DECLINE OF THE MEROVINGIAN PRINCES.--THE MAYORS OF THE PALACE.--PEPIN
OF LANDEN.--PEPIN OF HERISTAL.--CHARLES MARTEL.--THE BATTLE OF TOURS.
When the Roman empire had ceased to exist, the Frankish kings had,
in imitation of the Roman rulers, begun to surround themselves
with a court, and a great many high officers, and charges had been
created, among the most important of which may be mentioned the
office of Lord High Chancellor (archicancellarius, referendarius);
Lord High Chamberlain, or High Treasurer (thesaurarius, camerarius);
Master of the royal stables (marescalchus); Lord Justice (comes
palatii); Steward of the royal household (senescalchus); and more
particularly that of Mayor of the palace (præfectus palatii, or
major-domus, or comes domûs regiæ). The functions of the latter
officer had originally been confined to the general superintendence
of the palace, and the administration of the royal domains; but had
speedily been extended also to the command of the household troops.
In the course of the domestic wars between the Merovingian princes,
the mayors of the palace had gradually acquired a power and influence
second only to that of the king; so that, after the assassination of
Sigebert, in 575, GOGO, the then mayor of the palace of Austrasia,
had actually been named regent during the minority of Sigebert’s son,
Childebert. So powerful indeed had these domestic officers grown,
that Clotaire II. was positively forced to bind himself by oath to
WARNACHAR, the mayor of the palace of Burgundy, to leave him for his
life in undisturbed possession of his office; he was obliged also to
acknowledge the learned and valiant ARNULF, the Austrasian, mayor
of the palace, and subsequently--when that officer embraced the
ecclesiastical profession, and became Bishop of Metz--the energetic
Pepin of Landen,[92] as his representative with sovereign powers in
Austrasia. Even when Clotaire had ceded the kingdom of Austrasia to
his son DAGOBERT (622), Pepin continued to exercise almost unlimited
sway in that part of the Frankish empire. After Clotaire’s death,
in 623, Dagobert succeeded also to the Neustrian kingdom; and in
631, after his brother Charibert’s death,[93] who had held some
of the south-western provinces, he became sole king of France. He
died in 638; he was a compound of sensuality and indolence; still
his character and life were not stained with the horrible crimes
perpetrated by his predecessors, and more particularly by his own
father; he was the last of the descendants of Clovis, who exhibited
even the faintest spark of that fierce and energetic spirit which
made the founder of the Frank monarchy, however so abhorrent as a
_man_, yet _respectable_, and even _great_, as a _king_. Dagobert
built and richly endowed the Church of St. Denys, which gained him
the surname “The Great,” from a grateful clergy; but history has
refused to register the ill-deserved epithet. Pepin of Landen died a
year after his king (689). His son, _Grimoald_, deemed the power of
his family already so firmly established, that, taking advantage of
the tender age of Dagobert’s sons, Sigebert (second of the name in
the list of the Merovingian kings), and Clovis (II.), he attempted to
deprive them of their father’s succession, and to place his own son
(Childebert) on the throne; both father and son paid with their lives
the failure of the ambitious plan. But the overthrow of Grimoald led
simply to a change of persons; the power of the mayors of the palace
remained undiminished, and from this time forward, the Merovingian
kings were mere ciphers. “They ascended the throne without power, and
sunk into the grave without a name.” (Gibbon.) Sigebert died in 650;
his brother Clovis six years after. One of the sons of the latter,
Clotaire (III.), succeeded to the Neustrian, another, Childeric
(II.), to the Austrasian part of the empire. After Clotaire’s death,
in 670, the third brother, Theodoric, or Thierry (III.), was for a
short time king of Neustria; but he was speedily dispossessed by his
brother Childeric (or to speak more correctly, _his_ mayor of the
palace was compelled to give way to Childeric’s mayor of the palace).
Childeric was murdered in 673; when Thierry was reinstated in
Neustria, Austrasia being given to Dagobert (II.), a son of Sigebert
II., but who had hitherto been kept out of his inheritance.
After the death of Dagobert in 678, the Austrasians refused to submit
to Thierry, the King of Neustria and Burgundy, or rather to his
haughty mayor of the palace, EBROIN. PEPIN D’HERISTAL, the grandson
of Pepin of Landen, and his cousin, MARTIN, were at the head of the
insurgent Austrasian nobility. Martin fell into the hands of Ebroin,
and was killed. Ebroin himself was soon after assassinated, (682).
