Chapter VIII: Part 8

The foundation of the feudal relationship proper was the fief, which was usually land, but might be any desirable thing, as an office, a revenue in money or kind, the right to collect a toll, or operate a mill. In return for the fief, the man became the vassal of his lord; he knelt before him, and, with his hands between his lord's hands, promised him fealty and service; he rose to his feet and took the oath of fealty which bound him to the obligations he had assumed in homage; he received from his lord ceremonial investiture with the fief. The faithful performance of all the duties he had assumed in homage constituted the vassal's right and title to his fief. So long as they were fulfilled, he, and his heir after him, held the fief as his property, practically and in relation to all under tenants as if he were the owner. In the ceremony of homage and investiture, which is the creative contract of feudalism, the obligations assumed by the two parties were, as a rule, not specified in exact terms. They were determined by local custom. What they were, however, was as well known, as capable of proof, and as adequate a check on innovation by either party, as if committed to writing. In many points of detail the vassal's services differed widely in different parts of the feudal world. We may say, however, that they fall into two classes, general and specific. The general included all that might come under the idea of loyalty, seeking the lord's interests, keeping his secrets, betraying the plans of his enemies, protecting his family, &c. The specific services are capable of more definite statement, and they usually received exact definition in custom and sometimes in written documents. The most characteristic of these was the military service, which included appearance in the field on summons with a certain force, often armed in a specified way, and remaining a specified length of time. It often included also the duty of guarding the lord's castle, and of holding one's own castle subject to the plans of the lord for the defence of his fief. Hardly less characteristic was court service, which included the duty of helping to form the court on summons, of taking one's own cases to that court instead of to some other, and of submitting to its judgments. The duty of giving the lord advice was often demanded and fulfilled in sessions of the court, and in these feudal courts the obligations of lord and vassal were enforced, with an ultimate appeal to war. Under this head may be enumerated also the financial duties of the vassal, though these were not regarded by the feudal law as of the nature of the tenure, i.e. failure to pay them did not lead to confiscation, but they were collected by suit and distraint like any debt. They did not have their origin in economic considerations, but were either intended to mark the vassal's tenant relation, like the relief, or to be a part of his service, like the aid, that is, he was held to come to the aid of his lord in a case of financial as of military necessity. The relief was a sum paid by the heir for the lord's recognition of his succession. The aids were paid on a few occasions, determined by custom, where the lord was put to unusual expense, as for his ransom when captured by the enemy, or for the knighting of his eldest son. There was great variety regarding the occasion and amount of these payments, and in some parts of the feudal world they did not exist at all. The most lucrative of the lord's rights were wardship and marriage, but the feudal theory of these also was non-economic. The fief fell into the hands of the lord, and he enjoyed its revenues during the minority of the heir, because the minor could not perform the duties by which it was held. The heiress must marry as the lord wished, because he had a right to know that the holder of the fief could meet the obligations resting upon it. Both wardship and marriage were, however, valuable rights which the lord could exercise himself or sell to others. These were by no means the only rights and duties which could be described as existing in feudalism, but they are the most characteristic, and on them, or some of them, as a foundation, the whole structure of feudal obligation was built, however detailed.

Ideally regarded, feudalism covered Europe with a network of these fiefs, rising in graded ranks one above the other from the smallest, the knight's fee, at the bottom, to the king at the top, who was the supreme landowner, or who held the kingdom from God. Actually not even in the most regular of feudal countries, like England or Germany, was there any fixed gradation of rank, titles or size. A knight might hold directly of the king, a count of a viscount, a bishop of an abbot, or the king himself of one of his own vassals, or even of a vassal's vassal, and in return his vassal's vassal might hold another fief directly of him. The case of the count of Champagne, one of the peers of France, is a famous example. His great territory was held only in small part of the king of France. He held a portion of a foreign sovereign, the emperor, and other portions of the duke of Burgundy, of two archbishops, of four bishops, and of the abbot of St Denis. Frequently did great lay lords, as in this case, hold lands by feudal tenure of ecclesiastics.

It is now possible perhaps to get some idea of the way in which the government of a feudal country was operated. The early German governments whose chief functions, military, judicial, financial, legislative, were carried on by the freemen of the nation because they were members of the body politic, and were performed as duties owed to the community for its defence and sustenance, no longer existed. New forms of organization had arisen in which indeed these conceptions had not entirely disappeared, but in which the vast majority of cases a wholly different idea of the ground of service and obligation prevailed. Superficially, for example, the feudal court differed but little from its Teutonic predecessor. It was still an assembly court. Its procedure was almost the same as the earlier. It often included the same classes of men. Saxon Witenagemot and Norman _Curia regis_ seem very much alike. But the members of the feudal court met, not to fulfil a duty owed to the community, but a private obligation which they had assumed in return for the fiefs they held, and in the history of institutions it is differences of this sort which are the determining principles. The feudal state was one in which, as it has been said, private law had usurped the place of public law. Public duty had become private obligation. To understand the feudal state it is essential to make clear to one's mind that all sorts of services, which men ordinarily owe to the public or to one another, were translated into a form of rent paid for the use of land, and defined and enforced by a private contract. In every feudal country, however, something of the earlier conception survived. A general military levy was occasionally made. Something like taxation occasionally occurred, though the government was usually sustained by the scanty feudal payments, by the proceeds of justice and by the income of domain manors. About the office of king more of this earlier conception gathered than elsewhere in the state, and gradually grew, aided not merely by traditional ideas, but by the active influence of the Bible, and soon of the Roman law. The kingship formed the nucleus of new governments as the feudal system passed away.

