28 Lynch comments that in the Carolingian period, «the baptismal sponsor became a spiritual parent to the child as well as a coparent to the child's father and mother», which served to reinforce both practical and religious bonds; Lynch, *Godparents and Kinship*, p. 288. In this case, it also mirrored the typical position that the popes took as well.

29 Angenendt, *Das geistliche Bündnis*. 30 Charlemagne's third wife Hildegard visited Rome twice for the baptism of her children, and a number of later baptisms coincided with royal visits: Story, *The Carolingians and the oratory of Saint Peter*, pp. 269-273.

scribes the role he himself played in dressing little Rotruda. This does not seem to be an official role, but rather something that Agnellus was invited to do because of his relationship with George (which at the time seems to have been positive), or perhaps was indicative of Agnellus playing a role in the baptism ceremony as a member of the clergy31.

The final item that stands out is the composition of the imperial party. Agnellus mentions Lothar, his wife, the empress Ermengarde, and a daughter named Rotruda who appears in no other narrative sources. According to Eduard Hlawitschka, it is possible that the very same Rotruda eventually married Lambert II of Nantes, and even if her marriage into the family of one of Lothar's western allies played a role in later family strategies, they were significantly outshone by the conflicts between her brothers32.

As to the event itself, the timing of Lothar in Pavia between 837 and 840 was early in George's tenure as bishop, and before the death of Louis the Pious and the ensuing chaos. This was a time when Ravenna faced other strains from external forces, including the loss of relics of saint Severus, which were taken to Germany by a professional relic thief in 837 and left a legacy of fear over the possible pilfering of other relics33.

The eyewitness account of this baptism, and the noteworthy cost of Ravenna's participation in the gifts provided by George, highlights the tension that Agnellus must have felt between supporting George's pro-imperial and anti-papal stance, and the bishop's depredation of the tombs of his predecessors and his later failures at the battle of Fontenoy.

#### 4. *The* Liber pontificalis *on the Carolingian civil wars*

The Battle of Fontenoy was the turning point in the conflict among the three Carolingian brothers and kings34. Following the death of Louis the Pious in 840, whose demise coincided with a number of unfortunate portents as recorded by Agnellus, Lothar faced threats from both inside and outside his realm. The greatest and most immediate existential danger was in the ambitions and intentions of his younger brothers, Charles the Bald and Louis the German. In Ravenna, Agnellus depicts George seizing the opportunity presented by this unrest, but also the way in which he positions Lothar as central to the narrative, while the wider conflict amoung the Carolingians appears

31 A ninth-century version of the baptismal liturgy mentions the role of the clergy as drying-off of baptized infants and dressing them in white, but shoes are not mentioned. Lynch, *Godparents and Kinship*, pp. 302-303. 32 Hlawitschka, *Waren die Kaiser Wido und Lambert*. 33 On the contexts for the theft of the relics of Severus in 837, see: Geary, Furta Sacra, p. 58. On

the anxieties over later relic thefts and the protections that appeared following the theft, see: Schoolman, *On moving relics and monastic reform*. 34 On the importance of and sources for Lothar at Fontenoy, see: Sernagiotto, *Lotario I e la*

*guerra tra fratelli*; Screen, *The importance of the emperor*.

through the lens of the church of Ravenna as an institution. According to the *Liber pontificalis Ravennatis*, after obtaining papal authorization, George travels to Frankia with a treasure taken from his church (and the privileges obtained by earlier bishops) in an attempt to forge a peace between Charles the Bald, Louis the German, and Lothar, but arrives when the brothers are still preparing for war but the open hostilities had yet taken place. Agnellus describes the battle and its outcome for Lothar:

Sonant arma, humeris uentilantur splendida scuta, tremebant multi animo, se terga dabant, pauida corda et gemitos immensos, cadebant corpora ferro. Lotharius armatus se medium mersit in hostes, uidens uictos suos fugientes passim undique, nec erat quies secantium gladiis membra. In media inimicorum, ut dixi, arma deuentus, non ex eius lateri qui posset auxilium erant praebere, sed solus acer multa demoliuit cadauera hasta. Bella solus uicit, sed sui omnes terga dederunt. Crinito sedens sonipede, pictas ornatus faleras ostro, calce equo percutit, inimicos morsibus uastans. Qualis in hoste solus, decem sicut ille fuissent, <ut> imperium diuisum non esset, nec tantos in sedilia reges. Interea versa est victoria in manus Caroli. Adiuuabat eum Lodouicus, frater suus, Baioariorum rex35.

