Ordines Coronationis Franciae, Volume 1: Texts and Ordines for the Coronation of Frankish and French Kings and Queens in the Middle Ages 9781512821604

Citation preview

Ordines Coronationis Franciae

University of Pennsylvania Press MIDDLE AGES SERIES Edited by Edward Peters Henry Charles Lea Professor of Medieval History University of Pennsylvania A listing of the available books in this series appears at the back of this volume

Ordines Coronationis Franciae Texts and Ordines for the Coronation of Prankish and French Kings and Queens in the Middle Ages VOLUME I

Edited by RICHARD A. JACKSON

UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS Philadelphia

Copyright © 1995 by the University of Pennsylvania Press All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Jackson, Richard A., 1937Ordines coronationis Franciae : texts and ordines for the coronation of Prankish and French kings and queens in the Middle Ages / edited by Richard A. Jackson, p. cm. — (Middle Ages series) Includes bibliographical references ISBN 0-8122-3263-1 Contents: v.l 1. France — Kings and rulers — Religious aspects — Sources. 2. Coronations — France — History — Sources. 3. Rites and ceremonies — France — Sources. 4. Monarchy — France — History — Sources. 5. France — History — Medieval period, 987-1515 — Historiography. I. Series. DC33.15.J3 1995 394' .4—dc20 94-48121 CIP

For Virginia

This page intentionally left blank

CONTENTS Preface Abbreviations and Frequently Cited Works General Introduction The Selection of Texts The Manuscript Sources Nature and Problems of the Editions The Development of the Ceremony Reliability of the Ordines Presentation of the Edition General Principles of the Edition Abbreviations Individual Letters Texts of the Ordines Ordo I. Royal Texts in the Sacramentary of Gellone—790–800 II. Royal Texts in the Sacramentary of Angoulême—ca. 800 III. Royal Texts in the Collection of Sankt Emmeram— 824–827 IV. Royal Texts in the Benedictional of Freising—before 900 V. Marriage and Coronation Ordo of Judith—856 VI. Ordo of Ermentrude—866 VII. Ordo of Charles the Bald—869 VIII. Ordo of Louis the Stammerer—877 IX. Royal Texts in the Sacramentary of Saint-Thierry— 878 (in part) X. Petitio and Promissio of Carloman—882 XI. Texts Concerning the First Coronation of Eudes—888 XII. First Set of Royal Texts in the Second Sacramentary of Tours—ca. 900 or earlier XIII. Erdmann Ordo—ca. 900 XIV. Ordo of Eleven Forms—900–950 XV. Ratold Ordo—ca. 980 XVI. Royal Ordo in Cologne Dombibliothek 141—1000–1050 XVIIA. Memorandum of Philip I's Coronation—1059 XVIIB. French Translations of the Memorandum of Philip I's Coronation—1555–66, 1825, 1951, 1969 XVIII. OrdoofSaint-Bertin—ca. 1150–1200 XIX. Ordo of 1200—ca. 1200 Works Cited

ix xiii 1 4 11 15 21 32 38 41 47 47

51 55 66 69 73 80 87 110 124 130 133 139 142 154 168 201 217 233 240 248 269

This page intentionally left blank

PREFACE The origin of this edition was quite accidental. During the academic year 1973-74 I went to France to complete my research for a history of the late-medieval and early-modern French coronation ceremony. I had already sought in the medieval coronation ordines the source of a number of practices, but there were many questions that seemed to defy answers. I discussed some of these with Herve Pinoteau, who, during his many years at the Bibliotheque nationale in Paris, had looked at the manuscripts and had concluded that the coronation ordines were a tangled skein. Mutual interest in French royal ceremonial developed into friendship, and Pinoteau referred me to diverse manuscripts, sought my opinion regarding particular ordines, or asked me whether I thought that a reading in manuscript X implied this or that Until then I had worked primarily (although not exclusively) from printed editions, unaware, even though I knew the studies of Percy Ernst Schramm, of the number of manuscripts that survive, and little conceiving the inadequacy of the editions with which I had worked. My enlightenment began when I examined the manuscripts that I knew or that were brought to my attention by Herve Pinoteau and, eventually, Frangois Avril, and it increased as I worked through Victor Leroquais's superb volumes on the pontificals. Then a series of journeys around northern France brought me into direct contact with manuscripts unknown to Schramm, and a trip to the British Library in London became a turning point in the undertaking, for it was there that I examined MS Egerton 931, the beautiful pontifical from which Dom Edmond Martene had edited the Last Capetian Ordo (Ordo XXII A) in the eighteenth century. When I collated this manuscript with Martene's second edition, I discovered over 160 differences between the manuscript and the edition. Collation of other editions with their surviving manuscript sources further proved the degree to which earlier editors had tampered with their texts. It became excruciatingly obvious that a reliable history of the medieval and Renaissance French coronation ceremony, and to some extent even of medieval kingship, could not be written until there was a reliable edition of the coronation texts. Over half a century ago Percy Ernst Schramm was aware of the need for such an edition, and he issued a call to the French scholarly community to produce it. I also had hoped that an edition would be forthcoming, but when there was none on the horizon by the conclusion of my stay in France in 1974, I decided to undertake the task myself. Several

x

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

factors led me to make this decision. First, at that time French scholars were not particularly interested in the coronation texts, and there was no evidence that any French person was preparing an edition. (I later learned that Jacques Broussard had been working on one, but his death prevented its completion.) Second, I needed good, reliable texts for my own work on coronation ceremonial. Third, it had been suggested to me that one task that could be undertaken in an area of the world with very limited research resources was to edit texts, and here was a project that suited my interests and my requirements, as well as the needs of erudition. The recommendation that I edit texts was both good and bad, both right and wrong. Most of the actual collation could be done from microfilms, photocopies, or photographs, but on many occasions the reproduction was illegible, or my reading doubtful, and it was necessary to reexamine the manuscripts, sometimes two or three times. In some instances the reproduction proved to be clearer than the manuscript, and I was forced to make agonizing decisions. (If any doubt remained, I note it in the apparatus.) Also, I originally thought that simply listing the editions would be sufficient, but, following the example of editors of other texts, I concluded that it was necessary to identify their sources. This required collating the editions, for I became increasingly unwilling to accept an editor's statement that the text was taken from such and such a manuscript or edition. Many of the editions cited in the apparatus are extremely rare, however, and nowhere near at hand were there sufficient bibliographical resources even to identify them, so, although I could do much of the work without library resources (and in that respect the advice given to me was good), I could never have completed the edition if I had not had the opportunity to travel to the libraries and archives that contained what I needed. In that I was fortunate. I was able, during four years of teaching at the Universite de Strasbourg II, to make many trips to Paris, Reims, Brussels, and elsewhere. After my return to the United States in 1983 I made two further journeys to Europe, and I took advantage of my time there to reexamine some manuscripts and to scrutinize others that I had not previously seen. I was granted nearly a year of uninterrupted research as a member of the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, where I completed Volume I. At another Princeton institution, Princeton University, and within five or six hours of travel time from Princeton at major libraries from Washington, B.C. to Cambridge, Massachusetts, is the greatest collection of books in the world, and I was able to consult works that I had not been able to find in any French collection. I now possess

PREFACE

xi

copies of nearly all manuscripts and editions containing coronation texts, and these were essential to the completion of this edition because, while preparing it, I found myself returning to my copies hundreds of times to verify one reading or another. Nonetheless, questions arose even in the final stages of editing, and because there was no possibility of further travel to Europe, I rather unashamedly turned to fellow scholars whose meticulousness I trusted to make a final confirmation of a reading or to resolve an aggravating question. These colleagues, too, are part of the making of this edition, and the apparatus often indicates the contribution made by them. These remarks are intentionally subjective because I am now convinced that every edition is a personal accomplishment and that another editor might do things differently. It is this conviction, not egotism, that led me to decide not to emulate Julius Caesar, but to identify my decisions in the first person so that others would know their origin and could evaluate them accordingly. All texts, even the short ones, required making hundreds of decisions, and the long ones forced me to consider thousands of alternatives. I have no way of knowing whether or where I made the correct choices, but I recognize perfectly that personal decision making is evident in the very structure of the edition because, in the end, I alone had to decide which texts to include and how to present them. The edition would not have seen the light of day without the indispensable help of a number of institutions and individuals. First, there are the institutions that provided financial assistance and made travel to libraries and manuscript collections possible: the American Council of Learned Societies, the American Philosophical Society, the Council for International Exchange of Scholars, the Institute for Advanced Study, the National Endowment for the Humanities, and the University of Houston. Then there are those that furnished favorable surroundings for research and writing: the Institute for Advanced Study and the Universite des Sciences Humaines of Strasbourg. The administrators and staffs of many libraries have been most helpful. It is not necessary to list all of them here: every library at which I examined manuscripts or from which I obtained photographic copies is on the list, as are the Bibliotheque municipale of Auxerre, the Bibliotheque nationale et universitaire of Strasbourg, the Bodleian Library, and the libraries of Columbia University, Harvard University, Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, Princeton Theological Seminary, Princeton University, Union Theological Seminary, and the University of Pennsylvania. Other institutions provided me with photographic materials: the Hill Monastic Microfilm Library at St. John's University, the

xii

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes, and the Vatican Film Library at St. Louis University. Many individuals have encouraged the project over the years, have brought to my attention manuscripts, editions, and secondary literature that might otherwise have escaped my attention, and have looked at manuscripts or verified readings for me: my colleagues in the Institut d'Histoire du Moyen Age at the Universite de Strasbourg and fellow members of the Institute for Advanced Study (among the latter, Roberto Rusconi was particularly helpful with a number of difficult passages), Frangois Avril, Robert-Henri Bautier, Robert L. Benson, Claude Buridant, Natalie Zemon Davis, Ralph E. Giesey, Aleksander Gieysztor, Abbe Jean Goy, Heinrich Griiger, Andrew Hughes, Donald R. Kelley, Guy Lobrichon, Abbe Irenee Noye, Edward M. Peters, J. H. M. Salmon, Rudolf Schieffer, John Snyder, Jenny Wormald, and Patrick Wormald. A few individuals provided particularly noteworthy help. Elizabeth A. R. Brown provided me with a number of very careful transcriptions, engaged in long conversations concerning the ordines, and brought many manuscripts and much secondary literature to my attention. Guy Lanoe sent me copies of his forthcoming publications, and he quickly and generously provided me with urgently needed photocopies of manuscripts from his personal collection or from microfilms at the Institut de Recherche et d'Histoire des Textes. Virginia Jackson carefully read the English parts of the manuscript and suggested many improvements in my style and arguments, and she repeatedly inspired me to complete the project. In addition to stimulating me to undertake the edition, Herve Pinoteau checked and transcribed a number of passages, informed me quickly of the most recent research, and constantly encouraged me to continue my work on the edition. Reinhard Elze played a most important role as he followed my progress over the years. He generously sent me references, advised me of promising leads, provided me with transcriptions, and generally plaqed at my disposal his unparalleled knowledge of coronation ceremonial. His willingness to read and to criticize the manuscript before publication made this a far better edition than it would otherwise have been, and I am truly grateful to have benefited from the aid of such a great scholar. I appreciate the help given by the gentle staff of the University of Pennsylvania Press: Alison Anderson, Managing Editor; Carolyn Delaney, Copy Editor; Carl Gross, Production Manager; and Jerome Singerman, Acquisitions Editor. If I have omitted some names from these acknowledgments, that is not for want of gratitude, but is due to forgetfulness on my part, and I apologize deeply to the individuals or institutions in question.

ABBREVIATIONS AND FREQUENTLY CITED WORKS Note: For full references, see Works Cited, pp. 271-85. Paris, Archives nationales Etienne Baluze, ed., Capitularia regum Francorum. Biblioteca, Bibliotheek, Bibliothek, Bibliotheque Bibl. Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Bibl. Apos. Vat. Bibliotheque municipale Bibl. mun. Bibliotheque nationale Bibl. nat. Collection Baluze Baluze Collection Dupuy Dupuy fonds frangais, fonds latin fran., lat. nouv. acq. fran. nouvelles acquisitions frangaises nouvelles acquisitions latines nouv. acq. lat. Cornelius A. Bouman, Sacring and Crowning. Bouman, Sacring Corpus Christianorum Series Latina CCSL Codex latinus Cod. lat. Fernand Cabrol and Henri Leclercq, DictionDACL naire d'archeologie chretienne et de liturgie. Leopold Delisle, "Memoire sur d'anciens sacraDelisle, "Memoire" mentaires." Dewick E. S. Dewick, The Coronation Book of Charles V of France. Duchesne, Scriptores Andre Duchesne, ed., Historiae Francorum scriptores. edition, editions ed., edd. Reinhard Elze, ed., Ordines coronationis impeElze or rialis. Elze's Ordo Theodore Godefroy and Denis Godefroy, eds., Le Godefroy ceremonial frangois. Felix Grat et al, eds., Annales de Saint-Bertin. Grat, Saint-Bertin Richard A. Jackson Jackson "Manuscripts, Texts and Enigmas." "Manuscripts" Vivat rex: Une histoire des sacres et couronneVivat rex ments en France. Vive le Roi! A History of the French Coronation Vive le roi Ceremony. Victor Leroquais Leroquais

Arch. nat. Baluze, Capitularia

XIV

Pontificaux Sacramentaires Mansi Martene Martimort MGH Capitularia

Leges MS, MSS

Nelson, Politics PL

n., nn. no., nos. Recueil des historiens Schramm Frankreich Kaiser "OrdinesStudien II" "Westfranken"

Sirmond Opera varia Hincmari opera Karoli Calvi capitula var., vars. Vogel-Elze Warren, Leofric

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE Les pontificaux manuscrits des bibliotheques publiques de France. Les sacramentaires et les missels manuscrits des bibliotheques publiques de France. Giovan Domenico Mansi, ed., Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima coUectio. Dom Edmond Martene, ed., De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus. Aime-Georges Martimort, La documentation liturgique de Dom Edmond Martene. Monumenta Germaniae Historica Alfred Boretius and Victor Krause et al, eds., Capitularia regum Francorum. MGH Legum sectio 2,2. Georg Heinrich Pertz, ed., MGH Leges (in folio). manuscript, manuscripts Janet L. Nelson, Politics and Ritual in Early Medieval Europe. Jacques Paul Migne, ed., Patrologiae cursus completus latinae. note number, numbers paragraph number, numbers Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, ed. Dom Martin Bouquet et al. Percy Ernst Schramm DerKonig von Frankreich. Kaiser, Konige und Pdpste. "Ordines-Studien II: Die Kronung bei den Westfranken und den Franzosen." "Die Kronung bei den Westfranken und Angelsachsen von 878 bis urn 1000." Jacques Sirmond Opera varia. ed., Hincmari archiepiscopi Remensis opera. ed., Karoli Calvi et successorum aliquot Franciae regum capitula. variant, variants Cyrille Vogel and Reinhard Elze, eds., Le pontifical romano-germanique du dixieme siecle. F. E. Warren, ed., The Leofric Missal as Used in the Cathedral of Exeter.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION Monarchy was, from the end of Antiquity to the twentieth century, the normal form of government in Western Europe, and if we were to ignore those 1500 years of human government, it would be impossible to understand the nature of political power, the source and legitimation of political authority, and the ways in which political power is acquired, modified, exercised, and corrupted. In the last two decades, as scholars have come increasingly to realize the importance of studying rulership in all periods of history, interest in the subject has grown remarkably, resulting in an impressive number of books and articles devoted to it. Among recent discoveries is the degree to which the modern nation-state came into existence through transformations in medieval monarchies; the ways in which it developed out of the early-modern monarchies; and the extent to which the Founding Fathers of the United States both reacted to and borrowed from the time-honored institutions of government with which they were familiar. Josef Fleckenstein once wrote of medieval kingship, "... it is indisputable that the determining powers of the entire age are concentrated in the kingship," and in discussing the first Carolingian king, he aptly continued, "The anointing, which bestowed upon him a new, a spiritual legitimation, was the decisive step in the Christianization of the kingship. Through it, the ruler entered into an immediate relationship to God, and as God's representative he exercised his rulership as a God-given office."1 Although the ceremony could be only vaguely regarded as bearing upon the feudal king's relationship to his barons, it was administered by the greatest non-royal institution of the Middle Ages: the Church. The ceremony defined, from the Church's point of view, the powers of the king, while simultaneously laying upon him obligations towards both the Church and his subjects; it set the guidelines for royal behavior; and it charted the relationship between the king and the Church's governing element, the episcopate. In France, as in the other European countries that anointed and crowned their monarchs, the ceremony bonded the secular office of government to the Christian religion and colored the complexion of medieval rulership. 1 Josef Fleckenstein, "Rex Canonicus: Uber Entstehung und Bedeutung des mittelalterlichen Konigskanonikates," in Ordnungen undformende Krdfte des Mittelalters: Ausgewahlte Beitrdge (Gottingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 1989), 195, 197.

