(from cheval, "a horse"); an abstract term, used to express the peculiar privileges, obligations, and turn of mind, with all the other distinguishing characteristics of that order of men who flourished in Europe in the dark ages, during the vigour of the feudal systems of government, under the name of Knights or Knights Errant.

To ascertain the period at which the order sprung up, and the circumstances to which its origin was owing, is no easy task. In the history of society, such the origin a multiplicity of collateral facts appear interwoven together, and causes and effects run into each other by a gradation so imperceptible, that it is exceedingly difficult, even for the nicest eye, to discern causes from their immediate effects, or to distinguish to which among a number of collateral circumstances the origin of any particular event is to be referred. The age to which we must look for the origin of chivalry was singularly rude and illiterate. Even the principal events of that period, emigrations, wars, and the establishment of systems of laws and forms of government, have been but imperfectly, and in many instances unfaithfully, recorded. But the transactions which took place in the ordinary course of civil and domestic life, and which, though less striking, must have always prepared the way for more remarkable events, have been generally thought unworthy of transmission to posterity, and have very seldom found a historian.

Add to these difficulties which oppose our researches on this subject, that the nations of Europe were in that age a mixed multitude, consisting of the aboriginal inhabitants, who, though either subdued by the Roman arms, or at least compelled to retire to the woods and mountains, still obstinately retained their primitive manners and customs; Roman colonies, and such of the original inhabitants of the countries in which these were established, as had yielded not only to the arms of the Romans, but also to the influence of their laws, arts, and manners; and the barbarians, who proceeding from the northern regions of Asia and Europe, the wilds of Scythia and Germany, dissolved the fabric of the Roman empire, and made themselves lords of Europe. Amid this confusion of nations, institutions, and Chivalry, and customs, it becomes almost impossible to trace any regular series of causes and effects.

Yet as the history of that period is not entirely unknown to us, and the obscure and imperfect records in which it is preserved, while they commemorate the more remarkable events, throw a faint light on the customs, manners, and ordinary transactions of the age; we can at least collect some circumstances, which, if they did not of themselves give rise to the institution of chivalry, must certainly have co-operated with others to that end. We may even be allowed, if we proceed with due diffidence and caution, to deduce, from a consideration of the effect, some inferences concerning the cause; from those particulars of its history which are known to us, we may venture to carry imagination backwards, under a proper restraint, to those which are hid under the darkness of a rude and illiterate age.

Distinction of ranks appears to be essentially necessary to the existence of civil order. Even in the simplest and rudest social establishments, we find not merely the natural distinctions of weak and strong, young and old, parent and child, husband and wife; these are always accompanied with others which owe their institution to the invention of man, and the consent, either tacit or formal, of the society among whom they prevail. In peace and in war, such distinctions are equally necessary; they constitute an essential and important part of the mechanism of society.

One of the earliest artificial distinctions introduced among mankind, is that which separates the bold and skilful warrior from those whose feebleness of body and mind renders them unable to excel in dexterity, stratagem, or valour. Among rude nations, who are but imperfectly acquainted with the advantages of social order, this distinction is more remarkably eminent than in any other state of society. The ferocity of the human character in such a period produces almost continual hostilities among neighbouring tribes; the elements of nature, and the brute inhabitants of the forest, are not yet reduced to be subservient to the will of man; and these, with other concomitant circumstances, render the warrior, who is equally distinguished by cunning and valour, more useful and respectable than any other character.

On the same principles, as the boundaries of society are enlarged, and its form becomes more complex, the classes into which it is already distinguished are again subdivided. The invention of arts, and the acquisition of property, are the chief causes of these new distinctions which now arise among the orders of society; and they extend their influence equally through the whole system. Difference of armour, and different modes of military discipline, produce distinction of orders among those who practise the arts of war; while other circumstances, originating from the same general causes, occasion similar changes to take place amidst the scenes of peace.

