' C 'W' ”—- W ‘ A ”—1 '4‘ ’WI" ”I.“ v..- _..— .a w”. ,3.— 'a’ o ”A .d-A .‘f v. . _ -‘ .— .~ v '...——. .—— . “H -—‘ _._..J. M. “ .5 , . - ‘— 5 .. m- ..._ - . o 4 ~ >v v A Lt. .4 . - - M— -“Qw- -— .“ § . ' ,.__,.::— ”4—, ""_' "‘..-:~ . .- . ~. R ‘4 I- ‘ IIIh . I" 2 I“ . .I I ‘IIII’I‘IIIEI "L . .. hIII IIII ’ .4..- W -____'._- . - _‘ - ‘5‘: , - IIII III III IIIIIIII“ I J 'I‘ .- £- .0 *fi-‘h gfl- d- )I M- , a I III I';1 II.,IrII< «II‘fiIIII'IIIII I ia—vf. 7..., ' ._——- 'Pfi A..__,_‘._'.:——-—"" A . _' I" -:.._..4-— .7- v ' '__n' .—....a- p. #M—Hd I III II III I ._4- .M “-g‘ ".— Mic—v.“ :4” .,.~- "Wfi Zn. .I'II IIIII _ III I)“ rII .III‘IIIII aw “I... “,- ,. '1‘..." -...y_... ..L:- :3? w... .44- _.»—..:‘. o.— It IJ‘III': :I ;II' 1;:I IEIII: III IIII‘IIIIIIII III I . II IIIII’II III; II: .I-I III {III}; IIFII II III-II II’ IIIIIIII"‘IIII"I ' I .q . ::.-‘-'~’v_~ " @515. bi- : ‘ .... 3..., .,.. . 3‘.— .— L7 ~u- \ k .' . ' j .. A . v .7 '* t‘I‘III‘II II- E iv I '0 u: ‘35" I!!! ’-. “IIIIIIII-IIIIII I III IIEIIIIIZII'II’is‘I} ,.- II ‘: iiii‘z‘ tm‘... I n ' u .2“ 33h..." ‘ :Qq,..!i"‘:' .Iz' “($13“ ”I"; I I' I .r A - —V“, ;"kv7"‘§"g g fl.w-.-~—.—‘ rim“ Ilmh’finlfid’éngJéE wi'é;£;- . we .r_2',,-ft- . LII. ffilésiy This is to certify that the thesis entitled The Role of the Sermon in Carolingian Political Theory and Renovatio presented by Michael Frassetto has been accepted towards fulfillment \ of the requirements for l M.A. degreein History @45W 1 Major professor aw 7, [qgé Date 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution MSU LIBRARIES m RETURNING MATERIALS: Place in book drop to remove this checkout from your record. FINES will be charged if book is returned after the date stamped below. THE ROLE OF THE SERMON IN CAROLINGIAN POLITICAL THEORY AND RENOVATIO BY Michael Frassetto A THESIS submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER or ARTS: Department of History 1986 ABSTRACT THE ROLE OF THE SERMON IN CAROLINGIAN POLITICAL THEORY AND RENOVATIO BY Michael Frassetto The role of the sermon to implement the reformist notions of the Carolingian kings and churchmen, and to define political theory to the Frankish people has received little attention from modern scholars. Moreover, there is little agreement among the few scholars who have commented on the political nature of the sermon. It is the purpose of this study to suggest that the sermon was used to define political theory to the Frankish people and to define accep table behavior to create a city of God. The sermons of Agobard of Lyons, Alcuin, Hrabanus Maurus and Theodulph of Orleans will be examined. Their sermons suggest that the sermons brought notions of kingship and the notion of society as a community of the faithful to the Franks. The sermons defined matters of faith and ethics as a responsibility of all members of the community. TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction Carolingian Reform and Political Theory I The Carolingian Sermon and Political Theory Conclusion INTRODUCTION The desire of the Carolingians to reform society along Christian lines was the cause of the intellectual fervor of that period known as the Carolingian Renaissance. The condition of the Christian community and the institutional Church by the mid-eighth century was very poor; much of the clergy was barely literate, the bishops acted more like lay magnates than spiritual ministers and as a result the mass of the laity was nominally Christian at best. The Carolingians recognized the desperate situation of the Church and took action to improve it; however, the goal of reshaping society along Christian lines required great effort, and led to more precise definitions of the nature of kingship and of Church-state relations. Political theory was formulated to justify the actions taken by the Frankish kings to reform the community of the faithful. and therefore defined kingship in theocratic terms as a response to the reality of the political situation created by the Carolingian monarchy. I The Carolingian kings assumed the responsibility of improving the religious life of the clergy and laity, not only within the existing state but also by expanding the borders of the Christian community. Kingship and the state, therefore. came to be defined in terms of Old Testament and Augustinian notions. Carolingian political theory expressed the duty of the monarch to defend the faith and to ensure the salvation of his subjects. Moreover. because of the close connection of matters of the state with matters of the Church, the political and religious goals of the Carolingians were often one and the same. The great number of capitularies dedicated to religion, especially the "Admonitio Generalis” of 789 which established as law the goals of the "renovatio,” illustrates the merging of ecclesiastical and secular interests in Carolingian political ideology. The importance of the capitularies as an instrument of the expression of Carolingian theocratic designs has, perhaps, overshadowed an equally important instrument. the sermon. The sermon has been generally overlooked by modern scholars as an instrument of Carolingian political will and as an expression of political theory. What little investigation has been done has failed to reach any consensus; some have argued that there is no expression of political theory in the sermons, and other scholars have argued the opposite. It is the intent if this study to show that the sermons offer important. testimony to the Carolingian understanding of political thought and also that they express the interconnection of politics and religion that was the cornerstone of the Carolingian state. If the sermon conveyed political and religious ideas to the Frankish people, then the role of the sermon in the "renovatio” must be addressed to understand how effectively the sermon conveyed Carolingian political and religious ‘beliefs. The sermon had been the traditional teaching device of the Church; the extent of preaching during the reform would determine how effectively reform was brought to the Frankish people. Moreover, if the sermons were an effective teaching instrument, then the message that they delivered must be comprehended. The Carolingian reformers were dependent upon the Old Testament and St. Augustine and the other Church Fathers for most of their political and religious notions. The sermon authors brought these ideas to the Frankish people in their sermons, and in so doing hoped to inspire a sense of responsibility to the king and the community among the people so that they would follow the dictates of reform. The goal of the reformers was to explain Carolingian political theory to the Frankish people so that they would understand the nature of society and their role in society. It is a purpose of this study to determine the role of the sermon in the Carolingian "renovatio" and the nature of the definition of political theory in the sermons by examining the sermons of Alcuin, Agobard of Lyons, Hrabanus Maurus and Theodulph of Orleans. CAROLINGIAN REFORM AND POLITICAL THEORY In order to understand better the role and nature of the sermon an understanding of Carolingian reform and political theory must be attempted. The development of political theory from the reform movement is an important facet of the Carolingian intellectual climate. The idea of reforming society along Christian lines established the outlines of political theory, and the practice of reform led to a justification of reform in the writings of political theorists. The first steps toward reform were taken by Pippin, but these were taken with the end of consolidating power into the hands of the newly-founded dynasty. The reform movement was begun in earnest by Pippin's son, Charlemagne, the founder of reform and renaissance. A devout Christian, Charles thought that salvation and prosperity would sup- port him invincibly if, in contributing to the peace and concord of the church, he might bind the peaceful ones more closely in brotherly union, discourage the rebellious with impartial severity and not only take power away from the crushed pagans; but also in the same manner lead those enemies of the Christian name to acknowledge and confess truth. He therefore devoted his reign to these ventures.1 Because ”[hisl will to govern and to extend his power was inseparable from his purpose to spread the Christian religion and let his subjects live according to God's will,” Charlemagne sought to create a community of the faithful based upon theocratic notions of kingship.2 Charlemagne's attempt to create a city of God on earth followed two paths; internal reform and expansion of the faith by missionary work into newly conquered areas. inter- nal reform had been hinted at in the legislation of the early part of Charlemagne's reign, but only in the ”Admonitio Generalis” of 789 did the course of reform become fully stated. The purpose of reform was to create a new society defined by religious precepts; to achieve this end, Charles attempted to present legislation which would reconstitute the episcopacy and lesser clergy and define the duty of each member of a Christian community. An important aspect of reform was the improvement of the education and virtue of the clergy. The efficacy of the priest was crucial for the ability of the laity to understand the faith; it was the priest who would instruct the laity on matters of the faith, and therefore each must have a minimum of education of orthodox doctrine. The clergy itself must be educated and virtuous so that it could provide the instruction to enable the laity to understand the basic Christian message necessary for salvation. The "Admonitio Generalis” ordained that the clergy be educated so that the laity could gain an understanding of the faith and thereby strive to live a proper Christian life.3 The "Admonitio Generalis” was very explicit on the importance.of preaching as the means of educating the laity, for it was defined as one of the primary functions of the clergy.4 Charles assumed the responsibility of reforming society so that his subjects could earn their own salvation. The directives of the ”Admonitio Generalis" however, stressed the need of educating the clergy and laity for more than purely spiritual reasons, because good works and virtuous living would benefit the entire community. As Rosamond McKitterick explains: ”the Franks saw Christianity first and foremost in terms of social living; Christianity was a way of life... [it was] regarded as the essential prerequisite for the peace and stability of the kingdom.” 5 The purpose of the ”renovatio” was thus two-fold; the improvement of the education and restoration of the dignity of the clergy would better enable priests to educate the laity and thus secure salvation for all, and the increased understatnding of Christianity would encourage a more harmonious social order. Missionary activity into newly conquered lands further supports the notion that the ”renovatio” was designed to achieve both spiritual salvation and political harmony. Very early on in the conquest of Saxony, Charlemagne‘s military and political activities took on a missionary characteristic. The notion evolved that a Christian king must extend not merely the boundaries of his own realm, but rather the boundaries of the community of the faithful. Charlemagne intermingled political conquest with religious conversion; Carolingian missionaries ”became part of the political and religious establishment set up to pacify the conquered areas."6 The religious community was extended into the new regions of the empire, and the Christian vir- tues of the Carolingians were imposed on newly conquered people as a means incorporating them into the community of the faithful. Successfully converted, one-time pagans would become part of the political-religious community much easier than those who remained pagan, and Christianity would be the bond to unite one-time enemies. Charlemagne's son, Louis the Pious, continued the policy of combining missionary activity with practical political ends. Louis sent missions to Denmark to preach and convert the Danish king and people to Christianity and thereby end the threat posed by pagan Denmark. Charlemagne and Louis understood the important bond that could be forged by shared religious belief. Carolingian policy concerning conquered and newly- converted pagans was at first exceedingly harsh. The Franks sought to coerce pagans recently brought into the empire into accepting Christianity. Pagan practices such as the practice of magic, the burning of the dead and human sacrifice were punishable by death. The death penalty was also threatened for those who failed to follow Christian laws such as those forbidding the eating of meat during Lent, theft from a church or the murder of a clergyman. Pagans were forced to attend Mass and to pay the tithe. Charles sought to establish Christianity in Saxony by force. However, the policy came to be moderated under the influence of Alcuin. The second Saxon capitulary issued by Charlemagne moderated the severity of the first; justice was to be determined for justice's sake, and not by notions of vengeance.8 Although the coercion by the state could still be applied, it was complemented by the use of persuasion. Carolingian missionaries had long sought to convert the pagans by proving the superiority of Christianity; in part by illustrations of the strength of the Carolingian state as the agent of God's will, but also by accounts from the Bible and simplified explanations of dogma.9 Missionaries would preach to the pagans and instruct them in the ways of Christianity and thus bring the Carolingian theocratic political and social structure into newly-conquered and newly-Christianized areas. Frankish reform, therefore, was a religious reform that redefined not only the beliefs and practices of the Christian community, but also redefined the very structure of the social and political communtiy. Charlemagne's understanding of royal duty inspired the idea of reform which caused the Carolingian idea of kingship 'to gain more precise definition from the progress achieved by the reformers. The Carolingians derived most of their ideas of kingship from the Old Testament and from the Church Fathers, both of which enjoyed heightened prestige among the Carolingian reformers. The Frankish kings regarded themselves as heirs to the political traditions of the Hebrew kings. The ceremony of unction that all Carolingian rulers underwent provided graphic illustration of their election by God and because they regarded themselves as kings by the grace of God, they exhibited a heightened sense of responsibility for Christianity. The Carolingian notion of the special stature of the king was further influenced by the notion that the earthly kingdom was a reflection of the heavenly kingdom, and therefore the earthly king stood in the place of God to direct the community of the faithful toward salvation. Carolingian notions of kingship were deeply theocratic, and thus further blurred any lines of distinction between the Church and Carolingian state. An important influence on Carolingian political thought and practice was the example of the Hebrew kings of the Old Testament which provided Carolingian theorists with the precedents for justifying the actions taken by the Carolingian kings. Moreover, the books of the Old Testament provided much of the theocratic definition of the Carolingian theocracy as a ministry from God to do His will on earth. It was the model of David that most impressed the Franks, for they seem to have overlooked the reign of Saul. The notion of a ministerial kingship based upon Hebrew kingship was no doubt in Pippin‘s mind when he accepted the royal crown from Pope Stephen IV, and in the mind of Charlemagne when ”he would invoke the precedent of the Kings of Israel to justify his intervening in the religious life of his people."10 The Frankish kings, however, were inspired by more than political considerations in their emulation of the Hebrew kings. Frankish reform truly sought to. pattern society after a Christian interpretation of the Kingdom of Israel. The capitularies of the Carolingians and the purpose of reform illustrate a desire to rebuild the kingdom in the image of the Hebrew people of the Old Testament ”whose political community was in a manner consecrated for the purposes of prOphesying and announcing the city of God which was to be assembled out of all nations."11 The Frankish monarchs received support for their program of reform from members of the Church hierarchy. The popes were active supporters of Carolingian political power and program of religious reform. It was the papacy that initiated the alliance with the Franks and established the dynasty. The papacy was eager to encourage the ”renovatio," and openly identified the Franks as God‘s elect. Pope Paul I called the Franks "a holy nation, a royal priesthood, a 12 chosen people.” The identification with Old Testament kings was given important support by members of the ”Palace School.” Kathulf recognized Charlemagne as a new David, but a most important statement on this matter was made by Alcuin who exclaimed, Blessed... is the nation whose God is the Lord, blessed are the people exalted by a ruler and supported by a preacher of the faith whose right hand brandishes the sword of triumph and whose mouth makes the triumph of Catholic faith ring. It was thus that David, chosen by God to be king of the people who were then His chosen people... subjected the neighboring nations to Israel... and preached the divine law to his subjects. Alcuin continued by praising Charles as a new King David. Bearing the same name, inspired by the same virtue and the same faith, this king is presently our ruler and guide: a ruler in whose shadow the Christian people remains in peace and who everywhere inspires fear in the pagan nations.13 ‘ Alcuin thus defined the extent to which Carolingian notions of kingship were influenced by biblical models. The court scholars, therefore, had a very well-defined model of kingship which they could apply to their own political situation. The Old Testament notions of political theory had an important influence on the formation Carolingian theocratic ideas. Charlemagne was perceived by his contemporaries as a new David, but he was not the first to be hailed as an Old Testament king. The Carolingians were regarded as such even before they assumed the throne since Charles Martel was noted for his defense of the faith against the encroachment 10 of Islam. It was Pippin, however, who made manifest the notion by receiving unction at his coronation ceremony in 754.14 The ceremony of unction invested the Carolingians with a more exalted claim to sovereignty. The king became 'rex et sacerdos.” A contemporary of Charlemagne argued that royal unction gave the anointed king "different rights from those of other princes; it made him more than an ordi- nary