The Lombards

The past few days have been filled with discussion about the Lombards, aka the Langobards, and their origin according to medieval texts. This blog has mostly dealt with them previously because of their occupation of the northern Italian peninsula. That's not where they started, however.

They are mentioned by 1st-century Roman historians as a group occupying the Lower Elbe (the river that connects Hamburg to the North Sea). At one time defeated by the Ostrogoths, after the departure of Ostrogoths from the region, some Lombards traveled west. Paul the Deacon describes their migrations and their conflicts with various peoples as they moved across the Danube and into Europe.

By 570CE they had conquered northern Italy, and in the next few years added central Italy to their kingdom. The height of their presence and influence in that part of Europe was reached during the reign of King Liutprand. Liutprand reigned more than 30 years (712 - 744), and you can see his minted gold coinage above. Charles Martel of the Franks allied with Liutprand as a Christian defense against threatened Muslim incursions.

The first Lombards to enter Italy had been pagans, although some had become Arian Christians. They slowly adopted Roman Christianity and Romanized names, so that by the time Paul the Deacon was writing he did not report any evidence of their paganism.

Lombardy at its height contained 36 duchies. They had expanded throughout much of Italy by taking advantage of local conflicts and conquering the divided communities—divided especially due to violence between groups that fell on opposite sides of the iconoclasm controversy. Some of the duchies have been mentioned before: Friuli, Pavia, Spoleto, Benevento.

By the time of Charles Martel's grandson, Charlemagne, the Lombards were not seen as allies so much as another territory to conquer. But that would come a little later. Tomorrow we'll look at more of the Kingdom of Lombardy.

Paul the Deacon's Writings

Paul the Deacon (c.720s – 13 April c.796-799) has many writings attributed to him (some probably erroneously, like a life of Gregory the Great, that was probably written much earlier than Paul). He was in the household of Adelperga, a daughter of King Desiderius of the Lombards.

Adalperga, upon reading a history by a 4th century Roman named Eutropius that covered the founding of Rome to Eutropius' lifetime, was not pleased that it covered only pagan Roman achievements and not any Christian topics. She asked Paul to amend it, so he added extracts from Scripture to a version just for her.

Another request for a history came from Angilram, the Bishop of Metz, to write a history of the diocese of Metz, giving Paul access to the diocesan records. Paul finished it by 784, noting that Angilram's own entry would be completed later (it wasn't). Paul also refers to Angilram in his Historia Langobardorum ("History of the Lombards"), calling him a "very gentle man and distinguished by holiness."

Paul also wrote a summary of De verborum significatione libri XX ('Twenty Books on the Meaning of Words") that he dedicated to Charlemagne. It was edited by a 2nd century Roman (Festus) of a work by a turn-of-the-millenium Roman grammarian (Verrius). Later...

Paul’s work, and through it that of Festus and of Verrius, became the subject of intense interest again during the Italian Renaissance after a copy of the work was discovered by Poggio Bracciolini and Bartolomeo da Montepulciano at the Abbey of St. Gall in 1416. [source]

Charlemagne also asked him to compile a collection of homilies, which Paul did and which was used in Frankish liturgy. One of Paul's homilies, In Assumptione, raises the possibility that the Blessed Virgin Mary was assumed bodily into Heaven. He also produced a commentary on the Rule of St. Benedict which still exists, although in a revised form.

His major work, the history he wrote of the Lombard people, was his most used, right up until the 15th century. Although possessing factual errors and questionable timelines, it is a view into the culture and myths over the course of a couple centuries. Some of the sources from which he drew are lost to us, making his work even more valuable as insight to an earlier time. There are 115 extant manuscripts, all with minor differences and many with large pieces missing.

Let's dig out some gems from this work tomorrow.

Paul the Deacon

Winfrid was born about 720 in the Duchy of Friuli, the northern part of the Italian Peninsula that was the kingdom of the Lombards. His parents, Warnefrid and Theodolinda, were well-to-do, and Winfrid grew up well-educated, knowing some Greek along with Latin.

Winfrid decided that rather than inherit from his father, he would join the clergy, taking the title Paulus Diaconus, Paul the Deacon. He was likely one of the secretaries to King Desiderius of the Lombards. When Desiderius married his daughter Adelperga to the Duke of Benevento, Adelperga requested that Paul continue the Breviarium Historiae Romanae ("Summary of Roman History") begun by a 4th century Roman, Eutropius.

He was with her at the court in Benevento prior to 774, probably fleeing when Charlemagne captured the territory. By 782 he was in the Benedictine monastery at Monte Cassino. While there he met Charlemagne, who was very interested in both the Church and education and took a liking to someone who wrote history. Their relationship was strong enough that, after a revolt against Charlemagne's rule in Friuli in which Paul's brother Arichis was imprisoned for taking part, Paul could write to Charlemagne on Arichis' behalf and get his brother freed.