2

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

Cooperation with episcopate was essential to the creation of the king, for no West Prankish or French monarch in the high Middle Ages fully possessed the royal title and royal powers until he had been anointed and crowned. Coronation of the successor as co-king during the father's lifetime was the method adopted by the early Capetians to solve the problem of succession and to prevent the development of an elective monarchy in the West Prankish kingdom, and whether or not this Capetian practice was largely the result of a series of accidents, it surely helped to establish the dynasty firmly upon the throne.2 Philip V rushed to have himself crowned early in 1317 after the death of his infant nephew John, in order to preempt anyone else's claims to the throne. By the end of the Middle Ages the coronation was no longer necessary to constitute the king, but in the popular mind it remained an essential component of royal accession, as is demonstrated by Joan of Arc's consistent use of gentil Dauphin when she referred to or addressed her monarch prior to his coronation at Reims in 1429, after which she addressed Charles VII as roi for the first time. Unfortunately, though, our sources for the history of medieval rulership are very limited, particularly before the middle of the fourteenth century. The most informative sources are the liturgical ordines and other texts relating to the anointing and crowning of kings and queens, and we are fortunate that some of these survive from every century after the Carolingians came to power, enabling us to undertake a broad survey of these mirrors of princes and patterns of political symbols. This edition is intended to be a counterpart to Reinhard Elze's edition of the medieval ordines for the coronation of the emperor and empress, and its title was chosen accordingly.3 It contains all known ordines and major texts relating to the Prankish/French coronation ceremony from the late eighth century to the end of the Middle Ages (for a complete list, see the Synoptic Table, p. 5).4 It includes texts that have been published 2

Andrew W. Lewis, "Anticipatory Association of the Heir in Early Capetian France," American Historical Review 83 (1978): 906-27. 3 Reinhard Elze, Ordines coronationis imperialis: Die Ordines fur die Weihe und Krb'nung des Kaisers und der Kaiserin, MGH Fontes iuris Germanici antiqui, vol. 9 (Hanover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung, 1960). 4 Cyrille Vogel, Introduction aux sources de Vhistoire du culte chretien au moyen age, reprinted in Biblioteca degli «Studi Medievali» 1 (Spoleto: Centre Studi Alto Medioevo, 1981), 101, n. 1, has an excellent definition of the word "ordo." Both ordines and texts that are not ordines are included in this collection. Strictly speaking, a coronation ordo contains both liturgical formulas and rubrics that either identify the formulas or that prescribe the ceremonial acts surrounding the pronunciation of the

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

3

in the past, some of them many times, as well as texts previously unpublished or published only in part. With the exceptions noted below in the Principles of the Edition, every reading of nearly all medieval and sixteenth-century manuscripts is retained. This includes the complete text of every liturgical formula, so that each ordo is complete in itself: it is not necessary to refer to another ordo in order to see the entire formula. The readings of seventeenth- or eighteenth-century manuscripts and of printed editions are retained only if they preserve the text of a manuscript that has disappeared. A multitude of other medieval sources that treat of coronations will not be found in this edition, though: the abundant medieval allusions to coronations in annals and histories, saints' lives, epic and lyric poetry, and government documents and account books. Nonetheless, some of these are noted in the apparatus, which, in turn, will alert the researcher to additional literature that provides details and information that would be out of place in an edition of texts. Because there is a natural division in the ordines, the texts will be published in two volumes. Volume I contains the general introduction and all texts and ordines to the beginning of the thirteenth century (Ordines I-XIX). Even though these had their origin in Francia or the West Prankish kingdom or France, there is little or nothing in them that identifies them as specifically French, i.e., as providing for unction with chrism from the Holy Ampulla or as involving participation of the peers of France. Volume II will contain the ordines after 1200 (Ordines XX-XXV), as well as the bibliographies, indexes, and illustrations. These last six ordines are generally far more detailed than the earlier texts, and they essentially defined the French ceremony from the late Middle Ages to the end of the monarchy. The division into two volumes might appear at first glance to be undesirable, and one could argue that it would be preferable to have all texts between a single set of covers. There are advantages to two volumes, nevertheless. Some users will be able to compare an ordo in Volume II with one in Volume I without having to flip pages back and forth. Furthermore, because most of the manuscripts and the great majority of references to earlier editions or to the literature are to be found in Volume I, this convenience will also be available to anyone who uses the indexes and bibliography. Finally, by publishing the texts in separate volumes, the first nineteen ordines will be published more quickly than would otherwise be possible.

formula, but the distinction between an ordo and other kinds of texts is not always possible to maintain.

4

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE The Selection of Texts

Although French scholars little concerned themselves with coronation ceremonial after 1830, interest in the subject never completely died out in France any more than in England, where monarchy survives to the present. The four texts attributed to Hincmar of Reims are evidence of that interest in the second half of the ninth century, and its continuous survival is proven by the presence of coronation texts in many medieval liturgical works copied for clerics who could never expect to preside over, or even to assist at, such a ceremony, who could at most only hope to be among the many observers at a coronation. With the development of the printing press, the number of editions and studies of coronation ceremonial rose dramatically, requiring Gaston Saffroy to list 703 entries in the thirty-nine pages his bibliography devoted to French coronations.5 Most of the studies published prior to the last quarter of the nineteenth century are of little value, unfortunately, either because their authors ignored the sources and did little more than repeat what had already been published, or because they argued a particular political point of view instead of attempting to reconstruct the past. The study of kingship became a topic so interwoven with French political life that it could be undertaken by very few French academic historians in the modern world. Thus it was that the investigation of coronation ceremonial as an historical problem was begun by German historians: Georg Waitz opened a new field with the publication of his study of German and imperial coronations,6 and Hans Schreuer and Maximilian Buchner extended the field to France in the early twentieth century.7 Using their findings as a point 5 Gaston Saffroy, Bibliographic genealogique, heraldique et nobiliaire de la France, 5 vols. (Paris: Librairie Gaston Saffroy, 1968-88), 1: 679-717, nos. 15197-15882; and 5: 49-50, nos. 53237-53253. 6 Georg Waitz, "Die Formeln der Deutschen Konigs- und der Romischen KaiserKronung vom zehnten bis zum zwolften Jahrhundert," Abhandlungen der historischphilotogischen Classe der Koniglichen GeseUschaft der Wissenschaften zu Gottingen 18 (1873): 3-92. 7 In chronological order, because Schreuer's and Buchner's studies were published in response to one another: Schreuer, "Uber altfranzosische Kronungsordnungen," Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung fur Rechtsgeschichte, germ. Abt. 30 (1909): 142-92; Buchner, "Zur Datierung und Charakteristik altfranzosischer Kronungsordnungen mit besonderer Beriicksichtigung des 'angeblichen' ordo Ludwigs VII," Zeitschr. fur Rechtsgesch., germ. Abt. 31 (1910): 360-423; Schreuer, Die rechtlichen Grundgedanken der franzosischen Konigskronung: Mit besonderer Rucksicht auf die deutschen Verhdltnisse (Weimar: Hermann Bohlaus Nachfolger, 1911); Schreuer,

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

5

Synoptic Table Ordo number I II III IV V VI VII VIII IXA IXB IXC X XI XII XIIIA XIIIB XIV XV XVI XVIIA XVIIB XVIII XIX XXA XXB XXI XXIIA XXIIB

XXIII XXIV XXV

Title

Schramm's number*

Sacramentary of Gellone Sacramentary of Angouleme Collection of Sankt Emmeram Benedictional of Freising Ordo of Judith Ordo of Ermentrude Ordo of Charles the Bald Ordo of Louis the Stammerer Sacramentary of Saint-Thierry Sacramentary of Saint-Thierry Sacramentary of Saint-Thierry Petitio and Promissio of Carloman Texts Concerning the First Coronation of Eudes Second Sacramentary of Tours Erdmann Ordo Investiture Formulas from Sens Ordo of Eleven Forms Ratold Ordo Royal Ordo in Cologne Dombibliothek 141 Memorandum of Philip I's Coronation Philip I's Coronation, French Translations Ordo of Saint-Bertin Ordo of 1200 Ordo of Reims Ordo of Reims, French Translations Ordo of 1250 Last Capetian Ordo Last Capetian Ordo, French Translations Lost Manuscripts from Charles V's Library Ordo of Charles V Jean Golein's Traite du sacre Descriptions of Late Medieval Coronations Ordo of Louis XI Ordo of Charles VIII Descriptions of Modern Coronations

* From Schramm, "Ordines-Studien II."

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

11 12 10 19 13 14 15 16 17 18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

6

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

of departure, Percy Ernst Schramm published the first complete survey of the Frankish and French texts in articles that appeared in the 1930s.8 Investigations of additional texts were prepared by Carl Erdmann (and published posthumously)9 and by the Netherlander Cornelius A. Bouman.10 The influence of each of these scholars, and most particularly of Schramm, is evident in my selection of texts for this edition. The starting point for the edition was the information in Schramm's "Ordines-Studien II," published in 1938. That study discussed seriatim 26 ordines, from the Ordo of Judith (Schramm's no. 1; my Ordo V) to a brief survey of descriptions of modern coronations (Schramm's no. 26). The first decision that I had to make concerned which of these texts to edit (cf. the Synoptic Table, p. 5). Initially, that seemed easy: all except Schramm's no. 26 would be published. Then it became necessary to modify the selection, partly because, in addition to no. 26, two of Schramm's numbers refer to a series of manuscripts or texts: his no. 20 lists lost ordines in the library of king Charles V, and his no. 23 is a brief bibliography of descriptions of the later medieval coronations. As to the remainder, there were obvious choices. They included the four texts attributed to Hincmar of Reims (Ordines V-VIII), the Erdmann Ordo (Ordo XIII), the Ratold Ordo (Ordo XV), the Ordo of 1250 (Ordo XXI) the Last Capetian Ordo (Ordo XXII A), and the Ordines of Charles V and Charles VIII (Ordines XXIII-XXV), all of which contain the liturgy of the ceremony, and, with the exception of Ordines V-VI and VIII, disclose the framework of the entire ceremony. An extract from Jean Foulquart's treatise on the obligations of Reims had to be added to these because, as I have argued elsewhere, Foulquart copied the full liturgical text of an "Noch einmal liber altfranzosische Kronungsordnungen," Zeitschr. fur Rechtsgesch., germ. Abt. 32 (1911): 1^0, with "Nachtrag," 312-315; Buchner, "Nochmals die Kronungsordnung Ludwigs VII. von Frankreich: Eine Erwiderung," Zeitschr. fur Rechtsgesch., germ. Abt. 33 (1912): 328-89. Some of each author's arguments still merit consideration. 8 Percy Ernst Schramm, "Die Kronung bei den Westfranken und den Angelsachsen von 878 bis urn 1000," Zeitschr. fur Rechtsgesch., kan. Abt. 23 (1934): 117-242, and "Ordines-Studien II: Die Kronung bei den Westfranken und den Franzosen"Archivfur Urkundenforschung 15 (1938): 3-55, with additions and corrections 279-86. 9 Carl Erdmann, Forschungen zur politischen Ideenwelt des Fruhmittelalters, ed. Friedrich Baethgen (Berlin: Akademie-Verlag, 1951). 10 Cornelius A. Bouman, Sacring and Crowning: The Development of the Latin Ritual for the Anointing of Kings and the Coronation of an Emperor before the Eleventh Century, Bijdragen van het Instituut voor Middeleeuwse Geschiedenis der Ryks-Universiteit te Utrecht, vol. 30 (Groningen: J. B. Wolters, 1957).

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

7

ordo that must have been compiled for the coronation of Louis XI (Ordo XXIV).11 Next are a few texts whose inclusion is not so obvious because they do not contain the liturgy. The most vital of these is the Ordo of Reims (Ordo XX A), which is a modus, a non-liturgical text that simply stipulates in detail how the ceremony should be carried out, not in terms of a precise event, but generically.12 The Ordo of Reims was so important that, not long after its composition, most of it appeared in the form of rubrics in the Ordo of 1250, and it remained an integral part of the later ordines. Another non-liturgical text is Hincmar of Reims's capitulary that recounts in detail the first part of the ceremony of Charles the Bald's coronation in 869 (Ordo VII); the information it provides is so important that it did not seem possible to omit it. Equally instructive is Gervais of Reims's memorandum concerning Philip I's coronation in 1059 (Ordo XVII), a text that conveys invaluable evidence concerning the attitudes of at least one important contemporary. Far more difficult was the decision as to whether to include several ordines that have left no certain trace of having been used at a ceremony. Of these, the choice was easiest with the Ordo of 1200 (Ordo XIX) because, although it is not a "French" ordo in the usually accepted sense of the term, it was located in Reims in a manuscript that was demonstrably consulted for, and in part copied into, later ordines, which makes this 11 Richard A. Jackson, Vive le Roif: A History of the French Coronation Ceremony from Charles V to Charles X (Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina Press, 1984), 36-40 (=Vivat rex: Une histoire des sacres et couronnements en France, 1364-1825 [Strasbourg: Association des Publications pres les Universites de Strasbourg, 1984], 40-43). On "composition" and "compilation" of ordines, see my brief remarks in "Manuscripts, Texts, and Enigmas of Medieval French Coronation Ordines," Viator 23 (1992): 36. This last study surveys the entire history of the medieval French ordines and says something of the problems they present. 12 Elze's Ordo XIII, 34-35, is a similar text. In Vive le Roi, 24-25 and 222 (Vivat rex, 29-30 and 207), I called the Ordo of Reims a directory. In so doing, I adopted the term used by H. G. Richardson, "The Coronation in Medieval England: The Evolution of the Office and the Oath," Traditio 16 (1960): 111-202. Other scholars refer to the text as an "ordinary" because that is one of the terms used for the type of manuscript in which the ordo is found; for an excellent discussion of an ordinary, see Aime-Georges Martimort, Les "ordines", les ordinaires et les ceremoniaux, Ttypologie des sources du moyen age occidental, fasc. 56 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1991), 49-85.1 also now prefer to call this type of liturgical work an ordinary, but to refer to the Ordo of Reims as a "modus" in order to bring the terminology into accord with Reinhard Elze's usage, which is also applied to some English texts. Adoption of a standard terminology for this type of text will simplify coronation studies to some degree.

8

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

previously unpublished text a source of the greatest importance for reconstructing the history of the ceremony. Shorter than the Ordo of 1200 and manifesting no influence at all is the Ordo of Saint-Bertin (Ordo XVIII), which is included for four reasons: the two manuscripts of it were copied in France, it is related to the Ordo of 1200, it has never before been published in full, and it makes its own contribution to the understanding of French history. In working through manuscripts of the ordines already selected, it became increasingly evident that two other ordines needed to be added to the collection: the Ordo of Eleven Forms (Ordo XIV) and the Royal Ordo in the cathedral library of Cologne (Ordo XVI). These also originated in, or on the borders of, the West Frankish kingdom, and both have been extensively discussed in the literature. Although until now neither ordo has been published in full, each was either a source of ordines influential in France or a potentially valuable witness to the location of manuscripts before 1050. A third group of texts to which Schramm had assigned numbers proved to be more problematical. The texts from the second sacramentary of Tours that relate to the first coronation of Eudes in 888 (Ordo XI) contain only part of the liturgy, but they do have the king's coronation oath, so their inclusion was necessary. For the coronation of Louis III and Carloman in 879 there remains only indirect evidence of the episcopal petitio and the royal promissio (Ordo X); dating from 882, the text claims to repeat the wording of the petitio and promissio of 879, so it seemed useful to present it in a new edition. A fourth group of texts is found in sacramentaries and benedictionals. The sacramentary of Saint-Thierry contains several formulas, including one that was specifically stated to have been spoken at the recoronation of Louis the Stammerer in 878, and Schramm had assigned it no. 5 (here Ordo IX A). Two other sets of formulas in the same sacramentary relate to royal inaugural (Ordo IXB and IXC). The manuscript was (and is) in Reims, and it had a demonstrable influence upon later ordines, so its texts do belong here. A similar set of formulas in the second sacramentary of Tours (Ordo XII) seemed desirable as evidence, if not of actual coronation practice, at least of conceptions of kingship after the collapse of the Carolingian Empire. Incorporation of this opened the way to inclusion of texts from other surviving sacramentaries from France or from Germany. The earliest surviving royal texts are in the eighth-century Gelasian sacramentary and in sacramentaries copied from it, copies that contain additions to the original text; the Gelasian sacramentary was the source of several of the formulas in the ordines attributed to Hincmar (Ordines V-VIII). Two French manuscripts were

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

9

selected to represent this tradition, the sacramentary of Gellone (Ordo I) and the sacramentary of Angouleme (Ordo II). Both sacramentaries provide evidence of the broad dispersion of the Gelasian sacramentary in France. Some of the Gelasian sacramentary's liturgical formulas have long been recognized as sources of coronation ceremonial, and they have often been referred to as such in the literature, so it seemed desirable to present them along with the ordines they influenced. Geographically further removed are sets of liturgical formulas in the collection of Sankt Emmeram (Ordo III) and in the benedictional of Freising (Ordo IV), both manuscripts that contain the earliest examples of some formulas that likewise made their way into the French ceremony. Deriving from a time when no clear distinction could be made between French and German monarchy, they contain evidence that is every bit as valid as any from manuscripts that were produced within the geographical boundaries of the later kingdom of France. Finally, there are French translations of three texts, each of which is included for different reasons. One translation of the Ordo of Reims (Ordo XX B) is a recurring one that found its way into several official collections after the early thirteenth century, and there is also a previously unpublished translation of the same ordo. One translation of the Last Capetian Ordo (Ordo XXII B) is medieval; likewise not previously edited, it is interesting to compare it with the translation published by Jean du Tillet and extensively discussed in the older literature. Jean du Tillet's translation of the Ordo of Philip I (Ordo XVII B) is included because it appears to preserve some of the contents of a lost manuscript from Beauvais. For those whose Latin is weaker than their French, these translations will also serve as a "pony," an aid in understanding the text, because they translate most of the liturgical formulas and many of the rubrics of the late medieval ordines. In addition, the entire text of Ordines XXIV and XXV is in French, with the exception mainly of the for mulas; this, too, may help some students of the subject. There are precise reasons why several texts have not been included in this collection. The first to be excluded was what seemed a most promising text entitled De coronatione regis Francie and found in the first version of Jacques Cajetan's Roman ceremonial. Cajetan begins the text with an interesting remark13: 13 Avignon, Museum Calvet, MS 1706, fols. 15v, 17r-18r (due to misnumbering, there is no fol. 16); fourteenth century, on paper. The ordo was published by L. H. Labande, "Le ceremonial remain de Jacques Cajetan: Les donnees historiques qu'il renferme," Bibliotheque de I'Ecole des Charles 54 (1893): 68-72. On the manuscript,

