The Demanding Drama of Louis the Pious
Courtney M. Booker
THE DEMANDING DRAMA OF LOUIS PIOUS by Courtney M. Booker Ivan Gobry, Histoire des Rois de France: Louis Ier , Premier successeur Charlemagne (Paris: Pygmalion/Gérard Watelet 2002) 254 pp. + appendices including a genealogical table, chronology, biographical notices, and brief bibliography. “Louis the Pious, who is also called Debonair, presents melancholy spectacle of man essentially good nature, full lofty intentions amiable magnanimous in private life, quick to repent when he had done amiss, quicker forgive injury, yet wanting vigor resolution, easily relying on advice others, destitute worldly wisdom which would have enabled him choose his advisers well. Men character are numerous every age; they doomed suffer themselves bring suffering others; born, as was hold reins government, their life apt be tragedy.”1 This characterization Carolingian king emperor Pious (778–840) made not Gobry but Lewis Sergeant more than century ago. Unfortunately, there little Gobry’s new biography Louis, Charlemagne, that differs from ’s vivid, inveterate portrait. For example, Louis’s “want resolution,” “lack wisdom,” “reliance upon others” flaws invoked repeatedly explain particularly problematic course emperor’s reign: “le sentimental Louis” (36); était timide, emprunté, éloigné” (91); le Pieux certes faible, mais influençable” (202).2 In stark contrast, those surrounding such sons Lothar, German, Charles Bald, or courtier Gombaud, often characterized astute, influential, energetic (as manifested either terms boorish obstinacy gallant fortitude): “prince qui plus 1 L. Sergeant, The Franks, Their Origin Confederacy Establishment Kingdom France German Empire (London 1898) 298–299. 2 Additional examples: “sous l’influence cette épouse maléfique” (35); un sentimental” (48); “avec l’indécision et les caprices du nouvel empereur” (102–103); “compliqué hésitant” (103); “son indécision” (110); “la faiblesse Pieux” (219). 171 sauvage inculte” (199); “Lothaire fort déterminé (202); “l’infatigable Gombaud” (203); “Charles, avait l’esprit chevaleresque” (233).3 Yet, for principal “bad influence” unequivocally ambitious recklessly domineering second wife, Judith: “cette dominatrice” (150); “Judith, ambitieuse adroite mau politique aveugle” (198); “Judith connaissait la son époux” (198).4 other words, account historical actions agency—as well absence—Gobry follows an ahistorically “psychological” template: psychologie (179); d’une beaucoup fine que celle (196); “l’astucieux père aussi ses fils” (229). practice amounts inferring ostensibly common meaning eclectic assemblage reports about events, simply accepting repeating medieval interpretation motives at work behind them.5 Thus, sees problems beginning only with marriage 819 “willful” “nefarious” wife. Glibly following scathing typological enemies Judith another Jezebel, ignores fact troubles begun previous year revolt subsequent murder nephew King Bernard Italy.6 striking vision reported poor woman Laon leaves doubt outrage caused this act vengeance.7 3 “Gombaud ... astucieux influent” “Charles tenace” (235); accueillit avec courtoisie” (236); stratège” (237); Lothaire, l’obstination lui propre” (240); refusa énergiquement ” (242). 4 “l’ardente Judith” (226); “On ne sait si l’ambitieuse...
Comitatus-a Journal of Medieval and Renaissance Studies