was continually menaced by treachery and poison. Upon the death of Edward Confessor the Eng- lish crown, contrary to the wishes of Rome, was seized by Harold II., son of Earl Godwin. Within the same year (1066) Harold was de- posed by Alexander II., one of the Hildebrandine popes, and his kingdom given to William of Normandy, who, armed with a papal war- rant, was enabled tocollecta sufficiently large following both in France and England, to defeat and supplant his rival. The pope blessed the banner under which William was to conduct his conquest of England and excommunicated in advance all who might oppose this design. Under these pontifical directions the English bishops met together and decided to deliver up the kindom to the pope's protege. Accom- panied by the nobles and the magistrates and dignitaries in London, the prelates advanced beyond the walls of that city to Berkhamstead, and there offered the crown of England to William. " The latter ap- peared to be so confident of the efficacy of his pontifical warrant, that after formally accepting the crown from these persons, he took no measures to secure the kingdom, but spent his time in hunting and hawking in Hertfordshire.^" The bearing of these facts is not altered because a few years later (1075) William refused to Gregory VII. the homage and Peter's-pence which he had gratefully paid to Alexander II. Gregory not only de- manded the homage and tribute, but also the arrears of the latter, which he asserted were due from previous years, and he couched the demand in terms whose haughtiness afforded to the wily Norman pre- '^^ Henry, Hist. Br., Ill, i, 7; Voltaire, i, 165. ^^ Henry, in, i, 8, from M. Pictavin, 205. ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 265 cisely that pretext for rebellion which seems to have secretly formed a portion of his original design. " In 1114 Henry I., king of England, married his daughter Matilda to the emperor Henry V. , an act that, taken in connection with the other relations of these princes, may fairly be regarded to imply the vassal- age of the former and suzerainty of the latter. The feudal subordina- tion of Henry II. is evinced by the submissive letter which he wrote to pope Alexander III. , after the death of Becket ; by suffering himself to be deprived of his royal title and accepting it again at the hands of the pope's agent; by submitting to be stripped, scourged and person- ally degraded by the pope's agents; by holding the pope's stirrup (1161); and by numerous other degrading acts. Cardinal Platina, in referring to these transactions, always alluded to Henry as a " vassal" of the pope, his lord.^^ Stephen, king of England, in a royal charter published soon after his coronation, expressly acknowledged vassalage to the pope; and this vassalage he confirmed by permitting appeals from the courts of law in civil cases to be submitted to the decision of ecclesiastics. " Richard I., king of England, paid homage and acknowledged vassalage to the emperor Henry VI. ^^ This same Richard wrote to the emperor : ' 'Con- silio matris suae imperatori sicut universorum domino/^ Henry is said ^' In 1080 Gregory wrote to William, "Bethink thee whether I must not very diligently provide for thy salvation, and whether, for thine own safety, thou oughtest not without delay to obey me, so that thou mayest possess the land of the living." Bryce, 160, from Migne, cxLViii, p. 568. In the second sentence of his excommunication which the same pope passed upon the emperor Henry IV., he claimed the right to "give and to take away empires, kingdoms, princedoms, marquisates, duchies, countships and the posses- sions of all men." Bryce, 161. Consult also Henry, Hist. Br., 111,1,276; Epist.Wilhelm, opera Lanfranc, p. 304. ^^ Bartolommeo Plata or Platina, 1421-81, member of the papal college of "Abbrevia- tors " and of the Roman (antiquarian) Academy of Pomponio Leto, the illustrious mem- bers of which were imprisoned and tortured by Paul 1 1 . ,upon a suspicion of mutiny and non-conformity, in the preparation or publication of classical books and antiquities. A recent archosological discovery amply confirms the justice of the holy father's suspicions and proves that Platina and his colleagues had discovered the then dangerous secret of the church's history. Lanciani, p. 12. Fathers Pelligrini and Hardouin afterwards made similar discoveries. 33 William of Malmesbury, p. 102, col. i; Viner's statutes. At the outset of his reign the emperor Conrad III. wrote to the Basileus John I., " Nobis submittuntur Francia et Hispania, Angliaet Dania." "France, Spain, England and Denmark have submitted to us." Letters in Otto Frey, i; Bryce, i86«. England at this period was governed by Stephen. If he " submitted " to Conrad and the ecclesiastical accounts are also true,then he was doubly a vassal. 3^* Freeman i, 131. ^5 Lg(.j.gj. in Hovenden; Bryce, 186. 266 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED, at his death to have released Richard from his submission.'^ But if so, such release could only have extended to his person ; for the latter voted as a prince of the empire at the electionofthe emperor Frederick II. John, king of England, having seized the possessions of the English church to pay the expenses of a war in France, was, in 1209, excom- municated and outlawed by pope Innocent III., who in 12 13 deposed him from his kingdom and conferred the same on Philip II., of France. Upon this, John offered to acknowledge the pope as his temporal lord and suzerain, to do public homage to him, and to pay him tribute. His penance having been accepted, and the homage duly performed to Pandolfo,the pope's legate, the latter ordered Philip to desist from his enterprise, an order which the latter obeyed, though with marked re- luctance. The following is the oath of vassalage taken by king John, and, after him, by the sixteen barons of England, at Dover, May 15, 1 2 1 3 : "I, John, by the grace of God, king of England and lord of Ire- land, for the expiation of my sins and out of my pure free will and with the advice of my barons, give unto the Church of Rome, to pope In- nocent and to his successors, the kingdoms of England and Ireland, with all their rights, and will hold them as a vassal of the pope. I will be faithful to God, to the Roman church, to the pope my lord, and to his successors lawfully elected. I bind myself to pay him a tribute of a thousand marks of silver yearly, that is, seven hundred for the king- dom of England, and three hundred for Ireland." The first year's tribute was thereupon paid to Pandolfo, who affected to show con- tempt of it, by placing his feet upon it. The crown and sceptre were also handed to him. These he kept for five days, when he restored them to the king, by the favour of their common master." Before the death of John, which was wrought bypoisonin 1216, Philip, atthepeti- tion of the English barons and the king of Scotland, privately sent his son (afterwards Louis VIII.) to execute the pope's original decree. This prince landed at Sandwich in 12 16, overran the whole of Kent, ^^Bryce, 187, *' Voltaire, General History, i, 238. Freeman (i, 131) says that John only "com- mended " his kingdom to the pope. After reading this text of the oath, the reader can judge for himself. Sir N. H. Nicolas, in his " Chronology," p. 309, admits that none of the Anglo-Norman kings, fromWilliam I. ,to Richard I., styled himself in his charters king of his doviinions, but only king, duke, or count of \i\s people; adding that John was the first to style himself sovereign of England. What he omits to say is that John thus styled himself in an oath of vassalage to the pope, his temporal lord and suzerain, in which oath he expressly proclaimed himself a vassal. As for the great seals of Henry II., and Richard I., there is nothing to show when or by whom they were made. There was but one seal, whilst there were many charters, and the latter, therefore, furnish far the better evidence. ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 267 advanced to London and was there crowned king of England in May, 12 1 7. "Louis, the eldest and legitimate heir of the French king, was elected Lord and, as it were, King of England. " '* The date of this event, in some modern histories, is placed a year too late, possibly with the object of shortening Louis' occupation of England, which in fact lasted about eighteen months. ' 'A great part of the nobles and many of the principal cities swore fealty to Louis of France. " " Upon the death of John and through the exertions of earl Pembroke, the Protector of Henry III., Louis was defeated in September of the same year and compelled to evacuate the country, never to return. The evidences of England's subordination to the Medieval, or, as it was then called, the Holy Roman, empire, during the reign of Henry III. , are numerous, not because their political relations underwent any material change, but because the obscurity of the period is elucidated by the valuable chronicle of the monk Matthew Paris, who was often employed about the court, knew many of its secrets, and was not afraid to record them. In 1240 king Henry III. admitted in a letter to his son-in-law, the emperor Frederick, that " he was a tributary or vassal of the pope. " ^° And when Frederick reproached the king with permit- ting the pope " to boast that he has the power of a liege lord over you," Henry replied that "he did not dare to oppose the pope. " " On the first day (Christmas) of the year 1241 the king at Westminster seated the pope's legate in his own (Henry's) royal seat at table, himself sitting at the legate's right hand."^ In 1246, at a royal council held in London, the king (Henry III.) addressed to the earls,barons, abbots, and priors, then present, a speech in which the grievous tyrannies, oppressions, and exactions of the pontificate, as they were termed, were alluded to at length. It was thereupon unanimously resolved that the spiritual lords should petition the pope to abate his " insupportable yoke." A similar petition was addressed to his holiness by the temporal lords, clergy, and people in general. A petition to the same effect was also addressed to the pope by the king, and still another one setting forth that the knights' service and military service and horses and arms demanded of England by the Roman See, was an unendurable burden." "These mournful complaints of the king of England and the whole community were treated by the pope with contempt, " and Henry, again succumb- ing to the authority of the pope, " all the endeavors of the nobles, as well as of the bishops, were of no avail, and all hope of the freedom of ^^ M. Paris, 11, 406. ^^ Allen, Royal Prerog., p. 46. ^"M. Paris, I, 257. " M. Paris, i, 268. ^*M. Paris, i, 318. ^^ M. Paris, 11, 148, 153, 155, 156. 268 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. the kingdom and of the English church, died away. " " In 1 248 the pope in a conference with the French king at Lyons alluded to ' ' the king of England, as our vassal. " " It is admitted that by itself the pope's asser- tion concerning a relation of this kind would possess no historical val- idity, but it is abundantly evident not only from what is here shown, but also from the further testimony adduced elsewhere in this work, relating to other vassalian acts of Henry III., that this prince was a vassal of the empire. As to whether the pope or the emperor, or both combined, was Henry's lawful suzerain, is a matter which has been discussed already, but concerning which an additional testimony may with propriety be inserted in this place. Among the early ' ' statutes " of the English princes, (the earliest of all being the Magna Charta ratified in 1225 by " the Lord Henry, sometime king of England," and confirmed by Edward I. in 1299,) is "The Award made between the king and his Commons at Kenilworth,"in 1266 (51 Henry III.). This settlement, which relates to lands, escheats, etc., begins in the name of theTrinity and of Mary, ' 'the glorious and most excellent Mother of God," and then goes on to recite that "We, William, Bishop of Oxon," and others "appointed to provide for the good estate of the land," according to the form confirmed by the king and "by the assent of the legate of the Apostolic See and the noble H. of Almaine, having like power and authority," etc. As this was during the Great Inter- regnum, the ' 'noble H. of Almaine, " can only mean the Hohenstaufen, who in that year assumed the rights of his grandfather, the emperor Frederick II. If this conjecture proves to be well founded, it follows that Henry confirmed a Settlement which had been made by the united authority of pope and emperor,and whether it is, or not, well founded, it is certain that he permitted the papal legate to fix its terms and figure in the award as a dispenser of ' ' power and authority. " In other words, it is not the edict of a sovereign, but of a feudal prince, who is strug- gling to become one. This document appears in French, with an Eng- lish official translation, from which last named version the quoted words are taken verbatim." In 1198, to the petitions of the king Richard of England for relief against certain exactions, the pope answered that he would grant them as far as possible. In the same year the pope exhorted the king to re- voke some of his acts and obey the ' ' mandate " of the Apostolic See. In 1201-2, "Otto, emperor-elect of the Romans, "wrote to the pope, remindmg him that "the king of England was bound to give help to *'*M. Paris, 11, 170, 176. ^^ M. Paris, 11, 26S. ^^ Statutes at Large, first volume. ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 269 the emperor against all enemies, and to make peace with France, as he himself was bound by the order of the pope, whom he thanks, next to God, for his promotion." In 1202 the pope issued his "mandate" to the king John of England to restore certain property which had been confiscated by that prince. In 1203 the king of France was forbidden by the pope to make vvar on the king of England. In the same year the king John was censured by the pope for his delay in appearingbefore his liege lord, king Philip of France."' No mention of these and other like evidences of the vassalage of the kings of England to the Roman emperor and pope appear in the popular histories of that country, yet that they are valid no one can doubt; and that they prove the con- tinuance of Caesar's empire and the vassalic condition of England down to the fourteenth century, only the obstinate will refuse to admit. How- ever, the vassalage of the kings of England was fast drawing to an end. The Twelve Tables were destroyed, the Books of the Sibyls were closed; the inspired character of the yEneid was lost; and the empire of Csesar was fading from sight. At the outset of Edward Third's reign but a flicker of it is discernible; a few years more and it was to dis- appear entirely. In the Magna Charta confirmed by Edward I. , he is styled ' 'Edward, bythe grace of God, kingof England, lord of Ireland anddukeof Guyan" (Guienne). Chapter xxvi of this instrument forbids the granting to, or acceptance by, any religious house, of lands, either to hold, as a tenant, or in any other way, under penalty of forfeiting such lands to the lord of the fee. Both the title assumed and the nature of this enactment imply an assertion of independent sovereign authority. But assertion is one thing,and fact another, and the fact will presently appear."* In 1337 Edward was appointed, and he accepted the appoint- ment, of vicar-general and lieutenant to the emperor, Louis IV., from whom he obtained authority to coin "gold and silver. " "'^ These acts imply vassalage to the emperor, which indeed Edward further ac- knowledged by performing homage, all except kissing the emperor's feet, a portion of the ceremony which he respectfully desired should be omitted. ^'' The homage which Edward had paid to the emperor was likewise demanded by the pope, and in the contest between the rival *^ Bliss, Papal Registers. *^ It ought to be remembered that all the earlier Statutes bear an appearance of having been "restored." Thus, the original MS. of Magna Charta is lost; the statute of Marl- borough, a code of Procedure in twenty-nine chapters, is taken from the Cotton MS., etc. The earliest of these texts which do not present an anachronical appearance are the two ordinances of the king relating to the organization of the royal exchequer, both bearin ; the date 1266. "'^Grafton; Froissart; Ruding, 11, 146. '" Bryce, iS'j.n. 270 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. suzerains, for an acknowledgement of supremacy which by this time belonged to neither of them, it was forever lost to both." In 1207 Haco IV. , the natural son of Swerro,an "adventurer" who had reigned as king of Norway from 1 186 to 1202, was proclaimed king, but did not become so legally until 1 247, when he acknowledged himself a vassal of the pope (Innocent I. ,) and paid him a tribute of 15,000 marks, be- sides 500 marks from the churches of Norway; whereupon the pope declared him to have been lawfully begotten. In 125 1 Mandog,dukeof Lithuania, acknowledged himself a vassal of pope Innocent IV. , and paid tribute ; whereupon he was raised by the pope to the dignity of king. " In maintaining, as he does, that the Scottish chieftains paid homage to and acknowledged the suzerainty of Edward I. , SirFrancis Palgrave silences the objections which Scottish historians have offered to this view, with reasons which admirably serve to refute his own denial that the English kings, in turn, acknowledged the suzerainty of the Med- ieval empire. Sir Francis's first objection is that such homage was only the courtesy which clothed a voluntary league of friendship. Refuta- tion by himself: "It is an old artifice of State, even amongst rude na- tions, to disguise any onerous or disagreeable condition, by civil and courtly terms. " Sir Francis's second objection is that the instances are few. Refutation by himself: " Our history exists only in fragments; the notice of . . , affairs is incidental; and the distance interposed be- tween the emperor (or pope) and his vassal, will fully account for the frequent absence of the king. The emperor (or pope,) might be reason- ably solicited to excuse the non-appearance of a monarch, who on his return was in danger of finding his throne occupied by an intruder." SirFrancis's third objection is that homage was often exacted by force. This objection is tersely disposed of by himself \r\ another part of his book, where he says that "There was no other way to exact homage."" Fourth. — The feudal subordination of England to the empire, which these evidences attest, is corroborated by the feudal subordination of the other western provinces ; for if it can be shown that France, Spain, Denmark, Saxony, Almaine, Poland, Bohemia, and other provinces of the West, acknowledged the supremacy of the Medieval empire, this fact would go far to prove that it was also acknowledged by the princes of England. In 754 Pepin the Short, at that time a subordi- nate prince, accepted the title of Roman patrician from Pope Stephen II., at St. Denis. He afterwards accepted from the same authority ^' Henry, Hist. Br., iv, ii, 66. If to anybody, it belonged to the Basileus and expired with his downfall. *2 Voltaire, i. 257. " Sir F. Palgrave, i, 604-5. ENGLAND, A PROVINCE OF THE EMPIRE. 271 the title of king. Tiiis is undoubtedly an act of vassalage. Alfonso II. , the king of Galicia, Leon, and Asturias, not only declared himself the vassal of the emperor Charlemagne, but he appeared to be proud of it, for he commanded " that he should be spoken of as Carl's man." " In 841 Charles the Bald, and Louis the Pious, kings of France, ac- knowledged themselves vassals of their brother Lothaire the emperor. In 875 Charles did homage to the pope, from whom he bought an empty title to the empire. " In 895, Odo, king of the West Franks, "commended himself" (essentially equivalent to an avowal of vas- salage) to Arnulf. This was a year before the latter became empe- ror. ^* In 962, Otto I., was crowned emperor at Rome, and on this occasion, the king of Denmark and dukes of Poland and Bohemia, acknowledged themselves his tributary vassals. " Three years later Otto celebrated his accession to the empire at Cologne. The ceremony was attended by the king of France and numerous feudal princes and dukes, whose presence testified their feudal subordination to the Med- ieval empire. In defending the pretensions of Ferdinand of Castile,(A. D. 1053,) the Spanish jurists set up the claim that as Spain had been lost by the empire to the Moors, it was a sort of derelict recovered by the Cas- tilian Goths and therefore belonged to them, free of homage to the empire. ^® To this it was replied that in fact not the Castilians, but all Christendom, had combined to rescue Spain from the Moors, and that consequently more than any other of the provinces of Rome, did it belong to the empire. This opinion, like all opinions which favoured the interests of the deathless college that reigned at Rome, eventu- ally prevailed. From these various evidences, derived in many instances from the reluctant testimony of unwilling historians, ^^ it seems sufficiently evi- dent that, from the date of the acceptance of the Christian religion by the various Anglo-Saxon chieftains of England, dowato the reign of Edward III., that country was a fief of the Roman empire, and that its sovereigns acknowledged this vassalian relation by doing homage, paying tribute, and furnishing military and other aid to the emperor, or else the pope of Rome, whichever happened to be upper- ** Eginhard, Vita Caroli. ^^ Voltaire, i, 90. 5« Freeman, i, 131. "'Gibbon, v, 149. ** Arthur Duck, De usa et authoritati Juris Civilis. Bryce, 186, «. 69 < • Freeman, however radical in politics, was a staunch high-churchman, and like his predecessor at Oxford, bishop Stubbs, thoroughly at one with all the ecclesiastical tradi- tions of the university." London Daily Chronicle, April 15, 1892. 272 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. C most at the time, and by taking part in, or voting at, the diets or councils of the empire. To these evidences we have added in other parts of this work, the evidence of their abstension from the exercise of regalian rights, such as dealing with foreign nations, entering into foreign wars or alliances, sending or receiving foreign embassies, main- taining a standing or paid army or a fleet, coining gold, altering the monetary system of Rome, interfering with the language or the laws of the empire, or with the administration of the latter, changing the imperial religion, creating sub-kings or dukes, erecting corporations, or trading in any other ships than those sailing under the flag or au- thority of the empire. When massed together it must be conceded that these evidences present a strong presumptive case in favour of the views advanced in this work. *" ®° Proofs of abstention from the formation of standing or paid armies or fleets, and from trading in Arabian or other foreign ships, have not been deemed necessary.the facts being sufficiently well known. 273 CHAPTER XV. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. Coinage, the surest mark of sovereignty — Abstention of the Christian princes from mining and coining gold, from Pepin to Frederick II. — Dates of the earliest Christian coinages of gold in the West — Inadequate reasons hitherto given to explain this sin- gular circumstance — Opinions of Camden — Ruding — Father Jobert — The true reason given by Procopius — The coinage of gold was a Sacred Myth and a prerogative of the Roman emperor — Its origin and history — Brahminical Code — The Myth during the Roman republic — During the civil wars — Conquest of Egypt by Julius Ccesar — Seizure of the Oriental trade — The Sacred Myth embodied in the Julian Constitution — Popu- larity and longevity of the Myth — It was transmitted by the pagan to the Christian church of Rome and adopted by the latter — Its importance in throwing light upon the relations of the western kingdoms to the Roman empire. THE right to coin money has always been and still remains the surest mark and announcement of sovereignty. A curious proof of this afforded by the story told by Edward Thomas in his " Pathan Kings of Delhi " of that Persian commander, who, being suspected of a treasonable design toward his sovereign, diverted suspicion from him- self to the king's son, by coining and circulating pieces of money, with the latter's superscription.' Says Mr. Thomas: Some, perhaps many, of the Mahometan coinages of India constituted merely "a sort of numismatic proclamation or assertion and declaration of conquest and supremacy. " In ancient times such conquest and supremacy often em- braced the triumph of an alien religion. Where printing was uncom- mon and the newspaper unknown, a new gold or silver coinage was the most effective means of proclaiming the accession of a new ruler or the sera of a new religion." At the period of the earliest voyages of the Portuguese to India, the same significance was attached to the pre- rogative of coinage. Says Duarte Barbosa: " There are many other lords in Malabar who wish to call themselves kings, but they are not so, because they are not able to coin money. . . . The king of Cochin » Del Mar's " History of Money," p. Sg. ' Gibbon declared that, were all other records destroyed, the travels of the emperor Hadrian could be shown from his coins alone and that the emperor Theodoric, the Goth, stamped his coins with the view to instruct posterity. " Hist, of Money," 8g«. 274 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. could not coin money, nor roof his house with tiles, under pain of losing his fief (to the king of Calicut, his suzerain) ; but since the Portuguese went there, he has been released from this, so that now he lords it ab- solutely and coins money." Father Du Halde, in his history of China, makes a similar statement in reference to that country. Says he: " There were formerly twenty-two several places where money was fabricated, at which time there were princes so powerful that they were not contented with the rank of duke, but assumed the dignity of sovereigns; yet they never durst attempt to fabricate money; for, however weak the emperor's authority was, the coins have always had the stamp that he commanded." ^ Says Mr. Stanley Lane-Poole: "The Greek cities of the coast were not allowed (by the Persian monarchs) to issue gold coins ; but the Persian rulers did not interfere with their autonomous issues of silver and copper moneys, which bear types appropriate to the striking cities." * In his posthumous "Memoirs," Napoleon Buonaparte said of the Mamelukes: "In 1767 Ali Bey, Sheikh-el-Bilad, (chief of the country,) declared himself independent, (of Turkey,) issued coin and took pos- session of Mecca." ^ The prestige of the Padishah, or Grand Mogul, in India was so great that it long outlasted the fall of his power. In 1813 theTamburetty, or princess, of Travancore, a Hindu state never subject to the Mogul, applied to him for a robe of investiture for her infant son. Though compelled by the British authorities to desist from her purpose, she was by no means satisfied that the coveted investiture was unnecessary. In order to render it quite plain to the Hindus that the House of Babu had no longer any sovereign authority, the British government deemed it necessary to issue orders forbidding the Padishah fo coin jtioney, or establish weights and measures, or confer title or command except within the limit of his own household.* " The position taken by our State Department during the Brazilian Insurrection, was that as a precedent to recognition the insurgents must have a seat of government; must issue money; and must have a navy. At least two of these requisites are lacking in the case of the present insurrection" (in Cuba).' From these various passages it is evident that the right to issue money is a certain mark and necessary prerogative of sovereign power. ^ Duarte Barbosa, pp, 103 and 157. Du Halde, Hist. China, 11, 293. * Poole, "Coins and Medals, 1892, p. 142. * Cosmopolitan Magazine, January, 1899. * Thornton's Gazeteer of India, art. " Delhi." 'Washington semi-official dispatch, February 29, 1896. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. 275 It may be added as a correlative principle that to delegate the pre- rogative to Others (for example to banks, or still worse to private individuals,) is a proceeding fraught with dangerous consequences. The custom of employing coins as a means of promulgating religious doctrine and official information was adopted by the Romans during the Commonwealth. It maybe traced, at a later period, in the other- wise superfluous coinages of the empire. Julius, Hadrian and Theodoric depicted the principal events of their reigns upon their coins. In the absence of felted paper and printing ink, it was the only means the ancients had of printing and disseminating the most important intel- ligence and opinions. Addison correctly regarded the Roman coinage as a sort of ' ' State gazette, " in which all the great events of the em- pire were periodically published. It had this advantage over any other kind of monument: it could not be successfully mutilated, forged, or suppressed. Especially is the fabrication and issuance of full legal- tender coins the mark of sovereignty. Toward the end of the Republic and during the empire this attribute belonged alone to gold coins; therefore to speak of these, is to speak of full legal-tender money. Even during the Republic, the client states and the provinces were forbidden to coin gold. ® Vassal princes, nobles and prelates, under the warrant of their suzerains, everywhere struck coins of silver, which, although legal-tender in their own dominions, were not so elsewhere, unless by special warrant from theBasileus ; but no Christian vassal ever struck gold without intending to proclaim his own independent sover- eignty and without being prepared to defy the suzerainty of the Caesars. Lenormant,in his great work on the moneys of antiquity, holds simi- lar language. "With the exception of the Sassanian coinages, down to the reign of Sapor III., it is certain that the coinage of gold, no matter where, was always intended as a mark of defiance to the pre- tensions of suzerainty by the Roman empire ; for example, during the period of the republic, about B. C. 86, the gold coinages of Mith- ridates in the various places over which he had extended his conquests. The supremacy of Rome was so widely accepted both east and west that, for many centuries, neither the provinces subject directly nor in- directly to the Basileus, nor even the more or less independent states adjacent to the empire, ever attempted to coin gold money. When gold was struck by such states, it was as a local money of the Roman sovereign." ^ As such it yielded him seigniorage; it bore his stamp; its use implied and acknowledged his suzerainty, both spiritual and tem- poral ; while its issuance was subject to such regulations as he choosed ^ Mommsen, Hist. Rome, ed. Dickson, in, 435, 584. ' Lenormant, 11, 427. 276 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. to impose. Commodus refused to believe that his favourite, Perennis, aspired to the empire until he was shown some pieces of provincial money upon which appeared the effigy of his faithless minister. '" Then he executed him. Elagabalus condemned Valerius Paetus to death for striking some bijou pieces of gold for his mistress, upon which he had imprudently caused his own image to be stamped." The very first act of a Roman sovereign after his accession, election, or proclama- tion by the legions, was to strike coins, that act being deemed the surest mark of sovereignty. Vespasian, when proclaimed by the legions in Asia, hastened to strike gold and silver coins at Antioch. '" Antoninus Diadumenus, the son of Macrinus, was no sooner nominated by the legions as the associate of his father in the empire, than the latter hastened to strike money at Antioch in his son's name, in order to definitely proclaim his accession to the purple." When Septimius Sev- erus accepted Albinus, his rival, for his associate on the imperial throne, he coined money at Rome in the name of Albinus as evidence to the latter of his agreement and good faith." Vopiscus,in hislife of Firmus, asserts that the latter was no brigand, but a lawful sovereign, in whose name money had been coined. Pollion says that when Trebellius was elected emperor by the inhabitants of Isaurus he immediately hast- ened to strike money as the sign of his accession to power. *^ When the partisans of Procopius, the rival of Valens, sought to win Illyria to their master's cause, they exhibited the gold aureii which bore his name and effigy as evidence that he was the rightful head of the Roman empire.'* Moses of Khorene informs us that "when a new king of Persia ascended the throne, all the money in the royal treasury was recoined with his effigy." Even when counter-marks were stamped upon the Roman coins, care was taken never to deface the effigy of the sacred emperor.'* The interchange of religious antipathy and de- fiance which Abd-el-Melik and Justinian stamped upon their coins is related elsewhere. Indeed history is full of such instances. The coin- age of money, and especially of gold, was always the prerogative of supreme authority.'* The jealous monopoly of the gold coinage by the sovereign-pontiff, ascends to the Achimenides of Persia, that is to say, to Cyrus and Darius.^" In fact it ascends to the Brahmins of India. The Greek and Roman republics broke it down ; Caesar set it up again. Some remains of the peculiar sanctity attached to the coinage of '» Herodian, I, 9. " Dion. Cass., Lxx, ix, 4. ''^ Tact., Hist., Ii, 82. " Lapridinus, in Diadumenus, 2. '* Herodian, 11, 15. '^ Thirty Tyrants, xxv '* Ammianus Mercellinus, xxvi, 7. ''' Lavoix, MS., p. 12. '» Lenormant, 11, 389; iii, 389. '^ Lavoix, MS., p. 16. ^^ Lenormant, 11, 19 5-6. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. 