CHAP. IV. change from the Carolingian to the Capetian line was hardly felt. To Hugh's own subjects it made little practical difference whether their Prince were called Duke or King. Beyond the Loire, men cared little who might reign either at Paris or at Laôn. But, slight as may have been the immediate change, the election of Hugh was a real revolution: it was the completion of the change which had been preparing for a century and a half; it was the true beginning of a new period. The modern Kingdom of France dates its definite existence from the election of Hugh; the successive partitions showed in what way the stream of events was running, but the election of Hugh was the full establishment of the thing itself. France at last had, what till quite lately she has had ever since, a French King reigning at Paris. GalloRoman France now finally shook off the last relics of that Teutonic domination under which she had been more or less completely held ever since the days of Clovis. The Connexion Western Kingdom now broke off all traces of its old France and connexion with the Eastern. Up to this time the traGermany dition of the former unity of the whole Frankish Kingdom Modern France now definitely begins. between ceases. had still lingered on. The two realms were still Eastern and Western "Francia;" each King was alike "Rex Francorum," "Orientalium," or "Occidentalium," as might happen. In war the two Kings of the Franks appear rather as rivals than as ordinary enemies; in peace they seem almost to act as royal colleagues, like the Eastern and Western Emperors of an earlier time. The Eastern colleague is the superior. He is often Emperor, which the Western never is; even when not Emperor, he sometimes receives homage from the Western King, which the Western King in no case 1 1 As Arnulf from Odo. See above, p. 131. So we shall see in 940 (Flod. in An. Pertz, iii. 387) the chief French princes, though not the King, do homage to Otto the Great. FORMATION OF MODERN FRANCE. 181 between receives from him. Thus, down to the extinction of CHAP. IV. the Carolingian House at Laôn, the Eastern King, the "King beyond the Rhine," remains, whether in friendship or in enmity, a most important person in the politics of the Western Kingdom. Even in the middle of the tenth century, we shall see Otto of Saxony and Lewis of Laôn still acting together in the administration of a common Frankish realm. But nothing of this sort remains after the final establishment of the Parisian dynasty; the German Cæsar is now as alien to Capetian France as his brother at Byzantium. And another result took place. Hitherto Lotharingia, Lotharthe border land of Germany and France, had held an hitherto ingia, ambiguous position between the two Kingdoms. Lo- fluctuating tharingia was the seat of loyalty to the Carolingian France house. Whenever a Karling reigned in the Western many, now Kingdom, he found the people of Lotharingia his faithful becomes subjects. The country retained its affection to the old Imperial line after the Capetian revolution, but its position was now necessarily changed. Lotharingia retained its Carolingian princes, but it retained them only by definitively becoming a fief of the Teutonic Kingdom. After the Parisian family were fully established in Western France, descendants of Pippin and Charles still reigned in Lotharingia, but, after a few struggles for their old dominion, they were no longer neither Kings of the Western France or pretenders to its crown, but Dukes holding their states in fief of the Teutonic Emperor. Thus, after a century of struggle, Gaul or Western France became definitely French as distinguished from Frankish. The Romance and the Teutonic Franks were 1 Flodoard, A. 938, Pertz, iii. 385, "Otto Rex Transrhenensis." So in 946 (Pertz, iii. 393), our Eadmund is "Edmundus Rex Transmarinus." This way of describing suggests some of those curious mediæval verbs, "transfretare," "transpadare," and the like. and Ger German. CHAP. IV. now divided; Comparison of Gaul seceded from the Teutonic Kingdom. We must now go on to sketch the history of the Normans in Gaul during the period of struggle, and to show how important an element they were in determining the controversy in favour of the competitor most foreign to their own ancient blood and speech. § 2. Settlement and Reign of Rolf. 911-927. The history of the ravages of the Northmen within the Empire, and of their final settlement in Northern ravages in Gaul, reads almost like a repetition of their ravages and the Danish England and within settlements in our own island. Their incursions into the Empire. the two countries were often closely connected. The same armies and the same leaders are often heard of in England and in Gaul, and each country drew a certain advantage from the sufferings of the other. Each often enjoyed a season of comparative rest while the other was undergoing some unusually fearful devastation. The two stories are nearly the same, except that, the French story reads, so to speak, like one long reign of Æthelred from the very beginning. There is nothing at all answering to our long succession of great and victorious Kings from Ælfred onwards. That such was the case was not wholly the fault of the princes who reigned in any portion of the Empire. The power of the Great Charles had kept the heathen in awe, but it is not granted to every man to be a Charles or even an Æthelstan. When the great Emperor was gone, when the terror of his name was forgotten, the ceaseless internal divisions made his Empire an easy prey. Those The pro gress of the Danes favoured by the 1 Cronica Regum Francorum, ap. Pertz, iii. 214. "Hic divisio facta est inter Teutones Francos et Latinos Francos." 