Rhegino writes thus, in Chron. anni 577.—­“After the Death of King Pipin, Lewis his Son (who had been present at his Father’s Decease and celebrated his Funerals) kept his Residence at Francfort, the principal Seat of the Eastern Kingdom.” Luitprandus Ticinensis says, lib. 1. cap. 6.—­“It was order’d that Wido shou’d have for his Share, that which Men call the Roman France, and Berengarius shou’d have Italy.”  And a little after,—­“When he had march’d thro’ the Territories of the Burgundians, he purposed to enter Roman France, &c.”  Now it was call’d Roman France, first, because the Franks had possessed themselves of that Gallia, which was under the Roman Obedience.  Secondly, because the Roman Language prevail’d in that Country, as we formerly told you:  Whence arose the Saying, Loqui Romanum, of such as used not the German or Frank; but the Latin Tongue.  Otto Frisingius, chron. 4. cap. penult. says,—­“It seems to me, that those Franks who dwell in Gallia, borrowed the Language, which they make use of to this Day, from the Romans; for the others who stay’d about the Rhine, and in Germany use the Teutonick Tongue.”—­And in Imitation of him, Godfridus, part. 17. cap. 1.—­“The Franks (says he) seem to me to have learn’d the Language which they make use of to this Day, from the Romans, who formerly dwelt in those Parts.”—­From all these ’tis apparent, that the Reputation and Power of the Franks was extraordinary great; as ’twas fitting for such as were Masters of a great Part of Europe.

Moreover we find, that those Germans which were transplanted by the Emperor Frederick the IId, into the Kingdoms of Naples and Sicily, and establish’d there as a presidiary Colony, were called Franks. Petrus de Vineis, lib. epist. 6. cap. 25. [Footnote:  These are only broken pieces of Sentences, to prove, that the Germans (establish’d in Naples and Sicily) were called, and actually were Franks.] —­“Following (says he) the Law and Custom of the Franks, in this Instance, that the Eldest Brother to the Exclusion of all the Younger succeeds, even in the Camp it self.” Imp.  Freder. 2.  Neapol. constit. lib. 2. tit. 32. speaking of those Franks, “who upon Occasion trusted the Fortune of their Lives, and of all their Estates, to the Event of a Duel, or single Combat.”  And again,—­“The aforesaid manner of Proof, which all who observe the Rites of the Franks made use of”—.  Also lib. 2. tit. 33.—­“which Law, our Will is, shall in all Causes be common both to the Franks and Longobards.”

Matters being thus plain, ’tis strange that Gregory Bishop of Tours (who writ concerning the Original of the Franks 800 Years ago) shou’d say, in the first Part of his History, That altho’ he had made diligent Enquiry about the Rise and Beginning of the Franks, he could find nothing certain:  notwithstanding he had seen an ancient Book of a certain Historian of theirs, called, Salpitius Alexander; who affirms nothing, either of their first Habitations, or the Beginnings of their Domination.