1

LAY NOBLES AND CAROLINGIAN POLITICAL THEORY IN THE EARLY

NINTH CENTURY

WORD COUNT: 10,416

CANDIDATE NUMBER: T12313

KING’S COLLEGE LONDON, 2014

2

The Carolingian Empire dwarfed other early medieval polities with the breadth of

territory and the ambition of its rulers. In the ninth century, Charlemagne and Louis

the Pious enjoyed command of a realm whose geographical boundaries would not be

matched until a millennium later, while lacking the state bureaucracy and

organization that developed in similarly geographically large states seen before in

Europe and Asia.1 In addition, Carolingian monarchs and their intellectual supporters

launched an impressive programme of reform and transformation that sought to

create a perfect Christian state on Earth in which all sectors of society were expected

to play their part.2

One of the most important social groups within medieval Europe was the lay

aristocracy; free men with land, power and influence. The ninth century was not an

exception. These lay magnates were instrumental not only for Carolingian rulers to

exert influence from their palaces and royal estates into the localities; they also

served to promote Carolingian ideology and theology and became active participants

within them. For the most part, these aristocrats did not need to be controlled through

coercion and force; rather the situation was beneficial for both parties.

This arrangement was stressed in the years of chaos following the rebellions of 830

and 833 leading to the division of the Empire in 843. The pressures placed on many

lay magnates forced them to choose between remaining faithful to their king or

emperor, or to protect their land and influence, break their oaths either retreating into

the localities or switching allegiances.

Contemporaries were not shy in expressing their concerns, and works written by lay

intellectuals reflect this. Nithard, a political figure who was personally involved to a

great extent in the chaos of the early 840s ends his histories at the close of 843 with a

dismal view on the state of affairs, where ‘dissension and struggle… want and

sadness are rife.’ 3 Dhuoda, whose family were at the heart of the Imperial court at

the start of the crisis, opens her Liber Manualis by writing that ‘the wretchedness of

1 Chris Wickham, The Inheritance of Rome: A History From 400-1000, (Penguin, 2010), 387 2 Mayke De Jong, The Penitential State: Authority and Atonement in the Age of Louis the Pious, (Cambridge, 2009), 4 3 Nithard, Histories, Book IV, 7 tr. Scholz, Carolingian Chronicles: Royal Frankish Annals and Nithard’s Histories (Ann Arbor, 1970), 129-174, 174

3

the world grew and worsened’ in order to impress upon her audience the importance

of her advice.4 Later works, such as Hincmar of Rheims’s treatise on how to order

the realm reflected an attitude that what had previously been good was now

‘corrupt’.5

The historiography of the Carolingian era has not been kind to lay magnates. Earlier

historians blamed the disintegration of the Empire on aristocratic selfishness. The

underlying assumption has been that strong imperial rulership and institutions bound

unruly, shortsighted aristocrats together into the Frankish polity.6 Echoing the

improvement of Louis the Pious’ later years within historiography, there has been a

movement to rehabilitate the Carolingian aristocracy. De Jong and Stone have shown

how aristocrats were not troublesome, petty tyrants who paid lip service to the tenets

of Carolingian reform. Rather, they were active participants within the self-correcting

Christian culture of Carolingian intellectualism.7 This paper will move to reinforce

this position, showing how Carolingian lay potentes were involved in the Carolingian

political structure and how they adhered to it.

Keeping this in mind, this dissertation will first establish some of the parameters of

lay aristocracy and their role within the Carolingian plan in order to develop a broad

sense of Carolingian political theory as it applied to aristocrats, whilst focusing on

the mechanisms that promoted Carolingian thought and kept aristocrats part of the

Frankish empire. Secondly it will examine whether the crises of the 830s and 840s

caused these to change by using works produced both during and after this period of

political instability.

Lay Aristocracy

Defining lay nobles is difficult. Power alone is not enough. Within early medieval

Europe, there was no divide between political power wielded by a layman or a cleric.

At court, or in the localities, potentes could be clerical; abbots of rich monasteries,

4 Dhuoda, Liber Manualis, Prologue, Neel (trans.) Handbook for William: A Carolingian Woman’s Counsel for her Son, (Washington, DC, 1991), 1-42, 6 5 Adalhard of Corbie/Hincmar of Rheims, De ordine palatii, in Dutton, Carolingian Civilization A Reader (Toronto, 1993), 485-499, 499 6 François-Louis Ganshof, Frankish Institutions Under Charlemagne, (Providence, 1968) 7 De Jong, Penitential State, 113

4

bishops of high-ranking sees and others participated in the same arenas of political

and social activity as counts and dukes. To some extent, within the mechanics of

administration, there was little difference between powerful clerics and powerful

laymen. In addition, the definition between social rank could be unclear. There were

also divisions between noblemen, lay and clerical, and those of lower social rank.

However, the breadth of its application could vary drastically depending upon

geographical location within the Carolingian Empire. In some regions, the term

nobiles was applied more broadly then others, such as in Bavaria.8 Contemporary

differentiation is visible in Thegan’s Gesta Hludowici imperatoris. Thegan is

virulently against raising un-free individuals upwards through society, blaming much

of the events of the 830s on ungrateful ‘slaves’, such as Ebbo.9 As Airlie asserts,

‘nobiles were potentes, but not all potentes were nobiles.’10

Some distinction can be observed. Capitularies make clear the divide between

clerical and comital position and authority, as seen in 823-5’s Admonitio ad omnes

regni ordines.11 Within his letters Einhard changes how he addresses a figure, and

refers to himself, depending on the recipient. When Einhard a lay abbot, writes to a

priest, he refers to himself as a 'sinner’, demarcating himself.12 Books of advice to the

laity are full of assurances that one can still be an effective lay actor and attain

paradise; this is one of the concerns addressed by Alcuin who offers advice for those

of this ‘occupation’.13 While clergy intermittently participated in warfare, such as

during the siege of Paris, warfare was considered to fall within the lay sphere and

was the remit of free laymen.14 The importance of military activity to noble identity

can be observed in rituals of penitence where a person’s transformation from lay

8 Warren Brown, Unjust Seizure: Conflict, Interest and Authority in an Early Medieval Society, (Ithaca, 2001), 29 9 Thegan, Gesta Hludowici imperatoris, in Dutton (eds.), Carolingian Civilization: A Reader (Toronto, 1993), 226-302, 151 10Stuart Airlie, ‘Bonds of Power and Bonds of Association in the Court Circle of Louis the Pious’, Collins, Godman, (eds.) Charlemagne’s Heir: New Perspectives on the Reign of Louis the Pious (814-840) (Oxford 1990), 191-204, 204 11 Admonitio ad omnes regni ordines, MGH Cap. i:150 12 Einhard, The Letters of Einhard, 43 in Dutton (eds.) Carolingian Civilization: A Reader, (Toronto 1997) 283-310, 152 13 Alcuin, De virtutibus et vitiis, R. Stone tr., forthcoming in The Heroic Age, 1 14 Rachel Stone, Morality and Masculinity in the Carolingian Empire, (Cambridge, 2012), 86

5

political actor to neutralized religious penitent was marked by divesting them of

sword and belt, as happened with Louis the Pious in 833.15

With regards to gender, there is no clear-cut difference between male and female lay

aristocrats in terms of managing local power. It is not viable to speak of equality

within Frankish society, but at the same time, there is not much evidence to suggest

that female aristocrats wielding power were problematic.16 In this paper, I will avoid

issues of gender in terms of the way a lay potentes worked within the wider programs

of conveying reform and Christian authority; however, the presence of Dhuoda

shows that this discussion extended across gender barriers and indeed her writings

show her importance as a proponent of aristocratic fidelity in the 840s.

Possel concludes that it is difficult to clearly define a noble aristocrat. Instead, she

suggests core functions of an aristocrat rather than defining lines.17 This dissertation

will refer to this sector of society as lay magnates, potentes, aristocrats and nobles.

These free, noble, powerful land owners were expected to provide political support

for Church and Emperor, both militarily and through administration. They were also

advised by the ecclesiastical sector of Carolingian intellectualism to be able to

perform the duties expected of them in order to attain eternal life and favour in God’s

eyes within a developed framework.