10

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

This rubric that follows is a composition in the books of the French, not in the rubrics of the Roman Church as we have them at Avignon. And note that in the books of the French there is a special rubric on the coronation of the king of France, which I have seen. What follows this has nothing to do with the promise of Cajetan's comment. It is an ordo entitled De benedicatione [sic] et coronatione regum et reginarum rubrica, a version of the royal ordo in the Roman pontifical, although it is not exactly like any other ordo that I have seen. A mixture of other texts, it appears to have been Cajetan's own invention, and it could hardly have been of use at any French ceremony. In the present context the primary value of this curious text from the south of France is that it shows that the French ceremony was not well known or understood at a distance from Reims. Another text, this one in a manuscript in the Walters Art Gallery in Baltimore, was excluded because it is not a coronation ordo, although it does have its own value and is quoted in a note.14 A third text, a hymn that appears to have been composed for the second coronation of Eudes in 888, conveys little information about the ceremony and is inappropriate in the present context.15 A set of ordination texts (Ordo XIIIB) to which Schramm had assigned its own number (no. 9) is here published with the Erdmann Ordo because it comes from the same manuscripts. The possibility of including the Anglo-Saxon Leofric Ordo was also considered because, when I began to prepare this edition, it was generally accepted that the manuscript containing it came from northwestern France before making its way to England. Some years later Janet L. Nelson argued that the Leofric text originated in England and is one of the sources of the French rite, rather than vice versa.16 The Leofric Ordo, of which there is already a good edition,17 belongs therefore with a collection of Anglo-Saxon/English texts rather than in an edition of Frankish/French ones. Jean Golein's fourteenth-century treatise see L. H. Labande, Manuscrits de la Bibliotheque d'Avignon, 3 vols., Catalogue general des manuscrits des bibliotheques publiques de France: Departements, vols. 27-29 (Paris: E. Plon, Nourrit et Cie., 1894-1901), 28,1: 98-100. 14 See Ordo XIII n. 6. 15 See Ordo XI n. 4. 16 "The Earliest Surviving Royal Ordo: Some Liturgical and Historical Aspects," in Janet L. Nelson, Politics and Ritual in Early Medieval Europe (London and Ronceverte: Hambledon Press, 1986), 341-60. Nelson's study was first published in 1980. 17 F. E. Warren, ed, The Leofric Missal as Used in the Cathedral of Exeter during the Episcopate of Its First Bishop A.D. 1050-1072 (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1883), 230-32.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

11

was excluded both because there is a recent edition of it18 and because, although Golein used coronation texts as sources, his work contains none of the liturgy of the ceremony and does not contribute significantly to our knowledge of the history of the ceremony. Both the French and the German monarchy were derived from a common Frankish source, and Anglo-Saxon practice was subject to Continental influences; therefore, a number of the texts in the present edition should also be included in editions of German royal or Anglo-Saxon/English ordines. Ordines I-IV and Ordines VII-VIII (Hincmar's texts) all had an influence upon England, and Ordo XV bears traces of its Anglo-Saxon origin. The link between the texts in this volume and the German royal ceremony is even stronger; as a matter of fact, it would be difficult to imagine an edition of the German ordines that did not include at least Ordines I-VIII and XIII-XVI. The introduction to each ordo explains in greater detail why a particular text is included in the edition if the selection is not immediately obvious. Although each introduction also says something about the sources of each text, a brief survey of the major sources will show generally how coronation ordines survived. The Manuscript Sources More coronation ordines are found in pontificals than in any other type of manuscript.19 In the first part of the ninth century the pontifical began to develop out of earlier liturgical works, and it assumed a recognizable form by around 900, although it often coexisted with both sacramentaries and benedictionals, and the three types of liturgical works 18

Richard A. Jackson, ed., "The Traite du sacre of Jean Golein," Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society 113 (1969): 305-24. The decision not to include this text was an agonizing one for two reasons. First, owing to circumstances beyond the control of editor or publisher, many errors that were corrected in proof were not incorporated into the printed text, and the list of errata and corrigenda that I circulated as widely as possible was three typed pages long. Second, I did not collate the text in Paris, Bibl. de 1'Arsenal, MS 2002, because I thought that it was later than it is. Frangois Avril convinced me that the manuscript's miniatures date from the fourteenth century, and he suggested to me that the numerous corrections in the manuscript were made by Golein himself. 19 1 do not intend here to describe the various liturgical works, but simply to identify them for those unfamiliar with them. For full discussions, see Vogel, Introduction aux sources, the pertinent articles in DACL, and Victor Leroquais's introductions to his Les sacramentaires et les missels manuscrits des bibliotheques publiques de France, 4 vols. (Paris: Protat freres, 1924), and to his Les pontificaux manuscrits des bibliotheques publiques de France, 3 vols. (Paris: Protat freres, 1937).

12

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

were often mixed, even in the later Middle Ages. To some degree the standard for the pontifical was set by the mid-tenth-century RomanoGermanic pontifical of Mainz, which came to be quickly and widely diffused. Pontificals were designed for the practical use of the episcopate (archbishops and bishops) in the performance of many (though not all) of their liturgical functions. These functions included various ordinations: of bishops, of abbots, and, far less often, of kings or emperors. Cyrille Vogel wrote that liturgical books were copied because they were intended to be used for one of two purposes, either for the actual performance of rites, or for didactic purposes.20 Some pontificals with coronation ordines were written with an eye towards use in the service and thus served the first of these purposes. Although there is seldom any evidence that a given manuscript was actually used, there is sometimes evidence that it was consulted in preparing one or more coronation ceremonies, and these instances are noted in the apparatus. The majority of the pontificals appear, on the other hand, to have been copied to serve didactic purposes. Some manuscripts could hardly have been used otherwise because they are too small to have been read at any distance under the obscure lighting of a church. Coronation ordines are also found in pontificals that were copied for bishops or archbishops who could never hope to anoint and crown a king, or they were copied for churches where no coronation ever took place. Furthermore, there are also pontificals that display the use of the monastery that produced them, but to my knowledge no abbot qua abbot crowned a king, at least not in France. Nonetheless, a bishop or abbot who might never conceivably crown a king would need to know the coronation ritual because both abbots and bishops attended the ceremonies, sometimes in large numbers. With two notable exceptions (Ordines XVTI and XXV) the texts in this edition do not say which clerics attended a given ceremony, but it appears quite likely that, when they did, they often brought a coronation text with them to the city of coronation. At least one surviving manuscript suggests this practice, which must have been common.21 Working with the pontificals has been enormously pleasurable. Although they were not all illuminated, they were often expensive works, carefully copied, beautifully adorned, written on very fine parchment, and their colors and inks are apparently as vivid now as they must have been when new. Interestingly enough, the later pontificals are not as 20

Vogel, Introduction aux sources, 44-46. Paris, Archives de la Compagnie des pretres de Saint-Sulpice, MS 1928, which contains the Ordo of Charles V; see the introduction to Ordo XXIII. 21

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

13

striking in one respect as some of the earlier ones: although the colors of the inks in the later manuscripts tend to be more brilliant than in the earlier ones, the later medieval development of new methods of making gold ink that required smaller quantities of gold produced a flat surface that has also tended to rub off. This is quite distinct from the earlier manuscripts, in which the passages written in gold literally glisten because the ink is rounded up on the parchment, producing convex mirrors that have remained largely intact and that reflect light from every direction. One must examine the manuscripts in person in order to see this feature because even the best modern reproductions fail to capture the glitter of these early manuscripts. Equally enjoyable, but for different reasons, are several manuscript sacramentaries and one benedictional.22 In most cases the manuscript sacramentaries are older than the pontificals, and they provide extremely important evidence for the development of liturgy and ceremony. They were not immediately supplanted by the pontifical, but remained in use even after the development of the newer liturgical work. One has the impression that the sacramentary and the benedictional continued to serve the liturgical interests of the church until the manuscript wore out, or until it was replaced by something so superior that the manuscript was consigned to the back of the cupboard. Eventually, it was probably discarded, for very few sacramentaries survive, even though every major ecclesiastical institution must have had at least one.23 The sacramentary was not designed for use specifically by bishops or abbots, and its contents were more generic than those of the pontificals. Many sacramentaries had one or more series of royal blessings. These came to be incorporated into the developing coronation liturgy, and most, though not all, such blessings are found in at least one later coronation ordo. The texts in the sacramentaries are particularly precious relics because they provide a slight glimpse into the intellectual world that conceived and developed coronation ceremonial. From them we learn something of the concepts of kingship in the eighth century, and surely they incorporate some ideas—and perhaps even precise phraseology— from the Merovingian age. 22

The benedictional theoretically contained only a series of blessings to be pronounced by any priest, but the distinction between types of liturgical texts is sometimes ambiguous. Many texts from benedictionals were left out of the later missals but incorporated into pontificals. There are several examples of sacramentaries that also contain a benedictional, usually near the end of the manuscript. See Bouman, Sacring, 2, n. 3. 23 See below at n. 60.

14

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

One ordo, the Ordo of Reims (Ordo XXA), survives in its entirety only in a different type of liturgical work, an ordinary copied for use in the cathedral of Reims. The ordinary is simply a practical manual of liturgical practice that was intended for regular use; it describes how a ceremony is to be performed, but it contains none of the liturgy or other spoken text. The nature of this source makes the Ordo of Reims distinctive. Part of the Ordo of Reims also survives in several late-medieval copies of a work that is not at all liturgical, Lambert of Saint-Omer's Liber floridus, an early encyclopedia, and the text was also inserted into a copy of Guillaume de Nangis's life of Saint Louis (Ordo XXA, MS H). The remainder of the texts in this edition come from a wide variety of manuscripts, many of which were not primarily liturgical. Hincmar of Reims's texts alone (Ordines VI-VIII) survived in three types of source: 1) a collection of capitularies of the Frankish kings and, perhaps, some medieval collections of canon law; 2) a manuscript at the monastery of Saint-Laurent in Liege that apparently also contained some of Hincmar's letters, so the manuscript appears to have been, at least in part, a collection of several of Hincmar's writings; and 3) the manuscripts of that portion of the Annales Bertiniani that Hincmar composed, as well as manuscripts of the Continuation of Aimoin, which was copied, in part, from the Annales Bertiniani. None of the four ordines survives in any medieval manuscript of the first and second of these types, so for this edition their contents have been reconstructed from early editions and sixteenth-century manuscripts, a task that was extremely complex and is described in the introductions to the four ordines. There were French translations of the Ordo of Reims (Ordo XX B) in the four Libri memoriales, the early registers of the Chambre des Comptes, and one of the registers also had a copy of the Last Capetian Ordo (Ordo XXIIA, lost manuscript 3). The Ordo of Louis XI (Ordo XXIV) was inserted into a tract on the obligations of the city of Reims at a fifteenth-century coronation. Two ordines (Ordo X and Ordo XI B) come from a miscellaneous collection of texts from an Aragonese monastery. A few manuscripts contain nothing (or nearly nothing) but coronation texts: Ordo XXI, MS A-, Ordo XXIIA, MS#; Ordo XXIII, MSS A and F\ and the lost original of Ordo XXV. Two manuscripts (Ordo XV, M C, and Ordo XVII A, MS A) are now part of what the French call a recueil factice, a miscellany of unrelated pieces, and not enough of the original manuscripts survive to determine the original context of their coronation texts. Finally, there are the numerous modern copies of medieval coronation texts. Nineteenth-century French historiography was little concerned

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

15

with coronation ceremonial after the July Revolution, but prior to 1830 the modern world was obsessed with it. Gaston Saffroy's bibliography lists many manuscripts, and, diligent though Saffroy was, his list is far from complete.24 There were several modern copies of the Chambre des Comptes's Libri memoriales, and even more were made after the fire of 1737 destroyed three of the four original registers (Ordines XX B and XXII A). There are early-modern copies of other medieval manuscripts (for example, Ordo VII, MSS A, B, and C); some of these were copied fo the preparation of an edition (e.g., Ordo XI B, MS C, and Ordo XVII A). Pierre Dupuy, Etienne Baluze, and others copied enormous quantities of material, not all of which were ever intended for publication. Historians of the French monarchy or of coronation ceremonial often copied the text of several ordines either from manuscripts or editions, and some ordines survive only in such modern manuscript copies (e.g., Ordo XXIV) or in a combination of manuscript copies and printed editions (e.g., Ordo XXV). To the extent possible, the sources of these modern manuscripts are noted in the apparatus to each ordo. Nature and Problems of the Editions Several manuscripts have been lost since the ordines they contained were first published. This forces us to rely in some cases exclusively upon early printed editions, and in other cases upon a combination of medieval manuscripts, modern manuscript copies, and early editions; therefore, in preparing the present edition I had to make far greater use of early editions than would be customary. I attempted to locate and to view every edition of every ordo, and I collated all that I even slightly suspected of possessing value. In so doing, I came to realize that the editions presented problems of their own, difficulties that were occasionally as great at those posed by the manuscripts. I discovered that editors often stated that their text was taken from manuscript X, when, in fact, it was taken from edition z, which in turn might have come from edition y, and that from edition x. Collating the editions produced a collection of variants that was sometimes enormous. In the case of the memorandum of the coronation of Philip I (Ordo XVII A), for example, the variants became so extensive that for my own use while editing I needed to print the text in 14 point and the variants in 9 point simply in order to find the text; by itself the text of Ordo XVIIA occupies less than two pages, but nine pages were required to print it with the variants of all the editions. After establishing the filiation, I was able to delete multitudes of variants 24

Above, n. 5.

16

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

from the apparatus (which is why the text occupies just six pages in this edition), so very little of my labor appears in print: a simple statement that edition a was copied from manuscript X or edition x was sometimes the sole result of several days of intense labor, but I thought that it was necessary to establish such filiations in order to clarify the history of the topic. I was greatly disappointed to find that only rarely did collating the editions appear to be of any help in recovering the readings of a lost manuscript because most pre-nineteenth-century editors simply copied earlier editions and seldom bothered to collate the manuscript (or manuscripts) of an ordo that had already been published. In most cases, about all that my extensive collating accomplished was to determine which edition or editions a later editor copied or collated. In the apparatus to each ordo I note the filiation as determined from my collation rather than from the editors' statements because some editors were not above falsehood; the textual evidence is not always crystal clear, though, and when it is not, I list two or more possible sources. In some instances an editor did list his sources more or less briefly in his preface, but not all works were available to me as the present edition neared completion, so I was not able to consult all those prefaces; had I been able to do so, some of the ambiguous cases might have been resolved. Preparation of the edition brought a host of surprises, and some of them were very welcome. The most agreeable was the discovery that Jacques Paul Migne's Patrologia latina is remarkably accurate in the passages that I collated. In the Ordo of Charles the Bald (Ordo VII), for example, there was some standardization of names (Carolus and Ludovicus instead of Karolus and Hludovicus) and correction of punctuation when Migne's source used the wrong punctuation mark, but there was only one typographical error and one instance of the wrong word (illius instead of istius). Migne has a reputation for inaccuracy; however, if there is inaccuracy, it is due not to Migne but to the works he republished. One should be deeply grateful to him for making widely available so many early printed editions that would otherwise be almost impossible to obtain. Some editions proved, on the other hand, to be confused and untrustworthy. Pierre Delalande, for example, completely altered the order of the formulas in one of his texts and inserted formulas from another (Ordo XIII, edition a). Edmond Martene was not quite so free in his great collection of liturgical texts, but he did make a number of unacceptable errors. In the case of Ordo XXII A, most of the differences between Martene's manuscript source and his edition consisted of various kinds of standardization, which might be considered permissible; what was not

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

17

acceptable, however, was Martene's transposition of words, his insertion of words not in the manuscript, his substitution of words, and his deletion of passages, including three entire liturgical formulas. (When other texts published by Martene were collated with his manuscript sources, the results were similar.)25 Even more lamentable, past editors sometimes generated an amalgam, like that of Delalande, in that they conflated texts from several sources without any clear indication as to editorial procedure. The prime example of this is in the editions of the capitularies of the Prankish kings, which is the first of several major collections that need to be noted. All editions of the capitularies of the Prankish kings are derived partly from Jacques Sirmond's 1623 edition of the capitularies of Charles the Bald and his successors. Caesar Baronius, drawing upon a manuscript not known to Sirmond, had previously edited part of Ordo VII in his Annales ecclesiastici, but Sirmond was the first to edit all four texts attributed to Hincmar of Reims (Ordines V-VIII). Sirmond based his edition of Ordo VII upon a manuscript source from Beauvais and upon one from Liege in such a way as to muddle the ordo's manuscript tradition. In 1677 Etienne Baluze published an edition of the capitularies that was more comprehensive than Sirmond's work, but in the meantime, in 1641, Frangois Duchesne had published the first edition of the Annales Bertiniani. Baluze copied — and occasionally corrected — Ordines V-VIII from Sirmond's edition of 1623, and he added to his edition of the capitularies extracts from Duchesne's edition. To these Baluze added Ordines X-XI for a total of six ordines. These six were a standard feature of later editions of capitularies. Succeeding editions emulated Baluze in that they included the six ordines and in that their versions of Hincmar's ordines were Baluze's combination of Sirmond's two sources and the Annales Bertiniani. When Georg Heinrich Pertz republished the texts in his edition of the Leges for the Monumenta Germaniae Historica, he added a fourth source for one of Hincmar's texts, further confusing matters. Then the manuscript that Pertz had consulted was stolen in the mid-nineteenth century, and the part of it that contained the coronation text was never recovered. The series of editions over a period of nearly three hundred years reached its final stage in 1897 with the publication of the second volume of the MGH's new edition of the capitularies, Alfred Boretius and Victor 25

Edmond Martene, De antiquis ecclesiae ritibus, 1st ed., 3 vols. (Rouen: Guillelmus Behourt, 1700-1702), 3: 209-21; full references to further editions are given in the list of Works Cited and in the Apparatus.

