CHAPTER II.

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 toWarnachar, 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 valiantArnulf, the Austrasian, mayor of the palace, and subsequently—whenthat 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 sonDagobert(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 aman, yetrespectable, and evengreat, as aking. 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 thegrave 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,hismayor 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,BertharorBerchar, 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 thenameof king was left to Thierry, he was compelled to acknowledge Pepin assole,perpetual, andhereditaryMayor 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 darednot 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 hishumblehousehold.[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 wereendeavoring 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 ofDrogo, another of hissons) 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 ambitiousPlectrudis[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 bearinfant-kings, indeed, but they refused to put up with aninfant mayor of the palace. They, therefore, madeRaganfried, 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 Radbodusand 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 valiantEudes, 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 othermissionaries, 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 matchevenfor a priest and a saint. Theudebert also died (724), leaving behind a son, namedHugibert, and a daughter, namedGuntrudis, and who was married toLiutprand, 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). Hugibertnow 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 atpage 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 ofAbdalrahman 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 namedAnbesato 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 ofOthman, orMunuza, 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 thegreater 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 theBurgundiannobles 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 ofMartel, theHammer. 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 Orientalshad, 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 ofJussuf 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,HunoldandHatto, 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 headvanced into Septimania, and laid siege to Narbonne. He totally defeated Omar Ben Kaled, the Arabian general, who was marching to the relief ofthe 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 thename of Kingto the exercise of the royal power which he wielded, he changed the month of meeting from March to May; theCampus Martiusbecame accordingly aCampus Majus.[96]Nam et opes et potentia regni penes palatii præfectos, qui Majores Domûs dicebantur, etad quos summa imperii pertinebat, tenebantur; neque regi aliud relinquebatur quam ut regis tantum nomine contentus, speciem dominantis effingeret, legatos audiret, eisque abeuntibusresponsa, quæ erat edoctus vel etiamJUSSUS,ex sua velut potestate redderet; cum præter inutile regis nomen etpræcarium 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 missionaryWillibrod, as bishop of Utrecht (696)?[99]Of the race of the Bojoarian Agilolfingians.[100]Alpais, orAlpheida, 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 thespiritof 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 ofSuanehilda, 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 offifteen hundredChristians 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!)

[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 thename of Kingto the exercise of the royal power which he wielded, he changed the month of meeting from March to May; theCampus Martiusbecame accordingly aCampus Majus.

[96]Nam et opes et potentia regni penes palatii præfectos, qui Majores Domûs dicebantur, etad quos summa imperii pertinebat, tenebantur; neque regi aliud relinquebatur quam ut regis tantum nomine contentus, speciem dominantis effingeret, legatos audiret, eisque abeuntibusresponsa, quæ erat edoctus vel etiamJUSSUS,ex sua velut potestate redderet; cum præter inutile regis nomen etpræcarium 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 missionaryWillibrod, as bishop of Utrecht (696)?

[99]Of the race of the Bojoarian Agilolfingians.

[100]Alpais, orAlpheida, 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 thespiritof 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 ofSuanehilda, 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 offifteen hundredChristians 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 NOTEObvious 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’sseat’ replaced by ‘Clodomir’sseat’.Pg 124: ‘the beleagured city’ replaced by ‘the beleaguered city’.Footnote 88: ‘children of Coldomir’ replaced by ‘children of Clodomir’.

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’sseat’ replaced by ‘Clodomir’sseat’.Pg 124: ‘the beleagured city’ replaced by ‘the beleaguered city’.Footnote 88: ‘children of Coldomir’ replaced by ‘children of Clodomir’.

Back to Index Next