Marxist-Leninist science has clearly shown the internal laws of the emergence and development of feudalism as a world-historical formation. However, Medievalists who study the genesis of feudalism are constantly faced with the question: why in some cases did the primitive communal formation develop directly into a feudal one, while in others the primitive one was first replaced by a slave-owning formation, and only then it was replaced by a feudal one? Obviously, the reasons for this are explained by differences in the local conditions of life and everyday life of specific peoples. These differences undoubtedly explain the variants of the genesis of feudalism. In recent years, Soviet historical science has been intensively engaged in this problem, exploring both the typological similarity and formational unity of all feudal societies, and their diversity, depending on where and how they arose. The question of the typology of feudalism since the epoch of its genesis has come up very close.

Relatively recently, this issue has already been considered by A.D. Lyublinskaya, who outlined a number of deep and complex aspects of it1 . The report of Z. V. Udaltsova and E. V. Gutnova, presented as the first major topic on the Middle Ages section at the XIII International Congress of Historical Sciences (Moscow, 1970), shows the new efforts of Soviet scientists in the field of solving a cardinal problem in its significance. Its title is characteristic: "The Genesis of feudalism in European countries" (references to the report given in the text of the article). Defining their task as considering the typology of this historical phenomenon based on the material of Western Europe and Byzantium (p. 2), the authors outline three main types of the feudalization process: "balanced" (this term was used A.D. Lublin) synthesis of feudal elements that were born in parallel in the depths of the slave-owning formation and tribal system (in the areas of Northern Gaul, as well as South-Eastern Europe - among some South Slavic peoples, for example, among the Serbs and Croats); the same synthesis with a preponderance of the ancient, slave-owning heritage (part of the Mediterranean, especially Byzantium); almost or completely synthetic-free development to feudalism of purely barbaric or almost barbaric regions (North-West Germany, the Scandinavian countries, the regions of the western and eastern Slavs, as well as South-West Germany, Britain, pp. 3, 7, 15). Separating the main points of this report, we will focus in more detail on one of the areas that are mainly referred to as the region of "balanced" synthesis - Gaul, taking not only its "Shaggy" part (the Roman name for the Gaulish North), but the country as a whole. It is known that Gaul, especially Northern Gaul, is considered a zone of feudal development

1 A.D. Lyublinskaya. Typology of early feudalism in Western Europe and the problem of Romano-Germanic synthesis. "The Middle Ages "(hereinafter: SV). Issue 31. 1968

page 97

the classic type. Therefore, the identification of local subtypes in it, that is, further typologization and clarification of the provisions expressed in the above-mentioned report, should, in our opinion, help to clarify the fundamental problem of the relationship between the forms of society and the complex of various historical conditions that gave rise to them.

First of all, we should mention the periodization of the process. Z. V. Udaltsova and E. V. Gutnova suggested starting from the idea of two stages of feudal genesis: the early one, which proceeded independently of each other in the barbarian and Late Roman societies that were not yet synthesized, and the secondary one, which occurred after the barbarian invasion of the Roman Empire and its collapse (p. 2). However, such a periodization in relation to Gallium does not sufficiently take into account the complexity of the crystallization of "protofeudal" elements and therefore requires additional division. It seems that the features of the historical development of Gaul allow us to speak about four stages of the genesis of feudalism. The first one occurs in Gaul before the Roman conquest, when the local society was already undergoing a noticeable process of property and social class differentiation and the future early class relations were gradually maturing: military leaders and squads appeared, tribal nobles and priests developed, the dependence of inferior clients on their masters was outlined, tribal unions were formed as an embryonic form of state-political organization. When scholars note the maturation of early class relations in Doric Gaul, the question inevitably arises: what kind of relations in the future, slave-owning or feudal? There are supporters of both points of view. This is partly due to the weak study of the history of ancient Gaul. If we assume that it is more correct to speak about the spontaneous development of the Celts along the common Germanic and common Slavic path and about the emergence of future feudal relations among them, then we will have to admit! that this natural process was interrupted and metamorphosed by the invasion of the Roman legions. Gaul became part of the slave republic, and later the empire.

A few centuries later, when the Western Roman Empire and the slave system were declining, the second stage of the genesis of feudalism began, but within a different society. The Gaulish substratum in the course of primary synthesis mixed with the Roman stratification, giving rise to a Romanesque society. It formed numerous latifundia belonging to the nobility, as well as estates divided into small parcels. There were few free peasants left, slaves were increasingly put on the land, and the work of dependent artisans and dependent farmers-colonists, who anticipated the future feudal-dependent peasants, prevailed. Further, Gaul was shaken by the invasions of barbarians, whose society was also already heterogeneous: tribal and military nobility stood out; incomplete members of the tribe appeared.

litas and other "prototypes" of future semi-serfs; tribal alliances led by "kings"were formed. A secondary synthesis followed: the Romanesque order of class society merged with the late-gentile order of the barbarians, who were experiencing a stage of military democracy. This is the third stage in the genesis of feudalism. Finally, the fourth period comes at the time of the early feudal states, Merovingian and others, that emerged in Gaul in the fifth and sixth centuries, and within the framework of which the genesis of feudalism is being completed.

