There is hardly a question connected with the march of civilization more difficult to answer satisfactorily than this: What is to be done with the Poor?
In our own day, when subdivision of labour has been carried to an unheard of extent, when property follows the natural law of accumulation in masses, and society numbers the proletarian as an inevitable1 unit among its constituents2, the question presents itself in a threatening and dangerous form, with difficulty surrounding it on every side, and anarchy3 scowling4 in the background, hardly to be appeased5 or vanquished6. But such circumstances as those we live under are rare, and almost unexampled in history: even the later and depraved days of Roman civilization offer but a very insufficient7 pattern of a similar condition[1007]. Above all it would
498
be difficult to find any parallel for them in countries where land is abundant, and the accumulation of property slow: there may be pauperism8 in New York, but scarcely in the valley of the Mississippi. The cultivator may live hardly, poorly; but he can live, and as increasing numbers gather round him and form a market for his superfluous10 produce, he will gradually become easy, and at length wealthy. It is however questionable11 whether population will really increase very fast in an agricultural community where a sufficient provision is made for every family, and where there is an unlimited12 fund, and power of almost indefinite extension. On the contrary, it seems natural under these circumstances that the proportion between the consumers and the means of living should long continue to be an advantageous13 one, and no pressure will be felt as long as no effort is made to give a false direction to the energies of any portion of the community.
But this cannot possibly be the case in a system which limits the amount of the estate or hýd. Here a period must unavoidably arise where population advances too rapidly for subsistence, unless a manufacturing effort on an extensive scale is made, and made with perfect freedom from all restraints, but those which prudence14 and well-regulated views of self-interest impose. If want of rapid internal communication deprive the farmer of a market, and compel him to limit his produce to the requirements of his own family, there cannot be a doubt not only that he will be compelled to remain in a stationary15 and not very easy position,
499
but that a difficulty will arise as to the disposal of a redundant16 population. Many plans have been devised to meet this difficulty; a favourite one has been at all times, to endeavour to find means of limiting population itself, instead of destroying all restrictions17 upon occupation. The profoundest thinkers of Greece, considering that a pauper9 population is inconsistent with the idea of state, have positively18 recommended violent means to prevent its increase[1008]: infanticide and exposition thus figure among the means by which Plato and Aristotle consider that full and perfect citizenship19 is to be maintained. I have already touched upon some of the means by which our forefathers20 attempted this regulation: emigration was as popular a nostrum22 with them as with us: service in the comitatus, even servitude on the land, were looked to as an outlet23, and slavery probably served to keep up something of a balance: moreover it is likely that a large proportion of the population were entirely24 prevented from contracting marriage: of this last
500
number the various orders of the clergy25, and the monks26 must have made an important item. It is even probable that the somewhat severe restrictions imposed upon conjugal27 intercourse28 may have had their rise in an erroneous view that population might thus be limited or regulated[1009]. But still, all these means must have furnished a very inadequate29 relief: even the worn-out labourer, especially if unfree, must have become superfluous, and if he was of little use to his owner, there was little chance of his finding a purchaser. What provision was made for him?
The condition of a serf or an outlaw30 from poverty is an abnormal one, but only so in a Christian31 community. In fact it seems to me that the State neither contemplates33 the existence of the poor, nor cares for it: the poor man’s right to live is derived34 from the moral and Christian, not from the public law: so little true is the general assertion that the poor man has a right to be maintained upon the land on which he was born. The State exists for its members, the full, free and independent citizens, self-supported on the land; and except as self-supported on the land it knows no citizens at all. Any one but the holder35 of a free hýd must either fly to the forest or take service, or steal and become a þeóv. How the pagan Saxons contemplated36 this fact it is impossible to say, but at the period when
501
we first meet with them in history, two disturbing causes were in operation; first the gradual loosening of the principle of the mark-settlement, and the consequent accumulation of landed estates in few hands; secondly37 the operation of Christianity.
This taught the equality of men in the eye of God, who had made all men brothers in the mystery of Christ’s passion. And from this also it followed that those who had been bought with that precious sacrifice were not to be cast away. The sin of suffering a child to die unbaptized was severely38 animadverted upon. The crime of infanticide could only be expiated39 by years of hard and wearisome penance40; but the penance unhappily bears witness to the principle,—a principle universally pagan, and not given up, even to this day, by nations and classes which would repudiate41 with indignation the reproach of paganism, though thoroughly42 imbued43 with pagan habits. In the seventh century we read of the existence of poor, and we read also of the duty of assisting them. But as the State had in fact nothing to do with them, and no machinery44 of its own to provide for them, and as the clergy were ex officio their advocates and protectors, the State did what under the circumstances was the best thing to do, it recognized the duty which the clergy had imposed upon themselves of supporting the poor. It went further,—it compelled the freeman to supply the clergy with the means of doing it.
In the last years of the sixth century, Gregory the Great informed Augustine that it was the custom of the Roman church to cause a fourth part of
502
all that accrued45 to the altar from the oblations of the faithful to be given to the poor; and this was beyond a doubt the legitimate46 substitute for the old mode of distribution which the Apostles and their successors had adopted while the church lurked47 in corners and in catacombs, and its communicants stole a fearful and mysterious pleasure in its ministrations under the jealous eyes of imperial paganism. As soon however as the accidental oblations were to a great degree replaced by settled payments (whether arising out of land or not[1010]), and these were directed to be applied48 in definite proportions, we may venture to say that the State had a poor-law, and that the clergy were the relieving officers. The spirit of Gregory’s injunction is that a part of all that accrues49 shall be given to the poor; and this applies with equal force to tithes51, churchshots, bóts or fines, eleemosynary grants, and casual oblations. In this spirit, it will be seen, the Anglosaxon clergy acted, and we may believe that no inconsiderable fund was provided for distribution. The liability of the tithe50 is the first point upon which I shall produce evidence. The first secular52 notice of this is contained in the following law of Æðelred, an. 1014:—“And concerning tithe, the
503
king and his witan have chosen and said, as right it is, that the third part of the tithe which belongs to the church, shall go to the reparation of the church, and a second part to the servants of God, and the third to God’s poor and needy53 men in thraldom[1011].”
But if positive public enactment54 be rare, it is not so with ecclesiastical law, and the recommendations of the rulers of the Anglosaxon church. The Poenitentials, Confessionals, and other works compiled by these prelates for the guidance and instruction of the clergy abound55 in passages wherein the obligation of providing for the poor out of the tithe is either assumed or positively asserted. In the ‘Capitula et Fragmenta’ of Theodore, dating in the seventh century, it is written, “It is not lawful56 to give tithes save unto the poor and pilgrims[1012],” which can hardly mean anything but a prohibition57 to the clergy, to make friends among the laity58 by giving them presents out of the tithe; but which shows what were the lawful or legitimate uses of tithe. Again he says[1013],—“If any one administers
504
the xenodochia of the poor, or has received the tithes of the people, and has converted any portion thereof to his own uses,” etc.
In the Excerptions of archbishop Ecgberht we find the following canon:—“The priests are to take tithes of the people, and to make a written list of the names of the givers, and according to the authority of the canons, they are to divide them, in the presence of men that fear God. The first part they are to take for the adornment60 of the church; but the second they are in all humility61, mercifully to distribute with their own hands, for the use of the poor and strangers; the third part however the priests may reserve for themselves[1014].”
In the Confessional of the same prelate we find the following exhortation62, to be addressed by the priest to the penitent:—“Be thou gentle and charitable to the poor, zealous63 in almsgiving, in attendance at church, and in the giving of tithe to God’s church and the poor[1015].”
In the canons enacted64 under Eádgár, but which are at least founded upon an ancient work of Cummianus, there is this entry:—“We enjoin65 that the priests so distribute the people’s alms, that they do both give pleasure to God, and accustom66 the people to alms[1016];” to which however there is an addition which can scarcely well be understood of anything but tithe: “and it is right that one part be delivered to the priests, a second part for the need of the church, and a third part for the poor.”
505
The Canons of Ælfríc have the same entry, and the same mode of distribution as those of Ecgberht: “The holy fathers have also appointed that men shall pay their tithes into God’s church. And let the priest go thither67, and divide them into three: one part for the repair of the church; the second for the poor; the third for God’s servants who attend to the church[1017].”