Christian, more than a king, or priest."15 Unction was regarded as a sacrament which conferred the blessing of God upon the anointed king. The ceremony of coronation and unction had far reaching consequences including the notion that unction was the outward expression of the king's elec- tion by God; it gave a heightened sense of personal responsibility of the king for the salvation of his kingdom, and a closer identification with and emulation of the Old Testament kings. The ceremony of unction was the earthly presentation of royal power by God to His chosen representative. It was testimony to the sacerdotal character of kingship. Thus, Carolingian kingship stressed ”a sacred mythos that was derived from divine sanction and grace."16 The Carolingian ruler thus became either the vicar of God on earth or the adopted of God; at any rate anointing with the holy oil sanctified the king,' who ruled by the grace of God. That the sacrament of unction bore an almost magical quality to exalt the person of the king, was indeed recognized by contemporaries. Kathulf declared that Charles was the 11 "vicar of God" who had been given authority over all members of Frankish society, including the episcopacy.17 He explained that Charles was given a divine mission to improve the spiritual life of his subjects, and that the king is responsible to God for himself and his people at the Last Judgment. Like the rule of David, that of Charles saw the union of church and kingdom.18 Alcuin noted the gift of knowledge that God had granted His elected ruler so that he might direct and protect the community of the faithful with care.19 Moreover, the importance of the notion of divine sanction was not lost for Charlemagne's heirs. Haimo, bishop of Halberstadt from 841 to 853, declared The king is a minister of God; that is he has been established by God for your benefit, by terror and assistance to guard and protect you, lest you be killed by your enemy and lest others snatch away your prosperity.20 By the time of Haimo, the authority of the king over the ecclesiastics had suffered from the civil wars, but his power from God to rule and protect all Christians remained a central tenet of the Carolingian theocracy. The sacramental notion of Carolingian kingship and the belief that the king was God's elect defined the concept that royal authority came from God. It was a sacred duty to obey the king because he was the agent of God's will. The Carolingian understanding of all earthly power emanating from God illustrates the debt Carolingian scholars owed St. Augustine.21 The Carolingians believed that because the king held power from God, he was obligated to ensure the continued prosperity of the true faith. The king became the 12 leader of an elect people and it was his duty to promote the interests of the community of the faithful. He became an agent to do God's will, who because of his position as king held a special position in the social and religious order. The ceremony of unction and the belief that the king ruled by the grace of God contributed to the heightened sense of Christian responsibility expressed by Charlemagne 22 and Louis the Pious. They strove to fulfill the Christian duties defined by the court scholars, the Church Fathers and the Bible. The Christian king should provide, by his own example, the proper behavior of a good Christian; he must live righteously and obey the word of God by attending Mass, saying prayers and doing penance. The king must also provide for social hamrony: to protect widows, children, the poor and oppressed, and correct the actions of sinful men so that all men may be able to earn salvation. Carolingian theorists the most important responsibility of the Christian king was to rule justly. Alcuin wrote to Charlemagne's son, Pippin, that a good king must rule 23 justly. Kathulf defined the requirements of a just rule when he argued Eight pillars support the rule of a just king: the first is truth in the exercise of kingship; the second, patient forebearing in conducting service; the third, generosity in rewarding service; the fourth, a convincing way with words; the fifth, correction and restraint of criminals; the sixth, elevation and public praise of good men; the seventh, lightness of taxes levied on his people, the eighth, equal justice to rich and poor.24 The Frankish kings sought to realize fully their 13 Christian duties in their dealings with the Church; in many ways the kings of the Franks intended not only to be the secular lords of the Church, but also to rule over spiritual matters, and thereby maintain spiritual harmony within the community of the faithful. The capitularies deal with a great many issues on important matters of the faith. The reform program was implemented to improve the spiritual life of all members of society, as well as improving the education of the clergy and the laity. To achieve reform, the Carolingians attempted to unify belief, to encourage ecclesiastical discipline, and to assure attendance at Mass by the laity. Charlemagne sought to unify the liturgical practice of the empire and petitioned Pope Hadrian I for a Roman liturgical model. Moreover, the Carolingians wanted to preserve the integrity of Church institutions and property. Charles tried to assure payment of the tithe and other church dues, and the sanctity of asylum and church property. The Carolingian monarchs sought to restore the integrity of the episcopacy by appointing candidates for election to episcopal sees, and legislating literacy requirements for all of the clergy, especially the bishops. Charles went so far as to participate in the Council of Frankfurt, in which important matters of dogma were decided. Although it was not unusual for kings to participate in a synod, the influence of Charlemagne was especially strong over the Council of Frankfurt. Charles presided over the council; the definition of orthodoxy produced by the 14 participants followed the outlines established by Charles. Moreover, Charles convoked the council to reassert his authority over the Church and to denounce the Council of 25 Nicaea of 787. An even more dramatic expression of the position of the king‘s authority over the Church is the letter sent by Charles to Leo III on his ascension to the papal throne in 795. Charles wrote It is my duty, with the aid of divine mercy to defend the holy Church of Christ by arms every- where: without against the incursions of the pagans and the devastations of the infidels; within, by being her patron in the dissemination of the Catholic faith. Your duty most Holy Father, is to raise your hands towards God as did Moses and through your prayers to hasten the suc- cess of our arms... Let your Prudence hold fast to the canonical regulations in all matters and follow constantly the'rules established by the holy fathers so that your life will provide the example of holiness to all.26 There is no more explicit statement defining the roles of the king and the pope; the king has reserved the realm of action for himself. The Carolingians came to establish secular and spiritual authority over the Church; within a generation of their creation by the pope as kings of the Franks and protectors of the papacy and the entire Church.27 The Carolingian notion of the nature and function of the state came to be redefined as a result of reform. The state itself came to be regarded "as a community of belief, in an Augustinian sense."28 The purpose of the reform program contributed to the new perception of the state, because reform sought to reconstruct Frankish society into a Christian society. The influence for this model came partly from the Old Testament, for as the Frankish kings regarded 15 themselves as the heirs of the biblical tradition of kingship so must the Frankish people be the heirs of the tradition of a chosen people. The Carolingians recognized a divine purpose to kingship that was reflected onto the people, for just as the kings were the elect of God so were the Frankish people. Pope Paul I called the Franks a "holy 29 nation” and a "chosen people." The Salic Law, composed during the reign of Pippin, declared that the Frankish community was created by God and had divine purpose to 30 defend and preserve the faith. The Frankish people came to be regarded as a Christian people bound together by common faith; Christianity came to be the means to unite ah empire of diverse people into one harmonious community. The state took on new responsibilities corresponding to the changed perception of the "populus" and the changed definition of kingship. As Richard Sullivan commented The rediscovery of the idea that the faithful constituted a corporate entity with a unique goal was perhaps the most fertile political concept 'of the Carolingian age... It permitted the chief political figures to transcend the older Germanic view that the state was that which the king ”owned” by right of conquest... By envisioning the state as an organic community beyond man, the Carolingians found justification for a political program that transcended the private interests of a single man.31 The Carolingian state itself became the manifestation of a 32 religious idea in its institutional form. The Church was incorporated into the Frankish state by Charlemagne, and the empire and Church was identified legally as one institution by Louis. The state came to be an institution to guarantee 16 Christian virtue and morality; it was an institution defined by Christian ethics which in turn would define Christian ethics for the people. The Carolingian state, as Richard Sullivan argued, was an institution ”to constrain the evil nature of man so that no one would depart from the norms of conduct established by Christian moral principles."33 This definition, however, seems to overlook the power of the state to promote good. The Carolingians recognized that the state was a community of the faithful created by God as an instrument of positive good. The legislation of the Carolingians sought to promote Christian morality and behavior among all citizens. The more purely Augustinian notion of the state as an essentially negative force to restrict evil was not among Carolingian beliefs; for unlike the bishop of Hippo the Carolingians sought to create a City of God on earth and in fact recognized their own community as an earthly city of God. The Carolingian political and religious community was established by a‘ reform program which aspired to the creation of an earthly city of God. The Carolingians sought to give legal, constitutional basis for their sovereignty over the Church, and in so doing' made manifest the notions of theocratic kingship that the political theorists expressed. The imperial coronation of 800 can be seen as the legitimization of Carolingian claims to authority over Rome and one-time Roman imperial territory. The coronation of 800 made Charles the as 1213 ruler of Roman lands as well as the g2 faggg ruler. Charles had been exercising imperial authority during the last 17 decade of the eighth century. As a result of the troubles of Leo III and the usurpation of the Byzantine throne by Irene, Alcuin and others argued that Charles' power now eclipsed the power of the other dignities and that he alone was responsible for the salvation of all Christendom.34 Moreover, western Christendom was co-extensive with Charlemagne's realm which came to be viewed as a Christian empire, an empire in which spiritual and temporal matters were mingled under the new emperor‘s authority.35 The imperial coronation heightened the already established sense of Christian duty inherent in Carolingian political theory, and gave a constitutional framework for the assimilation of church and state. To establish the religious nature of his authority Charles, in 802, ordered his subjects to swear an oath to the emperor. The oath was a practice that had been used by the Merovingians and which was resurrected by the Carolingians. Charles had made use of oaths earlier in his career often during times of civil unrest and revolt. The oath of 802 differed in nature from the earlier oaths, for it reflected the important religious obligations the Carolingians felt as king and emperor. Furthermore, the oath as an instrument of assuring fidelity was strengthened by the religious nature. of the oath itself.36 The oath was a means to solidify the state around the emperor and to mandate responsibility to the empire, but more importantly it stressed the obligation of fidelity and service to God. The swearer of the oath pledged to adhere 18 to Christian virtues, to respect Church property, and to respect the rights of widows and orphans. The realm of the spiritual and the temporal were again brought into close association. The oath had been used previously as a support of Carolingian power by the sanction of a vague religious power, but in 802, the oath merged responsibility to God with duties to the emperor. The oath of 802 illustrated the theocratic nature and purpose of the state, and again stressed the near indivisibility of church and state that was the central notion of Carolingian political theory and practice. The statement of political theory that most explicitly expressed the Carolingian notion of the association of the empire with the community of the faithful was made by Louis the Pious in 816 and 817. In 816 Louis was crowned emperor of the Franks by Pope Stephen IV. Louis recognized that the coronation of 813 lacked ecclesiastical sanction and that he must re-affirm the unity of the empire with the Church.37 Louis sought to express clearly his divine election and the unity of church and state by papal coronation. He recog- nized that the ceremony of coronation and unction would heighten his prestige by making him the elect of God, and the heir to his father's divine legacy. Furthermore, Louis intended to define the imperial dignity as the foundation of his power and his coronation as emperor rejected the royal titles upon which his father had based his authority to rule. The imperial coronation of 816 granted Louis the full weight of Carolingian ideas of theocratic government and the 19 authority over the church since it conferred sovereignty in a constitutionally defined manner. The coronation of 816 was the first step taken by Louis to define legally and constitutionally his authority over church and state and the necessary unity of church and state. In 817, Louis took steps to define constitutionally the unity of the empire as necessary for the well-being of the Church, and to emphasize the notion that to divide the empire would be a sin before God. He recognized that his ”office came from God; the Church was identified with the Empire and the imperial office [was] a ministerium."38 The empire itself became an almost sacred institution; it was long recognized as the political expression of the Church, but was now more intimately associated with the body of the Church. Agobard wrote that ”Louis the Pious is emperor of the whole church; empire and church coincide, the empire is one because the church is one."39 The "Ordinatio Imperii" of Louis the Pious gave constitutional and legal definition to the assimilation of church and state. The ”Ordinatio Imperii" sought to strengthen the integ- rity of the empire by two means. The first was to place the papacy within the Frankish imperial hierarchy. The role of the papacy within the empire was to continue the effort to improve Christian life, and for this it need be a strong papacy; however, it would remain subordinate to the imperial dignity. Louis promised to protect and defend papal lands; the notion of protection assumed authority over the 20 protected and by this definition Louis afforded himself a means to intervene in papal affairs at his discretion.40 He also sought to establish a method for succession to preserve the integrity of the empire. Louis conferred the imperial dignity upon his eldest son Lothar, thus making Lothar co- emperor while Louis lived and sole emperor after his death. Louis' remaining sons were granted sub-kingdoms to rule under imperial authority. Louis hoped to preserve the integrity of the imperial succession by making a compromise between the traditional patrimonial notions of the state held by the aristocracy and the unitary ideas held by Louis and the ecclesiastical hierarchy. The ”Ordinatio Imperii" was designed to promote the continued unity of church and state and preserve the integrity of the Frankish-Christian empire. It was the most sophisticated expression of the assimilation of church and state and of the sanctity of the Carolingian political order. The intellectual climate of the age was influenced by an understanding of the universal order in which the tempo- ral order was a reflection of the heavenly order. This understanding further blurred the distinction between tempo- ral and spiritual duties and reinforced the idea of the divine origin of Carolingian political power and associated divine will with the mandate of the earthly king. Christian doctrine had long referred to God's spiritual domain as the heavenly kingdom; during the Carolingian age, however, this notion was no doubt understood in a concrete manner and was perhaps ”interpreted in terms of the fighting and feuding 21 41 customs of the age.” Moreover, Angilbert described God as ”the omnipotent ruler who governed high and low”, and who looked down from the highest throne and came to the assistance of His servants as a ‘good king'.”42 Therefore, if the greatest lay and ecclesiastical figures of the Christian community understood heaven in this manner, there can be no question that the rest of the laity knew heaven as a spiritual kingdom, patterned in a more or less feudal structure. God ”was often represented as the lord of the divine castle, presiding like a powerful king over the celestial court of his vassals, the saints."43 The cult of the saints extended the notion of God as divine king, implying an important social order in heaven with God at the apex and the saints forming a pyramid between God and man. The saints were the faithful retainers of the king of heaven; and thus formed an important hierarchial structure at the summit of which stood God, ”[and] He, ruler of the universe,... whose 'honor' was enhanced by the number of His saintly followers."44 Moreover, God the Father and the son were understood as the conquering warriors of the Apocalypse and not the God who suffered on the cross. The more humane qualities of God were overshadowed in favor of his qualities as an omnipotent ruler and conquering warrior. The most dramatic expression of this notion can be found in the laudes proclaimed by Frankish churchmen during the Mass. Ernst Kantorowicz explained The laudes invoke the conquering God-~Christ the victor, ruler and commander--and acclaim Him; with 22 Him, or through Him , His imperial or royal vicars on earth along with all the other powers conquer- ing, ruling, commanding and