Sigebertus, sub Anno 662. taking Eguinarthus for his Pattern, inveighs against the former Kings in almost the same contumelious Terms. "Whose Custom (says he) it was, indeed, to make an Appearance like a Prince, according to what had been usual to their Family; but neither to act, nor dispose of any thing, only to tarry at Home, and to Eat and Drink like Irrational Creatures."—As if the like Sloth and Cowardise ought to be imputed to all the former Kings, among whom we nevertheless find many brave Men, such as Clodoveus, who not only defeated a great Army of Germans, which had made an Irruption into France, in a great Battel near Tolbiacum; but also drove the Remainder of the Romans out of the Confines of Gallia. What shall we say of Childebert and Clotharius, who rooted the Visigoths and Ostrogoths out of Provence and Aquitain, where they had seated themselves? In the Histories of all which Princes, there is no Mention made of any Mayor of the Palace, but cursorily, and by the By, as one of the King's Servants. This we may see in Gregorius, lib 5. cap. 18, where he speaks of Gucilius, Lib. 6. cap. 9. and cap. 45. Lib. 7. cap. 49. And we find this Employment to have been not only in the King's Palace, but also in the Queen's: For the same Gregorius, lib. 7. cap. 27. mentions one Waddo as Mayor of the Palace, in the Court of Queen Riguntha: And in very many other Places of their Histories, we find both Gregorius and Aimoinus making Mention of these Masters of the Court and the King's House.
Now the first Beginning of the great Authority of these Præfecti Regii, was (as we told you before) during the Reign of King Clotharius the Second, about the Year of our Lord 588. that is, about 130 Years after the constituting the Francogallican Kingdom; which we may also learn from the before-mention'd Historian, so often quoted by Venericus.
Yet there are two other Historians, (tho' not of equal Credit) Sigibertus and Trithemius, who refer the Beginning of so great a Power in the Mayor of the Palace, to the Reign of Clotair the Third; whose Magister Palatii was one Ebroinus, a Man of extraordinary Wickedness and Cruelty: But however this may be, we find Historians calling them by several other Appellations; such as Comites Domus Regie, Præfecti Aulæ, Comites Palatii, &c.
CHAP. XIII.
Whether Pipin was created King by the Pope, or by the Authority of the Francogallican Council.
Having in the former Chapter given an Account, that after the Expulsion of Childerick, (a stupid Prince, in whom the Line of the Merovingians ended) Pipin, from being Mayor of the Palace, was created King; It will be worth our Enquiry, to know by whose Authority the Kingdom was conferr'd upon him. For Pope Gelasius says thus, Cap. 75. Quest. 6. —"A Roman Pope, viz. Zacharias, deposed the King of the Franks, not so much because of his evil Actions, as because he was stupid, and unfit for the Exercise of so great a Trust; and in his Stead, substituted Pipin, Father of Charles the Emperor: Absolving all the Franks from the Oath of Allegiance to Childeric."
And there is scarce an Author who does not acquiesce in this Testimony of one Pope, concerning the Power of another: Thus Ado, Lambertus, Rhegino, Sigibertus, Aimoinus, Landulphus, nay, even Venericus Vercellensis, (in the Book which we formerly quoted) cites these Words out of the Epistle of Pope Gregory the VIIth. to Herman Bishop or Metz; viz. "A certain Pope of Rome deposed the King of the Franks from his Kingdom, nor so much for his Wickedness, as his being unfit for so great a Power; and after having absolved all the Franks from the Oath of Fidelity they had sworn to him, placed Pipin in his Room.—Which Otto Frisingius, lib. Chron. 5. cap. 23. and Godfrey, Chron. Part. 17. laying presently hold of, break out into this Exclamation—From this Action, the Popes of Rome derive an Authority of changing and deposing Princes, &c."
But pray let us enquire whether the Truth of this Story, as to the Matter of Fact, be sufficiently proved and attested. For in the first Place, 'tis manifest, That not one of all that great Number of Kings of the Franks, which we have instanced to have been Elected or Abdicated, was either created or abdicated by the Pope's Authority. On the contrary we have irrefragably prov'd, that the whole Right, both of making and deposing their Kings, was lodg'd in the yearly great Council of the Nation; so that it seems incredible the Franks shou'd neglect or forgo their Right, in this single Instance of Pipin. But to make few Words of this Matter, Venericus Vercellensis gives us the Testimony of an ancient Historian, who has written of all the Francogallican Affairs; whereby that whole Story of the Pope, is prov'd to be a Lye: And 'tis clearly demonstrated, that both Childerick was deposed, and Pipin chosen in his room, according to the usual Custom of the Franks, and the Institutions of our Ancestors: That is to say, by a solemn General Council of the Nation; in whose Power only it was, to transact a Matter of so great Weight and Moment; as we have before made it appear. The Words of that Historian are these:—"That by the Counsel, and with the Consent of all the Franks, (a Relation of this Affair being sent to the Apostolick See, and its Advice had) the most noble Pipin was advanced to the Throne of the Kingdom, By the Election of the whole Nation, the Homage of the Nobility, with the Consecration of the Bishops, &c." From which Words, 'tis most apparent that Pipin was not appointed King by the Pope, but by the People themselves, and the States of the Realm. And Venericus explains this Matter out of the same Historian. "Pipin, Mayor of the Palace (says he) having all along had the Administration of the Regal Power in his Hands, was the first that was appointed and elected to be King, from being Mayor of the Palace; the Opinion of Pope Zachary being first known, because the Consent and Countenance of a Pope of Rome, was thought necessary in an Affair of this Nature."—And presently after he tells us; "The Pope finding that what the Ambassadors had deposed was just and profitable, agreed to it; and Pipin was made King by the unanimous Suffrages and Votes of the Nobility, &c."—To the very same Purpose writes Ado of Vienna, Ætat. 6. sub Anno 727.—"Ambassadors (says he) were sent to Pope Zacharias, to propose this Question to him; Whether or no the Kings of the Franks, who had scarce any Power in their Hands, but contented themselves with the bare Title, were fit to continue to be Kings?" To which Zacharias return'd this Answer,—"That he thought the Person who governed the Commonwealth, ought rather to have also the Title of King: Whereupon the Franks, after the Return of the Ambassadors, cast out Childeric, who then had the Title of King; and by the Advice of the Ambassadors, and of Pope Zacharias, Elected Pipin, and made him King."
Besides the above Proofs, we have Aimoinus's Testimony to the same Purpose, lib. 4. cap. 61. where he concludes thus.—"This Year Pipin got the Appellation of King of the Franks, and according to their ancient Customs was elevated to the Royal Throne in the City of Soissons, &c." Nay, even Godfrey of Viterbo himself; Chron. part. 17. cap. 4. "Pipin (says he) was made King by Pope Zacharias, (ex electione Francorum) through the Election of the Franks, Hilderic their slothful King being, by the Franks, thrust into a Monastery."