The Carolingian Renaissance

Having discussed lay nobles, this dissertation will now investigate the Carolingian

Plan or Project. This refers to the collective systems of government, intellectual

movements and religious doctrines that were spread throughout the Empire during

the reigns of Charlemagne and Louis the Pious and beyond.18 This will gather the

various forms of correctio, societal development, encompassing programmes of

reform, and capitularies, etcetera in order to identify idealized images of aristocrats

15 Thegan, Gesta Hludowici, 151 16 Stuart Airlie, ‘The Aristocracy in the service of the state in the Carolingian Period, Airlie’, Phol, Reimitz, (eds.)Staat im fruhen Mittelalter (Vienna, 2006), 98 17Christina Possel, ‘Authors and Recipients of Carolingian Capitularies: 779-829’, Godman, Collins, (eds.) Charlemagne’s Heir: New Perspectives on the Reign of Louis the Pious (814-840) (Oxford 1990), 270 18 Thomas Noble, ‘Secular Sanctity: forging an ethos for the Carolingian Nobility’, Wormald, Nelson, (eds.) Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World (Cambridge, 2001) 8-36, 9

6

within it, and demonstrate that Carolingian writers possessed a collective, conscious

awareness of the changes happening within society.19

The chief tenets of the Carolingian project can be described as follows: first the

continuation of the collective polity that comprised the Carolingian Empire and its

collective sub-kingdoms, along with the continued dominance of the Carolingian

dynasty itself; secondly was the propagation and spread of Frankish culture in

intellectual and theological thought; thirdly was the establishment of a ministerium in

order to bring about a perfect Christian state wherein everyone could be pleasing to

God, who might then bestow good fortune upon the state and the people within it and

in order to avoid clades or divine punishment.20 To achieve this, individuals would

observe and correct each other. This ministerium was rooted in earlier theological

work, such as Bede’s commentaries but rose to a fever pitch during the reign of Louis

the Pious.21 It was most forcefully expressed in the 823-825 capitulary Admonitio Ad

Omnes Ordines that spoke of a collective responsibility for all under the king.22 De

Jong refers to this as a ‘Penitential State’ characterised by ‘a sense of responsibility

for the common good and the knowledge that one would be held accountable by God

for the way in which one had carried out one’s ‘ministry’.’23

All three of these tenets fed into each other; the dissemination of Frankish thought

would lead to people trying to act in the correct manner, policing each other with

admonitio in order to avoid sin; by associating breaking oaths and other breaches of

public behaviour with scandalum, the very act of rebelling would endanger the

immortal souls of the rebel and threaten those under him.24 This also served to sustain

the links between the various different peoples and cultures of the Frankish domain

within a God-pleasing hierarchy with the Carolingian Imperial family conveniently

on top.

19 Paul Dutton, The Politics of Dreaming in the Carolingian Empire, (London, 1994), 1 20 De Jong, Penitential State, 151 21 Matthew Innes, ‘Charlemagne, justice and written law’, Rio (eds.) Law, Custom, and Justice in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (London, 2011) 155-203 167 22 MGH Cap. i:150, 3, Rio (trans.) 23 de Jong, Penitential State, 113 24ibid, 151

7

Historians must be wary of establishing anachronistic patterns of behaviour and

thought on societies of the past; the phrase ‘Carolingian Renaissance’ has commonly

been used.25 Although the term is questionable, the movement itself is not. Several

historical studies on the development and advancement of Carolingian theological

and political theory indicate that many intellectuals in Frankish society were

conscious of a programme to accomplish these goals.26 Walahfrid Strabo, within his

Libellus de Exordiis et incrementis quarundam in ovservationibus, presents a

comparison between the secular and clerical offices of Carolingian society. Each

office in the church is given a counterpart in lay society and ‘What counts or prefects

do in the secular world, the remaining bishops do in the church.’27 Strabo lists the

hierarchy of society from popes and caesars to the domestic servants of counts and

bishops, ianitores and ostiary.28 Within this model, ‘Christ’s one body is formed by

all members of His offices’ who contribute products for the benefit of all... if one

member glories, all the members rejoice with it; if one member suffers anything, all

the members suffer with it. Therefore, that harmony must be held until we all attain

to perfect manhood, “so that God may be in all”.’29 Similar concepts of unity can be

observed in other texts intended for lay audiences. The proliferation of Latin lay

mirrors in the early ninth century suggests that literacy was not unusual among lay

magnates. In addition, the high quality of works that emerge from the laity in this

period, such as Dhuoda’s Liber Manualis, Nithard’s Histories and the works of

Einhard indicate that aristocrats made up an important part of the intellectual

community from which these ideas arose. How then are they reflected in this political

theory?

The Role of Aristocrats in the Carolingian Empire and the Localities

Several key themes keep appearing within Carolingian literature across genres during

the early ninth century. Lay mirrors, admonitory letters and other works provide 25 Janet Nelson, "On the limits of the Carolingian renaissance", Nelson (eds.), Politics and Ritual in Early Medieval Europe, (London, 1986), 49-64 26 Dutton, Politics of Dreaming, 114 27 Walahfrid Strabo, Libellus de Exordiis et incrementis quarundam in ovservationibus, Harting-Correa, (trans.) Libellus de Exordiis et incrementis quarundam in ovservationibus: A Translation and Liturgical Commentary, (Leiden, 1996) 193 28ibid, 195 29ibid, 197

8

models of what was expected of a secular figure by the Carolingian intelligentsia

both in behaviour and contributions towards the Empire. Military activity played a

major part of noble identity and was an important function of lay magnates in the

absence of the Emperor as seen with Duke Baldric in 820.30 However, this

dissertation will focus on the administrative function of lay magnates rather than

military activity. When divest of moral authority and stripped of the political and

economic mechanics, an early medieval emperor or king is just a man trapped within

his own power base unless other individuals chose to obey him. As Mann notes, the

state ‘does not possess a distinctive means of power independent of… economic,

military and ideological power.’31 In order to gain influence, Carolingian rulers

allowed aristocrats to use these for their own interests and in return spread their

control over the realm. This can be observed in lay potentes and their judicial

activities.

Judges and missi

Carolingian identity and reform were brought to the localities through lay judges.

Capitularies under both Louis the Pious and Charlemagne repeatedly commented on

the duty of local counts and missi to provide good justice in accordance to

Carolingian legislation. Lay mirrors, a genre that emerged within this period, often

written by churchmen after being asked by the laity for advice and widely distributed

both at court and the localities highlighted the importance of this role. Perhaps the

most successful lay mirror was Alcuin’s De virtutibus et vitiis written at the turn of

the turn of the ninth century.32 The importance of good judicial practice in regards to

Aristocratic behaviour is shown by Alcuin dedicating an entire section on instruction

on being a good judge; reflecting on the effect of unjust judges not only in temporal

matters, but also upon the spiritual health of judged and judge. Injustice is spoken of

in martial terms, ‘Unjust judges are worse then the enemy. Enemies are often avoided

by flight, [but] judges because of their power cannot be fled.’ 33 Performing one’s

30 The Astronomer, Vita Hludovici, Noble (eds.) Charlemagne and Louis the Pious: the lives by Einhard, Notker, Ermoldus, Thegan, and The Astronomer (Philadelphia 2009), 226-302, 260 31 Michael Mann, ‘The autonomous power of the state: its origins, mechanisms and results’, Archives Européennes de Sociologie 25, 1984, 185-213, 188 32 Stone, Morality and Masculinity, 1-2 33 Alcuin, De virtutibus et vitiis, 14

9

duties well and dispensing good justice is celebrated. Wielding judicial power and

giving good council appears to be as crucial as wielding a sword, in regards to the

conceptual idealized image of a lay noble.