Thus according to the view of the Anglosaxon church, ratified68 by the express enactment of the witan, a third of the tithe was the absolute property of the poor. But other means were found to increase this fund: not only was the duty of almsgiving strenuously69 enforced, but even the fasts and penances70 recommended or imposed by the clergy were made subservient71 to the same charitable purpose. The canons enacted under Eádgár provide[1018], that “when a man fasts, then let the dishes that would have been eaten be all distributed to God’s poor.” And again the Ecclesiastical Institutes declare[1019]: “It is daily needful for every man that he give his alms to poor men; but yet when we fast, then ought we to give greater alms than on other days; because the meat and the drink, which we should then use if we did not fast, we ought to distribute to the poor.”
So in certain cases where circumstances rendered the strict performance of penance difficult or impossible, a kind of tariff72 seems to have been devised, the application of which was left to the
506
discretion73 of the confessor. The proceeds of this commutation were for the benefit of the poor. Thus Theodore teaches[1020]:—“But let him that through infirmity cannot fast, give alms to the poor according to his means; that is, for every day a penny or two or three.... For a year let him give thirty shillings in alms; the second year, twenty; the third, fifteen.”
Again[1021]:—“He that knows not the psalms74 and cannot fast, must give twenty-two shillings in alms for the poor, as commutation for a year’s fasting on bread and water; and let him fast every Friday on bread and water, and three forties; that is, forty days before Easter, forty before the festival of St. John the Baptist, and forty before Christmas-day. And in these three forties let him estimate the value or possible value of whatsoever75 is prepared for his use, in food, in drink or whatever it may be, and let him distribute the half of that value in alms to the poor,” etc.
When we consider the almost innumerable cases in which penance must have been submitted to by conscientious76 believers, and the frequent hindrances77 which public or private business and illness must have thrown in the way of strict performance, we may conclude that no slight addition accrued from this source to the fund at the disposal of the church for the benefit of the poor. Even the follies78 and vices79 of men were made to contribute their quota80
507
in a more direct form. Ecgberht requires that a portion of the spoil gained in war shall be applied to charitable purposes[1022]; and he estimates the amount at no less than a third of the whole booty. Again, it is positively enacted by Æðelred and his witan that a portion of the fines paid by offenders81 to the church should be applied in a similar manner: they say[1023], that such money “belongs lawfully82, by the direction of the bishops83, to the buying of prayers, to the behoof of the poor, to the reparation of churches, to the instruction, clothing and feeding of those who minister to God, for books, bells and vestments, but never for idle pomp of this world.”
More questionable is a command inculcated by archbishop Ecgberht, that the over-wealthy should punish themselves for their folly84 by large contributions to the poor[1024]: “Let him that collecteth immoderate wealth, for his want of wisdom, give the third part to the poor.”
Upon the bishops and clergy was especially imposed the duty of attending to this branch of Christian charity, which they were commanded to exemplify in their own persons: thus the bishops are admonished85 to feed and clothe the poor[1025], the clerk who possessed86 a superfluity was to be excommunicated
508
if he did not distribute it to the poor[1026], nay87 the clergy were admonished to learn and practise handicrafts, not only in order to keep themselves out of mischief88 and avoid the temptations of idleness, but that they might earn funds wherewith to relieve the necessities of their brethren[1027]. Those who are acquainted with the MSS. and other remains89 of Anglosaxon art are well-aware how great eminence90 was attained91 by some of these clerical workmen, and how valuable their skill may have been in the eyes of the wealthy and liberal[1028].
Another source of relief remains to be noticed: I mean the eleemosynary foundations. It is of course well known that every church and monastery92 comprised among its necessary buildings a xenodochium, hospitium or similar establishment, a kind of hospital for the reception and refection of the poor, the houseless and the wayfarer93. But I allude94 more particularly to the foundations which the piety95 of the clergy or laics established without the walls of the churches or monasteries96. Æðelstán commanded the royal reeves throughout his realm to feed and clothe one poor man each: the allowance was to be, from every two farms, an amber97 of meal, a shank of bacon, or a ram98 worth fourpence, monthly, and clothing for the whole year. The reeves here intended must have been the bailiffs (villici, praepositi, túngeréfan) of the
509
royal vills; and, if they could not find a poor man in their vill, they were to seek him in another[1029]. In the churches which were especially favoured with the patronage99 of the wealthy and powerful, it was usual for the anniversary of the patron to be celebrated100 with religious services, a feast to the brotherhood101 and a distribution of food to the poor, which was occasionally a very liberal one. In the year 832 we learn incidentally what were the charitable foundations of archbishop Wulfred. He commanded twenty-six poor men to be daily fed on different manors102, he gave each of them yearly twenty-six pence to purchase clothing, and further ordered that on his anniversary twelve hundred poor men should receive each a loaf of bread and a cheese, or bacon and one penny[1030].
Oswulf, who was duke of East Kent at the commencement of the ninth century, left lands to Canterbury charging the canons with doles103 upon his anniversary: twenty ploughlands or about twelve hundred acres at Stanstead were to supply the canons and the poor on that day with one hundred and twenty wheaten loaves, thirty of pure wheat, one fat ox, four sheep, two flitches, five geese, ten hens, ten pounds of cheese (or if it happened to be a fastday, a weigh of cheese, fish, butter and eggs ad libitum), thirty measures of good Welsh ale, and a tub of honey or two of wine. From the lands of the brotherhood were to issue one hundred and twenty sufl loaves, apparently104 a kind of cake; while
510
his lands at Bourn were to supply a thousand loaves of bread and a thousand sufls[1031]. Towards the end of the tenth century Wulfwaru devised her lands to various relatives, and charged them with the support of twenty poor men[1032]. About the same period Æðelstán the æðeling gave lands to Ely on condition that they fed one hundred poor men on his anniversary, at the expense of his heirs.
From what has preceded it may fairly be argued that at all times there was a very sufficient fund for the relief of the poor, seeing that tithe, penance, fine, voluntary contribution, and compulsory105 assessment106 all combined to furnish their quota. It now remains to enquire107 into the method of its distribution.
The gains of the altar, whether in tithes, oblations, or other forms, were strictly108 payable109 over to the metropolitan110 or cathedral church of the district. The division of the fund was thus committed to the consulting body of the clergy, and their executive or head; and the several shares were thus distributed under the supervision111 and by the authority of the bishop59 and his canons in each diocese. Private alms may have remained occasionally at the disposal of the priest in a small parish, but the recognized public alms which were the property of the poor, and held in trust for them by the clergy,
511
were necessarily managed by the principal body, the clergy of the cathedral. To the vicinity of the cathedral flocked the maimed, the halt, the blind, the destitute113 and friendless, to be fed and clothed and tended for the love of God. In that vicinity they enjoyed shelter, defence, private aid and public alms; and as in some few cases the cathedral church was surrounded by a flourishing city, they could hope for the chances which always accompany a close manufacturing or retailing114 population. In this way the largest proportion of the poor must have been collected near the chief church of the diocese, on whose lands they found an easy settlement, in whose xenodochia, hospitals and almshouses they met with a refuge, to whom they gave their services, such as they were, and from whom they received in turn the support which secular lords were unable or unwilling115 to give: for the cathedral church being generally a very considerable landowner, had the power of employing much more labour than the majority of secular landlords in any given district.
But it must not be imagined that the poor could obtain no relief save at the cathedral: every parish-church had its share of the public fund, as well as private alms, devoted116 to this purpose; and to the necessary buildings of every parish-church, however small, a xenodochium belonged. When now we consider the great number of churches that existed all over England in the tenth century, a number which most likely exceeded that now in being, and consequently bore a most disproportionate
512
ratio to the then population of the country,—when we further consider that the poor were comparatively few (so that a provision was absolutely made for the case where a pauper could not be found in a royal village), we shall have no difficulty in concluding that relief was supplied in a very ample degree to the needy.
