John Locke's Latter Ofhandling

Here inheld are the first five headings of John Locke's Latter Offhandling of Redeship, twoth of two offhandlings.

Oversetter's Markup

In this oversetting into Anglish, several words are brooked instead of "nature" and its forthbrought shapings, such as "natural". The word "nature" comes from the Latinish word for "birth", so in all befallings where mayly, a shape of the root word "birth" is brooked, for byspell, "inborn" for "natural". In many befallings, the brooking of these words becomes unseemly. In some of these, the feeling called forth by the brooking of "nature" is that of the "beginning" of the thing, a suchness the thing has from its beginning for the sake of the kind of being it is. In others, the feeling is that of the wight- and wortlife and the goings on of the world selfstanding outside of the body and work of mankind itself. This sense is overset "the earth".

Lastly, in one bestevened befalling, Locke brooks the name, "state of nature". In the same way, he also later brooks "law of nature" and "state of war". For this first wordstring, these two words together make for a besunder hardship in coining an Anglish match. There has been much mooting over the seemly way to overset "state". In the befalling of the wordstring "state of nature", it is not so much an inting of the body of men and lawframed setups of the redeship, but of the stead in which one stands, or the shape and suchness of a thing as it is now. By this sake, this onsetting brooks the word "stead" for "state" in this befalling.

As for "nature", in this befalling, the brooking of the words chosen thus far – namely, some shaping of "birth" or "beginning" seemed to miss the mark or to be besunder unwieldy together with "stead". To say that one is in a "birthstead" seems to mean that they are as a bairn, sackless and helpless. This is not the meaning of Locke's "state of nature", which is as said before, the shape and suchness of a thing as it is "in nature" or from its sooth beginning until now with no inbreaching from a befouling inflood or begrounding of an updraught to frame a new shared redeship beyond the "law of nature".

By this sake, another word more streamlined and pithy than the unwieldy "beginning" is brooked, namely "ord". "Ord" comes from Old English and bears the meaning of the foremost point as of a spear, but also the beginning or the wellspring. Together, these words build the onsetting brooked herein: "ordstead". The same way of wordbuilding is then brooked for "law of nature" and "state of war", which are onset, "ordlaw" and "warstead", beteeingwise.

In many befallings, the wellspring of Locke's ordspringly English writing inholds foreshortening and markup from the bydrafter, which are herein marked slantwise. Unless otherwise outfoldly written, the slantwise writings are the work of the first bydrafter; however, in some befallings, further markup is eked to unfold Anglish oversettings or other insights left unsaid before. The writership of this further markup should be wis to the reader as a deal of the Anglishmoot.

Foreword to the two Offhandlings

Reader, you have here the beginning and the end of a twofold offhandling about redeship. It isn't worthwhile to go into what happened to the leaves that should have come in between (they were more than half the work).

The missing leaves, that were to have been inheld in the Latter Offhandling, that is the next bit of the twofold offhandling, were onefoldly lost. They inheld a lengthy onslaught on Sir Robert Filmer's Patriarcha [Highfatherdom], an upholding of the godly right of kings, forthsent in 1680 (Filmer had died in 1653). The lost leaves seemingly overlapped the onslaught on the same mark that filled Locke's First Offhandling of Redeship and also take up a good deal of room in the Latter.

These outliving leaves, I hope, are enough to beground the seat of our great edstower, our nowtide King William, to rightready his calling to the seat on the grounds of the leave of the folk, which is the only lawful grounds for redeship, and which he holds more fully and sharply than any other reder in the Christfollowing world; and to soothfasten to the world the folk of England, whose love of their fair and inborn rights, and their will to keep them, spared this thede when it was on the brink of thralldom and downfall under King James II.

If these leaves are as overredesome as I flatter myself that they are, the missing leaves will be no great loss, and my reader can be fulfilled without them. I truly hope so, as I don't foresee having either the time or the yearning to go to such lengths again, filling up the gap in my answer by again following Sir Robert Filmer through all the windings and thesterings of his amazing layout.

The king and the thede as a whole have since so thoroughly belied his undersetting that I don't think anyone ever again will be bold enough to speak up against our shared soundness, and be a spokesman for thralldom, or weak enough to be misled by nonsense clothed in handsome speech. If you bother to tackle the bits of Sir Robert's reardings that are not dealt with here, stripping off the blossom of twiminded sayings and trying to turn his words into straightforward, forthput, understandable forsickerings, and if you then aliken these forthputs with one another, you will soon be fulfilled that there was never so much glib nonsense put together in keen-sounding English.

If you don't think it worthwhile to look through all his work, only try the bit where he betalks overthrowing, and see whether all your skill is enough to make Sir Robert understandable and evenhearted with himself and with meansome feeling. I wouldn't speak so flatly of an athelman who is no longer in a steadholding to answer, if it weren't that in tidely years preachers have been fortiding his teaching and making it the nowtide straightlief of our times...

