University of Virginia Library

Search this document 
  
expand section 
  
expand section 
  

expand section1. 
expand section2. 
expand section3. 
expand section4. 
expand section5. 
expand section6. 
expand section7. 
expand section8. 
expand section9. 
expand section10. 
expand section11. 
expand section12. 
expand section13. 
expand section14. 
expand section15. 
expand section16. 
expand section17. 
expand section18. 
expand section19. 
expand section20. 
expand section21. 
expand section22. 
expand section23. 
expand section24. 
expand section25. 
expand section26. 
expand section27. 
expand section28. 
expand section29. 
collapse section30. 
expand section30.1. 
expand section30.2. 
expand section30.3. 
expand section30.4. 
 30.5. 
5. Of the Conquests of the Franks.
 30.6. 
expand section30.7. 
expand section30.8. 
expand section30.9. 
expand section30.10. 
expand section30.11. 
expand section30.12. 
expand section30.13. 
expand section30.14. 
expand section30.15. 
expand section30.16. 
expand section30.17. 
expand section30.18. 
expand section30.19. 
expand section30.20. 
expand section30.21. 
expand section30.22. 
 30.23. 
expand section30.24. 
expand section30.25. 
expand section31. 

30.5. 5. Of the Conquests of the Franks.

It is not true that the Franks upon entering Gaul took possession of the whole country to turn it into fiefs. Some have been of this opinion because they saw the greatest part of the country towards the end of the second race converted into fiefs, rear-fiefs, or other dependencies; but such a disposition was owing to particular causes which we shall explain hereafter.

The consequence which sundry writers would infer thence, that the barbarians made a general regulation for establishing in all parts the state of villainage is as false as the principle from which it is derived. If at a time when the fiefs were precarious, all the lands of the kingdom had been fiefs, or dependencies of fiefs; and all the men in the kingdom vassals or bondmen subordinate to vassals; as the person that has property is ever possessed of power, the king, who would have continually disposed of the fiefs, that is, of the only property then existing; would have had a power as arbitrary as that of the Sultan is in Turkey; which is contradictory to all history.