FRANCIS HOTOMAN,
Franco-Gallia: Or, an Account of the Ancient Free State of France, and most other Parts of Europe, before the Loss of their Liberties (1574, 1721)

[1]

CHAP. I.↩

The State of Gaul, before it was reduced into a Province by the Romans.

My Design being to give an Account of the Laws and Ordinances of our Francogallia, as far as it may tend to the Service of our Commonwealth, in its present Circumstances; I think it proper, in the first place, to set forth the State of Gaul, before it was reduced into the Form of a Province by the Romans: For what Cæsar, Polybius, Strabo, Ammianus, and other Writers have told us concerning the Origin, Antiquity and Valour of that People, the Nature and Situation of their Country, and their private Customs, is sufficiently known to all Men, tho' but indifferently learned.

We are therefore to understand, that the State of Gaul was such at that time, that neither was the whole under the Government of a [2] single Person: Nor were the particular Civitas, a Commonwealth. Commonwealths under the Dominion of the Populace, or the Nobles only; but all Gaul was so divided into Commonwealths, that the most Part were govern'd by the Advice of the Nobles; and these were called Free; the rest had Kings. But every one of them agreed in this Institute, that at a certain Time of the Year a publick Council of the whole Nation should be held; in which Council, whatever seem'd to relate to the whole Body of the Commonwealth was appointed and establish'd. Cornelius Tacitus, in his 3d Book, reckons Sixty-four Croitates; by which is meant (as Cæsar explains it) so many Regions or Districts; in each of which, not only the same Language, Manners and Laws, but also the same Magistrates were made use of. Such, in many Places of his History, he principally mentions the Cities of the Ædui, the Rhemi and Arverni to have been. And therefore Dumnorix the Æduan, when Cæsar sent to have him slain, began to resist, and to defend himself, and to implore the Assistance of his Fellow Citizens; often crying out, That he was a Freeman, and Member of a Free Commonwealth, lib. 5. cap. 3.

To the like purpose Strabo writes in his Fourth Book: Ἀριστοκρατικαὶ δ' ἦσαν αἱ πλείους τῶν πολιτειῶν, ἔνα δ' ἡγεμόνα ἡρούντο κατ' ἐνιαυτόν τὸ παλαιόν ὡς δ' αὕτως εἰς πόλεμον ἐἷς ὑπὸ τοῦ πλήθους ἀπεδείκνυτο στρατηγός. "Most of the Commonwealths (says he) were govern'd by the Advice of the Nobles: but every Year they anciently chose a Magistrate; as also the People chose a General to manage their Wars." The like Cæsar, lib. 6. Cap. 4. writes in these Words: "Those Commonwealths which are esteem'd to be under the best Administration, have made a Law, that if any [3] Man chance to hear a Rumour or Report abroad among the Bordering People, which concerned the Commonwealth, he ought to inform the Magistrates of it, and communicate it to no body else. The Magistrates conceal what they think proper, and acquaint the Multitude with the rest: For of Matters relating to the Community, it was not permitted to any Person to talk or discourse, but in Council."—Now concerning this Common Council of the whole Nation, we shall quote these few Passages out of Cæsar. "They demanded, (says he) lib. 1. cap. 12. a General Council of all Gallia to be summon'd; and that this might be done by Cæsar's Consent." Also, lib. 7. cap. 12.—"a Council of all Gallia was summon'd to meet at Bibracte; and there was a vast Concourse from all Parts to that Town."—And lib. 6. cap. 1—"Cæsar having summon'd the Council of Gaul to meet early in the Spring, as he had before determin'd: Finding that the Senenes, Carnates and Treviri came not when all the rest came, he adjourned the Council to Paris."—And, lib 7. cap. 6. speaking of Vercingetorix,—"He promis'd himself, that he shou'd be able by his Diligence to unite such Commonwealths to him as dissented from the rest of the Cities of Gaul, and to form a General Council of all Gallia; the Power of which, the whole World should not be able to withstand."

Now concerning the Kings which ruled over certain Cities in Gallia the same Author makes mention of them in very many Places; Out of which this is particularly worthy our Observation: That it was the Romans Custom [4] to caress all those Reguli whom they found proper for their turns: That is, such as were busy men, apt to embroil Affairs, and to sow Dissentions or Animosities between the several Commonwealths. These they joined with in Friendship and Society, and by most honourable publick Decrees called them their Friends and Confederates: And many of these Kings purchased, at a great Expence, this Verbal Honour from the Chief Men of Rome. Now the Gauls called such, Reges, or rather Reguli, which were chosen, not for a certain Term, (as the Magistrates of the Free Cities were) but for their Lives; tho' their Territories were never so small and inconsiderable: And these, when Customs came to be changed by Time, were afterwards called by the Names of Dukes, Earls, and Marquisses.

Of the Commonwealths or Cities, some were much more potent than others; and upon these the lesser Commonwealths depended; these they put themselves under for Protection: Such weak Cities Cæsar sometimes calls the Tributaries and Subjects of the former; but, for the most part he says, they were in Confederacy with them. Livius writes, lib. 5. that when Tarquinius Priscus reigned in Rome, the Bituriges had the principal Authority among the Celtæ, and gave a King to them. When Cæsar first enter'd Gaul, A.U.C. 695. he found it divided into Two Factions; the Ædui were at the Head of the one, the Arverni of the other, who many Years contended for the Superiority: But that which greatly increas'd this Contention, was, Because the Bituriges, who were next Neighbours to the Arverni, were yet in file & imperio that is, Subjects and Allies to the Ædui. On [5] the other hand, the Sequani (tho' Borderers on the Ædui) were under the Protection of the Arverni, lib. 1. Cap. 12. lib. 6. cap. 4. The Romans finding such-like Dissention; to be for their Interest; that is, proper Opportunities to enlarge their own Power, did all they cou'd to foment them: And therefore made a League with the Ædui, whom (with a great many Compliments) they titled Brothers and Friends of the People of Rome. Under the Protection and League of the Ædui, I find to have been first the Senones, with whom some time before the Parisians had join'd their Commonwealth in League and Amity. Next, the Bellouaci, who had nevertheless a great City of their own, abounding in Numbers of People, and were of principal Authority and Repute among the Belgæ, lib. 2. cap. 4. and lib. 7. cap. 7. Cæsar reckons the Centrones, Grudii, Levaci, Pleumosii, Gordunni, under the Dominion of the Nervii, lib. 5. cap. 11. He names the Eburones and Condrasii as Clients of the Treviri, lib. 4. cap. 2. And of the Commonwealth of the Veneti (these are in Armorica or Brittanny) he writes, that their Domination extended over all those Maritime Regions; and that almost all that frequented those Seas were their Tributaries, lib. 3. cap. 2. But the Power of the Arverni was so great, that it not only equall'd that of the Ædui, but a little before Cæsar's Arrival, had got most of their Clients and Dependents from them, lib. 6 cap. 4. lib. 7. cap. 10. Whereupon, as Strabo writes in his 4th Book, they made War against Cæsar with Four hundred thousand Men under the Conduct of their General Vercingetorix. These were very averse to Kingly Government: So that Celtillus, Father to Vercingetorix, [6] a Man of great Power and Reputation (reckon'd the first Man in all Gaul,) was put to Death, by Order of his Commonwealth, for aspiring to the Kingdom. The Sequani, on the other hand, had a King, one Catamantales, to whom the Romans gave the Title of their Friend and Ally, lib. 1. cap. 2. Also the Suessiones, who were Masters of most large and fertile Territories, with 12 great Cities, and cou'd muster Fifty thousand fighting Men, had a little before that time Divitiacus, the most potent Prince of all Gallia for their King; he had not only the Command of the greatest Part of Belgæ, but even of Britanny. At Cæsar's Arrival they had one Galba for their King, lib. 2. cap. 1. In Aquitania, the Grandfather of one Piso an Aquitanian reigned, and was called Friend by the People of Rome, lib. 4. cap. 3. The Senones, a People of great Strength and Authority among the Gauls, had for some time Moritasgus their King; whose Ancestors had also been Kings in the same Place, lib. 5. cap. 13. The Nitiobriges or Agenois, had Olovico for their King; and he also had the Appellation given him of Friend by the Senate of Rome, lib. 7. cap. 6.

But concerning all these Kingdoms, one thing is remarkable, and must not lightly be past by; which is That they were not hereditary, but conferr'd by the People upon such as had the Reputation of being just Men. Secondly, That they had no arbitrary or unlimited Authority, but were bound and circumscribed by Laws; so that they were no less accountable to, and subject to the Power of the People, than the People was to theirs; insomuch that those Kingdoms seem'd nothing else but Magistracies for Life. [7] For Cæsar makes mention of several private Men, whose Ancestors had formerly been such Kings; among these he reckons Casticus, the Son of Catamantales, whose Father had been King of the Sequani many Years, lib. 1. cap. 2. and Piso the Aquitanian, lib. 4. cap. 3. also Tasgetius, whose Ancestors had been Kings among the Carnutes, lib. 5. cap. 8.

Now concerning the Extent of their Power and Jurisdiction, he brings in Ambiorix, King of the Eburones, giving an account of it, lib. 5. cap. 8. "The Constitution of our Government is such (says he) that the People have no less Power and Authority over me than I have over the People. Non minus habet in me juris multitudo, quam ipse in multitudinem." Which Form of Government, Plato, Aristotle, Polybius and Cicero have for this Reason determined to be the best and most Excellent: "Because (says Plato) shou'd Kingly Government be left without a Bridle, when it has attained to supreme Power, as if it stood upon a slippery Place, it easily falls into Tyranny: And therefore it ought to be restrained as with a Curb, by the Authority of the Nobles; and such chosen men as the People have empower'd to that End and Purpose."

[8]

CHAP. II.↩

Probable Conjectures concerning the ancient Language of the Gauls.

In this Place it seems proper to handle a Question much disputed and canvass'd by Learned Men; viz. What was the Language of the Gauls in those old Times? For as to what belongs to their Religion, Laws, and the Customs of the People, Cæsar, as I said before, has at large given us an account. In the first place we ought to take notice, that Cæsar, in the Beginning of his Commentaries, where he divides the Gauls into Three Nations, the Belgæ, the Aquitanæ, and the Celtæ, tells us they all differ'd, not only in their Customs, but in their Language: αλλ ένίους μικρόν παραλλάττοντας ταϊς γλώτταις Which also Strabo confirms, lib. 4. where he says they were not όμογλώττους of one Language, but a little differing in their Languages. And the same thing Ammianus Marcellinus testifies in his 15th Book. But what many Learned Men (especially of our own Country) have maintain'd, viz. That the Gauls commonly used the Greek Tongue, may be refuted by this single Instance which Cæsar takes notice of lib. 5. cap. 12. That when Q. Cicero was besieged in his Camp, he dispatched Letters written in the Greek Language, "Lest (if they were intercepted) his Designs shou'd be discover'd by the Gauls." But to this some object, what Strabo writes, lib. 4. viz. "That all Sorts of good Literature (and especially that of the Greek Language) flourish'd at Marseilles to [9] such a degree, that the Gauls, by the Example of the Massilians, were mightily delighted with the Greek Tongue, insomuch that they began to write their very Bargains and Contracts in it." Now to this there is a short and ready Reply: For, in the first place, if the Gauls learnt Greek by the Example of the Massilians, 'tis plain, 'twas none of their Mother-tongue. Secondly, Strabo in the same place clearly shows us, that the Fashion of writing their Contracts in Greek began but in his Time, when all Gallia was in Subjection to the Romans. Besides, he speaks precisely only of those Gauls who were Borderers and next Neighbours to the Massilians, of whom he says, that not only many of their private Men, but even their Cities (by publick Decrees, and proposing great Rewards) invited several Learned Men of Massilia to instruct their Youth.

It remains that we shou'd clear that place in Cæsar, where he tells us the Gauls, in their publick and private Reckonings, Græcis literis usos fuisse. But let us see whether the word Græcis in that place ought not to be left out, not only as unnecessary but surreptitious. Since it was sufficient to express Cæsar's Meaning to have said, that the Gauls made no use of Letters or Writing in the Learning of the Druids, but in all other Matters, and in publick and private Accounts, they did make use of Writing: For uti litteris, to use Letters, is a frequent Expression for Writing among Latin Authors. Besides, it had been a Contradiction to say the Gauls were unskill'd in the Greek Tongue, as Cæsar had averr'd a little before; and afterwards to say, that they wrote all their publick and private Accounts in Greek. As to what many suppose, that the [10] words literis Græcis in that place, are not to be taken for Writing Greek, but only for the Characters of the Letters; I can less approve of this Explanation than the former; because though many ancient Writers (as we just now said) frequently used the Expression, Uti litteris for Scribere; yet I never observ'd, that any of them ever used it to signify the Forms and Fashions of the Characters. Neither does it make at all for their Opinion, what Cæsar says in the First Book of his Commentaries, viz. That there were found in the Helvetian Camp, Tablets, literis Græcis conscriptas; as if the same Person, who had learnt to make use of the Greek Forms of Characters, might not as easily have learnt the Greek Language; or as if there might not be among the Helvetii, Priests or Gentlemens Sons, who might then have learnt Greek, as our's now learn Latin; Greek being at that Time a Language in Vogue and Esteem. The very Neighbourhood of the School of Massilia is sufficient to confute that Opinion: And therefore Cæsar, when he speaks of his own Letter to Cicero, tells us, he sent that Letter written in Greek Characters, lest (in case it were intercepted) his Designs shou'd be discover'd by the Enemy. Justinius, lib. 20. says, there was a Decree of the Senate made, that no Carthaginian, after that Time, shou'd study the Græcis literas. Greek Language or Writing, lest he shou'd be able to speak or write to the Enemy without an Interpreter. Tacitus, in his Book de moribus Germanorum, tells us, that several Tombs and Monuments were yet to be seen in the Confines of Germany and Swisserland with Greek Inscriptions on them. Livius, lib. 9. says, The Roman Boys formerly studied the Tuscan Language, as now they do the Greek. And in his [11] 28th Book,—"Hanibal erected an Altar, and dedicated it with a large Inscription of all his Atchievements, in the Greek and Punick Tongues. Idem Lib. 40. Both Altars and Inscriptions on them in the Greek and Latin Tongues." Lastly, I cannot imagine, that Cæsar wou'd have expressed himself (if he had meant, as these wou'd have him) Græcis literis scribere; but rather, Græcarum literarum formâ, as we see in Tacitus, Lib. 11. "Novas literarum formas addidit." He added new Characters of Letters: Having found, that the Greek Literature was not begun and perfected at once. And again,—"Et forme literis latinis quæ veterrimis Græcorum, &c."

Now lest any body shou'd wonder, how the Word Græcis crept into Cæsar's Text, I will instance you the like Mischance in Pliny, lib. 7. cap. 57. where 'tis thus written,—"Gentium consensus tacitus primum omnium conspiravit ut IONUM literis uterentur." And afterwards,—"Sequens gentium consensus in tonsoribus fuit." And again,—"Tertius consensus est in Horarum observatione." Now who is there that sees not plainly the Word IONUM ought to be left out, as well because 'tis apparently unnecessary, (for Pliny had no farther Design than to let us know, that Men first of all consented in the Writing and Form of their Letters) as because 'tis false, that the Ionian Letters were the first invented; as Pliny himself in his foregoing Chapter, and Tacitus, lib. 11. have told us? I have observed however two Places, (Gregorius Turonensis, lib. 5. and Aimoinus, lib. 3. cap. 41.) wherein 'tis intimated, that the Gauls used the Forms of the Greek Letters: For where they speak of King Chilperick,—"He added (say [12] they) some Letters to our Letters; and those were, ω, ψ, ζ, φ; and sent Epistles to the several Schools in his Kingdom, that the Boys should be so taught." Aimoinus mentions only three Letters, χ, θ, φ. But we must understand, that these were Franks, not Gauls; or rather Franco-gauls, who made use of their own native Language, the German Tongue; not that ancient Language of the Gauls, which had grown out of use under the Roman Government: Besides, if the Francogalli had made use of the Greek Letters, how came they at first to except these, when they made use of all the rest? But we have said enough, and too much of this Matter. As for their Opinion who believe that the Gauls spoke the German Language, Cæsar confutes it in that single place, wherein he tells us, that Ariovistus, by Reason of his long Conversation in Gallia, spoke the Gallick Tongue.

Now for two Reasons their Opinion seems to me to be most probable, who write, that the Ancient Gauls had a peculiar Language of their own, not much differing from the British: First, because Cæsar tells us it was the Custom for these Gauls who had a mind to be thoroughly instructed in the Learning of the Druyds, to pass over into Britain; and since the Druyds made no use of Books, 'tis agreeable to Reason, that they taught in the same Language which was used in Gallia. Secondly, because Tacitus in his Life of Agricola, writes, that the Language of the Gauls and Britains differ'd but very little: neither does that Conjecture of Beatus Rhenanus seem unlikely to me, who believes the Language which is now made use of in Basse Bretayne [Britones Britonantes] to be [13] the Remains of our ancient Tongue. His Reasons for this Opinion may be better learn'd from his own Commentaries, than told in this Place. The Language which we at present make use of, may easily be known to be a Compound of the several Tongues of divers Nations. And (to speak plainly and briefly) may be divided into four Parts. One half of it we have from the Romans, as every one that understands Latin ever so little, may observe: For besides, that the Gauls being subject to the Romans, wou'd naturally fall into their Customs and Language, 'tis manifest that the Romans were very industrious to propagate their Tongue, and to make it universal, and (as it were) venerable among all Nations. And to that End settled Publick Schools up and down, at Autan, Besancon, Lyons, &c. as Valerius Maximus, Tacitus, and Ausonius tell us. The other half of it may be subdivided thus. One third of it we hold from the Ancient Gauls, another from the Franks, and the last from the Greek Language: For it has been demonstrated long since by many Authors, that we find innumerable Frank (that is, German) Words (as we shall hereafter prove) in our daily Speech. And several learned Men have shewn us, that many Greek Words are adapted to our common Use, which we do not owe to the Learning and Schools of the Druyds, (who I believe spoke no Greek); but to the Schools and Conversation of the Massilians, whom we formerly mentioned.

[14]

CHAP. III.↩

The State of Gaul, after it was reduced into the form of a Province by the Romans.

'Tis very well known to all learned Men, that Gaul, after having been often attempted with various Success, during a ten Years War, and many Battels, was at last totally subdued by Cæsar and reduced into the Form of a Province. It was the Misfortune of this most valiant and warlike People, to submit at length to the Great Beast, as it is called in Scripture, with which however they so strove for Empire for eight hundred Years, (as Josephus informs us) that no Wars with any other Nation, so much terrified Rome. And Plutarch in his Lives of Marcellus and Camillus; Appian in his 2d Book of the Civil Wars; Livius, lib. 8. & 10. have recorded, that the Romans were so afraid of the Gauls, that they made a Law, whereby all the Dispensations (formerly granted to Priests and old Men, from serving in their Armies) were made void, in Case of any Tumult or Danger arising from the Gauls: which Cicero takes notice of in his 2d Philippick. Cæsar himself in his 6th Book, and after him Tacitus, lib. de moribus Germanorum, do testify, That there was a time wherein the Gauls excell'd the Germans in Valour, and carried the War into their Territories, settling Colonies (by reason of their great Multitudes of People) beyond the Rhine.

[15]

Now Tacitus in his Life of Agricola, attributes, the Loss of this their so remarkable Valour, to the Loss of their Liberty. "Gallos in bellis floruisse accepimus, mox segnities cum otio intravit, amissa Virtute pariter ac Libertate—." And I hope the Reader will excuse me, if the Love of my Country makes me add that remarkable Testimony of the Valour of the Gauls, mentioned by Justin, lib. 24.—"The Gauls (says he) finding their Multitudes to increase so fast, that their Lands cou'd not afford them sufficient Sustenance, sent out Three hundred thousand Souls to seek for new Habitations. Part of these: seated themselves in Italy; who both took and burnt the City of Rome. Another part penetrated as far as the Shores of Dalmatia, destroying infinite Numbers of the Barbarians, and settled themselves at last in Pannonia. A hardy bold and warlike Nation; who ventured next after Hercules, (to whom the like Attempt gave a Reputation of extraordinary Valour, and a Title to Immortality) to cross those almost inaccessible Rocks of the Alps, and Places scarce passable by Reason of the Cold: Where after having totally subdued the Pannonians they waged War with the bordering Provinces for many Years.—And afterwards—being encouraged by their Success, subdivided their Parties; when some took their Way to Græcia some to Macedonia, destroying all before them with Fire and Sword. And so great was the Terror of the Name of the Gauls, that several Kings (not in the least threatned by them) of their own accord, purchased their Peace with large Sums of Money—. And in the following Book, he [16] says,—So great was the Fruitfulness of the Gauls at that time, that like a Swarm they fill'd all Asia. So that none of the Eastern Kings either ventured to make War without a mercenary Army of Gauls, or fled for Refuge to other than the Gauls, when they were driven out of their Kingdoms." And thus much may suffice concerning their warlike Praises and Fortitude, which (as Tacitus tells us) was quite gone, as soon as they lost their Liberty. Yet some Cities, or Commonwealths, (as Plinius, lib. 4. cap. 11. tells us) were permitted to continue free, after the Romans had reduced Gallia to the Form of a Province. Such were the Nervii, Ulbanesses, Suessiones and Leuci. Also some of the Confederates: and among these he reckons the Lingones, Rhemi, Carnutes and Ædui.

But we may easily learn from these Words of Critegnatus the Arvernian, mentioned by Cæsar, lib. 7. what the Condition was of those Commonwealths, which had the Misfortune to be reduced into the Form of a Province. "If" (says he) "you are ignorant after what manner far distant Nations are used by the Romans, you have no more to do, but to look at our neighbouring Gallia, now reduced into the Form of a Province: Which having its Laws and Customs chang'd, and being subjected to the Power of the Axes, is oppress'd with perpetual Slavery."

We are to understand, there were three kinds of Servitude, or Slavery. First, To have a Garison of Soldiers imposed upon them, to keep them in Awe; yet such Provinces as seemed peaceable and quiet, had no great Armies maintained in them. For Josephus writes in [17] his 2d Book of the Hist. of the Jews, "That in the Emperor Titus's time, the Romans had but 1200 Soldiers in Garison in all Gaul, altho'" (says he) "they had fought with the Romans for their Liberty, almost 800 Years, and had near as many Cities, as the Romans had Garison-Soldiers." A Second Sort of Servitude was, when any Province was made Tributary, and compelled to pay Taxes; and to that End were forced to endure a Number of Tax-gatherers, that is, Harpies and Leeches, which suck'd out the very Blood of the Provincials. Eutropius tells us, in his 6th Book, That Cæsar, as soon as he had subdued Gaul, impos'd a Tax upon it, by the Name of a Tribute, which amounted to H. S. Quadringenties: which is about a Million of our Crowns. A Third Sort of Servitude was, when the Provinces were not permitted to be govern'd by their own Laws; but had Magistrates and Judges, with full Power and Authority (cum imperio & securibus) over Life and Estate, sent them by the People of Rome. This Threefold Slavery not only our Gallia, but all the other Provinces, took most bitterly to heart; and therefore in Tiberius's Reign, not long after Cæsar's Conquest, Tacitus tells us, That the Cities of Gaul rebell'd, because of the Continuance of Taxes, the Extortions of Usurers, and Insolence of the Soldiery. And afterwards in Nero's Reign, Suetonius writes, "That the Gauls being weary of his Tyranny, revolted. The World" (says he) "having for near 13 Years, endured such a Sort of Prince, at last shook him off: The Gauls beginning the Defection." Now all Gallia was divided by the Romans into 16 Provinces, viz. Viennensis, [18] Narbonensis prima, Narbonensis secunda, Aquitania prima, Aquitania secunda, Novempopulana, Alpes maritimæ, Belgica prima, Belgica secunda, Germania prima, Germania secunda, Lugdunensis prima, Lugdunensis secunda, Lugdunensis tertia, Maxima Sequanorum, & Alpes Græcæ, as Antoninus in his Itinerary, and Sextus Rufus, give an Account of them. But Ammianus Marcellinus treats of them more particularly.

But to return to what we were speaking of: 'Tis not to be imagined how grievously, and with what Indignation the Gauls bore the Indecencies and Plunderings of the Romans; nor how frequently they revolted upon that Account and because they were not strong enough of themselves to shake off the Roman Tyranny, 'twas common Custom with them, to hire German Auxiliaries. These were the first beginnings of the Colonies of the Franks; For those Germans, whether they were beaten by the Romans, or (which is more likely) were bought off by them, began by little and little, to settle themselves in the borders of Gallia. This gave to Suetonius, in his Life of Augustus, to say,—"He drove the Germans beyond the River Elb; but the Suevi and Sicambri (submitting themselves); he transplanted into Gallia where he assign'd them Lands near the river Rhine."—Also in his Life of Therius,—"He brought (says he) forty thousand of those that had surrendred themselves in the German War, over into Gallia, and allotted them Settlements upon the Banks of the Rhine."—Neither must we omit what Flavius Vepiscus records, concerning the Reign of Probus the Emperor; in whose time almost all Gallia, that is, sixty Cities, [19] revolted from the Romans; and with common Consent, took up Arms for the Recovery of' their Liberty:—"Having done these things (says he) he march'd with a vast Army into Gaul, which after Posthumus's Death was all in Commotion, and when Aurelianus was kill'd, was In a Manner possessed by the Germans; there he gain'd so many Victories, that he recover'd from the Barbarians sixty of the most noble Cities of Gallia: And whereas they had overspread all Gallia without Controul, he slew near four hundred thousand of those that had seated themselves within the Roman Territories, and transplanted the Remainders of them beyond the Rivers Neckar, and Elb."