Let us now turn to the general characterization of the secondary synthesis process. It was he who identified the main differences between local early feudal societies, which manifested themselves in the forms of economic, social and political life, the scale of distribution of new relations, and the pace of development. In the III - VI centuries, Roman Gaul experienced German invasions (Franks, Burgundians, Visigoths, Ostrogoths

page 98

et al.) and Celtic (Britons) tribes. This gave rise to the five main areas of synthesis: the Frankish State, Burgundy, Visigothic Aquitaine, Ostrogothic Provence, and Briton Armorica (Brittany). The formation of early feudal relations in the Franco-Romanesque territory 2 , which is traditionally considered a classical standard for comparison with any other type of feudal relations anywhere in the world3, is most fully studied in Soviet medieval studies . The available data suggest that, in general, in Northern, North-Eastern and Central Gaul, which was captured by the Salic Franks during the conquest that lasted from the end of the third to the beginning of the sixth centuries, there was a strong mixing of free conquerors with the local population, the bulk of which was dependent. At that stage of development, the rank-and-file Franks were still barely dependent, and the situation of the former slaves (serfs) and semi-free colonists had changed for the better. Thus, the local society, which was already moving towards feudalism, was pushed back, as it were, to the social epoch that the Gauls (naturally, taking into account all the changes) basically experienced in the first century BC, and the Romans, perhaps, in the VIII-VII centuries BC. If we accept the view that the first, earliest Stage of the genesis of feudalism in Gaul ended with the Roman invasion taking this process aside, then now the third stage of the genesis of the feudal system is expressed here in a partial return to its original positions. As it steadily made its way into feudalism, pre-feudal history temporarily created a phenomenon that F. Engels figuratively called the" rejuvenation " of local society4 .

At the last, fourth stage of the genesis of the new system in this part of Gaul, the fruits of merging two social structures of different stages in terms of development are revealed. The results were diverse. The Germans destroyed the old order. But, being in the minority compared to the Gallo-Romans and noticeably inferior to them in cultural traditions, they gradually dissolved into their environment and began to assimilate their civilization and language. Particularly strong impact on pagans-

2 This was done in particular detail by A. I. Neusykhin (see: A. I. Neusykhin, The emergence of the dependent peasantry as a class of early feudal society in Western Europe of the VI-VIII centuries, Moscow, 1956, ch. III; his. Pre-feudal period as a transitional stage of development from the tribal system to the early feudal. 31); see also S. D. Skazkin. Essays on the history of the Western European peasantry in the Middle Ages, Moscow, 1968, Chap. I-V; G. M. Danilova. The emergence of feudal relations among the Franks of the VI-VII centuries. Petrozavodsk. 1959; A. R. Korsunsky. Obrazovanie rannefeudalnogo gosudarstva v Zapadnoy Evropy [Formation of the Early Feudal state in Western Europe]. The emergence of feudal Relations in Western Europe, Moscow, 1968; N. F. Kolesnitsky. Feudal state (VI-XV centuries). Moscow, 1967; B. F. Porshnev. Feudalism and Popular Masses, Moscow, 1964; A.D. Lyublinskaya, D. P. Pritsker, M. N. Kuzmin. Essays on the history of France, L. 1957; R. V. Udaltsova. Problems of studying the genesis of feudalism in Western Europe. Voprosy Istorii, 1966, No. 9. As for foreign works of recent decades, the following are particularly important: M. Blok. Characteristic features of the French agrarian history, Moscow, 1957; E. Gamillscheg. Die frankische Einwanderung und junggermanische Zuwanderung. B. 1938 ("Germanische Siedlung in Belgien und Nordfrankreich". Bd. 1); L. Schmidt. Geschichte der deutschen Stamme bis zum Ausgang der Volkerwanderung. Munchen. 1940 (Bd. 2: "Die Westgermanen"); W. von Wartburg. Umfang und Bedeutung der germanischen Siedlung in Nordgallien im 5. und 6. Jahrhundert im Spiegel der Sprache und der Ortsnamen. B. 1950; E. Salin. La Civilisation merovingienne d'apres les sepultures, les textes et le laboratoire. Tt. 1 - 4. P. 1949 - 1959; S. J. de Laet, J. A. E. Dhondt, J. Nenquin. Les Laeti du Namurois et l'origine de la civilisation merovingienne. Gent. 1952; E. Ewig. Die frankischen Teilungen und Teilreiche (511 - 613). Mainz. 1953; R. Latouche. Les Origines de l'economie occidentale (IVe - IXe siecle). P. 1956; M. Lugge. "Gallia" und "Francia" im Mittelalter. Bonn. 1960; R. Grand. Recherches sur l'origine des Francs. P. 1965; E. Demougeot. La Formation de l'Europe et les invasions barbares des origines germaniques a l'avenement de Diocletien. P. 1969.

