¹ Dopsch, A., Die wirtschaftlichen und sozialen Grundlagen der europäischen Kultur-entwicklung (Vienna2nd ed., 2 vols 19231924:Google Scholartranslated as The Economic and Social Foundations of European Civilization, London 1937)Google Scholar“Benefizialwesen und Feudalität” (Mitteilungen des Österreichischen Instituts für Geschichtsforschung, t XLVI 1932)Google Scholar “Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft lm frühen Mitteialter, in the Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis, t XI The twolast of these works have been republished in the series of Betträge zur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte. Gesammelte Aufsätze Zweite Reihe (Vienna, 1938) edited byGoogle ScholarPatzelt, E.. —Mgr. Lesne, E., Histoire de la propriétéecclésiastique en France (4 times in 6 vols Paris 1910-1938)Google Scholar particularly t 11, fasc. Iet2(1922, 1926).— Lot, F., “Origine et nature du bénéfice”, in Anuario de historia del derecho espanol, 1933Google Scholar and chapter XXV (“Les transformations de la société franque avènement du régime vasslique”) of Lot, F., Pfister, C. and Ganshof, F. L., Histoire du Moyen Age (ed Glotz, G.) t. I: Les destinées de l'Empire en Occident de 395 à 888 (Pans, 1928-1934)Google Scholar — Mitteis, H., Lehnrecht und Staatsgewalt (Weimar, 1933.)Google Scholar — krawinkel, H.Untersuchungen zum fränkischen Benefizialrecht (Weimar 1936Google Scholar) Feudum (Weimar, 1938Google Scholar; these workss are published in the series of Forschungen zum Deutschen Recht). Marc Bloch's book La société féodale. La formation des liens de dépendance (Paris, 1939), reached me too late for me to use it in this article.Google Scholar

² “Note sur les ongines de 1'union du bénéfice avec la vassalité (in Études d'histoire dédiées à la mémoire de Henri Pirenne par ses anciens éléves, Brussels, 1937Google Scholar.

³ In order to confine the length of this article within manageable limits, I have tried to keep to the conclusions that seem to be cleary indicated by the texts, and have avoided, as far as I have been able, the discussion of difficult questions of interpretation. In a later article, dealing in particular with the work of Dr Krawinkel, I hope to discuss at greater length a number of points that require more detailed consideration.

⁴ One can also use several texts of the beginning of the reign of Louis the Pious which cleary refer to conditions of a few years before. The scope of the article is limited to the Frankish state in the strict sense of the word; evidence regarding the state of society in Italy will only be used in so far as it throws light on condition north of the Alps. There is a short but extremely valuable study of early feudal relationships in Italy by Leicht, P. S., “Gasindi e Vassalli, in Rendiconti della Classe di Scenze morali, storiche e filologiche, R. Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, 1927.Google Scholar

⁵ It is clear that the word honor, as used when speaking of the royal vassals, did not indicate a public function of any kind. This can be seen by comparing cap. IX (forma communis) of the Capitulary of Herstal of 779 ( Boretius, A., Capitularia regum Francorum, Hanover, 1888, no. 20)Google Scholar with cap. XXIV of the Capitulate missorum generale of 802 (ibid. no. 33). The first of these texts runs as follows: “Ut latrones de infra immunitatem illi iudicis ad comitum placita praesentetur; et qui hoc non fecerit, beneficium et honorem perdat. Similiter et vassus noster, sihoc non adimpleverit, beneficium et honorem perdat”; the second: “Si quis autem presbiter sive diaconus, qui post hoc in domo sua secum mulieres extra canonicam licentiam habere presumserit, honorem simul et hereditatem privetur usque ad nostram presentiam.” See also cap. IX of the Capitulare missorum Italicum of 802–10 (ibid. no. 99; on the date, cf. Clercq, C. De, La legislation religieuse franque de Clovis à Charlemagne, Louvain, 1936, pp. 217–20)Google Scholar, cap. X of the Capitulare Italicum of Pepin of 802–10 (ibid. no. 102; on the date, cf. Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 218–19)Google Scholar, cap. IX of the Divisio Imperii of 817 (ibid. no. 136), and cap. XXVI of the Admonitio ad omnes regni ordines of 823–5 (ibid. no. 150).

⁶ Capit. Haristal. cap. XXI (ibid. no. 20): “Si comis in suo ministerio iustitias non fecerit, misso nostro de sua casa soniare faciat usque dum iustitiae ibidem factae fuerint; et si vassus noster iustitiam non fecerit, tune et comes et missus ad ipsius casasedeant et de suo vivant quousque iustitiam faciat.”

⁷ That this is the sense in which the phrases iustitias and iustitiam facere must be understood is indicated by a comparison of the provision just cited with other texts, of which the most explicit are cap. IV and cap. VIII of the Capitulare Saxonicum of 797 (ibid. no. 27), cap. xxv of the Capitulare missorum generate of 802 (ibid. no. 33), cap. VI of the Capitulare legi ribuariae additum (ibid. no 41), and capp. VII-IX of the Capitulare de latronibus of 804–13 (ibid. no. 82). The expression was of a general character and was susceptible of varied applications; one cannot assume that a vassal exercised judicial powers from the fact that he is enjoined iustitias facere.

⁸ See cap. IX and cap. XXI of the Capitulary of Herstal (cited above, notes 5 and 6).

⁹ Cf. the Capitulare episcoporum of 769–800 (ibid. no. 21; on the date, see Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 159–60):Google Scholar “Comites vero fortiores libram unam de argento aut valentem, mediocres mediam libram; vassus dominicus de casatis ducentis mediam libram, de casatis centum solidos quinque, de casatis quinquaginta aut triginta unciam unam.”

¹⁰ Cf. cap. IV of the Capitulare Papiense of Pepin of 787–8 (ibid. no. 94; on the date, see Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 165–7):Google Scholar “De episcopis, abbatibus, comitibus seu vassis dominicis vel reliquis hominibus qui ad palatium veniunt aut inde vadunt vel ubi-cumque per regnum nostrum pergunt…Et quando hibernum tempus fuerit, nullus debeat mansionem vetare ad ipsos iterantes, in tantum quod ipsi iniuste nullam causam tollant…”

¹¹ Capitulare missorum generale of 802 (ibid. no. 33), cap. XXXXIX: “Ut in forestes nostras feramina nostra nemine furare audeat.…Si quis autem comis vel centenarius aut bassus noster aut aliquis de ministerialibus nostris feramina nostra furaverit, omnino ad nostra presentia perducantur ad rationem. Caeteris autem vulgis, qui ipsum furtum de feraminibus fecerit, omnino quod iustum est conponat, nullatenusque eis exinde aliquis relaxetur…”

¹² On the royal foresta see C. Petit-Dutaillis, “De la significationdu mot ‘forêt’ à l'époque franque”, in the Bibl. de l'École des Charles, t. LXXVI, 1915Google Scholar, and Prou, M., “La forêt en Angleterre et en France”, in the Journal desSavants, 1915Google Scholar.

¹³ In charters embodying judgements given by the palatine court the status of theassessors is not always indicated; generally some general term such as optimates, fideles, or proceres is used.

¹⁴ Cf. Mühlbacher, E., Die Urkunden der Karolinger, t. I, Hanover, 1906, no. 65Google Scholar(undated, probably 772): “Tune nos una cum fidelibus nostris, id est Hagino, Roth-lando, Wichingo, Frodegario comitibus necnon et vassis nostris Theoderico, Berthaldo, Albwino, Frodberto, Gunthmaro taliter visi fuimus iudicavisse. …”

¹⁵ Ibid. no 116, note (dated 776) = Stengel, E., Urkundenbuch des Klosters Fulda, t. I, i (Marburg, 1913), no. 83Google Scholar(dated 777). The formalities involved in the grant of some property to the abbey of Fulda by the king are carried out by two counts and “Finnoldum atque Gunthramnum, vasallos dominicos”.

¹⁶ Devic, Dom and Vaissete, Dom, Histoire générale de Languedoc (ed. Privat, , t. II, Toulouse, 1875, Preuves, no. 6 (act of 782): “Cumque residerent missi gloriosissimo atque scellentissimo dompno nostro Carolo rege Francorum in Narbona civitate…et per ordinatione de suos missos, id est…et vassis dominicis, id sunt Rodestagnus et Abundancius et judices….” The examination of the parties to the dispute and the judgement are the work of “ipsi missi et judices et vassi dominici”Google Scholar.

¹⁷ Annales Laureshamenses, a. 802 (ed. G. H, Pertz, in Mon. Germ. Hist., Scriptores, t. I, pp. 38–9:Google Scholar “Eo anno demoravit domnus Caesar Carolus apud Aquis palatium quietus cum Francis sine hoste; sedrecordatus misericordiae suae de pauperibus, qui in regno suo erant et iustitias suas pleniter abere non poterant, noluit de infra palatio pauperiores vassos suos transmittere ad iustitias faciendum propter munera, sed elegit in regno suo archiepiscopos et reliquos episcopos et abbates cum ducibus et comitibus, qui jam opus non abebant super innocentes munera accipere…”

¹⁸ The extracts from capitularies given in the notes to this article all clearly imply the existence of an appreciable number of royal vassals in every part of the Frankish kingdom, for the dispositions regarding them have a quite general character.

¹⁹ , Astronomus, Vita Hludowici imperatoris, c. 3Google Scholar(ed. Pertz, G. H., M.G.H., Scriptores,. t II, p. 608)Google Scholar. “Ordinavit autem per totam Aquitaniam comites. abbates, necnon alios plurimos quos vassos vulgo vocant, ex gente Francorum…eisque commisit curam regni prout utile ludicavit, finium tutamen, villarumque regiarum ruralem prowsionem….”

