LEVELLO. – This name was given to a special form of agricultural contract, by which a grantor (livellante) conferred the usufruct of a piece of land upon a grantee (livellario) for a fixed period of time, under specific conditions, with the obligation of an annual payment (canon) as consideration.
1. The level is a form of emphyteusis (q.v.), slightly modified. In the Middle Ages, it was the most widely diffused type of agricultural concession in Italy, and may therefore be considered the characteristic medieval form of Italian emphyteusis. It was known as the pacium par excellence. It was also called precaria, a term under which it was known and widely used even outside Italy. The name derived from the form of the instrument originally used in the stipulation of the contract, as it became customary to request the concession of the land by means of a written petition addressed to the grantor, called libellus, charta, pagina libelli, etc. Sometimes, the level was written by the grantor himself, in which case the tradition of it marked the perfection of the transaction; at other times, there were two libelli, exchanged mutually between grantor and livellario as records of the concession having taken place. The term level, more often libellaria, was also used to denote the relationship arising from the contract, as well as the canon representing the consideration. The relationship was also frequently indicated by the periphrasis of tenere or colere per chartam or per libellum: lands thus granted were said to be inchartati or libellati. In the level, as in emphyteusis, at the time of stipulation the livellario was required to give the grantor the calciario, also called libellaticum or intratura, originally represented by a pair of shoes, a symbol of the consideration due for the concession.
2. Beginning in the early Middle Ages, with the transition of landed property from the collective and family regime characteristic of the barbarian-Germanic peoples to the form of private individual ownership, the original concept of unitary ownership was gradually replaced by the concept of divided ownership, which, by accentuating the Romanistic distinction between usus and dominium, between enjoyment of the thing and dominion over it, had led to the characteristic medieval distinction between direct dominion and useful dominion, giving rise to a notable complex of new relationships, among which, alongside benefice, emphyteusis, feud, and other similar forms of possession, the level held special prominence. It is already mentioned in documents of the 6th century. It is spoken of, for example, by St. Gregory the Great in his letters and by Cassiodorus in the Varia.
It is held that originally ecclesiastical benefice had its first expression, under the name of precaria, in a level relationship between a bishop, as grantor, and a cleric in charge of souls, as grantee, and that from this the level originated (c. 72, C. 12, q. 2; cc 4-6, C. 10, q. 2, etc.); however, the ecclesiastical origin of this contract seems undeniable. The fact is that the Church made extensive use of it to put its lands to productive use, and promoted its introduction and diffusion, precisely because, due to the specific differences that distinguished it from emphyteusis—especially the temporariness of the bond and the pact of reversion in favor of the grantor—it proved to be the form of concession most suited to safeguarding the canonical principle of the inalienability of ecclesiastical goods, for which, while allowing the alienation of the usufruct, it maximally protected ownership.
3. Originally, the level was a contractual relationship that granted the grantee the enjoyment of a real right with the corresponding possessory protection, and had the approximate character of a lease ad laborandum et meliorandum, as stated in the formulas of the time. In this, it was chiefly distinguished from emphyteusis, which corresponded almost to a veiled alienation. But later, when the livellati were granted ownership of the lands, the feudal relationship supervened, the level canon became a real encumbrance, and the concession transaction was called investiture.
Unlike emphyteusis, the level was normally for a fixed term, generally not exceeding 25 years. There were, however, some fixed for longer periods, for the entire life of the grantee or even for an indefinite term. Upon expiration of the term, the contract was not considered terminated, but had to be renewed. The periodic renewal, introduced in levels of indefinite term to safeguard the owner’s right against prescription, was called recognitio in dominium and involved, at the time of performance, the payment to the grantor of a small canon (laudemium), which could be a new symbolic calciario. The right of withdrawal of the livellario at the end of the contract was sometimes agreed upon. In ecclesiastical levels, the pact of reversion in favor of the grantor was always included.
4. The rights and duties were substantially the same in emphyteusis and in the level, except that in the latter other burdens and servitudes accompanied the canon. The livellario was obliged to perform field work, maintain the land in good condition, and promote necessary improvements, which then remained acquired to the land itself, i.e., to the owner. Taxes and the annual canon (census, iustitia, dominica) were incumbent upon him; this canon generally consisted of a share of the produce proportional to the land, almost never of a sum of money. In the feudal age, it was sometimes more a symbolic recognition than a commercially assessable reality. The full usufruct of the land represented the right of the livellario. This right was transmissible to legitimate heirs, but its alienation and transfer to unrelated heirs was not permitted without the owner’s consent. Often, however, sub-leasing in level to third parties was allowed. The relationship could be extinguished either by mutual agreement of the parties or by forfeiture. Originally, failure to pay the canon resulted in forfeiture of the level. Later, however, penalties were substituted in the contract itself. In more recent times, laws of redemption of the canon were also causes of extinction.
5. With the end of the Middle Ages, a gradual legal regulation of the level began, which gradually led to its fusion with emphyteusis. A revival of considerable importance occurred only in the 18th century, in Tuscany, with the level system introduced by Pietro Leopoldo. By the time of the codifications, its identification with emphyteusis could be said to be complete. The Napoleonic Code transformed levels into perpetual rents. The Italian Civil Code of 1865 did not distinguish them from emphyteusis (arts. 1556-67); it nevertheless wished to preserve the original regulation of those constituted in earlier times, while granting the right of redemption (Trans. Dispos. arts. 29, 30). In the current Code, only emphyteusis is considered (arts. 957-77). The CIC likewise ignores the level as an autonomous figure of contract, so that the old levels are subject to the canonical norms on emphyteusis (can. 1542; q.V. ENFITEUSI).