TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > History > Nobility and Expansion Dynamic - Effect on surrounding peoples
(SMITH)
Einhard reports Byz proverb: ‘Have a Frank as a friend, not a neighbour’.
Frankish strategy = negotiation + force if req. Diplomacy + gift-exchange practised; but equal terms only with Byz emperor and amir of Cordoba. Imperial rhetoric broke down at the frontier.
Consider views of Francia from the periphery.
Transformation: pressure to conform to Car will à creation of new pol systems. Huge change by 900. Car policy preferred to deal with single relatively powerful prince to competing claimants à e.g. Brittany dev of princely dynasty after 831. Acquisition and control of landed resources / judicial supervision by Car è complementary contribution to mould periphery in image of Car state.
Missionary activity / Car schemes of ecc admin contributed to pol transformation.
All this had far-reaching influence on later dev of national identity.
Balance of power between central authority and regional kingdoms
Nelson: dynamics of the relationship
- Geography crucial - dependence on location / quality of lands under central control (e.g. Lombards - Po valley / West Saxons - Somerset). Frankish royal lands (‘fisc’) based on old Roman structures. 751 - Carolingians added family lands to Merovingian fisc à base in Meuse / Moselle / Rhineland.
- Every kingdom retained some royal demesne - this not hampered by dynastic change (Seine palaces e.g. Compiègne disappeared early C8 then reappeared in Car hands).
- Division between heirs sometimes à partition of core lands (e.g. Charlemagne + brother in 768), but done with care.
- Careful management of estatesà perpetuation of royal power; provision of horses / arms. Also sustenance of royal household - king itinerant but valuable base, lengthy stays.
- Charlemagne - royal travelling essentially for campaign purposes. Aachen = his sedes regni after 794, surrounded by many royal lands. Protection of demesne / fisc = prerequisite for kingdom’s survival.
- Not a fixed area - enlarged by gift / inheritance, or by conFISCation due to treason / disloyalty. Also used to reward followers, bits outside heartlands were often granted away as they were difficult to manage anyway. Conquest; use of victim’s fisc as new resource for ruling extended area.
- Difficulties of control - Einhard - Charlemagne’s empire ‘amplified’ to 1,200,000 sq km. Access to inland areas via rivers + use of Roman roads in some regions but retaining outlying fisc lands was tricky + of limited use (unless the base was otherwise used for military base).
- Still real power; F stability depended upon chronic instability of environs - momentum via exploiting neighbours. Likeliest ally = neighbour's neighbour. Expansion provided kings with wherewithal to maintain aristocratic / family loyalty.
- New problems of resource management (e.g. Aquitaine created for 3yr old Louis the Pious in 781 - Charlemagne had to intervene to control grasping magnates. Reorganisation of fisc à four major rural palaces. This kept until absorbed back into realm of Charles the Bald in 838. Gascons remained independent of F control, but even late C9 some royal influence - King Odo spent much time in Aq in ecc accommodation).
Wormald
- Imperial ideal resurrected under Charlemagne – but Franks did not see govt. as an aggregate of states (civil wars). Noblemen gained little from idea of untied kingdoms. Not only brothers jockeying for position – royal aristocracies in conflict. Francia moving towards a feudal society – but ‘service in return for reward’ system had always been a feature of traditional barbarian ethics.
- F fragmentation thus revolves around warrior aristocracies with too much drive for war. Opportunities in E but geog restrictions of W Gaul. 888 fragmentation thus reflects regional competition as well as waning Car power.
- French history as dialogue between royal authority and regional identities … state of flux. Francia too large for control to be realistic even in C16.
- Ideological blow 834-5, but general allusions to new imperial strength; self-confidence was a Car legacy attributable largely to C.
Comments