²⁰ Leicht, op. cit. (see above, n. 4). See also below, n. 109.

²¹ Annales regni Francorum, a. 788, original version (ed F.Kurze, Hanover, 1895), p. 80: “Quod et Tassilo denegare non potuit, sed confessus est postea ad Avaros transmisisse, vassos supradicti domm regis ad se adortasse et in vitam eorum con-sihasse….”

²² We even hear in 802 of Saxon vassi in Francia: “De illis Saxonibus qui beneficia nostra in Francia habent, quomodo an qualiter habent condricta” (Capitularia missiorum specialia, cap. XI, in , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 34Google Scholar; this capitulary consists of instructions to the missi in Francia, in the strict sense of the word, Neustria, and a part of Burgundy). If Hincmar is to be believed, Charlemagne granted the domain ofNeuilly-Saint-Front, a possession of the church of Rheims, as a benefice to a Saxon vassal ( “De villa Noviliaco”, in M.G H., Scriptores, t. XV, p. 1168).

²³ Fidelis has under Charlemagne only the: general meaning of “subject”, a person, bound to loyalty to the king and observing this loyalty. This can easily be seen by examining a series of royal diplomas, which describe many people whom there is not the slightest reason to suppose were bound to the king by ties of vassalage: as fideles; see , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t, I, nos. 172Google Scholar(of 791), 181 (of 797), 187 (of 799), 194 (of 785–800), 205 (of 807), 210 (of 809), 212 (of 811), 213 (of 811), 216 (of 812). In Italy we hear of fideles nostri discurrentes (e.g. , Mühlbacher, op. cit. no. 111, dated 776)Google Scholar, who appear to be men charged with some particular mission; cf. , Leicht, op. cit. pp. 298–300Google Scholar.

²⁴ It often happens, of course, that the fideles of the texts were in fact royal vassals, but this we only know through some special mention in the text, as, for example, fromthe fact that they are specified as fideles holding benefices from the king; cf. cap. XVIII of the Capitulare missorum of Nijmegen of 806, cap. IX of the Capitulare missorum de exercitu promovendo of 808, cap. xx of the Capitulare of Aachen of 802–13 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, nos. 46, 50 and 77Google Scholar; on, the date of the last, see Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 217–18)Google Scholar. No doubt it was such Cases that largely accounted for the evolution of the word fidelis, which,in the latter part: of the ninth and even more in the tenth century came simply to mean “vassal”.

²⁵ In cap. IX (forma communis) of the Capit. Haristal. ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 20Google Scholar, dated 779) there are provisions for the punishment of a royal vassal who refused to give up a robber to justice: “Similiter et vassus noster, si hoc non adimpleverit, beneficium et honorem perdat; et qui beneficium. non, habuerit, bannum solvat.”

²⁶ Cf. the text of the Annales Laureshamenses cited above, p. 150, n. 17.

²⁷ Cf. cap. VII of the Capitulary of Boulogne of 811 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 74):Google Scholar “De vassis dominicis qui adhuc intra casam serviunt et tamen beneficia habere noscuntur….”

²⁸ Cf. Cap. VI of the Breviarium missorum Aquitanicum of. 789 (ibid. no., 24: “Quo-modo illis beneficiis habent condrictos provideant vel sues, proprios”, and cap. x of the Capitularia missorum specialia at 802 (ibid. no. 34): “De illis hominibus qui nostra beneficia habent distructa et alodes eorum restauratas….”

²⁹ The precaria was a particular form of tenure distinct from ordinary domanial tenure (mansus). It was Roman in origin, being styled praecarium in Roman legal texts. In the sixth, seventh and eighth centuries it appears as a grant of lands either revocable ad nutum or, as became more and more the custom, made for life. It might either involve the payment of a census, generally of a nominal character, or even be free; the modesty of the payments it entailed perhaps explains the term beneficium sometimes applied to it. There were several types of precariae, but it is unnecessary to give the details here; certain of the characteristics ofthe institution developed and altered in the course of the eighth and ninth centuries, but its essential character remained unchanged. On precariae from the sixth to the eighth centuries, cf. Lesne, E., op. cit. t. I, 1910, pp. 321 sqqGoogle Scholar.

³⁰ Cf. the text of the Capitulare episcoporum of 769–800 cited above, p. 149, n. 9.

³¹ Cf. however a charter of Echternach of 775–84 ( , Mülbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 184Google Scholar= Wampach, C., Geschichte der Grundherrchaft Echternach im Frühmittelalter, t. I, ii, Quellenband [Luxemburg, 1930], no. 92):Google Scholar “…insola…quem Widgarius et Autgarius per nostrum beneficium tenuerunt”, and another of the same abbey of 777–97 ( , Mühlhacher, op. cit. no. 185:Google Scholar= , Wampach, op. cit. no. 93):Google Scholar “…villam nostram que dicitur Duouendorf…quam Geraldus vassus noster usque nunc perbeneficium nostrum tenuit”. On the benefices granted to counts, see below, p.. 167.

³² The aprisio, which was ratified by a royal grant, conferred on those who enjoyed it the full powers of a landed proprietor over the soil, but these powers came to an end on the death of the king (Henrenfall, or in this case Thrnmfall), and could of course be terminated in case of infidelity; cf. Schwerin, Brunner-von, Deutsche Rechtsgeschichte, t. II² (Munich and Leipzig, 1928), pp. 346–8Google Scholar. An excellent example of this type of grant is that of a fideiis John, who, after becoming a vassal, of Charlemagne, received, in 795 a grant of property, in the pagus of Narbonne, of which he had made an apristo: “…in manibus nostris se commendavit… et petivit nobis…ut ipsum, villarem… concedere fecissemus. Nos vero concedimus ei ipsum villarem…quantum, ille cum homines suos…occupavit vel occupaverit vel de heremo traxerit…vel aprisione fecerit” ( , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 179)Google Scholar. After the death of Charlemagne, John commended himself to Louis the Pious and obtained from him a regrant of the property he had acquired by aprisio (diploma of Louis of 815 in , Bouquet, Recueil deshistoriens des Gaules et de la France, t. VI, p. 472)Google Scholar.

³³ These non-royal vassals, even non-royal vassi casati, are a comparatively ancient institution.; cf. my “Note sur les origines de l'union du bénéficeavec la vassalité” (cited above, p. 147, n. 2), p. 175, n. 2. Mitteis (op. cit. p. 123)Google Scholar is wrong in assuming that cap. XIII (forma communis) of the Capitulary of Herstal of 779 provesthat churches and abbeys now had also their own vassals. The second part of the phrase in question (“Et sit discretio inter precarias de verbo nostro factas et inter eas quae spontanea voluntate de ipsis rebus ecclesiarum faciunt”: , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 20)Google Scholar deals with precariae freely granted by churches, but there is nothing to prove that these were granted to their vassals.

³⁴ , Boretius, op. cit. no. 25Google Scholar; on the: date, see Clercq, De, op. cit. p. 179Google Scholar.

³⁵ Cap, II: “Quomodo illum, sacramentum iuratum esse debeat ab episcopis etabbatis sive comitibus vel bassis regalibus necnon, vioedomini, archidiaoonibus adque canonicis.”Cap. IV: “Deinde advocatis et vicariis, centenariis sive fore censiti presbiteri atque cunctas generalitas popui, tam puerilitate annorum XII quamque de senili, qui ad placita venissent et iussionem adimplere seniorum et conservare possunt, sive pagenses, sive episcoporum et abbatissuarum vel comitum homines et reliquorum homines, fiscilini quoque et coioni et ecclesiasticis adque servi, qui honorati beneficia et ministeria tenent vel in bassalatico honorati sunt cum domini sui et caballos, arma etscuto et lancea, spata et senespasio habere possunt; omnes iurent. Et nomina, vel numerum de ipsis qui, iuraverunt ipsi missi in brebem secum adportent; et comites similiter de singulis centinis semoti, tarn, de illos qui infra pago nati sunt et pagensales fuerint quamque et de illis qui aliunde in bassalatico commendati sunt….” In the phrase “episcoporum et abbatissuarum, vel comitum homines et reliquorum homines”, the word homo is clearly used in more general sense than “vassal” (cf. below, p. 171, n. 114); the homines are all those in some personal relationship of dependence towards bishops, (abbots), abbesses, counts and other persons, so that the word homines is inclusive of not only vassi, but of many other persons besides.

³⁶ Cap. IV, the passage running “adque servi…habere possunt”. The employment of serfs on confidential missions is not unknown in the reign of Charlemagne. The king himself sometimes made use of them, though the practice was disapproved of by contemporaries, or at all events by the clergy. , Adrevald, in the Miracula Sancti Benedicti, I, 18Google Scholar(ed. de Certain, Paris, 1858), describes how the occupation and organization of Italy after the conquest absorbed all the available elements of the Frankish aristocracy, and how in consequence the king “quibusdam servorum suorum, fisci debito sublevatis, curam tradidit regni; atque in primis Rahonem, Aurelianensibus comitem, praefecit, Biturigensibus Sturminium, Arvernis Bertmundum, aliisque ut ei visum est, locis alios praeposuit”. Saint-Benoit-sur-Loire had much to complain of in the violent acts of its count Raho; Adrevald explains them “ut eius debitum exposcebat naturae”.

