the spirit of laws-第165节

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！


ould　not　give　also　in　fief；　so　that　whatever　they　had　given；　they　might　always　resume。　Besides；　a　grant　of　that　kind　did　not　descend　to　the　children　like　the　fiefs；　because　it　was　not　supposed　to　have　been　made　according　to　the　feudal　laws。

If　we　compare　the　situation　in　which　the　rear…vassalage　was　at　the　time　when　the　two　Milanese　senators　wrote　those　books；　with　what　it　was　under　King　Pepin；　we　shall　find　that　the　rear…fiefs　preserved　their　primitive　nature　longer　than　the　fiefs。＇179＇

But　when　those　senators　wrote；　such　general　exceptions　had　been　made　to　this　rule　as　had　almost　abolished　it。　For　if　a　person　who　had　received　a　fief　of　a　rear…vassal　happened　to　follow　him　upon　an　expedition　to　Rome；　he　was　entitled　to　all　the　privileges　of　a　vassal。＇180＇　In　like　manner；　if　he　had　given　money　to　the　rear…vassal　to　obtain　the　fief；　the　latter　could　not　take　it　from　him；　nor　hinder　him　from　transmitting　it　to　his　son；　till　he　returned　him　his　money：　in　fine；　this　rule　was　no　longer　observed　by　the　senate　of　Milan。＇181＇

27。　Another　change　which　happened　in　the　Fiefs。　In　Charlemagne's　time　they　were　obliged；＇182＇　under　great　penalties；　to　repair　to　the　general　meeting　in　case　of　any　war　whatsoever；　they　admitted　of　no　excuses；　and　if　the　count　exempted　any　one；　he　was　liable　himself　to　be　punished。　But　the　treaty　of　the　three　brothers＇183＇　made　a　restriction　upon　this　head　which　rescued　the　nobility；　as　it　were；　out　of　the　king's　hands；　they　were　no　longer　obliged　to　serve　him　in　time　of　war；　except　when　the　war　was　defensive。＇184＇　In　others；　they　were　at　liberty　to　follow　their　lord；　or　to　mind　their　own　business。　This　treaty　relates　to　another；＇185＇　concluded；　five　years　before；　between　the　two　brothers；　Charles　the　Bald　and　Louis；　King　of　Germany；　by　which　these　princes　release　their　vassals　from　serving　them　in　war；　in　case　they　should　attempt　hostilities　against　each　other；　an　agreement　which　the　two　princes　confirmed　by　oath；　and　at　the　same　time　made　their　armies　swear　to　it。

The　death　of　a　hundred　thousand　French；　at　the　battle　of　Fontenay；　made　the　remains　of　the　nobility　imagine　that　by　the　private　quarrels　of　their　kings　about　their　respective　shares；　their　whole　body　would　be　exterminated；　and　that　the　ambition　and　jealousy　of　those　princes　would　end　in　the　destruction　of　all　the　best　families　of　the　kingdom。　A　law　was　therefore　passed　that　the　nobility　should　not　be　obliged　to　serve　their　princes　in　war　unless　it　was　to　defend　the　state　against　a　foreign　invasion。　This　law　obtained　for　several　ages。＇186＇

28。　Changes　which　happened　in　the　great　Offices；　and　in　the　Fiefs。　The　many　changes　introduced　into　the　fiefs　in　particular　cases　seemed　to　spread　so　widely　as　to　be　productive　of　general　corruption。　I　noticed　that　in　the　beginning　several　fiefs　had　been　alienated　in　perpetuity；　but　those　were　particular　cases；　and　the　fiefs　in　general　preserved　their　nature；　so　that　if　the　crown　lost　some　fiefs　it　substituted　others　in　their　stead。　I　observed；　likewise；　that　the　crown　had　never　alienated　the　great　offices　in　perpetuity。＇187＇

But　Charles　the　Bald　made　a　general　regulation；　which　equally　affected　the　great　offices　and　the　fiefs。　He　ordained；　in　his　capitularies；　that　the　counties　should　be　given　to　the　children　of　the　count；　and　that　this　regulation　should　also　take　place　in　respect　to　the　fiefs。＇188＇

We　shall　see　presently　that　this　regulation　received　a　wider　extension；　insomuch　that　the　great　offices　and　fiefs　went　even　to　distant　relatives。　Thence　it　followed　that　most　of　the　lords　who　before　this　time　had　held　immediately　of　the　crown；　held　now　mediately。　Those　counts　who　formerly　administered　justice　in　the　king's　placita；　and　who　led　the　freemen　against　the　enemy；　found　themselves　situated　between　the　king　and　his　freemen；　and　the　king's　power　was　removed　farther　off　another　degree。

Again；　it　appears　from　the　capitularies；＇189＇　that　the　counts　had　benefices　annexed　to　their　counties；　and　vassals　under　them。　When　the　counties　became　hereditary；　the　count's　vassals　were　no　longer　the　immediate　vassals　of　the　king；　and　the　benefices　annexed　to　the　counties　were　no　longer　the　king's　benefices；　the　counts　grew　powerful　because　the　vassals　whom　they　had　already　under　them　enabled　them　to　procure　others。

In　order　to　be　convinced　how　much　the　monarchy　was　thereby　weakened　towards　the　end　of　the　second　race　we　have　only　to　cast　an　eye　on　what　happened　at　the　beginning　of　the　third；　when　the　multiplicity　of　rear…fiefs　flung　the　great　vassals　into　despair。

