The Online Library of Liberty

A project of Liberty Fund, Inc.

• The Spirit of Laws.
• Book XX.: Of Laws In Relation to Commerce, Considered In Its Nature and Distinctions.
• Chap. I.: Of Commerce.
• Chap. II.: Of the Spirit of Commerce.
• Chap. III.: Of the Poverty of the People.
• Chap. IV.: Of Commerce In Different Governments.
• Chap. V.: Of Nations That Have Entered Into an œconomical Commerce.
• Chap. VI.: Some Effects of an Extensive Navigation.
• Chap. VII.: The Spirit of England, With Respect to Commerce.
• Chap. VIII.: In What Manner the œconomical Commerce Has Been Sometimes Restrained.
• Chap. IX.: Of the Prohibition of Commerce.
• Chap. X.: An Institution Adapted to œconomical Commerce.
• Chap. XI.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XII.: Of the Freedom of Commerce.
• Chap. XIII.: What It Is That Destroys This Liberty.
• Chap. XIV.: The Laws of Commerce Concerning the Confiscation of Merchandises.
• Chap. XV.: Of Seizing the Persons of Merchants.
• Chap. XVI.: An Excellent Law.
• Chap. XVII.: A Law of Rhodes.
• Chap. XVIII.: Of the Judges of Commerce.
• Chap. XIX.: That a Prince Ought Not to Engage Himself In Commerce.
• Chap. XX.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXI.: Of the Commerce of the Nobility In a Monarchy.
• Chap. XXII.: A Singular Reflection.
• Chap. XXIII.: To What Nations Commerce Is Prejudicial.
• Book XXI.: Of Laws Relative to Commerce, Considered In the Revolutions It Has Met With In the World.
• Chap. I.: Some General Considerations.
• Chap. II.: Of the People of Africa.
• Chap. III.: That the Wants of the People In the South Are Different From Those of the North.
• Chap. IV.: The Principal Difference Between the Commerce of the Ancients and the Moderns.
• Chap. V.: Other Differences.
• Chap. VI.: Of the Commerce of the Ancients.
• Chap. VII.: Of the Commerce of the Greeks.
• Chap. VIII.: Of Alexander. His Conquest.
• Chap. IX.: Of the Commerce of the Grecian Kings After the Death of Alexander.
• Chap. X.: Of the Circuit of Africa.
• Chap. XI.: Of Carthage and Marseilles.
• Chap. XII.: The Isle of Delos. Mithridates.
• Chap. XIII.: Of the Genius of the Romans As to Maritime Affairs.
• Chap. XIV.: Of the Genius of the Romans With Respect to Commerce.
• Chap. XV.: Of the Commerce of the Romans With the Barbarians.
• Chap. XVI.: Of the Commerce of the Romans With Arabia, and the Indies.
• Chap. XVII.: Of Commerce After the Destruction of the Western Empire.
• Chap. XVIII.: A Particular Regulation.
• Chap. XIX.: Of Commerce After the Decay of the Roman Power In the East.
• Chap. XX.: How Commerce Broke Through the Barbarism of Europe.
• Chap. XXI.: The Discovery of Two New Worlds, and In What Manner Europe Is Affected By It.
• Chap. XXII.: Of the Riches Which Spain Drew From America.
• Chap. XXIII.: A Problem.
• Book XXII.: Of Laws In Relation to the Use of Money.
• Chap. I.: The Reason of the Use of Money.
• Chap. II.: Of the Nature of Money.
• Chap. III.: Of Ideal Money.
• Chap. IV.: Of the Quantity of Gold and Silver.
• Chap. V.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. VI.: The Reason Why Interest Was Lowered One Half After the Conquest of the Indies.
• Chap. VII.: How the Price of Things Is Fixed In the Variation of the Sign of Riches.
• Chap. VIII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. IX.: Of the Relative Scarcity of Gold and Silver.
• Chap. X.: Of Exchange.
• Chap. XI.: Of the Proceedings of the Romans With Respect to Money.
• Chap. XII.: The Circumstances In Which the Romans Changed the Value of Their Specie.
• Chap. XIII.: Proceedings With Respect to Money In the Time of the Emperors.
• Chap. XIV.: How the Exchange Is a Constraint On Despotic Power.
• Chap. XV.: The Practice of Some Countries In Italy
• Chap. XVI.: The Assistance a State May Derive From Bankers.
• Chap. XVII.: Of Public Debts.
• Chap. XVIII.: Of the Payment of Public Debts.
• Chap. XIX.: Of Lending Upon Interest.
• Chap. XX.: Of Maritime Usury.