³⁷ Cap. XVI of the Capitulary of Aachen, of 802–13, ( , Boretius, op. cit. t, I, no. 77)Google Scholar: “Quod nullus seniorem suum dimittat postquam ab eo acciperit valente solido uno, excepto si eum vult occidere aut cum baculo caedere vel uxorem aut filiam maculare seu heredilatem ei tollere.” There is a similar provision in a fragment published by Boretius (ibid. no. 104) as cap. VIII of the Capitula Francica: “Si quis seniorem suum dimittere voluerit et e approbare potuerit unum de his criminibus: id set primocapitulo si senior eum iniuste in servitio redigere voluerit; secundo capitulo si in vita eius consiliaverit; tertio capitulo si senior vassalli sui uxorem adulteraverit; quarto capitulo si evaginato gladio super eum occidere voluntane occurrerit; quinto capitulo si senior vassalli. sui defensionem facere potest postquam ipse manus suas in eius commendaverit et non fecerit, liceat vassallum cem dimitteie. Qualecumque de istis quinque capitulis senior contra vassallum suum, perpetraverit, liceat vassallum, eum dimittere.”

³⁸ The humble position of these vassi non casati appears also from the fact that they were not allowed to leave their master once they had received from him the equivalent of one solidus for their maintenance. One is reminded of the poor man who entered into a bond of vassalage because he had nothing with which either to clothe or feed himself and who is mentioned in Formula 43 of the collection of Tours ( , Zeumer, Formulae Merowingici et Karolini aevi, Hanover, 1886, p. 158Google Scholar; this formula should probably be dated from, the beginning of the Carolingian period). Cf. also cap. x of the Capitulary of Boulogne of 811 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 74):Google Scholar “Constitutum est ut nullus episcopus aut abbas aut abbatissa vel quislibet rector aut custos aecclesiae bruniam vel gladium sine nostro permisso cuilibet homini extraneo aut dare aut venundare praesumat, nisi tantum vassallis suis. Et si evenerit ut in qualibet ecclesia vel in sancto loco plures brunias habeat quam ad homines rectores eiusdem ecclesiae stifficiant, tune principem idem rector ecclesiae interroget, quid de his fieri debeat.”

³⁹ Dronke, E. F., Codex diplomaticus Fuldensis (Kassel, 1850), no. 83:Google Scholar a donation in 785 by a private person of property in Alsace, including: “quantumcumque in ipsa marca homini meo Baturico condonavi in beneficium. cum omni adiacentia, ad ipsurn beneficium pertinet, totum et integrum, in ipsa marca Onchysashaim vinea una quem ipse in beneficio habuit”. Lacomblet, T. J., Urkundenbuch für die Geschichte des Niederrheins, t. I, Düsseldorf, 1840, no. 4:Google Scholar a donation, by a count in 794 of land situated in the Ysselgouw, including: “unum agrum quem Hildigerus ingenuua homo, in meo beneficio ante habuit”. Wampach, C., op. cit. t. I, iiGoogle Scholar, Quellenband, no. 111: a grant in Precaria by the abbey of “rem nostrum quam vasallo nostro Fulcoldo antea prestaturm habuimu”. Bitterauf, T., Die Trditionen dest Hochstifts Freising, t. I, Munich, 1905, no. 257Google Scholar(of 807): “Notitia qualiter domnus Atto episcopus in beneficium praestabit ecclesiae in loco quidicitur Tankiricha suo homine cui nomen Uuldarrich. Ipse enim Uualdalrrich se ipsum tradidit in servittum Attonis episcopi seu domui sanctę Mariae usque ad finem vitę suae. In hoc enim ipsumbeneficium accepit ut fideliter in servitio domui sanctę Mariae permansisset et si aliter aliquid fedsset, privatus de ipso beneficio permansisset.” Brevium exempla ad describendas res ecclesiasticas et fiscales (in. , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 128)Google Scholar, capp. 17–22: a list entitled “De beneficiariis qui de eodem monasterio beneficium habere videntur ”; each article indicating what is held in benefice of the abbey of Wissembourg contains the words “habet in beneficium”. Capitulare missorum de exeracitu promovendo of 808 (ibid. no. 50), cap. IV: “De hominibus comitum casatis isti sunt excipiendi…. Episcopus vent vel abbas duo tantum de casatis et laicis hominibus suis domi dimittant.”—Servitium in the Freising extract must be understood as “service”, meaning thatUdalric entered, into vassalage; “serfdom” would not be possible in this Context. One may compare an analogous use of the word servitium in Regino of Prüm, chronicon (ed. F.Kurze, Hanover, 1890), a. 787, where: the account of the submission of Tassilo (cf. below, p. 156, n.46) is reproduced almost word far word from the Annales regni Frrancorum, but servitium used, for vassaticum without changing the sense: (“tradens se manibus eius ad servitium”). An for the beneficiarii of Wissembourg, it seems to be vassi casati who are in question and not those holding precariae of the church, since these have already been dealt within the preceding section.

⁴⁰ See above, p. 153, n. 3,5: “tam de illos qui infra pago nati sunt et pagensales, fuerint quamque et de ills qui aliunde in bassalatico commendati sunt”.

⁴¹ It is no doubt such vassals as these armati homines that persons entering the Church sometimes wished to retain. Charlemagne objected to the practice (Capitula de causis cum episcopis et abbatibus tractandis of 810–11, cap. VIII, in Boretius, Capitularia, no. 72Google Scholar [on the date, see Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 213–14]:Google Scholar “Miramur unde accidisset ut si qui se confitetur seculum reliquisse neque omnino vult consentireut ipse a quolibet secularis vocetur, armatos homines et propria vellit retinere”).

⁴² Thegan, , Vita Hludowici imperatoris, c. 12Google Scholar (ed. Pertz, G. H., M.G.H., Scriptores,.t II, p. 593):Google Scholar “Eodem tempore venit Bernhardus, filius fratris sui Pippini, et tradidit semetipsum ei ad, procerem, et fidelitatem cum iuramento promisit. Susoepit eum libenter domnus Hludowicus.” The reference is to Bernard, King of Italy, who declared himself a vassal of Louis the Pious in, 814.

⁴³ Annales regni Francorum, a. 757 (ed. Kurze, pp. 14–16): “Ibique Tassilo venit, dux Baioariorum, in vasatico se commendans per manus, sacramenta iuravit multa et innumerabilia, reliquias sanctorum manus inponens, et fidelitatem promisit regi Pippino et supradictis filiis eius, domno Carolo et Carlomanno, sicut vassus recta mente et firma devotione per iustitiam, sicut vassus dominos suos esse deberet.”

⁴⁴ In my previous article (cited above, p. 147, n a,), pp. 186–7, I assumed that this was the case. Monod, G. (Études critiques sur les sources de l'histoire caroliagienne, Paris, 1898, pp. 106–10)Google Scholar believed that the original version of the Royal Annals for the ears 741–88 was composed in 788–9, but that although not strictly contemporary it was complied with the help of notes and annals as well as from the recollections of the compiler. Halphen, M L. (Études critiques sur l'histoire de Charlemagne, Paris, 1921, pp. 8–9)Google Scholar regards the annals for the years 741–58 inclusive as strictly contemporary with the events they describe, but that a few slight changes were made later. Cf. the criticism of these views by Levison, M. W. in the Neues Archiv, t XLV, 1924, p. 391Google Scholar.

⁴⁵ This possibility was suggested to me by my friend and colleague Dr Bonenfant, Professor at the University of Brussels, and would be in complete agreement with the views of Monod as to the date of the compilation of the first part of the annals. Monod had already noted the attention paid in them to everything concerning Tassilo, and suggested that the downfall of the last ofthe national dukes and the suppression of the duchy of Bavaria might have been the occasion of their compilation.

⁴⁶ Annales regni Francorum, a. 787 (ed Kurze, p. 78; original version): “Tassilo venit per semetipsum, tradens se manibus in manibus domni regis Caroli in vassaticum”; a. 788 (p 80) “Tune domnus rex Carolus congregans synodum ad iamdictam villam Ingilenhaim, ibique veniens Tassilo ex lussione domni regis, sicut et ceteri eius vassi; et coeperunt fideles Baioarii dicere quod Tassilo fidem suam salvam non haberet….”— , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 179:Google Scholar charter of 795 (see above, p. 152, n. 32).—Capitulare missorum tn Theodonis villa datum secundumgenerale 805 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I no. 44):Google Scholar “De iuramento, ut nulli alteri per sacramentum fidelitas promittatur nisi nobis et unicuique proprio seniori, ad nostram utilitatem et sui senioris.”—Fragment of a capitulary, publishedas cap VIII of the Capitula Francica (ibid. no. 104; see above, p 153, n. 37).— , Astronomus, Vita Hludouici imperatoris (cf above, p. 150, n. 19)Google Scholar, c 21, p 618, on thesubject of the position of Wala immediately after the accession of Louis the Pious: “Qui tamen citissime ad eum venit et humillima subiectione se eius nutui secundum consuetudinem Francorum commendans subdidit.”— , Thegan, Vita Hludowici imperatorir (see above, p. 155, n 42)Google Scholar —Annales regni Francorum, a. 814 (ed. Kurze, p. 141), apropos of a struggle between several pretenders to the Danish throne: “Quo facto Herildus rebus suis diffidens ad imperatorem venit et se in manus lllius commendavit, quem ille susceptum in Saxoniam ire…iussit.”— , Bouquet, Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, t. VI, p. 472Google Scholar; act of 815 (cf. above, p. 152, n 32, in fine): “…in manibus nostris se commendavit”.

⁴⁷ I have made no attempt to discuss here the forms of service that could be demanded of a vassal, since, apart from military service and temporary functions fulfilled by royal vassals, our information on these points is so slight that even a short account of them is scarcely possible.

⁴⁸ See my article cited, above, p. 147, n. 2.

