Plunder and Tribute in the Carolignian Empire
Bookmark this page

• Tribute gilt-edged income of the Franks from warfare – plunder less calculable
• Victory and plunder more or less coterminous – raids by scara or rapid deployment, fast moving, no baggage train, living off the land.
• Salves an important source of profit from war, even Christians as slaves – shown by increasing church legislation on Christian slaves (818, 824 Breton)
• Temple treasures very popular – gold and silver taken when the Irminsul was bunt in 772, also in Frisia – 875 Charles the Bald takes thesauri – Vikings not the only church robbers- armies and horses important – noble items not just valued for utilitarian worth.
• Tribute directly to the King but some plunder, even when not on raid is reserved for the King – see Charlemagne treasure of last Avar raids shipped to Aaachen even though Charlemagne did not participate – was sons Pippin.
• Home matches meant plunders kept their own plunder – catching up with a wiking.
• Merovingians went to war as a way of getting plunder Theuderich “I will lead you into a country where you may find gold and silver as much as you may desire” – opps for plunder – Carolingians more active – plundering expeditions under royal control and direction – Ordinatio Imperii.
• Merovingians wealth in tact for heirs and set them up with it in sub-kingdoms –c Carolingians more lavish – lams for the poor and the church, Louis the German and Charlemagne in own lifetime and through their wills.
• Some wealth distributed to the armies – Lombard treasure in 774 after capture of Pavia, Rome, Ireland, Britain – most to nobility. Lorsch annals = “churches, bishops, abbots and counts”
• Nobility had their own warbands, Archbishop John of Ravenna went about with nearly 500 men – not illegal or improper, but inappr opriate in the circumstances, a warrior needs constant rewards – basic pay clothing, food, drink, accommodation expected, what really counted was noble gifts
• Very large-scale circulation of goods of gift giving, tribute payment, largely controlled by king motored by inflow of tribute and plunder. – Language in which to express power relationships – gift giving – subjection?
• Not great at paying taxation – gist giving acceptable but taxation not, gift giving a a very public game, not seem to be voluntary – monasteries had to pay. Tribes around empire probably preferred to give gifts than pay tribute.
• Tribute was in practice institutionalized plunder – plunder from yourself, conceal subjection and dependence, precious things circulating as tribute, plunder and gifts vital political level, created and reinforced political relationships, to determine military and hence political power.
• Incentive for small landowners – with no men of their own benefits not high compared to cost, and King redistributes plunder to the optimates. Land was given to the large land owners benefit not the small land holders, also had to fight at own expense – large costs so unlikely the freemen make up the back bone of the Carolingian army
• Resources of military manpower provide by warbands not big enough for defensio patriae, not good for war bands as defensive fighting less profitable with similar costs.
• Louis the Pious problems 832 raising an army – were demands made actually an increase on pre 800 (evidence surprisingly thin for general obligation to serve).
• Despite Carolingian renaissance - intellectual and spirtual the Franks were the Vikings to othe rgroups – not a Byzantine imperialism, did not distance themselves from their enighbours as the Byzantines did. Two sides understood each other very well
• Cross border exiles, Pippin of Aquitaine and Hugh of Lotharangia allied themselves with Vikings at various points – such things not possible unless both sides playing essentially the same game.
• West more economically developed in 9^th century than east despite Saracen and northmen raids – not reflected in political power – East powers able to impose their will in settlement of Lotharingian succession and to intervene 3 times in west Francia. Contrast between economic underdevelopment and political superiority = East Kingdom was the only one of 3 kingdoms to be produced by the division of Verdun with an open frontier – consequent possibilities of tribute taking and plunder. Spanish frontier in the west did not offer the same opportunities as it had done time of Charlemagne and Louis of Aquitaine – also Aquitaine only nominally part of Charles the Bald’s kingdom for first 20 years of career, Brittany a poor substitute – tribute paying did not compensate for the negative balance of payments for the west
• Charles the Bald’s decision to try for the kingdom of Italy and for imperial rule in 875 more rational than it did to Hincmar – differing political opportunities helped to determine was was France and what was Germany – Henry I turned to tributes in Slaves after stopping expansion of the East Francia – wets elite turned to other forms of political and military organization – the principality, the castellany, beneficed miles, old methods no longer made to work, more faute di meux than spirit of progress.

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