I wouldn't have written against Sir Robert, working to show his mistakes, unevenheartednesses, and lack of the Christbooksome witness that he boasts of having as his only groundwork, if there weren't men among us who, by herrying his books and intaking his teaching, unburden me of the bewrayment of writing only against a dead foe.

They have been so earnest about this that if I have done him any wrong, I can't hope they will show me any ruth. I wish that where they have done wrong to the truth and to the folk, they would be as ready to right it as I am to acknowledge mistakes witnessed against me, and that they would give ought weight to the thought that the greatest harm one can do to the king and the folk is to spread wrong thoughts about redeship.

If they did, it might forever put an end to our having grounds to whinge of thunderings from the flatscape! If anyone who is truly careful about truth tries to belie my undersetting, I behight him either to acknowledge any mistake he fairly befinds me of or to answer his struggles. But he must withcall two things: that picking holes in my rearding - gainstanding this wording or that little happening - is not the same as answering my book; that I shan't let a scolding stand for a reckoning.

Latter Offhandling

Heading 1

1. In my First Offhandling of Redeship, I showed these four things:

1. That Adam did not have, whether by inborn right as a father or through an forthput gift from God, any such right over his children or over the world as has been called out.
2. That even if he had, his jerfes would not have the same right.
3. That if the right were to be bequoth to his jerfes, it would be unsettled who were his jerfes, as there is no ordlaw or forthput law of God that settles this asking in every mayly befalling; so it wouldn't be settled who erved the right and thus was named to rede.
4. Even if all that had been outlookwisely settled, it would be brookless in deed: the knowledge of the line of jerfes running back to Adam has been utterly lost, so that nobody in all the strains of mankind and families of the world would have the slightest calling to have that forethought right of erveship.

All these forehegdings having, as I think, been sharply begrounded, no reders now on earth can bring forth the slightest shadow of right from the underset wellspring of all of mankind's mootish might, Adam's own lordship and fatherly rede.

So if you don't want to give grounds to think that all redeship in the world is the ware only of might and wald, and men live together only by the same guidelines as the lower wights, where strength settles every bickering, and so lay a groundwork for everlasting strife and harm, unruliness, uproar and uprising (things that the followers of that might and wald undersetting so loudly cry out against), you will have to find another reckoning of the beginnings of redeship, another wellspring for mootish might, and another way of settling who the folk are who ought to have it - other, that is, than what Sir Robert Filmer has taught us.

Locke uses the word "positive" in cleaving one and again in 13 and elsewhere. "Positive" is a craftly word. A "positive" law is one that some lawmaker uplays; it comes from the choosing of some lawmaking right. The undershed is with an ordlaw, which isn't laid down by anyone but onefoldly arises out of the beginnings of things. So a "positive" gift from God would be onefoldly a gift as wontly understood; Locke throws in "positive", seemingly as even an inborn right that Adam had would in a way be a gift from God, as God gave Adam his beginning; but it wouldn't be a "positive" gift, arising from an outfold gift-giving deed on God's behalf. Likewise with the thought on a "positive" law of God's.

In this oversetting into Anglish, "forthput" is brooked for this kind of "positive", as "to posit" means "to put forth."

2. For this goal, I think it may be worthwhile to say what I think mootish might is; so that the sway of a redeship steward over an undertan can be undershed from that of a father over his children, a reeve over his shalk, a were over his wife, and a lord over his thrall. As it sometimes happens that one man has all these sundry sways, we can get sharper about how the sways undershed by looking at the sundry maythhoods in which the man stands: as a reder of a meanwealth, father of a family, and shipper of an oarship.

3. So: I take mootish might to be a right to make laws - with the death strafe and forfollowingly all lesser strafes - for steadying and upholding ownership, and to hire the strength of the meanship in helmstanding such laws and shielding the meanwealth from outside onslaught; all this being only for the shared good.

Heading 2: The Ordstead

4. To understand mootish might rightly and bring it forth from its true wellspring, we must bethink what stead all men are born in. In this stead men are flawlessly free to set their deeds, and deal out their belongings and themselves, in any way they like, without asking anyone's leave - under only the borders set by the ordlaw.

It is also a stead of sameness, in which no one has more sway and right than anyone else; as it is onefoldly straightforward that makings of the same kind and stead, all born to the same foredealings of birth and to the brooking of the same skills, should also be the same in other ways, with no one being underthrown or set below anyone else unless God, the lord and reeve of them all, were to bode sharply and outfoldly his wish that some one man be raised above the others and given an untwiminded right to overall lordship.

5. The wise Richard Hooker sees this inborn sameness of men as so straightforward and unhinderable that he grounds on it men's binding to love one another, on which he builds their owings toward each other, from which in turn he brings forth the great overforthputs of rightfulness and goodwill. Here are his words:

An alike inborn enkindling has led men to beaughten that they have as much owing to love others as to love themselves. Things that are the same must be meted by one standard; so if I unformithably want to get some good - indeed as much good from every man as any man can want for himself - how could I foresee having any bit of my wants that other men, being all of the same birth, must have?

