No More Learning

They say that they had remonstrated with him in vain, and
had finally invited him to meet them at Ober Lahnstein and
waited for him, but he had not come. The Archbishop of
Maintz therefore, in the name of the electors, and acting as
in a court, declared Wenceslas deposed,1 and notified the
Princes, lords and cities of the Empire that they were free
from their oath of obedience to Wenceslas, while they con-
tinued to be bound by their oath to the Empire and to the
person who should be elected King of the Eomans. 2
When we now endeavour to put together the political prin-
ciples of the writers with whom we have dealt in this chapter,
it is evident that there is a substantial agreement among them.
They are clear that all political authority is derived from the
community, that is, while they conceive of it as coming from
God ultimately, directly and immediately it comes from the
whole body of the community. It is indeed interesting to
observe that Wesselius thought it well to correct the mis-
interpretation of St Paul's words, "The powers that be are
ordained by God. " It is clear that, whether they were ecclesi-
astics or laymen, they did not recognise the doctrine of what
is called the Divine Eight of Kings; they were clear whether
they were Englishmen or Frenchmen that the authority of the
,iui-h ny kene achte gehabt alle der
mishel und Kriege, dy leider manche
zijt in Deutachen und in anderen
Landen des heiligen Richa swerlich
und vortorplich geweson und noch
werendo sint. . . . (6) Er hat auch,
das erschreglich und unmenschlich
ludet, mii syna sol tier hand, und auch
ubermiez ander ubelteden die er by
yme hail, erwirdige und bidderbe
prelaten paflen und geistlich lude, und
vil andere erbar lude ermordet, erdrun-
ket, verbrand mit fackeln und sy
jemorlichen und unmenschlichen wid-
der recht getodet, das eym Romischen
Konige unczemelichen stehet und
ludot. "
1 Id. id. , p. 257: "Und wir Johann
Erzbischoff vorgenant, Gots namen
zu dem ersten angeruffen, in Gerichtes
stad gesessen, in namen und wegen
unsero vorgoschriben Herren und middo
Kurfiirsten des heiligen Romischen
Richs und unser selbes, umbe diese
egenanten und andere vile grosser
gebreeten und sachen una darezu
bewogonde, abethun und abeseczen mit
dissem unserme Urteil, daz wir thun
und geben in dieeer sehriflt, den vor-
genanten Herren Wencezlaus als einen
unnuczen veraiimelichen unachtbaren
entgleder und unwordigon hant haber
dee heiligen Romischen Richs, von dem
selben Romischen Riche und vor aller
der wirde und herlichkeit darezu
gehOreude. "
1 Id. id. id.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 184
[PART II.
FIFTEENTH CENTURY.
King was a limited authority. Gerson, d'Ailly, and Turrecre-
mata emphatically prefer a mixed government, that is, a
government which included the aristocratic and democratic
elements, as well as the monarchical. Gerson and d'Ailly in
France, and Fortescue in England, are clear that the legal
rights of the subjects are protected, even against the King,
by the Courts of Law. Gerson, Zabarella, and Wesselius are
even clear that in the last resort the violent and unjust ruler
might be resisted and deposed.
These writers, then, know nothing of absolute monarchy;
indeed, it is evident that such a conception would have seemed
to them irrational and repulsive; they all, like the Mediaeval
writers in general, conceived of monarchy as the best form of
government, but it was a monarchy limited and conditioned
by the law, and the good of the community for which it
existed.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 185
CHAPTER IV.
THE THEOKY OF THE DIVINE BIGHT.
We have been carefully searching for the appearance of the
theory of the absolute Divine authority of the King in the
fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, as we have done in other
volumes with relation to the earlier Middle Ages.
In our first volume we pointed out that this theory was first \
explicitly stated by Gregory the Great, and in later volumes,
that, in spite of his great authority, there is hardly any trace
of it, except in a small group of imperialist writers, of whom
the most important was Gregory of Catino, during the great
conflict between the Popes and the Emperors in the eleventh
and twelfth centuries. The great Mediaeval writers, like St
Thomas Aquinas, ignore this theory, and even speak with
confidence of the right to resist and even to depose the
unrighteous ruler. 1
The only writer of any importance in the fourteenth century
who seems to us to have maintained the doctrine of the absolute
Divine authority of the King was Wycliffe, and we have dealt
with this in an earlier chapter. It seems to us that the con-
1 We wish again to express our great mediaeval polities to this work, which
regret that, owing to the troubled is, as far as we have seen, the most
times in which it came out, our thorough study of the subject, within
attention had not been called to the its limits. We are glad to find that,
admirable work of Professor F. Kern, as we think, we are not compelled to
'Gottesgnadenthum und Widerstands- alter the judgments which we have
recht im Mittelalter. ' We greatly expressed in former volumes, but
regret that we were unable to consult Professor Kern has handled his subject
it in writing our last volume. We with a fulness and precision which
are glad to take this opportunity to command our admiration,
draw the attention of students of
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 186
[PAST II.
