Mostly Germany, and Lotharingia
A History of Europe by Henri Pirenne
University Books, first published 1938 but written during the Great War
Book Three
Feudal Europe
Chapter II
The Division of Europe
1. The Treaty of Verdun
p128 The Roman unity was replaced, in the epoch of the Invasions, by States which were independent of one another, conquered by different peoples, and governed by dynasties belonging to these peoples... All these States -- excepting the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms and the Visigothic kingdoms of Spain -- were fused together in the Carolingian conquest, and absorbed into the great politico-religious unity of the Empire. It was upon its ruins that the States of continental Europe established themselves... There was nothing national in the partition of the monarchy under the sons of Louis the Pious. The question of different peoples did not enter into the case... Since the government to which they were subjected was of a universal and ecclesiastical character... The Carolingians were, so to speak, transferable; they could govern anywhere; their nationality mattered no more that the nationality of the Pope mattered to the Church... The quarrel between Lothair and his brothers... ended in the compromise of Verdun (843).
p129 This was the first of the great treaties of European history, and none was to have more lasting consequences. Even to this day [1917?] we see its traces in Western Europe, where -- between France and Germany -- Holland, Belgium, Switzerland and Italy represent the share of Lothair.
...All they could do... was to give each party to the treaty, as far as possible, a region whose revenue would be approximately equal... and they had not to take into consideration such matters as trade routes and highways and the extent of the coasts... [because there was no commerce to speak of]. The whole destiny of Europe depended on the share to be awarded to Lothair, the elder and the holder of the Imperial title, which gave him at least a moral supremacy over his brothers. Evidently he must be given the central portion... [and Italy].
...It was due to chance that Louis' share consisted entirely of Germanic peoples, and that of Charles of peoples almost entirely Romantic. But we have only to consider Lothair's share to realize how little attention was paid to national differences... it included, counting from north to south, Frisians, Flemings, Walloons, Germans, Provencaux, and Italians. Evidently no more regard was paid to the populations than modern States have paid to the negro tribes on partitioning Africa. And this method answered very well: no one had cause for complaint, since the peoples were conscious only of the rule of the aristocracy, and the aristocracy was everywhere local.
p130 There were no nations in the 9th century. There was only Chrisendom... The division concerned the dynasty; it was made over the heads of the peoples, and no one was inconvenienced. The Treaty of Verdun was... perfectly adapted to a Europe in which the only policy was universal, and the domainal economy had no outlets...
On the death of Lothair (855) his three sons divided his Empire... Lothair [II, took] the territory to the north of the Jura... The kingdom of Lothair II was heterogeneous... so it was called... Lotharingia... when Lothair II died in his turn... Lotharingia was divided into two parts... more or less along the linguistic frontier... Charles the Bald, on the death of his brother Louis (876), attempted to seize his States. He was defeated by his nephew Louis III, then King of Germany, at Andernach. This was the first battle in which a French and a German army fought for the prize of Lotharingia, although there was as yet no talk of France or Germany. Contemporaries... gave the same name of France to the kingdom of the East and to that of the West, merely adding the adjective, Eastern or Western... Louis III adroitly took advantage of the disturbances... [following the deaths of Charles and Louis the Stammerer (879)] to obtain the cession of all the territory which Charles the Bald had acquired. This time the whole of Lotharingia was annexed to the Eastern kingdom.
That's as much of that as I can stand. You would have to have money riding on this to continue following this dynastic mess.
2. The New States
p133 Between the two distinct States which had now [911] emerged from the Carolingian unity -- France and Germany -- there was no necessary and inherent motive of hostility. The nationalities of the two States were different, but not more different, each from the other, than were the peoples within each State... Their economic constitution did not urge them to encroach upon each other. And yet there arose between them, immediately, that "Belgian question" which one might really call the Western question, and which ever since, under various forms, has made periodic reappearances in the course of European history. On this occasion it appeared as a Lotharingian question.
I agree that it is hard to imagine why either party would be particularly eager to expand into a non-belligerent territory at this time. After the return of trade, this is no longer true and the area, like the Ardennes in particular, is mostly a battlefield for geographical reasons having little to do with the people or even the resources of the area.
p134 The Lotharingian aristocracy remembered that Lotharingia had been a kingdom... They had had kings of their own... and they wished to continue the tradition. They had not acknowledged Conrad of Franconia, elected by the German Duchies; they had placed themselves under the scepter of Charles the Simple, who left them under the authority of their Duke Regnier; and he assumed an attitude of such independence that his son Gislebert had already hopes of obtaining the royal title...
p135 Lotharingia became a German duchy [after Henry the Fowler] against her will, because Germany was stronger than France....
...
...The Wends, along the Elbe and the Saale, and the Czechs further to the south, had begun to assail the frontiers; and presently a more terrible enemy appeared, the last comer among the European peoples: the Magyars or Hungarians.
p136 They were the last wave of that Finnish inundation which since the days of Attila had never ceased to beat upon the frontiers of Europe: bringing first the Avars, and finally these Magyars, who, like the rest, having traversed the Russian Steppe, made their way into the Danube corridor, driven onward by the Petchenegs. Their earliest raids occurred at the close of the 9th century, when Arnold of Carinthia fought against them. Their arrival in Europe was of the greatest importance to the Western Slavs, whom they cut in two. They destroyed the kingdom of Moravia, founded by the Czechs of Bohemia. The latter were henceforth separated from the Croats and the Serbs, and also from the Poles; so that they were isolated from the Byzantine influence which had recently manifested itself in Bohemia by the dispatch of evangelists Methodius and Cyril, for whom Ratislav, the Prince of Moravia, had sent in order to escape the Frankish influence. From the Danube the Hungarians flung themselves upon Germany and Italy: as terrible as the Normans, and equally adventurous. One of their raids penetrated as far as the Rhine, and as they retired they ravaged Burgundy.
The Hungarian plain -- previously known as Pannonia -- is geographically interesting. The Romans took the area but, it's difficult borders made it impossible to hold. Instead of a valuable strong-point in their frontier, it became a dangerous salient. It isn't large enough to support an empire (compared with France or even Germany) and has always been surrounded by typically ferocious mountain peoples. The Balkans were the best recruiting ground for both the Roman and the Ottoman empires. Hard to conquer but too small to rule.
...Henry the Fowler... a Saxon king... was the most powerful of the German dukes, and his purely military rule did much to enhance the importance of royalty. [In the Eastern kingdom] With his Saxons, Henry repulsed the Slavs, enforced an oath upon the Duke of the Bohemians, and defeated the Hungarians, who had penetrated as far as Merseburg (933). He consolidated the royal power to such effect that the princes acknowledge his son Otto as his successor during Henry's lifetime.
p137 Henry had based his power mainly on his duchy of Saxony. Otto entered upon the stage as King of Germany... The Hungarians were finally defeated at Augsburg (955). Henceforth they settled down and became Christians... they entered once and for all into the European community; which proves that racial differences are of no significance... An expedition was despatched to Poland, where Duke Mesko I took the oath, paid tribute, and became a Christian (966), a fact of considerable importance, in so far as it attached Poland to Rome. In the same way, Harold Bluetooth, King of Denmark, was compelled to found bishoprics and to become a convert.
...It was to the bishops -- and not to the Pope -- that he [Otto] looked for support... His brother Bruno was Archbishop of Cologne, and Otto created him Duke of Lotharingia... the bishops were about to become rulers. Otto considered them rather in their secular aspect than from the spiritual standpoint. One might say that what distinguished his policy from that of the Carolingians was that the latter clericalized the State, while he secularized the Church... The King of Germany could make such gifts, [of land to the clergy to increase their standing] though the King of France could not... It was because the evolution of Germany was less advanced, in a feudal sense, that his royal policy was practicable, and it was for this reason that he was able to make his bishops princes of the Empire... In their eyes the king, not the State, was the stronger, since they themselves were given a portion of the State... For the rest, neither Otto nor his successors meddled in questions of dogma. It was enough for them that they had the Church well in hand. Their Reichskirche had something in common with the Landeskirchen of a later day.
p139 The Pope, absolutely powerless, did nothing to obstruct the great episcopal policy of the King of Germany... John XII called on him for assistance, and on February 2nd, 962 restored the Imperial dignity for his benefit. This merely placed the Church more than ever in Otto's hands, until the day when it brought upon Germany the War of Investitures.
... in 951 Otto crossed the Alps and assumed the title of King of Italy. The peninsula having been left to its devices for a moment, had taken the opportunity of rending itself to pieces, with the result that for centuries it was tied to Germany.
...
p140 ...There were no words to describe Germany [after Otto]; she was merged in the Empire. Her kings exhausted their strength in maintaining the Empire. They were all Germans, but they had no German policy... They were destined to wear themselves out in pursuit of their policy. Germany has been the victim of the Empire, but her history is confounded with that of the Empire.
...
No comments:
Post a Comment