186
THE SAXONS IN ENGLAND.
[book i.
from over-population, has been noticed in the last
chapter ; but I agree with Eichhorn1 and Grimm2,
in attributing the principal and original cause of
slavery in all its branches to war and subsequent
conquest. Another and important cause is for-
feiture of liberty for crime ; and the amount of
dependence, the gentler or harsher condition of the
serf, depends to a great extent upon the original
ground of servitude. If the victor has a right to
the life of the vanquished, which by the law of
nature is unquestionably the case, he possesses à
fortiori a perfect claim to the person, the property
and the services of his prisoner, if his self-interest
or the dictates of humanity induce him to waive
that right3. These remarks apply no doubt, in
their full force, only to our pagan forefathers ; but
even Christianity itself did not at once succeed in
rooting out habits which its divine precepts of jus-
tice and mercy emphatically condemn. Beda, in
his desire to prove the efficacy of the mass for the
dead4, tells an interesting story of a young noble
1 Deut. Staatsges. i. 72, § 15.
2 Deutsche Rechtsalterthuiuer, p. 320, with the numerous examples
there given. So Fleta. “ Fiunt autem homines servi de iure gentium
Captivitate : hellaenim orta sunt, et Captivitates sequutae. Fiunt etiam
de iure civili, per Confessionem in curia Iisci factain.” Lib. i. c. 3. § 3.
3 A whole army may be devoted as victims by the conquerors. “ Sed
helium Hermunduris prosperum, Cattis exitiosius fuit, quia victores
diversam aciem Marti ac Mercurio sacravere, quo voto equi, viri, cuncta,
victa occidioni dantur.” Tac. Annal, xiii. 57. “ Lucis propinquis bar-
barae arae, apud quas tribunes ac primorum ordinum Centuriones mac-
taverant : et cladis.... superstites, puguam aut vincula elapsi, referebant
... .quot patibula captivis, quae scrobes,” etc. Tac. Annal, i. 61.
4 Hist. Eccles, iv. 22.
CH. VI∏∙]
THE UNFREE. THE SERF.
187
who was left severely wounded on the field, after a
battle between EcgfriS of Northumberland and
JESelred of Mercia, in the year 679. Fearful of
the consequences should his rank be discovered, he
disguised himself in the habit of a peasant, and as-
sumed that character, at the castle of the earl into
whose hands he fell ; declaring that he was a poor,
and married man ɪ, who had been compelled to at-
tend the army with supplies of provisions. But his
language and manners betrayed him, and at length,
under a solemn promise of immunity, he revealed
his name and station. The reply of the earl is cha-
racteristic ; he said : “ I knew well enough from
thy answers that thou wert no rustic ; and now in-
deed thou art worthy of death, seeing that all my
brothers and relations were slain in that battle:
yet I will not kill thee, lest I should break the
faith that I have pledged.” Accordingly when his
wounds were healed, his captor sold him to a Frisian
in London, who, finding that he could not be bound,
finally released him on his parole and permitted
him to ransom himself. Whatever the motive, it
is thus clear that the victor possessed the right of
life and death over his captive, even when taken in
cold blood ; and the traditions, as well as the histo-
rical records of the northern nations are filled with
instances of its exercise.
' This is confirmatory of the statement in the last chapter, that,
strictly speaking, the Comes could not marry. One cannot see why the
assertion should have been made on any other grounds : his great
anxiety was to prove himself not a comes or minister, and as one argu-
ment, he states himself to be “uxoreo nexu constrictus.'’