None of the new distinctions which are introduced among men, with respect to the discipline and conduct of war, in consequence of the acquisition of property and the invention of arts, is more remarkable than that occasioned by the use of horses in military expeditions, and the training of them to the evolutions of the military art. Fire-arms, it is true, give to those who are acquainted with them a greater superiority over those to whom their use is unknown, than what the horseman possesses over him who fights on foot. But the use of fire-arms is of such importance in war, and the expense attending it so considerable, that wherever these have been introduced, they have seldom been confined to one particular order in an army; and, therefore, they produced indeed a remarkable, though transient, distinction among different nations, but establish no permanent distinctions in the armies in any one nation. But to maintain a horse, to equip him with costly furniture, to manage him with dexterity and vigour, are circumstances which have invariably produced a standing and conspicuous distinction among the military order, wherever bodies of cavalry have been formed. The Roman equites, who, though they became at length a body of ulcers and farmers-general, were originally the only body of cavalry employed by the state, occupied a respectable rank between the senators and the plebeians; and the elegance and humanity of their manners were suitable to their rank. In ancient Greece, and in the celebrated monarchies of Asia, the same distinction prevailed at a similar period.

Since the circumstances and principles on which this distinction depends are not such as must be confined in their influence to one particular nation, or one region of the globe, we may hope to trace their effects among the savage warriors of Scythia and Germany, as well as among the Greeks or Romans. From the valuable treatise of Tacitus de Moribus Germanorum, we learn that, among the German warriors, a distinction somewhat of this nature, did actually subsist; not so much indeed a distinction between the warrior who fought on horseback and those who fought on foot, as between those whom vigour of body and energy of mind enabled to brave all the dangers of war, and such as, from the imbecility of youth, the infirmities of age, or the natural inferiority of their mental and bodily powers, were unequal to scenes of hardship and deeds of valour. The youth was not permitted to take arms and join his warlike countrymen in their military expeditions whenever he himself thought proper: there was a certain age before which he could not be invested with armour. When he had attained that period, if not found deficient in strength, activity, or courage, he was formally honoured with the shield and the lance, called to the duties, and admitted to all the privileges of a warrior.

Another fact worthy of notice, respecting the manners of the barbarians of Germany before they fellible themselves in the cultivated provinces of the women among the Roman empire, is, that their women, contrary to what we find among many other rude nations, were treated with a high degree of respect. They did not generally vie with the men in deeds of valour, but they animated them by their exhortations to distinguish themselves in the field; and virgins especially were considered with a sacred veneration, as endowed with prophetic powers, capable of foreseeing events hid in the womb of futurity, and even of influencing the will of the deities. Hence, though domestic duties were their peculiar province, yet they were not harshly treated nor confined to a state of slavery. There appears indeed a striking analogy between the condition of the women among among the rude soldiers of Sparta and the rank which they occupied among the warlike cantons of Germany. Perhaps indeed the German were still more honourable than the Spartan women; as they were taught to wield the magic weapons of superstition, which in Greece were appropriated to the priests.

It appears, therefore, that in the forests of Germany at least, if not the more northern regions of Asia and Europe, the conquerors of the Roman empire, before they penetrated into its provinces, treated their women with a degree of respect unknown to most of the nations of antiquity; that the character of the warrior was likewise highly honourable, being underfed to unite all those qualities which were in the highest estimation; and that it was only at a particular age, and with certain forms, that the youth were admitted to bear arms.

When those nations fell from their deserts and forests, overran the Roman empire, and established themselves in its provinces, the changes which took place in their circumstances were remarkable; and by a natural influence it could not but produce an equally remarkable change in their habits, customs, and manners. The great outlines might still remain: but they could not now fail to be filled up in a different manner. Here, however, the records of history are peculiarly imperfect. We have no Caesar or Tacitus to supply facts or direct our reasonings; the Gothic nations had not yet learned to read and write; and the Romans were so deprived under a sense of their own miseries, as to be negligent of the changes which happened around them. But as soon as the light of history begins again to dawn, we find that the leading features of the barbarian character were not effaced, but only modified in a particular manner, in consequence of their mixing among a more polished people, becoming acquainted with the luxuries of life, and acquiring extensive power and property.

Those who fought on horseback now began to be distinguished with peculiar honours. The manners of the warrior too were become more cultivated, and his spirit more humane. Leisure and opulence, with the influence of a polished people, even though in a state of slavery, taught those barbarians to aspire after more refined pleasures and more splendid amusements than those with which they had been before satisfied. The influence of Christianity, too, which, though grossly corrupted, was still favourable to the social happiness of mankind, concurred to polish their manners and exalt their character. Hence in the end of the tenth and in the beginning of the eleventh century, we see knight-errantry, with that romantic gallantry, piety, and humanity, by which it was principally distinguished, make its appearance. At the court of every prince, count, or baron, jousts and tournaments became the favourite amusements. At those entertainments, skill in arms, devotion to the fair, and generous courtesy, were all at once cultivated. About this period began the crusades; and these, to which alone some have referred the origin of chivalry, though they could not give rise to what was already in existence, yet moulded the form and directed the spirit of the institution in such a manner, as to raise it, by a rapid progress from infancy, as it were, to full vigour and maturity. Its character, as it appeared when fully formed, is well described by an eloquent historian in the following manner:

