institutions has been the subject of so violent controversy as
this of the origin of Feudalism. It was formerly supposed that
Feudalism was only a somewhat more developed form of the
ancient Germanic 'following' transplanted to Roman soil, but a
more critical examination of the documents of the early period
soon showed that there was more to it than this. It became
evident that Feudalism was not so simple as had at first
appeared. ... When, however, scholars had come to see this,
they then found themselves at variance upon the details of the
process by which the popular monarchical arrangements of the
early Franks were converted into the aristocratic forms of the
later Feudalism. While they agreed upon the essential fact
that the Germans, at the time of their emergence from their
original seats and their occupation of the Roman lands, were
not mere wandering groups of freebooters, as the earlier
school had represented them, but well-organized nations, with
a very distinct sense of political organization, they found
themselves hopelessly divided on the question how this
national life had, in the course of time, come to assume forms
so very different from those of the primitive German. The
first person to represent what we may call the modern view of
the feudal system was Georg Waitz, in the first edition of his
History of the German Constitution, in the years 1844-47.
Waitz presented the thing as a gradual growth during several
centuries, the various elements of which it was composed
growing up side by side without definite chronological
sequence. This view was met by Paul Roth in his History of the
Institution of the Benefice, in the year 1850. He maintained that
royal benefices were unknown to the Merovingian Franks, and
that they were an innovation of the earliest Carolingians.
They were, so he believed, made possible by a grand
confiscation of the lands of the Church, not by Charles
Martel, as the earlier writers had believed, but by his sons,
Pippin and Karlmann. The first book of Roth was followed in
the year 1863 by another on Feudalism and the Relation of the
Subject to the State, (Feudalität und Unterthanenverband), in
which he attempted to show that the direct subjection of the
individual to the government was not a strange idea to the
early German, but that it pervaded all forms of Germanic life
down to the Carolingian times, and that therefore the feudal
relation was a something entirely new, a break in the practice
of the Germans. In the years 1880-1885 appeared a new edition
of Waitz's History of the German Constitution, in which, after
acknowledging the great services rendered by Roth to the cause of
learning, he declares himself unable to give up his former
point of view, and brings new evidence in support of it. Thus
for more than thirty years this question has been before the
world of scholars, and may be regarded as being quite as far
from a settlement as ever."
_E. Emerton,
An Introduction to the Study of the Middle Ages,
page 236 (foot-note)._
ALSO IN:
_F. P. Guizot,
History of Civilization:
Second Course, lecture 2._
See, also, FRANCE: A. D. 987-1327.
FEUILLANTS, Club and Party of the.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1790, and 1791 (OCTOBER).
FEZ:
Founding of the city and kingdom.
See EDRISITES.
FIANNA EIRINN.
The ancient militia of Erin,
famous in old Irish romance and song.
_T. Moore,
History of Ireland,
volume 1, chapter 7._
FIDENÆ.
An ancient city on the left bank of the Tiber, only five miles
from Rome, originally Latin, but afterwards containing a mixed
Latin and Etruscan population. It was at war with Rome until
the latter destroyed it, B. C. 426.
_W. Ihne,
History of Rome,
book 2, chapter 15._
FIEFS.
See FEUDAL TENURES;
and FEUDALISM.
FIELD OF LIES, The.
Ludwig, or Louis, the Pious, son and successor of Charlemagne,
was a man of gentle character, and good intentions--too
amiable and too honest in his virtues for the commanding of a
great empire in times so rude. He lost the control of his
state, and his family, alike. His own sons headed a succession
of revolts against his authority. The second of these
insurrections occurred in the year 833. Father and sons
confronted one another with hostile armies, on the plain of
Rothfeld, not far from Colmar in Alsace. Intrigue instead of
battle settled the controversy, for the time being. The
adherents of the old emperor were all enticed away from him,
and he found himself wholly deserted and alone. To signify the
treacherous methods by which this defection was brought about,
the "Rothfeld" (Red-field) on which it occurred received the
name of "Lügenfeld," or Field of Lies.
_J. C. L. de Sismondi,
The French under the Carlovingians;
translated by Bellingham, chapter 7._
{1119}
FIELD OF THE CLOTH OF GOLD, The.