But how cruel and inhuman the Domination of the Romans was in Gallia: How intolerable their Exactions were: What horrible and wicked Lives they led; and with how great Inveteracy and Bitterness they were hated upon that Account by the Gauls, (especially by the Christians) may best be learn'd from the Works of Salvianus, Bishop of Marseilles, which treat of Providence: Therefore 'tis incredible to tell, what Multitudes of Germans pour'd themselves into Gallia; the Gauls not only not hindring, but even favouring and calling them in. Latinus Pacatus, in his Speech to Theodesius, has this Passage; "From whence shou'd I begin my Discourse, but from thy Mischiefs, O Gallia! who may'st justly challenge a Superiority in Sufferings, above all the Nations of the Earth, that have been vexed with this Plague?"—Now 'tis most plain both from Sidonius Apollinaris, and especially from the above-mentioned Salvianus, in many Places of [20] his Writings, that our Franks were a Part of those German Nations, who thus entred into Gallia.

CHAP. IV.↩

Of the Original of the Franks; who having possessed themselves of Gallia, changed its Name, into that of Francia, or Francogallia.

The Order of our Discourse requires, that we should now enquire into the Original of the Franks, and trace them from their first Habitations, or (as it were) their very Cradles: In which Disquisition 'tis very much to be admired, that no mention has been made of them by Ptolomy, Strabo, or even by Tacitus himself, who of all Writers was most accurate in describing the Names and Situations of all the German Nations: and 'tis plain, the Franks were a German People, who possessed most part of Europe for many Years, with great Reputation; of which we will quote but a few Instances out of many.

First, Johannes Nauclerus says thus,—"Charles the Great was call'd King of the Franks; which is as much as to say, King of Germany and France." Now 'tis demonstrable, that at that time all Gallia Transalpina, and all Germany from the Pyrenæen Mountains, as far as Hungary, was called Francia: This last was called [21] Eastern France, the former Western France; and in this all true Historians agree.

Eguinarthus, in his Life of Charlemain, says,—"The Banks of the River Sala, which divides the Taringi from the Sorabi, were afterwards inhabited by those called the Eastern Franks." Otto Frising. Chron. 5. cap. 4. speaking of King Dagaber's Reign, "The Bounds of the Franks Dominions reach'd now (says he) from Spain, as far as Hungary, being two most noble Dukedoms, Aquitania and Bavaria";—but much more at large, lib. 6. cap. 17. And after him Godfrey of Viterbo, in his Chronic. part. 17. sub Anno 881, "Arnulphus (says he) ruled all Eastern Francia, which is now called the Teutonick Kingdom, or Germany; that is to say, Bavaria, Suabia, Saxonia, Turingia, Frisia and Lotharingia; but Odo was king of Western France." Again, sub Anno 913. "It is apparent by the Authority of many Writers, that the Kingdom of Germany, which the Emperor Frederick at present holds, is part of the Kingdom of the Franks; for there (on both sides of the Rhine) the first Franks were seated; which as far as to the Limits of Bavaria, is now called Eastern France: But Western France is that Kingdom which lies on both Sides the Rivers Seine and Loire"—And again he says, "In the time of Charles the Great, King of the Franks, all Gallia, that is, Celtica, Belgica, and Lugdunensis and all Germany which reaches from the Rhine as far as far as Dalmatia, made but one Kingdom; which was called Francia"—Almost all which Quotations have been taken out of Otto, as I said before. 'Tis to be noted, that Rhegino writes thus, in [22] Chron. anni 577.—"After the Death of King Pipin, Lewis his Son (who had been present at his Father's Decease and celebrated his Funerals) kept his Residence at Francfort, the principal Seat of the Eastern Kingdom." Luitprandus Ticinensis says, lib. 1. cap. 6.—"It was order'd that Wido shou'd have for his Share, that which Men call the Roman France, and Berengarius shou'd have Italy." And a little after,—"When he had march'd thro' the Territories of the Burgundians, he purposed to enter Roman France, &c." Now it was call'd Roman France, first, because the Franks had possessed themselves of that Gallia, which was under the Roman Obedience. Secondly, because the Roman Language prevail'd in that Country, as we formerly told you: Whence arose the Saying, Loqui Romanum, of such as used not the German or Frank; but the Latin Tongue. Otto Frisingius, chron. 4. cap. penult. says,—"It seems to me, that those Franks who dwell in Gallia, borrowed the Language, which they make use of to this Day, from the Romans; for the others who stay'd about the Rhine, and in Germany use the Teutonick Tongue."—And in Imitation of him, Godfridus, part. 17. cap. 1.—"The Franks (says he) seem to me to have learn'd the Language which they make use of to this Day, from the Romans, who formerly dwelt in those Parts—." From all these 'tis apparent, that the Reputation and Power of the Franks was extraordinary great; as 'twas fitting for such as were Masters of a great Part of Europe.

Moreover we find, that those Germans which were transplanted by the Emperor Frederick [23] the IId, into the Kingdoms of Naples and Sicily, and establish'd there as a presidiary Colony, were called Franks. Petrus de Vineis, lib. epist. 6. cap. 25. These are only broken pieces of Sentences, to prove, that the Germans (establish'd in Naples and Sicily) were called, and actually were Franks. —"Following (says he) the Law and Custom of the Franks, in this Instance, that the Eldest Brother to the Exclusion of all the Younger succeeds, even in the Camp it self." Imp. Freder. 2. Neapol. constit. lib. 2. tit. 32. speaking of those Franks, "who upon Occasion trusted the Fortune of their Lives, and of all their Estates, to the Event of a Duel, or single Combat." And again,—"The aforesaid manner of Proof, which all who observe the Rites of the Franks made use of"—.Also lib. 2. tit. 33.—"which Law, our Will is, shall in all Causes be common both to the Franks and Longobards."

Matters being thus plain, 'tis strange that Gregory Bishop of Tours (who writ concerning the Original of the Franks 800 Years ago) shou'd say, in the first Part of his History, That altho' he had made diligent Enquiry about the Rise and Beginning of the Franks, he could find nothing certain: notwithstanding he had seen an ancient Book of a certain Historian of theirs, called, Salpitius Alexander; who affirms nothing, either of their first Habitations, or the Beginnings of their Domination.

But we have found out, that these People originally came from that Country which lies between the Rhine and the Elb, and is bounded on the West by the Sea, almost in the same Tract where the greater and the lesser Chauci dwelt. "A People (says Tacitus) the most noble among all the Germans, who founded their [24] Greatness and maintained it by Justice." These were next Neighbours to the Batavians; for 'tis agreed on all Hands, that the Franks had their first Seats near the Sea-shore, in very marshy Grounds; and were the most skilful People in Navigation, and Sea-fights, known at that time: Whereof we have the following Testimonies. First, in Claudian, who congratulating Stilicon's Victory, writes thus;

—Ut jam trans fluvium non indignante Chayco Paseat Belga pecus, mediumque ingressa per Albin Gallica Francorum montes armenta pererrent.

In which Place he makes use of a Poetical License, and calls those People Chayci, which the Geographers call Chauci. Now that they were seated near the Sea, that Panegyrical Oration made to Constantine the Great, is a Testimony: "Quid loquar rursus, &c. What should I speak more of those remote Nations of the Franks, transplanted not from Places which the Romans of old invaded; but plucked from their very original Habitations, and their farthest Barbarous Shores, to be planted in the waste Places of Gallia; where with their Husbandry, they may help the Roman Empire in time of Peace; and with their Bodies, supply its Armies in time of War—." And in another Panegyrick, by Eumenius the Rhetorician, we find this Passage, "Aut hæc ipsa, &c. Or this Country, which was once overspread with the Fierceness of the Franks, more than if the Waters of their Rivers, or their Sea, had cover'd it;" but now ceases to be barbarous, and is civilized. To the same Purpose is Procopius Testimony, in his first Book [25] of the Gothick War; for where he describes the place where the Rhine falls into the Ocean; "In these Parts (says he) there are great Marshes, where of old the Germans dwelt; a barbarous People, and at that time of small Reputation, which now are called Franks—." And Zonaras, in the 3d Tome of his Annals, quotes this very Passage of Procopius. Also Flavius Vopiscus, in his Life of Probus, tells us, That the Franks were discomfited by Probus in their inaccessible Marshes.—Testes sunt Franci inviis strati paludibus. Also Sidonius Apollinaris says thus;

"Francorum & penitissimas paludes,
Intrares venerantibus Sicambris."

Now what we have said concerning the Neighbourhood of the Franks to the Chauci, may be plainly proved by comparing of Places, and the Descriptions of their particular Seats. Those of the Chauci are described by Pliny, lib. 16. cap. 1. Those of the Franks by the Rhetorician Panegyrist, above mentioned: For Pliny says thus, "We have seen in the Northern parts the Nations of the Chauci, called Majores & Minores, where twice every 24 Hours the Ocean is forcibly driven in a great way over the Land; thro' a vast Passage which is there, making it a perpetual Controversy of Nature; and a Doubt, whether it ought to be reckon'd part of the Land or of the Sea."

The Panegyrist speaks in these Terms, "—Quanquam illa Regio, &c. When thy noble Expeditions, O Cæsar, have proceeded so far, as to clear and conquer that Country, [26] which the Rhine runs through, with his cunning Mæanders or Windings, [Meatibus callidis, for so it must be read, and not Scaldis, as in some Copies,] and embraces in his Arms a Region, which I can scarce call Land; 'tis so soak'd with Water, that not only the Marshy part of it gives way, but even that which seems more firm, shakes when trod upon, and trembles at a Distance under the Weight of the Foot."

We think therefore we have made it plain from what Seats the Nation of the Franks first came into Gallia; that is to say, from that marshy Country which lies upon the Ocean, between the Rivers Elb and Rhine: which may be further confirm'd by this Argument. That the Franks were very well skill'd in maritime affairs, and sail'd far and near all about those Coasts; For so says Eutropius, lib. 9. where he gives a short History of the Emperor Galienus. "After this time, when Carausius had in charge to scour the Sea-coasts of Belgia and Armorica, then infested by the Franks and Saxons, &c." The very same thing Paulus Orosius mentions, lib. 7. Also what the Panegyrist, before cited, says in a certain Place, has Reference to this.— "The Franks (says he) are cruel above all others; the tide of whose warlike Fury surmounting that of their very Ocean it self, carried them to the Sea-coasts of Spain, which they very much infelted with their Depredations." And therefore the Emperor Justinian, when he explains to the General Governor of Africk the duty of his Office, makes mention of those Franks which were seated in a certain part of Gallia, bordering upon Spain.

[27]

But we find a very memorable Passage; which highly sets forth the great Glory of their war-like Atchievements, in another place of that Panegyrick; viz. That a small Body of Franks, which Probus, the Emperor had overcome and carried captive into Pontus, seiz'd on some Ships, wandred all about the Sea-coasts of Græcia and Asia, invaded Sicily, took Syracusa, and afterwards laden with Booty, return'd into the Ocean thro' the Streights of Gibraltar. "Recursabat in animos sub Divo Probo & paucorum ex Francis Captivorum incredibilis audacia, & indigna foelicitas: qui à Ponto usque correptis navibus, Græciam Asiamque populati, nec impunè plerisque Lybiæ littoribus appulsi, ipsas postremò navalibus quondam victoriis nobiles ceperant Syracusas: & immenso itinere permensi, Oceanum, qua terras rupit intraverant: atque ita eventu temeritatis, offenderant, nihil esse clausum piraticæ desperationi quò navigiis pateret accessus."

And, as farther Arguments of what I have been proving, may be added all those Places in several Authors, which inform us that the Habitations of the Franks were Bordering upon the Batavians. The same Rhetorician, in his Speeches to Maximianus and Constantine, says,—"Many thousand Franks, who had crossed the Rhine, and invaded Batavia, with other Countries on this Side, were slain, driven out, or carried away captive."

Besides there is a notable Instance in Corn. Tacitus, lib. 20. where speaking of the Neighbourhood of Frisia and Batavia to each other, he mixes the Caninesates among them, whose Custom in Electing their Kings was, (as I shall hereafter shew) the very same with that of the [28] Franks.—"Ambassadors (says he) were sent to the Caninesates, to persuade them to enter into the Confederacy: That People inhabit one part of the Island, equal as to their Descent, Laws and Valour, to the Batavians; but inferior in Number.—And again—Brinnio being set upon a Shield (according to the Custom of the Country) and hoisted up on Men's Shoulders, was chosen their Commander." Which Words will prove of no small Authority for us, when we come hereafter to that Part of the Controversy.

The Case being so; I cannot forbear wondring at the Opinion of the Learned Andreas Tarnebus, who despising the Authority of so many grave and ancient Writers, says, that he thinks the Franks were originally of Scandinavia: because in Ptolomy he finds the Phirassi seated in that Peninsula, which Word he will needs suppose to be corrupted; and that, instead of it, the Word Franci ought to be there: but brings no Reason for his Opinion more than his own mere guess, tho' this Opinion differs manifestly from all other ancient Authors.

As to all those who are pleas'd with Fables, and have deduced the Original of the Franks from the Trojans, and from one Francion, a Son of Priam, we can only say, that they furnish Materials for Poets rather than Historians: And among such, William Bellay deserves the first Place; who, tho' he was a Person of singular Learning and extraordinary Ingenuity; yet in his Book, which treats of the Antiquities of Gallia and France, seems rather to have design'd a Romance, like that of Amadis, than a true History of the Francogallican Affairs.

[29]

CHAP. V.↩

Of the Name of the Franks, and their sundry Excursions; and what time they first began to establish a Kingdom in Gallia.

But I think it requisite that we should enquire a little more carefully into this Name of Franks; which, as we told you before, is not to be found in any of the ancient Descriptions of Germany. That I may no longer detain the Reader in Suspence, it must needs be, that either the Nation of the Franks, by which such mighty things were done, was at first very obscure and mean, (as we see in Switz, an ordinary Village) yet because the first beginning of the Liberty of those Countries proceeded from thence, gave the name of Switzers to all the rest of the Cantons: Or (which seems to me most probable) this Appellation had its Original from the Occasion; viz. When those that set up for the prime Leaders and Beginners, in recovering the publick Liberty, called themselves Franks; by which name the Germans understood such as were Free, and under no Servitude; as the Writers of that Nation do unanimously hold: And therefore in ordinary Speech, by a Frank was meant a Freeman, by a Franchise, an Asylum, or Place of Refuge; and Francisare signified to restore to liberty and freedom. The first Proof we shall give of this, is, what Procopius in his first Book of the Gothick [30]Wars relates. The Franks (says he) were anciently by a general name call'd Germans; but after they exceeded their Limits, they obtain'd the name of Franks: Of the same Opinion I find Gregory of Tours, the Abbot of Ursperg; Sigibertus and Ado of Vienne, and Godfrey of Viterbo to have been, viz. That they had the Name of Franks from their freedom, and from their ferocity, (alluding to the sound, of the words Francos Feroces), because they refused to serve as Soldier under Valentinian the Emperor, and to pay Tribute as other Nations did. A second Proof may be that of Cornelius Tacitus, who in his 20th Book, speaking of the Caninesates, whom we have formerly demonstrated to have been the very-next Neighbours, if not the true Franks themselves, and, of their Victory over the Romans, he has this expression: Clara ea victoria, &c. "That Victory (says he) was of great Reputation to them immediately after it, and of great Profit in the Sequel; for having by that Means got both Weapons and Ships into their Possession, which before they were in great want of; their Fame was spread over all Germany and Gaul, as being the first beginners of liberty;" Libertatis Auctores celebrabantur. For the Germans thereupon sent Ambassadors, offering their Assistance. May the Omen prove lucky! and may the Franks truly and properly deserve that name; who after having shaken off that Yoke of Slavery, imposed upon them by Tyrants, have thought fit to preserve to themselves a commendable liberty even under the Domination of Kings: For to obey a King is not servitude: neither are all who are govern'd by Kings, presently for that Reason to be counted Slaves, but such as submit themselves to the [31] unbounded Will of a Tyrant, a Thief, and Executioner, as Sheep resign themselves to the Knife of the Butcher. Such as these deserve to be called by the vile names of Servants and Slaves.

Therefore the Franks had always Kings, even at that very time when they profess'd themselves the vindicators and assertors of the publick liberty: And when they constituted Kings, they never intended they shou'd be Tyrants or Executioners, but keepers of their Liberties, Protectors, Governors and Tutors. Such, in short, as we shall describe hereafter, when we come to give an Account of the Francogallican Government.

For, as to what a certain, foolish and ignorant Monk, called John Turpin, has wrote (in his Life, or rather Romance of Charlemagn) concerning the Origins of the Word Frank, viz. That whoever contributed Money towards the Building of St. Denis's Church, should be called Francus, that is, a freeman, is not worthy of being remembred, no more than all the rest of his trifling Works; stuft'd full of old Wives Tales, and meer Impertinencies.

But this may be truly affirm'd, that this name of Franks, or (as Corn. Tacitus interprets it) Authors of Liberty, was an Omen so lucky and fortunate to them, that through it they gain'd almost innumerable Victories. For after the Franks had quitted their ancient Seats upon that glorious Design, they deliver'd not only Germany, their common Country, but also France from the Tyranny and Oppression of the Romans; and at last (crossing the Alps) even a great part of Italy itself.

The first mention made of this illustrious name, we find in Trebellius Pollios Life of the Emperor Gallienus, about the 260th Year after [32] Christ. His Words are these: "Cum, &c. Whilst Gallienus spent his time in nothing but Gluttony and shameful Practices, and govern'd the Commonwealth after so ridiculous a manner, that it was like Boys play, when they set up Kings in jest among themselves; the Gauls, who naturally hate luxurious Princes, elected Posthumus for their Emperor, who at that time was Gallienus's Lieutenant in Gaul with imperial Authority. Gallienus thereupon commenced a War with Posthumus; and Posthumus being assisted by many Auxiliaries, both of the Celtæ and the Franks, took the Field along with Victorinus—." By which Words we may plainly perceive, that the Gauls crav'd the Assistance of the Franks; that is, of these Authors or Beginners of liberty, to enable them to shake off the Tyrant Gallienus's Yoke: Which same thing Zonaras hints at in his Life of Gallienus, when he says, ἐπολέμισε δὲ ϕράγγοις &c.—We find another mention made of the same People in Flavius Vopiscus's Life of Aurelian, in these Words:—"At Mentz the Tribune of the 6th Legion discomfited the Franks, who had made Incursions, and overspread all Gallia; he slew 700, and sold 300 Captives for Slaves."—For you must not expect that our Franks, any more than other Nations in their Wars, were constantly victorious, and crown'd with Success. On the contrary, we read that Constantine, afterwards call'd the Great, took Prisoners two of their Kings, and exposed them to the Wild Beasts at the publick shews. Which Story both Eutropius in his 9th Book, and the Rhetorician in that Panegyrick so often quoted, make mention of.

[33]

And because the same Rhetorician in another place speaks of those Wars in the Confines of the Batavi, which we have shewn not to be far distant from the Franks, I will set down his Words at Length. Multa Francorum millia, &c. "He slew, drove out, and took Prisoners many thousand Franks, who had invaded Batavia, and other Territories on this side the Rhine." And in another Place says, "He clear'd the Country of the Batavians, which had before been possess'd by several Nations and Kings of the Franks; and not satisfied with only overcoming them, he transplanted them into the Roman Territories, and forced them to lay aside their Fierceness as well as their Weapons." From which place we are given to understand, not obscurely, that Constantine, (being constrain'd to do so by the Franks) granted them Lands within the Bounds of the Roman Empire. Ammianus, lib. 15. writes, that the Franks, during the Civil Wars between Constantine and Licinius, sided with Constantine, and fought very valiantly for him. And in other places of the same Book he records, that during the Reign of Constantine, the Son of Constantine, great numbers of Franks were at that Court in high favour and authority, with Cæsar. "Afterwards, says he, Malarichus on a sudden got power, having gained the Franks; whereof at that time great numbers flourish'd at Court."—During the Reign of Julian, call'd the Apostate, the same Franks endeavour'd to restore the City of Cologne (which was grievously oppress'd by Roman Slavery) to its liberty: and forced it, after a long Siege, to surrender thro' Famine; as the same Ammianus tells us, lib. 12. And because one Band of those Franks fix'd their [34] Habitations upon the Banks of the River Sala, they were thereupon called Salii; concerning whom he writes in the same Book,—"Having prepar'd there things, he first of all march'd towards the Franks; I mean those Franks which were commonly called Salii, who had formerly with great boldness fix'd their Habitations within the Roman Territories, near a place called Toxiandria." Again, in his 20th Book he makes mention of that Country possess'd by the Franks beyond the Rhine, and called Francia.—"Having on a sudden pass'd the Rhine, he enter'd the Country of those Franks called Attuarii, a turbulent sort of People, who at that time made great Havock on the Frontiers of Gallia."—And in his 30th Book, where he speaks of King Macrianus, with whom Valentinian the Emperor had lately made a Peace on the Banks of the Rhine, in the Territory of Mentz,—"He died, says he, in Francia, whilst he was utterly wasting with Fire and Sword all before him, being kill'd in an Ambush laid for him by that valiant King Mellobandes." Now of this Mellobandes, King of the Franks, the same Author in his following Book gives this Character; "That he was brave and valiant, and upon the score of his Military Virtue constituted great Master of the Houshold by the Emperor Gratianus, and Lieutenant-General (in conjunction with Nannienus) of that Army which was sent against the Lentiates, a People of Germany." Afterwards, by virtue of a Treaty concluded between the Franks and the Emperor Honorius, they defended the Frontiers of the Roman Gallia against Stilicon: For Orosius tells us in his last Book, "That the Nations [35] of the Alani, Suevi and Vandali, being (together with many others) encouraged by Stilicon; pass'd the Rhine, wasted the Territories of the Franks, and invaded Gallia."

After the Emperor Honorius's time, we have very little in History extant concerning the Frank's Warlike Deeds. For to those Times must be apply'd what St. Ambrose writes in his Letter (the 29th) to Theodesius the Emperor: That the Franks both in Sicily and many other Places, had overthrown Maximus the Roman General. "He (says he, speaking of Maximus) was presently beaten by the Franks and Saxons in all places of the Earth." But in the Reign of Valentinian the 3d, that is, about the 450th Year of Christ, 'tis plain, by the consent of all Writers, that Childeric, the Son of Meroveus, King of the Franks, compleated the Deliverance of Gallia from the Roman Tyranny, after a continued Struggle of more than 200 Years; and was the first that established in Gallia a firm and certain Seat of Empire: For altho' some reckon Pharamond and Clodio-crinitus as the first Kings of the Franks, yet without doubt there were many before them, who (like them) had cross'd the Rhine, and made Irruptions into Gallia: but none had been able to settle any peaceable Dominion within the Limits of Gallia. Now Meroveus, who is commonly reckon'd the 3d King; tho' he was indeed King of the Franks, yet he was a Stranger and a Foreigner, not created King in Gallia, not King of the Francogalli; that is to say, not elected by the joint Suffrages of both Nations united: In short, all these were Kings of the Franci, and not of the Francogalli. But Childeric, the Son of Meroveus, was (as we said [36] before) the first that was elected by the publick Council of the associated Franks and Gauls, and he was created King; of Francogallia presently after his Father Meroveus had been kill'd in a Battel against Attila, during the Reign of Valentinian the Third, a dissolute and profligate Prince. At which time the Angli and Scoti took Possession of Great Britain; the Burgundians of Burgundy, Savoy and Dauphine; the Goths of Aquitain: the Vandals of Africk and Italy, nay of Rome it self; the Hanni under their Leader Attila wasted Gallia with Fire and Sword. This Attila having an Army of about Five hundred thousand Men, over-ran all Gallia as far as Thoulouse. Ætius was at that time Governor of Gallia, who fearing the Power of Attila, made a League with the Goths, and by their assistance defeated Attila in a Battel; wherein, 'tis said, they slew no fewer than a Hundred and eighty thousand Men. But the Conqueror Ætius being suspected by Valentinian of aspiring to the Empire, was afterwards, by his Command, put to Death; and within a little while after, he himself was slain by Maximus before-mention'd.

During these Transactions, Meroveus, King of the Franks, taking his Opportunity, pass'd the Rhine, with a great Army; and joyning in Confederacy with many Cities, who assisted in the common Cause of the publick Liberty, possess'd himself at length of the innermost Cities belonging to the Celtæ, between the Seine and the Garonne. He being dead, and both Nations (the Gauls and Franks) united into one Commonwealth; they unanimously elected Childeric, the Son of Meroveus, for their King, placing him upon a Shield according to [37] ancient Custom; and carrying him upon their Shoulders thrice round the place of Assembly, with great Acclamations of Joy, and universal Congratulation, saluted him King of Francogallia. Of all which particulars, Sidonius Apollinaris, Gregorius Turonensis, Otto Frising, Aimoinus and others are Witnesses; whose Testimonies we shall further produce, when we come to treat of the Manner of the Inauguration of the King.

