AHC:. Independent Kingdom of Aquitaine

As it says in the tin:

How can we can an long-term independent Kingdom of Aquitaine in the Middle Ages? Also, how would this state develop, especially in a (semi-reconizable) early modern period.
 
I have a thought...
Have the franks lose the Battle Of Vouillé (507 AD), leading to a surviving visigothic presence in Aquitaine. Later, some succession war to the visigothic throne could lead to Aquitaine breaking off.
507 is also early enough to butterfly islam away, so the aquitainians won't need to ask for frankish help against invaders from Iberia.
 
As it says in the tin:

How can we can an long-term independent Kingdom of Aquitaine in the Middle Ages? Also, how would this state develop, especially in a (semi-reconizable) early modern period.
Your best bet is probably to have the proto-nations of the late Merovingian era (Austrasia, Neustria, Burgundy and Aquitaine) solidify and form the basic divisions of Europe, with Austrasia failing to hold eventual conquests in the east long enough, with them becoming new independant kingdoms, to became too dominant.

How things will go from then on is anyone guess since it butterfly the Carolengian empire and its crucial role the gestation of Europe. At most one can presume it will probably play a crucial role in the Reconquista, or an attempt to it at least, for geographical reasons. Considering the historical links between Catalan and Occitan culture I can imagine the ATL equivalent of Aragon being biger and more powerfull then the ATL equivalent of Castille compared to OTL.

If you feel particularly creative you can have an equivalent on steroid of the pocket empire of Peter II of Aragon formed for a few month before it came crashing down at Muret happen here and actually live on this time around.
 
It really depends on which kingdom of Aquitaine we're talking about. Summarizing some of proposals there.

Visigothic Kingdom (@GauchoBadger)
I don't really think it could be considered as such to begin with (and that's where I'd disagree with Penent while I religiously compulse his book on the history of Aquitaine), giving we're talking about the period of stabilization of Romano-Barbarian kingdoms. Most of the efforts of Visigoths were indeed more mediterannean-focused than Franks' were in the early Vth, but it never prevented Goths to be wary of Northern Gaul as the context of the Battle of Déols or the support they gave to Burgundians against Franks show well.

In short, rather than a proto-kingdom of Aquitaine, we're more in the presence of a Late Roman imperium, which wasn't clearly set on a territorial horizon : in the case of a Frankish defeat, the relative opposition of the Gallo-Roman nobility (altough Alaric II admittedly tried to mend the gap at this point, but it wasn't really enough), the still important Frankish presence in Northern Gaul (plus their alliance with Gallo-Roman nobility and Burgundians) would prevent them IMO to take a clear southern Gallic figure (especially with their dominion in Spain)

Merovingian Aquitaine (@phil03)

I'll gloss over lesser known entities such as the short lived Gondabald's realm in Aquitaine (which was more a tentative to claim back Frankish royal titles which backfired as he recieved only the support of Roman nobility) or Caribert's kingdom, as not really relevant.

Aquitaine was less a Frankish sub-kingdom in the VIth and VIIth centuries, than a peripherical duchy as Bavaria or Thrungia was. It allowed it to maintain a distinct identity (that Franks called Aquitain, but that Aquitains themselves called Roman) altough geopolitically mixed with the Basque presence (the sub-kingdom of Caribert II was basically a mega-march against them, and most of the late and powerful dukes of Aquitaine in the late Merovingian and Peppinid periods were also dukes of Gascons).

Now, the merovingian duchy of Aquitaine certainly reached its apogee with Eudon of Aquitaine who recieved a royal title or a little while. But this royal title was probably more a sub-royal one, as it recieved it from the stillborn help he gave to Chilperic II and Franks opposed to the Peppinid hegemony (regardless Plectrude or Charles-led).
Furthermore, when in need against the Arabo-Berber campaigns of 720's and 730's, the naturel supporter was Peppinid Francia (less trough love than necessity) in spite of the ressources of Aquitaine.
It seems to indicate that while largely independent not only geopolitically (in no small parts thanks to the Gascon cavalry and presence) but also culturally, Aquitaine was still pretty much deeply into Frankish sphere (the distinction between Neustria, Burgundy and Austrasia as distinct entities is mostly an historiographical one) even if as a peripherical part of it (hence why it was usually shared between Frankish kings, rather than gaven to one in particular).