• Chap. XXI.: Of Lending By Contract, and the State of Usury Amongst the Romans.
• Chap. XXII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Book XXIII.: Of Laws In the Relation They Bear to the Number of Inhabitants.
• Chap. I.: Of Men and Animals, With Respect to Multiplication of Their Species.
• Chap. II.: Of Marriage.
• Chap. III.: Of the Condition of Children.
• Chap. IV.: Of Families.
• Chap. V.: Of the Several Orders of Lawful Wives.
• Chap. VI.: Of Bastards In Different Governments.
• Chap. VII.: Of the Father’s Consent to Marriage.
• Chap. VIII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. IX.: Of Young Women.
• Chap. X.: What It Is That Determines to Marriage.
• Chap. XI.: Of the Severity of Government.
• Chap. XII.: Of the Number of Males and Females In Different Countries.
• Chap. XIII.: Of Sea-port Towns.
• Chap. XIV.: Of the Productions of the Earth Which Require a Greater Or Less Number of Men.
• Chap. XV.: Of the Number of Inhabitants With Relation to the Arts.
• Chap. XVI.: The Concern of the Legislator In the Propagation of the Species.
• Chap. XVII.: Of Greece, and the Number of Its Inhabitants.
• Chap. XVIII.: Of the State and Number of People Before the Romans.
• Chap. XIX.: Of the Depopulation of the Globe.
• Chap. XX.: That the Romans Were Under a Necessity of Making Laws, to Encourage the Propagation of the Species.
• Chap. XXI.: Of the Laws of the Romans Relating to the Propagation of the Species.
• Chap. XXII.: Of the Exposing of Children.
• Chap. XXIII.: Of the State of the World After the Destruction of the Romans.
• Chap. XXIV.: The Changes Which Happened In Europe, With Regard to the Number of the Inhabitants.
• Chap. XXV.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXVI.: Consequences.
• Chap. XXVII.: Of the Law Made In France to Encourage the Propagation of the Species.
• Chap. XXVIII.: By What Means We May Remedy a Depopulation.
• Chap. XXIX.: Of Hospitals.
• Book XXIV.: Of Laws As Relative to Religion, Considered In Itself, and In Its Doctrines.
• Chap. I.: Of Religion In General.
• Chap. II.: A Paradox of Mr. Bayle’s.
• Chap. III.: That a Moderate Government Is Most Agreeable to the Christian Religion, and a Despotic Government to the Mahometan.
• Chap. IV.: Consequences From the Character of the Christian Religion, and That of the Mahometan.
• Chap. V.: That the Catholic Religion Is Most Agreeable to a Monarchy, and the Protestant to a Republic.
• Chap. VI.: Another of Mr. Bayle’s Paradoxes.
• Chap. VII.: Of the Laws of Perfection In Religion.
• Chap. VIII.: Of the Connection Between the Moral Laws and Those of Religion.
• Chap. IX.: Of the Essenes.
• Chap. X.: Of the Sect of Stoics.
• Chap. XI.: Of Contemplation.
• Chap. XII.: Of Penances.
• Chap. XIII.: Of Inexpiable Crimes.
• Chap. XIV.: In What Manner Religion Has an Influence On Civil Laws.
• Chap. XV.: How False Religious Are Sometimes Corrected By the Civil Laws.
• Chap. XVI.: How the Laws of Religion Correct the Inconveniencies of a Political Constitution.
• Chap. XVII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XVIII.: How the Laws of Religion Have the Effect of Civil Laws.
• Chap. XIX.: That It Is Not So Much the Truth Or Falsity of a Doctrine Which Renders It Useful Or Pernicious to Men In Civil Government, As the Use Or Abuse of It.
• Chap. XX.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXI.: Of the Metempsychosis.
• Chap. XXII.: That It Is Dangerous For Religion to Inspire an Aversion For Things In Themselves Indifferent.
• Chap. XXIII.: Of Festivals.
• Chap. XXIV.: Of the Local Laws of Religion.
• Chap. XXV.: The Inconveniency of Transplanting a Religion From One Country to Another.
• Chap. XXVI.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Book XXV.: Of Laws As Relative to the Establishment of Religion and Its External Polity.
• Chap. I.: Of Religious Sentiments.
• Chap. II.: Of the Motives of Attachment to Different Religions.
• Chap. III.: Of Temples.
• Chap. IV.: Of the Ministers of Religion.