⁴⁹ , Boretius. Capitularia, t, I, no. 20Google Scholar, cap. XIII (forma communis):“De rebus vero eccle-siarum, unde nunc census exeunt, decima et nona cum ipso censu sit soluta; et unde antea non exierunt, similiter nona et decima detur; atque de casatis quinquaginta solidum unum, et de casatis triginta dimidium solidum, et de viginti trimisse uno…” Cap. XIV of the forma langobardica is more explicit: “De rebus vero aecclesiarum, que usque nunc per verbo domini regis homines seculares in beneficium habuerunt, ut inanteasic habeant, nisi per verbo domoi regis ad ipsas ecclesias fuerint revocatas. Et is inde usque nunc adpartem aecclesiae decima et nona exivit, et nunc inantea faciat; et insuper ad illas aecclesias de L casatos solido uno reddat, de triginta medio solido, de XX tremisse uno; et qui usque nunc alium censum,dedit, inantea sicut prius fecit ita faciat. Et unde usque nunc nullum censum exivit, et ipsa res aecclesiae sunt, censentur, et ubi non sunt, scribantur.”

⁵⁰ The nominal character of these payments can be seen by comparing them with those of the time of St Boniface, which amounted to 12 denarii for each family of tenants (Die Briefe der Hl. Bonifatius und Lullus, ed M. Tangl, no. 60, p. 123 [dated. 745]).

⁵¹ The Council of Frankfurt of 794, cap. XXVI ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 28):Google Scholar “Ut domus ecclesiarum et: tegumenta ab eis fiant emendata vel restaurata. qui beneficia exinde habent.”—Capitula e canonibus exerpta, cap. XXIV (ibid. no. 78):“Quicumque beneficium ecclesiasticum habet, ad tecta ecclesiae restauranda vel ipsas ecclesias omnino adiuvet.” The capitulary of which this provision forms a part was perhaps promulgated after the Councils of 813.

⁵² , Lesne, op. cit. t. II, ii, pp. 313sqqGoogle Scholar.

⁵³ E.g. Caroli epistola in Italiam missa of 779–81 (, Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 97Google Scholar; for the date, see: Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 161–2)Google Scholar; Council of Frankfurt (see above, p. 157, n. 51), cap. xxv; Italian capitulary of Pepin of 802–10, cap. VI ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 102)Google Scholar.

⁵⁴ Some traces of the practice can be found in the texts; cf. d' , Herbomez, Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Gorze, Paris, 1898,nos. 12, 13Google Scholar(both dated 770); , Prou and , Vidier, Recueil des chartes de l'abbaye de Saint-Benoĩt-sur-Loire, t. I, Paris, 1907, no. 19. TGoogle Scholar he date of this last is 835, but it refers, to events that took place at the end of the reign of PepinIII and the beginning of that of Charlemagne. The first of these texts deals with properties held in benefice of the church of Metz, which are distinguished from simple grants in precariam (e.g. “rem illam…quam Beto and partem Sancti Stephani delegavit, et ipse modo per precariam tenet, seu et sortem illam in ipsa villa, quam Nebolongus per beneficium Sancti Stephani vel nostrum tenerevidetur…”); the second is concerned with a domain “quam nunc per beneficium Sancti Stephani vel nostrum Fredelaigus, vassus domini Carolimanni regis, per precariam nostram tenere videtur” and of another “quam Godfridus, similiter homo dominicus per beneficium Sancti Stephanivel nostrum per precariam tenere videtur”. In the third text, Louis the Pious restores to the abbey of St-Benoĩt a part of a domain that had been usurped, by the Crown, and given in benefice to a royal, vassal; the latter, and no doubt other vassals after him, had retained it after Pepin had restored, the villa to the abbey.

⁵⁵ This was the view of Pösch, M., Bischofsgut und Mensa episcopalis, t. I, Bonn, 1908, pp. 122sqq.Google Scholar, and, it seems to be correct. It is possible that the passage in the Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium, cap. XV (ed. Loewenfeld, Hanover, 1886, pp. 44–5), relating to abbot Guy (753–87) refers in part to the reign of Charlemagne; certain “res aecclesiae…quas ipse regiis hominibus ad possidendum contradidit” are mentioned in it. It is safer not to use four charters of Pretaria that figure in the Gesta Aldrici (ed. Charles and Froger, Mamers, 1889, pp. 179–85), and which mention precariae verbo regis, since their authenticity is very doubtful. Further information relating to the secularization of Church property under1 Charlemagne will be found in Lesne, , op. cit,. t. II, i, pp. 65sqqGoogle Scholar. Save where Italy is concerned, however, the evidence quoted is generally rather late and its value is often, open to question. See1 also above, p. 151, n. 23.

⁵⁶ , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 20Google Scholar, cap. XIV, forma langobardica, the first part (see above, p. 157, n. 49) and the last: “Etsit discretio inter precarias de verbo dominco factas et inter eas quas episcopi et abbates et abbatisse eorum arbitrio vel dispositione faciunt, ut liceat eis, quandoquidem eis placuerit, res quas beneficiaverint ad partes ipsius aecclesiae recipere, facientes ut unusquisque homo ad causa Dei in honore Deo fideliter et firmiter deserviat.” It seems that one must make the same distinction in cap. XLLV, in fine, of the Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium (p. 45) where the author, writing of the year 787 and of the possessions of the abbey of St Wandrille, distinguishes between those “quae ad usus proprios fratrumque stipendia pertinere videntur”, those which “in beneficiis relaxati. sunt”, the domains that abbot Guy “regiis hominibus contradidit”, and those “que sub usufructuario aliis concessit”.

⁵⁷ He seems to have made relatively important restitutions to the abbey of Wandrille, St (Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium, cap. XVI, p. 47)Google Scholar, probably between 802, and 806, under Abbot Gervold. Perhaps some sort of restitution is indicated in acharter of Gorze of 795 (Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Gorze [cited above, p. 158, n. 54], no. 35), by which a certain Sigerannus declares that the church of jouy-aux-Arches (dept. Moselle, arr. Metz, cant. Gorze) belonging to the abbey “…per beneficium tenui et postea spontanea voluntate…per meum gladium vobis reddidi” after this restitution he takes the property back as a precaria.

⁵⁸ Capitularia missorum specialia of 802 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 34Google Scholar; cf. above, p. 150, n. 22), cap. x: “De illis hominibus qui nostra beneficia habent distructa et alodes eorum restauratas. Similiter et de rebus ecclesiarum.” Capitulare missorum of Nijmegen of 806 (ibid. no. 46), cap. XVIII: “Consideravimus itaque ut praesente anno …ut omnes episcopi, abbates, abbatissae, obtimates et comites seu domestici et cuncti fideles qui beneficia regalia tam de rebus ecclesiae quamque et de reliquis habere videntur….”

⁵⁹ This was evidently the case for the property restored in 835 to St-Benoĩt-sur-Loire; see above, p. 158, n. 54.

⁶⁰ On the word beneficium as applied to the early ecclesiastical benefice,see Lesne, E., “Les diverses acceptions du terme ‘beneficium’ du VIII^e au XI^e siècle”, in the Revue kistorique de droit français etétranger, 1924Google Scholar. On beneficium as used, to mean a precaria see the Capitulary of , Herstal, forma langobardica, cap. XIV (above, p. 158, n. 56). Beneficium might also designate other forms of tenure, as for example that of a “maire” (cf. cap. X of the Capitulare de villis, inGoogle Scholar, Boretius, op. cit. no. 32)Google Scholar, and even, in an exceptional case of a holding not for a fixed rent but for a fixed proportion of the produce, that of a simple cultivator of the soil (cf. cap. XVIII of the Capitula ecclesiastica collected, by Ansegisus of 800–13, in , Boretius, op. cit. no. 81Google Scholar; on the date, see Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 291–2)Google Scholar. Sometimes it is quite impossible to say precisely what form of tenure the word is being used to describe, as in certain diplomas of Charlemagne (e.g. , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, nos. 90, 121, 144Google Scholar, of the years; 775, 779, 782) and in private charters (e.g. , Wartmann, Urkundenbuch der Abtei Sankt Gallen, t. I, Zurich, 1863, no. 116Google Scholar, of the year 788).

⁶¹ The use of the word beneficium as applied to a precaria is extremely common. I may cite a few examples, grouped according to the modern source from which they are taken. , Albanès and , Chevalier, Gallia Christiana novissima, Marseille;Valence, 1899, no. 42 (780)Google Scholar; , Beyer, , Eltester and , Goerz, Urkundenbuch zur Geschichte der… mittelrheinischen Territorien, t.I, Koblenz, 1860, nos. 21, 23, 30, 33Google Scholar(767–87); , Bitterauf, op. cit. t. I, nos. 38Google Scholar, 42, 48, 96, 139, 171, 182,, 195, 240, 247, 273, 278, 287, 295, 296, 300, 315, 317, 320 (770-814); , Devic and , Vaissete, op. cit. t. IIGoogle Scholar, Pièces justificatives, no. 15: (802); , Dronke, op. cit. nos. 68Google Scholar, 87, 99, 117, 118, 209, 213 (788-803); Gallia Christiana, t. XII, Instrumenta ecclesiae Turonensis, no. 12, cols. 15–19 (813); Glōckner, K., Codex Laureshamensis, t. I, Darmstadt, 1939, no. 14 (790)Google Scholar; Guérard, B., Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Bertin, Paris, 1841, nos. 47Google Scholar, 50, 52, 54 (802–11); d' , Herbomez, op. cit. nos. 21Google Scholar, 22, 29, 30, 33, 34, 37, 38, 39, 42, 43, 44(775-811); , Lacomblet, op. cit. t I, no 21 (801)Google Scholar; , Stengel, op. cit. t. I, nos. 56, 58 (772)Google Scholar; , Wampach, op. cit. t. I, ii, nos. 90Google Scholar, 98 (784-89); , Wartmann, op. cit. t. I, nos. 57Google Scholar, 60, 104, 109, 110, 113, 120, 135, 151, 158, 177 (770-804). This list could be greatly expanded withoutmuch difficulty.

