I wouldn't leave it in the French, because...

Even though there certainly *should* be (and most probably is) a corresponding legal term for it in English, since the English "feudal system" worked much the same as the French), the O.E.D. doesn't recognize the word "aveu", so it would appear that that particular word was never in use in England.

If we take apart the defintion of "AVEU" found in The Tresor de l'Langue Fr. :

Droit féodal.

Acte d'un vassal reconnaissant quelqu'un pour seigneur, duquel il déclarait tenir tel heritage,

[This sounds like the act of "homage" --"Formal and public acknowledgement of allegiance, wherein a tenant or vassal declared himself the man of the king or the lord of whom he held, and bound himself to his service" (OED)-- and/or of "fealty" --"The obligation of fidelity on the part of a feudal tenant or vassal to his lord".]

généralement suivi du dénombrement, description détailée des biens composant le fief.

[A "fief" being "An estate in land... held on condition of homage and service to a superior lord, by whom it is granted and in whom the ownership remains; a fief, feudal benefice." OED aside, fiefs could also be made up of things other than real estate, as I'll explain later.]

It looks to me like it is this second, "enumeration" or "description" (or even "census") of the specific pieces of property *or rights* (either or both of which could be held "in fee" or "in fief") which we are dealing with in your quotation.

There is a dispute between the Viscount of Brosse and his immediate overlord, the Lord of Piégut over the rights which the Viscount's Provost in St. Wherever had over the church of that place, which rights included the collection of 50 livres of annual rent.

A detailed description of the fief held by the Viscount in 1552 (which gave him these rights) conflicts with another description --this one of the fief held by the Lords of Piégut and Lavaupot-- which gives *them* (or him) the rights over this church.

I take it that the same Lord held (from a Count, Duke, the King, whoever) the fiefs of both Piégut and Lavaupot, and he was, in turn, the overlord of the Viscount of Brosse, who was, in turn the overlord of the Provost of St. Wherever.

Feudal Law could get very, very complicated.

It already was pretty complicated by 1552, and, 437 years later, it took a Revolution to Straighten it All Out --by simply scraping the whole thing and Starting Over.

I mentioned above that virtually *anything* --not just real estate-- could be held "in fief" : I've seen cases of all sorts of rights to things being held in return for some service or other.

What we have in this case, I believe, is a classic case of "subinfudation" ("The granting of lands [SIC: or rights] by a feudatory to an inferior to be held of himself, on the same terms as he held them of his superior; the relation or tenure so established"), as the Lords of Piégut gave [or didn't give, depending upon which _aveu_ is to be believed] the rights over St. Wherever to the Viscounts of Brosse, who, in turn, hired (or enfiefed) a Provost to exercise those rights in his name.

Clear?

What more can I say?

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs 25 mins (2004-05-29 17:46:21 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

Well, there is the obsolete word \"allegiance\", which the precious OED defines as :

2. The relation or duties of a liege-man to his liege-lord; the tie or obligation of a subject to his sovereign, or government.

But the instances of use cited don\'t seem to refer to a specific *document* or description of what those duties/obligations/rights might have been :

1399 Langl. Rich. Redeless i. 9 Of alegeaunce now lerneth a lesson oþer tweyne Wherby it standith and stablithe moste;

1494 Fabyan vii. 324 He had, contrary his allegeaunce, made homage vnto Lewys.

1593 Shaks. 2 Hen. VI, v. i. 179 Hast thou not sworne Allegeance unto me?

1651 Hobbes Leviath. i. xii. 60 Subjects may be freed from their Alleageance.

1768 Blackstone Comm. I. i. x. 284 Natural allegiance is therefore perpetual.

1824 Dibdin Libr. Comp. 115 To take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy.

1845 Stephen Laws of Eng. II. 399 We shall now pass from the duties of the sovereign to those which are owing to him from his people, and which are comprehended in the single word allegiance.

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs 30 mins (2004-05-29 17:50:42 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

So I would just translate the passages as \"the Viscount of Brosse, in the description of his fief in 1552...\" (I *know* that\'s twisting the text somewhat, but it is necessary to get around using a term which is not recognizable in English.)

And \"According to the description of the fief of the Lords of Lavaupot...\"

--------------------------------------------------
Note added at 7 hrs 36 mins (2004-05-29 17:57:01 GMT)
--------------------------------------------------

So I would just translate the passages as \"the Viscount of Brosse, in the description of his fief in 1552...\" (I *know* that\'s twisting the text somewhat, but it is necessary to get around using a term which is not recognizable in English.)

And \"According to the description of the fief of the Lords of Lavaupot...\"