• Chap. V.: Of the Bounds Which the Laws Ought to Prescribe to the Riches of the Clergy.
• Chap. VI.: Of Monasteries.
• Chap. VII.: Of the Luxury of Superstition.
• Chap. VIII.: Of the Pontificate.
• Chap. IX.: Of Toleration In Point of Religion.
• Chap. X.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XI.: Of Changing a Religion.
• Chap. XII.: Of Penal Laws.
• Chap. XIII.: A Most Humble Remonstrance to the Inquisitors of Spain and Portugal.
• Chap. XIV.: Why the Christian Religion Is So Odious In Japan.
• Chap. XV.: Of the Propagation of Religion.
• Book XXVI.: Of Laws, As Relative to the Order of Things On Which They Determine.
• Chap. I.: Idea of This Book.
• Chap II.: Of Laws Divine and Human.
• Chap. III.: Of Civil Laws Contrary to the Law of Nature.
• Chap. IV.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. V.: Cases In Which We May Judge By the Principles of the Civil Law, In Limiting the Principles of the Law of Nature.
• Chap. VI.: That the Order of Succession Or Inheritance Depends On the Principles of Political Or Civil Law, and Not On Those of the Law of Nature.
• Chap. VII.: That We Ought Not to Decide By the Precepts of Religion, What Belongs Only to the Law of Nature.
• Chap. VIII.: That We Ought Not to Regulate By the Principles of the Canon Law, Things Which Should Be Regulated By Those of the Civil Law.
• Chap. IX.: That Things Which Ought to Be Regulated By the Principles of Civil Law, Can Seldom Be Regulated By Those of Religion.
• Chap. X.: In What Case We Ought to Follow the Civil Law Which Permits, and Not the Law of Religion Which Forbids.
• Chap. XI.: That Human Courts of Justice Should Not Be Regulated By the Maxims of Those Tribunals Which Relate to the Other Life.
• Chap. XII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XIII.: In What Cases, With Regard to Marriage, We Ought to Follow the Laws of Religion; and In What Cases We Should Follow the Civil Laws.
• Chap. XIV.: In What Instances Marriages Between Relations Should Be Regulated By the Laws of Nature; and In What Instances By the Civil Laws.
• Chap. XV.: That We Should Not Regulate By the Principles of Political Law, Those Things Which Depend On the Principles of Civil Law.
• Chap. XVI.: That We Ought Not to Decide By the Rules of the Civil Law, When It Is Proper to Decide By Those of the Political Law.
• Chap. XVII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XVIII.: That It Is Necessary to Enquire, Whether the Laws Which Seem Contradictory, Are of the Same Class.
• Chap. XIX.: That We Should Not Decide Those Things By the Civil Law, Which Ought to Be Decided By Domestic Laws.
• Chap. XX.: That We Ought Not to Decide By the Principles of the Civil Law, Those Things Which Belong to the Law of Nations.
• Chap. XXI.: That We Should Not Decide By Political Laws, Things Which Belong to the Law of Nations.
• Chap. XXII.: The Unhappy State of the Ynca Athualpa.
• Chap. XXIII.: That When, By Some Circumstance, the Political Law Becomes Destructive to the State, We Ought to Decide By Such a Political Law As Will Preserve It, Which Sometimes Becomes a Law of Nations.
• Chap. XXIV.: That the Regulations of the Police Are of a Different Class From Other Civil Laws.
• Chap. XXV.: That We Should Not Follow the General Disposition of the Civil Law, In Things Which Ought to Be Subject to Particular Rules Drawn From Their Own Nature.
• Book XXVII.: Of the Origin and Revolutions of the Roman Laws On Successions.
• Chap. I.
• Book XXVIII. Of the Origin and Revolutions of the Civil Laws Among the French.
• Chap. I.: Different Character of the Laws of the Several People of Germany.
• Chap. II.: That the Laws of the Barbarians Were All Personal.
• Chap. III.: Capital Difference Between the Salic Laws and Those of the Visigoths and Burgundians.
• Chap. IV.: In What Manner the Roman Law Came to Be Lost In the Country Subject to the Franks, and Preserved In That Subject to the Goths and Burgundians.
