libri carolini2
DESCRIPTION
Libri Carolini 2TRANSCRIPT
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
1/34
titatntion ant) learning
in Search of iDeologp:
Cibti Carolini
T H O M A S F X N O B L E
T
he text called bymodern scholars the Libri Carolini, the Caroline
books, that is to say, Charlemagne's books, is puzzling in many
ways.
1
It isnot clear, for example, in what sense this treatise can be as
cribed to Charlemagne. I tishard to sayexactlywhat kind oftreatise the
Libri Carolini really is. Sometimes the work is called the Capitulare de
imaginibus,
but itisnot acapitulary.
2
Francois LouisGanshof refused to
accept the Libri Carolini asa capitulary in his authoritative treatment of
those quasi-legislative texts.
3
I twas published by the Monumenta Ger
maniaeHistorica intheConciliaseriesasasupplement,notintheCapitu
laria series,but this isnot helpful either because the treatisewasnot the
product of conciliar deliberations. Isthework actually about images?Is
oneofitscustomarytitlesatleasthalfright?Thisdeceptivelysimpleques
tion requires investigation too,but itcanbesaidright awaythatmuchof
what ismost important in the Libri Carolinihas nothing to dowith im
ages.
TheoldestsurvivingmanuscriptoftheLibri Carolinilacksalltitular
andprefatorymaterial,butaslightlylaterandcompletetextcallsthework,
ifImaybepermittedsomenondistortingabridgement,Opus Caroli contra
synodum.
4
Here isCharles again, but now he has issued neither librinor
capitularia, but rather an opus.And this time itiscontra synodumnot de
imaginibus.
Thesynodreferred toistheSecondCouncilofNicaea,heldin
787,
and itisperfectly clear, on the plain and copious testimony of the
text, that that synod figured largely in the discussions that produced the
7
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
2/34
22 8 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
Libri
Carolini. But,onceagain,thereismuch inthe
LibriCarolini
thatis
onlylooselyconnectedwithSecondNicaea.Confusingtitlesbybothorig
inalauthorsandmoderneditorshavesentreadersscurryingdownseveral
divergentpathsintheirattemptstounderstandthe
Libri
Carolini.
The
Libri Carolini
isabigbookbyanymeasurethatmightbeappliedto
it: 228quartopagesinthestandard printededition.I thas,Ithink,been
moreoften characterized than read,moreoften interpreted than studied.
There havebeen battles overwho wrote it, although it appearsthat the
gunshavebeenstilledonatleastthisfieldofcontentionasaresultofAnn
Freeman's compelling demonstration that Theodulf, the later bishop of
Orleans,wastheauthor.
5
IthasbeensuggestedthattheCarolingianscom
pletelymisunderstoodthesubtletiesofthetheologicalpositionsembraced
atNicaea andthat they responded withamisguidedandintemperatedi
atribethatwaslargelyirrelevanttotheissuesathand.Somehavetriedto
,exculpateCharlemagneandhisassociatesbysayingthattheyworkedfrom
such abad translation of the conciliar
acta
thattheycouldnotpossibly
havecometogripswiththeissuesthathadbeenraisedin787.Thereare
thosewhothinkthatthe
LibriCarolini
wasmainlyaproudassertionby
Charlemagneofhisregalandsacerdotalposition,whileotherscounterby
sayingthatCharlemagnedidnotwishtoembarrassPopeHadrianIand
thathelaidhisgreatbookasidewithoutpublishingit.
6
Itwouldbeeasy,andperhapsinstructive,togoonandonpointingout
puzzles,butitismoreimportanttotrytosolveatleastafewofthem.In
the process of offering solutions, some bold claimswill beadvanced on
behalfofthe
Libri
Carolini. Indefenseofsuchclaims,Icansayonlythis:I
amgoingtotrytotacklethe
Libri Carolini
asawholeandinitshistorical
context. I takemy lead from aremark byWalter Goffart in his brilliant
studyof
early
medievalhistoricalwriting.Hesaysthat"likeus,Jordanes,
Gregoryandtheothersmeanttowritewhattheydidandwerewellaware
of what they said and why."
7
Although poststructuralist critics have
warnedusthattextscanbepolysemicandthatauthorialintentmaybean
illusion,IproceedontheassumptionthatTheodulfhadboththemeans
andthewilltoarticulatehisownviewsandthoseofhiscontemporaries
andassociates.Thecentralpurposeofthisstudy,therefore,istoworkout
whatTheodulfsaidandwhyhesaidit.Iamconfidentthatthisinvestiga
tionwilldemonstratethatthe
LibriCarolini
isaworkofgreatpowerand
sophistication thatm ustbeunderstood asawholeandon itsownterms,
andthat itisabook that revealsagreatdealabouttheculturallifeofthe
Carolingianworldinthelastdecadesoftheeighthcentury.
Mydiscussionof
theLibri Caroliniwill
proceedalongthree
paths.
First,
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
3/34
229radition and Learning
I shallsayalittle about how the book cameto bewritten and how the
circumstances surrounding its composition provide some clues as to its
meaning.Second,Ishallgivemyreadingofthetextitself,layingparticular
stress on theorganization ofthe work and on the severalmajor linesof
argumentthatitdevelops.Inthecourseofthisdiscussion,Ishallattempt
toassessthekindsoflearningonwhich
theLibri Carolini
depended.Third
andfinally,Ishalloffer
aseriesofinterpretationsoftheLibri Carolinibased
onitspreparation,historicalsetting,andintellectualfoundations.
Ostensiblythe
Libri Carolini
representsaresponseofsomekindtotheis
suesinvolvedintheSecondCouncilofNicaeaof
787.
Letus,asabegin
ning,makeabriefinvestigationofhowthatsynodcametobecalled,what
itscentralconcernswere,andhowthesynodanditsconcernscametothe
attentionoftheFranks.
Byzantine Iconodasm, inaugurated in the 720s byEmperor Leo III,
proceededthroughtw odistinctphasesintheeighthcentury First,during
Leo'sreignandtheearlyyearsofthatof hissonandsuccessor,Constan
tineV,iconsweredestroyedonimperial
orders.
Theprincipalobjectionto
iconsinthisearlyperiodofIconoclasmwasthattheywereidolatrous.Or
thodox theologians, chiefly John of Damascus, were able to show that
idolsand iconswerefundamentally different, and alsoto assertthat there
wereprofoundtheologicalgrounds,tobefoundintherealmsofsoteriol
ogyandChristology,fordefendingtheuseof iconsinthechurch.Atthis
juncture,amajorcouncilwasheldatHiereiain754,andiconswerenow
condemned on ecclesiastical and theological authority with, of course,
complete imperial approval. The chargeof idolatry wasnot abandoned,
butit
was
nowsupplementedbyargumentswhosebaseswereChristologi
cal,
andwhich sought to respond to thedefense of images advancedby
John of Damascus. In 775 the arch-Iconoclast Constantine V died, and
fiveyearslaterhewasfollowedtothegravebyhissonandsuccessor,Leo
IV.Leo left behind aminor son,Constantine VI, and aremarkable and
resourcefulwidow,Irene.
8
Almost immediately upon assuming her regency, Irene embarked
upon aseriesofdiplomaticinitiatives.Her efforts toward theEast areof
nodirectconcerntoushere,buthighlysignificantwasheropeningtothe
West,which took the form of aproposed marriage alliance between her
sonConstantine and Charlemagne's daughter Rotrud. Ireneand theold
patriarch Paul IV had already been making some subtle moves against
Iconoclasm, and without these the empress could have had no hopeof
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
4/34
230 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
reconciliation, letaloneofalliance,with thepopeandtheFranks.Fortwo
generations the popes and their protectors and allies, the Carolingians,
had steadfastly opposed Byzantine Iconodasm. That opposition had
playedaroleinthepapalalienationfrom Byzantium,theFranko-papalal
liance, and the reconfiguration of the political map of Italy.Apparently,
then,Irenewassignalingherwillingnesstorecognizethepermanentloss
to the Byzantine Empire of allofnorthern and central Italy,while also
hopingtomakeCharlemagneguarantorofthecontinuedimperialposses
sionoftheduchyofNaples
andof
Sicily.
Wherethepopewasconcerned,
Ireneprimarilywishedtotellhimthatassoonaspossibletherewouldbe
an end to Iconoclasm. Essentially, Irene was leading the Byzantine state
outof
the
diplomaticandecclesiasticalisolationinwhichithadfoundit
selfforahalfcentury.
9
It isfrustrating that, becauseoflackofsources,wecannotknowmore
precisely the mom entum and motivations of change in Constantinople.
TheapproachtoCharlemagneandthefirstonetoRomecamein781.By
784IrenehaddecidedtocallanecumenicalcounciltocondemnIcono
clasm, and in 785 shedulynotified Pope Hadrian ofher intentions and
invitedhimtoattendortosendrepresentativestothecouncil.
10
Hadrian
respondedinOctoberof
785
withalongletterinwhichheexpressedhis
pleasureattheforthcomingcondemnationofhereticalIconoclasm,raised
anumberofecclesiasticalconcerns,andagreedtosendlegatestoacoun
cil.
x1
Hadrianalsoreceived,perhapsalongwithIrene'sletter,asynodical
letterandprofession offaith from thenewlyelected (25December784),
andfirmlyiconodule,patriarchTarasius.
12
Ireneconvenedhercouncilin
Constantinople in 786, but it was almost immediately disbanded by
troopsloyaltoIconoclasm.
13
Aboutayearlater,andwelloutsidethecapi
tal,
at Nicaea, the council assembled again and this time completed its
workinsixfullsessions,withabrieffinal
sessionintheMagnauraPalacein
Constantinople.
14
Leaving aside rituals and protocols, the work of the
councilconsistedoftwomajoraccomplishments.Thefirstwasareviewof
theplaceofimagesinChristianhistory,withaviewtoshowingthatan
cient and authentic traditions approved their use.The secondwas ade
tailed and systematic refutation of theharas,
the definition, and of the
biblicaland patristicproof-texts advanced atHiereia in 754.The council
didnotofferanythingnew.Itsintentionfromtheoutsetwastorestorethe
statusquo
ante
Iconoclasm.
Hadrian's representatives brought the conciliar
acta
back to Rome,
probablyverylatein787.Accordingtothe
Liber
Pontificate,aLatintrans
lationoftheGreekactawas
preparedandplacedintheLateranarchives.
15
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
5/34
Tradition and Learning 231
Twothingsonlyareknown with certainty about that translation: itwas
poorly done and it somehow found its way into Charlemagne's hands.
There isno t ascrapofsurvivingevidenceto theeffect that Hadrian sent
the
acta
totheking,andtherearehintsthatCharlemagnethought hehad
gottenhistextdirectlyfromConstantinople.
16
WhileIamnotoptimistic
that we shall ever know exactly how Charlemagne got his copy of the
Niceneacta,Iamquiteconvincedthatitcannothavebeenlaterthan788
whenthekingfirstheardoftheproceedingsofNicaeaandConstantin
ople.