His successor, GISELMAR, defeated Pepin at Namur, but the Austrasian
notwithstanding maintained his position. The Neustrian nobility,
discontented with the rule of Giselmar’s successor, BERTHAR or
BERCHAR, ultimately called Pepin to their aid.
Berthar, and his puppet, Thierry, were defeated by the Austrasian
ruler in the famous battle of Testry, near Peronne and St. Quentin,
in 687. Berthar was slain as he fled from the field of battle: and
although the _name_ of king was left to Thierry, he was compelled
to acknowledge Pepin as _sole_, _perpetual_, and _hereditary_ Mayor
of the Palace, in the three kingdoms of Neustria, Austrasia, and
Burgundy, under the style and title of Duke and Prince of the Franks,
(Dux et Princeps Francorum). Pepin was now, to all intents and
purposes, the actual ruler of the Frankish empire--king in all but
the name. The nominal sovereigns had, henceforth, a residence[94]
assigned them, which they dared not even quit without the sanction
of their master; nay, even the paltry consolation of the pomp and
glitter of royalty was not vouchsafed them--except once a year in
the month of March,[95] when the royal puppet was conducted in state
in the old Frankish fashion, in a waggon drawn by two oxen, to the
great annual assembly of the nation; to give audience to foreign
ambassadors, or to receive plaints and petitions--and to place his
organ of speech, for a time, at the disposal of the Mayor of the
Palace, and give utterance to the replies or decisions of the real
ruler of France. The assembly over, the “King” was reconducted to
his residence or prison, where a feeble retinue and a strong guard
insulted the fallen majesty of the house of Clovis. It would even
appear, that the civil list assigned to the “King,” was only a
precarious grant, and that the nominal master of three kingdoms,
was often left without the means of defraying the expenses of his
_humble_ household.[96] The epithet of the “_do-nothing kings_,” (les
rois fainéans) has been felicitously applied to the last princes of
the Merovingian line. Besides Thierry III, (✠621), three of them
lived in the reign of Pepin of Heristal, viz: Clovis III, (✠695);
Childebert III, (✠711); and Dagobert III., all of them minors.
Pepin was an able and energetic ruler; he restored in some measure
the respect of the law. Liberal rewards secured him the allegiance
of the nobility; munificent endowments to churches and monasteries,
and the aid and encouragement which he gave to the Christian
missionaries, who were endeavoring to convert the heathen Germans,
gained him the favor and support of the clergy: his good sword put
down the discontented; and last, though certainly not least, he
deserved the grateful affection of the people by alleviating their
burthens, and by protecting them, in some measure, against the
despotic oppression of the nobility. The expulsion of some Christian
missionaries from Friesland, gave Pepin a pretext for endeavoring to
subject the Frisons to the Frankish sway. He invaded Friesland in
689, and defeated the Frison duke, or prince, Radbodus, at Dorestadt,
or Dorsted; in consequence of which defeat, the latter was compelled
to cede West Friesland to the Duke of the Franks; but all attempts to
obtain the conversion of Radbodus[97] to Christianity failed.
In 697, a new war broke out between the Duke of the Franks and the
Prince of the Frisons,[98] in which the latter is stated to have been
again defeated, and compelled to acknowledge, by the payment of an
annual tribute, the supremacy of the Franks. It is added, also, that
he gave his daughter in marriage to Pepin’s son Grimoald.
Pepin of Heristal made also several expeditions, though, it would
appear, with indifferent success only, against the Alemanni, the
Thuringians, and the Bojoarii, or Bavarians, who had taken advantage
of the internal dissensions and disorder of the Frankish empire, to
shake off the yoke of their masters.
In the beginning of the year 714, Pepin fell seriously ill, at
his estate Jopila, on the Meuse. He sent for his only surviving
(legitimate) son, GRIMOALD, whom he had made (after the death of his
friend Nordbert) major domûs in Neustria, and (after the death of
DROGO, another of his sons) Duke of Burgundy and Champagne, and whom
he intended to name his successor in the government of the entire
monarchy. But on his way to his father, Grimoald was assassinated at
Liège, in the church of St. Lambert, by a Frison; at the instigation,
it would appear, of some discontented nobles. He left an illegitimate
infant son, Theudoald, or Theudebaud. Pepin was unfortunately
persuaded by his wife, the ambitious PLECTRUDIS[99], who expected
to wield the government during the minority of her little grandson,
to name this infant his successor, instead of either of his own two
illegitimate sons (Charles and Childebrand)[100], and of whom the
latter, more especially, possessed his father’s great qualities, and
that amount of physical and intellectual vigor indispensable to keep
together and to rule over an empire composed of such heterogeneous
and antagonistic elements, as the Frankish. Soon after this fatal
step, which, we may safely assume the love of his country and of his
glory, would never have permitted the aged ruler to take, had not his
faculties been greatly impaired at the time by long illness and by
the bitter grief of his son’s death, Pepin of Heristal died on the
16th of December, 714.