"Between the age of Charlemagne and that of the Gibbon, a revolution had taken place among the Spanish, the Normans, and the French, which gradually extended to the rest of Europe. The service of the infantry was degraded to the plebeians; the cavalry formed the strength of the armies, and the honourable name of miles, or soldier, was confined to the gentlemen who served on horseback, and were invested with the character of knighthood. The dukes and counts, who had usurped the rights of sovereignty, divided the provinces among their faithful barons; the barons distributed among their vassals their fiefs or benefices of their jurisdiction; and these military tenants, the peers of each other and of their lord, composed the noble or equestrian order, which disdained to conceive the peasant or burgher as of the same species with themselves. The dignity of their birth was preserved by pure and equal alliances; their sons alone who could produce four quarters or lines of ancestry, without spot or reproach, might legally pretend to the honour of knighthood; but a valiant plebeian was sometimes enriched and ennobled by the sword, and became the father of a new race. A single knight could impart, according to his judgment, the character which he received; and the warlike sovereigns of Europe derived more glory from this personal distinction than from the lustre of their diadem. This ceremony was in its own origin simple and profane; the candidate, after some previous trial, was invested with his sword and spurs; and his cheek or shoulder was touched with a slight blow, as an emblem of the last affront which it was lawful for him to endure. But superstition mingled in every public and private action of life: In the holy wars, it sanctified the profession of arms; and the order of chivalry was assimilated in its rights and privileges to the sacred orders of priesthood. The bath and white garment of the novice were an indecent copy of the regeneration of baptism: his sword, which he offered on the altar, was blest by the ministers of religion; his solemn reception was preceded by fasts and vigils; and he was created a knight in the name of God, of St George, and of St Michael the archangel. He swore to accomplish the duties of his profession; and education, example, and the public opinion were the inviolable guardians of his oath. As the champion of God and the ladies, he devoted himself to speak the truth; to maintain the right, to protect the distressed; to practise courtesy, a virtue less familiar to the ancients; to pursue the infidels; to despise the allurements of ease and safety; and to vindicate in every perilous adventure the honour of his character. The abuse of the same spirit provoked the illiterate knight to disdain the arts of industry and peace; to esteem himself the sole judge and avenger of his own injuries; and proudly to neglect the laws of civil society and military discipline. Yet the benefits of this institution, to refine the temper of barbarians, and to infuse some principles of faith, justice, and humanity, were strongly felt, and have been often observed. The asperity of national prejudice was softened; and the community of religion and arms spread a similar colour and generous emulation over the face of Christendom. Abroad, in enterprise and pilgrimage;" Chivalry, pilgrimage; at home, in martial exercise, the warriors of every country were perpetually associated; and impartial taste must prefer a Gothic tournament to the Olympic games of classic antiquity. Instead of the naked spectacles which corrupted the manners of the Greeks, and banished from the stadium the virgins and matrons, the pompous decoration of the lists was crowned with the presence of the chaste and high-born beauty, from whose hands the conqueror received the prize of his dexterity and courage. The skill and strength that were exerted in wrestling and boxing bear a distant and doubtful relation to the merit of a soldier; but the tournaments, as they were invented in France, and eagerly adopted both in the east and west, presented a lively image of the brawn of the field. The single combat, the general skirmish, the defence of a pass or castle, were rehearsed as in actual service; and the contest, both in real and mimic war, was decided by the superior management of the horse and lance. The lance was the proper and peculiar weapon of the knight: his horse was of a large and heavy breed; but this charger, till he was routed by the approaching danger, was usually led by an attendant, and he quietly rode a pad or palfrey of a more easy pace. His helmet and sword, his greaves and buckler, it would be superfluous to describe; but I may remark, that at the period of the crusades, the armour was less ponderous than in later times; and that, instead of a massive cuirass, his breast was defended by a hauberk or coat of mail. When their long lances were fixed in the rest, the warriors furiously spurred their horses against the foe; and the light cavalry of the Turks and Arabs could seldom stand against the direct and impetuous weight of their charge. Each knight was attended to the field by his faithful esquire, a youth of equal birth and similar hopes; he was followed by his archers and men at arms; and four, or five, or six soldiers, were computed as the furniture of a complete lance. In the expeditions to the neighbouring kingdoms or the Holy Land, the duties of the feudal tenure no longer subsisted; the voluntary service of the knights and their followers was either prompted by zeal or attachment, or purchased with rewards and promises; and the numbers of each squadron were measured by the power, the wealth, and the fame of each independent chieftain. They were distinguished by his banner, his armorial coat, and his cry of war; and the most ancient families of Europe must seek in these achievements the origin and proof of their nobility.

