Collateral proofs are derived from the spirit and tenure of the Anglo-Saxon laws, but especially from the grants of hereditary estates on condition of military service. The condition of fiefs under the Anglo-Saxons was very different from what it was afterwards. In their times we find no mention made of those oppressions of which so much notice has already been taken; and this may easily be accounted for from the alteration of the feudal spirit in different ages. During the time that a warm and generous affection subsisted between the feudal superiors and vassals, the incidents were marks of generosity on the one part and gratitude on the other; but as soon as variance had taken place, by reason of the interested disposition which the introduction of luxury produced, the same incidents became sources of the most flagrant oppression. This was remarkably the case in the time of William the Conqueror; and, during the reign of king John, matters were come to such a crisis, that the people every where complained loudly, and demanded the restoration of the laws of Edward the Confessor. 'What the laws of Edward the Confessor were,' says Mr. Hume, which the English every reign, during a century and a half, desired so passionately to have restored, is much disputed by antiquarians; and our ignorance of them seems one of the greatest defects of the English history.' Dr. Stuart has offered an explanation, in a conjecture, that by the laws or customs of the Confessor, that condition of felicity was expressed which had been enjoyed during the fortunate state of the feudal association. The cordiality, equality, and independence which then prevailed among all ranks in society continued to be remembered in less prosperous times, and occasioned an ardent desire for the revival of those laws and usages which were the sources of so much happiness. Besides the great distinction between the state of fiefs under the Anglo-Saxons and under the Normans, they were no less distinguished by the introduction of knight-service. Hitherto the refinement of the English had been obstructed by the invasion of the Danes, and the insular situation of the kingdom; but after the Norman conquest the fiefs were made perpetual. Still, however, the knight's fee and knight-service were altogether unknown. William, the sixth duke of Normandy, was well acquainted with every thing relating to fiefs; for that duchy had experienced all the variety incidental to them from the time of its being granted to Rollo by Charles the Simple, A. D. 912 to 1066, when William conquered England. On this event a number of forfeitures took place among those who had followed the fortune of Harold II. Their estates were to be disposed of at the pleasure of the conqueror; and it was natural to suppose that he would follow the method practised in his own country. Hence the origin of knight-service in England. A grant of land, to any person whatever, was estimated at a certain number of knights' fees; and each of these required the service of a knight. The grants of lands were even renewed to the old tenants under this tenure; so that by degrees the whole military people in the kingdom acquiesced n it. To accomplish this, Domesday Book is supposed to have been compiled, which contained

an exact account o all the landed property of the kingdom. Hence it is to be concluded, not that William introduced fiefs into England, as some have imagined, but that he brought them to their ultimate state of perfection by the introduction of knight-service. This is evident from the laws enacted during his reign. In these it is not only mentioned that knight-service was en-. acted, but that it was done expressly with the consent of the common council of the nation; which at that time was equivalent to an act of parliament. The invention of knight-service proved generally agreeable; for, as only a few of the Anglo Saxon fiefs were hereditary, the advancement of the rest to perpetuity, under the tenure of knight-service, must have been accounted an acquisition of some importance; as not only augmenting the grandeur and dignity of the sovereign, but securing the independence of the subject, and improving his property. In the happy state of the feudal association, there was indeed no necessity for the knight's fee; but when the discordance and oppression so often mentioned began to take place, it became then necessary to point out particularly every duty of the vassal, as well as of the lord; and this was fully done by the invention of knight-service. The nobles possessed duchies, baronies, and earldoms; which extensive possessions were divided into as many fees, each of them to furnish a knight for the service of the king, or of the superior: so that every feudal state could command a numerous army and militia to support and defend it in case of any emergency. The knights were also bound to assemble in complete armour whenever the superior thought proper to call, and to hold themselves in readiness whenever the king or superior found it convenient to take the field; so that thus the militia might be marched at the shortest notice to defend or support the honor of the nation. The knights were usually armed with a helmet, sword, lance, and shield; and each was obliged to keep a horse. This last requisite was owing to the contempt into which the infantry had fallen, through the prevalence of tournaments and luxuries of various kinds, though it was by means of the infantry that the barbarians had originally distinguished themselves in their wars with the Romans, and become able to cope with these celebrated warriors. All proprietors of fees or tenants by knight-service fought on foot: the cavalry were distinguished by the name of battle; and the success of every encounter was supposed to depend on them alone. They only were completely armed; the infantry, being furnished by the villages under the jurisdiction of the barons, had at first only bows and slings; though afterwards they were found worthy of much greater attention. While the feudal association remained in perfection, the superior could at any time command the military service of his vassals; but in the subsequent degeneracy this service could neither be depended upon when wanted, nor was it of the same advantage when obtained as formerly. The invention of knight service tended in a great degree to remedy this inconvenience. Those who were possessed of knight's fees were now obliged to remain forty days in the field at their own expense; and this without exception, from the great crown vassals