Letusnotethatfrom781to789Charles'sdaughter
was
affianced to
Irene'sson.Inaddition,theFranksandtheGreekswereinvolvedinacom
plicated setofpoliticalanddiplomatic intrigues insouthern Italy.Finally,
thepapalandFrankishcourtswereinalmostconstantcontactthroughout
theperiodthatconcernsus.In789theFranko-Byzantinemarriagealliance
wasbroken off, probably asaresultof thedecisions taken,orthought by
the Franks to have been taken, at Nicaea. Much wasgoing on in these
yearsthathasleft notraceinthescantyrecords.
By790or791Theodulfhadbegunworkonatextthatwouldcometo
beknownasthe
Libri
Carolini.
17
In792adecisionwasmadeattheFrank
ish court to send the recently condemned Adoptionist heretic, Felix of
Urgel,toRomeinthecustodyofAngilbertofSaint-Riquier.Apparently
itwasalsodecided, rather hastily,to inform Hadrian about thedelibera
tions at the Frankish court concerning Second Nicaea.A very briefver
sion,perhapsinvolvingnomorethanchaptertitles,ofthe
Libri Carolini
as
a work-in-progress accompanied Angilbert to Rome. This document is
usuallycalledthe
Capitulare adversussynodum.
18
In,probably,793amas
siveresponse from Hadrian arrivedattheFrankishcourt.
19
Inangryand
exasperated terms Hadrian rejected point after point the Frankish con
demnation ofSecond Nicaea.This responseappears tohavebeenwholly
unexpected,anditsimmediateresultwastoputanendtothediscussions
atcourtsurroundingthe
Libri
Carolini.
The
LibriCarolini
is,therefore, abookprepared atthecourtofChar
lemagnebetweenabout790and793.Ahappyaccidenthaspreservedthe
actual,workingcopyofthe
Libri
Carolini: MS Vaticanus Latinus 7207.
Close studies of that original manuscript, plus some scattered bits of
ninth-century evidence, makeit possible to form areasonably good im
pressionofhowthebookcametobecomposed.
ItistoAnnFreeman,andtoalesserdegreetoWalterSchmandt,that
weareindebtedforourunderstanding,notonlyofthecompositionofthe
Libri
Carolini, but alsoforprecious insights into theway inwhichChar
lemagne'scourttheologiansattackedtheproblemsposedbythecouncilof
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
6/34
232 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
Nicaea.
20
Theodulf of Orleanswas assigned the taskofpreparing a first
draftoftheFrankishresponsetotheByzantines.Thatdraft wasprettywell
advancedwhenthe
Capitulare adversus synodum
wasdispatchedtoRome.
Meanwhile,seriousworkcontinued, apparentlyintwostages.TheodulPs
draft, now the Vatican manuscript, atext that lacks thepreface and the
beginning ofbook 1aswellasthewholeofbook4 ,wassubjected to in
tensescrutinyatcourt.Thistruncatedmanuscriptcontainsnofewer than
3,400corrections.
21
Theheavilycorrectedsectionsstopatbook2,chapter
29,
andafter book3 ,chapter 13thereisamarkeddeclineinthequalityof
the parchment and script.
22
These changes almost certainly betoken the
arrivalofHadrian'sdishearteningresponse.Atsomepointintheproceed
ings,
actual argumentation wascarriedout inCharlemagne's presence,
23
and his reactions were recorded in marginal notations that were subse
quently erased and replaced with Tironian notes.
24
Thus,insum,there
wasathree-stepprocess:compositionby
Theodulf,
reviewbyothertheo
logians,andapprovalbyCharlemagne.Theworkcan,therefore,besaidto
beofficial in the sense that ithad the king's explicit endorsement, but it
mustberemembered that itwastheintellectualproductofaseriesofspir
itedandsophisticatedexchanges.
Manuscript Vat.Lat. 7207 arrived in Romein 1784 andwasalready
mutilated.
25
Initstatteredandcorrectedstate,ithadbeenputinthepal
acearchives,whereHincmarsawitinthe820s
26
andwhereitmighthave
been consulted in connection with the renewed image controversy that
culminated in the Council ofParis in 825 .
27
Around the middle of the
centuryHincmarhadacopymadeforhimself,andthismanuscript,con
taining the complete text ofthe
LibriCarolini,
survives asParisArsenal
663.
2 8
AngeloMercatiwasableto tracethepresence inthepapallibrary
of
a
copyof
theLibriCarolini
inthefifteenthandsixteenthcenturies,but
it is not known what happened to this manuscript.
29
A few years ago,
BernhardBischoffdiscoveredontheflyleafofaParismanuscriptasingle
folio from another copyofthe
LibriCarolini
thatwasmadeatCorbiein
themiddleoftheninthcentury.
30
Allinall,then,onlyfourcopiesofthe
bookcanbeshowntohavebeeninexistence.Thisrepresentsanextremely
limited dissemination indeed for abookofsuchevident importance and
powerful associations. It hasbeenpublished anumber oftimessincethe
middleofthesixteenthcenturybutneversatisfactorily.Anewandtruly
critical edition byAnn Freeman ispresently in press at the Monumenta
GermaniaeHistorica.
ItwillbeclearnowwhyIspokeattheoutsetofpuzzles.Afullconsider
ationofthe Libri Caroliniwouldrequireacarefulassessmentofalltheevi
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
7/34
Tradition and Learning 233
dentiaryproblemsthatIhaveonlyalludedtohere.Obviouslythisisnot
theplaceforthatassessment.Butthereisonepuzzlethatcannotbepassed
overinsilence.It isthis:whywassomuch effort andsuchgreat learning
lavishedupon aworkthat seemsneverto havebeenpublishedandnever
tohavebeendisseminated?Andwhywasthisworksoapparentlyuninflu
entialuntil,ironically,itwasembracedbyProtestantsinthesixteenthcen
turyandplacedontheIndexofForbiddenBooksuntil1900?Mostofthe
restofthispaperwillconstituteanattempttoanswerthosequestions.
Schmandthasquitecorrectlycalled
theLibri CaroliniaStaatsschrift
(po
liticaltract),
31
but the implications of his observations have often been
missed. An old tradition holds that the
LibriCarolini
andtheSynodof
Frankfurt in 794 represented the high point of Carolingian Caesaro
papism and adeep humiliation for the pope.
32
Another tradition holds
thatthe
LibriCarolini
was,infact,shelvedthisaccountingforitsweak
disseminationeither because the Franksdid not wishto embarrass the
popeorbecauseHadriancommandedtheFrankstogiveuptheiropposi
tiontohisofficial position.
33
Each of these views is anachronistic. Charlemagne never treated the
popes in the haughty way that Roman or Byzantine emperors did, and
the plain testimony of the
LibriCarolini
speaks respectfully of the pa
pacy.
34
Moreover,noearlymedievalpopepossessedorclaimedthekindof
jurisdictionalprimacyinmattersofdogmathathighmedievalpopesrou
tinely asserted. It was only with the professionalization of theological
learningandthehardeningofjurisdictionallinesbythecanonistsandde
cretaliststhatthereemergedasharplyRome-centeredsourceofdogmatic
definition.
35
Intheveryperiodthatconcernsus,theFranksandthepopes
agreedtodisagreeonadoctrinalmatterofsomesignificance:theproces
sion of the Holy Spirit, or the
filioque
controversy.
36
Charlemagne and
Hadrian had some rather sharp differences ofopinion about the nature
anddimensionsoftheterritorialsettlementsinItalythatresultedfrom the
demiseoftheLombard kingdom,butherealsotheymanagedtoworkto
getheramicablytoachieveajustandlastingsolution.
37
AmicablecooperationisindeedthespiritthatIdetectinthewholepe
riodwhenthe
LibriCarolini
wasbeingprepared.Letusconsidersomeof
therelevantactionsofboththekingandthepope.Theprefacetothe Libri
Carolini^asectionwrittenin790andneverrevised,
38
saysthatwhenthe
Frankslearnedofthesynodof
the
Greeksanditshorribledecisions,they
immediatelysettoworkindefenseofthefaithandthechurch.
39
Itisinter
esting to note that the procedure followed wasexactly the same as that
usedintheAdoptionistand
filioque
controversies.That is,whenaproblem
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
8/34
23 4 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
wasbroughttoCharlemagne'sattention,he,asaloyalsonof
the
church,
gatheredhisclergysothatthey,withhisblessingandunderhisauthority,
might assemble the necessary scriptural and patristic texts to settle the
matter.
40
AsinthecasesofAdoptionistandTrinitarianstrife,sotoointhe
matterofimages;theresultsofFrankishdeliberationsweresenttoRome.
Nowhereinanyofthepertinentsourcesistherearemarktotheeffectthat
the Frankswere, in anyof these instances, attempting to dictate to the
pope.NoristhereanywhereahintthattheFranksfeltinsomesensele
gallyobligatedtolaytheirworkbeforethepope.Theyhadactedinde
fenseofthechurchandthefaith,andtheirrecoursetoRome was amarkof
profound respect.
After Hadrian's responseto the
Capitulare adversus synodum
arrivedat
court, planswere continued for thegreat synod and public assembly of
Frankfurt that washeld in 794. Papal legates did attend Frankfurt. The
acta
saythat thecouncilwasheld"withapostolicauthority,"andthat the
council'ssecondcanonpronouncedacondemnationofsortsuponSecond
Nicaea. Thus, it might seem that the Franks imposed their views upon
Rome.Closerinspectionshowsthatsuchwasnotthe
case,
however.Inthe
firstplace,Frankfurt wasoneofthe most significant councilsheld inthe
whole of Charlemagne's reign and it dealt with ahuge agendaofbusi
ness.
41
Nicaeawascertainlynotthefirstitemonthatagenda.Indeed,the
initialtopicwasAdoptionism,andNicaeacamesecond.
42
That issignificant byitself,but twofurther aspectsofFrankfurt's treat
ment of Nicaea are evenmore revealing.Thefirstof these concerns the
languageofthecanonsthemselves.Canonone,dealingwithAdoption-
ism,says"sanctissimipatres...contradixeruntatque...statuerunt"(the
mostholyfathers . . .contradict and . . .declare),andcanontw o,dealing
withNicaea,says"sanctissimipatresnostri...contempseruntatque...
condem pnaverunt" (ourmostholyfathers . ..despiseand . ..condemn).
CanonthreehandledtheaffairsoftherebelliousDukeTassiloofBavaria.
Its dispositive language says that Tassilo was "made to stand up in the
midst of themost holy council"and that after allthe chargeswere read
"dominus noster" (our lord), that is,Charlemagne himself, pronounced
his punishments: "indulsit" (he indulged), "concessit" (he conceded),
"precepit"(heinstructed),and"iussit"(heordered).
The dispositive language in subsequent canons is more like that of
canonthreethanofcanonsoneandtwo.Forexample,canonfourreads
"Statuit piissimus domnus noster rex" (Our most pious lord king de
clared),andcanonsixsays"Statutumestadomnoregeetsanctasynodo"
(Itwasdecreedbythelordkingandbytheholysynod).
43
Itappearsthata
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
9/34
235radition and Learning
cleardistinctionwasbeingdrawnbetween thefirst twocanonsandallthe
others.AsHansBarionarguedlongago,"dogmaticissueswerebeingin
dependentlydecidedlegallybythebishops."