Agnellus described next the arrival of the aid of Pepin, but despite the renewed forces, Lothar's army was defeated, and George, who had no business near the battlefield in the first place, was captured and abused by those under the command of Charles the Bald, although according to the account in the *Annales Bertiniani*, he was detained by Lothar himself and sent back «cum honore»36. Agnellus, however, goes into great detail about the possible mistreatment of George, and especially the privileges he wished to have imperially reconfirmed that were then destroyed, divine justice for his ignominious actions, but says nothing further about Lothar, and the work ends imperfectly with George's death in 846.

Despite Lothar's acknowledged defeat at the Battle of Fontenoy, echoed in the other major contemporary sources for the conflict, the *Annales Bertiniani* and *Annales Fuldenses*, Agnellus presents him in overtly heroic tones, not just fierce but *acer* (the same adjective used in the prefatory verse), and also *bella solus uicit*, that Lothar «alone, he conquered in war». This was the embodiment of marshal valor, as expected by a king or emperor, and further

fratresque eius pacis gratia directus, sed a Lothario detentus neque ad fratres venire permissus, captus est, et cum honore ad propria remissus»: *Annales Bertiniani*, a*.* 841.

35 «Weapons resounded, splendid shields were brandished on shoulders, many trembled in spirit, gave their backs, fearful hearts and immense sighs, their bodies fell by the sword. Lothar, armed, plunged into the midst of the enemy, seeing his followers, conquered, fleeing everywhere, nor was there a respite from the slaughter of bodies with swords. Having arrived, as I said, in the midst of the weapons of his enemies, there were none from his side who could offer aid, but alone, fierce, he destroyed many corpses with his spear. Alone, he conquered in war, but all his followers fled. Sitting on a crested horse, decorated with trappings colored with purple, he struck the horse with his heel, devastating his enemies with its biting. Thus alone among the enemy, [he fought] as if he were ten men, so that the empire might not be divided, nor [have] such kings on its thrones. However, the victory turned into the hands of Charles. Louis, his brother, king of Bavaria, aided him»: Agnellus, *Liber pontificalis*, 174; trans. Deliyannis. 36 «In quo proelio Georgius, Ravennatis episcopus, a Gregorio Romano pontifice ad Lotharium

reinforced by his depiction in imperial purple on horseback. For Agnellus, it was the failure of Lothar's army, and not a loss of his innate bravery and skill in battle, that led to Lothar's defeat. If anything, the description offered by Agnellus reconfirms his own allegiances, if not those of the church of Ravenna, to the eldest son of Louis the Pious.

#### 5. *History and memory of Lothar I in and beyond Agnellus*

Although most concerned with the effects of broader events and relationships on the church of Ravenna (or at least its urban clergy), in his account Agnellus balanced the disreputable nature of George, a despoiler of church treasuries who was punished and embarrassed at the hands of an enemy king, with the fact that he was aligned with the ultimately heroic Emperor Lothar. In the same vein, the narratives about Lothar served in essence to re-elevate the city's "imperial" status within its own present, history, and community memory.

Because of this connection, the animus against George was tempered by the association with an emperor who showed favor to the city, and who, unlike his father, was personally invested in Italian affairs, lending to the possibility of Ravenna reasserting its independence from Rome37. Despite Agnellus's searing personal dislike of George, the connections reflected back on four centuries of interaction, going back to Ravenna's position as imperial capital in the fifth century. Simply by becoming emperor, a moment that is not described in Agnellus or any other Italian source, Lothar served to restore the city's imperial status, even if obliquely, through his appearance with George.

This also connects to Ravenna's complicated relationship with Charles the Great. While there are significant differences between the reigns of Charles and his grandson, with respect to Ravenna, they shared crucial features: both were emperors; they were essentially absent from the city's governance and affairs; they were spoliators of the church and city, rather than donors; and they were fierce victors (although this is more tenuous). And in fact, the *Liber pontificalis* of Ravenna was not so different in its application from other contemporary and near-contemporary sources concerning Lothar, which could claim a relationship to Lothar and redraft their own institutional histories to suit various needs, often through connections across the Carolingian dynasty.