It does not necessarily follow, although in itself very probable, that the claim to relief was a territorial117 one, that is that the man was to have relief where he was born, lived or had gained a settlement by labour. As some landowners, particularly in later times, especially honoured certain churches with the grant of tithes consecrated118 to them, it is possible that some paupers119 may have followed the convenient precedent120, and argued that whither the fund went, thither might the recipients121 go also. And inasmuch as in many cases they would appear under the guise122 of poor pilgrims, we can readily understand the immense resort to particular shrines123 at particular periods, without overrating the devotion or the superstition124 of the multitude. But all this might have led to very serious consequences, had the facilities really been so great. In point of fact there were no facilities at all except for such as were from age or infirmity incapable125 of doing any valuable service. For among the Saxons the law of settlement applied inexorably to all classes: no man had a legal existence unless he could be shown to belong to some association connected with a certain locality, or to be in the hand, protection and surety of a landed lord. Even a
513
man of the rank nearest the princes or ealdorman could not leave his land without having fulfilled certain conditions; and the illegal migration21 of a dependent man from one shire or one estate to another was punished in the severest manner, in the persons of all concerned. He was called a Flýma or fugitive126, and the receiving or harbouring him was a grave offence, punishable with a heavy fine, to be raised for the benefit of the king’s officers in the shire the fugitive deserted127, as well as that wherein he was received[1033]. Even if the vigilance of the sheriffs and ealdorman in two shires could be lulled128, it was difficult to disarm129 the selfishness of a landlord or an owner who thought the runaway’s services of any value, or his price worth securing. A year and a day must elapse ere the right abated130 from the “lord in pursuit,” for so was the lord called over all Europe in the idioms of the several tongues[1034]; and hence it cannot have been a very easy matter for any man to take advantage of the poor-law, while it remained any one’s advantage to keep him from falling into the state of pauperism: in other words, no man whose labour still possessed any value would be so cast upon the world as to have no refuge but what the church in Christian charity provided. And this was the real and trustworthy test of destitution131. If a man was so helpless, friendless and useless that he could find no place in one of the mutual132 associations, or
514
in a lord’s family, it is clear that he must become an outlaw as far as the State is concerned[1035]: he must fly to the woods, turn serf or steal, or else commend himself as a pauper to the benefits of clerical superintendence: but it is perfectly133 obvious that none but the hopelessly infirm or aged112 could ever be placed under such difficulty, in a country situated134 like England at any period of the Saxon rule, and hence pauper relief was in practice strictly confined to those for whom it was justly intended. The Saxon poor-law then appears simple enough, and well might it be so: they had not tried many unsuccessful and ridiculous experiments in œconomics, suffered themselves to be misled by very many mischievous135 crochets136, nor on the whole did they find it necessary to make so expensive a protest against bad commercial legislation as our poor-law has proved to us. But it is not quite the simple thing it seems, and requires two elements for its efficient working, which are not to be found at every period, namely a powerful, conscientious clergy, and a system of property founded exclusively upon the possession of land, and guarded by
515
a compulsory distribution of all citizens into certain fixed137 and settled associations.
I have already called attention to the fact that it was usual, if not necessary, on emancipating138 a serf, to provide for his subsistence. It is however not improbable that, though such emancipated139 serfs remained for the most part upon the land, and in the protection of their former lord, they found some assistance from the poor fund, either directly from the church, or indirectly140 through the private alms of the lord.
To resume all the facts of the case:—the State did not contemplate32 the existence or provide for the support of any poor: it demanded that every man should either be answerable for himself in a mutual bond of association with his neighbours; or that he should place himself under the protection of a lord, if he had no means of his own, and thus have some one to answer for him. If unfree, the State of course held him to be the chattel141 of his owner, who was only responsible to God for his treatment of him. He therefore who had no means and could find no one to take charge of him was an outlaw, that is, had no civil rights of any kind.
But Christianity taught that there was something even above the State, which the State itself was bound to recognize. It accordingly impressed upon all communicants the moral and religious duty of assisting those of their brethren whom the strict law condemned142 to misery143; and the clergy presented their organization as a very efficient machinery for the proper distribution of alms. The voluntary
516
oblations became in time replaced by settled payments; but the law did not alter the disposition144 which the clergy had adopted; it only recognized and sanctioned it; first by making the various church payments compulsory upon all classes; and secondly by enacting145 that the mode of distribution long prevalent should be the legal one, in a secular as well as an ecclesiastical obligation. And thus by slow degrees, as the State itself became Christianized, the moral duty became a legal one; and the merciful intervention146 of religion was allowed to supply what could not be found in the strict rule of law.
It is unnecessary here to enquire how the power of the clergy to assist the poor was gradually diminished, by the arbitrary consecration147 or total subtraction148 of tithe, and other ecclesiastical payments; or how the burthen of supporting the poor, having become a religious as well as a civil duty, was shifted from one fund to another. It is enough to have shown how the difficulty was attempted to be met during the continuance of the Anglosaxon institutions. Under the present circumstances of almost every European state, it is admitted that no man is to perish for want of means, while means anywhere exist to feed him: and but two questions can be admitted, namely:—Who is really in want? and,—How is he to be fed at the least possible amount of loss to others? This is as far as the State will go. Religion, properly considered, imposes very different duties, and very different tests: but public morality alone ought to teach that
517
where the State has interfered149 on one side, it must pay the penalty on the other; and that where it has positively prescribed the directions in which men shall seek their subsistence, it is bound to indemnify those whom these restrictions have tended to impoverish151. Every Poor Law is a protest against some wrong done: and in proportion to the wrong is the energy of the protest itself. Do not interfere150 with industry, and it will be very safe to leave poverty to take care of itself. It is quite possible to conceive a state of things in which crime and poverty shall be really convertible152 ideas, but of this the history of the world as yet has given us no example.
In our own day, when subdivision of labour has been carried to an unheard of extent, when property follows the natural law of accumulation in masses, and society numbers the proletarian as an inevitable1 unit among its constituents2, the question presents itself in a threatening and dangerous form, with difficulty surrounding it on every side, and anarchy3 scowling4 in the background, hardly to be appeased5 or vanquished6. But such circumstances as those we live under are rare, and almost unexampled in history: even the later and depraved days of Roman civilization offer but a very insufficient7 pattern of a similar condition[1007]. Above all it would
498
be difficult to find any parallel for them in countries where land is abundant, and the accumulation of property slow: there may be pauperism8 in New York, but scarcely in the valley of the Mississippi. The cultivator may live hardly, poorly; but he can live, and as increasing numbers gather round him and form a market for his superfluous10 produce, he will gradually become easy, and at length wealthy. It is however questionable11 whether population will really increase very fast in an agricultural community where a sufficient provision is made for every family, and where there is an unlimited12 fund, and power of almost indefinite extension. On the contrary, it seems natural under these circumstances that the proportion between the consumers and the means of living should long continue to be an advantageous13 one, and no pressure will be felt as long as no effort is made to give a false direction to the energies of any portion of the community.
But this cannot possibly be the case in a system which limits the amount of the estate or hýd. Here a period must unavoidably arise where population advances too rapidly for subsistence, unless a manufacturing effort on an extensive scale is made, and made with perfect freedom from all restraints, but those which prudence14 and well-regulated views of self-interest impose. If want of rapid internal communication deprive the farmer of a market, and compel him to limit his produce to the requirements of his own family, there cannot be a doubt not only that he will be compelled to remain in a stationary15 and not very easy position,
499
but that a difficulty will arise as to the disposal of a redundant16 population. Many plans have been devised to meet this difficulty; a favourite one has been at all times, to endeavour to find means of limiting population itself, instead of destroying all restrictions17 upon occupation. The profoundest thinkers of Greece, considering that a pauper9 population is inconsistent with the idea of state, have positively18 recommended violent means to prevent its increase[1008]: infanticide and exposition thus figure among the means by which Plato and Aristotle consider that full and perfect citizenship19 is to be maintained. I have already touched upon some of the means by which our forefathers20 attempted this regulation: emigration was as popular a nostrum22 with them as with us: service in the comitatus, even servitude on the land, were looked to as an outlet23, and slavery probably served to keep up something of a balance: moreover it is likely that a large proportion of the population were entirely24 prevented from contracting marriage: of this last
500
number the various orders of the clergy25, and the monks26 must have made an important item. It is even probable that the somewhat severe restrictions imposed upon conjugal27 intercourse28 may have had their rise in an erroneous view that population might thus be limited or regulated[1009]. But still, all these means must have furnished a very inadequate29 relief: even the worn-out labourer, especially if unfree, must have become superfluous, and if he was of little use to his owner, there was little chance of his finding a purchaser. What provision was made for him?
The condition of a serf or an outlaw30 from poverty is an abnormal one, but only so in a Christian31 community. In fact it seems to me that the State neither contemplates33 the existence of the poor, nor cares for it: the poor man’s right to live is derived34 from the moral and Christian, not from the public law: so little true is the general assertion that the poor man has a right to be maintained upon the land on which he was born. The State exists for its members, the full, free and independent citizens, self-supported on the land; and except as self-supported on the land it knows no citizens at all. Any one but the holder35 of a free hýd must either fly to the forest or take service, or steal and become a þeóv. How the pagan Saxons contemplated36 this fact it is impossible to say, but at the period when
501
we first meet with them in history, two disturbing causes were in operation; first the gradual loosening of the principle of the mark-settlement, and the consequent accumulation of landed estates in few hands; secondly37 the operation of Christianity.
