18. Præfectus Augustalis. 19-29. Vicarii XI. 30-37. Comites rei militaris VIII. 38-62. Duces rei militaris xxv. IV. CLARISSIMI. Consulares provinciarum XXXVII. V. PERFECTISSIMI. Præsides-Arabiæ, Isauriæ, et Dalmatiæ. VI. EGREGII. "for This title was very common, somewhat corresponding, perhaps, to the English " esquire," or rather "gentleman;' as to gentlemen, the remark made on them by Sir Thomas Smith* some two centuries and a half ago, will hold at the least equally true now, that "they be made good cheap in England." There are one or two of the titles in the foregoing list of dignities, which, from the figure they have made in modern. times, and still make, deserve more especial notice. These titles are comes and dux, count (corresponding to earl) and duke. Where the government is a pure despotism, the private friends or associates of the monarch will be, with some exceptions perhaps, the principal officers of state. In the courts of the Roman emperors, these associates, counsellors or ministers, were styled comites, companions of the emperor, from their constant attendance on his person. When these comites of the prince took upon them the government of a province, town or castle, or the exercise of any office, they were then called comites of that province, town, castle or office. Of this the comites Britanniarum, the counts of Britain; the comites littoris Saxonici per Britanniam, the counts of the Saxon shore in Britain; and the comites largitionum, the comites sacri palatii, &c., are examples. The word dux, from its original signification of the leader *Commonwealth of England, book i. c. 20. of an army in general, became, under the Roman empire, a title denoting certain military rank, the name of the province being added to it in the same way as to the title comes. For example, the officer who had command on the northern frontier of Britain over thirty-seven fortified places, and the troops stationed in them, was styled dux Britanniarum, the duke of Britain. It will be seen, from the table we have given, that in the Notitia, contrary to the modern order of things, the comites or counts take precedence of the duces or dukes. Notwithstanding the authority of the Notitia, however, the relative order of precedence of the comites and duces appear either to have been not very clearly settled, or to have varied at different times. Thus, besides the precedence in the Notitia, the comites are named before the duces in the following places of the Theodosian Code, lib. vii. t. 1. 1. 18, lib. vii. t. 20. 1. 13, and lib. viii. t. 7. 1. 11. they are placed on an equality with them, lib. vi. t. 14. l. 3. and they are named after them in the following places, lib. vii. t. 1. 1. 9, and lib. xii. t. i. l. 128. This would seem to show a "glorious uncertainty" in the Roman law, certainly not inferior to that of which we hear so much in the English. However, as it will be observed that there are no duces in the Class II. (the ILLUSTRES), we think we may, on the whole, conclude that the dux was a title inferior to the comes. From this picture of an old society in a state of corruption, of decay and decomposition, we now turn to that of a very young society in a state of rudeness, of barbarism, but nevertheless a society in a state of freshness, of growth, of youthful vigour. The origin of the word seneschalch, composed of the words senes, chief, and schalch, domestic, indicates, in some sort, the position of the great officer who bore the name. Everywhere the course of events seems to be, that the chief domestic of the king, in a rude state of society, should first fulfil the king's duties, and afterwards usurp his place. We find the same thing happening among the tribes of Asia and Africa, that we find among the warlike barbarians who overran Europe from the fifth to the tenth century. And it was not merely when the monarch was disposed to belong to the class of the Rois Faineants, that the chief domestic had this power; for we find him a very important and powerful personage under the most energetic of the Norman kings, though, of course, his power would not be so great as when the king, from feebleness of character, was a cypher. Thus it was, in fact, their jealousy of the power of this great officer, the seneschal or lord high steward, that led the Norman kings of England to keep it in the royal family after the ruin of the family of the De Montforts, earls of Leicester, who were probably assisted by the power and influence of this great office in the successful opposition which they long made to the royal power. We shall now extract some passages of importance from the work to which we have already referred. "The English lawyers and legal antiquaries have produced between them almost inextricable confusion on the subject of some of these officers. Madox, who, in an antiquarian point of view, has done the most for this subject, and whom Blackstone and others seem to have followed, in his history of the Exchequer, places the great officers of the king's court in the following order :-1. The High Justiciary, or High Justicier, as he writes it. 2. The Constable. 3. The Mareschall. 4. The Seneschall, or Dapifer. 5. The Chamberlain. 6. The Chancellour. 7. The Treasurer.-Instead of this classification we shall substitute the following, for reasons which will be given immediately: 1. The Grand Seneschall, or Dapifer Anglia. 2. The High Justiciary. 3. The Seneschall, or Dapifer Regis. 4. The Constable. 5. The Mareschall. 6. The Chamberlain. 7. The Chancellor. 8. The Treasurer. "I. The Grand Seneschall, or Dapifer-Senescallus, or Dapifer* Angliæ, in modern phraseology, the lord high steward—comes palatii, major domus regiæ, or maire du palais. The word seneschalch, about the etymology of which opinions vary somewhat, meant originally a sort of steward in the household of the Frank kings. After their conquest of Gaul, it came to signify a high political dignity. Dapifer, as shown in the note below, means the same thing, being the Latin synonym for it. This officer was the highest in the state after the king, executing all the chief offices of the kingdom as the king's representative. He was not only at the head of the king's palace, but of all the departments of the state, civil and military, chief administrator of justice, and leader of the armies in war. This is That these terms are synonymous is shown by Ducange, Spelman, &c. Dapifer seems to have been introduced when a Latin word came to be wanted for seneschal, and was adopted for want of a better, there being no Latin term exactly corresponding. Dapifer has been ignorantly translated "sewer" by Dugdale and others; whereas sewer, so far from meaning seneschall, means only écuyer tranchant, an officer a great many degrees below the seneschall. See Ducange, ad voc. Dapifer, Senescallus; Spelman, ad voc. Dapifer, Capitalis Justitiarius Senescallus; and Dugdale's Baronage. proved not only to have been the case in France, by Ducange and other high authorities, as well as by the public records of that kingdom*; but to have been so also in England, by a document published by Madox himself, from the black and red books of the Exchequer-to wit, the celebrated Dialogus de Scaccario, written in the time of Henry II.