- Feb 2010
- Canary Islands-Spain
I agree on the Hugh Capet option. That's the real stablishment of the Kingdom of France.
i don't know how "Celtic" current France was or how Frankish Austrasia was. The Old French is more Germanic (or Frankish) than later medieval French for example. And certainly still during Hugh Capet the area was considered part of the "Frankish state" judging from Otto II's actions.Wait ... the Franks were Germanic, the Gauls were Celtic [like South Western Germans in that age, but this is a different matter]. If you consider "proto-France" a "post-Carolingian Gallic state" the connection with Franks becomes weak: they weren't Gallic, but Germanic. So [as sometime actually I hear] you are saying that the Franks weren't able to make old Gaul a Germanic state. Failing in this, I don't see why we should note a continuity with their Western Kingdom.
Carolingian rule ended ended in the East before the West. Otto the Great was decedent of the first German (Saxon) kings. It was in Otto's interest for a non Carolingian to rule Francia believing he (Otto) would have more influence in France.i don't know how "Celtic" current France was or how Frankish Austrasia was. The Old French is more Germanic (or Frankish) than later medieval French for example. And certainly still during Hugh Capet the area was considered part of the "Frankish state" judging from Otto II's actions.
Very true.Carolingian rule ended ended in the East before the West. Otto the Great was decedent of the first German (Saxon) kings. It was in Otto's interest for a non Carolingian to rule Francia believing he (Otto) would have more influence in France.
From Wikipedia "Hugh Capet: "
Indeed, for the Ottonian to make France a vassal state of the empire, it was imperative that the Frankish king was not of the Carolingian race, and not powerful enough to break the Ottonian tutelage. Hugh Capet was for them the ideal candidate, especially since he actively supported monastic reform in the abbeys while other contenders continued to distribute church revenues to their own partisans. Such conduct could only appeal to Reims, who was very close to the Cluniac movement."
The western populations lost their Celtic character after the Roman conquest and were totally Latinized linguistically. The modern French language has almost no words of Celtic origin and few of Germanic origin. I would assume Hugh Capet spoke a dialect between vulgar Latin and medieval French. The use of word "Frankish" can be confusing because it seems to be used for both Gallic and Germanic populations.
What about the population? Germanic speaking rulers were the case throughout the Frankish period but how much of the Gallic population was affected? In fact literacy was defined as being able to speak, read and write the the Vulgate (ecclesiastic form of Latin) throughout post Roman Europe. Since literacy was so rare, we probably will never know how much the population's speech was influenced. I've always wondered how illiterate populations of that time experienced Mass.Very true.
Don't forget that the Franks were in the area of Paris since the 5th century, so they definitely had a linguistical impact, which was reversed when the church gained influence. Unfortunately the Franks weren't as good in writing as they were with fighting each other, so it is difficult to reconstruct that period linguistically.
This is complicated by the Frankish practice of splitting up their realms. In the early days only one of the Frankish leaders had their realm in Paris at once and the kingdom was rarely united. Paris was always a central location but my answer is going to be when the Capetians took over.Question appeared in neighboring topic.
I was quite surprised by such statements. So decided to read some about it. What i have seen:
Only third son of Clovis got Paris. Eldest son Theuderic got Rheims. Looks like Rheims was official main town, which was important for kings title. But in reality Theuderic lived in Metz.
Next 100 years there were hash of kings and princes which stayed in Metz, Soissons, Paris, Orlean. So Paris were only one of main towns.
Paris wasnt dominant town in Church's history too. Only several not primary Councils gathered in Paris (whole list). Rheims cathedra was superior for Paris.
In reality Paris became something like capital during the reign of Chlothar II. I didnt read after him yet, but i know that there were several Roi faineant . So their residence in Paris didnt mean much. Later Charlemagne lived in Austrasia.
So, how do you think. When did Paris become real capital of the state?
...I am not certain about XV-XVI centuries even. Because i know that many Estates General gathered not in Paris.
You see, it was a kind of rebirth of the Roman - Gaul soul. I could make a parallel with Northern Italy. Here [well, now I'm in London, I mean in my homeland, Piedmont] the "Lombards", a Germanic population, dominated for centuries and they controlled almost all the peninsula. They made something similar to what Franks did in France. They left a legacy and they even gave the name to a wide region: the Lombardia [the land of the Lombards]. Today it's the richest Italian region with about 10,000,000 inhabitants. But Northern Italy has kept its Roman - Gaul soul. Like modern French is "Latin", also modern Italian [developed in Northern Italy starting from the Florentine school] is "Latin". Both the languages are well far from being "Germanic".i don't know how "Celtic" current France was or how Frankish Austrasia was. The Old French is more Germanic (or Frankish) than later medieval French for example. And certainly still during Hugh Capet the area was considered part of the "Frankish state" judging from Otto II's actions.
So, when it happened?Anyway, the concept of a "capital" in the present-day sense doesn't really arise until much later. The centre of power is wherever the King is, and medieval courts were quite peripatetic outfits. There is no concept of a permanent central government administration, always located in the same city. The reason Paris eventually got this status was that it was the biggest town in the Île-de-France, the crown estate, which for a long time was the only part of France the King wielded real direct power over, and where he therefore tended to spend a lot of time. Plus of course it also became the biggest city in France, and for quite a while in Europe.
|Similar History Discussions||History Forum||Date|
|Comparison of Imperial German and British scientific life until the end of ww1||European History|
|comparison of genghis khan and napoleon||General History|
|Parishes in Louisiana, South Carolina, and Jamaica||North American History|
|The Germans go for Paris in May 1940 instead of for the Atlantic Coast||Speculative History|