Part II
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 21 June 2019
Summary
Hailing from North Africa, Lactantius was an imperial professor of Latin rhetoric, a position that brought him to the courts of the emperors Diocletian and Constantine. This chapter explores themes in his Divine Institutes that bear on his legal thought. In addition to setting out Lactantius’s conception of religious tolerance and its influence on the emperor Constantine’s religious policy, the chapter considers the role of “divine law” in Lactantius’s work. He found the first two principles of divine law in Matt 22:36–40 and considered them equivalent to pietas and aequitas in Cicero’s thought. Just as Roman citizens were defined by their access to Roman law, so adherence to divine law, for Lactantius, constituted both Christian and Roman identity. After Augustine of Hippo rejected Lactantius’s suggestion that the law of the state could be a faithful image of the divine law, Western medieval scholars largely ignored the legal thrust of Lactantius’s arguments. Nevertheless, his advocacy of religious tolerance gained currency in recent times, when the Second Vatican Council embraced it.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2019
References
Sources
Further Reading
Sources
Further Reading
Further Reading
Further Reading
Other Sources for Papal Letters
Further Reading
Secondary Sources and Further Reading
The first section of this chapter, on Dionysius’s life and times, is dependent on the following: Wurm, Hubert, Studien und Texte zur Dekretalensammlung des Dionysius Exiguus, Kanonistische Studien und Texte, Bd. 16 (Bonn: Röhrscheid, 1939); Duchesne, Louis, L’Église au VIe siècle (Paris: Boccard, 1925); Caspar, Erich, Geschichte des Papsttums von den Anfängen bis zur Höhe der Weltherrschaft, 2: Das Papsttum unter byzantinischer Herrschaft (Tübingen: Mohr, 1933); Schurr, Viktor, Die Trinitätslehre des Boethius im Lichte der ‘skythischen Kontroversen’ (Paderborn: Schöningh, 1935); Schwartz, E., “Die Kanonessamlungen der alten Reichskirche,” in Gesammelte Schriften, 4: Zur Geschichte der alten Kirche und ihres Rechts (Berlin: De Gruyter 1960), 159–275; Versanne, J.-M., Denys le Petit et le droit canonique dans l’Église latine au VIe siècle (Villefranche: Réveil du Beaujolais, 1913); Richards, Jeffrey, The Popes and the Papacy in the Early Middle Ages, 476–752 (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979); Moorhead, John, Theoderic in Italy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992); Chadwick, H., Boethius: The Consolations of Music, Logic, Theology, and Philosophy (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1981); O’Donnell, James J., Cassiodorus (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1979); Frend, W. H. C., The Rise of the Monophysite Movement: Chapters in the History of the Church in the Fifth and Sixth Centuries (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972); Davis, Leo Donald, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787): Their History and Theology (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1983); Jedin, Hubert, History of the Church, 2: The Imperial Church from Constantine to the Early Middle Ages (New York: Crossroad, 1980); Meyendorff, John, Imperial Unity and Christian Divisions: The Church 450–680 AD (Crestwood, NY: St. Vladimir’s Seminary, 1989); Döpp, S. and Geerlings, W. (eds.), Lexikon der antiken christlichen Literatur, 3rd edition, Freiburg: Verlag Herder, 2002).
The second section of this chapter, on Dionysius’s contributions to the canonical tradition, is dependent on the following: Wurm, Studien und Texte; Schwartz, “Die Kanonessamlungen der alten Reichskirche,” 159–275; Plöchl, Willibald M., Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, 1: Das Recht des ersten christlichen Jahrtausends von Urkirche bis zum großen Schisma, Geschichte des Kirchenrechts, Bd. 1, 2nd edition (Vienna: Herold, 1960); Gaudemet, Jean, Les sources du droit de l’Église en occident du IIe au VIIe siècle (Paris: Cerf, 1985); Van Hove, Alphonse, Prolegomena ad Codicem Iuris Canonici, 2nd ed. (Rome: Dessain, 1945); Stickler, Alphonsus M., Historia Iuris Canonici Latini, I: Historia Fontium (Turin: Pontificium Athenaeum Salesianum, Facultas iuris canonici, 1950); Fournier, Paul and le Bras, Gabriel, Histoire des collections canoniques en Occident depuis les Fausses Décrétales jusqu’au Décret de Gratien, 1 (Paris: Sirey, 1931); Hartmann, Wilfried and Pennington, Kenneth (eds.), The History of Byzantine and Eastern Canon Law to 1500 (Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press, 2012); Erdö, Péter, Storia delle fonti del diritto canonico (Venice: Marcianum, 2008); Erdö, P., Storia della scienza del diritto canonico: Una introduzione (Rome: Editrice Pontificia Università gregoriana, 1999); Ferme, Brian E., Introduction to the History of the Sources of Canon Law: The Ancient Law up to the Decretum of Gratian (Montréal: Wilson and Lafleur, 2007).
