THE FRANKS

Introduction.
The Franks came from the region of the lower Rhine, and spread slowly into the Roman province of Gaul. Their leader, Clovis (A.D. c.466-510), conquered Gaul and also defeated three other Germanic tribes: the Alemanni, the Visigoths or West Goths, and Burgundians. Clovis was the first leader to unify the Franks and to complete the conquest of the territories of what would be the major part of modern France. The Frankish kings in Gaul were the only Germanic tribes to enter the Roman Empire as pagans and not as Arian Christians. About A.D. 500, Clovis decided to accept catholic baptism, following his marriage to a catholic princess. He married a Burgundian princes, Clotida (A.D. 474-545), and linked the Burgundian territories won by this marriage with others won in battle. The union of all the Frankish tribes from the eastern bank of the Rhine under his leadership was a great contribution to the peace in the area. Clovis accepted Christianity partly through the influence of his wife and partly because of what appeared to be divine aid given to him in battle. According to a Frankish history, Clovis agreed to accept Christ if the Christian God would give him victory over another tribe with whom he was at war. Clovis won his battle against the Alemanni; then, with three thousand of his warriors, he was baptized. His acceptance of Christianity in 496 makes that year significant in the history of western Europe because the Franks, whom Clovis had united, were to become the bulwark of the papacy against its temporal foes and to give to the papacy the territories that it would hold as temporal possessions for over a millennium.

The Merovingian Rulers.
The Frankish rulers who traced their ancestry back to Clovis' grandfather, Meroveus, are called the Merovingians. The conversion of Clovis and the devotion of his Merovingian successors to the Apostle Peter and the Roman church did not mean that the pope immediately had control on Royal policy. The harsh, even barbaric, conditions of Gaul under the Merovingian dynasty of Frankish rulers proved very detrimental to the church during the sixth and seventh centuries. Gregory the Great, determined to revive the church in the West, attempted to launch reform in Gaul. He was thwarted by the Merovingian rulers, who indulged in such practices as appointing laymen as bishops, and selling church appointments. These Frankish rulers simply assumed that the church was freely at their own disposal. Gregory's efforts pointed the way to the reforms of the eighth century.

According to German custom, a kingdom was divided among the sons of the reigning monarch at his death. And so there came to be two Frankish states: Austrasia, or the old territory along the Rhine, and Neustria, or the land acquired later in western Gaul. Not only was the Frankish state divided, but the monarchs were a sorry lot. The low character of Frankish rulers and the constant divisions which took place at the death of each king contributed to what the historian Charles Oman calls, "the most hopeless and depressing page in the history of Europe."

The Carolingian Rulers. As it is so often true, Clovis' sons did not have the ability of their father; and the control of the affairs of state passed into the hands of an official of the Royal household, called the Mayor of the Palace (major domus), who held the reins of government, while the weak successors of Clovis enjoyed life in the palace. These Mayors of the Palace made up what is known as the Carolingian Dynasty of Frankish Rulers. They actually usurped the powers of the king, and one of these, Pippin of Heristal, succeeded in making the office hereditary in his family. Pippin was the first these Mayors of the Palace to reunite the divided possessions of Clovis, and from A.D. 687 to 714 he controlled the Franks for the degenerate descendants of Clovis.

An illegitimate son of Pippin, Charles Martel (A.D. 689-741), called the Hammerer, took over the duties of Mayor of the Palace after A.D. 714. It was he who really made the position prominent enough to enable his successor to become king of the Franks. His abilities as a warrior were used to repel the Muslims who had overrun Spain, and were now threatening to take over all of western Europe Charles commanded the army at the battle of Tours near Poitiers in A.D. 732 that defeated the Muslims. The Roman church was obligated to him because he apparently had saved western Europe for catholic Christianity. He also supported the work of Boniface in evangelizing the tribes beyond the Rhine, knowing that if they were won to Christianity, he would not have difficulty with them on the western bank of the Rhine. But Charles incurred the wrath of the church, because he took away church lands. Originally, the church agreed to the use of its lands and incomes to help fight off the Muslim invaders. But Charles did not return the lands. In addition, he refused the papal request for an attack on the Lombards in Italy, because the Lombards had been Charles' allies against the Muslims.