He had scarcely departed life when Plectrudis, who dreaded the
aspiring genius of Charles, had the latter seized, and confined
in the city of Cologne. She now deemed herself in safe possession
of the government; but she was soon awakened from her ambitious
dream. The Neustrians were indignant that they should thus be handed
over to the sway of a child and to the rule of a woman: they could
bear _infant-kings_, indeed, but they refused to put up with an
_infant mayor of the palace_. They, therefore, made RAGANFRIED, a
powerful Neustrian noble, their mayor of the palace, and prepared
to resist by force of arms, any attempt which Plectrudis might
make to compel their submission. The widow of Pepin showed indeed
that, if she had had the ambition to seize the sceptre, she had
also the spirit to wield, and the requisite energy to defend it.
She collected a powerful army, and sent the puppet-King Dagobert
(III.), and his infant minister Theudebaud, with it against, what she
was pleased to call, the Neustrian rebels. But the fortune of war
declared against her: the Austrasian forces were totally routed by
Raganfried, and “King” Dagobert fell into the hands of the Neustrian
mayor of the palace. The infant on whose tiny shoulders Pepin’s
ill-judged partiality, or uxoriousness, had thrown the burthen of
three kingdoms, died soon after this reverse (715). Radbodus took
advantage of the position of affairs, to re-annex West Friesland
to his dominions; and, in conjunction with the Saxons, invaded the
Frankish territories from the north east, whilst the Merovingian
princes of Aquitaine ravaged them in the south west; the Alemanni and
the Bavarians threw off the Frankish yoke, and resumed their ancient
independence. Matters were looking dark indeed for the house of the
Pepins, and though Mistress Plectrudis most gallantly braved the
storm, her utmost efforts could have availed but little against such
a multitude of foes, had not Pepin’s son, Charles, meanwhile found
his way out of the prison to which the ambition of his father’s widow
had confined him.
CHARLES, who was destined afterwards to play so important a part in
history, was, at this time, about 25 years of age (he was born in
690). Nature had been most bountiful to him: tall even among the tall
nation of the Franks, of a most commanding figure, and of a compact
and beautifully symmetrical frame, he might be said to present in
his physical conformation a compound of Hercules and Antinöus; his
features were regular and expressive, and the lightning glance of
his large blue eyes reflected, as in a mirror, the energy of his
mind and the vigor of his intellect. He possessed enormous bodily
strength combined with surprising agility. The remembrance of his
great father, and his own manly beauty and grace, gained him the
hearts of the Austrasians; and he soon found himself at the head
of a formidable body of troops, with which he proceeded first to
attack the Frisons, but with rather indifferent success, it would
appear, as, we find Radbodus and his Frisons soon after laying siege
to Cologne, in conjunction with the Neustrians under Raganfried.
Plectrudis, however, purchased the retreat of the besieging forces;
and the Frisons and Neustrians having separated again, Charles fell
upon the latter at Ambleva. But, although he exhibited all the
qualities of a great general, and that the fearful execution which
his heavy sword did in the hostile ranks struck terror into the foe,
and made ever after his war-cry “Here Charles and his sword,” ring
as the prelude of inevitable defeat on the affrighted ears of his
enemies: yet the superiority of numbers was too great on the side
of Raganfried, and the battle terminated at last rather in favor of
the Neustrians than otherwise (716). Soon after his capture by the
Neustrians, Dagobert had passed from his royal prison to the grave
(715), and another unlucky scion of the race of Pharamond, the Monk
Daniel, had been dragged from the repose of his cloistral cell, to
figure, as Chilperic II., in the line of the “titular” kings of
France. Charles would have acquiesced in the arrangement, had not
Raganfried steadily refused to acknowledge him as Duke of Austrasia;
he determined, therefore, to appeal once more to the decision
of arms. A fierce and sanguinary battle was fought between the
Austrasians and the Neustrians, at Vincy, between Arras and Cambray
(21st of March, 717): and this time, Charles’ valor and generalship
were rewarded with a brilliant and decisive victory, which made him
master of the country up to Paris. But, wisely declining to pursue
his conquests in this quarter, and to court perhaps the chance of
a defeat far away from his resources, he led his victorious army
swiftly back to the Rhine, and compelled Plectrudis to give up to
him the city of Cologne, and his paternal treasures; which latter he
turned to excellent account in increasing the number and efficiency
of his forces. Plectrudis took refuge in Bavaria.