On Rome and the papacy during Dionysius’s lifetime, see de Marini Avonzo, Franca, “Secular and Clerical Culture in Dionysius Exiguus’ Rome,” in Kuttner, Stephan and Pennington, Kenneth (eds.), Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Berkeley, California, 28 July–2 August 1980 (Città del Vaticano: Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana, 1985), 83–92; and Richards, Jeffrey, The Popes and the Papacy in the Early Middle Ages 476–752. (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1979).
On the development of theology and doctrine during the patristic period, see Kelly, J. N. D., Early Christian Doctrines, 5th edition (London: A. & C. Black, 1977); Pelikan, Jaroslav, The Christian Tradition: A History of the Development of Doctrine, vol. 1: The Emergence of the Catholic Tradition (100–600) (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1973); and Berardino, Angelo Di and Studer, Basil, trans. M. J. O’Connell, History of Theology, vol. 1: The Patristic Period (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996). On the ecumenical councils, see Davis, Leo Donald, The First Seven Ecumenical Councils (325–787): Their History and Theology (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1983).
For detailed information on the Collectio Dionysiana, including its manuscript traditions and its historical reception, see the online article by Abigail Firey, Carolingian Canon Law project, http://ccl.rch.uky.edu/dionysiana-article (accessed March 13, 2018).
Further Reading
de Vogüé, Adalbert’s contribution to the Brepols series Typologie des sources du moyen âge occidental, entitled Les règles monastiques anciennes (400–700) (Turnhout: Brepols, 1985), is a good introduction to the ancient monastic rules. His list of editions is updated somewhat by Forman, Mary and Sullivan, Thomas, “The Latin Cenobitic Rules: AD 400–700: Editions and Translations,” American Benedictine Review 48.1 (1997): 52–68.
For the Rule of the Master, the most important source is the edition of de Vogüé. He has written about RM in other places, even suggesting that it might be an earlier edition of the RB, written by Benedict himself, although this interpretation has not been widely accepted. A very useful tool for comparing the Latin texts of RM and RB and their sources is Guevin, Benedict, Synopsis fontesque: Regula Magistri, Regula Benedicti, Regulae Benedicti Studia, Supplementa 10 (St. Ottilien: EOS Verlag, 1999).
The interpretation of the RB has changed considerably now that it is generally agreed that it depends on RM. De Vogüé’s seven-volume edition and commentary is foundational. Parts of it are appearing in English: see de Vogüé, Adalbert, A Critical Study of the Rule of Benedict, 2 vols., trans. Colleen M. McGrane (Hyde Park, NY: New City Press, 2013, 2015). (A third volume is in press.) Although De Vogüé’s work dominates the study of the Rule of Benedict, his conviction that Cassian’s writings prompted Benedict to put more emphasis on the abbot’s relation to each individual monk as his spiritual father than on fraternal relations has been widely questioned. De Vogüé collected some of his more important articles in two collections: Saint Benoît, sa vie et son Règle: études choisies, Vie monastique 12 (Bégrolles-en-Mauges, France: Abbey de Bellefontaine, 1981); and Études sur la Règle de Saint Benoît: Nouveau recueil, Vie monastique 34 (Bégrolles-en-Mauges, France: Abbaye de Bellefontaine, 1996). Because de Vogüé was always ready to engage with his critics, his articles put the reader in touch with other opinions.
RB 1980: The Rule of Benedict in Latin and English, ed. Fry, Timothy et al. (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1981), contains a wealth of information. Although by now somewhat dated, it has an excellent concordance of Latin words and a helpful topical index.
Kardong, Terrence, the foremost scholar of Benedict’s Rule working in English today, sums up much of his work in Benedict’s Rule: A Translation and Commentary (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 1996). Böckmann, Aquinata has written meticulous studies of the Rule in German, and some of these are also available in English: Perspectives on the Rule of Saint Benedict: Expanding our Hearts in Christ, trans. M. Handl and M. Burkhard (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2005); A Listening Community: A Commentary on the Prologue and Chapters 1–3 of Benedict’s Rule, trans. M. Handl and M. Burkhard (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2015). Holzherr, Georg, a scholar who was abbot of the Swiss monastery of Einsiedeln, wrote a fine commentary on the entire RB: The Rule of Benedict: An Invitation to the Christian Life, trans. Mark Thamert, Cistercian Studies 256 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2016).
