WI : Continued Carolingian dynasty in France - 10th century

More generally, you (and, in fairness, quite a lot of historians) are way too focussed on the Robertian/Carolingian conflict.
What I'm saying is that your methodology is not historically acceptable. You're cherry-picking the bits of Richer you like in order to force it into the straight-jacket of an all-consuming feud between Robertians and Carolingians.
Let's agree we disagree.
I can conceive your point on the Aquitanian connection is relevant if we reject the Robertian feud as actual, but my point on the Anjou is based on an opposite assumption and I think it can fit the source without contradicting them.
As for my method, I do not take what is convenient and discard the remainder, 'cherry-picking' as you say, but I tend to take it under a global, multi-disciplinary approach, to palliate the problems and lacuna inherent to a work on ancient sources.
Where you view the sources under the assumption that the Robertian feud isn't a factor (assuming there's no renewed feud), I view them under the assumption it is, so we each draw different conclusions. Can we agree on that?

As I see the things, it's three king over 70 years either fighting in Lotharingia, Normandy or Robertians, all north of the Loire, while the most marking event concerning Aquitaine is Louis V's marriage at the end of this period. As for Otto's late interventions, I mostly see they are related to Hugh the Great's rebellion so I'm bent on considering this as a whole intervention with several campaigns.

Also, whatever one can say about the circumstances of Louis' marriage, it's Gerberga who goes and asks Otto for help in the first place and every indication is that brother and sister were very close after about 940 or so. Plus, as I said, Louis' personal relations with Otto seem to be surprisingly warm; even given the fighting over Lotharingia, they spend more time even before 946 being friendly than not. Assuming that Louis 'detested' Otto, quite simply, has no evidence to support it.
That's not like she had much alternatives to free her husband and restore him on the throne; for me, it tells more her attachment to Louis IV than to her brother.
Plus, as I said, Louis' personal relations with Otto seem to be surprisingly warm; even given the fighting over Lotharingia, they spend more time even before 946 being friendly than not. Assuming that Louis 'detested' Otto, quite simply, has no evidence to support it.
'detested' is quite a strong word: I mean only 'despise' which is not as strong. It's not like he would cry his dissatisfaction of Otto openly, he may well have been waiting and kept his mouth shut, it wouldn't have made a great difference and it's not surprising, it's just pragmatism.
 
As I'm wrestling with the question myself, I was wondering if either of you would care to speculate a bit on the possible trajectory of the reign of a longer-lived Louis V.
I'm not sure, but I guess he would continue Lothar's campaigns in Lotharingia, taking on the momentum they have.
 
That's been a while since the last post, but I wanted to put in some things I discussed with LSCatilina last December, IRL.

Speaking on the lack of territorial base for the Carolingian dynasty in West Francia, we discussed the ways it could be remedied, and eventually, we came with a simple solution, with regards to the author's privilege, that of swapping the 'luck' of Carolingian and Capetian dynasties in terms of longevity and offspring.

The point made was that, compared to other dynasties that come and go through Europe, the Capetian house had a record longetivity.
However, in the late 10th, I notice that both dynasties were on a tight rope with no much male heirs to speak of. So, instead of having the Carolingian dynasty coming extinct as an accident and the Capetians thriving, I will revert the role, and have the Capetian house coming extinct after the death of Hughes Capet, Robert being born a girl, and Duke Henri of Burgundy, Hughes Capet's last surviving brother, who died IOTL without heir.
That would open for the Carolingian monarch an opportunity to annex Paris and its basin to the 'royal demesne', maybe with a prior marriage to one of Hughes Capet's daughters. As for Orléans, I guess it would fall into the sphere of the House of Blois which had already taken Tours from the Robertians decades before.
 
What do you think of a Carolingian England?

Looking at it, I see Louis IV was the son of Eadgifu of Essex, daughter to King Edward the Elder, and grew up in exile along his mother at his uncle's court, after his father Charles III had been overthrown.
Now, maybe that given family ties, we could have Edward the Confessor living his exile at the court of his Carolingian cousins instead of Normandy. Would Edward favor Carolingian courtiers instead of Norman ones due to this situation?
Mind that at the time of Edward's death in the 1060s, the Carolingian royalty is stronger than the century before with an enlarged territorial base (taking the Parisian basin after Capetian extinction at the very least). Also, I think that the Carolingian dynasty has more pronounced imperial ambitions, so I wouldn't say it's not in their character, but would they have the means, the possibility?
 
Switch the fates of Louis V and Robert II : a second Carolingian empire ?
Hi,

I've given this thread a second thought. After having spoken to @LSCatilina on that topic and thinking of it, on his suggestion, I found an easier and more convenient POD than the controversial one I proposed earlier.
That POD is based on a remark by Catilina that the Capetians were a lucky dynasty to last and span as they did. Looking more at it, I noticed that actually, at the end of the 10th century, both the early Capetians and the late Carolingians were in a very fragile situation, on the brink of extinction.