FIFTEENTH CENTURY.
caption was wholly alien to the political thought of the fifteenth
century, as we have so far considered it, but it found expression
in two quarters, in Spain in 1445, and in a work of Aeneas
Sylvius (afterwards Pope Pius II. ) written apparently in 1446.
We cannot here discuss the circumstances which lay behind
the appearance of this conception in the proceedings of the
Cortes of Olmedo in 1445, but it is evident that the country was
in a highly disturbed and disorderly condition, not indeed
uncommon in Spain in the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries,
and it was very natural that men should set out in the strongest
terms the urgent need of political order and obedience.
However this may be, the principle of the Divine authority
of the King, and the wickedness of resistance to him, is ex-
pressed in very strong terms. After referring to the wars
and revolts caused by some of the King's subjects in his king-
dom, the Cortes declared that the Divine Law expressly forbade
men to touch the King, who was the Lord's Anointed, or to
speak evil of him, for he was the Vicar of God, or to resist him,
for to resist the King was to resist the ordinance of God. 1
This statement is rendered more significant when we observe
that the Cortes went on to say that the revolters affirmed in
their justification that they were acting in the King's own
interest, and in accordance with the law of the kingdom as
expressed in the ' Siete Partidas' of Alfonso X. The passage
from this law book, which they quote at length, certainly seems
1 'Cortes of Castilo and Leon,' vol. iii.
18 (Olmedo, 1445). Present, the King,
various prelates, nobles, doctors of the
King's Council, and the Procurators of
the cities and villas of the kingdom.
The Cortes presented a supplication
to the King in which they first refer to
the revolt of some of his subjects,
p. 458: "Oluidada la ley natural, por
estilo dela qual las abejas han un
principe, e las gruas siguen un cabdillo,
e aque ellos acatan e obedescen; e
asi memo pospuesta la ley devinal,
lo qual espresamente manda e defienda
que ninguno non sea osado de tocar en
su rrey e principe, commo a quel que
es ungido de Dios, nin aun de rretraor
nin dezir del ningunt mal nin aun lo
ponsar en su espiritu, mas que aquel sea
tenido commo vicario de Dios e onrrado
commo por escelonte, e que ningunt
non sea osado dele rresistir, por quelos
que al rrey rresisten son vistos querer
rresister ala ordenanca de Dios, alo
qual asi fazer todos son obligados e
temidos, non solo temiendo la ira de
Dios, e el mal e pena que dello loa
puede venir, mas aun por la guarda de
sus consciencias. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. IV. ] THE THEORY OF THE DIVINE BIGHT.
187
to suggest that the subjects should guard the King not only
against themselves and foreigners, but also against himself,
not only by good counsel, but by preventing him from com-
mitting any act which might dishonour him, and injure his
kingdom. 1 The Cortes urged that the revolters were mis-
interpreting the passage; they cited a number of other passages
from the 'Siete Partidas' on the nature of the authority of
kings, which seemed to them to forbid such actions as those of
the insurgents, and they contended that these should not be
tolerated. It would, they said, be abominable and contrary to
God, and Divine and Human Law, that the King should be
subordinate to his vassals and subjects, and should be judged
by them; for the King is the Vicar of God, who holds his heart ]
in his hands; he is the head and heart and soul of his people,
who are his members, and owe him reverence and obedience;
his authority is so great that all laws are subject to him, for he
holds his power from God and not from men. 2
After further citations from the "Fuero de las leyes," the
Cortes urged that if anything in the 'Siete Partidas' was
contrary to these principles, the King should revoke it " de su
cierta ciencia e proprio motu e poderio absoluto," so far as it
'Id. id. (p. 459). These are some
words they quote from the 'Siete Par-
tidas,' it. , 13, 25: "E por ende el pueblo
deve mucho punnar en quardar su rrey,
lo uno por que lo han ganado espiritual-
mente por don de Dios, e lo al natural,
mente por rrazon e por derecho, e
