Letters on French history, for the use of schools

Front matter

i'iir^ liP ! ■'

mmWi y ill .iWkii

.0 o o.

Letter II

Comprising a period of two hvmdred and seventy years, from A. D. 481, to A D. 751, filled by the reigns of Clovis and his descendants, and corresponding with the estabUshment of the Saxons, and the existence of the heptarchy in England, ...-- 7

LETTER in.

Comprising a period of sixty -four years, from A. D. 750, to A. D. 814, 24

Letter IV

Comprising a period of a hundred and seventy-three years, from A. D. 814, to A. D 987, 38

Letter V

Comprising a period of seventy-three years, from A. D. 987, to A. D. 1060, - - - . 64

Letter VI

Comprising a period of one hundred and sixty-three years, from A. D. 1060, to A. D, 1223, .-.----.- till 6K) STENTS.

LETTER Vlf.

Comprising" a period of one hundred and five yearS, from A. D. 1223, to A. D 1328, - - - - 95-

Comprising a period of eleven years and one month, from the commencement of the empire 18th May, 1804, to the battle of Waterloo, and the complete establishment of the house of Bourbon, - 2T7

LETTERS

ON

]f 3Bl^s^:g]i3 m©^®Oiirc

Letter I

OF all the countries of Europe, France next to our own, is that which chiefly merits our attention. From a period of very remote antiquity, it was noted for its abundant fertility, and its numerous and warlike population. In after times it has not been less distinguished by its early civilization and the events of its history It has generally held an important rank, and often had a preponderating influence in the scale of European nations; and its political and military concerns' have, during the space of seven hundred and fifty years, been intimately blended with those of England. Without some knowledge of the history of France, that of Great Britain leaves only an in* c?omplete idea.

B

1. During the times of the Roman republic and empire, France was known by the name of Gallia or Gaul, and its inhabitants, called Galli or Gauls, were of Celtic origin. At what period the Celts migrated from the central parts of Asia, whicli may be considered as the cradle of the human race, and formed settlements in Gaul is unknown, being probably anterior to any records of history or tradition. But it is certain that from Gaul they soon spread into Britain, and in all probability were its first inhabitants. The religion, the form of government, the manners and customs of the Gauls and the Britons were, according to Caesar's description, so similar, that no doubt can be entertained of their being originally sprung from the same common stock.

2. Gaul, like most other countries in those early times, was divided into a number of independent and often hostile states; and although history throws only a glimmering of light on the subject, it is easy to conceive the state of the country under such a political system, constantly a theatre of intestine wars, and presenting various scenes of devastation.

3. Some of the Gallic tribes, actuated by a desire of plunder or the love of romantic adventure, made formidable inroads into neighbouring and even very distant countries, i About four centuries before the Christian era, the Tectosagse, a Gallic tribe inhabiting the country around Toulouse, being led by Brennus their chief, penetrated into Italy and destroyed the city of Rome, the capitol alone resisting the assaults of those barbarian conquerors.

4. From this memorable epoch, the Romans regarded the Gauls as their most formidable enemies; and in their wars with that people, considered themselves as fighting, not for conquest and glory, but for independence and national existence. At length, the valor and discipline of the Roman legions, directed by the military skill and experience of Julius C^sar, triumphed over those enemies who had so long been the terror of the republic. After a vigorous and successful war of ten years' duration, that celebrated general reduced the w^hole of Gaul under the Roman domination.

5. During the space of nearly five centuries, Gaul remained under the dominion of Rome, and constituted one of the most valuable and flourishing provinces of her extensive empire. In the fifth century, the Romans being attacked on every part of their extensive frontier by the nations to the north of the Danube and the Rhine, that vast empire, which had conquered and civilized all the southern countries of Europe, w^as at length overturned, and its provinces were divided amongst the barbarian tribes of Germany, Hungary, Transylvania, Moldavia and Wallachia.