277 gold exist at the present, or at least existed wlien Dr. Ruding wrote his "Annals of the Coinage*" In the ancient temples which were employed as mints, the officers of the mint who, of course, were priests, v/ere exempt from all civic duties. This exemption remained after the coinage fell into the hands of civil magistrates. Besides this, the precincts of the imperial mint where gold was coined, were sacred; and this character also remained until a late date and perhaps still remains. These privileges of the mint descended from the sovereign- pontiff of the Roman empire to the various princes who fell heirs to that empire when it was broken up in 1204. There is no knowledge of such privileges in the various provinces (now independent king- doms) before that event; they make their appearance immediately afterward. Workmen were " pressed " for the service of the Mint by Henry III., and by Edward III. " Pressing workmen for the Mint continued down to the reign of Elizabeth. Among the privileges of officers of the Mint were exemption from execution for debt, from military duty and from jury service. This appears in statute ist Eliz- abeth (20th February, 1558). It was repeatedly confirmed, so late as 1744 and is still in force. ^^ The boundaries of the Scotch Mint pro- tected insolvent debtors from capture and this was probably the case in England from the Plantagenet period down to that of the Restoration. " Assuming the common belief that the Christian princes of medieval Europe were in all respects independent sovereigns before the de- struction of the Roman empire by the Fall of Constantinople in 1 204, it is difficult to explain the circumstance that none of them ever struck a gold coin before that event, and that all of them struck gold coins immediately afterwards. There was no abstention from gold coinage by either the Goths, the Celts, the Greeks, or the Romans of the Commonwealth; there was no abstention from gold coinage by the Merovingian Franks, or the Arabians of later ages; there was no lack of gold mines or of gold river-washings in any of the provinces or countries of the West; there was no want of knowledge concerning the manner of raising, smelting, or stamping gold; yet we find the strange fact that wherever the authority of the Roman sovereign-pont- iff was established, there and then, the coinage, nay sometimes even " Patent of 31st Henry III., m. 3; Pat. 25th Ed. III., p. 2, m. 13, dors. "" Ruding, I, 47. See also statute 14 Eliz., Harl. MS., Br.Mu. Lib., No. 698; also Report Select Com. House of Commons, 1837; Chambers Encyc, art. "Numismat- ics;" Penny Encyc, art. "Mint," ed. 1S39. -"'Encyc. Perthensis, or Univers. Die. F.dinb., 1816, xv, 98, art. "Mint." 278 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. the production, of gold, at once stopped. It must be borne in mind that it is not the use of gold coins to which reference is made, but the coinage, minting and stamping, of gold. In England, gold coins, except during the early days of the Heptarchy, have been in use from the remotest asra to the present time. Such coins were either Gothic, (including Saxon,) Celtic, Frankish, or Moslem, but never Roman, unless struck by or under the sovereign-pontiff. In a word, for more than thirteen centuries — that is, from Augustus to Alexis IV., — the gold coins of the Empire, east and west, were struck exclusively by the Basileus, Again, from the eighth to the thirteenth century, a pe- riod of five hundred years, we have no evidences of any native Christ- ian gold coinage, under any of the kings of Britain. With the exception of an unique and dubious coin now in the Paris collection which bears the effigy of Louis le Debonnaire the same is true of France, Germany, Italy, indeed of all the provinces of the empire, whose princes were Christians. Before pointing out the significance of these circumstances it will be useful to clear the ground by examining the explanations of others. Camden conjectures that "ignorance" was the cause, but as Dr. Ruding very justly remarks, it could not have been ignorance of re- fining or coining gold, because silver, a much more difficult metal to treat, and one that in its natural state is nearly always combined with gold, had been refined and coined in Britain for many ages. " Dr. Ruding and Lord Liverpool both have supposed that coins of gold were not wanted during the Middle ages ; but this is worse than Cam- den's conjecture; for it flies in the face of a palpable fact. That gold coins were indeed wanted is proved by the very common use of gold aurei, solidi, folles, or besants, throughout all this period. Not only this, but the Arabian gold dinar or mancus was current in the coun- tires of the North and either this coin or the gold maravedi was the principal medium of exchange in the trade of the Baltic. Another explanation which has been advanced is that the confusion caused by the conquests or revolts of the barbarians, resulted in the closure of the gold mines, and rendered gold metal too scarce for coinage into money. Explanations which take no heed of the truth, made either in ignorance or desperation, may be multiplied indefinitely without serving any useful end. The facts were precisely the reverse of what is here assumed. It was the barbarians who opened the gold mines, and the Christians who closed them. The heretical Moslems, Franks, Avars, Saxons, Norsemen, and English, all opened gold mines during *^ Camden's " Remains," art. " Money," p. 241. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. 279 the medieval ages. The moment these people became Christians or were conquered or brought under the control of the Roman hierarchy their gold mines began to be abandoned and closed, " All such futile explanations are effectually answered by the com- mon use of Byzantine gold coins throughout Christendom. In England, for example, the exchequer rolls relating to the medieval ages, col- lated by Madox, prove that payments in gold besants were made every day and that gold coins, as compared with silver ones, were as common then as now. ^® If metal had been wanted for making English gold coins, it was to be had in sufficiency and at once. All that was necessary was to throw the besants into the English melting-pots. As for the feeble suggestion — that for five hundred years no Christian princes wished to coin gold so long as the Basileus was willing to coin for them, when the coinage of gold was the universally recognized mark of sovereignty and when also the profit, as we shall presently see, was one hundred per cent — it is scarcely worth answering. The greatest historians of the medieval ages, Montesquieu, Gibbon, Robertson, Hallam, Guizot, etc., have neither remarked these facts, nor sought for any explanations concerning the gold comage. In their days the science of numismatics had not freed itself from the toils of the soph- ist and forger, and it offered but little aid to historical investigations. It has since become their chief reliance. The true reason why gold money was always used, but never coined, by the princes of the Medieval empire, relates not to any circumstances connected with the production, plentifulness, scarcity, or metallurgical treatment, of gold, but to that Sacred constitution of pagan Rome, which afterwards, with modifications, became the constitution of Christ- ian Rome. Under this constitution and from the epoch of Augustus to that of Alexis, the mining and coinage of gold was a prerogative attached to the office of the sovereign-pontiff; and was therefore an article of the Roman constitution and of the Roman religion. Althouofh it is probable that during the Dark and Middle ages the prerogative of mining was violated by many who would never have dared to commit the more easily detected sacrilege of coinage, there are no evidences of such violation by Christians. '* History of the Precious Metals; History of Money, ^^ Lord Liverpool does not appear to have perused this valuable and instructive work» Sir David Balfour, in his " Memorandum" on the Coinage, dated October 20, 1S87, showed that Lord Liverpool in his celebrated " Letter to the King," wherein he re- viewed the history of the coinage, was guilty of still further omissions. In short. Lord Liverpool's account of the coinage was not, as was pretended, an impartial historical essay, but a special pleader's brief. 28o THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. The mines of Kremnitz, which contained both silver and gold, and which Agricola says were opened in A. D. 550, were in the territory of the pagan Avars; the gold washings of the Elbe, reopened in 719, were in the hands of the pagan Saxons and Merovingian Franks; so were the gold washings of the Rhine, Rhone, and Garonne. The gold mines of Africa and Spain, reopened in the eighth century, were worked by the heretical Moslems; the gold mines of Kaurzim, in Bohemia, opened in 998, were managed by pagan Czechs. Whenever and wher- ever Christianity was established, gold mining appears to to have been relinquished to the Basileus, or abandoned altogether. So long as the Byzantine empire lasted, neither the Medieval empire nor any of the princes of Christendom, except the Basileus himself, seem to have conducted or permitted gold-mining. With regard to gold coinage, the facts are simple and indisputable. Julius Csesar erected the coinage of gold into a sacerdotal prerogative ; this prerogative was attached to the sovereign and his successors; not as the emperors, but as the high-priests, of Rome; it was enjoyed by every Basileus, whether pagan or Christian, of the Joint and Eastern empires, from the Julian conquest of Alexandria, to the papal destruc- tion of Constantinople; the pieces bore the rayed effigies of the deified Caesars, and some of them the legend "Theos Sebastos. " When em- peror-worship was succeeded by Christianity, they bore the effigy of Jesus Christ." It would have been sacrilege, punishable by torture, ^'William Till, p. 59, says that Justin II., A.D. 565-78, first struck the aureus (sol- idus, or besant,) with the eiifiigy of Christ and the legend " Dominus Noster, Jesus Christus, rex regnantium," and that this practice was observed down to the Fall of the Byzantine empire. This statement is erroneous in several respects. The first name of Christ on the Roman coins was never spelled " Jesus," but succesively, " Ihs," " Is- sus " and " lesus." The effigy of Christ did not appear on the coins of Justin II. It first appeared on a gold solidus of Justinian II., (Khinotmetus,) who reigned 685-95, and again, 704-11. Sabatier, Monnais Byzantines, 11, 22. The coin is shown in Plate XXXVII, No. 2. Obverse: d N. JqSTINIANVS. SERV. ChPSTI. (Our Lord Jus- tinian, Servant of Christ.) Full-faced bust of Justinian, showing him to be a young man, with a light beard and flowing locks. His coat is ornamented with squares. In his right hand a " potency" cross, poised on three steps; in his left, a globe, sur- mounted by a Greek cross; on the globe, the word PAX (peace). Reverse: d N. Ihs. Chs. REX. REGNAnTIVM. (Our Lord, Jesus Christ, King of Kings.) Full-faced bust of Christ, showing him to be a middle-aged, bearded man, with closely curled, almost woolly hair and close robe. On each side of the head, where the ears ought to be, appear two small projections, which form the extremity of a small cross, that is supposed to be behind the head; in his left hand, a book. Both the effigies are very- rude and neither of them are rayed. On a silver miliaresion of Justinian II. (Sabatier, No. II,) appears the effigy of Christ, showing him to be an old man, with long beard -and loose robe. This effigy is not rayed. The effigy of Christ did not appear on the THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. ^ 281 death, and anathema, for any other prince than the sovereign-pontiff to strike coins of gold; it would have been sacrilege to give currency to any others: hence, no other Christian prince, not even the pope of Rome nor the sovereign of the Western or the Medieval "empire," attempted to coin gold while the ancient empire survived. Says Procopius : Every liberty was given by the Basileus Justinian I. , to subordinate princes to coin silver as much as they choosed, but they must not strike gold coins, no matter how much gold they possessed ; and he intimates that the distinction was neither new, nor its signi- ficance doubtful. Theophanes, (eighth century,) Cedrenus, (eleventh century,) and Zonaras, (twelfth century,) state that Justinian II. broke the Peace of 686 with Abd-el-Melik because the latter paid his tribute in pieces of gold which bore not the effigy of the Roman emperor. In vain the Arabian Caliph pleaded that the coins were of full weight and fineness, and that the Arabian merchants would not accept coins of the Roman type. Here are the exact words of Zonaras: "Justinian broke the treaty with the Arabs because the annual tribute was paid not in pieces with the imperial effigy, but after a new type; and it is not permitted to stamp gold coins with any other effigy but that of the emperor of Rome. "^' The "new type" complained of, probably had as much to do with the matter as the absence of Justinian's effigy. That new type was the effigy of Abd-el-Melik, with a drawn sword in his hand, and the Mahometan religious formula declaring the Unity of God — a triple offense: an insult, a defiance and a sacrilege. The privilege afforded to subject kings with regard to silver was ex- tended to both mining and coinage. Silver mining and coinage was conducted by all the western princes, the western emperor included. The pope disposed of a few coining privileges to new or weak states, or to dependant bishoprics; the western emperors disposed of others to coins of all the Roman emperors, but only on those of the following ones: Justinian II., Michael I, Alexander, A.D. 886-912, Romanus I., A.D. gi8, Christopher, A.D. gi8, Constantine X.,Nicephorus II., John Zimisces, John Comnenus, Andromicus I,, Michael Paleologos, Andromicus II., and his son Michael, A.D. 1295-1320. ^^ From the period A.D. 645, when their conquests deprived the Roman empire of the bulk of its Asiatic and African possessions to about the beginning of the eighth century, the Arabians struck coins with the effigy of the Roman emperor and the em- blems^ and the cross. At that period they struck coins still with these emblems, but in place of the emperor's effigy, that of Abd-el-Melik with a drawn sword in hand. Like the maravedis of Henry II., 1257, and the nobles of Edward III., 1344, the issue of these coins amounted to an assertion of independent sovereignty, and as such was resented by Justinian. To the nummulary proclamation of the Arabian: " The servant of God, Abd-el-Melik, Emir-el-Moumenin," the Roman replied: " Our Lord Justinian, servant of Christ." 282 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. the commercial cities ; but for the most part silver was coined by the feudal princes, each for himself, and not under any continuing prerog- ative of the empire, whether ancient or medieval. The following table shows the date and place of the earliest gold coinages of Christian Europe: 1225 Naples. 1225 Leon. 1225 1226 1241 Portugal France. Faenza. 1250 France. 1252 1252 1257 1265 1276 1300 Florence. Genoa. England. Flanders. Venice. Boh. &Pol 1300 Divers. EARLIEST GOLD COINAGES OF CHRISTIAN EUROPE, Weights in Etiglish Grains. Aurei, or augustals, of Frederick II,, struck at Amalfi; weight, 81 to 82 grains fine. Ducatsof Alfonso, 54^ gr, gross; inscribed: " In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, God is One. He who believes and is baptized will be saved. This dinar was struck in Medina Tolei- tola, in the year 1225, month of Saphar." ^^ A curious mixture of doctrines and dates! Ducats of Sancho I., 54^ grs. gross. Pavilions of Louis IX.; De Saulcy, Documents, i, 115-25. Leather notes, stamped " 3 ducats," of Frederick II. Grimaudet, 62; Yule's " Marco Polo." Redeemed in gold. Agnels.or dinars struck for Louis IX., by Blanche, his mother, 63^ grains gross. ^^ Republican zecchins, or florins, 56 grains fine. Republican genovinas. Pennies, or maravedis, of Henry III., 43 grains fine. Mantelets. De Saulcy, i, 31. Zecchins, or sequins, S^H grains fine. Ducats of Veneslaus, 54^ gr.gross. Rene Chopin, citing Chromerus, assigns the earliest gold to the archbishop of Gnesnes and bishop of Posnanie, under authority of King Vladislaus in 1224, but there ■was no king Vladislaus or Ladislaus at this date. At about this time gold coins were also struck by the archbishop of Aries, the Count of Vienne and Dauphiny, the archduke Albert of Austria, the Count Palatine of the Rhine, the archbishop of Mainz, and the king of Hungary. "Coins and Medals," by Stanley Lane-Poole, 1892. Doblas (= 100 pesetas) of Alfonso XI, Sequins of pope John XXII., 54^^ grains fine,^' Ducats of Louis IV. Florines of Pedro IV. and Hainault, ducat. Guelderland, Duke Rainhold, ducat. Florins and ducats, struck under patent of the Emperor Louis IV., 67X to the Lubeck mark. Nobles (=bs. M.) of Edward III. Ducats of Count William V. Ducats of Count Louis II., under patent Charles IV. Andrews of Robert II., 38 grs. fine. Henry, x, 269; Humphreys, "Coin Manual," 507. Ducats, under patent of the Emperor Charles IV. Chopin. Ducats, under patent of the Emperor Charles IV., 53 gr. Ducats of Prince of Orange, under patent of Louis 11. (XI). 1496 Den.& Nor, Eight-mark piece of John, 240 grains gross, ^^ 2' Although this can hardly be deemed a Christian coin I have included it in the table. Heiss publishes a gold coin with " Ferdinand " on one side and "In nomine Patriset Filii Spiritus Sanctus " on the other, which he ascribes to Ferdinand I., (II.,) 1157-88, but Saez is positive that they are sueldos of Ferdinand II. .(III.,) 1230-52. There is about the same difference of time between the Julian and Christian asras. The next gold coins after those of Alfonso were either the sueldos of Barba Robea, in the thir- I3I2 Castile. I3I6 Avignon. 1325 Germany. 1336 Aragon. 1339 Holland 1342 Lubeck. 1344 England. 1356 Holland. 1357 Flanders. I37I Scotland, I37I Bohemia. 137- Nuremb'g. 1473 Holland. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. 283 That Christian Europe abstained from coining gold for five cent- uries, because such coinage was a prerogative of the Basileus, is an explanation that may not be acceptable to the old school of historians ; but that is not a sufficient reason for its rejection. The Old School would have been very greedy of knowledge if they had not left some- thing for the New School to discover. In his Science des Medailles, (i, 208-11,) Father Jobert and after him other numismatists, observing the strange abstention of the Christ- ian princes from coining gold, and perhaps anxious to supply a reason for it, which would have the effect to discourage any farther exami- nation of so dangerous a topic, invented or promulgated the ingenious doctrine that the Roman emperors, from the time of Augustus, were invested, in like manner, with the power to coin both gold and silver. If this doctrine enjoyed the advantage of being sound, it would de- prive the long abstention from gold coinage by the western princes of much of its significance; because assuming that the coinage of gold and silver stood upon the same footing and remembering that all the Christian princes coined silver, their omission to coin gold might be attributed to indifference. But that Father Jobert's doctrine is not sound, is easily proved. I. — With the accession of Julius Ceesar was enacted a new and mem- orable change in the monetary systems of Rome. The gold aureus was made the sole unlimited universal legal-tender coin of the empire; the silver and copper coins were limited and localized in legal-tender; teenth century, or the Alfonsines, struck by Alfonso XI., of Castile, 1312-50. The latter had a castle of three turrets on one side and a rampant lion on the other; gross weight 67.89 English grains. Heiss, i. 51; ill, 218. ^^ Baron Malestroict, Ins., pp. 4-5, ascribes the first gold agnel to (Blanche of Cas- tile as regent of France during the minority of) Louis IX. Patin, " History of Coins," p. 38, repeats that they were struck by Blanche as regent, but says nothing more. As Blanche was regent a second time, (during the sixth crusade, 1248-52,) these coins were probably struck in 1250, to defray the expenses of the crusade. Louis' ransom of loo.ooo marks, was probably paid in silver. " There were sent to Louis in talents, in sterlings, and in approved money of Cologne, (not the base coins of Paris or Tours,) eleven waggons of money, each loaded with two iron hooped barrels." Matthew Paris, sub anno 1250, vol. II, pp. 342, 378, 380. Humphreys, p. 532, ascribes these agnels to Philip le Hardi, 1270-85, but there is no reason to doubt the earlier and more explicit authority of Malestroict, Le Blanc, and Patin, nor the more recent judgment of Lenormant, ("Monnaies et Medailles," p. 228), and Hoffman, (" Monnaies Royale.") ^' This pope is responsible for a treatise on the Transmutation of Metals, the pro- lific exemplar of many similar works. ^"^ The mark piece and its fractions, of King Hans, (John,) A.D. 1481-1512, are in the Christiania Collection. The type of these coins is evidently copied from the nobles of Edward III., minted 135 1 to 1360. 284 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. the ratio of gold to silver in the coinage was suddenly and, in the face of greatly increased supplies of gold bullion, raised from 9 silver to 1 2 silver for i gold ; and the mining and commerce of gold were seized, controlled, and strictly monopolized, by the sovereign-potiff ; whereas the mining of silver was thrown open to subsidiary princes and cer- tain privileged individuals. ^^ With the production of gold thus limited to pontifical control, and that of silver thrown open to numerous per- sons, the coinage of the two metals, in like manner, or under like con- ditions, was totally impracticable and historically untrue. ^* II. — As will presently be shown more at length, the imperial treas- ury, which was kept distinct from the public treasury and known by another name, was organized as a Sacred institution ; its chief officer, then or later on, was invested with a sacred title ; the coinage of gold, which was placed under its management, was exercised as a sacred prerogative; and the coins themselves were stamped with sacred em- blems and legends. '^ On the contrary, the coinage of silver was a secular prerogative, it belonged to the emperor as a secular monarch, and as such it was thrown open to the subsidiary princes, nobles and cities of the empire, while that of copper-bronze was resigned to the senate. These are not like conditions of coinage, but, on the contrary, very unlike ones. III. — From the accession of Julius to the Fall of Constantinople, the ratio of value between gold and silver, within the Roman empire, whether pagan or Christian, was always i to 12; whereas during the same interval it was i to about 6)4 in India, as well as in the Arabian empire in Asia, Africa and Spain, and it was i to 8 in Friesland, Scan- dinavia and the Baltic provinces. It is inconceivable that one single unvarying ratio of i to 12 should have been maintained for centuries by the innumerable and irreconcileable feudal provinces of the Roman empire, if the freedom to coin silver exercised by the feudal princes was, in like manner, extended to gold. IV. — The authority of ancient writers is conclusive on this subject. Cicero, Pliny, Procopius, and Zonaras, though they lived in distant ages, all concur in representing that the coinage of the two precious metals was not conducted in like manner, nor under like conditions. V. — The authority of modern writers, for example Letronne, Momm- ^* The exportation of gold had been previously controlled by the senate, Cresar made it a prerogative of the sovereign-pontiff. ^■^ See my " History of Monetary Systems " for further consideration of this subject. ^' The officers of the sacred fisc who were stationed in the provinces to superintend the collection of gold for the sacred mint at Constantinople, are mentioned in the No- titia Imperii. Guizot, i, 292. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACER OF GOLD. 285 sen, and Lenormant is to the same effect. This absolutely closes the subject and completely disposes of Father Jobert. The sacerdotal character conferred upon gold, or the coinage of gold, was not a novelty of the Julian constitution, rather was it an ancient myth put to new political use. Concerning the testimony of witnesses, the very ancient Hindu Code says: " By speaking falsely in a cause concerning gold, he kills the born and the unborn " — an ex- treme anathema. Stealing sacred gold is classed with the highest of crimes. ^° A similar solicitude and veneration for gold occurs else- where throughout these laws. The Buddhists made it unlawful to mine for or even to handle gold, probably because the Brahmins had used it as an engine of tyranny. According to Mr. Ball this superstition is still observed in some remote parts of India. It is possible that in some instances the sacerdotal character attached to gold by the Brah- mins belonged only to such of it as had been paid to the priests, or consecrated to the temples, and that when the priests paid it away it was no longer sacred; but the texts will not always bear this reading. For example, " He who steals a svarna" (suvarna, a gold coin), dies on a dunghill, is turned to a serpent, and " rots in hell until the dis- solution of the universe. " See the Brahminical inscription on copper- plate found at Raiwan,in Delhi. " The same superstition occurs among the ancient Egyptians, Persians and Jews. There are frequent allu- sions to it in the pages of Herodotus. For example, Targitaus, the first king of Scythia, a thousand years before Darius, the sacred king of Persia, (this would make it about B. C. 1500,) was the divine son of Jupiter and a daughter of the river Borysthenes, or Dneister. In the kingdom of Targitaus gold was found in abundance, but being deemed sacred, it was reserved for the use of the sacred king. In another place Herodotus says that in the reign of Darius, B.C. 521, (of whom Lenormant says, in his great work on the Moneys of An- tiquity, that he reserved the coinage of gold to himself absolutely) in the reign of Darius, Aryandes, his viceroy, in Egypt, struck a silver coin to resemble the gold darics of the king. Possibly, to make the resemblance greater, it was also gilded. For this offence Aryandes was condemned as a traitor and executed. '® Josephus makes many ^^Halhed'sGentooCode,vni,99; L\,237. ^'Journal Asiatic Society,Bengal,LVi, 118. ^* Aryandes had been appointed praef ect of Egypt by Cambyses. Darius issued a coin of pure gold; Aryandes struck one to resemble it, of silver. For this he was condemned for treason and executed. Herodotus, Mel., 166. Darius reserved absolutely to him- self the coinage of gold. Lenormant, i, 173. Some of the aryandics were believed to be still extant. Queipo, i, 554; but the coins which were taken for them are now other- wise assigned. 286 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. allusions to the sacredness of gold. A similar belief is to be noticed among the ancient Greeks, whose coinages, except during the repub- lican £era, were conducted in the temples and under the supervision of priests. Upon these issues were stamped the symbolism and religion of the state; and as only the priesthood could correctly illustrate these mysteries of their own creation, the coinage, at least that of the more precious pieces, naturally became a prerogative of their order. Raw- linson notices that the Parthian kings, even after they threw off the Syro-Macedonian yoke, never ventured to strike gold coins. '' The reason probably was, that in place of the Syro-Macedonian yoke they had accepted the Roman; and that the Roman (imperial) law forbade the coinage of gold to subject princes. Whatever credit or significance be accorded or denied to these an- cient glimpses of the Myth, its significance becomes clearer when it is viewed through the accounts of the Roman historians. The Sacred Myth of Gold appears in Rome at the period when the history of the Gaulish invasion, A. U. 369, was written. The story runs that after the Eternal city had been saved from the barbarians, it was held by the Roman leaders that to the gold which had taken from the mass belonging to the temples, should be added the gold contributed by the women toward making up the ransom, or indemnity, of a thousand pounds' weight, and that all of it should thenceforward be regarded as sacred. SaysLivy: " The gold which had been rescued (from pay- ment) to the Gauls,as also what had been, during the hurry of the alarm, carried from the other temples into the recess of Jupiter's temple, was all together judged to be sacred, and ordered to be deposited under the throne of Jupiter."" At this period, according to Pliny, the Roman money was entirely of bronze. If this is true, all offerings of money to the temples must have been in bronze coins. If the object of conferring a sacerdotal character upon gold was merely to preserve the ecclesiastical treasure from violation, it is inexplicable that the same sacred character was not also conferred upon the current bronze money. It is far more con- sonant with the grossly superstitious character of the age to believe that the Romans of the period when this legend was penned were taught to regard all gold, except such as was worn upon the person, as sacred, and that the object of pronouncing the gold in the jewels contributed by the Roman women, to be sacred, was to prevent its ever being again worn as jewelry. It was this gold that saved Rome, for although it is said it was not actually paid to the Gauls, the delay at- ^* Geo. Rawlinson, " Seventh Monarchy," p. 70. ^° Livy, v, 50. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. 287 tending the weighing of it, had given time for Camillus to advance to the rescue of the beleagured citadel, and drive the barbarians away. There was no less reason for rendering sacred the gold in the jewels, whose weighing had saved the city, than the geese whose cackling had contributed to the same happy event. However,it is possible that, as yet, a sacred character was only attached to such gold as had been consecrated to the gods. The social, servile, and civil wars of Rome were characterized by great disorders of the currency, and during the latter, that is to say, in B.C. 91, Livius Drusus, a tribune of the people, authorized the coin- age of silver denarii, alloyed with "one-eighth part of copper," which was a lowering of the long established standard. As the civil wars con- tinued, a portion of the silver coinage was still further debased, and the denarius, whose legal value had long been i6 aces, was lowered to 10 aces. Later on, we hear of the issue of copper denarii, plated to resemble those of silver. It is possibly to these debased or plated coins that Sallust alludes, when he says that, by a law of Valerius Flac- cus,the Interrex, under Sylla, (B.C. 86,) "argentum sere solutum est," i.e.^ silver was now paid with bronze. Valleius Paterculus explained the operation of this law differently, in saying that it obliged all cred- itors to accept in full payment only a fourth part of what was due them. These explanations afford a proof that at this period the gold coins were not sole legal-tenders. The discontent produced among commercial classes by this law of Valerius Flaccus, induced the Col- lege of Praetors, B. C. 84, to restore the silver money to its ancient standard, by instituting what we would now call a trial of the pix. Sylla, enraged at this interference with the coinage and the political designs connected with it, annulled the decree of the Prsetors, pro- scribed their leader, Marius Gratidianus, as a traitor,and handed him over to Catiline, by whom he was executed."' The exigencies of the war had evidently compelled Sylla to tem- porarily alter the standard of the coins — a fact which is deducible from the specimens still extant. Marius Graditidianus, the creature of an avid faction, proposed to fix the standard unalterably. It was in the interest of the State that Sylla destroyed him. The story is a brief one, but it is suggestive, Sylla'slex nummaria, B.C. 83, which prescribed the punishment of fire and water, or the mines, to the forgers of gold and silver coins, *' Modern writers on money have expended a good deal of false sentiment on Gratidi- anus. Cicero, who was his relative, and possibly knew him better, proves him a liar, cheat, demagogue, and traitor. Off., ni, 20, 288 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. implies that at this period the immunity which perhaps previously and certainly afterwards,attended gold coins, was not yet secured. About B.C. 82, Q. Antonius Balbus, an urban praetor, was authorized by the senate, then controlled by the partisans of Marius,to collect the sacred treasure from the temples and turn it into coins. This money was em- ployed in the struggle with Sylla. It is to this period, doubtless, that Cicero afterwards referred when he said : "At that time the currency was in such a fluctuating state, that no man knew what he was worth. " " After Sylla's triumph over Marius and his resignation of the dictator- ship, B.C. 79, the ancient standard of the silver coinage was restored, and the opulent citizens, in order to express their approbation of this measure, erected full length statues of the unfortunate Marius Grat- idianus, in various parts of Rome. About B.C. 69, Cicero alluded to the public treasury as the sanctius serarium. This expression, in con- nection with the coins struck by Antonius Balbus from consecrated treasure, and the statues erected to Marius Gratidianus all point to this period as that of the adoption of the sacredness of gold in the Roman law. About this time the Jews appear to have again acquired some share in that lucrative trade with India, which they had formerly shared with the Greeks, and which has ever been a source of contention and hatred among the states of the Levant. The principal channel of this trade was now by the Nile and the Red Sea, and was in the hands of the Ptolemaic rulers of Egypt. A portion of it, however, went over- land by Palmyra, and from this portion Jerusalem derived important commercial advantages. Such as they were, these advantages were lost to the Jews and acquired by Rome, when, in B. C. 6;^ Pompey and Scaurus, snatched Judea from the contentious Maccabees, and established over it a Roman government. " In B.C. 59, Cicero said: " The senate, on several different occasions, but more strictly during my consulship, prohibited the exportation of gold. " Exportare aurum non oportere cum saepe antea senatus tum me consule gravissime ju- dicavit. ** Cicero was consul four years previously, that is to say, in B.C. 6^. " Exportation " here seems to mean transmission from one province of the Roman empire to another, because elsewhere in the same pleading Cicero says: " Flaccus, (a proconsul of Syria,) by a ^^ The Maccabeesstruck the earliest Jewish coins. These were called sicals or shekels, the same name given to coins by the ancient Hindus, with whom sicca meant a mint, or "minted," or " cut." The Arabians of a later period also borrowed the same term. **Orat., pro L. Flacco, c. 28. Corroborative testimony will be found in Pothier's "Pandects," ed. 181S, vol. xx, p. 205, or liber 48, tit. 10, sec. 4, " LexNummaria." See also Cicero, Verr., i, 42. *^ Off., in, 30. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OE GOLD. 289 public edict, prohibited its exportation, (that of gold,) from Asia." The introduction of the word "Italy," in Cicero's plea for Flaccus, can only be regarded as a means of enlisting the prejudice of the judges. Here is the passage in full: " Since our gold has been an- nually carried out of Italy and all the Roman provinces by the Jews, to Jerusalem, Flaccus by a public edict, prohibited its exportation from Asia." The Jews probably bought their gold (with silver) in the provinces between Judea and India,because it was cheaper in those places than in Europe. They may have bought silver in Greece or Italy; but unless their commercial prominence is a trait of altogether modern growth, it is hard to believe that they bought gold in Italy when it could have been obtained nearer by, at two-thirds the price. The penalty which this unlucky people have paid for their ill-starred attempts to share in the Greek and Roman profits of the Oriental trade, have been more than two thousand years of hatred oppression and ostracism. The conquest of Egypt by Julius Csesar, B.C. 48, threw the whole of the Oriental trade into the hands of Rome. Canals connecting the Mediterranean and Red Seas had been constructed successively by Necho, *' Darius, and Ptolemy, and at the period of the Julian con- quest of Egypt, one of these canals was used for the voyages of the Indian fleet. A century or so later Pliny recorded the fact that a hundred million sesterces worth of silver, (equal in value to one million gold aureii,) was annually exported to India and China. The numerical proportion of the gold and silver ratios in Europe and India, indicate that this trade was not a new one, and that a similar trade had been conducted by the Ptolemies and by the Babylonians and Assyrians upward to the remotest asra of commercial intercourse between the Eastern and the Western worlds. " During the Ptolemaic period the ratio was 10 for i in Europe and 12^ for i in Egypt, whilst it was 6 to 6^ for i in the Orient. In other words, a ton weight of gold could be bought in India for about 6^ tons of silver and coined in Egypt into gold pieces worth 12)^ *" Herodotus, Clio, 202; Eut., 158; Mel., 39. ** Strabo. At a later period the inter-oceanic canal became clogged with drifting sand and was reopened by Trajan or Kadrian, probably the latter. It was kept open by the Byzantine emperors. See Marcianus, in Morisotus " Orbis Maritimus," and Ander- son's History of Commerce. It was again opened by Amrou, in A.D. 639, during the reign of the caliph Omar. The Ptolemaic (and Roman) route was by Alexandria, the Nile, the Canal, Berenice, Sabia, and Muscat. It is fully described in the Periplus maris erythrsei of Arrian. 