The Words of the same Otto, in the last Chapter but one of his 4th Book concerning their taking possession of several Cities, are these.—"The Franks, after having pass'd the Rhine, in the first place put to flight the Romans, who dwelt thereabouts; afterwards they took Tournay and Cambray, Cities of Gallia; and from thence gaining ground, by degrees they subdued Rheims, Soissons, Orleans, Cologne and Triers." And thus much may briefly be said touching the first King of Francogallia. To which we shall only subjoin this Remark: Hotoman's Francogallia was written Anno 1573. That altho' the Francogallican Kingdom lasted from that time to this, almost One thousand two hundred Years; yet during so long a space, there are but three Families reckon'd to have possess'd the Throne, viz. the Merovingians; who beginning from Meroveus, continued it to their Posterity two hundred eighty three Years. The Carlovingians, who drawing their Original from Charles the Great, enjoy'd it 337 Years: And lastly, the Capevignians, who being descended from Hugh Capet, now rule the Kingdom, and have done so for Five hundred and eighty Years past.

[38]

CHAP. VI.↩

Whether the Kingdom of Francogallia was hereditary or elective; and the manner of making its Kings.

But here arises a famous Question; the Decision of which will most clearly show the Wisdom of our Ancestors.—Whether the Kingdom of Francogallia were Hereditary, or conferr'd by the Choice and Suffrages of the People, That the German Kings were created by the Suffrages of the People. Cornelius Tacitus, in his Book Demoribus Germanorum, proves plainly; and we have shown, that our Franks were a German People: Reges ex nobilitate, Duces ex virtute sumunt; "Their Kings (says he) they chuse from amongst those that are most eminent for their Nobility; their Generals out of those that are Famous for their Valour:" Which Institution, 1574. to this very day, the Germans, Danes, Sweeds and Polanders do retain. They elect their Kings in a Great Council of the Nation; the Sons of whom have this privilege (as Tacitus has recorded) to be preferr'd to other Candidates. I do not know whether any thing cou'd ever have been devised more prudently, or more proper for the Conversation of a Commonwealth, than this Institution. For so Plutarch, in his Life of Sylla, plainly advises. "Even (says he) as expert Hunters not only endeavour to procure a Dog of a right good Breed, but a Dog that is known to be a right good Dog himself; or a Horse [39] descended from a generous Sire, but a tryed good Horse himself: Even so, those that constitute a Commonwealth, are much mistaken if they have more regard to kindred, than to the qualification of the Prince they are about to set over them."

And that this was the Wisdom of our Predecessors in constituting the Francogallican Kingdom, we may learn, First, from the last Will and Testament of the Emperor Charlemagn, publish'd by Joannes Nauclerus and Henricus Mutius; in which there is this Clause—"And if any Son shall hereafter be born to any of these, my three Sons, whom the People shall be willing to Elect to succeed his Father in the Kingdom; My Will is, that his Uncles do consent and suffer the Son of their Brother to reign over that portion of the Kingdom which was formerly his Father's." Secondly, What Aimoinus, lib. I. cap. 4. says, of Pharamond, commonly counted the first King of the Franks, in these Words.—"The Franks electing for themselves a King, according to the custom of other Nations, raised up Pharamond to the Regal Throne." And again, lib. 4.—"But the Franks took a certain Clerk or Priest called Daniel; and as soon as his Hair was grown, establish'd him in the Kingdom, calling him Chilperic." And lib. 4. cap. 67.—"King Pipin being dead, his two Sons, Charles and Carlomannus, were elected Kings by the consent of all the Franks." And in another place—"As soon as Pipin was dead, the Franks having appointed a solemn Convention, constituted both his Sons Kings over them, upon this foregoing condition, that they should divide the whole Kingdom equally between them."— [4] And again, after the Death of one of the Brothers—"But Charles, after his Brother's Decease, was constituted King by the consent of all the Franks." Also, towards the end of his History of Charles the Great, he says, "The Nobility of the Franks being solemnly assembled from all parts of the Kingdom; he, in their presence, called forth to him Lewis King of Aquitain, (the only one of Heldegardis's Sons then living) and by the advice and consent of them all, constituted him his Associate in the whole Kingdom, and Heir of the Imperial Dignity." Thus much out of Aimoinus.

Many Testimonies of the like nature we find in Gregorius Turen whereof we shall cite only these few following, lib. 2. cap. 12.—"The Franks (says he) having expelled Childeric; unanimously elected Eudo for their King."—Also lib. 4. cap. 51.—"Then the Franks (who once looked towards Childebert the Elder) sent an Embassy to Sigebert, inviting him to leave Chilperic and come to them, that they by their own Authority might make him King."—And a little after—"The whole Army was drawn up before him; and having set him upon a Shield, they appointed him to be their King."—And in another place—"Sigebert agreeing to the Franks Proposals, was placed upon a Shield, according to the Custom of that Nation, and proclaimed King; and so got the Kingdom from his Bother Chilperic"—And presently after—"The Burgundians and Austrasians concluded a Peace with the Franks, and made Clotharius King over them in all the three Kingdoms," Which particular the Abbot of Ursperg confirms. "The Burgundians (says he) and Austrasians having [41] struck up a Peace with the Franks, advanced Clotharius to be King and sole Ruler of the whole Kingdom."—And in another place—"The Franks appointed one of his Brothers, called Hilderic, who was already King of the Austrasians, to be also their King."

To this matter belongs what Luitprandus Ticinensis writes, lib. i. cap. 6. "And when he was about to enter into that Francia which is called Roman, (after having cross'd the Countries of the Burgundians) several Ambassadors of the Franks met him, acquainting him that they were returning Home again; because being tired with long expectation of his coming, and not able any longer to be without a King, they had unanimously Chosen Odo or Wido, tho' 'tis reported the Franks did not take Wido upon this occasion for their King, &c."

But concerning this Odo, the Story is memorable which Sigibert relates; from whence we may more clearly be inform'd of the manner of their rejecting their King's Son, and "setting up another in his stead." For (sub anno 890.) he says thus— "But the Franks neglecting Charles the Son of Lewis the Stammerer, a Boy scarce ten years old; Elected, Odo for their King, who was Son of Duke Robert, slain by the Normans." Also Otto Frinsing, Chronic. lib. 6. cap. 10. "The Western Franks (says he) with the consent of Arnolphus, chose for their King Odo a valiant Man, and Son of Robert."—Also in the Appendix to Gregory of Tours, lib. 15. cap. 30. "After the Death of Dagobert, Clodoveus his Son obtain'd his Father's Kingdom, being at that time very young, and all his Leudes (that is, Subjects) rais'd him to the Throne, [42] in Villa Masolano."—Also Sigebert, in chronic. anno 987.—"Lewis King of the Franks being dead, the Franks had a mind to transfer the Kingdom to Charles the Brother of Lotharius; but whilst he spent too much time, deliberating with his Council concerning that Affair, Hugo acquires the Kingdom of the Franks, &c." There are many Testimonies, of the same Kind in Ado, viz. anno 686.—"Clodoveus the King dying, the Franks elect Clotarius his Son for their King." And again, —"Clotarius having reigned four Years, died, in whose stead the Franks elected Theodorick his Brother—." Again, anno 669. "The Franks establish'd in the Kingdom a certain Clerk, called Daniel, having caused him to quit his Tonsure and Orders, and name him Chilperic." And again,—"The Franks appoint, as King over them, Theodoric the Son of Dagobert"—. Also Otto Frising chron. 6. cap. 13.—"Otto (says he) King of the Franks being dead, Charles was created King by unanimous Consent—." The Appendix to Greg. Turon. lib. 11. cap. 101. says thus, "When Theodoric was dead, the Franks elected Clodoveus his Son, who was very young, to be their King." And cap. 106. "But the Franks appoint one Chilperick to be their King." Also Godfrey of Viterbo, chron. part. 17. cap. 4.—"But Pipin in being elected by the Franks, was declared King by Pope Zacharias, they having thrust their cowardly King Hilderic into a Monastery."

From these Proofs, and very many others like them, I think 'tis most plain, that the Kings of Francogallia were made such rather by the Suffrages and Favour of the People, than by any [43] Hereditary Right. Of which a farther Argument may be the Forms and Ceremonies used by our Ancestors, at the Inauguration of their Kings. For we observe, the very same Custom was continued at the Election of our Kings, which we told you before out of Cornelius Tacitus, was formerly practised by the Caninesates, (the Franks own Country-men) viz. that they set their Elected King upon a Shield, and carried him on high on Men's Shoulders. So did we; for whoever was chosen by the Votes of the People, was set upon a Shield, and carried thrice round the place of publick Meeting for Election, or round about the Army on Men's Shoulders, all the People expressing their joy by Acclamations, and clapping of Hands. Greg. Turen. lib. 2. where he makes mention of King Clodoveus's Election,—"But they (says he) as soon as they heard these things, applauding him both with their Hands and Tongues, and hoisting him on a Shield, appointed him to be their King—." Also lib. 7. cap. 10. where he speaks of Gondebaldus,—"And there (says he) placing their King upon a Shield, they lifted him up; but 'tis reported, that as they were carrying him round the third time, he fell down; so that he was scarcely kept from tumbling to the very Ground by those that stood about him." Of which Accident Aimoinus, lib. 3. cap. 6. gives us this Account,—"They called forth Gondebaldus, and according to the Custom of the ancient Franks, proclaimed him their King, and hoisted him on a Shield; and as they were carrying him the third time round the whole Army, of a sudden they fell down with him, and could scarce get him up again [44] from the Ground—." The like says Ado. Vien. Ætat. 6.—"Sigebertus consenting to the Franks, was placed upon a Shield, according to the Custom of that Nation, and proclaimed King": And peradventure from hence arose that Form among those Writers, who treat of the Creation of a King;—In Regem elevatus est.

But now we come to the third Part of this Controversy, in order to understand, how great the Right and Power of the People was, both in making and continuing their Kings. And I think it is plainly prov'd from all our Annals, that the highest Power of abdicating their Kings, was lodged in the People. The very first that was created King of Francogallia, is a remarkable instance of his Power. For when the People had found him out to be a profligate lewd Person, wasting his time in Adulteries and Whoredoms, they removed him from his Dignity by universal Consent, and constrain'd him to depart out of the Territories of France: and this was done, as our Annals testify, in the Year of Christ 469. Nay, even Eudo, whom they had placed in his stead, abusing his Power thro' excessive Pride and Cruelty, was with the like Severity turned out. Which Fact we find attested by Gregory of Tours, lib. 2. cap. 12. Aimoinus, lib. 1. cap. 7. Godfrey of Viterbo, part. 17. cap. 1. Sigibertus, sub annis 461, & 469. "Childeric (says Gregorius) being dissolved in Luxury, when he was King of the Franks, and beginning to deflower their Daughters, was by his Subjects cast out of the Throne with Indignation; whereupon he finding they had a Design to kill him, fled into Thoringia." But the Abbot of Ursperg says, "the People were unwilling to kill him, but [45] contented themselves with having turn'd him out, because he was a dissolute Man, and a Debaucher of his Subjects Daughters—." Sigibertus says,—"Hilderick behaving himself insolently and luxuriously, the Franks thrust him out of the Throne, and made Ægidius their King."

And this most glorious and famous Deed of our Ancestors, deserves the more diligently to be remark'd, for having been done at the very Beginning, and as it were, the Infancy of that Kingdom; as if it had been a Denunciation, and Declaration, that the Kings of Francogallia were made such, upon certain known terms and Conditions; and were not Tyrants with absolute unlimited and arbitrary Power.

Their Successors also, keeping up the same Custom, in the Year of Christ 679, forced Childeric, their Eleventh King, to Abdicate, because he had behaved himself insolently and wickedly in his Government. And he having formerly caused a certain Nobleman, called Bodilo, to be tied to a Stake and whipp'd, without bringing him to a Tryal, was a few Days after slain by the same Bodilo. Our Authors are Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 44. Trithemius, anno 678. and Sigebertus, anno 667.

The Severity of our Ancestors appear'd in the same Manner a little while after, in the Instance of their 12th King Theodoric; who being a wicked and covetous Prince, "the Franks (says Aimoinus) rose up against him, and cast him out of the Kingdom, cutting off his hair by force," lib. 4. cap. 44.—Ado, Ætat. 6. anno 696. but Sigebertus sub anno 667. imputes a great many of his Crimes to Ebroinus his Favourite and chief General. Præfectus Regius. "King Theodorick" [46] (says he) "was deposed by the Franks, because of the Insolence of Ebroinus, and his Brother Hilderick was with unanimous Consent chosen King." And Ado says, "The Franks cast Theodorick out of the Kingdom, shaved Ebroinus in the Monastery of Lexovium, and afterwards raised Childerick to be King over them." Also the Appendix to Greg. of Tours, lib. II. cap. 64.—"The Franks rise up in Arms against Theodorick, cast him out of the Kingdom, and cut off his Hair: They shaved also Ebroinus."

The like Virtue our Ancestors exerted in the Case of Chilperick their 18th King, whom they forced to abdicate the Kingdom, Regno se abdicare coegerunt. and made him a Monk, judging him unworthy to sit at the Helm of so great an Empire, Propter inertiam. by reason of his Sloth. Whereof Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 61. Sigibertus and Trithemius, anno 750. and Godfrey, Chronic. part. 17. cap. 4. are our Witnesses.

Again, a sixth Example of the like Severity is extant in Charles the Gross their 25th King; who for the like Cowardise, and because he had granted away part of France to the Normans, suffering his Kingdom to be dismembred, was Ab optimatibus Regni repudiatas. rejected and turn'd out by the Nobility and Gentry of the Kingdom, as Sigebertus tells us anno 890. Which same thing Godfridus records, part. 17. But more at large Otto Frising, chron. 6. cap. 9. where he adds this memorable Passage,—"This Man (says he) who next to Charles the Great, had been the King of greatest Power and Authority of all the Kings of the Franks, was in a short time reduced to so low a Condition, that he wanted Bread to eat, and miserably begged a small Allowance from Arnolphus, who was chosen King in his stead, [47] and thankfully accepted of a poor Pension: From whence we may observe the uncertain and miserable State of all Human Greatness; that he who had govern'd all the Eastern and Western Kingdoms, together with the Roman Empire, shou'd at last be brought down to such a Degree of Poverty, as to want even Bread." A Seventh Instance is Odo the 26th King, who after he had been elected King in the Room of Charles the Son of Lewis the Stammerer, was in the 4th Year of his Reign, by the Franks, banish'd into Aquitain, and commanded to abide there; they replacing in his stead the same Charles the Son of Lewis. Which Fact is recorded by Sigebertus, sub anno 894. Aimoinus lib. 5. cap. 42. and Godfridus part. 17.

We must add to this Number Charles the 27th King, sirnamed (because of his Dullness) Propter Stuporem ingenii. Charles the Simple: Who having thro' his Folly suffer'd his Kingdom to run to Decay, and lost Lorrain (which he had before recover'd) was taken and cast into Prison, and Rodolphus was chosen in his place, as Aimoinus, lib. 5. cap. 42. and Sigebertus, anno 926. do testify.

[48]

CHAP. VII.↩

What Rule was observ'd concerning the Inheritance of the deceased King, when he left more Children than one.

All that we have above said, tends to prove, that the Kingdom of Francogallia in old times, did not descend to the Children by Right of Inheritance (as a private Patrimony does); but was wont to be bestow'd by the Choice and publick Suffrages of the People: So that now there is the less Room left for the Question,—What Rule was observed in Relation to the Children of the deceased King, when he left more than one behind him. For since the Supreme Power nor only of Creating, but also of dethroning their Kings, was lodged in the Convention of the People, and Publick Council of the Nation; it necessarily follows, that the ordering the Succession (whether they should give it entirely to one, or divide it) was likewise in the People. Altho' in this place another Question may arise, viz. supposing the People shou'd reject the Son of their King, and elect a Stranger, whether any thing should be allowed to the first to maintain his Dignity? For the Solution, of which 'tis to be understood, that Lawyers reckon four Kinds of such Goods, as may be properly said to be under the King's In Regis ditione. Governance; viz. the Goods of Cæsar, the Goods of the Exchequer; the Goods of the [49] Publick, and Private Goods. The Goods of Cæsar are such as belong to the Patrimony of every Prince, not as he is King, but as he is Ludovicus, or Lotharius, or Dagobertus. Now this Patrimony is called by the Gallican Institutions, The King's Domain; which cannot be alien'd, but by the Consent of the publick Council of the Nation, as we shall make it appear hereafter, when we come to treat of the Authority of that Council. The Goods of the Exchequer are such as are given by the People, partly to defend the King's Dignity, and partly appropriated to the Uses and Exigencies of the Commonwealth. The Goods of the Publick (as the Lawyers call them) are such as inseparably belong to the Kingdom and Commonwealth. The private Goods are reckon'd to be such Estate, Goods and Fortune, as are esteemed to belong to every Father of a Family. Therefore upon the Death of any King, if the Kingdom be conferr'd on a Stranger, the Patrimonial Estate, as Lawyers call it, (being what was not in the King's Power to alienate) shall descend by Inheritance to his Children: But that which belongs to the Kingdom and Commonwealth, must necessarily go to him who is chosen King, because it is part of the Kingdom. Altho' it may be reasonable, that Dukedoms, Counties, and such like (by Consent of the publick Convention of the People) may be assigned to such Children for the Maintenance of their Quality; as Otto Frising, Chron. 5. cap. 9. and Godfrey of Viterbo, tell us, That Dagobert Son of Lotharius being made King, assigned certain Towns and Villages near the Loire, to his Brother Heribert for his Maintenance. Which Aimoinus confirms, lib. 4. cap. 17. and further [50] adds, that he made a Bargain with him, to live as a private Person, and to expect no more of his Father's Kingdom. Also in his 61. chap. where he speaks of King Pipin, "He bestowed (says he) some Counties on his Brother Grison, according to the Order of the Twelve Peers." And to this belongs what Greg. Turon. writes, lib. 7. cap. 32.—"Gondobaldus sent two Ambassadors to the King with consecrated Rods in their hands, (that no Violence might be offer'd them by any body, according to the Rites of the Franks) who spoke these Words to the King, Gondobaldus says, he is a Son of King Clotharius, and has sent us to claim a due Portion of his Kingdom."

But to return to the Question, as far as it relates to the Succession of the Kingdom; I can find out no certain Rule or Law in Francogallia touching that Matter; because (as I said before) the Kingdom was not hereditary. 'Tis true, that in many Noble Patrimonies there was what we call Fiefs, Feuda; as Otto Frising. lib. 2. cap. 29. observes, "'Tis the Custom (says he) in Burgundy, which is also in most of the other Provinces of France, that the Authority of the Paternal Inheritance always falls to the Elder Brother, and his Children, whether Male or Female; the others looking on him as their Lord—." And that the same was practised among the whole Nation of the Franks, Petrus de Vincis, lib. epist. 6. epist. 25. and in other Places of his Writings, sets forth at large. But in the Succession of the Kingdom a different Rule was observ'd. For our Records do testify, that in old times the Kingdom of Francogallia, upon the Death of the King, was very often, [51] not bestowed by the People on any one of his Sons, but divided into convenient Parcels, and a part assigned to each of them. Therefore when Clodoveus the 2d King dyed, anno 515. who left four Sons, Theodorick, Clodoveus, Childebert, and Clotharius, we find the Kingdom was thus divided among them; Theodorick had the Kingdom of Metz for his Share, Clodoveus that of Orleans, Clotharius that of Soissons, and Childebertus that of Paris, as 'tis recorded by Agathius, lib. hist. 1. Greg. Taron. lib. 3. cap. 1. Aimoinus lib. 2. cap. 1. Rhegino sub anno 421.

Again, after the Death of Clotharius the 4th King, the Kingdom was divided among his four Sons. So that Cherebertus had that of Paris: Guntranus, Orleans: Chilpericus, Soissons: and Sigebertus that of Rheims—, Greg. lib. 4. cap. 22. Aimoinus lib. 3. cap. 1. Rhegino sub anno 498.

On the other hand, Otto Frising. chron. 5. cap. 9. and God. Viterb. tell us, That about the Year 630, when Lotharius the 7th King died, Dagobertus his Son reigned singly in France, and assigned to his Brother Heribert some Cities and Villages on the River Loire, for his Maintenance. For from Clodoveus's Time till now, the Kingdom of the Franks was confusedly subdivided among the Sons, and the Sons Sons, each of which reigned over the part allotted him.—"The Extent of the Kingdom of the Franks reaching now from Spain, as far as to Hungary: Dagobert being sole King of all the Franks, gave Laws to the Bavarians." So says Godefridus, not without good Grounds, as many wise Men have thought. For, as Justin tells us, lib. 21. "That Kingdom will be much more potent, which remains under the Domination of one Person, [52] than when 'tis divided among many Brothers."

But after some Years, when the Kingdom of the Franks was excessively enlarged on all Sides, and King Pipin was dead, the General Council of the Gauls changed this Method again. Which serves to confirm what we said before; viz. That the whole Power, relating to that Matter, was lodged in that Council. For Eguinarthus, in his Life of Charlemagn, writes thus, "—After King Pipin's Death, the Franks having assembled themselves in a solemn general Convention, did there appoint both his Sons to be their Kings, upon this Condition, that they shou'd equally divide the whole body of the Kingdom between them: And that Charles shou'd reign over that part of it, which their Father Pipin enjoy'd; and Carloman over the other Part which their Uncle held."

Also the Abbot of Ursperg says,—"When Pipin was dead, his two Sons Charles and Carloman, by the Consent of all the Franks, were created Kings, upon Condition, that they shou'd divide the whole body of the Kingdom equally between them.—" The same Method in dividing the Kingdom, was practised after the Death of Charlemagn, as 'tis manifest by his last Will and Testament, recorded by Joannes Nauclerus, and Eguinarthus's History of his Life. Wherein we find almost all Europe so divided among his three Sons, that nothing was assigned either as a Portion or Dower, to his Daughters; but the marrying and providing for them was entirely trusted to the Care and Prudence of their Brothers. Otto Frisingensis, chron. 6. cap. 6. and Rhegino in chron. anno [53] 877. assure us, that the same Manner of dividing the Kingdom was practis'd in East-France, after the Death of King Lewis the Stammerer, in 874. Again, some Years after, anno 880. after King Lewis the 23d King's Death, the very same way of dividing the Kingdom was made use of; which however we are to observe, was not in the Power and Arbitriment of the Kings themselves; but done by the Authority of the Publick Council, as we may easily collect from these Words of Aimoinus, lib. 5. cap. 40. "The Sons (says he) of Lewis, late King of the Franks, met at Amiens, and divided their Father's Kingdom between them, according to the Direction of their faithful Subjects."

From all which Arguments 'tis very plain, that anciently there was no certain Law or Right of Francogallia touching this Matter; but the whole Power of disposing of it was lodged in the Publick Council of the Nation. Indeed afterwards in the Reign of Philip the 3d, (the 41st King) it was ordained, that certain Lordships might be set out and assigned to younger Brothers: But even of this Law there were various Interpretations, and many Controversies arose concerning Daughters; so that we can deliver nothing for certain in this Affair; only thus much we may truly say, That if the Ancient Institution of our Ancestors ought to be our Rule, the Determination of this whole Matter must be left to the Publick General Council of the Nation: that according to the Number of Children, some particular Lordships or Territories, may (by its Authority) be assigned for their Maintenance.

[54]

CHAP. VIII.↩

Of the Salick Law, and what Right Women had in the King's their Father's Inheritance.