Though the Merovingian princes had lost all real power in the state,
yet there still attached to the name of the family a prestige in the
eyes of the nation, which rendered the continued existence of “Kings”
chosen from among the descendants of Clovis, a matter of political
necessity. Charles wisely resolved therefore, to put himself in this
respect on equal terms with Raganfried; and he accordingly invested
with the insignia of a sham royalty another scion of the long-haired
line, yclept Clotaire, fourth of that name. An expedition against
the Saxons, to chastise them for their predatory incursions into the
Frankish territories, was eminently successful, and the son of Pepin
displayed his victorious banner on the Weser (718); but receiving
information that Raganfried had made an alliance against him with
the valiant EUDES, Duke of Aquitaine (of Merovingian descent), and
dreading lest the united power of the two might prove too strong
for him, he resolved to attack the former before a junction of the
allied forces could be effected, and accordingly led his army with
his accustomed celerity from the banks of the Weser to the banks of
the Seine. After totally routing Raganfried at Soissons (719), he
compelled Paris to surrender. The wretched Chilperic[101] sought
refuge with his ally, Eudes. Charles marched on to the Loire, and
was preparing to carry his arms into Aquitaine, when the death of
Clotaire led to an arrangement with Chilperic, who, acknowledging
Charles as major domûs in the three kingdoms, was permitted to
continue in the enjoyment of his fictitious royalty. In the same
year still (719), Charles was delivered by death from another of his
opponents, Radbodus, the brave duke of the Frisons. He promptly took
advantage of this event to re-annex West Friesland to the Frankish
dependencies, and to induct Bishop Willibrod into his see of Utrecht,
from which Radbodus had kept him excluded.
In the year 720, Chilperic was gathered to his fathers; Charles
replaced him by a child of the Merovingian race, taken from the
monastery of Lala (Thierry IV.) In 721 Charles crossed the Rhine at
the head of a powerful army, to subject the Alemanni, the Bavarians,
and the Thuringians again to the Frankish sway. As he saw in the
conversion of these stubborn nations to Christianity one of the
most efficient means to secure their allegiance in future, he had
himself attended by Winifried,[102] and other missionaries, who,
now that they were supported by the arms of the Frankish chief, were
brilliantly successful in their missionary labors, in some of the
very places among others, where they had on former occasions been
treated with derision and contumely, or whence they had been forcibly
expelled.
In 722, Charles drove the Saxons from the Hassian (Hessian) district
which they had invaded; but when he followed them into their own
country, with the intention of subjecting them altogether to his
sway, he experienced such determined resistance that he wisely
resolved to leave them alone. In 725, he compelled the Suabians and
Alemanni, and their duke, LANTFRIED, to acknowledge his sovereignty.
Since 553, after the extinction of the Gothic kingdom of Italy, the
Agilolfingian dukes of Bavaria “enjoyed” the “protection”[103] of the
Frankish kings; although, whenever the dissensions among the members
of that amiable family, or the contentions among the mayors of the
palace, afforded a fitting opportunity, the Bavarians invariably
took occasion to “thank” them for their protection, and to decline
further favors. But the persuasive force of Pepin of Heristal, and
of his son Charles, fully succeeded in the end in restoring the
amicable relations between the two nations, to the old footing. Duke
Theodo II., a most pious prince, who greatly favored and furthered
the extension of Christianity in his dominions, committed the
capital blunder so common at the time (and so natural withal)--to
divide his dominions between his three sons, Theodoald (Theudebaud),
Theudebert, and Grimoald. Theudebaud had married Pilitrudis, the fair
daughter of Plectrudis; he died in 716, and his brother Grimoald
deemed it no harm to marry the beautiful widow of the departed; but
Saint Corbinian happened to think very differently; and his zealous
exhortations, and the fearful picture which he drew of the pains
and penalties that awaited him who should have committed, what
the holy man was pleased to call, “incest,”[104] frightened poor
Duke Grimoald into giving his consent to a divorce from his dearly
beloved wife. Mistress Pilitrudis, however, was by no means pleased
with the pusillanimous conduct of her second husband; and the exile
of the meddlesome ecclesiastic speedily showed him, that a woman
offended may prove more than a match _even_ for a priest and a saint.