There is a further element to the role of aristocrat as judge. Much has been written of

the programme of capitularies and reform that characterized the Carolingian empire

from other early medieval polities. As mentioned above, the nature of power within

the Carolingian empire was not imposition but negotiation.34 There was no modern

legislative reform through written codices to provide a modern legal code.35 But lay

potentes played a crucial role in bringing these local laws into line with royal

authority and imposing Imperial authority upon the localities. Studies on dispute

settlement and legislation across different regions of the Frankish dominions

demonstrate that aristocratic co-operation with Carolingian legal codes and the

imposition of Royal justice came about when it was beneficial for the local potentes,

with the authority of the count or missi stemming from Imperial authority but really

supporting local power.36 Looking at a series of disputes that arose in 822, Brown

shows how missi were only appointed by Louis the Pious to deal with a series of

disputes that arose as a result of capitulary legislation sent out in 821. After this

dispute over royal lands was resolved, missi disappeared from the surviving records

until 829.37 The evidence presented within these studies suggests that Brown’s

statement that ‘what Louis the Pious said and did only mattered in Bavaria insofar as

his policies benefited someone’ reflects the reality on the ground.38 To be appointed a

missi did not automatically convey authority, but could give one an edge.

This was not beneficial for all lay potentes. Aristocrats rarely act as one body even

within localities. In the aftermath of Bavaria’s absorption into the Frankish Empire,

Brown notes that aristocrats from the same kin groups were often on different sides

of disputes bringing them in conflict with one another, some engaging with

34 Airlie, ‘Aristocracy in the Service of the State’, 95-99 35 Innes, ‘Charlemagne, Justice and Written Law’, 157 36 Janet Nelson, ‘Dispute Settlement in Carolingian West Francia’, Fouracre, Davies, (eds.) The Settlement of Disputes in Early Medieval Europe, (Cambridge, 1986), 45-64, 48 37Brown, Unjust Seizure, 149-152 38 ibid, 151

10

Carolingian justice, others resisting it.39 In addition Nelson questions whether judges

were truly representative of the localities, noting the rarity of success of coloni and

other less powerful figures in contesting against their landowners under Imperial

Law.40

Despite this, these local disputes did not endanger broader Carolingian interests;

some degree of opposition and non-compliance could be tolerated. What mattered is

that good justice was conducted. Capitularies helped to form reference points to join

other sources of law and authority enabling Carolingian judges to act according to

God’s will. Much of what was laid out in capitularies is broad and repetitive, serving

as reference to missi and counts as opposed to prescriptive rules.41 Possel identifies

that while certain aspects of identity were not affected, it did have an impact on the

exercise of public power; individuals saw themselves as a group of Imperial power

holders with the Emperor at the apex.42 This resulted in a movement towards

respecting the material interests of Imperial bodies such as the Emperor and the

Church within Francia and the promotion of a Christian society where inappropriate

behaviour was punished.43 Correcting the behaviour of those within Carolingian

society to that envisioned by clerical and royal authorities relied on people within the

localities to enforce and educate.44 Priests dealt with matters of religious instruction

and education while comites and other laymen had their own areas of responsibility.

In return, they could use Imperial office to support them in their disputes.

Much as wielding weapons in support of the Emperor was seen as part of an

aristocrat’s role within Carolingian society, wielding justice in the name of the

Emperor and King was also praiseworthy. This is reflected in the Song of Count

Timo, where the actions of the count who gave ‘justice to the good forcing the bad to

justice in the kingdom where the little field of Noricum lies’ are said to be pleasing

39 ibid, 101 40 Nelson, ‘Dispute Settlement’, 50 41 Possel, ‘Authors and Recipients of Carolingian Capitularies’, 273 42 ibid 270 43 Innes, ‘Charlemagne Justice and Written Law’ 168 44 Carine van Rhijn, ‘Priests and the Carolingian Reforms: The Bottlenecks of local correctio’, Goodman, Collins (eds.) Charlemagne’s Heir, Texts and Identities in the Early Middle Ages, (Oxford 1990), 221

11

the king, for ‘it is a kingly thing to thwart wrongdoers’. 45 Unless on campaign, both

Charlemagne and Louis the Pious rarely strayed from Aachen, the Seine valley and

the middle Rhine valley.46 It fell to the Counts and missi dominici to oversee disputes

and dispense Royal justice in the name of the Emperor or the King in their absence,

extending their authority into the peripheries.

Bad judicial practices were denounced as damaging the connection between the

Emperor and the rest of Carolingian society. In an admonitory letter to Matfrid of

Orleans written in 827, Agobard of Lyons chastises the Count of Orleans, stating that

‘in the regions bordering us… in many people, the fear of the king and the laws has

grown so silent that man currently suppose that no one need be feared… with these

others placed in the way, the one who is to be feared, shall not see our foolishness.’47

Ineffective judicial practices, especially the taking of bribes, turns aristocrats into ‘a

wall between the emperor and [the people].’48 This indicates the vital role of judges

in promoting Imperial interests out into the wider Empire in exchange for prestige

and authority in local disputes.

Fidelity and Personal Networks

In addition to providing military support or extending the king’s justice out into the

localities, lay magnates joined their clerical counterparts in providing a further

service. In the Carolingian world, much relied on the personal networks of

individuals bound by oath directly to the Emperor, a practice solidified in the 802

Programmatic Capitulary which set out how ‘every man in his entire realm, whether

ecclesiastical or layman… Who has previously promised fidelity to him in the name

of the king is now to make that promise in the name of Caesar.’49 Within early

medieval society, these personal networks were the means through which political

45 Song of Count Timo, Dümmler (eds.), Poetae Latini Aevi Carolini II (Berlin, 1884), 120-124, Rio (trans.) 46 Stuart Airlie, ‘The Palace as Memory: The Carolingian Court as Political Centre’, Jones, Marks and AJ Woodbridge, (eds.), Courts and Regions in Medieval Europe, (York, 2000) 1-20, 2 47Agobard of Lyon, On Injustices to Mathfrid, North (trans.) Agobardi Lugdunensis Opera Omnia, Opusculum XIII, Van Aacker (eds.) Corpus Christianorum 52 (1981), 225-227, 226 48 ibid 49 MGH CAP 802, King (trans.) Charlemagne: Translated Sources (Kendal, 1987), 202-268, 233-234

12

and economical activity was conducted.50 This is arguably the factor that made the

Carolingian Empire an Empire. Through these networks, the Carolingian Court was

connected by these lay magnates to their dependents and downwards through society

thus binding each man to the Emperor personally. The Collected Letters of Einhard

demonstrates how this functioned. This collection shows how through him,

individuals from all ranges of Carolingian society, lay, clerical, free, unfree, noble

and base, were given some level of access to each other, such as the case of Letter 5

where Einhard, on behalf of ‘this man of my country, David’ asks a court member to

‘procure him the opportunity to appeal to our lord the emperor.’51 All manner of

business can be observed as taking place through this system, economic, judicial,

dispute-settlement, political and personal all mingled together.

As with judges and missi, older historiography on the Carolingian Empire conceived

of it as an entity wherein strong Imperial figures imposed their will upon the

peripheries and the diverse peoples that inhabited the territories that came under

Charlemagne’s control during his reign. 52 Modern studies now perceive a

relationship where power is not imposed but negotiated with either side receiving

benefits from the arrangement.53 Aristocrats who were not part of courtly life could

attach themselves to these networks and acquire resources and connections through

them, which brought them in line with Imperial and Court policy.54

However, while they did not need to be coerced, aristocrats are still self-interested

actors in a highly competitive political environment. Participating in this society was

motivated by the rewards one could gain. Mirroring their engagement with

Carolingian law, counts and other potentes had influence both through their own

connections and with Imperial courts within fidelity networks. The concept of the

50 Gerd Althoff, Family, Friends and Followers: Political and Social Bonds in Early Medieval Europe, (Cambridge, 2004), 66 51 Einhard, Letters, 285 52 Gerd Tellenbach, ‘From the Carolingian Imperial Nobility to the German Estate of Imperial Princes’, Reuter (eds.) The Medieval Nobility: Studies on the Ruling Classes of France and Germany from the Sixth to the Twelfth Century (Amsterdam, 1978) 203-242, 204 53 Matthew Innes, State and Society in the Early Middle Ages: The Middle Rhine Valley, (Cambridge, 2000), 124 54 Marios Costambeys, Matthew Innes, Simon Maclean, The Carolingian World (Cambridge, 2011), 315

13

missi dominici as outside enforcers of royal authority has fallen away to this new

model where locally important people were selected to be invested with this royal

authority. Within Bavaria, Brown comments that ‘a great many, if not all authority

figures involved in disputes… whether missi, counts or judges, belonged to kin

groups present… before the Carolingian takeover’ pointing towards Counts Gerold

and Reginhard as strong examples of this phenomenon.55

Those at the centre of these fidelity networks could employ their influence at court to

protect those within their networks from others using Imperial authority. In one of

Einhard’s letters, he speaks on behalf of ‘our men’, possibly some of his personal

fideles who were being punished for not being where they were ordered to be.