To offer them anything unevenhearted with their want will be to burden them as much as it would burden me; so that if I do harm I must foresee tholing, as there is no grounds why others should show more love to me than I have shown to them. Thus, my want to be loved as much as mayly by my kindly peers gives me an inborn owing to do unto them with the same love. Everyone knows the guidelines and standards inborn wisdom has laid down for the guidance of our lives on the grounds of this maythhood of sameness between ourselves and those who are like us.

6. But though this is a stead of freedom, it isn't a stead of leave in which there are no borders on how men behave. A man in that stead is wholly free to deal out himself or his belongings, but he isn't free to unmake himself, or even to unmake any made thing in his ownership unless something more athel than its mere forlasting is at stake. The ordstead is reded by a law that makes bonds for everyone. And wisdom, which is that law, teaches anyone who bothers to bethink it, that as we are all the same and selfstanding, no one ought to harm anyone else in his life, health, freedom, or belongings. This is as:

• we are all the work of one almighty and unendingly wise maker;
• we are all the shalks of one overall reeve, sent into the world by his leave to do his work;
• we are all the belongings of him who made us, and he made us to last as long as he chooses, and not as long as we choose;
• we have the same skills, and share in one meansome birth, so there can't be any row-following that would berighten some of us to unmake others, as if we were made to be brooked by one another, as the lower kinds of makings are made to be brooked by us.

Everyone ought to uphold himself and not to offlean life willfully, so on the same grounds everyone ought, when his own outliving isn't at stake, to do as much as he can to uphold the rest of mankind; and other than when it's an inting of strafing a lawbreaker, no one may take away or scathe anything that bypulls to the upholding of someone else's life, freedom, health, limb, or goods.

7. So that all men may be held back from inthringing the rights of others and from harming one another, and so that the ordlaw that aims at the frith and forlasting of all mankind may be heeded, the helmstanding of that ordlaw (in the ordstead) is in every man's hands, so that everyone has a right to strafe lawbreakers as harshly as is needed to hinder the breaking of the law. For the ordlaw, like every law over men in this world, would be worthless if no one had sway to helmstand it and thereby forlast the sackless and fetter misdoers. And in the ordstead if anyone may strafe someone for something bad that he has done, then everyone may do so...

8. That is how in an ordstead one man comes to have a lawful sway over another. It isn't a forewardless sway, aleaving him to use a haftling lawbreaker by the hot madness or unbridled utmost of his own will; but only a sway to strafe him so far as ruly wisdom and thewing say is evenly meted to his misdeed, namely as much strafing as may theen for goodmaking and beleaning - those two are the only grounds for one man to lawfully harm another, which is what we call "strafing".

By breaking the ordlaw, the misdoer bodes himself to live by some rede other than that of wisdom and shared fairness (which is the standard that God has set for the deeds of men, for their meansome fastness); and so he becomes a threat to mankind as he has forheeded and broken the tie that is meant to spare them from harm and wald. This is a misdeed against the whole strain of mankind, and against frith and soundness that the ordlaw behefts for the lifekin.

Now, every man, by the right he has to forlast mankind overall, may fetter and if needful unmake things that are scathel to mankind; and so he can do to anyone who has overstepped that law as much harm as may make him forthink having done it, and thereby hinder him - and by his byspell hinder others - from doing the same. So on these grounds every man has a right to helmstand the ordlaw and to strafe misdoers.

9. No wonder this will seem a rather outlandish teaching to some folk, but before they fordeem it, I dare them to unfold what right any king or stead has to put to death or otherwise strafe an outlander for a misdeed he betakes in their homeland. The right is wisly not grounded on their laws, through any leave they get from the couth will of the lawmoot; for such oncouthings don't get through to an outlander: they aren't bespoken to him, and even if they were, he does't owe it to listen...

Those who have the utmost sway of making laws in England, France or Holland are to an Indian merely like the rest of the world, men without right. So if the ordlaw didn't give every man a sway to strafe misdeeds against it as he undrunkly deems the befalling to need, I don't see how the rightnessmoot of any meanship can strafe someone from another land; as they can't have any more sway over him than every man can by birth have over another.

10. As well as the misdeed that bestands in breaching the law and leaving from the right rede of wisdom - misdeeds through which man becomes so misthriven that he bodes that he is forsaking the firstliefs of human birth and becoming wormkin - there is often overstepping through which someone does harm to someone else. In the latter befalling, the man who has been harmed has, moreover the overall right of strafing that he shares with everyone else, a sundry right to seek goodmaking from the man who harmed him; and anyone else who thinks this right may also meet with the scathed man and help him to edtake from the misdoer such fees as may make fulfillment for the harm he has tholen.

11. So there are two marked rights: (i) the right that everyone has to strafe the misdoer so as to bind him and forestall such misdeeds in the hereafter; (ii) the right that a scathed man has to get goodmaking. Now, a sheriff, who by being sheriff has the shared right of strafing put into his hands, can by his own right (i) withdraw the strafing of a lawbreaking misdeed in a befalling where the shared good doesn't forlong that the law be helmstood; but he can't (ii) withdraw the fulfillment owed to any sunder man for the scathing he has taken. The only one who can do that is the man who has been harmed.