• Chap. V.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. VI.: How the Roman Law Kept Its Ground In the Demesne of the Lombards.
• Chap. VII.: How the Roman Law Came to Be Lost In Spain.
• Chap. VIII.: A False Capitulary.
• Chap. IX.: In What Manner the Codes of Barbarian Laws, and the Capitularies Came to Be Lost.
• Chap. X.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XI.: Other Causes of the Disuse of the Codes of Barbarian Laws, As Well As of the Roman Law, and of the Capitularies.
• Chap. XII.: Of Local Customs. Revolution of the Laws of Barbarous Nations, As Well As of the Roman Law.
• Chap. XIII.: Difference Between the Salic Law, Or That of the Salian Franks, and That of the Ripuarian Franks, and Other Barbarous Nations.
• Chap. XIV.: Another Difference.
• Chap. XV.: A Reflection.
• Chap. XVI.: Of the Ordeal, Or Trial By Boiling Water, Established By the Salic Law.
• Chap. XVII.: Particular Notions of Our Ancestors.
• Chap. XVIII.: In What Manner the Custom of Judicial Combats Gained Ground.
• Chap. XIX.: A New Reason of the Disuse of the Salic and Roman Laws, As Also of the Capitularies.
• Chap. XX.: Origin of the Point of Honour.
• Chap. XXI.: A New Reflection Upon the Point of Honour Among the Germans.
• Chap. XXII.: Of the Manners Relative to Judicial Combats.
• Chap. XXIII.: Of the Code of Laws On Judicial Combats.
• Chap. XXIV.: Rules Established In the Judicial Combat.
• Chap. XXV.: Of the Bounds Prescribed to the Custom of Judicial Combats.
• Chap. XXVI.: Of the Judiciary Combat Between One of the Parties, and One of the Witnesses.
• Chap. XXVII.: Of the Judicial Combat Between One of the Parties, and One of the Lord’s Peers. Appeal of False Judgment.
• Chap. XXVIII.: Of the Appeal of Default of Justice.
• Chap. XXIX.: Epoch of the Reign of St. Lewis.
• Chap. XXX.: Observations On Appeals.
• Chap. XXXI.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXXII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXXIII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXXIV.: In What Manner the Proceedings At Law Became Secret.
• Chap. XXXV.: Of the Costs.
• Chap. XXXVI.: Of the Public Prosecutor.
• Chap. XXXVII.: In What Manner the Institutions of St. Lewis Fell Into Oblivion.
• Chap. XXXVIII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXXIX.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. Xl.: In What Manner the Judiciary Forms Were Borrowed From the Decretals.
• Chap. Xli.: Fiux and Reflux of the Ecclesiastic and Temporal Jurisdiction.
• Chap. Xlii.: the Revival of the Roman Law, and the Result Thereof. Change In the Tribunals.
• Chap. Xliii.: the Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. Xliv.: of the Proof By Witnesses.
• Chap. Xlv.: of the Customs of France.
• Book XXIX.: Of the Manner of Composing Laws.
• Chap. I.: Of the Spirit of a Legislator.
• Chap. II.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. III.: That the Laws Which Seem to Deviate From the Views of the Legislator, Are Frequently Agreeable to Them.
• Chap. IV.: Of the Laws Contrary to the Views of the Legislator.
• Chap. V.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. VI.: That Laws Which Appear the Same, Have Not Always the Same Effect.
• Chap. VII.: The Same Subject Continued. Necessity of Composing Laws In a Proper Manner.
• Chap. VIII.: That Laws Which Appear the Same, Were Not Always Made Through the Same Motive.
• Chap. IX.: That the Greek and Roman Laws Punished Suicide, But Not Through the Same Motive.
• Chap. X.: That Laws Which Seem Contrary, Proceed Sometimes From the Same Spirit.
• Chap. XI.: How We Are to Judge of the Difference of Laws.
• Chap. XII.: That Laws Which Appear the Same, Are Sometimes Really Different.
• Chap. XIII.: That We Must Not Separate Laws From the End For Which They Were Made. of the Roman Laws On Theft.
• Chap. XIV.: That We Must Not Separate the Laws From the Circumstances In Which They Were Made.
• Chap. XV.: That Sometimes It Is Proper the Law Should Amend Itself.
• Chap. XVI.: Things to Be Observed In the Composing of Laws.