Einhard, himself a missi and having issued similar orders in his letters writes that it

‘does not seem fair to me that men, who were exactly where the emperor himself had

ordered them [to be], should have to pay the herban [fine for not appearing when

summoned.]’56 Both parties are using the authority of Imperial office in this instance

to try and strengthen their position, with Einhard interceding on behalf of his fideles.

The lay aristocracies were not just bound to the Empire by oaths and networks of

fidelity; a religious connection was promoted in parallel.

Ministerium

Within this system of good judging and keeping faithful to one’s lord, the wider

cultural and spiritual world in which the Carolingian aristocrat resided must be

considered. The ideology of the Carolingian ministerium relied heavily upon the

participation of lay magnates in order to have any chance of being effective. Much

has been written on the capitulary legislation of Louis the Pious in this regard where

the development of a highly Christianised Carolingian society was outlined, along

with the obligations of members of this society.

The methodology and intention of the Carolingian system of ministerium,

admonition and correctio is outlined in de Jong’s The Penitential State.57 Within this

system, power is seen to have been bestowed upon individuals by divine authority.

55 Brown, Unjust Seizure, 103 56 Einhard, 139 57 de Jong, Penitential State, 151-155

14

However, this power also meant that one was responsible not only for one’s own

salvation. By not acting properly, whether in terms of personal behaviour or in the

execution of public duties, one could threaten the salvation and eternal life of the

people under you.58 Acting in a manner displeasing to God could bring about divine

punishment, or clades. Clades could take the form of natural disasters, plagues and

illnesses or military reversals such as the series of defeats suffered in 827. This

system extended through Carolingian society with both lay and clerics acting as

vicars in their ministerium. As the head of this structure, the Emperor was responsible

for everyone within the Frankish realm; bishops and counts were responsible for

those within their territories, sees and pagus continuing down through the lower

strata of society.

Lay and clerical figures were placed on the same level, each member keeping their

eyes on the other, ‘And if ever by the negligence of an abbot, abbess or count, if they

create an obstacle for you any difficulties, you should let us know at the time.’59 They

were imbued with royal authority to report any perceived misdoing to the Emperor to

correct their behaviour. As Wallace-Hadrill comments, had this system been as

successful as intended, it would have resembled an early medieval police state. 60

However, while it was potentially restrictive, this system of admonition played a

large role in nascent Carolingian political discourse. As long as one presented one’s

work as an admonition towards Christian behaviour, there was freedom to critique

powerful figures. As mentioned above, Agobard of Lyons’ On Injustices is a perfect

example of the admonitory literature that was inflicted upon aristocrats in the period.

Stone raises the question of whether this was an unattainable standard or a reflection

of reality.61 It is very unlikely that these tenets represent an average noble’s

behaviour, but failing to adhere to them could have consequences.

The 825 Capitulary reveals how correctio could impact the careers of lay magnates.

Within is a series of offences that one could perform that bring damage upon

Imperial authority. Committing violence, dishonoring the King and Kingdom,

58 Timothy Noble, ‘Secular Sanctity: Forging an Ethos for The Carolingian Nobility’, Wormald, Nelson, (eds.) Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World, (Cambridge, 2007), 8-36, 9 59 MGH Cap. i:150, 4 60 J Wallace-Hadrill, The Frankish Church, (Oxford, 2001), 299 61 Stone, Morality and Masculinity, 9

15

refusing to give the Emperor good horses annually and other crimes are bestowed

with a spiritual dimension. Furthermore, punishment for causing scandulum, or

public offence to God, whether through conduct or politics was seen as a critical part

of correctio. The threat was clear: ‘We want it noted that those who were meant to

take care of the legates and to do this on our behalf should not presume to neglect

this…. We, nor our kingdom, [do not] want him to have any honour’.62 Here, honour

refers to honores, or office. As mentioned above, bestowing honores frequently came

with the allocation of benefices from the fisc or Imperial estates.

Bestowing or removing these honores could make or break an aristocrat. In the late

820s in the case of Hugh, Matfrid and other aristocrats who, after a series of military

upsets in Spain and North Francia, were accused of negligentia and stripped of their

benefices; here the course of reform and imperial politics meshed together.63 This

was the grandest example of public correctio prior to the 830s and was attempting

ameliorate the clades suffered in the three defeats of 827. However, in 830, those

who had been stripped of office through correctio attempted to do the same to the

Emperor.

Aristocrats Askew?

The final years of the reign of Louis the Pious have been seen as a destructive period

in Carolingian history with Charlemagne’s single empire fractured between Louis’s

sons. Recent historiographical movements have rehabilitated his reputation by

emphasising his recovery from his deposition in 833 and referring to earlier attempts

to divide the realm. Charlemagne himself had inherited a divided realm and had

planned to divide his dominions.64 The danger to royal authority may have been

exaggerated, but for lay nobles the situation was precarious.

The crisis of the 830s arose due to several connected factors. Following the disasters

of 827, Louis the Pious stripped Count Hugh of Tours and Count Matfrid of Orleans

of their honores. This forced them to find an alternative nexus of power, which they

62 MGH Cap. i:150, 18 63Hans Hummer, Politics and Power in Medieval Europe: Alsace and the Frankish Realm: 600-1000, (Cambridge, 2005), 156 64Janet Nelson, ‘The Last Years of Louis the Pious’, Goodman, Collins (eds.) Charlemagne’s Heir: New Perspectives on the Reign of Louis the Pious (814-840) (Oxford, 1990), 48

16

found in Italy in the court of Lothar. The need to allocate the young Charles the Bald

territory of his own caused upset among the Emperor’s other sons, particularly Lothar

and Louis the German, in addition to threatening the personal lands of Hugh and

other nobles.65 This prompted Lothar, supported by this group of disgruntled

noblemen to rebel against the Emperor. They turned the doctrine of correctio against

Louis the Pious and the Empress Judith, accusing them of having threatened the

spiritual health of the entire realm through personal transgressions. Empress Judith

was accused of adultery with Bernard of Septimania, and Louis of forcing his fideles

to endanger their immortal souls through perjury by establishing Charles as a

Carolingian monarch.

In 833, this resulted in a confrontation between the Emperor Louis and his rebellious

sons with Pope Gregory IV present. With the most important secular and

ecclesiastical leaders of Western Europe present, the histories show the bulk of the

Emperor’s army deserting him as he awaited battle, either fleeing for their own lands

or defecting. The drama of the moment serves to drive home the crucial point. Louis

the Pious was captured by his rebellious sons because most of his faithful men did

not remain faithful; they moved away from the Carolingian plan in this respect and

abandoned their Emperor on the Field of Lies. It could be possible to see this as a

military failure, however, it moves beyond a purely military matter in that it was a

collapse of the principal of fidelity that resulted in Louis’s capture.

Most extant histories of the period are negative in their portrayal of Hugh and

Matfrid and those who joined them in their revolt, opposing royal attempts to impose

correctio upon them; but we can infer why they moved against Louis.66 Having

suffered correctio and endured their honores stripped from them, these high-ranking

men who were at the very heart of Carolingian political life now found themselves on

the fringes. Their followers as well were now separated from the network of

connections and favours, which they had previously enjoyed, damaging Hugh and

Matfrid even further as without this, aristocrats lost influence and prestige; they had

lost their position as judges, as missi and access to benefices.67

65 Hummer, Politics and Power, 160 66 ibid 67 De Jong, Penitential State, 39

17

The importance of lay networks in times of strife is revealed within the Annals of St-

Bertin. After falling away from the Emperor, we are told that the ‘some of these

men’, among which were important courtly figures, that had deserted Louis the Pious

on the Field of Lies, were able to survive reprisal from the seemingly successful

rebels by fleeing into the localities in which they had influence, taking themselves ‘to

the lands of their friends and kinsmen and of their faithful men.’68 They provided a

safe refuge for them to weather out the political chaos, a path of action followed by

Bernard of Septimania in 833.

It can be argued that this was an example of aristocratic selfishness. Unsure of who

was going to emerge from the conflict the victor, aristocrats could suffer heavily if

they supported the wrong royal.69 A clear example of how a lay magnate responded

to this period of uncertainty is within Einhard’s letters. Several letters within this

collection, addressed to members of the Carolingian royal family in the 830s, are

concerned with Einhard’s attendance at court and his continued fidelity to the

competing interests with Einhard assuring Louis the Pious, the Empress Judith,

Lothar and Louis the German that he is their faithful man. However, he refused to

attend their courts and excused his absence with the discomfort of travel, illness such

as ‘pain in my kidneys and spleen’ and his duties as lay abbot.70

Further letters are sent by Einhard, often addressed to a ‘Friend’ asking them to

‘intercede on my behalf with our most pious Lord and Emperor.’71 These letters are

clearly intended to ask the centres whether the ruler in question is friendly towards

Einhard and to maintain their favour while at the same time keeping a safe distance

as he waited to see who emerged victorious from the struggle. During 833, Einhard

addressed both Louis the Pious and Lothar as ‘Emperor.’ While Lothar had been

crowned sub-Emperor in 817, the date of the letter and Lothar’s deposition of his

father and assumption of the Imperial title point to Einhard’s letters reflecting his

politically flexible nature.

68 Annales Bertiniani, 833, Nelson (trans.), The Annals of St Bertin: Ninth-Century Histories, Vol.1, (Manchester, 1991) 69 Karl Werner, ‘Noble Families in Charlemagne's Kingdom’, Reuter (eds.), The Medieval Nobility: Studies on the Ruling Classes of France and Germany from the Sixth to the Twelfth Century (Amsterdam, 1978), 137-202, 166 70 Einhard, 151 71 ibid

18

Other nobles’ concerns are evident in these letters. Several counts and other laymen

appear to be concerned about their own status and standing as they try to

accommodate the competing Imperial interests. A number of letters within the

collection address the problems of nobles who held territory within regions under the

control of different Carolingian monarchs. Each letter asks that the person for whom

Einhard is interceding be allowed to hold onto the benefice until the time where they

can travel to pay homage and renew their oaths of fidelity. One asks permission for a

member of their family to become the fides of another Carolingian monarch, in

whose territories the family’s benefices now lay as ‘unless it is done they lose their

benefice lying beyond the Rhine.’72 Prior to the 830s, benefices could be awarded

across the entire Frankish Empire, after 833 lands lying within the realm of another

Carolingian ruler were liable to be seized and redistributed to lords who supported

that King.73

Ignoring the ideological and theological elements, the political consequences for

backing the wrong side in this struggle were dire. The Annals of the monastery of St-

Bertin laid out what awaited nobles who chose poorly or were unable to secure

protection. ‘Those who had tormented or favoured conflict were justly punished for

their crimes, some by loss of property, others by exile.’74 Other punishments lurked:

tonsuring, blinding and execution were common in the 830s. With these intense

pressures upon the Carolingian aristocracy, maintaining their position as potentes and

ensuring one was seen to be faithful to the correct monarch was of prime importance.

This uncertainty continued into the civil war of the 840s and the manner in which lay

nobles conducted themselves within Nithard’s Histories would suggest that lay

aristocrats were no longer interested in the Carolingian project, but rather moved to

protect themselves, ‘since each goes his separate way.’75 As previous addressed, lay

nobles participated in this system because they could benefit from adhering to the

Carolingian political framework. Now benefit seemed to lie from moving away.

Nithard records at the beginning of Book II of his Histories that upon the death of

72 ibid 142 73 Charles West, Reframing the Feudal Revolution: Political and Social Transformation between Marne and Moselle: 800-c.1100 (Cambridge 2013), 42 74 Annales Bertiniani, 839 75 Nithard, Histories, Book IV, 7, 173

19

Louis the Pious, Lothar ‘promised that he wished to grant everyone the benefices

which his father had given and that he would make them even bigger’ if they moved

to support him.76

On the ground in the localities, Innes shows that the struggle over retaining control

over land and benefices in this period extended beyond king and nobles into local

struggles as regional power brokers were made and destroyed through divesting or

granting land.77 The distribution of public property for private use and stripping

honores from those who refused to lend support are seen in Nithard where Lothar

‘deprived Charles’ emissaries’ of their lands because ‘they did not want to break their

fealty.’78 This led to a local redistribution of land, such as the practice of granting

gifts of land to monasteries and ecclesiastical institutions in order to prevent its

seizure, using the privileged position of Church land against royal power, seen in

Bavaria and the Middle Rheine.79

The nobility were faced with a dilemma; do they continue to support the king they

were under, or do they change sides and support another king in the hope of receiving

a greater reward? This in turn raises another question: with the Carolingian rulers

endangering many aristocrats with their squabbles, would it be safer to disengage

from the Empire and pursue their own interests instead? Having examined how

Carolingians aristocrats fitted into the Empire and the pressures that were upon them,

how then did the lay aristocracy react ideologically?

Askew… But still on the hinges? Retaining their Carolingian Ideas

In this context, the record of Einhard’s correspondence is quite striking. It is thought

to have been intended as a model for letter writing.80 However, the fact that these

letters not only have been preserved, but collected within a single volume, suggests

Einhard’s efforts to keep himself away from any one court at this time was not seen

as disgraceful or damaging. The model may have been for letter writing, but perhaps

76 Nithard, Histories, Book II, 1, 77 Innes, State and Society, 202 78 Nithard, Histories, Book II, 2 79 Brown, Unjust Seizure, 126 80 David Ganz, ‘Einhardus Peccator, Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World’, Eds Wormald, Nelson, (Cambridge, 2007), 37-50, 38.

20

it was also intended to serve as an example of how to act without disgracing oneself,

a fact noted by Walahfrid Strabo.

At no time can one say that Einhard had broken his fidelity outright and moved away

from the Carolingian model. Even when he was negotiating this delicate political

situation, the letters contain constant assurances to the claimant in question that he

was faithful to them and his service to Louis the Pious. One can contrast Einhard here

as someone who successfully negotiated the rough political landscape of the 830s

with Nithard’s gloomier outlook presented in Book IV of his histories. Nithard,

having ended up much poorer in 843 than he had been in 840 and very much

removed from his position as a potentes, presents a very bleak view of the situation, a

tone that does not exist in Einhard.

This poses the question: did the unrest that came about as a result of Lothar, Hugh

and Matfrid’s actions cause aristocrats to abandon their roles and all the trappings of

the Carolingian project that came with them in order to pursue their own interests,

retreating from public life into the localities? Or was there a continued perception

that maintaining the principles that had been established before 830 was still the

correct thing to do? When examining the situation in the 830s, there is no evidence

suggesting of a movement to destroy or break from the Carolingian Empire from

within the aristocracy. The rebels are seen as acting through a member of the

Carolingian royal dynasty, Lothar. Pro-Louis histories accuse them of giving him bad

advice or pushing him to further their own agenda, but, pertinently, not of breaking

from the framework.

It is important to note the manner in which they attempted to depose the Emperor.

The revolts of 830 and 833 were all conducted within the system of correctio and

admonition with the lay members of the forces arrayed against Louis the Pious

presenting themselves as victims of the Imperial couple’s behaviour and Louis as ‘a

creator of scandal, a disturber of the peace and violator of oaths…’ who ‘broke…the

pact that had been struck for the sake of the empire’s peace and concord.’81 The

Report of Compiegne lists the various crimes of which the Emperor was accused,

including, as mentioned earlier, forcing his fideles to perjure and therefore

81 Bishops’ statement from Compiègne 833, de Jong (trans.), The Penitential State (Cambridge, 2009), 271-279, 275

21

endangering their immortal souls by his actions. The language is typical of admonitio

texts of the period and reflects the tenets of the Carolingian ministerium in their

accusation of Louis not living up to the standards of royal behaviour he himself had

set.82 This can be further seen in Paschasius Radbertus’ Life of Wala, where

Radbertus justifies the actions of Wala of Crobie during 830 and 833 as trying to

correct an Emperor who was following the advice of men who had ‘shattered and

defiled everything and emptied every royal dignity… completely altered everything

so that no orderly arrangement may exist.’83 These vehement words are followed by

the complaints of the aristocrats, ‘The best of men… Soon neglected authority to act

because no one… had any convenient way to secure or retain honours or whatever he

might wish or desire than to what the tyrant… Preferred.’84

Even if these revolts are opportunistic grabs for power, the lay members of these

conspiracies justified their actions in the language of admonitio and correctio and

worked through the authority of bishops, not their own. While these accusations were

all refuted by supporters of Louis the Pious once the Emperor had regained power,

the fact remains that the rebels sought the authority they needed from the political

and theological thought that underpinned the Carolingian project. They drew their

authority from the same ideological well as Emperors and it was with this language

that they ‘deceived the people who had come with the lord emperor, by evil

persuasions and false promises’.85

In essence the events of the 830s exposed the underlying mechanics of the

Carolingian project and like a machine burning itself out, pushed them to the

extremity of failure. The political and theological mechanisms of control and order

were turned against the authority they were meant to support. Those mechanisms and

beliefs were not themselves spurned; rather the rebels used them to hold the Emperor

to these standards.

82Janet Nelson, ‘Bad Kingship in the Earlier Middle Ages’, Haskins Society Journal 8, 1999, 1-26, 22 83 Paschasius Radbertus, Epitaphium Arsenii, Cabaniss (trans.) Charlemagne’s Cousins: Contemporary Lives of Adalard and Wala (Syracuse, 1967) Vol.2, 147-204, 159 84 ibid 85 Annales Bertiniani, 833

22

Lay Views from Magnates

The 840s produced two important works from lay authors; Nithard’s Histories and

Dhuoda’s Liber Manualis. Polanchika and Cilley have connected these works as they

reflected interest in family and promoted their families within history to support their

authors’ positions in this time of unrest and uncertainty.86 Both reflect the dire state

of the Empire in this time; Nithard more so.

Books I and II of the Histories were written to bolster both his and Charles the Bald’s

position. Book IV was written after he had withdrawn to his monastery and

demonstrates his belief that fidelity had been broken and this was why the situation

had become so dire. Nithard still considered fidelity to be important and had done so

throughout his work, noting Bernard of Septimania’s shortcomings after he held back

from the Battle of Fontenoy.87 To this end, he expresses how things were so much

better for the realm in the time of Charles the Great. His despair must be brought

into the correct context; Nelson makes the point that Nithard was one of the losers of

the 840s as his lands lay within the territory that was ceded to Lothar in 842 and 843

at Verdun.88

This would account for his bitter condemnation of Adalhard, a central figure at

Charles the Bald’s court, ‘who cared little for the public good…’ and the way in

which he presents the division of territory.89 Airlie makes the point that both

Adalhard and his actions that resulted in the division of the realm appear more

reasonable when they are viewed in context of the political situation at the time.90

With the losses he suffered over the course of the civil war, one would presume that

he would have been completely disenchanted with the Carolingian project but this is

not the case. He ends his Histories by informing the reader ‘how mad it is to neglect

86 D. Polanichka and A. Cilley, ‘The very personal history of Nithard: family and honour in the Carolingian world’, Early Medieval Europe 22:2 (2014), 171-200, 199 87 Nithard, Histories Book II, 156 88 Janet Nelson, ‘Public History in the Work of Nithard’, Nelson, (eds.) Politics and Ritual in Early Medieval Europe, (London, 1986) 224 89 Nithard, Histories Book IV, 173 90 Stuart Airlie, ‘The World, the Text and the Carolingian’, Wormald, Nelson (eds.) Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World (Cambridge, 2007), 71

23

the common good and to follow only private and selfish desires, since both sins insult

the Creator so much…’91 Here at the end of Book IV we also see a stage in the

development of Charlemagne from the flawed, albeit very successful, ruler presented

in the earlier histories of the man into the one who symbolizes a golden age where

‘peace and concord ruled everywhere.’92 For Nithard, the situation had become so

bad because kings and nobles have moved away from Carolingian political theory,

the ‘one proper way, the way of the common welfare, and thus the way of God.’93

This theme can be seen quite widely throughout the lay literature of the 840s beyond

Nithard. Dhuoda’s Liber Manualis has the importance of fidelity as a central theme.

Within the Liber Manualis fidelity to one’s lord is not just a political advisable act or

an example of good behaviour; it takes on a spiritual dimension. William has Charles

as his Lord because ‘God and your father, Bernard, have chosen him for you to serve

at the beginning of your career.’94 Here, remaining faithful and keeping fideles is

transformed from a reciprocal temporal act and becomes a way to attain eternal life, a

means to ‘reach the celestial goal.’95

Dhuoda offers William advice for his later career where he may be ‘found worthy to

be called to the council of magnates…’ three chapters in Book III are dedicated to

this area alone. Perhaps this is in response to the view points discussed above where

kings were led astray by poor counselors, but if Dhuoda’s handbook is aimed at a

broader audience it becomes a long section of advice on the importance of offering

‘worthy and appropriate comment…’ on attaching oneself to ‘good men seeking after

worthy goals’ and the dangers of poor counsel or judgment, as ‘there are no riches

where stupidity reigns’ aimed at these counselors. Again, as with fidelity, this

behaviour makes someone ‘worthy to receive fitting reward both from God and in the

secular world.’96

Dhuoda also promotes the sense of a broader Carolingian community. She presents

an example of harts crossing a river, drawn from Psalm 41, guiding and supporting

91 Nithard, Histories, Book IV, 174 92 ibid 93 ibid 94 Dhuoda, ‘Liber Manualis’, 25 95 ibid, 27 96 ibid, 27-31

24

each other as they ‘begin to cross seas or wide streams with churning waters.’97 For

Dhuoda, this shows ‘that human beings too must have the brotherly fellowship of

love for greater and lesser men alike, in all ways and in all circumstances.’ 98 The

text here is reminiscent of Louis’ 825 Capitulary in the universality and sense of a

single community with bonds of fidelity and correctio. This may have extended only

to those within Charles the Bald’s realm, but still demonstrates a sense of unity as

Carolingians, sharing the same set of values. 99

Like Nithard, Dhuoda’s family has suffered a loss in status and reputation during the

830s and in the 840s, both William and Bernard of Septimania would lose their lives

in opposition to Charles the Bald.100 However, for Dhuoda the principle of fidelity

and loyalty to one’s lord, both as the Christian thing to do and also as the means of

advancement show that Dhuoda does not see retreating away to the localities as

proper reaction to this crisis; going contrary to her husbands action in 833. This may

be justifying selfish behaviour; keeping a close link to powerful figures was always

an advantage, especially in times of uncertainty. This may also be an expedient

duality as Dhuoda herself was away from the court but connected through William.

She still assertion that one is able to balance one’s secular and religious duties,

similar to Alcuin, sustaining this earlier tenet of Carolingian Aristocracy.101 This is

being framed in a morale dimension where it is a universal good, not just something

to make one’s own position better at the expense of all.

With the division of the realm, there no longer existed a centralized court that was

able to award lands across the entire regnum. However, individual lay magnates still

needed the connections of the smaller Frankish kings and their courts in order to

advance their own interests. The world may have shrunk, but the principles that had

been established under Louis the Pious and Charlemagne continued to be promoted

by the lay aristocracy itself which became the chief repository for these ideals,

disseminating them within the nobility. 97 ibid, 36 98 ibid 99 Stuart Airlie, ‘Bonds of Power’,192 100 Karen Cherewatuk, ‘Speculum Matris, Dhuoda’s Manual’, Florilegium 10, (1988–91), 49-64, 61 101 Janet Nelson, ‘Dhuoda’, Wormald, Nelson (eds.) Cambridge ‘Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World’, (Cambridge 2007), 106-120, 112

25

From Outside the Laity

The ideology that underpinned much of what can be collectively termed the

Carolingian Project emerged from outside the lay sphere but became part of it. Prior

to the 830s, ecclesiastical authors often wrote with laymen as their audience. The

clerical response to the 830s and 40s shows how the intellectual world outside of the

laity was responding to the political uncertainty of the time with regard to lay

activity.

