Book XVIII.
Chap. 22.their daughter; but if there were none but daughters, they were to have the whole inheritance.
4. We have two ancient formularies[1] that state the case, in which according to the Salic law the daughters were excluded by the males, that is when they were in competition with their brother.
5. Another formulary[2] proves, that the daughter succeeded to the prejudice of the grandson; she was therefore excluded only by the son.
6. If daughters had been generally excluded by the Salic law from the inheritance of land, it would be impossible to explain the histories, formularies, and charters, which are continually mentioning the lands and possessions of the women, under the first race.
People[3] have been to blame to assert, that the Salic lands were fiefs. 1. This head is distinguished by the title of allodial lands. 2. Fiefs at first were not hereditary. 3. If the Salic lands had been fiefs, how could Marculsus treat that custom as impious which excluded the women from inheriting, when the males themselves did not succeed to fiefs? 4. The charters which have been cited to prove that the Salic lands were fiefs, only prove that they were freeholds. 5. Fiefs were not established till after the conquest, and the Salic customs subsisted long before the Franks left Germany. 6. It was not the Salic law which by setting bounds to the succession of women formed the establishment of fiefs; but it was the establishment of fiefs that set limits to the succession of women, and to the regulations of the Salic law.
After what has been said, one would not imagine that the perpetual succession of the males to the crown of France should have taken its rise from the Salic
