The rest of the decade saw complex manoeuvres involving Nicholas, Lothar, Charles the Bald and Louis the German, and Theutberga and Waldrada themselves.
As we have seen, however, such ambitions were the common currency of the political situation after 843 and Charles the Bald himself fell victim to them in 858.
Precisely in order to frustrate the latter aim, Lothar's uncles acted against him, this being particularly true of Charles the Bald.
As a trusted agent of Charles the Bald, he was a player in the drama; his views on royal divorce were more flexible when his own royal master was involved than when the wretched Lothar was the subject of scrutiny.
Some of this language may, of course, resonate with the imagery of the Virgin Mary, who was to be invoked as a `fruitful virgin' (fecunda virgo) by Charles the Bald in a prayer for his new wife Richildis in 872.
105) Something of the potency of such language can be gauged from the fact that Charles the Bald deployed it in representations of his kingship when he invaded Lotharingia after Lothar's death in 869.
107) None the less, Lothar's kingship suffered: he could not support Gunther of Cologne's resistance to the pope; he found difficulty in advancing supporters and could not open vital channels of patronage to important followers; and he had to promise Alsace to his uncle, Louis the German, in order to deploy him as a counterweight to his other uncle, Charles the Bald, though his resourceful diplomacy meant that Alsace was not entirely lost to him.
In a list of royal names from the Merovingian and Carolingian families to be prayed for, which was entered into the abbey's Liber Memorialis in 862/3, the names of Charles the Bald and his queen Ermentrude are present; Lothar's name is conspicuous by its absence.
It is probable that the text was written for Charles the Bald, though it is possible that it was written for Lothar II himself: see Anton, Furstenspiegel und Herrscherethos, 262-3, 269; L.
Chief among them are these: (i) that the reign of Charles the Bald
saw the transition to a 'feudal' regime, in particular because the capitulary of Quierzy allegedly guaranteed hereditary succession to courtships and benefices; (ii) that the politics of the period can be explained in terms of the concerted action of large family groups; (iii) that the foundations of the territorial principalities of France were laid under Charles.