safeguarding the order of this present world.45 The central theme of the laudes is the military virtues of Christ. In the Carolingian thought world, God, therefore, was a conquering king who ruled over a mighty, celestial kingdom supported by faithful, saintly retainers. The Carolingians ”transferred [to God] the essential features, duly magnified, of royal power, and then, as it were, borrowed them back. God thus became not only the source of their power but also their model."46 Kathulf wrote to Charles that the king is "in [God's] place over all the limbs of His body to protect and to rule.”47 The Carolingian king by virtue of standing atop the temporal hierarchy was a reflection of God as He sat atop the celes- tial hierarchy. The Frankish social structure was thus considered the reflection of the celestial hierarchy. The Frankish empire was built on the model of the celestial empire. The construction of Aix-la-Chapelle gives further validity to the idea that the Frankish empire was a reflec- tion of God's empire. The palace reflected the structure of Frankish society, but also implied the parallelism between the heavenly and earthly kings. The role of the king as intercessor before God was firmly expressed at the church in the palace,48 and perhaps the positioning of the king's throne inspired the notion that the king was more than intercessor. The notion of the Frankish ruler as the 23 reflection of the heavenly king, and the notion that there existed a connection between the powers of the king and God were well-established by Carolingian theorists. The belief that the temporal order was a reflection of the heavenly order surely contributed to the desire of the Frankish rulers to create an earthly city of God. The notion that the king stood in God's place on earth gave credibility to the Carolingian desire to reform society. That the king in some ways achieved the likeness of God led to the further assimilation of church and state; as God's vicar, the king assumed responsibility of the salvation of all and thus assumed the duty to rule over spiritual mat- ters. The near lack of distinction between church and state in the Carolingian world was thus reinforced by both political and spiritual considerations. Indeed, it was commonly believed that God Himself continued to intervene in the affairs of the world that He had created. The Franks believed that they were in constant contact with the super- natural, and that ”[thel Christian world was one where all labored to please God."49 Thus, not only was there almost no distinction between temporal and spiritual matters in a purely political sense, but also in the very conception of the universal order. The heavenly kingdom was mirrored by the temporal kingdom, and perhaps the two were merged into one in the perception of the universe. The spiritual and 'temporal orders, and the will of God and that of the earthly Icing therefore were assimilated in Carolingian thought world and Carolingian political theory. 24 The belief that the temporal order was a reflection of the heavenly order is one of great importance. The court scholars developed and supported this conception of the universal order. They argued that God was the source and model of kingship, and because God was presented as a king, His authority would be associated with His earthly counter- part. The court scholars wrote the sermons in which was presented this understanding of a parallel between heaven and earth to the Frankish people. It will be argued that the sermon authors intended to inspire loyalty to God, the king of heaven and thereby to inspire loyalty to the king of the Franks. THE CAROLINGIAN SERMON AND POLITICAL THEORY The sermon was the instrument used by the clergy to teach Christian dogman to all members of society, but the lack of distinction between the temporal and spiritual orders made the expression of the political beliefs of the Carolingian kings and churchmen as important as the expression of religious beliefs. The sermon authors hoped to convey their theocratic notions to the Frankish people and thus be able to create an earthly city of God. The sermon, therefore. was not only an instrument to define religious beliefs, but was also an important vehicle to express Carolingian political will and political theory. However, there has been limited discussion on this topic, and those who have considered it do not agree. One recent scholar argued that in the sermons 25 there is little reference either to the king or to the king's officers... there were also no vehicles for government ”propoganda.” for there are few exhortations to obey an earthly ruler, loyalty being rendered to the "King of Heaven”... what the sermon material suggests is an indifference on the part of the church to public and ”governmental” affairs.50 However. another scholar claimed that the ”sermons provided a lively commentary on the social and political conditions of the age,"51 and still another recognized the sermons as a vital instrument of the reform program.52 McKitterick's argument that the sermon material sug- gests ”an indifference on the part of the church" to public affairs fails to recognize Carolingian political theology in its most comprehensive expression. The political theory of the Carolingians went beyond the secular and temporal con- cerns of more modern statements of political thought. The definition of Carolingian kingship was given its unique characteristics because of its sacramental nature. Carolingian political theory achieved its fullest expression as a result of the religious beliefs of the individual Carolingian rulers. The Carolingian political structure itself was understood as a community of the faithful, patterned after the Old Testament model of the Hebrew kingdom. The very purpose of the Carolingian monarchy was to effect a reform of society, to restore Christian ethics and morality and to establish an earthly city of God. Moreover, to state that the Church was indifferent to Carolingian politics neglects the important role of ecclesiastics in the reform movement, and their place in the 26 Frankish political hierarchy and the role of the Church in the creation of the Carolingian dynasty. To understand the nature and function of the sermon in the Carolingian reform and as an expression of political theory, an examination of the sermons of Agobard. Alcuin. Theodulph of Orleans and Hrabanus Maurus will be undertaken.53 These four were important members of the 'reform movement and the preaching movement, and they reflect important streams of thought that influenced Carolingian political theory. Alcuin brought with him the intellectual tradition of England, and although his ability as an original thinker was limited, he was widely respected for his breadth of knowledge and abilities as a teacher. Born near York in 735, Alcuin came to be one of the most important members of Charlemagne's court school. He was educated at York in the tradition of the Venerable Bede. and ordained as a deacon at the age of thirty. Returning from a trip to Rome in the Spring of 781. Alcuin met Charlemagne at Parma and was invited by the Frankish king to head his palace school. An active supporter of orthodoxy who vigorously opposed the Adoptionist heresy, Alcuin also sought to teach Charles of the spiritual responsibilities of a monarch and perhaps influenced Charles to accept the imperial coronation. In 796, Alcuin removed himself from the court and retired to the abbacy of the monastery of St. Martin at Tours where he continued to teach and continued to correspond with Charles until he died in 804. 27 Theodulph of Orleans represented the Gothic tradition of Spain which had developed theories of kingship as well as a more philosophical approach to Church doctrine. Theodulph was a Goth from Spain born in the mid-eighth century who joined the palace school of Charlemagne in 794. His impor- tance in the school was second only to Alcuin's and his literary talents as a poet are celebrated today. Theodulph's learning and literary talent suggest his involvement in the writing of the Caroline Books and his participation at the synod of Frankfurt gives this notion further support. By 798. Theodulph was bishop of Orleans and as bishop he was concerned with the reform of his flock and clergy. He wrote important capitularies on the proper behavior of the clergy; his extant sermons suggest his concern that his flock live as good Christians. As a bishop, Theodulph performed important civil and ecclesiastical functions; he was a "missus" of Charlemagne and a witness of the emperor's will in 811. However, Theodulph's fortunes turned when he participated in the revolt of Bernard, King of Italy in 818. He was deposed from his see and was imprisoned until his death in 821. In 782. Agobard fled the Saracens of Spain for the safety of the Frankish kingdom. In 804, he was ordained a priest and settled in Lyons to continue his education under the bishop Leidrad, whom he succeeded in 816. He fervently supported orthodoxy and opposed the Adoptionist heresy as well as rejecting superstitions and the veneration of 28 images. He emphasized the importance of the priesthood and the unity of the Church. He argued against the variety of laws within the empire and encouraged one law for all Christians just as there was one faith. During the political turmoil of the 830's. Agobard supported the settlement of 817 and the party of Lothar against Louis the Pious. Agobard recognized the divine origin of the Frankish state and the importance of its continued unity. He under- stood that the state was the political expression of the Church and to break up the state would be a sin. Agobard was forced to leave his see when Louis gained victory over Lothar with whom the bishop fled to Italy. The see of Lyons was assumed by Amalarius with whom Agobard and his loyal deacon Florus entered into a disputation concerning the new bishop's orthodoxy. In 838, Louis convened a synod at Kiersy which determined that Amalarius was a heretic and thus Amamariu was deposed and Agobard was reinstated as bishop of Lyons, a position he held until his death on June 6. 839. Hrabanus Maurus was one of the most gifted scholars of the renaissance and one of its greatest successes. Hrabanus was a Frank born in Mainz in 776 who was educated at Fulda for a short time and then, from 801 to 804, was a student of Alcuin at Tours. Hrabanus remained at Tours until 814 when he returned to Fulda and was ordained presbyter. He became the director of the school at Fulda by 817 and its abbot in 822, a position held until he resigned in 842 to dedicate his time to study and writing. His retirement was short- 29 lived for in 847 he was elected archbishop of Mainz. As archbishop. he was noted for his charity and concern for his flock until his death in 868. He wrote excellent commentary on Scripture, but was also known for his poetry and encyclopedia. Hrabanus personified the virtues of the renaissance in the liberal arts and defense of orthodoxy. He supported the orthodox view in the Eucharistic controversy of Paschasius Radbertus and Ratramnus, and he condemned the heretical theology of Gottschalk. The reformers of the eighth and ninth centuries re- asserted the duty of bish0ps and priests to preach the Christian message on the holy days. The practice of preaching had come to be neglected during the pre- Carolingian era, and the Carolingians realized the utility of the sermon to teach the laity their responsibilities as members of the earthly city of God. The obligation of the clergy to preach was expressed not only by ecclesiastical reformers but also by the Carolingian kings. The "Admonitio Generalis” stated that bishops must preach to all members of the laity on matters of the faith.54 The duty of the bishops was not only to preach to the laity on matters of the Christian religion, but also ”to provide themselves with a homilary for the purpose.”55 The cornerstone of the Carolingian reform program thus made episcopal and clerical preaching a legal responsibility since the capitulary carried the force of law. This order to preach illustrates .again the blurred distinction of spiritual and temporal 30 matters. However. the concern of the Carolingian rulers with preaching was voiced on another occasion. The synod of Rheims of 813, convoked by imperial decree to improve the integrity of the Church. declared the duty to preach. The "Statuta Synodalia Ecclasiae Remensis” states that clergymen are the shepherds of their flocks and must teach the faithful. and the bishops must deliver the word of God to nourish the laity.56 However, as important as these examples are. it must be noted that they are only two among the many pieces of legislation enacted during the reigns of - Charlemagne and Louis to encourage preaching. The importance attached to preaching by the Carolingian kings was echoed with equal fervor by the members of the court school. Alcuin stressed the importance of preaching to convert the Saxons, and in 796 wrote to Arno. bishop of Salzburg Do you be [sic] a preacher of righteousness, not an exactor of tithes, because a new spirit must be nourished with milk of kindness until it grows and becomes strong for the receiving of solid food.57 Alcuin encouraged the members of the clergy to preach actively to fulfill their ministry and thereby to follow the example of Christ.58 Agobard exhorted his flock to preach to others about the miracles of God and of His deeds.59 He also declared that the fight against the Devil could be waged with success by abstinence, continence and vigils and also by performing the work of an evangelist.60 Hrabanus recognized the importance of preaching and thus composed two collections of homilies. one of which he sent to the emperor 31 Lothar, and the other was prepared specifically for popular preaching. Hrabanus declared in the preface of the ”Homiliae de Festis Praecipius. Item de Virtutibus” that its purpose was to provide material to be used to instruct the people in all that is necessary for them to believe.61 The homilies were concerned with important feast days and Christian virtues, and were compiled to provide a standard text for preaching. The homiletic collections of Hrabanus are testimony to the importance that he attached to preach- ing. Theodulph also considered the priest as the shepherd of a flock who must lead by instruction of word and deed. In his episcopal decrees, Theodulph sought to implement the Carolingian reform. and he repeated the injunctions of the ”Admonitio Generalis.” Preaching was thus recognized by both the Frankish kings and churchmen as an important duty of the ecclesiastic. The sermon was an important tool of the Carolingian reformers because of its traditional use as a means of instruction; it was used to teach the laity the proper behavior and beliefs of a good Christian. It delivered simple messages on the basic tenets of Christianity to the people; its purpose was to achieve at the lower levels of society what the royal and synodal legislation attempted at the upper levels of society, to communicate the ideas of the reformation 0:2 society and an exhortation to live a Christian life. The sermons provided the illiterate laity tvith the Christian message in a manner which they could 32 understand. Christianity was defined as a way of behavior; those who followed the prescribed practices would benefit. from the grace of God. The sermons explained some of the more sophisticated theological doctrines, but also stressed the simple rudiments of the faith and the responsibilities of the members of the Christian community. The Carolingians understood Christianity in terms of social living, and thus the sermons were intended to teach the laity that they had certain responsibilities in society.63 The use of the sermon by the Carolingian missionaries is an example of the sermon as an instrument of Frankish political will. The missionaries sought to tie the newly- conquered pagans into the Christian community of the Franks; ”the work of the missionaries went hand-in-hand with political penetration, Christianization was a necessary step leading to political penetration."64 The peoples conquered by the Franks were instructed in the basic tenets of Christianity as a means of incorporating them into the Frankish political and social structure. The association of Christianity with Carolingian military conquest and political authority was no doubt made by the conquered peoples. The activities of the missionaries were of crucial importance to the success of Carolingian attempts to convert the pagans and incorporate them into the Christian community. The missionaries sought to convert the pagans by preaching; they strove to persuade the pagans that Christianity was the true religion, and perhaps cited the example of Carolingian success in the course of their dispu- 33 tations. The sermons of the missionaries introduced to the pagans the Christian faith in its most simple and concrete form. The missionaries explained the errors of pagan prac- tices and the weakness of pagan gods to protect their adherents from conquest. They defined, in the simplest manner. the power of the Christian God to promote the wel- fare of His followers and the prospect of eternal damnation to those who refused Him.65 Christianity was defined in terms familiar to the pagans; religion was understood as a system of rewards and punishments. The victory of Christianity was complemented by the victory of Frankish arms. The presentation of the Christian faith in these terms would have perhaps eased the conversion of the pagan, and thus incorporated him into the community of the faithful. The Carolingians restored the duty to preach as an important function of the clergy. The Christian message was delivered to all members of the Frankish community and also to pagans conquered by Carolinigan power. Although the clergy began to preach more actively. their audience, com- prised mainly of illiterate peasants, would not have under- stood the Latin in which the sermons were written. However, there is some evidence to suggest that although the sermons were written in Latin, they were delivered in the vernacular as presctibed by law. It was important to the ruling mem- bers of Carolingian society, therefore. that all subjects understand the message that was being delivered to them. 34 Charlemagne stressed the need for preachers to instruct their flock in a language that they would understand, even if it were the vernacular.66 Moreover, imperial initiative in this matter took the form of a canonical legislation from the council of Tours in 813. The council, convoked by imperial command, decreed that each bishop should have a collection of homilies, And let each bishop strive to translate these homilies openly into the rustic Roman tongue or into Theodeutsch, so that all the people can understand what is said.67 Charles was supported by important members of the palace school including Alcuin and Hrabanus. In his "De Clericorum Institutione,” Hrabanus explained that ”it was necessary to be able to preach to people in their own language because the preacher was not speaking to the learned but rather to those who were untaught."68 Those seeking to reform society realized that the laity must understand what the preacher is saying so that they would be able to follow Christian law. Language was no barrier for the Carolingian scholars because their native language was a vernacular and Latin was a learned language reserved for correspondence and disputation with other scholars. Thus, the practical utility of the sermon as a means of instruction was not limited by the barrier of language. The use of the vernacular clearly demonstrates the importance of the sermon in the Carolingian reform program. 