to the smallest feudatories; but, if longer service was required, the prince was obliged to pay his troops. In those times, however, when the fate of nations was frequently decided by a single battle, a continuance in the field for forty days was sufficient for ordinary occasions. Thus matters seemed once more to be restored nearly to their former state. It was now, as much as ever, the interest of the nation to act with unanimity in its defence, not only against foreign enemies, but against the tyranny of the prince over his subjects, or of one part of the subjects over the other. New inconveniencies, however, soon began to take place, owing to the gradual improvements in life and the refinement of manners. From the first institution of military service, a fine had been accepted instead of actual appearance in the field. In the times of barbarity, however, when men accounted rapine and bloodshed their only glory, there were but few who made an offer of this compensation; but as wealth and luxury increased, and the manners of the people became softer, a general unwillingness of following the army into the field became also prevalent. A new tenure, called escuage, was therefore introduced; by which the vassal was only obliged to pay his superior a sum of money annually instead of attending him into the field. See ESCUAGE, and KNIGHT-SERVICE. Hence originated taxes and their misapplication; for, as the king was lord paramount of the whole kingdom, it thence happened that the whole escuage money collected throughout the nation centered in him. The princes, then, instead of recruiting their armies, frequently filled their coffers with the money, or dissipated it otherwise, hiring mercenaries to defend their territories when threatened with danger. These being composed of the dregs of the people, and disbanded at the end of every campaign, filled all Europe with a disorderly banditti, who frequently proved very dangerous to society. To avoid such inconveniencies, standing armies were introduced, and taxations began to be raised in every European kingdom. New inconveniencies, however, arose. The sovereigns in most of these kingdoms having acquired the right of taxation, as well as the command of the military power, became completely despotic but in England the sovereign was deprived of this right by Magna Charta, which was extorted from him (See ENGLAND), so that though allowed to command his armies, he could only pay them by the voluntary contributions of the people, or their submitting to such taxations as were virtually imposed by themselves.

:

The author of A View of Society in Europe, (book I. chap. ii. sect. 1). has traced the remote sources of the feudal laws in an elegant and concise manner. Tacitus informs us, he observes, that the individuals of each of the German nations cultivated by turns a tract of land proportionable to their number, for the use of the whole; after which each individual received such an allotment of the cultivated tract as his dignity required. These nations had not altered their political principles at the time they overran the Roman empire; and hence the provinces of it were then divided after the same manner. The most considerable allotment was bestowed on the

king, as the most dignified person in the community, and this allotment was styled his domain; while the shares of citizens and warriors, which were likewise in proportion to the merit or dignity of each, constituted what was called allodiality. But, as it often happened that all the land was not exhausted by these partitions, what remained was considered as the property of the community; and in the barbaric codes was called the lands of the fisc. In such German nations as had thus obtained a settlement, it was necessary that there should be a more close connexion betwixt the sovereign and the chiefs, as well as between the chiefs and people, than in others. This was effected by means of the lands of the fisc; for of these the sovereign took possession, dealing them out to the chiefs under the burden of appearing in arms whenever he should please to call; while the chiefs in like manner dealt out lands to those called their retainers, who were also obliged to supply them with military assistance in cases of necessity. Hence a political system was founded, which had a prodigious effect on society in all those countries where it prevailed. The intention and tendency of this system was to render the nation independent both at home and abroad; for, while the people were all armed in their common defence, individuals were also properly guarded against the attacks of despotism. The power of the chiefs, who formed a regular nobility, was a counterpoise to that of the sovereign; while the number of the retainers and vassals, constituting the greatness and power of the nobility, was a proper barrier against aris tocratical oppression; for a chief who oppressed his vassals evidently acted against his own intercst.