• Chap. XVII.: A Bad Method of Giving Laws.
• Chap. XVIII.: Of the Ideas of Uniformity.
• Chap. XIX.: Of Legislators.
• Book XXX.: Theory of the Feudal Laws Among the Franks, In the Relation They Bear to the Establishment of the Monarchy.
• Chap. I.: Of Feudal Laws.
• Chap. II.: Of the Source of Feudal Laws.
• Chap. III.: The Origin of Vassalage.
• Chap. IV.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. V.: Of the Conquests of the Franks.
• Chap. VI.: Of the Goths, Burgundians, and Franks.
• Chap. VII.: Different Ways of Dividing the Land.
• Chap. VIII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. IX.: A Just Application of the Law of the Burgundians and of That of the Visigoths In Relation to the Division of Lands.
• Chap. X.: Of Servitudes.
• Chap. XI.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XII.: That the Lands Belonging to the Division of the Barbarians Paid No Taxes.
• Chap. XIII.: Of Taxes Paid By the Romans and Gauls, In the Monarchy of the Franks.
• Chap. XIV.: Of What They Called Census.
• Chap. XV.: That What They Called Census Was Raised Only On the Bondmen, and Not On the Freemen.
• Chap. XVI.: Of the Feudal Lords Or Vassals.
• Chap. XVII.: Of the Military Service of Freemen.
• Chap. XVIII.: Of the Double Service.
• Chap. XIX.: Of Compositions Among the Barbarous Nations.
• Chap. XX.: Of What Was Afterwards Called the Jurisdiction of the Lords.
• Chap. XXI.: Of the Territorial Jurisdiction of the Churches.
• Chap. XXII.: That the Jurisdictions Were Established Before the End of the Second Race.
• Chap. XXIII.: General Idea of the Abbé Du Bos’ S Book On the Establishment of the French Monarchy In Gaul.
• Chap. XXIV.: The Same Subject Continued. Reflection On the Main Part of the System.
• Chap. XXV.: Of the French Nobility.
• Book XXXI.: Theory of the Feudal Laws Among the Franks, In the Relation They Bear to the Revolutions of Their Monarchy.
• Chap. I.: Changes In the Offices and In the Fiefs. of the Mayors of the Palace.
• Chap. II.: How the Civil Government Was Reformed.
• Chap. III.: Authority of the Mayors of the Palace.
• Chap. IV.: Of the Genius of the Nation In Regard to the Mayors.
• Chap. V.: In What Manner the Mayors Obtained the Command of the Armies.
• Chap. VI.: Second Epocha of the Humiliation of Our Kings of the First Race.
• Chap. VII.: Of the Great Offices and Fiefs Under the Mayors of the Palace.
• Chap. VIII.: In What Manner the Allodial Estates Were Changed Into Fiefs.
• Chap. IX.: How the Church-lands Were Converted Into Fiefs.
• Chap. X.: Riches of the Clergy.
• Chap. XI.: State of Europe At the Time of Charles Martel.
• Chap. XII.: Establishment of the Tithes.
• Chap. XIII.: Of the Election of Bishops and Abbots.
• Chap. XIV.: Of the Fiefs of Charles Martel.
• Chap. XV.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XVI.: Confusion of the Royalty and Mayoralty. the Second Race.
• Chap. XVII.: A Particular Circumstance In the Election of the Kings of the Second Race.
• Chap. XVIII.: Charlemaign.
• Chap. XIX.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XX.: Lewis the Debonnaire.
• Chap. XXI.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXIII.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXIV.: That the Freemen Were Rendered Capable of Holding Fiefs.
• Chap. XXV.: The Principal Cause of the Humiliation of the Second Race. Changes In the Allodia.
• Chap. XXVI.: Changes In the Fiefs.
• Chap. XXVII.: Another Change Which Happened In the Fiefs.
• Chap. XXVIII.: Changes Which Happened In the Great Offices, and In the Fiefs.
• Chap. XXIX.: Of the Nature of the Fiefs After the Reign of Charles the Bald.
• Chap. XXX.: The Same Subject Continued.
• Chap. XXXI.: In What Manner the Empire Was Transferred From the Family of Charlemaign.
• Chap. XXXII.: In What Manner the Crown of France Was Transferred to the House of Hugh Capet.
• Chap. XXXIII.: Some Consequences of the Perpetuity of Fiefs.
• Chap. XXXIV.: The Same Subject Continued.