esta guarda quele han de fazer es en
tres maneras. La primera, de si mesmo,
la segunda de ellos mismos, la tercera
dolos estrannos. E la guarda que han
de fazer a el de si mesmo es que non le
dexen fazer cosa a sabiendas por que
se pierda el alma, ninque sea a mal
estanca e desonrra de su cuerpo e de su
lignage, o a grant dapno de su rregno. "
* Id. id. (p. 483): "Lo quarto, por
que cosa seria muy abominable e
sacrilego e absurda e non menos
escandalosa e dapnosa e contra Dios e
ley divina e umana e rrepugnante a
toda buona policia e rrazon natural e a
todo derecho canonico e ceuil, e enemiga
de toda justicia e lealtat, major mente
delas leyes de nuestros rregnos, si el
rrey cuyo coracon es enlas manos do
Dios, e lo el guia e inclina a todo lo quel
plaze, et qual es vicario e tiene su logar
enla tierra, e es cabeca e coracon e alma
del pueblo, e ellos son su mienbros, al
qual ellos naturalmente deuen toda
lealtat e fi? delitat e sujecion e obediencia
e rruenerencia e servicio, e por e1 se ha
de guiar e mandar el derecho dol
poderio el quel es tan grande, especial-
mente segunt las leyes de nuestros
rregnos que todas las leyes e los
derechos tienen so si, por que el su
poderio non lo ha delos omes mas de
Dios, cuyo logar tiene en todas las cosas
temporales--ovieso de ser e fuese
sugeto asus vasallos e subditos 9
? ? naturales, e por ellos juzgado. "
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 188
[PABT II.
FIFTEENTH CENTURY.
might be contrary to the aforesaid laws of the "Fuero" and
"Ordinamiento. " 1
It would be difficult to find a more emphatic assertion of the
doctrine of the " Divine Eight" of the King, and of his absolute
authority as above the Law. It is possible that this may be
related to the attempt made by Juan II. at the Cortes of
Palencia in 1431 to annul the provisions of the Cortes of
Bribiesca in 1387 and to give his Briefs the authority of law,
which we have already considered; but as we have seen,
Juan II. had been compelled to withdraw from this position. 2
We have another example in the fifteenth century of the
assertion of the "Divine Eight" in a treatise of Aeneas Sylvius:
'De Ortu et Auctoritate Imperii Eomani,' written, as we have
said, apparently in 1446.
This treatise is indeed primarily an exposition of the nature
and authority of the Empire, and it is only incidentally that
it touches upon the "Divine Eight," and it is perhaps worth
while to observe its more general principles. Aeneas Sylvius
begins by tracing the origin of monarchy to the conflicts among
men; its purpose therefore is to secure peace and justice. The
conflicts of nations compelled men to accept some supreme
authority; this was the origin of the various Empires of the
ancient world, and finally of Eome. 3 In Eome itself men
were driven by similar causes to agree that the Government
should be placed in the hands of one man; the Prince was
created and it "ratum esset quicquid ab eo constituitur. " 4
All peoples are subject to the authority of the Empire,
for the purpose of the Empire is universal peace. 5 These,
however, are little more than commonplaces; we are con-
cerned to know what in the view of Aeneas Sylvius was
the authority of the Emperor. The Emperor has authority
to make law, to interpret law and to abrogate law where
1 Id. id. (p. 492): "Las quiera
rrevocar de su cierta ciencia e proprio
motu e poderio rreal absoluto, asi o en
quanto son e pueden aer contra las
die lias leyes del Fuero e Ordina-
nneoto. "
1 Cf. p. 133.
3 Aeneas Sylvius, 'De Ortu et Auc-
toritate Imperii Romaoi,' 2-4.
? Id. id. , 5.
'Id. id. , 1013.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. IV. ] THE THEORY OF THE DIVINE RIGHT.
189
there is reasonable cause. 1 In another chapter he deals
with the question of appeals from the Emperor alone to the
Emperor acting with the Princes; he flatly denies that any
such appeal can be made, and adds that the Emperor has
just as great an authority when acting alone as when acting
with the Princes. 2 We are not here discussing the constitu-
tion of the Empire, but it is obvious that Aeneas is speaking
under the terms of the interpretation of Eoman Law by the
Civilians rather than under those of the actual constitution
of the Empire in the Middle Ages.