The respectable author of the Letters on Chivalry and Romance, traces, with great ingenuity and erudition, a strong resemblance between the manners of the age of chivalry and those of the old heroic ages delineated by Homer.

There is, says he, a remarkable correspondence between the manners of the old heroic times, as painted by their great romancer Homer, and those which are represented to us in the modern books of knight-errantry. A fact of which no good account can be given, but by another not less certain; that the political state of Greece, in the earliest periods of its story, was similar in many respects to that of Europe, as broken by the feudal system into an infinite number of petty independent governments.

Some obvious circumstances of agreement between the heroic and Gothic manners may be worth putting down.

1. The military enthusiasm of the barons is but of a piece with the fanaticism of the heroes. Hence the same particularity of description in the accounts of battles, wounds, deaths, in the Greek poet as in the Gothic romancers. Hence the minute curiosity in the display of their dress, arms, accoutrements. The minds of all men being occupied with warlike images and ideas, were much gratified by these details, which appear cold and uninteresting to modern readers.

We hear much of knights errant encountering giants and quelling savages in books of chivalry. These giants were oppressive feudal lords; and every lord was to be met with, like the giant, in his stronghold or castle. Their dependents of a lower form, who imitated the violence of their superiors, and had not their castles but lurking places, were the savages of romance. The greater lord was called a giant for his power; the least, a savage for his brutality.

2. Another terror of the Gothic ages was monsters, dragons, and serpents. Their stories were received in those days for several reasons: 1. From the vulgar belief of enchantments; 2. From their being reported on the faith of eastern tradition, by adventurers from the Holy Land; 3. In still later times, from the strange things told and believed on the discovery of the new world.

In all these respects, Greek antiquity resembles the Gothic. For what are Homer's Laërigons and Cyclops, but bands of lawless savages, with each of them a giant of enormous size at their head? And what are the Grecian Bacchus, Hercules, and Theseus, but knights-errant, the exact counterparts of Sir Launcelot and Amadis de Gaul?

3. The oppressions which it was the glory of the knights to avenge, were frequently carried on, as we are told, by the charms and enchantments of women. These charms, we may suppose, are often metaphorical; as expressing only the blandishments of the sex. Sometimes they are taken to be real, the ignorance of those ages acquiescing in such conceits. Are not these stories matched by those of Calypso and Circe, the enchantresses of the Greek poet?

4. Robbery and piracy were honourable in both: so far were they from reflecting any discredit on the ancient or modern redresseurs of wrongs. What account can be given of this, but that, in the feudal times, and in the early days of Greece, when government was weak, and unable to redress the injuries of petty sovereigns, it would be glorious for private adventurers to undertake this work; and, if they could accomplish it in no other way, to pay them in kind by downright plunder and rapine?

5. Bastardy was in credit with both. They were extremely watchful over the chastity of their own women; but such as they could seize upon in the enemy's quarter, were lawful prize. Or if, at any time, they transgressed in this fort at home, the fault was covered by an ingenious fiction. The offspring was reputed divine. Their greater heroes were the fruit of godesses approached by mortals; just as we hear of the stoutest knights being born of fairies.

6. With the greatest fierceness and savageness of character, the utmost generosity, hospitality, and courtefy, Chivalry, tely, were imputed to the heroic ages. Achilles was at once the most relentless, vindictive, implacable, and the friendliest of men. We have the very same representation in the Gothic romances. As in those lawless times, dangers and difficulties of all kinds abounded, there would be the same demand for compassion, gentleness, and generous attachment to the unfortunate, those especially of their own clan, as of resentment, rage, and animosity against their enemies.

7. Again, the martial games celebrated in ancient Greece, on great and solemn occasions, had the same origin and the same purpose as the tournaments of the Gothic warriors.