44
Intheverycanonswhere
papalauthorityisemphasized,episcopalauthority ismuchtothefore.An
other structural aspect of these canons is striking. Canon one says that
Adoptionism"exortumest"(arose),whilecanontwosaysthattheimage
question"Allataestinmedio"(wasbroughtforward),and,finally,canon
threesaysofTassilothat "definitum estcapitulum " (adecisionwasspelled
out). Each of thesecaseswascomplex, and sothe languagedealingwith
themdoesnotreflecttheclear,crisp,business-likedispositionsof therest
ofthecanons.Hereitisasifcrucialissuesweredecidedopenlyandonly
afterduedeliberation.
45
Thesecondissuethatrequirescarefulanalysistouchestheactualwords
used at Frankfurt concerning Nicaea. In aslightly tortured bit ofLatin,
thecouncil fathers accused theirNicaean counterparts of anathematizing
anyonewhowouldnotpaytoimagesofthesaintsexactlythesamehonor
that
was
tobeaccordedtotheTrinity.
46
AtNicaea,BishopConstantineof
Cyprushadexplicitlycondemnedastatementthatthesamehonorshould
bepaidtoimagesastotheTrinity,buthiswordshadbeengarbledinthe
translation sent to the Franks. At Frankfurt, only Constantine's words
were condemned, and it cannot have been too difficult for the pope's
legates to agree to this condemnation. The Latin translation of the text
hadbeenpreparedinRome,after all,anditmayhavebeenthatallparties
thoughtthatConstantineofCyprushadindeedsaidsomethingreprehens
ibleinthemidstofacouncilthatotherwisemetwithpapal,butnotFrank
ish,approval.Thus, atFrankfurt, one remarkablyminute issuewasfixed
uponforcondemnation.
47
Thepope,throughhislegates,wasnotaskedto
condemnallthat
was
doneatNicaea,andtheFranksgotatleastameasure
ofpapalapprovalfortheirdissatisfaction with Nicaea.
Thepapallegateswenthomeladenwithgifts,
48
andtheFranksdoseem
tohavetakenatleastsomeofHadrian'sobjectionstoheartincarryingout
their revisionsof theLibriCarolini.
49
Here again one detects aspirit of
cooperationandcompromise.ThissamespiritisevidentinHadrian'smas
sive letter to the Franks. It contains no less than two diplomatic safety
valves for the Franks. In one, Hadrian promised Charlemagne that he
mightyetdeclaretheGreekshereticsiftheydidnotrestoretothechurch
provinces and revenues that had been seized many years before by Leo
III.
50
Hadrian did not promise to repudiate Nicaea, but the Franks got
some hopeof acondemnation of the Greeks. In the other, Hadrian at
tempted todissociateCharlemagne from thetotalityof
theLibriCarolini
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
10/34
2 3 6 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
and to associatehimpersonallywithonlyaverylimitedreadingofthefa
mous letter of Gregory I to Serenus of Marseilles concerning images.
Hadrian wassaying, ineffect, that Charlemagnewassurely correct inall
histhinking,but hisbishopshad gotten abitcarriedawayintheheatof
theargument.
51
ThepopegaveCharlemagne,inotherwords,adiplomaticopportun ity
todistancehimselffromtheverydocumentshehaddispatchedtoRome
inthefirstplace,whiletellingthekingthathisunderstandingofthepapal
viewofimageswasimpeccable.Finally,ithasbeensuggestedrecentlythat
HadrianmayhavetakenFrankishviewsonsacredartintoconsiderationin
Rome in theyears after about 790.When, before Hadrian's pontificate,
theLiberPontificates
makesoneofitsnumerousmentionsofimages,itdoes
sowithnoreferencetoaestheticconsiderations.Thespiritual,ortheologi
cal,
significanceofimageswasstressed.InHadrian'stime,however,mod
ifyingadjectivesdenotingsize,color,orbeautybegintoappeartosignify
aesthetic or evendecorative, but not spiritual, value attached to images.
Thiswastheargumentofthe
Libri
Carolini.
52
EinhardsaysthatCharlemagneweptwhenheheardofHadrian'sdeath
in 7 9 5 .
53
Wellmight he have done so. He and the old pope had been
friends and alliesfor more than two decades.They sometimes disagreed
withoneanotherbuttheyneverhadamajorbreakinrelations.Thewhole
affairsurroundingthe
Libri Carolini
didnotprovokeariftinFranko-papal
relationsbecauseitwasnotmeanttodosoandbecausethepopeandthe
Frankishkingknewverywellhowtocompromiseandcooperate.
The
LibriCarolini
wasa
Staatsschrift
inthesensethatitrepresenteda
core of ideological values and ideas that were prominent at the Caro
lingiancourtinthe780sand790s.Butitwasmorelikeatreatise,likea
liber,
than likeacapitulary or other publicactof thewillofthe king. It
receivednowiderdisseminationthanothertreatiseswrittenintheCaro
lingian period, for example, the books on kingship written byJonasof
Orleans, Smaragdus of Saint-Mihiel, Hincmar of Reims, and Sedulius
Scottus,orthevolumesofethicaladvicepreparedbyPaulinusofAquileia,
Alcuin, HrabanusM aurus, and Hincmar.But the
LibriCarolini
wasoffi
cialbecause itreflected theviewsofCharlemagneandhismost influential
associatesatakeymomentinthereign.
Letusturnnowtowhatthe
Libri Carolini
actuallysaysor,m oreprecisely,
tothemajorthemesitdevelops.Therearefourof
these,
andeachistied
closelytoaparticulartypeof
tradition.
ForpurposesofdiscussionIshall
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
11/34
237radition and Learning
callthesethemesbiblical,ecclesiastical,papal,andChristian-imperial.Al
though these labels arenotionally accurate,none actually appears in just
thiswayinthe
Libri
Carolini.Thefourtraditionsarewovensotightlyinto
thetextthatitisnoteasytodisentanglethemwithoutrendingthefabric.
Withduecare,then,weshallattemptinwhatfollowstotracefourparticu
larthreads.
The
LibriCarolini
wascomposed infour books,theoriginal intention
havingbeentoproducebooksofthirtychapters,eachbookprecededbya
preface. The survivingversion departs slightlyfrom this scheme,but the
discrepanciesarenotsuch
as
torequirecomment.
54
Book
1
beginswithan
attackontheeasternemperorsandgoesontosaythattheGreeksmisun
derstand images in a fundamental way.The flaws in their reasoning are
particularlyattributableto adeficientunderstandingoftheOldTestament.
PatriarchTarasiusisalsoseverelycriticized,andthenmorescornisheaped
onByzantinemisunderstandingsof
the
OldTestament.Book2beginsby
carryingontheattackagainstByzantinemishandlingoftheBibleandthen
turns to a series of searing indictments of the mistakes of anumber of
GreekFathersandofthemisuseofthoseFathersatNicaea.Book3begins
withaFrankish confessiofideiandthengoesontoanothercondemnation
ofTarasius,which blames him for misleading hischurch. Nextthere are
severalrejectionsofByzantinetheologicalerrors,followed bysharpcriti
cismsofthetheologicalpositionsofagroupofeasterntheologians.After
this we find a neat bit of ecclesiological criticism of Second Nicaea, a
pointedattackonIrene,andthenaremarkablesetofobservationsonwhat
imagesare,whattheyarenot,andwhatplacetheyholdinthechurch.The
fourth andlastbookcontinuesthetheologicalreasoningbegun inbook3
butis,inasense,moresystematicandlesshistorical,exegetical,andec
clesiologicalatleastuntiltheveryend.HerewereadthattheByzantines
donotunderstandwhatanimagetrulyisorwhatimagesareforanddo
notknowhowtoestablishortoverifyevidenceconcerningimages.The
workendswitharingingdenunciationofthefailureoftheByzantinesto
adheretotheuniversaltraditionsoftheChurch.
Again and again the
LibriCarolini
refers to Second Nicaea, and the
problem of imagesappears in somefashion on almostevery page.But I
believethatNicaeaprovidedanopportunity,andimagesprovidedanis
sue,thatenabledthe Carolingianstocrystallizetheirthinkingonahostof
concerns that reached far beyond the immediate historical circumstances
thathadsetTheodulfandhiscolleaguestoworkinginthefirstplace.An
investigation baseduponthefourtraditionsenumeratedabovewillenable
ustotestthevalidityofthat
belief.
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
12/34
2 3 8 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
First,then,letuslookatthebiblicaltradition.Thefirsttwobooksespe
ciallyofthe LibriCarolini contain aseriesof specific and programmatic
condemnations of Byzantine readings of the Old Testament. In specific
terms,
they reject along set ofpassages thatwere adduced atNicaea in
defenseofimages.Forexample,theysaythatAbrahamdidnotadorethe
sonsofHeth,MosesdidnotadoreJethro,andJacobdidnotadorepha
raoh.
55
Likewise,Jacobdidnoterecthispillowstoneasanimage,nordid
hetreatJoseph'scloakinthisway.Jacob'sstaffwasnotanimage,andnei
therwastheArkoftheCovenant.Bezeleeldidnotbuildimages,andthe
storyofMosesandthehyacinthshasnomoretodowithimagesthandoes
the tale of Moses' bronze
staff.
The account of Joshua and the twelve
stonesdoesnotauthorizeimages.
56
Extensiveattentionispaidtotheal
legedmisuseofthepsalmsbytheByzantines.Inparticular,Easterninter
pretationsofelevenpsalms(4,9,11,25,29,47,73,74,84,98,and124)
areexplicitlycriticized.
57
Theminuteattentiondevotedtothepsalmsin
this section ofLibriCarolini is probably attributable to the prominent
placeoccupiedbythesebiblicalprayer-poems inthepublicworshipofthe
Westernchurch.
Themoreprogrammaticcommentsareoftwo kinds.Inone,theByzan
tinesarehectoredforfailingtounderstand thevocabularyandgrammarof
the Old Testament.
58
The second kind is more serious and sustained.
AgainandagaintheFrankscondemntheByzantinesforreadingpassages
intheOldTestamentliterallyandforquotingthosepassagesinconnection
withimageswhen,inreality,allsuchpassagesaretobeunderstoodtypo
logicallyasreferring toChristorto thechurch .
59
TheByzantinescertainlydidnotneedalessonintypologicalexegesis,
and atleastsomeofthe Carolingians'criticismsoftheGreekswereocca
sionedbymisunderstandingsoftheirownpromptedbythepoortransla
tionofNicaea'sactafrom which theywereworking.Tosomeextentthe
controversy wascreated by the fact that the Byzantinesgenerally hewed
close to the more literalistAntiochene schoolofexegesiswhiletheWest
had apreference for the allegoricalschoolofAlexandria.But ittakesvery
littleimaginationtoseethatTheodulfandhisassociateswerereallygiving
voiceto acentralsetofpreoccupations intheCarolingian court.It isto
thoseconcernsthatonemustturninordertounderstandthecontextand
meaningoftheexegeticalandinterpretiveargumentsthatfillmostofthe
firsttwobooksoftheLibri
Carolini.
At just the time when theLibriCarolini was being prepared, Char
lemagne'smassiveprogramofeducationalreformandspiritualrevivalwas
comingintofullswing.Itwouldbenoexaggerationtosaythatthatpro
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
13/34
239raditionandLearning
gram was focused directly on the Bible.