6. Amidst these tremendous commotions, three different nations formed settlements in Gaul. The Goths having ravaged Italy, their king, Adolphus, brother of the famous Alaric, concluded a peace with the emperor Honorius, espoused the sister of that monarch, and in consequence of that arrangement, established a Gothic kingdom in the southern part of Gaul, called Gallia Narbonensis, and .made Toulouse its capitol. The Burgundians, a

<t LETTERS ON FRENCH HISTORY.

people of German origin, seized on the eastern part; and the Franks, another German nation inhabiting a district situated between the Rhine and the Weser, established themselves in the northern provinces. The Franks afterwards made themselves masters of the whole country of Gaul, which from its new possessors derived the modern name of France.

7. The first king of the Franks whose name history records, isPharamond. The commence^ tnentofhis reign is placed by the French historians about A. D. 424^ ; but it does not appear that this prince ever passed the Rhine to make any conquests in Gaul. His son cind successor, Clodion, issaid to have conquered that part of the country which is now called Belgium, but was then included in Gaul ; and it is added, that about A. D. 436, he obtained possession of Cambray and its adjacent territory.

8. Clodion was, according to the French historians, succeeded by Merovasus, who is said to have been an ally of the Romans in the celebrated battle fought against Attila, king of the Huns, in the plains of Chalons in Champaigne, where that barbarian conqueror received the memorable defeat which effected his expulsion from Gaul. The appellation of Merovingian, /which is given to the first dynasty of French monarchs, is generally supposed to be derived from Merovaeus ; but the truth of this opinion is questioned by the president Henault, and is a matter of dispute amongst the learned. The death of that prince is placed about A. D. 468 ; and the sceptre of the Franks devolved m\ his son, Childeric, who died A. D. 481, and whose actions, Hke those of his predecessors, are involved in obscurity. Some historians say; that Childeric made himself master of the northern parts of France, and added Paris to his dominions; but it does not appear certain whether that city was his acquisition, or that of Glovis, his son and successor.

I have thus, my dear sir, endeavoured to exhibit a sketch of the ancient state of Gaul, and of what may be called the fabulous, or at least the obscure age of the French monarchy. It is only the uncertain outline of an almost obliterated picture; and history affords few authentic documents to illumine its faded colouring. The first kings of the Franks, illiterate themselves, reigned over an illiterate people. Like the early heroes of Greece before the Trojan war, they had no historian to commemorate their exploits, no poet to sing their praise. Letters alone can transmit the remembrance of actions and events to posterity; for, as an elegant writer observes, "When the hillock which covered his remains is removed, or his funeral stones are thrown down, the memory of the savage perishes for ever. ' ' But when we reflect on the multitude of kings and chiefs of whom fame has preserved no memorial, and whose names time has swept away from the earth, it is some consolation to consider, that the history of barbarian princes, and illiterate nations, scarcely merits the attention of enlightened ages.

With every sentiment of respect and esteem, I have the honour to be, dear sir, your's, &c. B2

LETTERS ON FRENCH HISTORY.

QUESTIONS FOR EXAMINATION.

1. — What was the ancient name of France?

Who were its first inhabitants? 2. — What was its early political state? S. — What were the early exploits of the Gauls? 4. — Who was the Roman general that conquered Gaul? 5. — How long was Gaul subject to the Romans?

What was the state of Gaul while under the Roman

dominion? 6, — What nations settled in Gaul on the subversion of

the Roman empire ? 7. — Who was the first king of the Franks mentioned in

history? $. — What is the appellation usually given to the first

dynasty, or race of Trench kings?

LETTERS ON FRENCH HISTORY.

Letter II

Comprising a period of two hundred and seventy years, from A. Z). 481, to A. D, ISl, filled by the reigns of Clovis and his descendants, and corresponding with the establishment of the Saxons, and the existence of the Heptarchy in England,

CURIOSITY strongly impels us to investigate the origin of celebrated nations, empires, and states; and that of the French monarchy, particularly claims our notice, on account of its early and continued importance. But the history of its commencement, and the actions of its primitive monarchs are so involved in obscurity, that the president Renault begins his Chronological History with Clovis, the first Christian king of France, whom he considers as the real founder of the monarchy.

1. Cloyis succeeded his father, Childeric, A. D, 481, but it is uncertain how far the Franks had extended their conquests in Gaul, and what was the state of their kingdom at his accession. The battle of Soissons, in which he gained a signal victory over the Roman general Siagrius, is recorded as the first memorable transaction of his reign. This event took place A. D. 486, and from that time all his enterprises were successful. In the next ten years of his reign, he made himself master of the provinces situated between the Somme, the Seine, and the Aisne; and the city of Rheims, with several others, submitted voluntarily to his authority.