⁶² See, further, particularly nn. 71, 76, 97 and the Gesta abbatum Fantanellensium, cap. XV (p. 15): in 787 “in beneficiis vero relaxati sunt mansi integri numero 2120, medii 40, manoperarii 235, qui simul iuncti fiunt 2395, alii 156; habent ipsi molendina 24”. Cf also , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 184Google Scholar( = , Wampach, op. cit. t. I, ii, no. 92)Google Scholar, of 775–84, which relates to a whole island being given as a benefice.

⁶³ Cf. the second text cited above, p. 152, n. 31, and the texts that refer to villae granted as benefices to counts (cited below, p. 167, nn. 97–100) These cases seem to be those referred to in cap. VI of the Capitulate missorum of Nijmegen of 806 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 46):Google Scholar “Auditum habemus qualiter et comites et alii homines qui nostra beneficia habere videntur conparant sibi proprietates de ipso nostro beneficio et faciant servire ad ipsas proprietates servientes nostros de eorum beneficio et curtes nostrae remanent desertae et in aliquibus locis ipsi vicinantes multa mala paciuntur.” These royal benefices in which the curtis has been deserted as a result of usurpations are probably whole villae, in which the curtis was the centre of exploitation; as a result of the loss of the lands attached to it, it would cease to perform any useful function and fall into decay.

⁶⁴ Cf. for example the diploma of 835 for St-Benoĩt-sur-Loire (cited above, p.158, n.54.

⁶⁵ Capitulare missorum de exercitu promovendo of 808 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 50)Google Scholar, cap. I: “Ut omnis liber homo, qui quatuor mansos vestitos de proprio sive de alicuius beneficio habet….” Beneficium is applied here, apparently, to any type of benefice, including that of a vassal.

⁶⁶ The text cited in the preceding note goes on to prescribe that the aforesaid free man “ipse se praeparet et per se in hostem pergat, sive cum seniore suo si senior eius perrexerit, sive cum comite suo”

⁶⁷ See below, pp. 168–9.

⁶⁸ Capitulare missorum in Theodonis villa datum secundum generale of 805–6(, Boretius, op. cit. no 44Google Scholar; on the date, see Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 207–8)Google Scholar, cap. VI: “De armatura in exercitu, sicut antea in alio capitulare commendavimus, ita servetur, et insuper omnis homo de duodecim mansis bruneam habeat; qui vero bruniam habens et earn secum non tullerit, omne beneficium cum brunia pariter perdat.”

⁶⁹ Capitulary of Boulogne of 811 (ibid. no. 74), cap. VII: “De vassis dominicis qui adhuc intra casam serviunt et tamen beneficia habere noscuntur, statutum est ut quicumque ex eis cum domno imperatore domi remanserint vassallos suos casatos secum non retineant sed cum comite cuius pagenses sunt ire permittat.”

⁷⁰ That this was the case under Charles Martel and Pepin III is common knowledge it is confirmed incidentally by a diploma of Charlemagne, probably of 782–3 ( , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 148)Google Scholar An Italian capitulary of Pepin, probably of 787 ( , Boretiusop. cit. no. 95Google Scholar; on the date see, Clercq, Deop. cit. p. 165)Google Scholar, suggests that the practice persisted under Charlemagne: “(cap.VI) De monasteria et senedochia qui per diversos comites esse videntur, ut regales sint; et quitcumque eas habere voluerint, per beneficium domno nostro regis habeant.” It seems probable that the dispositions mentioned hert were of a general character, though in this Capitularv only their application in Italy is in question.

⁷¹ Duplex legationis edictum, a. 789( Boretius, Capitularia, no. 23), cap, XXXV: “Ut missi nostri prowdeantbeneficia nostra qurmodo sunt condricta et nobis renuntiare sciant” (cf. cap. V of the Capitulare Aquitantium of Pepin III of 765, inGoogle Scholar, Boretius, op. cit. no. 18).Google ScholarBreviarium missorum Aquitanicum, a. 789 (ibid. no. 24) cap VI: “Quomodo illis beneficiis habent condrictos provideant vel suos proprios.” Capitulare missorum generale, a. 802 (ibid. no. 33), cap. VI: “Ut beneficium domni imperatoris desertare nemo audeat, propriam suam exinde construere.” Capitularia missorum specialia, a. 802 (ibid. no. 34), cap XI (see above p. 150, n.22). Capitulary of Aachen, a 802 (ibid. no.77), cap. IV: “Ut hi qui beneficium nostrum habent, bene illud immeliorare in omni re studeant; et ut missi nostri hoc sciant.” see also below, p. 173, n. 117.

⁷² Council of Frankfurt of 704 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 28)Google Scholar, cap. IV “Et qui nostrum habet beneficium, diligentissime praevideat, quantum potest Deo donante,ut nullus ex mancipiis ad illum pertinentes beneficium famen moriatur….”Capitulare missorum of Nijmegen of 806 (ibid. no. 46,) cap. XVIII enjoins on all those who hold a benefice of the king (see above, p. 159, n. 58) “…unusquisque de suo beneficio suam familiam nutricare faciat et de sua proprietate propriam familiam nutriat, et si Deo doante super seet super familiam suam, aut in beneficio aut in alode, annonam habuerit et venundare voluerit, non carius vendat nisi…”

⁷³ Same capitulary, cap. VI (see above, p. 160, n. 63).

⁷⁴ See the texts indicated above, p. 159, n.61.

⁷⁵ Capitulare missorum of Nijmegen of 806 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 46)Google Scholar cap XVIII; see above, p. 161, n.72.

⁷⁶ Capititulare de iusticiis faciendis, a. 811 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 80Google Scholar; on the date, cf. Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 215–17)Google Scholar, cap. V: “Ut missi nostri diligenter inquirant et describere faciant unusquisque in suo missatico, quid unusquisque de beneficio habeat vel quot homines casatos in ipso beneficio”; cap. VII: “Ut non solum beneficia episcoporum, abbatum, abbatissarum atque comitum sive vassallorum nostrorum sed etiam nostri fisci describantur, ut scire possimus quantum etiam de nostro in uniuscuiusque legatione habeamus.” Italian Capitulary of Pepin, probably of 787 (ibid. no. 95), cap. VI; see above, p. 161, n. 70.—A diploma of Charlemagne for Fulda of 779 ( , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 127Google Scholar= , Stengel, op. cit. no. 90):“…donatumque in perpetuum essevolumus quasdam res proprietatis nostrae, hoc est in pago Wormacinse, quas fidelisnoster Otakarus per nostrum beneficium visus est habuisse, id est in Mogontia civitate mansos xxx et v et mancipia LXVI etXVI lidos et vineas ad ipsum beneficium pertinentes.” The rights of proprietorship of the king over the benefices held of him and over the male and female serfs attached to these benefices are affirmed in a series of judgements pronounced in the course of certain legal disputes regarding benefices in the Autunois, principally at Perrecy and Baugy, which were held by members of the family of the Nibelungen (Google Scholar, Prou and , Vidier, op. cit. t. I, nos. 9–13, 16, 17Google Scholar; a. 796–821). No. 9 (776) is especially characteristic: “veniens Moyses, advocatus Hildebranno comite, die Martis, Botedono villa, mallavit hominem aliquo nomine Dodono, quod, servos erat domno Karolo de suum beneficium, de villa quae dicitur Jovo [Jey]”, and further on “recredidit quod servus erat: domno Karolo rege de iamdicta villa Jovo”. On these disputes, see Levillain, L., “Les Nibelungen historiques et leurs alliances de famille” (in Annales du Midi, 1937), PP- 343–57Google Scholar. — , Bitterauf, op. cit. t. I, no. 166Google Scholar a: a donation made by Helmoin in 793 to the church of Freising of property that he held in benefice ofthe king:“…ipse Helmuni…pro mercede domni regis manibus suis tradidit ad supradicto domo Sanctae Mariae”.— , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 206Google Scholar; Charlemagne confirms in 807 an. exchange of property between the church of Würzburg and count Audulf, the bishop granting1 “praedicto viro Audulfo glorioso comiti ad partern nostram….Similiter et in conpensatione huius meriti dedit iam dictus Audulfus comis per nostrum comiatum de eius benefitio suprascripto viro Agiluuardo venerabili episcopo.”

⁷⁷ It is clearly implied, by the Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium, cap. xv, where the mansi which “in beneficiis relaxati sunt” are classified with those which “ad usus proprios fratrumque stipendia pertinere videntur” in the list of the possessions of the abbey. It is also implied by the inventory of property conceded in benefice that appears in thedescription of a part of the possessions of the abbey of Wissembourg in the Brevium exempla (see above, p. 154, n. 39). See also a charter of 796–7 in , Wampach (op. cit. t. I, ii, no. 111)Google Scholar, in which a benefice conceded to a vassal is described as “rem nostram, quam vasallo nostro Fulcoldo antea prestatum habuimus”.

⁷⁸ It appears to be implied by two dispositions of a general nature that at once follow and complete each other in the Capitulare de iusticiis faciendis of 811–13 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 80)Google Scholar, cap. v: “Ut missi nostri diligenter inquirant et descnbere faciant unusquisque in suo missatico,quid unusquisque de beneficio habeat vel quot homines casatos in ipso beneficio”; cap. VI: “Quomodo beneficio condricta sunt, aut quis de beneficio suo alodem comparavit vel struxit.” See also cap. IV of the Capitula de causis diversis of 807, in fine (see below, p. 170, n. 111).

⁷⁹ See my article cited above, p. 147, n. 2.