60
The whole idea o f the reform
wastocom mu nicate biblicaltruthstoth epeoplesothatallm ight beledto
salvation.InorderfortheclergytopreachtheBible,andforthepeopleto
unders tand what was being p reached to them, books had to be ob ta ined
andcopied, teachershad to betrained, schoolshadto beformed, and pu
pilshadtoberecruited.
61
Inmanyrespects, thewholeprogramdemanded
that theright thingshadtobetaughtandunderstood.WheretheOldTes
tament was concerned, this mean t tha t it had to be seen as hav ing fo re
shado we dthe N ewT estament andalso,asweshallseebelow,the Frankish
peopleandtheir kings.
Itcann otbemerecoincidencethatjustintheyearswh enthe LibriCaro
lini
was being prepared, there arose am ong Charlemagne's keyadvisers a
potentassociationbetweenthegreatFrankandthekingsoftheOldTesta
men t. In the preface to theAdmonitio generalis o f 789 , Char lemagne is
comparedtoJosiahbecause,likehim,hesought"byvisitation,correction
and admoni t ion to recall the k ingdom which G od had g iven h im to the
worsh ip o f the t rue G od" (cf. 2 K in gs :22 -23 ) .
6 2
As early as 775 Char
lemagne had been addressed as both Solomon and David by
Cathwulf,
63
andCharlemagne's thron e atAachen, inthechapelonw hich construction
hadbegun in about 788 ,wasconsciously modeled on that of Solom on.
6 4
To Alcu in , Charlemagne was like So lomon bo th because o f h is wisdom
and becausehe erected acomplex ofbuildingsl ikethe Templeonce built
in Jerusalem.
65
Paul the Deacon called Charlemagne David in about 787,
ashadC athw ulfearlier,albeitinanumericalrid dle .
6 6
Byabout794,how
ever, it had become comm on to refer to Charlemagne as David .
6 7
These
sources, whether poetic or episto lary , sought to draw aparallel between
Charlemagne's and David's prophet ic wisdom and strength in defense of
Israel and the fai th .
68
The precise significance of these references to Old
Testament k ings can be g rasped from the very first chap ter o f the
L ibri
Carolini,wheretheemperorsofByzantiumareaccusedoffailingtoruleas
David and So lomon had done .
6 9
I t may well have been known a t Char
lemagne's cour t tha t in the East the emperor was ca lled allosDabid (the
secondDavid).
The point of the careful Old Testament exegesis in the
Libri Carolini,
coupled with the designation of Charlemagne as D avid , wasprecisely to
make the Frank ish ruler, and h im a lone , the au thent ic representa tive o f
and heir to the David ic k ingsh ip o f I s rae l.
70
Pope Pau l I had called the
Franksa"newIsrael"
71
andataboutthesametime,inthesecondprologue
t o th e Salic Law, th e Franks h ad referred t o them selves in th e sam e
terms.
7 2
In the
LibriCarolini
theFrankssay,"wearcnotthecarnalbutthe
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
14/34
2 4 0 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
spiritual Israel."
73
Beginning in the late 780s, the Franks are called, in
sourcesofallkinds,thepopulusChristianus.
74
Thenewlydefined"Chris
tianpeople"wasnoneotherthanthenewFrankishIsraelledbythenew
CarolingianDavid.
AcorrectunderstandingoftheOldTestament,therefore,pointedina
palpablyhistoricalwaytotheFranks.Atthesametime,
a
propertypologi
calexegesisoftheOldTestamentpointedtotheageofChrist,theapostles,
andthechurch.Forpurposesofdiscussion,Ilabelthese,takentogether,
theecclesiasticaltraditiontowhichthe
Libri Carolini
drawsattention.
TheLibri Carolini
developeditsargumentsonecclesiasticaltraditionsin
waysthatwerebasedondoctrine,practice,andinstitutions,althoughitis
not always easy to make sharp distinctions between these categories.
Wheredoctrineisconcerned,thebiblicalfoundationwascrucial.Theodulf
saysindeedthatonemustfollowtheteachingsoftheprophets,theLord,
andtheapostles.
75
Theendofbook2presentsaninterestingsetofargu
mentstotheeffectthateverythingthatisneededforeverypossiblekindof
knowledge is available in Scripture.
76
Always,prioritywasgiventothe
wordofGod.
77
Butoveralongperiodof
time,
God'swordhadbeenin
terpreted, made accessible, andkept inviolate byaseriesof authoritative
teachers. In fact, the Scriptures couldonlybeunderstood in thelightof
the"writingsoftheholyfathers."
78
Thusbook3containsalongseriesof
attacks on various Greek theologians, or the way in which those theo
logianswereunderstood or evenmisunderstoodat Nicaea.
79
Butthe
argumentisnotcarriedpurelybynegation.Jerome,Ambrose,Augustine,
andGregoryarerepeatedlycitedashavingheldtothecorrectlineinmat
tersoffaith, and thereisaremarkablestatement inbook2that "after the
writingsoftheprophets,evangelistsandapostlesweareverycontentwith
theteachingsoftheillustriousLatindoctorswhoselifeandteachingare
known to us,aswellaswith those Greekswho wereCatholic and who
havebeentranslatedbyCatholicsintoourlanguage."
80
Itisperfectlytrue
thattheCarolingianssometimesweremuddledaboutwhathadbeensaid
at Nicaea.
81
And on afew occasions they admitted to being unfamiliar
withtextsandauthorscitedthere.
82
Butthisisbesidethepoint.Whatis
clearisthatTheodulf andthosewhoworkedwithhimsawastraightline
ofteachingrunningfromthetimeofJesustothatofCharlemagne,andas
theylookedbackalongthatlinetheycouldseethattheByzantineshadat
some point departed from it, that "they had severed the bond ofeccle
siasticalunity."
83
This is also the argument advanced in thematter ofpractices orcus
toms.
Totakefirstafairlyobviousexample,images,
theLibri Carolini
takes
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
15/34
241radition and Learning
arathersimpleline.Traditionhasalwayspermittedthepossessionofim
ages for purposes of ornamentation or commemoration, but nothing
more.
Wedo not reject imagesput up to remind usofgreat deedsor to
beautifychurchessinceweknowtheywereputupthusbySolomon
andMoses,althoughonly
as
typefigures,but
we
objecttotheirado
ration which is contrary to custom and indeed more than super
stitious;and
we
cannotfindthisworshipevertohavebeeninstituted
bypatriarchsorprophetsorapostolicmen.
84
TheByzantinescannotseemtogetthisstraight.TheythinktheOldTesta
menttalksabout imageswhenitdoesnosuchthing.
Byzantine failures in this regard are twofold. First, they do not study
theOldTestamentcorrectly.Iftheydidso,theywouldknowthatevery
passagehasthreelevelsofmeaning:historical,spiritual,andallegorical(or
mystical).
85
Thustheyareledtosupposethatwhenthepsalmistspoke(Ps.
4:7)ofthe"countenance"
(vultus)
oftheLord,hemeantanimage,when
hesimplycannothavebeenreferringtoamanufacturedthing.
86
Orwhen
thepsalmistsaid,"Lord Ihavelovedthebeautyofyourhouse"(Ps.25:8) ,
hesupposed an image to have been implied, whereas "the house ofthe
Lordistobeunderstood accordingtoallegoryasthechurch,oraccording
toanagogy
as
thecelestialhomeland,oraccordingtotropology
as
thesoul
ofman."
87
Their second failure is to reject theuniversal tradition of the
church,which refuses toworshipGod in images.
88
TheGreeksalsomis
readtheFathers,whonevercommandorevenpermittheworshipofim
ages.
89
Theodulf and his associates could even be a bit devious in
separatingtheByzantinesfrompatristictradition.Forexample,Theodulf
givesanextensivecitationfromoneof
the
famouslettersofGregoryIto
SerenusofMarseilleson imagesbut only to argue that Gregory forbade
theadorationanddestructionofimages.AlltherestofGregory'shighly
nuanced argument for thedidacticvaluesof imagesissilently om itted.
90
AndofcourseByzantiumspentahalfcenturydestroyingimagesonlyto
turnaroundandcommandworshipofthem.
Otherreligiouspracticesarebroughtup
as
well.TheFranksunderstand
thecustomary placeof relicsandwhythey areholy.They arethe actual,
physicalremainsofthesaints,orelseobjectscloselyassociatedwiththem
during their lives.
91
The Greeks think images are holy when they are
merely senseless objects made bymen.
92
It hasnever been the universal
practice of the church to worship God through mere objects, and only
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
16/34
2 4 2 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
Godistobeworshipedinthefirstplace.
93
TheFranks,apparentlyalone,
understandthatcertainobjectsareactuallyinsomesenseholy:relics,the
cross,
andthesacredvessels,forexample.
94
Theseobjectsareholybecause
theyareconsecratedbyprayers,usedintheworshipofGod,andapproved
bytradition.Buttheyareneverworshipedforthemselves,astheGreeks
insistthatimagescan,indeedmust,be.
95
TheCarolingianpositionwasthat,eversinceapostolictimes,therehad
beencertainuniversaltraditionswithrespecttocustomaryChristianprac
tices,
andthattimeandtimeagaintheByzantineshaddepartedfrom those
traditionsandthen,havingdeparted,hadhadthetemeritytoinsistthat
othersjointhemontheirwaywardpath.TheCarolingianviewwassome
what less than fair to the Greeks and somewhat lessthan accurate in its
readingofChristianhistorybut,onceagain,thatisbesidethepointifour
goalistounderstandtheargumentofthe
Libri
Carolini.
96
Insofar as ecclesiastical tradition refers to institutions, similar points
weremade,although inthisrealmsomeverynew,andheretofore poorly
understood,argumentswereadvanced.Actually,itseemstomethatami
norandamajorargumentaremadeontheinstitutionalfront.Theminor
oneturnsonthepositionofTarasius.Ontwoseparateoccasions,the
Libri
Carolini
addressestheelectionofthepatriarchofConstantinople.Inbook
1Tarasiusiscriticizedbecausehe
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
17/34
243raditionandLearning
bishopswhowerelearned,wise, andhumble;bishopswhowouldbeboth
leadersandmodelsfor thoseentrustedtotheir care. Inotherwords, only
the b ishops of Charlemagne's realm represented the ideal b ishopof both
St. Paul and Pope Gregory I . The i rregular s ituat ion of Tarasius, as the
Franks wished toview it, indicated yet again aByzantine departure from
thetraditionsof thechurch andmarked theprecise Frankish adherence to
thosetraditions.
The major and much more h is to rically significant ins ti tu tional issue
tu rned around a cen tral ecc lesio logical p roblem, namely , the natu re o f
synodsandtherelationshipofsynodstothecatholica
fides.
Agenerationor
two agoit wascustomary to argue that the Frankswereoffended because
the Byzantines called Nicaea universal and theyhad not been invi ted .
100
Then, inamorerefinedview,i t wasmaintainedthatwhat theFranksob
jectedtoinNicaeawasitsdeparturefromwhattheybelievedtheCatholic
faith to beand to dem and of its adherents. Inoth er wo rds, Nicaea falsely
called i tself universal, no t because the Franks were absent, but because it
wasuntruetotheuniversal faith.
1 01
In reality, theLibri Carolinisketches
ou t a fasc inating and new concilia r theory that cons ti tu tes no th ing less
thanarecastingofawholeseriesoftraditionalpositions.