With extremely good conditions (no Arabo-Berber conquest of Spain, and Peppinid backstabbing each other to extinction...even more than IOTL) you could see some sort of bastard sub-kingdom/kingdom of Aquitaine lasting long, but not more than Frankish sub-kingdoms or peripherical duchies : if these maintain there tendency to unite, then Aquitaine might end up swallowed up anyway; if they tend to divide a lot, Aquitaine would be stll part of the infighting and its own succession is shadowy enough for betting on chaos may be unwise.

Carolingian Aquitaine (@phil03)

The case there is more interesting. Charlemagne recreated a kingdom in Aquitaine both as a big march (as Dagobert did in its time) but as well to answer some regionalist tendencies. Not that he didn't want to impose Frankish influence on a strategical region (his son Pepin had teachers that were specifically told that he wasn't to become a Roman; Charlemagne put trusted family members as Guilhèm as regent de facto and Count-Marchio of Toulouse/Gothia/Spain), but the Aquitano-Franko-Hispanic kingdom that was the Carolingian Kingdom of Aquitaine had assets to survive.

The problem, as always with Carolingians, was the matter of both succession and indepenent drive of the Carolingian nobility : both tendencies managed to crush Carolingia, while not easily, definitely.

I'd rather expect a smooth succession as planned in 806 (Francia/Aquitaine/Italy) to be more stable than the perpetually renegociated Ordino Imperi made by Louis during the ongoing civil wars between and with his sons. More stable, in a relative fashion of course : I do not doubt that various Charlemagne's sons would attempt to take more or even swallow the entiere thing.

But a strong kingdom of Aquitaine, with a clear legitimacy (the succession of Peppin II and III was...shaky at best, mostly because hereditary principle wasn't really a thing, but rather settled by treaty within the dynasty) and augmented with Burgundy might have its chance there in the way it would turn into late and post-carolingian disorder as its own thing as other kingdoms.

Giving that Aquitaine gave most of its administrative and clerical managers to Carolingia, still, I would suspect that it would form a cultural continuity with other Carolingian entities especially with the Roman elements being diluted into a regional matter (as it happened with Ottonian demesne).

EDIT : Oops, the post was cut in half. I'm rewriting the rest.
 
Late Carolingian Aquitaine

This one get overlooked a lot while it's probably the best opportunity.
To be honest, we should rather talk about opportunities.

The tentative of Peppin II and III to keep or take back the kingship of Aquitaine isn't without merits and possibilities, but these largely depends on Charles II of WFrancia being deprived of skills or life : Peppinid legitimacy largely was issued from local nobility and from alliances with opponents of Charles (notably Lothar) rather than clear support base. Once Charles does manage to secure WF, he does manage to have a freeway to Aquitaine without Lothar being much able or even willing to do something (basically, early medieval Aquitaine is in dire need of allies).
At this point, eventually, Aquitaine is seen as a kingship constituent from WFrancia : not always a given territory, but rather a title to strengthen one legitimacy or one's successor.
Basically, you need to break any strong Western Francia (with a caveat Aquitaine might become Western Francia)

While Frankish nobles first rejected in the latter part of the century the Carolingian claim to the WFrankish throne, it wasn't a unanimous decision : many princes refused (mostly for their own interest) to acknowledge Eudes I as king for a while, who never really managed to affirm its authority beyond Loire and Meuse.
Ramnulf II, for instance, not only supported Charles II against Eudes, but claimed the kingdom of Aquitaine for himself (it's unclear if he declared himself king, or taking it for Charles)
Aquitaine as an independent entity was then somehow resurrected (altough not at all consistent), and it open a series of PoD onwards on which the opposition between Robertians/Capetians and Carolingians could lead to either a new Carolingian Kingdom of Aquitaine or a Ramnulfid kingdom.

