Was successful Kingship in Merovingian Gaul simply a matter of being an effective and lucky war leader?
RevisionNotes.Co.Uk - Free Revision and Course Notes for UK Students
 
Home : University : History : Early European : Was successful Kingship in Merovingian Gaul simply a matter of being an effective and lucky war leader?
 Revision Notes
 GCSE
 A-Level
 University
 IB
 User Options
 Search
 My Revision Notes
 Bookmark Page
 Contribute
 Contribute Work
 Other Sites
 AcademicDB
 Coursework.Info

Was successful Kingship in Merovingian Gaul simply a matter of being an effective and lucky war leader?
Bookmark this page

Introduction

  • Define success – King reigned as opposed to governed – could look through success terms of subject, blood thirsty family survival and peace more relevant
  • Different Kings – Chlothar II all and others, only sub kingdoms depending on succession

Yes – effective, lucky war leader

  • Success certainly attributed to lucky and effective war leader- notably Charles Martel 17 – huge victories, Clovis, Theudebert, Chlothar II
  • Why important – gan land territories for fisc – pay off aristos, sustainability, divide and rule only slightly – autonomy meant loyalty
  • Popular – both arsitos, soldiers and kings benefited – occasions when soldiers force hand of ruler to go to war – even Italy Frankish graveyeard massive soruce wealth – declines 7th century

 

Aristocratic Support

  • Monarchy reliant on acquiescence of the landed aristocracy – achieved by bribery, positions of power, land, dukedoms etc – use of court to get cooperation (come setc sign diplomatas – aristos wanted strong King protect their psoiiton and ebenfit from Kings trying to get support
  • Mid 7th century Chlothasr educating men from different regions at court and then sending them out – like  Desiderius – cements kingdom

Succession and Context

  • Succession difficult and context of succession important effects – weak minority Kings – example weak susceptible to aristocratic pressures – could not be great war leaders – vulnerable – uxorious
  • Chlothar II – structured succession Dagobert rules with father for 6 years – seamless transition almost
  • Lack of brothers means less chance civil war, esp, if father strong enough to have ruled unite kingdom – leads us to believe, like Theudebert, effective war leader especially necessary is brothers fighting it out.

Other Notes in this Category

  1. Ancient Cities
  2. Carolignian Period
  3. Charles the Bald
  4. Chronology of Byzantium and Persia
  5. Dynasty of Theodosius I and Barbarians in the West
  6. French and British Agriculture
  7. Islamic Conquests up to 700 a.d. - Islamic Strenghts / Roman Weaknesses?
  8. Islamic Conquests up to 700 a.d. - Islamic Strenghts / Roman Weaknesses?
  9. MOHAMMED, CHARLEMAGEN AND THE ORIGINS OF EUROPE
  10. New Centres of Power in the 8th and Ninth Century
  11. Peace and War - Rome and Persia - 5-7th Centuries
  12. Practice Questions
  13. The Age of Attila
  14. The Decline of the Ancient World
  15. The Mediterranean and the Dilemma of the Roman Empire in Late antiquity
  16. Warfare
  17. Was successful Kingship in Merovingian Gaul simply a matter of being an effective and lucky war leader?
  18. Why did the western empire fall when the east survived?

Didn't find this useful?

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

 

© UK-Learning 2001-3. Disclaimer, Feedback, Other Stuff.