290 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. tons of silver. "' The profit was therefore cent per cent. ; and eve;i after the Romans conquered Egypt, the rate of profit on exchanges of Western silver for Eastern gold, was quite, or nearly, as great. This explains what seemed so abstruse a puzzle to the industrious but un- commercial Pliny. He could not understand why his countrymen ' ' always demanded silver and not gold, from conquered races. " *^ One reason was, that the Roman nobles knew where to sell this silver at a usurer's profit. When this profit ceased, as it did when the Oriental trade was abandoned, the Roman government entirely altered its pol- icy. During the Middle Ages it preferred to collect its tributes in gold coins. When the enormous difference in the legal value of the precious metals in the Occident and the Orient, is considered, and that too at a period when maritime trade between these regions was not uncom- mon, it is impossible to resist the conviction that the superior value of gold in the west was created by means of legal and perhaps also sacerdotal ordinances. This method of fixing the ratio may even have originated in the Orient. Colebrook states that the ancient Hindus struck gold coins, which were multiples of the christnala, the latter containing about 2^ English grains fine."" According to Queipo, fivechristnalas equal- *'' Minimaque computatione millies centena millia sestertium annis omnibus India et Seres peninsulaque ilia imperio nostro adimunt. Tanto nobis delicioc et feminse con- stant. Nat. History, xii, 18. In another place, vi, 23, he puts it at half this sum, " quingenties H.S." for India alone. The " feminine luxuries" imported in exchange included gold, silk, and spices. Numbers of the silver coins exported to India at this period have been found during the present century buried in Buddhist topes. In A.U. 775 (A. D. 22), the Emperor Tiberius in his Message to the senate said: " How are we to deal with the peculiar articles of female vanity and especially with that rage for jewels and precious trinkets which drains the empire of its wealth, and exports in ex- change for baubles, the Money of the Commonwealth to foreign nations and even to the enemies of Rome?" Tacitus, Annals, iii, 53. ^^ Equidem miror P. R. victis gentibus in tribute argentum imperitasse non aurum. Nat. Hist., xxxiii, 15. ■•^ Asiatic Researches, London, 1799, v, gi.. Meninsky, in his "Thesaurus Ling., Orient.," p. 1897, voc. ' Choesrewani," says that in the time of Chosroes, (A. D. 531-79,) the Persians worshipped the dirhems of that monarch. If we read "venerated" for "worshipped" and "dinars" and "dirhems" we shall probably get nearer to the truth. Chosroes, the deified, was so successful in his wars against Justinian, that the latter was obliged to pay him an annual tribute of forty thousand pieces of gold (sacred besants). These were most likely the pieces, that, upon being recoined in Persia, were venerated by its subservient populace. Von Strahlenberg, p. 330, says that, in the reign of Chosroes, the les-tiaks or Oes-tiaks, near Samarow, venerated a cufic coin of the Arabians, from whom they had captured it. In a tomb near the river Irtisch, between THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. 291 led a masha of ii^ grains and 80 christnalasa toIa,orsuvarna,of 180 grains. " This system appears to have originated at two different periods, the octonary relations belonging to the remote period of the Solar worship and the quinquennial, to the Brahminical period. Dished gold coins (scyphates,) of the type afterwards imitated in the besant, called ' 'ramtenkis, " and regarded as sacred money, were struck in India at a very remote period. The usual weights were about 1 80, 360 and 720 English grains (i, 2 and 4 tolas). One example weighed 1485 grains; and was probably intended for 8 tolas sicca. The gold being alloyed with silver, gave a pale appearance to the pieces. The ex- tant coins contain no legible dates or inscriptions ; and are much worn by repeated kissing. The emblems upon them are the sacred ones of Rama, Sita and Hunuman. They were evidently held in high venera- tion by the Brahmins. Fac-similes of these coins have been pub- lished. " In the Brahminical coinages the value of silver seems to have been lowered from 4, to 5, for i ; and though in later coinages the value of silver was again lowered, as before stated, to about 6}^ for I gold, the general tendency in the Orient was to maintain the value of silver and in the Occident, to raise that of gold. So that although the system of deriving a profit, from the device of altering the ratio, was probably of Oriental origin, the practical operation of this system, certainly at the periods embraced within the Greek and Roman histories, was precisely opposite in the western world, to what it was in the eastern. The governments of Persia, Assyria, Egypt, Greece and Rome made a profit on the coinage by raising the value of gold; while those of India, China and perhaps also Japan, made their profit by maintaining, in some cases enhancing, the value of sil- ver. In the last named state silver was valued at 8, some say at 4, to I of gold; at one of which ratios it stood so late as 1858. It is evident that by continuing the use of this myth, or by attaching a sacerdotal character to the coinage and coins of gold which in Italy the salt lake Jamischewa and the city Om-Ies-troch, a flat oval gold coin was found and delivered to Prince Gagarin, the governor of Siberia, (about A.D. 1715.) Its rude type is thus described by Von Strahlenberg (p. 408): " It seems tome designed for the figure of the Virgin Mary with a little Jesus in her lap, whose face is encompassed with a glory. I have seen the like in several Russian churches. The characters seem to be Boutumian Scythian." This character is shown in Rev. Thomas Hyde's "Quad- rupt. ling, dialecto" and David Wilkin's " Prsefat. in Orat. Domin. Joannis Cham- berlayn." "The Chrysandrians were thegolden 7nen who inhabited the fabulous kingdom of Numismatica." Noel, Die. Fable, art. " Chrysandriens." This fable is evidently related to the amalgam-box of Mercury alluded to in the author's work on Money. '"Queipo, I, 449-52. "Jour. Asiat. Soc, Bengal, Lni, 207-n. 292 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. may hitherto haveonlybeen attached to consecrated deposits of gold, a character which the Conqueror who was also the pontifex-maximus of E-ome, was quite competent to confer upon it, he would not only acquire the means to republish upon its coins the mythology and re- ligious symbols of the empire, altered to accord with his own impious pretensions of divine origin, but he would also be enabled to reap profits equal to those which the Ptolemies had derived from the Ori- ental trade. Indeed, in this respect, Caesar made another innovation. He increased the Roman ratio from 9 to 12 for i and there it remained fixed in consequence of his ordinance, for thirteen centuries. " That Ceesar attached asacerdotal character to the gold coins of Rome, and that Augustus and his successors, both the pagan and Christian sovereign-pontiffs of the empire, continued and maintained this sacred character,is so abundantly evidenced, that it has never been disputed. It is only in assigning reasons for the measure, that numismatists have differed. Evelyn believed that the gold coins were rendered sacred to preserve them from profanation and secure them from abuse. " Others have found the origin of this regulation in the desire to preserve the most precious monuments of Roman antiquity from the melting-pot; and they point to the numerous coinage restorations of Trajan, as a proof of the Roman anxiety on this subject. The reasons herein suggested as the true ones are, first, the usefulnessof coins to proclain monarchical and pontifical accessions and to disseminate religious doctrine; and second, the profits of the Oriental trade, which could only be secured by means of an ordinance enjoying the sanctity of religious authority.. These reasons even receive confirmation from the contrary regula- tions adopted by the Arabians. Whether in scorn of the Roman myth- ology, or else to enhance the value of the immense silver spoil which they had derived from the conquest of the Roman provinces in Asia, Africa, and Spain, or because they were unable or unwilling to continue that pretence of sacredness, partly by means of which so artificially high a valuation of gold had been created in Europe, it appears that when the Arabians came to permanently regulate the affairs of the ^^ Kenyon (R. L.) Gold Coins of England, ed. 1884, p. 14, admits that there was no gold coinage in England until Henry III., but assigns no reason for it. He says that gold besants "have been found" in England, and is of opinion that "they had no legal currency here and were probably accepted merely as bullion," all of which is pure nonsense. So long as there were five besants or solidi to the libra, the former were always current at 48 pence or 4 shillings, with due regard to their weight, which was by no means constant. This fact proves that they a'zV have "legal currency." Kenyon should have read Madox and the rolls of the Exchequer. ■'^ Evelyn, " Medals," 224-7. THE SACERDOTAL CHARACTER OF GOLD. 293 conquered provinces, (reform of Abd-el-Melik,) they swept away the mythological emblems upon the coins for all time, and for several cent- uries they destroyed the Roman valuation of gold. They issued plain coins, of constant weight and fineness, and reduced the ratio to the In- dian level (then) of 6}i for i. Whatever reasons induced Caesar to enhance the value of gold, there can be no doubt of the fact. In the scrupulum coinages of A. 17,437, the ratio was 10 of silver for i gold. In the coinage system of Sylla, A.U. 675, the ratio was 9 for i. Caesar raised the value of his gold coins by a double jump to 12 for i. In other words,without changing its value in silver coins, he gradually lowered the aureus from 168 ^to 125 grains, fine ; and this alteration of weight he sanctified and rendered permanent by stamping the coins with themost sacred devices and solemn legends. If this great politician of antiquity endeared himself to the masses by thus lowering the measure of indebtedness, he secured for his empire the approval of the patrician and commercial classes by securing its stability, for the ratio which he adopted and solemnized was never changed in the Roman law, until Rome dissolved into a mere name, a name by which ambitious princes afterwards continued to conjure, but which at that late period really belonged to a dead and powerless empire. In that admirable review of the Byzantine empire which forms the subject of Gibbon's seventeenth chapter, he declares that by law the imperial taxes during theDark Ages were payable in gold coins alone. " We now know the reason of this ordinance. The Oriental trade was gone. The custom of the period was that when gold coins were not paid, silver coins were accepted instead, at the sacred weight ratio of 1 2. In the reign of Theodosius the officer entrusted with the gold coinage was the comes sacrarum largitionum,or Count of the Sacred Trust, one of the twenty-seven illustres, or greatest nobles of the empire. His powers supplanted those of the former quasstores praefecti aerarii and other high officers of the treasury. His jurisdiction extended over the mines whence gold was extracted,^* over the mints in which it was converted into coins, over the revenues which, being payable in gold coins, kept the latter in use and demand, and over the treasuries in which gold was deposited for the service of the Sacred emperor, or in exchange for silver. Even the woollen and linen manufactories and ^■* A similar statement occurs in his Miscellaneous Works, in, 460. *^ In Assam the gold mines are " guarded by orders from the king and worked only under special authority." Sir John Bowring, 1857, quoted in Lock's voluminous work on " Gold." Similar monopolies of the gold mines by the governments of Bangok and Assam are mentioned on pp. 272, 273 and 279 of same work. The Roman custom was evidently borrowed from the Orient. 294 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. the foreign trade of the empire, were originally placed under the con- trol of this minister, with the view, no doubt, to regulate that exchange of western silver for oriental gold, of which some remains existed at the period of these elaborate and subtle arrangements. It is the peculiarity of sacerdotal ordinances that they long outlive the purpose intended to be subserved by their enactment. In the hot climates of India, Egypt, Palestine, and Arabia, the interdiction of certain meats for food may possibly have been originally founded upon hygienic considerations; a fact that may have commended this or- dinance to local acceptation, but certainly did not earn for it that gen- eral and continued observance which it owes to the Brahminical, Jew- ish, and Mahometan religions. It is not to be wondered that Justinian I. rebuked Theodebert, the Frank, for striking heretical gold coins, nor that Justinian II. proclaimed war against Abd-el-Melik,for presuming to pay his tribute in other heretical gold. But it certainly seems strange to find this myth observed in distant ages and among distant nations — for example, to witness the pagan Danes of the medieval ages solemn- izing their oaths upon baugs of sacred gold; to find Henry III. of England, after plundering the Jews of London, receiving the gold into his own hands, but the silver by the hands of others; and to discover that Philip II. of Spain attempted to re-enact, in America, this played- out myth of idolatrous India, Egypt, and Rome. ^^ The importance of this myth in throwing light upon the political relations of the Roman provinces toward the Byzantine and Western or Medieval empires, does not depend either upon its antiquity or the reasons of its adoption into the Reman constitution, nor upon its general acceptance, or popularity. It is sufficient for the purpose if it can be shown that as a matter of fact the sovereign-pontiff alone en- joyed the prerogative of coining gold throughout the empire, and that the princes of the empire respected this prerogative. It is submitted that concerning this cardinal fact the evidences herein adduced are sufficient. What, then, was this political relation inrespect of England? Clearly that of a feudal province, whose reigning prince was not inde- pendent, but the vassal of a distant suzerain ; a feudal province, whose laws were not final, but subject to appellate Rome; a province or state of limited powers, restricted, bound, conditioned, hampered, burdened, and hindered, by institutions whose history had been forgotten, and whose origin was unknown. ^* Procop. Bel. Got., iii, 33. Lenormant. 11, 453-4, leads us to infer that this oc- curred about the year 540. Du Chaillu, "Viking Age;" Matthew Paris, i, 459; " Re- copilacion de Leyes de los Reynos de las Indias," law of 1565, 295 CHAPTER XVI. CLUES DERIVED FROM THE jC^ S. d. SYSTEM. This system appears in the Theodosian Code — It is probably older — Its essential characteristic is valuation by moneys of account — Advantages — Previous diversity of coins — Danger of the loss of numismatic monuments — Exportation of silver to India — Difficulty of enforcing contracts in coins of a given metal — £ s. d. as an instrument of taxation — As an historical clue — It always followed Christianity — Side-lights to history afforded by the Three Denominations — £s.d. and the Feudal System — It saved the most previous monuments of antiquity from destruction — Artificial character of the system — Its earliest establishment in the provinces — In Britain — Interrupted in some provinces by barbarian systems — Its restoration proves the resumption of Roman government — This rule applied to Britain, SEARCHING for the beginning of a custom is like tracing a river back to its source. We soon discover it has not one source but many. When brevity is preferable to precision it is sufficient if we follow an institution to its principal or practical source. We have elsewhere shown the marks of chronological stratification in Roman history, originally decimal and afterwards duodecimal, which resulted from a change which it is assumed took place in the method of measuring the solar circle. This we are persuaded was originally divivided into ten parts, each of 36 degrees. Hence the archaic Ro- man or Etruscan year of ten months each of 36 days, and the week or nundinum of 9 days. At a later period the zodiac was divided into twelve parts each of 30 degrees, whence the year of twelve months each of 30 days. ' In these two systems we have the basis of the deci- mal and duodecimal methods of notation which are so strangely in- termingled in all Roman numbers and proportions and which also appear in ^ s. d. Thus the number of solidi to the libra was five, and the number of sicilici to the libra twenty, both of which are deci- ' By some writers, the year of 360 days has been erroneously called a lunar year, but in fact a year contains nearly thirteen lunar months. The year of twelve months was ori- ginally solar, and was always astrological. Many of the early institutes mentioned by Livy, Pliny, and Censorinus were evidently taken from the laws of conquered and ob- literated Etruria,and falsely attributed to Romulus,Numa,and other creations of Roman ecclesiastical fancy. Among these institutes was the changed division of the year from ten months of 36 days, to twelve months of 30 days. Livy, I, 19. For numerons other authorities on this subject see my "Worship of Augustus Csesar." 296 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. mal proportions. ' On the other hand, the number of denarii to the sicilicus was twelve and the ratio between the metals was twelve, which is duodecimal. ^ Those writers whose researches into monetary systems are bounded by the narrow conclusions of Adam Smith's "Wealth of Nations "or Tooke's "History of Prices," usually attribute the origin of;^ j. d. to William the Norman or to Charlemagne, and their explanation of the system is commonly confined to that of the j£, which they re- gard as the symbol for a pound weight of silver or else a pound weight of silver coins. The different books in which this delusion is repeated are probably sufficiently numerous to stock a good sized library. Yet it can be demolished in a few words. Neither the contents of the Norman nor Carlovingian, nor any other coins, sustain this theory; neither is it sustained by the texts of the Carlovingian or of any other period; the libra of money (not the whole triad of ^^ s. d.) is at least five hundred and may be fifteen hundred years older than Charle- magne, being clearly defined in the Theodosian Code, Lib., xiii, Tit. II, II, of which the following is the text and literal translation: " Ita ut pro singulis libris argenti quinos solidus inferat." "So that for each libra of money, five solidi are to be understood." * Thispor- "^ The " pound " of money (not the whole triad of £ s. d.) is to be discerned during the decay of Attic liberty. The Romans used the term pondus to mean 100 drachmas, and the Greeks used the " talenton " of money before them. Twenty drachmas (of silver) equalled in value one stater, and five staters were valued at a talenton, which the Romans called a pondus. The Greek ratio was 10. Most of the confusion on this subject has resulted from the refusal of numismatic writers to recognize what their own monetary systems of to-day attest — that every name of a weight also meant at the same time a sum of money, which had no relation to such weight. Humphreys, Chambers, and Putnam, all furnish confused references to the pondus of 100 drachmas. The Persiansin the time of the deified Cyrus appear to have had a system of £ s. d. very like what the Romans afterwards had. ^A remarkable custom, which it may reasonably be conjectured originated in the changed subdivision of the zodiac, prevailed among the Goths. With them ten meant twelve, and an hundred was six score. The custom still prevails in Essex, Norfolk, and Scotland. Sir Francis Palgrave, I, 97. Some vestige of the score system still lingers in the French names for numbers. Curiously enough, too, the method of counting by scores was employed by the Aztecs. Prescott, p. 35. The vigesimal system is still used in Northern Asia. Consult Prof. Conant's "Number Concept." •'It is from this passage in the Theodosian Code that the learned Boeckh, Romede ITsle, and Jean Bodin regarded the libra as a weight and deduced the supposed ratio between silver and gold of 14.4 to i. It is needless to say that if the libra was a money of account and not a weight, the deduction is erroneous. There is no instance of such a ratio as 14.4, or thereabouts, in Roman or Greek history; a fact which by itself should have rendered these erudite persons more cautious. The Code of Justinian, Liber X, tit. Lxxvi, de argenti pretio, also gives the ratio: "pro libra argenti, 5 solidi." CLUES DERIVED FROM THE jT^ S. d. SYSTEM. 297 tion of the Code is atributed by some commentators to the constitu- tions of Constantine, by others to a law of Honorius and Arcadius, A. D. 397, ^ but in fact the libra of five gold pieces is older than either. It was used for five gold aureii by Caligula, Probus and Diocletian. It frequently occurs in the texts of Valens, ® Arcadius, and other sov- ereign-pontiffs of the fourth to the eighth century, where, except in one instance,it always means five solidi. Accordingto Father Mariana, "De Ponderis etMensures, " the sicilicus,knownin a subsequent age as the gold shilling, was struck so early as the first century of our sera, for he states that in his own collection were gold pieces of this weight struck by Faustina Augusta, Vespasian and Nero. Others of Justinian, weighing i6 grains, are now in the Madrid collection. The denarius of the early empire, of which 25 in value went to the aureus, nearly tallied in weight with the half aureus. In the reign of Cara- calla 24 denarii went to the aureus; the ratio of value between the metals remaining unchanged at 12 for i. Such is briefly the genesis of ;^ s. d. The translation of "argentum" into "money" needs no explanation to Continental readers, for in all the Continental languages, French, Spanish, Italian, etc., "silver" means "money." This custom is de- rived from the Romans of the empire with whom "argentum" meant money, as the following examples sufiiciently prove: Argentariae tabernse, banker's shops: Livy. Argentaria inopia, want of money: Plautus. Argentarius, treasurer: Plautus. Argentei sc, nummi, or money: Pliny, XXXIII, 13. Ubi argenti venasauriquesequunter: Lu- cretius, VI, 808. Cum argentum esset expositum in sedibus: Cicero. Emunxi argento fenes: Terrence. Concisum argentum in titulos, faciesque minutas: Juvenal, xiv, 291, Tenue argentum venaeque se- cund^e: Ibid, ix, 31. The Romans in turn got this term from the ancient Greeks whose literature they studied and whose customs they affected. One of the Greek names for money was "argyrion " from ^Queipo, II, 56. ® The cupidity of the duke of Moesia induced him to withhold provisions from the Gothic refugees.whom Valens, the sovereign-pontiff, had permitted to enter that prov- ince; so that a slave (mancipium) was given by the Goths for a loaf of bread (unum panem) and ten libras (of money) for a carcass of meat (aut decern libras in unum carnem mercarentur). It is evident that 10 libras meant precisely what the law declared it should mean, namely, 50 solidi, (equal to the contents of about 32 English sovereigns,) for ten pounds' weight of gold would contain as much as 464 English sovereigns. Gibbon avoids the difficulty by saying " the word silver must be understood"; but such was not the custom of that time any more than it is now. When silver was understood it meant money, and not metal. Said the law: " So that for each libra (libris argenti) 5 solidi (of gold) are to be understood." Jornandes, De Getarum, c. xxvi; Gibbon, II, 597. 298 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. argyros, silver. The Hebrew word for money was caseph, literally silver, alluding to the coined shekels of the Babylonians. The same custom, /. e. , using the term ' ' silver " for money is to be found in the most ancient writings of Egypt and India. In a letter of Honorius and Theodosius II. to the prsefectof Gaul written in our year of 418, after suggesting the formation of a coun- cil to regulate the affairs of that province, the emperors proposed, in case its members failed to attend the meetings, to subject them to fines of three and five " libras of gold " each. It is evident that the "libras" here mentioned are moneys and not weights, for five Roman libras weight of gold are equal to the quantity contained in 232 Eng- lish sovereigns of the present day, and this would have been a prepos- terously heavy mulct for mere non-attendance. On the other hand, a libra of account represented by five gold solidi would not have con- tained more than one-fourteenth of this quantity of gold; and it is evident that this was intended. These researches into the origin of ;^ s. d. were necessary in order to determine its essential characteristics as a system of valuations and proportions. The names of the sub-divisions of money have in all ages been used to denote the relative proportions of the sub-division of other measures, as of weight, area, capacity, etc., and it is this practice which is responsible for much of that confusion on the subject of money that distinguishes economical literature. For example,^ s. d. were at one time used as proportions of the pound weight for weigh- ing bread; at another time as proportions of the acre for measuring land. In the former case j[^ represented a pound weight of bread, s. an ounce, etc.; in the latter ;^ meant one-and-a-half acres, and d. a rod of land. '' Sir Francis Palgrave, i, 93, says that many in- stances of this practice are to be found in charters of the sixth cent- ury. The mischief of it lies in the insinuation it conveys that because a "pound" weight can be the unit, integer, or standard of weight and a "pound" measure, (i^ acres) can be the unit of superficial area, so a "pound " sum of money can be the unit of money; which in the last case is physically impossible. The unit of money can never be one "pound," but must necessarily be all the "pounds" under the same legal jurisdiction joined together. In other words, the unit of money is and must necessarily be all money. " Taking the essential character of ^^ s. d. to be a system of valua- tion by moneys of account, as distinguished from a system of valua- ' Statute 51 Henry III., 1267; Fleetwood's " Chronicon Preciosum." ^ See chapter on this subject in the author's " Science of Money." CLUES DERIVED FROM THE ^ S. d. SYSTEM. 299 tion by coins, it must have possessed merits that rendered its adoption highly necessary and advantageous. We shall find that this was ac- tually the case. Previous to the adoption of ^^ s. d. there was com- monly but one denomination of money and — except in the peculiar monetary system of the early Roman Commonwealth — it usually re- lated to an actual coin. With the Romans this coin was successively the ace, denarius, sesterce, and aureus. Even when two of these kinds of coins circulated side by side, as the ace and the denarius, or the sesterce and aureus, sums of money were always couched in one de- nomination, never in both. We now say so many pounds and shillings and pence, perhaps combining some of each denomination in one sum, or we may say so many dollars and cents, or so many francs and centimes. Down to the aera of ^ s. d. the Romans in expressing sums of money only used one term. So long as only one or two or three kinds of coins were current at the same time, there v^-as no inconve- nience in this custom, but when coins came to be made of different sizes and weights and of several different metals — bronze, silver and gold — some of them of limited tender and highly overvalued, like the bronze coins of to-day, one term for money became inexact and incon- venient. This is one of the reasons that led to the adoption of ^ s. d. In the last quarter of the third century the Roman empire was di- vided between four Caesars, to whom was afterwards added he whom Sir Francis Palgrave has rather effusively termed " our own Carau- sius. " Even before this division took place the diversity of bronze and silver coins was so great as to produce confusion. With four em- perors almost daily adopting new designs for coins and several thou- sand unauthorized moneyers expelled from Mount C?elius and other places to ply their trade in every province of the Roman empire, the confusion became intolerable. Without some device by aid of which this maddening variety of types and weights could be readily harmon- ized and valued, it became impossible to carry on the operations of trade. Such a device was^^ s. d. The infinite diversity and number of local and imperial silver coins had long since broken down that fragment of the fiduciary system of money which was attempted to be revived by Augustus; it had effaced all the influence of mine-royalties; it had nullified all the ef- fects of mint-charges and seigniorage. The relative value of coins which Rome was formerly content to read in the edicts of her con- suls or emperors, she was now almost compelled to determine with a pair of scales. The imperial government could scarcely have observed this symptom of popular distrust without grave concern. In propor- 300 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. tion as such coins lost fiduciary value and rested upon that of their metallic contents, so did the empire lose importance to the provinces, and the proconsuls to the local chieftains. Furthermore, when money- ceased to derive any portion of its value from limitation of issue, or from sacerdotal and imperial authority, why might not the procon- suls feel at liberty to issue circulating money as well as the sovereign- pontiff; why not the under-lords as well as the proconsuls; why not foreigners as well as citizens; why not anybody or everybody? Besides this, it is to be remembered that the coins of Rome were designed to illustrate its mythology and history, and that they con- stituted its most precious and enduring monuments. Upon them were stamped the story of its miraculous origii:;, the images of its gods, demi-gods and heroes, the symbols of its religion, the spirit of its laws, and the dates of its most glorious achievements. All these now threat- ened to disappear in the melting-pot, the monuments had come to be regarded only as so much bullion, and every provincial governor or barbarian king would be tempted to reduce them to metal in order that upon recoining them, his own upstart image might shine in the glass that had once reflected a Romulus, a Caesar, or an Augustus. There was but one way to stop such a calamity and that way was mo- nopoly of the coinage and arbitrary valuation ; but this had to be done through some new device, for the old ones were worn out and would be seen through and rejected at once. * The efforts to save the old monuments would justify a slight discrimination of value at the out- set in favor of certain precious issues and this discrimination might be extended and enlarged as time went on. Rome had hitherto kept its most sacred numismatic monuments from the furnace by means of a Golden Myth, a fixed ratio, and the restriction of exports. Without disturbing either of these arrangements it was now proposed to sup- plement them with the device of jQ s. d. The diversity of coins and the hope of restoring some of their lost fiduciary value, furnish reasons for the adoption of a triad of mon- etary terms in the place of that single term in which the Romans had hitherto couched their valuations and contracts; but the same con- siderations do not explain why these denominations were essentially ideal ones, nor why they remain so still. The explanation is simple enough. It will be found in the physical impossibility of adding to- ' In a less superstitious age perhaps not even the device of ^^ i-. d. would have allayed the fear that the valuations would be changed, or have kept the coins from the melting pot. But to the Romans that law was a sacred one which forbade the melting down of old coins. Digest, i, c. de Auri pub. prosecut., Lib. 12, 13; Camden, Brit., p. 105. CLUES DERIVED FROM THE j[^ S. d. SYSTEM. 301 gether quantities of various materials and producing a quotient of one material. If jQ means a piece of gold, s. a piece of silver, and d. a piece of bronze, then as a matter of fact it is impossible to add them together and produce a sum which shall represent a quantity of any one of these metals. Hence these denominations are essentially ideal. However, as logic seldom stands in the way of practical legislation, we may be sure that it was not this difficulty which compelled the Ro- mans when they adopted ^ s. d. to make them ideal moneys or moneys of account that would logically add together; it was the practical diffi- culty of enforcing contracts payable in coins of a particular metal. Numbers of the mine-slaves had revolted or escaped to swell the armies of the Goths and other malcontents, the produce of the Roman mines had become irregular, the Oriental trade had absorbed vast quanti- ties of silver. "* A contract to pay sesterces meant so many silver coins and the name sesterce had been so long wedded to a silver coin that it was found easier to establish a new denominatiou than divorce ses- terce from silver. The same maybe said of the gold aureus. ;£s. d., being imaginary moneys, might be represented by either gold, silver or bronze coins at pleasure of the government, and as best suited the convenience of the times or the equity of payments. " It is scarcely necessary to turn fromthe public to the private influ- ences which urged the adoption of ^ s. d. upon the imperial and pontifical mind. A monetary system which by insensible degrees might be made to slip away from all metallic anchorage or limitation needed no further recommendation to a needy treasury. Yet it still had an- other one. The diversity of races that constituted the population of the empire and the nascent feudal system, both stood in the way of any uniform system of taxation ; while the distance between Rome and the capital of each province greatly multiplied frauds upon the treasury and threw too much power and profit in the hands of the provincial vicars or proconsuls and the greedy farmers of the revenues. The facility to regulate the value of various coins which the adoption of j£ s. d. promised to afford, placed in the hands of the sovereign-pontiff the means of levying a tax that neither be evaded nor intercepted. Thus many reasons and interests combined to recommend the sys- '" Pliny, Natural History, vi, 23, and xii, 18. " In 1604 the Privy Council of Ireland decided that;i^j-.^. were imaginary moneys and meant concretely whatever coins the sovereign from time to time might decree they should mean; they deduced this conclusion not only from the spirit of the Common law, but also from the principles of the Civil law, and there can be no doubt that such was its legal significance at the period of its original adoption in Rome. State Trials, 11, 114; Digest, XVIII, II. 302 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. tern of ^ s. d. It brought into harmony the diversity of coins and coin- ages ; it promised to restore some of the lost value of bronze and silver coins and to conserve or obliterate (at pleasure) the ancient and sacred types; it offered to remedy the difficulties produced by the irregular supplies of the mines and by the heavy exports of silver to India; it placed a future choice of other remedies in the hands of the emperor ; and finally it was competent, at a pinch, to solve the problem of sud- denly recouping an empty treasury. Under the system of jQs.d., any coin or piece of money could be legalized or decried at pleasure of the government, and any value could be put upon it that seemed expedient or desirable. All that was needed was a brief edict of the supreme sov- ereign and at once, with military precision, this or that piece of money took its allotted station among the jQ s.d., and there it served in the capacity and with the rank assigned to it by imperial master.