Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-13T02:08:23.618Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Greek and Latin Versions of II Nicaea and the Synodica of Hadrian I (JE 2448): A Diplomatic Study*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 July 2016

Luitpold Wallach
Luitpold Wallach*
Affiliation:
Marquette University
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

Hadrian I's synodica of 785 (JE 2448), addressed to the Byzantine Emperors Irene and her son Constantine VI, which encouraged the rulers in their planned restoration of image-worship, is one of the most important official Latin documents of the eighth century. In the East it became in 787 the basis of the discussions at the Seventh Ecumenical Council (II Nicaea), which restored the worship of images in Byzantium. In the West, the Franks and Charlemagne based their rejection of image worship and of II Nicaea on certain sections of the synodica which were critically discussed in the Frankish Capitulare adversus synodum of c. 788/9, as well as in Hadrian I's refutation of this lost capitulary, whose text is extensively cited in the chapter headings of the so-called Hadrianum (JE 2483) of c. 791. Greek and Latin testimonia invoked in JE 2448 in favor of image worship are rebuked in Charlemagne's Libri Carolini, the official Frankish protest against II Nicaea. Finally, numerous merous fragments of the synodica's text, especially from its catena of patristic testimonia, were inserted into the Libellus synodalis of the Paris Synod of 825.

Type
Articles
Information
Traditio , Volume 22 , 1966 , pp. 103 - 125
Copyright
Copyright © Fordham University Press 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Edited in Mansi 12.1055–76D; Baronius, C., Annales ecclesiastici 13 ed. Theiner, A. (Barri-Ducis 1868) 171a-178b; partly in Migne, PL 96.1215C-34C; Gaudenzi, A., ‘La Vita Adriani Papae,’ Bullettino dell’ Istituto Storico Italiano 36 (1916) 297–310 (an insert from Anastasius Bibliothecarius’ translation of the Greek Acts of II Nicaea, as correctly surmised by Th. R. von Sickel, Neues Archiv 18 [1893] 109). — The present writer is preparing a critical edition of this important document, whose catena of Greek testimonia and diplomatic sources will be dealt with in a volume entitled Diplomatic Studies of Latin and Greek Documents. Google Scholar

2 See the edition of the Hadrianum by Karl Hampe in MGH, Epistolae 5 (Karolini Aevi 3; Berlin 1899) 5–57. Google Scholar

3 Cf. Wallach, L., ‘Libri Carolini and Patristics, Latin and Greek: Prolegomena to a critical merous fragments of the synodica‘s text, especially from its catena of patristic testimonia, were inserted into the Libellus synodalis of the Paris Synod of 825.4 Edition,’ in The Classical Tradition: Literary and Historical Studies in Honor of Harry Caplan, ed. Wallach, L. (Cornell University Press: Ithaca, New York 1966) 451–498.Google Scholar

4 Edited by Werminghoff, A., MGH, Concilia 2.2. (Karolini Aevi 1.2; Hannover and Leipzig 1908) 473–551, including the Epitome. Google Scholar

5 See n. 1 above. Google Scholar

6 Cf. Levison, e.g. and Ostrogorsky, as cited n. 30 below, and Ostrogorsky, G., Geschichte des byzantinischen Staates (2nd ed. Munich 1952) 149 n. 1.Google Scholar

7 Art. cit. (n. 3) 467–496.Google Scholar

8 ‘ Zweisprachigkeit in den Konzilsakten,’ Philologus 88 (1933) 245–253; also ‘Der sechste nicaenische Kanon auf der Synode von Chalkedon,’ Sb. Akad. Berlin (1930) 614–616; see furthermore Steinacker, H., ‘Die römische Kirche und die griechischen Sprachkenntnisse des Frühmittelalters,’ Mitteilungen des Instituts für Oesterreichische Geschichtsforschung 62 (1954) 28–66.Google Scholar