⁸⁰ Such was the case for the domains of Baugy and Perrecy, held in benefice underCharlemagne by two generations of Nibelungen (see above, p. 162, n. 76, and Levillain, loc. cit.). Another example is given, for northern Italy, by a diploma of Charlemagne for the church of Aquileia of 811 ( , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 214):Google Scholar “quidam fidelis noster nomine Landola per nostrum tenuit beneficium et post eius discessum Bennofilius eius, deinde Bono hactenus tenere visus fuit….

⁸¹ On this question I am of the same opinion as U. Stutz (“‘Römerwergeld’ und ‘Herrenfall’”, in Abhandl. der Preuss. Akad. der Wissenschaften, Phil.-hist. Klasse, 1934), as against that of Mitteis, H. (op. cit. p. 137sqq.Google Scholar, and in the Historische Zeitschrift, t. CLII, 1935, pp. 566–72)Google Scholar.

⁸² Brunner, and Schwerin, von, op. cit. t. II, pp.346–8Google Scholar. The case is that of the vassal John, who on the death of Charlemagne came to do homage to Louis the Pious and obtain from him the regrant of the property he held by aprisio (cf. above, p. 152, n. 32).

⁸³ See my article cited above, p. 147, n. 2.

⁸⁴ Cf. what has been said above, pp. 151 sqq., on the subject of vassi casati.

⁸⁵ In the sense indicated by , Mitteis, op. cit. pp. 129sqGoogle Scholar.

⁸⁶ , Mitteis (op. cit. pp. 149–50)Google Scholar is prepared to admit it for the later part of the reign.

⁸⁷ Capitulare missorum of Nijmegen ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 46)Google Scholar, cap. VII: “Audivimus quod aliqui reddunt beneficium nostrum ad alios homines in proprietatem, etin ipso placito dato pretio conparant ipsas res iterum sibi in alodem; quod omnino cavendum est, quia qui hoc faciunt non bene custodiunt fidem quam nobis promissam habent. Et ne forte in aliqua infidelitate inveniantur; quia qui hoc faciunt, per eorum voluntatem ad aures nostras talia opera illorum non perveniunt.”

⁸⁸ It is of course necessary, as , Mitteis (op. cit. pp. 147–51)Google Scholar has very rightly pointed out, not to confuse the confiscation of a benefice as a punishment for a failure to fulfil the specific obligations of vassalage with the confiscation of a benefice as a punishment for some breach of the law. To the second class of offences belong those provided against in the Capitulary of Herstal of 779 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, no. 20)Google Scholar, cap. IX (refusal to surrender a robber), the Italian Capitular of Pepin of 782–6 (ibid. no. 91), cap. VII (failure to fulfil legal obligations, iustitias facere, and so on; see above, p. 149, n. 7), the Capitulary of Boulogne of 811 (ibid. no. 74), cap. v (failure of a royal vassal to take part in a campaign when called upon to do so).

⁸⁹ One might at first glance cite as a third relevant text cap. VI of the Capitulate missoorum generale of Thionville of 805–6 ( , Boretius, op cit. no 44Google Scholar; see above, p. 160, n 68). But this is really only another case of confiscation following some breach of the “common law”, like those cited in the preceding note.

⁹⁰ Capitulary of Aachen of 802–13 (ibid. no. 77), cap. XX: “Et si quis de fidelibus nostris contra adversarium suum pugnam aut aliquod certamen agere voluit,et con-vocavit ad se aliquem de conparis suis ut ei adiutorium praebuisset, et ille noluit et exinde neglegens permansit, ipsum beneficium quod habuit auferatur ab eo et detur ei qui in stabilitate et fidelitate sua permansit.” , Mitteis (op. cit. pp 149–50)Google Scholar believes that this text has in view all vassals, and, arguing that the Carolingian vassal was the “peer” of his lord, he would interpret the provision as declaring that when a lord demands theaid of his vassals for a private war (“Fehde”), a vassal refusing his aid will lose his benefice. It therefore proves the existence of a legal bond between benefice and vassal-age, since it isan example of the confiscation of the benefice as a punishment for the failure to fulfil the service required of a vassal. This interpretation, in my view, is incorrect. In the first place, I do not believe that in a capitulary of Charlemagne a vassal would be described as the peer (conpar of his lord; the examples cited by Mitteis. which in any case only refer to the word par, and not conpar, are irrelevant. And secondly, and more important, if Charlemagne had promulgated a provision with the meaning that M. Mitteis attributes to it, it would have been tantamount to encouraging the practice of private warfare, a supposition which is quite irreconcilable with the emperor's efforts for the maintenance of pax. The truth is that the provision is concerned with a person appealing for help to one of his cortpares, that is, to another person of the same group. This group, in my view, can only be that of the royal vassals; fideles of the king, who have received benefices from him, can scarcely mean anything else. The appeal for help made by one of the royal vassals to other vassi dominici, endowed with benefices in the same region as himself, is justified because the vassal is acting in the king's service. And it is because the benefice is granted in return for services that the confiscation of it is justified if its holder does not go to the assistance of his conpares.

⁹¹ , Bitterauf, op. cit. t. I, no. 257Google Scholar; see above, p. 154, n. 3.9.

⁹² See above, pp. 148–9.

⁹³ See my article cited above, p. 147, n 2.

₉₄ Capitularia missorum specialia, a. 802 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, t. I, no. 34)Google Scholar, cap. XVI11 a (only in the text for the two missatica whose centres are given by Boretius as Paris and Rouen): “Ut diligenter inquirant inter episcopis, abbatis sive comites vel abbatissas atque vassos nostros qualem concordiam et amicitiam ad invicem habeant per singula ministeria, an si aliqua diseordia inter ipsos ease videtur, et omnem, veritatem in eorum sacramento nobis exinde renuntiarenon neglegent.”

⁹⁵ See above, p. 165, n. 90.

⁹⁶ Fragments of lost capitularies, preserved in the collection of Ansegisus ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 70Google Scholar, where they are dated 810–11), cap. I:“Si quis super missum dominicum cum collecta et armis venerit et missaticum illi iniunctum contradixerit aut contradicere voluerit, et hoc ei adptobatum fuerit, quod, sciens contra missum dominicum ad re-sistendum venisset, de vita componat: et si negaverit, cum XII suis iuratoribus se idoniare faciat; et pro eo quod cum collecta contra missum dominicum armatus venit ad resistendum, bannum dominicum componat. Simili modo domnus imperator, de suis vassis iudicavitit. Et si servus hoc fecerit, disciplinae corporali subiaceat.” It does not appear to me possible to regard the penultimate sentence as anything else than, an assimilation of the position of the vassi dominici to that of the missi dominici. It cannot be understood as a particular provision making the stated penalties applicable also to criminal vassi dominici; the penal clauses,of a very general character (they are introduced, by the phrase si quis), make no distinctions as to the rank of guilty persons, and are aimed impartially at any who break the law on this point, royal vassals as well as other men. A particular disposition is necessary only in the case of unifree men.

⁹⁷ , Mühlhacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 177Google Scholar(donation of a domain to the church of Utrech in 777): “quantumcumque Wiggerus comes ibidem per nostrum beneficium tenuit”. , Devic and , Vaissete, op. cit. (new ed.),, t. II, Preuves, no. 6Google Scholar(see above, p. 150, n. 16; act of 782): “Tune Milo comis in suum responsum dixit: Ipsas villas senior meus Karolus rex michi eas dedit ad benefitio. …” , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 154Google Scholar(donation of the domain of Marolles to St-Germain-des-Preś in 786): “…villam nostram…vel sicut moderno tempore Autbertus comes per nostrum beneficium tenere videtur”. , Bitterauf, op. cit. t. I, no. 166aGoogle Scholar(see above, p. 162, n. 76; act of 793,): “Et reliqua confinia et loca per circuitum quae Keroldus comes ibidem hahere in beneficio domni regis videbatur…”.

⁹⁸ See p. 186 of my article cited above, p. 147, n. 2.

⁹⁹ , Boretius, Capitularia, no. 46 (806)Google Scholar, capp. VI, XVIII (see above, nn. 63 and 58); no. 80 (811), cap. VII (see above, n. 76). Cf. also the diploma of 807 for the church of Würzburg cited above, p. 162, n. 76.

¹⁰⁰ This can be seen particularly in the charters of St-Benõt-sur-Loire (, Prou and , Vidier, op. cit. t. I, nos. 12, 13 and 16), where one sees, in 818 and 819, counts Childebrand II and Nibelung II appealing in a legal case before the mallus of Autun that concerned the benefices of Perrecy and Baugy, which they held in Autunois. The count of Autun, who presided over the mallus, was a certain ThieryGoogle Scholar. Cf. , Levillain, op. cit. particularly pp. 346 and 361Google Scholar; Chaume, M., Les origines du duché de Bourgogne, t. I, Dijon, 1925, p. 546Google Scholar; and above, pp. 162 and 163, nn. 76 and 80.

¹⁰¹ This landed endowment of the count is referred to, for the pagus Tornacensis, in a diploma of Louis the Pious of 20 November 817, which deals with the cession of a piece of land to the church of Tournai in order to enlarge the cloister of the canons (Recueil da historiens des Gaules et de la France, t. VI, p. 509Google Scholar; cf. Pirenne, H., “Le fisc royal de Tournai”, in Mélanges d'histoire du moyen age offerts à M. Ferdinand Lot, Paris, 1925):Google Scholar “…id est de proprio fisco nostro in eodem loco de terra habente in cicuitu perticas LXXXIVnecnon et in eodem loco de fisco nostro quem Werimfredus in beneficium habet,perticas XCIX similiter et de fisco nostro quem Hruoculfus comes in ministerium habet, perticas XXXII,” On the endowment of the office of count, see: Lesne, E., op. cit. t. II, ii, pp. 234sqqGoogle Scholar(with a documentation later than the reign of Charlemagne).

