Importance of seemingly casual phrases. novelty, and a novelty of Flambard's devising. The obvious inference is that the whole system, a system which logically hangs together in the most perfect way, was the device of the same subtle and malignant brain. And having got thus far, we are now enabled to see the full force of those seemingly casual expressions in the writers of the time of which I have already spoken. It was the royal claims of relief, of wardship, and marriage, systematically and mercilessly enforced, no less than the royal claim to enjoy the fruits of vacant ecclesiastical benefices, which are branded in Latin as the injustitiæ of Rufus and Flambard, and which in our own tongue take the shape of the King's claim to be the heir of every man.
Flambard's theory of land-holding.
Relief and redemption.
This last pithy phrase takes in all the new claims
which were now set up over all lands, whether held
by spiritual or temporal owners, and, in some cases at
least, over personal property also. All the "unrighteousnesses,"
all "the evil customs," which the charter of
Henry promises to reform[1] come under this one head.
In Flambard's system of tenure there could be no such
thing as an ancient eðel or allod, held of no lord, and
burthened only with such payments or duties as the
law might lay upon its owner. With him all land was in
the strictest sense loanland.[2] The owner had at most
a life-interest in it; at his death it fell back to the king,
for the king was to be the heir of every man. The king
might grant it to the son of the last owner; but, if so, it
was by a fresh grant,[3] for which the new grantee had
to pay. And the terms of Henry's charter imply that
- ↑ See the charter of Henry, Select Charters, 97; "Et omnes malas consuetudines quibus regnum Angliae injuste opprimebatur inde aufero, quas malas consuetudines ex parte hic pono." He then goes through the grievances in order, relief, marriage, wardship, and the rest.
- ↑ I borrow our ancient word lænland, which survives in the German lehn.
- ↑ See N. C. vol. v. pp. 379, 867.