'The sermon was the most important instrument for the {education of the Frankish people, for it not only brought 35 the message of Christian ethics and morality to the Frankish people but also was the instrument used to define the community as a religious institution in which the demands of the spiritual order were intertwined with the demands of the temporal order. The Carolingians recognized the sermon as an instrument to carry out their plans for the reformation of society. The sermon was meant to bring Carolingian political beliefs to the Frankish people. The repeated royal declarations for the clergy to preach suggests that the Carolingian kings believed the sermon to be the most effective means of teaching the people religious and political ideology. The sermon is the most important example of the theocratic nature of Carolingian kingship; the very nature of the sermon was to provide religious instruction which contributed to the formation of the earthly city of God and contributed to the understanding of the political order as a religious organization. The sermons provide testimony to the influence of the Old Testament on Carolingian thought. concerning kingship and the state. They defined kingship for the Frankish people and their role in history as heirs to the biblical tradition of the chosen people. The sermons defined the notion of the Frankish kingdom as a community of the faithful and the importance of fulfilling the responsibilities that the notion of the chosen people entailed. In this light, the exhortations to Christian living can be seen as imperial law, and therefore an impor- tant goal of Carolingian reform and political will. The 36 role of the sermon was to define the practical duties of all citizens in the city of God, and their obligation to God's appointed king. The definition of temporal kingship in the sermons is, on the surface, an essentially negative definition. The few references to temporal kings in the sermons express certain negative characteristics of kingship. The sermons call on the king to avoid sin, an exhortation not only to kings but also to all members of the laity and clergy. Moreover, the sermon authors seem not to have been concerned with defining the character or responsibilities of a Christian king. Alcuin did not mention specifically royal duties, nor did Hrabanus in his collection of homilies intended for popular preaching.69 Theodulph did make three contributions to the definition of kingship in one of his extant sermons; however they are general prescriptions applicable to all Christians. In his sermon Theodulph quoted Solomon who declared that there is nothing so wicked as the love of money.70 The precedents established by the Hebrew kings were especially important to the Carolingians and certainly the words of Solomon were weighed with careful consideration by the Frankish kings. The prohibition against the desire for money. however. was a responsibility of all Christians, not just the royal members of the community of the faithful. A second reference to the proper behavior of kings made by Theodulph is part of a general admonition against drunken- ness and laziness. He encouraged his flock to avoid excess 37 of drink and lamented the city whose princes wasted the day.71 The problem with drinking, however, was endemic to society and not the peculiar problem of kingship. The final reference to royal duty is another example from the Old Testament, and the model is again Solomon. Theodulph reminded his listeners of the failure of Solomon, who as a result of an excess of leisure succumbed to the sin of fornication and through fornication lapsed into idolatry.72 If so wise a king as Solomon could be led astray. then the ordinary Christian need be extra careful and take heed from the example of Solomon. The importance of Solomon as a model for kingship would have given the lesson of his lapse into idolatry greater importance. but the lesson was not peculiar to kings. Theodulph advised kings of certain fun- damental responsibilities, but his advice was as much for the edification of all members of society as for the royal members. The sermon of Agobard does offer a more precise state- ment of the duties of kings than those of Theodulph, Alcuin or Hrabanus. Agobard's definition of the earthly king was in the negative and expressed in apocalyptic terms.. His discussion of kingship was derived from Daniel and was expressed in terms of the coming of the Antichrist. Agobard explained the blasphemies that the evil king raised up by the Antichrist will commit against God. The king will oppress and destroy 7ghe saints of God and will rise up against God Himself. The sins of the king who is the minion of the Antichrist may be understood as a warning for 38 the earthly king. The good king must not allow himself to become proud and exalt himself above God. A king must protect the followers of Christ and obey the laws of God. The king raised up by the. Antichrist was destroyed by Christ; the king who refuses the call to proper Christian behavior can expect similar treatment by God at the Last Judgment. Agobard's admonition to the kings not to follow the path of sin and become like the king raised up by the Antichrist is the clearest statement concerning the proper behavior of a king. It may be inferred from the example of the evil king of the Apocalypse that the Christian king must be faithful to God and obey God's law. On the baSis of the brief references in the sermons of Theodulph and Agobard and the absence of any reference in the homilies of Alcuin and Hrabanus Maursus the role and function of kingship may not to have been a concern of the sermon authors. Moreover, the lack of any statements concerning the duties of subjects to temporal kings may be further indication of the lack of concern among the sermon authors with theories of kingship. However, the character- istics of God and the obedience due God by all people expressed by the sermon authors may be associated with the role and function of kingship. Certainly the notion of a parallelism between heaven and earth was recognized by the sermon authors; thus the association of the characteristics of the spiritual and temporal kings may be drawn from the sermons. The sermon authors were involved with the formula- 39 01 (ll sh C0 of po: Fm sex thi the POP‘ witl serr God the defi tion of political theory on all levels and recognized that God was the source and model of kingship. By declaring that all Christian members of society owe allegiance and obedience to God the sermon authors implied that the same duties were owed the king because of the peculiar relation- ship that existed between God and His anointed earthly counterpart. The sermon authors implied the responsibility of obedience to the temporal king by associating his position on earth with the position of God in heaven. Furthermore. the far less sophisticated audience of the sermons lived in a shadowy world where things temporal and things spiritual were not clearly distinct. The prestige of the anointed king may have been more exalted among the populace who may have confused the divinely-appointed king with the king of the liturgical acclamations. That the sermon authors were concerned with defining the nature of God is beyond doubt but there is evidence to suggest that the nature of kingship was defined in terms of the definition of the godhead. The repeated references to God as king of heaven pro- vide examples of the willingness of the sermon authors to make the association between the temporal and spiritual kings. It must be remembered that even the most sophisti- cated members of Carolingian society understood the heavenly «order in terms of the earthly social structure, and .reference to God as the king of heaven would reinforce this notion.74 Agobard emphasized the belief that heaven was the 75 kingdom of God, a kingdom that will have no end. Hrabanus 40 we Lc th th. ex; thl and whi fai the witj The autl popu Only w°Ul< 76 also described heaven as a kingdom: the ”regnum coelorum." The importance of this notion must not be dismissed because of its simplicity; the description of heaven as a kingdom did not convey a metaphorical meaning to the faithful; it was understood in terms of the earthly kingdom and inspired the association between the two kingdoms. Moreover, the impression that the earthly kingdom was a reflection of the heavenly kingdom was given added weight by the belief that the king was in the place of God in the temporal order. God was referred to as the prince of the kings of the earth, Lord of Lords and King of Kings,77 and the place as head of the Church assumed by the Carolingian king was thought held by Christ.78 God is described as being seated on a heavenly throne with Christ seated at His right hand.79 Agobard explained to his flock that God is seated on His royal throne in ”blessing and honor, and glory and power for ever and ever."80 Alcuin told his audience that the throne upon which God is seated is prepared for those who are among His faithful.81 Hrabanus completed most of his homilies with the statement ”Our Lord Jesus Christ, who lives and reigns with the Father and the Holy Spirit for ever and ever."82 The educated members of society recognized that the authority to govern was a royal responsibility and the popular mind could understand the ability of God to rule only in terms of temporal kingship. The description of God as a conquering warrior also would have inspired the association between the heavenly and 41 fa Ct th co th La hi: 13111 0f kin and for CORq the earthly kings. Although the Carlongians sought to fashion kingship into a nobler institution, the notion of the king as a war-lord was not easily overcome. The annual campaigns of Charlemagne and of Louis the Pious testify to the importance of the king's martial success. God was perceived as a successful warrior by the sermon authors. Theodulph, who otherwise was content to describe the impor- tance of observing proper Christian behavior. commented that God will destroy evil and things hateful to Him.83 Hrabanus described the power of the faith in God in martial terms; he explained that good Christians are armed with the ”shield of faith, cuirass of justice and helmet of salvation, and sword of the spirit, which is the word of God."84 Moreover, Hrabanus explained that Christ will lead the army of the faithful in the struggle against the army of the devil. Christ the king will lead His Church to victory over sin and the forces of evil.85 The most dramatic statements concerning the military strength of God are to be found in the sermon of Agobard who described Christ's victory at the Last Judgment. At the time of the Apocalypse, the devil and his minions will rise up against God and will attack heaven, but God will destroy them and lead the faithful to victory. Agobard explained that the devil and his army will make war of God, ”and the Lamb who is the Lord of lords, and King of kings will conquer them."86 Christ will destroy the devil and all his earthly followggs and deliver the kingdom of God for all time thereafter. - God was presented as a great conqueror who will vanquish the enemies of virtue; the 42 cc ki th Th kil fe< The ref. ten; temp spiritual victories of God were a reflection of the victories of the Frankish kings in defense of the faith. The portrayal of God as a warrior prince would contribute to the understanding that the faithful owed responsibility to both the heavenly and earthly king. The precedent of the Old Testament kings, invoked in the sermons, gave the clearest definition of the association between God and the king. Biblical precedent clearly sup- ported the notion that there existed a peculiar relationship between God and the earthly king. Alcuin reminded his flock that Christ Himself was of the line of King David.88 Pippin and Charles both were called a ”new David” by members of the Church; this symbolic reference may suggest a more precise association with God. The most definite statement concerning the relationship of the heavenly and the earthly king. however, was made by Hrabanus Maurus. He recognized the special value that anointing conferred upon the king. The anointing with holy chrism exalted the person of the king and made concrete the compact with God. Hrabanus, recognizing the value of chrism, explained Jesus is called the ”saviour" because he is under- stood as Christ by the true chrism: because just as the ancient kings had holy oil poured over them by the priests, our Lord Jesus Christ was filled by an infusion of the Holy Spirit.89 The spiritual chrism bestowed upon Christ by God is reflected by the ceremony of coronation and unction of the temporal king. The temporal king was given charge of the temporal order by God, and thus stood in God's place on 43 I earth. The biblical models of the relationship of God with the Old Testament kings make certain that the association of the character of the earthly king with the heavenly king was intended. The characteristics of the heavenly king and the obedience due Him that were expressed in the sermons were intended to be transferred to the Carolingian king. Each of the sermon authors agrees that the most impor- tant characteristic attributed to God was the quality of justice. . Hrabanus stated that piety and justice are sent from heaven by God to good Christians, and he urged all Christians to seek the kingdom of God and His justice.90 Theodulph explained to the poor that God will reward them with eternal life for their temporal sufferings because He is just and pious in all His works.91 God's justice will be done when He comes to judge the living_and the dead during the Apocalypse. It will be at that time that He will show mercy and righteous vengeance. At the Last Judgment, God will punish sinful behavior , but He will be merciful to those who have shown mercy and He will reward the vir- tuous.92 The performance of justice was an important royal prerogative of the heavenly king. The decisions of the divine judge were truly just for it was only the sinful who would earn the wrath of God at the Last Judgment. The duty of the temporal king to do justice and to be just has been suggested by modern scholars as well as the Carolingian scholars. The king's justice was one with which the Frankish people would be familiar. The association between the temporal and spiritual king would therefore be made at 44 the popular and educated levels of Frankish society. All members of society would have understood that the justice of the heavenly king would be reflected back onto the temporal king; since the king of heaven was merciful and just his earthly counterpart must also be merciful and just. More- over, the familiarity of the popular elements of society with this aspect of royal power would have allowed them to understand the implied association between the king of heaven and the king of the Franks. Although the references are by no means extensive, there are enough examples to suggest that justice and mercy were important attributes of heavenly kingship and therefore mercy and justice were important attributes of temporal kingship. The sermon authors sought to imbue a sense of respon- sibility to God in their work; they expressed the notion that faithful Christians must love and obey the king of heaven. Alcuin explained to his flock that they should love God because He called His people to faith and life, from darkness to the light.95 This reference could have been an implied reference to Charlemagne. for the reform program of the Frankish king called his subjects from the darkness of paganism to the light of Christianity. Alcuin further exhorted his flock to praise God and to esteem His piety and majesty.95 Hrabanus also commented on the duty of all Christians to love God; he explained to his flock that they must love God and remain humble, for even the holy angels ”have persisted at all times as faithful followers in the 4S 96 castle of the king above.” He not only cited the practice of the devotion of the angels as an exhortation to love God, but also explained that "we have a mandate from God to love 97 Him and those like Him.” Theodulph explained to his flock they must love God, and that although it is a difficult 98 task, it brings great reward. The emotional attachment to God was a central tenet of the faith. for to be truly deserving of God's grace one must love Him. Moreover, this emotional characteristic of true faith would make obedience to His commandments much easier. To love God meant to obey Him and obedience would help unify the community of the faithful. The fundamental responsibility of all Christians to be obedient to God was commented upon by the sermon authors. They commented on pride as being the root of sin, and that pride caused disobedience which was punished by the divine judge. Pride was the worst of sins; the most abhorrent to God, and the first of sins. Pride caused the trangression 99 . of the law of God. The sermon authors recognized the divisiveness that pride could encourage; disobedience to authority would be dangerous to the established social order. Agobard explained that the faithful serve God in his temple day and night.100 The bishop of Lyons contended that obedience to God was a duty that no good Christian could shirk for Christ Himself remained obedient to God the Father when He had become man and was ordered bylghe Father to suffer the torment of death on the cross. Agobard no doubt hoped that his flock would learn the lesson provided 46 by the example of Jesus Christ that all Christians must obey the word of their heavenly king no matter how dire the consequences. Hrabanus noted that all members of the faithful must serve God without pride.102 The association of service and obedience was again made to encourage proper behavior within the community of the faithful. Theodulph explained the importance of obeying God's will; he taught his flock that they must actively serve God and remain obedient to Him.103 Moreover, Theodulph exhorted his flock not to subvert the established social order because it was created by God as part of His divine plan. Those in the condition of servitude must obey their‘ master, decreed Theodulph, because God created some men to be slaves and others to be masters.104 The statement by Theodulph pro- vided dramatic expression of the lack of distinction between things spiritual and things temporal. The exhortation to preserve the societal order and to obey temporal masters provided testimony to the parallel between the heavenly and temporal orders that existed in the minds of the Carolingian scholars. The commandment to obey temporal masters could be extended to the king himself. and indeed supported the argument that Christians were obligated to obey not only God, but also the temporal king. That Christians must love and obey God was plainly stated by the sermon authors; the Iintellectual climate of the age supported the association between the earthly and temporal kings, and thus obedience to God was transferred back onto the kings of the Franks. 