Itistruethatsomeofwhatthe
LibriCarolini
saysisquiteconventional.
A couple o f po in ts , however, a t first read ing suggest something a little
odd.WearetoldthatNicaeawasheld"carelessly"and"indiscreetly,"and
tha t a synod shou ld only be held to dea l w i th " se rious" p rob lems and
should confine itself to taking only those actions that are s tr ictly neces
sary.
102
W hat canthismean?W asno t theremovalof theIconoclastic her
esy se riou s and necessary? Yes and n o . C o n st an ti ne V I and I rene , as
W ilhelm deVries has astutely pointed out, were in aprecarious posit ion.
They wished to res to re images , bu t the Iconoclasts were still numerous
andpowerful. M oreov er, theofficial Byzantinechu rchwascompletelyiso
latedfrom alltheoth er churchesoftheEastandW est.N oth ing lessthan a
properly ecumenical council would solve their theological and pol it ical
problem s.Butfor theF ranks,and,p erhapsinitiallyatleast,for H adr ian as
well, Iconoclasm was merely a local heresy . N o official council , Hiereia
havingbeenroundlycondemned,hadproclaimedit, andsonoecumenical
counci l wasneeded to renounce i t.T he Byzantine church needed only to
p ut its o w n h ou se in o r de r .
1 0 3
Th is a lone might well exp lain why the
Franksconsidered the Greeksa rrogant for callingN icaea ecumenical, but
thereisevenmoretoi t thanthis.
Theodulfandhiscolleaguestooktheopportunitytoengageinabit of
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
18/34
24 4 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
reflection on ecumenicity anduniversality.The ancient church had built
up a conciliar theory that had both "vertical" and "horizontal" dimen
sions.
Theverticalonesinvolvedauthoritative,acceptedteachingreaching
back through theFathers to theBible.Thehorizontalonesmeantrepre
sentation and acceptance by the "pentarchy" of ancient patriarchates
(Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, Constantinople, and Rome) and the
churchestheyrepresented.TheFranksacceptedtheverticalargumentbut
addedanewtwist.Theyraisedanargumentbasedonthetwinprinciples
ofscrutinium
and
ratio.
104
Aswehaveseen,theysharplyrejected theBy
zantine readingofScripture andpatristicteaching.In otherwords,they
said it isnot enough merely to cite precedents or to claim adherence to
tradition.No,everytextadducedmustbeexaminedcloselytoseewhatit
meansandifitistrulyrelevant.
10 5
ThiswillexplainwhytheFrankssub
mittedtextaftertexttotheirownpowerfullyreasonedscrutiny.
The vertical conciliar theory wasno t astaticmeasurebut aconstantly
evolvingandrationallyfoundedstandard.Astothehorizontaltheory,the
Franks found its received version inadequate.They complained that the
issues raised atNicaea, if they had to bediscussed at all,ought to have
been submitted to "each and every part of the church."
106
The Franks
wereadjusting conciliartheorytohistoricalreality.Theoldpentarchyhad
arisen before the Franks had come on the scene.They did not feel that
their "monarch," thepope, adequately represented them.They deserved
representation oftheirown.Theywerenot offended materiallyathaving
gottennoinvitationtoNicaea,butformallyattheideathatthepopealone
couldrepresentthewholeWesternchurch.Intheendtherearetwoissues
here:
theverydifferent viewstheFranksandtheByzantineshadofwhata
synodwasandofhowthechurchwasorganizedintheworld.
So the Old Testament had pointed to the New, and the New had
pointed to the church.Only the Frankshad sofar been faithful inallre
spectstothesetwolinksinanunbrokenchainoftradition.TheByzantines
had fallen away in both instances. Christ himself, in hiswords to Peter
(Mt.16:16-18),hadinstitutedaguarantorofhistraditions. Weturnnow
to athird tradition, the papal, towhich, accordingto the
Libri
Carolini,
theFrankshadbeen faithful andtheByzantines,faithless.
Veryearlythe LibriCarolinisetsaboutemphasizingtheimportanceof
communionwithRome.Attheendofthefifthchapterofbook1weread
that"amongallotherchurches,theHolyRomanChurchisheldinspecial
veneration concerning matters ofthe faith."
10 7
The following chapteris
themostrigorouslypapalofthewholetreatise.Itmakesthreeverysimple,
directarguments:theRomanchurchhasfromthebeginningbeensetbe
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
19/34
245radition and Learning
fore allotherchurches;onlybooksusedinRomeandteachingsthathold
authority there are to be admitted; and although many people have at
some time broken from Rome's communion, theFranksneverhave. In
deed,theystrugglemightilytobringnewpeoples,suchastheSaxons,into
theRoman fold.
108
Elsewhere in the text,on one occasion the teaching
authorityofPopeSylvesterisaffirmed,
109
whileonanotheroccasionsome
debating points are scored against the Byzantines bypointing out that
evensogreatascholarasSt.Jeromedidnothesitatetoturnforinstruction
toPopeDamasus.
110
PopeGregoryIwascitedasanauthorityonimages
andtheordinationofbishops.
111
ThecitationatNicaeaoftheallegedcor
respondence betweenJesusandAbgarofEdessawasrejected on theau
thorityofPopeGelasius.
112
TheodulfalsomentionsSt.Peter'sleadership
oftheapostolicchurch.
113
Thepositionofthepapacyasthe culmination
andguaranteeofecclesiastical traditions can besetoffneatly against the
irregularandschismaticsituationofTarasius.
The broadcontextwithinwhichTheodulfwaswriting serves to shed
evenmore light on the relationship between the Franks and the Roman
church.Inbook 1,TheodulfsaidthattheFrankshadturnedtoRomefor
instructioninliturgicalchant"sothattherewouldbenodifference insing
ingbetweenthosewhowerealikeinbelieving."
114
WhatTheodulfisrefer
ringto,ofcourse, istheextraordinarily livelyliturgicalexchangebetween
Romeand theFrankishcourt thatbeganunderPepinIII inthe760sand
carriedonwellinto the ninthcentury.
115
In 774,or shortly after, Char
lemagnegotfromRomeacopyoftheDionysio-Hadriana,whichwasthen
regarded by the Franks as the definitive collection of canon law.
116
In
around 787,Charlemagne turned toRome for an authentic copyof the
RuleofSt.Benedictinordertopromotemonasticreforminhisrealm.
:17
In
about 791,whileTheodulfwasdrafting the
Libri
Carolini,Charlemagne
orderedacollectiontobemadeofhisandhispredecessors'correspondence
withRome.Theresultwasthebookknownasthe
Codex
Carolinus.
118
In
794CharlemagnerequestedfromRomeacopyofthelettersofPopeGreg
ory I, another sure sign of the Frankish adherence to Roman and papal
traditions.
119
Afewyearsearlier,Charlemagneshowedhisattachment to
RomanandPetrinetraditionsbycommissioningPaultheDeacontowritea
historyofthebishopsofMetz.
120
Paulstressed,asnoonebeforehimhad
done,theconnectionbetweentheCarolingiansandtheseeofMetzandthe
connectionbetweenMetzandSt.Peter,theseeallegedlyhavingbeenfoun
ded byadisciple.
121
This passion for doing thingsmore Romano(in the
Roman fashion) wasnot confined to liturgy and law, inotherwords to
books.IthaslongbeenrecognizedthatCarolingian architecture,whether
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
20/34
246 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
therebuildingofSaint-Deniswithoccidentation andanannularcrypt,or
themodeling ofparts oftheAachen complexon theLateran baptistery,
owedagreatdealtogenuineorputativeRomanexemplars.
122
Theremarksinthe
Libri Carolini
aboutthepapacyareinperfectagree
mentwithwhatwasgoingonattheCarolingiancourt.DonaldBullough
has sagely observed that the massive Carolingian educational reform
sought authentic books and that, to those associatedwith Charlemagne
and his court, authenticmeant "Roman" and Roman meant "papal."
123
Josef Flechenstein has also shown that the Carolingian emphasis on au
thenticbooksandpropertraditions,as
well
as
correct(orcorrected)books
andteachers,had itssourceinpapalRome.Zacharyhadwritten tourge
Pepinto adheretothe "normarectitudinis,"aphrasethatsurelyneedsno
translation and very little explanation.
12 4
The synod ofVerneuil in 755
referredtoaneedtogetbackto"rectissimanorma."
125
Inpromotinghis
religiousreforms,ChrodegangofMetzoftenusedsuchphrasesas"norma
rectitudinis" and "linea rectitudinis."
126
TheAdmonitio generalisof789,
thecircularletter
Delitteris colendis
(whichmust date from around 789),
thecorrespondenceofAlcuin,andthe
LibriCarolini
arerepletewiththe
word
recte
(rightly) inallitsvariousforms.Anddoingitright,whatsoever
"it"happenedtobe,meantdoingit
moreRomano^
thewaythepopedid.In
alltheirwordsanddeeds,theFranksclungsteadfastlytothetraditionsof
papalRom e,whilethe perfidious Byzantinesattackedthe popes,ignored
their teachings, and challenged their authority. Thosewho have argued
that Charlemagne somehow setout to humiliate Hadrian orto subordi
nate him to the Frankish royal power have simply ignored the radically
papalist current in Carolingian thought and action in the 780s and
790s.
127
It is ironic but nevertheless true that the Carolingians, much
more than the popes themselves, placed the pope at the center of the
church,enhancedpapalpowers,andevokedpapalpretensions.
Onefinalineofhistoricaldevelopmentisworkedoutinthe
Libri
Caro
lini.
It might be called Christian-imperial. The
LibriCarolini
talks fairly
often about rulership,andvirtuallyeverything itsaysinvolvesimplicitor
explicit comparisons of good and bad rulership. The Byzantine rulers,
oftenderisivelytitled"kings,"arecalledarrogantanduncharitable.
128
The
point ofthesecriticisms isto drivehomethedistinction betweentheBy
zantines and the Franks, whose royal theory demanded that rulers be
humble,lovingservantsofGodandhispeople.
129
Atonepoint,Theodulf
remarks that David was ahumble minister ofG od, and evenof Christ,
whosetypehebore.
130
TheOldTestamentkings,aswehaveseen,werein
manyrespectsappropriated asmodelsbyTheodulfandtheCarolingians.
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
21/34
TraditionandLearning 247
The reason why the Byzant ines got their image of ru lership out of focus
wasthat theydrew their inspiration from thew orldofpagan Rom e.This
ledthemtocallthemselvesdivasandth eirofficial actsdivalia.Theyhadthe
hauteurtocomparetheir ownimagestothoseofChrist , andtocall them
selves the "equal of the apost les" (isapostolos).
131
These were t rad it ional
epithets andprotocols atB yzantium, inheritancesfrom antiquity.
1 32
T h e
odulfand his associates fixed up on them with avengeance, however, be
cause they provided a pretext for elaborating anew view of h is tory . By
viewingtheBibleastherecordofsalvationhistory,theFrankscouldinsist
that the o ld sequence o f k ingdoms runn ing from Babylon to Rome had
beenbroken.TheodulfexplicitlystatedthatRome,bywhichhemeantBy
zant ium,was theheir of Babylon.
1 3 3
Byzant iumwas, in o ther words, the
heirtotheorderthathadbeenoverthrown.Charlemagnewasthetrueheir
ofthesalvationhistoryfirstrevealedintheBible.