IOTL, the last Carolingian king, Louis V, had no heir except his uncle Charles of Lower Lorraine whose line would soon come extinct a generation later.
On the Capetians' side, Hugues Capet had many daughters but only one son, Robert, who came to succeed him, and a brother, Duke Henri of Burgundy, who died heirless.
So, what if in 987, Robert son of Hughes Capet, was the one to die instead of Louis V, what if we switched their fate?

What then?

As LSCatilina pointed out (invaluable was his help), the big default of the Carolingian kings was their lack of a strong territorial base, a "royal demesne".
Now, since Hughes Capet is only left with daughters to marry, and Louis V just happens to be single (freshly divorced, but lacking an heir, marriage remains an urgent necessity), I guess it wouldn't be too hard to imagine Hugh's daughter Gisela (his first born) marrying Louis V.
Both being about the same age, I figure their marriage would have more chances of success. Now, it could also go along Hugh granting some territories to King Louis V as a dowry (with no male heir but his childless brother, he would be faced with the near perspective of his house' demise). The extant can be discussed, but I would propose Paris and its surroundings, as they are close to Carolingian bases in northeastern France.

So, based on the premise of merely switching the genealogical luck of both dynasties, there a rough list of kings with same reign lengths and relative dates (ie the successor of a Carolingian king is born in the same year of the reign as for the OTL Capetian counterpart we shall call the mirror). And also with possible events I would imagine associated to their reign.

  • 986 - 1026 : Louis V , born ca 967, has the same lifespan as Robert II (59). He expands the royal demesne with the Capetian domains of Paris and the Loire valley, piece by piece, except for the duchy of Burgundy that goes to Count Otto-William of Burgundy, stepson of Duke Henri in exchange for Henri to aknowledge Gisela and Louis V's rights to the Capetian lands.
  • 1026 - 1047 : Charles IV. With Louis V's marriage ca 990 and Charles born as a second son in 995, he inherits the crown upon the premature death of his elder brother Lothar. Dies at 52, like OTL Henri I. He keeps enlarging the royal demesne, acquiring the counties of Champagne in exchange for support of Blois' claims to the throne of Burgundy (the kingdom, not the duchy). May get invited in Italy by local nobility (but acceptance of the Italian crown and its actual conquest are yet to discuss).
  • 1047 - 1095 : Louis VI. Born in 1039, a late first son to Charles IV, he lives up to 56 (as his OTL mirror, Philip I). He marries Margaret of Wessex, sister of Edgar the Aetheling, who gets him to lend an army to enforce her brother's claims on the English throne, which he gets.
  • 1095 - 1124 : Charles V aka Saint Charles. Born in 1068 to Margaret of Wessex and Louis VI, he lives up to 56 (as his OTL mirror Louis VI). He leads the First Crusade and gets married to the recently widowed Anna Komnene (the basileus is here treating King Charles V almost as an equal, as the direct descendent of Charlemagne and his imperial bloodline, also to strengthen the alliance with the crusaders).
  • 1124 -1167 : Philip I. Born in 1107, second son, lives up to 60 (as his OTL mirror Louis VII), his name is an import from East thanks to his mother. Pushed by his ambitious mother, he quickly claims the crown of England after Edgar's death, without any child left, around 1126 by virtue of being his grandnephew.
By the mid 12th century, you got the Carolingians ruling at least over France and England, and perhaps northern Italy and the Low Countries and Lorraine (as part of Lotharingian duchies claimed by the Carolingians since early 10th century, which may or may not have been conquered, partially or wholly).
All in all, that could be termed as a new Carolingian empire.

Any thought?
 
Hi!

I'll be trilled to see a Carolingian phoenix...
Opting for a peaceful solution it's better, IMO, to have the Carolingians building up a royal power base that will allow them to survive the 10-12th feudal century fragmentation.

Now, the trick is how to convince Hugue Capet to give his daughter to Louis? You need a justification, either that the marriage happens before the death of Robert, or after. Wouldn't Hugue try to coopt someone else than the king to continue his legacy, in the situation of remaining only with daughter. How do you convince him to offer his daughter? After a war as peace treaty? Would he perceive it as a favor from the King or as an enforcement?

I think the Carolingians are bound to try to refund Charlemagne empire.... especially if the Germans pass through a rough period, I'm thinking at the Investiture controversy. Sadly, this it would be a recipe of disaster... France didn't involve because the Capetian were too weak on one hand and they didn't have the legitimacy on the other hand.