Actual government in the feudal age was primitive and undifferentiated. Its chief and almost only organ, for kingdom and barony alike, was the _curia_--a court formed of the vassals. This acted at once and without any consciousness of difference of function, as judiciary, as legislature, in so far as there was any in the feudal period, and as council, and it exercised final supervision and control over revenue and administration. Almost all the institutions of modern states go back to the _curia regis_, branching off from it at different dates as the growing complexity of business forced differentiation of function and personnel. In action it was an assembly court, deciding all questions by discussion and the weight of opinion, though its decisions obtained their legal validity by the formal pronunciation of the presiding member, i.e. of the lord whose court it was. It can readily be seen that in a government of this kind the essential operative element was the baron. So long as the government remained dependent on the baron, it remained feudal in its character. When conditions so changed that government could free itself from its dependence on the baron, feudalism disappeared as the organization of society; when a professional class arose to form the judiciary, when the increased circulation of money made regular taxation possible and enabled the government to buy military and other services, and when better means of intercommunication and the growth of common ideas made a wide centralization possible and likely to be permanent. Feudalism had performed a great service, during an age of disintegration, by maintaining a general framework of government, while allowing the locality to protect and care for itself. When the function of protection and local supervision could be resumed by the general government the feudal age ended. In nearly all the states of Europe this end was reached during, or by the close of, the 13th century.

Decline and survivals.

At the moment, however, when feudalism was disappearing as the organization of society, it gave rise to results which in a sense continued it into after ages and even to our own day. One of these results was the system of law which it created. As feudalism passed from its age of supremacy into its age of decline, its customs tended to crystallize into fixed forms. At the same time a class of men arose interested in these forms for their own sake, professional lawyers or judges, who wrote down for their own and others' use the feudal usages with which they were familiar. The great age of these codes was the 13th century, and especially the second half of it. The codes in their turn tended still further to harden these usages into fixed forms, and we may date from the end of the 13th century an age of feudal law regulating especially the holding and transfer of land, and much more uniform in character than the law of the feudal age proper. This was particularly the case in parts of France and Germany where feudalism continued to regulate the property relations of lords and vassals longer than elsewhere, and where the underlying economic feudalism remained in large part unchanged. In this later pseudo-feudalism, however, the political had given way to the economic, and customs which had once had no economic significance came to have that only.

Feudalism formed the starting-point also of the later social nobilities of Europe. They drew from it their titles and ranks and many of their regulative ideas, though these were formed into more definite and regular systems than ever existed in feudalism proper. It was often the policy of kings to increase the social privileges and legal exemptions of the nobility while taking away all political power, so that it is necessary in the history of institutions to distinguish sharply between these nobilities and the feudal baronage proper. It is only in certain backward parts of Europe that the terms feudal and baronage in any technical sense can be used of the nobility of the 15th century. (G. B. A.)

BIBLIOGRAPHY.--For more detailed information the reader is referred to
the articles ENGLISH LAW; FRANCE: _French Law and Institutions_,
VILLENAGE; MANOR; SCUTAGE; KNIGHT SERVICE; HIDE. For a general sketch
of Feudalism the chapters in tome ii. of the _Histoire generale_ of
Lavisse and Rambaud should be consulted. Other general works are J.T.
Abdy, _Feudalism_ (1890); Paul Roth, _Feudalitat und Unterthanverband_
(Weimar, 1863); and _Geschichte des Beneficialwesens_ (1850); M.M.
Kovalevsky, _Okonomische Entwickelung Europas_ (1902); E. de Laveleye,
_De la propriete et de ses formes primitives_ (1891); and _The Origin
of Property in Land_, a translation by M. Ashley from the works of
N.D. Fustel de Coulanges, with an introductory chapter by Professor
W.J. Ashley. Two other works of value are Sir H.S. Maine, _Village
Communities in the East and West_ (1876); and Leon Gautier, _La
Chevalerie_ (Paris, 1884; Eng. trans. by Henry Frith, _Chivalry_,
London, 1891).

For feudalism in England see the various constitutional histories,
especially W. Stubbs, _Constitutional History of England_, vol. i.
(ed. 1897). Very valuable also are the writings of Mr J.H. Round, of
Professor F.W. Maitland and of Professor P. Vinogradoff. Among Round's
works may be mentioned _Feudal England_ (1895); _Geoffrey de
Mandeville_ (1892); and _Studies on the Red Book of the Exchequer_
(1898). Maitland's _Domesday Book and Beyond_ (Cambridge, 1897) is
indispensable; and the same remark applies to his _History of English
Law before the time of Edward I._ (Cambridge, 1895), written in
conjunction with Sir Frederick Pollock. Vinogradoff has illuminated
the subject in his _Villainage in England_ (1892) and his _English
Society in the 11th century_ (1908). See also J.F. Baldwin, _The
Scutage and Knight Service in England_ (Chicago, 1897); Rudolf Gneist,
_Adel und Ritterschaft in England_ (1853); and F. Seebohm, _The
English Village Community_ (1883).

For feudalism in France see N.D. Fustel de Coulanges, _Histoire des
institutions politiques de l'ancienne France_ (_Les Origines du
systeme feodal_, 1890; _Les Transformations de la royaute pendant
l'epoque carolingienne_, 1892); A. Luchaire, _Histoire des
institutions monarchiques de la France sous les premiers Capetiens,
987-1180_ (2nd ed., 1890); and _Manuel des institutions francaises:
periode des Capetiens directs_ (1892); J. Flach, _Les Origines de
l'ancienne France_ (1886-1893); Paul Viollet, _Droit public: Histoires
des institutions politiques et administratives de la France_
(1890-1898); and Henri See, _Les classes rurales et le regime
domanial_ (1901).

For Germany see G. Waitz, _Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte_ (Kiel and
Berlin, 1844 foll.); H. Brunner, _Grundzuge der deutschen
Rechtsgeschichte_ (Leipzig, 1901); V. Menzel, _Die Entstehung des
Lebenswesens_ (Berlin, 1890); and G.L. von Maurer's works on the early
institutions of the Germans.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] _Digest_, xliii. 26. 12.