*^ In the fourth century the d. was represented by a silver coin, and the s. by a gold coin, each containing about i8 (afterwards i6) grains of fine metal, and the ;£ by five large solidi, (afterwards calledbesants,) each containing 72 (afterwards 64) grains of fine gold. If we follow the adoption of jQ s. d. in the various provinces of Europe — for ex- ample, Gaul, Britain, Spain, orGermany — it will be found that it never preceded, whilst it invariably followed, the establishment of Roman Christianity. It therefore furnishes a valuable guide to the date of such establishment and to the restoration of Roman government. £ s. d. was adopted in Gaul by Clovis ; in a part of England it was established by Ethelbert; whilst in other parts it was rejected by the unconverted Gothic kings,his contemporaries. '^ So the Arian Goths of Spain, down '^ On different occasions the same coin has ranked as a penny, three-half-pence, two- pence, and even three-pence. A shilling was at one time represented by a gold coin, at another by a silver coin. Examples of this character often occur in the ordinances of the medieval kings of France, and there is reason to believe that the sovereign-pontiffs of Rome more than once altered the legal value of their silver and bronze issues. '^ The name of the sicilicus, which is evidently derived either from the fourth of the aureus, or else from the fifteen-grain gold pieces of Sicily, was applied to the Norse aurar, in the laws of Ethelbert (Sections 33-5). From the context it is evident that fifty scats are less in value than three shillings, hence that the purely silver scat of five to the gold shilling was not yet in use, and that the scats alluded to were the old rude ones of com- posite metal weighing 7^ grains and upwards, and of varying and uncertain metallic contents. The shilling of Ethelbert's laws is the earliest mention of that coin in England. There was as yet no Norse analogue either for the libra or the penny; in other words, there was no twelfth of the aurar, nor any twenty-aurar pieces, hence there was no further application of;^ s. d. at that time to Gothic coins. The Roman triad of "pounds, shil- lings, and pence " had yet to be fully established in England. Some of the gold sicilici of the heretical Roger II., of Sicily, bear the legend in Arabic, "One God: Mahomet is his prophet." On the other is the phallic sign. A specimen, somewhat worn, weighed by the writer, contained 15 grains gross. These shillings were evidently copied from older Sicilian coins of the same weight and type. CLUES DERIVED FROM THE j^ S. d. SYSTEM, 303 to theclose of Roderic's reign, refused both theRoman religion and the Roman system of money ; and the Saxons would none of either, until Charlemagne bent their stubborn necks to the yoke of the Roman gospel. Another valuable historical side-light is derived from jT^s. d. The arithmetical relations of these moneys of account were originally, but have not been always, 12 X 20=240. Sometimes they were 5 X 48 = 240, or 4X60 = 240, or even (exceptionally) 5x60 = 300. Whenever this is observed it affords a sure indication of grafting. The Gothic ratio be- tween the precious metals was 8, the Arabian ratio 6^, and theRoman ratio 12. Consequently when the Roman arithmetical relations of ^ s. d. were grafted on Gothic or Arabian or Gothico- Arabian monetary systems, they had to be modified to suit the local valuation of gold and silver. '* For example, in the eighth century, in Roman Christian Gaul, (ratio of 12,) it took 12 silver pence, each of 16 grains, to equalin legal value I gold sicilicus of similar weight, whilst in the Gothic parts of Britain where the Arabian ratio prevailed, (ratio of 6}^,) 5 silver pence, each of 20 grains, sufficed; so that if, as convenience dictated, the newly introduced ^ was still to consist of 240 pence, it would have to be valued at 48 shillings of account ; and this was accordingly done. ** Modifications in the weights of the silver penny and efforts to har- monize the two principal conflicting ratios, the Roman and the Arabian, will explain not only the remaining variations of ^ J-. d. above alluded to, but also many other obscure problems connected with the early monetary systems of England. We have seen how ;£ s. d. arose out of the circumstances of a decay- ing empire. We shall now see how it accommodated itself to those cir- cumstances, so as to promote the very disease it was in part designed to remedy. The empire was falling to pieces, splitting into many parts. First it had one Caesar, then two, three, four, or more. Even when it got rid of its Thirty Tyrants and reduced the number to six the diver- sity of coins and coinages was too bewildering for practical purposes. To harmonize and regulate these coins, as well as for other reasons, ^ s. d. was adopted. Yet, by accommodating itself to a diversity of moneys, this system prevented the evil from righting itself through the simple and efficacious means of recoinage. Dispensing with the necessity of uniformity, it encouraged heterogeneity by rendering it less intolerable; and thus facilitated that splitting up and subdivision '* The system of Offa, king of Mercia, was Gothico-Arabian, and, as is elsewhere shown, some of his coins had Arabian inscriptions upon them. >* System of Ethelbert, king of Kent, 725-60. 304 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED, of the coining authority which characterized the matured feudal sys- tem and lent it strength and support. Devised in part to unify moneys and centralize authority, it became no insignificant aid to decentral- ization and feudalism. On the other hand, but for its influence, the Roman coins, and with them the memories which they invoked and the sacred myths they perpetuated, would have been destroyed; and the modern world would have had to read the history of the past in the unmeaning bangs of Scandinavia, the saigas of Frakkland, or the composite scats of the Anglo-Saxon heptarchy. Returning to the historical clue afforded by the adoption of -Q s. d., the reader will scarcely fail to have been impressed with the extreme artificiality of this system. Hundreds of books have already been written upon it, and hundreds more will probably yet be written upon it, before its true character, mischievous bearing and incongruity with the modern age of progress, will be recognized and acted upon. Allusion is here made not merely to a system of three denominations, as jT^ s. d.^ nor to a mingled bidecimal and duodecimal notation, nor to its character as money of account, but to the mingling in this system of imperial with provincial and municipal or other coins, of seignioried with non-seignioried coins, of coins with various degrees of legal- tender, '°of coins of local with others of extensive legal-tender, of native with foreign coins made legal-tender, or redeemable with non-redeem- able coins, of governmental with private (bank) issues of various de- grees of legal-tender, and of non-interest-bearing with interest-bear- ing legal-tender issues. In these respects and others the principles of all the monetary systems of the present day originated in the Roman imperial system of £^ s. d. j and so far as they follow it, they interpose important obstacles to the practice of equity, the just diffusion of wealth, and the progress of civilization." The ;£ s. d. system was as much unfitted for the Gothic kingdoms, or fiefs, of the dark ages as it was suitable for the empire. In a former work it was shown that there existed a natural harmony or tendency toward harmony between systems of government and systems of money, just as there is between social phases and language. For ex- ample, if one of the sentences of Cicero or Tacitus were imputed to a savage orator, no matter how eloquent or renowned, the unfitness of the phraseology and its lack of harmony with the social phase of the '* "It is unlawful for either the money-changer or the merchant to refuse Caesar's coin; so that if one presents it, then whether he will or no, he must give up what is sold for it." Epictetus,about A.D.120. Dissertations, i,xxix. I commend this passage to those modern financial sciolists who contend that the ancients knew nothing of legal-tender, "Del Mar's "Science of Money," Chapter vi. CLUES DERIVED FROM THE j[^ S. d. SYSTEM. 305 speaker, would at once expose the blunder, or imposture. Similarly, if an £^s. d. system of money were attributed to a tribe of Zulus, the incongruity of the collocation would immediately stamp it as untrue. For not only are three denominations of money too artificial a means of valuation to fall within the mental compass of a barbarian tribe,one of them (thc;,^) was always an ideal money,and all of them were main- tained, and could only be maintained, by a mint code of extreme com- plexity and covering mining, minting, seigniorage, artificial ratio be- tween the precious metals, and a hundred other subjects concerning which neither Zulu nor Goth ever had a clear conception. For these various reasons the artificial system of^^.^. furnishes an unerring clue to historical researches during the dark ages. In a previous chapter similar clues were found in the Golden Myth and the sacred Ratio of Twelve; in the present one we shall follow the clue of the Three Denominations. The text of the Theodosian Code implies the use of £^ s. d. at Rome and in all the Christian provinces of the empire. The non-Christian provinces were those parts of Gaul and Britain which at the time of the promulgation of this Code were temporarily under the control of Anglo-Saxon, Frankish and other barbarian chieftains. The letter of Honorius and Theodosius II., A. D. 418, implies the use of ;£ s. d. at that date in southern and perhaps central Gaul. From 496 to 561, during the governments of the Roman patricians Clovis and Clothaire I., the £^ s. d. system was probably established throughout the whole of Gaul except Brittany, Burgundy and Provence. The Roman coins found buried with the body of Childeric, " and more especially the Ro- man offices and titles accepted by the Merovingian Frankish princes down to the sixth century, when image worship was insisted upon, or still worse, when the assassin Phocas was worshipped at Rome, im- ply the continuance of Roman government in Gaul until that period. After this time and until the reign of Pepin many of the provinces forgot their allegiance. " Over and over again the Franks had pro- fessed and evinced their willingness to live under Roman law and Ro- man government and they proved their sincerity and good faith in these professions by accepting Roman ecclesiastics as the adminis- trators of that law and the representatives of that government. So long as Rome inculcated the worship of a Heavenly deity the Franks '^ His tomb was opened in the seventeenth century. Morell, 67. '* The Merovingians struck gold under authority of the Basileun until the reign of Theodebert, who struck gold for himself. Yet even after this perjod many of the Mero- vingians coined under authority of the Basileus. 3o6 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. continued loyal to the empire, but when the Roman pontiff fell at the feet of Phocas and the detested religion of emperor- worship seemed about to be revived in the very fane of religion, they turned upon the empire. ^^ From Theodebert to Pepin the Short the Roman mon- etary system was interrupted in Gaul. Its place was partly filled with a Frankish system in which the relative value of gold and silver, no tonger kept in place by the Sacred myth of Rome, fell back to the old Druidical (and Etruscan) ratio, or else obeyed to a certain extent the influence of the Moslem mint-laws of Spain and southern Gaul; for it became i to lo instead of i to 8. The gold sou or solidus was val- ued in Merovingian laws at 40 silver deniers or denarii; the little sou, or sicilicus, was valued in the same laws at 10 silver deniers ; the sicili- cus and denier, containing the same weight of metal. The first fact is from the texts of the period, the last from the coins themselves. The establishment of this system was the mark of Frankish indepen- dence from the empire. It lasted about a century and a half; after that Gaul again became a Roman province. " In short, the monetary system of jQ s. d. was established wherever Roman government prevailed, in Italy, Greece, Asia Minor, Armenia, Egypt, Carthage, Spain, Gaul, Britain and Germany. After it was es- tablished in Rome it was not established by any state or people not subject to Rome, never by the pagan iVngles, Jutes, Saxons, Franks, Sclavs or Huns, and never by the Moslems, whether in Arabia, Egypt, Africa, Spain, France or Persia. After the dry bones of the Sacred empire fell into the hands of the Turks in the fifteenth century, the latter, in order to accommodate their nummulary language so far as practicable to the customs of the conquered Greek provinces, em- ployed the ^ and the d. to mean, not indeed what they formerly meant, but something that it suggested, and this practice afterwards found its way into other provinces of Turkey; but it had no essential connection with the jQ s. d. system and employed only two denomi- nations instead of the characteristic three. Although it is probable that the libra of money, (not the £^ s. d. sys- tem,) continued to be used in the Roman cities of Britain from the Roman period down to the time when these cities fell into the hands of the Anglo-Saxons, we have no certain evidence of the fact. The earliest implication of the ^ s. d. system in any document now ex- 20 Charlemagne, at the council of Frankfort, 794, denounced the worship of the im- perial images. 21 The earliest rehabilitation of the Roman system appears in the capitulary of Pepin and Carloman, A. D. 743, wherein the sol is valued at I2 deniers. Guizot, III, 27. CLUES DERIVED FROM THE jQ S. d. SYSTEM. 307 tant, occurs in the barbarian laws of Ethelbert A.D. 561-616, (§§ 33-5,) where certain fines are levied in shillings. No ' ' libras " are mentioned, nor no denarii, for twelfths of the Norse aurar; " hence no entire adoption of the system can be positively inferred. The shilling of Ethelbert was probaby either a Latin name for a coin identical in weight with the Norse aurar or an anachronism inserted by copyists at a later date. ^' In neither case would this text afford any certain in- dication when the ^ s. d. system was re-introduced into Britain, and there is no other evidence that can be relied upon of an earlier date than the reign of Ina, which was toward the end of the seventh century. Measured by the clue of ;Q s. d. the Anglo-Saxon chieftains in- terrupted the continuity of Roman government in some parts of Brit- ain during an interval of more than two centuries, that is to say, from a date somewhat later than the edict of Arcadius and Honorius, to the reign of Ina. In other parts there was scarcely any interval at all, for many of the Roman cities of Britain held out long after the le- gions departed and even then they capitulated on terms which in- volved, if they did not expressly admit, the imperial supremacy of Rome, So far as it goes, the clue of ;Q s. d. harmonizes with the Myth of Gold and the Sacred ratio, and they all corroborate those other evidences which proclaim that, except during a comparatively brief interval, which was probably no greater in Britain than in Gaul, the former remained a province of the empire from the reign of Claudius down to a much later period than is commonly supposed. 24 ^* See Roman coins of Canterbury mentioned in my "Ancient Britain," Chapter xiv. ^^ Bishop Fleetwood, Chronicon Preciosum, pp. 52-4, gives examples from Bromp- ton's translations of the laws of Ethelstan and Ina, in which the terminology and valua- tions of money were changed to suit the circumstances of the translator's times. Guerard and De Vienne give examples of similar alterations in the ancient texts of the Frankish, Lombardian, Frisian, and Burgundian codes of law, ** Mr. Freeman deems it probable that at the end of the sixth century there were still Roman towns in Britain, tributary to the English chieftains, rather than occupied by them. Sir Francis Palgrave i, vi, extends the Roman occupation of some British cities down to the seventh century. Du Bos, Savigny, and Gibbon concur in a similar belief with regard to some of the cities of Gaul. 3o8 CHAPTER XVII. VASSALIAN POSITION OF THE ANGLO-NORMANS. Marks of sovereignty wanting in the coinages of the Anglo-Norman kings — No national gold or bronze coins — No national coinage laws — The circulation filled with Roman gold and bronze coins at Roman valuations under Roman laws — The silver sterlings which are now paraded as the sole monuments of the period really filled but a small part of the circulation — Failure of attempts to prove that the European king- doms were independent sovereignties. THE false chronicles of the Middle Ages lead us to believe that the states of Europe during this period were independent sov- ereignties, but the moment we refer to the monuments we find that this is not true; that they were not independent, but dependent, they were not sovereignties, but vassals to the Roman, or as we wrongfully term it, the Byzantine empire. The most numerous and reliable of these monuments are the coins and the coinage systems. Both of these evi- dences are to the same effect: down to the Fall of Constantinople the so-called kingdoms of Europe were vassal states and so they acknowl- edged themselves to be, both in what they did and in what they ab- stained from doing. Let us take England for example, and for the sake of brevity, limit our researches to the period from the accession of William I., to the Fall of Constantinople. Had England been an independent state during this interval her coinages would have included gold, silver, and copper, or other base metal, struck in England or for account of the Crown, adorned with national devices and valued by denomination in the English law. To these coins might have been added a few French or other foreign pieces admitted into the circulation from motives of policy or cour- tesy but valued in the English law in English denominations. On the contrary, England coined neither gold nor bronze metal. Her mone- tary system was of a totally different character. It consisted of impe- rial Roman, or Byzantine, gold and bronze coins, together with Norse, ' ' Anglo-Saxon " and Norman silver pieces. Nor had she any coinage laws but such as were promulgated in Constantinople or Rome, nor any national devices upon her scanty issues of silver coins. When VASSALIAN POSITION OF THE ANGLO NORMANS. 309 this system has been briefly described it will be shown that imme- diately after the Fall of Constantinople all these missing marks of sovereignty were supplied: gold and base metal coins of native mint- age bearing national devices, valued in the national law and issued by virtue of national mint statutes and indentures. The authority for the statements we are about to make are the Domesday Book, the Liber Niger, the Rolls of the Exchequer or Accounts of the Treasury, as collated by Madox, and the coins them- selves. There can be no higher authority. During the Norman dynasty the coins which circulated in England and which were received into and paid out of the exchequer consisted chiefly of five classes. I. — Christian Gold. The gold besants issued by the Basileus at Con- stantinople contained about 65 English grains fine and were valued at 40 sterlings, this being at the imperial ratio of 1 2 silver for i gold. ' The besant was a thin and slightly ' 'dished" gold coin, (scyphus,) with the image of Jesus Christ on one side and the effigy and name of the Basileus on the other. It was the direct descendant of the sacred au- reus of Augustus and the sacred solidus of his successors, the pagan sovereign-pontiffs or emperors of Rome. The largest transactions were effected with these coins. There are extant a few gold coins of this period which have been assigned to the mints of English Christian prelates, but there is no evidence to sustain this opinion. There can be little doubt that the pieces are heretical. The Anglo-Norman kings coined no gold. The coinage of gold ceased when Christianity was introduced, and practically the last gold coins struck in England pre- vious to the reign of Henry III., were the dinars of Offa before he finally submitted to the yoke of the gospel. II. — Heretical Gold. The Moslem dinar, 60 to 66 grains fine, and the zecchin, 50 to 55 grains fine, were in circulation under the re- spective names of besant and mancus. Five of the zecchins went to the mark which was valued at 160 sterlings each of 18 to 20 grains of ' At the same time the ratio in the Gothic or Scandinavian coinages was 8 for i and in the Moslem coinages 6)4 for i; so that a 12 for i ratio was a sure mark of Roman coinage and valuation. See entry in the exchequer-rolls, 17th John, 1215, where cer- tain besants (of Constantinople) were valued each at 35-. 6d. silver. Madox, 11, 261. Making allowance for difference of standard between the gold and silver coins and for the probably abraded condition of the former, this evidently means a ratio of 12 for i. At the same time the ratio for bullion was 9 or 10 for i. We are not here alluding to the compromise ratios in the coinages of the Gothic kings of the Heptarchy, shown in our History of Monetary Systems, but to the actual ratios for bullion in 5 Stephen, 2 and 16 Henry II., and 15 John. Madox, I, 277; li, 261W. 310 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. fine silver; a ratio of 9 or 10 for i. In other words, heretical gold was valued lower than sacred gold, or gold of the Byzantine stamp. Such an exceptional valuation could not have been maintained had there been any lawful means to coin gold in England. There was also in circulation a Moslem gold half-mithcal which was valued at a pro- portionate rate in silver sterlings. Finally, there was a Gothic or Norse ora which is valued in Domesday Book at 20 sterlings, (or one- eighth of the mark,) and which, at 10 for i, (the silver value of heretical gold,) must have contained about 38 grains fine. All of these heretical coins, especially the mancus and zecchin, or sequin, were in common circulation and, except the ora, they are frequently mentioned in the texts of the period, or else included in their multiple, the mark.^ III. — Christian Silver, The silver penny, or sterling, was the coin employed in the smaller transactions of the period ; yet although such coins were struck by the Anglo-Norman kings and are now almost the only coins of the period which are to be found in numismatic cabinets, it must not be supposed that they formed an important part of the cir- culation or that there were no other coins which went by the same name; for the contrary is the fact. The Roman silver denarii, struck by the sovereign-pontiff of Rome and stamped PERMJSSV DIVI AVGVSTI,and afterwards with the names and devices of the Byzan- tine emperors, circulated as pennies; so also did the half-dirhems of the heretical Moslems; indeed coins were so scarce that in all prob- ability any silver coin, containing 18 to 20 grains fine, went for a penny or more. The Anglo-Norman pennies contained about 20 grains of silver 0.925 fine, equal to about 18^ grains fine. There is reason to believe that they sometimes went for i J^, 2, and even 3 pence each. (History Monetary Systems, ch. viii.) IV. — Heretical Silver. Beside the Moslem half-dirhems, there also circulated in England the Gothic or "Anglo-Saxon " silver scats, of which four went to the Anglo-Saxon shilling of account while sixty shillings went to the pound of account. There were therefore two moneys of account employed during the reign of at least the earlier Anglo-Norman kings, namely, the Roman 12X20=240 pence, and the Gothic 4 X 60=240 pence to the ' ' pound " of account. However, they were employed in different classes of payments. '^ The origin of the markjwas an object of search to the learned for many years. The word mark is derived from Mercury, mere, market, etc. Both the term and the thing for which it stood were Gothic. The Gothic mark weight was two-thirds of a Roman pound weight; the mark of money was and is still two-thirds of a "pound " of account in money. History Monetary Systems. VASSALIAN POSITION OF THE ANGLO — NORMANS. 31 1 V. — Roman bronze coins of varied sizes, types and designs also cir- culated among the common people and, according to Sir John Lub- bock, they continued in circulation down to the present century. We are assured by other writers that such was also the case in the other states of Europe; the bronze coins of the " Byzantine " empire were the only base metal coins in circulation down to and often long after the Fall of Constantinople. Beside these principal coins the circulation was eked out with the silver coins of France, Venice and other states, all of which being re- ceivable for public dues under the Roman law at the weight-ratio of 12 for I of gold, were rated probably at first by the Roman and af- terwards by the local authorities at or about this valuation. But at best the circulation was a scant one, a fact due less to the scarcity of metal, as Mr. Jacob and Sir Archibald Alison have im- magined, than to the retention of the prerogative of coinage in the hands of the Basileus. There was plenty of gold and silver in the mines of England and there is yet; but at that time without the *'per- missu divi Augusti" it could not be coined, and at the present time without paying discouraging royalties it cannot be mined. Sir Matthew Hale, in his " Sheriff's Accounts," proves that during the Norman aera farms were let variously upon a money rent (numero) or a bullion rent (blanc) but, that in both cases, the actual payments were made in kind. Even the payments into the exchequer, which Madox would lead us to infer were always made in silver, either ad scalam, ad pensum, or by " combustion," were often made with goats and pigs. Lord Liverpool's researches led him to the same conclu- sion. He says, chapter x, that in the reigns of William I. , and William II. , and during a great part of the reign of Henry I. , the king's rents arising from his demesnes (which formed at that time an important part of the royal revenue), though stipulated in money, were really answered in corn, cattle, and other provisions; because money was then scarce among the people. ' Such rents continued to be paid in kind, down to a still later period; as we are assured by the writer of the Black Book, or Liber Niger Scaccarii, who avers that he had con- versed with men who saw the rents brought in kind to the king's court. The sterlings of Henry I., are of about the same weight as those of William I., but not quite so fine. These were followed by emissions from the king's mints of debased pieces, which it was afterwards pre- ^ However, they were commuted for money by Henry I. This was probably after his various coinages of silver pennies had rendered money sufficiently plentiful. Ander- son's History of Commerce, i, 248-55. 312 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. tended were counterfeits. Upon instructions, no doubt from the Ro- man pontificate, a recoinage was ordered in 1108; and the severest sentences were threatened to false coiners. In 11 23, to lend effect to these threats, the power of Rome was invoked in aid of the crown; and the penalties of the sacred law were added to those of the tem- poral. The indifference that was manifested toward these solemn in- junctions leads to the suspicion that much of the base coining was done under either royal or ecclesiastical authority and by people who knew too much about the crimen majestatis to stand in fear of im- peachment. * In 1 1 25 the current silver coins had become so corrupt that a large proportion of them would not even pass from hand to hand; and ninety-four accused persons, among them several privileged mon- eyers, underwent mutilation for false coining. Some writers have credited Henry I. with " abolishing the oppressive tax of moneyage;" but the fact is, that he had no right even to levy such a tax; and its abolition should be credited, not to Henry, the knung,but to his mas- ter, the pope. The only extant coins of Stephen are the sterling pennies of the regular Anglo-Norman weight and fineness. There were also debased coins, struck in Stephen's name; but these cannot be traced to the royal mints. Other debased coins (always of silver) were struck by Stephen's illegitimate brother, Henry, bishop of Winchester; by his illegitimate cousin Robert, earl of Gloucester; by his two sons, Eu- stace and William; as well as by Roger, earl of Warwick, and numer- ous other prelates and nobles. In 1139 the sum of forty thousand marks, probably in debased silver pennies, was captured in the castle of the Devizes, from Roger, bishop of Salisbury. In 1 181 silver coins, nominally valued at eleven thousand pounds, and gold coins, prob- ably Byzantine, amounting, in value, to three hundred pounds, were found in the treasury of Roger, bishop of York. ^ Such are the monetary monuments, and such were the monetary systems of the Anglo-Norman kings. That attempts were made to harmonize the diverse materials of which they were composed — Ro- man, early Gothic, Moslem, Anglo-Saxon, Carlovingian, and Byzantine — is proved by the intervaluations of Domesday Book and the gradual suppression and disappearance of some of these materials, chiefly the early Gothic and the Moslem ; but it is equally evident that the attempt * In 1362 the abbot of Missenden was convicted of coining and clipping groats and sterlings; in 1369 the canon of Dunmore was accused of counterfeiting gold and silver coins; and in 1371, the canon of St. Gilbert de Sempingham was charged with secretly conveying coins abroad, contrary to law. Ruding, ll, 199-208. * Dr. Henry, History of Britain, III, 311. VASSALIAN POSITION OF THE ANGLO — NORMANS. 313 was only partially successful ; and that there yet remained, as, for ex- ample, in the mark and pound, an incongruous medley of pagan and christian denominations ; and in the divided authority to coin — for ex- ample, to the Basileus,gold, and to the kings, nobles, and prelates, silver (upon conditions) — another medley which faithfully reflected the gen- eral confusion of a period from whosehistory all attempts to deduce an independent national existence for either France, England, Germany, or Spain, have been unsuccessful and misleading. When England became an independent state, she left no room for doubt as to her proper status among nations; but to contend that she was one during the reign of the Norman kings, almost amounts to a slur upon the courage and patriotism of her always brave inhabitants. It was not the military power of the Normans that conquered England, or kept it in awe, during the medieval period; but the swords,spiritual and temporal, of the deathless Roman empire. 314 CHAPTER XVIII. EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. Purity of the English coinages before the Fall of Constantinople — Corrupt state afterwards — The change due to the destruction of the Sacerdotal Authority, the dis- appearance of the besant, and the assumption of certain regalian rights by the kings of England — So long as contracts could be made in gold besants, there was no profit in tampering with the silver coinage — Afterwards, such tampering became one of the commonest resources of royal finance — Coinage systems of Henry II. — Richard I. — John — Henry III. — Edward I. THE evidences which will now be brought together to support the argument of this work, namely, that England before the Planta- genet dynasty was a Fief of the Empire, again relate to those earliest, most widely diffused, and most trustworthy of printed documents, the coins of the realm. These evidences may be conveniently formulated as follows: That previous to the Fall of Constantinople there were but few tamperings with the coinage; afterwards such tamperings became ex- ceedingly numerous ; a proof that some event had occurred meanwhile to render their repetition practicable and profitable,such event having been in fact the acquisition by the king,of the coinage rights which the Basileus had lost. That previous to the Fall of Constantinople no king of England had ventured to strike a gold coin, whereas soon after that event and following the example of other princes of the West, a gold coin was struck by Henrylll. ; and that although this coin was recalled and melted down, it was followed by another one struck by Edward III. The issuance of this last-named coin, the gold noble, or half-mark, is regarded as the definite declaration of England's independence. Reference to the numismatic portions of this work must convince the reader that from William I., to Henry II., an interval of nearly a century, the coins issued by the kings of England were substantially free from degradation or debasement. In other words, the Norman kings did not tamper with the coinage. The coins were all of one class, namely silver pennies,sometimes also half-pennies,but usually pennies only. Although these did not constitute the only money in circulation, they were the only money issued by the king. The gold coins of Con- EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. 315 stantinople constituted the backbone of the circulation and kept the rest of it straight. So long as contracts could lawfully be made in these coins, the kingof England could make no profit by tampering with the silver pennies; accordingly, he struck the latter, as nearly as he could, to contain exactly the same quantity of fine metal as the gold shilling, or quarter-besant, of the Empire. As previously shown, the besant con- tained about 73, afterwards 65, grains fine. The gold shilling therefore contained 18^, afterwards 16^, grains fine; and this was exactly the contents of silver in the two classes of silver pennies of the Heptarchy and of the Norman kings; twelve of the lighter of such pennies being valued at a shilling and forty-eight at a besant. ' With the reign of Henry II.,(Plantagenet) commenced those tam- perings with money which announced the advent of sovereign power in England and presaged the extinction of Imperial control. Plantagenet inherited from his mother the states of Normandy and Maine; from his father Touraine and Anjou ; while from his wife, Eleanor, who had been divorced from Louis VII., he received Poitou, Saintonge, Angu- mois, and Aquitaine; in a word, he became possessed of the entire western half of France, from the Channel to the Pyrenees. After add- ing these domains to the crown of England, he acquired Northumbria by treaty with the king of Scotland, and Ireland (1154) by a grant from pope Hadrian IV. The productions and trade of these extensive do- mains, together with his share of that additional trade and wealth, which, in common with other Christian princes, the king of England derived from the suppression and spoliation of the Spanish-Arabian empire, are indicated to some extent by the vastly increased revenues of crown and mitre, the splendour of the court, and the number and wealth of the churches. To this period belongs some of the finest specimens of ecclesiastical architecture in England. Yet the monetary monuments are still those of a vassal and feudal state. An important part of the coinage was struck, valued, and made part of the circulation, by one foreign prince, (theBasileus,) v/hilst an important part of the revenues were collected and enjoyed by another (the Pope). The in- flux of besants,the efflux of Peter's-pence,the defiant issues of baronial and ecclesiastical mints, which included leather and tin coins, all be- tray the impotency of the king to preserve the National Measure of value from degradation and derangement. Of old sterlings there were probably few or none in circulation when Henry II. came to the throne, but of the base and adulterated coins, issued by the baronial robbers ' The heavier pennies went at 40 to the besant. The Roman copper coins of the medieval period have been alludedto else where. Pagan Gothic copper coins were struck. 3l6 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. and ecclesiastical forgers, who flourished during the weak reign of Stephen, there were many. Among Henry's early cares was the sup- pression of these moneys and the issuance in their place of a new coin- age, about the year 1156. This coinage, in violation of the king's com- mands, was made below the standard; a fault for which he severely punished the moneyers. About the year 1180'' Henry II. sent to Tours for Philip Aymary, a French moneyer, and committed to his charge the striking of a new stamp of sterlings. After these were issued, the previous sterlings were retired. In executing this work Aymary was himself charged with fraud and dismissed to his own country; yet the appearance of the coins supposed to have been minted under his superintendence, great numbers of which are extant, afford no support to this accusation. The pieces are indeed badly executed, and may thus have formed a ready temptation to rounders and clippers. The weights, though not on the average deficient,are irregular. Perhaps it was on these accounts that the foreign artist was so summarily treated. The rates of exchange established by the mint between the new ster- lings and the old ones — whether the base ones of 11 56 or the rounded and clipped ones, is uncertain — prove that the latter were inferior in value to the former by about 10 per cent ; at all events, this rate prob- ably marks the degree to which clipping extended at this period. For y^375 ^3-9 of old clipped money, the mint paid ;!^343:i5 :6 of new; for ^iooold,;;^89:6:8 new; again, for ;^i 00 old, ^83:6:8 new; and so on.