This curious custom may evidently be traced to the commencement of civilization, where the soil, from its abundance, is ofno value, and cattle is the one form of wealth. Sir H. Maine seems to be right in supposing that the beneficium andcommendatio, which transformed the social organization after the fall of the Roman empire, must have had their roots incertain rudimentary usages of Aryan nations, and particularly in the one we are considering. In the author's opinion, the veryetymology of the word feudal supports this view: it shews that, among the Germans, the origin of the relation of vassalage,subsequently called feudal, was the same as among the Celts of Ireland. The English word fee , which signifies remuneraticm or honorarium , is obviously the same as the Dutch vee and German vieh , signifying cattle. If the same word means both remuneration and cattle , it is manifestly because cattle were formerly given for services rendered. When, subsequently, landwas given instead of cattle, this land was a feod ( od , property, and fe , remuneration) as opposed to the allod ( od , property,and all , complete), a personal domain entirely independent, and not held of any one. The chief granted his vassal cattle, andafterwards land, to secure his services, just as in Sweden, at the present time, the temporary enjoyment of land is granted tothe soldiers of the in-delta , instead of pay in money. The benefices, or lands, granted by the kings to their faithful followers,were feods or fiefs . The feudal system evidently dates from the time when cattle were alike the one form of reward and theone form of riches. This form of vassalage, which formerly existed among the Irish Celts, seems so natural m a certain stateof society, that it is found identically the same among the most widely different nations. Thus we find in the Rev. H.
Dugmore's curious book, on the Laws and Usages of the Caffres , the following passage: "As cattle constitutes the solewealth of the Caffres, it is the medium in all transactions of exchange, payment, or remuneration of services. The followersof a chief serve him in consideration of a certain number of beasts, and he could not preserve his influence nor retain a singleadherent, if he were not plentifully provided with what is at once their money, their food, and their clothing." These few linesare a faithful sketch of the primitive social condition of Ireland and Germany.
At the time of the Brehon Laws, when a member of the tribe received cattle from the chief, he became his liege-man, hisvassal. The more cattle he accepted, the greater was his dependence, for the gift was evidence of his former destitution.
Hence arose the difference between the two classes of tenants, the saer tenants and daer tenants , which correspond prettyclosely with the two categories of inhabitants of an English manor, the free and base tenants.
The saer stock tenant , who had only received a small grant of cattle, remained free and retained all his rights in the tribe.
After seven years, the common term of this vassalage, he be came owner of the cattle which had been entrusted to him.
During this period he might use the beasts for agriculture; the chief having the right to their milk and increase. It wastherefore an actual lease of cattle for a term. The saer tenant also owed the chief homage and certain services. Thus he wasbound to help get in the lord's harvest, to build or repair his fortified house, or to follow him to the wars.
The daer stock tenant , having received a larger lease of cattle, was under heavier obligations. He seems, in some measure, tohave lost his liberty, and the texts depict him as heavily burdened. The " cheptel ," which his chief granted him, consisted oftwo parts: the first was proportioned to the fine or composition which had to be paid by any one injuring him, and variedaccording to the rank and dignity of the person injured; the second part was regulated by the rent in kind, which the tenantwas bound topsy. These rents are minutely determined in the Brehon Laws. To entitle the chief to a calf, to three days'
" refection " during the summer, and to three days' labour, he must grant the tenant three heifers; while a grant of twelveheifers or six cows to the tenant, entitles the chief to a heifer. The right of " refection " allowed the chief to take up his abodeand live in the house of the tenant with certain of his followers, for a given number of days. This practice shews that thelords were hardly better lodged and fed than their vassals. It was a mode of consuming the rent in kind to which they wereentitled. The custom is found wherever the feudal system existed (under the name of " droit de gîte et d'alberge " in France);but, in Ireland, it gave way to abuses, which quite overwhelmed the poor tenants. Old English writers, who have treated ofIreland, such as Spenser and Davis, inveigh against the extortions of which they were victims. In theory, the tenant afterseven years became owner of the cattle, and the greater part of his obligations ceased; but, in proportion as the chief becamemore powerful, the dependence of his tenants increased and became permanent.