47 The sermons were, therefore. an important instrument for the expression of ideas of kingship. The definition of kingship is not one that would fit a society of more secular orientation; it is one that is theocratic at its very essence. The definition of kingship provided by the sermons declared that the authority of the earthly king was derived from God, and therefore he was an instrument of the divine plan. The religious responsibility exhibited by the Carolingian kings must have surely impressed the sermon authors, who helped create the recognition of these respon- sibilities by the Frankish kings. The sermon authors would seek to communicate these notions of theocratic, or divine kingship to the Frankish lay population. Although the definition of kingship lacked concern for practical matters of statecraft and in fact seems divorced from matters of the temporal sphere, the definition drew upon popular and sophisticated intellectual currents of the age. The lack of distinction between spiritual and temporal obligations sup- ports the argument that kingship. was understood in essentially religious terms, and reference to the king of heaven was understood to be transferred to the Frankish king. The sermon writers hoped not only to present the idea of kingship that would inspire loyalty among their listeners but also to define society as a community bound by common faith. There existed within the Carolingian realm forces that threatened to fragment society. The Carolingian king- dom was comprised of Saxons, Lombards, Franks and other 48 Germanic peoples who followed different customs and spoke different languages. The people of the Aquitaine were of such an independent spirit that Charles was forced to make Louis king of Aquitaine as a concession to their sense of national identity. The Carolingian state suffered from a loss of allegiance due to the ties of blood. The people of the realm had familial ties that caused private loyalties and private feuds. These national and familial ties hin- dered the development of a broader sense of community extending across the entire Carolingian realm. An important goal of the Carolintian reform was to eliminate these forces of fragmentation; the reformers hoped to create a society without internal division, a community bound together by the Christian faith. The sermon authors introduced to the Frankish people the notion that they were members of a community of belief, and therefore had certain responsibilities to fulfill. Alcuin encouraged his flock to help the wretched, and warned them not to be heretics or unbelievers who denied the virgin birth of Christ and His divinity.105 Heresy is a divisive element in society that Alcuin sought to eradicate; not only were heretics in danger of losing salvation, but they also upset the social order by arguing against the true faith, which was the bond of society. In his sermon, "De Omnibus Ordinibus Hujus Saeculi,” Theodulph offered advice to various members of society of how to live in the community, so that it would remain at peace. He encouraged widows to 49 remain chaste and humble, to await God silently and not to be idle gossips. The poor were reminded to suffer their burden for Christ will reward them, and the rich were reminded that they can earn the remedy of sin by giving alms. Those in bondage were advised to bear their burdens because a good servant is better than a bad lord; by knowing their place, those in servitude will enjoy God's blessing in the next life.106 The admonitions by Alcuin and Theodulph encouraged harmony within the established social order, and thus contributed to the understanding of society as a commu- nity bound together by the true faith. The idea of society as a community with some higher mission gained more elaborate expression in the sermons of Agobard and Hrabanus Maurus. Agobard was a strong advocate of the political solution that Louis the Pious had estab- lished in 817, and supported the notion that the maintenance of the unity of the empire was a sacred duty. He recognized the Frankish people as a community of the faithful. During the civil war that plagued the empire in the 8303, Agobard opposed the emperor. Louis. He argued that to change the ”Divisio Imperii” of 817 would be to commit a sin, and wrote to Louis ”you are not able to change [the ”Divisio Imperii”) without sin, without placing the salvation of your soul in peril."107 Agobard took up the defense of the idea of unity; he associated church and state, identified the Frankish people with the Christian people, and argued that as God gave one faith for all men so should they have one 108 law and one king. Agobard's beliefs expressed the theo- 50 cratic nature of political theory in the Carolingian age, and therefore found comfortable expression in his sermon. Agobard understood that God had given the Frankish people a special mission to fulfill in His divine plan. They were the newly-constituted chosen people; they were chosen by God as His elect and therefore must live up to a higher standard of Christian virtue. The Frankish people, just as the Frankish king, were recognized in terms of the precedent of the Old Testament. Agobard made this notion explicit in his sermon; he told his audience You are however an elect people, a royal priest- hood, a holy race, a people of acquisition. that you whom he called from the darkness into his admirable light may announce his virtues.109 He exhibited before his audience the parallel between the Frankish people and the Hebrew people of the Old Testament. He explained the dignity which they possessed and the obli- gation which their special place in history entailed. Agobard recognized that the Frankish people were a community of the faithful in the Old Testament tradition. He may have intended to impart to his flock the very notion that Agobard himself held of the sacred unity of the empire or at the very least, he intended to impart a sense of identity that would bind the community together. Moreover, just as the Hebrew people were constituted by God to fulfill a pre- ordained role so too did the Franks have a special mission. The Carolingian impulse to missionary activity was in part derived from this belief in their special place in history. Agobard exhorted his audience to announce the virtues of God 51 to all who did not know them; thus the sense of community was reinforced by the sense of shared duty. Agobard gave further expression of the religious nature of the community by declaring that Christ Himself was the head of the body of the faithful. Christ assumed temporal powers as a result of his spiritual authority just as his earthly counterpart had earned greater spiritual authority as a result of his temporal powers. The association of Christ with the temporal community granted it a higher sanctity, just as the association of earthly kingship with heavenly kingship elevated the conception of temporal king- ship. Moreover. the role of Christ strengthened the sense of unity within the body of the faithful; Agobard explained to his flock Because moreover, the mediation of the mediator of God and man our Lord Jesus Christ joins every elect creature to the Father, so that by this ineffable unity of spirit, there will be no dif- ference of race, condition or sex, but one house and city of God will be made from angels and men. and at the head of such wonderful unity is Christ.110 The Franks were. therefore, bound together by a common faith into a spiritual community. They were unified by common belief and bound to the same spiritual king through the faith, and thus the sanctity of the earthly community was reinforced, and the understanding of society as the earthly city of God was given greater weight. The activities of the Carolingian kings may have been recognized in this descrip- tion for Charles sought to create a city of God by unifying his people by a common faith to the heavenly king. For 52 Louis, this may have been an admonition to preserve the unity of the empire because it was a sacred institution that was constituted by God for some divinely-inspired purpose. That Agobard intended to imply an association between the spiritual and temporal realms is given support by the comment he made describing the community as a place Where there is not gentile or Jew, circumsision or uncircumsision. barbarian or Scythian. slave or free, but all are one in Christ.111 In ”Adversus legem Gundobadi,” Agobard used virtually the same language in defense of a uniform body of law.112 He argued that since God gave man one faith there should be only one law; he clearly was arguing about affairs in the temporal order. The similarity of language leads to the conclusion that he intended his sermon to refer not only to the heavenly kingdom, but also to the city of God on earth. Agobard sought to encourage the notion of unity among the Frankish people to, preserve the empire. His sermon expressed the importance of religious unity among the Carolingians and the spiritual duty they assumed as God's chosen people. Agobard recognized the nature of the Carolingian political structure as a divinely-ordained institution formed into a community of shared belief. ~Hrabanus Maurus also recognized the importance of the idea that the Carolingian empire was a community of the faithful formed by God with a spiritual mission. The homi- lary compiled for popular preaching had two interrelated purposes; Rosamond McKitterick explained 53 The implication of Hrabanus' teaching in fact is that the Frankish people were fulfilling their allotted role in the continuity of history and that these sermons were designed to assist them to make themselves worthy of that role.113 She argued, moreover that ”the sermons were designed to shape every individual to a Christian pattern. in order that a Christian society might be achieved.”114 Hrabanus sought to illustrate the important role in history that the Frankish people were chosen by God to play. The Franks constituted for Hrabanus, as for the other sermon authors examined, a people of God who were bound in faith to God and to each other by shared faith. Hrabanus sought to explain to the Frankish people that they were a community with a responsibility. That the Franks were united by belief in Christianity was, perhaps, the central notion of Carolingian political ideology. Hrabanus sought to create this impression in the minds of his flock; not only did he preach that the Franks were a community of the faithful but also that as members of the community each Frank must adhere to the code of Christian behavior. He brought the central notions of the reform program of the Carolingians to the Frankish people. The homilary of Hrabanus is the most dramatic expression of the unity of political and religious sensibilities current among the Frankish people, and there- fore his collection of homilies warrants further examination. Hrabanus sought to inculcate a sense of unity within the temporal order by suggesting various traditions to his flock. In one of the homilies, he suggested that all men 54 Cl of te of a1 as th so bi. cor nil sug e15 "it Her truly are brothers because they were all descendants of Adam. The archbishop wrote in one homily Recognize. brothers, your origin: all who are of the human race are from one man, he is Adam, who was begotten and mortal. we are a mortal race, and similarly we will die, and similarly we will rot.115 The community of man could be understood as a family, not merely as a political association. Moreover, like the other scholars of the Carolingian reform. Hrabanus was willing to make the association between the Frankish people and the Hebrew people of the Old Testament. In the homilies, the Franks were called the ”populus Dei" or the ”populum Christianum.” They were encouraged to follow the tradition of the ancient fathers by celebrating the dedication of the temple. and were encouraged to choose to be like the people of God.116 The recognition that Adam was the ancestor of all men would imply a certain sense of unity, but the association of the Franks with the Hebrews conferred upon the Frankish community a more elevated conception of the societal bond. Furthermore, Hrabanus invoked the responsi- bility of the Franks to Christ. their spiritual king. The common bond to Christ the king would further bind the commu- nity together in religious confraternity. Hrabanus suggested, by these various themes, that the Franks were an elect people, unified in a community of the faithful charged with a sacred mission. The members of Hrabanus's flock were taught that they were members of a special community; this notion was given 55 further weight by two important events associated with the duties of the members of society. The sacrament of baptism and attendance at Mass were dramatic expressions of the religious bond that Hrabanus suggested existed within the Frankish community. Baptism was the initiation rite into the faith. but also into the community of the elect. Hrabanus explained in one of his homilies Whoever therefore comes to the sacred baptism and is sent in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit, he is at once entirely clean, in the soul as in the body: because in baptism the sins of man are sent away and are destroyed; for before hs is baptized, he is called a son of the devil after a true son of God.117 Baptism therefore brought people into the community of be- lief; they became sons of God, rather than sons of the devil. Baptism was, moreover, a public action performed before the members of the parish. This activity would have inspired a sense of community among those who received the sacrament. Attendance at Mass in the local church was another public duty of the members of the society of the elect.118 The sacrament of baptism and attendance at mass provided a means for the practical expression of the bond of the community of the faithful. Hrabanus provided definition of the Carolingian realm as a sacred institution in both theoretical and practical terms; he illustrated the likeness of the Franks to the Hebrews of the Old Testament, and suggested that the sense of community was made manifest by the performance of certain public activities. The Frankish state was understood, therefore, as a community of the faithful whose members were charged with a 56 divine mission. One important obligation of the members of the community of the faithful was the preservation of the community itself. Hrabanus explained that the community must be preserved in harmony; he reasoned that this was necessary ”therefore because God desires our unity and concord."119 God had constituted the temporal society as a part of His divine plan. and therefore required its mainte- nance as a united institution. Moreover, the continued unity of the empire had become an important aspect of Carolingian political theory and practice. The desire of God that the empire remain in unity and concord was identical to the conception held by the Carolingian kings. The belief that the empire was a sacred institution led Hrabanus to preach the cause of unity by denouncing envy and hatred, fraud and avarice. He taught that these were divi- sive practices that upset the natural order. violate God's order by causing heresy and schism.120 He suggested that the members of the community of the faithful work together; he advised: ”Do not despise your lesser broigers with whom you hold partnership in the name of Christ.” Hrabanus also exhorted his flock to follow the divine precept to forgive those who sin against them. This was an especially important concept for Hrabanus, one that he repeated 122 throughout his collection of homilies. The preservation of harmony within the community of the faithful was an important message conveyed by Hrabanus in his homilies. Hrabanus further sought to express the importance of concord 57 within the empire by reminding his flock that the community of the faithful was a community of the Catholic faith. He explained that the true faith of the community was the Roman faith, one that was held by all the world. The true faith of the empire was called catholic because it was diffused throughout the whole world; the true Church was not that of certain heretics whose beliefs were contained in one province, but it was the Church of all men.123 This definition of the faith would further support the notion of community among the Franks, and would contribute to feelings of antipathy toward heresy. Hrabanus lamented the influence of heretics and schismatics, and exhorted his audience not to be seduced by their false beliefs. The mission of the new chosen people, therefore, was to spread the true faith, and to reject idolatry and heresy. He taught that heresy should be repudiated because it is false, and worse, because it threatens the unity of the community. The responsibility of the Franks was to serve the victory of the true faith; Hrabanus stated that for members of the community it is not enough to accept the name of Christian but that good works must be performed.124 The community of the faithful must actively support the Catholic Church by good works and by denying the claims of heretics. The expression of Carolingian political theory in the definition of kingship and the definition of the community already explored is but one side of the sermon as an instrument of Carolingian political will and social reform, for the sermons set out to define the responsibilities of 58 ti ea Ch 1i of cul la: the the soc enc the the sut im; the in; Cl’a Chr The Car the 381': ins. €39: the members of a theocratic society and thus create an earthly city of God. The sermons brought the basic Christian message to the Frankish people; the injunctions to live a proper Christian life expressed as much the concerns of the Church as of the state. The sense of community held by the Carolingian scholars gave added importance to the cultivation of the knowledge of Christianity among the laity. The