9 See Schwartz, E., Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum [= ACO] II.3.3 (Berlin-Leipzig 1937) p. xviii, with a list of all the relevant adnotationes Rustici, from ACO II.3.1 (1935) 40.16 (first intervention of the legates) to II. 3.2 (1936) 409.10ff. (the imperial allocution); also Schwartz, ‘Aus den Akten des Konzils von Chalkedon,’ Abh. Akad. Munich. 32.2 (1925) 13ff.Google Scholar

10 Schwartz, ACO I.1.7 (Berlin-Leipzig 1929) 119f.; see the Latin subscriptiones interspersed among the Greek signatures of the synodal proceedings, ibidem 111–117, passim. Google Scholar

11 Ibid. 119.25–120.31.Google Scholar

12 Schwartz, ACO I.1.3 (1927) 53.31–54.24. — In 866, Nicholas I referred to this discussion, ep. 90: ‘… ita ut … ipsa epistola cum competenti honore Latine primitus et postea in Graecam dictionem sine ullo fuco falsitatis iam translata sit coram synodo lecta’ (ed. Perels, E., MGH, Epistolae 6 [Karolini Aevi 4; Berlin 1925] 492.39–493.4).Google Scholar

13 Franz Dölger, Regesten der Kaiserurkunden des oströmischen Reiches: Teil I.: Regesten von 565–1025 (Munich-Berlin 1924). Google Scholar

14 The later patriarch; see Alexander, P. J., The Patriarch Nicephorus of Constantinople (Oxford 1958) 60f.Google Scholar

15 Das Papsttum unter fränkischer Herrschaft (Darmstadt 1956) 54 n. 47. — Caspar's posthumously edited studies, first published in Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte 54 (1935), contain a number of confusing references to the Hadrianum (JE 2483) and Hadrian I's synodica 2448 which are mistakenly interchanged: instead of JE 2448 read 2483 on p. 78 nn. 110 and 111, p. 79 n. 116; instead of JE 2483 read 2448 on p. 83 n. 130, p. 84 n. 132; also, p. 84 n. 131 has JE 2448 in mind, but cites the text of 2483 which was never included in the Acts of II Nicaea; on p. 86 read 692 instead of 612.Google Scholar

16 ‘ Entstehungsgeschichte der Libri Carolini,’ Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 21 (1929–30) 24.Google Scholar

17 Ed. Perels, E., MGH, Epistolae 6.436.Google Scholar

18 ed. Perels, E. and Laehr, G., MGH, Epistolae 7 (Karolini Aevi 5; Berlin 1928) 416.Google Scholar

19 MGH, , Epistolae 6.448–449.Google Scholar

20 MGH, , Epistolae 6.457, and cf. 458.Google Scholar

21 See below, notes 30 and 31, and Dölger, cited in n. 43. Google Scholar

22 See MGH, , Epistolae 6.487.21; also ep. 91, p. 533, ep. 89, p. 488.9, ep. 90, p. 492.20–38, ep. 93, p. 541.36–40.Google Scholar

23 MGH, , Epistolae 7.415.2–12.Google Scholar

24 See John VIII, ep. 208, ed. Caspar, E., MGH, Epistolae 7.176–181; the section in the Tarasius passage, p. 178.22–27, is an unacknowledged quotation in JE 2448 from Gregory the Great's Registrum epistolarum 9.215; see below, II D.Google Scholar

26 See Perels, MGH, Epistolae 6.448.31–35. Google Scholar

26 MGH, , Epistolae 7.166, 176, 181.Google Scholar

27 Edited by Gaudenzi, A., art. cit. (see note 1 above); ibidem pp. 296–7 see the Divalia, ed. Mansi 12.984–5.Google Scholar