CHAP. XXV.

Of the French Nobility.

THE Abbé du Bos maintains, that at the commencement of our monarchy there was only one order of citizens among the Franks. This assertion, so injurious to the noble blood of our principal families, is equally affronting to the three great houses which successively governed this realm. The origin of their grandeur would not therefore have been lost in the obscurity of time. History might point out the ages when they were plebeian families; and to make Childeric, Pepin, and Hugh Capet gentlemen, we should be obliged to trace their pedigree among the Romans or Saxons, that is, among the conquered nations.

This author grounds* his opinion on the Salic law. By that law, he says, it plainly appears, that there were not two different orders of citizens among the Franks: it allowed a composition† of two hundred sous for the murder of any Frank whatsoever; but among the Romans it distinguished the king’s guest, for whose death it gave a composition of three hundred sous, from the Roman proprietor to whom it granted a hundred, and from the Roman tributary to whom it gave only a composition of forty-five. And as the difference of the compositions formed the principal distinction, he concludes that there was but one order of citizens among the Franks, and three among the Romans.

It is astonishing that his very mistake did not set him right. And indeed, it would have been very extraordinary that the Roman nobility who lived under the domination of the Franks, should have a larger composition; and been persons of much greater importance than the most illustrious among the Franks, and their greatest generals. What probability is there, that the conquering nation should have so little respect for themselves, and so great a regard for the conquered people? Besides, our outhor quotes the laws of other barbarous nations, which proves that they had different orders of citizens. Now it would be a matter of astonishment that this general rule should have failed only among the Franks. Hence he ought to have concluded either that he did not rightly understand, or that he misapplied, the passages of the Salic law; which is actually the case.

Upon opening this law, we find that the composition for the death of an Antrustio* , that is, of the king’s vassal, was fix hundred sous: and that for the death of a Roman, who was the† king’s guest, was only three hundred. We find there likewise that‡ the composition for the death of an ordinary Frank∥ was two hundred sous; and for the death of an ordinary Roman§ , was only one hundred. For the death of a Roman** tributary, who was a kind of bondman or freedman, they paid a composition of fortyfive sous: but I shall take no notice of this, no more than of the composition for the murder of a Frank bondman or of a Frank freedman, because this third order of persons is out of the question.

What does our author do? He is quite silent with respect to the first order of persons among the Franks, that is the article relating to the Antrustios; and afterwards, upon comparing the ordinary Frank, for whose death they paid a composition of two hundred sous, with those whom he distinguishes under three orders among the Romans, and for whose death they paid different compositions, he finds that there was only one order of citizens among the Franks, and that there were three among the Romans.

As the Abbé is of opinion that there was only one order of citizens among the Franks, it would have been lucky for him that there had been only one order also among the Burgundians, because their kingdom constituted one of the principal branches of our monarchy. But in their codes* we find three sorts of compositions, one for the Burgundian or Roman nobility, the other for the Burgundians or Romans of a middling condition, and the third for those of a lower rank in both nations. He has not quoted this law.

It is very extraordinary to see in what manner he evades† those passages which press him hard on all sides. If you speak to him of the grandees, lords, and the nobility: these, he says, are mere distinctions of respect, and not of order; they are things of courtesy, and not legal privileges; or else, he says, those people belonged to the king’s council; nay, they possibly might be Romans: but still there was only one order of citizens among the Franks. On the other hand, if you speak to him of some Franks of an inferior rank‡ , he says, they are bondmen; and thus he interprets the decree of Childebert. But I must stop here a little, to enquire farther into this decree. Our author has rendered it famous by availing himself of it in order to prove two things; the one* , that all the compositions we meet with in the laws of the Barbarians were only civil fines added to corporal punishments, which intirely subverts all the antient records: the other, that all freemen were judged directly and immediately by the king† , which is contradicted by an infinite number of passages and authorities informing us of the‡ judiciary order of those times.