Theudebert also died (724), leaving behind a son, named HUGIBERT, and
a daughter, named GUNTRUDIS, and who was married to LIUTPRAND, King
of the Lombards. After his second brother’s death, Grimoald seized
upon his dominions to the prejudice of his nephew. Hugibert, finding
all his remonstrances disregarded, claimed the intercession of the
Duke of the Franks, in his capacity as Protector of Bavaria. Charles
accepted the offer of mediator between the contending parties; and
called upon Grimoald to deliver up to Hugibert the provinces which he
was unjustly withholding from him. Grimoald refusing, Charles entered
Bavaria at the head of his army, and the Bavarian duke was defeated
and slain in the first battle (725). Hugibert now succeeded to the
government of all Bavaria,[105] with the exception, however, of a
large slice of the Northern provinces, which he ceded to Charles in
reward of his services.[106] The unfortunate Pilitrudis was despoiled
by the “magnanimous” victor of all she possessed, except a mule, or
donkey, to carry her to Pavia to her relations. A new irruption of
the Saxons, called Charles again to the Weser; he defeated and drove
back the invaders (729). Whilst he was thus occupied on the Saxon
frontier, the Suabians and Alemanni took advantage of his absence,
to throw off once more the yoke of the Franks. Charles confounded
them, however, by the rapidity of his movements; he appeared on the
Mein before they were well aware that he had left the banks of the
Weser. The battle which ensued, terminated in the total defeat of the
“rebels;” Duke Lantfried was slain, and the humbled nation submitted
to the rule of the conqueror (730).
We are now approaching the most important and most interesting
period in the life and career of Charles, viz., his encounter with
the Saracens; we will, therefore, resume here the thread of the
history of the Moslem invasion, broken off at page 88, where we
left the Saracen general, El Zama, laying siege to Thoulouse. A
branch of the Merovingian family, descended from Clotaire’s (II.)
younger son Charibert (631), had established the independent[107]
duchy of Aquitaine in the south of France. At the time of the Arab
invasion, EUDES (Eudo, or Odo), an able and energetic prince, was
Duke of Aquitaine. This prince, seeing his capital threatened by the
Moslems, collected a numerous army of Gascons, Goths, and Franks, and
marched bravely to the rescue. He attacked the Arabs under the walls
of Thoulouse, and succeeded in inflicting on them a most disastrous
defeat (721). El Zama fell in the battle, and the discomfited Moslems
were saved from total destruction only by the prudence and valor
of ABDALRAHMAN BEN ABDALLAH (Abderrahman, or Abderame), a veteran
officer, whom they had elected by acclamation in the place of their
late general.
The Khalif, however, did not ratify the choice of the army, but named
ANBESA to the government of Spain. The new governor advanced again
into Aquitaine in 725; he took Carcassone by storm, and penetrated
as far as Burgundy; but the valiant Eudes succeeded ultimately in
driving him back, and also in defeating several subsequent attempts
of the Arabs to gain possession of Aquitaine.
In the year 730, the Khalif Hesham, yielding to the wishes of the
people and the army of Spain, restored Abdalrahman to the government
of that part of the Arab dominions. That daring and ambitious
commander proposed to subject to his sway, not only Aquitaine, but
the entire Frank empire; and collected a formidable host to carry his
resolve into execution. But, at the very threshold of his enterprise,
he met with an obstacle which, though he indeed triumphantly overcame
it, yet cannot be denied to have exercised a powerful adverse
influence upon its final issue. This was the rebellion of OTHMAN,
or MUNUZA, a Moorish chief, who, as governor of Cerdagne, held the
most important passes of the Pyrenees. The fortune of war had placed
the beauteous daughter of Eudes in the hands of Munuza; and the
political Duke of Aquitaine, justly appreciating the advantages of
an alliance with the man who might be said to hold the keys of his
house, had willingly consented to accept the African misbeliever for
his son-in-law. The skill, rapidity, and decision, of Abdalrahman’s
movements undoubtedly disconcerted the strategic combinations of
the two allies, and Munuza was overcome and slain, ere Eudes could
hasten to his assistance; the head of the rebel, and the daughter of
the Duke of Aquitaine, were sent to Damascus. But much precious time
was consumed, and a great number of combatants were lost, in this
unexpected prelude to the invasion of France. However, immediately
after the overthrow of Munuza, Abdalrahman advanced rapidly to the
Rhone, crossed that river, and laid siege to Arles; Eudes attempted
to relieve the beleaguered city, but his army was totally routed, and
Arles fell into the hands of the invaders (731). Abdalrahman speedily
conquered the greater part of Aquitaine, and advanced to Bordeaux.