2. A variety of circumstances favoured the designs of Ciovis, and contributed to his success. Salvianus, a writer of that age, informs us, that the Gauls, harrassed and oppressed by tyrannical governors, were weary of the Roman domination, and regarded the Franks as deliverers rather than conquerors; and had they even had fewer causes of complaint, the decline of the Roman empire rendered the nations hitherto subject to that government sensible of the necessity of looking out for a new master. The people of Gaul were strongly attached to their clergy, and Clovis gained their affections by the favour which he shewed to their bishops. Arianism prevailed at that time in the Christian world. The Gauls were the only people untainted with its doctrines; and, surrounded by Arian princes, they had reason to be alarmed both for their religion and liberty. Such was the state of things in Gaul, when Clovis began to sway the sceptre of the Franks. The clergy, as the Abbe du Bos judiciously observes, if they found that they must have a barbarian for their master, would give the preference to a Pagan, rather than to a heretic, as the Pagan religion was visibly on the decline; and the conversion of an idolatrotis prince appeared much more probable than that of one who adhered to Arianism. The marriage of Clovis with Clotilda, a princess of Burgundy; and a Christian, also afforded them laopes of his conversion; and the pious endeavours

Letters on prench history. p

of his consort contributed to realise their expectat ions.

3. But it was requisite to overcome the prejudices of the Franks before Clovis could make a public profession of Christianity. PoHcy suggested an expedie-nt well calculated for this purpose. Having defeated the Alemanni, a German nation, at Tolbiac, near Cologne, A. D. 496, he piously, or politically, ascribed his victory to the God of the Christians, whom he declared that he had in^ voked when the issue of the battle was doubtful, binding himself by a vow to embrace Christianity, if his arms should prove successful. This declaration of their king produced such an effect on ih^ minds of the Franks, that when Clovis was baptized in the same year at Rheims, the whole nation followed his example. At this period, Arianism was so predominant in the Christian church, that Clovis was the only monarch who professed the Catholic doctrine of the Trinity.

4. The conversion of this prince does not appear to have extinguished his ambition: he continued to aggrandise his power, and extend his dominions. He made himself master of Gaul, as far as the Pyrenees. The inhabitants of Bretagne having cast off the Roman yoke, submitted volun. tarily to his authority, and owned him for their sovereign, and although the history of his reign is far from being luminous, it appears on the whole that, in consequence of the co-operation of the prelates and most of the clergy, he found the whole country of Gaul an easy conquest.

5. The seat of government was at first fixed at

Soissons; but about A. D. 508, Clovis made Paris the capital of his dominions. The origin of large and celebrated cities, like that of great empires, is often involved in obscurity; but here, in viewing the magnificence of the oak, we see distinctly the acorn from which it has sprung. This metropolis of France is first mentioned by Caesar, in the 54th chapter of the 7th book of his Commentaries. In his time, it was known by the name of Lutetia, and the whole of it was comprised within the narrow limits of that island in the Seine, which is now called L'lslc Notre Dame, or La Cite, and does not compose one-twentieth of the area of the present city of Paris. Being completely surrounded by the Seine, it was considered as a place of great strength; and the adjacent marshes, which human industry has since converted into firm ground, and covered with magnificent edifices, rendered it of still more difficult access to an enemy. But the buildings were only an assemblage of small huts, like those of the other towns in Gaul and Britain, Such was the state of the present metropolis of France, about fifty-seven years before the Christian era. About the middle of the fourth century, the emperor Julian, then governor of Gaul, made Lutetia his favourite residence, and adorned it with commodious and elegant buildings, but apparently without extending its limits; and it was probably confined to the island in the Seine, until after Clovis had made it the capital of the French monarchy. Its present name of Paris is derived from the circumstance of its having been the principal seat of the Parisii, a

Gallic tribe, who, in the time of Caesar, occupied the town and its adjacent territory.