¹⁰² Memoratorium de exercitu in Gallia occidentali praeparando, a. 807 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 48)Google Scholar, cap. I: “In primis quicumque beneficia habere videntur, omnes in hostem veniant.” Capitula de causis diversis (ibid. no. 49; nos, 48 and 49 probably form only a single text), cap. III: “De Frisionibus volumus ut comites et vassalli nostri, qui beneficia habere videntur, et caballarii omnes generaliter ad placitum nostrum veniant bene praeparati…” Cf. also the second Capitulare missorum generale of Thionville, cap. VI (see above, p. 160, n. 68).

¹⁰³ Capitulare missorum de exercitu promovendo, a. 808 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 50)Google Scholar, cap. IV: “De hominibus comitum casatis isti sunt excipiendi et bannum rewadiare non iubeantur: duo qui dimissi fuerunt cum uxore illius et alii duo qui propter ministerium eius custodiendum et ser-vitium nostrum faciendum remanere iussi sunt. In qua causa modo praecipimus, at quanta ministeria unusquisque comes habuerit totiens duos homines ad ea custodienda domi dimittat, praeter illos duos quos cum uxore sua; ceteros vero omnes secum pleniter habeat vel, ai ipse domi remanserit, cum illo qui pro eo in hostem proficiscitur dirigat. Episcopus vero vel abbas duo tantum de casatis et laicis hominibussuis domi dimittant.” Capitulare Bononiense, a. 811 (ibid. no. 74), cap. IX.: “Et quia nos anno praesente unicuique seniori duos homines quos domi dimitteret concessimus, illos volumus ut missis nostris ostendant, quia his tantummodo heribannum concedimus.”

¹⁰⁴ Capitulare missorum de exercitu promovendo, a. 808, capp. I, IV (see above, pp. 160, 168, nn. 65 and 103). Capitulare Bononiense, a. 811 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 74)Google Scholar, cap. IX: “Quicumque liber homo inventus fuerit anno praesente cum seniore suo in hoste non fuisse, plenum heribannum persolvere cogatur….” See also below (P. 175, nn. 122 and 123) the provisions forbidding vassals from abstaining from taking part in an expedition on the pretext that their lords had not been called to participate in it.

¹⁰⁵ Capitulare Bononiense, a. 811, cap. VII (see above, p. 160, n. 69). Other provisions of the capitulary ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 74.)Google Scholar show equally clearly the essential part played by the military service due from the vassals in the Carolingian state; cap. v (penalties, against a royal vassus casatus whose pares are calledup on a military expedition and who does not come himself), cap. IX (penalties against vassals who have not accompanied their lord to the army and against the lords and counts who have acquiesced in theirabstention; permission for each lord to leave two vassals at home), cap. XI(obligations of lords in the matter of naval expeditions). See also the Capitulare missorum de exercity promovendo of 808.(ibid. no. 50), cap. V (measures of the same character as those in cap. v of the: Capitulary of Boulogne), cap. IX (no penalties against vassals who have not gone because they have been retained in the interior).

¹⁰⁶ Memoratorium de exercitu in Gallia occidentali praeparando, a. 807 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 48),Google Scholar. cap. III: “Omnes itaque fideles nostri capitanei cum eorum nominibus et carra siva dona, quantum melius praeparare potuerint, ad condictum placitum veniant. Et unusquisque missorum nostrorum per singula ministeria considerare faciat unum de vassallis nostris, et praecipiat de verbo nostro, ut cum illa minore manu et carra de singulis comitatibus veniat et eos post nos pacifice adducat, ita ut nihilexinde remaneat et mediante mense Augusto ad Renum sint.”

¹⁰⁷ See above, pp. 149–50 and nn. 14 and 16.

¹⁰⁸ Capitulare Aquisgranense, a. 809 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 61)Google Scholar, cap. V: “Ut nullus alius de liheris hominibus ad placitum vel ad mallum venire cogatur, exceptisscabinis et vassis comitum, nisi qui causam suam aut quaerere debet aut respondere.” The vassalsof the counts are not yet named amongst the assessors at ordinary placita in the Capitulare missorum of 803 (ibid. no. 40), cap. XX.

¹⁰⁹ See above, p. 153, n. 37. To the provisions reproduced in this note, cap. XI of the Capitulary of Mantua of 802–3 (ibid. no. 90; on the date, see Clereq, De, op, cit. p. 219)Google Scholar must be added: “Ut nullus quilibet hominem Langobardiscum in vassatico vel in casa sua recipiat, antequam sciat unde sit vel quomodo natus est; et qui aliter fecerit, bannum nostrum, conponat.”The object of this provision seems to have been to prevent the Franks established in Lambardy from receiving into vassalage dependent Lombards (gasindi or even vassals) who might have left their lords without authorisation.

¹¹⁰ Divisio regnorum ( , Boretius, op. cit. no 45)Google Scholar, cap. VIII: “Similiter precipimus, ut quemlibet liberum hominem qui dominum suum contra voluntatem eius dimiserit et de uno regno in aliud profectus fuerit, neque ipse rex suscipiat neque homimbus suis consentiat ut talem hominem recipiant vel iniuste retinere praesumant”; cap.IX: “Quapropter precipiendum nobis videtur ut post nostrum ex hac mortalitate discessum homines uniuscuiusque eorum accipiant beneficia unusquisque in regno domini sui et non in alterius, ne forte per hoc, si aliterfuerit, scandalum aliquid possit accidere. Hereditatem autem suam habeat unusquisque illorum hominum absque contradictione, in quocunque regno hoc eum legitime habere contigerit”; cap. X “Et unusquisque liber homo post mortem domini sui licentiam habeat se commendandi inter haec tria regna ad quemcunque voluerit, similiter et ille qui nondum alicui commendatus est.” That these articles must be read in conjunction with one another is shown by the context and is confirmed by the use of thewords quapropter and et. The apply to vassals in general. Cap. VIII is directed towards preventing the arbitrary desertion of lords by their vassals; such desertion would be facilitated by the possibility of taking as a second lord the subject of one of the other kings. Cap. IX is not only directed towards preventing intrigues within another kingdom by the intermediacy of vassais who might have received benefices in it, as they could retain their allodial possessions there. Its chief object was to prevent the possibility of a vassal, living in one kingdom and whether casatus in it or not, from receiving a benefice and becoming a vassal in another kingdom; this system of cross-vassalage and duality of allegiance would seriously compromise the solidity of the tie between vassal and lord, and create the scandalum which it was the object of this measure to prevent.

¹¹¹ Capitula de causis diversis, a 807 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 40)Google Scholar, cap. IV: “Volumus itaque atque praecipimus ut missi nostri per singulos pagos praevidere studeant omnia beneficia quae nostri et aliorum homines habere videntur, quomodo restaurata sint post annunciationem nostram sive destructa. Primum de aecclesii….Similiter et alia beneficia, casas cum omnibus appenditiis earum et laboratu sive adquisitu; vel etiam quid unusquisque, postquam hoc facere prohibuimus, in suum alodem ex ipso beneficio duxit vel quid ibidem exinde operatus est. Qualiter autem sit, hoc unusquis-que vicarius singulis comitatibus in suo ministerio simul cum nostris missis praevideat, et sicut ipse hoc coniurare valeat, totum sicut invenerit in bievem mittat, et ipsos breves nobis deferant. Et omnes hii qui in ipsa beneficia habent, una cum nostris missis veniant, ut scire possimusqui sint aut qui suum beneficium habeat condrictum aut distructum. Similiter et illorum alodes praevideant, utrum melius sint constructi ipsi alodi aut illud beneficium; quia auditum habemus, quod ahqui homines illorum beneficia habent deserta et alodes eorum restauratos.” Cf. also the Capitularede iustitiis faciendis of 811 (ibid. no. 80), cap V: “Ut missi nostri diligenter inquirant et describere faciant unusquisque in suo missatico, quid unusquisque de beneficio habeat \el quot homines casatos in ipso benehcio.”

¹¹² Duplex legationis edictum 789 ( , Boretius, Capitularia, no. 23)Google Scholar, cap. XVIII: “De Sacramento fidelitatis causa, quod nobis et filiis nostris iurare debent, quod his verbis constate debet: ‘Sic promitto ego ille partibus domini mei Caroli regis et filiotum eius quia fidelis sum et ero diebus vitae meae sine fraude et malo ingenio.’” Capitulariamissorum specialia of 803 (ibid. no. 34), in fine: “Sacramentale qualiter repromitto ego quod ab isto die inantea fidelis sum domno Karolo piissimo imperatori, filio Pippini regis et Berthanae reginae, pura mente absque fraude et malo ingenio de mea parte ad suam partem et adhonorem regni sui, sicut per drictum debet esse homo domino suo. Sic me adiuvet Deus et ista sanctorumpatrocinia quae in hoc loco sunt, quia diebus vitae meae per meam voluntatem, in quantum mihi Deus intellectuam dederit, sic attendam et consentiam.” Variant: “Item aliud. ‘Sacramentale qualiter repromitto ego: domno Karolo piissimo imperatori, filio Pippini regis et Berthane, fidelis sum, sicut homo per drictum debet esse domino suo, ad suum regnum et ad suum rectum. Et illud sacramentum quod iuratum habeo custodiam et custodire volo, in quantum ego scio et intelligo, ab isto die inantea, si me adiuvet Deus, qui coelum et terram creavit, et ista sanctorum patrocinia’.”—For the oath of Tassilo, see above, p. 155, n. 43.