The Emperor has supreme legislative power, but we are also
concerned to know what Aeneas thought was his relation to the
actually existing law. It is right that he should live, and j udge,
according to the law, and he cites the ' Digna vox' (Cod. i. 14,
4),3 but he adds that while it is honourable to say this, it
must not be asserted that the Emperor is subject to the law,
for he is "legibus solutus. "* Aeneas may not, however,
have meant by this much more than to assert the dispensing
power of the Emperor, that he had authority to temper the
rigour of the law by Equity.
It is, however, when we turn to Aeneas' discussion of the
relation of the subject to what might be the unjust actions of
the Prince that we come to the matter with which we are here
specially concerned. We must always, he says, presume that
there is a rational cause behind the action of the Prince, and
therefore, even if he should unjustly annul, or derogate from
some " privilegium," we must not revile or resist him, for there
is no one who can judge his temporal actions. Whatever the
1 Id. id. , 19.
* Id. id. , 22: "Nuno ultimo loco
de appellationi bus transigamus eosque
confutemus qui a sententia eummi
principis asserunt appellandum. . . .
Sed appellant quidam rursus ad
Caeearem adjunctia principibus, quasi
maior ait imperator cum illis quam sine
illis. . . . Sed vana atquo inania sunt
iata fundamenta. Tanta est eoim in
Caesare potestas, sine principibus
quant am cum ipsis. A mat enim uni-
tatem suprema potostas. . . .
33. Cumque in Caesare summa
potestas sit, summaque authoritatis
plenitudo, nil est quod adjunctia prin-
cipibus authoritatis accedat, quoniam
neque summo adiici quicquam potest,
neque plenum potest esse plenius. "
? Id. id. , 20.
4 Id. id. , 20: "Quod quamvis pul-
chrum est dicero, non tamen assoron-
dum est imperatorem esse subject um,
cum sit solutus. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 190
[PART II.
FIFTEENTH CENTURY.
Prince does must be patiently endured, however unjust it is,
and we must look for some amendment of his action by his
successor, or to its correction by that heavenly judge who does
not suffer violence and injury to be perpetual. We must
remember that whatever the Prince does, is done by the
permission of God, for the heart of the King is in the hands of
God, who turns it whither he wills. 1
Aeneas was setting out in dogmatic phrases the doctrine of
passive obedience, and relating this to the conception, that
whatever the Prince does is done by the permission of God.
He returns to this again in a passage of which we have already
quoted a part, in which he deals with the question of appeals
from the judgment of the Emperor. He admits that sometimes
unrighteousness and an unjust judgment might proceed from
the highest authority, but there can be no appeal, for there is
no judge who can examine the temporal actions of Caesar.
Men must recognise that they are subject to the Prince, and
must reverence the Emperor and Lord of the world, for he
rules over temporal things in God's place, and as men must do
what God commands, they must also accept the commands of
Caesar, " sine repugnatione. " 2
It is clear that Aeneas was concerned in this treatise to
assert the absolute authority of the Emperor, both as supreme
1 Id. id. , 16: "Verum quum in
omnibus quae geruntur a principe,
caussa presumatur et ratio facti, si
quando vel abrogare privilegia vol
ipsis derogaro principem contingit in-
juste, quamvis liceat eum per viam sup-
plicationis informare, humiliterque
petere restitutionem, non tamen recla-
mare licet, vituparare vel impugn are,
si perseveret, cum nemo sit qui de
suis fact is temporalibus possit cognos-
ce re. Tolerandum est patienter, quod
princeps facit, quamvis inique, ex-
pectandaque est successoris emenda,
vel superni oorrectio judicis, qui vio-
lentias atque injurias non sinit esse
perpetuas. Cogitandum insuper est,
quod princeps agit Dei fieri per-
missione. Quia cor regis (ut inquit
scriptura) in manu Dei est, et ubi
voluerit, inclinabit illud. . . . Ex quo
fit, ut occult<> Dei judicio apud Deum
justa nonnunquam reperiantur, quae
nobis videntur injusta. "
* Id. id. , 23: "Etenim quamvis ex
summo solio nonnunquam procedat
iniquitas, injustumque judicium pro-
deat, non tamen ideirco locus est
appellationis, quum nemo sit judex,
qui temporalia Caeearis facta valeat
oxaminare. . . . Cognoscant homines
se principi esse subjoctos, imperator-
emque mundi et dominum tanquam
Dei vioem in temporalibus gerentem
venerentur, et si cut quae Deus jubet
implenda sunt, nihilque contra replican-
dum est, sic temporalia Caesaris man-
data sine repugnatione suscipiant. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? chap. IV. ] THE THEOK. Y OF THE DIVINE RIGHT.