The feudal system, it has been well observed by another writer, was originally grounded on the universal principles of self-defence, and the necessity of relinquishing a portion of our individual rights for the public security. Every freeman, therefore, under this system, upon receiving a portion of the lands which were divided, bound himself to appear in arms against the enemies of the community. This military service was the condition upon which he received and held his lands; and, as they were exempted from every other burden, that tenure, among a warlike people, was deemed both easy and honorable. The king, or general, who led them to conquest, had the largest portion allotted to him; and he parcelled it out among those who entered into an obligation to bear arms in his defence. chief officers imitated his example, in distributing portions of lands among their dependents, upon the same condition. Thus a feudal kingdom resembled a military establishment rather than a civil institution. The names of a soldier and a freeman were synonymous. Every proprietor of land, girt with a sword, was ready to march at the summons of his superior, and to take the field against the common enemy. The feudal government, however, though admirably calculated for defence against the assaults of any foreign power, was defective in its provisions for the interior order of society. The bond of political union was extremely feeble; and the sources of anarchy were

His

innumerable. The powerful vassals of the crown soon extorted a confirmation for life of those grants of land which, being at first purely gratuitous, had been bestowed only during pleasure. They then succeeded in having them converted into hereditary possessions; and at length in rendering them unalienable. The crown vassals, after having secured the possession of their lands and dignities, were led by the feudal institutions to new, and still more dangerous encroachments on the prerogatives of the sovereign. They obtained the power of supreme jurisdiction, both civil and criminal, within their own territories; the right of coining money; together with the privilege of carrying on war against their private enemies in their own name, and by their own authority. Subordination was almost lost, and persons of superior rank aspired at independence. Hence a kingdom, considerable in name and extent, was broken into as many separate principalities as it contained powerful barons. A thousand causes of jealousy and discord sprang up among them, and gave rise to as many wars. Every country in Europe, wasted or kept in continual alarm during these endless contests, was filled with castles and places of strength, erected for the security of the inhabitants, not against foreign force, but against internal hostilities. Indeed an almost universal anarchy prevailed. The guilty escaped punishment, and the innocent could not find protection. Such was the state of Europe with respect to the interior administration of government from the seventh to the eleventh century. This system likewise prevented nations from acting with vigor in their external operations. Besides, the feudal anarchy had a fatal influence on the character and improvement of the human mind. Without the protection of a regular government, and the certainty of personal security, it cannot be expected that men will make any progress in the arts and sciences, or aim at attaining refinement in taste or manners. In less than a century after the barbarous nations settled in their new conquests, almost all the effects of the knowledge and civility which the Romans had spread through Europe disappeared. The human mind, neglected, uncultivated, and depressed, sunk into the most profound ignorance. The inhabitants of Europe during this period were not only strangers to the arts which embellish a polished age, but destitute of the virtues which abound among people who continue in a simple state.

bours. It was this inefficiency of the feudal militia, perhaps, that saved Europe during the middle ages from the danger of universal monarchy. In times, when princes had little notion of confederacies for mutual protection, it is hard to say, what might not have been the successes of an Otho the Great, a Frederic Barbarossa, or a Philip Augustus, if they could have wielded the whole force of their subjects whenever their ambition required. If an empire equally exten sive with that of Charlemagne, and supported by military despotism, had been formed about the twelfth or thirteenth centuries, the seeds of commerce and liberty, just then beginning to shoot, would have perished; and Europe, reduced to a barbarous servitude, might have fallen before the free barbarians of Tartary.

'If we look at the feudal polity as a scheme of civil freedom, it bears a noble countenance. To the feudal law it is owing, that the very names of right and privilege were not swept away, as in Asia, by the desolating hand c power. The tyranny which, on every favorable moment, was breaking through all barriers, would have rioted without control, if, when the people were poor and disunited, the nobility had not been brave and free. So far as the sphere of feudality extended, it diffused the spirit of liberty, and the notions of private right. Every one, I think, will acknowledge this, who considers the limitations of the services of vassalage, so cautiously marked in those law-books which are the records of customs, the reciprocity of obligation between the lord and his tenant, the consent required in every measure of a legislative or general nature, the security, above all, which every vassal found in the administration of justice by his peers, and even (we may in this sense say) in the trial by combat. The bulk of the people, it is true, were degraded by servitude; but this had no connexion with the feudal

tenures.