It　was　a　custom　of　the　kingdom＇190＇　that　when　the　elder　brothers　had　given　shares　to　their　younger　brothers；　the　latter　paid　homage　to　the　elder；　so　that　those　shares　were　held　of　the　lord　paramount　only　as　a　rear…fief。　Philip　Augustus；　the　Duke　of　Burgundy；　the　Counts　of　Nevers；　Boulogne；　St。　Paul；　Dampierre；　and　other　lords　declared＇191＇　that　henceforward；　whether　the　fiefs　were　divided　by　succession　or　otherwise；　the　whole　should　be　always　of　the　same　lord；　without　any　intermediation。　This　ordinance　was　not　generally　followed；　for；　as　I　have　elsewhere　observed；　it　was　impossible　to　make　general　ordinances　at　that　time；　but　many　of　our　customs　were　regulated　by　them。

29。　Of　the　Nature　of　the　Fiefs　after　the　Reign　of　Charles　the　Bald。　We　have　observed　that　Charles　the　Bald　ordained　that　when　the　possessor　of　a　great　office　or　of　a　fief　left　a　son　at　his　death；　the　office　or　fief　should　devolve　to　him。　It　would　be　a　difficult　matter　to　trace　the　progress　of　the　abuses　which　thence　resulted；　and　of　the　extension　given　to　that　law　in　each　country。　I　find　in　the　books　of　fiefs；＇192＇　that　towards　the　beginning　of　the　reign　of　the　Emperor　Conrad　II；　the　fiefs　situated　in　his　dominions　did　not　descend　to　the　grandchildren：　they　descended　only　to　one　of　the　last　possessor's　children；　who　had　been　chosen　by　the　lord：＇193＇　thus　the　fiefs　were　given　by　a　kind　of　election；　which　the　lord　made　among　the　children。

In　the　seventeenth　chapter　of　this　book　we　have　explained　in　what　manner　the　crown　was　in　some　respects　elective；　and　in　others　hereditary　under　the　second　race。　It　was　hereditary；　because　the　kings　were　always　taken　from　that　family；　and　because　the　children　succeeded；　it　was　elective；　by　reason　that　the　people　chose　from　among　the　children。　As　things　proceed　step　by　step；　and　one　political　law　has　constantly　some　relation　to　another　political　law；　the　same　spirit　was　followed　in　the　succession　of　fiefs；　as　had　been　observed　in　the　succession　to　the　crown。＇194＇　Thus　the　fiefs　were　transmitted　to　the　children　by　the　right　of　succession；　as　well　as　of　election；　and　each　fief　became　both　elective　and　hereditary；　like　the　crown。

This　right　of　election＇195＇　in　the　person　of　the　lord　was　not　subsisting　at　the　time　of　the　authors＇196＇　of　the　book　of　fiefs；　that　is；　in　the　reign　of　the　Emperor　Frederick　I。

30。　The　same　Subject　continued。　It　is　mentioned　in　the　books　of　fiefs；　that　when　the　Emperor　Conrad　set　out　for　Rome；　the　vassals　in　his　service　presented　a　petition　to　him　that　he　would　please　to　make　a　law　that　the　fiefs　which　descended　to　the　children　should　descend　also　to　the　grandchildren；　and　that　he　whose　brother　died　without　legitimate　heirs　might　succeed　to　the　fief　which　had　belonged　to　their　common　father。＇197＇　This　was　granted。

In　the　same　place　it　is　said　（and　we　are　to　remember　that　those　writers　lived　at　the　time　of　the　Emperor　Frederick　I）＇198＇　〃that　the　ancient　jurists　had　always　been　of　opinion＇199＇　that　the　succession　of　fiefs　in　a　collateral　line　did　not　extend　farther　than　to　brothers…german；　though　of　late　it　was　carried　as　far　as　the　seventh　degree；　and　by　the　new　code　they　had　extended　it　in　a　direct　line　in　infinitum。〃　It　is　thus　that　Conrad's　law　was　insensibly　extended。　All　these　things　being　supposed；　the　bare　perusal　of　the　history　of　France　is　sufficient　to　demonstrate　that　the　perpetuity　of　fiefs　was　established　earlier　in　this　kingdom　than　in　Germany。　Towards　the　commencement　of　the　reign　of　the　Emperor　Conrad　II　in　1024；　things　were　upon　the　same　footing　still　in　Germany；　as　they　had　been　in　France　during　the　reign　of　Charles　the　Bald；　who　died　in　877。　But　such　were　the　changes　made　in　this　kingdom　after　the　reign　of　Charles　the　Bald；　that　Charles　the　Simple　found　himself　unable　to　dispute　with　a　foreign　house　his　incontestable　rights　to　the　empire；　and；　in　fine；　that　in　Hugh　Capet's　time　the　reigning　family；　stripped　of　all　its　demesnes；　was　no　longer　in　a　condition　to　maintain　the　crown。

The　weak　understanding　of　Charles　the　Bald　produced　an　equal　weakness　in　the　French　monarchy。　But　as　his　brother；　Louis；　King　of　Germany；　and　some　of　that　prince's　successors　were　men　of　better　parts；　their　government　preserved　its　vigour　much　longer。

But　what　do　I　say？　Perhaps　the　phlegmatic　constitution；　and；　if　I　dare　use　the　expression；　the　immutability　of　spirit　peculiar　to　the　German　nation　made　a　longer　stand　than　the　volatile　temper　of　the　French　against　that　disposition　of　things；　which　perpetuated　the　fiefs　by　a　natural　tendency；　in　families。

Besides；　the　kingdom　of　Germany　was　not　laid　waste　and　annihilated；　as　it　were；　like　that　of　France；　by　that　particular　kind　of　war　with　which　it　had　been　harassed　by　t