The scathed man has the sway of taking for himself the goods or work of the misdoer, by right of self-forlasting; and everyone has a sway to strafe the misdeed to forestall its being betaken again, by the right he has of forlasting all mankind, and doing everything wise that he can to that end.

And so it is that in the ordstead everyone has a sway to kill a murderer, both to frighten others from this misdeed that no goodmaking can make up for, by the byspell of the strafing that everyone wreaks for it, and also to fasten men from forthcoming misdeeds by this lawbreaker; he has forsworn wisdom, the shared rede and standard God has given to mankind, and by the wrong wald and slaughter he has betaken on one man he has forkithed war against all mankind, so that he can be unmade as though he were a lion or a tiger...

This is the grounds for the great ordlaw, "Whoever sheds man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed." Cain was so fully overwon that everyone had a right to unmake such a lawbreaker that after murdering his brother he cried out "Anyone who finds me will slay me" - so sharply was this law written in the hearts of all mankind.

12. On the same grounds a man in the ordstead may strafe lesser breaches of the ordlaw. 'By death?' you may ask. I answer that each misdeed may be strafed harshly enough to make it a bad deal for the lawbreaker, to give him grounds to forthink, and to frighten others from lawbreaking in the same way. Every misdeed that can be betaken in the ordstead may also be strafed in the ordstead - and be strafed in the same way (as far a mayly as it would be in a meanwealth).

I don't want to go into the onefoldhoods of the ordlaw or of its strafely guidelines, but I will say this much: it is wis that there is an ordlaw, which is as understandable and sharp to a wise man who learns it as are the forthput laws of meanwealths. See the unfolding of "forthput" after cleaving 1.

It may be even sharper - as much sharper as wisdom is sharper - eathier to understand, than the flighty thoughts and entangled outlookwise becastings of men who have tried to find words that will further their clashing hidden stakes. For that is what has gone into the becasting of most of the mooted laws of lands. Soothly, such laws are right only to the breadth that they are grounded on the ordlaw, which is the standard by which they should be forwended and sweetled.

13. To this outlandish teaching of mine, namely that in the ordstead everyone has the sway to helmstand the ordlaw, I foresee this gainstanding shall be raised:

It is unwise for men to be lawdeemers in their own befallings, as self-love will leaning men to uphold themselves and their friends. And on the other side, foehood, heartdraught and yieldback will lead them to strafe others too harshly. So nothing but befuddlement and unruliness will follow, and that is why God has - as he wisly has - begrounded redeship to fetter the leaning and wald of men.

I freely aleave that burgherly redeship is the right salve for the drawbacks of the ordstead. There must wisly be great misforedealings in a stead where men may be lawdeemers in their own befalling; someone who was so wrong as to do his brother a scathing will (we may well forethink) hardly be so right as to fordeem himself for it! But I answer the gainstanding as follows:

If the ordstead is unbearable because of the evils that might follow from men's being lawdeemers in their own befallings, and redeship is to be the salve for this, let us do an alikening. On the one side, there is the ordstead, and on the other there is redeship where one man - and withcall that utter kings are only men! - leads a throng, is free to be the lawdeemer in his own befalling, and can do what he likes to all his undertans, with no one being aleaved to becall or steer those who carry out his wishes, and everyone having to put up with whatever he does, whether he is led by wisdom, mistake, or heartdraught.

How much better it is in the ordstead, where no man owes it to yield to the wrong will of someone else, and someone who deems wrongly (whether or not it is in his own befalling) is answerable for that to the rest of mankind!

14. It is often asked, as though this were a mighty gainstanding: 'Where are they - where ever were they - any men in such a ordstead?' Here is an answer that may fulfill in the mean time: The world always did and always will have many men in the ordstead, because all kings and reders of selfstanding redeships throughout the world are in that stead. I inhold in this all who rede selfstanding meanships, whether or not they are tied into others; for the ordstead between men isn't ended only by their making a fordraught with one another.

The only fordraught that ends the ordstead is one in which men thware together evenwayly to betread into one meanship and make one burgherly body...

The behightings and deals inheld in trading between two men on an eyot wasteland, ... or between a Swiss and an Indian in the woods of Americksland, are binding on them even though they are flawlessly in an ordstead foreholding one another; for truth and oath-keeping belongs to men as men, not as belongers to a fellowship - that is, as an inting of ordlaw, not forthput law.