3 See, for example, A. Y. Shevelenko. Comparison of the ways of the genesis of feudal relations in the Frankish state and Indonesia. Voprosy Istorii, 1965, No. 12.

4 See K. Marx and F. Engels, Op. 21, p. 154.

page 99

the newcomers were supported by the Christian Church, a hotbed of early feudal relations. Two social networks, Frankish and Romanesque, overlapped one another, but their cells did not match. But both of them were already "proto-feudal" and therefore intertwined. And the initial mismatch of cells made the early feudal network even more dense in the future: the elements of feudalism that matured in the depths of Frankish and Roman societies mutually complemented each other and strengthened the process of feudalization. This led to a significant depth of penetration of modified forms of life into society, accelerated and expanded the use of such feudal institutions as commendation and patronage, vassalage and benefices, precarii and immunity. That is why the brainchild of the fourth stage of the genesis of the new system - the complete allod as a family, freely alienated property-contained the germ of a feudal conditional property that was fatal to it, and in the seventh century gradually crawled out of the allodial cocoon and became entangled in the system of holdings that determined who and how much received income from the labor of direct producers. And when this preparation for the redistribution of material goods was spontaneously completed and the existence of rent as direct evidence of the emergence of a new dependence and the loss of free people of their former rights to the results of their labor was outlined, the agrarian revolution of the VIII century took place. The Merovingian state, within which the genesis of feudal relations was realized, was replaced by the Carolingian state, which confirmed the complete triumph of the new socio-economic formation.

Already on the example of the Frankish State, one can see the validity of the general remarks of A.D. Lyublinskaya, Z. V. Udaltsova and E. V. Gutnova about the uneven process of feudalization, its asynchrony in different, even in neighboring regions of the same continent. Nevertheless, the historical pattern manifested itself everywhere: one way or another, feudalism was inexorably replacing both ancestral and ancient norms of life. In terms of this ultimately unified course of development (with all the innumerable local differences), the once-fierce dispute between "Germanists" and "Romanists" about who won when the barbarian world collided with the ancient one looks rather ridiculous at the present time. It all depended on the correlation of specific circumstances. There were areas where alien influence was stronger; in others, local traditions were stronger. However, the feudal system eventually prevailed everywhere. But where it grew directly out of tribal society, or where elements of the latter were insignificant in purely ancient areas that had long outlived tribal traditions and therefore easily assimilated barbarians, feudalism in both cases turned out to be one - sided, overloaded with forms that were clearly specific, too local, historically small-scale and non-universal. On the contrary, in Frankish Gaul, a fairly harmonious mixture of barbarian and ancient elements allowed them to successfully interact and created such models of feudal relations, many of which find analogies not only in Europe. This circumstance explains why this particular path of feudal development is considered by the overwhelming majority of scientists to be classical.

Its variant was an evolution typical of Burgundy. The initial stage of this path in relation to the Gallic region proper has not yet been sufficiently studied5 , since the main part of the research is being carried out in the following areas:-

5 Let us first name: A. I. Neusykhin. The emergence of the dependent peasantry..., p. 285 sl.; N. P. Graziansky. On land divisions among the Burgundians and Visigoths. Sv. Issue I. 1942; Ya. D. Serovaisky. Changes in the agrarian system on the territory of Burgundy in the fifth century St. Vol. XIV. 1959; J. Richard. Histoire de la Bourgogne. P. 1957; R. Guichard. Essai sur l'histoire du peuple Burgonde. P. 1965; A. Deleage. La Vierurale en Bourgogne jusqu'au debut du XIe siecle. Macon. 1941.

page 100

The argument concerns the history of the Burgundians either at the still "Pre-Gallic", Rhenish-Swiss stage of their settlement, or concerns later feudal states - the Burgundian kingdoms (Upper, Lower and Arelat), the duchy and county, that is, the era of the developed Middle Ages rather than the early one. The way of life of the inhabitants of the Upper and Middle Rhone basin in the "pre-Burgundian" period, especially the Allobrogs, Ambarrs, and Seguziavs, is hardly touched upon in any special works .6 So far, it is impossible to state with sufficient clarity what appeared here exactly after 443-457, when Burgundy as such appeared in Gaul, and what-after 534, when it was conquered by the Franks, although many phenomena are traditionally attributed by scientists to the end of the V - beginning of the VI century. - the time of the unification of the young state by Gundobad (480 - 516) and fixing ordinary laws in the form of the "Burgundian Truth".

