For discovering the amount of the different fums mentioned in this and in the following chapters, it will be neceffary to enquire by what standard of money the author calculated. It feems highly probable, that in the days of Malcolm III. the people of Scotland had the fame ftandard of money as their Saxon neighbours. Now it is certain that at the Norman conqueft (a coinciding æra) the Saxon pound was about three times the weight of a pound of our prefent money; that there were 48 fhillings in the pound, and five-pence in the fhilling; confequently that a Saxon fhilling was a fifth larger than ours, and a Saxon penny three times as large as ours. Hence, if the author of LL. Malcolmi meant, by centum librata terra, and decem libra, thofe denominations in Saxon money, the former implies lands of the yearly value of 4800 Saxon fhillings, the latter a fum of 480 Saxon fhillings; or 5400 fhillings, and 540 fhillings of our prefent ftandard. Moft extravagant fums when the comparative value of money at the Norman conqueft, and at this day, is confidered. But it would appear, that the author of LL. Malcolmi had no idea of Saxon money, and did not calculate his table of fees by any denomination known among the Saxons. Thus, at $5, the fees for litera pacis domini regis de morte alicujus, are ftated thus, clerico pro fcriptura, fex folidos, OCTO DENARIOS. Here eight pence are mentioned as quotient parts of a fhilling; which proves that the author could not mean the Saxon fhilling, containing only five pence. And here occurs the firft great difficulty in the hypothefis, that LL. Malcolmi are the laws of Malcolm III. That prince began to reign in 1057, full ten years before the conqueft. We know not with certainty how foon after the conqueft it was that the change from the Saxon to the Norman denomination of money took place: that it took place inftantly, is most improbable. So that here we have the Scottish legislature calculating in the Norman manner, at a time when there is reason to believe that manner of calculating was unknown in England. What increases the difficulty is, that in c. viii. § 1, the author fuppofes that payments were made in money, in Laudonia, et partibus ibidem, inter aquas de Forth et Tyne; whereas payments, in the more northern countries, were made in cattle. Now, what is the country between Forth and Tyne? precifely the Anglo-Saxon territories, fuppofed to be fubject at that time to the king of Scots. According to this hypothefis, we must hold, that the Saxons on the north fide of Tyne ufed the Norman denomination of money, while they on the fouth side retained their own. But granting that in the days of Malcolm III. money was eftimated in Scotland according to the Norman denomination, the the difficulty from the exorbitancy of the fees will not be removed. In c. iii. § 1, we have the daily falary of the juftitiarius, pro qualibet die itineris fui centum folidi. If we understand this according to the Norman computation, it is five pounds; a fum ridiculously large. The mention of iter does of itself feem to point at a later period than that of Malcolm III. Spelman in Glofs. voc. Iter, afferts, that it was Henry II. of England who first established the iters, or ambulatory courts of the juftices. Maddox does not carry their inftitution further back than the preceding reign, 5to. Steph. Hiftory of the Exchequer, c. iii. p. 100. And yet it is here fuppofed, that the iter juftitiarij was established in Scotland during the reign of Malcolm III. during or before the reign of William the Conqueror. As this establishment did not take place in England under William the Conqueror, nor under his fons, we may conclude that it was not a Norman eftablishment. We know that it was a French one: and it is highly probable that Stephen, or Henry II. introduced it from France. But it feems that, in Scotland, the improvements of interior policy were fooner introduced and perfected than in England and it may be faid, that as Glanville formed a body of laws upon the model of the Scottish Regiam Majeftatem, so alfo the inftitution of the iter juftitiarij may have been borrowed from Scotland. If any one inclines to ftrengthen his early prejudices, or to cherish his national vanity, by fuch an hypothefis, I cannot pretend to undeceive him. But to return: in this fame c. iii. at § 3, a colpindach, i. e. a young cow or heifer, is valued at 30 denarij, or 2 s. 6 d. according to the Norman denomination of money; fo that the daily falary of the juftitiarius was equal to the value of 40 heifers, as the author was pleased to calculate it. I fhall hereafter fhew that the price of the heifer is beyond all bounds of probability. In the fame chapter, § 5, the daily charge for maintaining fix perfons at a reafonable rate, fuftentatio rationabilis, is eftimated at 2 folidi; that is, according