« PreviousContinue »
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 here
ditatis portio de terrâ Salicâ ad mulicrem venito; “ Let “no part of the Inheritance of Salick Land
come to a Woman. Now (fays Gaguinus), the
French Lawyers call Salick Land, such as be“ longs only to the King, and is different
from the Alodial which concerns the Sub
jects ; to whom, by that Law, is granted a "free dominion of any thing, not excluding " the Princely Authority. And to the fame 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. I. 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 förinerly 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 thefe last, and even their very Name is in a manner extinct. Ammianus Marcellinus makes mention in his Histórý (as we told you before) of these Salii, and shews, that they are called the Eastern Franks, as the other 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
Great 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 wete their
Governors; and from among a great many, “ four persons were chofen; Wisogaft, Arbogast, “ Salogast, and Windogaft ; 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 Frifing, lib. 4. cap. penult. make use of almost the same words. “From " that time (say they) the Laws recommended s to them by Wisigastaldus and Salogastus, be- gan to be in force. By this Salogastus, they
tell us, that Law was invented, which from « his Name is to this day called the Şalick Law; çc and the most noble of the Franks, called Sa“ lici, 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 that it was call'd 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 Suc
. : .
e it at this is the France Salick Law?
cefsion 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 Inheri“ tance: But where a dispute shall arise (after a
long course of time) among the Grandsons. “ and great Grandsons, de * Alode terræ; ler it be * Allodium “ divided, Non per stirpes sed per capita. The is the conlike Law, Extat apud Ripuarios, tit. 58. Item a- trary to
Feudun : pud Anglos, tit. 7. Where they are so far from Gothick enacting any thing relating to the Inheritan- Words, ces of Kingdoms, that they do not so much as for which affect Feudal Successions, but only belong to tis
cult to Allodial; altho' a portion was assigned to Wo- find men out of those Allodial Lands. Which way per Ema foever this matter may be, 'tis manifest in the glijb. first place, That altho' no Article, either of the Frank or Salick Law were extant, which debars Women from the Inheritance of the Crown ; yer 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,af
barsa kor Salick altho’no Artis manifeft in way per pro,
ter 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' for ... 'a Depravation of the Law, are convey'd down to got to Women, cannot properly be called Feuda,
but Feudastra, as in other of our Writings we have made it appear.'
CH A P. IX.
of Hair, peculiar to the Royal Fa-
TT will not be amiss, in this place to give I 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
of the Regal Family, shou'd preserve their Hair, and wear it parted from the Forehead, on both sides the Head, and anointed with fweer 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 Hi. stories tell us of Julius Cæfar,and several others. Aimoinus, lib. 1. cap. 4. says "The Franks 66 chufing for themselves a King, according to of the Custom of other Nations, raised Pharaşcmond 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 SC Cuftom of the ancient Kings of the Franks. In like manner Agathius, lib. de Bell. Goth. 1. where he speaks of Clodoveus, one of our Kings, who was taken in Battel by the Burgundians, (he calls him Clodamirus). “As soon (says he) cc as his Horse had thrown him, the Burgundi. « ans espying his large Head of Hair, which « fell back over his Shoulders, presently knew Śc him to be the Enemy's General ; for 'tis not -c 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 Clarge Head of Hair hanging low down upon © their Backs. And we have many Instances that it was our Ancestor's custom, whenever they either deprived any one of the Crown,