28 See Liber Pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, L. (Paris 1886–1892; reprint: Paris 1955) I 512, and the comments by von den Steinen, op. cit. (n. 16 above) 11ff. I discount as a later concoction the report by Roger de Wendover (von den Steinen 12 n. 3) that Charlemagne had received the acta of II Nicaea from Constantinople, and that he sent them to Alcuin in England, who wrote an epistola against them.Google Scholar

29 See n. 28 above. Google Scholar

30 Levison, W., Aus Rheinischer und Fränkischer Frühzeit (Düsseldorf 1948) 434 n. 6, and Ostrogorsky, G., ‘Rom und Byzanz im Kampf um die Bilderverehrung,’ Seminarium Kondakovianum 6 (1933) 75.Google Scholar

31 Michel, A., ‘Die Kaisermacht in der Ostkirche,’ Ostkirchliche Studien 5 (1956) 2 charges the imperial chancellery with the adulterated version of JE 2448; cf. also Jugie, M., Le schisme byzantin: Aperçu historique et doctrinal (Paris 1941) 85f.Google Scholar

32 Ed. Funk, F.X., Didascalia et Constitutiones Apostolorum I (Paderborn 1905) 572, and II 42, no. VII.2.Google Scholar

33 Cf. Louis Bréhier, ‘L'investiture des patriarches de Constantinople au moyen âge,’ Miscellanea Mercati G. III (Studi e Testi 123; Città del Vaticano 1946) 368. The Greek text of c. 12 is not preserved; the extant fragment β’ (Mansi 16.405B) corresponds to a section of Latin c. 17 (ibid. 171D-E) which is not pertinent here. For a convenient confrontation of the 14 extant Greek fragments with the 27 Latin canons of Anastasius Bibliothecarius, see Ioannou, P.P.'s edition in Conciliorum oecumenicorum decreta (ed. Centro di Documentazione, Istituto per le Scienze Religiose, Bologna; Herder, Freiburg etc. 1962) 142–162. (I am indebted to Professor Kuttner for the reference to Ioannou.)Google Scholar

34 Edd. Perels and Laehr, MGH, Epistolae 7.403–18, especially 410.17f. Google Scholar

35 Ibid. 417.27f. and n. 5. On Anastasius as dictator of imperial and papal documents see Nelly Ertl, ‘Diktatoren frühmittelalterlicher Papstbriefe,’ Archiv für Urkundenforschung 15 (1938), especially pp. 82–132, and the objections against Ertl voiced by Paul Devos, ‘Anastase le Bibliothécaire: Sa contribution à la correspondance pontificale,’ Byzantion 32 (1962) 97–115. Gudrun Lindholm, Studien zum mittellateinischen Prosarhythmus (Acta Univ. Stockholmiensis: Studia lat. Stockholmensia 10; 1963) 11 n. 13, reports that Miss Ulla Westerbergh shows in a still unpublished study that Anastasius was not the author of Nicholas I's letters. It remains to be seen whether the evidence for Anastasius’ authorship discussed by Lapôtre, Ernst Perels, and Nelly Ertl can be shaken. Clausulae alone are not sufficient evidence of authorship.Google Scholar

36 MGH, , Epistolae 7.411.12.Google Scholar

37 Ibid. 411.17.Google Scholar

38 Ed. Duchesne, II 181–3. Google Scholar

39 Ibid. 181 and MGH Epistolae 7.411.11–13.Google Scholar

40 Cf. ep. 86, MGH, Epistolae 6.451.15–16; also ep. 85 of 682, addressed to Emperor Michael III, ibid. 446.8–10. Compare also in the Acts of the Eighth Ecumenical Council (IV Constantinople), translated by Anastasius, Mansi 16.331D-334E, the abridged text of ep. 82 by Nicholas I, addressed to Emperor Michael, MGH, Epistolae 6.433–439. Google Scholar