This taught the equality of men in the eye of God, who had made all men brothers in the mystery of Christ’s passion. And from this also it followed that those who had been bought with that precious sacrifice were not to be cast away. The sin of suffering a child to die unbaptized was severely38 animadverted upon. The crime of infanticide could only be expiated39 by years of hard and wearisome penance40; but the penance unhappily bears witness to the principle,—a principle universally pagan, and not given up, even to this day, by nations and classes which would repudiate41 with indignation the reproach of paganism, though thoroughly42 imbued43 with pagan habits. In the seventh century we read of the existence of poor, and we read also of the duty of assisting them. But as the State had in fact nothing to do with them, and no machinery44 of its own to provide for them, and as the clergy were ex officio their advocates and protectors, the State did what under the circumstances was the best thing to do, it recognized the duty which the clergy had imposed upon themselves of supporting the poor. It went further,—it compelled the freeman to supply the clergy with the means of doing it.
In the last years of the sixth century, Gregory the Great informed Augustine that it was the custom of the Roman church to cause a fourth part of
502
all that accrued45 to the altar from the oblations of the faithful to be given to the poor; and this was beyond a doubt the legitimate46 substitute for the old mode of distribution which the Apostles and their successors had adopted while the church lurked47 in corners and in catacombs, and its communicants stole a fearful and mysterious pleasure in its ministrations under the jealous eyes of imperial paganism. As soon however as the accidental oblations were to a great degree replaced by settled payments (whether arising out of land or not[1010]), and these were directed to be applied48 in definite proportions, we may venture to say that the State had a poor-law, and that the clergy were the relieving officers. The spirit of Gregory’s injunction is that a part of all that accrues49 shall be given to the poor; and this applies with equal force to tithes51, churchshots, bóts or fines, eleemosynary grants, and casual oblations. In this spirit, it will be seen, the Anglosaxon clergy acted, and we may believe that no inconsiderable fund was provided for distribution. The liability of the tithe50 is the first point upon which I shall produce evidence. The first secular52 notice of this is contained in the following law of Æðelred, an. 1014:—“And concerning tithe, the
503
king and his witan have chosen and said, as right it is, that the third part of the tithe which belongs to the church, shall go to the reparation of the church, and a second part to the servants of God, and the third to God’s poor and needy53 men in thraldom[1011].”
But if positive public enactment54 be rare, it is not so with ecclesiastical law, and the recommendations of the rulers of the Anglosaxon church. The Poenitentials, Confessionals, and other works compiled by these prelates for the guidance and instruction of the clergy abound55 in passages wherein the obligation of providing for the poor out of the tithe is either assumed or positively asserted. In the ‘Capitula et Fragmenta’ of Theodore, dating in the seventh century, it is written, “It is not lawful56 to give tithes save unto the poor and pilgrims[1012],” which can hardly mean anything but a prohibition57 to the clergy, to make friends among the laity58 by giving them presents out of the tithe; but which shows what were the lawful or legitimate uses of tithe. Again he says[1013],—“If any one administers
504
the xenodochia of the poor, or has received the tithes of the people, and has converted any portion thereof to his own uses,” etc.
In the Excerptions of archbishop Ecgberht we find the following canon:—“The priests are to take tithes of the people, and to make a written list of the names of the givers, and according to the authority of the canons, they are to divide them, in the presence of men that fear God. The first part they are to take for the adornment60 of the church; but the second they are in all humility61, mercifully to distribute with their own hands, for the use of the poor and strangers; the third part however the priests may reserve for themselves[1014].”
In the Confessional of the same prelate we find the following exhortation62, to be addressed by the priest to the penitent:—“Be thou gentle and charitable to the poor, zealous63 in almsgiving, in attendance at church, and in the giving of tithe to God’s church and the poor[1015].”
In the canons enacted64 under Eádgár, but which are at least founded upon an ancient work of Cummianus, there is this entry:—“We enjoin65 that the priests so distribute the people’s alms, that they do both give pleasure to God, and accustom66 the people to alms[1016];” to which however there is an addition which can scarcely well be understood of anything but tithe: “and it is right that one part be delivered to the priests, a second part for the need of the church, and a third part for the poor.”
505
The Canons of Ælfríc have the same entry, and the same mode of distribution as those of Ecgberht: “The holy fathers have also appointed that men shall pay their tithes into God’s church. And let the priest go thither67, and divide them into three: one part for the repair of the church; the second for the poor; the third for God’s servants who attend to the church[1017].”
Thus according to the view of the Anglosaxon church, ratified68 by the express enactment of the witan, a third of the tithe was the absolute property of the poor. But other means were found to increase this fund: not only was the duty of almsgiving strenuously69 enforced, but even the fasts and penances70 recommended or imposed by the clergy were made subservient71 to the same charitable purpose. The canons enacted under Eádgár provide[1018], that “when a man fasts, then let the dishes that would have been eaten be all distributed to God’s poor.” And again the Ecclesiastical Institutes declare[1019]: “It is daily needful for every man that he give his alms to poor men; but yet when we fast, then ought we to give greater alms than on other days; because the meat and the drink, which we should then use if we did not fast, we ought to distribute to the poor.”
So in certain cases where circumstances rendered the strict performance of penance difficult or impossible, a kind of tariff72 seems to have been devised, the application of which was left to the
506
discretion73 of the confessor. The proceeds of this commutation were for the benefit of the poor. Thus Theodore teaches[1020]:—“But let him that through infirmity cannot fast, give alms to the poor according to his means; that is, for every day a penny or two or three.... For a year let him give thirty shillings in alms; the second year, twenty; the third, fifteen.”
Again[1021]:—“He that knows not the psalms74 and cannot fast, must give twenty-two shillings in alms for the poor, as commutation for a year’s fasting on bread and water; and let him fast every Friday on bread and water, and three forties; that is, forty days before Easter, forty before the festival of St. John the Baptist, and forty before Christmas-day. And in these three forties let him estimate the value or possible value of whatsoever75 is prepared for his use, in food, in drink or whatever it may be, and let him distribute the half of that value in alms to the poor,” etc.
When we consider the almost innumerable cases in which penance must have been submitted to by conscientious76 believers, and the frequent hindrances77 which public or private business and illness must have thrown in the way of strict performance, we may conclude that no slight addition accrued from this source to the fund at the disposal of the church for the benefit of the poor. Even the follies78 and vices79 of men were made to contribute their quota80
507
in a more direct form. Ecgberht requires that a portion of the spoil gained in war shall be applied to charitable purposes[1022]; and he estimates the amount at no less than a third of the whole booty. Again, it is positively enacted by Æðelred and his witan that a portion of the fines paid by offenders81 to the church should be applied in a similar manner: they say[1023], that such money “belongs lawfully82, by the direction of the bishops83, to the buying of prayers, to the behoof of the poor, to the reparation of churches, to the instruction, clothing and feeding of those who minister to God, for books, bells and vestments, but never for idle pomp of this world.”
More questionable is a command inculcated by archbishop Ecgberht, that the over-wealthy should punish themselves for their folly84 by large contributions to the poor[1024]: “Let him that collecteth immoderate wealth, for his want of wisdom, give the third part to the poor.”
Upon the bishops and clergy was especially imposed the duty of attending to this branch of Christian charity, which they were commanded to exemplify in their own persons: thus the bishops are admonished85 to feed and clothe the poor[1025], the clerk who possessed86 a superfluity was to be excommunicated
508
if he did not distribute it to the poor[1026], nay87 the clergy were admonished to learn and practise handicrafts, not only in order to keep themselves out of mischief88 and avoid the temptations of idleness, but that they might earn funds wherewith to relieve the necessities of their brethren[1027]. Those who are acquainted with the MSS. and other remains89 of Anglosaxon art are well-aware how great eminence90 was attained91 by some of these clerical workmen, and how valuable their skill may have been in the eyes of the wealthy and liberal[1028].
