ABSTRACT
AS IN THE English, so also in the French king the two fundamentally opposed functions of theocratic and feudal rulership were combined. A spectator surveying the scene in England and France at the turn of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries would not unjustifiably have come to the conclusion that their respective developments would be very much the same, with certain minor modifications. One might say that in an inverted sense the factors which brought forth the full implementation of feudal kingship in England helped to bring about the full implementation of the theocratic monarchy in France. But these factors displayed their force in a way precisely opposite to that in which they operated in England. We have already remarked on the ‘natural’ inclination of every medieval ruler to reduce as far as possible his feudal functions to a-to him-tolerable degree and to emphasize his monarchic kingship correspondingly. Much depended on the way in which the king proceeded, that is, how little or how much he was in a position to avoid the antagonism of his ‘natural counsellors’. The English Henry II knew how to progress-and so did Philip II and Louis IX. John cared little for the reaction which the blatant display of his voluntas caused, and the result was that he came to be hedged in by feudal restraints. To this must be added the disastrous by-products of his reign, most of which were to redound to the advantage of the theocratic monarch Philip II. Above all, the rapid extension of the French royal domain-notably Vermandois, Artois and Normandy-brought under the direct royal control large and profitable parts1 which, as far as government was concerned, could not be distinguished from the royal domain proper.2 Other, that is, feudal parts, such as Champagne, were administered for a long time by regents who were wholly dependent on the king, which was one more feature assisting the trend towards full royal monarchy in France. Nor should one forget that-for reasons irrelevant to our inquiry-the feudal ties between king and feudal magnates were far less developed than they were in England. The pièce de resistance to the deployment of monarchic functions, namely the baronage, was either too weak or not cohesive enough or too little motivated by common views or too inarticulate to be an organ with which the king had to reckon. Feudal resistance was appeased by the feudal veneer with which the thirteenthcentury French kings knew how to surround themselves. It should also be taken into account that in sombre contrast to
England there had been in France no general oath of fidelity outside the royal domain, since the end of the tenth century.1