The two major histories of the life of Louis the Pious were written by Thegan and a

person known as the Astronomer. His true identity is unknown, but it is likely he was

a member of the Church rather then a layman. Recently, Booker has suggested he

was Walahfrid Strabo.102 Thegan wrote his Life of Louis in 837 and the

Astronomer’s work has been placed circa 840. However, from their histories, it is

possible to discern how they perceived aristocrats through examining their views on

these lay potentes, the mechanisms that controlled them and if these under went

change.

Within the Vita Hluodowici, the Astronomer shows time and time again that the

system of swearing oaths of fidelity, as discussed above, was continuously employed

by Louis the Pious to bind his rebellious sons. The brothers divide the empire despite

‘the people having already been bound together by oaths’. When in 834, Lothar was

forced into submission and came to his father, ‘Louis upbraided him verbally, bound

him and his nobles with such oaths as he wished.’103 In addition to attempting to

secure the allegiance of Lothar’s magnates in 837, within the province of Neustria,

‘the nobles… who were present gave their hands to Charles and bound themselves by

oath to be faithful and those who were absent later did the same.’104 Thegan,

similarly, notes how Lothar and his nobles were bound by these oaths, ‘After this,

Lothar swore fidelity to his father… then the rest swore.’105

102 Courtney Booker, Past Convictions: The Penance of Louis the Pious and the Decline of the Carolingians (Philadelphia, 2009), 293 103 The Astronomer, Vita Hluodowici, 281 104 ibid, 287 105 Sedulius Scottus, ‘On Christian rulers’, Doyle (trans.), Sedulius Scottus: On Christian rulers and the Poems (Binghampton, 1983), 51-94 pg 68

26

The record of these oaths reinforces the concept that even if the oaths of fidelity are

not effective in preventing Lothar, and more importantly, his magnates, from acting

against Louis the Pious, this method of securing loyalty was considered viable. Even

if it failed, the swearing of oaths was considered important enough to be insisted

upon. Thegan and the Astronomer sought to shame Lothar’s noblemen by showing

them as frequently breaking their fidelity with the Emperor, a theme they share with

Nithard.

Looking at the later Carolingian period, allowing for sufficient passage of time to

reflect any major changes that may have occurred after several decades of political

and spiritual reflection on the events of the 830s and early 840s, clerical authors are

still promoting a role for aristocrats that is comparable to that seen before 830.

Within Sedulius Scottus’s ‘On Christian Rulers’, securing aristocratic cooperation

remained an important role in good rulership. In Chapter 10, he writes on the many

pillars which support the kingdom of a just prince, among these are ‘the friendship

and exaltation of good men… the equality of justice between rich and poor.’106

When Hincmar of Rheims was composing his treatise for Carloman, On the

Governance of the Palace he borrowed heavily from the work of Adalard of Corbie

written in roughly 812 and focused upon Charlemagne’s court, not upon Louis’.107

The question is often posed whether this is an accurate reflection of the framework of

Carolingian politics during the reign of Louis the Pious or Charlemagne or whether it

merely serves as an idealized mirror created by Hincmar to demonstrate his own

talents and knowledge to Carloman. The two works stress the need for counts and

judges who reflect the decency of the king and the connections made between

locality and centre through appointments of royal officials in order to facilitate

‘access to the palace… for all subjects, since they recognized that members of their

own families or inhabitants of their own region had a place.’108 The text also calls for

rulers to be aware that as God has given them their authority, they will be punished in

the future world unless ‘he corrects the sinners placed under him.’109

106 Sedulius Scottus, ‘On Christian rulers’, 68 107 Janet Nelson, ‘Aachen as a Place of Power’, de Jong, Theuws, van Rheijn (eds.) Topographies of Power in the Early Middle Ages (Brill, 2001), 217-241, 227 108Adalhard of Corbie/Hincmar of Rheims, De ordine palatii, 491 109 ibid, 489

27

The tenets of good justice, fidelity and ministerium are all present here. If this is in

fact just an idealized model, then even if the reality didn’t match the vision, this

image resembles the role laid out for lay nobles prior to the second penance of Louis

the Pious and indeed, Hincmar states that these institutions have ‘decayed’.110

However, that he is presenting this system as the model for Carloman to adopt

reveals how the position of aristocrats within the idealized plan of the Frankish world

survived the crisis: even if the Empire had decayed, the idealized image of the

Frankish world and the roles of the people within it had survived.

CONCLUSION

Over the course of this dissertation, the key functions of Carolingian lay aristocracy

in the administration of the Empire and the propagation of the ideals of the

Carolingian Renaissance have been discussed, and the judicial role in which

Carolingian ideology was promoted, the fidelity networks where oaths bound people

directly to the Frankish Emperor and the collective responsibility in which nobles

operated and were held in account in the ministerium of the Frankish community

examined. It then demonstrated that the crises of the 830s and 840s, while caused by

problems of fidelity and ministerium, did not cause Carolingian political theory to

shift or fracture radically. In particular, post 834 voices from within lay aristocracy

highlighted the political and spiritual importance of the mechanisms that still bound

people to the Frankish world.

This work set out to show how the localities interacted with the centre. The major

authors of the lay intellectual world are all connected heavily with the centre despite

writing from the localities; Nithard tried to reframe his position as a lay abbot at St

Riquer after losing his benefices.111 Dhuoda wrote her Liber Manualis from outside

of the court sphere and Einhard insisted that he is focused upon his monastery and his

saints.112 The centres were important to all of these writers and they were able to

engage with them to various degrees of success.

When I started my dissertation, I held the belief that the lay aristocracy of the

Carolingian period has been under-studied compared to other aspects of the

110 ibid, 499 111 Nelson, ‘Public Histories’, 224 112 Ganz, ‘Einhardus Peccator’, 37

28

Carolingian World. I still believe this. Most of the work I have read deals with

aristocrats in relation to something else; De Jong discusses laymen and their role in

Louis the Pious’ ‘Penitential State’ and Brown touches on them when they appear

within the cartulary evidence of Bavaria. Other works discuss certain dimensions of

lay magnates, such as Stone’s Morality and Masculinity or Nelson’s vast body of

work on medieval sociology but remain limited to their areas of study. Although

Stuart Airlie’s upcoming book may redress some of the deficiencies, there remain no

large-scale studies or works encompassing aristocrats across the Frankish World as

exists with Emperors and the Frankish Church. Perhaps the variation and size of the

task makes it an unfeasible work but it is a noticeable gap in Carolingian

Historiography.

After the death of Louis the Pious, his sons attempted to seize the polity over which

Louis had presided, but ultimately were unable to do so, settling for the division,

although conflict continued until the collapse of the Carolingian dynasty at the end of

the century. But the division of the realm did not mark the end of the Carolingian

Project. Division had been planned before the death of Charlemagne and only the

deaths of Louis the Pious’ brothers gave him the regnum he enjoyed. The lesson of

833 was not lost on the competing Imperial claimants and throughout their struggles,

they endeavored to keep their aristocrats and potentes on their side, threatening and

bribing in order to accomplish this. The stresses placed upon the Carolingian

aristocracy were massive and it is quite possible that without this ideological

framework, there would have been further disintegration of the Carolingian Empire

beyond the division of the realm.

The later Carolingian period seems bereft of lay authors such as Einhard or those

writing in the 840s. The pressures that aristocrats were under in the 830s and 840s

may have prompted Nithard and Dhuoda to speak, but commentary on an aristocrat’s

position in society and what service they offer the king in late ninth century was

mostly ecclesiastical in its origin. Perhaps this accounts for the more idealized vision

of society during the early years of Louis the Pious that emerges in the late ninth

century, but still nothing appeared to have radically changed. The wider political and

social environment changed for the Carolingian aristocracy following the division of

the Empire. However their roles and positions as lay potentes and aristocrats and the

29

expectations placed upon them persisted. This dissertation has suggested and shown

evidence that lay nobles continued to be guided by the tenets of Carolingian political

theory beyond 840, surviving as a model into the latter part of the ninth century.