The differences between the Frankish and New Burgundian territories are easily discernible. The scale of Frankish settlement contrasts with the narrowness of Burgundian settlement. The first, applied to Gaul, was a complex, multi-faceted process that lasted more than two centuries; the second, which took only a few years and was actually two isolated acts, the Franks constantly expanded their possessions; the Burgundians in Gaul mainly defended what they had already acquired. During the immediate collapse of the Roman Empire, the Franks acted as direct conquerors, the Burgundians as contractual federates. In the creation of the Frankish state, the military nobility played a major role, and the tribal aristocracy "disappeared"; in the creation of the Burgundian state, the role of the old aristocracy was significant. The Franks were introduced into Roman society without a systematic division of Gallo-Roman property, but more often acted simply as conquerors; the Burgundians, also conquerors, nevertheless took about a third of all serfs, half of the estates and two-thirds of the arable land from the locals under Gundobad. The Franks were orthodox Catholics from the very beginning; the Burgundians remained Arians for quite a long time and were at odds with the official Roman Church. As a result of the ethnic, linguistic, and other divisions that were already being outlined, the Gallo-Frankish community later became the basis of the Northern French nation, and the Gallo-Burgundians merged into the Southern French nation, etc. All this makes it possible to firmly delineate the two named territories.

The Ostrogothic subtype of Gaul is even less well understood than the Burgundian one. This is explained by the fact that the Ostrogothic state covered mainly Italy. The former Gallic Province of Narbonne (hence the name Provence) was in the mentioned state on the outskirts. In addition, it has experienced a more complex historical fate. Having become Roman as early as 118 BC, it fell into the hands of the Visigoths in 477 AD, was conquered by the Ostrogoths in 509, and by the Franks in 536. It is therefore more correct to speak not so much of the Ostrogothic as of the mixed Germanic influence on it during the Romano-Germanic synthesis. The real heritage of each of the Germanic tribes remains to be clarified here. If we keep in mind the entire early Middle Ages, then we must not forget that since the beginning of the VIII century. Provence was partly owned by the Arabs, who managed to hold out there in some mountainous and coastal areas until 983. [7 ] This sharply distinguishes Provence from other provinces of Gaul, both Transalpine and Cisalpine, and, in our opinion, does not allow it to be fully attributed to the regions of the ancient way of the genesis of feudalism (as A.D. Lublin believes-

6 See summary data: T. Mommsen. Istoriya Rima [History of Rome], T. V. M. 1949; E. M. Shtaerman. The crisis of the slave-owning system in the Western provinces of the Roman Empire, Moscow, 1957; A. Grenier. Manuel d' archeologie Gallo-Romaine. Vol. 1 - 6. P. 1931 - 1961.

7 J. Lacam. Les Sarrazins dans le Haut Moyen-Age francais. Histoire et archeologie. 1965.

page 101

skye), nor "balanced". The analysis of local history is also complicated by the fact that almost all scholars who have studied the internal politics of the Ostrogothic state have studied it mainly in relation to the Italian territory. The same applies to foreign policy. But when the Byzantine generals tried to restore the Roman Empire to its former extent in the sixth century and smashed the Ostrogothic detachments of Vitigis and Totila in Italy, their troops did not reach Provence and did not clash with the Franks, so the fate of the last Ostrogoths can also be traced here mainly in relation to Italy. 8
The Ostrogoths, in comparison with other Germans, were most strongly influenced by the Romanesque heritage. Their communal allotments, under the influence of Roman forms of ownership, soon became allods. The foreign nobility who had become rich in Italy immediately stood out sharply from among the German free warriors. The laws of the Ostrogoths and the administrative system largely copied the Roman ones. Finally, within a somewhat modified framework, traditional Roman culture continued to develop, influenced by Germanic and Christian stratifications. But it would be wrong to assume that the rapid collapse of the Ostrogothic power in Italy significantly affected Provence. The latter followed its own, special path, one of the distinguishing features of which was the preservation of ancient, especially episcopal, cities of their former significance, although not to the same extent. As you know, the Eastern Roman Empire differs from the Western One, in particular, by the fact that urban life continued to develop intensively there in the V-X centuries. In this respect, Provence resembles Byzantium, remaining one of the few places in the West where the German invasion and the decline of independent crafts and developed commodity-money relations did not lead to the desolation of urban centers. Therefore, with reference to Provence, it is not necessary to speak of a "secondary" separation of handicrafts from agriculture, as a result of which cities were either revived or appeared for the first time in most of the Western European territory in the X - XI centuries. Indeed, Arles (Arelate), Marseille (Massalia), Avignon (Avennio), Nice (Nicaea), Aix (Aquae Sextiae), and Toulon (Teloiis), and Kannes (Kannes), Antibes (Antipolis), and Jere (Olbia Pomiaoniana) can claim the right to be direct heirs of Roman urban - type settlements , 9 so for them the discussion thesis of continuity - continuity of development since ancient times-with some reservations should be accepted. It should also be noted that the area was almost completely devoid of secularization of ecclesiastical lands in Carolingian times, and the influence of the German community on agricultural practices can hardly be traced here.