191
Legislator, and as being above the Law, and bis references
to this unchallengeable Divine authority are of some
importance.
It is then, we think, true to say that in the statements of
the Cortes of Olmedo and of the treatise of Aeneas Sylvius
we have a clear and sharp re-statement of a political doctrine
which had little importance in the Middle Ages, but which,
as we shall see later, was developed by some writers in the
sixteenth century.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 192
CHAPTER V.
TAXATION.
We have in a previous chapter dealt with this subject, as
related to the fourteenth century, in some detail. We must
now examine it in relation to the fifteenth century, for there
appears to have been some confusion about this: naturally
enough, for there are some statements by important writers
of the fifteenth century which if uncontrolled by a more precise
examination of the actual facts, might produce, and indeed
have produced, a somewhat incorrect judgment: Sir John
Fortescue, for instance, in his 'Governance of England,'
attributed the poverty-stricken condition of the French people
to the arbitrary power of taxation of the King. 1
We must therefore consider carefully the evidence as to the
constitutional principles, and the actual practice of taxation
in the fifteenth century, and we begin with France, for it is
here that there seems to have been most uncertainty. As we
shall see, there is evidence that from time to time the French
Crown endeavoured to impose taxation without the consent
of the Estates, Provincial or General, but we think that it is
also clear that the legal right to do this was not recognised, and
that normally, when the Crown needed more than it received
from its ordinary fixed revenues, it asked for Aids or Subsidies,
either from the Provincial Estates or the States General.
It is unnecessary to enumerate all the occasions on which
the kings of France asked for Aids from the States General or
'Fortescue: 'Governance of Eng. Laudibus,' chap. 35.
land,' chap. 3. Cf. bis work 'Do
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. V. ]
193
TAXATION.
Provincial Estates; we deal with some of the more important
examples.
The Treaty of Troyes of 1420, by which the unhappy King
Charles YI . recognised Henry V. of England as his successor,
contains a clause providing that Henry was not to impose upon
the Kingdom of France any taxes without reasonable cause,
and that these were to be in accordance with the laws and
customs of the Kingdom. According to Juvenal des Ursins the
Three Estates met in Paris later in the same year, and were
asked for an Aid, and after deliberation expressed themselves
as prepared to grant whatever the King and his Council should
command. 1
These proceedings were, it may be urged, taken, not under
the legitimate government of France, but under the English
usurpation, and we turn to the legitimate government. In a
letter of Charles VII. of 1423 we find him mentioning that the
Three Estates of the Kingdom had granted him an Aid at their
meeting in Bourges. 2 In 1425 the States General meeting at
Melun granted Charles VII. a Taille, but attached to this the
condition that he should inform them what measures he
proposed to take to put an end to the disorders caused by the
soldiers, otherwise they would not make a grant. 3 In 1423,
as we lear n from another letter of Charles VII. , the Three
Estates of Languedoc had met in April and May at Carcassonne,
and had granted him the sum of 200,000 "livres tournois. " *
What is, however, more significant is the account given in
a letter of Charles VII. of December 1427 to his Lieutenant
in Languedoc, of the complaints made by the Estates of
1 'Kecueil des Anciennes Lois Fran-
chises,' vol. viii. 695 (p. 639): Juvenal
des Ursins, 'Hiatoire de Charles VI. '
(Ed. 1653, p. 381).
* 'Ordonnances,' vol. xiii. p. 14:
"Charles. . . . Aux Commie b, impose r
et asseoir en notre pays de Poietou,
l'ayde a nous presentement octroyeo par
lee gens des Trois Estats de notre roy-
aume, a l'Assemble? e par eux faiete en
notre villo de Bourges. "
>> 'Recueil,' vol. viii. 28 (p. 731).
VOL. VI.
Cf. Picot, 'Histoire dos Etats G6ner.
aux,' vol. i. p. 299.
* 'Ordonnanoes,' vol. xiii. p. 34:
"Charles . . . Comme ez mois de Mai
et d'Avril derrie`rement passcz, a VAs-
semble dos Trois Estats de notre pays
de Languedoc, que lors par notre
Ordonnance furent assemblez en notre
villo de Carcassonne, nous fut octroye
par les gens du Commun Estat du pays
la somme de deux cent milles livres
tournois. "
N
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 194
[PART II.
FIFTEENTH CENTURY.