Similarily, for exemple, the opposition of Guilhèm II (the last great late Carolingian duke of Aquitaine) against Raoul (Robertian by alliance).

Note, tough, that the ducal power was shifting from house to house, and that the dismembrement of Aquitaine along great houses (Auvergne, Ramnulfids, Raimondins for the greatest) already began to fragilize the region : maybe it would buttefly away the exinction of the House of Auvergne that led to a really damaging succession war between the other houses and a great feudal desintegration in Aquitainr (that was felt up to the Capetian tekeover), but the kingdom would be in a situation midway between WFrancia and Ottonian Italy geopolitically wise.

Anyhow, after the death of Acfred and the War of Succession of Auvergne, there's not really a way to make an extremely divised Aquitaine a kingdom. So let's go for two late medieval exemples.

Barcelonese Aquitaine (@phil03)
Phil03 proposed a sort of mangled Aquitaine issued from Muret. I'm afraid it's simply not possible given the context.

Languedoc was, as all Aquitaine, deeply divided in small feudal states. In fact, the Great Southern War that took place before the Crusade significantly further weakened Languedoc not only trough general weariness but also with the rise of smaller nobles and urban republics.

Aragon/Barcelone wasn't welcomed as a cultural brother helping against French (as I see it narated far too often), but as a last resort from Raimondins (traditional foes of Barcelone and traditional allies of Capetians) to maintain their states against Crusaders (it didn't really worked, hence the Battle of Muret) and other local dynasties.

I stress this : the land was a damned puzzle and even people studying it are depressing over the sheer ammount of local dynasties which existed everywhere but had more relevance there (would it be the shitload of Viscounts of Lescure : some working for Crusaders, some working for Raimondins)

Asserting his authority wouldn't be easy : towns acting as independent republics, lords not always recognizing their direct suzerains authority, and an enduring rivalry between Raimondins, Trencavel and Aragon.

Even with a victory at Muret, Peìre would have to deal with a bad geopolitical situation, with everyone trying to get as much as possible out of the situation : and either abandoning the region to its own shenenigans or trying to clear the mess, it would still be Capetians that would have the better hand (especially as "oh well, they would be further suzerains and Peter is becoming a nuisance anyway")

I'd fully expect a modified Treaty of Corbeil, where Aragon could push the border to not only Carcassès and Razès (that they claimed anyway) but maybe Albigès as well, while the situation would a bit better for Raimondins and Trencavel. Certainly not a transpyrenean kingdom.

Plantagenêt/Lancaster Aquitaine


Again, I'm quite surprised that nobody picked this one in spite of the anglocentric view on this board.

Of course, I'm not talking about the so-called Angevine Empire*, but rather the late medieval duchy of Aquitaine during HYW.
Aquitaine was given up in full holding to Plantagenets with the Treaty of Brétigny, and was several times promised to Lancaster nobles during the civil war between Armagnacs and Bourguignons, by each side to gain help against the other.

It happened that Charles V was a magnificent bastard that managed to break the treaty even before signing it (the exchange of places was never reallt effective) in first place, and that Henry V wanted the whole of the prize, not just Aquitaine.

With the right events (death of Charles V or Henry V at the right time), you could see the Duchy of Aquitaine blossoming as a constituent part of the English kingship until realizing that contrary to Wales, it was a bit too great to be that efficiently supervized from across the sea.

I don't think it would be a separated kingdom (rather a constitutent kingdom) or that it would be really that safe from Valois takeover (while probably more good at this), but you would have a late medieval kingdom of Aquitaine with possibilities of survival for some time.