Raaijmakers, Janneke, The Making of the Monastic Community of Fulda, c.744 – c.900, Cambridge Studies in Medieval Life and Thought, Fourth Series (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012), is an excellent study that refers to an abundance of relevant literature.
For Robert of Chaise-Dieu, the studies of Gaussin, Pierre-Roger are the starting point: Saint Robert de Turlande et la fondation de la Chaise-Dieu (Paris: Desfossés, 1964); Huit siècles d’histoire. L’abbaye de La Chaise-Dieu 1043–1790 (Brioude: Almanach de Brioude, 1967); Le Rayonnement de La Chaise-Dieu (Brioude: Watel, 1981). For more recent bibliography and translations of the two early Latin lives of Robert, see Feiss, Hugh, O’Brien, Maureen M., and Pepin, Ronald (eds.), The Lives of Monastic Reformers 1: Robert of La Chaise-Dieu, Stephen of Obazine, Cistercian Studies Series 222 (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press, 2010).
Further Reading
Further Reading
The classic work on Isidore remains Fontaine, J., Isidore de Séville et la culture classique de l’Espagne wisigothique, 3 vols. (Paris: Études Augustiniennes, 1959 and 1983). One should also mention Cazier, P., Isidore de Séville et la naissance de l’Espagne catholique (Paris: Beauchesne, 1994). Among recent publications, mention should be made of the following: Stocking, R. L., Bishops, Councils and Consensus in the Visigothic Kingdom, 589–633 (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2001), in which see pp. 139–42 for the highly significant story of the trial of Martianus bishop of Ecija; Henderson, J., The Medieval World of Isidore of Seville: Truth from Words (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007); and Fear, A. and Wood, J. (eds.), Isidore of Seville and His Reception in the Early Middle Ages: Transmitting and Transforming Knowledge (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2016). These books also provide references to further literature, especially in English. Extensive bibliographies on Isidore of Seville and his work can be found in the introduction of A. Valastro-Canale to his Italian translation of the Etymologies (Isidoro di Siviglia Etimologie o Origini, 2 vols. [Turin: UTET, 2004] 27–52, which goes up to 2004; and on the website opac.regesta-imperii.de (search for Isidorus), up to 2015) (last access: Jan 31, 2018).
In general, on the Visigothic realm, on the ecclesiastical policy, and on the cultural environment in early Spain, see King, P. D., Law and Society in the Visigothic Kingdom (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972); Heather, P., The Goths (Oxford: Blackwell, 1998); Collins, R., Visigothic Spain 409–711 (Malden, MA: Blackwell; Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2006); and Wolfram, H., Die Goten und ihre Geschichte (München: C. H. Beck, 2010).
On the importance of the library of Seville in Visigothic Spain, see Orlandis, J., Historia del reino visigodo español (Madrid: Rialp, 1988), 351–54. On the sources and the use of the sources in Isidore, see Gasti, F., “Fonti letterarie e fonti ‘tecniche’ nelle Etimologiae di Isidoro di Siviglia,” Sileno 42.1 (2016): 21–39.
On Isidore’s position regarding Judaism, see Cohen, J., Living Letters of the Law: Ideas of the Jew in Medieval Christianity (Berkley: University of California Press, 1999), which contains a chapter specifically devoted to “Isidore of Seville: Anti-Judaism and the Hermeneutics of Integration”; and Drews, W., The Unknown Neighbour: The Jew in the Thought of Isidore of Seville (Leiden: Brill, 2006).
On Isidore’s episcopal activity, see Kottje, R., “Isidor von Sevilla und der Chorepiskopat,” Deusches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittealters, 28 (1972): 533–37.
On the Collectio canonum Hispana and the disputed attribution of its first recension to Isidore, see Gaudemet, J., Les sources du droit de l’Église en Occident du II e au VIIe siècle (Paris: Cerf, 1985), 155–59.
For the diffusion of Isidore’s work in the early Middle Ages, see Fear, A. and Wood, J. (eds.), Isidore of Seville and his Reception in the Early Middle Ages: Transmitting and Transforming Knowledge (Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 2016). On the use of Isidore’s writings in the work of Jonas of Orléans in particular, see Reviron, J., Les idées politico-religieuses d’un évêque du IXe siècle: Jonas d’Orléans et son “De institutione regia.” Etude et texte critique (Paris: Vrin, 1930). For the late Middle Ages, see Elfassi, J. and Ribémont, B. (eds.), La reception d’Isidore de Séville durant le Moyen âge tardif (XIIe–XVe s.) (Ouzouer-le-Marche, France:Cahiers de recherches médiévales, 2008).