Charles Martel had two sons, Carloman and Pepin (A.D. c.714-768), known as Pepin the Short or Pepin the Great, who had been raised in the monastery of St. Denis near Paris. These two brothers ruled jointly from A.D. 741 to 747 in the office of Mayor of the Palace, and were helped by Boniface to carry out a major reform of the Frankish church. These reforms of the clergy and church organization, brought about a renewal of religious and intellectual life and made possible the educational revival associated with the greatest of the Carolingian rulers, Charlemagne. When Carloman retired to a monastery in A.D. 747, Pepin alone received the mayoralty title. Considering himself king in all but name, Pepin secured the sanction of Pope Zacharias for the deposing of Childeric III, last of the Merovingians, who in order to maintain the legal fiction of that dynasty he was named king of all the Franks in A.D. 743. Childeric was compelled to spend the rest of his life in a monastery. Zacharias died before he could ratified the new dynasty. Boniface, the Pope's legate, and several other bishops consecrated Pepin as king at Soissons in A.D. 751. Pepin was the first real Carolingian king because he took the title of king (A.D. 751) as well as exercising the authority of Mayor of the Palace. Apparently Pepin had promised Pope Zacharias to aid the pope with military expeditions against the Arian Lombards in Italy. When Pope Stephen II appealed to Pepin for aid against the Lombards, Pepin redeemed his promise to Pope Zacharias and came to the aid of Stephen in A.D. 754 and 756. Pepin promised land in central Italy from Rome to Ravenna to Pope Stephen II in A.D. 754. This grant, known as the Donation of Pepin, had special significance for the people of Rome because 754 B.C. was the traditional date for the founding of the city of Rome. This allotment was the foundation for the papal states that the pope held uninterruptedly in Italy from A.D. 756 until the union of the Italian people in A.D. 1870. It is not surprising that the reigning pope, Stephen II, crowned Pepin for the second time as the "King of the Franks and Patrician of the Romans" in A.D. 754, Stephen received the promised grant in A.D. 756. Thus Stephen placed Rome under the protection of Pepin and recognized him and his sons as "Protectors of the Romans".

The Papacy.
For some centuries a story had been developing concerning the miraculous healing and conversion of Constantine by the bishop of Rome in the fourth century. The grateful Constantine was supposed to have made liberal grants of rights and territories to the bishop of Rome. These stories were combined in a document known as the Donation of Constantine. This document was given wide circulation during the Middle Ages and was used by the popes to buttress their claims to the temporal possessions and to power in both temporal and spiritual realms. The authoritative formulation seems to have been made about the middle of the eighth century so that it was in circulation at the time Pepin made his grant of land in Italy to the papacy. In this document supposedly written by Constantine, Constantine greeted Pope Sylvester and the bishops of the church and went on to relate that he had been healed from leprosy and baptized by Sylvester. In return, Constantine declared that the church at Rome was to have precedence over all other churches and that its bishop was the supreme bishop in the church. He gave to Sylvester territories throughout his empire, the Lateran Palace, and the clothing and insignia of the imperial rank. Constantine then withdrew to Constantinople so that he would not interfere with the imperial rights of the pope. These events were not historically correct. No other record of any such facts exists. In 1440 Lorenzo Valla showed in his book, the first document of real historical criticism, that the Donation was a forgery made some centuries after the events it purported to describe. Valla's arguments helped to establish the science of literary criticism. Valla held that Constantine was not the kind of ruler to give away his empire, and that Sylvester would not have accepted such a gift as he was most concerned with his spiritual office as the shepherd of souls. Through philological and critical reasoning Valla showed that the document could not have been written in the fourth century, as it refers to satraps, the stockings of the Roman senators, and the papal crown. None of these terms or items was in use during Constantine's time. Valla's scholarship was so thorough that even the pope accepted his conclusions. Few spurious documents have exercised so powerful an influence on history as this one did.

In A.D. 725 the Eastern Emperor Leo II forbade the use of icons or pictures in worship. The result was religious revolt. The monks and common people resisted in defense both of the veneration of images and of the freedom of the Church. Leo enforced his decree by the army. In most of the empire he had his way. But Italy was too remote, and there the papacy, and Italy generally, opposed the iconoclastic efforts of the Eastern Emperor Leo III, going so far as to excommunicate the iconoclasts in a Roman Synod held under Pope Gregory III, in A.D. 731. The Emperor answered by removing all of Sicily and such portions of Italy as he could from the Pope's jurisdiction, and placing these regions under the see of Constantinople. In Rome and northern Italy the imperial power exercised from Constantinople was too feeble to control papal action. The imperial representative was the Exarch of Ravenna, under whom stood a duke of Rome for military affairs, though the Pope was in many respects the Emperor's representative in the civil affairs of the city. The papacy was now in practical rebellion against the Eastern rulers who had their seat in Constantinople. But the papacy was in a most dangerous position. The Lombards were pressing, and were threatening the capture of Rome. The disunion as the result of the iconoclastic dispute made it necessary, if the papacy was to maintain any considerable independence in Rome, to find other protection against the Lombards than that of the Eastern Emperor. Thus the Pope sought and last obtained it from the Franks. In A.D. 739 Gregory III appealed to Charles Martel for aid against the Lombards, but in vain. With Pepin the Short it was otherwise. He was more ecclesiastically minded, and had greater plans than even his father had entertained. Pepin and the papacy could be of mutual assistance each to the other. The new Lombard King, Aistulf (A.D. 749-756), had conquered Ravenna from the Emperor in A.D. 751 and was grievously pressing Rome itself. Pepin desired the kingly title as well as the kingly power in France. He had determined upon a revolution which should relegate the last of the feeble Merovingians, Childeric III, to a monastery, and place Pepin himself on the throne. For this change he desired not only the approval of the Frankish nobility, but the moral sanction of the Church. He appealed to Pope Zacharias (A.D. 741-752). The Pope's approval was promptly granted, and before the close of A.D. 751, Pepin was formally in the kingly office. To this he was anointed and crowned, but whether by Boniface, as has usually been supposed, is uncertain. This event had far reaching consequences. From it the conclusion might be drawn that it was within the Pope's power to give and withhold kingdoms.