For example, the *Gesta episcoporum* of Naples offers three instances where Lothar is mentioned, although often removed from the events around the city, and ultimately promoting a relationship with his son Louis II38. In

37 While the bishop George was unable to increase Ravenna's autonomy during the reign of Lothar, his activities set the stage for further efforts at independence from the papacy later in

the ninth century. Simonini, *Autocefalia ed Esarcato*, pp. 174-182. 38 *Gesta episcoporum Neapolitanorum*. For the editions and history of the *Gesta*, which extends in an anonymous original text covering the history of Naples's bishops through 763 and

the first instance, the *Gesta* records an appeal was made by Duke Andrea of Naples for aid from the emperor in dealing with a siege of the city by Sicardus of Benevento, an instance in which the call for help went unanswered and Lothar remaining a distant figure39. That conflict progressed, influenced nominally by a treaty between Benevento and Naples in 836, and lasted until Sicardus's assassination in 839. There was not immediate resolution, as the situation was made worse by the arrival of a Frankish general, Contardus, who killed Andrea and married his daughter40. Now weary of Frankish interventions, other threats remained for Naples, especially in the form of various groups of Saracens from North Africa who also served intermittently as Neapolitan mercenaries.

This situation would bring about the next appearance of Lothar in the *Gesta*, when it was reported that he was later moved to supply aid by sending troops to address the rising threats of and damage caused by Saracens in Italy. In 846, Rome itself was targeted by a raid from Muslim forces, likely those that had been established in Sicily in the decades before41. In response to this attack, the *Gesta* describes the events the following way: Lothar sent a force that pursued the Saracens south as far as Gaeta, where the Saracens set a trap along the steep paths and were able to soundly defeat the Franks who were unaccustomed to this type of warfare42. Like the first episode, Lothar remained physically distant from these events. Although he is seen taking action by sending an army, the reality was that he was unable to improve the situation for the Neapolitans, who during this conflict were able to rout the Saracens by sea under the leadership of Cesarius, the son of Duke Sergius of Naples.

In a final episode concerning Lothar recorded in the *Gesta*, it was through the supplication of Sergius that Louis II was installed in Italy, specifically to deal with the Muslim forces still plaguing both the Lombard and Neapolitan territories. While Lothar is given the credit for promoting Louis II to co-emperor, it was Louis himself who personally «ex illis Hismahelitis triumphavit. Et sagaciter ordinans divisionem Beneventani et Salernitani principum, vic-

extended by two known hagiographers through 898, see: Achelis, *Die Bischofchronik von Neapel*; Granier, *La difficile genèse*; Granier, *Transformations de l'église*; Granier, *Le peuple devant*

*les saints*; Berto, Utilius est veritatem proferre. 39 «Mox autem Andreas consul Franciam direxit, deprecans domnum Lhotharium, ut saltem eius preceptione a tantis malis sopiretur Sichardus»: *Gesta episcoporum Neapolitanorum*, 57. 40 West, *Communities and* pacta, p. 388. On the author of the *Gesta*'s attitude towards Sicardus, see: Berto, *The Others and Their Stories*, pp. 46-47. On Contradus, see: Whitten, *Franks,*

*Greeks, and Saracens*, p. 267. 41 Lankila, *The Saracen Raid of Rome*, pp. 98-99. 42 «Lhotharius rex Francorum, ferocem contra eos populum misit; qui celeriter properantes, eos usque Caietam sunt persecuti. Hic autem Saraceni solitam molientes stropham, in locis angustis et arduo calle nonnullos audaciores absconderunt. Franci vero ignorantes calliditatem eorum, conabantur viriliter super eos descendere. At illi de latibulo exilientes, irato Deo, primum ipsorum percutierunt signiferum; quo perempto, cunctis terga vertentibus, validissime occidebantur»: *Gesta episcoporum Neapolitanorum*, 60.

tor reversus est»43. In each of these episodes, rather than considering larger political interests, the *Gesta* positions Lothar's actions as in some way responding to Naples but in keeping a great distance, finding the resolution to conflicts in other figures.

This is the opposite of the relationship invoked between Lothar and the community of Novalesa in northern Italy's piedmont, found in the eleventh-century chronicle of Novalesa's monastery44. In that recounting, a highly embellished text that included an imaginary son of Charles the Great who became the monastery's abbot, Lothar is presented as a patron: «Lotharius vero de eadem valle abbati Ioseph preceptum faciens, et insuper adcrevit Pagnum, quondam ditissimum et regalem monasterium, quod olim Aystulfus rex ambidexter condiderat»45. Not only was Lothar's grandfather tied directly to the development of the monastery, but Lothar himself was both reestablishing longstanding claims and contributing to the monastery's growing wealth.