This decree, which was made in an assembly∥ of the nation, says, that if the judge finds a notorious robber, he must command him to be tied, in order to be carried before the king, si Francus fucrit; but if he is a weaker person (debilior persona), he shall be hanged on the spot. According to the Abbé du Bos, Francus is a freeman, debilior persona is a bondman. I shall defer entering for a moment into the signification of the word Francus, and begin with examining what can be understood by these words, a weaker person. In all languages whatsoever, every comparison necessarily supposeth three terms, the greatest, the less degree, and the least. If none were here meant but freemen and bondmen, they would have said a bondman, and not a man of less power. Therefore debilior persona does not signify a bondman, but a person of a superior condition to a bondman. Upon this supposition, Francus cannot mean a freeman but a powerful man; and this word is taken here in that acception, because among the Franks there were always men who had greater power than others in the state, and it was more difficult for the judge or count to chastise them. This explication agrees very well with many capitularies* , where we find the cases in which the criminals were to be carried before the king, and those in which it was otherwise.

It is mentioned in the life of Lewis the Debonnaire† , written by Tegan, that the bishops were the principal cause of the humiliation of that emperor, especially those who had been bondmen, and such as were born among the Barbarians. Tegan thus addresses Hebo, whom this prince had drawn from the state of servitude, and made archbishop of Rheims. “What recompence‡ did the emperor receive from you for so many benefits? He made you a freeman, but did not enoble you, because he could not give you nobility after having given you your liberty.”

This discourse which proves so strongly the two orders of citizens, does not at all confound the Abbé du Bos. He answers thus∥ : “The meaning of this passage is not, that Lewis the Debonnaire was incapable of introducing Hebo into the order of the nobility. Hebo, as archbishop of Rheims, must have been of the first order, superior to that of the nobility.” I leave the reader to judge, whether this be not the meaning of that passage; I leave him to judge whether there be any question here concerning a precedency of the clergy over the nobility. “This passage proves only,” continues the same writer§ , “that the freeborn subjects were qualified as noblemen; in the common acceptation noblemen and men who are free-born have for this long time signified the same thing.” What! because some of our Burghers have lately assumed the quality of noblemen, shall a passage of the life of Lewis the Debonnaire be applied to this sort of people? “And perhaps, (continues he still)∥ Hebo had not been a bondman among the Franks, but among the Saxons, or some other German nation, where the people were divided into several orders.” Then because of the Abbé du Bos’s perhaps there must have been no nobility among the nation of the Franks. But he never applied a perhaps so badly. We have seen that Tegan§ distinguishes the bishops, who had opposed Lewis the Debonnaire, some of whom had been bondmen, and others of a barbarous nation. Hebo belonged to the former and not to the latter. Besides, I do not see how a bondman, such as Hebo, can be said to have been a Saxon or a German; a bondman has no family, and consequently no nation. Lewis the Debonnaire manumitted Hebo; and as bondmen after their manumission, embraced the law of their master, Hebo was become a Frank, and not a Saxon or German.

I have been hitherto acting offensively; it is now time to defend myself. It will be objected to me, that indeed the body of the Antrustios formed a distinct order in the state, from that of the freemen; but as the fiefs were at first precarious, and afterwards for life, this could not form a nobleness of descent, since the privileges were not annexed to an hereditary fief. This is the objection which induced Mr. de Valos to think, that there was only one order of citizens among the Franks; an opinion which the Abbé du Bos has borrowed of him, and which he has absolutely spoiled with so many bad arguments. Be that as it may, it is not the Abbé du Bos that could make this objection. For after having given three orders of Roman nobility, and the quality of the king’s guest for the first, he could not pretend to say that this title was a greater mark of a noble descent than that of Antrustio. But I must give a direct answer. The Antrustios or trusty men were not such because they were possessed of a fief, but they had a fief given them because they were Antrustios or trusty men. The reader may please to recollect what has been said in the beginning of this book. They had not at that time, as they had afterwards, the same fief: but if they had not that, they had another, because the fiefs were given at their birth, and because they were often granted in the assemblies of the nation, and, in fine, because it was the interest of the nobility to receive them, it was likewise the king’s interest to grant them. These families were distinguished by their dignity of trusty men, and by the privilege of being qualified to swear allegiance for a fief. In the following book,* I shall demonstrate from the circumstances of time, that there were freemen who were permitted to enjoy this great privilege, and consequently to enter into the order of nobility. This was not the case at the time of Gontram, and his nephew Childebert; but so it was at the time of Charlemaign. But though in that prince’s reign the freemen were not incapable of possessing fiefs, yet it appears by the above-cited passage of Tegan, that the freedmen were absolutely excluded. Will the Abbé du Bos,† who carries us to Turkey, to give us an idea of the ancient French nobility; will he, I say, pretend that they ever complained among the Turks of the elevation of people of low birth to the honours and dignities of the state, as they complained under Lewis the Debonnaire and Charles the Bald? There was no complaint of that kind under Charlemaign. because this prince always distinguished the ancient fron the new families; which Lewis the Debonnaire and Charles the Bald did not.