"The peace and good order of society were not promoted by this system. Though private wars did not originate in the feudal customs, it is impossible to doubt that they were perpetuated by so convenient an institution, which indeed owed its universal establishment to no other cause. And as predominant habits of warfare are totally econcileable with those of industry, not merely by the immediate works of destruction which render its efforts unavailing, but through that contempt of peaceful occupations which they produce, the feudal system must have been intrinsically adverse to the accumulation of wealth, and the improvement of those arts, which mitigate the evils, or abridge the labors of mankind.

to the very essence of a feudal tenure, most severely and promptly avenged, most branded by general infamy. The feudal law-books breathe throughout a spirit of honorable obligation. The feudal course of jurisdiction promoted, what trial by peers is peculiarly calculated to promote, a keener feeling and readier perception of moral as well as of legal distinctions. And as the judgment and sympathy of mankind are seldom mistaken in these great points of veracity and justice, except through the temporary success of crimes, or the want of a definite standard of right, they gradually recovered themselves, when law precluded the one, and supplied the other. In the reciprocal services of lord and vassal, there was ample scope for every magnanimous and disinterested energy. heart of man, when placed in circumstances which have a tendency to excite them, will seldom be deficient in such sentiments. No occasions could be more favorable, than the protection of a faithful supporter, or the defence of a beneficent suzerain, against such powerful aggression, as left little prospect except of sharing in his ruin.

The

'From these feelings, engendered by the feudal relation, has sprung up the peculiar sentiment of personal reverence and attachment towards a sovereign, which we denominate loyalty; alike distinguishable from the stupid devotion of eastern slaves, and from the abstract respect with which free citizens regard their chief magistrate. Men who had been used to swear fealty, to profess subjection, to follow, at home and in the field, a feudal superior and his family, easily transferred the same allegiance to the monarch. It was a very powerful feeling, which could make the bravest men put up with slights and ill treatment at the hands of their sovereign; or call forth all the energies of disinterested exertion for one whom they never saw, and in whose character there was nothing to esteem. In ages when the rights of the community were unfelt, this sentiment was one great preservative of society; and, though collateral or even subservient to more enlarged principles, it is still indispensable to the tranquillity and permanence of every monarchy. In a moral view, loyalty has scarcely perhaps less tendency to refine and elevate the heart than patriotism itself; and holds a middle place in the scale of human motives, as they ascend from the grosser inducements of self-interest, to the furtherance of general happiness, and conformity to the purposes of Infinite Wisdom.'

Arbuthnot on Aliments. Swift to Pope.

A feverish disorder disabled me. Common feverfew is the sort used in medicine, and is found wild in many parts of England. Miller. A light feveret, or an old quartan ague, is not a sufficient excuse for non-appearance. Ayliffe.

Sincere the' unaltered bliss her charms impart,
Sedate the enlivening ardours they inspire;
She bids no transient rapture thrill the heart,
She wakes no feverish gust of fierce desire.

Beattie. FEVER. See MEDICINE, Index. The ancients deified the diseases as well as the passions and affections of men. Virgil places them in the entrance into hell, Æn., vi. 273. See. FEBRIS.

FEVERSHAM, or FAVERSHAM,, a markettown of Kent,, seated on a branch of the river Thames, which is navigable for hoys. It was a royal demesne A. D. 811, and called, in Kenulf's charter the King's Little Town. It was inhabited by the Britons long before the invasion by Cæsar. In 903 king Athelstan held a great council here. King Stephen erected a stately abbey, in 1147, whose. abbots sat. in parliament; and he was buried in it, with Maud, his queen, and Eustace his son. Two mean gatehouses are all that now remain of it. The town of Feversham, afterwards by Henry VIII., with was first incorporated by the title of the Barons that of the mayor, jurats, and commonalty. The mayor holds a court of session twice a year, at which all offenders committed within the limits

of the town, except those for high-treason, are tried. It is a populous flourishing place, consisting chiefly of two long broad streets, with a market-house in the centre, built in 1574. Its ancient church was repaired in 1754, at the expense of £2300; it was originally built in the reign of Edward II. It is in the form of a cross; the walls are of flint, quoined with stone from Caen. The inside of the church is handsome, and well worthy of observation; it had originally a square castellated tower in the middle, but that was taken down in 1755. Before the Reformation there were several altars in various parts of the church. Many ancient mural monuments, and several of brass let into the floor, still remain. It has a free grammar school, built and endowed by queen Elizabeth in 1582; and two charity schools. It is a member of the cinque-port of Dover, and has a manufactory of gunpowder. The town was considerably improved in 1773, when a spacious avenue was opened from the London road into Preston Street, and a bridge was erected over the stream at the bottom of West Street: in 1789 an act was passed for paving, watching, and lighting, the place. The markets, on Saturday and Wednesday, are well supplied with provision, and. are well attended by the London dealers, who buy large quantities of the oysters caught on the coast. The Dutch also in time of peace, it is said, carry home as many oysters as amount to above £2000 a year. The fishermen admit none to their freedom but married men. It is nine miles west of Canterbury, and forty-seven east of London.