Another source of relief remains to be noticed: I mean the eleemosynary foundations. It is of course well known that every church and monastery92 comprised among its necessary buildings a xenodochium, hospitium or similar establishment, a kind of hospital for the reception and refection of the poor, the houseless and the wayfarer93. But I allude94 more particularly to the foundations which the piety95 of the clergy or laics established without the walls of the churches or monasteries96. Æðelstán commanded the royal reeves throughout his realm to feed and clothe one poor man each: the allowance was to be, from every two farms, an amber97 of meal, a shank of bacon, or a ram98 worth fourpence, monthly, and clothing for the whole year. The reeves here intended must have been the bailiffs (villici, praepositi, túngeréfan) of the
509
royal vills; and, if they could not find a poor man in their vill, they were to seek him in another[1029]. In the churches which were especially favoured with the patronage99 of the wealthy and powerful, it was usual for the anniversary of the patron to be celebrated100 with religious services, a feast to the brotherhood101 and a distribution of food to the poor, which was occasionally a very liberal one. In the year 832 we learn incidentally what were the charitable foundations of archbishop Wulfred. He commanded twenty-six poor men to be daily fed on different manors102, he gave each of them yearly twenty-six pence to purchase clothing, and further ordered that on his anniversary twelve hundred poor men should receive each a loaf of bread and a cheese, or bacon and one penny[1030].
Oswulf, who was duke of East Kent at the commencement of the ninth century, left lands to Canterbury charging the canons with doles103 upon his anniversary: twenty ploughlands or about twelve hundred acres at Stanstead were to supply the canons and the poor on that day with one hundred and twenty wheaten loaves, thirty of pure wheat, one fat ox, four sheep, two flitches, five geese, ten hens, ten pounds of cheese (or if it happened to be a fastday, a weigh of cheese, fish, butter and eggs ad libitum), thirty measures of good Welsh ale, and a tub of honey or two of wine. From the lands of the brotherhood were to issue one hundred and twenty sufl loaves, apparently104 a kind of cake; while
510
his lands at Bourn were to supply a thousand loaves of bread and a thousand sufls[1031]. Towards the end of the tenth century Wulfwaru devised her lands to various relatives, and charged them with the support of twenty poor men[1032]. About the same period Æðelstán the æðeling gave lands to Ely on condition that they fed one hundred poor men on his anniversary, at the expense of his heirs.
From what has preceded it may fairly be argued that at all times there was a very sufficient fund for the relief of the poor, seeing that tithe, penance, fine, voluntary contribution, and compulsory105 assessment106 all combined to furnish their quota. It now remains to enquire107 into the method of its distribution.
The gains of the altar, whether in tithes, oblations, or other forms, were strictly108 payable109 over to the metropolitan110 or cathedral church of the district. The division of the fund was thus committed to the consulting body of the clergy, and their executive or head; and the several shares were thus distributed under the supervision111 and by the authority of the bishop59 and his canons in each diocese. Private alms may have remained occasionally at the disposal of the priest in a small parish, but the recognized public alms which were the property of the poor, and held in trust for them by the clergy,
511
were necessarily managed by the principal body, the clergy of the cathedral. To the vicinity of the cathedral flocked the maimed, the halt, the blind, the destitute113 and friendless, to be fed and clothed and tended for the love of God. In that vicinity they enjoyed shelter, defence, private aid and public alms; and as in some few cases the cathedral church was surrounded by a flourishing city, they could hope for the chances which always accompany a close manufacturing or retailing114 population. In this way the largest proportion of the poor must have been collected near the chief church of the diocese, on whose lands they found an easy settlement, in whose xenodochia, hospitals and almshouses they met with a refuge, to whom they gave their services, such as they were, and from whom they received in turn the support which secular lords were unable or unwilling115 to give: for the cathedral church being generally a very considerable landowner, had the power of employing much more labour than the majority of secular landlords in any given district.
But it must not be imagined that the poor could obtain no relief save at the cathedral: every parish-church had its share of the public fund, as well as private alms, devoted116 to this purpose; and to the necessary buildings of every parish-church, however small, a xenodochium belonged. When now we consider the great number of churches that existed all over England in the tenth century, a number which most likely exceeded that now in being, and consequently bore a most disproportionate
512
ratio to the then population of the country,—when we further consider that the poor were comparatively few (so that a provision was absolutely made for the case where a pauper could not be found in a royal village), we shall have no difficulty in concluding that relief was supplied in a very ample degree to the needy.
It does not necessarily follow, although in itself very probable, that the claim to relief was a territorial117 one, that is that the man was to have relief where he was born, lived or had gained a settlement by labour. As some landowners, particularly in later times, especially honoured certain churches with the grant of tithes consecrated118 to them, it is possible that some paupers119 may have followed the convenient precedent120, and argued that whither the fund went, thither might the recipients121 go also. And inasmuch as in many cases they would appear under the guise122 of poor pilgrims, we can readily understand the immense resort to particular shrines123 at particular periods, without overrating the devotion or the superstition124 of the multitude. But all this might have led to very serious consequences, had the facilities really been so great. In point of fact there were no facilities at all except for such as were from age or infirmity incapable125 of doing any valuable service. For among the Saxons the law of settlement applied inexorably to all classes: no man had a legal existence unless he could be shown to belong to some association connected with a certain locality, or to be in the hand, protection and surety of a landed lord. Even a
513
man of the rank nearest the princes or ealdorman could not leave his land without having fulfilled certain conditions; and the illegal migration21 of a dependent man from one shire or one estate to another was punished in the severest manner, in the persons of all concerned. He was called a Flýma or fugitive126, and the receiving or harbouring him was a grave offence, punishable with a heavy fine, to be raised for the benefit of the king’s officers in the shire the fugitive deserted127, as well as that wherein he was received[1033]. Even if the vigilance of the sheriffs and ealdorman in two shires could be lulled128, it was difficult to disarm129 the selfishness of a landlord or an owner who thought the runaway’s services of any value, or his price worth securing. A year and a day must elapse ere the right abated130 from the “lord in pursuit,” for so was the lord called over all Europe in the idioms of the several tongues[1034]; and hence it cannot have been a very easy matter for any man to take advantage of the poor-law, while it remained any one’s advantage to keep him from falling into the state of pauperism: in other words, no man whose labour still possessed any value would be so cast upon the world as to have no refuge but what the church in Christian charity provided. And this was the real and trustworthy test of destitution131. If a man was so helpless, friendless and useless that he could find no place in one of the mutual132 associations, or
514
in a lord’s family, it is clear that he must become an outlaw as far as the State is concerned[1035]: he must fly to the woods, turn serf or steal, or else commend himself as a pauper to the benefits of clerical superintendence: but it is perfectly133 obvious that none but the hopelessly infirm or aged112 could ever be placed under such difficulty, in a country situated134 like England at any period of the Saxon rule, and hence pauper relief was in practice strictly confined to those for whom it was justly intended. The Saxon poor-law then appears simple enough, and well might it be so: they had not tried many unsuccessful and ridiculous experiments in œconomics, suffered themselves to be misled by very many mischievous135 crochets136, nor on the whole did they find it necessary to make so expensive a protest against bad commercial legislation as our poor-law has proved to us. But it is not quite the simple thing it seems, and requires two elements for its efficient working, which are not to be found at every period, namely a powerful, conscientious clergy, and a system of property founded exclusively upon the possession of land, and guarded by
515
a compulsory distribution of all citizens into certain fixed137 and settled associations.
I have already called attention to the fact that it was usual, if not necessary, on emancipating138 a serf, to provide for his subsistence. It is however not improbable that, though such emancipated139 serfs remained for the most part upon the land, and in the protection of their former lord, they found some assistance from the poor fund, either directly from the church, or indirectly140 through the private alms of the lord.
To resume all the facts of the case:—the State did not contemplate32 the existence or provide for the support of any poor: it demanded that every man should either be answerable for himself in a mutual bond of association with his neighbours; or that he should place himself under the protection of a lord, if he had no means of his own, and thus have some one to answer for him. If unfree, the State of course held him to be the chattel141 of his owner, who was only responsible to God for his treatment of him. He therefore who had no means and could find no one to take charge of him was an outlaw, that is, had no civil rights of any kind.
But Christianity taught that there was something even above the State, which the State itself was bound to recognize. It accordingly impressed upon all communicants the moral and religious duty of assisting those of their brethren whom the strict law condemned142 to misery143; and the clergy presented their organization as a very efficient machinery for the proper distribution of alms. The voluntary
516
oblations became in time replaced by settled payments; but the law did not alter the disposition144 which the clergy had adopted; it only recognized and sanctioned it; first by making the various church payments compulsory upon all classes; and secondly by enacting145 that the mode of distribution long prevalent should be the legal one, in a secular as well as an ecclesiastical obligation. And thus by slow degrees, as the State itself became Christianized, the moral duty became a legal one; and the merciful intervention146 of religion was allowed to supply what could not be found in the strict rule of law.