18

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

Krause's Capitularia regum Francorum. The MGH editors incorporated the work of earlier editors, including Baronius's edition, without attempting to disentangle the sources, and, despite careful editing, the result is one of the least satisfactory of all editions. This could have been a fortuitous consequence partly of nineteenth-century editorial practices,26 and partly of the death of each of the editors and, later, of the death of the editor who assumed the task of completing the edition—the MGH edition does not reveal who edited what or who was responsible for what. That this state of affairs has now endured nearly a century is extremely unfortunate because the texts in question are crucially important to the history of all European coronation rituals and because the MGH editions are so implicitly trusted. When I began to prepare this edition I was certain that I would need only to adapt the MGH edition to my edition, and one of the greatest jolts I experienced came from the subsequent discovery that the texts attributed to Hincmar of Reims would need to be entirely reedited. The greatest single collection of French coronation texts was published in the eighteenth century by Dom Edmond Martene in his multivolume De antiquis ecclesiis ritibus. Martene traveled extensively in his search for old rituals, and he himself examined the manuscripts he edited; his edition, the most commonly cited of all editions, has the merit of having brought to light several coronation ordines that had been unknown previously. Nonetheless, other early editors produced editions that were far more accurate than Martene's. The reasons for Martene's inaccuracy are not clear, unless it was because, although he did have some help, he worked very quickly and the pressure of time made him careless. Furthermore, sometimes he appears to have simply identified texts that he wanted when he visited a particular library and then to have had copies of these made for him. In our age of photography and photocopiers one can go far with copies, but in previous eras a copy was a handwritten document, in other words, a manuscript that was subject to all the errors of original manuscripts. To some extent, therefore, Martene's edition could be no more reliable than the copies from which he worked. Generally more accurate than Martene's edition is the collection of ordines and other coronation texts published in 1649 by Theodore Godefroy and his son Denis Godefroy in Le ceremonial frangois. In 1619 26

Other editions in the MGH series suffered similar treatment; cf. The Annals of Fulda, trans. Timothy Reuter, Ninth-Century Histories, vol. 2 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1992), 5-6, n. 23 in particular.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

19

Theodore Godefroy had devoted some attention to coronation ceremonial in Le ceremonial de France, which contains six coronation texts, four of them descriptions of queens' coronations. There is not a single coronation ordo among them, and the earliest text dates from 1517. In 1649, on the other hand, coronation ceremonial in the form of ordines, descriptions, extracts from chronicles, etc. occupy most of the Godefroys' first folio volume. The Godefroys published some ordines from manuscripts (e.g., the Ordo of 1250 [Ordo XXI] and the Ordo of Charles VIII [Ordo XXV]), but they copied other texts from previous scholars' editions. In editing the Ordo of Charles VIII the Godefroys saved space by noting only the incipits of the liturgical formulas; despite this, their edition remains our best source for the text of a manuscript that has since disappeared. Another early seventeenth-century scholar who was interested in coronation texts was Andre Duchesne. Duchesne's early work was not much more than a compilation of extracts from the writings of other authors, and one would never guess from it that Duchesne was capable of good scholarship; nevertheless, his Historiae Francorum scriptores, a collection of texts that grew to five good-sized folio volumes between 1636 and 1649, is very accurate—at least in those texts collated for the present edition. (Vols. III-V were completed by Andre Duchesne's son Frangois after the father's death in 1640.) Some of Duchesne's texts were copied from other editions, but others were copied from manuscripts. The faults in his edition of the Annales Bertiniani appear to be not the result of carelessness on the editor's part, but carelessness on the part of the scribe who sent Duchesne a copy of the only complete manuscript of the Annals. Several ordines were published in each of a few other collections. Delalande's supplement to Sirmond's collection of conciliar documents has already been mentioned, but also noteworthy is the Recueil des hisloriens des Gaules et de la France.21 Most of the ordines in this collection are found in the first eight volumes, which were edited by Dom Martin Bouquet himself. They were usually copied from earlier editions, although part of Ordo VII was edited from an earlier edition and a manuscript. Lodovico Antonio Muratori's Scriptores rerum Italicarum contains Ordines VII and VIII from earlier editions,28 Joannes Baptista 27

Dom Martin Bouquet et al., eds., Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, 24 vols. (Paris: Victor Palme, H. Welter, Imprimerie Rationale, 1738-1904); new ed. unchanged, vols. 1-19 (Paris: Aux depens des librairies associes, 1869-80). 28 Lodovico Antonio Muratori, ed., Scriptores rerum Italicarum, vol. 2, pt. 1 (Milan: Ex typographia Societatis Palatinae in Regia Curia, 1723).

20ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

20ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

Gatticus edited Ordo XXIIA from two manuscripts in the Vatican library for his collection of ceremonial documents,29 Laurent Bouchel copied Ordo XXIII from an earlier edition for his selection of Gallican documents,30 and Pierre Varin edited Ordo XXIV for his collection of administrative documents relating to the history of Reims.31 Gervais's memorandum concerning Philip I's coronation (Ordo XVII A), most of which was first published by Jean Bodin in 1576, was quickly copied by other editors and was soon included in the collections of documents relating to church councils. Although these collections were published in Germany and in Italy as well as in France, Gervais's text came to be regarded as a monument of Gallicanism owing to the author's explicit statement concerning the limited powers of the papal legates present at Philip's coronation, and the collection that was published in Paris in 1644 has a quasi-official character. To a large degree, all these editions were derived from preceding editions, but some of them do have readings of manuscripts that have disappeared.32 The Corpus Christianorum Series Latina (CCSL) and the publications of the Henry Bradshaw Society (HBS) are ongoing series that are particularly welcome. The editors of the CCSL present excellent new editions that place the royal texts within the context of the entire manuscript, as do the HBS editions. Of necessity, these texts have been extracted for the present edition, but each ordo in question can be fully comprehended only within the full setting of both liturgical history and coronation ceremonial. There are editions of Ordines I and II in the CCSL and of Ordines IV, XX B, and XXIII in the HBS volumes. Some of the latter also contain Anglo-Saxon or English ordines that must be considered in reconstructing the development of the Prankish/French rite. Other ordines newly come to light were published in the later nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Two works are particularly important in 29

Joannes Baptista Gatticus, ed., Acta selecta caeremonialia sanctae Romanae ecclesiae, 2 vols. in 1 (Rome: Haeredes J. L. Barbiellini, 1753), 1: 218-25. 30 Laurent Bouchel, ed., Decretorum ecclesiae Gallicanae ... libri VIII (Paris: Barthelemy Mace, 1609). 31 Pierre Varin, ed., Archives administratives de la ville de Reims, Collection de documents inedits sur 1'histoire de France. Premiere serie: Histoire politique, 3 vols. (Paris: Imprimerie de Crapelet, 1839^18). 32 A most interesting study of the collections of conciliar documents is Henry Quentin, Jean-Dominique Mansi et les grandes collections conciliaires (Paris: Ernest Leroux, 1900). Quentin, pp. 21-55, surveyed the editions cited in the present volume (beginning with Severinus Binius's edition of 1606), and his study points out the Gallicanism implicit in some of the editions published in France.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

21

this respect: Georg Waltz's collection of ordines in his very important study of German and imperial coronation formulas33; and Carl Erdmann's posthumously published essay on royal and imperial coronation in the Romano-Germanic pontifical, a study that brought to light an ordo (Ordo XIV) that makes a fundamental contribution to our understanding of European coronation ceremonial.34 Percy Ernst Schramm also brought several texts to light, and Schramm's works are often cited, although he usually published his texts from editions rather than manuscripts. Two very recent finds—Reinhard Elze's edition of a manuscript of Ordo XIV in Lisbon,35 and Guy Lanoe's discovery of a similar text in Leiden, as yet unpublished—not only provide further pieces of evidence for the early development of the ordines, but also raise new problems. Some ordines in this edition have never before been published or were published only in part. The most important unpublished ordo is Ordo XIX, which was instrumental for the compilation of the latemedieval ordines. A fourteenth-century French translation of the Last Capetian Ordo (Ordo XXIIB) might belong to the collection of translations from Latin that were carried out under the sponsorship of Charles V.36 An early sixteenth-century translation of part of the Ordo of Reims (Ordo XX B) is not much more than a curiosity, for it did not influence French history in any detectable way, but, made in northern Hainault, it is philologically interesting for its variations from the official fourteenthcentury French translation, which has been published many times. The formulas for the coronation of a queen were omitted in the editions of Ordo XIV, which unfortunately obscured the history of queens' ordinations. The same is true of Ordo XVI. Neither Ordo XVI nor Ordo XVIII i specifically French, but the full text of both might be of help in reconstructing the historical development of the French ceremony. The editors of both Ordo XXTV and Ordo XXV omitted the liturgical texts (excepting their incipits) from their editions; those texts are here presented in their entirety. The Development of the Ceremony Careful studies of all the texts in this edition will produce a clearer picture of the evolution of the ceremony than has previously been 33

Waitz, "Die Formeln der Deutschen Konigs- und der Romischen Kaiser-Kronung," 3-92. 34 Erdmann, Forschungen zur politischen Ideenwelt, 52—91. 35 Reinhard Elze, "Ein Kronungsordo aus Portugal," in Memoriam Sanctorum Venerantes: Miscellanea in onore di Mons. Victor Saxer, Studi di Antichita Cristiana, vol. 48 (Vatican City: Pontificio Istituto di Archeologia Cristiana, 1992), 323-34. 36 See Jackson, "Traite du sacre" 306.

22

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

possible, but, at the same time and like any good source, they will raise new questions and suggest avenues of research hitherto not taken. The texts do not enable us to answer some of the thorniest problems in the history of coronation ritual, however. For example, we have long known that ariointing was practiced to some extent in Visigothic Spain and that Pepin the Short was the first Prankish king to be anointed. Little hard evidence supports the recent argument that the anointing of European kings originated in early-medieval Ireland and was likely to have been introduced on the Continent as a result of Irish influence,37 although, on the other hand, nothing has been found to prove whether or not the Prankish anointing of Pepin followed a Visigothic model. It could have, for there were certainly enough contacts between Francia and Spain to have made the Visigothic precedent known in mid-eighth-century Gaul. The History of King Wamba, written by Julian, archbishop of Toledo, is our first certain source for anointing in Spain,38 and further investigation of the transmission of Julian's History might provide evidence that the Visigothic practice had a direct influence upon Gaul. In the present state of our knowledge, we are hardly in a position to deny the possibility that Julian's precise account of the anointing in 672 was known in Gaul by the mid-eighth century.39 It is also possible that the Visigothic anointing was known in the kingdom of Aquitaine and that it was via that kingdom that anointing came to the Prankish monarchy.40 Nevertheless, anointing may 37

Michael J. Enright, lona, Tara and Soissons: The Origin of the Royal Anointing Ritual, Arbeiten zur Fruhmittelalterforschung: Schriftenreihe des Instituts fur Fruhmittelalterforschung der Universitat Munster, vol. 17 (Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter, 1985). Enright's study is not well known and has not received the attention it deserves. 38 Robert-Henri Bautier, "Sacres et couronnements sous les Carolingiens et les premiers Capetiens: Recherches sur la genese du sacre royal francais," in AnnuaireBuUetin de la Societe de Vhistoire de France: Annee 1987 (1989): 9-11, quickly surveyed the Visigothic evidence. Bautier's study (pp. 7-56) is the best survey of early Prankish and French anointing and crowning, although it is based largely upon the sources alone and regretfully does not address itself to the extensive literature on the subject. I rely much upon it in the following pages. 39 Julian also wrote a book of prophecies known as the Prognosticon, which was widely copied. For example, there was a tenth-century copy of the Prognosticon at the monastery of Saint-Thierry near Reims and another in the Reims cathedral. Perhaps there were in Gaul manuscripts that contained both the Prognosticon and the Historia Wambae regis, although Enright, lona, Tara and Soissons, 81, denies that Julian's history of Wamba was known in medieval France. On pp. 80-94 Enright examined the Visigothic evidence and decided that it led to conclusions that were only speculative. 40 Michel Rouche first suggested this possibility to me in conversation.

20ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

23

have originated in Gaul independently of either the Visigothic kingdom or Ireland. Throughout western Europe the Bible was known and read, and the Old Testament model was available to all literate men. What is more, anointing might have been derived, not from the Biblical model, but from the baptismal ceremony, a customary liturgical practice that was known to everybody.41 At the moment, the introduction of anointing after Irish or Visigothic precedents appears to be just as likely as its independent genesis in Gaul. Neither the present texts nor any other evidence so far adduced in the literature provides an answer to the question. The early history of the Prankish rite poses another question. What kind of ceremonies and what kind of liturgical acts were carried out at the two anointings of Pepin the Short in 751 and 754; at the anointings of Charlemagne and Carloman in 754 and in 768; and at each of the anointings during the next hundred years? Here, too, our sources are silent, although it might be possible to infer a partial answer to these questions. There appear to have been no royal anointings in Francia between 768 and 81642; however, by the latter date there was a text that was specifically composed for the inauguration of a king, the "regalis benedictio quando elevatur in regno" (Ordo II A) in the sacramentary of Angouleme (ca. 800). Bouman insisted that its text, Prospice omnipotens Deusy was a formula of anointing43; if so, it was either composed for use at one or more of the previous anointings, or written to be used at indeterminate future ones. Whether or not Prospice is a formula of anointing, there can be no doubt that it is an inaugural text, and I am inclined to view it as one that was composed for an earlier ceremony rather than as a prescriptive exercise. Ordo II As words "elevatur in regno" imply a formal ceremony of some sort, so this text may preserve something of the earliest Carolingian inaugural rites.44 The other royal formula in Ordo II A, Deus inenarrabilis, is not necessarily associated with royal inauguration, although it became a part of coronation ritual, and it would certainly have been a fitting text to pronounce at a king's first formal enthronement. The Clausula de unctione Pipini regis, copied from a manuscript written at Saint-Denis in 767, provides independent evidence that suggests that the two formulas were pronounced at Saint-Denis in 41

So Janet L. Nelson suggested, Politics, 249-50, and elsewhere. Although Pepin, the five-year-old son of Pepin the Short, was anointed king of Italy in 781; cf. Bautier, "Sacres et couronnements," 13. 43 Bouman, Sacring, 90-94. 44 Words similar to these are repeated in three other early manuscripts (Ordines IV, IX, and XII), and Prospice reappears in Ordines XIX, XXI, XXIII, and XXV. 42

24

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

754, when Pope Stephen II anointed Pepin the Short a second time. It says that Pepin was "unctus et benedictus," two acts that accord perfectly with the two liturgical formulas in Ordo II A. The Clausula's prohibition, "ut numquam de alterius lumbis regem in evo presumant eligere," is similar to Prospice's penultimate sentence, "Reges quoque de lumbis eius per successiones temporum futurorum egrediantur regnum regere Francorum," suggesting thatProspice was already in existence and that the Clausula was based upon it.45 If Ordo IIA was used at the anointing in 754, that does not give any indication as to the content of the ceremonies in 751 and 768; for these, we remain in darkness. Ordo IIB, the prayers for the mass in the Gelasian sacramentary and the sacramentaries derived from it, is another matter. If the Gelasian sacramentary was compiled before the mid-eighth century, Ordo IIB originally had nothing to do with royal inauguration, but was part of the general liturgy of the Prankish Church. This hypothesis is supported by the fact that Ordo IIB is distinct from inaugural ritual in all the early sacramentaries, as well as by the presence ofDeus inenarrabilis in both Ordo IIA and II B. Only gradually did formulas of Ordo IIB come to be incorporated into coronation ceremonial because they were appropriate to the occasion. It is possible that Ordines III, IV, IX, and XII also contain formulas that were pronounced at early rituals of royal anointing. Cornelius Bouman studied the texts primarily within a liturgical context, and Robert-Henri Bautier investigated the ceremonies mainly within a historical context. The two methods need to be combined, and liturgy and history to be investigated as two aspects of a single phenomenon; such a study would also need to examine all surviving copies of the masses for kings. The earliest certain Continental ordo is the first of four texts attributed to Hincmar of Reims, the ordo devised for the marriage and coronation of Charles the Bald's daughter Judith in 856 (Ordo V). Janet Nelson has shown that it was adapted in part from the first Anglo-Saxon ordo in its Leofric version. The Leofric text, in turn, shows traces of Iberian, Prankish, and Anglo-Saxon liturgical sources, including formulas from the Missa pro regibus (here, Ordo II B), but does not display any definite knowledge of Prankish anointing practice or formulas.46 It is reasonably certain that Hincmar compiled the Ordo of Judith, and he did officiate at the 45