6. Clovis having established the monarchy of the Franks in Gaul, and promulgated many useful laws, died A. D. 511, at the age of 45, after a reign of thirty years, and was interred in the old church of St. Genevieve, at Paris. The character of this first Christian king of the French appears to have been a mixture of valour and policy. In war and in peace he was equally prosperous, and

i was perfectly skilled in the art of deriving advantage from favorable circumstances.

7. Clovis was succeeded by his four sons, who divided amongst themselves his extensive dominions. Thierry reigned at Metz, Childebert at Paris, Clotaire at Soissons, and Clodomir at Orleans. Whether this succession and division was regulated by the sole will of the deceased monarch, or by some law or custom of the Franks, is not known; but it is certain, that the consequences were hostile to the prosperity and happiness of the nation. France being thus divided into four independent kingdoms, after a fcw^ years of tranquility, began to exhibit a scene of barbarian wars

; and murderous contention, until at length the ' w^hole was, by various turns of fortune, united under the sceptre of Clotaire. After that union, the most prominent event of his reign was of a most melancholy and horrible nature. Cramne, one of his sons, having rebelled, and levied an army, was defeated in battle by his father, and perished with his whole family in the flames of a cottage in which he had taken shelter.

12 LETTERS ON FRENCH HISTC^KY.

8. Clotaire died, A. D» 562, in the fifty -first year of his reign as king of Soissons, but only in the second of his sovereignty over all France. A few years before the union of the monarchy under his sceptre, the heptarchy was completely fori^ied in England.

9. On the demise of Clotaire a second partition of the French monarchy took place; and the experience of the evils which had resulted from the former division did not prevent its repetition. The sons of Clotaire, like those of Clovis, were four in number, and the former kingdoms were divided amongst them by lot. Charibert obtained the kingdom of Paris; Gontran was king of Orleans and Burgundy; Sigebert reigned over Austrasia; and Chilperic at Soissons, But the precise boundaries of those divisions are unknown to the French historians and antiquaries; and the actions of their monarchs are now vminteresting. It suffices to sav, that all the evils of disunion were reiterated with the most horrible aggravation, and France again became a disgusting theatre of contention and crimes. After a long series of wars carried on with the most vindictive spirit, the destruction of a multitude of princes of the blood royal, many of whom fell by assassination, left Clotaire II. the son of Chilperic, king of Soissons, sole sovereign of France.

10. This third union of the monarchy took place A. D. 613. Clotaire was a lover of justice and peace: he promoted the prosperity and happiness of France, and died A. D. 628, in the fortysixth year of his age, greatly regretted by his subjects.

11. Clotaire II. left two sons, Dagobcrt and Charibert, who, following the former precedents, divided the kingdom. But the death of Charibert, about three years after, left his brother in possession of the whole monarchy.

12. The state of nations, in the different periods of their history, is more worthy of notice than the succession of princes whose bones are long since crumbled to dust; for a barren list of royal names is but little interesting. The reign of Dagobert furnishes some facts which show that a very considerable degree of wealth existed at that time in France. St. Eloy, a native of the province of Limousin, who was treasurer to Dagobert, and bishop of Noyon, was, in the early part of his life, an opulent goldsmith, and used to wear a bell set with diamonds when he came to court in the reign of Clotaire. He made for that prince a chair of massive gold, and for Dagobert an entire throne of the same metal. The relations of historians concerning the magnificence of that age would appear incredible, did they not point out the sources from whence those riches were derived. The Romans, who had established so many colonies, and built so many fine cities in Gaul, had undoubtedly brought into that country a part of that wealth of which they had plundered the world. And the Visigoths, when they established their kingdom at Toulouse under Adolphus, the brother of Alaric, must have brought thither a considerable share of the spoils of Italy and Rome. Another considerable source of wealth was the trade to the Levant, which had been opened to the French by negotiations with

C the emperors of Constantinople. But it must be observed, that whatever historians may relate concerning the luxury and splendour of ancient times, ought to be considered as relating only to princes, prelates, grandees, and a few opulent merchants. Wealth was then in the hands of a very small number of persons, and in such a state of society as France, and indeed all Europe, presented before the extension of commerce and the effects of civilization had excited the industry and ameliorated the condition of the lower classes of the community, the splendour and magnificence of the srreat were not a sure criterion of the wealth of the people.

