Sociology of Power
Bookmark this page

• Kingship crucial to political workings of all kingdoms – dynasticism very important as were strong kinship tires in binding together monarchies – also problematic – Charlemagne forbade sons to kill, blind, mutilate nephews, of force them to be tonsured
• Kings and aristocrats marriage alliances – conduits property, power, peace weavers, foci of interest groups, kin by marriage could offer political support, maternal and paternal kin could transmit claims on wealth and prestige to the next generation.
• Dead as well as living royal women acted as a focus for the loyalties of a subset of Carolingian kin and enabled one group to define itself against others – women’s identity Charlemagne choose Hildegrad in regna east of Rhine due to her Alemannic lineage – legitimised Charlemagne’s rule here, significant channels of patronage, second marriage and kin v. kin caused civil war in case of Louis the Pious
• Carolingians choose aristocrats as wives – queens ran households, dispensed annual payments – a king’s wife’s kin were his own – in laws offered support.  Carolingians rarely allowed daughters to marry – kept in convents, widen too much the circle of kinship.  Carolingians faced with no greater threat than the sterility of their wives – too much on binding-power of marriage alliances – who could predict  women’s infertility or her arousing inrevocabile odium.
• Kingship scare resource and sub-kingdoms limited – King’s sons surplus to requirements had to be shed – few kings escaped problem of rebellion by close kinsmen – only after Carloman, Charlemagne’s son was blinded did aristocratic support diminish.
• Names to include and exclude in Carolingians – Bernard name with illegitimacy, unlike Pippin – Charlemagne calls sons Clovis and Chlothar – neither illegitimacy or canonical disqualification proved definitive bars to royal succession – 887 – 870 Charles the Bald’s long tonsured son found support.
• Potents – powerful one at court – due to closeness to the ruler – ploughed benefits back into roots of their social power – King’s job to make sure such men did not focus of faction or rebellion – kingdom hold together if arisocrats functioned and saw themselves as givers of counsel – Konigsnahe.
• Young nobility around court for Konigsnahe, military political and social skills, quee surrogate mother and gift giver, same with clerics.
• King had access to lower social levels – important for support but such people, with royal protection had power – but maintenance relationship with Lords aristocracy as important if not more so than with kin.  Kingship and lordship went together and reinforced each other, main danger to a king was noble conspiracy.

Other Notes in this Category

1. Basis of Power
2. Carolignian Geneaology
3. Carolignians and Italy
4. Chronological Analysis
5. Church
6. Communications
7. Did growth lead to a more systematic style of government?
8. Domestic government and power bases
9. Ideology of Power
10. Importance of the West 814 - 898
11. Kingship and Royal Government - Janet Nelson
12. Logistics of Power
13. Nobility and Expansion Dynamic
14. Nobility and Expansion Dynamic - Effect on surrounding peoples
15. Plunder and Tribute in the Carolignian Empire
16. Society and Politics
17. Sociology of Power
18. The Carolignian Experiment - EF James
19. Vikings

Didn't find this useful?

• Visit Coursework.Info for over 14,000 GCSE, A-Level and University Essays