The public should not forget the obligation it owes to the Abbé du Bos for several excellent performances. It is by these works, and not by his history of the establishment of the French monarchy, we ought to judge of his merit. He committed very great mistakes, because he had more in view the count of Boulainvillier’s work, than his own subject.

From all these strictures I shall draw only one reflection; if so great a man was mistaken, how cautiously ought I to tread?

BOOK XXXI.

THEORY OF THE FEUDAL LAWS AMONG THE FRANKS, IN THE RELATION THEY BEAR TO THE REVOLUTIONS OF THEIR MONARCHY.

[* ]See the establishment of the French monarchy, vol. iii. book 6. chap. 4. page 304.

[† ]He cites the 44th title of this law, and the law of the Ripuarians, tit. 7. and 36.

[* ]Qui in truste dominica est, tit. 44. sect. 4. and this relates to the 13th formulary of Marculfus, de regis Antrustione. See also the title 66. of the Salic law, sect. 3. and 4. and the title 74. and the law of the Ripuarians, tit. 11. and the capitulary of Charles the Bald apud Carisiacum, in the year 877. chap. 20.

[† ]Salic law, tit. 44. sect. 6.

[‡ ]Ibid. tit. 44. sect. 4.

[∥ ]Tit. 44. sect. 15.

[§ ]Tit. 44 sect. 15.

[** ]Salic law, tit. 44. sect. 7.

[* ]Si quis quolibet casu dentem optimati Burgundioni vel Romano nobili excusserit, solidos viginti quinque cogatur exsolvere; de mediocribus personis ingenuis tam Burgundionibus quam Romanis si dens excussus fuerit, decem solidis componatur; de inferioribus personis, quidque solidos. Art. 1, 2, and 3, of tit. 26. of the law of the Burgundians.

[† ]Establishment of the French monarchy, vol. iii. book 6. chap. 4. and 5.

[‡ ]Ibid. vol. iii. chap. 5. page 319 and 320.

[* ]Establishment of the French monarchy, vol. iii. b. 6. c. 4. p. 307 and 308.

[† ]Ibid. page 309. and in the following chapter, page 319 and 320.

[‡ ]See the 28th book of this work, chap. 28. and the 31st. book, chap. 8.

[∥ ]Itaque Colonia convenit & ita bannivimus, ut unusque judex criminosum latronem ut audierit, ad casam suam ambulet & ipsum ligare faciat; ita ut si Francus fuerit, ad nostram præsentiam dirigatur; & si debilior persona fuerit, in loco pendatur. Capitulary, of Baluzius’s edition, tom. i. page 19.

[* ]See the 28th book of this work, chap. 28. and the 31st book, chap. 8.

[† ]Chap. 43. and 44.

[‡ ]O qualem remunerationem reddidisti ei! fecit te liberum, non nobilem, quod impossibile est post libertatem. Ibid.

[∥ ]Establishment of the French monarchy, vol. iii. book 6. chap. 4. p. 3, 6.

[§ ]Ibid.

[∥ ]Establishment of the French monarchy, vol. iii. book 6. chap. 4. p. 3. 6.

[§ ]Omnes episcopi molesti fuerunt Ludovico, & maximè ii quos è servile conditione honoratos habebat, cum his qui ex barbaris nationibus ad hoc fasti. gium perducti sunt. De gestis Ludovici Pii, cap. 43 & 44.

[* ]Chap. 23.

[† ]Establishment of the French monarchy, vol. iii. book 6. chap. 4. p. 302.