Maybe he already had a reputation for writing history; maybe it was Adelperga's request that got him started on the pursuit. He would start (but not finish) a history of the Lombards (Historia Langobardorum) in six books. When much history about the Carolingian era is written from the point of view of the Franks, Paul's Historia is a valuable view from the other side, that of the Lombards. It also gives us a look into beliefs and culture. It begins with:

The region of the north, in proportion as it is removed from the heat of the sun and is chilled with snow and frost, is so much the more healthful to the bodies of men and fitted for the propagation of nations, just as, on the other hand, every southern region, the nearer it is to the heat of the sun, the more it abounds in diseases and is less fitted for the bringing up of the human race.

He drew on Bede, Gregory of Tours, Isidore of Seville, and other histories (some now lost to us) to compile his history.

Tomorrow we'll look at his later life and other writings, some at the request of Charlemagne.

Pepin's Rebellion

There was a rebellion against Charlemagne in 792 by a handful of Frankish nobles headed by Charlemagne's eldest son, Pepin the Hunchback.

An anonymous Saxon poet known only as Poeta Saxo, writing in Annales de gestis Caroli magni imperatoris libri quinque ("Annals of the Deeds of Emperor Charlemagne in Five Books"; see the illustration), summed up the plot:

[W]icked men conceived a great crime which almost blotted out forever the shining light of the Franks, for they busied themselves in many ways plotting to put the king to death. For this purpose a cruel conspiracy is said to have been formed among the Frankish nobles. Conspicuous among them, the king's oldest son madly offered himself as the author of this crime, being more ignoble in his own worthless character than in his birth.

The plot was planned while Charlemagne was away from court, but a Lombard named Fardulf learned of it and informed Charlemagne. The co-conspirators were found out and accused of breaking their oaths of fealty to their king. The court found them guilty of oath-breaking and attempted regicide, confiscated their estates, and condemned them to death.

Charlemagne, however, overrode the death sentence on many, including that on his son. Loath to put his eldest son to death, Pepin was (at his own request, according to Einhard and Notker the Stammerer) tonsured and sent to a religious life at the monastery of Prüm (long before Regino of Prüm wrote his Carolingian history).

(And speaking of the religious life, the whistleblower, Fardulf, was given the position of abbot at St. Denis.)

The Lorsch Annals (covering 703 - 803) point out that, the following year, Charlemagne was extremely generous to his loyal retainers. It is possible that Pepin's rebellion was a perfect turning point in his reign. It gave him an excuse to excise Pepin the Hunchback from any chance of royal succession, it brought disloyal retainers out in the open, it made clear that the court would execute rebels, and it prompted Charlemagne to lavishly reward loyalty to ensure no future rebellions.

Pepin died at Prüm somewhere around 810 or 811.

This era of the Franks produced many contemporary chronicles. Einhard, Notker, the Lorsch Annals—all have been mentioned before, as has Paul the Deacon. We actually have a picture of Paul, so let's talk about him tomorrow.

Pepin the Hunchback's Treatment

Charlemagne's first son was named Pepin. Shortly after his birth he developed a spinal deformity that has caused historians to refer to him as "Pepin the Hunchback."

His mother was the concubine Himiltrude, a "noble girl" according to Paulus Diaconus (Paul the Deacon). At one point Charlemagne dismissed Himiltrude from his court, but Pepin remained living there as a royal prince. She was dismissed because Charlemagne was marrying Desiderata, in order to establish an alliance with her father Desiderius, the King of the Lombards.

Pepin, despite his deformity, was important because he was Charlemagne's eldest son and obvious heir. "Pepin" was also the name of Charlemagne's father, and it was a Carolingian custom to re-use names of ancestors, not only to honor them but also to inspire the new generation to emulate them. (Charlemagne's brother and rival, Carloman, had already had a son named Pepin.)

There is no record of discord between Desiderate and her step-son, but then, the marriage lasted only about a year, after which Charlemagne immediately married Hildegarde, a marriage that lasted more than a decade and produced nine children.

Their first child together was named Charles, called "the Younger" for obvious reasons. Their second child was also a son, named Carloman, born in 777. In 781, Charlemagne took Hildegarde and her children to Rome. Carloman was four years old, but had never been baptized. Charlemagne held off because he wanted the pope to perform the baptism. The eldest son, Pepin, was left at home, still living in the palace as a prince.

When Pope Adrian I baptized Carloman, he was given the name Pepin. This younger Pepin was named "King of Italy." 

The elder Pepin's position now seemed precarious. Charlemagne had an heir named for his father who was the result of a legitimate marriage and who showed no physical deformity. The older Pepin still lived at court.

Years later, Pepin was part of a rebellion against his father. It is easy to assume this was simply because he was being passed over, but he couldn't rebel all by himself. If others supported a rebellion, was there a reason beyond trying to reclaim his right as the eldest? We'll talk about other reasons to rebel against Charlemagne tomorrow.

The Holy Sponge

In 600 CE, the Patriarch of Jerusalem Sophronius visited the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, a 4th-century church in Jerusalem supposedly built on the site where Jesus was crucified. In an upper room Sophronius observed a few objects that inspired verses:

And let me go rejoicing
to the splendid sanctuary, the place
where the noble Empress Helena
found the divine Wood; 

and go up,
my heart overcome with awe,
and see the Upper Room,
the Reed, the Sponge, and the Lance.

The "divine Wood" found by the Empress Helena we know, because we've talked about the True Cross and Empress Helena's finding of it.

There were other relics there: "the Reed, the Sponge, and the Lance."

The Lance refers to the Spear of Longinus, the spear a Roman soldier jabbed into the side of the crucified Jesus mentioned only in the Gospel of John. There are, in fact, four known relics that claim to be the Spear/Lance of Longinus, in Rome, Vienna, Vagharshapat (in Armenia), and Antioch. Supposedly, one was even in the possession of the devout King Æthelstan of England.

The Reed was placed in the tortured Jesus' hands as a scepter, mocking him as King of the Jews.

The Holy Sponge and Holy Lance were brought by Nicetas, a cousin of Eastern Emperor Heraclius (610-641), to Constantinople from Palestine in 612. Latin Emperor Baldwin II sold the Sponge to King Louis IX of France. 

Byzantine Emperor Manuel II Paleologos made a gift of a sponge to Pope Boniface IX, along with a piece of Jesus' tunic (not sure where he got that). The Basilica of Santa Croce in Jerusalem is a church in Rome, built to house relics of the Passion of Christ, such as the True Cross. In it you will find a brown sponge.

Pieces of sponge also reside at the Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore, the Basilica di Santa Maria in Trastevere, St. Mary in Campitelli in Rome, and the Basilica di San Giovanni in Laterano in Rome. The church of St. Jacques de Compiègne in France and in the cathedral in Aachen where a piece owned by Charlemagne is displayed.

The items mentioned here are part of the Arma Christi, the "Arms of Christ," the Instruments of the Passion of Christ. There are many more...many more. I'll let you know about some tomorrow.

The Byzantines Come to Italy

I outlined yesterday the complicated relationship between the Franks under Charlemagne, the Lombards in Italy, and the Byzantine Empire. The final straw seemed to be the breakdown of plans to betrothe the seven-year-old Emperor Constantine VI to Charlemagne's daughter Rotrude. As a result, the Byzantine Empire wanted to drive the Franks out of Lombardy and restore Adalgis, son of the previous ruler Desiderius, as king.

Adalgis earlier had made contact with Emperor Constantine V. Many Lombards did not submit to Frankish rule, assuming that Adalgis would return and claim the throne. The Byzantine army arrived in southern Italy in late 788, led by Adalgis and a Byzantine administrator named John who had experience leading the army against the Abbasids in 781 when they invaded Asia Minor.

Unfortunately, some Lombards had accepted Charlemagne's overlordship. The prince of Benevento, for instance, Grimoald III, had chosen alliance with the Franks and led part of the combined force of Lombards that met the Byzantine army. Along with Grimoald was Duke Hildeprand of Spoleto, who had originally fought the Franks but had paid homage to Charlemagne 10 years earlier in exchange for the Franks' promise to defend his land from further invasions. A small number of Franks were involved in this army.

The clash between Byzantins and the Franks/Lombards took place at Calabria (the "toe" of the "boot" of Italy). Details are few, though the victory of the Lombards is undisputed. Alcuin of York, in a letter dated a year after the encounter, offers the details that there were 4000 Byzantines killed and 1000 captured, upon which the remaining force fled to the ships. One of those captured was Sisinnios, the brother of Patriarch Tarasios. Adalgis did not get his throne, and in fact disappears from the historical record, although you can see a portrayal of him above from 1664.

Several years later, in 797, Constantine VI sent a strategos ("general") to Charlemagne's seat of power, Aachen, probably to discuss the release of prisoners from the battle. Sisinnios was not released until 798 following negotiations by Empress Irene. By that time, Constantine VI was dead...

...and it wasn't from natural causes. Let's look at the (fairly brief) life of Emperor Constantine VI tomorrow.

Relations with Charlemagne

When the report of the Second Council of Nicaea (in 787 CE) was written up approving the use of icons for religious purposes, it mentioned the firm agreement between the pope in Rome and the emperor of Constantinople. As a document that would be made public to let everyone know the outcome of deliberation, it was going to upset at last one person: a powerful person with strong religious views who felt he deserved the pope's respect, and who had unorthodox connections with the Byzantines.

Before we go on to try to explain the controversy involved, let's explain the map you see here. The orange sections are the Byzantine Empire, which include Rome (and Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica), since the Byzantines had effectively been the guardians of the Roman Empire. The rest of the areas were controlled by Lombards.

Let's try to spell this out. Charlemagne was the king of the Franks. There was a Frankish presence in Lombard-controlled northern Italy (part of Lombardy), having driven out King Desiderius and his son Adalgis in 774. Constantinople wanted to restore Adalgis to the throne, and so they started an expedition to Italy in 788 to try to regain Lombardy from the Franks. This, of course, put them at odds with Charlemagne. The pope wanted an alliance with Charlemagne, as the closest strong ruler and a good person to have on your side. But the pope had just had a major agreement with the Byzantines.

It gets a little more twisted when we find out that Adalgis, hanging out in Pavia after being ousted from Lombardy, hosted the widow and children of Carloman I, Charlemagne's younger brother who had been forced to renounce the throne and go to a monastery. Even more twisted is the fact that Desiderius had been Charlemagne's father-in-law by virtue of his daughter Desiderata's marriage to Charlemagne (who had divorced her in 771).

The proceeds of the Council did not mention Charlemagne at all as being important to the adoption of the new policy among the Christian world. This was a public embarrassment for the pope, and things got worse when the Byzantines came to Italy to free Lombardy.

One of the other reasons for the attempt to drive the ranks out of Lombardy was the breakdown of negotiations for a royal marriage: Charlemagne's daughter Rotrude to Constantine VI, the seven-year-old emperor still under the regency of Empress Irene.

That's a lot to digest. Let's look at the actual fighting tomorrow and see who won.

Medieval Mosaics

Mosaic art—arranging pieces of stone, glass (called tesserae), or other material to make shapes and pictures—has existed since the 3rd millennium BCE, when pebbles were used to make floors with designs. They became widespread in ancient Greece and Rome, not just as public art but for domestic use: every household would be enhanced by mosaics on the floors (not usually on the walls, where fresco was used for decoration).

The earliest mosaics, found in a temple in Mesopotamia, were roughly cube-shaped bits of stone, along with pieces of shell and ivory. Around 1500 BCE we start to see evidence of glazed tiles being used. Rome and Greece elevated mosaic use to a high art (although most named mosaic artists in the Roman Empire have Greek names).

The Middle Ages chose brightly colored glass and gold leaf to make mosaics. When Ravenna became the capital of the Western Roman Empire, it became the site of several magnificent buildings with equally impressive mosaics. When the Lombards were problematic, Pope Adrian I turned to Charlemagne for aid. For Charlemagne's reward, he was allowed to take away from Ravenna anything he wanted. What he wanted was Roman art and architecture, so a number of Roman columns, statues, and mosaics traveled north to become a part of his complex at Aachen.

Taking and re-using older architecture and artwork was actually a recognized practice, and the elements were called spolia, from the Latin for "spoils." An example of spolia in Aachen is the porphyry columns in the Palatine Chapel which likely came from Ravenna. Charlemagne must have liked what he saw in Ravenna, because his Palatine Chapel's design is very similar to the church of San Vitale in Ravenna. The Palatine's ceiling and walls are covered in mosaic that is clearly Byzantine in style (see the illustration).

As the 13th century approached, mosaicists were also painters. One of the best known now (in the Modern Age) was Giotto, whom we'll talk about next time.

Child of the Forest

Widukind (seen here as a memorial in Hereford, Germany) was a Saxon leader who organized the chief opposition to Charlemagne's conquest of Saxony and his introduction (enforcement) of Christianity. To Frankish forces he was a murderer, a heathen, a destroyer of churches. To the Saxons he was a freedom fighter, a great leader, and protector of their way of life.

We know little about him personally except what the Franks record. He is first mentioned in the Royal Frankish Annals as the only significant Saxon leader who did not attend the Diet at Paderborn, when Charlemagne first set down the laws he expected Saxony to follow. Widukind was staying in Denmark with King Sigurd.

In 782 he was back in Saxony and convincing his countrymen to go to war again with the Franks. One success of his led to Charlemagne retaliating with the Massacre at Verden. Widukind agreed to surrender in 785 if the Franks guaranteed no bodily harm would come to him. He was baptized in the Elbe with Charlemagne as his godfather. He is now considered a saint, with churches named for him and a feast day on 6 January.

What made him surrender? Why did he acquiesce to baptism as a Christian after resisting for so long? Of course there is a legend that explains this.

According to the legend, Widukind decided to learn more about Christianity. He disguised himself as a beggar and infiltrated the Frankish military camp. It was Easter, and he saw a priest performing Mass. At the moment of the elevation of the Host, Widukind saw the priest holding up a beautiful child. He offered this beautiful child to each member of the congregation. Widukind was amazed at this vision. Continuing to act as a beggar afterward, he was captured when one of the soldiers recognized him.

He described the scene at mass, and Charlemagne declared that God had given him this vision of the divine child Jesus. Widukind realized the significance of this and renounced paganism, embracing Christianity.

Over time he was hailed as a national hero. A tomb made for him in 1100 in Herford was discovered in the Modern Era to contain the body of a woman. Three graves in front of the altar contain the bodies of three men, two of them about 60 years old, all of them related. It is assumed that one is Widukind.

The name Widukind literally means "child of the forest." For some real "children of the forest," I should tell you about the Green Children next, and that's just what I'll do.

The Saxon Wars, Phase 2

The Saxon Wars (see Part 1) were a series of campaigns led by Charlemagne to incorporate and Christianize Saxony. A first phase was complete by 779CE, with three of the four Saxon areas conquered; Nordalbingia would come later.

There was peace for a few years after that. In 782, Charlemagne returned to Saxony with the goal of making sure their code of laws conformed to his own ideas of justice. This code of laws was the Lex Frisionum, the "Law of the Frisians." He held a gathering of Saxon nobles, but there was one notable exception: Widukind was instead staying with the Danish king Sigurd (father of Ragnar Lodbrok). It might not have been difficult to have the native peoples adopt the new laws, but it was particularly harsh regarding pagan practices.

In autumn of 782, Widukind returned and led a revolt that burned several Christian churches and invaded the Chatti, a Germanic tribe that had been converted by St. Boniface and who were firmly part of the Frankish empire. Charlemagne was busy fighting the West Slavic Sorbs (Serbs), and in his absence Widukind defeated a Frankish army at the Battle of Süntel, killing the leaders and many other nobles. Charlemagne retaliated by killing 4500 rebels in a single day, referred to as the Massacre at Verden.

Charlemagne stayed in Saxony for two solid years of fighting. The Saxon rebels were reduced sufficiently that Widukind himself gave in and had himself baptized in 785. The major battles for Frankish rule over Saxony were done, but sporadic revolts continued for another two decades. The Nordalbingian Saxons were subdued in 798 by allies of Charlemagne, the Obotrites, a confederation of West Slavic tribes near what is now Mecklenburg. The Obotrites had also helped Charlemagne put down an Engrian revolt in 796.

In 797, Charlemagne started backing away from some of the harsher penalties, and in 802 codified Saxon common law. He also established bishoprics in Paderborn, Munster, Bremen, Verden and others.

Widukind's particular entry in this blog (see paragraph two) labels him only as Charlemagne's enemy. His conversion after his strong opposition to Frankish invasion seems unlikely, but of course there's a story behind it, which I will relate next time.

The Saxon Wars, Phase 1

In January of 772CE, a church in Deventer in the Netherlands was sacked and burned by Saxons who objected to missionary work in their lands. Deventer had been founded only a few years early, about 768, by an English missionary named Lebuinus. This burning was the reason for Charlemagne's first foray into Saxon lands to conquer the territory and forcibly convert the area to Christianity.

Saxony contained four areas at the time: Westphalia, Eastphalia, Engria, and Nordalbingia in the north. Charlemagne's Frankish forces subdued Engria first. It was on this occasion that Charlemagne destroyed the Irminsul. The difficulty for the conqueror was that he had many campaigns not in Saxony, so that he would "lose ground" whenever he turned his attention to, say, Lombardy. Charlemagne would destroy Saxon strongholds and take hostages, but Saxons led by Widukind would raid Frankish lands while Charlemagne was away.

There were 18 separate campaigns between 772 and 804 needed to complete the absorption and Christianization of Saxony. During this phase he conquered Eastphalia and converted their leader Hessi in 775, then returned to Austrasia through Westphalia, leaving a few temporary strongholds there as well. At this point he felt Saxony was well in hand except for the northernmost section of Nordalbingia. More missionaries were sent by Charlemagne.

In 777, a diet at Paderborn was called to integrate Saxon and Frankish laws. Charlemagne earned the nickname "butcher of Saxons" by decreeing capital punishment for anyone engaging in heathen practices. His harsh approach put him at odds with Alcuin of York, whose position was that God's word should be spread by persuasion, not the sword. Two years later he enforced mass baptisms. There was relative peace at this time, the end of the first phase of the Saxon Wars.

In 782, the second phase would begin because Charlemagne couldn't leave well enough alone. We'll go further with this tomorrow.

As for that church at Deventer, it was rebuilt a few years after the destruction by the "Apostle of Saxony," St. Ludger.

The Matter of France

This post referred to the Song of Roland as foundational to of the Matter of France. The Matter of France, also known as "The Carolingian Cycle," is a collection of legends and literary works about the origins of the French nation.

It is not unusual to look back in history and perceive a "Golden Age" when life was better and people were more heroic. Charlemagne, because he united much of Western Europe, promoted a rebirth of learning and arts, and spread Christianity, is seen as the cornerstone on which the nation of France was built.

The Matter of France is written about in chansons de geste, or "song(s) of heroic deeds."

A French poet from the Champagne region, Bertrand de Bar-sur-Aube (late 12th - early 13th centuries) divided the matter of France into three cycles of chansons de geste  at the start of a poem about a Count of Paris who was one of Charlemagne's grandsons:

At Saint-Denis, in the great abbey, we find it written (I don't doubt) in a book of noble lineage that there have been only three gestes in well-defended France (I think no-one will argue with me now). [...]

The lordliest is that of the kings of France. [...]

The next, it is right to say, was of Doon of the white beard, he of Mainz who had many lands. [...]

The third geste, which was much to be praised, was that of Garin de Monglane of the fierce countenance. [...]

Doon and Garin are not well-known to modern audiences, but Charlemagne turns up in every European history book. Their stories are different, but the heart of the Matter of France is Christianity (especially against Muslims, who are erroneously perceived as polytheistic) and feudal loyalty. The chansons were largely seen by the Middle Ages as reliable historical retellings.

The Matter of France evolved and spread to other countries. The Song of Roland became Orlando Furioso ("The Frenzy of Orlando") and Orlando Innamorato ("Roland in Love") in Italy in the early 1500s and late 1400s respectively. These works in turn influenced Edmund Spenser's Faerie Queene in England.

More to the point for England and Spenser was the Matter of Britain, which I'll talk about next time.

The Song of Roland

In 778, Basques ambushed the rearguard of Charlemagne's army as it was going northward through the Ronceveaux Pass in the Pyrenees. They had good reason, and they destroyed the rearguard and the baggage train. In the process, according to Charlemagne's biographer Einhard, they killed the "prefect of the borders of Brittany," Hruodlandus. Hruodlandus is translated as the name "Roland."

In the 11th century, a poet writing in Old French produced a 4000-word epic poem, La Chanson de Roland ("The Song of Roland") that turned the incident mentioned briefly by Einhard into the foundation of a literary cycle called the Matter of France. It tells a very different story from Einhard's brief description.

Instead of being pursued by Basques whose chief city of Pamplona had its walls torn down by Charlemagne's army on his way home, the poem has Charlemagne's army fighting Muslims in Spain for seven years. The last holdout is the city of Saragossa, ruled by Marsile. Marsile promises treasures to Charlemagne and that he will become a Christian if Charlemagne will leave and go home.

Charlemagne is satisfied with this. His nephew, Roland, selects Roland's stepfather Ganelon to carry the message of acceptance to Marsile. Ganelon, afraid that Roland wishes him ill by sending him to where Muslims might kill him, betrays them all by telling the Muslims how to ambush Charlemagne's army as they pass through Roncesvalles. The rearguard, led by Roland with comrades Oliver and Archbishop Turpin, finds themselves overwhelmed.

Oliver tells Roland to blow his horn and summon reinforcements. Roland believes that would be an act of cowardice. Roland, however, loves Oliver's sister, so Oliver tells him that Roland will not be allowed to see his sister again if he does not summon help. It is Turpin who ultimately convinced Roland to blow his horn (in the illustration above). Emperor Charlemagne hears the horn and starts back, but takes too long because Ganelon delays him. With Roland's men dead or dying, he blows the horn one more time so powerfully that his temples burst. He is taken to Heaven by angels.

Charlemagne finally arrives, finds Roland and all his men dead, and pursues the Muslims into the River Ebro where they drown. While burying their dead, the Franks are attacked by Baligant, emir of Babylon, who has come to support Marsile. The armies fight, Charlemagne kills Baligant, the Muslims flee, and Charlemagne now conquers Saragossa, returning home with Marsile's queen.

Ganelon's betrayal is discovered, and he is imprisoned; he argues that he acted out of legitimate revenge against his stepson, not treason against the emperor. Although Ganelon's friend, Pinabel, will fight anyone who claims Ganelon is guilty of treason, Thierry convinces the council of Barons that it was treason, since Roland was serving Charlemagne at the time of the betrayal. Pinabel challenges Thierry to trial by combat, Thierry kills Pinabel, Ganelon is executed by having four horses tied to him, one to each limb, and set to gallop.

There are many improbabilities and impossibilities here, not least of which Charlemagne did not become an emperor until many years later, and an "emir of Babylon" is unlikely to appear in northern Spain, thousands of miles west of Babylon. The poem became an important literary and cultural touchstone for medieval France, however. I referred above to the "Matter of France." There were three great "Matters" in the Middle Ages, and I'll tell you more about them tomorrow.

Battle of Ronceveaux

Charlemagne thought trying to retake parts of the Iberian Peninsula back from the Moors was a good idea, so he accepted an invitation from Sulayman al-Arabi to join him in opposing the Umayyad Caliphate (Suleyman was a supporter of the Abbasid family tree, which eventually did succeed the Umayyads). The affair did not go smoothly, and before too long Charlemagne headed home. Along the way, however, he decided to harass the Basques of Pamplona and surrounding lands.

This was not entirely arbitrary on Charlemagne's part. His father, Pepin the Short, had trouble with Basques, who were a significant part of the Aquitainian army that Pepin fought and defeated. The Basques had submitted to him in the late 760s. Charlemagne perhaps wanted to express his frustration at accomplishing nothing from the agreement with al-Arabi, and used his army to "blow off some steam" by tearing down the city walls of Pamplona.

What Charlemagne should have realized was that the Basques would not just sit back and lick their wounds. As he headed north, the Basque army followed him. To get through the Pyrenees, the Christian army chose the Ronceveaux Pass. The rearguard was led by Roland, warden of the Breton March.

Curious point about Roland: in all recorded history, he is mentioned only once. Einhard in his "Life of Charlemagne" tells the story of what happened when the Basques caught up with the tail end of the army at Ronceveaux on the evening of 15 August 778:

That place is so thoroughly covered with thick forest that it is the perfect spot for an ambush. [Charles's] army was forced by the narrow terrain to proceed in a long line and [it was at that spot], high on the mountain, that the Basques set their ambush. [...] The Basques had the advantage in this skirmish because of the lightness of their weapons and the nature of the terrain, whereas the Franks were disadvantaged by the heaviness of their arms and the unevenness of the land. Eggihard, the overseer of the king's table, Anselm, the count of the palace, and Roland, the lord of the Breton March, along with many others died in that skirmish. But this deed could not be avenged at that time, because the enemy had so dispersed after the attack that there was no indication as to where they could be found. [source]

The attack was completely unexpected, and the Frankish forces were in disarray. The lightly armored Basques had the high ground, and were successful at cutting off the rear guard from the main part of the army. The Franks fought as well as they could, and arguably succeeded in keeping the Basques focused on them, allowing the main part of the army to survive, but Roland and his part of the army was slaughtered by the Basques. In the 8th century, that was the end of the story.

In the 11th century, however, a French poet would compose an epic poem that would turn this once-mentioned Roland into a national hero in a highly fictionalized re-telling of the Battle of Ronceveaux. Tomorrow we will have "story time." See you then.

The Reconquista—Abbasid Alliance

I have mentioned before the disagreements, after the death of Muhammad, over which direction the faith should go. The Rashidun Caliphate was the successor to the Prophet, followed by the Umayyads. Not everyone approved of the Umayyads, however, and there was a third caliphate ready to be "born": the Abbasid, descended from Muhammad's uncle. As it happens, in the second half of the 9th century, there were Abbasid-leaning Muslims in the northern part of the Iberian Peninsula who were willing to ally themselves with Christian kingdoms if it meant getting rid of Umayyad rule.

Sulayman al-Arabi, the Abbasid-preferring governor of Barcelona, sent a message to Charlemagne in 777, offering his submission to Charlemagne's rule if he could get military aid against the Umayyad emir of Córdoba, Abd ar-Rahman I. Sulayman had allies: Husayn of Zaragoza and Abu Taur of Huesca. Charlemagne was all too happy to bring an army south to reconquer territory from Muslims.

Reaching Barcelona, Sulayman welcomed him, and their two armies marched next to Zaragoza to add Hosayn's military forces. Reaching Zaragoza, however, they found that Husayn would not allow them into the walled city. He had just recently defeated Abd ar-Rahman's general and taken him prisoner. Husayn was willing to rely on his own power to deal with further Umayyad threats, and no longer was willing to risk his autonomy being usurped by a Christian ruler.

Charlemagne settled into a siege of Zaragoza. After more than a month, however, an agreement was made: Husayn would pay Charlemagne some gold to go away. This he did, but on his way back north Charlemagne decided to make an example of the Basques, whom he suspected of being allied with the Moors. He spent some time destroying villages, tearing down the walls of Pamplona, and setting up his own garrisons. Satisfied, he set off for home through the Pyrenees.

Unknown to him, the angry Basque forces organized and pursued. Not only had this attempt at Reconquista come to naught, but Charlemagne was about to be handed a terrible defeat that would be immortalized in literature. Details tomorrow.

Theodulf of Orléans

When speaking of the Carolingian Renaissance, the most common name mentioned is Alcuin, but there were many other scholars involved. One of them was Theodulf of Orléans, mentioned here years ago as a maker of acrostics.

Born in the mid 8th century in Visigothic Spain, the Moorish occupation drove him to Aquitaine, eventually joining a monastery in Gaul under Benedict of Aniane. Traveling to Rome in 786, he was impressed by the numerous schools he saw, and wrote letters to abbots and bishops in Gaul, encouraging them to create public schools.

Back in Gaul, Charlemagne was impressed by Theodulf's appreciation of learning and made him Bishop of Orléans and put him in charge of many monasteries. Charles relied on him for theological advice and to establish many schools. Theodulf knew Greek and Hebrew, and was tasked by Charlemagne to make new translations of many works into Latin. He produced many original works as well, including one reminding priests of the importance of manual labor and chastity, poems and hymns, and a codification of what penance was necessary for different sins.

It is also very likely that Theodulf was the author of the Opus Caroli regis contra synodum ("The work of King Charles against the Synod"), known usually as Libri Carolini ("Charles' Books"),  commissioned by Charlemagne to counter the work of the Second Council of Nicaea regarding the use of sacred images. (You can purchase an English translation here.)

In 806 he built an oratory at Germigny-des-Prés (the remaining part is pictured above), patterned after Charlemagne's palace at Aachen. It was mostly destroyed by the Normans after 1066, which deprived the modern world of all its art except the only surviving Carolingian mosaic (badly restored in the 1860s) depicting the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant was probably an important image because it represents God's approval of religious images. 

Theodulf was a witness to Charlemagne's will, and after the emperor's death in 814, served his son, Louis the Pious. An incident involving Louis' nephew, King Bernard of Italy, led to Louis accusing Theodulf of conspiring against him, and the bishop was imprisoned.

But that's a story for tomorrow. See you then.

Charles' Books

The Opus Caroli regis contra synodum ("The work of King Charles against the Synod"), also known as Libri Carolini ("Charles' Books"), was a series commissioned by Charlemagne to counter the work of the Second Council of Nicaea. It was specifically written to argue against the Council's decrees about icons.

Held in 787, this Council reversed Emperor Leo III's decree decades earlier that religious images were forbidden. The Council decided that religious images were not only allowed, but the reverence and prayers aimed at them actually transferred to the saint or member of the Trinity which they represented. In fact, every altar should have in it a saint's relic.

Charlemagne, a devout Christian, had a different approach to the subject of religious icons, and decided it should be made known. In the 790s (prior to him being named Holy Roman Emperor in 800), he ordered an elaborate statement on the subject. 

The opening statement is rather strong:

In the name of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ beginneth the work of the most illustrious and glorious man Charles, by the will of God, king of the Franks, Gauls, Germany, Italy, neighboring provinces, with the assistance of the king, against the Synod which in Greek parts firmly and proudly decreed in favour of adoring images recklessly and arrogantly, ...