The texts are quoted and discussed by Bautier, "Sacres et couronnements,"

11-12. 46

Nelson, Politics, 341-60.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

25

ceremony—or at least it was he who blessed and crowned the thirteenyear-old queen.47 Hincmar was very close to the royal family (he had been one of the staunchest supporters and closest associates of Louis the Pious), so he would have been a logical choice to devise the ceremony. Verberie, although not far from Paris (it lies on the River Oise halfway between Senlis and Compiegne), was situated within the archdiocese of Reims, which also helps to explain Hincmar's role in the ceremony.48 The ordo for the coronation of Charles the Bald's queen Ermentrude at Soissons in 866 (Ordo VI) shows Hincmar's hand more clearly. The formulas are preceded by two episcopal statements in much the same way that Hincmar's capitulary precedes the liturgical text in Ordo VII. The authors of the statements are not identified, but the second one bears the earmarks of Hincmar's style, and although there is no proof that Hincmar himself officiated, Schramm argued that Hincmar was the guiding spirit behind the entire ordo, which bears all the traits of Hincmar's liturgical style.49 Because the ordo had no further influence upon the French ceremony, it essentially shows that Hincmar was capable of devising a ceremony for a single, specific circumstance. The next two ordines also were put together by Hincmar (or under Hincmar's eye) for specific events, but they were to leave a permanent mark upon anointing and crowning in France as well as in several other 47 Felix Grat et al., eds., Annales de Saint-Bertin (Paris: Societe de 1'histoire de France, 1964), ad ann. 856, p. 73: "Ediluulf rex occidentalium Anglorum Roma rediens, Judith, filiam Karli regis, mense iulio desponsatam, kalendis octobribus in Vermeria palatio in matrimonium accipit, et earn, Ingmaro Durocortori Remorum episcopo benedicente, inposito capiti eius diademate, reginae nomine insignit, quod sibi suaeque genti eatenus fuerat insuetum." Janet L. Nelson, The Annals of St-Bertin, Ninth-Century Histories, vol. 1 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1991), 83, translated the passage as "After Hincmar, Bishop of Rheims, had consecrated her and placed a diadem on her head," but the word benedicente does not necessarily imply consecration and it may mean no more than what it actually says, "blessing." 48 For details, see Richard A. Jackson, "Who Wrote Hincmar's Ordines?" Viator 25 (1994): 31-52. Percy Ernst Schramm, Der Konig von Frankreich, 2d ed., 2 vols. (Weimar: Hermann Bohlaus Nachfolger, 1960), 1: 21-22, and Kaiser, Konige undPapste, 4 vols. in 5 pts. (Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1968-71), 2: 173-76, although arguing that Hincmar was responsible for producing the ordo, did not assert that the Archbishop of Reims officiated. Nelson, Politics, 351—53, and Bautier, "Sacres et couronnements," 36-37, expressed themselves similarly, although Bautier recognized Hincmar's role in the coronation. 49 Schramm, "Ordines-Studien II," 10, and Frankreich, 1: 23. See Jackson, "Who Wrote Hincmar's Ordines?" for details.

26 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

26ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

nations. Although the earlier Leofric Ordo had provided for anointing, but not crowning, neither the Ordo of Judith nor the Ordo of Ermentrude had provided for anointing. With the Ordo of Charles the Bald (Ordo VII) both inaugural acts are combined for the first time in a surviving ordo. Most of the liturgical formulas Hincmar selected for the rite remained in the French ceremony until the end of the monarchy, and they found their way into coronation ceremonial in several other kingdoms. Even more directly determinative was the ordo Hincmar compiled for the coronation of Louis the Stammerer in 877 (Ordo VIII). All succeeding coronation ordines in England, France, and Germany may be said to descend from Ordo VIII. Unfortunately, the history of the ceremony then becomes extremely confusing. The coronations of Carloman in 879 (Ordo X) and of Eudes in 888 (Ordo XI) both betray the influence of the Ordo of Louis the Stammerer. We have only the text of the episcopal petition and the royal promise for 879 (the evidence is indirect and dates from 882), and we are deprived of knowledge of the liturgical circumstances of the acts. We do have two liturgical formulas, as well as the petition and promise, for Eudes's first coronation in 888, but the formulas are problematical: neither ever turned up again in either the French or the imperial ceremony (for want of editions it is not yet possible to speak of the English or German ceremonies). The text for Eudes's coronation is fragmentary and can hardly embody the entire ceremony. One reason that the Ordo of Eudes is so puzzling is that the Erdmann Ordo (Ordo XIII), a carefully prepared, fully satisfactory ordo, might have been previously composed. The Erdmann Ordo's generally accepted date is around 900, but the pontifical of Sens that contains the text, it has very recently been argued, dates from about 875 or even from the middle of the century.50 If this dating is correct, then one must conclude that the Erdmann Ordo was known neither at Compiegne when Eudes was crowned, nor in other cities when earlier kings were crowned. The surviving texts give the impression that there was no generally accepted coronation rite in ninth-century Francia, that each coronation ceremony was an ad hoc ceremony, that a rite was devised for each coronation and used on that occasion alone, and that the ritual was sometimes only slightly related to preceding ceremonies. Louis the Stammerer's Ordo (Ordo VIII) would play a crucial role in standardizing the ceremony, 50

The dating is proposed by Pavel Konakov and Guy Lobrichon, who are preparing an edition of the entire pontifical of Sens (letter from Guy Lobrichon, 25 January 1993).

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 27

27

but the ordo had yet to take its place on center stage. The absence of a standard rite could help to explain why the surviving sources are so fragmentary: the author of each text recorded only that part of the ceremony that he regarded as especially relevant to the coronation in question. If the Erdmann Ordo postdates the Ordo of Eudes, it might have been written fairly soon after the February coronation in 888, and it could have been produced under the impression of that ceremony. It is not impossible that the ordo was composed for a specific ceremony, the second coronation of Eudes, which took place in Reims in November 888. That seems unlikely, though, because an ordo for the coronation of a queen immediately follows the king's ordo in the pontifical, and each ordo appears to be prescriptive, a model for future ceremonies rather than a reflection of past ones. A second set of king's ordination formulas in the pontifical of Sens (Ordo XIIIB) may also be prescriptive. The dating of the three components of the Erdmann Ordo cannot be solved here, but must await the publication of the complete pontifical of Sens, after which all pertinent texts must be compared with great attention to detail, and the liturgical books available in Sens, Reims, and other cities must be carefully examined. Perhaps at this time it might be possible to determine whether the ordo was produced in the archdiocese of Sens or of Reims. If the Erdmann Ordo's first set of king's ordination formulas does date from the middle of the century, it should have been numbered Ordo V, VI, or VII in this collection, and the other ordines renumbered accordingly. Whatever the case may be, although the ordo survives in only two medieval manuscripts, there were more copies of it at one time, because the ordo made its way to England, where it exercised a profound influence upon the Second English Ordo (here Ordo XV). Nothing proves tha the Erdmann Ordo was ever used as such in France, but its formulas did enter the French ceremony either through the Ratold Ordo (Ordo XV) or through the Ordo of Eleven Forms (Ordo XIV). The complete and independent text of the next ordo in time,51 the Ordo of Eleven Forms, survives only in a manuscript from the monastery of Stavelot, southeast of Liege, which was in the episcopal diocese of Liege and the archiepiscopal province of Cologne. The manuscript dates from the thirteenth century, but the ordo is much older. It was known in 51

Most of the royal formulas in the sacramentary of Saint-Thierry (Ordo IX) and the first set of royal formulas in the second sacramentary of Tours (Ordo XII) are not dateable. Like the texts in the benedictional of Freising (Ordo IV), they were probably copied from earlier sources, so it is impossible to locate them accurately in the chronological sequence of ordines.

28 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

28ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

the archdiocese of Mainz in the mid-tenth century and in Milan and at Monte Cassino in the eleventh century, and it is a source of the Burgundian ordo, the oldest manuscript of which dates from the twelfth century. The ordo is commonly thought to date from the first half of the tenth century. Its terminus a quo could be as early as the last part of the ninth century, and its terminus ad quern cannot be later than about 950 because all its formulas were inserted into the Romano-Germanic pontifical of Mainz in the middle of the century.52 Just one of Ordo XIV's formulas for the king's ordination has a precedent in West Prankish ordines: the first part of the consecratory prayer, Omnipotens eterne Deus creator omnium (no. 2), is in both the Ordo of Louis the Stammerer and the Erdmann Ordo; the compiler of the Ordo of Eleven Forms appears to have taken this part of his text from the Erdmann Ordo. Excepting a few words, the ordo for the queen is identical to the contemporary queen's ordo in the Ottoman pontifical (Elze's Ordo III), which survives in many manuscripts.53 That the king's ordo was intended to be prescriptive is proven by its title, "Ordo qualiter rex ordinari debet" (my emphasis), and there is truly nothing in the ordo to associate it with any known coronation. Two recent discoveries, one as yet unpublished, show that the ordo or one of its sources was once far more widespread than the surviving manuscripts would indicate. A manuscript, now in Leiden, that was copied around 1000 either in the archdiocese of Sens or in northeastern France (which would place it in the province of Reims), contains five of the Ordo of Eleven Forms's seven formulas for the consecration of a king. The same five formulas form the first part of a thirteenth-century coronation ordo from the archiepiscopal province of Braga in Portugal, which was recently published by Reinhard Elze.54 The Leiden and Portuguese manuscripts (Ordo XTV, MSS A and E} may preserve the text of a precursor of the Ordo of Eleven Forms; for the sake of clarity, I refer to that putative precursor as the five-formula version. If there was such a version, its text and the ordo for the queen were used in compiling the Ordo of Eleven Forms, and they furnished nine of its eleven formulas. Whatever the case may be, every one of the eleven formulas reappears in several French ordines. Although they were transmitted indirectly to the 52

Cyrille Vogel and Reinhard Elze, eds., Le pontifical romano-germanique du dixieme siecte, 3 vols., Studi e Testi, vols. 226-27, 269 (Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1963-72), 1: 246-59, 266-69; 3: 23-28. 53 Elze, 6-9. 54 Elze, "Em Kronungsordo aus Portugal," 327. For further details and references, see the introduction to Ordo XIV.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 29

29

extent that they were conveyed via the royal ordo in the Romano-Germanic pontifical of Mainz, the ordo is part of the body of texts that formed the French ceremony. Chronologically, the next ordo to play a significant role in France is the Second English Ordo, the Continental version of which I prefer to call the Ratold Ordo (Ordo XV). The Second English Ordo does not appear to have been influenced by the Ordo of Eleven Forms in its complete form, but seems instead to have drawn upon the five-formula version, as well as upon the First English Ordo, the Ordo of Louis the Stammerer (Ordo VIII), and the Erdmann Ordo (Ordo XIII).55 Christopher Hohler stated that the Second English Ordo was composed in the 920s, and Janet Nelson argued more recently that it dates from 924 or, more likely, from 900.56 By about 980, at the latest, at least one copy of the ordo had made its way to the Continent (Ordo XV, lost MS x1), and there was at least one other copy on the Continent before 1050 (Ordo XV, lost MS x2\ Whether both copies are derived from a single manuscript taken to the Continent or whether they made their way to the Continent separately cannot be known, although the second possibility seems far more likely. In any case, it was the second copy that was a source of Ordo XVI and of the entire Continental tradition of the Ratold Ordo (Ordo XV). By the time the Ratold Ordo turned up on the Continent, another major ordo had been composed — the royal ordo in the Romano-Germanic pontifical of Mainz (ca. 950) — that was combined with the Ratold Ordo to create the royal ordo in Cologne (Ordo XVI). The manu script that contains the latter appears to have been produced near Arras in the diocese of Cambrai in the first half of the eleventh century at a time when the bishop of Cambrai was a suffragan of Reims. Ordo XVI i very rationally organized, but there is no evidence that it was produced for any particular coronation or that it had any influence upon the French ceremony. Its importance in the present context is that it is one piece of evidence in a horribly complex puzzle that is missing the majority of its pieces. The memorandum written by Gervais, archbishop of Reims and consecrator of Philip I in 1059 (Ordo XVII), appears to show that some version of the royal ordo from Mainz was used at least once in eleventh55

Of course, none of this precludes the existence of lost intermediate forms; cf. Nelson, Politics, 361, n. 4. 56 C. E. Hohler, "Some Service-Books of the Later Saxon Church," ed. David Parsons, Tenth-Century Studies (London and Chichester: Phillimore, 1975), 67-69; Nelson, Politics, 361-69.

30ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

30 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

century France. Other than that, we know nothing about the texts that might have been consulted for specific ceremonies after the coronation of Eudes in 888 (Ordo XI). The number of surviving twelfth-century manuscripts of the Ratold Ordo strongly suggests that this ordo was consulted for the coronations in that century, although there is no way of determining the degree to which each ceremony adhered to the model. Closely related to the "German" ordo from Mainz is a version of it in a manuscript copied in the monastery of Saint-Bertin in the second half of the twelfth century (Ordo XVIII). It is even possible that the Ordo of Saint-Bertin preserves the text of an earlier version of the ordo in the Mainz pontifical. Both ordines are related to an ordo in a pontifical in Reims, the Ordo of 1200 (Ordo XIX). The latter was to be consulted again and again, and its formulas were to have a marked effect upon the French ceremony; it was largely through this manuscript that the royal ordo in the Romano-Germanic pontifical made the French ordines what they were in the last three centuries of the Middle Ages. After 1200 the evolution is clearer than before. The earliest manuscript of the Ordo of Reims (Ordo XX A) dates from the 1270s, but the ordo was certainly in existence before 1250, and it probably dates from around 1230. Although it has been argued that a postulated earlier text dated from before 1215, there is no evidence for such an early date. The Ordo of Reims was the first ordo to add to the ceremony what we would recognize as specifically French traits, for example, details concerning Peers of France and the handling of the Holy Ampulla. As noted earlier, it is not actually an ordo but a modus, for it contains none of the liturgy of the ceremony, and most of its text was incorporated—inserted piecemeal would be a better term—into the Ordo of 1250 (Ordo XXI) as rubrics. The absence of parts of the Ordo of Reims from Ordo XXI might imply that the Ordo of Reims as it stands was a revised and lengthened form of an earlier text, so the Ordo of Reims may have developed in two stages, the first around 1230 and the second around 1270. A French translation of the Ordo of Reims (Ordo XX B) was the first text to make the journey from cathedral or monastic library to official government records. A lost manuscript of the Ordo of Reims was one of four sources for the Ordo of 1250 (Ordo XXI). Two other sources were the Ordo of 1200, which provided the basic framework for the Ordo of 1250, and a copy of the Ratold Ordo (Ordo XV) in a pontifical in Reims. The fourth source of Ordo XXI has been lost. The Ordo of 1250 is the most poorly organized ordo in the entire history of the French rite and has often been called a "compilation." That it is. It may have been made because the Ordo of

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

31

Reims did not contain the liturgy of the ceremony, but there was little that was done properly. Therefore, the ordo might have been nothing more than an ad hoc compilation made to meet the need for an ordo to accompany the series of illuminations of the coronation; these illustrations are the manuscript's most striking feature. The ordo had no known influence upon the medieval ceremony, but it had a major, and nearly disastrous, influence upon sixteenth-century French history.57 The faults of the Ordo of 1250 would have prevented it from ever having provided the framework for an actual coronation ceremony, which may be why another thirteenth-century ordo was produced. Commonly called the Last Capetian Ordo (Ordo XXII) because it was the last ordo to appear before the extinction of the direct Capetian line, it seems to date from the latter part of the reign of St. Louis, which would make it the third ordo written during that monarch's lifetime. It is nearly everything that one could ask for in an ordo. Based upon several manuscript sources in Reims, it is carefully and rationally organized and, although its chronology of events is not perfect, it was well suited to the needs of coronation ceremonial. There is, in fact, independent evidence that it served that purpose at least at the coronation of Philip VI in 1328,58 and it was probably followed to a large extent at the other coronations from 1270 (or 1285) to 1350. The next coronations prove that the ceremony's development was neither constant nor uniform. Those who prepared the ordo for the coronation of Charles V in 1364 (Ordo XXIII) adopted the excellent framework provided by the Last Capetian Ordo. They added many details to the rubrics and to the general prescriptions for carrying out the ceremony, reviewed many of the earlier manuscripts and inserted from them several formulas that had been omitted in a few earlier ordines, and greatly lengthened the ordo for the queen's coronation (Jeanne de Bourbon was crowned in the same ceremony). The end result was a well-organized ordo that has the distinction of being the longest and most complex coronation ordo produced in medieval France. Despite its length, it is likely to have served also at the coronation of Charles VI in 1380. The peculiar circumstances of Charles VIFs accession and coronation in 1429, and the apparent absence from Reims of any copy of Charles V's Ordo, led to the revival of the Last Capetian Ordo in 1429. This proved to be confusing, and for Louis XI's coronation in 1461, when Charles V's 57

See Jackson, Vive le Roi, 115-27 (Vivat rex, 107-19); Jackson, "Manuscripts,"

56-58.

