Royal power in the late Carolingian Age : Charles III the Simple and his predecessors

Accepted as a dissertation at the Université de Limoges and Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität Munich 2017. The prevalent image of the late Carolingian age is one of decline and fall. Charles III the Simple’s (893/898-923) rule, which has hardly received any scholarly attention since the late 19th century, is perceived to have been the classic example of this development. Enthroned by rebels as well as cast down by a rebellion he is said to have been a weak ruler, powerless in the face of the ambitions of the nobles of the West Frankish realm. Yet, what do 'weak' and 'powerless' mean? In modern scholarship, early medieval rule is understood not as a question of command and obedience but as the result of cooperation between rulers and nobles. Thus, royal actions, such as the defence of the realm against the Northmen, interactions with other rulers or in regard to conflicts with or between the nobles, are reflections of the relations between the ruler and the circle of nobles around him. A ruler’s power therefore depended on his ability to integrate the most powerful nobles into his rule, to mediate between their interests and to create consensus over the course of action. Based on this view, a new assessment of Charles the Simple’s rule, the circle of nobles around him, the actions taken by him and thus his royal power is provided in this study, with the rules of his predecessors since the death of Charles the Bald in 877 serving as a basis for comparison. Cover Half Title Title Copyright Dedication Contents Preface Summary Abbreviations Introduction Possibilities and limits of late Carolingian rule The functioning of royal power Analytical approach I. Becoming king: The questions of legitimacy and support I.1 Charles’ claim to the throne I.1.1 Louis the Stammerer’s two marriages I.1.2 The question of Louis’ succession I.1.3 Passing over Charles I.1.4 A Robertian on the throne I.1.5 Carolingian blood matters I.2 Close supporters and distant allies I.2.1 Archbishop Fulk of Reims I.2.2 The network elevating Charles I.2.3 The motives behind the rebellion I.2.4 The cohesion of the network I.2.5 Allies sought within the realm I.2.6 Allies sought outside the realm I.2.7 A network of different layers I.3 Conclusion II. Changes in the political landscape: From Louis the Stammerer to Odo II.1 Old elites: Louis II the Stammerer II.2 Rival factions: Louis III and Carloman II II.3 New faces on the rise: Charles the Fat II.4 Resistance, integration and rebellion: Odo II.5 Conclusion: Continuities and changes III. Networks of royal power: Charles the Simple III.1 General overview III.1.1 Charles’ itinerary III.1.2 Contacts with distant regions III.1.3 Using diplomas to demonstrate Carolingian legitimacy? III.2 Breaking it down: Networks of royal power III.2.1 Close associates and allies III.2.1.1 The first years III.2.1.2 Shifting balances III.2.1.3 A new balance III.2.1.4 Lotharingia III.2.1.5 The early Lotharingian network III.2.1.6 A king of two regna? III.2.1.7 The later years III.2.1.8 Liberty of choice? III.2.2 Family and friends III.2.3 The role of the marchiones III.3 Conclusion: The development of Charles’ network and its dissolution IV. Relations with other rulers IV.1 Creating cooperation: Louis the Stammerer IV.2 Carolingian networks: Louis III and Carloman II IV.3. Structural weaknesses: Odo IV.4 Possibilities and limits of royal power: Charles the Simple V. The Viking problem V.1 Viking incursions and royal measures in protection of the realm V.1.1 Going on the offensive: Louis the Stammerer-Charles the Fat V.1.2 Strategies of containment: Odo V.1.3 Return to the old strategies: Charles the Simple V.2 Diplomatic solutions V.2.1 Dudo’s De moribus et actis primorum Normanniae ducum V.2.2 The treaty of Saint-Clair-sur-Epte V.2.3 Using an old solution in a new way V.3 Conclusion VI. Conflicts, rebellions and the role of trust VI.1 Solving conflicts: The role of interest groups VI.2 Rulers and nobles: Breaches of trust VI.3 Speaking justice: Symbolic acts VI.4 Against the king: Questioning the right to rule VI.5. Conclusion Conclusion Bibliography Primary Sources Secondary Sources Index La 4eme de couverture indique : "The prevalent image of the late Carolingian age is one of decline and fall. Charles III the Simple's (893/898-923) rule, which has hardly received any scholarly attention since the late 19th century, is perceived to have been the classic example of this development. Enthroned by rebels as well as cast down by a rebellion he is said to have been a weak ruler, powerless in the face of the ambitions of the nobles of the West Frankish realm. Yet, what do "weak" and "powerless" mean? In modern scholarship, early medieval rule is understood not as a question of command and obedience but as the result of cooperation between rulers and nobles. Thus, royal actions, such as the defence of the realm against the Northmen, interactions with other rulers or in regard to conflicts with or between the nobles, are reflections of the relations between the ruler and the circle of nobles around him. A ruler's power therefore depended on his ability to integrate the most powerful nobles into his rule, to mediate between their interests and to create consensus over the course of action. Based on this view, a new assessment of Charles the Simple's rule, the circle of nobles around him, the actions taken by him and thus his royal power is provided in this study, with the rules of his predecessors since the death of Charles the Bald in 877 serving as a basis for comparison."

The prevalent image of the late Carolingian age is one of decline and fall. Charles III the Simple's (893/898?923) rule, which has hardly received any scholarly attention since the late 19th century, is perceived to have been the classic example of this development. Enthroned by rebels as well as cast down by a rebellion he is said to have been a weak ruler, powerless in the face of the ambitions of the nobles of the West Frankish realm. Yet, what do »weak« and »powerless« mean? In modern scholarship, early medieval rule is understood not as a question of command and obedience but as the result of cooperation between rulers and nobles. Thus, royal actions, such as the defence of the realm against the Northmen, interactions with other rulers or in regard to conflicts with or between the nobles, are reflections of the relations between the ruler and the circle of nobles around him. A ruler's power therefore depended on his ability to integrate the most powerful nobles into his rule, to mediate between their interests and to create consensus over the course of action. Based on this view, a new assessment of Charles the Simple's rule, the circle of nobles around him, the actions taken by him and thus his royal power is provided in this study, with the rules of his predecessors since the death of Charles the Bald in 877 serving as a basis for comparison.