15. To those who gainsay that anyone was ever in the ordstead, I againstand the right of the wise Hooker, who writes:

The ordlaw binds men utterly, only as men, even if they have no settled fellowship, no earnest thwaring among themselves about what to do and what not to do. What firstly leads us to seek onehood and fellowship with other men is the truth that on our own we haven't the means to beheft ourselves with a befitting stock of things that we need for the kind of life our beginning wants, a life fit for the worth of man. It was to make up for those flaws and unwholenesses of the lonely life that men first gathered themselves in burgherly fellowships. (The Laws of Ecclesiastical Polity [The Laws of Lordsgatheringish Borroughs], book 1, cleaving 10)

And I also foraye that all men are born into the ordstead, and stay so until they aleave to make themselves belongers to some mootish fellowship. I foresee making this all truly sharp in later bits of this rearding.

Heading 3: The Warstead

16. The warstead is a shape of foehood and unmaking. So when someone bodes by word or deed - not in a sudden outburst of wrath, but as an inting of calm settled outline - that he means to end another man's life, he puts himself into a warstead against the other man; and he thereby lays his life bare to the risk of falling to the might of the other man or anyone that links with him in his shielding and takes up his fight.

For it is wise and right that I should have a right to unmake anything that threatens me with unmaking, as the groundlaying ordlaw says that men are to be forlasted as much as mayly, and then when not everyone can be forlasted the soundness of the sackless is to be forechosen.

In line with this, I may unmake a man who makes war on me or has shown himself as a foe to my life, on the same grounds that I may kill a wolf or a lion; as such men are not under the ties of the meansome law of wisdom, have no guideline but that of strength and wald, and so may be behandled as flesheating wights - threatening makings that will wisly unmake me if I fall under their sway.

17. So it comes about that someone who tries to get another man under his utter sway thereby puts himself into a warstead with the other, for such an undertaking heaps up to a forkithing of a plot against the life of the other man. If someone wants to get me under his sway without my leave, I have grounds to gather that would brook me as he liked when he had got me there, and would unmake me if he wanted to;

For no-one can want to have me under his utter sway unless it's to bede me by strength to something that is against the right of my freedom, that is to make me a thrall. To fasten my own outliving I must be free from such strength; and wisdom tells me to look on him - the man who wants me under his sway - as a foe to my ouliving, wanting to take away the freedom that is the hedge to it.

So someone who tries to enthrall me thereby puts himself into a warstead with me. Someone wants to take away the freedom of someone else must be forethought to have a plot to take away everything else from the man, as freedom is the groundwork of all the rest; and that holds in a meanwealth as well as in the ordstead.

18. This makes it lawful for me to kill a thief who hasn't done me any harm or boded any plot against my life, other than using strength to get me under his sway so as to take away my geld or whatever else he wants. Whatever he says he is up to, he is using strength without right, to get me under his sway; so I have no grounds to think that he won't, when he has me under his sway, take everything else away from me as well as my freedom. So it is lawful for me to behandle him as someone who has put himself into a warstead with me, that is to kill him if I can; for that is the risk he ran when he began a war in which he is the threat.

19. This is the flat undershed between the ordstead and the warstead. Some men - namely Hobbes - have behandled them as the same; but in truth they are as far from one another as a stead of frith, goodwill, likewise help and forlasting is far from a stead of foehood, illwill, wald, and likewise unmaking. An ordstead, rightly understood, inholds:

men living together by wisdom, with no-one on earth who stands above them both and has the right to deem between them.

Whereas in a warstead

a man brooks or bodes his will to use strength against another man, with no one on earth whom the other can beseech for help.

It is the lack of such a beseeching that gives a man the right of war against a threat, not only in an ordstate but even if they are both undertans in one fellowship. If a thief has already stolen all that I am worth and is not an ongoing threat to me, I may not harm him but through a beseeching of the law. But if he is now setting on me to rob me - even if it's only my horse or my coat that he is after - I may kill him.

There is the law, which was made for my forehealing, but there is no time for it to come between to spare me from losing my goods and maybe losing my life (and if I lose that there is no goodmaking). Furthermore, it is the thief's shild that there is no time for beseeching the deemer that stands over him and me - namely, the law - and so I am aleaved to make my own shield, and to be at war with the thief and to kill him if I can.

What puts men into an ordstead is the lack of a shared deemer who has the right; the brooking of unlawful strength against a man's body makes a warstead, whether or not there is a shared deemer and (therefore) whether or not they are in an ordstead.

20. But for men who are in a fellowship under a redeship, the warstead ends when the deed of strength ends; and then those on each side of the bestirring should evenly yield to the fair bestevening of the law... But in the ordstead, where there are no forthput laws or lawdeemers with right to beseech, once a warstead has begun it goes on - with the sackless man having a right to unmake the other if he can - until the threat offers frith, and seeks andweaving on ends that will make up for any wrongs he has done and will give the sackless man soundness from then on. What if it happens like this?

There is time and opening for a beseeching of the law, and to lawfully framed deemers, but the salve is not handy owing to an opensightly bewarping of rightness, a barefaced twisting of the laws so that they foreheal or even meed the wald or scathings wrought by some men or some band of men.

In such a befalling it is hard to think we have anything but a warstead. For wherever wald is brooked and scathing done, even if it is done by men named to carry out rightness and is clothed in the name, callings, or shapes of law, it is still wald and scathing.