[2] _Ibid._ xliii. 26. 14, and cf. 17.

[3] Salvian, _De gub. Dei_, v. 8, ed. Halm, p. 62.

[4] H. Brunner, _Zeitschr. der sav. Stift. fur Rechtsgeschichte_,
Germ. Abth. viii. 1-38 (1887). Also in his Forschungen, 39-74 (1894).

[5] See F. Dahn, _Konige der Germanen_, viii. 2, 90 ff.

[6] F. Dahn, _Konige der Germanen_, viii. 2, 197.

[7] G. Waitz, _Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte_, vi. 112 ff. (1896).
Most fully described in G. Seeliger, _Die soziale u. politische
Bedeutung d. Grundherrschaft im fruheren Mittelalter_ (1903).

[8] F. Dahn, _Konige_, viii. 2, 89-90; 95.

FEUERBACH, ANSELM (1829-1880), German painter, born at Spires, the son of a well-known archaeologist, was the leading classicist painter of the German 19th-century school. He was the first to realize the danger arising from contempt of technique, that mastery of craftsmanship was needed to express even the loftiest ideas, and that an ill-drawn coloured cartoon can never be the supreme achievement in art. After having passed through the art schools of Dusseldorf and Munich, he went to Antwerp and subsequently to Paris, where he benefited by the teaching of Couture, and produced his first masterpiece, "Hafiz at the Fountain" in 1852. He subsequently worked at Karlsruhe, Venice (where he fell under the spell of the greatest school of colourists), Rome and Vienna. He was steeped in classic knowledge, and his figure compositions have the statuesque dignity and simplicity of Greek art. Disappointed with the reception given in Vienna to his design of "The Fall of the Titans" for the ceiling of the Museum of Modelling, he went to live in Venice, where he died in 1880. His works are to be found at the leading public galleries of Germany; Stuttgart has his "Iphigenia"; Karlsruhe, the "Dante at Ravenna"; Munich, the "Medea"; and Berlin, "The Concert," his last important picture. Among his chief works are also "The Battle of the Amazons," "Pieta," "The Symposium of Plato," "Orpheus and Eurydice" and "Ariosto in the Park of Ferrara."

FEUERBACH, LUDWIG ANDREAS (1804-1872), German philosopher, fourth son of the eminent jurist (see below), was born at Landshut in Bavaria on the 28th of July 1804. He matriculated at Heidelberg with the intention of pursuing an ecclesiastical career. Through the influence of Prof. Daub he was led to an interest in the then predominant philosophy of Hegel and, in spite of his father's opposition, went to Berlin to study under the master himself. After two years' discipleship the Hegelian influence began to slacken. "Theology," he wrote to a friend, "I can bring myself to study no more. I long to take nature to my heart, that nature before whose depth the faint-hearted theologian shrinks back; and with nature man, man in his entire quality." These words are a key to Feuerbach's development. He completed his education at Erlangen with the study of natural science. His first book, published anonymously, _Gedanken uber Tod und Unsterblichkeit_ (1830, 3rd ed. 1876), contains an attack upon personal immortality and an advocacy of the Spinozistic immortality of reabsorption in nature. These principles, combined with his embarrassed manner of public speaking, debarred him from academic advancement. After some years of struggling, during which he published his_ Geschichte der neueren Philosophie_ (2 vols., 1833-1837, 2nd ed. 1844), and _Abalard und Heloise_ (1834, 3rd ed. 1877), he married in 1837 and lived a rural existence at Bruckberg near Nuremberg, supported by his wife's share in a small porcelain factory. In two works of this period, _Pierre Bayle_ (1838) and _Philosophie und Christentum_ (1839), which deal largely with theology, he held that he had proved "that Christianity has in fact long vanished not only from the reason but from the life of mankind, that it is nothing more than a fixed idea" in flagrant contradiction to the distinctive features of contemporary civilization. This attack is followed up in his most important work, _Das Wesen des Christentums_ (1841), which was translated into English (_The Essence of Religion_, by George Eliot, 1853, 2nd ed. 1881), French and Russian. Its aim may be described shortly as an effort to humanize theology. He lays it down that man, so far as he is rational, is to himself his own object of thought. Religion is consciousness of the infinite. Religion therefore is "nothing else than the consciousness of the infinity of the consciousness; or, in the consciousness of the infinite, the conscious subject has for his object the infinity of his own nature." Thus God is nothing else than man: he is, so to speak, the outward projection of man's inward nature. In part 1 of his book he develops what he calls the "true or anthropological essence of religion." Treating of God in his various aspects "as a being of the understanding," "as a moral being or law," "as love" and so on, Feuerbach shows that in every aspect God corresponds to some feature or need of human nature. "If man is to find contentment in God, he must find himself in God." In part 2 he discusses the "false or theological essence of religion," i.e. the view which regards God as having a separate existence over against man. Hence arise various mistaken beliefs, such as the belief in revelation which not only injures the moral sence, but also "poisons, nay destroys, the divinest feeling in man, the sense of truth," and the belief in sacraments such as the Lord's Supper, a piece of religious materialism of which "the necessary consequences are superstition and immorality." In spite of many admirable qualities both of style and matter the _Essence of Christianity_ has never made much impression upon British thought. To treat the actual forms of religion as expressions of our various human needs is a fruitful idea which deserves fuller development than it has yet received; but Feuerbach's treatment of it is fatally vitiated by his subjectivism. Feuerbach denied that he was rightly called an atheist, but the denial is merely verbal: what he calls "theism" is atheism in the ordinary sense. Feuerbach labours under the same difficulty as Fichte; both thinkers strive in vain to reconcile the religious consciousness with subjectivism.