41 On Radoald and Zachary see, for instance, ep. 82, ibid. 439.12ff. and ep. 84, ibid. 441.15ff. — Francis Dvornik, The Photian Schism: History and Legend (Cambridge 1948) 90, relies on Baronius’ Annales ecclesiastici, and instead of referring to Mansi 12.1055–76, misinterprets the contents and the diplomatic nature of JE 2448. Haller, J., Nikolaus I. und Pseudoisidor (Stuttgart 1936) 277ff., in my opinion also misjudges the intentions of See, Hadrian I. furthermore F. Dölger in Dölger and Schneider, A.M. Byzanz: Wissenschaftliche Forschungsberichte 5 (ed. Karl Hönn; Bern 1952) 134–138, passim; Dvornik, ‘The Patriarch Photios in the Light of Recent Research,’ Berichte zum XI. Internationalen Byzantinischen Kongress (Munich 1958), Section III. 2, pp. 1–56, and the Korreferat by Stephanou, P. (pp. 17–26), challenging Dvornik's theories.Google Scholar

42 Cf. Cyril Mango, The Homilies of Photius (Cambridge, Mass. 1958) 303. Google Scholar

43 Loc. cit. (n. 30 above) especially p. 77f.; and F. Dölger, Byzanz und die europäische Staatenwelt (Ettal, Bavaria 1953) 103 n. 56 on suppression by Photius in papal documents of passages referring to the primacy of Rome.Google Scholar

44 See Anastos, Milton V., ‘The Transfer of Illyricum, Calabria, and Sicily to the Jurisdiction of the Patriarchate of Constantinople,’ Silloge Bizantina in onore di Silvio Giuseppe Mercati (Studi Bizantini e Neoellenici 9; Rome 1957) 14–31.Google Scholar

45 Ed. Wilhelm Gundlach, MGH, Epistolae 3 (Merowingici et Karolini Aevi 1; Berlin 1892) 469–657. Google Scholar

46 Liber diurnus Romanorum pontificum, ed. Th. von Sickel (Wien 1884); cf. the ‘Gesamtausgabe’ by Hans Foerster (Bern 1958).Google Scholar

47 See Wallach, above n. 3. Google Scholar

48 On the exclusive prerogative of the Roman Emperor to convene an ecumenical council see Schwartz, E., Gesammelte Schriften IV (Berlin 1960) 112, and Funk, F.X., ‘Die Berufung der ökumenischen Synoden des Altertums,’ Kirchenrechtliche Abhandlungen und Untersuchungen 1 (Paderborn 1897) 49f., 55, 68f.Google Scholar

49 Libri Carolini sive Caroli Magni Capitulare de imaginibus ed. Hubert Bastgen (MGH Concilia 2, Supplementum; Hannover-Leipzig 1924) 109f. — A rejoinder to Freeman, A., ‘Further Studies in the Libri Carolini,’ Speculum 40 (1965) 203–89, will appear in the near future, as announced in ‘Libri Carolini and Patristics’ (cited above, n. 3) 498 n. 103.Google Scholar

50 See Glossae Latinograecae et Graecolatinae, ed. Georg Goetz and Gotthold Gundermann (Corpus Glossariorum Latinorum 2; Leipzig 1888), 149, and M.L.W. Laistner, Philoxeni Glossarium in Glossaria Latina iussu Academiae Britannicae edita 2 (Paris 1926) 244b. Google Scholar

51 Op. cit. (above n.16) pp. 24, 61; also Hampe's note, MGH Epp. 5 ad loc. and p. 15, nn. 15, 16. — The relationship between JE 2448 and the Constitutum Constantini will be discussed in ‘Actus Silvestri, Libri Carolini, and the Constantine Donation: The Solution of a Pseudo-Problem,’ one of the studies in the forthcoming Pt. II of my Prolegomena to a Critical Edition of the Libri Carolini, listed in the article cited above n. 3) 498 n. 103. — The fragments of JE 2448 and 2449 cited in later collections of canon law are not included in the present study; their exact historical origin can now be assessed, I believe, on the basis of the present investigation. Google Scholar