Now, a successful Carolingian revival, will imply both a stronger France and a huge legitimacy. The Kings will be very tempted to go after the imperial crown. They could obtain but at what cost? Paris is very far away from Rome... They need secure access via Burgundy and Arles... Alas, Lyon will become more important than Paris, and might become the seat of power and capital of the new empire. But would this empire resist? The Germans will try to recover the crown and the Pope will turn against them as soon as he will get rid of the German Emperor.

The resulting empire will be completely different from France in the middle age. If the Carolingian Emperor will not increase the Imperial power over the territory via Imperial lands and cities, Imperial universal justice, etc., the Empire will become weaker than the HRE.

But if it will happen and the Carolingians will deliver male heirs every single generation for 3-4 centuries (which is huge and hard), then it will become a juggernaut. France had a much bigger population that Germany. Europe will be almost unrecognizable in few centuries.

So, in this case, Burgundy, Arles and N Italy it’s a must, Lothringia is highly probably. England…. Not really. It is possible to fall under Carolingian crown via imarriage… but it will be hard too keep it. I think it will be too big for its own good.... especialy if it has Italy...

The first and the folowing Cursades will be hugely different.... to better or to worst? this in one of hte many questions...

Anyway, go ahead with the timeline! It will be a pleasure to follow it!
 
Last edited:
Hughes is facing the prospect of his family male line's near extinction.
His only male heir in direct line is his brother Henri, Duke of Burgundy, who has no sons of his own. The Robertian power has been, it seems to me in reading, curbed since after Hughes the Great died with royal power being resurgent under Louis IV and Lothar along with the establishment of primogeniture rule.
As it goes after Robert's death, the main question will be for Hughes who will his daughters marry. And for a match, I dare you to find a more prestigious one than the man who is both a King and the last scion of Europe's most prestigious dynasty. Louis V, despite the disastrous marriage with Adelaide of Anjou, remains probably the best prospect for his daughters, a marriage which will give him and his clan some power while they are still alive, and a way of securing their legacy by entering the Carolingian bloodline.

As of Paris, the focus of late Carolingian, and later Capetian, policies has always been north of the Loire river, and that wouldn't change much IOTL until the late 12th century. In the short term, the Carolingians are looking upon reclaiming the long contested duchy of Lotharingia, which has not been under their control since the days of Charles III. Now, can Louis V take advantage of the turmoil the late Ottonians experienced? I don't know, but that's probably going to come into consideration. And as I see late Carolingian imperial ambitions, their sights were on Lotharingia, not yet on Italy.

The first opportunity in that direction would be the succession of the Rudolf III of Burgundy. Rudolf III meant for the Holy German Emperor to get the throne, against the wishes of nobility led by Count-Duke Otto-William (IOTL he was only Count of Burgundy, but the deal between Duke Henri and Louis V over Hughes' succession would have seen his right on his father-in-law's duchy aknowledged) who favored Odo II of Blois.
An intervention by Charles V here would be the occasion to undermine German influence and expand his influence over the Alpine passes and the Rhone valley. But even then, Carolingian focus would stay north, and their influence would be by proxies. Answering the call of Italian rebels would be an adventure and would require an adventurous king, but I doubt the Carolingian would be easy enough about their own power to get this far from their northern powerbase and leave it unprotected within the time a conquest of Italy would be possible. I think they would leave it to Odo who had actually claimed not only the Burgundian crown but also the Italian one IOTL.

All in all, besides a possible expansion over Lotharingia, the Carolingian power won't be that different from the Capetian one until a conquest of England.
The core of their realm would be north of the Loire and its attention set towards the Rhine. Burgundy and England would be under influence, but otherwise, the kings would be seeking to consolidate their power over vassals.
The succession of King Edgar in England, mirroring the OTL succession of Edward by Richard, will make this go from an influence to more actual control.

At this point, the Carolingian would evolve greatly. After Charles V's participation in the ATL 1st crusade, not to mention the prestige and imperial outlook of such venture, the Carolingian army would be boosted by an experienced cadre of crusade veterans, engineers trained in Arab-Greek science of siege warfare.
When the young Philip I, the only male heir of King Edgar as his great-nephew which is a stronger claim than Richard or Harold's OTL claims, arrives with an army of such veterans, he going to stay. After that, that is not less possible than is a Capetian takeover.
In the previous 60 years of Edgar's rule (and even before, with the rule of King Edward who would have been a guest of Carolingians ITTL during his exile instead of going to Normandy), England would have been subjected to French political and cultural influence, and with another 40 years of planned Philip I's rule (the post above says his rule begins at 17 in 1124, his conquest of England happens in 1126 and he reigns until 1167). I'd see the trends that happened under Norman rule happening too under Carolingian rule, perhaps even stronger.
Albeit, a possible difference would be that due to the Carolingian main area of interest being on the continent, they would probably leave Ireland and Wales to their own device, pushing an eventual conquest by a century or two, if that ever happens.
 
Top