The place of the famous meeting of Henry VIII. of England with
Francis I. of France, which took place in the summer of 1520
[see FRANCE: A. D. 1520-1523], is notable in history, from the
magnificence of the preparations made for it, as The Field of
the Cloth of Gold. It was at Guisnes, or between Guisnes and
Arde, near Calais (then English territory). "Guisnes and its
castle offered little attraction, and if possible less
accommodation, to the gay throng now to be gathered within its
walls. ... But on the castle green, within the limits of a few
weeks, and in the face of great difficulties, the English
artists of that day contrived a summer palace, more like a
vision of romance, the creation of some fairy dream (if the
accounts of eye-witnesses of all classes may be trusted), than
the dull every-day reality of clay-born bricks and mortar. No
'palace of art' in these beclouded climates of the West ever
so truly deserved its name. ... The palace was an exact square
of 328 feet. It was pierced on every side with oriel windows
and clerestories curiously glazed, the mullions and posts of
which were overlaid with gold. An embattled gate, ornamented
on both sides with statues representing men in various
attitudes of war, and flanked by an embattled tower, guarded
the entrance. From this gate to the entrance of the palace
arose in long ascent a sloping daïs or hall-pace, along which
were grouped 'images of sore and terrible countenances,' in
armour of argentine or bright metal. At the entrance, under an
embowed landing place, facing the great doors, stood 'antique'
(classical) figures girt with olive branches. The passages,
the roofs of the galleries from place to place and from
chamber to chamber, were ceiled and covered with white silk,
fluted and embowed with silken hanging of divers colours and
braided cloths, 'which showed like bullions of fine burnished
gold.' The roofs of the chambers were studded with roses, set
in lozenges, and diapered on a ground of fine gold. Panels
enriched with antique carving and gilt bosses covered the
spaces between the windows; whilst all along the corridors and
from every window hung tapestry of silk and gold, embroidered
with figures. ... To the palace was attached a spacious
chapel, still more sumptuously adorned. Its altars were hung
with cloth of gold tissue embroidered with pearls; cloth of
gold covered the walls and desks. ... Outside the palace gate,
on the greensward, stood a gilt fountain, of antique
workmanship, with a statue of Bacchus 'birlying the wine.'
Three runlets, fed by secret conduits hid beneath the earth,
spouted claret, hypocras, and water into as many silver cups,
to quench the thirst of all comers. ... In long array, in the
plain beyond, 2,800 tents stretched their white canvas before
the eyes of the spectator, gay with the pennons, badges, and
devices of the various occupants; whilst miscellaneous
followers, in tens of thousands, attracted by profit or the
novelty of the scene, camped on the grass and filled the
surrounding slopes, in spite of the severity of
provost-marshal and reiterated threats of mutilation and
chastisement. ... From the 4th of June, when Henry first
entered Guisnes, the festivities continued with unabated
splendour for twenty days. ... The two kings parted on the
best of terms, as the world thought."
_J. S. Brewer,
Reign of Henry VIII.,
chapter 12._
ALSO IN:
_Lady Jackson,
The Court of France in the 16th Century,
volume 1, chapters 11-12._
_Miss Pardoe,
The Court and Reign of Francis I.,
volume 1, chapter 14._
FIESCO, Conspiracy of.
See GENOA: A. D. 1528-1559.
FIESOLE.
See FLORENCE: ORIGIN AND NAME.
FIFTEEN, The (Jacobite Rebellion),
See SCOTLAND: A. D. 1715.
FIFTEENTH AMENDMENT, The.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1869-1870.
FIFTH MONARCHY MEN.
One of the most extremely fanatical of the politico-religious
sects or factions which rose in England during the
commonwealth and the Protectoral reign of Cromwell, was that
of the so-called Fifth Monarchy Men, of whom Major-General
Harrison was the chief. Their belief is thus described by
Carlyle: "The common mode of treating Universal History, ...
not yet entirely fallen obsolete in this country, though it
has been abandoned with much ridicule everywhere else for half
a century now, was to group the Aggregate Transactions of the
Human Species into Four Monarchies: the Assyrian Monarchy of
Nebuchadnezzar and Company; the Persian of Cyrus and ditto;
the Greek of Alexander; and lastly the Roman. These I think
were they; but am no great authority on the subject. Under the
dregs of this last, or Roman Empire, which is maintained yet by
express name in Germany, 'Das heilige Römische Reich,' we poor
moderns still live. But now say Major-General Harrison and a
number of men, founding on Bible Prophecies, Now shall be a
Fifth Monarchy, by far the blessedest and the only real
one,--the Monarchy of Jesus Christ, his Saints reigning for
Him here on Earth,--if not He himself, which is probable or
possible,--for a thousand years, &c., &c.--O Heavens, there
are tears for human destiny; and immortal Hope itself is
beautiful because it is steeped in Sorrow, and foolish Desire
lies vanquished under its feet! They who merely laugh at
Harrison take but a small portion of his meaning with them."