The goal of the law is to foreheal and get forgooding for the sackless, by an evenhanded behandling of all who come under it; and when this is not truly done, war is made upon the tholers, and they - having nowhere on earth to beseech for rightness - are left to the only salve in such befallings, a beseeching of heaven.

21. In an ordstead where there is no right to settle between striders, and the only beseeching is to heaven, every little undershed is fit to end up in war; and that is one great grounds for men to put themselves into fellowship, and leave the ordstead. For where there is a right, a sway on earth from which help can be had by beseeching, the gainwending is settled by that might and the warstead is blocked. The rest of this cleaving betalks, in the light of this, a plucking in the Old Witnessing, Judges xi.

Heading 4: Thralldom

22. The inborn freedom of man is

to be free from any higher strength on earth, and not to be under the will or the lawmaking right of men but to be reded only by the ordlaw.

The freedom of man in fellowship is

to be under no lawmaking sway but the one begrounded by leave in the meanwealth; and not under the sway of any will or under fetter from any law but what is umdone by the lawmoot evenhearted with its updraught.

Freedom then is not what Sir Robert Filmer tells us (Observations on Hobbes, Milton, etc.,, [Onlookings of Hobbes, Milton, and the others], leaf 55), namely a freedom for everyone to do what he wants, live as he likes, and not be tied by any laws. Rather, freedom is one of two things.

Freedom of birth is being under no fetter but the ordlaw. Freedom of men under redeship is having a standing guideline to live by, shared by everyone in the frained fellowship, and made by the lawmaking sway that has been set up in it; a freedom to follow one's own will in anything that isn't forbidden by the guideline, and not to be under the unsteady, unsound, unknown, willy-nilly choice of another man.

Here and elsewhere, Locke uses "arbitrary" not in the nowtide feeling of something like "chosen for no sake" or "chosen on a whim" or the like; but rather in a broader feeling, tidely in his day, as meaning only "chosen" or "hanging upon someone's choice". In that older and weaker feeling of the word, the fear of being under someone's "arbitrary" will is only a fear of being at the ruth whatever he chooses to do to you, whether or not his choice is "arbitrary" in the nowtidely feeling.

In this oversetting into Anglish, "willy-nilly" is brooked for this kind of "arbitrary", which comes from the wordstring, "will ye, nill ye", meaning, "be ye willing, be ye unwilling". It shares the nowtide feeling of whimsy of "arbitrary" but could also be understood to mean "hanging upon someone's choice", or more spot-on, "whether you like it or not".

23. In this cleaving Locke writes that a man doesn't have the sway to take his own life. He seemingly means that man may not rightly take his own life as the groundlaying ordlaw says that men are to be forlasted as much as mayly (cleaving 16). He goes on:

This freedom from utter willy-nilly sway, is so needful to a man's outliving, so tightly tied to it, that losing it inholds losing all sway over his own life. That's why no-one can willingly enter into thralldom. A man doesn't have the sway to take his own life, so he can't willingly enthrall himself to anyone, or put himself under the overall, willy-nilly sway of someone else to take away his life whenever he likes.

Nobody can give more sway than he has; so someone who cannot take away his own life cannot give someone else such a sway over it. If someone does a deed that meeds death, he has by his own shild forlorn his own life; the man to whom he has forlorn it may (when he has him under his sway) forestall taking it and instead make use of the besetting man for his own sake; and this isn't doing him any wrong, as whenever he finds the hardship of his thralldom to outweigh the worth of his life, he has the sway to withset his lord, thus bringing him the death that he wants.

24. What I have been betalking is the beshapehood of utter thralldom, which is a right ongoing of the warstead between a lawful overcomer and a haftling. If they enter into any kind of fordraught - thwaring to bordered sway on the one side and hearsomeness on the other - the warstead and thralldom ends for as long as the fordraught is upheld. For, as I have said, no man can by a thwaring hand over to someone else something that he doesn't himself have, namely a sway over his own life.

I acknowledge that we find among the Jews, as well as other thedes, befallings where men sold themselves, but wisly they sold themselves only into drudgery, not thralldom. It is shown that the man who was sold wasn't thereby put at the ruth of an utter, willy-nilly lordly sway; for the lord ought at a bestevened time to let the other go free from his besteading, and so he couldn't at any time have the sway to kill him.

Indeed, the lord of this kind of shalk was so far from having a willy-nilly sway over his life that he couldn't even choose to cripple him: the loss of an eye or a tooth set him free (Exodus xxi).

Wordlist

The words in the following spreadsheet are newly built for this leaf writ. They are herein unfolded and their wellsprings given when needful. Words with a star are wholly new and are not inheld in the English Wordbook. Words with a dagger are new oversettings for words already bestanding in the English Wordbook. Loanoversettings from Latin are often forechosen over those from New High German in befallings where the Theedish loanoversetting makes a word that is more bewildering than the Latinish one. However, here inheld are also some of the Theedish new words as other choices. These are marked "alternative", as they are not brooked in this leaf writ.