58

Jackson, Vive le Roi, 81-82 (Vivat rex, 78-79).

32ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

32 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

Ordo could again be consulted, the directors of the ceremony combined features of the Last Capetian Ordo and the Ordo of Charles V (Ordo XXIV). From Charles V's Ordo they retained most of the details concerning the handling of the Holy Ampulla, deleted many of the formulas that Charles V's Ordo had adopted from the Ordo of 1200, and restored the queen's ordo essentially to its form in the Last Capetian Ordo. Even this innovation caused some puzzlement, and when Charles VIII was crowned in 1484 all the service books were reviewed, and the ceremony was given its final medieval form (Ordo XXV). Apart from some details concerning those who assisted at the coronation of Louis XII in 1498 (primarily the Peers of France), we know next to nothing about that ceremony. Presumably, the order of the ceremony was based upon the Ordo of Charles VIII, which established the liturgical order of the ceremony for the modern period, when there were few liturgical departures from the ceremony devised in 1484. It is true that a few modern changes in the liturgy were important, but the modern ceremony is far more interesting for its non-liturgical innovations.59 We have fairly certain information about four of the last six medieval coronations: those of Charles V in 1364, Charles VII in 1429, Louis XI in 1461, and Charles VIII in 1484. Each of these four departed from its precedents in ways that were entirely unpredictable, and together they prove that every late-medieval ceremony was sui generis. The discovery of this in a period that left relatively extensive sources has enormous implications for the history of the ceremony in ages when sources are far more limited or nearly nonexistent. Reliability of the Ordines The monarch's inauguration was the greatest and most important ceremony of his reign. Every facet of the inauguration has something to contribute to our knowledge of medieval history, rulership in the Middle Ages, and the legitimation of political authority: the participants in the ceremony; the insignia bestowed upon the king; the king's obligations as expressed in liturgical formulas or in a coronation oath (if there was one) or oaths; the mythology incorporated into the ceremony; and the relationship between king and clergy as well as between the secular government and the Church. Is it any wonder that the coronation rites have been repeatedly and extensively examined by a host of researchers? 59

For details of this paragraph, see Jackson, Vive le Roi, especially 26-40 (Vivat rex, 31-43). The accounts of Louis XII's coronation are printed in Theodore Godefroy and Denis Godefroy, eds., Le ceremonial frangois, 2 vols. (Paris: Sebastien Cramoisy et Gabriel Cramoisy, 1649), 1: 231-33.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 33

33

Understandably enough, scholars have sought to associate each new ordo with a particular coronation, if at all possible, as a way both of interpreting the ordo and of illuminating crucial facets of a given king's rulership. In many instances, these investigations led to conflicting results, and in others the findings were less than fully proven. Although there are exceptions, the "inconclusive" conclusions are generally more convincing than arguments that associate an ordo with a particular coronation. This is occasioned by the nature of the surviving evidence. First, the surviving manuscripts with ordines are a small fraction of those that once existed and that must have existed if the manuscripts we know are to be explained. For example, the stemma of the Ratold Ordo requires eleven lost manuscripts to account for the wording of the nineteen surviving manuscripts, and that is the absolute minimum—there were probably more than that. The survival rate of medieval liturgical manuscripts is exceedingly low. Reinhard Elze noted that a catalog of a monastery near Lake Constance shows that the monastery possessed fifty-eight sacramentaries in 821-22; of these and others added before the end of the ninth century, three or four survive only as fragments, and just three complete codices have endured to the present. Jean-Loup Lemaitre found that, out of 1440 damaged or incomplete manuscripts in the diocese of Rodez in the 1450s, fewer than twenty manuscripts survive, and Bernhard Bischoff remarked that the liturgist must reckon with the fact that we possess only a few thousandths of the early medieval liturgical manuscripts.60 Second, before the mid-fourteenth century it is nearly impossible to date many of the ordines. Paleographical evidence may provide a general terminus ad quern, but not a terminus a quo. We have no way of knowing how far in the past to date ordines like those in the benedictional of Freising (Ordo IV), in the sacramentary of Saint-Thierry (Ordo IX), and in the sacramentary of Tours (Ordo XII). The Ordo of Eleven 60

Reinhard Elze, "Le consacrazioni regie," in Segni e riti nella Chiesa altomedievale occidentale: Spoleto, 11-17 aprile 1985, Settimane di studio del Centre italiano di studi sull'alto medioevo 33 (Spoleto, 1987): 51-52; Elze quoted Bernhard Bischoff on p. 52, n. 19. Jean-Loup Lemaitre made his remarks concerning Rodez in response to Professor Elze's paper, and he cited his own study, "Les livres liturgiques des paroisses du Rouergue au milieu du XVe siecle," in L'encadrement religieux des fideles au moyen age etjusqu'au Concile de Trente, Actes du 109e Congres national des Societes savantes, Dijon 1984: Section d'histoire medievale et de philologie (Paris: Ministere de 1'education nationale, Comite des travaux historiques et scientifiques, 1985), 1: 379-90. I am grateful to Reinhard Elze for bringing these materials to my attention.

GEN RALINTRODUCTION3

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 33

Forms furnishes a case in point: its complete text comes from a thirteenth-century manuscript, but the ordo had to have been written before the middle of the tenth century. For that reason, in numbering the ordines chronologically for this edition I may have made more than one error. Third, the knowledge of an ordo's sources is essential to its dating, but the sources available for compiling a particular ordo are not always known, so the utmost caution must be used in dating and interpreting the ordines. When Reinhard Elze published his edition of the imperial coronation ordines over three decades ago, he made some wise remarks that are worth repeating here because they were amply confirmed in preparing the present edition.61 Elze noted that because of later interpolations it is impossible to reconstruct the original reading of an ordo. In attempting to associate an ordo with a given coronation, one cannot always rely upon a description of that coronation because the description was not necessarily based upon the ordo used at the coronation. After all, the author of a description obviously wrote his narrative after the event — he may not been an active participant in the ceremony, and he may have chosen to base his description upon whatever ordo was available at the time of his writing. Not all ordines are equally important, but every ordo possesses some value. Neither the ceremony as a whole nor even the liturgy of the ceremony was ever fixed or static. Elze pointed out that the coronation texts in the pontificals were not binding upon those who prepared the ceremonies, with the consequence that, time and again, older and supposedly outdated ordines were reviewed and were mined for their examples and formulas. It is impossible to distinguish sharply, as Schramm attempted to do, between official, private, and not-received ordines or between "valid" and "invalid" ones. The valid ordines—those that are known to have been used at specific coronations—certainly do attract the scholar's principal attention; nevertheless, one must not ignore the "invalid" ordines—those that cannot be demonstrated to have been consulted for any coronation. I agree with Elze that each ordo reflects the thinking of at least one person, each ordo shows what could be altered and what could not, and each ordo is essential for reconstructing one or more parts of the ceremony's evolution. Nonetheless, one needs to recognize that the influence of the coronation ordines was very limited throughout most of the Middle Ages. Few 61

Elze, xxii-xxvi.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 35

35

of the kings ever read them (Charles V was a notable exception in that he is known to have studied the ordo compiled for his coronation). Not until after 1300 did their texts begin to appear in the collected documents of the royal government. Until then, they remained in monastic or episcopal collections, available only to the few who could read and were monks or members of a chapter. It was largely to the extent that these few transmitted to others the ordines' conceptions of kingship and their ideals of the relationship between secular and ecclesiastical government, between man and God, that ordines exercised their influence upon medieval rulership.62 Furthermore, the liturgy was frozen in time because its prayers and benedictions came, almost without exception, from the Carolingian age, and some of them might have been produced even before the anointing of the Pepin the Short in 751. This or that formula from one of the early sources might be selected for a particular ordo because it seemed appropriate for the occasion or because it reflected the compiler's conception of kingship, and in that respect each ordo is a valued historical source. Nonetheless, the body of conceptions expressed in the ordines' formulas remained finite and largely immutable. If the coronation ordines have such a limited value as historical sources, then, one might ask, why should we even bother ourselves with them? Professor Elze provided a partial answer to that query when he wrote, "All formulas, including the prayers and benedictions, are a sort of compendium of wisdom of rulership (Regierungsweisheit) for a Christian ruler and can be compared with Furstenspiegel"Q3 The ordines have been characterized as not only mirrors for princes, but also as "patterns of symbols,"64 and these designations alone would make the ordines worth study, particularly for those periods when there are few other expositions of what the ruler should do in the course of his reign. There is another reason why the ordines are valuable sources. Reinhard Elze suggested that the early ordines were largely mnemonic devices, that the liturgy was not fixed for a long period of time, and that each consecrator was free to formulate a coronation ceremony as he wished, that only gradually did the rite become a relatively fixed one with rules that 62

Cf. my remarks in Jackson, "Manuscripts," 68-71. Elze, xxx. Jacques Le Goff, "A Coronation Program for the Age of Saint Louis: The Ordo of 1250," in Coronations: Medieval and Early Modern Monarchic Ritual ed. Janos M. Bak (Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1990), 46-57, also speaks of the texts as mirrors for princes, but goes further and regards the ceremony as a rite of passage. 64 Nelson, Politics, 338. 63

36 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

36ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

needed to be generally respected.65 When it did, the directions for performance of the ceremony — the rubrics — became ever more detailed. In the earliest texts the rubrics are limited to two or three words (as, for example, in Ordo I) or are missing entirely (as in Ordo 111,3-4). The third of Hincmar's texts (Ordo VII) began the process of expanding the rubrics, with its occasional remarks concerning the act that preceded or accompanied a formula. The evolution of the rubrics was far from uniform, but by the end of the Middle Ages (Ordo XXV), the rubrics were so extensive that it would be easily possible to reconstruct Charles VIII's coronation ceremony—not that anyone would want to do so in its entirety, for the ceremony in 1484 began around five or six o'clock in the morning and was not completed until about two or three in the afternoon (and that does not include the post-coronation banquet). It is the rubrics that change most of all, and it is primarily in them that one must seek the changing perceptions of medieval kingship.66 Therefore, the study of the ordines does make a valuable contribution to our knowledge of medieval rulership. Very few of the ordines, including the famous ones attributed to Hincmar (Ordines V-VIII), have been adequately examined, even though they have been the subject of many remarkable studies by highly intelligent scholars. Scholarship has been partly hampered by the want of adequate editions, and it is sincerely hoped that the present edition will fill that lacuna and serve a useful function. Still, however, much more work needs to be done: each ordo deserves a detailed study, and although one ordo might be worth no more than an article, another might fully merit an entire volume. Each ordo must be interpreted within the context of other ordines, and the study cannot be limited by a narrowly nationalistic outlook. Because this study must be European in scope, it is still too soon to fulfill part of the objective: we must have satisfactory editions of the Anglo-Saxon/English and the German royal ordines, at the very least, before the full history of coronation ceremonial and kingship can be written for any of the medieval monarchies. In producing this edition, it was obviously necessary to extract the texts from their setting, but many questions can be answered only by examining them within their context, so scholars will need to scrutinize each ordo within the framework of the 65

Elze, xxiv-xxv. Janet L. Nelson concurred with Elze's views; cf. the following

note.

66

See also Janet L. Nelson's pertinent comments in "Ritual and Reality in the Early Medieval Ordines," in Nelson, Politics, 329-39, in particular her remark (p. 330), "The value of the early medieval ordines can be, not perhaps overestimated, but misconstrued."

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 37

37

entire manuscript that contains it (paleography, sources, etc.)67 and the scriptorium that produced it (by studying library catalogs, for example). The recent publication of the sacramentaries of Gellone, Angouleme, and Autun in the Corpus Christianorum Series Latina, and the benedictional of Freising in the Henry Bradshaw Society's volumes, together with the anticipated publication of the Ratold sacramentary68 and the Sens pontifical that contains the Erdmann Ordo,69 are, or will be, essential tools for future research because they make it possible to investigate the ordines within their liturgical environment. Further editions of such early manuscripts can only be most welcome. The ordines must also be examined within their political contexts.70 Some scholars have concentrated on the ordines and have ignored the political context,71 whereas others have examined the history of the rite, while largely ignoring the liturgy.72 These are merely observations, not criticisms, and they do not imply that such scholars did not know the history or the texts respectively; the complexity of the tasks undertaken by such scholars would hardly have permitted them to do more. Percy Ernst Schramm did seek to combine text and history, and the shadow he cast over coronation studies is indeed very long; major shortcomings of his work derive not from ineptitude, but from the absence of adequate editions. It is beyond the capacity of any one person both to provide the texts and to interpret them fully. Finally, it will be worthwhile to attempt to determine whether the ideas and ideals embodied in the ordines had any real effect upon the behavior of individual kings. Some must have been impressed enough by their coronation ceremony to induce them to seek to abide by its precepts, but for others we might find Johann Wolfgang von Goethe's bit of 67

Jean-Claude Bonne, "The Manuscript of the Ordo of 1250 and its Illuminations," in Bak, Coronations, 58-71, is an example of a study that addresses itself to many possible issues presented by the manuscript. 68 Announced by Hohler, "Some Service-Books," 220, n. 14, for publication by the Henry Bradshaw Society. 69 See n. 50 above. 70 Le Goff did precisely that in his study of the Ordo of 1250 (n. 63 above). See also my general remarks in European Monarchy: Its Evolution and Practice from Roman Antiquity to Modern Times, ed. Heinz Duchhardt, Richard A. Jackson, and David Sturdy (Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag, 1992), 7-14. 71 E.g., Bouman, Sacring; Anneliese Sprengler, "Die Gebete der Kronungsordines Hinkmars von Reims fur Karl den Kahlen als Konig von Lothringen und fur Ludwig den Stammler," Zeitschrift fur Kirchengeschichte 63 (= 4th ser., vol. 1) (1950-51): 245-67. 72 E.g., Bautier, "Sacres et couronnements."

38ORDINESCOR NATIONISFRANCIAE

38 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

doggerel more appropriate than the entire corpus of medieval coronation ordines: Ein Kranz ist gar viel leichter binden, Als ihm ein wtirdig Haupt zu finden.73 Presentation of the Edition To the extent possible, the texts in this collection are presented in chronological order and are numbered accordingly. In most cases this presents no difficulty: the chronology, if not the exact dates, is clear for Ordines I-III, V-VIII, X-XI, and XV-XXV, but it is impossible to know where to place Ordines IV and XII and most of the formulas in Ordo IX. Conflicting arguments concerning the dating of Ordines XIII and XIV make their places uncertain. In selecting the order for these texts I have adopted a conservative approach and have placed them in an order that is more or less traditional, one that in most cases was suggested by Percy Ernst Schramm or Cornelius Bouman. The models that I followed in preparing and presenting this edition are those provided by Reinhard Elze in his edition of the imperial ordines, by Cyrille Vogel and Reinhard Elze in their edition of the Romano-Germanic pontifical of Mainz, and by Michel Andrieu in his edition of the Ordines Romani.74 If I have occasionally departed from those models, that is not on account of willful stubbornness on my part, but because I believe that the texts themselves required such departures. The introductory apparatus to each ordo follows a standard format composed of several elements: 1) At the heading of each is the number and name that I have assigned to the ordo and that I have already made public.75 The numbers differ from those assigned by Schramm, as do several of the names. The change in numbers was required by the inclusion of texts not in Schramm's survey and by the exclusion of some 73

Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, "Sprichwortlich," in Epoche der Wahlverwandtschaften: 1807-1814, ed. Christoph Siegrist et al., vol. 9 of Samtliche Werke nach Epochen seines Schaffens: Munchner Ausgabe, ed. Karl Richter et al. (Munich: Carl Hanser Verlag, 1987), 122: "By far 'tis easier a wreath to bind / Than a worthy head for it to find." 74 Elze, Ordines coronationis imperialism Vogel-Elze, Le pontifical romano-germanique; Michel Andrieu, ed., Les Ordines Romani du haul moyen age, vol. 1, Les manuscrits, Etudes et documents, fasc. 11 (Louvain: Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense, 1931); vols. 2-4, Les textes, Etudes et documents, fasc. 23-24, 28 (Louvain: Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense, 1948, 1949, 1956). 75 Jackson, "Manuscripts."