Because we have undertaken to give an Account of the Law and Right of Regal Inheritance, we must not omit making Mention of the Salick Law; which is both daily discours'd of by our Countrymen, and in the Memory of our Forefathers serv'd to appease a great and dangerous Contention, which arose touching the Succession to the Crown. For when (Anno 1328.) Charles the Fair, Son of Philip the Fair, died, leaving his Wife with Child of a Daughter, (which some Months after was born) Edward King of England (Son of Isabella, the Daughter of Philip the fair, and Sister to Charles lately dead) claimed the Inheritance of his Grandfather's Kingdom as his Right. But Philip of Valois, Cousin germain by the Father's Side to the deceased King, standing up, alledged that there was an ancient Regal Law, called the Salick Law, by which all Women were excluded from the Inheritance of the Crown. Now this Law both Gaguinus and other Writers of like Stamp tell us, was written by Pharamond; and he calls it a most famous Law, even to his Time. For in his Life of Philip of Valois; "The Salick Law (says he) was a Bar to Edward's Title; which Law being first given by Pharamond to the Franks, has been religiously observed, even to those Days. By [55] that Law, only the Heirs Male of our Kings are capable of governing the Kingdom, and no Females can be admitted to that Dignity. The Words of that Law are these: Nulla hereditatis portio de terrâ Salicâ ad mulierem venito; Let no Part of the Inheritance of Salick Land come to a Woman. Now (says Gaguinus) the French Lawyers call Salick Land, such as belongs only to the King, and is different from the Alodial which concerns the Subjects; to whom, by that Law, is granted a free Dominion of any thing, not excluding the Princely Authority." And to the same Purpose, not only almost all the Francogallican Historians, but even all the Lawyers and Pettifoggers have wrote to this Day, as Paponius testifies, Arrest. lib. 4. cap. 1. So that now the mistake has prevailed so far, as to have obtain'd the Force of a Law. To explain this, it must be remembred (which we formerly gave an Account of) that the Franks had two Seats of their Empire, and two Kingdoms; One in France, which remains to this Day; The other beyond the Rhine, near the River Sala; from whence they were called Salii, and Salici Franci (joyning the two Names together) but for the most part briefly Salici; the Kingdom of these last, and even their very Name is in a Manner extinct. Ammianus Marcellinus makes mention in his History (as we told you before) of these Salii, and shews, that they are called the Eastern Franks, as the others were called the Western. Now as there were two Kingdoms of the Franks, so they had different Laws: those that belonged to the Salii, were called Salick; those that belonged to the Francogalli, were called French. Eguinarthus in his Life of Charles the [56] Great says thus:—"After he had assumed the Imperial Title, finding that his Peoples Laws were in many Things deficient, (for the Franks have two Laws very different from each other in many Cases,) he thought of adding such as were wanting."—The Author of the Preface to the Salick Law has this Passage.—"The renowned Nation of the Franks, before it was converted to the Catholick Faith, enacted the Salick Law by the Great Men of the Nation, who at that Time were their Governors; and from among a great many, four Persons were chosen; Wisogast, Arbogast, Salogast, and Windogast; who, during three Conventions [tres mallos] carefully perusing all Causes from their Original, gave their Judgment and Decree of every one of them in this Manner, &c.—" Sigebertus in Chron. anni 422. & Otto Frising, lib. 4. cap. penult. make use of almost the same Words. "From that time (say they) the Laws recommended to them by Wisigastaldus and Salogastus, began to be in Force. By this Salogastus, they tell us, that Law was invented, which from his Name is to this Day called the Salick Law; and the most noble of the Franks, called Salici, observe it at this time."—Thus say the old Chronographers. By which we may refute the Error of such as derive the Salick Law, à Sale, that is, Prudence; or what is called corruptly Lex Salica, instead of Gallica; than which nothing can be more absurd. But much greater Errors spring from the same Fountain: First, That People are so far imposed upon by those Authors, as to believe the Salick Law had reference to the Publick Right of the Commonwealth and the Government, also to the Hereditary [57] Succession of the Kingdom. Now the very Records or Tables of this Salick Law were not many Years ago found and brought to Light; from whose Inscription it appears, that they were first written and publish'd about Pharamond's time: Besides, that all the Heads and Articles, both of the Salick and French Laws, were Constitutions relating only to private Right between Man and Man, and meddled not with the Publick Right of the Kingdom or Commonwealth: among the rest, one Chapter, tit. 62. has this in it.—"Of the Salick Land, no Part or Portion of Inheritance passes to a Female; but this falls to the Male Off-spring; that is, the Sons shall succeed to the Inheritance: But where a Dispute shall arise (after a long Course of Time) among the Grandsons and great Grandsons, de alode terræ; Allodium is the contrary to Feudum, Gothick words, for which 'tis difficult to find proper English. let it be divided, Non per stirpes sed per capita." The like Law, Extat apud Ripuarios, tit. 58. Item apud Anglos, tit. 7. Where they are so far from enacting any thing relating to the Inheritances of Kingdoms, that they do not so much as affect Feudal Successions, but only belong to Allodial; altho' a Portion was assigned to Women out of those Allodial Lands. Which Way soever this Matter may be, 'tis manifest in the first Place, that altho' no Article, either of the Frank or Salick Law were extant, which debars Women from the Inheritance of the Crown; yet the Customs and Institutions of a Nation, preserv'd inviolate by universal Consent, during so many Ages, obtain the Force of a written Law: For tho' Childeric, the Third King, left two Daughters behind him at his Death, the Kingdom was given to his Brother Lotharius, and his Daughters excluded. Again, [58] after the Death of Cherebert the 5th King, who left three Daughters; the Succession devolv'd upon his Brother Sigebert. Also when Gontrannus King of Burgundy and Orleans died, the Kingdom was conferr'd on his Brother Sigebert, not on his Daughter Clotilda. Lastly, Philip of Valois's Advocates might with greater Caution, as well as Efficacy, have argued for him out of the Feudal Law, by which all Inheritances of Fiefs descend to the Male Issue only, and not to the Female, who are not admitted to them. And when there happens a Want of Heirs Males in that Line or Branch wherein the Fief is lodged, then the Feudum or Fief returns back to the other Stock or Branch: which was the very Case at that Time. But such Fiefs as thro' a Depravation of the Law, are convey'd down to Women, cannot properly be called Feuda, but Feudastra, as in other of our Writings we have made it appear.

CHAP. IX.↩

Of the Right of Wearing a large Head of Hair peculiar to the Royal Family.

It will not be amiss in this Place to give some Account of a Custom of our Ancestors, relating to the Hair worn by the Royal Family: For 'tis recorded, that our Forefathers had a particular Law concerning it; viz. That such as were chosen Kings by the People, or were [59] of the Regal Family, shou'd preserve their Hair, and wear it parted from the Forehead, on both Sides the Head, and anointed with sweet Oyl, as an Ornament and peculiar Mark of their being of the Royal Family; whilst all other Persons, how nobly born soever, had no right to wear a large Head of Hair; but were obliged to go with their Heads shorn or shaved, upon the Account (as 'tis probable) that they shou'd be more ready and expedite in their continual military Exercises, as the Roman Histories tell us of Julius Cæsar, and several others. Aimoinus lib. 1 cap. 4. says—"The Franks chusing for themselves a King, according to the Custom of other Nations, raised, Pharamond to the Throne, to whom succeeded his Son Clodio crinitus; For at that Time the Kings of the Franks wore large Heads of Hair. Also lib. 3. cap. 61. Gundoaldus being brought up by his Mother after the regal Manner, wore a long Head of Hair, according to the Custom of the ancient Kings of the Franks." In like Manner Agathius, lib. de Bell. Goth. I. where he speaks of Clodoveus, one of our Kings, who was taken in Battel by the the Burgundians, (he calls him Clodamirus). "As soon (says he) as his Horse had thrown him, the Burgundians espying his large Head of Hair, which fell back over his Shoulders, presently knew him to be the Enemy's General; for 'tis not lawful for the Kings of the Franks to cut off their Hair, but even from their Childhood they remain untrimm'd, and always keep a large Head of Hair hanging low down upon their Backs." And we have many Instances that it was our Ancestors Custom, whenever they either deprived any one of the Crown, [60] or took away all Hopes of obtaining the Kingdom, to cut off his Head of Hair. Aimoinus in the same Place—"He earnestly beholding him, commanded his Hair to be cut off, denying him to be his Son.—Also—Having caused his Hair to be cut off a second Time, he put him in Prison at Cologne; from whence making his Escape, he fled to Narses, and suffer'd his Hair to grow again, &c." Which Story Gregory of Tours, lib. 6. cap. 24. likewise records. Also cap. 44. where he speaks of King Theodorick.—"The Franks (says he) rose up in Arms against him, and cast him out of the Kingdom, and cut off his Head of Hair by Force." But there is a very remarkable, or rather horrible Story related by Gregory of Tours, concerning Crotilda, the Queen Mother; who chose rather to have the Heads of her two Grandsons cut off than their Hair. 'Tis in his 3d Book, cap. 18.—"Our Mother (says the King to his Brother) has kept our Brother's Sons with her, and intends to advance them to the Throne; we must concert what Measures ought to be taken in this Affair; whether we shall order their Hair to be cut off, and to reduce them to the State of common Subjects; or whether we shall cause them to be put to Death, and afterwards divide the Kingdom between us: Then they sent Archadius with a Pair of Scissars in one Hand, and a naked Sword in t'other to the Queen; who approaching her, showed them both to her, and said, Your Sons, most Glorious Queen, have sent me to know your Pleasure, what Destiny you are pleased to allot to these two Youths; whether by suffering their Hair to be cut off, you will have them [61] to live; or whether you had rather have both their Throats cut. Whereupon She chose rather to see them both kill'd, than to have their Hair cut off." I further observe, that it was the Fashion when our Kings went to single Combat, to have their long Hair tied up in a large Knot a-top of their Helmets like a Crest; and that was their Cognizance or Mark in all their Fights. Therefore Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 18. where he speaks of the dreadful Combat between King Dagobert and Bertoaldus, Duke of the Saxons: "The King (says he) having his Hair, together with a Part of his Helmet, cut off with a Blow of a Sword on his Head, sent them by his Esquire to his Father, desiring him to hasten to his Assistance."

Now when I consider what might be the Reasons of this Institution, I can find none but this. That since it had been the ancient Custom of the Gauls and Franks to wear their Hair long (as it was also of the Sicambri, and of most others in those Parts) our Ancestors thought fit to continue, and in Process of Time to appropriate this Ornament, and Mark of Distinction to the Regal Family. No Person, tho' but indifferently learn'd, needs any Proof that the Gauls wore their Hair long, especially when he calls to mind that of the Poet Claudian, ex lib. in Ruffin. 2.

Inde truces flavo comitantur vertice Galli
Quos Rhodanus velox, Araris quos tardior ambit,
Et quos nascentes explorat gurgite Rhenus.

Now that the Franks did so too, whom we have shewn to be descended from the Chauci or [62] Chaiici, that single Passage of the Poet Lucan is sufficient to confirm.

Et vos Crinigeros bellis arcere Chaycos
Opposui, petitis Roman, &c.

Which being so, we may easily comprehend the Reason why Strangers, who were ill affected towards our Nation, contumeliously called our Kings, who wore so great a Head of Hair, Reges setatos, bristled Kings; and not only so, but (tho' Bristles and long Hair be common to Lyons, Horses and Swine, all which are therefore called Setosi, or Setigeri) they stretched the Contumely so far, as to say, they had Hogs Bristles. From whence arose that filthy Fiction and foul Name, τριχοραχάτον of which Georgius Cedrenus writes thus in his History, "Ἐλέγοντο δὲ οἱ ἐκ τοῦ γένους ἐκείου καταγόμενοι κριστάτοι, ὅ ἑρμηνεύεται τριχοραχάτοι' εἶχον γὰρ κατὰ τῆς ῥάχεως αύτῶν τρίχας ἐκϕυομένας ὡς χοῖροι" that is, "They who were of the Kingly Race were called Cristati, which may be interpreted Bristleback'd; because they had all along their Back bones, Bristles growing out like Swine"—, Which Passage of Cedrenus, I believe, is corrupted, and instead of the Word, κριστάτοι ought to be Σέτάτοι or perhaps both. For as some Persons called them pleasantly Christati by Reason of their large erected Bunch of Hair upon the Tops of their Helmets; so their Ill-Willers called them upbraidingly Setati, or Setigeri. If Cedrenus had not been so very plain in this Passage, and the Appellation of Cristati be to be retained, I shou'd rather have thought they might have been called τριχοχάρακτοι, as being remarkable for their large Heads of Hair.

[63]

CHAP. X.↩

The Form and Constitution of the Francogallican Government.

These Things being thus briefly premised, we think it proper now to set forth in what Manner the Kingdom of Francogallia was constituted. And we have already made it plain, that the People reserv'd to themselves all the Power not only of Creating, but also of Abdicating their Kings. Which Form of Government 'tis manifest our Ancestors had; before they were brought under by the Romans, "So that the People (as Cæsar tells us) had no less authority and Power over their Kings, than the Kings had over the People. Populus non minus in Regem, quam rex in populum imperii ac Potestatis retinet." Altho' 'tis probable the Franks did not derive this Constitution of their Commonwealth from the Gauls; but from their Countrymen, the Germans; of whom Tacitus, lib. de mor. Germ. says,—"Regibus non est infinita aut libera Potestas. Their Kings have not an Arbitrary or Unlimited Power." Now 'tis manifest, that no Form of Government is more remote from Tyranny, than this: for not one of the three distinguishing Marks, or Characteristicks of Tyranny, which the old Philosophers make mention of, can be found in the Form and Constitution of our Government. First, as to a forced Obedience; i. e. that a King shou'd rule over a People against their Wills; we have shewn you [64] already, that the Supreme Power, both of Electing and Abdicating their Kings, was in the People. Secondly, as to a Life-guard composed of Foreigners, (which they reckon the Second Mark of Tyranny); so far were our Francogallian Kings from making use of Mercenary Strangers for their Guards, that they had not so much as their own Countrymen and Citizens, for that Purpose; but placed their whole Trust and Confidence in the Love and Fidelity of their Subjects; which they thought a sufficient Guard.

As an Argument of this, we may observe what Gregory of Tours writes, lib. 7. cap. 18. and Aimoinus, lib. 3. cap. 63.—"King Gontrannus being inform'd by an ordinary Fellow at Paris, that Faraulphus lay in Wait for him, presently began to secure his Person by Guards and Weapons; so that he went no whither (not even to the Holy Places) without being surrounded with armed Men and Soldiers." We have at present a very famous History extant of St. Lewis, written by that excellent Person Joannes Jonvillæus, who lived very familiarly with that King for many Years; in which whole History there is not the least Mention made of Guards or Garisons, but only of Porters or Doorkeepers; which in his native Tongue, he calls Ushers.

Now as to the third Mark of Tyranny, which is when Matters are so carried, that what is done tends more to the Profit and Will of the Person governing, than to that of the governed, or the Good of the Commonwealth; we shall hereafter prove, that the Supreme Administration of the Francogallican Kingdom was lodged in the Publick Annual Council of the Nation, which [65] in After-Ages was called the Convention of the Three Estates. For the Frame of this Government was the very same which the Ancient Philosophers, and among them Plato and Aristotle (whom Polybius imitates) judged to be the best and most excellent in the World, as being made up and constituted of a Mixture and just Temperament of the three Kinds of Government, viz. the Regal, Noble, and Popular. Which Form of a Commonwealth, Cicero (in his Books de Republicâ) prefers to all other whatsoever. For since a Kingly and a Popular Government do in their Natures differ widely from each other, it was necessary to add a third and middle State participating of both, viz. that of the Princes or Nobility; who, by Reason of the Splendor and Antiquity of their Families, approach, in some Degree, to the Kingly Dignity; and yet, being Subjects, are upon that Account on the same Foot and Interest with the Commons. Now of the Excellency of this Temperament in a Commonwealth, we have a most remarkable Commendation in Cicero, taken by him out of Plato's Books de Republicâ; which, because of its singular Elegancy, we shall here insert at length.

"Ut in fidibus (inquit) ac tibiis, atque cantu ipsò, ac vocibus, tenendus est quidam concentus ex distinctis sonis, quem immutatum ac discrepantem aures eruditæ ferre non possunt; isque concentus ex dissimillimarium vocum moderatione concors tamen efficitur, & congruens; Sic ex summis, & mediis, & infimis interjectis ordinibus, ut sonis, moderatâ ratione civitas, consensu dissimillimorum, concinit, & quæ harmonia a musicis dicitur in cantu, ea est in Civitate concordia: arctissimum [66] atq; optimum in Repub. vinculum incolumitatis, quæ fine justitiâ nullo pacto esse potest. i. e. As in Fiddles and Flutes, and even in Singing and Voices, a certain Consort of distinct Sounds is to be observed; which if it be alter'd, or not tunable, skilful Hearers cannot bear or endure: And this Consort of very different Tones, is, through as just Proportion of the Notes, rendred Concord, and very agreeable: Even so a Commonwealth, judiciously proportioned, and composed of the first, the middlemost, and the lowest of the States, (just as in the Sounds) through the Consent of People very unlike to each other, becomes agreeable: And what Musicians in Singing call Harmony, that in a Commonwealth is Concord; the very best and strongest Bond of Safety for a Government, which can never fail of being accompanied with Justice." Our Ancestors therefore following this Method, of a just Mixture of all the three Kinds, in the constituting their Commonwealth, most wisely ordained, that every Year on the Calends of May, a Publick Council of the whole Nation should be held: at which Council the great Affairs of the Republick shou'd be transacted by the common Consent and Advice of all the Estates. The Wisdom and Advantage of which Institution, appears chiefly in these three things: First, That in the Multitude of prudent Counsellors, the Weight and Excellency of Counsel shews it self more apparently, as Solomon and other Wise Men have said. Secondly, Because it is an essential part of liberty, that the same persons, at whose cost and peril any thing is done, shou'd have it done likewise by their authority and advice: for ('tis a common Saying) what [67] concerns all, ought to be approved by all. Lastly, That such Ministers of State as have great Power with the Prince, and are in high Employments, may be kept within the Bounds of their Duty, thro' the Awe they stand in of this great Council, in which all the Demands and Grievances of the Subject are freely laid open.—"For such Kingdoms as are ruled by the arbitrary Will and Pleasure of one Prince, may most justly (as Aristotle in his third Book of Politicks observes) be reckon'd Governments of Sheep; and brute Beasts, without Wit or judgment; not of Freemen, who are endued with Understanding, and the Light of Reason." The Case is thus—That even as Sheep are not guided or tended by one of their own Kind, nor Boys govern'd by one of themselves, but by something of more Excellency; even so a Multitude of Men ought not to be ruled and govern'd by one single Person, who perhaps understands and sees less than several others among them; but by many select Persons, who, in the Opinion of all Men, are both very prudent and eminent; and who act by united Counsels, and, as it were, by one Spirit, composed and made up of the Minds of many Wise Men.

Now whereas it may be objected, that most Kings have a constant Privy Council to advise them in the Administration of publick Affairs: We answer, That there is a great deal of Difference between a Counsellor of the King, and a Counsellor of the Kingdom. This last takes care of the Safety and Profit of the whole Commonwealth; the other serves the Humour and studies the Conveniences of one Man only; and besides, these King's Counsellors reside, for [68] the most part, in one certain Place; or at least near the Person of the Prince, where they cannot be supposed to be throughly acquainted with the Condition of the more remote Cities or Provinces; and being debauched by the Luxury of a Court life, are easily depraved, and acquire a lawless Appetite of Domineering; are wholly intent upon their own ambitious and covetous Designs; so that at last they are no longer to be consider'd as Counsellors for the Good of the Kingdom and Commonwealth, but Flatterers of a single Person, and Slaves to their own and Prince's Lusts.

Concerning this Matter, we have a most excellent Saying of the Emperor Aurelian, recorded by Flavius Vopiscus.—"My Father used to tell me (says Aurelian) that the Emperor Dioclesian, whilst he was yet a private Man, frequently said, That nothing in the World was more difficult than to govern well. For, four or five Persons combine together, and unanimously agree to deceive the Emperor they determine what shall be approved or disapprov'd. The Emperor, who, for the most part, is shut up in his Palace, knows nothing of the Truth of Affairs; he is compell'd to hear and see only with their Ears and Eyes; he makes judges, such Persons as do not deserve to be made so; he removes from Offices in the Commonwealth such as he ought to keep in; in short, a good, provident and excellent Emperor is sold by such Counsellors."—Now our Ancestors, in the constituting their Commonwealth, wisely avoiding these Mischiefs (as Mariners wou'd do dangerous Rocks) decreed that the Publick Affairs shou'd be managed by the joynt Advice and [69] Counsel of all the Estates of the Kingdom. To which Purpose the King, the Nobles, and the Representatives of the Commons out of the several Provinces, were obliged to meet at a certain Time every Year. And this very same Institution we find to have been that of many other Nations. First in our Ancient Gallia, where the Administration of Publick Affairs was intrusted with the Common Councel of the chosen Men in the whole Nation as we have above demonstrated. But because we are now speaking of a Kingdom, I shall give Instances of them. 'Tis man felt, that in old Times the Council of the Amphictions was instituted in Greece (as Suidas and others testify) by King Amphyction, Son of Deucalion; and therein it was ordained, that at a certain appointed Time every Year, Representatives chosen out of the Twelve Commonwealths of Greece shou'd meet at Thermopylæ, and deliberate concerning all the weighty Affairs of the Kingdom and Commonwealth: For which Reason, Cicero calls this the Common Council of Græcia, Pliny calls it the Publick Council.

We find the like Wisdom in the Constitution of the German Empire, wherein the Emperor represents the Monarchical State, the Princes represent the Aristocratical, and the Deputies of the Cities the Democratical; neither can any Matter of Moment appertaining to the whole German Republick be firm and ratified, but what is first agreed upon in that great Convention of the Three Estates. To this End was framed that ancient and famous Law of the Lacedemonians, which joyned the Ephori to their Kings; "Who, as Plato writes, were designed to be like Bridles to the Kings, and the Kings were obliged to govern the Commonwealth by their [70] Advice and Authority." Pliny, lib. 6. cap. 22. makes mention of the like Practice in the Island of Taprobana, where the King had thirty Advisers appointed by the People; by whose Counsel he was to be guided in the Government of the Commonwealth; "For fear (says he) lest the King if he had an unlimited Power should esteem his Subjects no otherwise than as his Slaves or his Cattel."

Furthermore, we find the very same Form of Administration of the Kingdom of England, in Polydore Virgil's History of England, lib. 11. where he has this Passage in the Life of Henry the First.—"Before this Time the Kings used to summon a publick Convention of the People in order to consult with them, but seldom: So that we may in some Manner say, that the Institution derived its Original from Henry: which took such deep Root, that it has always continued ever since, and still does so; viz. That whatever related to the Well governing or Conservation of the Commonwealth, ought to be debated and determin'd by the great Council. And that if either the King or the People shou'd act any thing alone, it shou'd be esteemed invalid, and as nothing, unless it were first approved and established by the Authority of that Council. And for fear this Council shou'd be cumbred with the Opinions of an unskilful Multitude, (whose Custom it is to distinguish nothing justly) it was at first establish'd by a certain Law, what Sort of Persons, and what Numbers either of the Priests or of the People shou'd be called to this Council, which, after a French Name, they commonly call A Parliament; which every King at the Beginning of his [71] Reign uses to hold, and as often afterward as he pleases, or as Occasion requires." Thus far Polydore Virgil.

But among all the Laws and Customs of this Kind, there is none so remarkable as that of the Spaniards; who, when they elect a King in the Common-Council of Arragon, (in order to keep up a perpetual Remembrance of their Privileges) represent a Kind of Play, and introduce a certain Personage, whom they call by the Name of The Law of Arragon, La justitia di Arragon. whom (by a publick Decree) they declare to be greater and more Powerful than their King; and afterwards they harangue the King (who is elected upon certain Terms and Conditions) in Words which (because of the remarkable Virtue and Fortitude of that Nation in repressing the unbridled Will of their Prince,) we will here set down at length.—"Nos que valemos tanto come vos, ii podemos mas que vos; vos elegimos Reii con estas ii estas Conditiones; intra vos ii nos un que manda mas que vos: That is, We, who are of as great Value as you, and can do more than you, do elect you to be our King, upon such and such Conditions: Between you and us there is one of greater Authority than you."

Seeing then that the Case is so, and that this has always been a constant and universal Law of all Nations, that are governed by a Kingly, and not by a Tyrannical Power: 'Tis very plain, that this most valuable Liberty of holding a Common-Council of the Nation, is not only a Part of the People's Right; but that all Kings, who by Evil Arts do oppress or take away this Sacred Right, ought to be esteemed Violators of the Laws of Nations; and being no better than Enemies of [72] Human Society, must be consider'd not as Kings, but as Tyrants.

But to return to the Matter in Hand. Our Commonwealth being constituted by the Laws of our Ancestors, upon the Bottom above-mention'd, and participating of all the three Kinds of Government; it was ordain'd, that once every Year (and as much oftner as important Occasions should make it necessary) a Solemn General Council shou'd be held: Which for that Reason, was called a Parliament of the Three Estates. By that Word was meant a Convention or Meeting of Men out of several Parts of the Country to one Place, there to confer and deliberate concerning the Publick Welfare: And therefore all Conferences (tho' between Enemies) in order to a Peace or Truce are always in our Chronicles called by the Name of Parliaments. Now of this Council, the King sitting in his Golden Tribunnal, was chief; next to him were the Princes and Magistrates of the Kingdom; in the third Place were the Representatives of the several Towns and Provinces, commonly called the Deputies: For as soon as the Day prefix'd for this Assembly was come, the King was conducted to the Parliament House with a Sort of Pomp and Ceremony, more adapted to popular Moderation, than to Regal Magnificence: which I shall not scruple to give a just account of out of our own Publick Records; it being a Sort of Piety to be pleas'd with the Wisdom of our Ancestors; tho' in these most profligate Times, I doubt not but it wou'd appear ridiculous to our flattering Courtiers. The King then was seated in a Waggon, and drawn by Oxen, which a Waggoner drove with his Goad to [73] the Place of Assembly: But as soon as he was arrived at the Court, or rather indeed the Venerable Palace of the Republick, the Nobles conducted the King to the Golden Throne; and the rest took their Places (as we said before) according to their Degrees. This State, and in this Place, was what was called Regia Majestas, Royal Majesty. Of which we may even at this Day observe a signal Remain in the King's Broad Seal, commonly called the Chancery Seal. Wherein the King is not represented in a military Posture a Horse-back, or in a Triumphant Manner drawn in his Chariot by Horses, but sitting in his Throne Robe'd and Crown'd, holding in his Right Hand the Royal Sceptre, in his Left the Sceptre of Justice, and presiding in his Solemn Council. And indeed, in that Place only it can be said that Royal Majesty does truly and properly reside, where the great Affairs of the Commonwealth are transacted; and not as the unskilful Vulgar use to profane the Word; and whether the King plays or dances, or prattles with his Women, always to stile him YOUR MAJESTY.