_T. Carlyle,
Oliver Cromwell's Letters and Speeches,
part 8, speech 2._
The Fifth Monarchy fanaticism, sternly repressed by Oliver
Cromwell, gave some signs of turbulence during Richard
Cromwell's protectorate, and broke out in a mad way the year
after the Restoration. The attempted insurrection in London
was headed by one Venner, and was called Venner's
Insurrection. It was easily put down. "It came as the expiring
flash of a fanatical creed, which had blended itself with
Puritanism, greatly to the detriment of the latter; and, dying
out rather slowly, it left behind the quiet element of
Millenarianism."
_J. Stoughton,
History of Religion in England,
volume 3, chapter 4._
ALSO IN:
_D. Masson,
Life of John Milton,
volume 5, page 16._
"FIFTY-FOUR FORTY OR FIGHT."
See OREGON: A. D. 1844-1846.
FILI.
A class of poets among the early Irish, who practiced
originally certain rites of incantation. Their art was called
Filidecht. "The bards, who recited poems and stories, formed
at first a distinct branch from the Fili. According as the
true Filidecht fell into desuetude, and the Fili became simply
a poet, the two orders practically coalesced and the names
Fili and bard became synonymous. ... In Pagan times and during
the Middle Ages the Irish bards, like the Gaulish ones,
accompanied their recitation of poems on a stringed instrument
called a crut. ... The bard was therefore to the Fili, or
poet, what the Jogler was to the Troubadour."
_W. K. Sullivan,
Article, Celtic Literature,
Encyclopedia Brittanica._
{1120}
FILIBUSTER.
"The difference between a filibuster and a freebooter is one
of ends rather than of means. Some authorities say that the
words have a common etymology; but others, including
Charlevoix, maintain that the filibuster derived his name from
his original occupation, that of a cruiser in a 'flibote,' or
'Vly-boat,' first used on the river Vly, in Holland. Yet
another writer says that the name was first given to the
gallant followers of Dominique de Gourgues, who sailed from
Finisterre, or Finibuster, in France, on the famous expedition
against Fort Caroline in 1567 [see FLORIDA: A. D. 1567-1568].
The name, whatever its origin, was long current in the Spanish
as 'filibustero' before it became adopted into the English. So
adopted, it has been used to describe a type of adventurer who
occupied a curious place in American history during the decade
from 1850 to 1860."
_J. J. Roche,
The Story of the Filibusters,
chapter 1._
See, also,
AMERICA: A: D. 1639-1700.
FILIBUSTERING EXPEDITIONS OF LOPEZ AND WALKER.
See CUBA: A. D. 1845-1860;
and NICARAGUA: A. D. 1855-1860.
FILIOQUE CONTROVERSY, The.
"The Council of Toledo, held under King Reccared, A. D. 589,
at which the Visigothic Church of Spain formally abjured
Arianism and adopted the orthodox faith, put forth a version
of the great creed of Nicæa in which they had interpolated an
additional clause, which stated that the Holy Ghost proceeded
from the Father 'and from the Son' (Filioque). Under what
influence the council took upon itself to make an addition to
the creed of the universal Church is unknown. It is probable
that the motive of the addition was to make a stronger protest
against the Arian denial of the co-equal Godhead of the Son.
The Spanish Church naturally took a special interest in the
addition it had made to the symbol of Nicæa, and sustained it
in subsequent councils. ... The Frankish Church seems to have
early adopted it from their Spanish neighbours. ... The
question was brought before a council held at Aix in A. D.
809. ... The council formally approved of the addition to the
creed, and Charles [Charlemagne] sent two bishops and the
abbot of Corbie to Rome to request the pope's concurrence in
the decision. Leo, at a conference with the envoys, expressed
his agreement with the doctrine, but strongly opposed its
insertion into the creed. ... Notwithstanding the pope's
protest, the addition was adopted throughout the Frankish
Empire. When the Emperor Henry V. was crowned at Rome, A. D.