But if the Pope could thus help Pepin, the latter could be no less helpful to the Pope. Aistulf and his Lombards continued to press Rome. Pope Stephen II, who succeeded Zacharias, went to Pepin himself, crowning and anointing Pepin and his sons, Charles and Carloman, again in the church of St. Denis near Paris, in A.D. 754, and confirming to them the indefinite title of "Patricians of the Romans" all the more useful, perhaps, because implying a relation to Rome that was wholly undefined. The title had been borne by the imperial exarch in Ravenna. Soon after this crowning Pepin fulfilled his reciprocal obligation. At the head of a Frankish army, late A.D. 754, or early in A.D. 755, he invaded Italy and compelled Aistulf to agree to surrender to the Pope Ravenna and the other recent Lombard conquests. A second campaign, in A.D. 756, was necessary before the Lombard King made good his promise. The Exarchate of which Ravenna was the capital and the Pentapolis were now the possessions of the Pope. The "States of the Church" now began the temporal sovereignty of the papacy which was to last until 1870. As far as we can tell, in granting the Exarchate to Pope Stephen, called the Donation of Pepin, Pepin regarded himself as overlord. But Pepin did not give Rome itself to the Pope. It was not his to give. Legally, the status of Rome would have been hard to define. Though the Pope had practically broken with the Emperor at Constantinople, Rome had not been conquered from the Emperor. Indeed the papacy recognized the sovereignty of the Eastern Emperor in the style of its public documents until A.D. 772. Pepin had the wholly nebulous rights that might be included in the title "Patrician of the Romans". Actually, Rome was in the possession of the Pope. Confirming the Pope's title as a temporal ruler was not quite an original ideas with Pepin. There was a legend embodied in a document drawn up some time between A.D. 754 and 775 called the Donation of Constantine that Constantine had done something of the sort by giving Pope Sylvester I "the city of Rome and all the provinces, places and cities of Italy and the Western regions." This document was often cited by later popes to justify their temporal government in central Italy.

Charlemagne.
The next ruler of the Franks was Charlemagne (Charles the Great), son of Pepin the Short, who died in A.D. 768. Pepin had divided his kingdom between his two sons, Charles and Carloman. The two brothers did not get along with each other, but the situation was relieved by the death of Carloman in A.D. 771. With this event the real reign of Charles, to whom the world has ascribed the title "Great", began. Charlemagne (A.D. 742-814) came to the throne in A.D. 768 and on Christmas Day in A.D. 800 he became Emperor in the West when Pope Leo III crowned him Imperator Romanorum (Emperor of the Romans). Thus the Roman Empire was revived in the West; and new Rome, led by a Teuton, took the place of the old Roman Empire. A universal empire now existed beside a universal church. The classical and Christian heritage were now linked in a Christian empire. The human dream of unity of men seemed again to be realized, for Charlemagne had the largest territory under his control that any man held since the fall of the Roman Empire in the West. The universal spiritual empire of the papacy over men's soul now had its counterpart in the revived Roman Empire that Charlemagne had over the bodies of men.

Charlemagne's influence was felt in every area of human life in western Europe. During his long reign he made many conquests. When he became sole ruler of the Frankish kingdom in A.D. 771, he spent the next three decades in warfare. When he died his kingdom included all of modern France, Belgium and Holland, nearly half of modern Germany and Austria-Hungry, more than half of Italy, and a bit of northeastern Spain. His greatest military achievement was the conquest of the Saxons in a protracted war that drained his resources. Victory was gained through massacres, forced conversions, mass deportation, and the organization of Saxony into counties and dioceses under Franks loyal to Charles. In A.D. 774 he defeated the Lombards and annexed Northern Italy. A quarrel with Desiderius, King of the Lombards, resulted in the conquest and extinction of that kingdom by Charles in two campaigns from A.D. 774 to 777. Even after Pepin's defeat of the Lombards and his confirmation of papal rule in central Italy, the Lombards continued to dispute such power as the Pope exercised, menacing Rome itself. And so Charles , like his father invaded Italy to chastise the Lombards. This time they were thoroughly conquered. Charles incorporated northern Italy into the Frankish empire, and assumed by himself the "Iron Crown" of the Lombards. Pepin's grants to the papacy were renewed, but the papacy was no longer separated as it had been from the main Frankish territories by the intervening Lombard kingdom. Charlemagne's relation to Rome was a much more effective overlordship than that of his father, and he thenceforth treated the Pope as the chief prelate of his realm, rather than as an independent power, though he did not go so far as to dictate the choice of the popes, as he did that of the bishops of his kingdom. He conducted several campaigns along the southwestern frontier and gained back the region in northeastern Spain called the Spanish March in A.D. 795, later known as the March of Barcelona. In the east he crushed Bavaria, organized the Ostmark as a defense against the Slavs and later destroyed the Avars, an Asiatic people who had penetrated to the middle Danube. These campaigns brought the heathen Slavic tribes under Charles's influence and opened the way for German colonization of eastern Europe. Charlemagne engaged in over fifty campaigns during the course of his reign in an attempt to end anarchy within his kingdom and to expand its borders.

