In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

LECTURE II General character ofevents under the Carlovingian empire. _, Reign ofPepin the Short. ~ Reign ofCharlemagne. ~ Epoch oftransition. Reigns ofLouis the Debonnair and Charles the Bald ~ Norman invasions . _, The last Carlovingians. _, Accession ofHugh Capet. I HAVE sketched the general progress of events in Frankish Gaul, under the Merovingians; I have now to give a similar outline ofthe reign ofthe Carlovingians . I shall enter neither into an examination ofthe institutions, nor a detailed narrative of occurrences; I shall seek to sum up the facts in the general fact which includes them all. The general tendency ofevents under the Merovingians was towards centralization ; and this tendency was natural. At that period, a society and a state were labouring to form and create themselves; and societies and states can be created only by the centralization ofinterests and forces. The conquests and authority of Clovis, however fleeting and incomplete they may have been, indicate this need ofcentralization, which was then pressing upon Roman and barbarian society. After the death ofClovis, his dominions were dismembered, and formed into distinct kingdoms; but these kingdoms could not remain separate; they continually tended to reunite, and soon became reduced in number to two, which finally coalesced. A similar process took place in reference to the authority in the interior ofeach state. The royal power attempted at first to be the centralizing principle, but did not succeed; the aristocracy of the chiefs, the great landowners, laboured to organize itself, and to produce its own government; it produced it, at length, in the form ofthe Mayors ofthe Palace, who eventually became kings. After two hundred and seventy-one years of labour, all the Frankish kingdoms were reunited into one. The supreme power was more entirely concentrated in the hands ofthe king, aided by the concurrence ofthe national assemblies, than it had ever been previously. Under Pepin the Short and Charlemagne, this centralization was maintained , extended and regulated; and it appeared to gain strength. New countries , new peoples, were incorporated into the Frankish state. The relations of 82 LECTURE II the sovereign with his subjects became more numerous and regular. New bonds ofunion were established between the supreme power, its delegates, and its subjects . A state and a government seemed likely to be formed. After the death of Charlemagne, affairs presented quite another aspect, and assumed a contrary direction. In proportion as a tendency to the centralization , either ofthe different states among themselves, or ofthe internal power of each state, had been visible under the rule of the Merovingian race, in just that proportion did a tendency to the dismemberment, to the dissolution, both of the states themselves and of the power in each state, become evident under the Carlovingians. Under the Merovingians, you have seen that five successive dismemberments took place, none ofwhich was able to last; after the death of Charlemagne, the kingdoms once separated do not reunite. Louis the Debonnair divided the empire among his children, in 838, and made vain efforts to maintain some unity therein. The treaty of Verdun, in 843, definitively separated the three monarchies. Charles the Fat, in 884, made an attempt to unite them again; but this attempt also failed-reunion was impracticable. In the interior of each state, and particularly in France, the same phenomenon was manifested. The supreme power which, under the Merovingians, had tended to become concentrated in the hands, either of the kings, or of the Mayors of the Palace, and which had seemed to have attained this end under Pepin and Charlemagne, took a contrary direction from the reign ofLouis the Debonnair, and tended constantly to dissolution. The great landed proprietors who, under the first race, had been naturally urged to coalesce against the royal authority, now laboured only to elevate themselves, and to become sovereigns in their own domains. The hereditary succession of benefices and offices became prevalent. Royalty was nothing more than a direct lordship, or an indirect and impotent suzerainty. Sovereigntywas dispersed; there no longer existed any state, or head of the state. The history of the Carlovingians is nothing but the struggle ofdeclining royalty against that tendency which was continually robbing and contracting it more and more. This was the dominant character, the general progress of events, from Louis the Debonnair to Hugh Capet. I shall now refer to the principal facts ofthis epoch; in them I shall find proofs ofthe general fact just stated. I. Pepin the Short (752-768). As this monarch had risen to power by the aid ofthe...

Share