On the legal sources used by Isidore, see the following: Maranca, Ph. Stella, Jurisprudentiae romanae reliquias quae Isidori Hispaliensis episcopi Etymologiarum libris continentur (Lanciano, 1927) – the work is unfinished and it is very difficult to find, but the thirty-two pages published are now accessible at www.ravenna-capitale.it (search under materiali per la ricerca / studi) (last access: Jan 31, 2018); Gallo, A. García, “San Isidoro Jurista,” Isidoreana. Collección de estudios sobre Isidoro de Sevilla en el XIV centenario de su nacimiento (Leon, 1961), 133–42; and de Churruca, J., “Presupuestos para el estudio de las fuentes juridicas de Isidoro de Sevilla,” Anuario de Historia del Derecho Español 43 (1973): 429–43.
On Isidore and the law, see Tabera, A., “La definición de furtum en las ‘Etimologias’ de S. Isidoro,” Studia et Documenta Historiae et Iuris 8 (1942): 23–47; de la Vega, R. R. Gibert Sanchez, “San Isidoro de Sevilla y el derecho civil,” Revista de la Facultad de Derecho de la Universitad Complutense de Madrid 18 (1974): 33–58; Lemosse, M., “Technique juridique et culture romaine selon Isidore de Séville,” Revue historique de droit française et étranger 79 (2001): 139–52; and Reynolds, P. L., “Isidore of Seville,” in Domingo, R. and Martinéz-Torrón, J. (eds.), Great Christian Jurists in Spanish History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1918), 31–49.
On the influence of Isidore’s work on European legal culture, especially regarding procedure, see Loschiavo, L., “Isidore of Seville and the Construction of a Common Legal Culture in Early Medieval Europe,” Clio@Themis 10 (2016): 1–21 [www.cliothemis.com]. A complete survey of the medieval tradition of the procedural forms is available in Fowler-Magerl, L., ‘Ordines iudiciarii’ and ‘Libelli de ordine iudiciorum’: From the Middle of the Twelfth to the End of the Fifteenth Century (Turnhout: Brepols, 1994). On the use of torture in the criminal procedure of the Visigothic kingdom, see Peters, E., Torture (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1985), 231–35.
Further Reading
One of the most significant and reliable introductions to Pseudo-Isidore, although it is outdated in places, remains Seckel, Emil’s article in the third edition of the Theologische Realenzyklopädie 19 (1905), 265–307. Seckel also published a series of influential articles on Benedictus Levita (“Studien zu Benedictus Levita” I–VIII) in Neues Archiv between 1901 and 1917.
For an overview of the manuscript tradition of Pseudo-Isidore, see Williams, Schafer, Codices Pseudo-Isidoriani: A Palaeographico-Historical Study, with a foreword by Horst Fuhrmann (New York: Fordham University Press, 1971).
Horst Fuhrmann, acknowledged as the leading twentieth-century expert on Pseudo-Isidore, provides an English-language introduction to the topic in Fuhrmann, Horst and Jasper, Detlev, Papal Letters in the Early Middle Ages (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2001), 135–95. The following extensive study of the reception of Pseudo-Isidore in medieval canonical collections remains very important: Fuhrmann, Horst, Einfluß und Verbreitung der pseudoisidorischen Fälschungen. Von ihrem Auftauchen bis in die neuere Zeit, 3 vols., MGH Schriften I–III (Stuttgart: Anton Hiersemann, 1972–1974).
Klaus Zechiel-Eckes published several articles regarding the manuscripts produced in Pseudo-Isidore’s “workshop” and the conclusions that may be drawn from them. He summarized his central findings in a lecture that was published in 2010, after his death: Fälschung als Mittel politischer Auseinandersetzung. Ludwig der Fromme (814–840) und die Genese der pseudoisidorischen Dekretalen (Paderborn: Schönigh, 2011).
Hartmann, Wilfried and Schmitz, Gerhard (eds.), Fortschritt durch Fälschungen? Ursprung, Gestalt und Wirkungen der pseudoisidorischen Fälschungen. Beiträge zum gleichnamigen Symposium an der Universität Tübingen vom 27. und 28. Juli 2001 (Hannover: Hahn, 2002) is an anthology of conference papers on Pseudo-Isidore, including the first article that Zechiel-Eckes published on the topic. The proceedings of another international conference on Pseudo-Isidore, which took place in Cologne in 2013, were published in Ubl, Karl and Ziemann, Daniel (eds.), Fälschung als Mittel der Politik? Pseudoisidor im Licht der neuen Forschung. Gedenkschrift für Klaus Zechiel-Eckes (Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz, 2015).