Of all these Matters, we shall give only a few Proofs, out of many which we could produce. First, out of Eginarthus, who was Chancellor to Charles the Great, and wrote his Life. These are his Words: "Wherever he went (speaking of Charlemagn) about the publick Affairs: he was drawn in a Waggon by a Pair of Oxen, which an ordinary Waggoner drove after his rustical Manner. Thus he went to the Courts of Justice, thus to the Place of the Publick Convention of his People, which every Year was [74] celebrated for the Good of the Realm; and thus he used to return Home again."

Joannes Nauclerus gives us an Account of the very same Thing, in almost the same Words, in Chron. Generat. 26. So does the Author of the Great Chronicle, in the Beginning of his Life of Charlemagn, Fol. 77. Neither ought this to seem so great a Wonder to any, who considers it was the Fashion in those Days for our Kings and Queens, and the Royal Family, to be drawn by Oxen; of which we have one Instance in Greg. Turon. lib. 3. cap. 26. "Deuteria, (says he) Wife of King Childebert, seeing her Daughter by a former Husband grown to Woman's Estate, and fearing lest the King (being in Love with her) should lye with her, caused her to be put into a Sort of Litter with untamed Oxen, and thrown Headlong off a Bridge." Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 30. makes mention of the Golden Throne, where he speaks of King Dagobert: "He proclaimed, says he, Generale PLACITUM in loco nuncupato Bigargio, a Great Council in a Place named Bigargium: To which all the Great Men of France assembling with great Diligence on the Kalends of May, the King thus began his Speech to them, sitting on his Golden Throne." Also in his 41st Chapter, speaking of King Clodoveus—Sitting in the midst of them, on his Golden Throne, he spoke in this Manner, &c. Sigebertus in Chron. Anni 662.—"'Tis the Ancient Custom (says he) of the Kings of the Franks, every Kalends of May, to preside in a Convention of all the People, to salute and be saluted, to receive Homage, and give and take Presents." Georgius Cedrenus [75] expresses this in almost the same Words: καττά δὲ τὸν Μάῖον μῆνα προκαιθέσεσαι ἐπὶ παντὸς τοῦ ἔθνους καὶ προσκυνῑν αὐτοῑς καὶ ἀντιπροσκυνῑσθαι ὑπ' αὐτῶ, δωροϕορεῖσθαί τε καττὰ συνήϕειαν καὶ ἀντιδιδόναι αὐτοῑς.

Now, concerning the Authority of the People, who were thus gather'd together at the Great Council, we have many Testimonies, Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 41. speaking of Clodoveus the Second; "Altho' (says that King in his Speech) the Care of our Earthly Principality obliges us to call you together Francigenæ cives, and to consult you in Affairs relating to the Publick, &c."—Also in his 74th Chapter of the same Book—"In the Beginning of the Year he went into Saxony, and there he held a General Convention every Year, as he used to do every Year in France also."—Again, lib. 4. cap. 13. where he speaks of Charles the Great—"When the Hunting near Aix la Chapelle was ended, as soon as he return'd, he held a General Convention of his People, according to usual Custom, &c. Cap. 116. The Emperor having held Two Conventions, one at Nimeguen, the other at Compiegn, wherein he receiv'd the Annual Presents, &c. Again, Cap. 117. In the Month of August he came to Wormes, and holding there the General Convention according to constant Practice, he received the Yearly Gifts which were offer'd him, and gave Audience to several Ambassadors, &c. Again, Lib. 5. cap. 31. The General Placitum was held on the Ides of June, in the Town Dusiacum."

And this may suffice touching this solemn General Council, which both French and German Historians, thro' a deprav'd Custom of the [76] Latin Tongue, called by different Names; sometimes Curia, sometimes Conventus Generalis, but for the most Part Placitum. Gregorius, lib. 7 cap. 14 says thus:—"Therefore when the Time of the Placitum approached, they were directed by King Childebert, &c. Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 109. In the middle of the Month he held the General Convention at Thionville, where there was a very great Appearance of the People of the Franks; and in this Placitum, the singular Compassion of the most Pious Emperor eminently show'd it self, &c."

Now it was the Custom in that Council to send Presents from all Parts to the King; as may appear from many Places which might be quoted, wherein that Council is called Conventus Generalis. Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 64. speaking of King Pipin—"He compell'd them (says he) to promise they would obey all his Commands, and to send him every Year at the Time of the General Convention, Three Hundred Horses, as a Gift and Token of Respect. Item, cap. 85. Not forgetting the Perfidy of the Saxons, he held the General Convention beyond the Rhine, in the Town of Kufftein, according to the usual Custom."

This Council was sometimes called by another Name, Curia, the Court; from whence proceeded the common Saying, when People went to the King's Hall or Palace, we are going to Court; because they seldom approach'd the King, but upon great Occasions, and when a Council was call'd. Aimoinus, lib. 5. cap. 50. "Charles, (says he) the Son of the Danish King, sued (or prosecuted) several [77] Noblemen of Flanders very conveniently at this Curia, or Court. Item, cap. sequenti; Henry King of the Romans being dead, at that Great and General Court, Curia, held at Mentz. &c. Also Otto Frising. Lib. Frideric. I. cap. 40. After these Things, the Prince enter'd Bavaria, and there celebrated a General Curia, Court, in the Month of February. Item, cap. 43. Conrade King of the Romans, calling the Princes together at Francfort, a City of East France, celebrated there a General Court."

CHAP. XI.↩

Of the Sacred Authority of the Publick Council; and what Affairs were wont to be transacted therein.

We think it necessary in this Place to consider what Kind of Affairs were wont to be transacted in this general Annual Council, and to admire the great Wisdom of our Ancestors in constituting our Republick. We have (in short) observed that they are these that follow. First, the Creating or abdicating of their Kings. Next, the declaring of Peace or War. The making of all Publick Laws: The Conferring of all great Honours, Commands, or Offices belonging to the Commonwealth: The assigning of any part of the deceased King's Patrimony to his Children, or [78] giving Portions to his Daughters, which they usually called by a German Name Abannagium; that is, pars exclusoria, a Part set out for younger Children. Lastly, all such Matters as in Popular Speech are commonly called Affairs of State: Because it was not lawful to determine or debate of any Thing relating to the Commonwealth, but in the General Council of the States.

We have already produced sufficient Proofs of the Electing and Abdicating their Kings, as well from the last Will and Testament of Charles the Great, as from several other Authors: To which we will add this one Passage more out of Aimoinus, lib. 5. cap. 17. where speaking of Charles the Bald, he says thus,—"Having summon'd a General Council at Crecy. Carifiacum, he there first gave his Son Charles arma virilia; that is, he girt him with a Sword, or knighted him, and putting a Regal Crown upon his Head, assign'd Neustria to him, as he did Aquitain to Pippin."

Now concerning the Administration of the Kingdom, Aimoinus gives us this remarkable Instance, lib. 5. cap. 35. speaking of Charles the Bald. "Charles (says he) being about taking a Journey to Rome, held a general Placitum on the Kalends of June at Compeign; and therein was ordained under particular Heads, after what Manner his Son Lewis should govern the Kingdom of France, in Conjunction with his Nobles, and the rest of the Faithful People of the Realm, till such time as he returned from Rome."

Also in the same Book, cap. 42. speaking of Charles the Simple: "Whose Youth (says he) the principal Men of France judging (as it was indeed) very unfit for the exercise of [79] the Government of the Realm, they held a General Council touching these weighty Affairs; and the great Men of the Franks, Burgundians, and Aquitanians being assembled, elected Odo to be Charles's Tutor and Governor of the Kingdom."

Now concerning the Power of making Laws and Ordinances, that single Passage in Gaguinus's Life of St. Lewis is a sufficient Proof. "As soon (says he) as King Lewis arrived at Paris, he called a General Convention, and therein reformed the Commonwealth; making excellent Statutes relating to the Judges, and against the Venality of Offices, &c."

Concerning the conferring the great Honours and Employments upon Persons of approved Worth, Aimoinus lib. 5. cap. 36. gives us this Instance; speaking of Charles the Bald, he tells us, "That whereas he began (before his Inauguration) to distribute the Governments and great Offices of the Realm according to his own liking; the Great Men summoned a General Council, and sent Ambassadors to the King; neither would they admit him to be crowned till he had made use of their Advice and Authority in disposing of those great Employments. The Nobles (says he) being very much displeas'd, because the King conferr'd Honours without their Consent; for that Reason, agreed together against him, and summoned a general Convention in the Town of Witmar, from whence they sent Ambassadors to Lewis, as Lewis likewise sent his Ambassadors to them, &c."

Also the Appendix to Gregory of Tours, lib. 11. cap. 54. "That same Year (says he) King Clotharius, cum Proceribus & Leudibus, i. e. with [80] the Nobility and free Subjects of Burgundy, met at Troyes, and when he earnestly solicited them to advance another Person to the same Place and Degree of Honour which Warnhar (lately deceased) had enjoy'd, they unanimously refused to do it; and said, they would by no Means have any Mayor of the Palace, earnestly desiring the King to excuse them:" And thus they gained their Point with the King.

To this Head may be referr'd all the Contentions of such Princes, as were foreseen might be dangerous to the Commonwealth. These were debated in the General Council. For Aimoinus, lib. 4 cap. I. where he speaks of Clotharius, Son of Chilperic, from whom Queen Brunechild demanded the Kingdom of Austratia, says thus:—"Clotharius made answer, that she ought to call a Convention of the Nobles of the Franks, and there debate (by common Consent) an Affair relating to the Community. That as for him, he would submit to their judgment in all Things, and would not obstruct in any Measure whatever they should command." The same Thing is recorded in the Appendix to Gregory of Tours, lib. II. "Clotharius (says he) made Answer to her, that he would refer the Difference between them, to the Determination of the Select Franks, and promis'd to fulfil whatsoever they should ordain." Also Aimoinus lib. 5. cap. 12. where he speaks of King Lewis the Pious, who was grievously tormented with the Contentions of his Sons, says thus,—"When Autumn approached, they whose Sentiments differ'd from the Emperor's, were for having the General Convention held in some Town of France.—Item [81] cap.13. He appointed the General Convention of his People to be held at Thionville. And after a little Time, summon'd his People to meet on the Feast of St. Martin, and used all his Endeavours to recal his Son Pipin who had absented himself; but he refused to come, &c." Gaguinus making Mention of this Same Passage, says; "When the Conspirators found out they should not be able to dethrone the King, without the Consent of the Nobility in Convention, they labour'd by all Means to have the Great Council held within the Limits of France. But Lewis knowing for certain that those Franks were gained by his Enemies against him, refused it, and summon'd the Convention to meet at Mentz, and ordered that none should be admitted Armed to the Council. But his Sons, (who had conspired against their Father) lest they should want the Authority of a Publick Convention, assembled a Council at Compiegne, consisting of the Bishops and Nobility of the Kingdom. And Lotharius taking his Father out of Custody, brought him to Compiegne."

Again, Aimoinus, lib. 5. cap. 38. where he speaks of Lewis the Stammerer, who held a Council at Marsua, wherein he treated a Peace with his Cousin, says: "In that Placitum, or Parliament, these Articles which follow were agreed upon between them, by and with the Consent of the faithful Subjects of the Realm."

To proceed, We find further, that it was the Custom (when any Prince, or Person of Extraordinary Quality, was accused of any Crime) to summon him to appear before the Great Council, and there he was to stand his Trial. Thus in the Reign of King Clotharius, when [82] Queen Brunechild stood accused, and was found guilty of many capital Crimes, the King made a Speech to the Estates of the Great Council of Francogallia, in these Words; which are recorded by Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap 1. "It belongs to you, my most dear Fellow-Soldiers, and high Nobility of France, to appoint what Kind of Punishment ought to be inflicted on a Person guilty of such enormous Crimes, &c." And Ado Ætat 6. sub Anno 583. tells us, "The Franks passing Sentence upon her in the King's Presence, condemn'd her to be torn in Pieces by wild Horses."

Now concerning the dividing of the Royal Patrimon, and the Appanages, we have the same Person's Testimony, lib. 5. cap. 94. where speaking of Charlemagn, he has these Words—"These Matters being ended, the King held a Convention of the Nobility and Gentry of the Franks, for the making and maintaining a firm Peace among his Sons, and dividing the Kingdom into Three Parts, that every one of them might know what Part of it he ought to defend and govern, in Case they survived him."—Also in that Place where he speaks of the Partition made among the Children of Lewis, lib. 5. cap. 40. he says thus.—"They went to Amiens, and there they divided their Father's Kingdom among them, according to the Advice and Direction of their faithful Subjects." Further, cap. 41. where he writes of Carloman, who held his Great Council then at Worms.—"To this Placitum (says he) came Hugo, and preferred his Petition for that Part of the Kingdom, which his Brother Lewis (in Locarium acceperat) had rented of him, or received in Pawn."

[83]

We may further observe, from very many Instances, that whenever the King had any expensive Design in Hand, such as the Building of Churches or Monasteries, he took first the Advice of the Council of the Estates. For Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 41. where he speaks of Clodoveus the Second, tells us, that sitting on his Throne, he began his Oration to the General Council in these Words.—"Quamquam Franciginæ cives, &c. Altho' (says he) the Care I ought to take of my Kingdom, obliges me to take your Advice in all Matters relating to the Publick, &c."

And thus much may suffice on this Point. From all which we think it appears plainly, that the whole Power of the Administration of the Kingdom was lodg'd in the Publick Council, which they called Placitum; because according to the Idiom of the Latin Tongue, that is properly termed Placitum, which after having been proposed and debated in a Council of many Persons, is at last agreed to, and resolved upon by them. And therefore Cicero, with others of the Ancients, were wont to call such-like Determinations, Placita Philosophorum.

Since therefore the Matter is so, I hope the Opinion which we have formerly given in some of our other Books, will not be esteemed absurd; viz. That the common Form used by the King's Secretary in the last Clause of our Ordinances and Edits, Quia tale est PLACITUM nostrum, arises from hence: For anciently those Laws were written in the Latin Tongue, (as is sufficiently proved by Aimoinus, the Capitulary of Charles the Great, and many other Records); but afterwards when the King's Secretaries or Clerks began to make Use of the [84] Vulgar Tongue, thro' Ignorance, or rather Malice, they translated it thus,—Car tel est nostre Plaisir: For such is our Will and Pleasure.

Now as to the Power of the People, we have this farther Argument extant in the same Capitulary of Charles the Great.—"Let the People (says it) be consulted touching all the Heads of the new Laws, which are to be added to the former; and after they have all given their Consents, let them set their Hands and Seals to every Article."

From which Words, 'tis apparent that the People of France were wont to be bound by such Laws only, as they had publickly agreed to in their Parliaments. Also in fine Leg. Aleman. we find this Passage.—"This is decreed by the King and his Nobles, and all the Christian People which compose the Kingdom of the Merovingians." Also Aimoinus, lib. 5 cap. 38.—"In this Placitum the Laws which follow were agreed upon, to be observed between them, by the Consent of the faithful Subjects.—An Agreement made between the Glorious Kings, &c. by the Advice and Consent of their faithful Commons, &c."

Lastly, we cannot omit observing, that so great was the Reputation and Authority of this General Council, even among Strangers, that foreign Princes submitted to have their Controversies and Differences decided by it. The Appendix to Greg. Turon. lib. 11. cap. 37. Anno 12. of Theodorick's Reign, has this Passage in it.—"When Alsaciones, [perhaps Alsatia] in which Country he had been brought up, and which was left him by his Father Childebert, fell nevertheless to Theodebert, according to the Custom in Use among the Barbarians; the two [85] Kings agreed that their Difference should be decided by the judgment of the Franks, (in Salocissa castro) in their Camp near the River Sala."

CHAP. XII.↩

Of the Kingly Officers, commonly call'd Mayors of the Palace.

Before we treat farther of the uninterrupted Authority of the Publick Council, we think it not improper to say somewhat of those Regal great Officers, which, during the Merovingian Race were called (Majores domus) Masters, or Mayors of the Palace. These having for some Time encroach'd upon the Kingly Power, finding at last a fit Opportunity, seiz'd upon it entirely as their own. Their Dignity near the Persons of our Kings seems to have been much the same with that of Præfecti Pretorio, or Generals of the Guards in the Time of the Roman Emperors, who were sometimes also titled Aulæ Præfecti. They were usually appointed in and by the same Convention which chose the Kings, and were wont to be Chiefs or Heads of the Publick Council. And upon this Account we frequently meet with such-like Expressions as these among our Historians.—"They elected such and such a Man to the Dignity of Mayor of the Palace. Herchinold, Mayor of the Palace, being dead, the Franks conferr'd that Dignity upon Ebroinus, and appointed him to be Mayor [86] in the King's Court." Also—"They chose Hilderick for their King, and Wolfold for Mayor of the Palace." Which Quotations of ours might indeed have been made as properly in out foregoing Chapter, where we proved that the greater Employments were not usually given by the Kings, but appointed by the Yearly General Council, and conferred upon Men of the greatest Fidelity and Probity.

But in this Magistracy, the same Thing hapned, which Plutarch tells us (in his Life of Lysander) came to pass when Agesilaus was appointed by the Lacedemonians to be General of their Army, and Lysander to be Legate or Lieutenant-General: "Even as in Stage-Plays, (says he) the Actors who represent a Servant or Messenger, have better Parts, and are more regarded than him that wears the Crown and Scepter, who scarce speaks a Word in the whole Play: So the chief Authority and Command was lodg'd in Lysander, whilst with the King remained only a naked and empty Title."—Just so it fell out in our Francogallia; Fair Opportunities of increasing the Power of these Mayors of the Palace, being offer'd by the Sloth and Negligence of our Kings; among whom we may reckon Dagobert, Clodoveus, Clotharius, Childericus, Theodoricus, &c. For the Author of the History of the Franks, often cited by Venericus Vercellensis, tho' without naming him, writes, That during the Reign of Clotharius, Father of Dagobert, the Kingdom of the Franks began to be administred and govern'd by some which were called Provisores Regiæ, or Majores Domus. The same says Godf. Viterb. parte Chron. 16. Whereupon, whilst those Mayors of the Palace [87] executed all the important Affairs of the Commonwealth, and commanded all the Armies in Time of War; and the Kings (spending their Days in Sloth and Idleness) tarried at Home, content with the bare Title of a King; Matters at last were brought to such a Pass, that during the Reign of Childerick the 18th King, Pipin, Mayor of the Palace, (who in the King's Name had waged great and long Wars, and had overcome and reduced the Saxons to Terms of Submission) finding a fit Occasion to assume the Regal Title which was offer'd him, did not let it slip: Especially seeing himself at the Head of a great and victorious Army, that espoused his Interests. Of which we have the Testimony of many Authors. First, Otto Frisingius, Chron. 5. cap. 12. and his Transcriber Godf. Viterb. Part. 16. who write thus.—"The Kings of France, before the Time of Pipin the Great, (formerly Mayor of the Palace) were in a Manner but titular Princes, having very little to do with the Government of the Realm." Sigebertus says almost the same Thing sub Anno 662.—"From this Time, (says he) the Kings of the Franks degenerating from their ancient Wisdom and Fortitude, enjoy'd little more than the bare Name of King. They did indeed bear the Title according to Custom, as being of the ancient Regal Race; but neither acted nor disposed of any Thing: The whole Administration and Power of the Kingdom, was lodg'd in the Hands of the Mayor of the Palace."

Yet in Reading such-like Authorities, we ought to take this Observation along with us. That since Pipin and his Sons laboured (as 'tis probable they did) under a great Load of Envy, [88] for having violently wrested the Royal Dignity from King Childerick, they made it their Business to find out and employ plausible ingenious Historians, who magnified the Cowardliness of Childerick and his Predecessors, upbraiding them with Sloth and Idleness, beyond what they deserv'd. And among such as these, we may reckon Eguinarthus, Chancellor to Charles the Great, and one that did him special Service of this Nature; who in the Beginning of his Book writes thus.—"The Family of the Merovingians, out of which the Franks used to Elect their Kings, is supposed to have lasted as long as to Hilderic; who by the Appointment of Pope Stephen, was deposed, shaven, and thrust into a Monastery. Now tho' it may be said to have ended in him, yet in Truth, for a long Time before, it ceased to have any Value or Excellency, bearing the bare empty Title of King. For both the Riches and Power of the Kingdom, were at the Disposition of the Prefects of the Palace, commonly called Majores Domus; with whom was also lodg'd the Authority of the Empire: Neither was there any Thing left remaining to the King, but only that contenting himself with the Title, he should sit on a Throne, wearing his Hair and Beard very long, and representing the Person of a Ruler; sometimes giving the first and last Audience to Ambassadors from Foreign Parts, and returning such Answers as were made for him, as if they proceeded immediately from himself. But besides the unprofitable Name of a King, and a precarious Allowance for his private Expences, (which the Mayor of the Palace was pleased out of Bounty to give him) he [89] had nothing that he could call his own, except one Village of very small Revenue, where he had a little House, and a few Servants, barely sufficient for his necessary Occasions, &c."

Sigebertus, sub Anno 662. taking Eguinarthus for his Pattern, inveighs against the former Kings in almost the same contumelious Terms. "Whose Custom (says he) it was, indeed, to make an Appearance like a Prince, according to what had been usual to their Family; but neither to act, nor dispose of any thing, only to tarry at Home, and to Eat and Drink like Irrational Creatures."—As if the like Sloth and Cowardise ought to be imputed to all the former Kings, among whom we nevertheless find many brave Men, such as Clodoveus, who not only defeated a great Army of Germans, which had made an Irruption into France, in a great Battel near Tolbiacum; but also drove the Remainder of the Romans out of the Confines of Gallia. What shall we say of Childebert and Clotharius, who rooted the Visigoths and Ostrogoths out of Provence and Aquitain, where they had seated themselves? In the Histories of all which Princes, there is no Mention made of any Mayor of the Palace, but cursorily, and by the By, as one of the King's Servants. This we may see in Gregorius, lib 5. cap. 18, where he speaks of Gucilius, Lib. 6. cap. 9. and cap. 45. Lib. 7. cap. 49. And we find this Employment to have been not only in the King's Palace, but also in the Queen's: For the same Gregorius, lib. 7. cap. 27. mentions one Waddo as Mayor of the Palace, in the Court of Queen Riguntha: And in very many other Places of their Histories, we find both Gregorius and Aimoinus [90] making Mention of these Masters of the Court and the King's House.

Now the first Beginning of the great Authority of these Præfecti Regii, was (as we told you before) during the Reign of King Clotharius the Second, about the Year of our Lord 588. that is, about 130 Years after the constituting the Francogallican Kingdom; which we may also learn from the before-mention'd Historian, so often quoted by Venericus.

Yet there are two other Historians, (tho' not of equal Credit) Sigibertus and Trithemius, who refer the Beginning of so great a Power in the Mayor of the Palace, to the Reign of Clotair the Third; whose Magister Palatii was one Ebroinus, a Man of extraordinary Wickedness and Cruelty: But however this may be, we find Historians calling them by several other Appellations; such as Comites Domus Regie, Præfecti Aulæ, Comites Palatii, &c.

CHAP. XIII.↩

Whether Pipin was created King by the Pope, or by the Authority of the Francogallican Council.

Having in the former Chapter given an Account, that after the Expulsion of Childerick, (a stupid Prince, in whom the Line of the Merovingians ended) Pipin, from being Mayor of the Palace, was created King; It will be worth our Enquiry, to know by whose [91] Authority the Kingdom was conferr'd upon him. For Pope Gelasius says thus, Cap. 75. Quest. 6. —"A Roman Pope, viz. Zacharias, deposed the King of the Franks, not so much because of his evil Actions, as because he was stupid, and unfit for the Exercise of so great a Trust; and in his Stead, substituted Pipin, Father of Charles the Emperor: Absolving all the Franks from the Oath of Allegiance to Childeric."

And there is scarce an Author who does not acquiesce in this Testimony of one Pope, concerning the Power of another: Thus Ado, Lambertus, Rhegino, Sigibertus, Aimoinus, Landulphus, nay, even Venericus Vercellensis, (in the Book which we formerly quoted) cites these Words out of the Epistle of Pope Gregory the VIIth. to Herman Bishop or Metz; viz. "A certain Pope of Rome deposed the King of the Franks from his Kingdom, nor so much for his Wickedness, as his being unfit for so great a Power; and after having absolved all the Franks from the Oath of Fidelity they had sworn to him, placed Pipin in his Room.—Which Otto Frisingius, lib. Chron. 5. cap. 23. and Godfrey, Chron. Part. 17. laying presently hold of, break out into this Exclamation—From this Action, the Popes of Rome derive an Authority of changing and deposing Princes, &c."