The Visigothic path of development 10 also has its own specifics. Even

8 See Z. V. Udaltsov. Italy and Byzantium in the VI century. Moscow, 1959; I. A. Dvoretskaya. Land division in the Ostrogothic State in Italy in the sixth century and the growth of differentiation among the Ostrogoths. "Scientific Notes" of the Moscow State Pedagogical Institute named after V. I. Lenin, vol. 104, 1957, issue 5: ee same. On the situation of the dependent population in the Ostrogothic Kingdom. "Scientific reports of the higher school. Istoricheskie nauki", 1959, No. 1; ee same. Organization of government in the Ostrogothic Kingdom. "The Byzantine Chronicle", T. XXI, 1962; R. Busquet, V. L. Bourilly. Histoire de la Provence. P. 1950; Ch. Rostaing. Essai sur la toponymie de la Provence. P. 1950.

9 For data on the continuity of the development of Provencal cities, see: H. Chobaut Avignon et le comtat Venaissin. Vaison. 1932; P. George. La Region du Bas Rhone. P. 1935; L. A. Constans. Aries antique. "Bibliotheque des Ecoles franchises d'Athenes et de Rome", 1921, fasc. 119; J. Girard. Avignon. [P. -Marseille]. 1956; J. Laphaud. Aix-en-Provence, son histoire, son destin. Marseille. 1950; E. Thevenot. Les Gallo-Romains. P. 1959; R. Busquet. Histoire de Marseille. P. 1945; R. Latouche. Histoire de Nice. Nice. 1951; P. Maurel. Histoire de Toulon. Toulon. 1943; H. P. Eydoux. La France antique. P. 1962.

10 See A. R. Korsunsky. Goth Spain, Moscow, 1969; his. On the conditions of the Visigothic settlement in Southern Gaul and Spain. St. Issue 25, 1964; N. P. Gratsiansky. Op. ed.; E. Le Roy Ladurie. Histoire du Languedoc. P. 1962; Ch. Dartique-Peyrou. Histoire de la Guyenne. P. 1950; "Historia mundi". Bd. V. Bern. 1956.

page 102

if we do not speak about Spain and single out only Visigothic Aquitaine, it is still necessary to separate it from other regions of Gaul. Undoubtedly, Aquitaine has a certain similarity with Provence, which is manifested primarily in the preservation of strong ancient traditions. But the difference is also striking. To the extent that German influence was transitory in the latter, it was also permanent in the former. After all, the Visigothic state is one of the most durable among the barbarian early feudal political entities. Although the Visigoths held sway in Aquitaine for less than a century (from 418 to 507), they had already left noticeable traces here. In fact, their dominance extended as far as the Vendee, Poitou and the middle reaches of the Loire, although in these more northern regions it was not so strong. The presence of a mass of small land holdings parallel to the existence of large Roman estates that have survived; the predominance of Libertines, Serfs, and Colonians among the dependent population; the early transformation of the agricultural community into a neighboring mark and the rapid disappearance of late-gentile institutions; the noticeable line between the tax-free Germans and the tax-free Gallo-Romans - these are some characteristic features of features of a mixed society in the vicinity of Bordeaux (Guienne) and Toulouse (Languedoc). The Visigothic invasion only deepened the ethnic differences between the western and eastern parts of Southern Gaul, which did not disappear even later, when the Southern French people gradually formed. The idea of the unity of the Languedocian customs, culture, and language in the early Middle Ages is as much a myth as the claims of the complete unity of the Languedocians (that is, the inhabitants of Northern Gaul and France).

In our literature, the history of Brittany in the fifth and eleventh centuries is almost completely undeveloped. It is therefore advisable to consider the Breton subtype of the "balanced" type of synthesis in more detail. The very beginning of the local medieval history is very different from that of the rest of Gaul. Instead of the Germanic-Roman interaction of social forms, we see here the Celto-Roman interaction. The Armorica peninsula was also Gallic before the Roman conquest. After its inclusion in the framework of the Roman State, the "primary" Gallo-Roman synthesis took place, as in the whole country. However, neither at the time of the Great Migration of Peoples, nor later, did Armorica for the most part fall under the rule of the Germans, although the migration also affected it. Here the newcomers were Britons who had fled Britain from the invading Anglo-Saxons and turned the extreme west of Gaul into their new homeland. This led to a" secondary", this time Britto-Romanesque synthesis. Here, then, the Roman stratification lies on the Celtic substratum, and the Celtic cover is again superimposed on it. This is why the subsequent history of Armorica was so markedly different from that of any other region of Gaul, although it nevertheless fits perfectly into the concept of feudalism.

Let's first focus on the most important stages of the history of this area. Separate detachments of Britons who crossed the English Channel landed in Armorica as early as 284, 364, 383, but mass migration followed in the 440s, when under the pressure of Germans arriving from the continent in Britain, one part of the Britons moved to Wales, another to Cornwall, and the third rushed to Armorica. This migration is described in Gildas ' "Lamentable Book of the Fall of Britain "(VI century), Nennius '"History of the Britons" (VIII - IX centuries) and early Frankish chronicles. Sources suggest that it was a series of migration waves moving towards the Gallic coast. By the seventh century, the Brittonization of Lower Armorica ended, which now became Braise-Isel, and the Breton people began to form on its territory. And in the VIII century, the Upper Armorica (Breiz-Ukhel) was also shriveled.