The intrepid Eudes met him once more, at the head of a numerous army;
but neither the valor and skill of the Christian leader nor the
bravery of his troops could save them from a most disastrous defeat.
Bordeaux fell, and the Saracens overran the fairest provinces of
France (732). Charles, who would most probably have remained deaf to
the most urgent entreaties of Eudes, whom he regarded in the light
of a rival, comprehended the necessity of a speedy and vigorous
action, from the moment that he saw his own dominions threatened.
He, therefore, rapidly collected his faithful Austrasians and the
auxiliary contingents of the Alemanni, the Thuringians, and the
Bavarians; and ordered the Neustrian and Burgundian nobles to join
him with their followers; and although many of the _Burgundian_
nobles hung back, yet a most powerful host of the nations of Germany
and Gaul gathered under the banner of the Christian leader, who was
joined also by Eudes and the remains of the Aquitanian army. In the
centre of France, between Tours and Poitiers, the Franks and the
Moslems met, in the month of October, 732. Six days were spent in
desultory warfare, and many a gallant heart had ceased to beat, ere
as the red sun of the seventh day rose, the day on which it was to
be decided whether mosque or cathedral should prevail in Europe. The
battle raged fiercely from noon till eventide; the fiery sons of the
South fought with tenfold their accustomed valor, and Abdalrahman
emulated the glory of Kaled “the Sword of God.” The Germans stood
firm as rocks, and fought as heroes; and the heavy battle-axe of
Charles, wielded with irresistible strength, spread death and
dismay in the Arabian ranks; the mighty strokes which the Christian
hero dealt with that formidable weapon, gained him the epithet of
_Martel_, the _Hammer_. Eudes, burning with the resentment of former
defeats, strove to rival the prowess of his ally. Still, for many
hours, the balance hung equipoised. The life-blood of thousands of
Christians and thousands of Moslems, that had ere just raced so
fiercely through its channels, mingled in sluggish streams on the
ground. Evening set in, and still the contest raged with unabated
fury; the Orientals had, indeed, repeatedly been forced to give
way to the superior weight and strength of the Germans but their
heroic chief had as often rallied them and led them on again to death
and glory. At length, a German spear struck him to death: his fall
decided the fate of the battle; the Saracens, disheartened by the
loss of their great commander, retired to their camp. There was no
leader left among them of sufficient renown and authority to replace
the fallen hero; despairing of their ability to renew the fight next
day with the slightest chance of success, they resolved upon a hasty
retreat; and taking with them the richest and most portable portion
of their spoil, they abandoned their camp in the middle of the night.
Next morning, when Charles was marshalling forth his troops to
renew the contest, his spies both surprised and rejoiced him with
the welcome intelligence that the enemy were in full retreat to the
south. The victory gained was decisive and final: the torrent of
Arabian conquest was rolled back; and Europe was rescued from the
threatened yoke of the Saracens. But the losses of the Christians
also had been very great, and Charles wisely declined incurring
with his sadly diminished forces, the possible mischances of a
pursuit.[108]
Leaving to Eudes the task of reconquering his own land from the
flying foe, Charles proceeded now to call the Burgundian nobles
to account for their hesitation and lukewarmness in his cause. To
secure their future allegiance, he placed officers of his into
the Burgundian cities and castles; to little purpose, however, it
would appear, as their presence did not prevent the discontented
Burgundian nobles, a few years after, from calling in the Saracens,
and actually delivering the city of Avignon into the hands of JUSSUF
BEN ABDALRAHMAN, the Arabian governor of Narbonne (735).
In 734, Charles defeated Poppo, the Duke of the Frisons, and regained
the western part of Friesland. In 735, Duke Eudes died, and as his
two sons, HUNOLD and HATTO, quarrelled about the succession, Charles
proffered his “armed mediation,” and settled the dispute finally by
naming Hunold Duke of Aquitaine, after having exacted and obtained
from that prince an oath of allegiance, not to the nominal king of
the Franks, but to himself personally, and to his two sons of his
first marriage, Carloman and Pepin. In 736, Charles had to repel
another invasion of the Saxons, which prevented him from proceeding
to Burgundy against the disaffected nobles and their allies, the
Arabs; he sent, however, his brother Childebrand. In 737, he came
himself; he speedily reduced Avignon, and expelled the Arabs from the
Burgundian territory; the nobility and clergy, who had treasonably
conspired against him with the enemy, or had acted in a hostile
manner to him, he deprived of their possessions, bishoprics, &c.,
which he bestowed upon his friends and followers.[109] In 738 he
advanced into Septimania, and laid siege to Narbonne. He totally
defeated Omar Ben Kaled, the Arabian general, who was marching to the
relief of the beleaguered city; but the governor of Narbonne defended
the place so valiantly and successfully, that the Franks were
compelled to raise the siege. However, though Septimania remained
in the hands of the Arabs till 755, when Pepin, the son of Charles
Martel, recovered it, an effectual and final check had been put to
their further advance into France.