1014, he induced Pope Benedict VIII. to allow the creed with
the filioque to be chanted after the Gospel at High Mass; so
it came to be generally used in Rome; and at length Pope
Nicholas I. insisted on its adoption throughout the West. At a
later period the controversy was revived, and it became the
ostensible ground of the final breach (A. D. 1054) between the
Churches of the West and those of the East."
_E. L. Cutts,
Charlemagne,
chapter 23._
"The Filioque controversy relates to the eternal procession of
the Holy Spirit, and is a continuation of the trinitarian
controversies of the Nicene age. It marks the chief and almost
the only important dogmatic difference between the Greek and
Latin churches, ... and has occasioned, deepened, and
perpetuated the greatest schism in Christendom. The single
word Filioque keeps the oldest, largest and most nearly
related churches divided since the ninth century, and still
forbids a reunion."
_P. Schaff,
History of the Christian Church,
volume 4, chapter 11, section 107._
ALSO IN:
_G. B. Howard,
The Schism between the Oriental and Western Churches._
See, CHRISTIANITY: A. D. 330-1054.
FILIPPO MARIA, Duke of Milan, A. D. 1412-1447.
FILLMORE, Millard.
Vice-Presidential Election.
Succession to the Presidency.
Administration.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1848 to 1852.
FINÉ, The.
A clan or sept division of the tribe in ancient Ireland.
FINGALL.
See NORMANS.
NORTHMEN: 8TH-9TH CENTURIES;
also, IRELAND: 9TH-10TH CENTURIES.
FINLAND: A. D. 1808-1810.
Conquest by and peculiar annexation to Russia.
Constitutional independence of the Finnish grand
duchy confirmed by the Czar.
See SCANDINAVIAN STATES: A. D. 1807-1810.
FINN GALLS.
See IRELAND: 9TH-10TH CENTURIES.
FINNS.
See HUNGARIANS.
FIODH-INIS.
See IRELAND, THE NAME.
FIRBOLGS, The.
One of the races to which Irish legend ascribes the settlement
of Ireland; said to have come from Thrace.
See NEMEDIANS,
and IRELAND: THE PRIMITIVE INHABITANTS.
FIRE LANDS, The.
See OHIO: A. D. 1786-1796.
FIRMA.
See FERM.
FIRST CONSUL OF FRANCE, The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1799 (NOVEMBER-DECEMBER).
FIRST EMPIRE (FRENCH), The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1804-1805, to 1815.
FIRST-FRUITS.
See ANNATES.
FIRST REPUBLIC (FRENCH), The.
See FRANCE: A. D. 1792 (SEPTEMBER-NOVEMBER), to 1804-1805.
FISCALINI.
See SLAVERY, MEDIÆVAL: FRANCE.
FISCUS, The.
"The treasury of the senate [in the early period of the Roman
empire] retained the old republican name of the ærarium; that
of the emperor was denominated the fiscus, a term which
ordinarily signified the private property of an individual.
Hence the notion rapidly grew up, that the provincial
resources constituted the emperor's private purse, and when in
process of time the control of the senate over the taxes gave
way to their direct administration by the emperor himself, the
national treasury received the designation of fiscus, and the
idea of the empire being nothing else than Cæsar's patrimony
became fixed ineradicably in men's minds."
_C. Merivale,
History of the Romans,
chapter 32._
FISHER, Fort, The capture of.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1864-1865
(DECEMBER-JANUARY: NORTH CAROLINA).
FISHERIES, North American: A. D. 1501-1578.
The Portuguese, Norman, Breton and Basque fishermen on the
Newfoundland Banks.
See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1501-1578.
{1121}
FISHERIES: A. D. 1610-1655.
Growth of the English interest.
See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1610-1655.
FISHERIES: A. D. 1620.
Monopoly granted to the Council for New England.
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1620-1623.
FISHERIES: A. D. 1660-1688.
The French gain their footing in Newfoundland.
See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1660-1688.
FISHERIES: A. D. 1713.
Newfoundland relinquished to England, with fishing rights
reserved to France, by the Treaty of Utrecht.
See NEWFOUNDLAND: A. D. 1713.