134
Rome's pagan inheri tance from Babylon was no t , however , the only
potent ial Frankish legacyfrom Rom e. There wasalso the Rom e of Con
stantine. It was C onstantine 's R om e, n ot that of the C aesars, that
C ha rlem ag ne sou g ht t o evo ke. T his w as a R o m e w h ose first em p er or
turned for instruction to Pope Sylvester
135
and whose most recent ruler ,
Pope Hadr ian , had addressed Charlemagne h imself as a "new Constan
t ine ."
1 3 6
Charlemagne'schapelatAachen,whichisalmostexactlycontem
porary with theLibri Carolini,expressedwell the program ofthat treatise
andi tscontrastingofByzantiumandtheFranks. I t canbecomparedwith
the imperial Chrysotryklinos, a room a lmost certa in ly known to a t least
some a t the Caro ling ian cou rt th rough d ip lomatic exchanges . In Con
stantinople, the em pero r 's thron e wasplaced in the east , behind the altar
and before amaiestasimage.A t Aachen, the altarwasin the east , but the
t hr on e m o d e led , as w e saw earlier, o n t ha t o f S olo m on w as in t he
west.A mosaicofChrist inM ajesty (orpossiblyanimageof theL am b of
God) was p laced in the cupola , regnan t over the whole scene .
1 3 7
These
comparisons se rved to demonst ra te , first, t ha t only Chris t tru ly ruled ;
earthly potentates acted in his nam e and on his behalf bu t never
reigned.
1 3 8
Second, Cons tan tine was a complex and amb iguous symbol
for theCarolingians. I tm aybetrue,asRichard Krautheimer said, that "i t
seem s as t h ou g h A n ti qu it y w ere epito m ized in th e C hristian R o m e o f
Constant ineandSylvester ."
139
But C onstant ine wasan Arian heretic and
a R o m an. I t w as n o t u ntil th e n in th century, a g en er atio n after C ha r
lemagne, that the Carolingians became comfortable with the ideal of the
first Chris t ian em pero r .
1 4 0
What was no t amb iguous at all was tha t, ac
cording to the
Libri Carolini
and the ideas prevai ling at the Carol ingian
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
22/34
248 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
court, only the Franks had been true to the correct ideal of Christian
rulership.
It istime to conclude.The LibriCarolini represents one masterfully de
signedstrategyintheCarolingianfightforhistory.Itwasonlynaturalthat
the Carolingians felt compelled to wage thatfight.Eversincethe fourth
century, Christians had been obliged to locate themselves in history.
141
Theveryfactofconversionmeantthediscoveryof
a
newhistory,which
beganwithAdamandEveandcontinueddowntocurrentevents.
14 2
Fora
longtime,ChristianandRomanuniversalismconverged.Thenthewest
ernprovincesoftheoldRomanEmpireweredividedamong
genUs
who
hadhadnopreviousplaceinbiblicalorclassicalschemesoftemporalreck
oning. As these peoples were converted to Christianity, they learned to
thinkinuniversaltermswhileseparatingthosetermsfrom thereferentsof
thevanishedRomanorder.
143
TheByzantineviewofhistorywasparadox
ical,implyingatonceadramaticchange,representedbytheadoptionof
Christianity, and a total absence of change, implicit in Roman continu
ity.
144
SoitwasthattheLibri Carolini"proclaimed,onbiblical-typological
grounds, a Christian universalism which directly opposed the constitu
tionallyfixed Byzantine claims upon world rulership."
14 5
For the Car
olingianstotaketheirplaceasChristiansintherollofnations,theyhadto
battletheByzantines.Todothis,theycontestedthemoneveryfieldthat
really mattered; the biblical, the apostolic, the ecclesiastical, and the
institutional.
Afewwidelychosenexamplesmayhelptoshowthatthehistoricalcon
cerns evidenced by theLibriCarolini were byno means unique to that
book.Wehavealreadymentionedtheparallelsdrawnbetweenthekingsof
theOldandNewIsraels.Noticewastaken,too,ofPaultheDeacon'shis
toryoftheseeofMetz.TheSacramentaryofGellone,writteninthelast
decade of the eighth century, contains alitany for the dead that begins
withNoahandgoesdowntoPeterandPaul.Thepointoftheseprayers
wastocreateasenseofcommunity"notonlyamongtheattendantsatthe
death,but betweenthem andthosewhohadprecededthem insacredhis
tory."
146
Carolingian collections of canon law tended to be "historical"
ratherthan"systematic."That is,theyorganizedtheirmaterialchronologi
callyaccordingtothecouncilsfromwhichthecanonsweretakeninstead
oftopicallyaccordingtothesubjectmattertreated.
147
Anepiscopalstatute
from the early ninth century mentions four great epochsof lawgiving:
naturallawbeforethefall;theMosaiclawof
the
OldTestament;Christ's
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
23/34
249raditionandLearning
law and the N ew Testam ent; and the legislation of the Frankish
C h u r ch .
1 4 8
Even Carolingian l ibrary collections were organized his tor i
cally.
149
T here is need for a b ig s tudy of the Carol ingian ideaof h is tory ,
andthe intensehistorical-mindedness ofCharlemag ne andhiskeyadvisers
willdoubtless playakeyrole inth at inquiry.
T he
Libri Carolini
consti tutes anelegant metahistory that can in every
waybear favorable comparison with the more famous works of Eusebius
andOrosiusandeven,inaway,withthatofAugustine.Itisametahistory
thatseekstolocatetheFranksintheirowntimebutalsoinalltime.Thisis
whyIinsistthatN icaeaandthe issueofimagesmerelyprovidedan opp or
tuni ty for deeper reflections on larger themes. Ca n anyone be surprised
tha t a few years after the L ibri Carolini was wr it ten Char lemagne was
crowned emperor? This magnificen t book had a lready prepared for that
event by d em o n st ra ti ng th at G o d 's cov en an t w i th A b raham h ad b een
communicated to the church, preserved by the popes, and t ransferred to
the Franks. The Byzant ines , wh o a lone in the la te e igh th cen tury cou ld
havecom petedw ith theFrankson groun ds ofspiri tual andhistorical uni
versalism,hadtobewrittenoutofhistory,asitwere.Thiswasdoneintwo
ways.First,theyweremadeobjectsofalmostunspeakablescorn.Theyand
their teachings were called arrogant, contem ptible, damnable, laughable,
stupid, foolish, silly,inad equa te, inapp ropriate , incautious, superficial I
could go on and on. At Byzantium, a physicalm utilation rendered aper
son inelig ib le for h igh office. The Franks rendered the Byzant ines ineli
g ib le for h is tor ical participat ion by verbal muti lat ion . Second, and more
significantly, theLibri Carolinineatly sets asideallpossibility that the By
zantinescouldberegardedastheheirsofIsrael,theOldTestament,apos
tolictraditions,theancientcouncils,theRomanpapacy,andtheChristian
Roman Empi re . W hen Theodu lf laid down h is quill, all o f h is to ry had
beenmade to p oint to theverycourt in whichhehad been working.
What is theargument of theLibriCarolinti I t is asimpleone that goes
like this : Abraham was a F rank , and David was a Caro ling ian. Go d in
heaven rulesthe world andhis agent on earth isCharlemagne.T his book
wasnot puto n theshelfforfear that i tw ould humiliate Ha drian, because
therewaslittleinitscentralthesis,qu itea part from itsdetails,that w ould
haveoffended the pop e.A nd itwasin asensepublished and disseminated
because its basic argumen ts were preached from the pulpits of the cathe
dral and mo nastic and parishchurches that played inallwayssodecisivea
role inspreading theC arolingian reform. If the eventsofChristmas Day,
800,haveanymeaningatall,thencertainlytheideascontainedinthe Libri
Carolini w ere official. T h e b oo k has been called a Staatsschrift and a
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
24/34
250 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
Streitschrift
(polemic).
15 0
Both characterizations are accurate but incom
plete,fortheLibriCaroliniwentbeyondpoliticsandpolemicstobecome
anexceptionallylearnedworkofhistory thatcontainednothing lessthan
the fullest single expression of the ideological program of the court of
Charlemagneduringthemostcreativeyearsofhislongreign.
Hotes
1. Libri CarolinisiveCaroliMagni capitularedeimaginibus, ed . Hu ber t
Bastgen,M G H , Conci lia , pt . 2 , Supplementum (Hannover , 1924) ,
hereafter
LC.
Anew edi tion is beingprepared for theM G H byAnn
Freeman.
2. This is the t i t le given to thew ork byBastgen (citedn. 1)and often
adoptedbymodernscholars .
3. FrancoisLouisGanshof,Recherchessurlescapitulaires.
4 .
Paris,Bib liotheq ue de PArsenal, MS 6 6 3 ,fol. 1.For areproduc tion ofthis
manuscript's titlepage,see Karl derGrosse: Werkund Wirkung, p i. 33 and
p.
193 .
5.
SeeAnnFreeman, "Theodul f ofOr leans and theLibriCarolini"; "F urther
Studies in theLibri CaroliniIII";" Fu rther Studies intheLibri Carolini
I I I :
The Margina l Notes in
VaticanusLatinus 7207";
and "Theodul f of
OrleansandthePsalmCitationsof the 'Libri Carolini. '" Freeman'sgreat
op po ne nt wasLuitpo ldW allach,w hosestudiesareconveniently assembled
inhis
DiplomaticStudiesinLatin and GreekDocumentsfrom theCarolingian
Age. Wallachm aintained , atdifferent times,that Alcuinw aseither the
author or the edi tor of theLibri Carolini.Foranassessmentofthe
authorshipproblem,seePaulJ. Meyvaert , "TheAuthorshipof the 'Libri
Carol ini ': Observations Prom pted bya RecentB ook."Don ald Bullough
hastaken aslighdy different line, arguing thatA lcuinplayedarolein the
revisionofthetextat thecourt. Hisevidenceconsistsprimarilyof
a
dem onstration that textsp repared byAlcuin inhiscampaign against the
Ad optionists found theirw ayinto, at the least,b ook4 of theLC; seehis
"AlcuinandtheKingdomofHeaven:Liturgy, Theology, andtheCarolin
gianAg e,"esp.pp. 3 4 - 3 8 ( repr. in Bullough,
CarolingianRenewal:Sources
andHeritage, esp.pp . 18087).Freeman, "Add itions andC orrections to
theLibri Carolini:L inksw ithAlcuin andtheAdo ptionist Controversy,"
says that Bullough's approach "comm ands respect."There isano ther
intr iguingp roblemdiscussed byJohnM arenbon,FromtheCircleofAlcuin
totheSchoolofAuxerre: Logic,Theology, andPhilosophyintheEarlyMiddle
Ages, p p .
35ff.
Theproblemis that theso-calleddictaAlbini, som e ph ilo
sophical fragments of Alcuin, tu rn up in theLibriCarolini, wheretheyare,
inone instance, attr ibuted toAugustine. Thequestionsare:Wheredid
Th eodu lf get thismaterial? Did heknow itwasbyhiscontempo rary and
fellowcourtier?Did it enter theLC du ring revision?Answersto these
questio ns willhaveto awaitfurther research.