What is more remarkable is the Chronicle of Novalesa's creative description of the Battle of Fontenoy. While Lothar's defeat goes unmentioned in the *Gesta* of Naples, and is used to cast Lothar as a valiant hero against insurmountable odds in the *Liber pontificalis* of Ravenna, the chronicle refashions the history of internal Carolingian conflicts, both confusing the main actors of the civil war following the death of Louis the Pious as well as the outcome of Fontenoy and its Italian implications:

Circa igitur haec tempora, cum non inter se aequaliter divisissent filii Caroli regna patris sui, ortum ilico bellum inter eos. Nam in campo quodam, ubi fontes nonnulle oriuntur, unde et nomen accepit videlicet Fontaneto, ibi quoque conglobati quattuor reges cum chuneis suis fortiter invicem dimicarunt; ubi occisa nonnulla milia hominum, non modicam ibi stragem dederunt.  Sicque victores effecti, regnum Italicum potiti sunt46.

For the later abbots and community of Novalesa, the connection (although fictious) proved to be what mattered, and in these cases, it was with the ruling

43 *Ibidem*, 61 («triumphed over the Ishmaelites» and «wisely ordered the division of Benevento and Salerno»).

44 *Chronicon Novaliciense*, ed. Bethmann; *Chronicon Novaliciense*, ed. Combetti. Trans. in

*Cronaca di Novalesa*, ed. Alessio; Clark, *The Chronicle of Novalese*. 45 *Chronicon Novaliciense*, 3.26 («Lothar ordered that valley to be made the possession of the Abbot Joseph, which also included Pagnum, at one time a most rich and regal monastery, which long ago King Aistulf had also founded»; trans. Clark).

46 «So about this time, when the sons of Charles [a mistake for Louis] had not divided equally among themselves the kingdoms of their father, war rose up immediately among them. For, on the plain where several fountains arise (whence its name "Fontaneto"), there also gathered the four kings with their battle lines, and clashed sharply; several thousand men were killed there; they brought about no small slaughter. Although many from each side died, nevertheless it is agreed that after his brothers had been defeated, Louis, with his son Lothar, gained the field and the victory. And thus having become the victors, they controlled the realm of Italy»: *Chronicon Novaliciense*, 3.28; trans. Clark.

powers rather than some semblance of imperial authority or legitimacy that reinforced that community's claims.

Finally, although the appearance and exclusion of Lothar in the narrative of Rome's *Liber pontificalis* has been well reviewed by Sernagiotto and others, it is worth quickly revisiting how that text that served as the model for so many institutional histories in Italy relied on similar types of refashioning and reinvisioning, often through omission of imperial activities that elevates the papacy47. Little attention was paid to events outside of the scope of papal reach, such as the Battle of Fontenoy; instead, Lothar appears as a distant figure, completely absent from the *Vita* of Gregory IV, and appearing in the *Vita* of Sergius II only in sending Drogo of Metz and his son Louis as delegates to Rome following Sergius's election48. As in the other two cases discussed above, the institutional needs took precedence over placing Lothar's reign and relationship with Italy at the forefront.

#### 6. *Conclusion*

Along with the *Liber pontificalis* of Ravenna, what these other accounts from Rome, Naples and Novalesa demonstrate is a substantially uneven presentation of Lothar's Italian activities. In Tom Noble's article on *Talking about the Carolingians* in the recent volume on *After Charlemagne: Carolingian Italy and its Rulers*, he makes the argument that the sources from the time of Lothar «have more to say [than for Louis]… but what they say is often wrong and rarely helpful». This culminates in the fact that «Lothar's imperial coronation in Rome is mentioned in no Italian source and we receive no reports about his activity in Italy» at that time49.