sermon authors consequently sought to imbue their audience with the idea of the sense of community of the faithful. Christianity was understood in terms of social living, and thus the sermon authors hoped to encourage proper behavior among their audience. Moreover, the sermon carried the sanction of law for the Franks, for the Carolingian kings legislated the responsibility of their subjects to be good Christians. The sermon was the means to impart Christian doctrine to the laity, and it "was seen by the Frankish clergy to be one of the effective means for the implementation of the Carolingian reform program."125 One of the central elements of the Carolingian theo- cracy and "renovatio" was that all members of the "populus Christianus” must know the central doctrines of the faith. The utility of the sermon to educate was recognized by Carolingian churchmen. Each of the sermon authors recognized the importance of preaching and the importance of the sermon. Hrabanus acknowledged the strength of the sermon to instruct the laity in the word of God so that they will be 126 eager to do His will. The sermon authors themselves were 59 eager to teach the word of God to their flocks so that the earthly city of God would become realized and so that the Franks would be able to fulfill their role in history as the chosen people of God. The sermon of Agobard is perhaps the most sophisticated theologically of the sermons examined. In the sermon, Agobard discussed the nature of the godhead, and also the nature of Christ. He described the godhead as ”therefore one deity, one eternity, one majesty, one power, one will, one operation, one piety, one glory."127 He explained the unity of the Trinity to his flock, and that although the godhead is comprised of three distinct persons, they are of one essence. The Trinity is coequal in will and power and coeternal; the Son begotten of the Father was not less than the Father, and the Holy Spirit, who proceeded from the Father and Son. was equal to them. Agobard defined the nature of the unity and trinity to his flock in this fashion: And because there is one person apart from the other, therefore the Trinity; and because there is not one thing apart from the other therefore the Unity; because he who is himself the Father is not the Son, nor he who is the Son the Father, nor the Holy Spirit. therefore true Trinity. Because what is in truth the Father is the Son, what is the Son is the Father and Spirit, therefore true Unity.128 Although a firm grasp of the concept of the unity of the Trinity may have eluded the simple Frankish layman, Agobard sought to educate the laity concerning an important part of dogma. He understood the importance of expressing the nature of the godhead so that members of the community would 60 have the opportunity of learning a more sophisticated notion of the faith. The nature of Christ was another sophisticated notion that Agobard discussed in his sermon. He attempted to define the nature of Christ as both man and God, and taught that his divinity was unchanging. When Christ was born of the Virgin Mary he became man, but was at the same time God. He was true God and true man at the same time.129 The difficulty of this notion plagued early medieval churchmen and led to such heresies as Arianism and Adoptionism,130 and thus it was no doubt a difficult subject for the Frankish people to grasp. However, that Agobard sought to define the nature of Christ is testimony to the importance of knowledge of the faith. Moreover, the definition of the nature of Christ offered by Agobard was the orthodox view, which further supports the importance of educating the laity as a defense against heresy or schism within the community. The definition of these orthodox beliefs was important for the establishment and preservation of the earthly city of God, which was the central goal of Christian kingship. Agobard sought to teach the important notion of salva- tion and divine grace in his sermon. Christ became man and suffered on the cross so that all men may learn the truth, and may be worthy of God's love and worthy of entry into heaven.131 Agobard argued that when Christ became man and died on the cross he offered all men 1\gzizctory over death through the promise of eternal life. God offers His grace to those who love and obey Him, and His will works 61 through men so that they will do good and thus be able to earn salvation.133 It needs no argument that the doctrine of salvation presented by Agobard is of central importance to Christian beliefs, or that eternal life is the goal of all Christians but it must be noted that the salvation of all his subjects was an important concern of the Carolingian kings. The king was ”man's intercessor before God and the crucial link in the governance of the world charged with the responsibility of guiding his people to salvation.”134 Sal- vation was, therfore, a concern of religious and political importance to the Carolingians. The importance of salvation was introduced to the Franks in Agobard‘s sermon; he explained that Christ had given of Himself that ‘all men might earn their salvation and thus it was important for all Christians to work toward earning salvation. The homily of Alcuin deals less with more sophisticated notions of the faith but expresses the role of Christ as the saviour of the world. Christ is called the ”Salvator mundi," who intercedes before the Father for those who are worthy; He is the redeemer who has died for man's sins so that they may earn salvation.135 However. Alcuin also taught his flock the doctrinal role of the Virgin Mary. The homily was written for the celebration of the nativity of the Virgin Mary. The importance of Mary as the mother of God is explained in the sermon; the doctrine of the virgig6birth of Christ is presented in the homily of Alcuin. He explained that Christ was conceived not of man, but of the 62 Holy Spirit and thus was not tainted with the sins of the flesh. Christ was born of the Virgin; he was untainted by sin but suffered the sins of man. Moreover, Alcuin reminded his listeners that although the virgin birth and dual-nature of Christ may seem doubtful, they need not be because God is omnipotent and can do all things.137 He exorted his flock to celebrate the nativity of Mary because she was the mother of God and the queen of heaven who is concerned for the salvation of all good Christians. Alcuin thus intro- duced an important tenet of Christianity; he sought to teach the importance of Mary and faith in God. The homily of Alcuin sought the education of the Franks to unify the community of the faithful in proper belief. The homilies of Hrabanus Maurus were compiled so that all members of the Christian community would have knowledge of the faith. The homilies were short lessons on important matters of faith; they addressed important virtues and the celebration of feast days. A number of the homilies were like the homily of Alcuin in that they addressed the proper observance of a saint's day or a feast day celebrating the life of Jesus Christ. The homilies stressed important orthodox events and beliefs. Hrabanus denounced heresy and paganism as abhorrent to God and proclaimed the duty to follow the orthodox beliefs he expressed. The collection by Hrabanus defined the orthordox beliefs supported by Rome and the Carolingian dynasty. The homilies were compiled to unite the faithful in common belief, and to impart to the faithful an understanding of the word of God so that they 63 may do His will on earth. They were to be used as an instrument to educate the community so that they would be able to create the earthly city of God. The most important theme addressed by Hrabanus concerned the nature and passion of Jesus Christ. He, like Agobard, discussed the sophisticated doctrine of the two natures of Christ. Hrabanus taught in one of his homilies that Christ he was true man because of us and he accepted true flesh on account of our salvation. And thus the Lord Christ was one person in two substances, that is in the substance of God, and in the substance of man without sin.138 The dual nature of Christ was a central notion of the Roman orthodoxy that the Carolingians supported and hoped to spread among the people of Europe. While Hrabanus sought to teach his flock the importance of the doctrine of the two natures of Christ, he also sought to illustrate to his flock the importance of the resurrection. He stressed the role of. Christ as the saviour; Christ was "the Lamb who raises the sins of the whole world.”139 Christ became man to save us, Hrabanus argued throughout his collection of homilies. Christ was the redeemer, the saviour of the world who died on the cross so that all men could live. The importance of Christ's passion was attested to when Hrabanus explained To be sure Christ died, he destroyed our death; and because he himself arose he gave us the ability to rise, and he made us pass from infidelity to the catholic faith, from idolatry to the one cult of God. from sin to justice, from error to truth, from discord to peace, from the 64 useless service of the devil to the useful service in the number of the sons of God. from exile to the fatherland, from punishment to the crown.140 It was not only the miracle of the resurrection that Hrabanus taught, but also the meaning of the resurrection as the means for salvation. The importance of knowledge and understanding of the resurrection and salvation were taught so that the members of the faithful could participate fully in the religious community. Hrabanus sought not only to teach the more sophisti- cated doctrinal points of theology but sought to impress upon his listeners the importance of belief. Faith in God was as important as any single point of dogma, for surely if one had faith that God was omnipotent then one could believe in His works. Faith would bring understanding of God and His ways, and strengthen the religious community. In his homily. ”De Fidei Catholicae Veritate, et Bonorum Operum Concordia.” Hrabanus discussed the importance of belief, and 141 what should be held as belief. The homily began with an exhoration to observe the days of fasting and the word of God; but he argued that this must be done with faith for ”it . 142 is impossible to please God without having faith." Hrabanus defined what must be believed when he wrote I believe in the omnipotent God the Father, crea- tor of heaven and earth; and in Jesus Christ his only son. our Lord: who as conceived of the Holy Spirit. born of the Virgin Mary, suffered under Pontius Pilate. was crucified and died: he descended into Hell; on the third day he rose from the dead and ascended into heaven, he is seated at the right hand of the omnipotent God the Father: from whence he will come to judge the living and the dead. I believe in the Holy Spirit, the holy catholic church, holy communion, the remission of 65 sins. resurrection of the flesh and eternal life. Amen.143 The remainder of the homily is devoted to explaining the meaning of each of the statements in the expression of faith. The expression of faith was important to the churchmen, and it was important that the Frankish laity know this simple statement. Hrabanus sought to inculcate the basic knowledge of Christianity to his flock in this homily, and thereby to improve the faith of the Franks. The sermons of Theodulph dealt with the context of social living, of proper behavior for all Christians. He exhorted his flock to live humbly and piously so that they would not upset the harmony of society ordained by God and so that they would be worthy of eternal life in heaven. The most important doctrinal point suggested by Theodulph is the avoidance of sin. All Christians must follow the laws of God and not fall prey to the temptations of the devil. He stated that good Christians must deny the cares of the world and seek the rewards of the heavenly king. The cause of sin was pride, thus pride was the ruin of virtue as well. Theodulph encouraged humility so that pride would not cause his flock to commit sinful acts; by living virtuously all Christians could earn salvation. The sermons of Theodulph encouraged a sense of responsibility among his flock that they must not sin. The sermons suggest the interconnection between religious and political duties. Although the reason for not sinning was salvation, sin was itself recognized in terms of social living, as antisocial actions that threat- 66 ened to rend the fabric of society. Theodulph firmly placed religious obligation into the realm of social and political obligation. It is in this area that the sermons came to be the important instrument of the Carolingian reform program and as an expression of Carolingian political and religious ideology. The sermons not only instructed the members of the faithful on spiritual matters but also defined the proper behavior of good Christians. The pattern of behavior described by the ser- mons was devised for the assured salvation of the members of the faithful who followed the lessons of the sermon authors. However. the same patterns of behavior that would earn salvation also would create a harmonious social order. The 'sermon authors no doubt recognized the utility of Christian virtues to the temporal kingdom as well as to the heavenly kingdom. It may also be argued that since the Franks did not distinguish between divine and secular law, the admonitions of the sermon authors carried the force of law.144 The pattern of behavior suggested by the sermon authors, therefore, would be recognized as the responsibility of the Frankish people to God and to the king. thus contributing to the establishment of a luarmonious political community by defining the Christian responsibility of virtuous behavior in terms of social living. Agobard was eager to denounce the vices that plagued ‘the'community of the faithful. He noted There are manifest however works of the flesh, 67 which are fornication, impurity. immoderation. idol worship. sorceries, enmities, strifes, jealousies. anger. brawls, dissensions. partisan- ship, envy, murders, drunkenness, carousings and similar things.145 and also Cowards however, and the unbelievers. and the cursed, and the murderers. and the fornicators, and the sorcerers, and the idolators. and all liars, their party will be in the lake burning with fire and brimstone, which is the second death.l46 He recognized the sins that would lead the faithful astray and lead to their eternal damnation. He denounced these sins to his flock so that they would not fall prey to them and lose their souls. The works of the flesh should not be of concern to the good Christian for those who succumb to the temptations of the flesh will not gain admittance to heaven. There is surely a spiritual admonition in Agobard's exhortation to avoid these sins; he encouraged his flock to save their own souls by avoiding them and combatting sin » 147 with reason, exertion, abstinence, continence and vigils. The importance of avoiding sin is -a central tenet of Christian belief, but it may be suggested that Agobard was as concerned with the preservation of harmony in the temporal community as with the salvation of the souls entrusted to his care. A number of the sins that Agobard denounced were a threat to the established religious order of the Carolingian state. Sorcery and sorcerers were often rivals of the priests for the attention of the general populace. The sorcerers practiced a rival form of religion that offered 68 concrete temporal rewards. Sorcery offered a means to secure a good harvest or prosperity; the Church held that temporal rewards could be earned by prayer and good living. Sorcery offered a rival belief and rival ritual that threatened the establishment of the Church, and the sorcerer was a person to whom prosperity was attributed by the believing populace. The same argument can be made about idol worship; the rem- nants of pagan idolatry were the main enemy of the Carolingian reform. Idolatry threatened the prestige and triumph of Christianity, and thus caused disorder among a community that was to be united by common religious belief. Those who were sorcerers or idol worshippers were joined by the unbelievers, who may have had no definable faith, and the heretics and schismatics. Religious dissent of this type would surely rend the fabric of society. Agobard hoped to preserve the unity of religious faith by ‘denouncing sorcery, idolatry, faithlessness and heresy. He claimed that whatever is contrary to the true, catholic faith is foolish and profane, and is a doctrine of wickedness.148 Moreover, he denounced sins of a less spitirtual orientation, but which were equally divisive to the community, including the sins or enmity, strife, jealousy, dissension, envy, murder, partisanship and dissension. These sins would cause discord within the political lcommunity; they would break down the careful balance estab- lished by the Carolingian rulers and churchmen. These sins ivould set members of the community against one another and (mause civil unrest, and thus break apart the city of God. 69 Agobard's teaching was intended not only for the salvation of souls but the preservation of the Carolingian political and religious community. Agobard not only denounced sin but also encouraged virtue, and good works. He exhorted his flock to take up the armor of God to do battle against evil; to love their enemies and forgive their sins and allow the goodness of God to work through them.149 His exhortations to good works are evidence enough, but rather general since he did not list the good works to perform as he listed the sins. The homily of Alcuin does treat specific good works that had to be performed to earn salvation, and to preserve social harmony. In his homily, Alcuin showed concern for all members of his flock and suggested the importance of helping the less fortunate members of the community of the faithful. In the homily celebrating the nativity of the Virgin Mary, Alcuin urged his flock to take care of their lesser brothers; he exhorted them to succour the wretched, to help the mean, and to revive the lamentable.150 The association of religious responsibility and social responsi- bility was given concrete expression in the homily. The call to social conciousness was made in a religious vehicle. The role of the poor in Christian thought was a unique one, for although they were oppressed during their earthly existence, “they would receive God's blessing in their next life. How- ever, Alcuin alerted his flock to the importance of improving the lot of the wretched in the present life. 70 Alcuin perhaps sought to encourage responsibility among the members of the community of the faithful to care for their own. Moreover, Alcuin's language is reminiscent of royal legislation which decreed the responsibility of the king's subjects to take proper care of the poor.151 The similarity between Alcuin's dictum in his homily and the legislation