8. Lastly, the passion for adventures so natural in their situation, would be as naturally attended with the love of praise and glory. Hence the same encouragement, in the old Greek and Gothic times, to panegyrists and poets. In the affairs of religion and gallantry, indeed, the resemblance between the hero and the knight is not so striking. But the religious character of the knight was an accident of the times, and no proper effect of his civil condition. And that his devotion for the fair sex should so far surpass that of the hero, is a confirmation of the system here advanced. For the consideration had of the females in the feudal constitution, will of itself account for this difference. It made them capable of succeeding to fiefs, as well as the men. And does not one instantly perceive what respect and dependence this privilege would draw upon them?

It was of great consequence who should obtain the favour of a rich heiress. And though, in the strict feudal times, she was supposed to be in the power and at the disposal of her superior lord, yet this rigid state of things did not last long. Hence we find some distressed damsel was the spring and mover of every knight's adventure. She was to be rescued by his arms, or won by the same and admiration of his prowess. The plain meaning of all which was this: That as, in these turbulent times, a protector was necessary to the weaknesses of the sex, so the courteous and valorous knight was to approve himself fully qualified for that purpose.

It may be observed, that the two poems of Homer were intended to expose the mischiefs and inconveniences arising from the political state of Old Greece: the Iliad, the dissensions that naturally sprung up among independent chiefs; and the Odyssey, the influence of their greater subjects, more especially when unrestrained by the presence of their sovereign. And can anything more exactly resemble the condition of the feudal times, when, on occasion of any great enterprise, as that of the crusades, the designs of the confederate Christian states were perpetually frustrated, or interrupted at least, by the dissensions of their leaders; and their affairs at home, as perpetually disturbed and disordered by the rebellious usurpations of their greater vassals? Jerusalem was to the European what Troy had been to the Grecian princes. See the article Knight.

Law, is used for a tenure of lands by knight's service, whereby the knight was bound to perform service in war unto the king, or the same lord of whom he held by that tenure. And chivalry was either general or special: general, when it was only in the feoffment that the tenant held per servitium militare, without any specification of sergeantry, escuage, &c.; special, when it was declared particularly by what kind of knight service the land was held.

For the better understanding of this tenure it hath been observed, that there is no land but is holden immediately or immediately of the crown by some service; and therefore all freeholds that are to us and our heirs, are called feuda or feuda, "fees;" as proceeding from the king for some small yearly rent, and the performance of such services as were originally laid upon the land at the donation thereof. For as the king gave to the great nobles, his immediate tenants, large possessions for ever, to hold of him for this or that service or rent; so they in time parcelled out to such others as they liked the same lands for rents and services as they thought good; and these services were by Littleton divided into two kinds, chivalry and escuage; the first whereof was martial and military, the other rustic. Chivalry, therefore, was a tenure of service, whereby the tenant was obliged to perform some noble or military office unto his lord; and it was of two kinds; either regal, that is, held only of the king; or common, where held of a common person. That which might be held only of the king was called servitium, or fergentia; and was again divided into grand and petit sergeantry. The grand sergeantry was where one held lands of the king by service, which he ought to do in his own person; as, to bear the king's banner or spear, to lead his host, to find men at arms to fight, &c. Petit sergeantry was when a man held lands of the king, to yield him annually some small thing towards his wars, as a sword, dagger, bow, &c. Chivalry that might be holden of a common person was termed scutagium, "escuage;" that is, service of the shield; which was either uncertain or certain.

Escuage uncertain, was likewise two-fold: first, where the tenant was bound to follow his lord, going in person to the king's wars, either himself, or sending a sufficient man in his place, there to be maintained at his expense, so long as was agreed upon between the lord and his first tenant at the granting of the fee; and the days of such service seem to have been rated by the quantity of land so holden; as, if it extended to a whole knight's fee, then the tenant was to follow his lord 40 days; and if but to half a knight's fee, then 20 days; if a fourth part, then ten days, &c. The other kind of this escuage was called cattle ward, where the tenant was obliged, by himself, or some other, to defend a cattle as often as it should come to his turn. And these were called escuage uncertain; because it was uncertain how often a man should be called to follow his lord to the wars, or to defend a cattle, and what his charge would be therein.