During the troubles of 1848-1849 Feuerbach's attack upon orthodoxy made him something of a hero with the revolutionary party; but he never threw himself into the political movement, and indeed had not the qualities of a popular leader. During the period of the diet of Frankfort he had given public lectures on religion at Heidelberg. When the diet closed he withdrew to Bruckberg and occupied himself partly with scientific study, partly with the composition of his _Theogonie_ (1857). In 1860 he was compelled by the failure of the porcelain factory to leave Bruckberg, and he would have suffered the extremity of want but for the assistance of friends supplemented by a public subscription. His last book, _Gottheit, Freiheit und Unsterblichkeit_, appeared in 1866 (2nd ed., 1890). After a long period of decay he died on the 13th of September 1872.

Feuerbach's influence has been greatest upon the anti-Christian theologians such as D.F. Strauss, the author of the _Leben Jesu_, and Bruno Bauer, who like Feuerbach himself had passed over from Hegelianism to a form of naturalism. But many of his ideas were taken up by those who, like Arnold Ruge, had entered into the struggle between church and state in Germany, and those who, like F. Engels and Karl Marx, were leaders in the revolt of labour against the power of capital. His work was too deliberately unsystematic ("keine Philosophie ist meine Philosophie") ever to make him a power in philosophy. He expressed in an eager, disjointed, but condensed and laboured fashion, certain deep-lying convictions--that philosophy must come back from unsubstantial metaphysics to the solid facts of human nature and natural science, that the human body was no less important than the human spirit ("Der Mensch ist was er isst") and that Christianity was utterly out of harmony with the age. His convictions gained weight from the simplicity, uprightness and diligence of his character; but they need a more effective justification than he was able to give them.

His works appeared in 10 vols. (Leipzig, 1846-1866); his
correspondence has been edited with an indifferent biography by Karl
Grun (1874). See A. Levy, _La Philosophie de Feuerbach_ (1904); M.
Meyer, _L. Feuerbach's Moralphilosophie_ (Berlin, 1899); E. v.
Hartmann, _Geschichte d. Metaphysik_ (Leipzig, 1899-1900), ii.
437-444: F. Engels, _L. Feuerbach und d. Ausgang d. class, deutsch.
Philos._ (2nd ed., 1895). (H. St.)

FEUERBACH, PAUL JOHANN ANSELM, RITTER VON (1775-1833), German jurist and writer on criminal law, was born at Hainichen near Jena on the 14th of November 1775. He received his early education at Frankfort on Main, whither his family had removed soon after his birth. At the age of sixteen, however, he ran away from home, and, going to Jena, was helped by relations there to study at the university. In spite of poor health and the most desperate poverty, he made rapid progress. He attended the lectures of Karl Leonhard Reinhold and Gottlieb Hufeland, and soon published some literary essays of more than ordinary merit. In 1795 he took the degree of doctor in philosophy, and in the same year, though he only possessed 150 thalers (L22: 10s.), he married. It was this step which led him to success and fame, by forcing him to turn from his favourite studies of philosophy and history to that of law, which was repugnant to him, but which offered a prospect of more rapid advancement. His success in this new and uncongenial sphere was soon assured. In 1796 he published _Kritik des naturlichen Rechts als Propadeutik zu einer Wissenschaft der naturlichen Rechte_, which was followed, in 1798, by _Anti-Hobbes, oder uber die Grenzen der burgerlichen Gewalt_, a dissertation on the limits of the civil power and the right of resistance on the part of subjects against their rulers, and by _Philosophische, juristische Untersuchungen uber das Verbrechen des Hochverraths_. In 1799 he obtained the degree of doctor of laws. Feuerbach, as the founder of a new theory of penal law, the so-called "psychological-coercive or intimidation theory," occupied a prominent place in the history of criminal science. His views, which he first made known in his _Revision der Grundsatze und Grundbegriffe des positiven peinlichen Rechts_ (1799), were further elucidated and expounded in the _Bibliothek fur die peinliche Rechtswissenschaft_ (1800-1801), an encyclopaedic work produced in conjunction with Karl L.W.G. Grolmann and Ludwig Harscher von Almendingen, and in his famous _Lehrbuch des gemeinen in Deutschland geltenden peinlichen Rechts_ (1801). These works were a powerful protest against vindictive punishment, and did much towards the reformation of the German criminal law. The _Carolina_ (the penal code of the emperor Charles V.) had long since ceased to be respected. What in 1532 was an inestimable blessing, as a check upon the arbitrariness and violence of the effete German procedure, had in the course of time outlived its usefulness and become a source of evils similar to those it was enacted to combat. It availed nothing that, at the commencement of the 18th century, a freer and more scientific spirit had been breathed into Roman law; it failed to reach the criminal law. The administration of justice was, before Feuerbach's time, especially distinguished by two characteristics: the superiority of the judge to all law, and the blending of the judicial and executive offices, with the result that the individual was practically at the mercy of his prosecutors. This state of things Feuerbach set himself to reform, and using as his chief weapon the _Revision der Grundbegriffe_ above referred to, was successful in his task. His achievement in the struggle may be summed up as: _nullum crimen, nulla poena sine lege_ (no wrong and no punishment without a remedy). In 1801 Feuerbach was appointed extraordinary professor of law without salary, at the university of Jena, and in the following year accepted a chair at Kiel, where he remained two years. In 1804 he removed to the university of Landshut; but on being commanded by King Maximilian Joseph to draft a penal code for Bavaria (_Strafgesetzbuch fur das Konigreich Bayern_), he removed in 1805 to Munich, where he was given a high appointment in the ministry of justice and was ennobled in 1808. Meanwhile the practical reform of penal legislation in Bavaria was begun under his influence in 1806 by the abolition of torture. In 1808 appeared the first volume of his _Merkwurdige Criminalfalle_, completed in 1811--a work of deep interest for its application of psychological considerations to cases Of crime, and intended to illustrate the inevitable imperfection of human laws in their application to individuals. In his _Betrachtungen uber das Geschworenengericht_ (1811) Feuerbach declared against trial by jury, maintaining that the verdict of a jury was not adequate legal proof of a crime. Much controversy was aroused on the subject, and the author's view was subsequently to some extent modified. The result of his labours was promulgated in 1813 as the Bavarian penal code. The influence of this code, the embodiment of Feuerbach's enlightened views, was immense. It was at once made the basis for new codes in Wurttemberg and Saxe-Weimar; it was adopted in its entirety in the grand-duchy of Oldenburg; and it was translated into Swedish by order of the king. Several of the Swiss cantons reformed their codes in conformity with it. Feuerbach had also undertaken to prepare a civil code for Bavaria, to be founded on the Code Napoleon. This was afterwards set aside, and the Codex Maximilianus adopted as a basis. But the project did not become law. During the war of liberation (1813-1814) Feuerbach showed himself an ardent patriot, and published several political brochures which, from the writer's position, had almost the weight of state manifestoes. One of these is entitled _Uber deutsche Freiheit und Vertretung deutsche Volker durch Landstande_ (1514). In 1814 Feuerbach was appointed second president of the court of appeal at Bamberg, and three years later he became first president of the court of appeal at Anspach. In 1821 he was deputed by the government to visit France, Belgium, and the Rhine provinces for the purpose of investigating their juridical institutions. As the fruit of this visit, he published his treatises _Betrachtungen uber Offentlichkeit und Mundigkeit der Gerechtigkeitspflege_ (1821) and _Uber die Gerichtsverfassung und das gerichtliche Verfahren Frankreichs_ (1825). In these he pleaded unconditionally for publicity in all legal proceedings. In his later years he took a deep interest in the fate of the strange foundling Kaspar Hauser (q.v.), which had excited so much attention in Europe; and he was the first to publish a critical summary of the ascertained facts, under the title of _Kaspar Hauser, ein Beispiel eines Verbrechens am Seelenleben_ (1832). Shortly before his death appeared a collection of his _Kleine Schriften_ (1833). Feuerbach, still in the full enjoyment of his intellectual powers, died suddenly at Frankfort, while on his way to the baths of Schwalbach, on the 29th of May 1833. In 1853 was published the _Leben und Wirken Ans. von Feuerbachs_, 2 vols., consisting of a selection of his letters and journals, with occasional notes by his fourth son Ludwig, the distinguished philosopher.