13. Dagobert being sole sovereign of France, the kingdom enjoyed a considerable share of prosperity, and presented on all sides a formidable front to its enemies. But the vices of the monarch debased the royal authority, and he burdened the people with taxes in order to support his debaucheries, or to expiate them by pious profusion. He founded the abbey of St. Denis, so long famous for being the burial-place of the kings of France; and his bequest of eight thousand pounds weight of lead to covei; the church, was his last attempt to bribe heaven to pardon his sins. He died A. D. 643, and left two sons, Sigebert and Clovis, who, according to the former precedents, divided the kingdom.

14. From this period may be dated the first appearance of that singular political phenomenon, the power of the mayors of the palace, which makes so conspicuous a figure in the history of

France. The office of mayor of the palace was originally confined to the direction of the king's household: they afterwards became the first ministers of state, and, at length, commanders-in-chief of the armies, and assumed the title of "Dux Francorum," or "Duke of the French," or sometimes that of "Subregulus,'' or "Viceroy." At first they were subject to removal at the king's pleasure: they had afterwards the influence and address to secure their office for life, and at length to render it hereditary.

15. During the reigns of the sons and grandsons of Dagobert, constituting a period of about forty-five years, France continued to be divided into two kingdoms, Austrasia and Neustria, the latter of which included Burgundy, and Metz was its capital. Each of these kingdoms had its mayor of the palace, whose power had almost absorbed the royal authority. During this period various changes of fortune took place amongst the princes, descendants of Dagobert, the details of which are now uninteresting.

16. Dagobert II. king of Austrasia, beingassassinated about A. D. 678, Thierry III. who reigned over Neustria and Burgundy, became sole heir to the whole of the French monarchy. But the Austrasians dreading to fall under the power of Ebroin, mayor of the palace to Thierry, refused to acknowledge his authority, and chose Pepin d'Heristal, father of the celebrated Charles Martel, for their sfovernor.

17. Pepin reigned over Austrasia with the title of duke; but he professed to acknowledge Thierry

16 LETTERS ON FRENCH HISTOR'K.

as paramount sovereign, and to rule in his name. A rupture however took place about A. D. 690; and a battle decided the contest between the real and the nominal kings. Thierry was defeated, and Pepin usurped the supreme authority over the whole kingdom of France, under the title of mayor of the palace, while the former, divested of power retained only the ostensible appearance of royalty.

18. During the remainder of the life of Thierry, and those of his successors, Clovis III. Chil*- debert III. and Dagobert III. Pepin continued to reign over France in their names, and was the real, while they were no more tb^n the nominal sovereigns. His administration however was conducive to the prosperity of the kingdom. He reduced to obedience several provinces on the frontiers, which the divisions and weakness of the government in the preceding reigns had encouraged to revolt; and although he subverted the regal power^ he greatly augmented the strength of the state.

19. Pepin being deprived by death, of both his legitimate sons, constituted his grandson Theodebald, who was yet an infant, mayor of the palace to Dagobert HI. and placed him under the guardianship of his mother, Pepin himself died soon after, A' D. 714, and the people of France saw the royal authority transferred to an infant, and subjected to the control of a woman. A revolt was the consequence of so strange an arrangement. The infant Theodebald was divested of his authority. Dagobert III. dying at this juncture, was succeeded in his nominal sovereignty by Chilperic II.

son of Childeric 11. and a nobleman named Rainfroy was constituted mayor of the palace.

/20. In the meanwhile, Charles Martel, the son oC, Pepin by a concubine, making his escape from a prison^ in which he had been confined by Theodebald's mother, appeared amongst the Austrasians, who received him with the greatest respect, and acknowledged him as duke of their country.

21 A war soon ensued between the new duke of Austrasia and Chilperic II. and the latter being defeated in several engagements fled into Aquitaine. Rainfroy, mayor of the palace, was divested of his office; and Charles Martel placed on the throne, in the room of Chilperic, another pageant king, known in history by the name of Clotharius IV. This revolution took place A. D. 719; but Clotharius dying the tame year, Charles recalled Chilperic to the throne. Charles now united in his own person the whole authority of the French empire; and was king in every respect, excepting the name; although, for some reasons which history has not developed, he contented himself with the le%s ostentatious title of mayor of the palace.