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

2) 3) 4)

5)

6)

39

(see the Synoptic Table on p. 5), and I have adopted names that seem to me to be more appropriate than those given by Schramm. This is followed by the date. If it is available, a precise date is given (or a series of dates in some cases); otherwise, an approximate date or a range of dates is given. If an ordo has been known by a name or names assigned by other scholars, all names that I know are listed. The purpose of this is to assist in avoiding ambiguity in future studies. There is an introduction to each ordo. This is often longer than is customary in an edition on account of the special nature of the text. The introduction attempts to outline briefly something of the place of the ordo in the history of the ordines, and it may explain why a particular ordo was included in the collection. It also says something of the manuscripts or describes how the ordo survives if there are no manuscripts. If the ordo presents peculiar problems, some of them are noted. These introductions are heavily dependent upon earlier literature, some of which I have published, but most of which is the work of other scholars. In no case does the introduction address itself to all aspects of an ordo, and no attempt has been made to list all relevant works; most of the latter are cited either in various notes, or may be found in the literature cited in the notes to both this general introduction and to each ordo and its introduction. In some cases, the introduction contains a stemma. I did not originally intend to include any stemmata, but I needed to devise a few in order to determine the approximate order of the manuscripts, so I decided that they might help others to follow the dispersion and to trace the influence of an ordo. A stemma is seldom fully dependable, nonetheless, and it must be accepted for what it is, an exercise that is subject to rectification, and that might be different if prepared by another scholar. The introduction is followed by a list of lost manuscripts, if any. No attempt has been made to infer all lost manuscripts; the list includes only the ones that have left positive evidence of their former existence, or putative manuscripts that have been adduced in the scholarly literature. The surviving manuscripts are next listed. Rather than grouping them by families, which would be impossible in most cases, I list them in strict chronological order, to the extent that that is possible, and I assign appropriate sigla in uppercase letters. I note the present location of each manuscript, its shelfmark (and,

40ORDINESCOR NATIONISFRANCIAE

40 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

occasionally, former shelfmarks), and the folios or pages that contain the coronation text. I also note the type of manuscript and cite a printed description of it if there is one; if there is more than one printed description, I normally cite only the most recent one or the most complete one. In a few instances I also list a manuscript or manuscripts of an ordo that is a source of variants (e.g., Ordo XIV, MSS B and D), but that is otherwise a text othe than the ordo here edited. Most manuscripts were examined in situ. Some of them were collated there alone, but in most cases I also worked from copies (microfilm, photographs, or photocopies). In a very few instances I had to rely upon copies made or published by other scholars. I note that I have relied upon another person's readings in every applicable instance, and the list of manuscripts indicates whether I examined the manuscript itself or worked from copies (or both). 7) Like the manuscripts, the editions are listed in strict chronological order and are assigned appropriate sigla in lowercase letters. If there are multiple editions of a given work, the chronologicallyimposed siglum is determined by the date of the first edition; all editions are then distinguished by means of a subscript number (e.g., Ordo V, edition a, with editions aly a2) and %). In nearly every instance I examined the edition in question and verified the reference. Some editions are extremely rare, however, so a few were not available, and in each such case I note the source of my reference, but cannot guarantee that it is as correct as the references to works that I myself examined. Treatment of the editions was a problem. Many editions are not new editions, but simply reprints of previous editions. Nonetheless, they are often given their own sigla either because the type was reset for them (with the consequent possibility of new errors or emendations), because their pagination differs from their source, or sometimes only to simplify the presentation of the source (e.g., Ordo XVIIA, ed. r). On the other hand, reprinted editions that are identical to the original are not cited.76 It is impossible to know all editions, and I doubtless missed some. It is also unnecessary to list all editions of those works that 76

An exception was made for the anastatic reprint of Etienne Baluze, Capitularia regum Francorum, ed. Pierre de Chiniac, 2 vols. (Paris: Benedictus Morin, 1780), in Giovan Domenico Mansi, ed. Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio (Paris: H. Welter, 1902), 17 bis and 18 bis, for some readers might not be aware of that reprint. Only occasionally will other reprints that are not generally well known be noted.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION

41

were republished many times (e.g., Jean Bodin's Republique), so I limit myself to a few representative ones, making sure that I include the most important ones. Only some editions were fully collated for one reason or another, and the apparatus notes those that were. The decision to list manuscripts and editions chronologically was made partly in order to facilitate finding the works to which the sigla refer. Locating something in a numerical or alphabetical list is far easier and faster than first seeking a group or family (which might not be remembered) and then having to look up the reference. 8) The final section of the introductory apparatus is a statement of the principles applied in editing that ordo alone. This statement is an addition to the general principles of the edition (see the following section). It notes departures from the general principles, if any. It also describes particular problems presented by the manuscripts and the manner in which I sought to resolve those problems. If not otherwise noted in this statement of principles, all general principles are respected for that ordo. General Principles of the Edition I sought to achieve three primary goals in preparing this edition: 1) to make readily available all ordines and similar texts that were produced in West Francia or France; 2) to include all significant variants from nearly all surviving medieval manuscripts and from most sixteenth-century manuscripts, as well as from some printed editions that were based upon lost manuscripts; and 3) to present the texts in such a way as to be legible and to avoid all ambiguities. I originally intended to present each text uniformly and to use the same rules for paragraphing, punctuation, expansion of abbreviations, etc. In the final analysis it seemed better to renounce uniformity because, in order to achieve my primary goals, the texts themselves required individual treatment. A text that survives in only one manuscript needed to be handled differently from one that is found in many manuscripts, and a text that survives only in printed editions demanded a still different treatment. Nonetheless, a number of general principles had to be applied and are respected unless stated otherwise in the specific principles applied to each ordo. To the extent possible, all principles are those applied by editors of similar texts.77 77

First and foremost, of course, the works cited in n. 74 above. I also consulted the following: Michel Andrieu, ed., Le pontifical romain au moyen age, vol. 1, Le

42ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

42 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

After the ordo number (and more precise designation, if called for) is the number of a folio or page, which is taken from the base text for the edition. This number is not intended to indicate that the text begins at the top of that page (although it might), but rather that it begins somewhere on the page. It was not possible to make the paragraphing of the ordines fully consistent, partly because some manuscripts combined rubrics and spoken texts in very complex ways. In many cases, the paragraphing is taken from the base manuscript or edition, but in others I added paragraphing; the principles of each ordo alert the reader to my additions. If possible, a very short rubric bears the same number as the formula that follows. Longer rubrics are given their own numbers, and I often split the very long rubrics in the late-medieval ordines into several paragraphs. If a text contains a litany, the litany is divided into sections in order to avoid placing the variants too far from the text; the numbering of these sections is uniform across all ordines (for example, in each litany the rogations bear a single number). In some cases the manuscripts and printed editions presented several liturgical formulas in a single paragraph. On the other hand, formulas were often divided into several parts, and some of the parts were eventually given their own rubrics. I make each formula that ends with Amen a separate paragraph, although I do not usually assign each paragraph a separate number if the paragraph was originally part of a longer formula.78 In some of these cases, though, each paragraph does bear its own pontifical romain du XIIe siecle, Studi e Testi, vol. 86 (Vatican City: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1938), 115-19; Stephan Kuttner, "Notes on the Presentation of Text and Apparatus in Editing Works of the Decretists and Decretalists," Traditio 15 (1959): 452-64, and 26 (1970): 432; Gerard Fransen and Stephan Kuttner, Summa 'Elegantius in iure diuino' sen Coloniensis, vol. 1, Monumenta luris Canonici: Series A: Corpus Glossatorum, vol. 1 (New York: Fordham University Press, 1969); Leonhard Cuniberto Mohlberg, Norme per le pubblicazioni di opere scientifiche, Rerum Ecclesiasticarum Documenta, Series minor: Subsidia studiorum, 2 (Rome: Casa Editrice Herder, 1966); Geoffrey Symcox, ed., "Repertorium Columbianum: Instructions for Contributors," typescript (Los Angeles, [1991?]), pp. 9; Comite International des Sciences Historiques: Commission Internationale de Diplomatique, "Colloque technique sur la normalisation internationale des methodes de publication des documents latins du moyen age," typescript (Barcelona, 2-5 October 1974), pp. 45; Bernard Barbiche, "Conseils pour 1'edition des documents frangais de 1'epoque moderne," Gazette des Beaux-Arts (July 1980): 25-28. The last two works were kindly placed at my disposal by Robert-Henri Bautier. 78 Even though they do not bear their own numbers, a few liturgical formulas that form separate paragraphs will be listed in the Table of Incipits with references to the

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 43

43

number because it was derived from another source; in these instances, one can discern the beginning and end of the entire formula by its first rubric and its conclusion, usually Quod ipse in benedictions. When it is necessary to identify the parts, those parts are identified with Greek letters in order to avoid confusion with the roman letters used for the variants. The text is normally presented in a single column; and the use of parallel columns has been avoided as much as possible, but is always resorted to if necessary to achieve clarity. Where there is more than one column, paragraph numbering is added as necessary to avoid ambiguity in future references. This does have the disadvantage that consecutive paragraphs from a given source will bear non-consecutive paragraph numbers (in Ordo VII, for example), but I see no way to avoid that discontinuity. If texts, usually different, come from different sources, that is clearly shown in the layout of the ordo. For example, the different texts are marked with identifying letters in the texts from the sacramentary of SaintThierry (Ordo IX) and in the Ordo of Eudes (Ordo XI). In such cases, the paragraphs are numbered continuously in order to ensure absolute clarity in future references. Throughout the edition I preferred redundancy to economy in order to achieve clarity. For example, in the Ordo of Louis the Stammerer (Ordo VIII) the episcopal petitio and royal promissio are repeated in order to make absolutely clear the two different traditions through which they survive. Where clarity is possible without repetition, texts are not repeated; a good example of this is the Ordo of Charles the Bald (Ordo VII), which uses parallel columns for clearness. One major departure from the customary presentation of editions has been introduced in order to achieve the goal of making the variants readily available. Rather than bury them at the bottom of the page, below the text and above the footnotes (if any), the variants are placed immediately after the paragraph to which they refer. Printed in a smaller typeface than the text and indented as they are, they do not materially detract from the continuity of the text, and the reader may use them or ignore them as required. This sometimes requires that the variants to a paragraph will appear on the following page, but the reader will always know where to find them quickly. The spelling of Latin words is quite uniform, with few notable exceptions, but the French texts presented a challenge not found in the Latin ones (quite apart from the difficulty of reading some of the scripts!). original formulas from which they were derived. If this were not done, some of the formulas would appear to have been innovations.

4 ORDINESCOR NATIONISFRANCIAE

44 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

French was a developing language during the centuries that produced manuscripts consulted for the edition, and there was no standardized French spelling before the creation of the Academic frangaise in the second half of the seventeenth century. Therefore, a word like the preposition avec was also spelled avecq, avecque, avecques, avecquez, avesquez, ovecques, and o; ampoule was also spelled ampole, ampolle, and ampoulle', feurre was also spelled feurel, fiurrel, fourel, fuerel, fuerre, andfuerrel; eschafaut was also spelled eschaffau, eschqffeau, eschaufau, and eschauffaut. The number of variants thus became enormous, particularly in the French translation of the Ordo of Reims (Ordo XX B); in that ordo the text with all variants was about four times as long as the text without variants. I could see no reason to retain all those variants, most of which were of little use even in establishing a stemma. I retain only the variants that have different meanings or that are philologically significant.79 In those cases, nonetheless, the orthography of the variant is retained from its manuscript. Here, as in the Latin texts, if more than one manuscript is listed with the same variant, the orthography of just the first manuscript listed is given. (Sometimes, nevertheless, it was necessary to standardize the orthography of a variant, for example, in Ordo III, var. 3a.~) Variant readings are usually separated by commas if they all bear on the same word or words, but they are separated by semicolons (;) if they happen to be different variants at the same point in the text, or if needed to avoid ambiguity. I make rather liberal use of the device of repeating the passage and separating it from the variant or variants by a square bracket (]) in order to make absolutely clear the passage to which the variant (or variants) refers; all variants after the square bracket are variants of that passage if they are separated only by commas. Furthermore, if there is a danger that a variant might be confused with a siglum, the variant and the siglum are separated by a colon (:), but it was rarely necessary to resort to this expedient. Also as a means of avoiding potential confusion in the variants and notes, the sigla of editions (but not of manuscripts) are printed in italic letters, which are likewise used for the sigla of manuscripts referred to in the introductions and notes. Matter that does not belong with the variants is placed in footnotes, which are always at the bottom of the page. This includes bibliographical 79 1 am deeply grateful to Claude Buridant for recommendations concerning the variants to retain. Some variant spellings reflect the region in which a manuscript or translation was written.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 45

45

references, comments on particular paleographical problems, notes on features of the manuscripts (for example, degraded text, illuminations, musical notation), references to quotations from the Bible, and occasional quotations from other ordines or other works. Within the texts themselves, italics are used only for liturgical formulas, episcopal petitions, and royal promises or oaths. Quotation marks (single or double as called for) are used for sermons, etc., and for words spoken within a rubric (e.g., Ordo XV,38).80 The liturgy is rich in Biblical quotations and allusions, and much of its wording comes from the Bible. To have sought out all these and noted them would have burdened the apparatus excessively. Previous editors sometimes placed quotation marks around (or used italic characters for) Biblical texts, but sometimes such passages are approximate quotations or slight paraphrases instead of precise quotations. In those cases, I simply refer to the biblical passage in a note, and I place single quotation marks around exact quotations only.81 If a liturgical formula appears in more than one ordo, quotations from the Bible are noted only upon their earliest appearance in that formula, although the quotation marks are retained in all formulas. On occasion, an erroneous or divergent reading by another editor is given in the apparatus. This is not intended to denigrate his work, but to signal that I have read the manuscript differently and that the reading at this point is my choice. Of course, my reading might be the erroneous one, but I examined every such instance very carefully, and if any question remains, it is discussed in a note. It proved impossible to retain the manuscripts' punctuation, which was sometimes truly bizarre. The scribes were far from consistent in their use of punctuation marks. Some made a distinction between the level of a period on the line, but it is often impossible to know where on the line the mark was intended to be. The punctuation mark that looks 80 The use of italics and quotation marks was adopted in order to parallel Reinhard Elze's edition of the imperial ordines. The advantage of that common practice in presenting coronation texts is that it clearly distinguishes rubricated and non-rubricated text in the manuscripts. It departs from the practice of the liturgical texts in Corpus Christianorum Series Latina, where small capitals are used for rubrics and normal font for the formulas. 81 Or nearly exact quotations, for there was no standard edition of the Vulgate in the Middle Ages, and one cannot possibly know the reading the composer of the ordo or the scribe of a manuscript had before him or in his memory. The use of single quotation marks follows the current practice in editions of liturgical texts. I use the Biblia Vulgata iuxta Vulgatam Clementinam, 4th ed., Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, vol. 14 (Madrid: Biblioteca de Autores Cristianos, 1959).

46ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

46 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

like an inverted semicolon (i) is used by some scribes, but not by others, in manuscripts of a given ordo. Therefore, I modernize the punctuation in order to facilitate reading the texts. The punctuation of texts from printed editions is retained, except that I correct it where the typesetters obviously selected the wrong punctuation mark. A most agonizing decision had to be made concerning whether or not to correct obvious scribal errors. Here, in particular, is where I decided not to seek uniformity. In almost every case a formula's correct reading is to be found in another ordo, so the reader can find the proper reading by consulting the formula in that ordo. In a few cases I correct an obviously incorrect reading in the text, e.g., Ordo XVI, var. 41a, even though in this case both manuscripts have the incorrect reading; in these instances the manuscript's (or manuscripts') reading is always given in a variant. In some other cases where the manuscript's reading is corrupt, I add a variant that refers to the correct reading in other ordines (e.g., Ordo I, vars. la and Ib). Occasionally, text that was omitted is supplied within square brackets.82 Grammatically impossible readings are generally passed over without being noted, for some of them have a significant role of their own to play in the development of the rite. The manuscripts often make one word appear as two, or two as one. These variants are not usually retained unless they might be useful for establishing a manuscript genealogy. The orthography of the base manuscript is respected unless the word is clearly broken only because it begins near the end of a line. Nevertheless, it is not always possible to determine whether a given scribe wrote a word as one or two, particularly in cases where both forms are correct (nee non or necnori). Minor scribal errors are retained only if they seem noteworthy, if, for example, they had an influence upon later texts. This might include a word like exercitum, which appears as exercitu because the scribe simply forgot to put the line over the u. The principles of each ordo explain how such variants are handled if they are to be found in a manuscript of that ordo. At a number of places in several manuscripts, space was left for initials that were never painted. These are not noted. Nonetheless, if the wrong letter was painted, it is given as a variant, and historiated initials 82 This follows the editorial practice for most editions. The usage for liturgical texts in the volumes of the Corpus Christianorum, e.g., Dom Antoine Dumas in his edition of the sacramentary of Gellone (Ordo I, ed. 6), is to place supplied text within angled brackets () and to use square brackets to set off text that is in the manuscript, but should be omitted.