2 Gunter, lib. i. "Et simul a nostro secessit Gallia regno, Nos priscum regni morem servamus, at illa DANISH INVASIONS OF THE EMPIRE. in the The unity which it 183 retained. divisions were themselves inevitable, but they brought CHAP. IV. with them their inevitable consequences; the land lay divisions open, almost defenceless, before the enemy. Indeed the Empire, divisions were actually more fatal because they were not complete; the very amount of unity which the Empire and by the partial still retained proved a further source of weakness. Empire did not at once split up into national Kingdoms, divided by ascertained boundaries, each of them actuated by a national feeling and capable of national resistance to an invader. The state of things was not unlike the elder state of things in the days of the Tyrants or Provincial Emperors. In those days each ambitious general gave himself out as Cæsar and Augustus; he aspired to the whole Empire, and he held such portions of it as he could win and keep. So now every King was a King of the Franks, ready to hold so much of the common Frankish realm as he could win and keep. Between potentates of this kind there could hardly be either the same formal alliances, or the same sort of international good understanding, which may exist between really distinct nations, each of which is assured of its own position. None of the rival Kings could feel sure that any other King would help him against the common enemy. None of them could feel sure that any other King would not seize the opportunity of a Danish inroad to deprive him of his Kingdom, or that he might not even league himself with the heathen invaders against him. It followed therefore that the invaders never encountered the whole strength of the Empire, that they seldom encountered the whole strength even of one of its component Kingdoms. The Carolingian princes, as far as mere vigour and ability goes, have been grossly and unfairly depreciated.1 1 Sir Francis Palgrave has completely dissipated the vulgar error which looks on the later Karlings as a line of utterly incapable Kings, like the later Merwings. No two sets of men could be more completely different both in position and character. CHAP. IV. The truth is that most of them were men of by no means contemptible natural gifts, but that they were, partly by their own fault, partly by force of circumstances, placed in a position in which they could not use their real vigour and ability to any good purpose. Thus the whole second half of the ninth century is taken up with almost uninterrupted incursions of the Scandinavian pirates on the whole coast of both the Eastern and the Western France. Position of Germany indeed, owing to the inland position of the Germany. greater part of her territory, remained comparatively unscathed. She suffered far more from the Magyars than she suffered from the Northmen. Still the whole Saxon and Frisian coast was as cruelly ravaged as any other part of Europe, and the great rivers afforded the heathens the means of making their way far into the interior of of France, the country. West-France, with her far greater extent of seaboard, suffered far more severely than the Eastern Burgundy, Kingdom. Even the Mediterranean coasts of Burgundy and Italy. and Italy were not wholly spared, though in those seas the Northman was far less to be dreaded than the Saracen. Everywhere we find the same kind of devastations which we find in England. In the course of the history, we come across many noble examples of local resistance to ance to the the invaders, and several examples of considerable victories gained over them. But we nowhere find any such steady check put to their progress as marks the first half of the tenth century in England. That is to say, no Carolingian Prince was in the position, even if he had the ability, to carry out the vigorous policy of Eadward the Elder. Yet it would be unjust to withhold their due share of honour from several Kings and Princes who at least did Victory of what they could. The Emperor Arnulf in the East,2 the young King Lewis in the West,3 gained glorious Instances of resist invaders. Arnulf, 891; 1 See the story of the taking of Luna by mistake for Rome, Dudo, 65. 2 Regino in Anno (Pertz, i. 602), and our own Chronicles. 3 On the battle of Saulcourt, see the Chronicle in Duchesne, p. 4. |