to the Norman computation, 4 d. each an eftimate which feems incredible.' The laft tract which appears in this collection is a catalogue of the Lords of Seffion, from the inftitution of the College of Juftice in the year 1532, with hiftorical notes. A very idle article! It fills us with regret, that a writer, who feems to poffefs all the learning and induftry of a Camden and a Selden, and who has certainly more liberal views, fhould fo far proftitute his attention and leifure, as to compile a meagre lift of uninterefting names. He feems to have been aware that this reflection might be employed against him; and on this account he he has felected the following motto from Cicero: Si delectamur quum fcribimus, quis eft tam invidus qui ab eo nos abducat? Sin LABORAMUS, QUIS EST QUI ALIENE MODUM STATUAT INDUSTRIA? But he had forgot, and Cicero had forgot it, that it is the duty of a good citizen to answer to the community for his labours and his industry. N. B. This Book is not yet in the fhops of the London bookfellers. ART. IV. Hiftorical Extracts relating to Laws, Cuftoms, Manners, Trade, Literature, Arts, Sciences, &c. Tranflated from the New Hiftory of France, begun by Abbot Velly, continued by M. Villaret, and now under farther Continuation by M. Garnier, Profeffor Regius. Vol. I. 8vo. 5 s. fewed. Caflon, &c. 1769. Hiftorical collections, judiciously formed, may be greatly use ful for conveying both inftruction and entertainment, efpecially to the minds of youth. It is commonly expected, perhaps, that works of this kind fhould principally confift of the characters, exploits, reflections, &c. of warriors, philofophers, ftatefen, or other confiderable perfons in any rank of life, which might fecretly inftil and improve the moral feelings of the heart; but, befide that fuch extracts have in different ways been often prefented to the public, there is no fufficient reafon for confining writers to thefe particular topics, fince other parts of history have likewife entertainment and utility. A view of ancient forms of government, and manners of life, with the gradual progrefs of civilization and of arts, have an evident tendency to open and enlarge the mind, and to produce the moft folid edification and improvement: and as few perfons have it in their power to procure the larger volumes, and yet fewer have leisure or refolution to perufe them with attention, collections like thefe which are here offered may prove very beneficial. The preface informs us that they took their rife from a letter publifhed fome time fince in the Gentleman's Magazine, earnestly wishing that collections of short paffages from real hiftory, and promotive of patriotism and virtue, were committed to the prefs, and put into the hands of youth, in order to furnish them with fubjects for exercifing their thoughts to the improvement of their minds and hearts, instead of being vitiated by the frivolous reading of novels and romances, in which the evil greatly preponderates against what good may be contained in fome of thofe compofitions. I remember, it is added, the late Mr. Cave, founder of the Gentleman's Maga zine, after reading fome pages of Pamela, faid, RICHARDSON is a clever fellow, but this kind of books, however purely written, by what I have obferved, do more harm than good.' In this REV. June 1770. Ff manner manner the Author pleads in favour of his mifcellanies, which have, without doubt, the farther recommendation of being feJected from a work of high reputation in the literary world. They begin with the year 420, and are finished with the year 1268: but we are acquainted, that fhould the work be favoured with a reception anywife adequate to the merit of the original, or the good intentions with which it is published, a fecond affortment of fimilar materials, taken from the fame ftore, will soon see the light.' It cannot be expected that any clear or good idea should be formed of a hiftory of a country from books of this nature, which, indeed, is by no means intended; and poffibly, in fome inftances, a little obfcurity and inconvenience may be occafioned, by not knowing what, in the original work, has immediately preceded particular paffages; but felect occurrences, manners, and cuftoms, in different ages, with other matters of curiofity and improvement, are here brought under confideration, and may be read with fome advantage, though detached from the great work of which they make a part. The numerous extracts here made are all diftinguished by their own titles, and attended with a table of contents and index. Without adding farther observations we fhall let the Author speak for himself, by laying before our Readers fome of thefe extracts, from which they may form their own judgment of the nature of this performance, and of the tranflation. 