But pray let us enquire whether the Truth of this Story, as to the Matter of Fact, be sufficiently proved and attested. For in the first Place, 'tis manifest, That not one of all that great Number of Kings of the Franks, which we have instanced to have been Elected or Abdicated, was either created or abdicated by the [92] Pope's Authority. On the contrary we have irrefragably prov'd, that the whole Right, both of making and deposing their Kings, was lodg'd in the yearly great Council of the Nation; so that it seems incredible the Franks shou'd neglect or forgo their Right, in this single Instance of Pipin. But to make few Words of this Matter, Venericus Vercellensis gives us the Testimony of an ancient Historian, who has written of all the Francogallican Affairs; whereby that whole Story of the Pope, is prov'd to be a Lye: And 'tis clearly demonstrated, that both Childerick was deposed, and Pipin chosen in his room, according to the usual Custom of the Franks, and the Institutions of our Ancestors: That is to say, by a solemn General Council of the Nation; in whose Power only it was, to transact a Matter of so great Weight and Moment; as we have before made it appear. The Words of that Historian are these:—"That by the Counsel, and with the Consent of all the Franks, (a Relation of this Affair being sent to the Apostolick See, and its Advice had) the most noble Pipin was advanced to the Throne of the Kingdom, By the Election of the whole Nation, the Homage of the Nobility, with the Consecration of the Bishops, &c." From which Words, 'tis most apparent that Pipin was not appointed King by the Pope, but by the People themselves, and the States of the Realm. And Venericus explains this Matter out of the same Historian. "Pipin, Mayor of the Palace (says he) having all along had the Administration of the Regal Power in his Hands, was the first that was appointed and elected to be King, from being Mayor of the Palace; the Opinion of Pope Zachary being [93] first known, because the Consent and Countenance of a Pope of Rome, was thought necessary in an Affair of this Nature."—And presently after he tells us; "The Pope finding that what the Ambassadors had deposed was just and profitable, agreed to it; and Pipin was made King by the unanimous Suffrages and Votes of the Nobility, &c."—To the very same Purpose writes Ado of Vienna, Ætat. 6. sub Anno 727.—"Ambassadors (says he) were sent to Pope Zacharias, to propose this Question to him; Whether or no the Kings of the Franks, who had scarce any Power in their Hands, but contented themselves with the bare Title, were fit to continue to be Kings?" To which Zacharias return'd this Answer,—"That he thought the Person who governed the Commonwealth, ought rather to have also the Title of King: Whereupon the Franks, after the Return of the Ambassadors, cast out Childeric, who then had the Title of King; and by the Advice of the Ambassadors, and of Pope Zacharias, Elected Pipin, and made him King."

Besides the above Proofs, we have Aimoinus's Testimony to the same Purpose, lib. 4. cap. 61. where he concludes thus.—"This Year Pipin got the Appellation of King of the Franks, and according to their ancient Customs was elevated to the Royal Throne in the City of Soissons, &c." Nay, even Godfrey of Viterbo himself; Chron. part. 17. cap. 4. "Pipin (says he) was made King by Pope Zacharias, (ex electione Francorum) through the Election of the Franks, Hilderic their slothful King being, by the Franks, thrust into a Monastery."

[94]

In like Manner Sigebertus, sub Anno 752.— The Authors of the Miscellany History, lib. 22. —Otto Frising. lib. 5. Cap. 21, 22, 23. And the Author of the Book intituled Fasciculus temperum, do all clearly agree in the Account given of this Transaction. From which we may easily gather, that altho' the Franks did consult the Pope before they created Pipin King, yet it cannot therefore be any Ways inferr'd from thence, that he was made King by the Pope's Authority; for 'tis one Thing to make a King, and another to give Advice touching the making him: 'Tis one Thing to have a Right of Creation, and another that of only giving Advice; nay; no Man has a Right of so much as giving Advice in Matters of this Nature, but he whose Advice is first ask'd.

Lastly, no Man has more clearly explain'd this whole Matter than Marsilius Patavinus; who during the Reign of Lewis of Bavaria, writ a Book—de translatione imperii, in which, Cap. 6. he has these Words.—"Pipin, a very valiant Man, and Son of Charles Martel, was (as we read) raised to the Dignity of being King of the Franks, by pope Zacharias. But Aimoinus more truly informs us, in his History of the franks, that Pipin was legally elected King by the Franks themselves, and by the Nobility of the Kingdom was placed in the Throne. At the same Time Childeric, a dissolute Prince, who contenting himself with the bare Title of a King, wasted both his Time and Body in Wantonness, was by them shaven for a Monk: So that Zacharias had no Hand in the deposing him, but consented (as some say) to those that did. For such deposing of a King for just Causes, [95] and and electing of another, does not belong to any Bishop or Ecclesiastick, nor to any College of Clergymen; but to the whole Body of citizens [ad universitatem civium] inhabiting that Region, and to the Nobles of it, or to the Majority of them both." Therefore those Pretences of the Popes, to a Power of creating or abdicating Kings, are apparently false to every Body. But besides this fabulous Device, which is a sufficient Instance of their Wickedness and Malice, I think it worth my while to add a remarkable Letter of Pope Stephen, adapted to the foregoing Fable; by which we may make a judgment of the Madness and folly of that old crafty Knave. This Letter is extant in Rhegino, a Benedictine Monk, and Abbot of Prunay, Abbot Pruniacensis an irrefragable Testimony in an Affair of this Nature; 'tis in Chron. anni 753. —"Stephen the Bishop, Servant of the Servants of God, &c. As no Man ought to boast of his Merits, so neither ought the wonderful Works of God which are wrought upon his Saints without their Desert, to be buried in Silence, but published abroad as the Angel admonished Tobias. I being constrained thro' the Oppression of the holy Church, by that most wicked, blasphemous, and not worthy to be named Wretch, Aistolphus, to fly for Refuge to that excellent and faithful Votary of St. Peter, Lord Pipin, the most Christian King, took my Journey into France; where I fell into a mortal Distemper and remained some Time in the District of Paris, in the venerable Monastery of St. Denis the Martyr. And being now past Hopes of Recovery, methought I was one Day at Prayers in the Church of the same [96] blessed Martyr, in a Place under the Bells: And that I saw standing before the great Altar our Master Peter; and that great Master of the Gentiles, our Master Paul; whom I knew very well by their Vestments. And a little after, I saw the blessed Lord Denis, a tall and slender Man, standing at the Right Hand of our Lord Peter. And then that good Pastor the Lord Peter said—This good Brother of ours asks for Health. Then reply'd the blessed Paul—He shall be healed presently. And thereupon approaching to our Lord Denis, he amicably put his Hand upon his Breast, and look'd back upon our Lord Peter, and Lord Peter with a chearful Countenance said to our Lord Denis, His Health shall be your particular Act of Favour. Then presently Lord Denis taking a Censer full of Incense, and holding a Branch of Palm-tree in his Hand, accompanied with a Presbyter and Deacon, who assisted him, came near to me, and said, Peace be with thee, Brother, be not afraid, thou shalt not die until thou return in Prosperity to thy own See. Rise and be healed, and dedicate this Altar to the Honour of God, and the Apostles St. Peter and St. Paul, whom thou seest standing before thee, with Masses of Thanksgiving. Whereupon I was presently made whole. And being about to accomplish that which I was commanded to do, they that were present said I was mad. So I related all that I had seen, to them, to the King, and all his People, and how I had been cured; and I fulfilled all that I was bid to do. These Things happen'd in the 753d Year, from the Incarnation [97] of our Lord on the Ides of August; at which Time being strengthned by the Power of Christ, between the Celebration of the Consecration of the above-mention'd Altar, and the Oblation of the Sacrifice, I anointed King Pipin and his two Sons, Charles and Carloman, Kings of the Franks. Moreover, I laid Hands upon, and blessed Bertranda the King's Wife, cloathed with her Royal Mantle, and the Grace of the Sevenfold Holy Spirit: And the Nobles of the Franks being sanctified by the Apostolical Benediction, and the Authority delivered by Christ to St. Peter, obliged themselves solemnly, and protested, That neither they, nor any of their Posterity, wou'd at any Time hereafter, presume to constitute any Person, as King over them, but only such as were of the Race of King Pipin."

CHAP. XIV.↩

Of the Constable, and Peers of France.

Besides the great Office of Mayor of the Palace before spoken of, there was another which we must take Notice of; because it seems, in the Memory of our Forefathers, to have succeeded in Place of the former: And that was the Office of Count of the King's Stable; called at first, Comes stabuli; and by Corruption at last, Connestabuli. Now all those who enjoy'd any extraordinary Honours or [98] Employments in the King's Court, and assisted in the Administration of the Commonwealth, were commonly called Comites, Counts; which was likewise the Custom of the Ancients, as I have in some other of my Works demonstrated. So Cicero, in many Places, calls Callisthenes, Comitem Alexandri magni. This Comes stabuli was in a Manner the same with the Magister Equitum among the Romans, that is, General of the Horse; to whom were subject those Keepers of the Horses commonly called Querries. Greg. Turen lib. 5. cap. 39. says,—"The Treasurer of Clodoveus being taken out of the City of Bourges, by Cuppan, Count of the Stable, was sent in Bonds to the Queen, &c." And again, cap. 48. where he speaks of Leudastes,—"She took him (says he) into Favour, rais'd him, and made him Keeper of the best Horses; which so filled him with Pride and Vanity, that he put in for the Constableship; [Comitatum Stabuloram] and having got it, began to despise and undervalue every Body." From these Quotations it appears, that tho' the Custody of the Horses was a very honourable Employment, yet 'twas much inferior to that of Constable. Aimoinus, lib. 3. cap. 43. gives the same Account of this Leudastes.—"Being grown very intimate with the Queen, he was first made Keeper of the Horse; and afterwards obtaining the Constableship above the rest of the Keepers, he was (after the Queen's Death) made by King Charibert, Count of Tours." And cap. 70. "Leudegesilus, Præfect of the King's Horses, whom they commonly call Constable, being made General of that Expedition by the King, order'd the Engines to be drawn [99] down &c." Also lib. 4. cap, 95. where he speaks of Charles the Great,—"The same Year (says he) he sent Burchard, Comitem Stabuli sui, which we corruptly call Constabulum, with a Fleet against Corsica"—. The Appendix to Gregory calls him, Comestabulum, lib. II. Brunechildis (says he) was brought out of the Village, ab exporre Comestabulo.

This being so, Albertus Krantzius, lib. Suet. 5. cap. 41. ventures to affirm, that this Constable was the same with what the Germans call Mareschal. "They named (says he) a Governor, one of the best Soldiers, who might have the Power of Convocating the Assembly of the Kingdom, and of acting in all Matters like the Prince. Our Countrymen call him a Mareschal, the French call him Constable, &c." This seems the more probable, because I do not remember any Mention to have been made in ancient Times, of a Mareschal in our Francogallia; so that 'tis very likely to have been an Institution of our latter Kings, accommodated to the Custom of the Germans.

That this Comitatus Stabulorum, a Constableship, had its Rise from the Institution of the Roman Emperors, I do not at all question; altho' it grew by Degrees among us from slender Beginnings, to the Heighth of chief Governor of the Palace. In former Times that Dignity was a Sort of Tribunatus Militaris. Ammianus, lib. 26. has this Expression where he speaks of Valentinian the Emperor,—"Having fixed his Stages, or Days Journeys, he at last entred into Nicomedia; and about the Kalends of March, appointed his Brother Valens to be Governor of his Stables, cum tribunatus dignitate, with tribunitial Dignity." What Kind of Dignity that was, [100] we may find in the Code of Justinian, lib. 1. Cod. de comitibus & tribunis Schol. Where 'tis reckoned as a great Honour for them to preside over the Emperor's Banquets, when they might adore his Purple. Also in lib. 3. Cod. Theodos. de annon. & tribut, perpensa, 29. Cod. Theod. de equorum Collatione & lib. 1. Cod. Theod. wherein we may find a Power allowed them, of exacting Contribution to a certain Value from the Provincials who were to furnish War-Horses for the Emperor's Service.

It now remains that we discourse a little of those Magistrates, which were commonly called Peers of France; whereof we can find no Records or Monuments, tho' our Endeavours have not been wanting. For among so great a Number of Books, as are called Chronicles and Annals of Francogallia, not one affords us any probable Account of this Institution. For what Gaguinus, and Paulus Æmilius (who was not so much an Historian of French Affairs, as of the Pope's) and other common Writers do affirm, to wit, That those Magistrates were instituted by Pipin or Charlemagn, appears plainly to be absurd; because not one of all the German Historians, who wrote during the Reigns of those Kings, or for some Time after, makes the least Mention of those Magistrates. Aimoinus himself who wrote a History of the Military Atchievements and Institutions of the Franks, down to the Reign of Lewis the Pious, and the Appendix, which reaches as far as the Time of Lewis the Younger, being the 37th King, speak not one Word of these Peers in any Place of their Histories; so that till I am better inform'd, I must concur in Opinion with Gervase of Tilbury, who (as Gaguinus says in the Book [101] which he wrote to the Emperor Otho the IVth, de otiis imperialibus) affirms. That this Institution is first owing to King Arthur of Britain, who ruled some time in Part of France.

For I suppose the Original of that Institution to be this; that as in the Feudal Law such are called, Pares curie beneficiari, i. e. equal Tenants by Homage of the Court, or Clientes, ὁμότιμοι Clients of like holding, or Convassilli, Fellow Vassals, who hold their Fiefs and Benefices from one and the same Lord and Patron; and upon that Account are bound to him in Fealty and Obedience: just so King Arthur having acquired a new Principality, selected twelve great Men, to whom he distributed the several Parts and Satrapies of his Kingdom, whole Assistance and Advice he made use of in the Administration of the Government. For I cannot approve of their Judgment, who write, that they were called Peers, because they were Pares Regi, the King's Equals; since their Parity his no Relation to the Regal Dignity, but only to that Authority and Dignity they had agreed should be common among them. Their Names were these, the Dukes of Burgundy, Normandy, and Aquitain; the Counts of Flanders, Tholouse, and Champagne; the Archbishops of Rheims, Laon, and Langres; the Bishops of Beauvais, Noyon, and Chalons. And as the Pares Curtis, or Curiæ, in the Feudal Law, can neither be created, but by the Consent of the Fraternity; nor abdicated, but by Tryal before their Colleagues; nor impeach'd before any other Court of Judicature; so these Peers were not bound by any judgment or Sentence, but that of the Parliament, that is, of this imaginary Council; nor could be elected into [102] the Society, or ejected out of it, but by their Fellows in Collegio.

Now altho' this Magistracy might owe its Original to a foreign Prince; yet when he was driven out, the succeeding Kings finding it accommodated to their own Ends and Conveniences, ('tis most probable) continued and made use of it. The first mention I find made of these Peers, was at the Inauguration of Philip the Fair, by whom also (as many affirm) the Six Ecclestastical Peers were first created.

But Budæus, an extraordinary Learned Man, calls these Peers by the Name of Patritians; and is of Opinion that they were instituted by one of our Kings, who was at the same Time Emperor of Germany; because, Justinian says, those Patres were chosen by the Emperor, quasi Reipub. patronos tutoresque, as it were Patrons and Tutors of the Commonwealth. I do not reject this Opinion of that Learned Person; such a Thing being very agreeable to the Dignity of these Peers. For in the Times of the later Roman Emperors, we find the Patritian Dignity not to have been very unlike that of the Peers; because (as Suidas assures us,) they were (partly) the Fathers of the Republick, and were of Council with the Emperor in all weighty Concerns, and made use of the same Ensigns of Authority with the Consuls; and had greater Honour and Power than the Præfectus Prætorio, tho' less than the Consul; as we may learn ex Justiniani Novellis; from Sidon. Apollin. Claudian; and Cassiadorus especially.

But when the Empire was transferr'd to the Germans, we do not believe this Honour was in use among them. Neither is it likely, that none of the German Historians should have [103] made the least Mention of it, if any Patritians of that Kind had been instituted by a German Emperor, who at the same Time was King of Francogallia.

Lastly, The same Badæus tells us in that Place, tho' a little doubtingly, that the like Dignity of Peers had been made use of in other neighbouring Nations; and that in the Royal Commentaries, Anno 1224, 'tis found written, that a certain Gentleman of Flanders, called Joannes Nigellanus, having, a Controversy there, appeal'd from the Countess of Flanders to the Peers of France; having first taken his Oath that he could not expect a fair and equal Tryal before the Peers of Flanders. And when afterwards the Cause was by the Countess revok'd to the judgment of the Peers of Flanders, it was at Length for certain Reasons decreed, that the Peers of France should take Cognisance of it. What the Reasons were of transferring, that Tryal, Budæus does not tell us; which one versed in the Feudal Laws should never have omitted. But 'tis Time to return to our principal Business.

[104]

CHAP. XV.↩

Of the continued Authority and Power of the Sacred Council, during the Reign of the Carlovingian Family.

We have, as we suppose, sufficiently explain'd what was the Form and Constitution of our Commonwealth, and how great the Authority of the Publick Council was during the Reigns of the Kings of the Merovingian Family. We must now proceed to give an Account of it under the Carlovingian Race. And as well all our own as the German Historians, give us Reason to believe that the very same Power and Authority of the Orders or States of the Kingdom, was kept entire. So that the last Resort and Disposal of all Things, was not lodged in Pipin, Charles, or Lewis, but in the Regal Majesty. The true and proper Seat of which was (as is above demonstrated) in the Annual General Council. Of this Eguinarthus gives us an Account, in that little Book we have already so much commended. Where, speaking of what happen'd after the Death of Pipin, he tells us, "that the Franks having solemnly assembled their general Convention, did therein constitute both Pipin's Sons their Kings, upon this Condition, That they should equally divide the whole Body of the Kingdom between them; and that Charles should govern that Part of it which [105] their Father Pipin had possess'd, and Carlomannus the other Part which their Uncle Carlomannus had enjoy'd, &c." From whence 'tis easily inferr'd, that the States of the Kingdom still retain'd in themselves the same Power, which they had always hitherto been in Possession of (during near 300 Years) in the Reigns of the Merovingian Kings. So that altho' the deceased King left Sons behind him, yet there came not to the Crown so much thro' any Right of Succession, as thro' the Appointment and Election of the States of the Realm. Now that all the other weighty Affairs of the Nation used to be determined by the same General Council, Aimoinus is our Witness, lib. 4. cap. 71. where he speaks of the War with the Saxons. "The King (says he) in the Beginning of the Spring went to Nimeguen; and because he was to hold a General Convention of his People at a Place called Paderburn, he marched from thence with a great Army into Saxony." And again, cap. 77.—"Winter being over, he held a Publick Convention of his People in a Town called Paderburn, according to the yearly Custom." Also cap. 79.— "And meeting with his Wife in the City of Wormes, he resolved to hold there the General Council of his People." In all which Places he speaks of that Charles, who thro' his warlike Atchievements had acquired the Dominion of almost all Europe, and by the universal Consent of Nations had obtained the Sirname of the Great: Yet for all that it was not in his Power to deprive the Franks of their ancient Right and Liberty. Nay, he never so much as endeavour'd to undertake the least Matter of Moment without the Advice and Authority of his People and [106] Nobles. And there is no doubt of it, after Charles's Death, Lewis his Son administred the Kingdom upon the same Terms and Conditions. For the Appendix to Aimoinus, lib. 5. cap. 10. tells us, that when Charles was dead, Lewis the Emperor, thro' a certain Kind of Foreknowledge, summon'd the general Council of his People to meet at Doue, near the Loire. And again, cap. 38. where he makes Mention of the Articles of Peace, concluded between King Lewis and his Cousin Lewis, "—They summoned, says he, a PLACITUM, and in that PLACITUM, by the Advice and Consent of their faithful Subjects, they agreed to observe and keep the Articles which follow. In which Placitum it was also by common Consent found convenient, that both Kings should return with a Guard [redirent cum scarâ] &c." Also cap. 41. where he speaks of Carloman the Son of Lewis the Stammerer,— "And so (says he) he departed from the Normans, and returned to Wormes, where he was on the Kalends of November to hold his Placitum." Also in the following Chapter, where he speaks of Charles the Simple,—"Whose Youth (says he) the great Men of France thinking unfit for the Administration of the Government, they held a Council concerning the State of the Nation."

But it would be an infinite Labour, and indeed a superfluous one, to quote all the Instances which might be given of this Matter: From what we have already produced, I think 'tis apparent to every man, that till Charles the Simple's Reign, that is, for more than 550 Years, the Judgment and Determination of all the weighty Affairs of the Commonwealth, [107] belonged to the great Assembly of the People, or (as we now call it) to the Convention of the Estates: And that this Institution of our Ancestors was esteemed sacred and inviolable during so many Ages. So that I cannot forbear admiring the Confidence of some Modern Authors, who have had the Face to publish in their Writings, That King Pipin was the first to whom the Institution of the Publick Council is owing. Since Eguinarthus, Charles the Great's own Chancellor, has most clearly proved, that it was the constant Practice of the whole Merovingian Line, to hold every Year the Publick Convention of the People on the Kalends of May; and that the Kings were carried to that Assembly in a Chariot or Waggon drawn by Oxen.

But to come to a Matter of greater Consequence, wherein the Prudence and Wisdom of our Ancestors does most clearly shew it self. Is it not apparent how great and manifest a Distinction they made between the King and the Kingdom? For thus the Case stands. The King is one principal Single Person; but the Kingdom is the whole Body of the Citizens and Subjects. "And Ulpian defines him to be a Traytor, who is stirred up with a Hostile Mind against the Commonwealth, or against the Prince." And in the Saxon Laws, Tit. 3. 'tis Written, "Whosoever shall contrive any Thing against the Kingdom, or the King of the Franks, shall lose his Head."—And again, "The King has the same Relation to the Kingdom that a Father has to his Family; a Tutor to his Pupil; a Guardian to his Ward; a Pilot to his Ship, or a General to his Army."— As therefore a Pupil is not appointed for the Sake of his Tutor, nor a Ship for the Sake of [108] the Pilot, nor an Army for the Sake of a General, but on the contrary, all these are made such for the Sake of those they have in Charge: Even so the People is not designed for the Sake of the King; but the King is sought out and instituted for the Peoples Sake. For a People can subsist without a King, and be governed by its Nobility, or by it Self: But 'tis even impossible to conceive a Thought of a King without a People. Let us consider more Differences between them. A King as well as any private Person is a Mortal Man. A Kingdom is perpetual, and consider'd as immortal; as Civilians use to say, when they speak of Corporations, and aggregate Bodies. A King may be a Fool or Madman, like our Charles VI who gave away his Kingdom to the English: Neither is there any Sort of Men more easily cast down from a Sound State of Mind, through the Blandishments of unlawful Pleasures and Luxury. But a Kingdom has within it self a perpetual and sure Principle of Safety in the Wisdom of its Senators, and of Persons well skill'd in Affairs. A King in one Battel, in one Day may be overcome, or taken Prisoner and carried away Captive by the Enemy; as it happen'd to St. Lewis, to King John, and to Francis the First. But a Kingdom though it has lost its King, remains entire; and immediately upon such a Misfortune a Convention is call'd, and proper Remedies are sought by the chief Men of the Nation against the present Mischiefs; Which we know has been done upon like Accidents. A King, either through Infirmities of Age, of Levity of Mind, may not only be missed by some covetous, rapacious or lustful Counsellor; may not only be seduced and [109] depraved by debauch'd Youths of Quality, or of equal Age with himself; may be infatuated by a silly Wench, so far as to deliver and fling up the Reins of Government wholly into her Power. Few Persons, I suppose, are ignorant how many sad Examples we have of these Mischiefs: But a Kingdom is continually supplied with the Wisdom and Advice of the grave Persons that are in it. Solomon, the wisest of Mankind, was in his old Age seduced by Harlots; Rehoboam, by young Men; Ninus, by his own Mother Semiramis; Ptolomæus sirnamed Auletes, by Harpers and Pipers. Our Ancestors left to their Kings the Choice of their own Privy-Counsellors, who might advice them in the Management of their private Affairs; but such Senators as were to consult in common, and take care of the publick Administration, and instruct the King in the Government of his Kingdom, they reserved to the Designation of the Publick Convention.

In the Year 1356: after King John had been taken Prisoner by the English, and carried into England, a Publick Council of the Kingdom was held at Paris. And when some of the King's Privy-Counsellors appeared at that Convention, they were commanded to leave the Assembly; and it was openly declared, that the Deputies of the Publick Council wou'd meet no more, if those Privy-Counsellors shou'd hereafter presume to approach that Sanctuary of the Kingdom. Which Instance is recorded in the Great Chronicle writ in French, Vol. 2. sub Rege Johanne, fol. 169. Neither has there ever yet been any Age wherein this plain Distinction between a King and a Kingdom, has not been observed. The King of [110] the Lacedemonians (as Xenophon assures us) and the Ephori, renewed every Month a mutual Oath between each other; the King swore that he wou'd govern according to the written Laws; and the Ephori swore that they wou'd preserve the Royal Dignity, provided he kept his Oath. Cicero, in one of his Epistles to Brutus, writes: "Thou knowest that I was always of Opinion, that our Commonwealth ought not only to be deliver'd from a King, but even from Kingship, Scis mihi semper placuisse non Rege folum, sed Regno liberari rempublicam."—Also in his Third Book de Legibus—"But because a Regal State in our Commonwealth, once indeed approved of, was abolish'd, not so much upon the Account of the Faults of a Kingly Government, as of the Kings who governed; it may seem that only the Name of a King was then abolish'd, &c."

CHAP. XVI.↩

Of the Capevingian Race, and the Manner of its obtaining the Kingdom of Francogallia.