FISHERIES: A. D. 1720-1745.
French interests protected by the fortification of Louisbourg.
See CAPE BRETON: A. D. 1720-1745.
FISHERIES: A. D. 1748.
St. Pierre and Michelon islands on the Newfoundland coast
ceded to France.
See NEW ENGLAND: A. D. 1745-1748.
FISHERIES: A. D. 1763.
Rights secured to France on the island of Newfoundland and in
the Gulf of St. Lawrence by the Treaty of Paris.
Articles V. and VI. of the Treaty of Paris (1763), which
transferred Canada and all its islands from France to England,
are in the following language:
"The subjects of France shall have the liberty of fishing and
drying, on a part of the coasts of the island of Newfoundland,
such as it is specified in the 13th Article of the Treaty of
Utrecht; which article is renewed and confirmed by the present
treaty (except what relates to the island of Cape Breton, as
well as to the other islands and coasts, in the mouth and in
the gulph of St. Laurence): and his Britannic majesty consents
to leave to the subjects of the most Christian king the
liberty of fishing in the gulph of St. Laurence, on condition
that the subjects of France do not exercise the said fishery,
but at the distance of three leagues from all the coasts
belonging to Great Britain, as well those of the continent, as
those of the islands situated in the said gulph of St.
Laurence. And as to what relates to the fishery on the coasts
of the island of Cape Breton out of the said gulph, the
subjects of the most Christian king shall not be permitted to
exercise the said fishery, but at the distance of 15 leagues
from the coasts of the island of Cape Breton; and the fishery
on the coasts of Nova Scotia or Acadia, and everywhere else
out of the said gulph, shall remain on the foot of former
treaties.
Article VI. The King of Great Britain cedes the islands of St.
Peter and Miquelon, in full right, to his most Christian
majesty, to serve as a shelter to the French fishermen: and
his said most Christian majesty engages not to fortify the
said islands; to erect no buildings upon them, but merely for
the convenience of the fishery; and to keep upon them a guard
of 50 men only for the police."
_Text of the Treaty (Parliamentary History,
volume 15, page 1295)._
FISHERIES: A. D. 1778.
French fishery rights recognized in the treaty between France
and the United States.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1778 (FEBRUARY).
FISHERIES: A. D. 1783.
Rights secured to the United States by the Treaty of Paris.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1783 (SEPTEMBER).
FISHERIES: A. D. 1814-1818.
Disputed rights of American fishermen after the War of 1812.
Silence of the Treaty of Ghent.
The Convention of 1818.
Under the Treaty of Paris (1783) "we claimed that the liberty
which was secured to the inhabitants of the United States to
take fish on the coasts of Newfoundland, under the limitation
of not drying or curing the same on that island, and also on
the other coasts, bays, and creeks, together with the limited
rights of drying or curing fish on the coasts of Nova Scotia,
Magdalen Islands, and Labrador, were not created or conferred
by that treaty, but were simply recognized by it as already
existing. They had been enjoyed before the Revolution by the
Americans in common with other subjects of Great Britain, and
had, indeed, been conquered, from the French chiefly, through
the valor and sacrifices of the colonies of New England and
New York. The treaty was therefore considered analogous to a
deed of partition. It defined the boundaries between the two
countries and all the rights and privileges belonging to them.
We insisted that the article respecting fisheries was
therefore to be regarded as identical with the possession of
land or the demarcation of boundary. We also claimed that the
treaty, being one that recognized independence, conceded
territory, and defined boundaries, belonged to that class
which is permanent in its nature and is not affected by
subsequent suspension of friendly relations. The English,
however, insisted that this treaty was not a unity; that while
some of its provisions were permanent, other stipulations were
temporary and could be abrogated, and that, in fact, they were
abrogated by the war of 1812; that the very difference of the
language used showed that while the rights of deep-sea fishing
were permanent, the liberties of fishing were created and
conferred by that treaty, and had therefore been taken away by
the war. These were the two opposite views of the respective
governments at the conferences which ended in the treaty of
Ghent, of 1814." No compromise appearing to be practicable,
the commissioners agreed, at length, to drop the subject from
consideration. "For that reason the treaty of Ghent is
entirely silent as to the fishery question.
See UNITED STATES OF AMERICA: A. D. 1814 (DECEMBER).