There may be a further layer impacting the inconsistent nature of institutional response, at least in the case of Ravenna, on account of the complex alliance between the Carolingians and Rome. Early in his reign, Lothar and his father Louis issued the *Constitutio Romana* in 824, notably the same year that Agnellus undertook the removal of relics and materials under the order of bishop Petronax. This edict ratified the rights of the papacy and their responsibility to the emperors (among other administrative features, including oaths made by Rome's citizens to the emperor personally), but also may have worked against Ravenna's ambitions for greater autonomy in highlighting the pope's power in dispute settlement50. That it was executed during the time

47 Sernagiotto, Spes optima regni, pp. 102-108. 48 *Liber pontificalis*, ed. Duchesne, Sergius II, 8. 49 Noble, *Talking about the Carolingians*, p. 24. 50 Noble argues that the *Constitutio Romana* was a product of Lothar under the direction of his father, and that rather than a reframing or reasserting of imperial rights, it followed on earlier efforts by Louis, notably the *Ludovicianum* of 816-817, to formalize the relationship between Frankish rulers and the papacy. Noble, *The Republic of St. Peter*, pp. 308-322.

of Petronax may have been part of the motivation for Agnellus's failure to include his biography in the *Liber pontificalis*, as Petronax clearly sought to affirm Ravenna's privileges through Rome rather than from the emperors, either Byzantine or Carolingian, activities that did not fit with the overall aims of Agnellus51.

While the sources may be wrong, or at the minimum conflicting, they can be extremely helpful in making sense of those living in the confusion following the revolts against Louis the Pious and the wars among his children, especially in making sense of their allegiances and why those allegiances mattered. In the case of Agnellus's *Liber pontificalis* and the city of Ravenna, Lothar was the last emperor to grace the city – and his legacy connected to his grandfather Charles – reconfirming the centuries-old links between the city's bishops and imperial favor. But even here, the appearance of Lothar served to strengthen the city's claims of special status despite his military failures and despoliation, further underscoring the incompatibilities within the medieval narratives.

51 In 819, Petronax received a confirmation of the privileges of the church of Ravenna from pope Pascal that omitted any mention of the role of contemporary Carolingians; the privilege appears in: *Le carte ravennati*, ed. Benericetti, pp. 21-23; ChLA2, LV, n. 1. On Pascal's relationship with the Franks, see: Goodson, *The Rome of Pope Paschal I*, pp. 30-33; Verardi, *Il papato alla prova dell'impero*.

#### **Works cited**

H. Achelis, *Die Bischofchronik von Neapel (von Johannes Diaconus u.a.)*, Leipzig 1930.

*Le carte ravennati dei secoli ottavo e nono*, ed. R. Benericetti, Faenza 2006.

*Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters*, 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LV, Italy XXVII, Ravenna II, publ. R. Cosma, Dietikon-Zürich 1999.

*Chronicon Novaliciense*, ed. L.K. Bethmann, MGH, SS rer. Germ., 21, Hannover 1846.

Edward M. Schoolman University of Nevada, Reno<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
### **«Per Padum fluvium termino currente usque […] Civitatem Novam atque Mutinam». Consolidation and affirmation of the Church of Modena and its bishops in 9th-century Carolingian Italy\***

by Edoardo Manarini

This paper seeks to trace the developments which led the Church of Modena and its bishops to acquire a pre-eminent position in its diocese in the second half of the ninth century and for much of the following one. The analysis sets out from the highly fragmented post-Roman territorial context and from the efforts made by Lombard kings, which were mostly directed towards the fiscal estate of Cittanova, rather than the ancient Roman *civitas* of Mutina. Particular attention is paid to the figure of Bishop Leodoin and to the manuscripts attributed to him in the Chapter Library, especially the famous *Codex legum* (O.I.2), for which a different production context is suggested, prior to its acquisition by the Church of Modena.

Middle Ages; 9th century; Italy; Modena; Leodoin; fiscal estates; bishops' soft power; lay manuscripts.

\* I am indebted to Matteo Al Kalak, Tiziana Lazzari, Luigi Provero, and Giacomo Vignodelli for their helpful comments on earlier written drafts.

Edoardo Manarini, University of Turin, Italy<EMAIL_ADDRESS>0000-0002-7796-0742 Referee List (DOI 10.36253/fup\_referee\_list)

FUP Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (DOI 10.36253/fup\_best\_practice)

Edoardo Manarini, *«Per Padum fluvium termino currente usque […] Civitatem Novam atque Mutinam». Consolidation and affirmation of the Church of Modena and its bishops in 9th-century Carolingian Italy*, © Author(s), CC BY 4.0, DOI 10.36253/978-88-5518-623-0.08, in Gianmarco De Angelis, Francesco Veronese (edited by), *Networks of bishops, networks of texts. Manuscripts, legal cultures, tools of government in Carolingian Italy at the time of Lothar I*, pp. 131-155, 2022, published by Firenze University Press, ISBN 978- 88-5518-623-0, DOI 10.36253/978-88-5518-623-0

Abbreviations

CDL III = *Codice diplomatico longobardo*, vol. 3, 1, ed. C. Brühl, Roma 1973 (FSI, 64).