6. Themostvaluablestudiesof theLC areWolfram vonden Steinen,
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
25/34
251raditionandLearning
"Entstehungsgeschichte derL ibri Carolini";von den Steinen, "Karl der
GrosseunddieLibri Carolini: Die t ironischenNotenzumCodex";Walter
Schmandt , Studien zu denLibri Carolini (I amgrateful to PaulM eyvaert for
providingm eacopyof thisstudy);and Freeman, "Carolingian O rthod oxy
andtheFateof theLibri Carolini.. Severalverywidelyheldviewscanbe
traced backto three sources: KarlH am pe, "Had rians I Vertheidigung der
zweitennicaeanischen Synode gegen dieAngriffe Karlsdes Grossen ";
Alber t Hauck,KirchengeschichteDeutschlands,2:32743;and Ge org
Ostrogorsky, "RomundByzanz imKampfurndieBilderverehrung."
Amongmanyotherworks thatmightbecited, theseseempertinent:
EdwardJamesMartin, A HistoryoftheIconoclasticControversy, p p . 2 2 2 - 5 7 ;
Ger t Haendler ,
Epochen karolingischer
Theologie:
Eine Untersuchungiiberdie
karolingischenGutachten zum byzantinischenBilderstreit,pp.2743, 6 7
101 ; S tephenG ero," Th eL ibri Carolini and the ImageControversy"; and
GirolamoArnaldi, "LaquestionedeiLibri Carolini."
7.
WalterGoffart,
TheNarratorsofBarbarian History:
Jordanes, Gregory
of
Tours,Bede,andPaul theDeacon,p.ix.
8. Th is ishardly the placefor afull bibliograph ical assessment ofthe first
period ofByzantine Iconoclasm.T he interpretation offered hereisbased
onmystudy, "JohnDamasceneandtheHistoryof theIconoclastic
Controversy,"whichcitesmucholder l i terature. Notmentionedinmy
earlierwo rkb utveryvaluable areHan s-G eorg Beck,
VonderFragwurdig
keitderIkone;PaulSpeck, "IkonoklasmusunddieAnfangedermakedo
nischen Renaissance"; Speck,"WeitereU berlegung en un d Un tersuchung en
iiberdieUrspriinge der byzantinischen Renaissance";An tonio Carile ,
"L'iconoclasmo fra bisanzioePItalia";and Peter Schreiner, "D er byzan
tinischeB ilderstreit: KritischeAnalysederzeitgenossischen M einu nge n
unddasUrteil der Nachwelt bisheute."
9. T he critical decadeofthe 780s inBy zantium hasrecentlybeen the subject
ofseveralim po rtan t studies: Speck,KaiserKonstantin VI; Judith Her r in ,
TheFormationofChristendom,pp. 408-66; andWarrenTreadgold, The
Byzantine Revival, 780-842,
pp .6 0 -1 2 6 .An interes ting assessment of
EmpressIrene isStevenRunciman, "TheEmpressIrene theAthenian."
10.
Mansi ,Concilia, 1 2 : 9 8 4 - 8 6 .
11.
Mansi ,
Concilia,
12:1056-72; andPhi l ippusJaffe ,
RegestaPontificum
Romanorum, no .2 44 8 (hereafter Jaffe, RP).
12. VenanceGrumel,LesRegestes des actesdupatriarchat deConstantinople,
no. 351; Mans i ,Concilia,12:1077-84; andJaffe ,RP, n o . 2 4 4 9 .
13. Treadgold,Byzantine Revival, p p .
4 9 - 8 1 ,
with full references atp.40 0 ,
n.9 ; andTreadgold, "T he EmpressIrene 'sPreparation for the Seventh
Ecumenical Co uncil ."
14.
T he
acta
of SecondNicaeaarepublished inMansi,
Concilia,
1 2 : 9 9 1 - 1 1 5 4 ,
13:1418.Extend ed discussions ofthecouncilm aybe found in Charles
JosephHefele and He nri Leclercq,Histoiredesconciles, p p . 6 0 1 - 8 0 4 ;
GervaisDumeige,Niceell; F.Boespflug andN . Lossky,eds. ,N iceell, 787
1987:Douzesieclesd'imagesreligieuses; JosefWohlmuth, ed. ,Streitumdas
Bild:
DaszweiteKonzil vonNicaa (787) inokumenischenPerspektive;Wilhelm
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
26/34
252 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
deVries,"DieStrukturderKirchegemassdemIIKonzilvonNicaa
(787)";andVittorioFazzo,"IIIIConciliodiNiceanellastoriacristianaed
irapporti fra RomaeBisanzio."ThereisavaluableEnglishtranslation of,
andcommentaryupon,thesixthsession (whichgavethe
horos
of
754,
its
refutation, andthe horosof
787)
inDanielJ.Sahas,Icon andLogos:Sources
in Eighth-CenturyIconoclasm.
15.
Le Liber
Pontificate,ed.LouisDuchesne,vol.1,2nded.(Paris,1955):
"Quamsynodumiamdictimissiingrecosermonesecumdeferentesuna
cumimperialibussacrismanibuspropriissubscriptis,praedictusegregius
antistesinlatinoearntranslatariiussit,etinsacrabibliothecapariter
recondi,dignamsibiorthodoxefideimemoriamaeternam faciens"
(p.512).
16.
Gero,"LibriCarolini,"hasemphasized(andperhapsexaggerated)the
importance ofthepoor translation.HealsobelievesthattheFranksmay
havehadnomorethanextractsof
the
actaofthecouncil.Intheninth
century,HincmarofReimssaidthatCharlemagnehadgottenhiscopyof
theacta f rom the pop e; seeOpusculaetepistolaequaespectantadcausam
HincmariLaudunensis,PL126:360ab.Freeman,"CarolingianOrtho
doxy,"p.68 ,thinkstha tH incmar basedhisaccountofeventsontheentry
in
theAnnales regni Francorumpertainingtothe SynodofFrankfurt in794
(ed.FriedrichKurze,M GH,SSrer.Germ. [Hannover, 1895],p.94).I
suspectthatsheisrightingeneral,buttheAnnalessaynothingaboutthe
acta. Hincm arwaseitherguessingor elsehehadanother sourceofinfor
mationofwhichweareignorant.(Pseudo-)SimeonofDurham,anno792,
ed.R.Pauli,MGH,SS13(Hannover,1881),says"KarolusrexFrancorum
misitsinodalemlibrumadBritanniamsibiaConstantinopolidirectum"
(p.
155).ScholarshaveconcludedthattheYorkannalsasquotedaboveare
substantially reliable (for afulldiscussion,seeFreeman,"Carolingian
Orthodoxy,"pp.
7778,
withnn.4248),butConstantinoplecannothave
beenthedirectsourceforCharlemagne.TheLC,aletterofHadrianto
Charlemagne (discussedbelow),anddocumentsfrom thereneweddiscus
sionofimagesundertakenatParisin825allcitetheLatintranslation,
itselfnolongerextant,towhichtheLiber Pontificaterefers.Theprefaceto
theLC merelyrefers to"textus . . adnosusquepervenit"without
elaboration (p.5).
17.
LC,Praef.: "Gestapraetereaestferme antetrienniumetalterasynodum"
(p.
3).AsFreeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"
p.
71,
carefully reasons,this
statementdatesonlythepreface.Becausetheword"ferme"isimprecise,it
ispossibletothinkofTheodulf ashavingbegunworkinabout790or
791,thoughFreemanwouldprefer790.
18. ThisisFreeman'sreconstructionofthechronologyofevents;seeher
"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"pp.7 1 -75 .Shepointsout,andIagree,thatthe
mostdifficult of
all
problemsconcernspreciselywhytheFrankswentto
workatallontheLC iftheyhadknownHadrianhadembracedthe
decisionsofSecondNicaea.GiventhatTheodulfdidlaborsoassiduously
onthetext,itwouldseemthattheFrankseitherdidnotgettheircopyof
theactadirectlyfrom thepope,orelsetheydidnot thinkthecopythathad
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
27/34
253
raditionandLearning
beensentto themboretheofficial stampofpapalapproval.Foranin
geniousbutunpersuasive reconstructionofthechronologyoftheseyears,
consistingessentiallyofanattempttomovethe LC toaround794,see
Arnaldi,"LaquestionedeiLibriCarolini."
19. EpistolaeHadriani I.papae, no.2,ed.ErnstDiimmler,MGH,Epp.5
(Berlin, 1899),pp. 5-57 .
20.
Seethestudiescitedabove,nn. 5and6,esp.thosebyFreeman.
21. Schmandt,Studien,p.6.
22. Freeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"p.86.
23. SuchwasthebeliefofthebishopswhogatheredinParisin825foranew
discussionofimages;Concilia aevikarolini,no.44,ed.AlbertWerming
hoff,MGH,Concilia,pt.2 (Hannover, 1908):"Eandemporro synodum
cumsanctaememoriaegenitorvester [thiswasaddressedtoLouisthe
Pious]coramsesuisqueperlegifecissetetmultisinlocis,utdignumerat,
reprehendisset" (p.481).
24. Seeesp.Freeman,"FurtherStudiesIII,"pp.597612.
25.
Freeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"p.96andn.125.
26. Hincmar's testimonyiscitedbyFreeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy" (from
Paris,B.N.,lat.2865):"Nonmodicumvolumen,quodinpalatioadoles
centuluslegi"(p.96,n.121).
27.
Freeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"pp. 100105,pointsoutthat nowhere
intherichtestimony from825 isthereasinglereference to LC.
28.
Ibid.,pp.96-99.
29.
AngeloMercati,"PerlastoriadelcodiceVaticanodeiLibriCarolini,"
pp. 112-19. Freemanargues,plausibly,thatthismanuscriptwasdestroyed
intheriotafter thedeathofPaulIVin 1559,whenamobsackedtheHoly
Office andburned allthebookstheycouldfind;see"Carolingian Ortho
doxy,"p.97,n. 127.
30.
Paris,B.N., lat.12125,fol.157.SeeFreeman,"FurtherStudiesIII,"
pp.
21819;andFreeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"p.66.
31. Schmandt,Studien,p.1.
32. HampeandHauck, asinn.6,above;andJohannesHaller,Das Papsttum:
Idee und
Wirklichkeit,
2:15.Haller'shighlyinfluentialworkisstillinprint,
recentlyin paperback.
33. SeetheworksofvondenSteinen,Freeman,andArnaldi(citedn.6,
above).
34.
CharlemagneandHadrianwerealliesandcooperated inmanyventures.
On this
alliance,
seemyThe Republic ofSt.Peter:The Birth of the Papal
State, 680-825, pp.256-76.AquickconsultationofJaffe,RP,no.
2467ff,
willsuffice toshowthatCharlemagneandHadrian carriedon allsortsof
routinebusinessduringthewholeperiodwhentheLCwasinpreparation.
Forsomerepresentativestatements from theLConthepapacy,see,LC
1.5-6,
pp.19,20-22.
35. See,e.g.,R.I.Moore ,TheFormation of a Persecuting Society,pp.69,134.
36.
Fora
summary
ofthe
filioque
struggle
intheageof
Charlemagne,
see
Richard H a u g h ,
Photius
and the
Carolingians:
The
TrinitarianControversy,
pp. 4 1 - 8 1 .And
LC
3.3,pp.110-13 ,mentions
thcfilioque
issue.