of the Carolingian kings offers support for the argument that there was little distinction between divine and secular law, but rather an association of matters temporal with matters spiritual. Alcuin encouraged social responsibility as a religious duty, and thus associated concern for the community with concern for the spiritual well-being of his flock.. The homilies of Hrabanus are perhaps the most detailed expression of proper Christian virtues as well as Christian sins. He sought to encourage his flock to fulfill their divinely-appointed role by living as good Christians. The exhortation to virtuous living expressed by Hrabanus was understood in terms of responsibility to God and to society. The virtues he defined were as important for the well-being of the individual soul as for the well-being of the religious community. He argued for the performance of good works from which the individual and the community would reap benefit. Hrabanus sought to create a community of the faithful by exhorting his flock to act as the virtuous members of the earthly city of God. Hrabanus, like Agobard, actively denounced certain sins ‘that would be a threat to the salvation of a good Christian 71 and a threat to the harmony and unity of the community. The sins of idol worship, sorcery, and the like were prominently denounced by Hrabanus for they would prevent the faithful from entering the kingdom of God.152 As suggested above, these sins were not only a threat to salvation but also were a threat to society. He denounced the folly of heretics and schismatics as false Christians, and warned his flock not to suffer the evils of these false Christians.153 Moreover, he dedicated two separate homilies to the denunciation of the errors and folly of paganism.154 He ridiculed those who partook in the festivals of the moon as well as general pagan rites, which Hrabanus considered not only futile but also diabolic rituals. He argued that not only would the pagan rituals fail but that these practices were a form of demon worship, and that the practitioners would be overcome by the demons they worshipped. Hrabanus called pagans and heretics back to the true faith of orthodox Christianity; their return would save their souls and preserve the unity of the community. Moreover, Hrabanus denounced the vices such as avarice, dissension, jealousy and murder that were abhorrent not only to God but also to the temporal community. Hrabanus recognized, as had Agobard and to some extent Alcuin, that there existed certain vices which men fell prey to that would provoke discord within the community. The religious nature of Carolingian society inspired the association of the temporal community with the heavenly community and caused the association of sin and 72 anti-social behavior. Hrabanus encouraged not only the repudiation of sin but also the practice of virtue. He exhorted his flock to turn from evil, convert to good, damn sin and to love God so that they might earn salvation.155 He also told his flock: "The _spiritual fruit however is charity, joy, peace, patience, goodness, generosity, faith, gentleness, and contenment."156 These traditional Christian virtues would secure peace for the soul and the community. Hrabanus taught the importance not only of having virtuous qualities, but also the impor- tance of doing good works. Good works were understood by the Carolingians as the outward expression of internal virtue; they were also an important means to salvation. Good works couig7be rewarded with the keys to the kingdom of heaven. Hrabanus suggested to his flock that They should learn to do good, wealth will come about in good works, it will be easy to give to and communicate with those near by, they will enrich themselves with good works so that they may earn eternal life.158 Good works were important because they would earn eternal life for their practitioner, and also because they would inspire a sense of community. Works were performed in full view of the community, and those who performed them were recognized as members of the faithful. The sense of belonging to the community could be fulfilled by attending 159 Inass and nightly vigils, or by saying prayers openly. ‘There were, however, other works that could be performed to rencourage the unity fof the community outside of the church. 73 Fasting was an important work that was performed publicly that would inspire empathy within the social group. Fasting was prescribed by the Church as penance for sin, but also as voluntary worship during certain holy seasons. Ritual fasting was endured by the entire community; the universality of fasting may have been understood as a public duty, or at least a shared burden which would have inspired the notion of unity and community among the populace. Hrabanus repeated the exhortation to fast throughout his collection of homilies, and may have intended to strengthen the bond of society by encouraging a shared reponsibility. Charity was a good work that would surely benefit society, and the call to give alms recognized social responsibility for the temporal community. Hrabanus exhorted his flock to give alms to secure blessing for the soul, but it would also heighten the sense of responsibilty among members of the community of the faithful. In the homily, ”De Contemptu Mundi et de Praemio Futuro,” Hrabanus told of the punish- ment of the rich man who neglected his less fortunate brother.16o Those who gave alms would secure their heavenly salvation and improve the general welfare of society. Good ‘works were an active means to earn salvation, but their 'utility was also temporal, for they would secure the preser- vation of the city of God which the Carolingian reformers sought to create. Hrabanus hoped to create the sense of community and social responsibility by his exhortations to his flock to live virtuously and to perform good works. 74 The sermon of Theodulph is an exhortation for all Christians to behave properly. He denounced the sins of pride and luxury and the sins of the flesh. He offered a general exhortation to serve God and to remain devoted to God. Theodulph reminded his flock that they cannot serve two masters and that they must devote themselves to doing God's will. He encouraged them to repudiate sin and to exercise self-control and moderation.161 He denounced avarice and encouraged his flock to give alms to the poor and needy.162 His sermons encouraged the proper religious belief and the proper behavior of a good Christian; to combat evil and to renounce the cares of the world and to serve God were the responsibilities of members of the commu- nity of the faithful. CONCLUSION The Carolingian political order was a unique creation that was established by the common labor of churchmen and the Frankish kings. The Franks truly sought to create a new order in which affairs of the state were identical with affairs of the Church. The Carolingians hoped to reform society along Christian lines, to create an earthly city of God. The immediate concern of the Carolingian kings, who were recognized as ”rex et sacerdos” and who were believed divinely-appointed, was to improve the piety and knowledge ‘of all members of society. The legislation of the kings sought to effect an improvement in education and :ecclesiastical organization. The capitulary played an important role in the reform movement but an important 75 supplement to it was the sermon. The sermon was the instrument used by the Carolingians to bring the reform program to all members of society. It was an instrument of instruction, a means to educate the faithful in the lessons of proper belief. The sermon of the Carolingian age was influenced by the general intellectual currents of the age that blurred the distinctions between things temporal and things spiritual. The sermons sought to educate the Frankish people not only on matters of faith but also on matters of the state. The sermons examined for this study provide testimony to suggest that the sermons were used to deliver lessons on kingship and definitions of the state to the people. Kingship and the state were presented in a highly theocratized manner that may have neglected the Germanic origins of the Carolingian political structure, but the definitions presented may have been the way in which the Carolingian kings and reformers perceived kingship and the state. The Carolingians sought to redefine kingship and the state in Christian terms only; the scholars who defined political theory would have rejected the Germanic notions of kingship that contradicted the Christian idea of kingship. The sermon authors that have been examined presented an idea of kingship that reflected the understanding and powers of the godhead. Kingship was divinely-inspired in both origin and nature; God was the heavenly king in whose place on earth stood the temporal king. The association of charac- teristics between the two kings was made by the sermon 76 authors to inspire fidelity to God and king. The state was also defined in terms that were both political and religious. The state was the community of the faithful, bound together by shared religious belief. The responsi- bilities of the members of society were also political and religious, and thus the sermon authors not only explained the nature of kingship and the state to the Frankish people, but also explained their responsibilities as members of the community. The main responsibilities of the Frankish people were to obey the law of the king and to live as a good Christian. The understanding of the political order expressed in the sermons of Alcuin, Agobard, Hrabanus Maurus and Theodulph would have inspired the notion that proper religious behavior was a spiritual and political responsi- bility. The sermons, therefore, defined political theory in a way that conveyed the association of religion and politics that formed the basis of the Carolingian ”renovatio.” 77 ENDNOTES 1 Allen Cabaniss, Son of Charlemagne A Contemporary Life e£’,Louis the Pious (Syracuse, 1965) 32. Emile Amann, L‘e o ue carolingienne (A. Fliche and V. Martin, Histoire ge L'Eglise, 6, Paris,1947) 82. Pierre RichéT Daily Life lg gee Age 9; Charlemagne, trans. JoAnn McNamara (Philadelphia, 1983) 191. Richard Sullivan, ”The Carolingian Missionary and the Pagan,” Speculum 28 (1953) 705. o ‘- F. L. Ganshof, The Carolingians end the Frankish Monarchy, trans. Janet Sondheimer (London, 1971) 25. 3 "Admonitio Generalis" in Georges Tessier, Charlemagne, (Paris, 1967) 303-304. 4 Rosamond McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789-895 (London, 1977) 5, quoting MGH C61, 58. The passage is: "Primo omnium, ut fides catholica, ab episcopis et presbyteris diligenter legatur et omni populo praedicetur.” See also Thomas Leslie Amos, ”The Origin and Nature of the Carolingian Sermon," (PhD Thesis, Michigan State University, 1983) 175. 5 Mckitterick, 208. See also McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms under the Carolingianey 751-895 (London, 1983) 17. Amann, 72; Walter Cllmann, The Carolingian Renaissaince and the Idea 9; Kingship (London, 1970) 3. 6 Amos, 255; Richard Sullivan, Aix-la-Chapelle IQ Ehe Age 9; Charlemagne (Norman, Oklhoma, 1963) 191-192. Richard Sullivan, "Early Medieval Missionary Activity: A Comparative Study of Eastern and Western Methods," Church History 23 (1954) 32. Ganshof, 19. Eleanor Shipley Duckett, Alcuin, Friend 9f Charlemagne: His World and His Work (New York, 1951) 33. 7 ”Capitulatio de partibus Saxoniae," in Tessier, 287- 289. 8 ”Capitulare Saxonicum," in Tessier, 311. 9 . Sullivan, ”The Carolingian Missionary and the Pagan,” 712-716. 10 Louis Halphen, ”L'idée d'état sous les Carolingiens,“ Revue Historique, 185 (1939) 64. The description of Carolingian political theory practice I have outlined over- looks many of the important Germanic notions of kinghsip ‘that influenced the Franks, including the personal nature of Frankish kingship which allowed the Carolingians to direct ‘the ”renovatio” with so free a hand. However, this not an aaspect of kinghship that would have appealed to the members of the reform movement who came to define political theory. The leading scholars of the reform movement were all eccle- siastics who were reared in the intellectual tradition of the Church. For these men, it would be the political traditions of the Roman Empire of Constantine; the political traditions of the Old Testament and of the Church Fathers that were of importance; consequently the expressions of political belief that they would define in the sermons would reflect their clerical education. The political theory of the Carolingian theorists was more sophisticated than the kings who practiced politics; and therefore, it was more thoroughly Christianized political theory that would have been presented in the sermons. 11 St. Augustine, The City eh egg, trans, Henry Bettenson (New York, 1972) X, 32. See also Prologue to the Salic Law, in Robert Folz, The Coronation eh Charlemagne 25 December 800, trans J. B. Anderson (London, 1974) 81-82, for the notion that the Franks were the new chosen people. 12 F012, 79. 13 Alcuin, Ep. 41 (MGH, Ep., 2) in Louis Halphen, Charlemagne and the Carolingian Empire, trans. Giselle de Rie (Amsterdam, 1977) 153-154. The viewpoint of Alcuin is typical of the court scholars, it is proper to cite Alcuin's thought as an expression of the outlook of the reformers for he was in large measure the most influential member. Eleanor Shipley Duckett, op cit, for the importance of Alcuin to the court school of Charlemagne. i 14 Bernard Walter Seholz, Carolingian Chronicles, (Ann Arbor, 1971) 25. 15 Arthur Kleinclausz, L‘empire Carolingien Ses origines eh ses transformations, (Paris, 1902) 214, quoting Leidrad, "Liber de sacramento baptismi," Migne, Patrologia Latina t XCIX, col 864. Ullmann, 54. Karl Frederick Morrison, The leg Kingdoms: Ecclesiology i2. Carolingian Political Thought (Princeton, 1964) 134, quoting Kathulf, MGH Epp. IV, no 7, 503. 18 F012, 99. 19 Arthur Kleinclausz, Charlemagne (Paris, 1934) 300, quoting Alcuin, Alcuini Epistolae, 174. 20 Morrison, 121. That this notion began early in the history of the Church and was central to Christian political thought, see R. W. and J. A. Carlyle, A History 2; Medieval Political Thought 12 hhe West, vol I (London, 1950) 89-90. 21 The importance of St.Augustine to the political and religious beliefs of the Carolingians cannot be under- estimated. His voluminous writings were known in some measure by all members of the palace school, and Charlemagne himself was familiar with the City 9; egg. The Carolingians turned to the writings of the bishop of Hippo as a source of authority on many matters. His theological writings defined orthodoxy for the Carolingians, and his sermons were an important model for the sermon writers of the eighth and ninth centuries. Moreover, the Carolingians borrowed from him the notion that kingship was an instrument of divine will and that God was the source of temporal authority. The Carolingian desire to create a city of God on earth was a corruption of the ideas expressed in Augustine's monumental work. 22 The first biographers of Charlemagne, Einhard and Notker, expressed in detail the piety and sense of Christian duty of Charles, as did the anonymous biographer of Louis. 23 Rosamond McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms Under the Carolingians 789-987 (London, 1977) 77. 24 Henry A. Myers with Herwig Wolfram, Medieval Kingship (Chicago, 1982) 139, citing Kathulf, MGH, Epistolae, vol IV: Epistolae Variorum Carolo Magne Regnante Scriptae, 7. Many modern commentators have recognized the central importance of justice including Jacques Boussard, The Civilization of Charlemagne trans. Frances Partridge (New York, 1973) 96-97; Carlyle, 223; Heinrich Fichtenau, The Carolingian Empire trans. Peter Munz (London, 1964) 58-59, Richard Sullivan, Aix-laChapelle l2 hhe hge e: Charlemagne, 99, and others. 25 The so-called ecumenical council of Nicaea was sum- moned by Irene the empress of Byzantium to address the iconoclastic controversy. Irene was opposed to iconoclasm and thus the council sanctioned the use of icons as a means to inspire religious devotion. The council was attended by members of the Byzantine clergy and legates of Pope Hadrian. Members of the Frankish Church, however, were not in attend- ance. Charlemagne rejected the decisions of the council and its claim as universal, because the largest Church in the West was not in attendance. 26 Halphen, 86-87. 27 Amann, 155. R. G. Heath, "The Western Schism of the Franks and the Filioque,” Journal 9f Ecclesiastical History (22, 1972) 100-101. Kleinclausz, Charlemagne, 250-253. Ullmann, 50. 28 J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, "The 'Via Regia' of the Carolingian Age" in Trends 9; Medieval Political Thought, ed Beryl Smalley (Oxford, 1965) 29. The notion of the Carolingian state as an Augustinian community is widely held: see also H. X. Arquilliere, L'augustinism politique L'église eh l'état eh Moyen Age, second edition (Paris, 1955); F012, 121; Kleinclausz, L'empire Carolingian ses origines eh ses transformations. 29 F012, 79. 30 Ibid, 81-82. 31 Richard Sullivan, Aix-la-Chapelle £2 hhe Age gf Charlemagne, 97. Charles Edwin Odegard, "The Concept of Royal Power in Carolingian Oaths of Fidelity," Speculum, 20 (1945) 279-289 and Louis Halphen, "L'idee d'etat sous le Caroligiens” make similar comments concerning the more refined nature of the Carolingian theory of the state. 32 Ullmann, 135. Kleinclausz, L'empire Carolingian ses Origines eh ses Transformations, 262. 33 Richard Sullivan, Aix-la-Chapelle l2 hhe Age 9; Charlemagne, 122. 34 Duckett, 221-222. 35 F012, 157. 36 F. L. Ganshof, Feudalism, trans. Philip Grierson (New York, 1964) 33. Ibid, 83. 37 The coronation of 813 was performed by Charlemagne without any participation by members of the Christian Church. In 813, Charles summoned a council at which he placed the imperial crown on his son's head and associated the empire with him. This action by the aging Frankish emperor reasserted the sanction of the blood line as the means of succession. The imperial dignity was defined by this action as part of Charlemagne's personal patrimony, to be dealt with as he chose. The coronation of 813 was strip- ped of all divine sanction; the new emperor lacked constitutional or spiritual authority over the Church. 38 McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms Under the Carolingians, 751-987, 131. See also Folz, 181-182; Ganshof, "Some observations on the Ordinatio Imperii of 817," in The Carolingians and the Frankish Monarchy, 273- 285. 39 Quoted in Ganshof, "Some observations on the Ordinatio Imperii of 817,” 280. 40 McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms Under the Caroliggians, 751-987, 132-133. 41 Peter Munz, Life ih hhe Age ef Charlemagne (New York, 1969) 94. 42 Heinrich Eichtenau, The Carolingian Empire, trans. Peter Munz (London, 1964) 53 citing MGH, Poet, i, 365. 