It is unnecessary here to enquire how the power of the clergy to assist the poor was gradually diminished, by the arbitrary consecration147 or total subtraction148 of tithe, and other ecclesiastical payments; or how the burthen of supporting the poor, having become a religious as well as a civil duty, was shifted from one fund to another. It is enough to have shown how the difficulty was attempted to be met during the continuance of the Anglosaxon institutions. Under the present circumstances of almost every European state, it is admitted that no man is to perish for want of means, while means anywhere exist to feed him: and but two questions can be admitted, namely:—Who is really in want? and,—How is he to be fed at the least possible amount of loss to others? This is as far as the State will go. Religion, properly considered, imposes very different duties, and very different tests: but public morality alone ought to teach that
517
where the State has interfered149 on one side, it must pay the penalty on the other; and that where it has positively prescribed the directions in which men shall seek their subsistence, it is bound to indemnify those whom these restrictions have tended to impoverish151. Every Poor Law is a protest against some wrong done: and in proportion to the wrong is the energy of the protest itself. Do not interfere150 with industry, and it will be very safe to leave poverty to take care of itself. It is quite possible to conceive a state of things in which crime and poverty shall be really convertible152 ideas, but of this the history of the world as yet has given us no example.
1007. The Roman poor-law was, consequently upon the Roman imperial institutions, of a strange, exceptional and most dangerous character. The rulers literally153 fed the people: panem et circenses, food and amusements; these were the relief which the wealthy and powerful supplied, and if ever these were sparingly distributed, convulsions and revolution were inevitable. The Λειτουργίαι, public dinners, and other doles of a compulsory nature assisted the poorer among the Athenians. (I have not cancelled this note, which was written long before the events of February 1848 and their consequences had added another pregnant example to the store of history.)
1008. Περὶ δὲ ἀποθέσεως καὶ τροφῆς τῶν γιγνομένων ἔστω νομος μηδὲν πεπηρωμένον τρέφειν, διὰ δὲ πλῆθος τέκνων, ἐὰν ἡ τάξις τῶν ἐθῶν κωλύῃ, μηδὲν ἀποτίθεσθαι τῶν γιγνομένων· ὥρισται γὰρ δὴ τῆς τεκνοποιΐας τὸ πλῆθος. Arist. Polit. vii. c. 14. See also Plato, Leg. bk. 5. Ed. Bekk. p. 739, 740, etc. Ed. Stalbaum, vol. vi. p. 131, etc. The tendency of Aristotle’s ideas on the subject may be gathered from his notion that the Cretans encouraged παιδεραστια, in order to check population. I am informed upon good authority, that in the Breisgau, and especially the See-Kreis of Baden, the younger children, or any supposed surplus, are permitted to die, of want of food, in order that the property (Bauerngut), amounting sometimes to 100 morgen or 66 acres of land, may remain undivided. It is also certain that in other parts of Europe, a woman who bears more than a certain settled number of children is looked upon with contempt.
1009. The Pœnitentials recommend abstinence every Wednesday, Friday and Sunday throughout the year: on all great fasts, high feasts and festivals: during all penances, general or special: seven months before and after parturition154.
1010. “To shipmen it is commanded, like as it also is to husbandmen, that they should give unto God the tenth part of all the increase upon their stock, and moreover give alms from the nine parts that are their own. And so is it commanded to every man that from the same craft wherewith he provides for his body’s need, he provide for that of his soul also, which is better than the body.” Ecc. Institutes. Thorpe, ii. 432. “O homo, inde Dominus decimas expetit, unde vivis. De militia155, de negotio, de artificio redde decimas.” St. Augustine, cited by Ecgb. Excerp. 102. Thorpe, ii. 112.
1011. Æðelred, ix. § 6. Thorpe, i. 342. This passage of Augustine is referred to in the collection commonly attributed to Ed. Conf. And a detailed156 enumeration157 is given of tithe: thus, the tenth sheaf of corn; from a herd158 of mares, the tenth foal; where there are only one or two mares, a penny per foal. Similarly of cows, the tenth calf159 or an obolus per calf. The tenth cheese, or the tenth day’s milk. The tenth lamb, fleece, measure of butter, and pig. Of bees according to the yearly yield: from groves160 and meadows, mills and waters, parks, stews161, fisheries, brushwood, orchards162; the produce of all business, and indeed of everything the Lord has given, the tenth part shall be rendered. Thorpe, i. 445.
1012. Cap. et Fragm. Theod. Thorpe, ii. 65.
1013. Ibid. Thorpe, ii. 80. These xenodochia were hospitals or almshouses.
1014. Excerp. Ecgb. Thorpe, ii. 98.
1015. Confes. Ecgb. Thorpe, ii. 132.
1016. Thorpe, ii. 256.
1017. Thorpe, ii. 352.
1018. Ibid. ii. 286.
1019. Ibid. ii. 437.
1020. Poenit. Thorpe, ii. 61: see also ii. 83. Tit. de incestis.
1021. Thorpe, ii. 68. See also pp. 67, 69, 70, 134, 222.
1022. Poenit. Ecgb. Thorpe, ii. 232.
1023. Æðelr. vi. § 51. Thorpe, i. 328.
1024. Thorpe, ii. 232.
1025. Archbishop Ecgberht, from the Canons of the Council of Orleans: “Episcopus pauperibus et infirmis, qui debilitate163 faciente non possunt suis manibus laborare, victum et vestimentum, in quantum possibilitas fuerit, largiatur.” Thorpe, ii. 105.
1026. Theod. Poen. xxv. § 6.
1027. Ecc. Inst. Thorpe, ii. 404.
1028. We know that Benedict Biscop received as much as eight hides of land for one volume of geographical164 treatises165, illustrated166 and illuminated167. Bed. Op. Min. 155.
1029. Thorpe, i. 196.
1030. Cod168. Dipl. No. 230.
1031. Cod. Dipl. No. 226. I think these súfls must be subflata, raised or leavened169 bread. The contrast afforded by the heavy black rye bread of Westphalia—technically Pumpernickel—will serve to explain the term. In the east of England still a kind of cakes are called Sowls, probably Sufls.
1032. Cod. Dipl. No. 694.
1033. Ælfr. § 33. “Be boldgetǽle.”
1034. In Germany the Nachfolgende, Nachjagende Herr. See Fleta i. cap. 7. § 7, 8.
1035. The lordless man, of whom no right could be got, i.e. who being in no sort of association, could neither support himself nor offer any guarantee to society, was to be got into one by his family. If they either could not or would not produce him at the folcmót and find a lord for him, he became an outlaw, and any one might slay170 him. Leg. Æðelstán. Thorpe, i. 200. The same prince decided171 that if any landless man, who followed a lord in some other shire, should revisit his family, they might receive him on condition of being answerable for his offences. Thorpe, i. 204. But this seems to me to be the case merely of a temporary visit, made of course with the knowledge and permission of his lord.
1008. Περὶ δὲ ἀποθέσεως καὶ τροφῆς τῶν γιγνομένων ἔστω νομος μηδὲν πεπηρωμένον τρέφειν, διὰ δὲ πλῆθος τέκνων, ἐὰν ἡ τάξις τῶν ἐθῶν κωλύῃ, μηδὲν ἀποτίθεσθαι τῶν γιγνομένων· ὥρισται γὰρ δὴ τῆς τεκνοποιΐας τὸ πλῆθος. Arist. Polit. vii. c. 14. See also Plato, Leg. bk. 5. Ed. Bekk. p. 739, 740, etc. Ed. Stalbaum, vol. vi. p. 131, etc. The tendency of Aristotle’s ideas on the subject may be gathered from his notion that the Cretans encouraged παιδεραστια, in order to check population. I am informed upon good authority, that in the Breisgau, and especially the See-Kreis of Baden, the younger children, or any supposed surplus, are permitted to die, of want of food, in order that the property (Bauerngut), amounting sometimes to 100 morgen or 66 acres of land, may remain undivided. It is also certain that in other parts of Europe, a woman who bears more than a certain settled number of children is looked upon with contempt.