Charlemagne developed an able bureaucracy and a good system of imperial government to administer his large empire. The empire was divided into different regions or provinces, each of which comprised several counties, under a duke. The emperor sent men known as Missi Dominici to the courts of these dukes at unexpected times to inspect their account, to announce new capitularies or laws, and to check on how well the dukes were keeping order. These inspectors traveled in pairs, one a layman and the other a clergyman. The Missi Dominici not only checked up on what the provincial governors or dukes were doing but exercised some control over judicial procedure in outlying districts. They were instrumental in determining the fate of an accused person by evidence instead of by more violent means, such as duels or other forms of ordeal. They revived what is known as the sworn inquest, first tried experimentally in the late years of the old empire. Substantial citizens would be summoned to tell what they knew about crimes committed in the locality, swearing an oath that their evidence was true. The sworn inquest survived the fall of the Frankish state, was kept alive in Normandy, was introduced by the Normans into England and became the germ of the English jury system. Thus local barbarism was somewhat checked by an intelligent central government. Charlemagne had an eye for statesman-like devices of enduring value.

Much of what is known about Charlemagne is derived from Einhard, sometimes incorrectly called Eginhard, a writer of a brief biography of Charlemagne. Charlemagne was about seven feet tall and had a proportionately large body. His bright face and long white hair, combined with such height, gave him an air of dignity. He delighted in hunting, riding, and swimming but also had a real interest in culture and this interest led him to combine the pleasure of the table with listening to music or having someone read to him. He was also devoted to the Christian religion, but it did not affect his domestic life because he kept concubines as well as legal spouse in his palace.

Charlemagne was also friendly to the Church. In fact he claimed power over both Church and State, and practiced a kind of religious paternalism in his Church reforms. He intervened in questions of clerical appointments, discipline, and even doctrine. He thought that the Church might be compared to the man's soul and the State to the body of man. Church and State had their respective spheres of responsibility. But he believed that the ruler of the Church should not dispute the decisions of the ruler of the State and that bishops should also be subordinated to the head of the State. When Pope Leo III was set upon by a faction in Rome and nearly killed, the Pope fled Rome for the court of Charlemagne. Charlemagne went back with him to Rome, and at a council the Pope was cleared of the charges against him. Then on Christmas Day in the year 800 A.D., at a holy mass in the cathedral, while Charlemagne knelt before altar, the Pope put the golden crown on Charlemagne's head and declared that he was the emperor of the Romans. The congregation took up the cry, "Long life and victory to Charles the August, crowned by God the great and pacific Emperor of the Romans." Thus, over three hundred years after the end of the Roman Empire in the West, another Roman Empire was proclaimed. But history does not always repeat itself in exactly the same way.

Different interpretations was put on this great event by each of the parties to it: by the audience, by Charlemagne, and by the Pope. We may assume that the audience that day contained many who looked back to the Roman Empire as a golden age of peace and security. Of course, those who lived in A.D. 800 did not actually remember the old empire, but they lived under the spell of its legend, which persisted through the long years of semi-barbarism. Indeed the dream of what once had been grew brighter as chaos reigned. And now there had arisen in the West another empire which would bring peace and security again. And there could be no better name for it than Roman.

The monarch who had been crowned knew that empire that he had created was something more and less than Roman. It included parts of the old empire in the West; Gaul, part of Italy and a bit of Spain were included in it. But North Africa, Britain and most of Spain were excluded, while added were parts of Germany which had never been in the old empire. Its citizens too was only partly Roman. The peoples of Italy and Gaul already included the Germanic tribes who had assimilated the Roman language and culture, while the newcomers to the empire, the eastern Germans and Slavs, were little affected by Roman culture. And the ruling Franks, a short few centuries before, had been outside Roman civilization. But there is some evidence that Charlemagne himself was not happy to have become Roman Emperor by the designation of the Pope. Charlemagne genuinely venerated the Roman tradition, but he would have preferred to have taken the imperial crown himself, especially since he had reason to believe himself strong enough to do so. Although he felt that the act had been stolen from him, Charlemagne did not repudiate the Pope's action when it was done. In the last analysis the Frankish monarch was glad that his position had been strengthened by the imperial title and he was not displeased to be known as Roman Emperor.