On the papacy in the Pseudo-Isidorian forgeries, see Harder, Clara, Pseudoisidor und das Papsttum. Funktion und Bedeutung des apostolischen Stuhls in den pseudoisidorischen Fälschungen (Köln: Böhlau, 2014).
On the reception history of the Donation of Constantine, see Fried, Johannes, “Donation of Constantine” and “Constitutum Constantini”: The Misinterpretation of a Fiction and its Original Meaning, Millennium Studies 3 (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2007).
Finally, Knibbs, Eric has recently proposed some new theories regarding the genesis of the false decretals. See, e.g., Knibbs, “The interpolated Hispana and the Origins of Pseudo-Isidore,” ZRG Kan. Abt. 99 (2013): 1–71; and “Ebo of Reims, Pseudo-Isidore, and the Date of the False Decretals,” Speculum 92.1 (2017): 144–83.
Further Reading
For a first and general approach to Jonas’s works, the introductions by Alain and Odile Dubreucq to their editions of DIR and DIL respectively (see Sources, above) are useful. Jonas is also the object of a profound ecclesiological study: Savigni, Raffaele, Giona di Orléans: una ecclesiologia carolingia (Bologna: Pàtron, 1989).
On Carolingian specula for laypeople as a genre, see Dubreucq, Alain, “La Littérature des specula. Délimitation du genre, contenu, destinataires et réception,” in Lauwers, Michel (ed.), Guerriers et moines. Conversion et sainteté aristocratiques dans l’Occident médiéval (Antibes: Éditions APDCA, 2002), 17–39; and Sedlmeier, Franz, Die laienparänetischen Schriften der Karolingerzeit. Untersuchungen zu ausgewählten Texten des Paulinus von Aquileia, Alkuins, Jonas’ von Orléans, Dhuodas und Hinkmars von Reims (Neuried: Ars Una, 2000).
The redefinition of episcopal identity under Louis the Pious has been brilliantly examined by Patzold, Steffen, “Redéfinir l’office épiscopal. Les évêques francs face à la crise des années 820–830,” in Bougard, François, Feller, Laurent, and Le Jan, Régine (eds.), Les élites au Haut Moyen Age. Crises et renouvellements, Haut Moyen Âge 1 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), 337–59. For a more general account of Carolingian bishops, see Patzold, Steffen, Episcopus. Wissen über Bischöfe im Frankreich des späten 8. bis frühen 10. Jahrhunderts (Ostfildern: Jan Thorbecke, 2008).
The study of lay morality in Carolingian times has been enriched recently by new approaches emphasizing gender. See Noble, Thomas F. X., “Secular Sanctity: Forging an Ethos for the Carolingian Nobility,” in Wormald, P. and Nelson, J. L. (eds.), Lay Intellectuals in the Carolingian World (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007), 8–36; and Stone, Rachel, Morality and Masculinity in the Carolingian Empire (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012). On the role of conjugal morality in Carolingian political discourses, see Airlie, Stuart, “Private Bodies and the Body Politic in the Divorce Case of Lothar II,” Past and Present 161 (1998): 3–38 (albeit focusing on a later and very special case); and Stone, Rachel, “Carolingian Domesticities,” in Bennett, J. M. and Karras, R. M. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Women and Gender in Medieval Europe (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013), 229–45.
On Jonas’s views about marriage, the classic study by Toubert, Pierre is still useful: “La théorie du mariage chez les moralistes carolingiens,” in Il matrimonio nella società altomedievale, vol. 1, settimane di studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’alto Medioevo 24 (Spoleto: Presso la sede del Centro 1977), 233–85. This should be read alongside Lauranson-Rosaz, Christian, “Quod coniugium a Deo sit institutum. Le mariage d’après Jonas d’Orléans (760–841),” in Ganivet, P. (ed.), Identités, marginalités ou solidarités. Droits et histoire des personnes (Clermont-Ferrand: Presses Univ. de la Fac. de Droit, 2005), 23–37; and Veronese, Francesco, “Contextualizing Marriage: Conjugality and Christian Life in Jonas of Orléans’ De institutione laicali,” EME 23.4 (2015): 436–56.
Elisabeth Magnou-Nortier has made stimulating observations (albeit not always supported by manuscript evidence) on Jonas’s writings and their role in the revolts of 830–34: see Magnou-nortier, , “La tentative de subversion de l’État sous Louis le Pieux et l’oeuvre des falsificateurs,” Le Moyen Âge 105 (1999): 331–65, 615–41. On the religious, moral, and political dimensions of Carolingian culture during this period, see De Jong, Mayke, The Penitential State: Authority and Atonement in the Age of Louis the Pious, 814–840 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009); and Booker, Courtney M., Past Convictions: The Penance of Louis the Pious and the Decline of the Carolingians (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2009).