In 737, King Thierry died; but so firmly was the power of Charles
Martel established now, that he could safely neglect to name a
successor to the dead “monarch;” nay, in 741, he actually proceeded
before a general assembly of the nobility and the army, to divide his
dominions between his two sons of his first marriage (with Rotrudis),
bestowing Austrasia, with Suabia and Thuringia, upon the elder,
Carloman; Neustria, Burgundy, and Provence, upon the younger, Pepin.
His son Grypho, whom Suanehilda had borne him, he excluded at first
from all participation in his succession; subsequently he assigned
him also a portion, which, after his death, led to the oppression and
imprisonment of the youth by his elder brothers. In the same year
(741) Charles was, on his return from a kind of pilgrimage to St.
Denys, seized with a violent fever, of which he died at Carisiacum,
or Quiercy, on the Oise, on the 22nd October.
FOOTNOTES:
[92] Pepin of Landen was the son of Carloman, a Frank noble of
Brabant. Pepin’s daughter, Begga, was married to Arnulf’s son,
Ansgesil; from this marriage sprang Pepin d’Heristal, the father of
Charles Martel.
[93] However, two natural sons of Charibert founded, after the death
of the latter, the semi-independent duchy of Aquitaine, in a more
restricted sense, with the capital, Thoulouse.
[94] Mamaccæ (Mommarques) on the Oise between Compiègne and Noyon.
[95] Pepin of Heristal restored the annual national assembly of the
Franks, which had fallen in desuetude since the days of Ebroin; when
the younger Pepin, the son of Charles Martel, finally added the _name
of King_ to the exercise of the royal power which he wielded, he
changed the month of meeting from March to May; the _Campus Martius_
became accordingly a _Campus Majus_.
[96] Nam et opes et potentia regni penes palatii præfectos, qui
Majores Domûs dicebantur, et _ad quos summa imperii pertinebat_,
tenebantur; neque regi aliud relinquebatur quam ut regis tantum
nomine contentus, speciem dominantis effingeret, legatos audiret,
eisque abeuntibus _responsa, quæ erat edoctus vel etiam_ JUSSUS, _ex
sua velut potestate redderet_; cum præter inutile regis nomen et
_præcarium vitæ stipendium_, quod ei præfectus aulæ, prout videbatur,
exhibebat, nihil aliud proprium possideret.--Einhardi, (Eginhart,)
Vita Caroli Magni; Pertz, Monumenta Germaniæ Historica, Tomus II., p.
444.
[97] At one time, it would appear, the Frison prince was on the point
of consenting to his baptism; he had already placed one foot in
the baptismal font, when it occurred to him to ask the officiating
bishop (Wolfram, of Sens), “where his ancestors were gone to?” “To
Hell,” was the unhesitating reply of the bigoted priest; whereupon
the honest heathen exclaimed: “Then I will rather be damned with them
than saved without them,” and withdrew his foot.
[98] Perhaps in some measure in consequence of the consecration of
the missionary WILLIBROD, as bishop of Utrecht (696)?
[99] Of the race of the Bojoarian Agilolfingians.
[100] ALPAIS, or ALPHEIDA, was the mother of these two sons.
[101] Raganfried had most likely perished on his flight.