* This nova moneta is known to numismatists as short-cross-pennies, and these became so popular that they continued to be struck in the name of "Henri" until the middle of the reign of Henry III., 1247, al- though the reigns of Richard I. and John Lackland intervened. This, however, does not necessarily imply that Richard or John struck such coins. The extant coins of Henry belong solely to the last issue. A hoard of these coins was found at Roylston in 1721. Other pieces, to the number of 5700, were found at Tealby in Lincolnshire in 1807. They were as fresh as when they left the mint. According to Keary, the fineness is o.925,and the contents,in fine silver, of the most perfect specimens, 18^ grains. Dr. Ruding's valuable but antiquated work gives what seems to be a wholly different account. He says that 5127 of them weighed 19 lbs. 6 oz. 5 dwts. This is an average of 22 grains each, or (assuming the fineness as equal to sterling) 20^ grains fine; but as he says nothing of the remaining 573 pieces found at Tealby, ''The Norman Chronicle states that the new sterling money was struck in 1175. Madox, I, 278. ^ Madox, i, 278. EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. :• 1 7 it may be that the average of the whole corresponded with Keary's assays. With regard to tin money of the nobles, mention of albata, or white money (argentum blancum), occurs in the exchequer-rolls pertaining to the fourth year of this reign, where it is expressly distinguished from silver money (argenti). In the fifteenth year, Walter Hose paid one shilling in the pound for the "bianco firmse " of Treatham. In the seventeenth year, twenty shillings were paid in " argento bianco ; " in the twenty-third year, Walter de Grimesby forfeited a lot of the same metal ; in the twenty-sixth year, the sheriffs of London and Mid- dlesex paid in, from the effects of a coin-clipper, ;£g:S'-A in silver pennies and five marks in "white money." In order to determine the meaning of "white money " it is to be remarked that the term "ar- gento bianco examinato " was used when silver bullion was meant. For example, in the thirtieth year of Henry II., the sheriff of Devon- shire paid 2>s. gd. in bullion (argento bianco examinato) made up of divers old coins, and in the thirty-third year the same sheriff paid twenty-six pennies in bullion (argento bianco examinato) made up of numerous coins dug from the earth. Sir Charles Fremantle was of opinion that the trial of the pix, mentioned in the Landsdowne ms. , re- lated to this reign, " In this opinion the author finds himself unable to concur, but believes that it relates to the reign of Edward I. Turning from the monetary system of Henry to that of his succes- sor, we find it marked by the same characteristics, a full legal-tender gold coinage issued by the Basileus and constituting the basis of the system; a silver coinage (pennies) issued by the king, as nearly as practicable of even weight with, and exactly one-twelfth the value of, the Byzantine sicilicus ; and a base coinage of local circulation issued by the nobles and ecclesiastics: the gold coinage being never, the sil- ver coinage rarely, and the base coinage frequently, altered. Although there are no native coins of Richard I. , the evidences that he exercised the usual coinage rights of provincial kings, are so nu- merous as to leave little room to doubt the fact. In 11S9, upon his accession to the throne Richard weighed out more than 100,000 marks from his father's treasury at Salisbury; in an ordinance of the same year, moneyers at Winchester are mentioned; in the same year he granted a local coinage license to the bishop of Lichfield; in 1 190, while at Messina on a crusading expedition, he found it necessary to command and exhort his followers to accept his money, a tolerably sure indi- cation of coinage; and in 1191 Henry de Cornhill was charged in the ^British Mint Report, 1871, p. 12. 3l8 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. exchequer accounts with ;^i2oo for supplying the cambium or mints of England, (except Winchester,) and with ^400, the profits of the cambium for a year. The names of Richard's moneyers in his mints at Warwick, Rochester and Carlisle, appear in several texts relating to his reign. Coins which were struck in Poitou under his authority are still extant. Finally, as will presently appear evident, he granted and revoked licenses to nobles and ecclesiastics, to strike tin and other base coins. All these prerogatives were such as were now being exercised by provincial kings; but Richard struck no gold, and made no attempt either to interdict the circulation of the imperial coins or to alter the sacred valuation between gold and silver, which was laid down in the constitution of the Roman Empire. With regard to the Ransom, the inference of new coinage is totally wanting. In 1192 Richard was taken prisoner on the continent and handed over to Henry VI., of Germany. In 1194 Richard was ran- somed for about the same amount of money that he is said to have inherited from his father. This ransom was collected in England and from the possessions of the English crown in France. From the par- ticulars of its collection, to be found in the pages of Madox, it ap- pears to have been contributed in coins. Caxton says that plate "was molten and made into money." Stowe makes a similar statement, al- together ten ancient texts agree in stating that the Ransom was paid in money and that the same was answered in "marks weight of Co- logne; " which was natural enough, that being the standard of weight with which the western emperor was most familiar. Notwithstanding this testimony, it may be safely conjectured that there was no new coinage ; for such an operation would have been needless, tedious and expensive. The old coin and bullion was probably melted down, re- fined, cast into bars, assayed, weighed and delivered to the emperor's nuncio, a supposition that precisely agrees with Polydore Vergil's ac- count of the affair. In this same year, 1 194, according to Trivet and Brompton,the king decried divers coins of the nobles and ecclesiastics, which remained in circulation, and ordained one kind of money to be current through- out his realm. ^ Among these various coins were those of tin. Cam- den would have us believe that the coinage of tin was a term used to denote merely the payment of that forty shillings per one thousand ^ In this same year, I194, occurs what has been regarded as the earliest mention in extant texts of the mark, valued at 13^-. 4af. Fleetwood, 30, from M. Paris; but as shown in a previous chapter, the mark of 13J. 4a'. is three or four centuries earlier. The mark of 1 1 94 was composed of five gold maravedis ; and 1 3 j. i\d. was its value in silver at the Christian ratio of I2 silver for i gold. EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. 319 pounds weight, which was the heirloom of the dukes of Cornwall ; but this can only relate to a subsequent period, for there were no dukes of Cornwall in the reign of Richard I. In 1 196 Henry de Casteillun, chamberlain of London, accounted to the king for ;^379:i :6 received for fines and tenths on imported tin and other mercatures, also for 16^-. lod. the chattels of certain clippers. ® In the same year 39^'. id. were allowed to Odo le Petit, in his account for the profit of the king's mint, for erecting therein a hutch and forge (fabrica) and utensils for making "albata silver," or albata money (dealbandum argentum), also 44^-. for a furnace and other devices for working the same. These coins, though struck in the royal mint, were not of royal issue, and could have had only a local and limited course within the domains of the noble for whom they were made. In the same year the sheriff of Worcestershire ac- counted for ^40:13:6 albata, or album money, the balance of hisferm of the county. Of this sum he had paid ;^i2, in album money, to the archbishop of Canterbury, and owed ;^28: 13:6 in album money to the exchequer, besides enough more to make up the difference between ;£i2 silver money and the like sum album money paid to the afore- said archbishop. In explaining the use of the term blanc, Madox con- fuses blanc silver and blanc money. The former was silver bullion, the latter a white money, sometimes called album, made wholly, or for the most part, of tin. The meaning of album money is clearly in- dicated in several of the exchequer-rolls which he himself cites. '' In the same year (1196) the king granted a coinage license to the bishop of Durham. In 1198 William de Wroteham accounted at the exchequer for the yearly ferm and profits of the mines of Devonshire and Cornwall, partly in money and partly in tin bullion. This bullion appears to have been sold for tin marks ; for in the 1 3th and 1 4th John, who succeeded Richard I. , this same William de Wroteham accounted to the king both for his ferm and for the marks obtained from the tin (de marcis provenientibusde stanno). It maybe safely inferred that in all cases these base coinages were issued by the nobles or eccle- siastics and were of limited course. ** The albata money of Richard's time was either a composition of tin and silver, a good deal of tin and very little silver, or else merely tin coins blanched with silver. The clippers, whose chattels were confiscated to the exchequer by * Madox, I, 775. ' Madox, i, 280. ^ The writers who allude to these corrupt coinages are Tindal, Notes to Rapin, i, 258; Leake, Historical Account of English Money, 58; Nicholson, Eng. History, i, 254; and the modern writers on tin and base coins. 320 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. Henry de Casteillnn, must have practiced their art upon the royal coins; for there could have been but small profit from exercising it upon those of the nobles. Although immediately after the payment of his ransom, Richard decried all other coins but his own, his edict became a dead letter; indeed he was probably glad enough to see the base coins remain in circulation. The population of England and Plantagenet France, dur- ing the reign of Richard I., was probably not over four or five mill- ions, and the total money, not over as many shillings, or say ^^250,000. Richard's ransom therefore stripped the kingdom of probably one- third or one-fourth of its Measure of Value; and but for the album money of his nobles, this circumstance might have brought on far greater calamities than the release of the king was expected to avert. The main defect of the tin coins was not the low cost of the ma- terial of which they were composed. The gold and silver obtained from the spoliation of the Moslems and the Jews were cheaper than tin, for they cost nothing to produce beyond the labour of cutting so many pagan aud infidel throats; whilst tin ore had to be discovered, excavated, and reduced to metal. But there was no world-wide de- mand and no world's Stock-on-Hand to enhance and steady the value of tin ; whilst as to gold and silver, there was ; and this is chiefly what has always rendered these metals preferable for coins. Tin coins were also easily counterfeited, the material was exposed to rapid oxi- dation, and the condition of society and government was wholly un- fitted for the use of coins of any material, which could not conve- niently and without substantial loss, be buried in the earth for use in future and safer times. There are no English coins extant of John. It is stated that this kinp- sent for certain Easterling artists to refine his silver coins. ' These may have been the coins he struck in Ireland, as Lord Para- mount of that country, specimens of which still remain. On the other hand, they may have been English sterlings, of which no specimens with his stamp have yet been found. '" John lost the most of his French possessions to Philip II., and thus almost at the outset of his career, gained the name of Lackland. His return to England was marked by the imposition of fines and aids, which, because they extended to the monasteries, earnt for him the curses of the archbishop of York and ® Anderson's History of Commerce, i, 199. '" The Encyc. Brit., art. " Coin," states that since Richard I., all coining has been confined to the Tower of London and the provincial mint of Winchester. This is a double error. Sir Matthew Hale's account of this matter is the correct one. EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. 321 a defamation of character which extends to the present time. This being probably in some measures unjust, should enjoin caution in weighing the events of his reign. " Camden ascribes to this period the leather money attributed to John; but though belonging to his reign, it may have been issued by his vassals. At all events, it wholly failed to secure public appreciation. In 1205 John publicly decried all coins which were clipped more than an eighth, severely denounced and threatened all clippers, especially the Jews, whom he affected to believe were the chief offenders, forbade the reblanching of old pen- nies, which could have been none other than the tin coins of his no- bles, and fixed the rate for exchanging "fine and pure silver at the king's exchanges of England and at the archbishop's exchange of Can- terbury, at sixpence in the pound." This could not have meant the exchange of new coins for old ones by tale, because the latter were much worn and clipped. It probably meant the exchange of new coins, weight for weight, for old ones. More important, however, than the king's coins, were those of the Basileus. The form used in England for expressing large sums of money proves the still common use of gold besants and Byzantine gold shil- lings. For example, in the previous reign, where ^^loo of old coins are bought for ;;^83 -.S-.S of new, the sum is thus written in the Great Roll of the exchequer : ' ' quartor XX / & LX Vj j- & Vii j d, " meaning four score libras, sixty-six solidi, and eight denarii. The former evidently meant actual besants and quarter-besants or little solidi. In the Magna Charta of this reign. Art. 2, where "centum solidus" is mentioned as the price of a knight's relief (a sort of succession duty) it is usually translated as "one hundred shillings. " Were these shillings merely moneys of ac- count, as is commonly held, it would be difficult to explain why they were not expressed in " libras," or pounds of account, like the sums which precede them in the same text. They were evidently actual quarter-besants, or shillings, and therefore belonged to the gold issues of the Basileus. The vassalian coinage of tin, which characterized the preceding reigns of Plantagenets, appears to have been also permitted by John; for in the thirteenth year of his reign (12 11), William de Wroteham paid into the exchequer ^543:5:0, and in the following year (12 1 2) ;^668:i2:9, for the money which he was permitted to strike from the tin of Cornwall and Devon. "^ The meaning here given to this record finds corroboration in the allowance of one-eighth for clipped coins, contained in the decree of 1 205, .which would have been " Anderson's History of Commerce, i, 193. '* Provenientibus de Stanno Cornubiae et Devoniffi. Madox, 11, 132. 32 2 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. excessive and impracticable in relation to sterling silver, but which, when applied to tin or albata coins, was reasonable. Two years after John had taken that humiliating oath of vassalage to the Pope which is mentioned in another place, he revolted from his servitude and, in the Great Charter, which he sealed at Runnymede, June 15, i2i5,he assumed powers which only belong to an independent monarch. With the fickleness that marked his entire career, he aban- doned and violated this charter in the following August; and in Sep- tember it was formally annulled by his master, the Pope. Soon after this, John was poisoned to death. He was a weak prince, but brief though his reign and irresolute his purpose, he earned the glory of exe- cuting an Instrument which has served as the model of every Bill of Rights won by the people, from that day to the present. Though dis- claimed by John and denounced by the Pope, Magna Charta was not dead, but lived on ; and both in its inception and repeated confirma- tion, it marks the slow and toilsome steps by which the people have won, from hierarch,king,and noble, their present inestimable liberties. The only silver coins of the reign of Henry III., now extant are the sterlings struck in 1248, originally of the usual weight and fineness, but for the most part much worn, rounded, and clipped. In addition to these issues, certain base coins were in circulation which are reputed to have been of foreign fabrication, but which are most likely to have been struck by or for English nobles and ecclesiastics. Some of these were probably coined in the abbey of St. Albans. When complaint was made of them, the transgressors were permitted to avail themselves of a tech- nical defense, and so escaped punishment.'^ Heme states that he had one of these base coins in his possession and describes its composition.'^ The presence of tin money, also struckby the nobles and ecclesiastics, is evinced by several contemporaneous references which point to the use of that metal for coinage. The following passage from Matthew Paris, sub anno 1247, is an example. "As the money was now adulter- ated and falsified beyond measure, the king began to deliberate on some remedy for this, namely, whether the coins could not be advantageously altered in form or metal; but it seemed to many wise persons that it would be more advantageous to change the metal, than to alter the shape; since it was for the sake of the metal, not the shape, that the money was subject to such corruption and injury. " However, as a matter of fact, the king did not change either the metal or the shape. In the 30th Henry III., the sheriff of Devonshire paid into the ex- ^^ Madox, I, 759, note x. ^*W. Henningford, Preface, p. xlv., cited in Ruding, 11, 74. EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. 323 chequer 25^-. id. , the profits of his contract for mining the black metal, (nigra minera,) which we take to be tin, that being its usual colour in the ore (oxide). He also accounts for 79^-. received from the sale of deal- banda and tin. Dealbanda seems to have been a composition of tin, like album or albata. He also accounts for ^^6:18:8 profit upon an issue of small coins and of ^54:15 13 upon an issue of large coins, (de exita majoris cunei), both of which were evidently of tin and were emitted by some local magnate. The comparatively small profit thus derived by the crown from the issue of tin coins in one of the principal tin mining districts of England, implies adwindlingof this coinage. It is true that we have no accounts from Cornwall and none from the mints, of tin coined during this reign, so that quantitative conclusions drawn from this single entry are apt to be misleading. Although, as is shown in another chapter, this reign is marked by the issue of a native gold coin, the first one ever struck by a Christian king of England, the issue was almost immediately retired, and matters re- mained apparently as before; so that the besants of the Sacred mint continued to form the basis of the English monetary system. But though in shrinking from the coinage of gold the king was afraid to definitely repudiate the suzerainty of the Sacred empire, the nobles and the burghers were not. The General Council of 1 247 resolved to lower the standard of royal silver coins, an act which by itself is almost suf- ficient to mark the fall of the Sacred empire and the declining authority of Rome. " Corrupt coins made their appearance in all directions, counterfeit coins at St. Albans, tin coins in Cornwall and Devon, base and clipped coins everywhere.*® It is now evident that at this juncture the besant began to disappear from circulation and that its agency in regulating the English monetary system was sensibly diminished; but in the sera of the Plantagenets no such explanation of coinage diffi- culties offered itself. In that age the solution of all monetary problems was found in torturing the Jews. Henry had resorted to this measure before the decision of the General Council.'^ He now resorted to it again. It was a pretty theory, a furtive belief in whose efficacy is not yet wholly effaced from the minds of men ; but it did not work. With the second persecution of the Jews the besants became still scarcer; and, as for lack of them, contracts could no longer be discharged with them, the use of other coins was rendered unavoidable and the mul- tiplication of base or overvalued ones was thus encouraged. One of the last contracts in which the consideration is specifically expressed in *^ The profits of this coinage are shown in Ruding, 11, 67. '^ Ruding, 11, 74. " The Second massacre of the Jews was in 1264. 324 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. besants, is still extant. It is a Hebrew bond and mortgage, executed duringthereignof Henry III., a complete English translation of which, by Dr. Samuel Pegge,the antiquarian, appeared in the Gents Magazine, i756,p.465. The besants are therein called "lakuof gold," in allusion to the radiated figure which is stamped upon all the later issues, laku being the Hebrew form of the Greek lacchus and Roman Bacchus. The division of the pound of account into twenty parts and each of these into twelve, was in this reign extended to the pound weight, used for the assize of bread, and still more strangely, was it imitated in the subdivisions of the agrarian acre. By the act 51 Henry III., (1267,) it was provided, among other things, that "when a quarter of wheat is i2d. per quarter, then wastel bread of a farthing shall weigh^6:i6j."; by which we suppose was meant 64-5 pounds' weight.'^ A similar en- actment was made as to acres. The acre was divided into 160 pence, or 320 half-pence, or 640 farthings, so that it tallied with the subdivisions of the mark of account." Thus denariatus terrse, a penny of land, meant a rod or perch, because the perch was the 1 60th part of an acre, as the penny was the i6oth part of a mark.^" So the obolus, or half- penny, of land, meant half-a-perch, and the quadrante, or farthing of land meant a quarter of a perch, or 4^^ square feet. The expression "40 great, long perches of candles," quoted in Anderson's History of Commerce, and the use of ' ' shillings, " for ounces, in the mint ac- counts of Henry III., are puzzling.''' This application of the divisions '^ Martin Folkes, Table of English Silver Coins; Harris on Coins, i, 51. '^ Bishop Fleetwood's Chronicon Preciosum, p. 40. '" That weights are derived from coins — and not coins from weights, as is commonly supposed — appears to be demonstrated from the earlier English statutes on this subject. That of 51 Henry III., A. D. 1266, says: "An English penny, called a sterling, round and without clipping, shall weigh 32 wheat corns in the midst of the ear, and twenty pence to make an ounce, and twelve ounces one pound." The statute of 12 Henry VII., (1496,) declares that "the pound Troy shall consist of 12 ounces each of 20 sterlings or pennyweights, each of the weight of 32 corns of wheat that grew in the middle of the ear." It is evident in both these cases that the weight of the ounce and pound Troy was derived from that of the sterling, and not the sterling from the pound Troy. Because the latter contains what is now determined to be 5760 grains, it does not follow that the pound sterling, or pound of account, consisted of 20 x 12 = 240 sterlings each of 24 grains of silver. This is the common belief, but it is erroneous. We possess thousands of sterlings of both these reigns, but none of them contain so much as 24 grains of silver, because they are all composed of a variable alloy of copper, which, at the least, amounts to vX percent, and sometimesto I2>4 percent, which alloy, in constructing the pound weight and in calculating the pound of account, was reckoned as so much silver, =" Anderson, Com. i, 178, and Ruding, i, 179. The term "shilling" appears to have been used also in the mint accounts of this reign, for an ounce weight. Fleetwood, Ruding, etc. The origin of this practice is obscure. Twelve sterlings (value one shilling) weighed less than half an ounce; so it could not have been derived from this analogy. Perhaps it was due to the use of tin or albata pennies, of which twelve may have roughly weighed an ounce. EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. 325 of imaginary moneys, to weights and measures, was not peculiar to England. It is to be found in all the kingdoms which grew out of the Roman provinces; for the custom is as ancient as the Empire itself. Wine measures were based on the Roman ace, which was the integer, and consisted of twelve cyathi. Thus, a cup of twocyathi, was called a sextans, three cyathi a triens, four cyathi a quadrans, etc., after the names of Roman coins. ^^ Many modern economists and writers on money have argued that because, by the law of 1267, a ^ meant a pound weight, as applied to bread, therefore it meant a pound weight of silver, as applied to coins; that because an s. meant the twentieth of a pound weight, as applied to bread, therefore it meant the twentieth of the pound weight of silver, as applied to coins ; and that as a d. meant the 240th part of a pound weight, as applied to bread, it meant the 240th part of a pound weight of silver as applied to coins. This mode of reasoning, if applied to the subdivisions of the acre, would lead to very startling results. For example, because by law a mark meant the whole, and a penny the i6oth part, of an acre, therefore when applied to coins, the mark meant an acre of silver and the penny, a perch of that metal! Another fallacy of money, one of practical importance at the pres- ent time, derives its origin from the monetary issues of this period. Jevons, in his "Money and Exchange," avers that the "standard" of England from the reign of the Plantagenets to that of the House of Brunswick, was silver, and afterwards gold. This is one of a host of modern sophistries which have sprung from the Act of 1666; and which no one, before that period, ever stumbled upon. It will be found in Harris' " Essays on Money and Coins " printed in 1757 and possibly in somewhat older books, although neither so old as the Act of 18 Charles II., nor as that story of the disputative knights and the shield, which on the one side, was of yellow metal, and the other, of white. In the case of money, the shield was neither of one metal nor the other. The term "standard," as used by Jevons, can only mean measure, and neither gold nor silver metal was ever the measure of '^^ Adams, 396. The custom is accounted for by M. de Vienne. In 9th John the Cam- bium of London (the Mint) charged in its accounts, "for gold weighing xxi shillings and viii pence, x /."; that is, for as much gold as weighed down 260 silver pennies (weights) they charged ;^io, or 2400 pennies (money). This bespeaks a ratio of about 9 for I. In Tetuan (Morocco) house property is charged with a water rent which is regu- lated by the size of the main water pipe that enters the house. This pipe is not measured by dhra 'a or by tomins, but by " the size of a coin of given denomination and date; a simple measure, always accessible." Talcott Williams, 'Historical Survivals in Mo- rocco," N. Y., 1890, pamph., p. 34. o 26 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. value in England until 1666; while, since that date, it has been such only to a limited extent, and under the operation of that act, as af- fected by subsequent legislation. Down to 1666 the "standard" of England was the whole number of ^ s. d. in the kingdom, whether of gold, silver, tin, copper, or leather; and the whole number of ^ s. d. was whatever the combined coinages of Basileus, king, barons, and prelates, conspired to make it. In the course of the present work many instances have been given when the king altered the measure or "standard " of value by simple decree and without increasing or diminishing the quantity of either gold or silver; an irrefragable proof that the "standard " was not either of these metals, nor any other metal; but merely the number of jT^ s. d., whether coined, or exist- ing by the king's will. Had either gold or silver metal been the "standard" of value, that standard would have been beyond the power either of Basileus, pope, or king, to alter. It needs but a cursory pe- rusal of the annals of the time to be convinced that such was not the case, and that in fact gold and silver metal had very much less to do with measuring value than the imperial and royal constitutions and edicts. Edward I., Longshanks, had lived many years at the court of Al- fonso El Sabio, and according to Calcott, (i, 461,) he had received knighthood from him. Here he had doubtless learnt those methods of asserting the independence of his future crown from the suzerainty of Rome, which Alfonso employed in his newly established Siete Parti- das. Upon ascending the throne of England Edward found the coin- age of his country in great confusion and very corrupt. The sterlings of Henry III., badly executed and so much worn and rounded or clipped, that they contained but half their original weight of silver; the base silver coins of the nobles and ecclesiastics, which had in great degree replaced them in the circulation; the gold besants and mara- vedis which the Jews and goldsmiths hoarded for export; and the numerous foreign silver coins which had crept into the circulation; combined to form a melange of money which was impossible to re- place and troublesome to improve. Before making any efforts in this direction the king commenced to fill his treasury by robbing the Jews and the goldsmiths, putting great numbers of the former to a cruel death and throwing the latter into prison. In the reign of Edward III. , there were few or no Jews left to kill, so the king robbed the Lom- bards ; in that of Charles I. , there were no Lombards, so the king rob- bed the goldsmiths. Edward Longshanks' apology for slaying the Jews was that they circulated base money, but in fact everybody did EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. 327 this, including the king himself, for there was at one period practi- cally little other money in circulation. Their real crime was the hoard- ing of that gold which the king coveted. Edward's raid upon the Jews and goldsmiths was made in 1279, the eighth year of his reign. As a makeweight to this transaction, he affected great concern for the purity of the silver coins purchased with this innocent blood. In the ninth or tenth year of his reign he or- dered the barons of the exchequer to "open the boxes of the assay of London and Canterbury, and to make the assay in such a manner as the king's council were wont to do. " ^^ Nothing is said in these in- structions about the base coints minted at St. Albans ; nor the coinage of tin in Devon and Cornwall; nor the issues of leather moneys at Conway, Caernarvon, and Beaumaris; nor the pollards and crockards, valued in other royal edicts; nor the light coins, called, from their devices. Mitres and Lions; nor the Cocodones, Rosaries, Stepings, and Scaldings; " nor the three sorts of copper coins which this king issued, after cunningly plating or washing them with silver. Lowndes, with some intemperateness, attributes to this reign "the most re- markable deceits and corruptions found in ancient records to have been committed upon coins of the kingdom. " Nothing is said of these matters in Edward's instructions concerning a trial of the pix and nothing is said of them in modern numismatic works," Yet these cor- ruptions of money have the highest historic value. Just, as in after times, the New England shilling first announced the stern resolution of her people to be free, and the * ' Continental " note proclaimed and asserted that freedom, so did the leather notes and base coins of Ed- ward's reign mark the parting of that mighty cable which held the province of Britain to the sinking ship of the Empire. The laws of politics, like those of pathology, are not gained by study of the healthy or the normal; but by observing the diseased and the abnormal. In 1289 an indented trial piece of the goodness of old sterling (0.925 fine) was ordered to be lodged in the exchequer and "every pound weight Troy was to be shorn at twenty shillings and three-pence, ac- cording to which the value of the silver in the coin was one shilling eight-pence farthing an ounce." So says Lowndes, 34, citing the Red Book of the Exchequer, but this citation only conveys part of the truth, the remainder being supplied by Dr. Ruding. This more con- scientious author states, with reference to sterling coins, that from '^^ Madox, I, 291. ■* Fleetwood, 39, 47. ^^ For leather issues of this reign consult Ruding, 11 130, and "Money and Civiliza- tion, " p. 64. 328 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. the Conquest down to the year 152 7, the royal mints of England bought bullion by the pound Troy (5760 grains) and sold it by the pound Tower (5400 grains); so that even when the buying and selling price was the same, there remained to the crown a profit of about seven per cent.-® The weight of Edward's sterling pennies, many of which, in a perfect state of preservation, are still extant, corroborate this state- ment. If we assume, with the Red Book, that Edward paid 243 sterling pence per pound Troy for sterling silver bullion — which is doubtful, for there were probably deductions made from this price to cover the cost of coinage — the coins prove that he sold it at 260 pence per Troy pound, or, which is the same thing, 280 pence per Tower pound. Ac- cording toKeary's assays, the extant sterling pennies weigh 22^ grains, 0.9667^ fine, equal to about 20^ grains net; but these relate to ex- ceptionally heavy specimens. In the same year, (1289,) says the Black Book, Edward sent for for- eign moneyers to teach him how to make and forge moneys. Forging here means simply striking. It does not relate to the forged coins which were current in this reign and which Edward's apologists im- puted to the foreigners and the Jews, but which it is much to be feared were made with the connivance and for the profit of that in- genious prince himself. However, the Jews suffered for the forgeries all the same ; for in the very next year Edward plundered and ban- ished the remainder of them from the kingdom." In 1298, (27 Ed- ward I.,) it was commanded that all persons, of whatever country or nation, may safely bring to our exchanges ^^ any sort or sum of good silver coins, or bullion, which shall be valued or reduced by the as- sayers according to the "old standard" of England. Silver bullion, when assayed and stamped with its value at our exchanges, may be used as a medium of barter, that is to say, as money." This was similar to a Brazilian regulation of the sixteenth century; and so far as it attempted to give currency to bullion, it proved quite as im- practicable and futile.'" It was also provided by 27 Edward I., that ^^ The statute of the Pillory and Tumbrel and of the Assize of Bread and Ale, 51 Henry III., (1266,) provides punishment for those "that sell by one measure and buy by another " ; a proof that the royal example had become contagious. A similar interdict against buying and selling by different measures occurs in Mahomet's Koran. -'' See Forgery, confession, and pardon, of Sir William Thurington, in the reign of Edward VI. ^* The "exchanges" were offices in the mint for exchanging coins. Madox, i, 291. ^^ This could only mean the value of the silver with reference to gold, a value which the coins of the Basileus still imposed and fixed. ^^ Free. Met., p. 119; Money and Civ., pp. 17, 78, 146. EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. 329 no bullion shall be exported out of the country without special license. This prohibition was repeated by Edward II., in 1307, thus implying that it had meanwhile been successfully evaded. This and some other acts of the Plantagenets, which encroached upon the imperial prerog- atives of Rome, must be recognized as efforts on the part of these kings of England to throw off their allegiance to the empire. But it was not yet quite thrown off. Iniagg (28 Edward I.,) it was provided that silver plate shall be of no worse standard than coins. Gold-plate shall be no worse than the "touch " of Paris. All plate shall be as- sayed by wardens of the craft and marked with a leopard's head. The wardens shall visit the goldsmith's shops and confiscate all plate of a lower standard. This was a new exercise of royal authority. With regard to the pollards, crockardsand other base coins of the reign, Dr. Ruding assumes, apparently because they were base, or be- cause their coinage does not appear to be provided for in the laws or mint indentures, that they were of foreign fabrication and surrepti- tious circulation; but this does not follow. Base issues were the rule, not the exception, of this reign. It is mere prejudice to heap them upon Phillip le Bel and other French kings and omit them from the records of the English monarchy. Base coins were quite as common in England as in France ; they were due to similar circumstances ; they were attended by similar social phenomena; they had similar results; and no good can come of their suppression, concealment, or false as- cription, by modern historians. Pollards and crockards appear in the circulation so early as 1280. In 1303 (32 Edward I.,) the "custodes of the Ordinance for the Money at Ipswick " were charged upon the exchequer-rolls with ^^14:4:11 for pollards and crockards.