See also, for an estimate of Feuerbach's life and work, Marquardtsen,
in _Allgemeine deutsche Biographie_, vol. vi.; and an "in memoriam"
notice in _Die allgemeine Zeitung_ (Augsburg), 15th Nov. 1875, by
Professor Dr Karl Binding of Leipzig University.

FEUILLANTS, CLUB OF THE, a political association which played a prominent part during the French Revolution. It was founded on the 16th of July 1791 by several members of the Jacobin Club, who refused to sign a petition presented by this body, demanding the deposition of Louis XVI. Among the dissident members were B. Barere; and E.J. Sieyes, who were later joined by other politicians, among them being Dupont de Nemours. The name of Feuillants was popularly given to this group of men, because they met in the fine buildings which had been occupied by the religious order bearing this name, in the rue Saint-Honore, near the Place Vendome, in Paris. The members of the club preserved the title of _Amis de la Constitution_, as being a sufficient indication of the line they intended to pursue. This consisted in opposing everything not contained in the Constitution; in their opinion, the latter was in need of no modification, and they hated alike all those who were opposed to it, whether _emigres_ or Jacobins; they affected to avoid all political discussion, and called themselves merely a "conservative assembly."

This attitude they maintained after the Constituent Assembly had been succeeded by the Legislative, but not many of the new deputies became members of the club. With the rapid growth of extreme democratic ideas the Feuillants soon began to be looked upon as reactionaries, and to be classed with "aristocrats." They did, indeed, represent the aristocracy of wealth, for they had to pay a subscription of four louis, a large sum at that time, besides six livres for attendance. Moreover, the luxury with which they surrounded themselves, and the restaurant which they had annexed to their club, seemed to mock the misery of the half-starved proletariat, and added to the suspicion with which they were viewed, especially after the popular triumphs of the 20th of June and the 10th of August 1792 (see FRENCH REVOLUTION). A few days after the insurrection of the 10th of August, the papers of the Feuillants were seized, and a list was published containing the names of 841 members proclaimed as suspects. This was the death-blow of the club. It had made an attempt, though a weak one, to oppose the forward march of the Revolution, but, unlike the Jacobins, had never sent out branches into the provinces. The name of Feuillants, as a party designation, survived the club. It was applied to those who advocated a policy of "cowardly moderation," and _feuillantisme_ was associated with _aristocratie_ in the mouths of the sansculottes.

The act of separation of the Feuillants from the Jacobins was
published in a pamphlet dated the 16th of July 1791, beginning with
the words, _Les Membres de l'assemblee nationale_ ... (Paris, 1791).
The statutes of the club were also published in Paris. See also A.
Aulard, _Histoire politique de la Revolution francaise_ (Paris, 1903),
2nd ed., p. 153.