1009. The Pœnitentials recommend abstinence every Wednesday, Friday and Sunday throughout the year: on all great fasts, high feasts and festivals: during all penances, general or special: seven months before and after parturition154.
1010. “To shipmen it is commanded, like as it also is to husbandmen, that they should give unto God the tenth part of all the increase upon their stock, and moreover give alms from the nine parts that are their own. And so is it commanded to every man that from the same craft wherewith he provides for his body’s need, he provide for that of his soul also, which is better than the body.” Ecc. Institutes. Thorpe, ii. 432. “O homo, inde Dominus decimas expetit, unde vivis. De militia155, de negotio, de artificio redde decimas.” St. Augustine, cited by Ecgb. Excerp. 102. Thorpe, ii. 112.
1011. Æðelred, ix. § 6. Thorpe, i. 342. This passage of Augustine is referred to in the collection commonly attributed to Ed. Conf. And a detailed156 enumeration157 is given of tithe: thus, the tenth sheaf of corn; from a herd158 of mares, the tenth foal; where there are only one or two mares, a penny per foal. Similarly of cows, the tenth calf159 or an obolus per calf. The tenth cheese, or the tenth day’s milk. The tenth lamb, fleece, measure of butter, and pig. Of bees according to the yearly yield: from groves160 and meadows, mills and waters, parks, stews161, fisheries, brushwood, orchards162; the produce of all business, and indeed of everything the Lord has given, the tenth part shall be rendered. Thorpe, i. 445.
1012. Cap. et Fragm. Theod. Thorpe, ii. 65.
1013. Ibid. Thorpe, ii. 80. These xenodochia were hospitals or almshouses.
1014. Excerp. Ecgb. Thorpe, ii. 98.
1015. Confes. Ecgb. Thorpe, ii. 132.
1016. Thorpe, ii. 256.
1017. Thorpe, ii. 352.
1018. Ibid. ii. 286.
1019. Ibid. ii. 437.
1020. Poenit. Thorpe, ii. 61: see also ii. 83. Tit. de incestis.
1021. Thorpe, ii. 68. See also pp. 67, 69, 70, 134, 222.
1022. Poenit. Ecgb. Thorpe, ii. 232.
1023. Æðelr. vi. § 51. Thorpe, i. 328.
1024. Thorpe, ii. 232.
1025. Archbishop Ecgberht, from the Canons of the Council of Orleans: “Episcopus pauperibus et infirmis, qui debilitate163 faciente non possunt suis manibus laborare, victum et vestimentum, in quantum possibilitas fuerit, largiatur.” Thorpe, ii. 105.
1026. Theod. Poen. xxv. § 6.
1027. Ecc. Inst. Thorpe, ii. 404.
1028. We know that Benedict Biscop received as much as eight hides of land for one volume of geographical164 treatises165, illustrated166 and illuminated167. Bed. Op. Min. 155.
1029. Thorpe, i. 196.
1030. Cod168. Dipl. No. 230.
1031. Cod. Dipl. No. 226. I think these súfls must be subflata, raised or leavened169 bread. The contrast afforded by the heavy black rye bread of Westphalia—technically Pumpernickel—will serve to explain the term. In the east of England still a kind of cakes are called Sowls, probably Sufls.
1032. Cod. Dipl. No. 694.
1033. Ælfr. § 33. “Be boldgetǽle.”
1034. In Germany the Nachfolgende, Nachjagende Herr. See Fleta i. cap. 7. § 7, 8.
1035. The lordless man, of whom no right could be got, i.e. who being in no sort of association, could neither support himself nor offer any guarantee to society, was to be got into one by his family. If they either could not or would not produce him at the folcmót and find a lord for him, he became an outlaw, and any one might slay170 him. Leg. Æðelstán. Thorpe, i. 200. The same prince decided171 that if any landless man, who followed a lord in some other shire, should revisit his family, they might receive him on condition of being answerable for his offences. Thorpe, i. 204. But this seems to me to be the case merely of a temporary visit, made of course with the knowledge and permission of his lord.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
inevitable
|
|
| adj.不可避免的，必然发生的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
constituents
|
|
| n.选民( constituent的名词复数 )；成分；构成部分；要素 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
anarchy
|
|
| n.无政府状态；社会秩序混乱，无秩序 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
scowling
|
|
| 怒视，生气地皱眉( scowl的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
appeased
|
|
| 安抚，抚慰( appease的过去式和过去分词 )； 绥靖（满足另一国的要求以避免战争） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
vanquished
|
|
| v.征服( vanquish的过去式和过去分词 )；战胜；克服；抑制 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
insufficient
|
|
| adj.(for，of)不足的，不够的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
pauperism
|
|
| n.有被救济的资格，贫困 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
pauper
|
|
| n.贫民，被救济者，穷人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
superfluous
|
|
| adj.过多的，过剩的，多余的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
questionable
|
|
| adj.可疑的，有问题的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
unlimited
|
|
| adj.无限的，不受控制的，无条件的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
advantageous
|
|
| adj.有利的；有帮助的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
prudence
|
|
| n.谨慎，精明，节俭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
stationary
|
|
| adj.固定的，静止不动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
redundant
|
|
| adj.多余的，过剩的；(食物)丰富的；被解雇的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
restrictions
|
|
| 约束( restriction的名词复数 )； 管制； 制约因素； 带限制性的条件（或规则） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
positively
|
|
| adv.明确地，断然，坚决地；实在，确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
citizenship
|
|
| n.市民权，公民权，国民的义务(身份) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
forefathers
|
|
| n.祖先，先人；祖先，祖宗( forefather的名词复数 )；列祖列宗；前人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
migration
|
|
| n.迁移，移居，（鸟类等的）迁徙 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
nostrum
|
|
| n.秘方；妙策 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
outlet
|
|
| n.出口/路；销路；批发商店；通风口；发泄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
clergy
|
|
| n.[总称]牧师，神职人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
monks
|
|
| n.修道士，僧侣( monk的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
conjugal
|
|
| adj.婚姻的，婚姻性的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
intercourse
|
|
| n.性交；交流，交往，交际 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
inadequate
|
|
| adj.(for,to)不充足的，不适当的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
outlaw
|
|
| n.歹徒，亡命之徒；vt.宣布…为不合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
contemplate
|
|
| vt.盘算，计议；周密考虑；注视，凝视 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
contemplates
|
|
| 深思，细想，仔细考虑( contemplate的第三人称单数 )； 注视，凝视； 考虑接受（发生某事的可能性）； 深思熟虑，沉思，苦思冥想 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
derived
|
|
| vi.起源；由来；衍生；导出v.得到( derive的过去式和过去分词 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
holder
|
|
| n.持有者，占有者；(台，架等)支持物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
contemplated
|
|
| adj. 预期的 动词contemplate的过去分词形式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
secondly
|
|
| adv.第二，其次 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
severely
|
|
| adv.严格地；严厉地；非常恶劣地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
expiated
|
|
| v.为（所犯罪过）接受惩罚，赎（罪）( expiate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
penance
|
|
| n.（赎罪的）惩罪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
repudiate
|
|
| v.拒绝，拒付，拒绝履行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
thoroughly
|
|
| adv.完全地，彻底地，十足地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
imbued
|
|
| v.使（某人/某事）充满或激起（感情等）( imbue的过去式和过去分词 )；使充满；灌输；激发（强烈感情或品质等） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
machinery
|
|
| n.(总称)机械，机器；机构 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
accrued
|
|
| adj.权责已发生的v.增加( accrue的过去式和过去分词 )；（通过自然增长）产生；获得；（使钱款、债务）积累 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
legitimate
|
|
| adj.合法的，合理的，合乎逻辑的；v.使合法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
lurked
|
|
| vi.潜伏，埋伏（lurk的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
accrues
|
|
| v.增加( accrue的第三人称单数 )；（通过自然增长）产生；获得；（使钱款、债务）积累 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
tithe
|
|
| n.十分之一税；v.课什一税，缴什一税 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
tithes
|
|
| n.（宗教捐税）什一税，什一的教区税，小部分( tithe的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
secular
|
|
| n.牧师，凡人；adj.世俗的，现世的，不朽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
needy
|
|
| adj.贫穷的，贫困的，生活艰苦的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
enactment
|
|
| n.演出，担任…角色；制订，通过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
abound
|
|
| vi.大量存在；(in，with)充满，富于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
lawful
|
|
| adj.法律许可的，守法的，合法的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
prohibition
|
|
| n.禁止；禁令，禁律 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
laity
|
|
| n.俗人；门外汉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
bishop
|
|
| n.主教，（国际象棋）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
adornment
|
|
| n.装饰；装饰品 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
humility
|
|
| n.谦逊，谦恭 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
exhortation
|
|
| n.劝告，规劝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
zealous
|
|
| adj.狂热的，热心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
enacted
|
|