page 103

The Gaulish tribes of the Osismii, Veneti, Curiosolites, Western Redons, and Western Namnets were all absorbed into the newcomers. This merger was facilitated by the fact that the slave-owning relations had little influence on Armorica, since it was the least affected by Rome from all the regions of Gaul, so that the bulk of the local population still lived according to the customs of the Celtic late ancestral times. Neither privately owned allotments (fundi) - the censored units of the imperial territory, nor virgin land developed by free or semi-free people (saltus) prevailed in comparison with the land of tribal districts (pagi). Here, instead of the usual slave villas in the south, the typical villages (vici) of Gallic free communities were those whose members cultivated their allotments on a usufructuary right of lifelong use for a portion of the harvest. After the general imperial social crisis of the third century, the power of Rome weakened. The Armoricans took part in the Bagaud movements, especially in 408-417, 435-437, and 447. In fact, Roman rule disappeared in Armorica even before the official fall of the empire. This is why the Britons did not encounter any organized Roman resistance here; they had little enmity with the Gauls. Their migration was not as devastating as the German invasion, but resulted in the peaceful infiltration of the Britons into the local society and its slow assimilation by newcomers. This is the first significant difference between the local synthesis and the Germanic-Romance one as a whole .11
The second difference is due to a certain similarity between British and Gaulish customs and the kinship of the two Celtic languages, which accelerated the blurring of ethnic lines. Only in the center of the peninsula, the former Gallic massif (province of Brogallo) remained longer than others. And in the north (Domnonia), northwest (Leon), southwest (Cornugall), and south (Broereck), mixing quickly produced Bretons. Brittany now consisted of the British provinces of Bro; then came the provinces of Commot, the districts of Pu, the lands of the great families of Plo, and the small families of Treves. Tribal and tribal groups were headed by military leaders and nobles - large (maktierns) and small (Tierns), which were gradually feudalized. However, the process of class formation was slow, and many ancestral remnants were preserved. The main figure of the Breton village of the VI - VIII centuries. was a free farmer 12 .

11 The information summarized above is contained in: E. M. Shtaerman. Morale and Religion of the oppressed classes of the Roman Empire, Moscow, 1961; S. A. Zhebelev Ancient Rome, ch. I. Ptgr. 1923; " Vita S. Pauli Domnocensis "("Revue Celtique", 1883, vol. 5, N 4); L. Rosenzweig. Repertoire archeologique de departement du Morbihan. P. 1863; C. Enlart. Manuel d'archeologie francaise. T. I. P. 1929; P. du Chatellier. Les Epoques prehistoriques et gauloises dans le Finistere. P. 1889; R. Latouche. Die Entstehung einer keltischen Provinz (Kleinbritannien) in Frankreich wahrend des Fruhmittelalters. "Stadtische Volksbewegungen im 14. Jahrhundert". B. 1960; E. Pegot-Ogier. Histoire des ties de la Manche. P. 1881; Bedae Venerabilis "Historia ecclesiastica". Cantabrigiae. 1644; F. Lot. Bretons et Anglais aux Ve et VIe siecles. "Proceedings of the British Academy". L. 1930; Au. de Courson. Essai sur l'histoire, la langue et les institutions de la Bretagne Armoricame. P. 1840; Einhardi "Annales" ("Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum". N 4. Hannoverae. 1845); G. de Reinold. La Formation de l'Europe. T. V, pt. 1. P. 1949; "Wales through the Ages". Vol. 1. Llandybie. 1959; H. Grohler. Uber Ursprung und Bedeutung der franzosischen Ortsnamen. Teil 2. Heidelberg. 1933; B. Palliser. Brittany and Its Byways. L. 1869; M. Reinhard. Histoire de France. T. 1. P. 1954; Ermoldi Nigelli " Carmen elegiacum "("Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France "(hereinafter-RHGF). T. VI. 1870). See also A. Ya. Shevelenko. From the history of the Breton village in the Gallic Armorica. St. Issue XXII. 1962.

12 See data in Vita S. Dalmatii. RHGF. T. III. 1869; "Vita S. Machutis" ("Melanges d'histoire bretonne". P. 1907); Le baron Walckenaer. Geographie ancienne, historique et comparee des Gaules. Tt. I - II. P. 1839; "Vita S. Winwaloei" (P. -H. Morice. Histoire ecclesiastique et civile de Bretagne. Vol. 1. P. 1750); R. Lefevre. Les Communes en Bretagne a la fin de l'Ancien Regime. Rennes. 1907; K. H. Schmidt. Die Komposition in gallischen Personennamen. Tubingen. 1957; J. Mabillon. Vetera ana-