^' If these were foreign and unlawful coins, it is difficult to account for their use in the royal treasury and their appearance and recognition in the royal accounts. In 2 Edward II., (1308,) there is an entry of a relief granted to the king's sheriffs and bailiffs, who had received these coins "then current" at a penny each, which "by the king's proclamation were fallen from a penny to a half-penny." ^^ Does this look like a refer- ence to foreign or discredited coins? The king's officers are first re- quired to receive them at a penny and afterwards at a half-penny each, and royal relief is granted to them for such of this class of coins as had accumulated in their hands during the royal alteration in their legal value. That they were in use during the whole of the reign of Edward I. ,and part of that of his successor is of itself almost sufficient proof of their legality. It has been stated that they were decried in *' Madox, I, 294. ^^ Madox, i, 294. 330 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. 1300 (29 Edward I). It is possible that this was the date when they were lowered by proclamation; but the entries above quoted prove that they actually continued in use for several years afterwards. As to their omission from the laws and mint indentures, there are no such instruments extant. With a fragmentary and unimportant exception, all instruments relating to the coinage, previous to 18 Edward III., if any existed, which is very doubtful, have been lost or destroyed. The extant sterlings ascribed to the first and second Edwards are not distinguishable, one from the other. Numismatists assign those with the name composed of the fewest number of letters, as "Edw," to Edward I. ; those with more letters, as "Edwa," to Edward II. ; and those with the full name, "Edwardus," to Edward III. This classifica- tion is attributed to archbishop Sharp, a numismatist of the last cent- ury, whose reasons for its adoption are, however, far from convincing. " In respect of the groats, bishop Sharpe's capricious arrangement was as capriciously reversed, for there the full spelf'Edwards" are ascribed to Edward I. , and the abbreviated Edwards to his successor. For the reason that Lowndes' citation from the Red Book merely relates to the buying price of silver at the exchequer, and as there is no certainty that any of the extant coins were struck by Edward I., and finally be- cause it is incredible, in such a condition of society as existed during this reign, that sterlings should have remained in a circulation already filled with tin, copper,and leather issues, we should deem it quite likely that no sterlings at all were issued during this reign, were it not for a circumstance recorded by bishop Fleetwood, namely, that Edwards' sterlings were valued at the time at two, three, or four pence, or ster- lings, each, a custom quite common both in England and France dur- ing the whole period, from the thirteenth to the fifteenth centuries, but commonly ignored or suppressed by modern writers on the subject.'^ Among his other issues, Edward struck silver coins weighing 80,85, 92, 116, and 138 grains each, which are regarded variously as groats, shillings, medals, etc., but which might have passed as half-marks, or even marks, for all that can be learnt from the few records now left of his numerous issues and their capricious valuations. The whole sum of money coined during this reign is estimated by Dr. Ruding at less than ;^i6,ooo; but as this calculation leaves out of viewthe enhanced legal valuation of the sterlings, it is of little worth. ^° The native mines ^^ Ruding, II, 123, from Bib. Top. Brit., No. xxxv., p. 25. Per contra, see Leake, p. 8, and Folkes. ^* Fleetwood, 34, 35, 39, etc., and "Present State of England." ^^ Consult Humphreys, 140; Sir M. Hale in Davis' Reports, ed. 1674, p. 18; Drier's Jiep.,7thed.,vi.,fol.82; Madox,i,294; "Money and Civilization," 65; Ruding,ll.,i29. EARLIEST EXERCISE OF CERTAIN REGALIAN RIGHTS. 331 produced some small amounts of silver in this reign. Those of Mar- tinstowe in Devonshire yielded 370 lbs. weight of silver in 1294, 521 lbs. in 1295, and 704 lbs. in 1296; after which they seem to have been abandoned as unprofitable. ^® An assay of silver from the mine of Byr- lande in Devon, was made in 24 Edward I. " The assumption of control over the mines, which the rendition of these accounts imply, was also a new exercise of royal authority.'^ The system of ;Q s. d. remained unchanged, but what constituted a pound of account was now quite within the King's newly assumed powers to determine, at pleasure. The king's prerogative, to raise or lower moneys, or to enhance or diminish their value, or to reduce them to bullion, a prerogative which had only been assumed by Henry II., when the Sacred empire drew to its close, and was only asserted after the Empire had expired, devel- oped, during the course of Edward's reign, into a practical form. The hour of England's complete independence was at hand. 3® Jacob, 195. '' Madox, i, 291. ^^ The earliest assertion of the doctrine of "Mines Royal" which was made by any European sovereign after the Fall of Constantinople occurs in the "Siete Partidas" of Alfonso El Sabio. " CartillaPractica," Burdeos, 1838. (Br.Mn.Library,No.7io6,f.4.) 332 CHAPTER XIX. GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OF ENGLISH NATIONALITY. No mint indentures prior to Edward I. — No statutes of any kind previous to Magna Charta — Sudden beginning of frequent monetary changes in tlie reign of Edward II. — Significance of this movement — Progressive assumption of regalian rights — Lower- ing of pollards and crockards — Interdiction of commerce in coins and bullion — Lower- ing of sterlings — Establishment of a Maximum — Coinage of base money by the king — His death — Accession of Edward III. — New monetary ordinances — Black money — Mercantile system — Tin money — Review of the gold question — The maravedi of Henry III. — Preparation of Edward III. to issue gold coins — Permission from the Emperor — Convention with Flanders — Authority of parliament — Issue of the double florin — Its immediate retirement — Fresh preparations — Issue of the gold noble or half-mark — Its great significance. NO written annals so plainly mark the steps by which England gradually developed from the provincial to the national phase of its existence, as those which are stamped upon the coinages of the second and third Edwards. Before describing these issues, one or two observations are necessary. With the exception of the statute 28 Edward I., already cited, not a single indenture of the mint,from 1066 to 1346, is extant at the present day ; nor is there any reason to sup- pose that any ever existed. If negative evidence were admissible in an enquiry of the present kind, this fact would be conclusive. It fur- nishes the inference that down to the sera of the Plantagenets the princes of England did not enjoy control of the coinage and had neither occasion nor authority to prescribe its regulations. The continued coinage and circulation of the gold solidus by the Basileus, its recogni- tion by the Latin pontificate, and the prescriptive ratio of 12 silver for I gold, rendered the coinage of silver by the king a mere perfunctory act. The silver penny coined by Christian princes had to be of the same weight as the gold shilling coined by the Basileus. When the penny failed to conform to this rule, it failed to circulate, and the Council of the Lateran was certain to seal the prejudices of the public with its official condemnation of the heretical coin. But no sooner was the power of the Basileus extinguished, than all this began to change, and every prince of Christendom stretched out his hands to GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OF ENGLISH NATIONALITY. 333 grasp the coveted prerogative of coinage. The Gothic princes,as usual, were the foremost. It was a Gothic prince of Leon who next after the emperor Frederick struck the first Christian coin of gold, and a Gothic prince of Denmark who first openly repudiated the suzerainty of pont- ifical Rome.' It need hardly be added that in such a cause the Gothic kings of England were not behind their compeers. Gold coinage began with Henry III., and mint indentures with Edward III. Not only are there no mint indentures before the fourteenth century, there are no national laws of any kind previous to the Fall of Con- stantinople. The earliest entry in the Statutes at Large is an altered copy of Magna Charta, not drawn from any official registry, but fished out of an antiquarian collection. Hardly more creditable is the ap- pearance of the ordinances which follow it, down to the reign of Ed- ward III. ^ They have all the appearance of having been "restored" in modern times. If the kings of England previous to Edward III. were not vassals, why have we none of their ordinances; and if the Pope or the Emperor was not their suzerain, why do the marks of the latter's superior authority appear in this, as indeed they do in every kind of literary record, except indeed upon the pages of recently written British history? However, it is not alone upon literary evidence that our argument relies ; it stands also upon the far more certain evidence of coins and the nummulary grammar. Many of these evidences have been already adduced. Those which will now be furnished relate chiefly to the sudden and frequent alterations of money which began after the Fall of Constantinople and culminated in the reign of Edward III. There are indeed many modern writers who either affirm or assume that no such alterations took place; but the evidence against them is over- whelming. From the accession of Edward I., to the coinage of gold by Edward III. , is a period which corresponds with the reigns of Philip le Hardie, Philip le Bel, Louis Hutin, Philip le Long, Charles le Beau, and Philip Valois, when we are taught that hundreds, almost thousands, of alterations were made in the monetary system of France, of which country a part still remained subject to the kings of England. In the single year 1346, reign of Philip Valois, there are recorded no less than ten alterations of the ratio between gold and silver in the French coin- age. As to the debasements and degradations of Philip le Bel, every ' " Waldemar, King of Denmark, etc. To the Bishop of Rome, Greeting: We hold our life from God; our kingdom from our subjects; our riches from our parents; and ourfaith from thee; which, if thou wilt not grant us any longer, we do by these presents resign. Farewell." Boulainvilliers', " Life of Mahomet," ed. 1752, p. iii. ^ These ordinances are not in the English, but tl;e Roman, language. 334 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. historical work is full of them. Yet all this time, while a furious storm of monetary changes and financial shifts were raging across the Chan- nel and whirling into every nook and corner of the English possessions in France, the numismatists and political economists assure us that England lay in the midst of a dead calm, and that nothing of the sort happened there. How utterly unfounded is the inference upon which they rest so confidently, will be seen when the positive evidence of the extant coins is unfolded. The wave of monetary alterations which distinguishes this period began in Gothic Spain, whence it flowed into Gothic France and Eng- land. The changes which began in France with Philip le Hardie and became so numerous under Philip le Bel and his successors, have rarely been correctly described and never fully understood. Even Mr. Hal- lam, one of the ablest and most impartial of historical writers, must have failed to grasp the significance of these transactions, when he stigmatized them by the coarse names of fraud and robbery. "The rapacity of Philip le Bel kept no measure with the public. . . . Dis- satisfaction and even tumults arose in consequence. . . . The film had now dropped from the eyes of the people, and these adulterations of money, rendered more vexatious by continued recoinages of the cur- rent pieces, upon which a fee was extorted by the moneyers, showed in their true light as mingled fraud and robbery. " ^ The fidelity of this description is discredited by Mr.Hallam himself, who, elsewhere says: " These changes seemed to have produced no discontent," an admis- sion that ill agrees with the imaginary dissatisfaction and tumults above set forth. That the crux of the situation is misunderstood by this writer is evident from the absence in his pages of all allusion to the Fall of the Empire, and the recent acquisition of its coinage pre- rogatives by the Christian states of the West. If we turn from Mr. Hallam's condemnation of Philip le Bel to his approval of his contemporaries, the princes of England, we shall find even less cause to be satisfied with his opinions on this subject. In the former case they find some apology in the defamation with which the medieval ecclesiastics pursued Philip for curtailingtheirprivileges and restraining their rapacity; in the latter, he is left with the poor defence of patriotic partiality. Says the historian: " It was asserted in the reign of Philip le Bel as a general truth that no subject might coin silver money. The right of debasing the coin was also claimed by this prince as a choice flower of the crown." Whilst, a little farther on, in the same paragraph, he says: "No subject ever enjoyed the * Hallam's " Middle Ages," chapter ii. GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OF ENGLISH NATIONALITY. 335 right, (I do not extend this to the fact,) of coining silver in England, without the royal stamp and superintendence, a remarkable proof of the restraint in which the feudal aristocracy was always held in this country. " If in fact the nobles and ecclesiastics of England exercised the privilege of coining siver, as we know they did, it is difficult to see wherein they were under greater restraint than the same classes elsewhere. But this is not all. Mr. Hallam's flourish goes farther. It implies that the prerogative to coin, which he represents to have been so sadly abused by Philip, was more rightfully or more justly exer- cised by his contemporaries the English princes. Such is not the opinion of the earlier English writers. Our Matthew Paris says that the coins of his own time were adulterated and falsi- fied beyond measure. Holinshed II., 318, says that notwithstanding the baseness of the father's coins, the son, Edward II., proclaimed them to be good and current money. Stowe, (326,) says that Edward II., ordered that his father's base coins should not be refused on pain of life and limb; and Carte prefers a similar accusation.* Indeed the text of the proclamation (4 Edward II.,) which contains this mandate, is extant to justify the medieval chroniclers. Lowndes (eighteenth century) says that the greatest deceits and corruptions known to his- tory were committed in the coinages of Edward I., and Lord Liver- pool, who wrote during the present century, reluctantly confesses in a letter to the king the adulterations of money which were inaugu- rated by the Plantagenets.* We shall presently offer even better testimony than the opinions of historians, namely, the evidence of the coins themselves. It will then be seen not only that England fully kept pace with France in the wild- est excesses of a now unrestrained right to coin, but also that these excesses, in which Mr. Hallam only perceives fraud and robbery, really constitute our most valuable proofs of England's approach toward national autonomy. They are the unsteady steps of tutelage which preceded the firm march of an actual and independent sovereignty. The year 1307 (i Edward II.,) is the most probable date when the value of the pollards and crockards was lowered one-half. In effect, it was decreed that that which was yesterday a penny, to-day shall be but a half-penny and that which yesterday constituted a pound shall be to-day but ten shillings.* In the same year was also enacted an explicit interdict against the exportation of either coined money or bullion from England.' A similar interdict was made in 1326.' It <" History of England," II, 308. *" Letter to the King," chapter ix. « Madox,l,294. ^ Eggleston, Antiq., p. 196. « Ruding, 11, 136. ^;^6 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. does not appear to have occurred to the crown that the Jews, banished to the continent, had it largely within their power to prevent the ship- ment of foreign moneys to England, by paying for English merchan- dise with bills of exchange drawn against foreign merchandise shipped to England. In this way they could and doubtless did, intercept and prevent the shipment to that country of some of the coins or bullion which would otherwise have been remitted to it to pay for its exports. Many people, even at the present day, similarly fail to comprehend the operation of exchange. Their view is that unless every nation makes its money of the same material as other nations, it will place itself in the position of being unable to pay its foreign debts. A les- son from practical bill-drawers would greatly tend to alleviate such an apprehension. In 1310 the Commons petitioned and represented to the king that the coins were depreciated (meaning probably not in value, but in con- tents of silver) more than one-half. " Nevertheless the king made pro- clamation the same year that the coins should be current at the value they bore under Edward I., and that no one should enhance the price of his goods on that account. This is the edict of which Holinshed, Stowe, and Carte complain. Mr. Jewett " says that the petition of the Commons set forth that the coins, probably meaning the old ster- lings, were dipt down to one-half. This was very likely, because un- less the silver coins were cut down so as not to contain any more silver than the base coins of like denomination, they would have dis- appeared altogether. But this time it could not have been the Jews who committed the offence, for there were no Jews now in England. Nor should the Caursini, Peruchi, Scali, Fiscobaldi, Ballardi, Reisardi, or other Roman clans or families who filled their places in the English marts and exchanges, be suspected; for these were all good Christians and therefore presumably loyal subjects. Clippers and counterfeiters had been condemned to excommunication by the Council of the Lat- eran in 11 23 and were subject, by a statute attributed to Edward I., to the penalty for treason. " Earth denounced such sacrilegious crimi- nals, and heaven forbade them to approach its holy precincts. We are therefore at a loss to look for the transgressor, unless indeed he was to be found in the royal sanctuary itself. It may have been with the object to more effectually keep his base money afloat that the king by proclamation in 13 10 forbade, under heavy penalties, the importa- tion of false moneys. If these false moneys were close imitations of ' Rolls of Par. i, App. p, 444, and clause 4 Edward II. ,m. in 12 dors. Ruding, 11, 133. "* Antiquities, 146. " Ruding, 11, 214, 226. GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OF ENGLISH NATIONALITY. 337 the king's base coins and contained the same proportion of fine silver, the practice of importing them infers that prices had not risen to the level of the debasement. In 131 1 the Lords Ordainers enacted that no changes should be made in the value of the coins without consent of the barons in par- liament assembled. This startling declaration amounted to a claim on the part of the nobles for a share in those regalian rights which the king was daily acquiring from the falling power of Rome; but it was successfully resisted by Edward, who in 1321, repeated the ordinance at York. There are no records relating to its operation in the inter- val. According to the roll of 9 Edward II., the king commanded Richard Hywysh, sheriff of Cornwall, by writ, to pay on his account jQzT^ '-^A'A to Antony di Pessaigne, of Janua, out of the profits of the tin coinage (coignagio stagminis). '^ Indeed tin money and gold money appear to have been struck by the western princes at the same time and owing to the same parent event, the fall of the Basileus. There being then a great deal of false money in circulation, a writ was issued in 13 18 to the barons of the exchequer, commanding them to order the sheriffs of England to make proclamation that "no man should import into the realm clipped money or foreign counterfeit money un- der great penalties and that such persons as had any clipped money in their hands should bore it through in the middle and bring it to the king's cambium to be recoined." " This proclamation must have had some other than its professed object, for in the same year Edward complained to Philip le Bel of France that "Merchants were not per- mitted to bring any kind of money out of France into England, for that it was taken from them by searchers." When it is remembered that the coins of Philip le Bel were greatly debased and overvalued, it appears more likely that the clipped and "foreign" counterfeit coins, mentioned in the proclamation, were fabricated in England. This view finds further corroboration in the fact that in 1318 "anas- say was made of the money minted in the exchanges of London and Canterbury ... to wit, of £^0, 730 minted in the said exchanges within the said time " (about two years) and " upon this assay, it was found that the said money was too weak and of a greater alloy than it ought to have been by ^258:5:10." " The classification of bullion into domestic and foreign, first occurs in the reign of Edward II. , and was continued in that of Edward III. , after which no traces of it appear in the mint records. Nature does not admit of such classification, because all bullion of the like metal '^Madox, I, 386. i^Iadox, I, 294. Statutes at Large.vol.i. ''' Madox, i, 291. 338 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. and when refined, is alike. Domestic metal cannot be distinguished from foreign. It was clearly impracticable to prevent foreign bullion from being imported, indeed the complaint of the times was that for- eign clipped and counterfeit coins were imported; and if practically coins could be imported, so also could bullion. Nor was it the policy of the crown to prevent the importation of bullion; on the contrary, it did everything in its power to promote such importation." It is there- fore difficult to see what object was aimed at by classifying silver into cismarinum and transmarinum, " except a further assertion of that newly-acquired imperial prerogative of entire control over the coin- age and the materials of coinage, which the king had in his mind, and seemed determined to proclaim to all the world. Whatever his plans, they were defeated by the rebellion of his wife Isabella and the nobles whom he had previously curbed and restrained. These, fleeing to France with the infant son of the king, there organized an expedition, which landed in England during the autumn of 1326, defeated and captured the king threw him into a dungeon,and there dispatched him. Edward III. was crowned January 25th, 1327. To the numerous and sudden alterations of money, which, like an exhibition of fire- works, celebrate the emancipation of the western princes from the thraldom of Caesar's Empire, but introduced the greatest confusion into nummulary denominations and relations, England contributed an additional element of confusion. At all events it was far less common in other countries. This was the marked difference between the con- tents of a coin as provided by law or mint indenture and its actual contents as found by weight and assay of perfect specimens still ex- tant. For example, the mint indenture of 1345 provided that the pound Tower of silver 0.925 fine, should be coined into 22}^ pennies. This would make the gross weight of each penny 24 grains and the contents of fine silver 22.2 grains; whereas, the actual coins, in good condition, weigh but 20 grains and contain but 18^ grains of fine silver. Similar differences are to be found in other coins of the period. In choosing between the conflicting evidences' of the statutes, the mint indentures, and the actual coins, the author has observed the following order of preference : first, the actual coins ; second, the mint- indentures; third, the acts of parliament, which in many instances were only intended for show or deception, and in such case were prac- tically dead letter. Even in the actual coins there is room for error; because they vary considerably. Mr. Keary's weighings are those of the heaviest ; and because this practice is regarded as misleading, we '5 Ruding. GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OF ENGLISH NATIONALITY. 339 have not always been guided by that author. Among the earliest stat- utes of the new reign were those of 1327 against the importing of light and counterfeit coins, and of 1331, against the exportation of either coins or bullion. The penalty for the latter was at first made death, and the forfeiture of all the offender's profit; but two years aftervv^ards it was lessened by proclamation to mere forfeiture of the money so attempted to be exported, and in 1335 the act was extended to ' ' religious men, " as well as others. The conviction which must en- force itself upon all persons in authority, that such ordinances can never be practically executed, the actual failure of similar ordinances in the preceding reign, and the language and tone of the present ones, all combine to produce the impression that the latter were intended as a cover, to account for the melting down of the "old sterlings" in the king's mints, and to furnish an apology for that emission of Black Money which soon afterwards made its appearance and was probably fabricated at the king's behest. That he was not above the art of issuing insincere edicts is strikingly proved by his proclama- tion of 1341, wherein he avows that in his previous Interdict of Usury he "dissembled in the premises," and " suffered that pretended stat- ute to be sealed," which he now revokes and declares void.'° Dr. Ruding naively enquires if the Turonensis nigri, mentioned in the statute of 1335, as being "commonly current in our (the king's) realm," meant copper coins struck at Tours. We think not. There are no proofs that copper coins of Tours circulated in England at this period, but many proofs that English black money did ; for in the same statute it was provided that all manner of black money actually in circulation should cease to be current in one month's time after it is decried. " Yet,but a short time afterwards, the king's council in parlia- ment at York, authorized new black money to be made, containing one- sixth part of alloy. '* In 1338 various proclamations were made which denote that black money was still in circulation ; and in 1339 one was made which authorized the circulation of black " turneys " (tournois) in Ireland." Black money was not peculiar to Edward III., but had been used by both his father and his grandfather. Edward I. , in 1 293, agreed to pay to the emperor Adolphus 300,000 "black livres tour- '® Statutes at Large; Ruding, 11, 251. " "All manner of Black Money which hath been commonly current of late in our realm " shall cease to be current within a month after it is decried. Statutes at Large, 9 Edward IIL, 1335. '* A great part of this statute is not printed in the modern editions of the Statutes at Large. Consult 9 Edward III., in Statutes, folio ed., 1577, black letter. '»C1. 13 Edward III., pt. 2, 35 dors. Rymer, " Fcedera," v, 113. 34° THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. nois," and in 1297, to certain nobles of Burgundy, 30,000 " small black livres tournois. " ^'' To the earl of Guelders Edward promised to pay 100,000 "black livres tournois, "" and it is not likely that at this period he would have stipulated, or the others accepted his stipulations, to pay so large a sum, in a coin which he did not himself fabricate. In the royal ordinance authorizing the establishment of a mint at Calais, after the capture of that city in 1347, the king, Edward III,, commanded White Money to be made there similar to that which was struck in England." In 1354 the moneyers of Aquitain were allowed 3^. in the mark, for all money coined by them, for the king, whether ' ' white or black, " except gold. " We repeat that these black moneys, which the historians usually evince much anxiety to keep out of view, are really the proofs of England's dawning independence; for while she remained a fief of Rome and while the mints of the Basileus supplied her with besants, nobody was obliged to use silver, and the fabrication of black money would have brought the king no profit; and therefore none was coined. The coinage of black money and the abrogation of the Sacred besant, mean the same thing: the refusal and rejection of any further allegiance to the Empire. In 1 341 a great mass of sterling coins and silver-plate was collected in London by private parties, for exportation. In 1342 a similar event occurred at Boston. " It is difficult to see the motive for these attempts to export silver, unless the circulation consisted of royal money, over- valued, and unless there was no further use for sterlings and silver bullion in the hands of private owners. In 1342 the king's rents in Guernsey, Jersey, Sark, and Alderney, were exacted in sterlings, while his payments were made in light coins, worth but ten shillings in the " pound. "^^ This may have been clipped coins or black money, of which each penny piece had but a half-penny's worth of silver in it, and therefore the nominal "pound," but ten shillings' worth. In 1343 the council in parliament advised the king to issue what would now be termed a Convention, or international gold coin, to be current, with permission of the Flemings, both in Flanders and Eng- land ; that no silver should be carried out of the realm except by noble- men ; and that these should be limited to the carrying out of silver-plate for use in their establishments. The first part of this proposal intro- duces one of the most important subjects connected with the regalian '•'"Anderson's " History of Commerce," i, 250; "Foedera," 778, -'Anderson, I, 251; Rymer's " Fcedera," v, 675, *^ Rot, France, 22 Edward III., m. ig; Ruding, 11, i82«, ^* Rot. Vase, 28 Edward III., m. i; Ruding, 11, 195. '* Ruding. 11, 150-2, "Ruding, 11, 152. GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OV ENGLISH NATIONALITY. 341 rights of the English crown. Down to the year 1204, or, practically, to 1257, the gold coins lawfully circulating in England had been sup- plied exclusively by the Basileus, and consisted, as before stated, of the besant and its fractions. When in that year Henry resolved to invade the prerogative of the Sacred empire, he struck, not a solidus, nor a fraction of a solidus, but a Moorish maravedi, a piece which com- merce with the Spanish-Arabians had rendered familiar to English- men under the various names of maravedi, new talent, obolusde Murcia, gold penny, etc. The maravedi of that period contained 40 to 43 grains of fine gold. It circulated in England, not like the besant, by force of law and immemorial usage, but merely because it was a justly minted and well-known coin of regular weight and fineness and pre- ferable to the adulterated and clipped coins which had made their appearance when the besants began to disappear in the reign of John. The maravedi had filled the circulation in continually increasing pro- portions. Its low valuation in silver, 10 for i, proves that it had no standing in the law. As the common circulation of the maravedi in England may seem incredible to a certain class of numismatists, it has been deemed useful to bring together some of the texts in which it is mentioned. It will be seen at a glance that its sera agrees substantially with that of the Plantagenet dynasty. Table showing the texts which mention the Maravedi, or Obolus de Murcia, as circulating in Englatid. Year. Reign. Remarks. I176 23 Henry II. Madox, 11, 367, valued at 20 sterlings. I193 5 Richard I. Madox, 1, 278, valued at 10 for i. 1215 17 John. Madox, I, 261, valued at 21 sterlings. 1250 35 Henry III. Madox, in the case of Philip Lurel. 1252 37 Henry III. Ruding, I, 316, valued at 16 sterlings." 1257 41 Henry III. Weight 4 1>^ grains fine, coined by the king, valued at 20 sterlings. 1269 53 Henry III. Same coin, valued at 24 sterlings. 1283 12 Edward I. Madox, 1293 22 Edward I. Madox. 1347 21 Edward III. Mixt Moneys Case. Davis' Reports. "^^ From Henshaw's translation of Domesday Book, vol. i, fol. i. The pence were light ones. The Maravedi was first coined in Spain during the dynasty of the Almoravedes, hence its name. One of these coins, struck in Murcia A. H. 548, (A. D. 1 153,) during the interregnum between the Almora- vede and Almohade dynasties, is called by Queipo a " Mourdanish," which we are inclined to believe is a misnomer. One of these pieces, in a very good state of preservation, is now in the cabinet of Gayanos, and weighs 44^^ English grains. It tallies in weight with the siliqua weight or the 120th part of the Egypto-Roman pound of 5243^ Eng- lish grains, with the gold maravedi, with the silver dirhem, and with 342 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. two Sterling pennies." The true Mourdanish should rather be found in the half-mithcal, a specimen of which, struck during the first years of the Almohade dynasty, is now in the cabinet of Cerda. This coin is also published by Queipo, who accords it its true name, the " mour- danish of Murcia," and gives its weight at 34^ grains, the state of conservation being very good. The use of the gold mithcal of Spain can be traced back to the eighth century, when Hakem I. , settled upon his brother, Suleiman, a life annnity of 70,000 "mithcales, or pesan- tes,"as an equivalent for his estates in Spain. ^* In the tenth century the mithcal was called by the Christians the " dobla," probably in ref- erence to its being the double of the more popular and better known half-mithcal, or "mourdanish.""^ Abd-el-Raman III., 912-61, settled a life annuity of 100,000 " doblas of gold " upon Ahmed-ben-Saia, for his capture and plunder of Tunis. ^° The annual revenvues of Al Hakem II.,besides the taxes in kind, were "twelve million mithcals of gold."" The piece we are considering is therefore not the half-mithcal, but the maravedi; and its period is notthat of the early,but of the later caliphs of Spain, the contemporaries of the Plantagenets. The weight of Henry's gold coins was 43 grains 0.965 fine, equal to about 41 >^ grains fine. They were probably intended to weigh ex- actly the same as one gold maravedi, or two silver sterlings. These coins he called "oboli " and ordered them to pass for twenty silver sterlings (or half-dirhems), a ratio apparently of 10 for i, but really of 9 for I, because his sterlings weighed less than 20 grains and were only 0.925 fine. It is alleged that these gold coins were objected to on commercial grounds, by the merchants of London. This is hardly credible, because the coins were really undervalued. They could be bought with 9 weights of pure silver, whereas they were worth twelve, which was the universal ratio of the times,in all Christian states. This conclusion is strengthened by the circumstance that these same ' 'oboli" after being temporarily demonetized, were raised by Henry's com- mand, in 1269, to 24 pence, a ratio of 12, and that at this ratio they actually passed current without objection. As to their mechanical execution, the author is able, from personal examination, to declare that they were far superior to any other coins, English or French, of ^'' The siliqua weight must not be confused with the siliqua coin, which weighed scarcely more than a third as much. ^^ Calcott, i, 139. ^^ The contents of the dobla de la vanda in " Money and Civilization," p. 93, deduced from the assumption that the castellano coin was as heavy as the castellano weight, are given erroneously. The " dobla " of the period mentioned in the text was in facta heavy dinar. At a later period it was the double maravedi; hence its name. 2" Calcott, I, 223. 3' Calcott, i, 249. GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OF ENGLISH NATIONALITY. 