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
28/34
254 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
37.
Noble,
Republic of St.Peter,
pp.138-83.
38. Freeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"pp.72-73,n.31;seealsoMeyvaert,
"Authorship,"pp.40-42.
39. LC,
Praef,esp.pp. 23.
40. LC,Praef.:
"cumconhibentia sacerdotuminregnoaDeonobisconcesso
catholicisgregibuspraelatorum" (p.5).FortheAdoptionist issue,see
Concilia aevi karolini,
no. 19,ed.Werminghoff, MGH,Concilia,pt.1
(Hannover andLeipzig, 1906),pp. 11064;for
filioque,
ibid.,no.33,
pp.
235-44.
41. Ganshof,"ObservationssurlesynodedeFrancfort de794."
42. Concilia aevi karolini,
no. 19,ed.Werminghoff, MGH,Concilia,pt.1,
p.
165.
43.
Ibid.,pp. 165-66.
44. Hans
Barion,
Dasfrdnkisch-deutsche Synodalrecbt desFruhmittelalters,
pp.252-53,265-66.
45.
Freeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"offers theinterestingspeculationthat
"thereisreasontothinkthatwhentheCouncilassembledtheimage
questionwasnotontheagenda"(p.92).Itiscertainlytruethatitwasnot
emphasized.
46. Concilia aevi karolini,
no. 19,ed.Werminghoff, MGH,Concilia,pt.1:
"AllataestinmediodenovaGrecorumsynodo,quamdeadorandis
imaginibusConstantinopolimfecerunt; inquascriptumhabebatur,utqui
imaginessanctorumitautdeificamtrinitatemservitioautadorationemnon
inpenderent,anathemaiudicaverunt"(p.165).
47.
Freeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"pp.92-95,givesaverycareful
readingoftheseevents.
48. Annales regni Francorum,
anno793,ed.Kurze,p.94.
49. Freeman,"CarolingianOrthodoxy,"pp.8792.
50. Ep.
Hadrianil,
no.2,ed.Diimmler,p.57.
51. Ibid.,pp.55-56.
52.
MariaAndoloro,"IILiberPontificalisetlequestionedelleimmaginida
SergioIaAdrianoI."Herviewswillhavetoawaitconfirmation,butif
thereisanythingtothem,theywouldpointtoanextremelypoliticgesture
onHadrian'spart,particularlybecause,asFlorentineMiitherichand
HenryMayr-Hartunghaveargued,itisverydifficult toshowthatthe
LC
hadanyclearimpactonFrankishart;see,respectively,"ILibriCaroliniela
miniaturacarolingia";and"CharlemagneasaPatronofArt."
53.
Eginhard,Viede
Charlemagne,
chap.19,ed.andtrans.LouisHalphen,4th
ed.(Paris,1967),p.60.
54.
Theworkhasageneralpreface,andthenbooks2through4havebriefer
individualprefaces.Thebookscontainthefollowingnumberofchapters:
bk.1= 30;bk.2 =
3 1 ;
bk.3= 31;bk.4=28.
55.
LC1.9,pp.26-28.
56. LC
1.10, 1.12, 1.13, 1.15, 1.16, 1.17, 1.18, 1.21,pp.28-29 ,31-32, 32
33,
34-37,37-39,39-42,42-44,48-49.
57. LC
1.22,1.23, 1.25, 1.26, 1.29, 1.30,2.1-2,2.3,2.4,2.5,2.7-8,pp.5 0
52,
53-54,54-55,56-57,57-59,60,63-64,64-65,65-66,66-68,
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
29/34
255
raditionandLearning
69. Foradiscussionoftheextensivecorrections inthissectionofthe
LC,
seeFreeman,"FurtherStudiesIII,"pp.214-15.
58.
Forsomeexamples:LC 1.9, 1.29,2.1,pp.26-28 ,57 -59,63.
59.
LC 1.5, 1.15, 1.17, 1.18, 1.19, 1.20,pp.18-19,34-37, 39-42 , 42 -44,
4445,48.Mostofthepassagescitedinn.57arerelevanthereaswell.In
fact,virtuallyeverychapterinbooks 1and2concernsexegeticalmatters.
60.
JohnJ.Contreni, "CarolingianBiblicalStudies,"esp.pp.71-77; Robert
E.McNally,TheBibleintheEarlyMiddle Ages,pp.
20ff.,
esp.:"The
Carolingian renaissancecanbecharacterizedasarebirth oftheChristian
aspiration for biblicalspiritualityandbiblicalstudies"(p.20).
61. ThethreesourcesthatspelloutmostclearlythecontoursofCharlemagne's
programare:thepreface totheAdmonitiogeneralis(MGH,Capit.,no.22,
ed.Alfred Boretius,vol.1[Hannover, 1883],pp.53-54);theEpistola de
litteris colendis(ibid.,no.29,p.79);andthecyclicallettersentoutwith
PaultheDeacon'srevisionofthe lectionary (ibid.,no.30,pp.8081).For
thewidercontextofCharlemagne'seducationalprogram,seeContreni's
chapterinthisvolume,chap.3,andtheliteraturecitedbyhim.
62. Admonitiogeneralis,MGH,Capit.,no.22,ed.Boretius,1:53-54.The
preface to theAdmonitioisalmostcertainlytheworkofAlcuin;see
Friedrich-CarlScheibe,"Alcuinund dieAdmonitioGeneralis."Bullough
acceptsScheibe'sarguments;seehis"AlcuinandtheKingdomofHeaven,"
p.24;and AulaRenovata:TheCarolingianCourt beforetheAachen
Palace,"p.294 (repr.inBullough,
Carolingian Renewal,
p.142).Idonot
sharethereservationsofRosamondMcKitterick,
The
Frankish Church
and
theCarolingianReforms, 789-895, p.1.IwishtothankKatyCubittand
PatrickWormaldfor interestingandhelpful discussionsofthismatter.
63. EpistolaevariorumCaroloMagno regnantescriptae,no.7,ed.Diimmler,
MGH,Epp.4(Berlin, 1895),p.503.
64.
Heinrich Fichtenau, "ByzanzunddiePfalzzuAachen,"pp.2526;Horst
Appuhn, "ZumThron KarlsdesGrossen,"pp. 12729;andRoderich
Schmidt,"ZurGeschichtedesfrankischen Konigsthrons."
65.
AlcviniEpistolae,no. 145,ed.Diimmler,MGH,Epp.4:235.
66.
Pauli et
Petri Diaconorum
Carmina,no. 14,ed.ErnstDiimmler,MGH,
Poetae1(Berlin, 1881),p.52.SeeFichtenau,"Pfalz,"p.29andn. 144.
67.
Mostfamously inthededicatoryversestotheDagulfPsalter:MGH,
Poetae 1:9091;andinthepoembyAngilbertwiththefrequent refrain
"Davidamatvates,"ibid.,pp.360-63.ThereisaLatintextandEnglish
translationof
this
poeminPeterGodman,Poetryof theCarolingian
Renaissance, pp. 11219.ForthedateoftheDagulfPsalter,seeLawrence
Nees'sreview ofKur t Holter ,ed.,DergoldenePsalter
cc
DagulfPsalter, in
Art Bulletin67 (1985):681-90 .AnotherDavidappellation from thesame
periodmaybefound inAlcvini Epistolae, no.41,ed.Diimmler,MGH,
Epp.
4:84.
68. Peter Godman,PoetsandEmperors:Frankish PoliticsandCarolingianPoetry,
pp.
65-66.
69.
LC 1.1,p.9.
70. Fichtenau,"Pfalz,"pp.30,32-34.
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
30/34
256 T H O M A S F . X . N O B L E
71. CodexCarolinus, no .39,ed.WilhelmGundlach,MGH,Epp.3(Berlin,
1892),p.552.
72. LexSalica, ed.KarlAugustusEckhardt,M GH ,LegumSectioI,Legum
Nationum Germanicarum,vol.4,pt.2 (Hannover, 1969),pp.19.
73. LC 1.19, p.44.O nthe FranksasaNewIsrael,seeEugenEwig,"Zum
christlichenKonigsgedankenimFriihmittelalter,"pp.39-45;andRobert
Folz,
The CoronationofCharlemagne 25 December
800
,
pp.97-100.
74. Forsomeexamples:AdmonitiogeneraliseMGH,Capit.,no.22,chap.62,
ed.Boretius,1:58;AnnalesregniFrancorum, anno791,ed.Kurze,p.88;
PaulinusofAquileia,
Libellus adversusElipandum,
ed.
Werminghoff,
MGH,
Concilia,pt.1,p.142;AlcviniEpistolae,no.41,ed.Diimmler,MGH,Epp.
4:84.ClaudioLeonardihasdevelopedafascinatingargumentforthe
centralityofAlcuinto theuniversalizingandhistoricizingefforts atthe
court;seehis"Alcuinoelascuolapalatina:Leambizionidiunacultura
unitaria,"1:459-96.SurelyAlcuinhadlittletoteachTheodulf
along
these
lines.
75. LC2.25,pp.84-85.
76. LC 2 .30-31 ,pp.92-102,esp.95-96.Theultimatesourceforthispoint
ofviewistheworkofAugustine,esp. Dedoctrina
Christiana.
77.
SoMcKitterick,"TextandImageintheCarolingianWorld."
78.
LC 1.5, p.19.
79. LC 3.4,3.6,3.7,3.10,3.17,3.18,3.19,3.20,3.26,pp.113-15,116-19,
119-20, 122-23, 138-40, 140-42, 143-45, 158-61.
80. LC2.17, p .77.
81. Forexample,in LC 2.27,p.87,TheodulfcriticizestheGreeksforclaiming
thatthebodyandbloodofChristwereimages.Infact,atSecondNicaea
theCouncilofHiereiawascondemned forthisteaching.Anotherexample
concernsthe refutation in787ofthe754teachingsbythedeacon
Epiphanios,whowastakenbytheCarolingianstohaveadvanced thevery
argument hewasrefuting; see
LC
4.15,pp.2012.
82. LC 2.17,p.76,containsanadmissionthattheFranksknowneither
GregoryofNyssanorhisworks,while2.20,p .79,admits unfamiliarity
withabookof
Cyril
ofAlexandria.
83. LC,Praef,p.3.
84. LC 2.9,p.70.Thisisthebasicargumentof LC;cf.Praef.,p.3;2.13,3.16,
pp.
73,138.
85.
LCI.17 , p . 41 .
86. LCI.23 , p . 51 .
87.
LCI.29,p. 57.
88.
LC 4.2,
p.175.
89. LC,Praef.,p.4.
90. LC 2 .23 ,pp.81 -82 .O ntheactualmeaningofGregory'sletter,seeCelia
M.Chazelle,"Pictures,BooksandtheIlliterate:PopeGregoryPsLetters
toSerenusofMarseilles."Forabrilliantdiscussionofathousandyearsof
interpretationofGregory'sletters,seeLawrenceG.Duggan,"WasArt
Reallythe'Bookof
the
Illiterate'?"
91. LC 1.18, 2.2 1,3.16,pp.4 0 -4 2 ,80,1 36 -38.Foranilluminating
-
5/20/2018 Libri Carolini2
31/34
257raditionandLearning
discussionofthissubject,seeDavidAppleb