The Pope, who had taken the initiative in putting the Roman stamp upon the Frankish-Roman mixture, believed that he was following a reasonable policy from his own standpoint. The manner in which he paid a debt to a Frankish king for services rendered would rebound, he believed, to the advantage of the Church. The Church was the heir of the old empire in so far as presiding over the affairs of Western Christendom was concerned. Yet policing the chaotic state of this world must be delegated because the Church, except in an emergency, was not equipped to preserve order in temporal affairs save in limited regions such as the Papal States. The most effective policeman for Western Europe would be the strongest western ruler. The Pope thought in terms of an universal ruler who would govern all of Western Europe, or as much of it as possible, for the Pope was also conscious of the Roman Empire tradition and legend. And of course such a policeman would be expected naturally to assist the Pope when necessary.

But the policeman must always realize that his was a delegated power, to be executed according the will of God. He must be invested with authority in such a way that he would remember that he was a deputy of God. That meant that he would be the deputy of God's deputy on the earth, the Pope. The crowning of Charlemagne as Emperor of the Romans invoked the Roman tradition for the glory of the Church. This was an empire which was both resurrected from the past and adjusted to the new present reality. Thus was inaugurated the theory of Church and State which persisted throughout the Middle Ages. Its consistent thread of agreement was that the Pope was supreme in spiritual affairs, while the emperor, or king, was supreme in temporal affairs. But there has been lively argument at various times as to whether these two co-chairmen were equal in dignity or whether one of them, in the last analysis, was superior to the other. As it turned out in this situation, Charlemagne was not one to recognize equality or superiority in another; he was the senior partner in fact and the Papacy did not challenge that fact.

The coronation of Charlemagne as emperor also gave the Pope the opportunity he wanted to loosen the constitutional ties to the Eastern Empire and Constantinople. Religious developments in the East provided the papacy the opportunity finally to break free. The "Iconoclastic controversy" gave the Pope the excuse he needed to throw off his constitutional bonds and to find a new, devoted and orthodox protector in the West. The alliance between the papacy and the Carolingians represented the culmination of this quest.

Carolingian Renaissance.
Charlemagne was deeply devoted to cultural and intellectual progress, and his imperial reign from A.D. 800 to 814 was a period of cultural and intellectual development that has since been called the "Carolingian Renaissance". Not since the work of Boethius and Cassiodorus during the reign of Theodoric, the Ostrogothic ruler of the land of Italy in the sixth century A.D., had there been such cultural progress. In order to effect his cultural renaissance, Charlemagne turned to the scholars of the Church in England and persuaded the great scholar Alcuin (A.D. c.735-804) to come to his court from York and to assume the leadership of his palace school at Aachen, where the children of the royal family and leading nobles might be educated . Alcuin was a masterful teacher who had the assistance of Paul the Deacon, Einhard, and other able scholars in this work. Deploring the ignorance of those who would be clergy, Charlemagne established the palace school to instruct them. He also invited his palace officials to attend. In the high-handed manner of the Frankish kings he commanded his nobles to become scholars. It is not recorded how successful was this attempt to educate the nobles, whose trade was war. The palace school of Charlemagne was an important link in the chain of men and schools that were responsible for passing on to the medieval universities the basic outlines of its curriculum, the trivium, and the quadrivium that had been derived from Roman higher education by Martianus Capella in the fifth century. From the palace school at the royal court a generation of Alcuin's students went out to head monastic and cathedral schools throughout the Empire which Charlemagne had created. Even though this Empire barely outlived its founder, the revival of education and religion associated with Alcuin and Charlemagne brightened European culture throughout the bleak and chaotic period that followed. This Carolingian Renaissance turned to classical and Christian writers for its models. The emphasis was on Latin literature; the efforts at Greek were incidental and superficial. The Irishman John Scotus Erigena was the only accomplished Greek scholar in the Carolingian world. The activity in copying rooms of Carolingian monasteries was of major importance for Western culture. The works of both pagan and Christian classical authors were copied. Many of the original texts have not survived; these manuscripts provide us with our only access to the original writings. The cultural activities of Charlemagne were an important step in the process by which the German people assimilated classical and Christian learning. Charlemagne himself delighted to listen to the reading of great books of the past and, according to his biographer Einhard, particularly liked Augustine's works , especially the City of God. He also insisted that the abbots set up monastery schools so the interpreters of Scriptures might be learned men who would understand and rightly interpret the Bible. Under Charlemagne preaching was encouraged and books of sermons were prepared. Confession was favored, though not yet obligatory. Every Christian was expected to be able to repeat the Lord's Prayer and the Apostles' Creed.