page 104

The third difference is caused by the peculiarities of the formation of settlements as places of concentration of direct producers. The Frankish state was dominated by the villain-a combination of Roman estates with a Germanic mark. In Breiseisel, the peasants lived in Gallo-Britton villages (vici) and conditae that had sprung up near former military camps, while in Breiseisel, they lived in locs (villages around churches). Since the eighth century, it has been dominated by lana farms. The fragile community that united them, with a fallow and shifting system of agriculture, fickle plowing, individual pastures and fenced fields-bokazhs-covered rather distant bordarii (manors), porth (courtyards), liz (estates), ti (residential buildings) and bot (individual houses). The co-heir of the property remained a clan or a large family. The kindred collective strongly influenced the fate of each of its members. Only gradually do Kemers appear - groups of peasants who worked the land together and built relationships not on the basis of relatives,but on the basis of neighbors. Only then do family allods appear (much later than those of the Franks, not to mention the Burgundians, Ostrogoths, and Visigoths): a small family owns a rannom - an allotment that, along with the house and household plot, makes up Tegran. The isolation of tehranes is delayed by about a century compared to the similar phenomenon of the Franks (maize system) .13 Hence the fourth important difference from most of Gaul: feudalization develops more slowly, and the agrarian revolution takes place here not in the eighth, but in the ninth century.

The process of feudalization in Brittany is characterized by the following features. The main role in the formation of feudal property and the establishment of peasant dependence was initially played by the Catholic Church. As early as the fifth and sixth centuries, the parishes of the bishoprics of Leon, Treguieres, Briec, Malouen, Vannes, Kenpere, and Dolie were formed. The parish territories served as a base for the development of large-scale land ownership. By the seventh century, the church had become the main early feudal owner, and its ideological influence on the population contributed to the establishment of patronage over ordinary Bretons. The initial form of church property associated with obtaining rent was minihy-land ceded by donors on various terms to the" eternal possession " of the monastery, but remained in use by the previous owners, for which they paid a tax. Dioceses - ecclesiastical districts became the first feudal administrative units in Brittany. Then counties grew out of them (the count and bishop often merged there in one person). The diocese was divided into parochia (parishes). The Parochians were the first layer of dependent people among the free Bretons .14
lecta. Nouv. ed. P. 1723; A. de Fovilles. Enquete sur les conditions de l'habitation en France des maisons-types. T. I. P. 1894; R. Latouche. L'Economie agraire et le peuplement des pays bocagers. "Revue de synthese historique". T. 17. 1939, N 1; J. Mainsard. Les Banalites en Bretagne. P. 1912.

13 Abundant, though scattered, information about this process is contained in the cartulary charters: "Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Redon (en Bretagne)", P. 1863; "Cartulaire de Landevennec", P. 1886; " Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Croix de Quimperle (Finistere)", P. 1896;"Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Georges de Rennes "(G.-A. Lobineau. Histoire de Bretagne. Vol. II. P. 1707); "Cartulaire general du Morbihan". Vol. 1. Vannes. 1895.

14 G. -G. Toudouze. La Bretagne. P. 1934; J. Loth. Les Noms des Saints Bretons. P. 1910; L. Duchesne. Fastes episcopaux de l'ancienne Gaule. T. 2. P. 1910; R. Latouche. L'Abbaye de Landevennec et la Cornouaille au IXe et Xe siecles. "Le Moyen Age", 1959, N 1 - 2; "Gildae vita et translatio" ("Melanges d'histoire bretonne". P. 1907); A. de Barthelemy. Melanges historiques et archeologiques sur la Bretagne. P. 1856; R. Larguilliere. Les Saints et l'organisation chretienne primitive dans l'Armorique bretonne. Rennes. 1925; J. Prasteau. Les iles d'Ouest. Paris - Grenoble. 1954; M. Planiol. Histoire des institutions de la Bretagne. T. II. Rennes - P. 1955; J. Ellul. Histoire des institutions. T. 2. P. 1956; A. Le Moyne de La Borderie. Histoire de Bretagne. T. 2. P. 1906.

page 105

Secular magnates infiltrated the village later. Their stronghold was Ker, a fortified estate that became the center of the patrimony, the center of non-economic coercion of the peasants. Residents of the lands subject to Ker paid his lord a galuar (a type of early feudal rent), the recipient of which became the seigneur of new subjects. In the ninth century, the predominant number of dependent persons were still on church grants. Grants from the secular nobility were of great importance for the development of church property. Most of them occurred in the second and third quarters of the ninth century, when Brittany was already an independent kingdom and a feudal hierarchy was established .15 At that time, the vast majority of peasants became dependent landholders. Small allodists in their mass were replaced by chincheviks. The old rann as an allodial type of property is bifurcated, turning into the original substance of either a fief or a sub-feudal tax holding. Along with it, the former freedom of the lower classes of labor disappears, replaced by social gradation and class inequality. So the Bretons embarked on a common path of feudal development.