†; and likewise by certain MSS. preserved in Sir Robert Cotton's collection in the British Museum, particularly an old MS., entitled, "Quis sit Seneschallus Angliæ, et quid ejus officiumt." Consequently, Madox is wrong, when he says (Hist. Excheq. p. 28) that in the reign of William I., William Fitz-Osbern was the king's constable, because he is called magister militum. Whereas in the very same passage (of Ordericus Vitalis) he is called Normanniæ Dapifer, in virtue of which office he would be magister militum. It was not till afterwards that the constable became magister militum, being originally an officer subordinate to the dapifer."-Pictorial Hist. of England, vol. i. p. 567. By the nature of feudalism everything had a tendency to be given in fiefs. "Among other things, the office of seneschal was given in fief, too, and became hereditary among the Franks, Normans, and at the conquest of England, among the Anglo-Normans. In France, under the Merovingian dynasty, the office was in the family of Charles Martel, from whom sprung the Carlovingian dynasty; afterwards the Plantagenet counts of Anjou were hereditary seneschals of France; and in England this high office was granted by William the Conqueror to the Grantmesnils, and thence came by marriage to the earls of Leicester. After the attainder of the family of Montfort, earls of Leicester, the office was given to Edmund the second son of King Henry III., and it then remained in the royal family till its *Ducange Gloss. ad voc. Dapifer et Senescallus. See also the Grand Coustumier de Normandie, c. x. "Solebat autem antiquitus quidam justiciarius predictis superior per Normaniam discurrere qui seneschallus principis vocabatur."-Conf. La Coutume Réformée de Normandie commentée par Basnage, t. i. p. 2. col. 2. (Senéschal). See also the charters of the various Frank kings, in the witnessing of which the name of the seneschal or dapifer (sometimes the one word is used, sometimes the other) always stands before those of all the other great officers. It is right to add, that in the English charters, the name of the dapifer, or seneschal, does not invariably stand so high as in the French. † Madox, Hist. Exchequer (edition 1711). See also Co. Litt. fol. 61 a, for some account of the judicial part of the office of seneschal, or steward, and some attempt at the etymology of the word, not much more successful than attempts of that kind usually are. Cotton MSS., Vespasian, b. vii. fol. 99, b. It will also be found in Harl. MSS., 305, fol. 48, transcribed in a modern hand by D'Ewes, who supposed it to be of the age of Edward II. See also Cotton MSS. Titus C. passim, at the beginning of which volume there is a well-written tract, which contains the most satisfactory account we have met with of the subject. There is also a tract entitled, "Summus Angliæ Seneschallus," in Somers's Tracts, vol. viii. All these agree in one thing, viz.-the vastness and paramount nature of the authority originally wielded by the high steward, though none of them explain the anomaly of the co-existence of such an officer as the high justiciary. This we hope we shall now be enabled to do. abolition-Thomas Plantagenet, second son of King Henry IV., being the last permanent high steward*, the office being conferred afterwards only pro unicá vice. "In France, when the office became hereditary in the counts of Anjou, it soon became necessary, for various reasons, to have another seneschal, or dapifer, besides the hereditary one; and this officer, whether he be considered as the representative or deputy of the hereditary seneschal, still took precedence, as appears from the charters of the French kings, of all the other great officers of state. In England also, something of the same kind took place, but with this difference-that the various functions of the original grand seneschal, senescallus Angliæ, were divided into two parts, and committed to two distinct officers as his representatives; the judicial functions being committed to an officer styled the High, or rather Chief Justiciary; the administrative and those relating to the affairs of the king's palace or household, to an officer styled not the Senescallus Angliæ, but the Senescallus, or Dapifer Regist. This explanation will be found to completely remove the confusion that has so long prevailed among the English historians, antiquaries and lawyers on this subject. Our view of the subject, if it needed it, would be corroborated by the high privileges of the officer created in later times, to preside in the House of Lords at state trials, which officer, be it observed, is not 'high justiciary,' but lord high steward,' that is, Senescallus Angliæ.' This explanation also removes the difficulty of accounting for the extraordinary powers of the lord high steward's court, which some English lawyers have attempted to get over, by saying that the lord high steward succeeded to some of the powers of the high justiciary, whereas he merely exercises powers which he had delegated to the high justiciary." - Pictorial Hist. Ibid. Madox, whom Blackstone and others, both lawyers and historians, follow on this subject, has made strange confusion, although even the documentary evidence contained in his own book furnished the means of extricating himself. But he did not know how to use his own instruments. However, he could read black letter and that is better than nothing. Sir Edward Coke blunders equally with the others on this subject. The vast power anciently attached to the office of seneschal, dapifer, or steward will be apparent to every one, from the consideration of the fact, that to two of the most powerful royal lines of modern Europe, the Carlovingians and Plantagenets, it * For a list of high stewards, see Harl. MSS. 2195. f Among many other proofs of this, see Madox's Form. Anglic. cclxxxix. See a Disquisition on the Office of Lord High Steward, by Mr. Amos, in Phillips's State Trials, Appendix, vol. ii. Mr. Amos falls into the usual error of supposing that the judicial authority of the lord high steward grew out of that which appertained to the chief justiciary at the period when the latter office was abolished. |