FEUILLET, OCTAVE (1821-1890), French novelist and dramatist, was born at Saint-Lo, Manche, on the 11th of August 1821. He was the son of a Norman gentleman of learning and distinction, who would have played a great part in politics "sans ses diables de nerfs," as Guizot said. This nervous excitability was inherited, though not to the same excess, by Octave, whose mother died in his infancy and left him to the care of the hyper-sensitive invalid. The boy was sent to the lycee Louis-le Grand, in Paris, where he achieved high distinction, and was destined for the diplomatic service. In 1840 he appeared before his father at Saint-Lo, and announced that he had determined to adopt the profession of literature. There was a stormy scene, and the elder Feuillet cut off his son, who returned to Paris and lived as best he could by a scanty journalism. In company with Paul Bocage he began to write for the stage, and not without success; at all events, he continued to exist until, three years after the quarrel, his father consented to forgive him. Enjoying a liberal allowance, he now lived in Paris in comfort and independence, and he published his early novels, none of which is quite of sufficient value to retain the modern reader. The health and spirits of the elder M. Feuillet, however, having still further declined, he summoned his son to leave Paris and bury himself as his constant attendant in the melancholy chateau at Saint-Lo. This was to demand a great sacrifice, but Octave Feuillet cheerfully obeyed the summons. In 1851 he married his cousin, Mlle Valerie Feuillet, who helped him to endure the mournful captivity to which his filial duty bound him. Strangely enough, in this exile--rendered still more irksome by his father's mania for solitude and by his tyrannical temper--the genius of Octave Feuillet developed. His first definite success was gained in the year 1852, when he published the novel _Bellah_ and produced the comedy _La Crise_. Both were reprinted from the _Revue des deux mondes_, where many of his later novels also appeared. He wrote books which have long held their place, _La Petite Comtesse_ (1857), _Dalila_ (1857), and in particular that universal favourite, _Le Roman d'un jeune homme pauvre_ (1858). He himself fell into a nervous state in his "prison," but he was sustained by the devotion and intelligence of his wife and her mother. In 1857, having been persuaded to make a play of the novel of _Dalila_, he brought out this piece at the Vaudeville, and enjoyed a brilliant success; on this occasion he positively broke through the _consigne_ and went up to Paris to see his play rehearsed. His father bore the shock of his temporary absence, and the following year Octave ventured to make the same experiment on occasion of the performance of _Un Jeune Homme pauvre_. To his infinite chagrin, during this brief absence his father died. Octave was now, however, free, and the family immediately moved to Paris, where they took part in the splendid social existence of the Second Empire. The elegant and distinguished young novelist became a favourite at court; his pieces were performed at Compiegne before they were given to the public, and on one occasion the empress Eugenie deigned to play the part of Mme de Pons in _Les Portraits de la Marquise_. Feuillet did not abandon the novel, and in 1862 he achieved a great success with _Sibylle_. His health, however, had by this time begun to decline, affected by the sad death of his eldest son. He determined to quit Paris, where the life was far too exciting for his nerves, and to regain the quietude of Normandy. The old chateau of the family had been sold, but he bought a house called "Les Paillers" in the suburbs of Saint-Lo, and there he lived, buried in his roses, for fifteen years. He was elected to the French Academy in 1862, and in 1868 he was made librarian of Fontainebleau palace, where he had to reside for a month or two in each year. In 1867 he produced his masterpiece of _Monsieur de Camors_, and in 1872 he wrote _Julia de Treoeur_, which is hardly less admirable. His last years, after the sale of "Les Paillers," were passed in a ceaseless wandering, the result of the agitation of his nerves. He was broken by sorrow and by ill-health, and when he passed away in Paris on the 29th of December 1890, his death was a release. His last book was _Honneur d'artiste_ (1890). Among the too-numerous writings of Feuillet, the novels have lasted longer than the dramas; of the former three or four seem destined to retain their charm as classics. He holds a place midway between the romanticists and the realists, with a distinguished and lucid portraiture of life which is entirely his own. He drew the women of the world whom he saw around him with dignity, with indulgence, with extraordinary penetration and clairvoyance. There is little description in his novels, which sometimes seem to move on an almost bare and colourless stage, but, on the other hand, the analysis of motives, of emotions, and of "the fine shades" has rarely been carried further. Few have written French with greater purity than Feuillet, and his style, reserved in form and never excessive in ornament, but full of wit and delicate animation, is in admirable uniformity with his subjects and his treatment. It is probably in _Sibylle_ and in _Julia de Trecoeur_ that he can now be studied to most advantage, though _Monsieur de Camors_ gives a greater sense of power, and though _Le Roman d'un jeune homme pauvre_ still preserves its popularity.

See also Sainte-Beuve, _Nouveaux Lundis_, vol. v.; F. Brunetiere,
_Nouveaux Essais sur la litterature contemporaine_ (1895). (E. G.)

FEUILLETON (a diminutive of the Fr. _feuillet_, the leaf of a book), originally a kind of supplement attached to the political portion of French newspapers. Its inventor was Bertin the elder, editor of the _Debats_. It was not usually printed on a separate sheet, but merely separated from the political part of the newspaper by a line, and printed in smaller type. In French newspapers it consists chiefly of non-political news and gossip, literature and art criticism, a chronicle of the fashions, and epigrams, charades and other literary trifles; and its general characteristics are lightness, grace and sparkle. The _feuilleton_ in its French sense has never been adopted by English newspapers, though in various modern journals (in the United States especially) the sort of matter represented by it is now included. But the term itself has come into English use to indicate the instalment of a serial story printed in one part of a newspaper.