[102] Better known as Boniface, the Apostle of the Germans. He was
sent by Charles to Rome to obtain the episcopal ordination, that
he might be able to act with greater ecclesiastical authority in
the newly converted districts; on the 30th November, 723, Pope
Gregory II. (715-731) ordained him bishop, after he had given in
his “profession of faith,” which was approved of by Gregory as
strictly orthodox. The pope furnished him then with letters and
credentials to Christian princes and ecclesiastics, and to the
heathen princes and nations of Germany, and also with faithful
copies of the ordinances, creed, ritual, and regulations of the
Romish Church; and the Christian missionary was thus converted into
the Popish legate. By his base monkish truckling to the authority
of Rome this narrow-minded zealot, who sought in idle formalities
and ceremonies the _spirit_ of the word of Christ, which he was
totally unable to conceive and comprehend, turned the new Christian
church in Germany into a dependence of the Papal see, and thus
prepared ages of bloodshed and misery for that devoted country. He
carried his “submissiveness” to Rome so far that he actually asked
instructions in that quarter as to whether, on which part of the
body, and with which finger he might, or was to, make the sign of
the cross during the delivery of his sermons. No wonder, indeed, his
“mission” succeeded only when backed by the sword. He was murdered by
the Frisons, in 755. Apart from his narrow-minded bigotry, he was an
estimable man, full of honest and disinterested zeal.
[103] The ingenuity displayed by man in the invention of specious
terms to disguise the plain and simple fact of the domination of one
being or nation over another, is truly marvellous.
[104] What a blessing a Primate like St. Corbinian would have been to
that tender-conscienced casuist, Henry VIII. of England.
[105] Of course, under Frankish protection.
[106] Or as the dower of SUANEHILDA, Theudebaud’s daughter of a
former marriage, whom Charles espoused on this occasion.
[107] Virtually independent.
[108] The idle and incredibly extravagant tale told by Paul
Warnefried and Anastasius of 350,000 or 375,000 Arabs slain in this
battle, to 1500 Christians, has been faithfully copied by most
historians. One should think a moment’s reflection would suffice to
show the absolute impossibility of these numbers. Where on earth
was a governor of Spain, a recent conquest of the Saracens, to find
the 450,000 men (for 100,000 are stated to have escaped) to lead
into France; and where was he to find, in a thinly populated region,
such as that country was in the time of Charles Martel, the means of
subsistence for such a host? His chief of the commissariat must have
been a rare genius indeed. And as to the number of _fifteen hundred_
Christians slain, this looks very much like the “one man killed and
four men slightly wounded,” to “one thousand of the enemy slain,” of
some of our modern bulletins. Striking off a nought from the number
of the Saracens, and adding one to that of the Christians may bring
us somewhat nearer the truth.
[109] Charles Martel was not over-nice, it would appear, in the
bestowal of ecclesiastical preferments and estates; it mattered very
little indeed to him whether the recipient was a priest or a layman,
or even whether he could read and write. He also laid his impious
hands repeatedly upon the revenues of the church, and applied them
to the necessities of the state, or to pay his soldiers. No wonder
then that a sainted bishop of the times, EUCHERIUS, of Orleans,
should have been indulged with a pleasant vision of the body and soul
of the wicked prince burning in the deepest abyss of hell--rather
scurvy treatment, though, on the part of a Christian clergy, of a
prince who, whatever might be his foibles as a man, and his vices as
a king--(and it must be admitted, he had a goodly share of them)--had
yet the merit of being the saviour of Christendom. (A synod held
at Quiercy, in 858, had the calm impudence to communicate this
interesting and flattering statement, accompanied by some others of
the same stamp, to Lewis, King of Germany, grandson of Charlemagne!)
END OF VOL. I.
LONDON:
BRADBURY AND EVANS, PRINTERS, WHITEFRIARS.
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE
Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been
corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences within
the text and consultation of external sources.
Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text,
and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained.
Pg 11: ‘same fate befel’ replaced by ‘same fate befell’.
Pg 16: ‘attuned to comtemplation’ replaced by
‘attuned to contemplation’.
Pg 39: ‘granted, Mahommed’ replaced by ‘granted, Mohammed’.
Pg 54: ‘let each party chose’ replaced by ‘let each party choose’.
Pg 58: ‘recal from the Persian’ replaced by ‘recall from the Persian’.
Pg 59: ‘Musulmans to oppose’ replaced by ‘Mussulmans to oppose’.
Pg 59: ‘decreed the downfal’ replaced by ‘decreed the downfall’.
Pg 74: ‘But Abd-eb-Malek had’ replaced by ‘But Abd-el-Malek had’.
Pg 85: ‘by the recal of’ replaced by ‘by the recall of’.
Pg 104: ‘CHLODOMIR’S seat’ replaced by ‘CLODOMIR’S seat’.
Pg 124: ‘the beleagured city’ replaced by ‘the beleaguered city’.
Footnote 88: ‘children of Coldomir’ replaced by ‘children of Clodomir’.
End of Project Gutenberg's Moslem and Frank, by Gustave Louis Strauss