22. Chilperic II. dying A. D. 720, Charles placed Thierry IV. son of Dagobert III. on the throne, and continued to reign over France in his name. His administration was highly conducive to the advantage and glory of the French nation. In the year :73 2, he gained over the Saracens that memorable victory which has immortalised his name. Abdoulrahman-ben- Abdoullah- El-Gafiki, viceroy of Spain for the caliph Hakkam who reigned at Damascus, resolved to attempt the conc 2 quest of France, and passed over the Pyrenees with an army, which by its numbers seemed to defy all opposition. After defeating the duke of Aquitainehe made himself master of Bourdeaux, traversed the provinces of Perigord, Saintonge, and Poitou; destroyed the towns and the churches, and carried desolation and slaughter as far as the neighborhood of Tours. Charles Martel, alarmed at the danger which menaced France; and even all Christendom, marched with the whole force of the kingdom to check the progress of this formidable invader. On the south side of the Loire, and not far from Tours^ the important contest was decided. The issue of the battle long remained doubtful; but at last the French gained one of the inost complete victories that the history of the world commemorates. The carnage on the side of the Saracens was almost unprecedented : the most moderate statements of their loss make it amount to upwards of three hundred thousand men, amongst whom was their commander, the viceroy of Spain, who on this bloody day terminated his ambitious career. This brilliant and most important victory over an enemy who^, until that celebrated day, had been deemed invincible, and threatened Europe with subjugation, threw a l)laze of glory arouncl the name of Charles Martel which time can never extinguish.* The Saraeens were soon after entirely expelled from France, and gave up all hopes of subduing that kingdom.

* It is supposed to have been on this occasion that Charles acquired the surname of Martel, or the Hammer.

LETTERS ON FRENCH n.. FORlf 19

23. After the death of Thierry IV. which happened A. D. 737, Charles continued to reign under the title offduke of the French, without nominating a new king; and, being victorious in every quarter, he sat down in peace, the fame of his exploits having rendered him the arbiter of Europe.

24. Charles Martel died A. D. 742, and was interred in the abbey of St. Denis. His two sons, Fepin and Carloman, shared the kingdom; but they remained closely united; and joining their forces, defeated the Bavarians, the Alemanni, the Saxons, and the Sclavonians. About A. D. 746, Carloman retired to Rome, and embraced the monastic life, leaving Pepin sole master of the French monarchy.

25. Pepin had, for some unknown reasons, placed a nominal king; Childeric III. son of Chilperic II. on the throne, But without giving him any real power. At length, however, the minister, not contented with possessing the regal authority, resolved to assume the title of king. In this he was encouraged by "pope Zachary;^ who, like himself, was a man of abilities and enterprise, and wanted his aid against the Greek emperor, Con stantine Copronymus, and also against the Loml>ards. The sentiments of the nation likewise concurred with his own ambition Through the influence of the pope, as well as in gratitude for favours received from Pepin, the clergy of France supported his pretensions: the nobles respected him for his military talents, and the people despised the pageant kings who had so long been no more than mere shadows of royalty. In this state of things, a new dynasty was introduced, without any commotion in the state. The minister was placed on the throne A. D. 751; and the king, Childeric III. was shut up in a monastery. Thus ended the Merovingian line of kings, the royal race of Clovis, after having worn the crown of France during the space of two hundred and fifty years, reckoning from the tinie of that monarch's accession.

26. I have now, my dear sir, conducted you under the surest guidance that history can furnish, through a period which, although somewhat obscure at the first, becomes at length more luminous, and is certainly both curious and interesting. The latter part of this period exhibits a singular system of government: a long continued succession of kings without power, and of ministers invested with the supreme authority, constituting two hereditary races; one of real, the other of nominal sovereigns. In this political picture, the talents and activity of the mayors of the palace form a striking contrast to the imbecillity and inactivity of the kings; who, neither knowing nor caring what passed in the kingdom, were mere pageants of state, decorated with the insignia of royalty. The appellation of '*faneants," or sluggards, given them by the French historians, is aptly expressive of their indolence.