by Magna Carta as reissued in 1217. Although the former of these lays stress upon the fact that the sheriff’s supervisory powers are universal many men did not attend his tourn. Some lords of manors and of hundreds held a court of their own for view of frankpledge, and in the 13th century it may be fairly said “of all the franchises, the royal rights in private hands, view of frankpledge is perhaps the commonest.” At the end of the same century the court for the view of frankpledge was generally known as the court leet, and was usually a manorial court in private hands. However, the principle of the frankpledge was still enforced. Thus Bracton says “every male of the age of twelve years, be he free be he serf, ought to be in frankpledge,” but he allows for certain exceptions.
As the word frankpledge denotes, these societies were originally concerned only with freemen; but the unfree were afterwards admitted, and during the 13th century the frankpledges were composed chiefly of villains. From petitions presented to parliament in 1376 it seems that the view of frankpledge was in active operation at this time, but it soon began to fall into disuse, and its complete decay coincides with the new ideas of government introduced by the Tudors. In a formal fashion courts leet for the view of frankpledge were held in the time of the jurist Selden, and a few of these have survived until the present day. Sir F. Palgrave has asserted that the view of frankpledge was unknown in that part of the country which had been included in the kingdom of Northumbria. This statement is open to question, but it is highly probable that the system was not so deeply rooted in this part of England as elsewhere. The machinery of the frankpledge was probably used by Henry II. when he introduced the jury of presentment; and commenting on this connexion F. W. Maitland says “the duty of producing one’s neighbour to answer accusations (the duty of the frankpledges) could well be converted into the duty of telling tales against him.” The system of frankpledge prevailed in some English boroughs. Sometimes a court for view of frankpledge, called in some places a mickleton, whereat the mayor or the bailiffs presided, was held for the whole borough; in other cases the borough was divided into wards, or into leets, each of which had its separate court.
See Pollock and Maitland, History of English Law (1895); G. Waitz, Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte, Band i. (1880); and W. Stubbs, Constitutional History, vol. i. (1897).
FRANKS, SIR AUGUSTUS WOLLASTON (1826–1897), English
antiquary, was born on the 20th of March 1826, and was educated
at Eton and at Trinity College, Cambridge. He early showed
inclination for antiquarian pursuits, and in 1851 was appointed
assistant in the Antiquities Department of the British Museum.
Here, and as director of the Society of Antiquaries, an
appointment he received in 1858, he made himself the first
authority in England upon medieval antiquities of all descriptions,
upon porcelain, glass, the manufactures of savage nations,
and in general upon all Oriental curiosities and works of art later
than the Classical period. In 1866 the British and medieval
antiquities, with the ethnographical collections, were formed into
a distinct department under his superintendence; and the Christy
collection of ethnography in Victoria Street, London, prior to its
amalgamation with the British Museum collections, was also
under his care. He became vice-president and ultimately
president of the Society of Antiquaries, and in 1878 declined the
principal librarianship of the museum. He retired on his
seventieth birthday, 1896, and died on the 21st of May 1897.
His ample fortune was largely devoted to the collection of
ceramics and precious objects of medieval art, most of which
became the property of the nation, either by donation in his
lifetime or by bequest at his death. Although chiefly a medieval
antiquary, Franks was also an authority on classical art, especially
Roman remains in Britain: he was also greatly interested in
book-marks and playing-cards, of both of which he formed
important collections. He edited Kemble’s Horae Ferales,
and wrote numerous memoirs on archaeological subjects.
Perhaps his most important work of this class is the catalogue
of his own collection of porcelain.
FRANKS. The name Franks seems to have been given in the
4th century to a group of Germanic peoples dwelling north of
the Main and reaching as far as the shores of the North Sea;
south of the Main was the home of the Alamanni. The names of
some of these tribes have come down to us. On the Tabula
Peutingeriana appear the “Chamavi qui et Pranci,” which
should doubtless read “qui et Franci”; these Chamavi
apparently dwelt between the Yssel and the Ems. Later, we
find them a little farther south, on the banks of the Rhine, in
the district called Hamalant, and it is their customs which were
brought together in the 9th century in the document known as
the Lex Francorum Chamavorum. After the Chamavi we may
mention the Attuarii or Chattuarii, who are referred to by
Ammianus Marcellinus (xx. 10, 2): “Rheno exinde transmisso,
regionem pervasit (Julianus) Francorum quos Atthuarios
vocant.” Later, the pagus Attuariorum corresponds to the
district of Emmerich and Xanten. It should be noted that this
name occurs again in the middle ages in Burgundy, not far
from Dijon; in all probability a detachment of this people had
settled in that spot in the 5th or 6th century. The Bructeri,
Ampsivarii and Chatti may also be classed among the Frankish
tribes. They are mentioned in a celebrated passage of Sulpicius
Alexander, which is cited by Gregory of Tours (Historia Francorum,
ii. 9). Sulpicius shows the general Arbogast, a barbarian
in the service of Rome, seeking to take vengeance on the Franks
(392): “Collecto exercitu, transgressus Rhenum, Bricteros ripae
proximos, pagum etiam quem Chamavi incolunt depopulatus
est, nullo unquam occursante, nisi quod pauci ex Ampsivariis
et Catthis Marcomere duce in ulterioribus collium jugis
apparuere.” It is evidently this Marcomeres, the chief of these
tribes, who is regarded by later historians as the father of the
legendary Faramund (Pharamund) although in fact Marcomeres
has nothing to do with the Salian Franks.
The earliest mention in history of the name Franks is the entry on the Tabula Peutingeriana, at least if we assume that the term “et Franci” is not a later emendation. The earliest occurrence of the name in any author is in the Vita Aureliani of Vopiscus (ch. vii.). When, in 241, Aurelian, who was then only a tribune, had just defeated some Franks in the neighbourhood of Mainz and was marching against the Persians, his troops sang the following refrain:
Mille Sarmatas, mille Francos, semel et semel occidimus;
Mille Persas, quaerimus.
All these Germanic tribes, which were known from the 3rd century onwards by the generic name of Franks, doubtless spoke a similar dialect and were governed by customs which must scarcely have differed from one another; but this was all they had in common. Each tribe was politically independent; they formed no confederations. Sometimes two or three tribes joined forces to wage a war; but, the struggle over, the bond was broken, and each tribe resumed its isolated life. Waitz holds with some show of probability that the Franks represent the ancient Istaevones of Tacitus, the Alamanni and the Saxons representing the Herminones and the Ingaevones.
Of all these Frankish tribes one especially was to become prominent, the tribe of the Salians. They are mentioned for the first time in 358, by Ammianus Marcellinus (xvii. 8, 3), who says that the Caesar Julian “petit primos omnium Francos, videlicet eos quos consuetudo Salios appellavit.” As to the origin of the name, it was long held to be derived from the river Yssel or Saal. It is more probable, however, that it arose from the fact that the Salians for a long period occupied the shores of the salt sea.[1] The Salians inhabited the sea-coast, whereas the Ripuarians dwelt on the banks of the river Rhine.
The Salians, at the time when they are mentioned by Ammianus, occupied Toxandria, i.e. the region south of the Meuse, between that river and the Scheldt. Julian defeated them completely, but allowed them to remain in Toxandria, not, as of old, as conquerors, but as foederati of the Romans. They perhaps paid tribute, and they certainly furnished Rome with
- ↑ Their legends are connected with the sea, the name Meroveus signifying “sea-born.”