343 that day. The only valid reason that can be assigned for the objec- tion made to them was the superstitious repugnance to accept gold coins not stamped with the authority of the Sacred empire. This re- pugnance may have been enhanced by the fear that the coins would not be currently accepted in England, or if in England, not in other Christian states. Bearing in mind the example and failure of Henry III., Edward did not venture to strike coins of gold until he had acquired that full de- gree of sovereignty which the Basileus had involuntarily bequeathed to the western princes. In November, 1337, Edward was appointed and he accepted the appointment of Vicar-General to the German emperor, with power to coin money of gold and silver. Though this formality now seemed needless, yet that it was entered into with the view to prepare the way for the coinage of gold, is evident from sev- eral circumstances. In 1340 the king's council in parliament enacted that all shippers of wool should undertake to bring in for each bag two marks worth of gold or silver. ^^ Again in 1342, the king ordered, still more pointedly, that all corn exported to foreign countries should be sold for gold coins or bullion. Another preparation, a futile one to be sure, consisted in employing Raymond Lully, or some other alchemist, for whom a laboratory was fitted up in the Tower, which should enable that impostor to transmute gold from baser metals. Was it an excess of caution, lest the great step he meditated might mis- carry at the last moment, that the king found a means to prompt the advice of his council in parliament that he should coin gold? At all events such seems to be the meaning of the insinuation that the Flemings sold their goods only for Flemish gold florins, which were so highly overvalued in English silver coins, as to render payment in the latter unprofitable to English merchants. In other words, said the king, by paying gold florins with silver coins, our merchants con- tinually lose; let us therefore enable them to pay in gold ones. Such appears to have been the genesis of the famous ordinance of 1343, Upon the king's information, the king's council advised the king, (provided the Flemings were willing,) to issue an international gold coin ; and it was provided in such event that such coins should be unlimited legal-tenders between merchant and merchant, "as money not to be refused; " that all other persons, great or small, might ac- cept them if they pleased; but not otherwise; that all other (foreign) gold coins should be melted down; and that no silver should be car- ried out of the realm except by noblemen, and then, only silver-plate *^ Ruding, 149. 344 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. for use in their establishments. This advice was carried into effect in 1344 by the coinage of a gold double-florin, weighing 50 to the pound Tower, of 23^ carats, 0.979 fine, the "old standard" forgold.'' Thus each piece would contain 105^ grains, fine. It was ordered to be current at six shillings (each of 12 sterlings). Two or three speci- mens of this piece are extant, both found in the river Tyne. The best one weighs 107 grains, gross. There were also florins and half- florins of the same issue, now extremely rare. At first and differing from the advice of the council in parliament, the double-florins were made full legal-tenders in " all manner of payments," afterwards op- tional legal-tenders; and finally, they were demonetized, all within the same year. They were the first English coins of any kind upon which were stamped the words, dei gratia." Down to that time the kings of England coined by the grace of Csesar, or, as in John's case, the Pope, his successor. Edward III. first coined by the grace of God. Previous to 1344 the sterlings of Edward III., '^ contained 20^ grains, 0.925 fine, equal to 19^ grains fine silver. Hence the ratio between the double-florin and the sterling or silver penny was about 12.6 for i; too high for gold and too low for silver. As the Flemings were evidently unwilling to accept gold at this valuation and the double-florins found no welcome with the merchants, the king, bent upon the successful issuance of this significant proclamation and token of national independence, ordered a new gold coin to be struck ; where- upon he decried the first one. The second issue, which was made in the same year as the first, was of nobles, weighing 39^ to the pound Tower, same fineness as the double-florins, hence containing 133.8 grains, fine, and valued at six shillings and eight-pence; a ratio of 11.06 for I. These were made legal-tender for all sums of twenty shillings and upwards, but not for any sum below. The obverse of this coin represents the king standing in a ship in mid-channel, obviously in allusion to its international character. Some of the numismatists, however, make it typify the strength of the English navy in 1359, fifteen years after date; others, a victory over corsairs, in 1347, three years after; and others, a naval victory over the French in 1340, four years before. Mr. Keary gives the weight of an extant noble of this issue at 138^ grains, standard. This is evidently exceptionally heavy. ^^ As this was the first issue of gold coins by any Christian king in England, or any king of all England, except the abortive maravedisof Henry III., the expression "old standard" in the mint indenture could only refer to the Byzantine or the Arabian standard. The former was about 0.900, the latter was 0.979 fine (23^ carats). Therefore " old standard " in reference to gold meant the Arabian or sterling standard. ^*Ruding, II, 212. 36 "Old Sterlings." Lowndes. GRADUAL DEVELOPMENT OF ENGLISH NATIONALITY. 345 He also gives the weight of the later issues of 1346 at 128 5-7 grains, standard, and the still later ones of 135 1 to 1360, at 120 grains, stand- ard ; the legal value being always 6s. 8d., or half a mark. The king's seigniorage upon these coins was ^i for each one pound Tower weight of gold, and the charge of the Master of the Mint was t,s. 4^., to- gether ^i .-3:4. As the Tower pound weight was coined into ^^13:3:4 of account, the merchant received back but ;^i2, or scarcely more than 91 per cent., of the gold deposited at the mint. In the follow- ing year the merchant's proportion of the ^13:3:4 coined out of his pound weight of gold, was raised from ^12 10^12:13:4; thus leav- ing to the crown and mint only 4 per cent.'" When the crown came to deal with the Flemings it found that people less compliant than it had wished. They agreed to accept gold nobles to be coined under the king's authority in Flanders, provided they could agree upon a proper division of the profits from the coinage." To determine this proportion and superintend the issuance of the coins, commissioners were sent to Ghent, Bruges, and Ipre, but the result of the negotiations is not definitively known. Froissart and Grafton both state that Edward struck gold coins at Antwerp in 1337, none of which are extant, and it may be the same with the Anglo- Flemish gold coins proposed in 1344. In a mint-indenture of 1345 the weight of the noble was reduced. The pound Tower of gold, 23 jE^ carats fine, was to be coined into 42 nobles, each valued at 80 sterl- ings. In 135 1 the noble was reduced to 120 grains standard, without alteration of nominal value, which continued as before, at 6s. 8d. One thing more. This coin convention with the Flemings is the earliest, or among the earliest, international monetary treaties known in history,since the establishment of the Sacred empire. If the "king- doms" of France, Spain, Portugal, England, Burgundy, etc., were as independent as the modern historians of those countries would fain pretend, why is it that they have not been able to produce the evi- dence of any international conventions or treaties between them pre- vious to the Fall of Constantinople, and why is it that such conven- tions took place immediately after that event and have continued at intervals to take place down to the present day? This completes our numismatic evidences. The view that has herein been asserted with respect to the constitution of the Roman empire ^* Ruding, II, 165, 174. ^' Ruding, II, 194. The Flemish ratio of the time was evidently lofori; therefore, to warrant the acceptance of the gold nobles in Flanders at Edward's valuation, the Plemings must have been obliged to demand the entire abandonment of the seigniorage, to which, of course, the English commissioners would not assent. 346 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. and its relations to England, run contrary to the entire stream of his- tory, as depicted in the pages of popular writers; and it had to be sup- ported by a strong array of proofs. Down to the issuance of the gold nobles, the monetary systems of the English monarchy belonged to the Empire, they conserved no local or national principles, they contained no lessons for Englishmen. But from this moment they assume an entirely different phase and bearing, they become imbued with life, they partake of the spirit which had begun to animate the nation to which they belong, they occupy a distinct position in the British Constitution, and they bear upon them the marks of those end- less struggles and vicissitudes through which the Anglo-Saxon races have borne the standard of religious and political liberty. To those to whom the ratio of value between the precious metals appears due to any other circumstance than the arbitrary laws of na- tional mints, or to those whose attention to the history of this recon- dite subject has now been drawn for the first time, the ratio may seem a strange or inadequate criterion of political or religious domina- tion. But it is precisely in such obscure relations between great and little things, that an Allwise Creator has sheltered the truth of his- tory from man's destructive powers. The forgery of books, the de- facement of monuments, the perversion of evidences, the extermination .of non-conformists, the invention of fabulous cosmogonies and super- stitious fictions, all are made in vain to conceal or crush the Truth, so long as a blade of grass or a breath of air remains on earth to re- veal it; for all Nature is united in a mysterious harmony, and to even approximately master one branch of science is to gain a key, which, with patience and industry, may eventually unlock for us all the others. 347 CHAPTER XX. VASSAL KINGS OF ENGLAND. Previous to 1204 the Kings of England were vassals to Byzantium — Afterwards they were vassals to Rome — Examples from the Papal Registers — From Matthew Paris — From other sources. THE vassalage of the European princes to the Roman Empire has been shown in previous chapters; their vassalage to the See of Rome, after the Fall of Constantinople, will form the especial subject of the present chapter. In the " Calendar of entries in the Papal Registers relating to Great Britain and Ireland," published in 1893 by Mr. W. H. Bliss, appear numerous mandates from the Papal See to both the Norman and Plan- tagenet kings of England, the nature of which clearly proves them to have been vassals of Rome. Under the year 1201-2 appears a "Letter from Otho, emperor-elect of the Romans, to the pope, informing him that the king of England (John) is bound to give help to the Emperor against all enemies, and to make peace with France, as he himself is bound by order of the pope, whom he thanks, next to God, for his promotion." The following passages are all from the English edition of Matthew Paris: In A. D. 1 236, Henry III. declared to an assemblage of his nobles at Winchester, that the pope alone had the authority to grant and annul rights in his kingdom. Vol. i, p. 34. In 1237, the king "declared that he could not arrange any business of the kingdom, make any al- terations or alienations, without the consent of his Lord the pope, or the legate, (Otto,) so that he might be said to be not a king, but a vassal of the pope. " p. 68. In the same year, the legate, Otto, ' ' whose footsteps the king worshipped," announced at St. Paul's that he had been sent by the Papal See as legate ' ' to iheprovince of England. " p. 69. In 1238, the king of England sent a body of troops, under the com- mand of Henry de Trubleville, to assist the Emperor against his rebel- lious subjects in the Italian provinces, p. 129. " The Emperor having 34^ THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. continued the siege of Milan, almost all the Christian princes sent him auxiliary troops. " p. 133. In 1239, the Emperor (Frederick II.) said; "I have sworn, as the world well knows, to recover the scattered por- tions of the Empire." p. 163. In 1239, the Emperor, (Frederick II.,) replying to pope Gregory, declared that the taxes demanded by the imperial ofificers from ecclesiastics were not upon the property of the church, but for feudal and patrimonial dues, "according to the com- mon law, (of Rome,) and this is in force in all parts of the world." p. 185. In 1239, the Emperor declared, in a letter to the western princes, that the pope's conduct was alienating "the nations" from "the Imperial sceptre." p. 191. In 1239, the pope, writing to the Emperor Otto, declared that the Pontificate had raised the Emperor to ' ' the summit of secular power, " and that in such position he was "its vassal." p. 197. In 1239, the Emperor wrote to his brother-in-law, Richard, earl of Cornwall, con- cerning the pope : ' ' For the humiliation of all other kings and princes becomes an easy matter, when the power of the Csesars of the Romans is first overthrown," and that the pope had violated his agreement to "apply to Our uses, the tithes of the whole world." p. 212. In 1239, the pope identifies as one " the Empire and the whole Christian com- munity." p. 225. In 1239, the pope sent letters to "all the prelates and nobles dwelling in Germany and other parts of the Empire. " p. 239. In 1239, when Gregory " condemned and cut off the so-called Em- peror Frederick from the imperial dignity and elected count Robert, brother of the French king, in his stead," the French king replied that Frederick " could not be deprived of his crown, unless by a decision of a General Council." p. 242. In 1240, king Henry III. admitted, in writing to the Emperor concerning himself, the king, that "he was a tributary or vassal of the pope. " p. 257. In the same year Frederick reproached Henry with permitting the pope "to boast that he has the power of a liege Lord over you " ; and Henry replied that "he did not dare to oppose the pope." p. 268. On the first day (Christmas) of the year 1241, the king (Henry) seated the pope's legate in his own royal seat at table, and sat on the legate's right hand. p. 318. In 1241, the Emperor wrote to the king of England and the other princes of the Roman Empire, attributing the Tartar invasion to the dissentions produced by the intrigues of the Pontificate, and entreated them to sustain, " the victorious eagles of the potent European Empire," exhorting Germany, France, Spain, England, Almaine, Dacia, Italy, Burgundy, Apulia, Ireland, Scotland, Norway, the Islands of the Sea, "and every noble and renowned coun- VASSAL KINGS OF ENGLAND. 349 try lying within the Royal Star of the West," to rally to the defense of the Empire, p. 347. In 1241, Frederick wrote to King Henry that God had ' ' decreed that the Machine of the World is to be governed, not alone by the priesthood, but by sovereignty and priesthood to- gether." p. 355. In 1244, Frederick drove the Tartars out of Hun- gary, and in turn received the homage of the king of Hungary, who was bound to supply the Empire with "300 knights and their followers, to fight on the borders for the Emperor, loyally and faithfully. " p. 490. In 1244, Frederick, writing to Richard, earl of Cornwall, terms his dominions "the Sacred Empire," and himself "our Magnificence," and repeats instructions " to you and the other kings and princes of Christendom." p. 494. In 1 244, David, ' ' prince of Wales, a petty vassal of the king of Eng- land . . . wishing to free his neck from the yoke of allegiance to the king, fled to the papal wings for protection, promising to hold that part of Wales which belonged to him, from the pope himself. The pope, in consequence, favored his cause," and accepted his presents and tribute, p. 511. In 1245, the pope ordered the abbots of Aber- conway and Kemere to enquire into the matter, and, if deemed ex- pedient, to release the prince of Wales from his oath of fidelity to the king of England. These instructions having been shown to Henry, he renewed the war against David. " When the pope heard of this, he winked at and concealed it all, but did not, however, restore to David the presents he had received from him." Vol. 11, 39. In 1245, the pope declared: " We have determined to convoke the kings of the earth, the prelates of the churches, and other magnates of the world in general," to a council, p. 49. In 1245, at the Council of Lyons, which was attended by delegates from the king of England, the pope, (Innocent,) excommunicated the Emperor Frederick, be- cause, among other offenses, "he has omitted for nine years and more to pay the annual pension of a thousand sequins, in which he is bound to the Roman church, for the tenure of the said kingdom." pp. 85, 148. In 1245, the pope attempted to bribe the electors with "15,000 pounds of silver," to elect anew Emperor; but the scheme was defeated by Frederick, p. 95. Said Frederick, of the pope, in 1245, in acircularletter to the kingsof the West, " Does his vulgar pride toss him to such heights as to enable him to hurl from the Imperial dignity, Me, the chief Prince of the World, than whom none is greater, yea, who am without an equal?" p. 103, There has been adduced no evidence that any of the kings thus addressed denied the claim of suzerainty made by the Emperor. 35° THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. In 1245, the Emperor wrote to the king of England and the other Western princes: "What will there not remain for each of you kings of each kingdom to fear, from the face of such a prince of priests, (the pope,) if he attempts to depose Us, who have been hon- oured, as it were, from Heaven, with the Imperial diadem, by the solemn election of princes, and with the approbation of the whole church?" p. 105. Also: " We will give you further information more secretly how we propose to arrange concerning the affairs of kings in general and of each one in particular." p. 106. In 1245, "the pope, with a patient mind and the eyes of connivance, dissemblingly passed by all these things, " and instructed all the bishops of England to affix their seals of attestation to the charter by which, half a century pre- viously, king John had acknowledged his kingdom a fief of the Pont- ificate and had agreed to pay it tribute, p. no. In 1245, the bishop of Beyrout came to England, with authority from the pope to preach a crusade and collect money, on being shown which authority, the king replied that ' 'we have been so often deceived by the Roman court," that "you will scarcely find anyone who will put faith in you." p. 117. In 1246, it was rumoured that upon the hearing of this, the pope declared that when he had subdued the Em- peror Frederick, " he would afterwards tread down the insolent pride of the English." p. 129. In 1246, at a Parliament held in London, the king read to the earls, barons, abbots, and priors, then present, an address ' in which the grievances, tyrannies, oppressions, and ex- tortions, of the pope, were set forth at length, and upon this it was unanimously resolved that the spiritual lords should petition his Holi- ness to abate his '' insupportable yoke." p. 148. A similar petition was addressed to the pope by the temporal lords, claiming to repre- sent themselves and the inferior clergy and ' ' people in general. " p. 150. And a similar petition by the king. p. 155. And still another petition setting forth that the knights' service and military service, horses, and arms, demanded for the service of the Roman See, was an unendurable burden, p. 156. All these complaints were treated by the pope with contempt, p. 175. In 1246, Frederick complained to the nobles of England that the pope had unwarrantably put him under the ban of the law," who is, by his Imperial rank, freed from all law, in whom temporal punish- ments ought to be inflicted, not by man, but by God, as he has no superior amongst men." p. 161. Hecontinues: "It commences indeed ' This address, given at length by Matthew Paris, constitutes a veritable Declaration of Independence; and is a much more interesting document than Magna Charta. VASSAL KINGS OF ENGLAND. 35 I with Us, but rest assured it will continue with other kings and princes, if Our sovereignty can be trodden under foot in the first place." p. 162. In i246,thecount of Savoy paid homage to the king of England, "with- out violating his faith, or injuring the Emperor or the Empire." p. 167. In the same year, the Holy See, having ordered that " if any clerk should die intestate, his property should be converted to the use of the pope," the king "forbade the decree being fulfilled; the first instance of insubordination on his part." p. 169. The king also for- bade the payment of talliages to the pope, until the reply of the latter was received, p. 170. Notwithstanding this, the pope " made a most urgent demand for money, placing his confidence in gold and silver, treating with contempt the mournful complaints of the king of Eng- land and the whole community. " p. 170. Frederick declared that "the Roman Church had never such effectual grounds for extorting money from the Christians, on which it had fattened and grown proud, as on the pretense of the Holy Land and the sophistical preaching of crus- ades for its liberation." p. 174. In spite of all this, king Henry suc- cumbed to the authority of the pope ; ' ' hence all the endeavours of the nobles, as well as of the bishops, were of no avail, and all hope oi the freedom of the kingdom, and of the English church, died away. " p. 176. The pope ordered that the gains of usurers and of all persons dying intestate," which had been acquired by usury," or by malpractices, or which was " rightly due to others," and the property of all persons living "which had been evilly acquired," should be collected "for the benefit of the Empire of Constantinople," which was now under the control of the Holy See. p. 179. Matthew Paris accuses Richard, earl of Cornwall, of serving the pope, ' ' to the ruin of the English king- dom and the detriment of the Empire." p. 189. " The notaries and accountants of the Roman court yield like wax to bribery and hire." p. 207. In 1247, "some adhered to Frederick as if to the Empire, and others to the pope, as if to the church." p. 235. In 1248, the pope, in a conference with the French king at Lyons, alluded to " the king of England, our vassal." p. 268. In 1249, Henry, king of England, "was forbidden by Master Albert, in the name of the pope, to attack in any way, whatever, any territory held under any title by the king of France." pp. 290, 527. It was believed that " the pope eagerly desired, above all things, to overthrow Frederick, in order that he might more easily trample down the French and Eng- lish kings and other kings of Christendom, all of whom he called petty princes and little serpents. " p. 328. In 1250, the king of England hav- ing complained to the pope that the bishops of England had assumed 352 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. command of his sheriffs and bailiffs, pope Innocent IV. ordered the bishops to refrain from such meddling, p. 337. It is submitted that these passages afford ample proof of the asser- tion that down to the reign of Henry III., the king of England was not a sovereign, but was a vassal, either of the pope or the Emperor. Nothing is easier than to write history upon familiar or accepted lines: nothing is easier than to float with the tide. Every bit of idle flotsam impels the voyager on his way and guards him from hostile approach. On the contrary, nothing is more difficult than to write history upon unfamiliar or objectionable lines. The friendly flotsam are now turned to snags and rocks which, one by one, have to be pushed aside or destroyed, if the adventurer is to survive and carry his reader safely into port. Every step upon such a course is a struggle ; every line a field of dispute; every misplaced word or turned letter, a fresh proof of the writer's ignorance or incapacity. In bringing forward the^palateable proofs of England's subordi- nancy to the Roman EmpirCj something more is implied than the poli- tical status of an ancient kingdom, concerning which, only the jurist and historical student might possess a., practical interest. Among other things, it throws some doubt upon t"he validity of certain Titles of Honour, which their present wearers pretend to have derived from kings whom it is herein shown had no authority to grant them. Not- withstanding the resentment which this may occasion, the truth must be told, and the truth appears to be that, down to the reign of the Plan- tagenet Kings, England was not an independent sovereign kingdom. 353 CHAPTER XXI. BIRTH OF THE INDEPENDENT MONARCHY. Impetus afforded to the development of national independence by the Great Inter- regnum — Assertions of English national authority — Suppression of Roman tribunals — Discouragement of Roman benefices — Statute of premunire — Establishment of English national law — Of the House of Commons — Of the English language in the courts — Royal assumption cf the right to charter trade-guilds — Assumption of national control over the precious metals and money — Assumption of Mines-Royal — Assump- tion of treasure-trove — Royal coinage of gold — Interdict of the besant — Trial of the Pix — Royal monetary commission — Suppression of episcopal and baronial mints — Export of precious metals prohibited — First complete national sovereignty of money — Prohibition of tribute to Rome — Conclusion. GREAT events do not occur alone. They appear neither unher- alded nor unsung. Minor facts presage them; others proclaim their existence; still others crowed about them to exalt their greatness; and a long heritage remains to chronicle them and attest them. The independence of England was not an isolated event. It was preceded, accompanied and followed by numerous others, some of which fore- told its coming, while others commemorated its occurrence. Among the former class was the coinage of gold by Henry III. This act pro- claimed an assumption of sovereign power which Henry's weak and faithless character was not fitted to support, either by moral courage or force of arms. It bears the same relation to England's Declaration of Independence as the coinage of Pine-Tree shillings did to that of America. It was the trumpet sound of a coming event ; not the event itself. The latter was marked by the magnificent gold coinage of j 1344, upon which Edward is pourtrayed with a drawn sword and \iy^ standing on the deck of a man-of-ra^, asserting his readiness to j defend the new born liberties of his country, if necessary, againsfc' the world. The interval between the coinages of Henry and Edward was filled with significant events. Prominent among these was that Great In- terregnum ' which marked the fall of the Medieval German empire * The name given to the interval between the death of Frederick II., and the accept- ance of the so-called imperial crown by Rudolph of Hapsburg, in 1273. 354 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. and the dissolution of that partnership of Cunning and Ambition which had joined the intrigues of Leo III. to the dripping swords of Pepin and Charlemagne. Frederick II. died in 1 250, and as Mr. Bryce pithily remarks, "with Frederick, fell the empire." The brief and eventless reign of Conrad IV., and the assassination of Conradin by the con- nivance and with the approval of Pope Clement, ended the Suabian line of "emperors, "but furnished no basis for a new dynasty. In vain did the See of Rome urge Richard of Cornwall, Alfonso of Castile, and others, to fill its now puppet-throne of empire. In vain did it urge upon the western princes the necessity of choosing an ' * imperial" sovereign. It met with nothing but respectful apathy. Edward was not the only prince who during or shortly after the Interregnum drew an independent national sword. The Church had extinguished both the Basileus and the " Emperor"; there was no longer any empire, neither Sacred, nor Holy, neither eastern, nor western. The edifice which Csesar had erected had often given way and had been as often propped up, patched and repaired. This time it went to pieces, and many of these pieces disappeared in the void of the Interregnum. The pope remained master of the field, but the field was now a desert, in which he stood alone, abandoned by all the world. The princes of Europe, the proconsuls, dukes and kings of the Roman provincial states, were free. Nay more, the people also were free and the Com- mons were born again. Yet though long since condemned by the uni- versal voice of Europe, though dismembered and past all hope of resuscitation, there was still enough vitality in the empire to make at least a show of authority. The pope of Rome had been its unwitting executioner, he was now its legatee, and as such he possessed suffi- cient resources to make a final struggle to revive it. This struggle did not come to a close until the reigns of Philip le Bel and Edward III. Boniface VIII. had written to Philip claiming him as "a sub- ject both in spirituals and temporals." To this, Philip had replied, " We give your Foolship to know that in temporals we are subject to no man. " ^ And with this contemptuous retort was blown out the last spark of Caesar's Empire. From this period commenced a New ^ra in the development of European liberty. Previously the movement against tyranny was di- rected both against the "emperor" and the pope and therefore was divided and weakened. It had now only to contend against the pope ; and the result was that it won many important victories. In the long series of oppressions and indignities which Britain had submitted to ^ Brady, 11, 84. BIRTH OF THE INDEPENDENT MONARCHY. 355 from Rome, not the least one appears to have been the statute Articuli cleri, made in 1316, which provided among other things that even where clerks, accused of theft, robbery or murder, made confession of their guilt before temporal judges, they should not be tried or con- demned by such judges, but only by judges appointed by the Church.^ The enactment of this statute revived the original causes of difference between the spiritual and temporal powers, whose joint authority was practically effective only when wielded by a single person; a principle which had been often illustrated under the Sacred Constitution, as modified by Diocletian, Constantine, and Theodosius. Another indignity, which, though of great antiquity, was now first so keenly felt in England as to excite general resentment, was the appointment of foreigners, chiefly Italians, to vacant benefices, and the diversion of their revenues to the uses of the papacy. Such resent- ment was strongly voiced in the remonstrance of Edward III., about 1343, in which, among other matters, he represented, "That by these provisions and reservations (namely, the practice of the Sacred College to fill vacant benefices, etc. ,) the encouragements of religion were be- stowed upon unqualified and mercenary foreigners, who neither re- sided in the country nor understood its language, by which means the ends of the priesthood were not answered, his (Edward's) own sub- jects were discouraged from prosecuting their studies, the treasures of the kingdom were carried off by strangers, the jurisdiction of its courts was baffled by constant appeals to a foreign authority, and both the crown and private persons were deprived of their most Un- questionable Rights. These mischiefs are now become intolerable, and our own subjects in parliament have earnestly requested us to put a stop to them by som_e speedy and effectual remedy." * The ecclesiastical statute, Articuli cleri, was checkmated by the royal statute of Premunire, which made it a misdemeanour punishable with forfeiture and imprisonment, to appeal from the decisions of the King's courts to those of the pope ; whilst the Roman gift of benefices was met by the English statute of Provisions (135 1) which made it pun- ishable in the same manner to procure any such favours from the pontificate. It was not for nothing that Edward represented himself as standing upon a ship with a drawn sword. It meant that England was no longer a province, and that the only enemies she could now have, dwelt beyond the sea. In 1398 the wily pope, seizing a favour- able opportunity, sought to induce the king of England to repeal these ^Coke's Institutes, part 2, p. 601, etc.; Henr}^ " Hist. Brit.," iv, ii, 49. *T. Walsingham, p. 161; Henry, "Hist. Brit.," iv, ii, 55. 356 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. Statutes; but although the papal legate was received with respect and loaded with gifts, the statutes remained in force/ The origin of the Common Law of England is -usually assigned to the thirteenth century, with the reservation that "traces of it are to be found at earlier dates." Such indefiniteness bespeaks uncertainty. What is the common law of England, and has this expression always meant what it does now? We are told that the common law is the lex non scripta; but it can be asserted with confidence that at no time after the acceptance of Christianity and the restoration of Roman gov- ernment did the lex non scripta form any material part of the general law. Were the laws of Ethelbert leges non scriptae? Thanks to Lam- bard and Wilkins, we have them yet. The English reader will find find them in Dr. Henry's laboured collection. Were the Roman laws of Alfred, the Norse laws of Offa, the Danish laws of Canute, the ghostly Code of Edward Confessor, or the Institutes of Bracton, leges non scriptae? Next we are told it was the feudal or manorial laws; but this is denied by both Coke, Selden, and others, who contend that the feudal laws existed in England during the heptarchical period, and therefore before there was any general law of England, whether common or otherwise, an opinion concerning whose soundness it is hoped that the readers of this volume are now in a position to judge for themselves. Finally, we are told that it was the dicta of the bench ; but there was no bench, in the sense implied ; there were no national tribunals; there was no nation. During the heptarchy there were never less than three, sometimes seven or eight, different provincial codes of law enforced in England. The well-known diversity of moneys, weights, and measures, corroborates this opinion at once. Beneath these codes of law was a multitude of feudal customs, prac- tically of local or manorial jurisdiction, and above them all, the law of Rome. The bench was the earl's audience chamber, the thane's dining hall, the cell of some dark intriguant, who dwelt in Canter- bury, Winchester, St. Albans, or Rome. Alfred attempted to bring the heptarchical codes into one, and his compilation, modified in turn both by Edgar and Edward Confessor, was extant, in a written form, so late as the reign of Edward IV., when its vassalian admissions to Rome compelled it to be destroyed. It never was the law of England; it was the West Saxon, in other words, the papal or ecclesiastical view of what the law of England should be when the Norse chieftains were thoroughly subdued and the rebellious Norse seed was exterminated. The term common law was invented by the jurisconsults to mean * Henry, " Hist. Brit.," iv, ii, 79. BIRTH OF THE INDEPENDENT MONARCHY. 