The intellectual activity of the Carolingian Renaissance and the political dynamism of the revived Empire stimulated new theological discussion and writing. There was some discussion and writing about the continuing iconoclastic problem in the Orthodox East. Political antagonism between the Eastern and the Carolingian emperors also led to an attack by the theologians in the West on the practices and beliefs of the Orthodox church. These controversial works on the "errors of the Greeks" proliferated during the ninth century as a result of the "Photian Schism", when the Patriarch of Constantinople Ignatius was deposed by the Eastern Emperor in A.D. 858. The deposed Patriarch appealed to Pope Nicholas I (A.D. 858-867), as did his replacement, Photius (A.D. c.820-c.895). A synod in Rome in A.D. 863 condemned Photius and declared Ignatius Patriarch. And when Nicholas ordered the restoration of Ignatius as Patriarch, the relations between Constantinople and Rome worsened. By the time the icon supporters had triumphed at Constantinople, Latin theologians also criticized the Eastern Church for its different method for deciding the date of Easter, the difference in clergymen's tonsure-style, and over the celibacy of the clergy. (The Eastern church allowed clergy to marry, but required monks to be celibate.) The major theological controversy involved the filioque question. Did the Holy Spirit descend "from the Father through the Son" or "from the Father and the Son"? From the time of Photius, Orthodox theologians bitterly attacked the Western church on this issue, declaring that the Western position of "and the Son" (filioque) was a late addition to the Nicene Creed (as it indeed was). This issue further alienated the Eastern and Western churches. The Greek-speaking East and the Latin West were also divided in language. "East and West could not understand each other because they could not understand each other!"

The Collapse of Charlemagne's Empire.
Charlemagne planned a division of his kingdom among his three sons (A.D. 806), but two them died before their father did, leaving to the third son, Louis the Pious (A.D. 778-840), the territory still united. Louis became King of Aquitaine in A.D. 781 and co-emperor in A.D. 813 with his father. Louis was the youngest and sole surviving son of Charlemagne who died in A.D. 814. Before he died, Charlemagne crown his heir with his own hand, attempting to protect Louis from obligations to the Pope. But Louis, who was called the Pious not without reason, submitted to being crowned a second time in A.D. 816, this time by the Pope. Louis was of excellent personal character, but was wholly unequal to the task of controlling the Empire he had inherited, or even controlling his own sons. Three of his sons, Lothaire, Charles the Bald, and Louis the German, plotted against their father, and after much quarreling and three years of civil war after their fathers death in A.D. 840 they finally divided their grandfather's domains at the Treaty of Verdun (A.D. 843). To Charles the Bald (A.D. 843-877) went the western part, or France, to Lothaire (A.D. 843-855) went the imperial title and a central strip, including the valley of Rhone and region lying immediately west of the Rhine, the later Lorraine, and northern Italy; while to Louis (A.D. 843-875) went the eastern part, or Germany, hence the nickname, "the German". This treaty of Verdun is usually regarded as the point from whence France and Germany go their separate ways. In A.D. 842, the year before the Treaty of Verdun, Charles the West Frank and Louis the East Frank had declared an armistice in the fighting between them. This agreement, known as the Strassbourg Oath, was written in both French and German so that it could be understood by the now divergent West and East Franks. In A.D. 870 another agreement, the Treaty of Mersen, divided what had been Lothair's middle kingdom between France and Germany so that these latter emergent states were side by side with a common boundary between them. This boundary remained for nearly seven centuries, although peace between the neighbors did not become an established habit. Northern Italy was cut adrift from the other remnants of Charlemagnes' empire, not, however, to remain forever uncoveted by the northern powers.

These rulers proved utterly inadequate for unity or defense. France suffered grievously from attacks by the Scandinavian Vikings, who pushed up its rivers and burned its towns, ultimately (A.D. 911) establishing themselves permanently in Normandy. Italy was a prey to Saracen raids, in one of which (A.D. 841) St. Peter's itself, in Rome, was plundered. A little later, with the beginning of the tenth century, the raids of the Hungarians brought devastation to Germany and Italy. Under these circumstances, when national unity or defense was impossible, feudalism developed with great rapidity. Its roots run back to the declining days of the Roman Empire, but with the death of Charlemagne it was given great impetus. Feudalism was based on the principle of tenure of land in return for military service, and was the only practical means of securing local defense during the collapse of central authority and the barbarian invasions. Between the tenant and his lord there was a peculiar personal relation, resting upon a religious sanction. In its ideal form the lord was as obligated to give his vassal protection as his vassal was to yield him obedience. With the lack of a strong, central government feudalism naturally was divisive, and resulted in constant local struggles for power. Churches and monasteries became largely the prey of local nobles, or defended their rights with difficulty as parts of the feudal system with armies of their own. Abbeys and bishoprics no less than local parish churches came under secular control, and lay investiture became common.