FEUQUIERES, ISAAC MANASSES DE PAS, MARQUIS DE (1590-1640), French soldier, came of a distinguished family of which many members held high command in the civil wars of the 16th century. He entered the Royal army at the age of thirty, and soon achieved distinction. In 1626 he served in the Valtelline, and in 1628-1629 at the celebrated siege of La Rochelle, where he was taken prisoner. In 1629 he was made _Marechal de Camp_, and served in the fighting on the southern frontiers of France. After occupying various military positions in Lorraine, he was sent as an ambassador into Germany, where he rendered important services in negotiations with Wallenstein. In 1636 he commanded the French corps operating with the duke of Weimar's forces (afterwards Turenne's "Army of Weimar"). With these troops he served in the campaigns of 1637 (in which he became lieutenant-general), 1638 and 1639. At the siege of Thionville (Diedenhofen) he received a mortal wound. His _lettres inedites_ appeared (ed. Gallois) in Paris in 1845.

His son ANTOINE MANASSES DE PAS, Marquis de Feuquieres (1648-1711), was born at Paris in 1648, and entered the army at the age of eighteen. His conduct at the siege of Lille in 1667, where he was wounded, won him promotion to the rank of captain. In the campaigns of 1672 and 1673 he served on the staff of Marshal Luxemburg, and at the siege of Oudenarde in the following year the king gave him command of the Royal Marine regiment, which he held until he obtained a regiment of his own in 1676. In 1688 he served as a brigadier at the siege of Philipsburg, and afterwards led a ravaging expedition into south Germany, where he acquired much booty. Promoted _Marechal de Camp_, he served under Catinat against the Waldenses, and in the course of the war won the nickname of the "Wizard." In 1692 he made a brilliant defence of Speierbach against greatly superior forces, and was rewarded with the rank of lieutenant-general. He bore a distinguished part in Luxemburg's great victory of Neerwinden or Landen in 1693. Marshal Villeroi impressed him less favourably than his old commander Luxemburg, and the resumption of war in 1701 found him in disfavour in consequence. The rest of his life, embittered by the refusal of the marshal's baton, he spent in compiling his celebrated memoirs, which, coloured as they were by the personal animosities of the writer, were yet considered by Frederick the Great and the soldiers of the 18th century as the standard work on the art of war as a whole. He died in 1711. The _Memoires sur la guerre_ appeared in the same year and new editions were frequently published (Paris 1711, 1725, 1735, &c., London 1736, Amsterdam subsequently). An English version appeared in London 1737, under the title _Memoirs of the Marquis de Feuquieres_, and a German translation (_Feuquieres geheime Nachrichten_) at Leipzig 1732, 1738, and Berlin 1786. They deal in detail with every branch of the art of war and of military service.

FEVAL, PAUL HENRI CORENTIN (1817-1887), French novelist and dramatist, was born on the 27th of September 1817, at Rennes in Brittany, and much of his best work deals with the history of his native province. He was educated for the bar, but after his first brief he went to Paris, where he gained a footing by the publication of his "Club des phoques" (1841) in the _Revue de Paris_. The _Mysteres de Londres_ (1844), in which an Irishman tries to avenge the wrongs of his countrymen by seeking the annihilation of England, was published under the ingenious pseudonym "Sir Francis Trolopp." Others of his novels are: _Le Fils du diable_ (1846); _Les Compagnons du silence_ (1857); _Le Bossu_ (1858); _Le Poisson d'or_ (1863); _Les Habits noirs_ (1863); _Jean le diable_ (1868), and _Les Compagnons du tresor_ (1872). Some of his novels were dramatized, _Le Bossu_ (1863), in which he had M. Victorien Sardou for a collaborator, being especially successful in dramatic form. His chronicles of crime exercised an evil influence, eventually recognized by the author himself. In his later years he became an ardent Catholic, and occupied himself in revising his earlier works from his new standpoint and in writing religious pamphlets. Reverses of fortune and consequent overwork undermined his mental and bodily health, and he died of paralysis in the monastery of the Brothers of Saint John in Paris on the 8th of March 1887.

His son, PAUL FEVAL (1860- ), became well known as a novelist and dramatist. Among his works are _Nouvelles_ (1890), _Maria Laura_ (1891), and _Chantepie_ (1896).

FEVER (Lat. _febris_, connected with _fervere_, to burn), a term generally used to include all conditions in which the normal temperature of the animal body is markedly exceeded for any length of time. When the temperature reaches as high a point as 106 deg. F. the term hyperpyrexia (excessive fever) is applied, and is regarded as indicating a condition of danger; while, if it exceeds 107 deg. or 108 deg. for any length of time, death almost always results. The diseases which are called specific fevers, because of its being a predominant factor in them, are discussed separately under their ordinary names. Occasionally in certain specific fevers and febrile diseases the temperature may attain the elevation of 110 deg.-112 deg. prior to the fatal issue. For the treatment of fever in general, see THERAPEUTICS.

_Pathology._--Every rise of temperature is due to a disturbance in the heat-regulating mechanism, the chief variable in which is the action of the skin in eliminating heat (see ANIMAL HEAT). Although for all practical purposes this mechanism works satisfactorily, it is not by any means perfect, and many physiological conditions cause a transient rise of temperature; e.g. severe muscular exercise, in which the cutaneous eliminating mechanism is unable at once to dispose of the increased amount of heat produced in the muscles. Pathologically, the heat-regulating mechanism may be disturbed in three different ways: 1st, by mechanical interference with the nervous system; 2nd, by interference with heat elimination; 3rd, by the action of various poisons.

1. In the human subject, fever the result of _mechanical interference_ with the nervous system rarely occurs, but it can readily be produced in the lower animals by stimulating certain parts of the great brain, e.g. the anterior portion of the corpus striatum. This leads to a rise of temperature with increased heat production. The high temperature seems to cause disintegration of cell protoplasm and increased excretion of nitrogen and of carbonic acid. Possibly some of the cases of high temperature recorded after injuries to the nervous system may be caused in this way; but some may also be due to stimulation of vaso-constrictor fibres to the cutaneous vessels diminishing heat elimination. So far the pathology of this condition has not been studied with the same care that has been devoted to the investigation of the third type of fever.