Further Reading
Still fundamental on Hincmar’s ideas about law is the book by Devisse, Jean, Hincmar et la loi (Dakar: Faculté des Lettres et des sciences humaines, 1962), which summarizes Hincmar’s conception of law and its divisions but devotes more space to his sources. See also the important updates on the topic that Devisse provided in his much longer Hincmar, archêveque de Reims 845–882 (Geneva: Droz, 1975–76), vol. 1, 549 ff. For a more recent evaluation in English, see Stone, Rachel and West, Charles (eds.), Hincmar of Rheims: Life and Work (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2015). The chapter in this collection most relevant to Hincmar on law is Simon Corcoran, “Hincmar and His Roman Legal Sources,” 129–55, but most of the chapters touch on law to some extent, reflecting its importance to the archbishop.
On the Paris manuscript discussed in the prelude to this chapter, see Böhringer, Letha, “Der eherechtliche Traktat im Paris. Lat.12445, einer Arbeitshandschrift Hinkmars von Reims,” Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 46 (1990): 18–47.
Bof, Riccardo and Leyser, Conrad, “Divorce and Remarriage between Late Antiquity and the Early Middle Ages: Canon Law and Conflict Resolution,” in Cooper, Kate and Leyser, Conrad (eds.), Making Early Medieval Societies: Conflict and Belonging in the Latin West, 300–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), is useful in emphasizing the difficulties that Hincmar faced in extracting consistent norms from the material available to him. On Carolingian ideas about law, the extent to which Hincmar represented an exception, and how his use of secular law (the leges) can be considered “interpretative,” or “exegetical,” see Faulkner, Thomas, Law and authority in the Early Middle Ages: The Frankish Leges in the Carolingian Period (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2016), esp. 79–81 and 84–96 for Hincmar.
The rationale for judicial ordeal is best approached through Bartlett, Robert, Trial by Fire: The Medieval Judicial Ordeal (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1986). Hincmar’s most elaborated arguments about it were presented in his De divortio (On the Divorce of King Lothar and Queen Theutberga), of which see the translation by Stone, Rachel and West, Charles, The Divorce of King Lothar and Queen Theutberga (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016).
For a survey of the wider dispute of which the De divortio was a part (with emphasis on “power politics”), see Heidecker, Karl, The Divorce of Lothar II: Christian Marriage and Political Power in the Carolingian World, translated from the Dutch by T. M. Guest (Ithaca: Cornell, 2010). For a different approach (more sympathetically disposed toward Hincmar, with his quest for peace), see Böhringer, Letha, “Gewaltverzicht, Gesichtswahrung und Befriedung durch Öffentlichkeit. Beobachtungen zur Entstehung des kirchlichen Eherechts im 9. Jahrhundert am Beispiel Hinkmars von Reims,” in Esders, S. (ed.), Rechtsverständnis und Konfliktbewältigung. Gerichtliche und außergerichtliche Strategien im Mittelalter (Cologne: Böhlau, 2007), 255–89; and Esders, S., “Das Recht im Dienst der Machtpolitik? Anmerkungen zu einer Neuerscheinung über die Scheidungsaffäre König Lothars II,” Mitteilungen des Instituts für Österreichische Geschichtsforschung 119 (2011): 146–54.
On Hincmar’s attitude to kingship, see the seminal study by Nelson, Janet L., “Kingship, Law and Liturgy in the Political Thought of Hincmar of Rheims,” English Historical Review 92 (1977): 241–79. For an example of how Hincmar tried to institutionalize one aspect of the distinction and cooperation between the church and worldly law, see West, Charles, “The Significance of the Carolingian Advocate,” EME 17.2 (2009): 186–206.
For Hincmar’s encounter with Pseudo-Isidore and his approach to accusations of forgery, the best guide is still Fuhrmann, Horst, Einfluß und Verbreitung der pseudoisidorischen Fälschungen. Von ihrem Auftauchen bis in die neuere Zeit, 3 vols., MGH 24 (Stuttgart: Hiersemann, 1972–74), 200–224, 625–726. On Pseudo-Isidore generally, see Chapter 19, by Clara Harder, in this volume.