| 制定（法律），通过（法案）( enact的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
enjoin
|
|
| v.命令；吩咐；禁止 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
accustom
|
|
| vt.使适应，使习惯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
thither
|
|
| adv.向那里；adj.在那边的，对岸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
ratified
|
|
| v.批准，签认（合约等）( ratify的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
strenuously
|
|
| adv.奋发地，费力地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
penances
|
|
| n.（赎罪的）苦行，苦修( penance的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
subservient
|
|
| adj.卑屈的，阿谀的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
tariff
|
|
| n.关税，税率；(旅馆、饭店等)价目表，收费表 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
discretion
|
|
| n.谨慎；随意处理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
psalms
|
|
| n.赞美诗( psalm的名词复数 )；圣诗；圣歌；(中的) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
whatsoever
|
|
| adv.（用于否定句中以加强语气）任何；pron.无论什么 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
conscientious
|
|
| adj.审慎正直的，认真的，本着良心的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
hindrances
|
|
| 阻碍者( hindrance的名词复数 )； 障碍物； 受到妨碍的状态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
follies
|
|
| 罪恶，时事讽刺剧； 愚蠢，蠢笨，愚蠢的行为、思想或做法( folly的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
vices
|
|
| 缺陷( vice的名词复数 )； 恶习； 不道德行为； 台钳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
quota
|
|
| n.（生产、进出口等的）配额，（移民的）限额 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
offenders
|
|
| n.冒犯者( offender的名词复数 )；犯规者；罪犯；妨害…的人（或事物） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
lawfully
|
|
| adv.守法地，合法地；合理地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
bishops
|
|
| （基督教某些教派管辖大教区的）主教( bishop的名词复数 )； （国际象棋的）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
folly
|
|
| n.愚笨，愚蠢，蠢事，蠢行，傻话 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
admonished
|
|
| v.劝告( admonish的过去式和过去分词 )；训诫；（温和地）责备；轻责 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
nay
|
|
| adv.不；n.反对票，投反对票者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
mischief
|
|
| n.损害，伤害，危害；恶作剧，捣蛋，胡闹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
eminence
|
|
| n.卓越，显赫；高地，高处；名家 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
attained
|
|
| （通常经过努力）实现( attain的过去式和过去分词 )； 达到； 获得； 达到（某年龄、水平、状况） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
monastery
|
|
| n.修道院，僧院，寺院 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
wayfarer
|
|
| n.旅人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
allude
|
|
| v.提及，暗指 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
piety
|
|
| n.虔诚，虔敬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
monasteries
|
|
| 修道院( monastery的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
amber
|
|
| n.琥珀；琥珀色；adj.琥珀制的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
ram
|
|
| (random access memory)随机存取存储器 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
patronage
|
|
| n.赞助，支援，援助；光顾，捧场 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
celebrated
|
|
| adj.有名的，声誉卓著的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
brotherhood
|
|
| n.兄弟般的关系，手中情谊 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
manors
|
|
| n.庄园（manor的复数形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
doles
|
|
| 救济物( dole的名词复数 )； 失业救济金 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
apparently
|
|
| adv.显然地；表面上，似乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
compulsory
|
|
| n.强制的，必修的；规定的，义务的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
assessment
|
|
| n.评价；评估；对财产的估价，被估定的金额 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
enquire
|
|
| v.打听，询问；调查，查问 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
strictly
|
|
| adv.严厉地，严格地；严密地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
payable
|
|
| adj.可付的，应付的，有利益的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
metropolitan
|
|
| adj.大城市的，大都会的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
supervision
|
|
| n.监督，管理 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
aged
|
|
| adj.年老的，陈年的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
destitute
|
|
| adj.缺乏的；穷困的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
retailing
|
|
| n.零售业v.零售(retail的现在分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
unwilling
|
|
| adj.不情愿的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
devoted
|
|
| adj.忠诚的，忠实的，热心的，献身于...的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
territorial
|
|
| adj.领土的，领地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
consecrated
|
|
| adj.神圣的，被视为神圣的v.把…奉为神圣，给…祝圣( consecrate的过去式和过去分词 )；奉献 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
119
paupers
|
|
| n.穷人( pauper的名词复数 )；贫民；贫穷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
precedent
|
|
| n.先例，前例；惯例；adj.在前的，在先的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
recipients
|
|
| adj.接受的；受领的；容纳的；愿意接受的n.收件人；接受者；受领者；接受器 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
guise
|
|
| n.外表，伪装的姿态 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
shrines
|
|
| 圣地，圣坛，神圣场所( shrine的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
superstition
|
|
| n.迷信，迷信行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
incapable
|
|
| adj.无能力的，不能做某事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
fugitive
|
|
| adj.逃亡的，易逝的；n.逃犯，逃亡者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
deserted
|
|
| adj.荒芜的，荒废的，无人的，被遗弃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
lulled
|
|
| vt.使镇静，使安静（lull的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
disarm
|
|
| v.解除武装，回复平常的编制，缓和 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
abated
|
|
| 减少( abate的过去式和过去分词 )； 减去； 降价； 撤消（诉讼） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
destitution
|
|
| n.穷困，缺乏，贫穷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
mutual
|
|
| adj.相互的，彼此的；共同的，共有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
situated
|
|
| adj.坐落在...的，处于某种境地的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
mischievous
|
|
| adj.调皮的，恶作剧的，有害的，伤人的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
crochets
|
|
| v.用钩针编织( crochet的第三人称单数 )；趾钩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
137
fixed
|
|
| adj.固定的，不变的，准备好的；(计算机)固定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
emancipating
|
|
| v.解放某人（尤指摆脱政治、法律或社会的束缚）( emancipate的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
emancipated
|
|
| adj.被解放的，不受约束的v.解放某人（尤指摆脱政治、法律或社会的束缚）( emancipate的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
indirectly
|
|
| adv.间接地，不直接了当地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
chattel
|
|
| n.动产；奴隶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
misery
|
|
| n.痛苦，苦恼，苦难；悲惨的境遇，贫苦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
disposition
|
|
| n.性情，性格；意向，倾向；排列，部署 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
enacting
|
|
| 制定（法律），通过（法案）( enact的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
intervention
|
|
| n.介入，干涉，干预 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
consecration
|
|
| n.供献，奉献，献祭仪式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
subtraction
|
|
| n.减法，减去 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
interfered
|
|
| v.干预( interfere的过去式和过去分词 )；调停；妨碍；干涉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
interfere
|
|
| v.(in)干涉，干预；(with)妨碍，打扰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
impoverish
|
|
| vt.使穷困，使贫困 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
convertible
|
|
| adj.可改变的，可交换，同意义的；n.有活动摺篷的汽车 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
literally
|
|
| adv.照字面意义，逐字地；确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
parturition
|
|
| n.生产，分娩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
militia
|
|
| n.民兵，民兵组织 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
detailed
|
|
| adj.详细的，详尽的，极注意细节的，完全的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
enumeration
|
|
| n.计数，列举；细目；详表；点查 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
herd
|
|
| n.兽群，牧群；vt.使集中，把…赶在一起 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
159
calf
|
|
| n.小牛，犊，幼仔，小牛皮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
groves
|
|
| 树丛，小树林( grove的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
stews
|
|
| n.炖煮的菜肴( stew的名词复数 )；烦恼，焦虑v.炖( stew的第三人称单数 )；煨；思考；担忧 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
162
orchards
|
|
| （通常指围起来的）果园( orchard的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
163
debilitate
|
|
| v. 使衰弱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
164
geographical
|
|
| adj.地理的；地区(性)的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
165
treatises
|
|
| n.专题著作，专题论文，专著( treatise的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
166
illustrated
|
|
| adj. 有插图的，列举的 动词illustrate的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
167
illuminated
|
|
| adj.被照明的；受启迪的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
168
cod
|
|
| n.鳕鱼；v.愚弄；哄骗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
169
leavened
|
|
| adj.加酵母的v.使（面团）发酵( leaven的过去式和过去分词 )；在…中掺入改变的因素 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
170
slay
|
|
| v.杀死，宰杀，杀戮 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
171
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |