1,721,023 research outputs found
Imagining power
No full textAny discussion of moral norms for Carolingian lay noblemen must include attitudes towards power, since eighth- and ninth-century Frankish society was marked by strong social inequalities. Moralising texts often used a binary opposition between potentes (the powerful) and pauperes (the ‘poor’), although in reality the situation was probably more complicated.In contrast to late Anglo-Saxon England, Frankish texts stress elite power more than wealth: potentes are far more frequent than divites (the rich). Many Carolingian sources also saw the pauperes in terms of lack of power or dependence, rather than poverty. Some texts, however, do contrast the ‘poor man’ and the ‘rich man’; Hans-Werner Goetz saw the pairing of pauper–dives as typical of narrative sources; it is also found in the lay mirrors. Power and nobility were also closely connected, but not conceptually equivalent. Jonas, for example, complains about the neglect of duty by ‘some powerful men [potentes] and certain noble married women [matronae]’
Men and morality
No full textThomas Noble describes the Carolingian lay noble ethos as ‘remarkably simple’, and some discussions have sought to boil it down to one or two essential concepts. Mayke de Jong, for example, stresses fides (loyalty to one’s lord) as a key virtue of elite society, while Eric Goldberg has argued that ‘Dignitas was at the heart of Carolingian political culture.’ Yet closer analysis of specific genres of moral texts has often revealed their variety. It is no coincidence that neither Hans Hubert Anton’s study of mirrors for princes, nor Franz Sedlmeier’s analysis of lay mirrors, ends with extensive conclusions: it has proved remarkably difficult to find core themes in these genres.There is a very different flavour to each of the four lay mirrors discussed in this book. Paulinus’ repeated yet unfocused worries about ‘worldliness’ in Liber exhortationis seem to reflect both the specific date of his writing, and also difficulties in adapting monastic texts to produce a lay ethos. Alcuin, in contrast, seems to have found moral writing for lay audiences relatively easy, perhaps because of his constant resort to banalities. De virtutibus et vitiis, in particular, seems to me to assume an audience less of ‘spiritual athletes’ than ‘spiritual couch-potatoes’, which may explain its popularity. Certainly a moralist who can claim: ‘We can be martyrs without sword or flames if we truly preserve patience in the soul with our neighbours’ is not making excessive demands for holiness on his audience
Sex
No full textAlthough some Christian norms of sexual behaviour were new, others drew extensively on both classical and Jewish traditions. Jesus in the Gospels said relatively little about personal sexual behaviour. New Testament sexual ethics were developed further in the epistles of Paul and his followers, and a strict code of sexual discipline soon became a key way of showing Christian communities as a ‘holy people’. By the early fourth century a clear contrast between a militantly ascetic view of the church, stressing celibacy, and a society of settled Christian households had developed. In the West, the prevailing view valued virginity and continence over marriage, and fourth- and fifth-century patristic writing about sexuality was almost exclusively negative. St Augustine, even as he defended marriage as good, developed a vision of sexuality as an enduring psychological drive, not easily tamed by society. Yet as Julia Smith comments on the intellectual resources available to Carolingian writers on gender and sexual behaviour: ‘that heritage was vast, and neither coherent nor consistent’.<br/
Central power
No full textAs in most western societies until recently, in the Carolingian period there was a close link between the ruler, the ‘state’ apparatus and the nobility. A variety of secular office-holders are visible in Carolingian sources, sometimes with overlapping roles. For example, Louis the Pious’ Legationis capitulum from around 826 mentions missi, comites, advocati, vicedomini, vicarii, centenarii and scabini. The highest secular offices were effectively reserved for noblemen, unlike some other medieval societies.Closeness to the ruler and attendance at court were thus key sources of noble power. Lupus of Ferrières told Charles the Bald in around 843: ‘do not fear the potentes, whom you made yourself and whom you can bring low when you wish’. This was undoubtedly an exaggeration, but royal favour was essential for real prominence and there was keen competition for it. The rewards included not only office, but also more tangible gains: Charlemagne’s courtiers shared in the booty after the defeat of the Avars, for example. Einhard’s letters show the variety of royal favours that a prominent courtier might seek both for himself and his friends, including exemption from paying the heribannus (a fine for not attending the host when summoned), grants of benefices and their retention in times of political turmoil. In return, such courtiers had a duty to give ‘aid and counsel’ to the ruler
Personal power
No full textThe role of personal power, derived from specific social relationships, has been a key theme of early medieval research for several generations. The German ‘new constitutional history’, which developed in the 1930s, saw such personal ties as the key to all social structures: the Carolingian empire, like its contemporaries, was a Personenverbandsstaat (‘state’ based on personal ties rather than institutions). All forms of power in the Germanic world, scholars argued, could be derived from Herrschaft (lordship). This constitutional history paradigm has now been substantially undermined, although without entirely losing its grip. Nevertheless, scholars still agree that much power in Carolingian society was exercised and experienced through such relationships between individuals. Whether these ‘personal’ relationships were in practice defined or marked by particular social or emotional closeness is a different matter.Carolingian authors did not provide a systematic guide to social morality as Rather of Verona did in the late tenth century, when he set out the behaviour expected of social groups from parents and old men to soldiers and doctors. Many Frankish texts do provide information, however, on behavioural norms for both male and female elites within power relationships. In turn, this chapter will explore the expectations of relationships that male noblemen had with their household and dependants (particularly the unfree), with their lords and their own followers, and with their kin and friends. Although these conceptual categories are used for ease of analysis, however, it is important to realise that both moralising and legislative sources are sometimes vague on the exact social relationships involved.<br/
Marriage
No full textAs already indicated, marriage, alongside warfare, was one of the key markers defining lay status in the Carolingian period, while both clerics and monks were expected to abstain from all sexual activity. The marital and sexual norms for the laity were therefore distinctive, but lay behaviour was not solely a ‘private’ matter to be decided within the patriarchal familia. The key social role of marriage throughout western history meant that rulers recurrently legislated on the topic and on related sexual issues, while the church’s interest in marriage and sexuality developed from an early date. The first Frankish synods under Carolingian control, in the 740s and 750s, were already concerned to regulate these key aspects of lay life. In this chapter the Carolingian norms on marriage will be analysed, while Chapter 9 deals with sexual behaviour both inside and outside marriage. Although there is some overlap between the two topics, especially in the wide-ranging concept of ‘incest’ (discussed below), such a separation can help clarify the reformers’ priorities.Christianity had developed an understanding of marriage unknown both to Judaism and the classical world, in which marriage was seen as possessing a sacramental character. St Paul and his followers, attempting to preserve the institution of the pious Jewish household in new Christian communities, developed an ideology of the loving, but hierarchical marriage. The debate in the fourth-century West over clerical celibacy demonstrates the varied views of patristic writers, ranging from Jerome’s denigration of married people to Augustine’s development of a substantial theology of marriage. Bitter conflicts between late antique churchmen over claims to authority within Christian society thus lay behind patristic texts. Subsequently removed from their political context, such texts were to be the raw material for many Carolingian discussions of marriage and sex. As Jean Gaudemet has pointed out, the vocabulary of marriage inherited from the fourth and fifth century (terms such as desponsatio, used for an intermediate stage in the process of marriage, and matrimonium) was also vague
Warfare
No full textWarfare played an important social and cultural role in the Carolingian period. The Franks had long had a reputation as a warrior people. Annals were structured around annual campaigns, and warfare was a key aspect of a king’s role. Much poetry dealt with warfare, from the De conversione Saxonum carmen of 777, through to Abbo’s work at the end of the ninth century; the liturgy of warfare also developed considerably in the period.This Frankish culture of warfare was, like those in most periods, overwhelmingly male, although occasionally royal women directed military operations. In theory, warfare and the use of weapons were lay prerogatives: several texts refer to weapons and marriage as the two key markers of lay life. However, Friedrich Prinz showed that Charlemagne ‘institutionalised’ the military service of the higher clergy (bishops and abbots), making their participation in campaigns and warfare the norm, and weakening the canonical position that such men should not participate in war or carry weapons
Power and wealth
No full textMost early medieval nobles were distinguished by their wealth as well as their power. The highest Merovingian nobility were already extraordinarily rich by European standards. Such wealth took a variety of forms. Most significant was land, vital not only as a source of rent and marketable crops, but as a key component in patronage networks. The importance of land is shown by a passing comment in the Gesta Fontanellensis about an abbot who had given away monastic land in benefice: ‘Indeed, such rectors are worse than pagans, since were a pagan to burn the place with fire, yet he would not take the land with him.’Carolingian wills show both the quantity of treasure that nobles held, and its cultural significance: the will of Eberhard and Gisela makes important symbolic legacies of weapons and clothing as well as books. Poetry, too, expresses the emotional force of precious objects: Waltharius, the Paderborn epic and Ermoldus’ poems are full of gold and jewels. There was also a long tradition of religious texts identifying such ‘treasure’ with goodness
Moral texts and lay audiences
No full textAny discussion of early medieval moral instruction must grapple with the question of whether lay noblemen actually read or heard the advice given. Were Carolingian moralists simply casting their work into a void? This issue has been approached from several different angles. Rosamond McKitterick and Janet Nelson have argued for relatively widespread lay literacy in the Carolingian period. Thomas Noble has assembled evidence for nobles receiving moral messages both orally and in writing. Many studies of individual Carolingian texts provide information on their audience and circulation. This chapter offers a synthesis of this research, giving an overview of the wide range of moral texts that might inculcate norms in lay noblemen.My focus is on works written in Latin within the Carolingian empire in the period from c. 750 to c. 900: material from Italy and Bavaria before their conquest is therefore not included. I have not looked at the much smaller number of Continental vernacular texts from the period. The earliest texts discussed in this book are Boniface’s letters and the conciliar legislation of Carloman and Pippin III, the starting point for Carolingian attempts at reform
Introduction
No full textThe many works written by Archbishop Hincmar of Rheims are inextricably intertwined with his own life history. Hincmar did not write in a vacuum but in response to events, attempting through these to re-order the world to suit his vision of a Christian society. This introductory chapter therefore focuses on his biography, from his days as a promising student at St-Denis through to his death while escaping from Viking raiders. It outlines the different networks within which Hincmar worked, discussing his interactions with the clerics of his own diocese, with kings and other laymen, and with popes, especially Nicholas I. It also demonstrates how long-standing and intractable many of his disputes were. The chapter also highlights recurring themes in the book, such as Hincmar’s working practices and the intensely personal nature of political culture. Hincmar appears within a wider context of scholarly men in the ninth century “fighting with words” and trying to establish social norms by appeals to varied authorities. Finally, Hincmar’s legacy is briefly considered, especially how he has shaped historians’ view of the early Middle Ages.<br/
- …
