:There are many sources that opt for a start date of 843. Janet Nelson's Charles the Bald, for instance, argues that he is properly seen as the first king of France. Jean Dunbabin's France in the Making starts in 843.  Let's avoid what Susan Reynolds, discussing France in Fiefs and Vassals, calls "a crude view of the use of words and names". (Reynolds uses the term "kingdom of France" freely in a chapter about the two centuries from 900 to 1100.) Why distinguish as you do between the Kingdom of France and the Kingdom of the Franks, while nobody distinguishes the Kingdom of England from the Kingdom of the English? Or why can't we call West Francia (a very rare contemporary term) the Kingdom of France when we are already using an anachronism like "Carolingian Empire"? (10th-century Latin authors used the word "Carolingian" in its Latin variations to refer to the dynasty, the western kingdom and the people of the western kingdom.) Can you cite one reference to the term "West Francia" from the two centuries between 987 and 1179? So what's a change of dynasty in 987? Or the coronation of 1179, which was just standard practice? Neither event caused a kingdom of France to come into being. The treaty of Verdun, however, established a kingdom with pretty definite borders closely approximating those of France today. Many scholars treat of the kingdom of France in the 11th, 10th and even 9th centuries. Have you read Schneidmuller's Nomen Patriae, it's about this very thing. I haven't read it, only reviews.