Chancery English	Kind	Anglish	Wellspring
accord	n	evenheartedness†	(cf. Latin accordāre)
administer	v	carry out†
adopt	v	assume, accept: onnim	(on- + <OE niman, cf. NHG annehmen, Du. aannemen)
aggressor	n	threat† alternative: besetter	(<OE besettan)
ambergris	n	gray burnstone	(cf. NHG Bernstein, "amber" + Frankish gris ,"gray")
annex	v	fasten*	(from Latin annectō, "attach")
appeal	v	beseech†
apply	adj	put to use: forwend†	(cf. NHG verwenden)
appropriate	v	onown*	(cf. NHG aneignen)
arbitrary	adj	willy-nilly†
argument	n	reckoning†
assert	v	forsicker	(cf. NHG versichern, "affirm, insure")
attempt	n	undertaking†
attribute	v	ascrape*	(from "ascribe", NHG zuschreiben, Du. toeschrijven, Latin āscrībō, from ad-, "to" + scrībō, "write". Cognate with Old English screpan, "to scrape, scratch")
authority	n	right†
authorize	v	berighten*	(cf. NHG berechtigen)
barter	v	trade†
beasts of prey	n	flesheating wights*
body politic	n	burgherly body*	(cf. NHG bürgerlich, "civic")
charge	v	bewray†	(<OE bewrēġan)
civilize	v	forborough† alternative: forsteaden	(for- + <OE burh, "stronghold") (cf. NHG verstädtern, "to urbanize")
clause	n	nearquide*	(<OE cwide + cf. NHG Nebensatz, "clause", from neben-, "near" + Satz, "set")
commodity	n	good* quemeness*	(from Latin commodus "suitable; convenient; opportune, timely" +‎ -itas; <OE cwēman, "to gratify, satisfy")
common	adj	meansome†
commonwealth	n	meanwealth†
communion	n	onehood†
concern	v	lit, cover: betee*	(<OE betēon, "cover", cf. NHG beziehen)
conserve	v	forwatch	(cf. Latin conservare "to keep, preserve", from com- intensive prefix + servo "keep watch, maintain")
condition	n	physical state: beshapehood† prerequisite: forewarding†	(cf. NHG Beschaffenheit) (cf. Du. Voorwaarde + -ing)
consistent	adj	evenhearted†	(cf. Latin accordāre)
contend	v	stride†	(cf. NHG streiten)
contrive	v	becast*	(<ME bicasten, conflated with OE costnian)
convenience	n	quemeness*	(<OE cwēmnes, cwēman, "to gratify, satisfy"; cognate of NHG Bequemlichkeit, "comfort")
convict	v	befind†	(<ME befinden)
convince	v	overrede†	(cf. NHG Überreden)
correspond	v	match* swap letters: withanswer*	(from Middle French correspondre, from Latin com-, "with" + respondeo "to match, to answer to") (cf. NHG entsprechen, Latin comrespondeo)
criminal	n	misdoer†
criminal offense	n	lawbreaking misdeed†
declare	v	forkithe†	(cf. NHG verkünden)
demand	v	forlong*	(cf. NHG verlangen)
detail	n	onefoldhood†	(cf. NHG Einzelheit)
devise	v	becast†	(<ME bicasten, conflated with OE costnian)
digest	v	fordew* melt*	(cf. NHG verdauen, from OHG dewen, "liquefy") (<OE meltan, "melt, dissolve, digest")
disadvantage	n	misforedealing†
discuss	v	betalk†
dispose of	v	deal out†
due	adj	ought*
duty	n	owing*
edible	adj	foodworthy†
effective	adj	worksome†	(cf. NHG wirksam)
encroach	v	oncrook†	(cf. Old French encrochier, "to seize", from en- + crook, <OE *crōc, "hook, bend, crook")
enmity	n	foehood†
enslave	v	enthrall*
espouse	v	fortide*	(cf. Du. verdedigen)
evident	n	shown*
exact	adj	true, spot-on† alternative: forestricken	(from "precise", cf. Latin prae-, "fore-" +‎ caedō, "strike")
forfeit	v	forlese (simple past forlore, past participle forlorn)*	(<OE forlēosan, cognate of Du. verliezen)
hypothesis	n	undersetting*	(cf. Ancient Greek hupótíthēmi, see also: suppose)
impose	v	uplay†	(cf. NHG auferlegen)
infringe	v	forbreak†	(cf. Latin infringere "to break off", from in "in" + frangere "to break")
in league with	adj	tied into*
in relation to	adj	beteeing*	(cf. NHG Beziehung)
inconsistent	adj	unevenhearted*	(cf. Latin accordāre)
inevitable	adj	unformithable*	(from un + "avoidable", cf. NHG vermeidbar)
innocent	adj	sackless†	(<OE saclēas)
intricate	adj	entangled*
judiciary	n	rightnessmoot†
justify	v	rightready†	(cf. NHG rechtfertigen)
legislature	n	lawmoot†