43 Riche‘, 273; Fichtenau, 48. 44 Heinrich Fichtenau, 171-172. Fichtenau's argument (made in chapter 3 of his book) concerning the parallel (between the temporal and spiritual kingdoms has been supported by J. M. Wallace-Hadrill in "The 'Via-Rigia' of the Carolingian Age” and Peter Munz in Life £2 hhe Age 9; Charlemegne, and forms the basis of my agrument. 45 Ernst H. Kantorowicz, Laudes Regiae: A Study 9f Liturgical Acclamations 32g Medieval Ruler Worship (Berkeley, 1958) 14. Kantorowicz, on page 16, illustrates the nature of Christ in the following example V. Rex Regum R. Christus vincit Rex nostra Christus vincit Victoria nostra Christus vincit Arma nostra invictissima Christus vincit Murus nostra inexpungabilis Christus vincit Defensio et exaltio nostra Christus vincit Lux, via vita nostra ' Christus vincit 46 Wallace-Hadrill, 23. 47 Amos, 147. Kleinclausz, Charlemagne, 247 and Wallace-Hadrill, 24. ' 48 Munz, 52. Sullivan, 45-46 and 174. 49 Sullivan, Aix-la-Chapelle lfl hhe Age 9f Charlemagne, 196. Riche, 188. . 50 McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reformsy 789-895, 113. 51 Amos, 329. 52 Ullmann, 139. 53 The life of Agobard is treated by J. Allen Cabaniss in "Agobard of Lyons," Speculum 27 (1951) 50-76. His theology and the controversy over the see of Lyons is examined by Cabaniss in ”Agobard and Amalarius, A comparison,” Journal 9; Ecclesiastical History 3 (1952). Louis Halphen discussed the role of Agobard in the civil wars of the 8308 in Charlemagne and the Carolingian Empire. For Alcuin, see the biography by Eleanor Shipley Duckett. There is a good summary of Alcuin's effect on the Carolingian renaissance and notions of political theory in Lester R. Born, "The Specula Principis of the Carolingian Renaissance,” Revue belge ge philologie eh d'histoire 12 (1933) 583-612. See also F. L. Ganshof, The Carolingians and the Frankish Monarchy. The biographical material concerning Hrabanus Maurus has been culled from several sources including Born, M. L. W. Laistner, Thought and Letters lfl Western Europe A; 2; 500-900, second edition (Ithaca, 1957), and Rosamond McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reformsy 789-895. Ann Freeman, ”Theodulph of Orleans and the Libri Carolini," Speculum 32 (1957) 663-705, examined Theodulph's thought and possible authorship of the Caroline Books. For Theodulph see also Arthur Kleinclausz, Charlemagne; and McKitterick The Frankish Church and the Carolingians Reformsy 789-895 and The Frankish Kingdoms Under the Carolingians, 751-895. 54 McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789-895, 5, citing "Admonitio Generalis," C61, MGH, p.58. The passage is : Primo omnium, ut fides catholica, ab episocpis et presbyteris diligenter legatur et omni populo praedicatur. 55 Ganshof, The Carolingians and the Frankish Monarchy, 216. 56 ”Statuta Synodalia Ecclesiae Renensis," PL 135 cols 405 and 408 quoted in McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789-895, 57-58. 57 Duckett, 131. 58 Kleinclausz, Charlemagne, 228. 59 Agobard, "Sermo Exhortatorius ad Plebem de Fidei Veritate et Totius Boni Institutione,” PL, 104, 270. 60 Ibid, 274. 61 Hrabanus Maurus, ”Homiliae de Festis Praecipuis, Item de Virtutibus,” PL, 110, 10. 62 Ullmann, 31-36. See also Amos, 139-175. McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789-895, 81-83, 157. Sullivan, Aix-la-Chapelle $2 the Age 9; Charlemagne, 181-182. 63McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789-895, chapter 3. Munz, 88-89. 64 Sullivan, ”The Carolingian Missionary and the Pagan," 733. 65 Ibid, 712-716, 734; and Sullivan, ”Early Medieval Inissionary Activity: A Comparative Study of Eastern and Western Methods,” 28-29. 66 Laistner, 194. 67 Quoted in Amos, 157. 68 Ibid, 272. For Alcuin, see Riché‘, 200. 69 The homiletic collection, ”Homiliae de Festis Praecipius, Item de Virtutibus" by Hrabanus Maurus does not contain any direct reference to temporal kingship. The collection presented to Lothar, may contain explicit instructions for the proper conduct of kings; however, because it was intended for private and not public consump- tion and because it was prepared after the death of Louis, I have not examined it for this study. ' 70 Theodulph, "Fragmenta Sermonum Aliquot," PL, 105, 278. 71 Ibid, 279. Although Theodulph does not specifically refer to the drunkenness of kings, the inference may be drawn, for the reference to the sloth of princes is placed within a passage devoted to drunkenness. 72 Ibid, 280. 73 Agobard, 278. 74 There are many references to God as the king of heaven in the sermons; a good example is Alcuin, "Sermo Alcuin de Nativitate Perpetuae Virginis Mariae," PL, 101, 1303. The passage is ”Dominus excelsus terribitis et. rex magnus super omnes coelos et super omnem terram.” 75 Agobard, 272-273, 283. 76 Hrabanus Maurus, 42, 48, 53, 70- 77 Agobard, 272, 278 are two examples. 78 Ibid, 274. Agobard said that Christ ”impse est caput corporis Ecclesiae” and ”sit in omnibus ipse primatum tenens.” 79 Hrabanus Maurus, 33. 80 Agobard, 272. The passage is ”benedictio, et honor, et gloria, et potestas in saecula saeculorum." 81 Alcuin, 1307. 82 Hrabanus Maurus, 77-78; but the majority of homilies end in this way. The passage is ”Domino nostro Jesu Christu, qui cum Patre et Spiritu Sancto vivit et regnat Deus, per omnia saecula saeculorum.” 83 Theodulph, 278. 84 Hrabanus Maurus, 40. The passage is "scutum fidei, loricam justitiae et galeam salutis, et gladium spiritus, quod est verbum Dei.” Agobard spoke of the faithful wearing the armor of God so that they may defend themselves against the forces of the devil. 85 Ibid, 24 and 119. 86 Agobard, 279. The passage is ”et Agnus vincet illos quoniam Dominus dominorum est et Rex regum.” 87 Ibid, 275. The passage is ”Deinde finis, cum tradiderit regnum Deo et Patri, cum evacuaverit omnem principatum, et potestam et virtutem.” 88 Alcuin, 1301; Hrabanus Maurus, 29. 89 Hrabanus Maurus, 28. The passage is ”Jesus ”salvator" interpretatur Christus vero chrismate dicitur: quia sicut antiqui reges a sacerdotibus sacro oleo perfundabantur, sic Dominus noster Jesus Christus Spiritus sancti infusione repletus est." 90 Ibid, 13 and 91. 91 ' Theodulph, "De Omnibus Ordinibus Hujus Saeculi,” PL, 105, 282. The passage is "Qui ille justus et pius est in omnibus operibus suis.” 92 Agobard, 272, 276. Hrabanus, 25. Theodulph, "Fragmenta Sermonum Aliquot," 279. 93 Alcuin, Epist, number 177 quoted in Ganshof, The Carolingians and the Frankish Monarchy, 34. Carlyle, 223. Fichtenau, 59. 94 Alcuin, 1305. The passage is ”Laudemus illum, adoremus illum, qui de tenebris et umbra mortis vocavit ad fidem, ad vitem de morte, ad incorruptionem de corruptionem, ad patriam de exsilio, ad gaudium de luctu, atque coelestia de terrenis revocavit.” 95 Ibid, 1301 and 1303. 96 Hrabanus Maurus, 59. The passage is ”qui in superni regis castris semper devoti persistunt.” 97 Ibid, 84-85. The passage is ”mandatum habemus a Deo, ut qui diligit Deum, diligit et proximum.” Theodulph, ”Fragmenta Sermonum Aliquot," 280; and "De Omnibus Ordinibus Hujus Saeculi,” 281. 99 ~ Ibid, "Fragmenta Sermonum Aliquot,” 277. 100 Agobard, 272. 101 Ibid, 274. 102 Hrbanus Maurus, 12. 103 Theodulph, "Fragmenta Sermonum Aliquot," 279. 104 Ibid, "De Omnibus Ordinibus Hujus Saeculi," 282. 105 Alcuin, 1303, 1306. 106 ‘ Theodulph, "De‘ Omnibus Ordinibus Hujus Saeculi," 281-282. 107Agobard, ”De comparatione regiminis ecclesiastici et politicii," MGH Epistolae, 226-228 in Amann, 220. 108 Kleinclausz, L'empire Carolingien ses origines et ses transformations, 274-275. 109 Agobard, 270. The passage is "Hos autem genus electum, regale sacerdotium, gens sancta, populus acquisitionis, ut virtutes annuntientes ejus qui vos de tenebris vocavit in admirable lumen suum.” 110 Ibid, 274. The passage is "Quod autem mediatio mediatoris Dei et hominum Domini nostri Jesu Christi conjungat Patri omnem electam creaturam, ita ut ista ineffabili unitate spiritus, nulla sit diversitas generis, conditionis et sexus, sed tam ex angelis, quam ex hominibus, una domus et una civitas Dei fiat, atque hujus tantae et tam mirabilis unitatis caput sit Christus.W 111 Idem. The passage is ”Ubi non est gentilis et Judaeus, circu cisio praeputium, Barbarus et Scytha, servus et liber, sed omnia et in omnibus Christus." 112 Ibid, ”Adversus legem Gundobadi,” PL 104, c115. 113 McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789-895, 99. 114 Ibid, 100. 115 Hrabanus Maurus, 26. The passage is ”Recogitate. fratres, originem vestram: omne quidem humanum generis ex uno homine, id est Adam, proceatum est et mortali, mortale genitum, et similiter et morimur, similiter et putrescimus." 116 Ibid, 36-37, 74. 117 Ibid, 32. The passage is ”Quicunque ergo ad sacrum venerit baptismum in hoc mittitur in nomine Patris, et Filii, et Spiritus sancti, statim totus est mundus, tam in anima quam in corpore: quia in baptismi lavacro peccata hominum dimittunter et delentur; nam antequam baptizetur, filius diaboli postea vero filius Dei nominatur." 118 Three homilies deal directly with the importance of attending Mass: ”In Dedicatione Templi," "In Anniversaria Festivitate Dedicationis Templi,” and ”In Dominicis Diebus.” 119 Ibid, 96. The passage is ”quia ergo unitatem nostram et concordiam Deus desiderat." 120 ' Ibid, 116. 121 Ibid, 16. The passage is "Nolite despicere fratres ) vestros minimos, cumquibus consortium nominis Christi tenetis.” 122 Ibid, See columns: 25, 26, 39, 41, 70, 112 and 114. The passage cited is Matthew VI, "Dimitte nobis debita nostra, sicut et nos dimittimus debitoribus nostris.” 123 Ibid, 28. The passage is ”Catholicam dicit, id est, toto orbe diffusam: quia diversorum, quia per loco autque per suas probincias continentur." 124 Ibid, 82. 125 McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789-895, 81. 126 Hrabanus, 9. 127 ' Agobard, 269. The passage is ”Una ergo deitas, una aeternitas, una majestis, una potentia, una voluntas, una operatic, una pietas, una gloria." 128 Idem. The passage is ”Et quia alius et alius, ideo Trinitas; et quia non est aliud et aliud ideo Unitas; quia non est ipse Pater qui Filius, non ipse Filius qui Pater, aut Spiritus sanctus, idea vera Trinitas. Quia vero hoc est Pater quod filius, hoc Filius quod Pater et Spiritus, ideo vera Trinitas." 129Ibid, 271. 130 The heresy of Adoptionism was developed in Spain during the last quarter of the eighth century; and its chief supporters were Elipandus, archbishop of Toledo and Felix of Urgel. The Adoptionists believed that Christ, in His human nature was the adopted son of God and not the natural son. The heresy was vigorously opposed by Alcuin and other mem- bers of the Frankish clergy. 10 T 131 Ibid, 275. 132 Ibid, 276. 133 Ibid, 277. 134 Sullivan, Aix-la-Chapelle I hhe Age eh Charlemagne, 174. 135 ' Alcuin, 1301-1302. 136 Ibid, 1302. 137 ‘ Ibid, 1302-1303. ' 138 Hrabanus Maurus, 17. The passage is "erat verus homo propter nos et veram carnem suscepit propter salutam nostram. Et ita erat Christus Dominus una persona in duabus substantis, id est in substantia Dei, et in substantia hominis absque peccato." 139 Idem. The passage is "Agnus qui tollit peccato totius mundi." 140 Ibid, 34. The passage is "in eo quippe quod Christus mortuus est, mors nostra destructa est; et quod ipse resurrexit nobis resurgendi facultatem tribuit, nosque transire fecit de infidelitate ad fidem catholicam, de idolatria ad unus Dei cultum, de peccato ad justitiam, de errore ad veritatem, de discordia ad pacem, de servis inutilibus et diaboli servitio mansipatis in numerum filiorum Dei, de exsilio ad patriam, de poena ad coronam." 141 Ibid, 27-30. The notion of faith was important to all the sermon authors, but Hrabanus made the most definite statement concerning its importance. 142 Ibid, 27. The passage is "impossible est sine fide placere Deo." 143 Idem. The passage is ”Credo in Deum Patrem omnipotentem, creatorem coeli et terrae; et in Jesum Christum Filium ejus unicum, Dominum nostrum; qui conceptus est de Spiritus sancto, natus Maria virgine, passus sub Pontio Pilato, crusifixus est et sepultus; descendit ad inferna; tetra die resurrexit a mortuis ascendit ad coelos, sedet ad dexteram Dei Patris omnipotentis: inde venturus judicare vivos et mortuis. Credo in Spiritum sanctum, sanctam Ecclesiam catholicam, sanctum communionem, remissionem peccatorum, carnis resurrectionem, vitam aeternam. Amen.” 11 144 Heinrich Fichtenau argued that the Franks were influenced by certain Germainc ideas that did not distinguish between divine and secular law, 58. Hrabanus Maurus suggested that the law was divinely inspired, 14. 145 Agobard, 276. The passage is ”Manifesta autem sunt opera carnis, quae sunt fornicatio, immunditia, luxuria, idolorum servitus, veneficia, inimicitiae, contentiones, oemulationes, irea, rixae, dissensiones, sectae, invidiae, homicidiae, ebrietates, comessationes et his similia." 146 ‘ Ibid, 283. The passage is ”Timidis autem, et incredulis, et exsecratis, et homicidis, et fornicatoribus, et veneficio, et idolotaris, et omnibus mendabus, pars illorum eut stagno ardente igne et sulphure, quod est mors secunda.” 147 Ibid, 276. 148 Ibid, 277. 149Ibid, 275-277. 150 Alcuin, 1306. The passage is "succurrat ergo miseris, juvet pusillanimes, refoveat flebiles.” 151 7 The oath of 802 made care of the poor a responsi- bility of all citizens, see McKitterick, The Frankish Kingdoms Under the Carloingians, 751-987, 88-89. 152 Hrabanus Maurus, 18 and 74. Hrabanus quoted Galatians V, the same scriptural source that Agobard quoted in his sermon. 153 Ibid, 49. 154 - Ibid, 78-80. The homilies are ”Contra eos qui in Lunae Defectu Clamoribus se Fatigabout,” and ”Contra Paganicos Errores, Quos Aliqui De Rudibus Christianis Sequuntur." 155 Ibid, 15. 156 Ibid, 74. The passage is ”Fructus spiritus est charitas, gaudium, pax, patientia, bonitas, benignitas, fides, mansuetudo, contentia.” 157 Ibid, 76. 158 Ibid, 56. The passage is ”Discant bene agere, divites fieri in operibus bonis, facile tribuere communicare cum proximis, thesaurizent sibi fundamentum bonum ut apprehendant vitam aeternam.” 12 159 Hrabanus encouraged these displays of public piety, see 22. 160 Ibid, 106-108. 161 Theodulph, ”Fragmenta Sermonum Aliquot,”.277-278. 162 Ibid, 278. 13 BIBLIOGRAPHY PRIMARY SOURCES Alcuin. "Sermo Alcuini de Nativitate Perpetuae Virginis Mariae.” Migne. Patrologia Latina, 101.1300-1308 Agobard of Lyons. ”Sermo Exhortatorius ad Plebem de Fidei Veritate et Totius Boni Institutione.” Migne. Patrologia Latina, 104.267-288 Hrabanus Maurus. "Homiliae de Festis Praecipius, Item de Virtutibus.” Migne. Patrologia Latina, 110.9-124 Theodulph of Orleans. "De Omnibus Ordinibus Hujus Saeculi." Migne. Patrologia Latina, 105.280-282 Theodulph of Orleans. ”Fragmenta Sermonum Aliquot." Migne. Patrologia Latina, 105.275-280 SECONDARY SOURCES Amann, Emile. L'epoqge Carolingienne (A. Fliche and V. MartinHistoire ge l'église, 5) Paris: 1947. Amos, Thomas Leslie. ”The Origin and Nature of the Carolingian Sermon.” PhD Thesis, Michigan State University, 1983 Arquilliere, H. X. L'augustinisme politique. L'eglise et l'Etat eh Moyen Age. second edition. Paris: 1955 Augustine. The City 9; God. Trans. Henry Bettenson. New York: 1972. Bede. A History f the English Church and People. trans. Leo Sherley-Price. New York: 1981. Born, Lester K. "The Specula Principis of the Carolingian Renaissance,” Revue belge ge philologie eh d'historire 12 (1933) 583-612. Boussard, Jacques. The Civilization ef Charlemagne. Trans. Frances Partridge. New York: 1973. Cabaniss, J. Allen. ”Agobard and Amalarius: A comparison,” Journal 9; Ecclesiastical History, 3 no. 2 (Oct., 1952). Cabaniss, J. Allen. ”Agobard of Lyons," Speculum 27 no. 1 Cabaniss, Allen. Son eh Charlemagne A Contemporary Life 9: Louis the Pious. Syracuse: 1965. 14 Carlyle, J. A. and R. W. A History 9: Medieval Political Thought 12 the West. Vol I, London: 1950. Duckett, Eleanor Shipley. Alcuin, Friend eh Charlemagne: His World and His Work. New York: 1951. Fichtenau, Heinrich. The Carolingian Empire. Trans. Peter Munz. London: 1964. Folz, Robert. The Coronation e; Charlemagne 25 December 800. Trans. J. E. Anderson. London: 1974. Freeman, Ann. "Theodulph of Orleans and the'Libri Carolini," Speculum, (Oct. 1957) XXXII no. 4, 663-705. Ganshof, F. L. Frankish Institutions Under Charlemagne. Trans. Bryce and Mary Lyon. New York: 1970. Ganshof, F. L. The Carolingians and the Frankish Monarchy. Trans. Janet Sondheimer. London: 1971 Ganshof, F. L. Feudalism. Trans. Philip Grierson. New York: 1964. Halphen, Louis. Charlemagne and the'Carolingian Empire. trans. Giselle de Rie (Europe in the Middle Ages Selected Studies) Vol. 3. Amsterdam: 1977. Halphen, Louis. ”L'idee d'Etat sous les Carolingiens," Revue historigue. 185 (1939) 59-70. Heath, R. G. "The Western Schism of the Franks and the Filioque," Journal 9; Ecclesiastical History, 23 (1972) 97- 1130 ’ Kantorowicz, Ernst H. Laudes Regiae A Study ih Liturgical Acclamations and Medieval Ruler Worship. Berkely: 1958. Kleinclausz, Arthur. L'empire Carolingien:ses origines eh ses transformations. Paris: 1902. Kleinclausz, Arthur. Charlemagne. Paris: 1934. Laistner, M. L. W. Thought and Letters 12 Western Europe A; D. 500 to 00 second edition. Ithaca: 1957. McKitterick, Rosamond. The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789-895. London: 1977. McKitterick, Rosamond. The Frankish Kingdoms Under the Carolingians, 751-987. New York: 1983. .Morrison, Karl F. The Two Kingdoms: Ecclesiology ih Carolingian Political Thought. Princeton: 1964. 15 Munz, Peter. Life 1 the Age f Charlemagne. New York: 1969. Myers, Henry A. with Herwig Wolfram. Medieval Kingship. Chicago: 1982. Odegaard, Charles Edwin. ”Carolingian Oaths of Fidelity," Speculum 16 (1941) 284-296. Odegaard, Charles Edwin. ”The Concept of Royal Power in Carolingian Oaths of Fidelity," Speculum 20 (1945) 279-289. Odegaard, Charles Edwin. Vassi and Fideles lfl the Carolingian Empire. Cambridge: 1945. ‘ Riche‘, Pierre. Daily Life 12 the Age 9; Charlemagne. Trans. JoAnn McNamara. Philadelphia: 1983. Scholz, Bernard Walter. Carolingian Chronicles. Ann Arbor: 1972. Sullivan, Richard E. Aix-la-Chapelle I the Age eh Charlemagne. Norman, OK: 1963. —_ Sullivan, Richard E. "Early Medieval Missionary Activity: A Comparative Study of Eastern and Western Methods,” Church History. 23 (1954) 17-35. Sullivan, Richard E. "The Carolingian Missionary and the Pagan," Speculum 28 (1953) 705-740. Sullivan, Richard E. ”The Papacy and Missionary Activity in the Early Middle Ages," Mediaeval Studies 17 (1955) 46-106. Tessier, Georges. Charlemagne. Paris: 1967. Ullmann, Walter. The Carolingian Renaissance and the Idea 2: Kingship. London, 1970. Wallace-Hadrill, J. M. ”The 'Via Regia' of the Carolingian Age,” in Beryl Smalley, ed. Trends lfl Medieval Political Thought. Oxford: 1965, 22-41. 16 TY LIBRARIES 656 M'TITITHWINMIMIW IUIWNVIEHWI) 3 12 9 3 0 3 0 5 6