Page images
PDF
EPUB

1

[ocr errors]

adds, that he made a Bargain with him, to live as a private Perfon, and to expect no more of his Father's Kingdom. Alfo in his 61. chap. where he speaks of King Pipin, "He bestowed (fays he) fome Counties on his Brother Grifon, according to the Order of the Twelve "Peers. And to this belongs what Greg. Turon. writes, lib. 7. cap. 32.· "Gondobaldus fent two

σε

[ocr errors]

СС

CC

[ocr errors]

Ambaffadors to the King with confecrated "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 fays, he is a Son of King Clotharius, and has fent. us to claim a due Portion of his Kingdom. But to return to the Question, as far as it. relates to the Succeffion of the Kingdom; I can find out no certain Rule or Law in Francogallia touching that Matter; because (as I faid before) the Kingdom was not hereditary. 'Tis true, that in many Noble Patrimonies there was what we call Fiefs, Feuda; as Otto Frifing. lib. 2. cap. 29. obferves, ""Tis the Cuftom "(fays he) in Burgundy, which is also in moft "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 fame was practised among the whole Nation of the Franks, Petrus de Vineis, lib. epift. 6. epift. 25. and in other places of his Writings, fets forth at large. But in the Succeffion of the Kingdom a different Rule was obferv'd. For our Records do testify, that in old times the Kingdom of Francogallia, upon the Death of the King, was very often,

[ocr errors]

66

not

[ocr errors]

not bestow'd by the People on any one of his Sons, but divided into convenient Parcels, and a part affigned 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 fhare, Clodoveus that of Orleans, Clotharius that of Soiffons, and Childebertus that of Paris, as 'tis recorded by Agathius, lib. hift. 1. Greg. Turon. lib. 3. cap. 1. Aimoinus lib. 2. cap. 1. Rhegino fub 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, Soiffons: and Sigebertus that of Rheims---, Greg. lib. 4. cap. 22. Aimoinus lib. 3. cap. 1. Rhegino fub anno 498.

On the other hand, Otto Frifing. chron. 5. cap. 9. and God. Viterb. tell us, That about the Year 630, when Lotharius the 7th King died, Dagobertus his Son reigned fingly in France, and affigned to his Brother Heribert fome Cities and Villages on the River Loire, for his Maintenance. For from Clodoveus's Time till now, the Kingdom of the Franks was confufedly fubdivided among the Sons, and the Sons Sons, each of which reigned over the part allotted him. ---"The Extent of the King"dom of the Franks reaching now from Spain, ແ as far as to Hungary: Dagobert being fole King of all the Franks, gave Laws to the "Bavarians. So fays Godefridus, not without good Grounds, as many wife Men have thought. For, as Juftin tells us, lib. 21. "That King

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

dom will be much more potent, which re"mains under the Domination of one Perfon,

E 2

"than

t

"than when 'tis divided among many Bro ແ thers.

But after fome Years, when the Kingdom of the Franks was exceffively enlarged on all Sides, and King Pipin was dead, the General Council of the Gauls changed this Method again. Which ferves to confirm what we faid before; viz. That the whole Power, relating to that Matter, was lodged in that Council. For Eguimarthus, in his Life of Charlemagn, writes thus, ---After King Pipin's Death, the Franks ha

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

ving affembled themselves in a folemn general "Convention, did there appoint both his Sons to "be their Kings, upon this Condition, that СС they fhou'd equally divide the whole body "of the Kingdom between them: And that "Charles fhou'd reign over that part of it, "which their Father Pipin enjoy'd; and Car"loman over the other part which their Uncle "held.

[ocr errors]

"When

Alfo the Abbot of Urfperg fays, ce Pipin was dead, his two Sons Charles and Car"loman, by the Confent of all the Franks, were "created Kings, upon Condition, that they "fhou'd divide the whole body of the King"dom equally between them---. The fame Method in dividing the Kingdom, was practifed after the Death of Charlemagn, as 'tis manifeft by his laft Will and Teftament, recorded bp Joannes Nauclerus, and Eguinarthus's Hiftory of his Life. Wherein we find almoft all Europe fo divided among his three Sons, that nothing was affigned either as a Portion or Dower, to his Daughters; but the marrying and providing for them, was entirely trufted to the Care and Prudence of their Brothers. Otto Frifingenfis, chron. 6. cap. 6. and Rhegino in chron. anno

[ocr errors]

877. affure us, that the fame Manner of dividing the Kingdom was practis'd in East France, after the Death of King Lewis the Stammerer, in 874. Again, fome Years after, anno 880. after King Lewis the 23d King's Death, the very fame way of dividing the Kingdom was made ufe of; which however we are to obferve, was not in the Power and Arbitriment of the Kings themselves; but done by the Authority of the Publick Council, as we may eafily collect from thefe Words of Aimoinus, lib. 5. cap. 40. "The "Sons (fays he) of Lewis, late King of the "Franks, met at Amiens, and divided their "Fathers 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 in Francogallia touching this Matter; but the whole Power of difpofing of it was lodged in the Publick Council of the Nation. Indeed afterwards in the Reign of Philip the 3d, (the 41ft King) it was ordained, that certain Lordfhips might be fet out and affigned to younger Brothers: But even of this Law there were various Interpretations, and many Controverfies arofe concerning Daughters; fo that we can deliver nothing for certain in this Affair ; only thus much we may truly fay, That if the Ancient Inftitution of our Ancestors ought to be our Rule, the Determination of this whole Matter muft be left to the Publick General Gouncil of the Nation: that according to the Number of Children, fome particular Lordships or Territories, may (by its Authority) be affigned for their Main

tenance.

F 3

CHAP.

T

54

CHA P. VIII.

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

Ecause we have undertaken to give an ac

[ocr errors]

count of the Law and Right of Regal Inberitance, 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 ferv'd to appeafe a great and dangerous Contention, which arofe touching the Succeffion 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 fome Months after was born) Edward King of England (Son of Ifabella, the Daughter of Philip the Fair, and Sifter to Charles, lately dead claimed the Inheritance of his Grandfather's Kingdom as his Right. But Philip of Valois, Coufin-german by the Father's fide to the deceafed King, ftanding 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 ftamp tell us, was written by Pharamond; and he calls it a moft famous Law, even to his time. For in his Life of Philip of Valois; The Salick Law (fays he) was a Bar to Ed"ward's Title; which Law being first given ૬ Pharamond to the Franks, has been reliffgioufly obferved, even to thofe days. By

se

$ that

« PreviousContinue »