liable	adj	answerable†
malice	n	illwill†
mandate	n	updraught, updraft*	(cf. NHG Auftrag, "mission")
mandate	v	assign, authorize: updraw*	(cf. NHG auftragen)
maxim	n	overforthput*	(from Latin propositio maxima, "greatest proposition")
mercantile	adj	waresome*	(from Latin merx, "merchandise, commodity, goods" + -some)
mutual	adj	likewise†
noxious	adj	scathel*	(<OE sceaþol)
object	v	gainstand†
offense	n	misdeed*
offend	v	beset*
oppose	v	againstand, transitive†
oppress	v	thrack	(<OE þryccan)
oppression	n	underthrack†	(<OE þryccan, cf. NHG unterdrücken, Du. undertrykke)
opt out of	v	offlean*	(cf. NHG ablehnen, "decline, reject")
ordinary	adj	usual, customary: wontsome*
orthodoxy	n	straightlief*	(cf. Greek orthódoxos; straight + opinion, <OE lēafa)
pact	n	fordraught, fordraft* tolerate, bear, endure: fordraw	(cf. NHG Vertrag, "treaty") (cf. NHG vertragen, "endure")
paragraph	n	quidecluster*	(from <OE cwide, "sentence" + cluster)
pass on	v	bequeath†
passion	n	heartdraught, heartdraft*	(cf. Du. hartstocht)
penalty	n	strafe*	(<NHG strafe, "punishment")
perpetrate	v	wreak*
pitcher	n	crock*	(<OE crocca, "crock, pot, vessel")
plain	adj	flat*
point of view	n	outlook* alternative: onsight	(cf. NHG Ansicht)
positive	adj	forthput* alternative: upstold	(cf. Latin positivus, "emplaced") (cf. NHG aufstellen, "postulate, set up")
practice	n	deed†
principle	n	firstlief†	(cf. Latin prīncipium + <OE lēafa)
proportionate	adj	evenly meted*
protect	v	foreheal†	(cf. Latin protegere + NHG verhelen, "cover in front")
provision	n	stocked good, good	(from Latin prōvīsiō, "preparation, foresight" and preparō, "arrange in advance"; goods stocked in foresight of their need)
pulpit	n	flatscape*	(cf. Latin pulpitum, "platform")
punitive	adj	strafely*
quarrel	n	fight*
question	v	becall*	(obs, challenge)
ratio	n	forhold*	(cf. NHG Verhältnis, Nor. forhold)
reason	n	wisdom†
reasonable	adj	wise†
regulate	v	steady†	(as in, "to make regular")
relieve	v	help*
reparation	n	goodmaking*	(cf. NHG wiedergutmachen)
respectively	adv	beteeingwise	(cf. NHG beziehungsweise)
rule	n	guideline*	(from Latin rēgula, "ruler")
section	n	cleaving*	(from Latin sectio, "cutting, excision")
sober	adj	undrunk*
solemn	adj	earnest*
sordid	adj	dirty*	(from Latin sordidus, "dirty")
source	n	wellspring*
sowable	adj	fieldworthy*
state	n	stead*
strict	adj	tight†	(from Latin strictus, "drawn tight")
subdue	v	underbring
subject	n	undertan*	(cf. NHG Untertan)
subordinate to	adj	set below*
subsist	v	understead* alternative: bestand	(cf. Latin subsistere, from sub "under" + sistere "to cause to stand, place" + bestead, "to support, help") (cf. NHG bestehen)
succeed	v	afterfollow*	(<OE æfterfolgian)
suppose	v	underset† alternative: onnim	(cf. Latin supponere, "to put under", see also: hypothesis) (cf. NHG annehmen, Du. aannemen)
tenant	n	dweller*
term	n	end*	(from Latin terminus, "bound", "end")
theory	n	outlook*	(cf. Greek theōréō and Latin speculātus, "look out")
theoretical	adj	outlookwise*
thesis	n	a statement supported by arguments: offhandling*	(cf. Da. afhandling)
topic	n	evin†	(from Scots evin, "matter, subject matter, substance", cognate with Swedish ämne "subject, substance, material, topic")
transgress	v	overstep†	(cf. Latin trānsgredior, "step beyond")
trouble	n	bestirring†	(from Latin turba, "stir", as in, "an effort taken beyond the norm")
unbiased	adj	evenhanded*
uncertain	adj	unsound†
unconditional	adj	forewardless*	(cf. Du. Voorwaarde + -less)
unjust	adj	wrong*
unquestionable	adj	unbecallable*	(obs, unchallengeable)
unreasonable	adj	unwise*
usual	adj	wontsome†	(<OE ġewunod, from wunian "to dwell, be accustomed to" + -some)
venture	v	undertake*
vermin	n	wormkin†	(from Latin vermis, "worm" + -kin)
violence	n	wald†	(<OE ġeweald, cf. NHG Gewalt, Sw. våld)