Escuage certain, was where the tenure was set at a certain sum of money to be paid in lieu of such service; as that a man should pay yearly for every knight's fee 20s., for half a knight's fee 10s. or some like rate; and this service, because it is drawn to a certain rent, growth to be of a mixed nature, not merely escuage, and yet escuage in effect, being now neither personal service nor uncertain. The tenure called chivalry had other conditions annexed to it; but there is a great alteration made in these things by the stat. 12 Car. II. c. 24. whereby tenures by knight's service of the king, or any other person in capite, &c., and the fruits and consequences thereof, are taken away and discharged; and all tenures are to be construed and adjudged to be free and common socage, &c.

Court of Chivalry, a court formerly held before the lord high constable and earl marshal of England jointly, and having both civil and criminal jurisdiction; but since the attainder of Stafford duke of Buckingham under Henry VIII. and the consequent extinguishment of the office of lord high constable, it hath usually, with respect to civil matters, been heard before the earl marshal only. This court, by stat. 13 Rich. II. c. 2, hath cognizance of contracts and other matters touching deeds of arms and war, as well out of the realm as in it. And from its sentences lies an immediate appeal to the king in person. This court was in great reputation in the times of pure chivalry; and afterwards during the English connexions with the continent, by the territories which their princes held in France; but it is now grown almost entirely out of use, on account of the feebleness of its jurisdiction, and want of power to enforce its judgments; as it can neither fine nor imprison, not being a court of record.

1. The civil jurisdiction of this court of chivalry is principally in two points; the redressing injuries of honour, and correcting encroachments in matters of coat-armour, precedence, and other distinctions of families. As a court of honour, it is to give satisfaction to all such as are aggrieved in that point; a point of a nature so nice and delicate, that its wrongs and injuries escape the notice of the common law, and yet are fit to be redressed somewhere. Such, for instance, as calling a man coward, or giving him the lie; for which, as they are productive of no immediate damage to his person or property, no action will lie in the courts at Westminster; and yet they are such injuries as will prompt every man of spirit to demand some honourable amends; which, by the ancient law of the land, was given in the court of chivalry. But modern resolutions have determined, that how muchsoever a jurisdiction may be expedient, yet no action for words will at present lie therein. And it hath always been most clearly held, that as this court cannot meddle with anything determinable by common law, it therefore can give no pecuniary satisfaction or damages; insomuch as the quantity and determination thereof is ever of common law cognizance. And therefore this court of chivalry can at most order reparation in point of honour; as to compel the defendant mendacium fibi ipsi imponere, or to take the lie that he has given upon himself, or to make such other submission as the laws of honour may require. As to the other point of its civil jurisdiction, the redressing of usurpations and encroachments in matters of heraldry and coat-armour; it is the business of this court, according to Sir Matthew Hale, to adjust the right and armorial ensigns, bearings, crests, supporters, pennons, &c.; and also rights of places or precedence, where the king's patent or act of parliament, which cannot be overruled by this court, have not already determined it. The proceedings of this court are by petition in a summary way; and the trial not by a jury of 12 men, but by witnesses, or by combat. But as it cannot imprison, not being a court of record; and as, by the resolutions of the superior courts, it is now confined to so narrow and restrained a jurisdiction, it has fallen into contempt. The marshalling of coat-armour, which was formerly the pride and study of all the best families in the kingdom, is now greatly disregarded; and has fallen into the hands of certain officers and attendants upon this court, called heralds, who consider it only as a matter of lucre, and not of justice; whereby such falsity and confusion have crept into their records (which ought to be the standing evidence of families, descents, and coat-armour); that though formerly some credit has been paid to their testimony, now even their common seal will not be received as evidence in any court of justice in the kingdom. But their original visitation books, compiled when progresses were solemnly and regularly made in every part of the kingdom, to inquire into the state of families, and to register such marriages and descents as were verified to them upon oath, are allowed to be good evidence of pedigrees.

2. As a criminal court, when held before the lord high constable of England jointly with the earl marshal, it had jurisdiction over pleas of life and member, arising in matters of arms and deeds of war, as well out of the realm as within it. But the criminal as well, as civil part of its authority is fallen into entire disuse, there having been no permanent high constable of England (but only pro hac vice, at coronations and the like), since the attainder and execution of Stafford duke of Buckingham, in the 13th year of Henry VIII.; the authority and charge, both in war and peace, being deemed too ample for a subject; so ample, that when the chief justice Fineux was asked by King Henry VIII. how far they extended? he declined answering, and said, the decision of that question belonged to the law of arms, and not to the law of England.