ChLA2, LXXXVIII = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores*, 2nd series, part LXXXVIII, Italy LX, Modena-Nonantola I, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, publ. G. Feo – M. Modesti – M. Al Kalak – M. Mezzetti, Dietikon-Zürich 2008.

DD B I = *I diplomi di Berengario I*, ed. L. Schiaparelli, Roma 1903 (FSI, 35).

MGH, Capit. I = MGH, *Capitularia regum Francorum*, vol. 1, ed. A. Boretius, Hannover 1883 (Legum sectio, 2).

MGH, DD Kar I = MGH, *Pippini, Carlomanni, Caroli Magni Diplomata*, ed. E. Mühlbacher, Hannover 1906 (Diplomata Karolinorum, 1).

MGH, DD LdF = MGH, *Die Urkunden Ludwigs des Frommen*, ed. T. Kölzer, 3 voll., Wiesbaden 2016 (Diplomata Karolinorum, 2).

MGH, DD Lu II = MGH, *Die Urkunden Ludwigs II.*, ed. K. Wanner, München 1994 (Diplomata Karolinorum, 4).

#### 1. *Introduction*

Si vero Karolo et Hludowico viventibus Pippinus debitum humane sortis compleverit, Karolus et Hluduwicus dividant inter se regnum quod ille habuit, et haec divisio tali modo fiat, ut ab ingressu Italiae per Augustam civitatem accipiat Karolus Eboreiam, Vercellas, Papiam et inde per Padum fluvium termino currente usque ad fines Regensium et ipsam Regiam et Civitatem Novam atque Mutinam usque ad terminos sancti Petri. Has civitates cum suburbanis et territoriis suis atque comitatibus quae ad ipsas pertinent et quicquid inde Romam pergenti ad laevam respicit, de regno quod Pippinus habuit, una cum ducatu Spoletano, hanc portionem sicut praediximus accipiat Karolus1 .

This paragraph from the 806 *Divisio regnorum* establishes in what way, after the death of Charlemagne (768-814), the Kingdom of Italy's territories were to be divided in the event that the emperor's son Pepin (781-810) died before his brothers Charles (800-811) and Louis (814-840). Charles the Younger would receive that stretch of the Kingdom of Italy which extended southward along the Gallic route (*via publica*) from the entrance into Italy at Aosta, and which included the cities of Ivrea and Vercelli, as well as the kingdom's capital, Pavia. Bounded by the great river artery of the Po, it extended into the plain of eastern Emilia, which in the area of Bologna bordered with the Exarchate. From there, the subdivision continued down to Rome and encompassed the Adriatic stretch of the kingdom, roughly coinciding with the Duchy of Spoleto.

The text offers a representation of the territory in question as this must have been envisaged beyond the Alps, at Charles' court, in the early ninth century. What is striking about it is the varying attention to detail: an evocative bird's eye description characterises the first section, which comprises cities located along the Roman road leading from the Alpine passes to the plain, whereas the second stretch follows the Po's course as its northern limit and includes the plain down to the Apennine coastline to the south. A reference to

1 MGH, Capit. I, n. 45, p. 128: «If however Pippin should come to the end of his allotted days while Charles and Louis are still alive, then Charles and Louis are to divide the kingdom which he held between themselves, and the division is to be made as follows: starting from the entrance to Italy at Aosta, Charles is to have Ivrea, Vercelli, and Pavia, and then, using the River Po as a boundary as far as the borders of Reggio, he is to have Reggio itself, Cittanova, and Modena as far as the boundaries of Saint Peter. These cities, together with their immediate neighbourhoods and territories and the countries pertaining to them, and everything from Pippin's kingdom which lies on the left of the route to Rome, with the addition of the duchy of Spoleto, this portion Charles, as we have said, is to take over».

cities was not enough to define the boundary of the eastern stretch of the Po Valley; other territorial and juridical points of reference were required. The mention of the Roman cities of Reggio and Modena is thus combined with that of the *fines Regensium* and of the main fiscal estate in this area, *Civitas Nova* – two territorial elements which had been part of the Lombard tradition and administration2.