*Angevine Empire, in spite of its name, certainly wasn't an unified demesne. It was rather a common feudal hegemony on really diverse demesnes, themselves often divided in small entities (especially Aquitaine, that was a true political mosaic). Hence why the revolts of Henry II's sons fit remarkably the demesnes they recieved : Aquitaine, Anjou, Normandy, etc. each with their own identity, their own structures, their own interests.
All of that under the still present suzerainty of the French kings that could play on the feudal piano quite easily.
 
Barcelonese Aquitaine (@phil03)
Phil03 proposed a sort of mangled Aquitaine issued from Muret. I'm afraid it's simply not possible given the context.

I am affraid I didn't express myself well enough here: what I was essentially proposing was for Merovingian Aquitaine to survive due to the political divisions of the late Merovingian era (Neustria, Austrasia, Burgundy and Aquitaine) eventually solidifying into more long term entities like Francia Occidentalis and Orientalis did into France and Germany respectivelly.

Since part of the challenge consisted in trying to imagine further developments I imagined Aquitain playing an important role in an ATL reconquista, and possibly even carving sizable dominions south of the Pyreneans and then used Peter II short-lived attempt at expansion north of Languedoc as the closest historical comparaison I could muster to show my drift. It is very imperfect as far as paraleles goes but going with a continuation and a solidification of the divisions of the Regnum Francorum essentially create a half unrecognisable Europe because they imply butterflying away the Carolingean empire so any comparaison with OTL is bound to suffer a bit.

I went with Merovingian Aquitaine because, as you noted so yourself, it was at the periphery of the Frankish world and therefore could concevably drift out of it one way or another and I can imagine Aquitaine being able to deal with any of the other sub-kingdoms (Burgundy, Neustria, Austrasia) separately. If you either butterfly away the arab conquest of Spain, stack the deck in favour of Aquitaine when they march north of the Pyrenées or butterfly the advance north of the Pyrenées somehow you would have Aquitaine in a good place.

Mind you, I may be out of the left field with my analysis but in any case it would at least be out of the left field in a different fashion then if I went with an Aragonese Aquitaine :p
 
Last edited:
I am affraid I didn't express myself well enough here: what I was essentially proposing was for Merovingian Aquitaine to survive due to the political divisions of the late Merovingian era (Neustria, Austrasia, Burgundy and Aquitaine) eventually solidifying into more long term entities like Francia Occidentalis and Orientalis did into France and Germany respectivelly.
e
No, no, I understood. It's just that Aquitaine wasn't really considered as a Frankish sub-kingdom, but as a peripherical territory.While the appearance of the tiers division of Francia in the VIIth is a thing (altough not that systematized, especially as Burgundy kept being lumped together with Austrasia then Neustria with the unifyinf tendency), Aquitaine was alsmost systematically divided between kings (Neustria+1/3 of Aquitaine, for exemple) as a region outside Francia proper.
You do have exemples of a sub-kingdom of Aquitaine, but that's essentially as a peripherical march (Caribert II) or as a periphery (Eudon).

I think you're confusing the Merovingian historiographical division there (Neustria/Austrasia/Burgundia + Aquitaine, Thuringia, Bavaria, etc.) and the later Carolingian division (WFrancia, MFrancia and EFrancia weren't set according these divisions at all, but were relatively new things* : Aquitaine and Bavaria (for exemple) kept a separate identity especially because they weren't considered as part of Francia proper.