FEUILLAGE, n. s. row of leaves. Of Homer's head I inclose the outline, that you may determine whether you would have it so large, or reduced to make room for feuillage or laurel round the oval. Jervas to Pope.

French. A bunch or

FEVILLEA, in botany, a genus of the pentandria order and diccia class of plants; natural order thirty-fourth, cucurbitaceae. The male CAL. and COR. quinquefid; stamina five; nectarium consisting of five filaments closing together: female CAL. quinquefid; styles three; FRUIT, a hard trilocular apple with a hard bark. Species two, of the East and West Indies, both climb

ing plants. FEUILLE'E (Lewis), a celebrated French naturalist and mathematician, of the religious order of Minims. He was a native of Provence, and sent by Louis XIV., in early life, to South America to make researches in natural history and philosophy, the result of which appeared in his Journal des Observations Physiques, Mathematiques, et Botaniques, faites sur les Côtes Orientales de l'Amenque Meridionale, et dans les Indes Occidentales, 1714, 2 vols. 4to. In 1724 he was employed, on the recommendation of the Academy of Sciences, in an expedition to the Canary Islands, to ascertain the position of the meridian of Ferro; a task he performed in a very able manner. He was rewarded with the post of botanist to the king, and a pension. He died in 1732, at Marseilles, where an astronomical observatory had been built for him. In the Royal library at Paris are preserved, in MS., a

Journal of his Voyage to the Canaries, and a collection of corresponding drawings in natural history.

FEUILLEMORT, n. s. French. The color of a faded leaf, corrupted commonly to phile

mot.

So to make a countryman understand what feuillemorte' colour signifies, it may suffice to tell him, it is the colour of withered leaves falling in autumn, Locke.

FEVRE (Claud le), an eminent French painter, born at Fontainbleau in 1633. He studied first in the palace, and afterwards at Paris under Le Sueur and Le Brun; the latter of whom advised him to adhere to portraits, for which he had a particular talent, and in his style equalled the best masters of that country. He died in England in 1675, aged forty-two.

FEVRE (Nicolas le), or Nicolaus Faber, was born at Paris, June 2nd, 1544. During the course of his studies a singular misfortune happened to him. In cutting a pen, a piece of the quill flew into his eye, and gave him such exquisite pain, that hastily lifting up his hand, he thrust the knife into his eye and cut it out. After acquiring the languages, he studied the civil law at Toulouse, Padua, and Bologna. He travelled through Italy, and spent eighteen months at Rome. In 1587 he published Seneca, with a learned preface and notes; and detected the defect in Scaliger's demonstration of the Quadrature of the Circle. He also wrote on ecclesiastical antiquities, and drew up a preface to the fragments of St. Hilary. He was appointed preceptor to the prince of Conde, by Henry the Great; after whose death, the queen dowager made him preceptor to Louis XII. He died in 1611; and his works were collected by his friend, John le Begue, and printed at Paris in

1614.

FEVRE (Tannegui le), an excellent scholar in Greek and Roman learning, born at Caen in Normandy, in 1615. Cardinal Richelieu gave him a pension of 2000 livres to inspect all the works published at the Louvre, and designed to have made him principal of a college he was about to erect at Richelieu. But the cardinal's

death cut off his hopes; and his pension was ill paid. Some time after, the marquis de Franciere, governor of Langres, took him with him to his government, where he embraced the Protestant religion; after which he was invited to Saumur, where he was chosen Greek professor. He there taught with extraordinary reputation. Young men were sent to him from all the provinces in the kingdom, and even from foreign countries, while divines and professors themselves gloried in attending his lectures. He was preparing to go to Heidelberg, whither he was invited by the prince Palatine, when he died, aged fifty-seven. He wrote Notes on Anacreon, Lucretius, Longinus, Phædrus, Justin, Terence, Virgil, Horace, Elian, Eutropius, Aurelius Victor, Dionysius, &c. A short account of the lives of the Greek poets. Two volumes of letters; and many other works. He left a son, and two daughters, one of whom was the celebrated Madame Dacier. In his Latin works he assumed the name of Tanaquil Faber.