The rise of the Modenese bishops over the course of the ninth century revolved precisely around the duality between the *civitas Mutinensis* rooted in the Roman tradition and the *Civitas Nova*3 established by the Lombard central authorities at a time of major public investments in the Modena area. The political, social, and cultural transformations which occurred in the Carolingian period played a crucial role in this process. The present contribution aims to trace the developments that led the Church of Saint Geminianus and its bishops from a position of evident subordination compared to other leading actors in eastern Emilia, to one of pre-eminence in the episcopal context of the Kingdom of Italy.

So far historians have mostly attributed these developments to Bishop Leodoin (870-*ante* 898), compressing the process of self-affirmation of the Church of Modena into the years of his – certainly rather long – episcopate4. The first reason for this distorted perspective is the fragmentary nature of the documents from the *Archivio Capitolare*, which make it very difficult to reconstruct an overall picture of episcopal action for the tenth century5 . The second reason is the relative abundance of manuscripts from Leodoin's age in the *Biblioteca Capitolare*6*.* Such codices bear witness to this bishop's considerable cultural, doctrinal, and pastoral commitment, as well as to the cultural liveliness of Modena in his time. However, both Leodoin's episcopate and, more generally, the process of self-affirmation of the Church of Modena in the Carolingian period, cannot fully be brought into focus without considering the relationship which the bishops of Saint Geminianus established, on the one hand, with kings and emperors and, on the other, with public officials active in the local area. What proves crucially relevant, from this perspective, is the dichotomy between the bishopric of Modena and the nearby fiscal estate of Cittanova.

The starting point for my analysis is therefore the evolution of the territorial and institutional situation in the Modena area from the early eighth

2 On the *fines Regensium* see the general overview in Bonacini, *Terre d'Emilia*, pp. 132-133. Recently, the topics of the extension of the royal fisc and of the economic capacity of early medieval Western states have become a focus of renewed scholarly attention, see Gasparri, *Le basi economiche del potere*; Loré, *Introduzione. Risorse materiali*; Lazzari, *La tutela del patrimonio fiscale*; Loré, *Spazi e forme dei beni pubblici*; *Biens publics, biens du roi*. 3 Vito Fumagalli was the first to suggest a relationship of political-institutional conflict betwe-

en the two settlements: see Fumagalli, *Terra e società*, pp. 90-91. 4 See Golinelli, *Cultura e religiosità*; Leonelli, *Storia dell'arcidiocesi*. 5 A commendable attempt, albeit one limited to the figures of Leodoin and Gotfredus (902-

933), has been made by Al Kalak, *Storia della chiesa di Modena*. 6 See Vigarani, *Inventario dei manoscritti*.

century to the first decades of the ninth. Some important archaeological finds have recently made it possible to reconsider the desolate picture of early medieval *Mutina* that emerges from literary-historical narratives composed in the city in the post-Carolingian age7 . The second step will be to examine the charter granted to the Church by the Emperor Louis the Pious (814-840) in 822: a genuine landmark charter that retraces and redefines the relationship between the Church and the royal authorities over the course of the previous century. It constitutes a first piece in the puzzle of the Modenese bishops' self-affirmation within a narrative of remarkable political, patrimonial, and institutional continuity. The third point revolves around the figure of Bishop Leodoin, who brought this process of consolidation and self-affirmation to completion. An analysis of his personality, court relations, and outstanding effort to affirm the Carolingian ideal of episcopal superiority over society clearly brings out the lines of development destined to become the hallmark of Modenese episcopal power in the following century8. However, I believe that it is necessary to temper the picture of Leodoin's absolute pre-eminence, and especially the attribution of broad public authority and judicial prerogatives to him. This becomes particularly evident when we set episcopal developments within the broader territorial context of Modena where, as late as the end of the century, the royal authorities continued to take substantial measures and different political actors still enjoyed considerable leeway.

#### 2. *A polycentric and complex territory: the Modena area and royal measures in the eighth century*

The polycentric situation described in the *Divisio regnorum* is also confirmed by local sources. The overall picture that emerges suggests an even greater degree of political and institutional complexity than the one drawn at Charlemagne's court.