It has been already shewn, that the Kingdom of Francogallia continued in Three Families only, during One Thousand Two Hundred Years. Whereof the first was called the Merovingian Family. The second, the Carlovingian, from the Names of their Founders or Beginners. For altho' (as we have often told you) [111] the Succession to the Kingdom was not conferred as Hereditary Right, but according to the Appointment of the General Council; yet the Franks were so far willing to retain the Custom of their Progenitors the Germans, (who as Tacitus tells us, chuse their Kings for their Nobility, and their Generals for their Valour) that for the most Part they elected such Kings as were of the Blood Royal, and had been educated in a Regal Manner, whether they were the Children, or some other Degree of Kindred to the Royal Family.

But in the Year 987, after the Death of Lewis the Fifth, who was the 31st King of Francogallia, and the 12th of the Carlovingian Line, there hapned a Migration or Translation of the Royal Scepter, and a Change of the Kingdom. For when there remained no Person alive of the former Family but Charles Duke of Lorrain, Uncle to the deceased King, to whom the Succession to the Kingdom, by ancient Custom seemed to be due; there arose up one Hugh Capet, Nephew to Hauvida, Sister to the Emperor Otho the First, and Son to Hugh Earl of Paris; a Man of great Reputation for Valour, who alledged, that he being present upon the Place, and having deserved extraordinary well of his Country, ought to be preferred to a Stranger, who was absent. For there having hapned some Controversies between the Empire of Germany, and the Kingdom of France; Charles upon Occasion had shewn himself partial for the Empire against France, and upon that Score had lost the Affections of most of the French. Whereupon Charles having raised an Army, made an Irruption into France, and took several Cities by [112] Composition. Capet relying on the Friendship and Favour of the Francogallican Nobles, got together what Forces he cou'd, and went to meet him at Laon, a Town in the Borders of Champagne; and not long after a bloody Battel was fought between them, wherein Capet was routed, and forced to fly into the innermost Parts of France; where he began again to raise Men in Order to renew the War. In the mean Time Charles having dismiss'd his Army, kept himself quiet in the Town of Laon with his Wife; but in the Year following he was on a sudden surrounded by Capet, who besieged the Town with a great Army.

There was in the Place one Anselmus, Bishop of the City. Capet found Means to corrupt this Man by great Gifts and Promises, and to induce him to betray both the Town and the King into his Hands; which was accordingly done. And thus having obtained both the City and the Victory, he sent Charles and his Wife Prisoners to Orleans, where he set strict Guards over them. The King having been two Years in Prison, had two Sons born to him there, Lewis and Charles; but not long after they all died. So that Capet being now Master of the whole Kingdom of France without Dispute or Trouble, associated his Son Robert with him in the Throne, and took care to get him declared his Successor. Thus the Dignity and Memory of the Carlovingian Family came to an End, the 237th Year after the first Beginning of their Reign. And this History is recorded by Sigebert in Chron. Ann. 987. as well as the Appendix, lib. 5. cap. 45.

[113]

We must not omit making Mention of the cunning Device made use of by Hugh Capet, for establishing himself in his new Dominion: For whereas all the Magistracies and Honours of the Kingdom, such as Dukedoms, Earldoms, &c. had been hitherto from ancient Times conferr'd upon select and deserving Persons in the General Conventions of the People, and were held only during good behaviour; whereof (as the Lawyers express it) they were but Beneficiaries; Hugh Capet, in order to secure to himself the Affections of the Great Men, was the first that made those Honours perpetual, which formerly were but temporary; and ordained, that such as obtained them shou'd have a hereditary Right in them, and might leave them to their Children and Posterity in like Manner as their other Estates. Of this, see Franciscus Conanus the Civilian, Comment. 2. Cap. 9. By which notorious fact, 'tis plain, that a great Branch of the Publick Council's Authority was torn away; which however (to any Man who seriously considers the Circumstances of those Times) seems impossible to have been affected by him alone, without the Consent of that Great Council it self.

[114]

CHAP. XVII.↩

Of the uninterrupted Authority of the Publick Council during the Capevingian Race.

We may learn, out of Froissard, Monstrellet, Gaguinus, Commines, Gillius, and all the other Historians who have written concerning these Times, that the Authority of the Publick Council was little or nothing less in the Time of the Capevingian Family than it had been during the two former Races. But because it would be too troublesome, and almost an infinite Labour to quote every Instance of this Nature, we shall only chose some few of the most remarkable Examples out of a vast Number which we might produce.

And the first shall be, what hapned in the Year 1328. When Charles the Fair dying without Issue Male, and leaving a Posthumous Daughter behind him; Edward King of England, and Son to Isabella, Sister of Charles, claimed the Kingdom of France as belonging to him of Right. Now there could be no Trial of greater Importance, nor more illustrious, brought before the Publick Council, than a Controversy of this Kind. And because it was decided there, and both Kings did submit themselves to the Judgment and Determination of the Council, 'tis an irrefragable Argument, that the Authority of the Council was greater than that of both Kings. This Fact is recorded not only by all our own Historians, but by [115] Polydore Virgil an English Writer, Histor. lib 19. Moreover, that great Lawyer Paponius, Arrestorum, lib. 4. cap. I. has left it on Record, (grounded, no doubt, upon sufficient Authorities,) "That both Kings were present at that Council, when the Matter was almost brought to an open Rupture; by the Advice of the Nobles, a General Convention of the People and States was summon'd: and the Vote of the Majority was, that the Kinsman, by the Father's Side, ought to have the Preference; and that the Custody of the Queen, then great with Child, shou'd be given to Valois; to whom also the Kingdom was adjudged and decreed in Case she brought forth a Daughter."—Which History Froissard, Vol. I. Cap. 22. Paponius Arrest. lib. 4. cap. I. Art. 2. and Gaguinus in Philippo Valesio, have published.

The Year 1356, furnishes us with another Example; at which Time King John was defeated by the English at Poictiers; taken Prisoner, and carried into England.—"After so great a Calamity, the only Hopes left were in the Authority of the Great Council; therefore immediately a Parliament was summon'd to meet at Paris. And altho' King John's Three Sons, Charles, Lewis and John, were at Hand, the eldest of which was of competent Age to govern; yet other Men were chosen, to wit, twelve approved Persons out of each Order of the States, to whom the Management of the Kingdom's Affairs was intrusted; and there it was decreed, that an Embassy shou'd be sent into England to treat of Peace with the English." Froissard, Vol. I. cap. 170. Joannes Buchettus, lib. 4. fol. 118. Nich. Gillius in Chron. Regis Joannis, are our Authors.

[116]

A third Instance we have Anno 1375, when the last Will and Testament of Charles the Fifth, Surnamed the Wise, was produced: By which Will he had appointed his Wife's Brother, Philip Duke of Bourbon, to be Guardian to his Sons, and Lewis Duke of Anjou his own Brother, to be Administrator of the Kingdom till such Time as his Son Charles shou'd come of Age. But notwithstanding this, a Great Council was held at Paris, wherein (after declaring the Testament to be void and null) it was decreed, that the Administration of the Kingdom shou'd be committed to Lewis, the Boy's Uncle: "But upon this Condition, that he should be ruled and governed in that Administration, by the Advice of certain Persons named and approv'd by the Council." The Education and Tutelage of the Child was left to Bourbon; and at the same Time a Law was made, that the Heir of the Kingdom shou'd be crown'd as soon as he shou'd be full 14 Years old, and receive the Homage and Oath of Fidelity from his Subjects.— Froissard, Vol. 2. cap. 60. Buchett, lib. 4. fol. 124. Chro. Brit. Cap.

A 4th Example we have in the Year 1392; at which Time the same Charles the Sixth was taken with a sudden Distraction or Madness, and was convey'd first to Mans, and afterwards to Paris; and there a General Council was held, wherein it was decreed by the Authority of the States, that the Administration of the Kingdom shou'd be committed to the Dukes of Aquitain and Burgundy.—Froissard, Vol. 4. cap. 44. is our Author.

5. Neither must we omit what Paponius (Arrest. lib. 5. tit. 10. Art. 4.) testifies to have been declared by the Parliament at Paris, within the [117] Compass of almost our own Memories, when Francis the First had a Mind to alienate Part of his Dominions; viz. "That all Alienations of that Kind made by any of his Predecessors, were void and null in themselves; upon this very Account, that they were done without the Authority of the Great Council, and of the Three Estates," as he calls them.

A 6th Example we have in the Year 1426, when Philip Duke of Burgundy, and Hanfred [Dux Glocestriæ] were at mortal Enmity with each other, to the great Detriment of the Commonwealth and it was at last agreed between them to determine their Quarrel by single Combat: For in that Contention the Great Council interposed its Authority, and decreed that both shou'd lay down their Arms, and submit to have their Controversies judicially tryed before the Council, rather than disputed with the Sword. Which History is related at large by Paradinus, in Chron. Burgund. lib. 3. Anno 1426.

A 7th Example happned in the Year 1484, when Lewis the Eleventh dying, and leaving his Son Charles, a Boy of 13 Years old; a Council was held at Tours, wherein it was decreed, "The Education of the Boy shou'd be committed to Anne the King's Sister;" but the Administration of the Kingdom shou'd be intrusted to certain Persons Elected and approved by that Council; notwithstanding Lewis, Duke of Orleans, the next Kinsman by the Father's Side, demanded it as his Right. A Testimony of which Transaction is extant in the Acts of that Council, printed at Paris; and in Joannes Buchettus 4th Book, folio 167.

[118]

CHAP. XVIII.↩

Of the Remarkable Authority of the Council against Lewis the Eleventh.

The Power and Authority of the Council and the Estates assembled, appears by the foregoing Testimonies to have been very great, and indeed (as it were) Sacred. But because we are now giving Examples of this Power, we will not omit a signal Instance of the Authority of this Council, which interposed it self in the Memory of our Fathers against Lewis the Eleventh, who was reputed more crafty and cunning than any of the Kings that had ever been before him.

In the Year 1460, when this Lewis governed the Kingdom in such a Manner, that in many Cases the Duty of a good Prince, and a Lover of his Country, was wanting; the People began to desire the Assistance and Authority of the Great Council, that some Care might therein be taken of the Publick Welfare; and because it was suspected the King wou'd not submit himself to it, the Great Men of the Kingdom (stirred up by the daily Complaints and Solicitations of the Commons,) "resolv'd to gather Forces, and raise an Army; that (as Philip de Comines expresses it) they might provide for the Publick Good, and expose the King's wicked Administration of the Commonwealth." They therefore agreed to be ready prepared with a good Army, that in Case the King should prove refractory, and refuse to [119] follow good Advice, they might compel him by Force: For which Reason that War was said to have been undertaken for the Publick Good, and was commonly called the War du bien public. "Comines, Gillius, and Lamarc, have recorded the Names of those Great Men who were the principal Leaders, the Duke of Bourbon, the Duke of Berry, the King's Brother; the Counts of Dunois, Nevers, Armagnac, and Albret, and the Duke of Charalois, who was the Person most concern'd in what related to the Government. Whereever they marched, they caused it to be proclaimed, that their Undertakings were only design'd for the Publick Good; they published Freedom from Taxes and Tributes, and sent Ambassadors with Letters to the Parliament at Paris, to the Ecclesiasticks, and to the Rector of the University, desiring them not to suspect or imagine these Forces were rais'd for the King's Destruction, but only to reclaim him, and make him perform the Office of a Good King, as the present Necessities of the Publick required."—These are Gillius's Words, lib. 4. fol. 152.

The Annals intituled the Chronicles of Lewis the Eleventh, printed at Paris by Galliottus fol. 27. have these Words.—"The first and chiefest of their Demands was, That a Convention of the Three States should be held; because in all Ages it had been found to be the only proper Remedy for all Evils, and to have always had a Force sufficient to heal such sort of Mischiefs."—Again, Pag. 28. "An Assembly was called on Purpose to hear the Ambassadors of the Great Men, and met on the 24th Day in the Town-House at Paris; at which were present some [120] Chosen Men of the University, of the Parliament, and of the Magistrates. The Answer given the Ambassadors, was, That what they demanded was most just; and accordingly a Council of the Three Estates was summon'd."—These are the Words of that Historian.—From whence the Old Saying of Marcus Antoninus appears to be most true.—"Etsi omnes molestæ semper seditiones sunt, justas tamen esse nonnullas, & prope necessarias: eas vero justissimas maximéque necessarias videri, cum populus Tyranni sævitiâ oppressus auxilium à legitimo Civium conventu implorat. Altho' all Sorts of Seditions are troublesome, yet some of them are just, and in a Manner necessary; but those are extraordinary just and necessary, which are occasion'd when the People oppress'd by the Cruelty of a Tyrant, implores the Assistance of a Lawful Convention."

Gaguinus, in his Life of Lewis the Eleventh, pag. 265. gives us Charles, the Duke of Burgundy's Answer to that King's Ambassadors. "Charles (says he) heard the Ambassadors patiently, but made Answer, That he knew no Method so proper to restore a firm Peace, at a Time when such great Animosities, and so many Disorders of the War were to be composed, as a Convention of the Three Estates. Which when the Ambassadors had by Special Messengers communicated to King Lewis, he hoping to gain his Point by Delays, summon'd the Great Council to meet at Tours, on the Kalends of April 1467; and at the appointed Time for the Convention, they came from all Parts of the Kingdom, &c."

[121]

The same Passage, and in almost the same Words, is recorded in the Book of Annals, fol. 64. and in the Great Chronicle, Vol. 4. fol. 242. where these very remarkable Words are further added.—"In that Council it was appointed, that certain approved Men shou'd be chosen out of each of the Estates, who shou'd establish the Commonwealth, and take care that Right and Justice shou'd be done." But Gillius in the Place above-mention'd says: "After the Battel at Montlebery, many well-affected and prudent Men were elected to be Guardians of the Publick Good, according as it had been agreed upon between the King and the Nobles; among whom the Count of Dunois was the Principal, as having been the chief Promoter of that Rising."—For it had grown into Custom after the Wealth of the Ecclesiasticks was excessively increas'd, to divide the People into Three Orders or Classes, whereof the Ecclesiasticks made one; and when those Curators of the Commonwealth were chosen, Twelve Persons were taken out of each Order. So that it was enacted in that Council, that 36 Guardians of the Republick shou'd be created, with Power, by common Consent, to redress all the Abuses of the Publick. Concerning which Thing, Monstrellettus, Vol. 4. fol. 150 writes thus: "In the first Place (says he) it was decreed, that for the re-establishing the State of the Commonwealth, and the easing the People of the Burthen of their Taxes, and to compensate their Losses, 36 Men shou'd be elected, who shou'd have Regal Authority; viz. 12 out of the Clergy, 12 out of the Knights, and 12 skilful in the Laws of the Land; to whom Power should be given of inspecting and [122] enquiring into the Grievances and Mischiefs under which the Kingdom laboured, and to apply Remedies to all: And the King gave his Promise in Verbo Regis, That whatsoever those 36 Men shou'd appoint to be done, he wou'd ratify and confirm."

Oliver de la Marck, a Flemming, in his History, cap. 35. writes the same Thing, and mentions the same Number of 36 Guardians or Curators of the Commonwealth. And he farther adds; "That because the King did not stand to his Promise, but violated his Faith, and the Solemn Oath which he had publickly sworn, a most cruel War was kindled in Francogallia, which set it all in a Flame, and continued near 13 Years. Thus that King's Perjury was punish'd both by his own Infamy, and the People's Destruction."

Upon the whole Matter 'tis plain, that 'tis not yet a hundred Years compleat, since the Liberties of Francogallia, and the Authority of its annual General Council, flourished in full Vigor, and exerted themselves against a King of ripe Years, and great Understanding; for he was above 40 Years old, and of such great Parts, as none of our Kings have equall'd him. So that we may easily perceive that our Commonwealth, which at first was founded and establish'd upon the Principles of Liberty, maintained it self in the same free and sacred State, (even by Force and Arms) against all the Power of Tyrants for more then Eleven Hundred Years.

I cannot omit the great Commendation which that most noble Gentleman and accomplish'd Historian, Philip de Comines, gives of this Transaction; who in his 5th Book and 18th Chapter, gives this Account of it, which we [123] will transcribe Word for Word.—"But to proceed: Is there in all the World any King or Prince, who has a Right of imposing a Tax upon his People (tho' it were but to the Value of one Farthing) without their own Will and Consent? Unless he will make use of Violence, and a Tyrannical Power, he cannot. But some will say there may happen an Exigence, when the Great Council of the People cannot be waited for, the Business admitting of no Delay. I am sure, in the Undertaking of a War, there is no need of such hast; one has sufficient Leisure to think leisurely of that Matter. And this I dare affirm, that when Kings and Princes undertake a War with the Consent of their Subjects, they are both much more powerful, and more formidable to their Enemies.—It becomes a King of France least of any King in the World, to make use of such expressions as this.—I have a Power of raising as great Taxes as I please on my Subjects;—for neither he, nor any other, has such a Power; and those Courtiers who use such Expressions, do their King no Honour, nor increase his Reputation with Foreign Nations; but on the contrary, create a Fear and Dread of him among all his Neighbours, who will not upon any Terms subject themselves to such a Sort of Government. But if our King, of such as have a Mind to magnify his Power; wou'd say thus; I have such obedient and loving Subjects, that they will deny me nothing in Reason; or, there is no Prince that has a People more willing to forget the Hardships they undergo; this indeed wou'd be a Speech that wou'd do him Honour, and [124] give him Reputation. But such Words as these do not become a King; I tax as much as I have a mind to; and I have a Power of taking it, which I intend to keep. Charles the Fifth never used such Expressions, neither indeed did I ever hear any of our Kings speak such a Word; but only some of their Ministers and Companions, who thought thereby they did their Masters Service: But, in my Opinion, they did them a great deal of Injury, and spoke those Words purely out of Flattery, not considering what they said. And as a further Argument of the gentle Disposition of the French, let us but consider that Convention of the Three Estates held at Tours, Anno 1484, after the Decease of our King Lewis the Eleventh: About that time the wholsome Institution of the Convention of the Three Estates began to be thought a dangerous Thing; and there were some inconsiderable Fellows who said then, and often since, that it was High-Treason to make so much as mention of Convocating the States, because it tended to lessen and diminish the King's Authority; but it was they themselves who were guilty of High-Treason against God, the King, and the Commonwealth. Neither do such-like Sayings turn to the Benefit of any Persons, but such as have got great Honours or Employments without any Merit of their own; and have learnt how to flatter and sooth, and talk impertinently; and who fear all great Assemblies, lest there they shou'd appear in their proper Colours, and have all evil Actions condemned."

[125]

CHAP. XIX.↩

Of the Authority, of the Assembly of the States concerning the most important Affairs of Religion.

We have hitherto demonstrated, that the Assembly of the States had a very great Power in all Matters of Importance relating to our Kingdom of France. Let us now consider, what its Authority has been, in Things that concern Religion. Of this our Annals will inform us under the Year MCCC. when Pope Boniface the Eighth sent Ambassadors to King Philip the Fair, demanding of him, whether he did not hold and repute himself to be subject to the Pope in all Things temporal as well as spiritual; and whether the Pope was not Lord over all the Kingdoms and States of Christendom? In Consequence of these Principles, he required of Philip to acknowledge him for his Sovereign Lord and Prince, and to confess that he held his Kingdom of France from the Pope's Liberality; or that if he refused to do this, he should be forthwith excommunicated, and declar'd a Heretick. After the King had given Audience to these Ambassadors, he summon'd the States to meet at Paris, and in that Assembly the Pope's Letters were read, to the Purport following. Boniface, universal Bishop, the Servant of the Servants of God, to Philip King of France. Fear God and keep his [16] Commandments. It is our Pleasure thou shouldst know, that thou art our Subject, as well in things temporal as Spiritual, and that it belongs not to thee to bestow Prebends or collate Benefices, in any Manner whatever. If thou hast the Custody of any such that may be now vacant, thou must reserve the Profits of them for the Use of such as shall succeed therein: and if thou hast already collated any of them, we decree by these Presents such Collation to be ipso facto void, and do revoke whatever may have been transacted relating thereunto; esteeming all those to be Fools and Madmen, who believe the contrary. From our Palace of the Lateran in the Month of December, and in the Sixth Year of our Pontificate. These Letters being read, and the Deputies of the States having severally deliver'd their Opinions about them, after the Affair was maturely deliberated, it was ordain'd; first, that the Pope's Letters should be burnt in the Presence of his Ambassador, in the great Yard of the Palace: Then, that these Ambassadors with Mitres upon their Heads, and their Faces bedaub'd with Dirt, should be drawn in a Tumbrel by the common Hangman into the said Yard, and there be exposed to the Mockery and Maledictions of the People: finally, that Letters in the King's Name should be dispatched to the Pope, according to the Tenor following. Philip by the Grace of God, King of France, to Boniface, who stiles himself universal Bishop, little or no greeting. Be it known to thy great Folly and extravagant Temerity, that in things temporal we have no Superior but God; and that the Disposal of the Vacancies of certain Churches and Prebends belong to us of Regal Right; that it is our due to receive the profits of them, and our Intention [127] to defend our selves by the Edge of the Sword, against all such, as would any way go about to disturb us in the Possession of the same; esteeming those to be Fools and Brainless, who think otherwise. For Witnesses of this History, we have the Author of the Chronicle of Bretayne, lib. 4. chap. 14. and Nicholas Gilles in the Annals of France, to whom ought to be join'd Papon. in the first Book of his Arrests tit. 5. art. 27.

[128]

CHAP. XX.↩

Whether Women are not as much debarr'd (by the Francogallican Law) from the Administration, as from the Inheritance of the Kingdom.

The present Dispute being about the Government of the Kingdom, and the chief Administration of Publick Affairs, we have thought fit not to omit this Question: Whether Women are not as much debarr'd from the Administration, as from the Inheritance of the Kingdom? And in the first Place we openly declare, that 'tis none of our Intention to argue for or against the Roman Customs or Laws, or those of any other Nation, but only of the Institutions of this our own Francogallia. For as on the one Hand 'tis notorious to all the World, that by the Roman Institutions, Women were always under Guardianship, and excluded from intermeddling, either in publick or private Affairs, by Reason of the Weakness of their Judgment: So on the other, Women (by ancient Custom) obtain the Supreme Command in Some Countries. "The (Britains says Tacitus in his Life of Agricola) make no Distinction of Sexes in Government." Thus much being premised, and our Protestation being clearly and plainly proposed, we will now return to the Question. And as the Examples of some former Times seem to make for the affirmative, wherein the Kingdom of Francogallia has been administered [129] by Queens, especially by Widows and Queen-Mothers: So on the contrary, the Reason of the Argument used in Disputations, is clearly against it. For she, who cannot be Queen in her own Right, can never have any Power of Governing in another's Right: But here a Woman cannot reign in her own Right, nor can the Inheritance of the Crown fall to her, or any of her Descendants; and if they be stiled Queens 'tis only accidentally; as they are Wives to the Kings their Husbands. Which we have prov'd out of Records for twelve hundred Years together.

To this may be added (which we have likewise prov'd) that nor only the sole Power of Creating and Abdicating their Kings, but also the Right of electing Guardians and Administrators of the Commonwealth, was lodged in the same Publick Council. Nay, and after the Kings were created, the supreme Power of the Administration was retained still by the same Council. And 'tis not yet full a hundred Years since 36 Guardians of the Commonwealth were constituted by the same Council, like so many Ephori: and this during the Reign of Lewis the Eleventh, as crafty and cunning as he was. If we seek for Authorities and Examples from our Ancestors, we may find several; there is a remarkable one in Aimoinus, lib. 4. cap. 1. where speaking of Queen Brunechild, Mother to young Childebert; "The Nobility of France (says he) understanding that Brunechild designed to keep the chief Management of the Kingdom in her own Hands; and having always hitherto, for so long a Time disdained to be subject to a Female Domination, did, &c." And indeed it has so happned in the Days of our [130] Ancestors, that whenever Women got into their Hands the Procuration of the Kingdom, they have been always the Occasion of wonderful Tragedies: Of which it will not be amiss to give some Examples. Queen Crotildis, Mother of the two Kings, Childebert and Clotarius, got once the Power into her Hands; and being extravagantly fond of the Sons of Clodomer, (another of her Sons then dead) occasion'd a great deal of Contention, by her endeavouring to exclude her Sons, and promote these Grandsons to the Regal Dignity; and upon that Score she nourished their large Heads of Hair with the greatest Care and Diligence imaginable, according to that ancient Custom of the Kings of the Franks, which we have before given an Account of. The two Kings (as soon as they understood it) presently sent one Archadius, who presenting her with a naked Sword and a Pair of Shears, gave her Choice which of the two She had rather shou'd be applied to the Boys Heads. But She (says Gregory of Tours) being enraged with Choler, especially when She beheld the naked Sword and the Scissars, anwer'd with a great deal of Bitterness—"Since they cannot be advanced to the Kingdom, I had rather see them dead than shaven"—And thereupon both her Grandsons were beheaded in her Presence. The same Gregory, lib. 3. cap. 18. subjoyns—"This Queen, by her Liberalities and Gifts conferr'd upon Monasteries, got the Affections, Plebis & vulgi of the common People and Mob: Date frenos (says Cato) impotenti naturæ, & indomito animali, & sperate ipsas modum licentiæ facturas. Give Bridles to their unruly Natures, and curb the untamed Animal; and [131] then, you may hope they shall see some Bounds to their Licentiousness." What an unbridled Animal and profligate Wretch was that Daughter of King Theodorick, by Birth an Italian; who being mad in Love with one of her Domesticks, and knowing him to have been kill'd by her Mother's Orders, feigned a thorough Reconciliation, and desir'd in Token of it to receive the Holy Sacrament of the Lord's Supper with her Mother; but Privately mixing some Poyson in the Chalice, She at once gave the strangest Instance both of Impiety and Cruelty in thus murdering her own Mother. The Account given of it by Gregory of Tours is this: "They were (says he) of the Arrian Sect, and because it was their Custom that the Royal Family shou'd communicate at the Altar out of one Chalice, and People of Inferior Quality out of another. (By the way, pray take notice of the Custom of Communicating in both kinds by the People.) She dropped Poyson into that Chalice out of which her Mother was to communicate; which as soon as she had tasted of it, kill'd her presently."—Fredegunda, Queen-Mother, and Widow of Chilperick the First, got the Government into her Hands; She, in her Husband's Time, lived in Adultery with one Lander; and as soon as she found out that her Husband Chilperick had got Wind of it, she had him murdered, and presently seiz'd upon the Administration of the Kingdom as Queen-Mother, and Guardian of her Son Clotharius, and kept Possession of it for 13 Years; in the first Place she poyson'd her Son's Uncle Childebert, together with his Wife; afterwards she stirred up the Hunns against his Sons, and raised a Civil [132] War in the Republick. And lastly, She was the Firebrand of all those Commotions which wasted and burnt all Francogallia, during many Years, as Aimoinus tells us, [lib. 3. cap. 36. & lib. 8. cap. 29.]