At the point WFrancia people were called Karlenses for a while


Since part of the challenge consisted in trying to imagine further developments I imagined Aquitain playing an important role in an ATL reconquista, and possibly even carving sizable dominions south of the Pyreneans
Such drive would be, quite obviously, more a Carolingian Aquitaine feature : remember that it did included (even with Peppin II) the March of Toulouse/Gothia/Spain and (technically) both Wasconias including Ulterior (which is Pampelune) : once again, Aquitaine was partially seen as a mega-march against Arabo-Berbers and as such disposing from military and economical resources to do the job (while it seemed not that relelvant in the middle of the Xth century) but for a WFrankish point of view, such a territory was vital to its own power and survival (hence why WFrankish kings tended to either take the Aquitain kingship for themselves or their successors until the XIth)

Anyhow, by the time the Arabo-Berber conquest kicks in, Merovingian Aquitaine is admittedly largely autonomous, but still pretty much dependent on what happen in Francia proper and that means since the late VIIth century an unification of Francia and its sub-kingdom at the benefit of Peppinids/Arnulfids which is hard IMO to get rid by the 710's.

Eventually, it's not like Late Merovingian Aquitaine didn't have a drive southwards, but it was much more difficult than the sphere of influence of Bavaria among Slavs. A good part of the historical reasons for the Arabo-Berber campaign of 732 in Gaul was because Eudon allied himself with Munuza (a berber lord responsible for some pyrenean passes) that revolted.
al-Andalus at this point, even with its weaknesses, was a powerful entity : by the time the Berver Revolt kicked in, Aquitaine was already felling the pressure of an unified Francia.

I went with Merovingian Aquitaine because, as you noted so yourself, it was at the periphery of the Frankish world and therefore could concevably drift out of it one way or another and I can imagine Aquitaine being able to deal with any of the other sub-kingdoms (Burgundy, Neustria, Austrasia) separately.
Well, Aquitaine drifted away like more or less all peripherical territories of Francia as Provence, Bavaria, Thuringia, etc. in the VIIth century onwards. A good part of the legitimacy of their aristocracy, tough, depended from their relationship with the Frankish kingship : Eudon managed to get a royal title briefly as ally/subordinate of Chilperic III but not as a Frankish king of Aquitaine.
You just have to witness both the Peppinid/Arnulfid efforts to impose themselves to these peripheries in the VIIIth, and the relative dependence of these peripheries (especially Aquitaine and Provence) in face of danger.

If you either butterfly away the arab conquest of Spain, stack the deck in favour of Aquitaine when they march north of the Pyrenées or butterfly the advance north of the Pyrenées somehow you would have Aquitaine in a good place.
You could see Aquitaine attempting to get a Gothic alliance as they maintained an alliance with Bavarians and Lombards for a while : but politically and militarily, the Frankish presence is not going to disappear anytime soon. You could have a TL where the unification trend of Francia is butchered hard enough that Arnulfids can't do it, and that they're not replaced by one of their foes, familial branchs or Merovingians, true : but giving the situation in Aquitaine (an important part of the nobility in some regions was largely issued from Austrasian or Neustrian nobility depending on the old shares of the place), I fully expect such disorder to plague it as well.

Not, mind you, that it couln't revive in a separate form, but for a while I would rather see a situation as in southern part of Burgundy especially the provencal patriciates.
Eventually : either Aquitaine becomes powerful enough to dominate (and that means an Aquitaine-led dominiation of Gaul), either it's still a part (if estrangered) of the larger geopolitical entity.

I could see, tough, with a lucky Aquitain drive, late Merovingian Aquitaine survive on its own as a peripherical duchy a bit like what existed in southern Italy under Charlemagne, then surviving the likely Carolingia/Carolingian replacement collapse.
 
I could see, tough, with a lucky Aquitain drive, late Merovingian Aquitaine survive on its own as a peripherical duchy a bit like what existed in southern Italy under Charlemagne, then surviving the likely Carolingia/Carolingian replacement collapse.

This was a really well thought out post - I'm always humbled when I realize how much more some people know about this era! :) So, lets say this later scenario occurs. How do you see this independent duchy (later Kingdom?) developing?
 
Could the Plantagenets keep their holdings in the place and eventually detach it from France?
Safe a total Capetian collapse, it's extremely unlikely.