The argument was a compromise between Leo III's strict iconoclasm and the Council's "reckless and arrogant" acceptance of honoring images. Charlemagne believed in religious images, but not treating them as anything more than images: do not burn incense before them, or votive candles. Do not pray to them, but to the figure they represent.

Was this document necessary? What was Charles' reason for arguing against the Council? The iconoclasm debate was considered a Byzantine issue; Nicaea was deep into the "Greek parts," as far from Gaul as one could get. It is possible that Charlemagne was partially motivated by the desire to oppose what he considered decisions coming out of the Eastern Empire, since it had offended him over the rejection of his daughter's marriage to its emperor and its decision to support his rival in Lombardy.

Charles did not have this statement sent to the pope after all; it is assumed that he decided not to antagonize the Church by arguing that Nicaea was wrong in its conclusions. The document did not disappear, however, and was found and published centuries later, in 1549. Calvin and the Protestant reformation found in it support for their beliefs. Christian churches these days almost all contain some images.

So who was the author? To whom did Charlemagne turn for this important work? Some assume Alcuin had a hand in it, but there is a better candidate. Some of the Latin language matches the style of Bishop Theodulf of Orleans, one of Charlemagne's "puzzle masters." Clearly, he was good at more than acrostics, and we'll talk about him next time.

The Other Children of Charlemagne

Charlemagne made sure all of his children had decent careers, even those who were illegitimate.

By his concubine Gersuinda, he had a daughter Adaltrude (c.775 - ?). She was made abbess of Faremoutiers, an important Benedictine nunnery in the Seine-et-Marne area of France. Another daughter, Theodrada (b.784), from his third wife Fastrada, became abbess of Argenteuil, in the northwest suburbs of Paris. Fastrada was also the mother of Hiltrude (c.787?), of whom history records nothing.

His next concubine was Regina, who bore him two sons, Drogo (801 - 855) and Hugh (802 - 844). The two were tonsured and forced away from court when Louis the Pious succeeded their father. Drogo became a cleric and Louis eventually named him Bishop of Metz. Hugh was made the abbot of Saint-Quentin, and later also of Lobbes and Saint-Bertin. After the death of Louis, his three heirs fought over the kingdom. Hugh supported Charles the Bald against Louis and Lothair. Hugh was with the army when it was ambushed in June 844; he was killed by a lance.

Drogo rose to the position of Archbishop of Metz. A few months after the death of Hugh, in October 844 at Thionville, Drogo presided over an attempt to unite the three brothers, which came to nothing. Drogo had been active in supporting their father, and was respected by all, even though he changed his support more than once between his nephews. On 8 December 855, he fell into the River Oignon in Bourgogne while fishing, and drowned. He is interred at St. Arnulf in Metz.

Charlemagne's last children were by the concubine Ethelind: Richbod (805 - 844), and Theodoric (b.807). We know nothing of Theodoric, and of Richbod not a lot, except that he became Abbot of Saint-Riquier, in the Somme area of northern France. Richbod was not a common name, but it was shared in history with a monk at Charlemagne's court who died a year before Charlemagne's son of that name was born. Was the son named in memory of the monk? What was the monk like, that he would have made such an impression on Charlemagne?

I'll tell you tomorrow.

The Daughters of Charlemagne

Charlemagne believed strongly in education for all his children; his daughters learned to read and write as well as his sons. He was also close to his children, and kept them close to him, bringing the family with him on travels both military and diplomatic. None of them married, although he did try to arrange a marriage or two. Some did have children, however, after finding relationships of their own.

Some did not live long, however. His first daughter by Hildegarde was Adalhaid, born in 774 while the family was on campaign in Italy. She was sent back home, but died along the way. A final child, named for her mother, was born in 782 but lived only a few months.

Rotrude was born in 775. She was tutored by Alcuin, who called her Columba ("dove") in letters. Marriage to Byzantine Emperor Constantine VI was arranged when she was six and he was ten, but his mother Irene eventually ended the engagement when she decided the Empire should side with the Lombards, whom Charlemagne had conquered. Rotrude had an affair with Charlemagne's retainer Rorgo of Rennes, Count of Maine and of Rennes (who himself was married several times). She had a son by him, Louis (800 - 867) who became Abbot of Saint-Denis and archchancellor under his namesake and uncle, Louis the Pious, emperor after Charlemagne. Rotrude became a nun at Chelles, where she passed away in 810.

Another daughter of Hildegarde was Bertha (c.779 - 826). Offa of Mercia wanted to marry his son Ecgfrith to her, an offer which Charlemagne felt was an insult. As a result, he broke off diplomatic relations with Mercia and forbade English ships from his ports. Bertha had a long-term relationship with a secretary named Angilbert. They had three children, one of whom was Nithard.

The third daughter of Charlemagne and Hildegarde who survived to adulthood was Gisela (c.781 - c.808). We know she was baptized at the Basilica of Sant'Ambrogio by the Archbishop of Milan while the family was in Italy. Her tutor Alcuin, who in his writings remarked that she had an interest in astronomy, nicknamed her "Delia." She never married, and some sources say she died in 808, while others say she was sent to a convent when her brother Louis came to power. The latter may just be an assumption based on Louis sending away as many potential sources of claimants to the throne as possible.

Next we will look at the children from Charlemagne's other wives.