The impulse for learning given by Charlemagne did not die immediately. At the court of Charles the Bald (A.D. 843-877), the Irish churchman and philosopher, John Scotus (A.D. c.810-c.877), to whose name was much later added Erigena, held somewhat the same position under Charles the Bald as that held by Alcuin under Charlemagne. By A.D. 855 Erigena began his translation from the Greek into Latin of the much admired writings of the Pseudo-Dionysius. This is the name given to an unknown author who, at the end of the 4th or at the beginning of 5th century A.D., wrote a series of treatises on God and mystical theology. The author presented himself as Dionysius the Areopagite mentioned in Acts 17:34 as one of the converts of the Apostle Paul. This forgery was a clever one, using a pseudonym that would almost certainly guarantee apostolic authority. The author wanted to convey Neoplatonism to an audience which would receive it only in Christian dress. Being a follower of Augustine and of the Pseudo-Dionysius, Erigena developed his own Neo-Platonic Christian philosophy, which his age was too ignorant to judge heretical or orthodox. Erigena in his De Divisione Naturae (On the Division of Nature), produced about A.D. 862, elaborated a system of ideas which appears in places to be pantheistic with pronounced mystical overtones. Erigena held that nature in the broadest sense comprises all beings, both uncreated and created things. Nature thus can be interpreted under four categories of existence:

  1. that which is uncreated and creates;
  2. that which is created and creates;
  3. that which is created and does not create;
  4. that which is uncreated and does not create.
Existence is possible only in these four forms. But this classification may be simplified. The first category is, in fact, the same as the fourth, for both of them contain that which uncreated, and consequently corresponds to the only being existing in a absolute sense, that is, God. The first category embraces God in so far as He is the creative principle, the beginning or source of all things; the fourth category is also God, but only so far as He is the end, the consummation, and the highest perfection of all things. Upon comparing the second and third categories, we find that they form a single class, containing all created things, or the universe, in so far as this is distinct from God. The second category contains the Ideas in God, which are realized in individuals and are productive created beings. Since the Ideas have proceeded from a principle, they are subordinate to God, and can in a sense be called created. The third category contains individuals that are created but non-productive things, they are universe of things modeled on the Ideas. Hence, we have left two classes in place of the four original categories; God and the created universe. But these two classes or modes of existence are also identical. "God is everything, and everything is God." (De Divisione Naturae, III, 17-18) "Hence we should not consider God and the creature as a duality, but as one and the same thing." Thus, the world is in God, and God is in it as its essence, its soul, its life (cf. 22-23). This is pantheism and accordingly, Erigena's work was condemned by Pope Honorius III in A.D. 1225.

In Germany, Rabanus Maurus (A.D. c.776-856), abbot of Fulda and archbishop of Mainz, a pupil of Alcuin, attained a deserved reputation as a teacher, commentator on the Scriptures, furtherer of clerical education and author of what was nearly an encyclopedia. In France, Hincmar (A.D. c.805-882), archbishop of Rheims, was not only a prelate of great assertiveness and influence, but a great gifted theological controversialist.

There was a renewed study of Augustine which led to two doctrinal controversies.

  1. The first was regarding the nature of Christ's presence in the Lord's Supper. About A.D. 831 Paschasius Radbertus, a monk of the monastery of Corbie, near the city of Amiens, of remarkable learning in Greek as well as in Latin theology, set forth the first thoroughgoing treatise on the Lord's Supper, De corpore et sanguine Domini (Of the Body and Blood of the Lord). In it he taught with Augustine, that only those who partake in faith eat and drink the body and blood of Christ, and with the Greek theologians that is the food of immortality; he also taught that by divine miracle the substance of the elements is made the very body and blood of Christ. This was in effect the doctrine of transubstantiation, although the word was not coined until the eleventh century. Rabanus Maurus wrote a reply to Radbertus; but a more elaborate answer was that of a fellow monk of Corbie, Ratramnus, about A.D. 844. He rejected the idea of a realistic change in the elements. Regarding their substance , he wrote, "they are after the consecration what they were before." But it is "according to their power" that they become the body and blood of Christ. Invisibly and by faith the gift of the sacrament is received. Moreover, what is received and really present in the consecrated elements is not the actual body born of the Virgin, crucified and risen (as it was for Paschasius), but something else the "Spirit" of Christ, the "power of the divine Word," a mysterious "spiritual" body appropriate to the sacrament. The controversy was not decided at that time, but the in future the Roman Church followed Radbertus. The Roman church did not officially accept the doctrine of transubstantiation until A.D. 1215 nor fully define it until the Council of Trent in A.D. 1545. But any acceptance of the idea of the Lord's Supper as a sacrifice by the priest was a gain for the power of the papacy, because the Pope headed the hierarchy of clergyman, who alone had the power to perform this miracle of the Mass.
  2. The second controversy was started by Gottshalk (A.D. c.808-c.868). He was a monk of Fulda, who was made so by parental dedication; his efforts for release from his bonds were frustrated by Rabanus Maurus. He then turned to the study of Augustine, and this led him to emphasize a double divine predestination. This is the belief that some people, the elect, are predestined to salvation, while the others, the non-elect, are justly predestined to eternal punishment. He was attacked by Rabanus Maurus and Hincmar, but found vigorous defenders. Condemned as heretic at a synod in Mainz in A.D. 848, he spent the next twenty years in monastic imprisonment, persecuted by Hincmar, and refusing to retract. The controversy was a fresh flaring up of the old dispute between the thoroughgoing Augustinianism and the modified type which was the actual view of a large portion of the church.
Often the Carolingian theologians anticipated later medieval theological developments. The Adoptionist heresy, alleging that Christ in his humanity was only the "adopted" Son of God, arose in Spain in the late eighth century and appeared again later in the Carolingian Empire. Alcuin combated it vigorously in his work, Against Felix. Several Carolingian monks disputed the question of the perpetual virginity of Mary, a view widely accepted from the fifth century. The Carolingian concern to protect the holiness and sinlessness of Mary points toward the later medieval emphasis on the Virgin Mary.