See, Plantagenêt's holdings were more a collection of various feudal demesnes with their own customs, interests, nobility and themselves divided (not that much for what matter Normandy, extremely so for what matter Aquitaine).
These sort of feudal hegemonies tended to be relatively short-lived, being plagued by revolt, division or succession matters. Capetians managed to impose their authority because they had both legitimacy and ressources to do soL, and it never went that smoothly.

Basically, the Angevin "Empire" was more or less doomed to collapse under its own weight, due to political instability, attrition and relative lack of legitimacy to hold on the whole of it.

In fact their best chance would have been, IMO, to have an actual relevant claim to the french throne (which was IOTL relatively poor), good enough to gain leverage within french nobility ITTL (and if possible, earlier than the XIVth). I realize, tough, it's not really what the OP asked or you did.

Now keeping Guyenne* longer? I proposed a Brétigny-like Aquitaine surviving longer (maybe not all the way to modern times, tough), so it's quite doable IMO : Gascony was without question the region most loyal to Plantagenêts within the kingdom of France (which doesnt mean a total loyalty, especially from local aristocracy), and the place Valois had more troubles eventually to clearly take down.
No HYW could help, with a Guyenne being probably sometimes under pressure from Capetians, but it could evolve as a separatus corpus from the kingdom with enough luck (that said, being considered as such would give more opportunity to Capetians to enforce conquest than if it was still a part of the kingdom) : how much could it last is anybody guess, but it's a relatively good chance.

It's no kingdom of Aquitaine as asked by the OP, tough.

*Aquitania gave, like many latin words, two different words in French and Occitan. One erudite ( Aquitaine/Aquitània), the other popular (Aguiaina -> Guiana / Aguiéne- > Guyenne)


So, lets say this later scenario occurs. How do you see this independent duchy (later Kingdom?) developing?
Well, I think it would imply a less successful Francia (for exemple, Arnulfids are kicked down, and a possible Merovingian revival), or maybe a TL where Arabo-Berbers conquests (if not Islam) are butterflied away forcing Franks to have a lesser Mediterranean focus (and which could lead to the aformentioned possibility).

The big asset of the duchy (double duchy, actually) would be Gascons which formed a large part of its military forces, and why Aquitaine was relevant into the larger Frankish sphere (as ally or foe).

In the case of an existing al-Andalus ITTL, Aquitaine would without doubt be under tight Frankish overlordship (would it be trough sheer opportunism as for 732), so really, this is to be butterflied away.

IMO, the best outcome would be no Arabo-Berber pressure in the south, and Ragenfred/Chilperic III being successful : it would imply acknowledgement of Aquitaine as a separate corpus (namely a subdorinated kingdom, which didn't last IOTL with the Neustrian defeat).

Aquitaine was more or less the doorstep to Spain and south-western Atlantic. Which wasn't that relevant in matter of trade (altough I personaly think, while it's debatable, it could have played a role if peripherical, into Spain/Atlantic trade).
You could see, depending on the good wealth of Gothic Spain, you could see some tentatives of raid or even conquest of Pyrenean regions (The ill-named Septimania*, or Gasconia Ulterior**)

Regardless, it would mean Aquitaine to become a tributaire and at least superficially acknowledging Frankish suzerainty, not unlike the southern Lombard duchies were IOTL in the early Xth, with ironically maybe less cultural influence it had in Carolingian Europe IOTL.
The duchy itself would be more or less peripherical and relatively outside the great centers of its era, but could do better when (if?) Frankish hegemony weakens or collapse. Most of the geopolitical situation of Aquitaine would be dependent on its relation with Franks and Franks' strength.

* Septimania is a name given historiographically to Lower Languedoc in Early Middle Ages, but it's kind of confusing and never used contemporarily. Best using "Gothia" which was used and corresponded for Franks and Aquitains to the part of Gaul ruled by Goths. Interestingly, it survived into the form of "Gothia Lunga" (Long Gothia) which might have gave "Catalonia"

** More or less Basque Country, Navarre and surrounding parts.
 
Top