The foreign policy history of Brittany in the same centuries is a stubborn struggle against Frankish expansion. Here are its main milestones: 481 (the invasion of Clovis ' troops in Armorica after the defeat of the state of Syagria), 533 (pushing the Franks out of the North-Western Border region), 560. (conquest of Braise-Ukhel by Chlothar's troops), 587 (second conquest of Braise-Ukhel), 597 (complete expulsion of the Franks from Brittany), a long series of border wars in the seventh century, 753 (capture of Eastern Brittany by Pepin the Short), 786 (unsuccessful campaign of the Franks in Western Brittany), 799. (Charlemagne's submission to Breiseisel). The Merovingians and Carolingians tried unsuccessfully to francize Brittany. The mainstay of Frankish expansion in the ninth century was the border Breton Marche, specially fortified in accordance with the imperial capitularies of 800, 802, 808, 810 and 811. Carolingian rules were imposed, rents grew, and the oppression of ordinary Bretons increased. This gave rise to the revolts of 811 in the diocese of Ale, 814 led by Jarnithin in the Breton Marche, 818 led by Morman in Breise-Uheul, 822 led by Viomark in the Breton Marche. The Carolingians tried to pacify this province by handing over its administration to the local nobility and the Duke of Nominoe. The latter established strong ties with the Breton monasteries, entered into a military alliance with the margraves and, using the Verdun division of the empire in 843, separated from France. After defeating the army of Charles the Bald in 845, he founded the Kingdom of Brittany, and in 846 - 849 - the separate archbishopric of Dolsky 16.

15 Brunet. Abrege chronologique des grands fiefs... P. 1759; E. Lesne. Histoire de la propriete ecclesiastique en France. T. II. Lille. 1928, fase. 3; J. Dhondt. Etudes sur la naissance des principautes territoriales en France. Brugge. 1948; R. Latouche. Agrarzustande im westlichen Frankreich wahrend des Hochmittelalters. "Vierteljahrschrift fur Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte". Bd. 29. 1936, Hit. 2; P. Le Baud. Histoire de Bretagne. Pt. 2. P. 1638; L. -D. -R. Bernard et Legorrec. Resume de l'histoire de Bretagne. P. 1826; H. Mitteis. Lehnrecht und Staatsgewalt. Weimar. 1933; A. Giffard. Justice seigneuriales en Bretagne. P. 1902; A. Le Braz. Vieilles histoires du pays breton. P. 1897.

16 См. "Annales Francorum, vulgo Bertini dicti". RHGF, t. VII, 1870; "Annales regni Francorum". Hannoverae. 1895; "Annales rerum Franciearum". RHGF, t. V, 1869; "Annales Vedastini". Monumenta Germaniae Historica (далее - MGH). Scriptores. T. I; "Anonymi annales". RHGF, t. XVIII, 1879; "Capitularia regum Francorum. MGH. Leges. Sectio III. Tt. I - II. Hannoverae. 1883; "Chronicon Aquitanense". MGH. Scriptores. T. II; "Chronicon S. Florentii" (G. -A. Lobineau. Op. cit. T. II); "Chronicon Fontanellense". RHGF, t. VII; "Chronicon Namnetense". P. 1896; "Gesta sanctorum Rotonensium". Venetiis. 1734. Saec. IV, pars 2; "Chronicon universum" ("Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Sainte-Croix", ed. cit.); "Gurhedenis chronici fragmentum" (ibid.); "Les Chroniques de Vitre". P. 1638; "Monasterii S. Salvatoris Rotonensis annales" ("Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Redon. ed. cit.). "Vitas Conwoioni". Acta ordinis S. Benedicti in saecuiorum classes distributa. Saec. IV, pars 2. Venetiis. 1734; "Vita S. Dalmatii Ruthenensis". RHGF, t. III,

page 106

there was a special state of the Bretons, who firmly took their place in history as a nation with an independent territory, language and culture. Their isolation from France, which was constantly increasing in those centuries, 17 is the fifth difference in the ways of local synthesis.

The above facts allow us, as it seems to us, to speak quite confidently about the presence in Gaul of five subtypes of a" balanced " synthesis of late slave-owning and late tribal relations. This circumstance has a certain significance for the further development of the cardinal problem of the genesis of the feudal formation. The special scientific session devoted to it (Moscow, 196618)was a big step forward. But the materials accumulated over the past years indicate that the previous results are no longer satisfactory to scientists. Let us compare, for example, one of the propositions put forward at this session 19, which referred to two main variants of Western European feudalism (Romanesque and Germanic - Celtic), with the later thesis of Z. V. Udaltsova and E. V. Gutnova on its three types. At the same time, it turns out that the latest research, while improving and enriching our knowledge of the genesis of feudalism, at the same time strengthens the main provisions of the Marxist-Leninist concept of the progressive change of socio-economic formations in the course of the historical process.

1869. Of the general works on political history, we will mention only a few recent ones: A. Rebillon. Histoire de Bretagne. P. 1957; H. Waquet. Histoire de Bretagne. P. 1958; Y. M. Rudel. Histoire de Bretagne. P. 1963.

17 See for more information: A. Y. Shevelenko. Formation of Breton studies. "French Yearbook, 1965", Moscow, 1966.

18 See R. G. Samodurov. Actual problems of the early history of feudal formation. Voprosy Istorii, 1966, No. 9.

19 St. Issue 31, p. 11.

page 107

Permanent link to this publication: