and a more faithful memory than in the court of kings. The disaster of
Roncesvalles and the heroism of the warriors who perished there, became
in France the object of popular sympathy and the favorite topic for the
exercise of the popular fancy. _The Song of Roland_, a real Homeric poem
in its great beauty, and yet rude and simple as became its national
character, bears witness to the prolonged importance attained in Europe
by this incident in the history of Charlemagne. Four centuries later the
comrades of William the Conqueror, marching to battle at Hastings for
the possession of England, struck up _The Song of Roland_, "to prepare
themselves for victory or death," says M. Vitel in his vivid estimate
and able translation of this poetical monument of the manners and first
impulses toward chivalry of the Middle Ages. There is no determining
how far history must be made to participate in these reminiscences of
national feeling; but, assuredly, the figures of Roland and Oliver, and
Archbishop Turpin, and the pious, unsophisticated, and tender character
of their heroism are not pure fables invented by the fancy of a poet or
the credulity of a monk. If the accuracy of historical narrative must
not be looked for in them, their moral truth must be recognized in their
portrayal of a people and an age.
The politic genius of Charlemagne comprehended more fully than would be
imagined from his panegyrist's brief and dry account all the gravity of
the affair of Roncesvalles. Not only did he take immediate vengeance by
hanging Duke Lupus of Aquitaine, whose treason had brought down this
mishap, and by reducing his two sons, Adalric and Sancho, to a more
feeble and precarious condition; but he resolved to treat Aquitaine as
he had but lately treated Italy, that is to say, to make of it,
according to the correct definition of M. Fauriel, "a special kingdom,
an integral portion, indeed, of the Frankish empire, but with an
especial destination, which was that of resisting the invasions of the
Andalusian Arabs, and confining them as much as possible to the soil of
the peninsula." This was, in some sort, giving back to the country its
primary task as an independent duchy; and it was the most natural and
most certain way of making the Aquitanians useful subjects, by giving
play to their national vanity, to their pretensions of forming a
separate people, and to their hopes of once more becoming, sooner or
later, an independent nation. Queen Hildegarde, during her husband's
sojourn at Casseneuil, in 778, had borne him a son whom he called Louis,
and who was afterward Louis the Debonair. Charlemagne, summoned a second
time to Rome, in 781, by the quarrels of Pope Adrian I with the imperial
court of Constantinople, brought with him his two sons, Pépin, aged only
four years, and Louis, only three years, and had them anointed by the
Pope--the former King of Italy, and the latter King of Aquitaine. On
returning from Rome to Austrasia, Charlemagne sent Louis at once to take
possession of his kingdom. From the banks of the Meuse to Orleans the
little prince was carried in his cradle; but once on the Loire, this
manner of travelling beseemed him no longer; his conductors would that
his entry into his dominions should have a manly and warrior-like
appearance; they clad him in arms proportioned to his height and age;
they put him and held him on horseback; and it was in such guise that he
entered Aquitaine. He came thither accompanied by the officers who were
to form his council of guardians, men chosen by Charlemagne, with care,
among the Frankish _Leudes_, distinguished not only for bravery and
firmness, but also for adroitness, and such as they should be to be
neither deceived nor scared by the cunning, fickle, and turbulent
populations with whom they would have to deal. From this period to the
death of Charlemagne, and by his sovereign influence, though all the
while under his son's name, the government of Aquitaine was a series of
continued efforts to hurl back the Arabs of Spain beyond the Ebro, to
extend to that river the dominion of the Franks, to divert to that end
the forces as well as the feelings of the populations of Southern Gaul,
and thus to pursue, in the South as in the North, against the Arabs as
well as against the Saxons and Huns, the grand design, of Charlemagne,
which was the repression of foreign invasions and the triumph of
Christian France over Asiatic paganism and Islamism.
Although continually obliged to watch, and often still to fight,
Charlemagne might well believe that he had nearly gained his end. He had
everywhere greatly extended the frontiers of the Frankish dominions and
subjugated the populations comprised in his conquests. He had proved
that his new frontiers would be vigorously defended against new
invasions or dangerous neighbors. He had pursued the Huns and the
Slavons to the confines of the Empire of the East, and the Saracens to
the islands of Corsica and Sardinia. The centre of the dominion was no
longer in ancient Gaul; he had transferred it to a point not far from
the Rhine, in the midst and within reach of the Germanic populations, at
the town of Aix-la-Chapelle, which he had founded, and which was his
favorite residence; but the principal parts of the Gallo-Frankish
kingdom, Austrasia, Neustria, and Burgundy, were effectually welded in
one single mass. What he had done with Southern Gaul has just been
pointed out; how he had both separated it from his own kingdom, and
still retained it under his control. Two expeditions into Armorica,
without taking entirely from the Britons their independence, had taught
them real deference, and the great warrior Roland, installed as count
upon their frontier, warned them of the peril any rising would
encounter. The moral influence of Charlemagne was on a par with his
material power; he had everywhere protected the missionaries of
Christianity; he had twice entered Rome, also in the character of
protector, and he could count on the faithful support of the Pope at
least as much as the Pope could count on him. He had received embassies
and presents from the sovereigns of the East, Christian and Mussulman,
from the emperors of Constantinople and the caliphs of Bagdad.
Everywhere, in Europe, in Africa, and in Asia, he was feared and
respected by kings and people. Such, at the close of the eighth century,
were, so far as he was concerned, the results of his wars, of the
superior capacity he had displayed, and of the successes he had won and
kept.
In 799 he received, at Aix-la-Chapelle, news of serious disturbances
which had broken out at Rome; that Pope Leo III had been attacked by
conspirators, who, after pulling out, it was said, his eyes and his
tongue, had shut him up in the monastery of St. Erasmus, whence he had
with great difficulty escaped, and that he had taken refuge with
Winigisius, Duke of Spoleto, announcing his intention of repairing
thence to the Frankish King. Leo was already known to Charlemagne; at
his accession to the pontificate, in 795, he had sent to him, as to the
patrician and defender of Rome, the keys of the prison of St. Peter, and
the banner of the city. Charlemagne showed a disposition to receive him
with equal kindness and respect. The Pope arrived, in fact, at
Paderborn, passed some days there, according to Eginhard, and returned
to Rome on the 30th of November, 799, at ease regarding his future, but
without knowledge on the part of anyone of what had been settled between
the King of the Franks and him. Charlemagne remained all the winter at
Aix-la-Chapelle, spent the first months of the year 800 on affairs
connected with Western France, at Rouen, Tours, Orleans, and Paris, and,
returning to Mayence in the month of August, then for the first time
announced to the general assembly of Franks his design of making a
journey to Italy. He repaired thither, in fact, and arrived on the 23d
of November, 800, at the gates of Rome. The Pope "received him there as
he was dismounting; then, the next day, standing on the steps of the
basilica of St. Peter and amid general hallelujahs, he introduced the
King into the sanctuary of the blessed apostle, glorifying and thanking
the Lord for this happy event." Some days were spent in examining into
the grievances which had been set down to the Pope's account, and in
receiving two monks arrived from Jerusalem to present to the King, with
the patriarch's blessing, the keys of the Holy Sepulchre and Calvary, as
well as the sacred standard. Lastly, on the 25th of December, 800, "the
day of the Nativity of our Lord," says Eginhard, "the King came into the
basilica of the blessed St. Peter, apostle, to attend the celebration of
mass. At the moment when, in his place before the altar, he was bowing
down to pray, Pope Leo placed on his head a crown, and all the Roman
people shouted, 'Long life and victory to Charles Augustus, crowned by
God, the great and pacific Emperor of the Romans!' After this
proclamation the Pontiff prostrated himself before him and paid him
adoration, according to the custom established in the days of the old
emperors; and thenceforward Charles, giving up the title of patrician,
bore that of emperor and augustus."
Eginhard adds, in his _Life of Charlemagne_: "The King at first
testified great aversion for this dignity, for he declared that,
notwithstanding the importance of the festival, he would not on that day
have entered the church if he could have foreseen the intentions of the
sovereign Pontiff. However, this event excited the jealousy of the Roman
emperors (of Constantinople), who showed great vexation at it; but
Charles met their bad graces with nothing but great patience, and thanks
to this magnanimity which raised him so far above them, he managed, by
sending to them frequent embassies and giving them in his letters the
name of brother, to triumph over their conceit."
No one, probably, believed, in the ninth century, and no one, assuredly,
will nowadays believe that Charlemagne was innocent beforehand of what
took place on the 25th of December, 300, in the basilica of St. Peter.
It is doubtful, also, if he were seriously concerned about the
ill-temper of the emperors of the East. He had wit enough to understand
the value which always remains attached to old traditions, and he might
have taken some pains to secure their countenance to his title of
emperor; but all his contemporaries believed, and he also undoubtedly
believed, that he had on that day really won and set up again the Roman
Empire.
What, then, was the government of this empire of which Charlemagne was
proud to assume the old title? How did this German warrior govern that
vast dominion which, thanks to his conquests, extended from the Elbe to
the Ebro, from the North Sea to the Mediterranean; which comprised
nearly all Germany, Belgium, France, Switzerland, and the north of Italy
and of Spain, and which, sooth to say, was still, when Charlemagne
caused himself to be made emperor, scarce more than the hunting-ground
and the battle-field of all the swarms of barbarians who tried to settle
on the ruins of the Roman world they had invaded and broken to pieces?
The government of Charlemagne in the midst of this chaos is the
striking, complicated, and transitory fact which is now to be passed in
review.
A word of warning must be first of all given touching this word
_government_ with which it is impossible to dispense. For a long time
past the word has entailed ideas of national unity, general
organization, and regular and efficient power. There has been no lack of
revolutions which have changed dynasties and the principles and forms of
the supreme power in the State; but they have always left existing,
under different names, the practical machinery whereby the supreme power
makes itself felt and exercises its various functions over the whole
country. Open the _Almanac_, whether it be called the Imperial, the
Royal, or the National, and you will find there always the working
system of the government of France; all the powers and their agents,
from the lowest to the highest, are there indicated and classed
according to their prerogatives and relations. Nor have we there a mere
empty nomenclature, a phantom of theory; things go on actually as they
are described--the book is the reflex of the reality. It were easy to
construct, for the empire of Charlemagne, a similar list of officers;
there might be set down in it dukes, counts, vicars, centeniers, and
sheriffs (_scabini_), and they might be distributed, in regular
gradation, over the whole territory; but it would be one huge lie, for
most frequently, in the majority of places, these magistracies were
utterly powerless and themselves in complete disorder. The efforts of
Charlemagne, either to establish them on a firm footing or to make them
act with regularity, were continual but unavailing. In spite of the
fixity of his purpose and the energy of his action the disorder around
him was measureless and insurmountable. He might check it for a moment
at one point; but the evil existed wherever his terrible will did not
reach, and wherever it did the evil broke out again as soon as it had
been withdrawn. How could it be otherwise? Charlemagne had not to
grapple with one single nation or with one single system of
institutions; he had to deal with different nations, without cohesion,
and foreign one to another. The authority belonged, at one and the same
time, to assemblies of free men, to landholders over the dwellers on
their domains, and to the king over the leudes and their following.
These three powers appeared and acted side by side in every locality as
well as in the totality of the State. Their relations and their
prerogatives were not governed by any generally recognized principle,
and none of the three was invested with sufficient might to habitually
prevail against the independence or resistance of its rivals. Force
alone, varying according to circumstances and always uncertain, decided
matters between them. Such was France at the accession of the second
line. The coexistence of and the struggle between the three systems of
institutions and the three powers just alluded to had as yet had no
other result. Out of this chaos Charlemagne caused to issue a monarchy,
strong through him alone and so long as he was by, but powerless and
gone like a shadow when the man was lost to the institution.
Whoever is astonished either at this triumph of absolute monarchy
through the personal movement of Charlemagne, or at the speedy fall of
the fabric on the disappearance of the moving spirit, understands
neither what can be done by a great man, when, without him, society sees
itself given over to deadly peril, nor how unsubstantial and frail is
absolute power when the great man is no longer by, or when society has
no longer need of him.
It has just been shown how Charlemagne by his wars, which had for their
object and result permanent and well-secured conquests, had stopped the
fresh incursions of barbarians, that is, had stopped disorder coming
from without. An attempt will now be made to show by what means he set
about suppressing disorder from within and putting his own rule in the
place of the anarchy that prevailed in the Roman world which lay in
ruins, and in the barbaric world which was a prey to blind and
ill-regulated force.
A distinction must be drawn between the local and central governments.
Far from the centre of the State, in what have since been called the
provinces, the power of the Emperor was exercised by the medium of two
classes of agents, one local and permanent, the other despatched from
the centre and transitory.
In the first class we find:
1st. The dukes, counts, vicars of counts, centeniers, sheriffs
(scabini), officers or magistrates residing on the spot, nominated by
the Emperor himself or by his delegates, and charged with the duty of
acting in his name for the levying of troops, rendering of justice,
maintenance of order, and receipt of imposts.
2d. The beneficiaries or vassals of the Emperor, who held of him,
sometimes as hereditaments, more often for life, and more often still
without fixed rule or stipulation, lands; domains, throughout the extent
of which they exercised, a little bit in their own name and a little bit
in the name of the Emperor, a certain jurisdiction and nearly all the
rights of sovereignty. There was nothing very fixed or clear in the
position of the beneficiaries and in the nature of their power; they
were at one and the same time delegates and independent owners and
enjoyers of usufruct, and the former or the latter character prevailed
among them according to circumstances. But, altogether, they were
closely bound to Charlemagne, who, in a great number of cases, charged
them with the execution of his orders in the lands they occupied.
Above these agents, local and resident, magistrates or beneficiaries,
were the _missi dominici_, temporary commissioners, charged to inspect,
in the Emperor's name, the condition of the provinces; authorized to
penetrate into the interior of the free lands as well as of the domains
granted with the title of benefices; having the right to reform certain
abuses, and bound to render an account of all to their master. The
missi dominici were the principal instruments Charlemagne had,
throughout the vast territory of his empire, of order and
administration.
As to the central government, setting aside for a moment the personal
action of Charlemagne and of his counsellors, the general assemblies, to
judge by appearances and to believe nearly all the modern historians,
occupied a prominent place in it. They were, in fact, during his reign,
numerous and active; from the year 770 to the year 813 we may count
thirty-five of these national assemblies, March-parades and May-parades,
held at Worms, Valenciennes, Geneva, Paderborn, Aix-la-Chapelle,
Thionville, and several other towns, the majority situated round about
the two banks of the Rhine. The number and periodical nature of these
great political reunions are undoubtedly a noticeable fact. What, then,
went on in their midst? What character and weight must be attached to
their intervention in the government of the State? It is important to
sift this matter thoroughly.
There is extant, touching this subject, a very curious document. A
contemporary and counsellor of Charlemagne, his cousin-german Adalbert,
abbot of Corbie, had written a treatise entitled "Of the Ordering of the
Palace" _(de Ordine Palatii),_ and designed to give an insight into the
government of Charlemagne, with especial reference to the national
assemblies. This treatise was lost; but toward the close of the ninth
century Hincmar, the celebrated archbishop of Rheims, reproduced it
almost in its entirety, in the form of a letter of instructions, written
at the request of certain grandees of the kingdom who had asked counsel
of him with respect to the government of Carloman, one of the sons of
Charles the Stutterer. We read therein:
"It was the custom at this time to hold two assemblies every year.... In
both, that they might not seem to have been convoked without motive,
there was submitted to the examination and deliberation of the grandees
... and by virtue of orders from the King, the fragments of law called
_capitula_, which the King himself had drawn up under the inspiration of
God or the necessity for which had been made manifest to him in the
intervals between the meetings."
Two striking facts are to be gathered from these words: the first, that
the majority of the members composing these assemblies probably regarded
as a burden the necessity for being present at them, since Charlemagne
took care to explain their convocation by declaring to them the motive
for it, and by always giving them something to do; the second, that the
proposal of the capitularies, or, in modern phrase, the initiative,
proceeded from the Emperor. The initiative is naturally exercised by him
who wishes to regulate or reform, and, in his time, it was especially
Charlemagne who conceived this design. There is no doubt, however, but
that the members of the assembly might make on their side such proposals
as appeared to them suitable; the constitutional distrusts and artifices
of our time were assuredly unknown to Charlemagne, who saw in these
assemblies a means of government rather than a barrier to his authority.
To resume the text of Hincmar:
"After having received these communications, they deliberated on them
two or three days or more, according to the importance of the business.
Palace messengers, going and coming, took their questions and carried
back the answers. No stranger came near the place of their meeting until
the result of their deliberations had been able to be submitted to the
scrutiny of the great prince, who then, with the wisdom he had received
from God, adopted a resolution which all obeyed."
The definite resolution, therefore, depended upon Charlemagne alone; the
assembly contributed only information and counsel.
Hincmar continues, and supplies details worthy of reproduction, for they
give an insight into the imperial government and the action of
Charlemagne himself amid those most ancient of the national assemblies:
"Things went on thus for one or two capitularies, or a greater number,
until, with God's help, all the necessities of the occasion were
regulated.
"While these matters were thus proceeding out of the King's presence,
the prince himself, in the midst of the multitude, came to the general
assembly, was occupied in receiving the presents, saluting the men of
most note, conversing with those he saw seldom, showing toward the
elder a tender interest, disporting himself with the youngsters, and
doing the same thing, or something like it, with the ecclesiastics as
well as the seculars. However, if those who were deliberating about the
matter submitted to their examination showed a desire for it, the King
repaired to them and remained with them as long as they wished; and then
they reported to him, with perfect familiarity, what they thought about
all matters, and what were the friendly discussions that had arisen
among them. I must not forget to say that, if the weather were fine,
everything took place in the open air; otherwise, in several distinct
buildings, where those who had to deliberate on the King's proposals
were separated from the multitude of persons come to the assembly, and
then the men of greater note were admitted. The places appointed for the
meeting of the lords were divided into two parts, in such sort that the
bishops, the abbots, and the clerics of high rank might meet without
mixture with the laity. In the same way the counts and other chiefs of
the State underwent separation, in the morning, until, whether the King
was present or absent, all were gathered together; then the lords above
specified, the clerics on their side, and the laics on theirs, repaired
to the hall which had been assigned to them, and where seats had been
with due honor prepared for them. When the lords laical and
ecclesiastical were thus separated from the multitude, it remained in
their power to sit separately or together, according to the nature of
the business they had to deal with, ecclesiastical, secular, or mixed.
In the same way, if they wished to send for anyone, either to demand
refreshment or to put any question, and to dismiss him after getting
what they wanted, it was at their option. Thus took place the
examination of affairs proposed to them by the King for deliberation.