GENERAL INTRODUCTION 47

47

are always noted in the apparatus. Musical notation, if present, or even if planned but not executed, is likewise noted in a footnote. Proper names and the names of God are capitalized, and each sentence or paragraph begins with a capital letter, whether or not the capitals are in the manuscript. On the other hand, other words are seldom capitalized even when capitalized in the manuscript (excepting instances when capitals or small capitals were used for particular emphasis). Abbreviations N. and ill. for Nomen and ille, etc. are not expanded because if they were the writer's intention that the name of a king or a queen was to be inserted at this point would be disguised. Resp. is always given for Responsum, Responsio, Responsorium, etc. (unless spelled out) because it is not always certain what the scribe intended. Vers. is always given for Versus, etc.; the same rule applies as for Resp. If) (or something similar) for a preface, Vere dignum, etc., is always expanded, although many editors did not expand the abbreviation. Final liturgical formulas (usually after Per) are spelled out only if they appear in abbreviated form or in full in the ordo's base text. Variants of final formulas are seldom worth noting, however, because the extent to which a concluding formula was written out in a manuscript was often determined solely by the scribe's attempt to achieve justification of the right margin. Nevertheless, variants of the concluding formula are retained if they differ notably from the base manuscript or if they help to show the filiation of a given group of manuscripts. In expanding abbreviations in all manuscripts, the orthography most often found (not necessarily the only one found) in a given manuscript is adopted, if possible, for words like haec, saeculum, etc. The diphthong is resolved as ae if no single orthography is more common than another. Individual Letters The treatment of the French texts differs from that of the Latin texts, both in orthography and in the use of accents.83 Medieval and earlymodern scribes used few accents when writing French, and their orthography was seldom uniform within a manuscript. Minimal accents are 83

The principles that follow — generally the rules established by the Ecole des Chartes — are those established in the works cited in n. 77 above, particularly Comite International des Sciences Historiques: Commission Internationale de Diplomatique, "Colloque technique sur la normalisation internationale," and Barbiche, "Conseils pourl'edition."

48ORDINESCOR NATIONISFRANCIAE

48 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

added in the French texts in accordance with current editorial principles: an acute accent is added to a final e in past participles, but not to a penultimate e (thus donne, but donnee] ne for negation, but ne for "born"); a cedilla is added to c if modern usage expects it (thus $a and sgavoir). The punctuation is modernized, so an apostrophe is added between an article or a preposition and a noun (thus Veglise, d'un). AE and ae, JE and ce, E and e, and f and £—This diphthong presented more problems than any other letter. AE and ae, E and e, and £ and § are usually rendered as they appear in the base text, but, in accordance with current editorial principles, & and ce are always expanded as AE or ae. If at all possible, the form predominant in the manuscript is used when expanding abbreviations. If there is a variant in more than one manuscript, only the orthography of the first manuscript listed is retained in the variants. Precise principles are noted in the principles of each text. c and t—Variants of these letters are not noted, but the edition follows the orthography of the base manuscript (i.e., iusticia or iustitia). In some instances it is impossible to be certain whether a letter is c or t, and another reader might see the letter differently, but in no instance is the choice of any real significance. If there is a variant in more than one manuscript, only the orthography of the first manuscript listed is given for c and t. c and k—The manuscripts' orthography is retained for these two letters. / and i—The letter i is always left as i in Latin texts, but is distinguished from j in French texts (i.e., iusticia or iustitia in Latin, but justice in French). U and u—The letter u is always changed to v as required by modern orthography in both Latin and French. UU and uu—The double u is always rendered as w in words like ewangelium or names like Walericus, but is obviously retained as uu in a word like continuum Unless explicitly stated otherwise, I examined every manuscript and every edition. Every manuscript from which variants are retained was collated at least twice, and even then I returned to a manuscript on many occasions in order to verify a reading that seemed incorrect. Of course, as any editor knows, no edition is perfect. It is impossible to avoid errors, and I can only hope that the present edition is as accurate as any published by other editors. As long as the manuscripts survive, they will continue to be useful and will never be entirely replaced by a printed edition.

TEXTS OF THE ORDINES

This page intentionally left blank

ORDOI Royal Texts in the Sacramentary of Gellone Date: 790-800 Other names: none Introduction The late eighth-century sacramentary of Gellone (perhaps 790-800), one of the most precious of medieval manuscripts, is particularly noteworthy for its wonderfully droll ornamentation. This manuscript in the Grande Reserve of the Bibliotheque nationale in Paris also has the distinction of containing the earliest surviving liturgical formulas associated with coronation ceremonial.11 wish to emphasize the adjective "surviving," because these formulas were copied from other sources. This is particularly evident in the rather corrupt version of the benediction, Deus inenarrabilis (no. 2), most clearly in its perfectly explicable misreading vetulu ininpetravit for vetulum inpetravit (var. J?/). In short, the formulas here are accidental survivals from older manuscripts, as are the coronation materials in the other early collections of liturgical formulas. Nothing in the sacramentary of Gellone shows that the formulas were to be pronounced at a royal inauguration, although the evidence of this and other texts suggests that they may have served on some such occasion. None of this sacramentary's four formulas remained permanently in the French ceremony, but the first three are in some later texts. For example, Deus inenarrabilis disappeared from the West Frankish ceremony after 878, then resurfaced in the Ordo of Saint-Bertin (Ordo XVIII) after 1150 and was often included in the later French ordines; it is also a regular feature of German and imperial ordines, as are nos. 1 and 3. Christe Deus oriens (no. 4), on the other hand, is in no other Frankish/ French or imperial ordo or, as far as I know, in any Anglo-Saxon/English or German ordo, although the second part of it did enter the benedictio cotidiana pro rege in several English manuscripts.2 Jean Deshusses (ed. b below), xxv, provided a stemma of the early sacramentaries derived, like the sacramentary of Gellone, from the Gelasian sacramentary. For the Missa pro rege from manuscript A, see Ordo II. 1 Apart from the formulas in the mass for the king, which are in the older Gelasian sacramentary; for these, see Ordo II. 2 See Bouman, Sacring, 6.

52ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

52 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

Manuscripts A—Paris, Bibl. nat, MS lat. 12048, fols. 165r-166r.s Sacramentary of Gellone, late eighth century. Description: Delisle, "Memoire," 80-81; Dom Paul Cagin, "Note sur le sacramentaire de Gellone," in Melanges de litterature et d'histoire religieuses publics a I 'occasion dujubile episcopal de M0r de Cabrieres, eveque de Montpellier, 1874-1899, 2 vols. (Paris: A. Picard, 1899), 1: 231-90; Leroquais, Sacramentaires, 1: 1-8, no. 2; Deshusses (ed. &), vii-xxxiv (with further references). B—Paris, Bibl. nat., MS lat. 12049, pp. 401-4. Copy of A made in 1677 for Luc d'Achery. Description: Deshusses 159 B (ed. 6), xxii; Henri Leclerc, "Gellone (Sacramentaire de)," in DACL, vol. 6, pt. 1 (1924), 781-82. Editions a—Bouman, Sacring, Appendix 2: 189-90. b—Dom Antoine Dumas, Liber sacramentorum Gellonensis, CCSL, vol. 159 (Turnhout: Brepols, 1981), nos. 2091-94, pp. 296-98; Dom Jean Deshusses, Liber sacramentorum GeUonensis: Introductio, tabulae et indices, CCSL, vol. 159 A (Turnhout: Brepols, 1981). Principles of the Edition The many errors and peculiar punctuation of the manuscript are retained. Because the scribe wrote both ae and £, his abbreviations are expanded as ae. Sometimes he terminated a noun with ur rather than er or or; these are retained because they do not obscure the meaning of the words. Dumas (ed. b) suggested many corrections, which are given in the apparatus. Not all his corrections can be accepted, though, and the apparatus notes some different readings from other ordines, which may or may not contain the correct reading. The formulas merit very careful comparison with their equivalents in other ordines printed elsewhere in this volume. ORDOI 1. [fol. 165r] Benedictio regalis. Deus, qui congregatis in nomine tuo famutis medium te dixisti adsistere, corona valente, da gratiam sacerdotibus, quam Habrahg in holocaustu, Moysi4 in exercitu, Heliae in herimo, Samuhel meruit 3 The Cabinet des Manuscrits of the Bibliotheque Rationale now makes only photographs of this manuscript available to readers, so I was able to examine the manuscript only from photographs and a colored microfilm. 4 The final i is a correction on an erasure.

ORDO I

SACRAMENTARY OF GELLONE

53

crinitus* in templo. Concede concordiam quam inspirantemb patriarchis, prgdicasti prophgtis, tradedisti apostolis, mandasti victorisc. Benedic, Domine, huncprincipem nostrum ill., quern ad salutempopuli nobis cognovimus5 [fol. 165v] fuisse concessum. Fac annis esse multiplicem, ut eum maximo roboris^ vultfinem ultimum pervenire possit gtatis. Sit nobis fidutia obtineree pro poputo, quam Aaron in tabemacuto, Hgliseus in fluvio, Ezechias in lecto, Zacharias vetulu ininpetravitf filio. Sit nobis regendiz, qualemh losug in castris, Gedeon super* in proeliis, Petrus accepit in clave, Paulus est usus dogmate, et itapastorum cura profitiat in ovile, sicut Isaac infruge, lacob est dilatatus in gregi. Quod. 1. acrinitum Ordines 11,2 and 11,10.—binspirasti Ordo 111,1, Elze's Ordo II,8a, and corr. b.—cvictoribus corr. b; however, victores Ordo 111,1 and evangelistis in most imperial ordines.—dcum maximo roboris Ordo 111,1, but cum maximo robore Ordo IV,5 and tentatively sugg. b. — eobtinere] obtinere gratiam Elze's Ordo II,8b, obtinendi gratiam corr. b. — fvetulus impetravit Elze's Ordo II,8b, and vetulus inpetravit corr. b; vetulum inpetravit was probably the reading of the scribe's source, as Bouman suggested. — § auctoritas add. Elze's Ordo II,8c, ius add. as corr. b; cf. Ordo III, var. If. — h qualiter Ordo 111,1, quale corr. b. — 4 sumpsit Ordo 111,1 and corr. b.

2. Benedictio alias regalis.6 Deus inenarrabilesa auctor mundi, conditur generis humani, gubematu imperii, confinnator regni, qui ex utero fidelis amid tui patriarchy nostri Habrahg, prglegisti reges saeculib profuturis0. Ta pr§sentem insignem regem cum exercitu super intercessionumd sanctorum omnium, ubique locupleta et solium regni firma stabilitate conectie. Viseta gum interventu sanctorum omnium, sicut Moysen in, rubo, losug in agro, lesu Nave inproelio, Samuhel* meruit crinitusz in templo. Et ilia gum permissioneh siderea ac sapientiae tug rore perfunde, qua beatus David7 rex inpsalterio, psalmorumifiliusi te remunerante percgpit a cglok. Sis gi contra aciis1 inimicorum lurica, in adversis galea, in prosperis patientia, in tectionem clipeum sempiternum. Etprgsta, ut gentes illgn teniantfidem, proceres adque obtimates habeant pacem, dilegant caritatem, absteneant se a cupiditate, loquantur iustitiam, et° custodiant veritatem. Itav populus iste pollititatione 5

ilium quern ... cognovimus om. Bouman (ed. a). Dumas (ed. 6), 1: 297, no. 292 (note), also gave variants of Deus inenarrabiles in the benedictional in Cambridge, Fitzwilliam Museum, MS J27; see Ordo IV, n. 5. 7 On David's role here and elsewhere in the liturgy of the coronation, see John Hennig, "Zur Stellung Davids in der Liturgie," Archiv fur Liturgiewissenschaft 10 (1967): 157-64. 6

54

ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

alitusv benedictione gternitatis, ut semper maneant* tripudiantes in pace victoris8. Quod. 2. a inenarrabilis in all other ordines. — b saeculi Ordo 11,10 also, but saeculis Ordo 11,2. — c profuturos Ordines 11,2 and 11,10, and corr. b. — d super intercessionum] suo intercessione Ordo 11,2, suo per intercessionem Ordo 11,10, suo per intercessionum corr. b. — e connecte corr. b. — f Samuel corr. b. — gerinitum Ordines 11,2 and 11,10. — hpromissione corr. b. — A Salomon Ordines 11,2 and 11,10, and corr. b. — J ems add. Ordines 11,2 and 11,10, and corr. b. — k de caelo Ordo 11,10, e c§lo Ordo 111,3 and corr. b. — ^cies Ordines 11,2 and 11,10, actus Ordo 111,3, acus b with corr. acies. —mprotectione Ordines 11,10 and 111,3, and corr. b.—nilli Ordines 11,10 and 111,3, and corr. b. —° et om. Ordo 11,10 and corr. b. —P Et Ita corr. b. —Q caelitus Ordo 11,10, quodalitus Ordo 111,3, coalitus corr. b. —rpermaneant Ordo 111,3 and corr. b. — s victores Ordines 11,2 and 11,10, and corr. b.

3. Item alia benedictio. Deus Patur glorig sit adiutur tuus in cunctis exaudiat, et vitam tuam longitudinem* digrum adimpleat. Thronum regni tui iugiterfirmit, et gentem populum- [fol. 166r] que tuum in gtemum conserved Inimicus tuus confusionem inducatb, et super te Christi sanctificatio floreat. Ut qui tibi tribuit in terris imperium, ipse in cglis inferat meritorumc angelorum illorumd. 3. alongitudine Ordo IX, 13 and corr. b.—binimicos tuos confusione induat Ordines 111,4 and IX,13, and corr. b.—cmeritum Ordines 111,4 and IX,13, and corr. b. —dillorum om. Ordines 111,4 and IX, 13, and corr. b.

4. Item alia. Christe, Deus oriens ex alto, rex regum et dominus dominantium, corona credentium, benedictio sacerdotum, qui regis gentes exaltas, reges respices, humilis ditas pauperis custodis veracis, benedic hunc clementissime regem ilium cum universe populo suo, sicut benedixisti Habraam in milia*, Isaac in victima, lacob in pascua, da $isb de rore cell benedictionem de pinguidinemc terre,8 ubertatem de inmicis^9 triumphum de lumbis sobolem regnatorem. Ut dum regalese non defecitf de sterpe& successio, sed indeficiens amor in populo. Pax perennis in regno quod ipse prgstare digneris qui in cglestia regna super cgrubin sedens universa, qui regna regis et regnas in saecula saeculorum. 4. afamilia corr. b. —b ^i corr. b. —c pinguidine corr. b. —d inimicis corr. ab. — e regalis corr. b. — f defecerit corr. b. —fi stirpe corr. b. 8

Cf. Gen. 27: 28. Both Bouman and Dumas missed the incorrect reading, a perfect example of an editor's tendency, so difficult to resist, to read an incorrect reading as a correct one. 9

ORDOII Royal Texts in the Sacramentary of Angouleme Date: ca. 800 Other names: none Introduction Perhaps only slightly younger than the sacramentary of Gellone, thus from around 800, are the sacramentaries of Angouleme and of Autun, both derived, in part, from the Gelasian sacramentary. The sacramentary of Angouleme has, in one passage, two royal benedictions and, in another, like the sacramentary of Gellone, a mass for the king. Because the sacramentary of Gellone (Ordo I) does not specifically state that its formulas were to be spoken at an inaugural ceremony, the first of these two benedictions, Prospice omnipotens Deus (no. 1), which here appears for the first time, is the earliest text that is specifically associated with the inauguration of a king, "quando elevatur in regno." The second of the benedictions, Deus inenarrabilis, which appears twice in the manuscript (nos. 2 and 10), is slightly different from the one in the sacramentary of Gellone. These benedictions are not in the sacramentary from Autun. The mass is identical in Angouleme and Autun, except that the sacramentary of Autun omits no. 8, which, seeing that it is in no other Frankish/French or imperial ordo, appears to have been an interpolation in the sacramentary of Angouleme. Deus inenarrabilis reappears in the mass in both sacramentaries. Excepting no. 8, all the mass's formulas are in bona fide coronation ordines. It is impossible to trace here the complex ways in which these formulas were later used. For example, all except no. 4, Deus in cuius manu corda, are in the Ratold Ordo (Ordo XV), and no. 4 is a regular feature of the imperial ordines. Because part of the mass (nos. 3-7) came from the Gelasian sacramentary and is also in the sacramentary of Gellone, it seemed useful to include the variant readings from those sources. It is now thought that the manuscript of the Gelasian sacramentary was copied in the convent of Chelles (between Paris and Meaux) at some undetermined time in the eighth century, perhaps before mid-century. The sequence of the developing liturgy appears quite clear when the four sources are thus placed together: the Gelasian sacramentary; intermediate manuscripts that were the source of the sacramentaries of Gellone, Autun, and Angouleme; then

56 ORDINES CORONATIONIS FRANCIAE

56ORDINESCOR NATIONSFRANCIAE

these three sacramentaries, with the sacramentary of Angouleme containing formulas that were not in the earlier sources. I selected the sacramentary of Angouleme for this edition of the mass because it does have those additional formulas, and I included Gellone's variants from the mass here, rather than printing the text with Ordo I, in order to show the relationship between the manuscripts.1 Patrick Saint-Roch (ed. #), xvi, reproduced Deshusses's stemma of the early Gelasian sacramentaries (cf. the introduction to Ordo I). In the notes I also quote from the Leofric missal those formulas that are in both it and the sacramentary of Angouleme, partly because the Leofric missal appears to have older readings than the sacramentary of Angouleme, and partly because the royal ordo in the Leofric missal provided much of the structure of the Ordo of Judith (Ordo V). Manuscripts A—Vatican City, Bibl. Apos. Vat., MS Reg. lat. 316, fol. 214r-v. The Gelasian sacramentary, eighth century. Nos. 3-7 only. Description: Mohlberg (ed. d), xxiii-xxxviii. B—Paris, Bibl. nat., MS lat. 12048, fol. 221r-v. Sacramentary of Gellone, late eighth century. Nos. 3-7 only. Description: see Ordo I, MS A. C—Paris, Bibl. nat., MS lat. 816, fols. 130r-v, 167v-169r. Sacramentary of Angouleme, ca. 800. Description: Delisle, "Memoire," 91-96; SaintRoch (ed.