357 something that, in the then state of public opinion, they dared not explain. At the present time the law is the law, common or uncom- mon, written or not written. There is but one authority and but one law. When there was more than one law, there was another authority besides the crown, and that authority was the Empire. Previous to Magna Charta the law of England was the Corpus Juris Civilis, as modified in the conflicts waged against it by the Anglo-Saxons and Nor- mans, whenever they clearly perceived its hierarchical bearing. Such modifications especially distinguish the Mercian and Danish laws. Illustrations of this antagonism will also be found in the changes to which Magna Charta itself was subjected during its various enact- ments and re-enactments; in the constitutions of Clarendon, 1164; and in the statutes of Mortmain, of Uses, etc. The basis of this an- tagonism was the mysterious common law. This law will be found neither in the Norse codes of retts, nor the codes of the Christian princes, nor in any similar compilation. These codes were mere cari- catures, not indeed of the Roman law, but of the Roman peculiarity of having any definite law at all. They acknowledged their own in- feriority and vanished, the moment they were ushered into the pres- ence of the majestic code of Rome. The common law to which we allude was never administered from any English bench, it was treas- ured up from the ancient Commonwealth of Rome, in the minds, in the spirit, of the Gothic people; it was not the result, but the origin of those medieval customs which aimed to preserve the liberties of the common people; it came not from hierarchical prescription, but from ancient memories, purified by the air of freedom, the spirit of the sea, the woods, the long march, and the clash of arms. That was the law which bade the Frankish soldiers to smash the vase of Clovis, and Harold, the English king, to offer the invader just six feet by two of the national soil. It was more than a law; it was a religion; the religion of the people. Beside this passionate love of liberty, and beside its bases, a sense of manhood and the pluck to maintain it against any odds — attributes of the Gothic races as strongly marked to-day as at any period of his- tory — there was no national law of England previous to the fourteenth century. The law of England was the law of Rome, and to admit this is what some jurisconsults indulge, what is now, a mere false pride in avoiding. Until the fourteenth century there were no acts of an Eng- lish legislature ; there was no such legislature. There were no general or national laws; there was no independent sovereignty. There were no mint-acts; the coinage was subject to the Empire. The written 358 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. law of England consisted of ten centuries of Roman jurisprudence, piled on top of a barbarian code of retts, which had become so at- tenuated that only the faintest traces of it remained. That such was also the case at the same period both in France and Spain is a fact that furnishes strong corroborative testimony to the soundness of this opinion. The development of that august legislature which can not only make and repeal laws, but also create and depose sovereigns, and establish or alter the religion of a country, evinces a similar course; it began in the reign of Henry, it was completed in that of Edward. The first assemblage of knights and burgesses, the beginning of the House of Commons, took place in 1258; butasyetit was only a Council or parliament; its assent first became essential to the enactment of law in 1308 ; it elected its first presiding officer in 1377 ; it first deposed a monarch in 1399." The adoption of a distinctive national language belongs to the same sera. Although hybrid tongues, in which Gothic, Gaelic,Roman,andNorman-Frenchstruggledforascendency, had cent- uries before become the common speech of Britain, the language of literature, law, and religion, was still Roman.' In the reign of Henry III.,thisbegan to give way to Norman-French; in the reign of Edward III., it succumbed to English. The earliest instrument extant in this language is of the year 1343. It was not until 1362 (26 Edward III., c. 15,) that English was required to be used in law pleadings.® In that distorted vision of the past, which, under the narcotic and bewildering influence of monkish history, has usurped an unmerited place in our beliefs, we are made to overlook, among other matters, the significant origin of the existing trade-guilds. The significance lies in the fact that they were all created about the thirteenth century. The creation of trade-guilds was eminently a sacerdotal function. Brahma, Numa, Julius Caesar, and, after him, all the Sacred emperors, created such guilds. The creation of a trade-guild by a provincial or vassal prince, for example, the king of England, was a sign that he had emancipated or attempted to emancipate himself from Imperial control. In common with his assumption of other imperial preroga- tives, it was a declaration of independence, and as such it possesses an importance which has not hitherto been recognized. It has been ^ Coke; Hannay. In the celebrated case of the baron de Wahull, the crown lawyers denied his claim on the ground that there had been no summons to parliament. They might have gone further and denied that there had been any parliament at all, in the sense claimed. ' Until the reign of Edward III., it was a capital offense to read the Scriptures in the English language; indeed the Roman law on that subject was not formally repealed until the fifteenth century. ^ " Seven Ages of England," p. 95. BIRTH OF THE INDEPENDENT MONARCHY. 359 asserted that the London city companies have outlived their useful- ness. Be that as it may, they have not outlived their significance. Another of the great political signs which mark the birth of the English monarchy was the assumption by the crown of entire control over the precious metals. This was accomplished by various steps, the assertion of mines-royal, treasure-trove, coinage of gold, demon- etization of the imperial besant and other coins, ordinances concern- ing the movement of the metals, the suppression of episcopal and bar- onial mints, the trial of the pix, the regulation of the standard, and the doctrine of National Money. All these steps were accomplished at this period. Control, over such supplies as mining and commerce afford of th& material out of which money is to be made by the sovereign power is a necessary corrollary of the sovereign right to create money, and the two prerogatives will always be found hand in hand.^ The doctrine of mines-royal holds that all mines producing such materials belong of necessity to the crown. Down to the fall of the Sacred empire the only material out of which the princes of Europe could lawfully cre- ate money was silver; '" after that period such material or materials included gold. The earliest assertion of mines-royal, including gold as well as silver, by any Christian king, was made by Louis IX., of France. He was followed by Henry HL, who in 1263 asserted for the first time in England a similar doctrine and prerogative. But Henry, though in this, as well as ocher respects, he frequently assumed an at- titude of independent sovereignty, was easily bullied out of it by the effrontery and swagger of the pope; so that according to Matthew Paris, the independence of England was oft asserted and surrendered during his weak reign. The heroic example of Frederick II., in de- fying the impudent claims of the Vatican was thrown away upon this superstitious and faithless voluptuary, who saw his country again and again led captive to the foot of a foreign throne, rather than brave a single curse from the lips of a scheming pontiff. The prerogative of mines-royal was therefore practically abandoned until the period of the first issue of gold coins by Edward III. , when, without any formal- ity, it again came into force and has so remained with little change down to the present time. We have seen the prerogative of treasure-trove adopted, held, and subsequently relinquished, by the pagan sovereign pontiff, (Hadrian,) ^ A proper adjustment of the rights of government to mines of the precious metals, both in England, France, Spain, and America, still awaits the dispassionate considera- tion of this great principle. On this subject, consult the author's " History of Money." '" With regard to copper, see elsewhere herein. 360 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. who equitably divided it between property and discovery, and we have seen his right to deal with it fall into the hands of the proconsuls and feudal kings and other lords who ruled in his name. What disposition they made of it does not appear in the chronicles of the medieval ages, but we need no chronicle to inform us. The chance discovery of a hidden treasure was not like the opening or working of amine, a public and onerous enterprise, involving outlays of capital, the co- operation of numerous persons and the permission of the authorities. On the contrary, the finding of hidden treasure was of a secret and furtive character, and in the medieval ages troven treasure practically belonged to him who could keep it. The earliest public notice of the subject in England relates to the reign of Edward Confessor, who declared that all of the gold and one-half of all silver treasure-trove belonged of right to the king. It will be borne in mind that the Eng- land of this prince only embraced a portion of the present kingdom. We next hear of treasure-trove in the reign of Louis IX., of France, 1226-70, who declared "Fortune d'or est au Roi; fortune d'argent est au baron," thus claiming gold treasure-trove for the crown and relinquishing silver to the nobles." The coinage of gold, first timidly attempted by Henry, then boldly and resolutely begun by Edward, has been sufficiently treated in other parts of this work. It is only necessary to repeat here that it now forms and has always formed practically the most striking, notorious and unequivocal assertion which it is possible to make of sovereign authority and power; and that its entire relinquishment and avoid- ance by the western Christian princes until the Fall of Constantino- ple, is to be accounted for on no other sufficient grounds than that the Basileus was universally conceded to be in certain respects the lawful successor of Constantine and therefore, as to such matters, the lawful suzerain of the Empire to which they owed fea.'ty. An inter- mediate step between the acts of Henry and Edward III., was taken by Edward I., who in 1291 or thereabouts, the date being uncertain, ordered that no foreign coins should be admitted into the kingdom, except such as might be in use by travellers and others for casual ex- penses, and as to these he provided public offices where they might be exchanged. This law evidently included and aimed at the besant, then the most important "foreign" coin in circulation, for with re- gard to other foreign coins, they appear to have been as numerous and as commonly employed in England after this enactment as before." The policy of regulating or attempting to regulate the import and " Etablissements, livre i, chapter xv. " Jacob, " Hist. Prec. Met.," p. 204. BIRTH OF THE INDEPENDENT MONARCHY. 361 export movement of the precious metals, which we have seen from Cicero, Pliny and other authors, was pursued by the Roman state " both as it approached and after it had assumed the condition of an empire, was also first adopted by the king of England during the Plantagenet period. It is true that Mr. J. R. McCulloch was of opin- ion that this policy was pursued in England before the Norman con- quest, but as he has offered no proofs to support it and the coinage and other legislation respecting gold contradicts it, the author is com- pelled, though with reluctance, to differ, in this instance, from that distinguished economist.'* The same policy of regulating the move- ment of gold and silver, now erroneously known as the Mercantile System, was assumed by all the states that rose on the ruins of the Empire, but not until they had shaken off its claims to their allegiance. This sudden assumption of a regalian right implies a previous inter- val of over thirteen centuries, during which, save the Empire itself, there was no permanently independent sovereign state within the do- main of Christendom. Analogous to this regalian right was that of purging the kingdom of episcopal and baronial mints, with the view to concentrate the pre- rogative of providing an unital Measure of Value for the whole king- dom and placing it in the hands of the sovereign. That right was evidently attempted to be exercised by means of the Monetary Com- mission of 1293,(22 Edward I.,) which was appointed to examine the various coins employed throughout the kingdom and report upon the same to the king.'* Another assertion of regalian rights during this period was the Trial of the Fix, which is first specifically mentioned in the Exchequer-rolls, relating to the 9th or loth Edward I. , about 1280 or 1281. The regulation of the standards of weight and fineness is necessa- rily connected with the prerogative of coinage. So long as the Sacred empire remained, the coinage prerogative of the Basileus — which the princes of Christendom had never presumed to violate — acted as a continual check upon any desire or tendency on their part to adulter- ate or lower the coinage. Anybody could balance a quarter-besant against a silver penny,and so settle out of hand the question of weight. That of fineness, though not susceptible of so satisfactory a solution, was almost as readily determinable with the aid of the touchstone. By these means, the tendency of the vassal princes of the empire to '^ At that period, for reasons which the readers of this work will understand, it was confined to gold. '* J. R. McCulloch, " PoHt. Econ.," p. 27. '° The text of the instructions to this commission is preserved in Madox's " History of the Exchequer," i, 293, note F. 362 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. adulterate their silver coinage, was effectually defeated. That such was their desire and tendency and that they often attempted to in- dulge it, has been abundantly proved; and to rid themselves of the serious restraints which the ancient prerogatives of the Basileus im- posed upon their fiscal operations, they would probably have been glad to enlist in a dozen crusades instead of five. But whilst the Sacred and faineant empire actually lasted — and this it did so long as the pope hesitated to destroy it — the Christian princes had to return sooner or later to the ratio of value and the standard of weight and fineness im- posed upon them by its senile, but venerable authority. The moment the Empire fell, all restraint flew before the winds. The standards then and for the first time began to permanently vary ; and they con- tinued to vary until all sight of the originals was lost. Indeed nothing more curiously yet unerringly marks the emergence of the Christian princes from the position of vassals to that of independent monarchs, than the open, flagitious, and radical alteration, debasement, and degra- dation of the coinage, which began in all parts of Europe after the Fall of Constantinople, and which, unlike all previous alterations, parted entirely from the original Roman standards and never returned to them. In all its aspects Money is the most certain indication of sover- eignty, but in none of them so absolutely as in the practical and con- tinued assertion of the principle that " that is money which the State declares to be money." We have seen this principle asserted by the ancient Commonwealth, preserved by Paulus and enshrined forever in the Digest. It was practically observed and employed by every sovereign of the Empire, but, until the downfall of the Empire, by no other prince of Christendom. Then, like all the other preroga- tives left by the defunct Basileus, this one was assumed by the princes who had shaken off his ancient but dishonoured claims of suzerainty, and we first hear of it in England during the reign of Edward III.'* If we turn from the prerogatives of the Basileus to those of the Pope, to mark the end as we have already marked the beginning and progress of those practical assertions of sovereignty which constitute the Birth of the Independent Monarchy of England, we shall find it in 1366, the fortieth year of the glorious reign of Edward III. In that year it was ordered that Peter's-pence should no more be gath- ered in England, or paid to Rome." '^ Plowden's Com., 316; Polydore Vergil; Pari. Rolls, 21 Edward III., fol. 60; and the Mixt Moneys Case in " State Trials," 11, 114. " Cooper's Chronicle, fol. 245; Stowe, 461; Fabian's Chron. relating to 40 Edw.IIL, in Nicholson's " Hist. Lit."; Statute 25 Henry VIII., c. 21 (1533); Ruding, 11, 205. BIRTH OF THE INDEPENDENT MONARCHY. 3O3 One of the earliest assertions of sovereign power on the part of the king of England consisted in an attempt to deprive the empire or the pontificate of the revenues which it derived from fairs. The statute of 13 Edward I., 1285 § 16, says: "And the king commandeth and forbiddeth that from henceforth neither fairs nor markets shall be kept in ehurch-yards. " '® In the statute pro moneta examinando, 22 Edward I., (Rot. 3 b.,) they are still called by their ancient name, "nundinis feriis," and may have been held on the ninth day. Not- withstanding the statute of Edward I., the pontificate seems to have held on to this prerogative of the Caesars until the reign of Edward III., at which time the crown picked it up, to voluntarily relinquish it to the people in the following century; since which time the hold- ing of fairs has been free." Here we rest our case. It has been shown in the clearest manner that the lawful supremacy of the Sacred Empire is the guide to all modern history; that it was acknowledged in the Treaty of Seltz ; that it was implied by the Forgery of the Decretals, proved by the coinage, confirmed by the acquies- cence of all the Christian princes, corroborated by common belief, custom, and Holy Writ, and demonstrated by that sudden repudia- tion of vassalage and assertion of national independence on the part of the Christian states, which followed quick upon the dissolution of the Empire. The monarch of this empire had once been an incarnated god, a king of kings, a supreme arbiter of the world. From a god he had fallen to the rank of a demi-god and from that to a Basileus, or sacred sov- ereign-pontiff. In the ninth century this monarch of falling powers was fain to concede the temporal government of the western prov- inces of his empire to Chrrlemagne and his successors. In conceding to Charlemagne the spiritual government of these same provinces, the Basileus had demanded and obtained certain reservations of au- thority, which, if not all of them essential to the government of a state, were nevertheless of sufficient importance to mark the rank of the Basileus. He reserved in his title of Sacred sovereign something of what it implied, including the right to be regarded as the spiritual head of the Roman church, the right to altar the calendar, to appoint festivals, to bestow the title of patrician, duke, exarch, and king, to coin the sacred metal gold, and to fix the relative value of gold and silver throughout all the domains of Christendom, east or west. '^ Statutes at Large, Vol. i. '^ For income from Fairs, see Sinclair's ' Hist, of the Revenue." 364 THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED. Down to the Fall of Constantinople no legal change was made in any of these arrangements, and in most of them no change at all. What the rois faineants had been to the maires du palais, what the mikado still remained to the shogun, so the Sacred sovereign remained to the princes of the west; a Reminiscence of the mythological past, a Leeal Fiction, a Sacred shadow: but a reminiscence that never left the mind, a fiction that exercised rights which no one presumed to question, a shadow that long darkened the earth and that is not yet wholly obliterated. But although these arrangements were not disturbed, the internal structure of the German empire between the ninth and thirteenth centuries underwent important modification. Barring his relations to the Eastern empire, the Treaty of Seltz had left Charlemagne an absolute sovereign. But upon his death the pope of Rome seized the spiritual empire, and to secure this, exerted all his power to keep the temporal one divided. Hence the wars of the Guelphs and Ghibelines. Notwithstanding this divorcement of the spiritual and temporal em- pires, their united authority, whether wielded altogether by, or sub- ject to, the "emperor " of Germany, or the pope of Rome, or divided between them, continued to be respected by the dukes or kings who now reigned over the various provinces of the distracted imperial state. Whatever the name of king now implies, it did not at that period practically mean an independent sovereign. The rulers of the Christ- ian states, whether known as vicars, dukes, or kings, were all vassals of the Roman empire; nay doubly vassals. In respect of certain at- tributes of supreme authority, they were vassals to the Basileus; in respect of all others they were vassals to Rome. Whilst not one of Christian rulers ever ventured, in more than a furtive way, to vio- late the prerogatives of the Basileus; whilst, until towards the end, they did not dare to brave the power of either "emperor" or pope, the rulers of the pagan states, whether Norse, Moorish, or Arabian, vio- lated and defied them all, and asserted in every conceivable manner their complete independence of Caesar's empire, spiritual and tem- poral, past or present, shadowy or real. In laying down these conclusions the author disclaims any intention to depreciate the elevating influences, or to doubt the sublime destiny, of Christianity. On the contrary, he has repeatedly declared his con- viction that through its singular capacity to continually renew itself, Christianity is destined to always remain the paramount religion of the civilized world. At the same time he refuses to accept the monkish account of its origin, or of the part it has played in the history of Rome BIRTH OF THE INDEPENDENT MONARCHY. 365 and of the various states that have issued out of the Roman Empire. This account is plainly fabulous ; it does not agree with the pagan his- tories; it does not agree with the bronze and marble monuments of antiquity; it does not agree with the inscriptions and insignia which the Romans stamped upon their coins; it does not agree with chron- ology ; in short, it is at variance with every valid testimony which has been bequeathed to us by the past, it violates probability and insults common sense. It results from what has gone before that the peculiarity of our civ- ilization, the traits and tendencies which distinguish it from other civilizations, are due to the constituents of its composite origin ; chiefly, to two great elements, Roman and Gothic. We inherit mind from one, body from the other. If the brawn, the muscle, the personal courage, the elan, push, spirit, dash, enterprise, of the western nations, be- longed to the Franks, Hidalgos, Angles, Saxons and other Gothic races, their social institutes are by similar tokens the produce of Roman thought, of Roman experience, of Roman freedom, and of Roman law. The ancient Commonwealth of Rome no more existed in vain than did the Gothic tribes and the rude marks they inflicted upon the hierarchy. They both left an indelible imprint upon west- ern civilization; and while sophistry would waste effort in searching for the origin of our institutes in faint graffiti of remote Judea, the deep carvings of republican Rome and barbarous Gotland can be recognized at a glance, FINIS. 367 INDEX. Abd-el-Melik, 276, 281. Adrian {see Hadrian). Advowsons, 221. v^irarium, 123. ^ras, 4, 37, 45, 147. Agrippa, M. Vipsanius, 53. Agrippa, K. of Judea, 35. Alaric I., 93, 171. Alexander the Great, 7, 9, 56, no. Alexius III., Basileus, 242. Alfonso, K. Castile, 259, 331. Ambassadors, foreign, 139, 232. America, 205. Antiochus, 14. Antipater, 63, go. Aries, city, 253. Arsaces, 17. Assemblage, right of, 116, 140, 218. Attorneys, 235. Augustals, gold coins, 251. Augustine of Hippo, 172. of Canterbury, 253, Augustines, 51. Augustus,sov.-pont. ,1,29, 38, 40,43,46,62, 88, 98, 112, 148, 292. Aurelian, sov.-pont., 109. Bacchus, 6, 15, Badhr {see Buddha). Baku, oil wells of, 176. Banks and Bankers, 234. Baptism, 163. Basileus {see also Augustus), 195. Benedict VIII., pope, 241. Benefices, 85. Benevento, duchy, 188. Benjamin of Tudela, 244. Besant, or Bezant, 279. Blinding, the custom of, 193. Boadicea, 124. Brahma, 3, 207. Brahmo-Buddhism, 207. Britain, 253, 277, 282, 314, 347. Brumess, 30, 159, 190. Buckle, cited, 72. Buddha, Buddhism, 4, 207, 285. Byzantium {see Constantinople). Calendar, 2, 19,139,147,155,198,232,295. Caligula, 54, no. Canonization, in, 213. Canon law, 235. Carausius, 299. Caste, 58, 129, 226. Castles, 71. Catholics, 170. Celeres, 19. Censors, 218. Census, 119. Charlemagne, 90, 144, 183, igi, 204, 220, 261. Charles the Bald, 271. Children's games, 160. Chilperic, 86. Chosroes, K. Persia, 199. Christianity, 143, 144, 164. Christmas {see Brumess), 159. Christnalas, coins, 290. Chronology, 2. Cicero, M. Tullius, 288. Civil Law, 235. Claudius, sov.-pont., 54, 55, 125. Clothaire, 256. Clovis, 65, 70, 173, 220, 255. Cohens, or cohanes, no. Coins; coinage systems; coinage rights; counterfeits; 127,225,269,275,280,282, 314, 316, 337. Common Law, 356. Commons, House of, 103. Conscription, military, 219. Constantine, Chlorus, 83. Constantine I., 206, 223. Constantinople, Fall of, 246. Constantius, sov.-pont., 206. Consuls, 120, 218. Conveyances of land, 226. Corporations, 139, 233. Count, title of, 132. Crimen majestatis, 115, 217. Cross, symbol of the, 5, 24, 31, 1 10, 209. Cross-quarter days, 161. Crusades, 244. Curetes, lOi. Dandolo, Henry, 245. Darius, K. of Persia, 10. Deifications, 12, Demetrius Poliorcetes, 15. Desiderius, K. Lombardy, 183, 261. Dinar, gold coin, 278. Diocletian, sov.-pont., 223. 368 INDEX. Dionysius Exiguus, 149. Dirhem, silver coin, 181. Divine year, 5. Druses of Lebanon, 36. Duke, title of, 131, 227. Easter, 160. Eastern empire, 194, 244. Ecliptical cycle, 4, 34, Education, 118, 218. Edward Confessor, 264. Edward I., K. Eng., 269, 326, III., , 259, 326, Egfrid, K. Northumbria, 172. Elagabalus, sov.-pont., 55. Emphyteusis, 64, 97. Emperor-worship, i, 36, 56, 143,144,164, 205, 208, 230. England, independent, 353. Ethelbert, K. Kent, 172. Excommunication, 116, 217. Fa-hian, 78. Fairs, 136, 229. Feoh, 69. Ferdinand of Castile, 257, 271. Festivals, origin of, 5. Feudal system, 58, 60, 77, 130, 164, 210,21 1. Fiefs, 181. Fisc (treasury), 123, 222. Fish-god, 161. Forgeries, 2, 224, 328, 337. Frankfort, Council of, 195. France, Franks, etc., 185, 198. Frederick II., 167,216,250,258,263,268, 350. Free Cities, 136, 229. Genghis Khan, 241. Gold; gold coins, etc., 199, 251, 273. Goldsmiths, 327. Goths, 82, 169. Grass-eaters, 214. Gratian, sov.-pont., 85, 106. Great, an ecclesiastical title, 261. Greece, Greeks, etc., 194. Greek fire, 1 76. Gregory II., pope. 174. VII., 250. XIII., 15S. Guelf and Ghibelline, 249, Guilds {see Corporations), 139, 233. Guizot, cited, 70. Gunpowder, 176. Hadrian I., pope. 184. Hallam, cited, 62. Hansa (Hanseatic League), 139, Hardouin, Father, cited, 160. Haroun Al Raschid, 189, 232. Henry IV., emp., 204, 240. Henry I., K. Eng., 311. II., 265, 315. III., 259, 267, 347. Herod, K. Judea, 63, 90. Ilesus, 5, 24. Hierarchits, 28, 59. Hilaria, 159. Holy Roman Empire, 166, Holy Sepulchre, 242. Honorius, sov.-pont., 305. Houli(j-^i? Christmas andEaster,25, 30, 159. Huns; Hungary, 144. laku, gold coin, 324, Idolatry, 20, 247. les Chrishna, 4, 24, 57, 108. lesnu, or Vishnu, 3, 6, 28, 57. Images, worship of, 176, 195. Incarnations, 12, 19, 143. Infallibility, 115, 210, 217. Innocent III., pope, 242. Inquisition, 116, 217. Internments, monastic, 215. Investitures, 62. Isidore, Decretals of, 197, 201. Islam, 210. Janus Quirinus, 34, 44. Japan, Japanese, 79. Jayme, K. Aragon, 258. Jesus Christ, 149, 206, 280, 291. Jews, Judea, 90, 207, 221, 237, 288, 326. John Lackland, K. Eng., 266. Julian religion, 31. Julius Caesar, 26, 34, 63, 80, 155,283,289. Juridical systems, 117, 218. Jury trials, 231. Justinian I., sov.-pont. ,199,260,281, 294. II., sov.-pont., 280, 281, 294. King, or Knung, (rex.,) 254. Kissing the pontiff's foot, 17. Kumbh Fair, the, 138. Kaurzim, mines of, 280. Kremnitz, mines of, 280. Land tenures, 128, 226. Land grants to temples, 128. Law, doctors of, 234. Laws (j'^^Canon,Common,Civil,etc.), 333. Lawyers, 235. Leather moneys, 321. Legal-tender laws, 127, 225, 304, Legislatures, 117, 218. Leo III., sov.-pont., 176. Lepidus, pont.-max., 105. Literatures destroyed, 112, 193. Livius Drusus, 287. Lombardy, Lombardians, 185. Louis the Lion, K. Eng., 267. I., the Pious, emp., 201. INDEX. 1^9 Louis, II., Stammerer, emp., 95. Ludi Sseculares, 21. Maccabees, the, 288. Magna Charta, 232, 269, 322. Mahabharata, Wars, 3. Maharanee, the Great, 56. Mahomet, 177, 194. Maia, goddess, 7,15,25,101,108,159,208, 291. Maravedi, gold coin, 281, 341. Marc Antony, 32. Mare, Consolato del, 233. Marius Gratidianus, 287. Marriage, 141. Martel, Charles, 86, 177. Martinmas, 161. Mass {see Nundine, Fairs, etc.,) 162. Maurice, sov.-pont., 174. Maximilian, emp., 260. Measure of Value, 361. Medieval (German) Empire, 166. Meiji, Japanese sera, 79. Mercantile System, 361. Messiahs, 3. Mexico, Mexicans, 79. Michaelmas, 161. Mikado, 79. Military service of ecclesiastics, 219. Mines, 126, 225, 278, 280, 293. Mines Royal, 126, 331, 359. Mints, 277, 332. Miracles, 47. Mixt Money Case, 301. Monachism, no. 213. Monetary Commissions, 361. Monetary Systems, 297, 362. Money, nature of, 127. Money, right to issue, 362. Monks (see Monachism). Montesquieu, cited, 76. Months, names of the, 32. Moslems, 168, 175, Municipal corruption, 205. Mysteries, religious, 21.0. Nara Sin, 5. Navigation Laws, 140, 233. Nebo Nazaru, 6. 151. Nero, sov.-pont,, 86, 124. New Year day, 44. Nicephorus, sov.-pont., 193. Nikios, John of, 162. Normandy; Normans, 239. Notaries, public, 140, 234. Numa Pompilius, 19. Nundine, or ninth day, 136, 161, 229. Offa, K. Mercia, 261, 302. Oleron, marine laws of, 233. Olympian games, 44, 150. Olympias, w. of Philip, 8, 11. Organs, musical, 182. Oriental trade, 6, 245, 288. Otto L, emp., 238, 263. III., emp., 216. IV., emp., 268. Ovid, cited, 38, Palgrave, Sir Francis, cited, 170. Pandects (see Civil Law). Parliaments (see Legislatures). Pausanias, 9. Pepin of Heristal, 177. Pepin the Short, 86,167,179,261,270,305. Peru; Peruvians, 79. Peter, St., church of, 191. Peter II., K. Aragon, 64. Peter's Pence, 223, 257, 260, 263. Petroleum, 176. Philip, K. Macedon, 8. Philip II., France, 269. IV., Le Bel, 337. Phocas, sov.-pont., 174. Pix, Trial of the, 361. Pizarro, Francisco, 252. Platina, cardinal, 265. Pollio, 42, 46. Pompey, 14. Pontifices, loi, 106, 212. Pope, origin of the title, 212. Pounds, shillings and pence, 295. Praetaxation, 217. Praetorian guards, 121. Precious metals, export of, 329, 340, 360. Prerogatives of state, 221, 236, 274, 314. Prester John, 241. Provinces, 135, 228. Ptolemy, K. Egypt, 14. Quiche-na, 5. Quirinus (see Janus and Romulus), 6. Ramtenkis, gold coins, 291. Ratio,silver to gold, 225, 244, 284,289,292. Ravenna, 178. Registers, public, of land titles, 128. Reliefs, 62. Religious animosity, 243. Revenues and Expenditures, 122, 221, Richard I., K. Eng., 25S, 265, 318. IL, 233. Robert Guiscard, 239. Robertson, historian^ cited, 67. Rois faineants, 179, Roman-British towns, 307. Roman laws, 279. money, 279. government, 307. provinces, 307. pontificate, loi. constitution, 99, 279. 370 INDEX. Rome scat, 223. Roncesvalles, battle of, 187. Royal prerogatives, 221, 236, 274, 314. Rupee, silver coin, 291. Sacred gold, 273. college of pontifices, loi, 212. Safe-deposites, Roman. 158. Saladin, caliph, 242. Salivahana, messiah, 7, 25. Sanctuaries. 112, 213. Soranus, Roman poet, 52. Saxon Looking Glass. 252. Schism, the Great, 200, 242. Scipio Africanus. 21. Scriptures, Sacred, 112, 196, 215. Scyphates, dished coins, 291. Seleucus, Epiphanes, 14. Seltz, Lost Treaty of, 192, 239, 251, 363, Sertorius, 23. Shilling; silver coin, 302. Sibylline scriptures, 112. Silver exports to Orient, 289. Slaves; slavery, 96, 133, 227. Solidus, gold coin, 189, 216. Standard of coins, 325, 361. Stephen, duke of Hungary, 257. K. England, 265, 312. Sterling, 327, Sterlings or pennies, 327, 330. Stubbs, bishop, cited, 74. Stylites, 214. Suabian Looking Glass, 252. Succession to the throne, 215. Suez Canal, 43, 143, 289. Sun-virorship, 159. Sylla, 22, 288. Table of Maravedis, 341. of earliest gold coins, 282. Taxes, 293. Tat (Buddha), 241. Temporal empire, 180, Temples, 146, 180. Ten months' year» 4, 33, 151, 162, 295. Thammuz, 6. Theodebert, 305. Theodoret, K. Provence, 92. Theodosius I., sov.-pont., 224. II., 86,145,305. Therapeuts, 213. Tiberius, sov.-pont., 32, 53, 107. Tithes, 107, 223. Titles of nobility, 128, 226. Titus Quinctius Flamininus, 22. Treasury officials r^" trade, 141, Treasure-Trove, 125, 225^ 359. Treaties, 138, 230. Treves, city, 253. Tribunitian power, 121. Valerian, sov.-pont., 109. Vassal kings, 308, 347. Venice, 241, 245. Bank of, 236. Virgin Mother, 10, 206, 293. War, right of, 130, 230. Weeks, and days of the, 137, 162. Weights and Measures, 142, 298, 324. Wilfrid, bishop, 172. William I., K. Eng., 159, 264, 311. Wills and Testaments, 128, 226. Woden (Odin), 209. Year, the, 151. Yule {see Houli), 159. Zodiac, 295, THE MIDDLE AGES REVISITED- 371 CORRIGENDA. p. L. 3 II 7 10 51 12 97 22 102 15 136 27 137 25 139 30 143 3 147 32 161 15 162 18 168 16 For Messiah read Atig. Casar. For A'lessiah read Aug. Ccesar. For Augusine read Atigustitte. For «o^ read none. Strike out the word not For festivals read festival. For //if read //^^/r. For sodalitiis read sodalities. For Adams read Adain. For Adams read Adam. For Selcucus read Seleucus. For //ifw read //^aw. For Norsemen read Norseman. p. 175 197 224 L. 19 9 18 233 41 261 29 276 40 294 39 301 34 306 10 314 22 For plentitude read plenitude. For undivisible read indivisible. After bequests insert therefore. Strike out /(7r //i^zV zwojA After Northumbria insert and. Marcellinus not Mercellinus. The first part of Note 56 relates to Theodoret, the second to Henry III., and the last to America. Before neither insert could. For 8 read 12. Before tamper insert oftett. APPENDICES. There are twenty-two Appendices to the present work, under the following titles: A Feudalism other than Roman. B Feudal Charters granted by Rome. C Bishop Stubbs on Feudalism. D Testament of Augustus Caesar. E Monastic Internments. F Falsification of Books and Monuments. G Origin of Antipathy to the Jews. H The Roman Pontifex Maximus. I The Mother of the Gods. J Ancient Images of the Madonna. K The Venus di Milo. L Astronomicon of Marcus Manilius. M Chronological /Eras and Cycles. N Vassalian Acts of Henry III. O Ancient Calendars. P Alterations of the Roman Calendar. Q Chinese Theogony. R Sun Worship of Elagabalus. S The Ludi Sseculares. T Chronology of Augustus. U Chronology of Christianity. V Chronology of Sylla. These Appendices furnish corroborative proofs and illustrations of the views advanced in the text. As such additional proofs will hardly be required by the general reader, and as to print them in the present work would double its cost, it has been determined to pub- lish them in a Supplementary volume, which can be obtained upon application to the Cambridge Encyclopedia Company, Post Office Box 2284, New York. 'rm-. Camhriixik KN'CVciAti'i'.niA Co.. /y/i/if/s/ii-n of liiitorlial. anJ rffi-rriicr works, 62 RraJr Street, X("ii< York, hr^r to aiiiioiiinr the fol- lowing^ partial list of their piihliiatioiis. \ Per sons resiiii/ii^- in forei'c;!! eoinitries may remit for these works by f^ostal order on \ew York, at the rate 0/4 shillini^s [Eni^lish) or 4 marks (German) or -^ franes (Freneh) to the American dollar. llie usual discount to the trade. | The Worship of AukusIus Caesiir ; derived from a study of coins, inonumeiits, calendars, ixiras, and astr()iioniic:al and aslrn- loi^ical cycles, the whole establishins^ a New Chronology (d' Historv and Religion, by Alex. Del Mar. formerly Director of the I'. S, Bureau of Statistics; 8yo, pj). 400; cloth, $3. The Middle Ag;es Revisited ; in- the Roman Cioyernment and Religion from Augustus to the Fall of Constantinople, by Alex. Del Mar; 8yo, pp. 400; cloth, $3 Aneient Britain ; in the light of modern archaeological discoy- eries. by Alex. Del Mar; eii to announce t lie following Additional I,isr of ihkir Publicaiions: Etching; its technical process and its history, by S. R. Koeh- Icr; new edition, illustrated i)y numerous plates and re- productions; folio, pp. 260. Edition de luxej cloth and gold; only 100 copies printed, $10. • Pharisees and Alligators, by Max O'Rell; 8vo, pp. 240; cloth, $1. Sketches by Max O'Rell: I, Jacques Bonhomme; II, The Auvergnats; III, John Bull on the Continent; IV, From my Letter Box; 8vo, pp. 168; paper, 50 cents. A Mother's Song, in Five Cantos, by Mary D. Brine; illus- trated by Miss C. A. Northam; 4to, pp. 60; cloth and gold. Edition de luxe. $ i . Sweet Twilight Dreams ; being Poems and Pictures of Life and Nature, selected from English and American poets, and profusely illustrated by twenty eminent artists; 4to, pp. 80; cloth and gold. $1. Sunlight and Shade; a Holiday gift book of Poems, pro- fusely illustrated by twenty-five eminent artists; 4to, pp. 192: $1. History of Yachting; 1850 to 1900. by Capt. Coffin and oth- ers; with 125 splendid illustrations, by Fred. Cozzens and other artists; 4to, pp. 225. Edition de luxe; cloth, $5. Movement, or Action in Art, as illustrated from the de- signs of the most eminent artists, ancient and modern, by W. H. Beard, with 225 original drawings by the author; large tamo, pp. 360, $1. Economic Philosophy, by Van Buren Denslow, LL. D., for- merly of the New York Tribune; 8vo, pp. 800. %2. History of Money in Ancient States, by Alex Del Mar: 8v(), ])p. 400. %}^. Life of Hon. Alex. Del Mar, by J K H Willcox: 8vo, pamphlet; third edition; 25 cents. 1 I u