There ruled once in France, Brunechild, Widow of King Sigebert, and Mother of Childebert. This woman had for her Adulterer a certain Italian, called Protadius, whom She advanced to great Honours: She bred up her two Sons, Theodebert and Theodorick, in such a wicked and profligate Course of Life, that at last they became at mortal Enmity with each other: And after having had long Wars, fought a cruel single Combat. She kill'd with her own Hands her Grandson Meroveus, the Son of Theodebert: She poysoned her Son Theodorick. What need we say more? Date frænos (as Cato says) impotenti naturæ, & indomito animali; & sperate illas modum licentiæ facturas. She was the Occasion of the Death of Ten of the Royal Family: And when a certain Bishop reproved her, and exhorted her to mend her Life, She caused him to be thrown into the River. At last, a Great Council of the Franks being summoned, She was judged, and condemned, and drawn in Pieces by wild horses, being torn Limb from Limb. The Relators of this Story are, Greg. Turonensis, [lib. 5. cap. 39.] and [lib. 8. cap. 29.] And Ado [Ætat. 6.] Otto Frising. [Chron. 5. Cap. 7.] Godfridus Viterbiensis [Chron. parte 16.] & Aimoinus [lib. 4. cap. 1.] Also the Appendix of Gregory of Tours, [lib. 11.] whose Words are these: "Having convicted her of being the Occasion of the Death of Ten Kings of the Franks; to wit, of Sigebert, Meroveus, and his Father Chilperick; Theodebert, and his Son Clothair; Meroveus, [133] the Son of Clothair, Theodorick, and his three Children, which had been newly killed, they order'd her to be placed upon a Camel, and to be tortured with divers sorts of Torments, and so to be carried about all the Army; afterwards to be tied by the Hair of the Head, one Leg and one Arm to a Wild Horse's Tail; by which being kick'd, and swiftly dragg'd about, She was torn Limb from Limb."

Let us instance in some others: Plectrudis got the Government into her Hands; a Widow not of the King, but of Pipin, who ruled the Kingdom whilst Dagobert the Second bore the empty Title of King. This Plectrudis having been divorced by her Husband Pipin, because of her many Adulteries and flagitious Course of Life; as soon as her Husband was dead, proved the Incendiary of many Seditions in France. She compell'd that gallant Man Charles Martel, Mayor of the Palace, to quit his Employment, and in his Place put one Theobald, a most vile and wicked Wretch; and at last She raised a most grievous Civil War among the Franks, who in divers Battels discomfited each other with most terrible Slaughters. Thus, says Aimoinus, [lib 4. cap. 50. & cap sequen.] Also the Author of a Book called, The State of the Kingdom of France under Dagobert the Second, has these Words: "When the Franks were no longer able to hear the Fury and Madness of Plectrude, and saw no Hopes of Redress from King Dagobert, they elected one Daniel for their King, (who formerly had been a Monk) and called him Chilperick." Which Story we have once before told you.

But let us proceed. The Queen-Mother of Charles the Bald, (whose Name was Judith) [134] and Wife of Lewis the Pious, who had not only been King of Francogallia, but Emperor of Italy and Germany, got the Government into her Hands. This Woman stirred up a most terrible and fatal War between King Lewis and his Sons, (her Sons in Law) from whence arose so great a Conspiracy, that they constrained their Father to abdicate the Government, and give up the Power into their Hands, to the great Detriment of almost all Europe: The Rise of which Mischiefs, our Historians do unanimously attribute, for the most Part, to Queen Judith in a particular Manner: The Authors of this History are the Abbot of Ursperg, Michael Ritius and Otto Frising. [Chron. 5. cap. 34.] "Lewis (says this last) by reason of the Evil Deeds of his Wife Judith, was driven out of his Kingdom." Also Rhegino [in Chron. ann. 1338.] "Lewis (says he) was deprived of the Kingdom by his Subjects, and being reduced to the Condition of a private Man, was put into Prison, and the Sole Government of the Kingdom, by the Election of the Franks, was conferr'd upon Lotharius his Son. And this Deprivation of Lewis was occasioned principally through the many Whoredoms of his Wife Judith."

Some Ages after, Queen Blanch, a Spanish Woman, and Mother to St. Lewis, ruled the Land. As soon as She had seized the Helm of Government, the Nobility of France began to take up Arms under the Conduct of Philip Earl of Bologn, the King's Uncle, crying out (as that excellent Author Joannes Joinvillæus writes) [cap. histor. 4.] "That it was not to be endured that so great a Kingdom shou'd be governed by a Woman, and She a Stranger." Whereupon those Nobles rejecting Blanch, chose Earl Philip to be [135] Administrator of the Kingdom: But Blanch persisting in her Purpose, sollicited Succours from all Parts, and at last determined to conclude a League with Ferdinand King of Spain. With Philip joyned the Duke of Brittany, and the Count de Eureux his Brother. These, on a sudden, seiz'd on some Towns, and put good Garisons into them. And thus a grievous War was begun in France, because the Administration of the Government had been seized by the Queen-Mother: It hapned that the King went (about that Time) to Estampes, being sent thither by his Mother upon Account of the War: To that Place the Nobles from all Parts hastily got together, and began to surround the King not with an Intention (as Joinville says) to do him any Harm, but to withdraw him from the Power of his Mother. Which She hearing, with all Speed armed the People of Paris, and commanded them to march towards Estampes. Scarce were these Forces got as far as Montlebery, when the King (getting from the Nobles) joyned them, and returned along with them to Paris. As soon as Philip found that he was not provided with a sufficient force of Domestick Troops, he sent for Succours to the Queen of Cyprus, (who at the fame Time had some Controversy depending in the Kingdom) She entring with a great Army into Champagn, plunder'd that Country far and near; Blanch however continues in her Resolution. This constrains the Nobility to call in the English Auxiliaries, who waste Aquitain and all the Maritime Regions; which Mischiefs arose thro' the Ambition and unbridled Lust of Rule of the Queen-Mother, as Joinvillæus tells us at large, [cap.7, 8, 9, 10.]

[136]

And because many of our Countrymen have a far different Opinion of the Life and Manners of Queen Blanch, occasioned (as 'tis probable) by the Flattery of the Writers of those Times; (For all Writers either thro' Fear of Punishment, or, by Reason of the Esteem which the Kings their Sons have in the World, are cautious how they write of Queen-Mothers:) I think it not amiss to relate what Joinville himself records [cap 76.] viz. That She had so great a Command over her Son, and had reduced him to that Degree of Timidity and Lowness of Spirit, that She would very seldom suffer the King to converse with his Wife Margaret, (her Daughter-in-Law) whom She hated. And therefore whenever the King went a Journey, She ordered the Purveyors to mark out different Lodgings, that the Queen might lie separate from the King. So that the poor King was forced to place Waiters and Doorkeepers in Ambush whenever He went near his Queen; Ordering them, that when they heard his Mother Blanch approach the Lodgings, they shou'd beat some Dogs, by whose Cry he might have Warning to hide himself: And one Day (says Joinville) when Queen Margaret was in Labour, and the King in Kindness was come to visit her, on a sudden Queen Blanch surprized him in her Lodgings: For altho' he had been warned by the howling of the Dogs, and had hid himself (wrapp'd up in the Curtains) behind the Bed; yet She found him out, and in the Presence of all the Company laid Hands on him, and drew him out of the Chamber: You have nothing to do here (said She) get out. The poor Queen, in the mean Time, being not able to bear the Disgrace of [137] such a Reproof, fell into a Swoon for Grief; so that the Attendants were forced to call back the King to bring her to her self again, by whose Return She was comforted and recover'd. Joinville tells this Story [cap. hist. 76.] in almost these same Words.

Again, Some Years after this, Isabella, Widow of Charles the 6th, (Sirnamed the Simple) got Possession of the Government: For before the Administration of the Publick Affairs cou'd be taken care of by the Great Council, or committed by them to the Management of chosen and approved Men, many ambitious Courtiers had stirr'd up Contentions: Six Times these Controversies were renewed, and as often composed by Agreement. At last Isabella being driven out of Paris betook her self to Chartres: There, having taken into her Service a subtle Knave, one Philip de Morvilliers, She made up a Council of her own, with a President, and appointed this Morvilliers her Chancellor; by whose Advice She order'd a Broad-Seal, commonly called, a Chancery-Seal, to be engraven: On which her own Image was cut, holding her Arms down by her Sides: and in her Patents She made use of this Preamble. "Isabella, by the Grace of God, Queen of France: who, by Reason of the King's Infirmity, has the Administration of the Government in her Hands, &c."— But when the Affairs of the Commonwealth were reduced to that desperate Future, that all Things went to Rack and Ruin, She was by the Publick Council banished to Tours, and committed to the Charge of Four Tutors, who had Orders to keep her lock'd up at Home, and to watch her so narrowly, that She shou'd be able to do nothing; not so much as to write a Letter [138] without their Knowledge. A large Account of all this Transaction we have in Monstrellet's; History. [cap. 161 & cap. 168.]

CHAP. XXI.↩

Of the Juridical Parliaments in France.

Under the Capevingian Family there sprung up in Francogallia a Kind of Judicial Reign, [Regnum Judiciale] of which (by Reason of the incredible Industry of the Builders up and Promoters of it, and their unconceivable Subtilty in all subsequent Ages), we think it necessary to say something. A Sort of Men now rule every-where in France, which are called Lawyers by some, and Pleaders or Pettyfoggers by others: These Men, about 300 Years ago, managed their Business with so great Craft and Diligence, that they not only subjected to their Domination the Authority of the General Council, (which we spoke of before) but also all the Princes and Nobles, and even the Regal Majesty it self: So that in whatever Towns the Seats of this same Judicial Kingdom have been fix'd, very near the third Part of the Citizens and Inhabitants have applied themselves to the Study and Discipline of this wrangling Trade, induced thereunto by the vast Profits and Rewards which attend it. Which every one may take Notice of, even in the City of Paris, the Capital of the Kingdom: For who [139] can be three Days in that City without observing, that the third Part of the Citizens are taken up with the Practice of that litigious and Pettyfogging Trade? Insomuch, that the General Assembly of Lawyers in that City (which is called the Robed Parliament) is grown to so great a Heighth of Wealth and Dignity, that now it seems to be (what Jugurtha said of old of the Roman Senate) no longer an Assembly of Counsellors, but of Kings, and Governors of Provinces. Since whoever has the Fortune to be a Member of it, how meanly born soever, in a few Years Time acquires immense and almost Regal Riches: For this Reason many other Cities strove with Might and Main to have the like Privilege of Juridical Assemblies: So that now there are several of these famous Parliaments, to wit, those of Paris, Tholouse, Rouen, Grenoble, Bourdeaux, Aix, and Dijon: All which are fix'd and sedentary; besides an Eighth, which is ambulatory and moveable, and is called the Grand Council.

Within the Limits of these great Juridical Kingdoms there are others lesser, which we may call Provincial Governments, who do all they can to imitate the Grandeur and Magnificence of their Superiors; and these are called Presidial Courts: And so strong is the Force and Contagion of this Disease, that a very great Part of the French Nation spends its Time and Pains in Strife and Law-Suits, in promoting Contentions and Processes; just as of old, a great Number of the Egyptians were employ'd by their Tyrants in Building Pyramids, and other such useless Structures.

Now the Word Parliament in the old Manner of Speech used by our Countrymen, [140] "signifies a Debate, or discoursing together of many Persons, who come from several Parts, and assemble in a certain Place, that they may communicate to one another Matters relating to the Publick." Thus in our ancient Chronicles, whenever Princes or their Ambassadors had a Meeting to treat of Peace or Truce, or other Warlike Agreements; the Assembly so appointed was always called a Parliament; and for the same Reason the Publick Council of the Estates was, in our old Language, called a Parliament. Which Assembly, being of great Authority, the Kings of the Capevingian Race having a Mind to diminish that Authority by little and little, substituted in its Place a certain Number of Senators, and transferred the August Title of a Parliament to those Senators: And gave them these Privileges: First, That none of the King's Edicts shou'd be of Force, and ratified, unless those Counsellors had been the Advisors and Approvers of them. Next, That no Magistracy or Employment in all France, whether Civil or Military, shou'd be conferr'd on any Person, without his being inaugurated, and taking the Oaths in that Assembly. Then that there should be no Liberty of Appeal from their judgment, but that all their Decrees should stand firm, and inviolable. In fine, whatever Power and Authority had anciently been lodged in the General Council of the Nation, during so many Years together, was at Length usurped by that Counterfeit Council, which the Kings took care to fill with such Persons as would be most subservient to their Ends.

Wherefore it will be worth our while, to enquire from what Beginnings it grew up to so great a Heighth and Power; First, a very [141] magnificent Palace was built at Paris, by Order (as some say) of King Lewis Hutin, which in our Ancient Language signifies mutinous or turbulent. Others say, by Philip the fair, about the Year 1314. thro' the Industry and Care of Enguerrant de Marigny Count of Longueville, who was hanged some Years after on a Gallows at Paris, for embezzling the Publick Money, Whoever 'twas that built it, we may affirm, that our Francogallican Kings took the same Pains in building up this litigious Trade, that the Egyptian Monarchs are said to have done in employing their Subjects to build the Pyramids; among whom Chemnis is recorded to have gathered together 360000 Men to raise one Pyramid. Gaguinus, in his History of King Hutin's Life, has this Passage,—"This Lewis ordained, That the Court of Parliament should remain fixed and immoveable in the City of Paris, that Suitors and Clients might not be put to the Trouble of frequent Removals." Now what some affirm, that Pipin or Charlemagn were the Authors of this Institution, is very absurd, as we shall plainly make appear. For most of the Laws and Constitutions of Charlemagn are extant; in all which there is not the least Mention made of the Word Parliament, nor of that great fixed Senate; he only ordains, That in certain known Places his Judges should keep a Court, and assemble the People; which according to his usual Custom he calls a Placitum, or a Mallum, as [lib. 4. cap. 35. Legis Franciæ] 'tis written, "He shall cause no more than three general Placita to be kept in one Year, unless by chance some Person is either accused, or seizes another Man's Property, or is summoned to be a Witness—." There are many other Laws extant of [142] that King's of the like Nature, by which we may observe the Paucity of Law-suits in his Days: And I am clearly of Opinion, that what I find several of our modern Authors have affirm'd is most true, viz. that the first Rise and Seeds of so many Law-suits, Calumnies and Contentions in this Kingdom, proceeded from Pope Clement the Fifth, who during the Reign of Philip the Fair, transferred the Seat of his Papacy to Avignon, at which Time his Courtiers and Petty-Foggers, engaging into Acquaintance with our Countrymen, Introduced the Roman Arts of Wrangling into our Manners and Practice. But not to speak of such remote Times. About the Year of our Lord 1230. reigned St. Lewis, as he is plainly called, whose Life Johannes Joinvillæus (whom we have often mentioned) has written at large. Out of his Commentary we may easily learn, how few Contentions and Law-Suits were in those Days, since King Lewis either determined the Controversies himself in Person, or referred them to be determined by some of his Followers and Companions: And therefore [cap. 94.] he thus writes,—"He was wont (says he) to command Lord Nellius, Lord Soissons, or my self, to inspect and manage the Appeals which were made to him. Afterwards he sent for us, and enquired into the State of the Case; and whether it were of such a Nature as could not be ended without his own Intervention. Oftentimes it hapned, that after we had made our Report, he sent for the contending Parties, and heard the Cause impartially argued over again. Sometimes for his Diversion he would go to the Park of Bois de Vincennes, and sitting down upon a green Sodd at the Foot of an Oak Tree, would [143] command us to sit by him; and there if any one had Business, he wou'd cause him to be called, and bear him patiently. He wou'd often himself proclaim aloud, That if any one had Business, or a Controversy with an Adversary, he might come near and set forth the Merits of his Cause; then if any Petitioner came, he wou'd hear him attentively; and having throughly considered the Case, wou'd pass judgment according to Right and Justice. At other Times he appointed Peter Fountain and Godfrey Villet to plead the Causes of the contending Parties. I have often (says he) seen that good King go out of Paris into one of his Gardens or Villa's without the Walls, dressed very plainly, and there order a Carpet to be spread before him on a Table; and having caused Silence to be proclaimed, those which were at Variance with each other, were introduced to plead their Causes; and then he presently did Justice without Delay." Thus far Joinvillæus—By which we may guess at the small Number of Law Suits and Complainants in those Days, and how careful our Kings were of preventing the Mischiefs that might arise from such as fomented Controversies. In the Capitular of Charles the Great this Law is extant.—"Be it known unto all Persons both Nobility and People, by these our Patents, That we will sit one Day in every Week to hear Causes in Person."

We have the like Testimony in William Budæus, a very famous Man, and a Principal Ornament of our Kingdom of France. For in his Annotations on the Pandects (where he treats of this very Argument, and inveighs against this Kingdom of Brawlers and Petty-Foggers) he tells us, that he finds in the Regal Commentaries of Venerable Antiquity, (the free [144] Perusal of which his Quality did intitle him to) "That in the Reign of the same King Lewis, [Anno 1230.] several Controversies arose between the King and the Earl of Britany; And that by Consent (as 'tis probable) of both Parties, a Camp-Court of Judicature was summoned to meet at Erceniacum, wherein sate as Judges, not Lawyers, Civilians and Doctors, but Bishops, Earls, and Barons. And there the Earl of Britany was cast, and it was order'd that the Inhabitants of his County should be absolved and freed from the Oath of Allegiance and fidelity, which they had taken to him. Again, in the same King's Reign, [Anno 1259.] a Dispute having arisen about the County of Clairmont between the King and the Earls of Poitou and Anjou, a Court of Judicature, composed of the like Persons was appointed, wherein sat the Bishops and Abbots, the General of the Dominicans, the Constable, the Barons, and several Laicks. To this he subjoyns: Yet there were two Parliaments called each Year, at Christmas and at Candlemas, like as there are two Scacaria summoned in Normandy at Easter and at Michaelmas." Thus far Budæus; to whom agrees what we find in an ancient Book concerning the Institution of Parliaments, wherein this Article is quoted out of the Constitution of Philip the 4th, Sirnamed the Fair [ex Anno 1302.]—"Moreover, for the Conveniency of our Subjects, and the expeditious determining of Causes, we propose to have it enacted, that two Parliaments shall be held every Year at Paris, and two Scacaria at Rouen: That the Dies Trecenses shall be held twice a Year: and that a Parliament shall be held at Tholouse, as it used to be held in past Times, [145] if the People of the Land consent to it: Also, because many Causes of great Importance are debated in our Parliament, between great and notable Personages; We ordain and appoint, that two Prelates, and two other sufficient Persons, being Laymen of our Council; or at least one Prelate and one Laick, shall be continually present in our Parliaments, to hear and deliberate concerning the above-mentioned Causes."—From which Words we may learn, First, how seldom the Courts of Judicature heard Causes in those Days. Next, how few judges sat in those Parliaments. For as to the other Provinces and Governments of the Kingdom, we have (in the same Book) the Constitution of Philip the Fair, in these Words, [Anno 1302.]—"Moreover, We ordain that our Seneschals and Bayliffs shall hold their Assizes in Circuit throughout their Counties and Bayliwicks once every two Months at least."

Furthermore, Budæus in the same Place, [Anno 1293.] writes, that Philip the Fair appointed, that three Sorts of People shou'd sit in Parliament, viz. Prelates, Barons, and Clerks mixed with Laymen: "Since the Laicks (says he) are chosen promiscuously out of the Knights, and out of other Sorts of People. Also, that the Prelates and Barons shou'd select fit Persons out of that third Estate, to exercise every Sort of Judicature; and at the same Time shou'd chuse three Judges, who shou'd be sent abroad into those Countries where the written Laws of the Land had their Course, that they might there judge and determine according to Law. And if any Question of great Importance were to be argued, they should take to their Assistance [146] the most Learned Men they could get.—" In which Place, Budæus lamenting the Evil Customs of our Times; that is, this Kingdom of Lawyers now in Vogue, breaks out with Juvenal into this Exclamation: "Quondam hoc indigenæ vivebant more! So (says he) may I exclaim, that in Old Times, when this Kingdom flourished, (as many appear by our Money coined of pure fine Gold) there was a plain and easy Way of doing Justice; there were few Law-suits, and those not of long Continuance, or indeed Eternal, as now they are; for then this Rabble-Rout of pretended Interpreters of the Law had not invaded the Publick: neither was the Science of the Law stretched out to such an unlimited Extent; but Truth and Equity, and a prudent Judge, endued with Integrity and Innocence, was of more worth than Six hundred Volumes of Law-Books. But now to what a sad Condition Things are brought, every one sees, but no Body dares speak out. [Sed omnes dicere mussant.]" Thus far honest Budæus; a most inveterate Adversary of this Art of Chicanery, upon all Occasions.

To return to our Purpose, of giving an Account upon what Foundations and Beginnings this Reign of Litigiousness was first raised. As Cicero writes, that the Old High-Priests (by Reason of the Multitude of Sacrifices) instituted three Assistants called Viri Epulones, altho' they themselves were appointed by Numa to offer Sacrifice at the Ludi Epulares: In like Manner, out of a very Small Number of Parliamentary Judges, (when Law-Suits and Litigiousness increased) swarm'd this incredible Multitude of Judges, and Spawn of Counsellors. And, in the first Place, a great, sumptuous and magnificent Palace was [147] built (as we told you before) either by the Command of Lewis Hutin, or of Philip the Fair: then (from a moderate Number of judges) three Courts of Ten each, were elected a [tres decurie] viz. Of the great Chamber of Accounts, of Inquests, and of Requests. Which Partition Budæus speaks of in the above quoted Place, but more at large Gaguinus in his Life of King Lewis Hutin.

I must not omit one remarkable Thing that ought for ever to be remembred, which both these Authors have transmitted to Posterity: viz. That this Meeting of the Court of Judicature was not perpetual and fixed, as 'tis now, but summonable by the King's Writs, which every Year were renewed by Proclamation about the Beginning of November: "And that we may be certain (says Gaguinus) that the King was the Original and Author of this solemn Convention; the Royal Writs are issued every Year, whereby the Parliament is authorized to meet on the Feast-day of St. Martin, that is, on the 10th of November."

Now of the wonderful and speedy Increase of this Judicial Kingdom, we have this Instance; That about a hundred Years after its Beginning, that is, in the Year 1455, in the Reign of Charles the 7th, we find this Order made by him—From the Feast of Easter, till the End of the Parliament, the Presidents and Counsellors ought to meet in their respective Chambers at Six a Clock every Morning: from the Feast of St. Martin forwards, they may meet later.—And a little after it says, We judge it very necessary, that the Presidents and Counsellors of the Court shou'd come to Parliament after Dinner, for the Dispatch of Causes, and of Judgments. This [148] was Charles the 7th's Order: But in Charles the Great's Reign, who ruled a Kingdom three Times as big, we find a very different Manner of rendring Justice; as we may easily understand by that Law of his, mention'd lib. 4. cap. 74. Legis Francie; "Let a Comes, a Judge (says he) not hold a Placitum, (that is, not pass a Decree) but before Dinner, or Fasting."

Concerning the Word Parliament, and the Authority of that Name, we have this Argument; That when of old a Senate was instituted in Dauphine with supreme Authority, which was commonly called the Council of Dauphine; Lewis the 11th endeavouring to oblige the Dauphinois, who had well deserved from him, changed the Name of this Council into that of a Parliament, without adding any Thing to the Privileges or Authority of it. Of which Guidopappius is our Witness. [Quest. 43. and again quest. 554.]

FINIS.