Languedoc. At their meeting in that year they had protested
that it had always been part of their liberty that no Aid or
Taille, &c, should be imposed upon them by the King, until he
had called together the Council or the Deputies of the Three
Estates, and they complained that, in spite of this, the Lieu-
tenant of the King, in virtue of a simple " letter patent," had
imposed upon them a new Aid of 22,000 "livres tournois,"
over and above the Aid of 150,000 francs which had been
imposed with the consent of the Three Estates. The King
accordingly ordered the levy of the new Aid to be suspended
until the meeting of the Three Estates which had been sum-
moned for the following January. 1
In a letter of Charles VII. of October 1428 there is a reference
to a meeting of the States General at Chinon which had granted
him an Aid of 500,000 francs, part for the Langue d'Oc, part
for the Langue d'Oil. 2 According to Vaissette's ' History of
Languedoc,' the King laid down, at this time, the general
principle, at least for Languedoc, that for the future no one
should impose any Aid or Subsidy without his express com-
1 'Ordonnances,' vol. xiii. p. 133:
"Nous avons ouii la dolente et griefve
complainte a` nous faites de par les
gens des Trois Estate de notre dit pays
de Languedoc, exposez par leurs
notables ambassadeurs et messagers
pour ce envoyez par devers nous, disons
que jac? oit ce que de tout temps ils
soient en telle liberte? et franchise, que
aucun aide ou taille ne doit de par nous
estre sur eux impose? , a` quelque cas
que ce soit, sans premie`rement appeler
a` ce et faire assembler le Conseil ou les
Deputez des trois Estaz d'icelui pais,
et que en ladite liberte? et franchise les
ayons jusques--cy maintenus; ne? ant
moins par vertu d'une simple lettre
patente commande? e et faite se? ele? e
sous notre se? cl, au mois d'Aout der-
nierement passe? , a` la relation de vous
notre Cousin et Lieutenant, sans que
ladicto lettre ait e? te? par nous passe? e, ni
sans y avoir aucunement appelle? ledit
Conseil des Trois Estats, vous avez
impose? et mis sus audit pays un aide
nouvel de 22 m. livres tournois, outre
et par dessus la derniere aide de 150 m.
franes, qui par le consentement des-
dite trois Etats y avait e? te? paravant
impose? s.
Pour ce est il que nous, . . . vou-
lons toujours nos loyaux subjects estre
favorablement traite? s, et attendu me? mo-
ment que ledit aide et impost de 22 m.
livres a e? te? fait sans notre su^ et sans
co que nous ayons este? advertis qu'il en
feut necessaire . . . par ces pre? sentes
octroyons de nostra grace speciale, se
mestier est, que d'icelui aide de 22 m.
livres et de tout autre nouvel aide
dont en les voudreit charger, ils soient
tonus en souffrance et suspens, sans
plus avant y proce? der par maniere de
contrainte, ne autrement, jusques a` ce
que a la prochaine assemble? e des
trois Estats de nostre obe? issance . . .
en soit par nous autrement ordonne? . "
? ? ? 'Recueil,' vol. viii. 39 (p. 749).
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:33 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/mdp. 39015002404211 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. V. ]
195
TAXATION.
maud and without calling together the three Estates, as had
been the custom. 1
We have again references to grants of money by the Estates
of Languedoc in 1431,1434, and 1435,2 and to the imposition by
the King with the consent of the Three Estates of his " obedi-
ence" (presumably the whole kingdom) of a variety of Aids
which had been levied for the War but had been abolished
when the King left Paris. 3
It is then evident that during the first part of the century
it was in virtue of a grant by the States General, or the Pro-
vincial Estates, that Aids and Subsidies were normally levied
by the King. We have, however, found a few cases in which
there is no indication that the Estates had been consulted. *
This does not, however, amount to much more than the
possibility that in the disturbed conditions of the early years
of the fifteenth century the government of France may have
occasionally levied taxes without taking account of the
normal constitutional custom.
We must now consider how far the constitutional practice
of the earlier part of the century gave place to another system
in its later part, and we must first examine the significance of
the important ordinance issued after the Meeting of the States
General at Orleans in 1439. We have already referred to this
Ordinance in an earlier chapter, but must now examine its
relation to taxation.
Its main purpose was, as we have already seen, the establish-
ment of a body of royal " Gens d'Armes " and the prohibition
of the levy of all private forces. It was in order to carry this
out that, as we should infer, the King, with the consent of the
Three Estates, imposed a Taille, which was presumably in-
tended to be continuous, at least for the period of the War.
1 'Ordonnancee,' vol. ziii. p. 140.