2. Fever may readily be produced by _interference with heat elimination_. This has been done by submitting dogs to a temperature slightly below that of the rectum, and it is seen in man in _Sunstroke_. The typical nervous symptoms of fever are thus produced, and the rate of chemical change in the tissues is accelerated, as is shown by the increased excretion of carbonic acid. The protoplasm is also injured and the proteids are broken down, and thus an increased excretion of nitrogen is produced and the cells undergo degenerative changes.

3. The products of various micro-organisms have a toxic action on the protoplasm of a large number of animals, and among the symptoms of this toxic action one of the most frequent is a rise in temperature. While this is by no means a necessary accompaniment, its occurrence is so general that the term _Fever_ has been applied to the general reaction of the organism to the microbial poison. Toxins which cause a marked rise of temperature in men may cause a fall in other animals. It is not the alteration of temperature which is the great index of the severity of the struggle between the host and the parasite, but the death and removal to a greater or lesser extent of the protoplasm of the host. In this respect fever resembles poisoning with phosphorus and arsenic and other similar substances. The true measure of the intensity of a fever is the extent of disintegration of protoplasm, and this may be estimated by the amount of nitrogen excreted in the urine. The increased disintegration of protoplasm is also indicated by the rise in the excretion of sulphur and phosphorus and by the appearance in the urine of acetone, aceto-acetic and [beta]-oxybutyric acids (see NUTRITION). Since the temperature is generally proportionate to the intensity of the toxic action, its height is usually proportionate to the excretion of nitrogen. But sometimes the rise of temperature is not marked, while the excretion of nitrogen is very decidedly increased. When the temperature is sufficiently elevated, the heat has of itself an injurious action on the protoplasm, and tends to increase disintegration just as when heat elimination is experimentally retarded. But the increase due to rise of temperature is small compared to that produced by the destructive action of the microbial products. In the beginning of a fever the activity of the metabolism is not increased to any marked extent, and any increase is necessarily largely due to the greater activity of the muscles of the heart and respiratory mechanism, and to the muscular contractions which produce the initial rigors. Thus the excretion of carbon dioxide--the great measure of the _activity of metabolism_--is not usually increased, and there is no evidence of an increased combustion. In the later stages the increased temperature may bring about an acceleration in the rate of chemical change; but this is comparatively slight, less in fact than the increase observed on taking muscular exercise after rest. The _rise of temperature_ is primarily due to diminished heat elimination. This diminished giving off of heat was demonstrated by means of the calorimeter by I. Rosenthal, while E. Maragliano showed that the cutaneous vessels are contracted. Even in the later stages, until defervescence occurs, heat elimination is inadequate to get rid of the heat produced.

The toxic action is manifested not only by the increased disintegration of protoplasm, but also by disturbances in the functions of the various organs. The activity of the _digestive glands_ is diminished and appetite is lost. Food is therefore not taken, although when taken it appears to be absorbed in undiminished quantities. As a result of this the patient suffers from inanition, and lives largely on his own fats and proteids, and for this reason rapidly emaciates. The functions of the _liver_ are also diminished in activity. Glycogen is not stored in the cells, and the bile secretion is modified, the essential constituents disappearing almost entirely in some cases. The production of urea is also interfered with, and the proportion of nitrogen in the urine not in the urea increases. This is in part due to the increased disintegration of proteids setting free sulphur and phosphorus, which, oxidized into sulphuric and phosphoric acids, combine with the ammonia which would otherwise have been changed to urea. Thus the proportion of ammonia in the urine is increased. Concurrently with these alterations in the functions of the liver-cells, a condition of granular degeneration and probably a state of fatty degeneration makes its appearance. That the functional activity of the _kidneys_ is modified, is shown by the frequent appearance of proteoses or of albumen and globulin in the urine. Frequently the toxin acts very markedly on the protoplasm of the kidney epithelium, and causes a shedding of the cells and sometimes inflammatory reaction. The _muscles_ are weakened, but so far no satisfactory study has been made of the influence of microbial poisons on muscular contraction. A granular and fatty degeneration supervenes, and the fibres waste. The _nervous structures_, especially the nerve-cells, are acted upon, and not only is their functional activity modified, but they also undergo structural changes of a chromatolytic nature. The _blood_ shows two important changes--first, a fall in the alkalinity due to the products of disintegration of protoplasm; and, secondly, an increase in the number of leucocytes, and chiefly in the polymorpho-nuclear variety. This is best marked in pneumonia, where the normal number is often increased twofold and sometimes more than tenfold, while it is altogether absent in enteric fever.

An interesting general modification in the metabolism is the enormous fall in the excretion of chlorine, a fall far in excess of what could be accounted for by inanition, and out of all proportion to the fall in the sodium and potassium with which the chlorine is usually combined in the urine. The fevered animal in fact stores chlorine in its tissues, though in what manner and for what reason is not at present known.

AUTHORITIES.--Von Noorden, L_ehrbuch der Pathologie des Stoffwechsels_
(Berlin, 1893); _Metabolism and Practical Medicine_, vol. ii., article
"Fever" by F. Kraus (1907); Dr A. Rabe, _Die modernen Fiebertheorien_
(Berlin, 1894); Dr G.B. Ughetti, _Das Fieber_, trans. by Dr R.
Teuscher (Jena, 1895); Dr M. Lovit, "Die Lehre von Fieber,"
_Vorlesungen uber allgemeine Pathologie_, erstes Heft (Jena, 1897);
Louis Guinon, "De la fievre," in Bouchard's _Traite de pathologie
generale_, t. iii. 2nd partie (Paris, 1899); Sir J.B. Sanderson, "The
Doctrine of Fever," in Allbutt's _System of Medicine_, vol. i. p. 139
(London, 1896). (D. N. P.)