1. Collection of Laws under Dagobert I. Anno 630. One of the finest monuments of the reign of Dagobert I. is the collection of the laws of the feveral nations under the French dominion. It appears that in all those nations there were two forts of perfons; the ingenus, or free; the ferfs, or villains. The free were diftinguished into two claffes; the nobles, who were called grandees, or only personnes majeures, according to their quality; and the gentry, who were called perfonnes mineures. The fashion of foliciting for and granting patents of nobility was not then known. The great dignities were thofe of patrician, duke, count, and domeftic, or mafter of the royal houses. The Francs paid no tribute, this mark of subjection being limited to the native Gauls, who generally were known by the appellation of Romans. It was very feldom that any confiderable employment was bestowed on them, all favours being the portion of their conquerors. Never was law more exact, more definitive and punctual, than that of the Francs; it provided for every thing, leaving nothing to the judges discretion †. There is no crime for which it does not prefcribe the penalty; no theft or larceny for which it does not affign the compenfation; no wrong, indecency, or abuse, of which it does not scrupulously eftimate the reparation. To rob a man fleeping, or to strip a dead perfon, to get on a horfe met by chance, without the mafter's leave, Lex Salic. Tit. 37, 43, 44. + Lex Salic. Tit. 60. are are offences on which it lays heavy fines. Any one squeezing the hand of a free woman was to pay fifteen fols; twice as much if he laid hold on her arm, and four times as much on touching her breaft; a regulation, the wisdom of which is certainly admirable; for the Francs, always taking their wives with them to the army, the fecuring them from all infults was a matter of the highest impor tance. Neither a like wisdom, nor a like equity, will perhaps be allowed in its ordinances relating to manflaughter. In thefe cafes it allows of compofition, or rather affigns the rate of every perfon's life, determining the fum by the circumftances of the action, and the ftation or quality of the perfon; concerning all which it enters into a very minute detail, If the murderer was infolvable, his relations, to a certain degree, were to make fatisfaction in lieu of himfelf. If not able, the murderer became a flave to the deceafed's family. However this jurifprudence may feem to authorize rather than punish guilt, yet it was not without fome views to the public good. It preferved a man to the state; to the deceased's relations it added a flave, or put an advantageous compofition into their hands: laftly, it laid every citizen under a neceflity of having an eye to all who were united to them by the ties of blood, this law making him, in fome measure, a fecurity for their good behaviour. There was, however, a privilege of renouncing confanguinity by a juridical declaration, but the renouncer forfeited the right of inheritance ; and if he happened to be killed, his fortune, or at least what the affaffin was obliged to pay, went to the public treasury. In this law are likewife found very excellent regulations for the decency of marriages and the quiet of families. Children could not marry without the confent of father and mother; the future bridegroom was to offer a fum to the maiden's parents, which indeed is not fixed by the law, but is generally thought to be a fol and denier. If the future wife was a widow, three golden fols and a denier were prefented to her in a court of juftice, and the judges diftributed them among the relations who had not partaken of the deceased husband's inheritance. But this offering was to be made in a full court, where a buckler had been lifted up, and at least three caufes had been tried, otherwife the marriage was illegal. This kind of purchase gave the husband fuch a power, that if he fquandered away his wife's portion, or any inheritances which had devolved to her, fhe could not claim any reftitution from him.-The order of facceffions was regulated with the like exactnefs; all the eftates and effects of the deceafed belonged to the children only; in the want of them, the father and mother were heirs; otherwife his brothers and filters; after them the father's and the mother's fifters; after them the nearest heir on the father's fide. Adoption was allowed: it conferred all the rights of a lawful fon, and was performed before the king, who confirmed it by his warrant.-It is to be obferved that our kings, at their entrance into Gaul, left the Gauls two-thirds of their lands, for which they paid tribute; the other was divided among the victo rious troops, in which the foldier's portion depended on that of the officer, who held by fubordination to a greater perfon, who himself was dependant on the king. Thus was the king lord paramount over all.' |