The Holy Roman Empire.
Even though the empire created by Charlemagne disappeared, the ideal of a universal political empire, which Western Europe had inherited from Rome, remained. It was realized, not by the Franks, but in the eastern section of Charlemagne's empire, which had gone to Louis the German in A.D. 843. But geography worked against German unity because rivers in Germany flow north to the North Sea and to the Baltic Sea, and in the southern part of the country they flow east. Northern Germany is mostly plain, whereas southern Germany is mountainous. This makes for different interests among the people. In addition, the traditional tribal divisions and the later feudal states led to decentralization of authority. But in spite of these problems the eastern part of Charlemagnes's old empire became the center of the imperial power that had once been wielded in the West by the Franks. The tribal dukes of Germany, faced with the need for unity in defense against the Northmen and the Slavic Magyars, elected Henry the Fowler, the Duke of Saxony, as their ruler in A.D. 919. He drove back the Northmen and was able to defeat the Slavic invaders. Henry was succeeded as king of the Germans by his son Otto (A.D. 912-973) in A.D. 936. Otto, called the Great, made the dukes his vassals and took over supervision of the affairs of the church by naming bishops and abbots of his choosing to take care of ecclesiastical matters in Germany. Since the bishops and abbots controlled large territories of Germany, by filling these posts with his adherents, their forces, coupled with his own, were sufficient to enable Otto to control any hostile combination of lay nobles. Thus under him they became lay rulers as well as spiritual prelates. As Otto extended his power, he founded new bishoprics on the borders of his kingdom, partly political and partly missionary in aim, as Brandenburg and Havelberg among the Slavs, and Schleswig, Ripen, and Aathus for the Danes. He also established the archbishopric of Magdeburg.

If he had been willing to confine his efforts to Germany, he might have built up a powerful centralized monarchy similar to that which later English, French, and Spanish kings were to create. But Otto became interested in the affairs across the Alps, and in the following centuries the problems of the church and state in Italy became a drain on German resources. A first invasion in 951 A.D. made him master of northern Italy. Rebellion at home (A.D. 953) and a great campaign against the Hungarians (A.D. 955) interrupted his Italian enterprise. But in A.D. 961 he went to Italy to aid the Pope against a powerful ruler, Berengar II, who had risen to threaten the papal power in Italy, and Pope John XII crowned Otto as Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire on February 2, 962 A.D. This was the inauguration of the Holy Roman Empire. Once again there was a Roman Emperor to claim jurisdiction over the people of Western Europe as Charlemagne and the Roman Emperors had done earlier. All central Europe from the North and Baltic Seas to the Adriatic was united under the German Roman Empire, which was to last until Napoleon brought about its dissolution in A.D. 1806. Theoretically, the Emperor was the head of secular Christendom, so constituted with the approval of the Church expressed by coronation by the papacy. Practically, the Emperor was a more or less powerful German ruler, with Italian possessions, on varying terms with the Popes.

Pope John XII soon tired of Otto's practical control, and plotted against him. Otto, of strong religious feeling, to whom such a Pope was an offense, was moved to replace him, no doubt by the desire to strengthen his hold on the German bishops by securing a more worthy and compliant head of the church. In A.D. 963 Otto compelled the Roman people to swear to choose no Pope without his consent, caused John XII to be deposed, and brought about the choice of Leo VIII (A.D. 963-965). The new Pope stood solely by imperial support. On Otto's leaving Italy, John XII resumed his papacy, and on John's death the Roman factions chose Benedict V. Once more Otto returned, forced Benedict into exile, restored Leo VIII, and after Leo's speedy demise, caused the choice John XIII (A.D. 965-972). Otto had rescued the papacy, for the time being, from the Roman nobles, but at the cost of subserviency to himself. Otto's son and successor, Otto II (A.D. 973-983), pursued substantially the same policy at home, and regarding the papacy, as his father, though with a weaker hand. His son, Otto III (A.D. 983-1002), went further. In A.D. 996 he entered Rome and after putting down a faction of Roman nobles, forced the election of his own cousin Bruno as Pope Gregory V (A.D. 996-999), the first German to hold the papal office.

During the next two centuries the Roman See had weak incumbents, and the German Emperors often crossed the Alps to bring order out of chaos and to extend their own interests in Italy. This constant interference by the German rulers in the affairs of the papacy in Italy led to a struggle between the Emperor and the Pope until Pope Innocent III (A.D. 1161-1216), who became pope in 1198 A.D., humiliated and defeated the Emperor Otto IV in A.D. 1214 and ended German interference in Italy.