30

Bibliography

Primary Sources

Admonitio ad omnes regni ordines, MGH Cap. i:150 Rio (trans.)

Alcuin, De virtutibus et vitiis, R. Stone tr., forthcoming in The Heroic Age,

Agobard of Lyon, On Injustices to Mathfrid, North (trans.) Agobardi Lugdunensis Opera Omnia, Opusculum XIII, Van Aacker (eds.) Corpus Christianorum 52,

(1981), 225-227

Annales Bertiniani, 839, Nelson (trans.), The Annals of St Bertin: Ninth-Century Histories, Vol.1, (Manchester, 1991)

Astronomer, The, Vita Hludovici, Noble (eds.) Charlemagne and Louis the Pious: the lives by Einhard, Notker, Ermoldus, Thegan, and The Astronomer (Philadelphia

2009), 226-302

Bishops’ statement from Compiègne 833, de Jong (trans.), The Penitential State (Cambridge, 2009), 271-279

Einhard, The Letters of Einhard, in Dutton (eds.) Carolingian Civilization: A Reader, (Toronto 1997)

of Corbie, Adalhard, of Rheims, Hincmar De ordine palatii, in Dutton, Carolingian Civilization A Reader (Toronto, 1993)

Dhuoda, Liber Manualis, Prologue, trans Neel, Handbook for William: A Carolingian Woman’s Counsel for her Son, (Washington, DC, 1991)

Nithard, Histories, tr. Scholz, Carolingian Chronicles: Royal Frankish Annals and Nithard’s Histories (Ann Arbor, 1970)

Radbertus, Paschasius Epitaphium Arsenii, Cabaniss (trans.) Charlemagne’s

Cousins: Contemporary Lives of Adalard and Wala (Syracuse, 1967) Vol.2, 147-204

Thegan, Gesta Hludowici imperatoris, in Dutton (eds.), Carolingian Civilization: A Reader (Toronto, 1993), 226-302

Strabo Walahfrid , Libellus de Exordiis et incrementis quarundam in ovservationibus, Harting-Correa, (trans.) Libellus de Exordiis et incrementis quarundam in ovservationibus: A Translation and Liturgical Commentary,

(Leiden, 1996)

31

Secondary Sources

Airlie, Stuart, ‘Bonds of Power and Bonds of Association in the Court Circle of Louis the Pious’, Collins, Godman, (eds.) Charlemagne’s Heir: New Perspectives

on the Reign of Louis the Pious (814-840) (Oxford 1990) 191-204

Airlie, Stuart , ‘The Aristocracy in the service of the state in the Carolingian Period’, Airlie, Phol, Reimitz, (eds.) Staat im fruhen Mittelalter (Vienna, 2006),

93-11

Airlie , Stuart, The Palace as Memory: ‘The Carolingian Court as Political Centre’, Jones, Marks and Woodbridge, AJ (eds.) Courts and Regions in

Medieval Europe (York, 2000), 1-20

Airlie, Stuart, ‘The World, the Text and the Carolingian’, Wormald, Nelson (eds.) Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World (Cambridge, 2007) 51-76

Althoff , Gerd, Family, Friends and Followers: Political and Social Bonds in

Early Medieval Europe, (Cambridge, 2004)

Brown, Warren, Unjust Seizure: Conflict, Interest and Authority in an Early Medieval Society, (Ithaca, 2001)

Booker, Courtney, Past Convictions: The Penance of Louis the Pious and the

Decline of the Carolingians (Philadelphia, 2009)

Cherewatuk, Karen, ‘Speculum Matris, Dhuoda’s Manual’, Florilegium 10, (1988–91), 49-64

Costambeys, Marios, Innes, Matthew, Maclean, Simon, The Carolingian World (Cambridge, 2011)

de Jong, Mayke, The Penitential State: Authority and Atonement in the Age of

Louis the Pious, (Cambridge, 2009)

Dutton, Paul, The Politics of Dreaming in the Carolingian Empire, (London, 1994)

Ganshof ,François-Louis, Frankish Institutions Under Charlemagne, (Providence, 1968)

Ganz, David, ‘Einhardus Peccator’, Wormald, Nelson, (eds.) Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World, (Cambridge, 2007), 37-50

Innes, Matthew, State and Society in the Early Middle Ages: The Middle Rhine

Valley, (Cambridge, 2000)

Innes, Matthew, ‘Charlemagne, justice and written law’, Rio (eds.) Law, Custom, and Justice in Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages (London, 2011)

32

Mann, Michael, ‘The autonomous power of the state: its origins, mechanisms and results’, Archives Européennes de Sociologie 25, 1984

McKitterick, Rosamund, ‘The Palace school of Charles the Bald’, Charles the Bald: Court and Kingdom, ed Gibson, Nelson, (Aldershot 1990),326-39

Nelson, Janet, ‘On the limits of the Carolingian renaissance’, Politics and Ritual in Early Medieval Europe, (London, 1986) 49-68

Nelson, Janet, ‘Public History in the Work of Nithard’, Politics and Ritual in

Early Medieval Europe, (London, 1986) 195-238

Nelson, Janet, ‘Dispute Settlement in Carolingian West Francia’, Fouracre, Davies (eds.) The Settlement of Disputes in Early Medieval Europe, (Cambridge, 1986)

45-64

Nelson, Janet, ‘Peers in the early Middle Ages’, Stafford, Nelson, Martindale (eds.) Law Laity and Solidarities: Essays in Honour of Susan Reynolds (Manchester, 2001),

27-46

Nelson, Janet ‘Aachen as a Place of Power’, de Jong, Theuws, van Rheijn (eds.) Topographies of Power in the Early Middle Ages (Brill, 2001)

Nelson. Janet, ‘Bad Kingship in the Earlier Middle Ages’, Haskins Society

Journal 8, 1999, 1-26

Nelson, Janet, The Last Years of Louis the Pious, Goodman, Collins (eds.) Charlemagne’s Heir: New Perspectives on the Reign of Louis the Pious (814-840)

(Oxford, 1990), 48

Nelson, Janet, ‘Dhuoda’, Wormald, Nelson (eds.) Cambridge ‘Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World’, (Cambridge 2007), 106-120

Noble, Timothy, ‘Secular Sanctity: Forging an Ethos for The Carolingian Nobility’, Wormald, Nelson, (eds.) Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World,

(Cambridge, 2007)

Noble, Thomas, Secular Sanctity: forging an ethos for the Carolingian Nobility Wormald, Nelson, (eds.) Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World (Cambridge,

2001)

Possel, Christina, ‘Authors and Recipients of Carolingian Capitularies: 779-829’, Godman, Collins, (eds.) Charlemagne’s Heir: New Perspectives on the Reign of

Louis the Pious (814-840) (Oxford 1990)

Polanichka D. and Cilley, A., The very personal history of Nithard: family and honour in the Carolingian world, Early Medieval Europe 22:2 (2014), 171-200

Tellenbach, Gerd, ‘From the Carolingian Imperial Nobility to the German Estate of Imperial Princes’, Reuter (eds.) The Medieval Nobility: Studies on the Ruling

Classes of France and Germany from the Sixth to the Twelfth Century (Amsterdam, 1978) 203-242

33

van Rhijn, Carine, ‘Priests and the Carolingian Reforms: The Bottlenecks of local correctio’, Goodman, Collins (eds.) Charlemagne’s Heir, Texts and Identities in

the Early Middle Ages, (Oxford 1990)

Wallace-Hadrill, J The Frankish Church, (Oxford, 2001)

Werner Karl, Noble Families in Charlemagne's Kingdom, Reuter (eds.), The Medieval Nobility: Studies on the Ruling Classes of France and Germany from the

Sixth to the Twelfth Century (Amsterdam, 1978)

West, Charles Reframing the Feudal Revolution: Political and Social Transformation between Marne and Moselle: 800-c.1100 (Cambridge 2013),

Wickham, Chris, The Inheritance of Rome: A History From 400-1000, (Penguin, 2010)