Further Reading
Regino’s Chronicle has attracted more writing in English than the Libri duo. For a recent translation of the Chronicle, along with a very helpful introduction to Regino’s life and works, see MacLean, Simon, History and Politics in Late Carolingian and Ottonian Europe: The Chronicle of Regino of Prüm and Adalbert of Magdeburg (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2009). See also MacLean, Simon, “Insinuation, Censorship and the Struggle for Late Carolingian Lotharingia in Regino of Prüm’s Chronicle,” English Historical Review 124 (2009): 1–28. Other recent studies of the Chronicle in English include the following: Airlie, Simon, “‘Sad stories of the death of kings’: Narrative Patterns and Structures of Authority in Regino of Prüm’s Chronicle,” in Tyler, E. and Balzaretti, R. (eds.), Narrative and History in the Early Medieval West, Studies in the Early Medieval West 16 (Turnhout: Brepols, 2006), 105–31; Goosmann, Erik and Meens, Rob, “A Mirror of Princes Who Opted Out: Regino of Prüm and Royal Monastic Conversion,” in Meens, R. et al. (eds.), Religious Franks: Religion and Power in the Frankish Kingdoms: Studies in Honour of Mayke de Jong (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2016), 296–313; and West, Charles, “Knowledge of the Past and the Judgement of History in Tenth-Century Trier: Regino of Prüm and the Lost Manuscript of Bishop Adventius of Metz,” EME 24 (2016): 137–59.
Hartmann, Wilfried is the leading expert on Regino’s Libri duo. In addition to his articles cited above, see his Kirche und Kirchenrecht um 900. Die Bedeutung der spätkarolingischen Zeit für Tradition und Innovation im kirchlichen Recht, MGH Schriften 58 (Hannover: Hahn, 2008). All of these sources are in German. For discussions of the Libri duo in English, see the excellent introductions (focused on penance, but not exclusively) in Hamilton, Sarah, The Practice of Penance, 900–1050 (Woodbridge: Boydell, 2001), 25–44; and Meens, Rob, Penance in Medieval Europe, 600–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014), 141–48. On the penitential context, see also Hamilton, Sarah, “Interpreting Diversity: Excommunication Rites in the Tenth and Eleventh Centuries,” in Gittos, H. and Hamilton, S. (eds.), Understanding Medieval Liturgy: Essays in Interpretation (Farnham: Ashgate, 2016), 125–58; and Payer, Pierre, Sex and the Penitentials: The Development of a Sexual Code, 550–1150 (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1984). The Canon Episcopi, on women who believe that they can fly on animals at night, appears in several translations of medieval sources, e.g., Kors, Alan C. and Peters, Edward (eds.), Witchcraft in Europe, 400–1700: A Documentary History, 2nd edition (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 2001), 60–63.
Not much has been written in English on diocesan visitations and synodal courts in Carolingian and post-Carolingian Europe, but see John Burden, Between Sin and Crime: Penitential Justice in Medieval Germany, 900–1200 (doctoral diss., Yale University, 2018), passim; and Slafkosky, Andrew L., The Canonical Episcopal Visitation of the Diocese: A Historical Synopsis and Commentary, Catholic University of America Canon Law Studies 142 (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America, 1941). Most of the literature in this field is in German: see, e.g., Dusil, Stephan, “Zur Entstehung und Funktion von Sendgerichten: Beobachtungen bei Regino von Prüm und in seinem Umfeld,” in Schmoeckel, M. et al. (eds.), Der Einfluss der Kanonistik auf die europäische Rechtskultur, vol. 3: Straf- und Strafprozessrecht (Cologne: Böhlau, 2012), 369–409; Hartmann, Wilfried, “Der Bischof als Richter. Zum geistlichen Gericht über kriminelle Vergehen von Laien im früheren Mittelalter (6.-11. Jahrhundert),” Römische Historische Mitteilungen 28 (1986): 103–24;Hartmann, Wilfried, “Probleme des geistlichen Gerichts im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert: Bischöfe und Synoden als Richter im ostfränkisch-deutschen Reich,” in La giustizia nell’alto medioevo (secoli IX-XI) (Spoleto: CISAM, 1997), 631–72; Hartmann, Wilfried, “Zu Effektivität und Aktualität von Reginos Sendhandbuch,” in Müller, W. P. and Sommar, M. E. (eds.), Medieval Church Law and the Origins of the Western Legal Tradition: A Tribute to Kenneth Pennington (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2006), 33–49; Rudolf Schieffer, “Zur Entstehund des Sendgerichts im 9. Jahrhundert,” in Müller and Sommar, Medieval Church Law, 50–56; and Hellinger, Walter, “Die Pfarrvisitation nach Regino von Prüm,” ZRG KA 48 (1962): 1–116.