¹¹³ On the meaning of the oath of fealty taken by subjects in the Carolingian Sate, see F. Lot, “Le serment de fidélité à l'époque franque”(in the Revue beige de philologie et d'histoire, t. XII, 1933)Google Scholar. He shows there very clearly, contrary to the opinion of Dumas, M. A. (“Le serment de fidélité et la conception du pouvoir duI ^er au XI^e siècle”, in the Revue historique de droit franÇais et étranger, 1931)Google Scholar, that the distinction between the oath of a vassal and the oath of a subject must be maintained. The reply of Dumas, M. (“Le serment de fidé1ité à l'époquefranque”, in the Revue belge de philologie et d'histoire, t. XIV, 1935)Google Scholar, though, extremely learned and admirably Constructed, is not, in my opinion, convincing.

¹¹⁴ The word homo in the language of Carolingian administration could haveseveral meanings. Normally, when there is no qualification indicating some particular relationship of the person mentioned to some other person or institution, it can be translated by “man” or“subject”. Such is the case, for example, in the Capitulare missorum in Theodonis villadatum secundum generale ( , Boretius, Capitularia, no. 44)Google Scholar, cap. VI (see above, p. 160, n. 68), in the Capitulare missorum de exercitu promovendo of 808(ibid. no. 50), capp. III, VI (referring to homines, in general, who have not fulfilled ‘their military duties), and in the Capitula de rebus exercitalibus in placito tractanda of 810–11 (ibid. no. 73; on the date, see Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 213–15)Google Scholar, cap, x (referring to homines, in general, who have killed their parents). Placed in relation to some other physical or moral person (homo alicuius), the word homo implies a notion of dependence, without it being always possible to determine th e precise nature of this dependence. Such is the case, for example, in cap. XIV (forma langobardica) of the Capitulary of Herstal of 779 (ibid. no. 20; cf. above, p. I58, n. 56), where homines of churches are referred to as having received precariae which were not conceded verbo regis, and in cap. IV of the Capitula a misso cognita facta of 802–13 (ibid. no. 59; on the date, see Clercq, De, op. cit. pp. 223–4):Google Scholar “Nullus homo alterius clencum aut hominem recipiat in sua potestate”; there is an analogous example in cap. III of the Capitula per missos cognita facienda of 803–13 (ibid.no. 67): “Ut nullus conparet caballum, bovem aut iumentum vel alia, nisi illum hominem cognoscatqui ei vendidit, aut de quo pago est vel ubi manet aut quis est eius senior.” The word is used in the same sense in canon 9 of the Council of Frankfurt of 794 (ibid. no. 28), where Bishop Peter of Verdun proposes that “suus homo ad Dei iudicium iret” to rebut an accusation. In cap. v of the Capitulare de iustitiis faciendis of 811 (ibid. no. 80) the missi are instructed to undertake a survey of the benefices in each missaticum and to note init “quot homines casatos in ipso beneficio [habeat]”; these homines casati may be either vasst casati or dependents of an inferior status occupying agricultural tenures(mansi or parts of mansi). The latter are certainly the persons referred to in the Capitulare missorum Aquisgranense primum of 809 (ibid. no. 62), cap. XVIII: “De mercatis ut in die dominico non agantur, sed in diebus in quibus homines ad opus dominorum suorum debent operari”, and in other text. The status of vassal, if it happens to be that of the homo of a lord or evenof another homo, or of a liber homo who is not explicitly placed in some relationship toa lord, can only be recognized from some element in the context. Frequently it is shown by the fact that the homo is in possession of a benefice; e.g. the Capitula missorum specialia of 802 (ibid. no. 34), cap x: “De illis homimbus qui beneficia nostra habent distructa etalodes eorum restauratas”; Capitulare legi ribuariae additum of 803 (ibid. no. 41), cap VI: “Similiter et de benefitio hominis, si forte res proprias non habuerit, mittaturin bannum usque quo rex interrogetur”; Capitulare missorum Niumagae datum of 806 (ibid. no. 46), capp. VI, VII (see above, pp. 160, 164, nn. 63, 87); Capitula de causis diversis of 807 (ibid. no. 49), cap. IV (see above, p. 170, n. 111); Capitulare missorum de exercitu promuovendo of 808(ibid. no. 50), capp. I, IV, V (see above, pp. 160, 168, nn. 65, 103; cap. V: “De hominibus nostris et episcoporum et abbatum, qui vel beneficia vel talia propria habent, ut ex eis secundum iussionem in hostem bene possunt pergere…”); Capitulare Bononiense of 8II (ibid. no 74), cap IX (see above, p. 168, n. 104), Gesta abbatum Fontanellensium, cap. XV (see above, p. 158, n. 55); the charters of 785, 794 and 807 in , Dronke, op. cit. no. 83,Google Scholar, Lacomblet, op. cit. t. I, no. 4Google Scholar; and , Bitterauf, op. cit. t. I, no. 257Google Scholar(see above, p 154, n. 39). As to the expression dominus suus, it is true that it is not exclusively used to designate the relationship of a lord to a vassal, but it none the less implies that the person to whom it refers has a dominus, and it may be applied to the lord of a vassal. The general sense of the word allowed of its retention when the general oath taken by all subjects was constructed on the basis of that taken by the vassal to his lord.

¹¹⁵ The distinction between the two conceptions was clearly made by Waitz, G., Deutsche Verfassungageschichte, t. III ², pp. 297–8Google Scholar.

¹¹⁶ As appears to be implied by section 3 of Chapter 4 of Book IV of Fustel de Coulanges, Les transformations de la royauté pendant l'époque carolingienne (Paris, 1891), pp. 611sqqGoogle Scholar. The title “L'Empire de Charlemagne est déjà un état féodal” is not that of Fustel de Coulanges, but that of his editor Camille Jullian

¹¹⁷ Capitulare missorum generale at 802 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no. 33)Google Scholar, cap. VI (see above, p. 161, n. 71); Capitularia missorum specialia of 802, (ibid. no. 34), cap. X: “De illis hominibus qui nostra beneficia habent distructa et alodes eorum restauratas”; Capitulare missorum Niumagae datum of 806 (ibid. no. 46), capp. VI, VII (see above, pp. 160, 164, nn. 63, 87); Capitula de causii diversis of 807 (ibid. no. 49), cap. IV (see above, p. 170, n. III); Capitula a misso cognita facta of 802–13 (ibid. no. 59), cap. III: “Qui beneficium domni imperatoris et aecclesiarum Dei habet nihil exinde ducat in suam hereditatem, ut ipsum beneficium destruatur”; Capitulare missorum Aquisgranense primum of 810 (ibid. no. 64), cap. XIV: “De beneficiis destructiset alodis restauratis”; Capitulare de iustitiis faciendis of 811 (ibid. no. 80), cap. VI: “Quomodo eadem beneficia condricta sunt aut quis de beneficio suo alodem comparavit vel struxit.” See also above, p. 160, n. 71.

¹¹⁸ Capitulare missorum Aquisgranense primum of 809 (ibid. no. 62), cap. IX: “De beneficiis nostris non bene condrictis.” See also cap. IX of the Capitulare missorum Aquisgranense alterum of 809 (ibid. no. 63), the Capitulare missorum Aquisgranense secundum of 810 (ibid. no. 65), and above, p. 161, n. 71.

¹¹⁹ , Mühlbacher, op. cit. t. I, no. 149:Google Scholar donation of 783 to the church of St Arnulf of Metz: “…ut iam fatam villam numquam presumant alicui beneficio tribuere neque per precariam, ut fieri adsolet”. , Wartmann, op. cit. t. I, no. 155:Google Scholar donation of 799 to the abbey: “…ita dumtaxat ut pro anima Crimoldi ad ipsum monasterium iure peipetuo possedeatur, nec cuiquam qualibet modo in beneficium concedatur”. Parallel cases will be found in the same work, nos. 164 (802), 170 (802), 176 (803), and 216 (813-16).

¹²⁰ , Bitterauf, op. cit. t. I, no. 257Google Scholar; see above, p. 154, n. 39.

¹²¹ See above, p. 170, n. 110. But a vassal in one kingdom could hold private property in another, since the possession of such property did not involve the special relationship of vassalage to another lord.

¹²² Capitula de rebus exercitalibus in placito tractanda of 810–11 ( , Boretius, op. cit. no.73)Google Scholar, cap. VII: “Sunt etiam alii qui dicunt se ease homines Pippini et Chaluduici et tunc profitentur se ire ad servitium dominorum suorum, quando alii pagenses in exercitum pergere debent”; cap. VIII: “Sunt iterum et alii qui remanent et dicunt quod seniores eorum domi reaideant et debeant cum eorum senioribus pergere, ubicumque iussio domni imperatoris fuerit. Alii vero sunt qui ideo se commendant ad aliquos seniores, quos sciunt in hostem non prefecturos.”

¹²³ , Boretius, op. cit. no. 74Google Scholar, cap. VII (see above, p. 160, n. 69). The lack of enthusiasm shown by many vassals in fulfilling their military obligations appears clearly in cap. v: “Quicumque ex his qui beneficium principis habent parem suum contra hostes communes in exercitu pergentem dimiserit et cum eo ire vel stare voluerit, honorem suum et beneficium perdat.” Cap. IX shows us non-royal vassals also ending military service, often with the complicity of their lord or of the count; see above, p. 168, n. 104.

¹²⁴ The subject of this article was that studied in my seminar for medieval history at the University of Ghent during two terms of the academic year 1938–39; Mlles. Sevens, Snissaert and Van Tongerloo, MM. Aernouts, De Bruyne, Maertens, Thijs, Van de Voorde and Van Kerrebroeck, took part in the researches it entailed. Some aspects of it were made the subject of a paper read at the Joumées d'Histoire du Droit at Dijon on 30 May 1939. The translation is the work of Mr. P. Grierson, to whom I am indebted for a series of notes and corrections in the text.