Further Reading
Hartmann, Wilfried (ed.), Bischof Burchard von Worms, 1000–1025, Quellen und Abhandlungen zur mittelrheinischen Kirchengeschichte 100 (Mainz: Selbsverlag der Gesellschaft für Mittelrheinische Kirchengschichte, 2000), includes articles in German by leading scholars in the field. Otherwise, the bibliography in Kéry, Collections, is the best starting point, although many sources listed there, too, are not in English.
The current scholarly attention to bishops in this period has been extremely helpful for understanding Burchard as a bishop: see Austin, Greta, “Vengeance and Law in Eleventh-Century Worms: Burchard and the Canon Law of Feuds,” in Müller, W. and Sommar, M. (eds.), Medieval Church Law and the Origins of the Western Legal Tradition: A Tribute to Kenneth Pennington (Washington, DC: Catholic University of America Press, 2006), 66–76; Gilsdorf, Sean (ed.), The Bishop: Power and Piety at the First Millennium (Münster: Lit, 2004); Ott, John and Trumbore-Jones, Anna (eds.), The Bishop Reformed: Studies of Episcopal Power and Culture in the Central Middle Ages (Aldershot, UK: Ashgate, 2007); Reuter, Timothy, “A Europe of Bishops: The Age of Wulfstan of York and Burchard of Worms,” in Körntgen, Ludger and Waßenhoven, Dominik (eds.), Patterns of Episcopal Power: Bishops in 10th and 11th Century Western Europe (Berlin: De Gruyter, 2011), 17–38; West, Charles, “Group Formation in the Long Tenth Century: A View from Trier and its Region,” in Albrecht, S. and Kleinjung, C. (eds.), Das lange 10. Jahrhundert – Struktureller Wandel zwischen Zentralisierung und Fragmentierung, äußerem Druck und innerer Krise (Mainz: Römisch-Germanischen Zentralmuseums, 2014), 49–59. The only monograph in English that focuses on Burchard is Austin, Greta, Shaping Church Law Around the Year 1000: The Decretum of Burchard of Worms (Farnham, UK: Ashgate, 2009). See also Austin, Greta, “Jurisprudence in the Service of Pastoral Care: The Decretum of Burchard of Worms,” Speculum 79 (2004): 929–59. On the relationship between the Collection in Twelve Parts and Burchard’s Decretum, see Austin, Greta’s somewhat unwieldy study “Freising and Worms in the Early Eleventh Century: Revisiting the relationship between the Collectio duodecim partium and Burchard’s Decretum,” ZRG Kan. Abt. 93 (2007): 45–108.
On the reception and adaptation of the collection – Austin’s research focuses rather on Burchard’s own editing – see the articles by Kathleen Cushing and Danica Summerlin in the forthcoming New Discourses in Medieval Canon Law Research – an edited volume that will represent important contributions in understanding the various ways in which the Decretum was adapted and used. The following articles or books on penance discuss Burchard’s Decretum explicitly: Hamilton, Sarah, The Practice of Penance, 900–1050 (Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK: Royal Historical Society: Boydell and Brewer, 2001); Körntgen, Ludger, “Canon Law and the Practice of Penance: Burchard of Worms’ Penitential,” EME 14.1 (2006): 103–17; and Meens, Rob, Penance in Medieval Europe, 600–1200 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2014). Recent scholarly interest in superstitio and other “magical” practices and beliefs during the Middle Ages has resulted in some writings on this subject in English, including the following: Filotas, Bernadette, Pagan Survivals, Superstitions and Popular Cultures in Early Medieval Pastoral Literature, Studies and Texts 151 (Toronto: PIMS, 2005); and Rampton, Martha, “Burchard of Worms and Female Magical Ritual,” in Rollo-Koster, J. (ed.), Medieval and Early Modern Ritual: Formalized Behavior in Europe, China, and Japan (Leiden: Brill, 2002), 7–34. On Burchard’s speculative theology in Book 20, see George House, Pastoral Eschatological Exegesis in Burchard of Worms’ Decretum (doctoral diss., University of Exeter, 2014); on Book 19 and the reception of Burchard’s Decretum in abbreviations, see Burden, John Between Sin and Crime: Penitential Justice in Medieval Germany, 900–1200 (doctoral diss., Yale University, 2018). For some excerpts from Book 19, the Corrector, translated into English, see, e.g., Shinners, John (ed.), Medieval Popular Religion, 1000–1500: A Reader, 2nd ed. (North York, Ont.: University of Toronto Press, 2009), 459–70; see also the longer translation in McNeill, John and Gamer, Helena, Medieval Handbooks of Penance: A translation of the principal ‘Libri poenitentiales’ and selections from related documents (New York: Columbia University Press, 1938; repr. 1990), 321–45.