After the military clashes involving *Mutina* in the aftermath of the Lombard expansion and of the Exarchate's reconquest, the situation became calmer for roughly half a century and the area turned into a buffer zone between the Lombard Kingdom of Italy and the Exarchate9. In relation to this time period, between the late sixth century and the early seventh, archaeological excavations have revealed that the Roman settlement of *Mutina* was affected by seri-

7 On these narratives, characterised by dramatic tones, see Vocino, Ut hoc flagellum evadamus, and Vocino, *Una comunità minacciata*. 8 On Bishop Leodoin's biography and intellectual activity see Scaravelli, *Leodoino*; Al Kalak,

*Leodoino vescovo*; Heil, *Bishop Leodoin*; on his pontificate in the kingdom's framework see

Manarini, *Politiche regie e conflitti*. 9 See Cosentino, *L'iscrizione ravennate*; Fasoli, *Tappe ed aspetti* also remains a useful source on these developments.

ous flooding10. The alluvial sediments from watercourses smaller than the two main rivers, the Secchia and the Panaro that do not flow through the settlement, significantly reshaped the area by levelling the terrain and erasing the height drops created by human habitation and activities in the Roman age. From the roughly 29 m.a.s.l. of the suburban western area to the south of the *via consularis* and the 31.2 m.a.s.l. of the paving in the basilica area in Late Antiquity, when an extramural necropolis was located there, the settlement reached a new ground level of 32.5 m.a.s.l11. The damage caused to the walls during the attack launched by the Exarch Romanus (590-596) in 590 and strong floods led to the gradual abandonment of the *civitas* in the early seventh century12. The area of the *ad corpus* basilica of S. Geminianus must have found itself in an equally poor state. This church was built in the early fifth century around the tomb of the city's patron saint, in a cemetery area located on the *Via Emilia*, on the western outskirts13. As late as the eighth century, it was still partially buried, with a 1.5 m. drop between the exterior and the interior ground surface14. Given this marked structural crisis, it is unsurprising that the final conquest of the urban area of *Mutina* by Rothari (636-652) occurred without any bloodshed in 643. According to Paul the Deacon – who drew his account from the *Origo gentis Langobardorum*15 – the clash with the troops of the Exarch of Ravenna, Isaac, occurred further to the east, near the river *Scultenna*16 – today's Panaro – which, from the Modenese Apennines, cuts across the plain between Modena and Bologna. Although Rothari's army won the battle, it suffered serious losses, which halted his advance in that direction17.

At least at first, annexation into the Lombard Kingdom did not entail any perceptible changes. The *Rythmus de synodo Ticinense* of 698 credits King Cunipert (688-700) with the restoration of the *urbs* in the late seventh century: «Semidiruta noncupata Motina, Urbe pristino decore restituit»18. The archaeological data attest to reconstruction work over the course of the eighth century: land reclamation and levelling made the areas around the old basilica accessible again. Then this building was replaced by a new church with a baptistery, which became the centre of the new early medieval city and was

10 Cremonini – Labate, *Modena: un "dissesto"*; Labate, *Modena in età medievale*, pp. 258-261. The second flood has tentatively been identified with the *diluvium* mentioned by Paul the Deacon in the year 589: Paul the Deacon, *Historia Langobardorum*, III, 23, p. 127; concerning this hypothesis, see Cremonini – Labate, *Modena: un "dissesto"*; with regard to the use of this passage from Paul the Deacon, it is also worth considering the methodology outlined by Dall'Aglio,

*Il "diluvium di Paolo Diacono"*. 11 Benassi – Labate, *Le fasi costruttive*, p. 396; Cremonini – Labate, *Modena: un "dissesto"*, pp. 16-17.

12 *Ibidem*, p. 258. 13 Golinelli, *San Geminiano e Modena*, p. 16. 14 Benassi – Labate, *Le fasi costruttive*, p. 396. 15 Cosentino, *L'iscrizione ravennate*, p. 37. 16 Paul the Deacon, *Historia Langobardorum*, IV, 45, pp. 170-171. 17 Fasoli, *Tappe ed aspetti*, p. 153; see also Cosentino, *L'iscrizione ravennate*. 18 *Rythmus de synodo Ticinense*, p. 729; see also Bonacini, *Regno ed episcopato*, p. 96; Vocino, *Una comunità minacciata*.

probably completed around the mid-eighth century19. The furnishings retrieved, along with the famous altar slab installed by Bishop Lopicenus (749- 752), would appear to confirm this dating20. During this period extending from the eighth century to the end of the ninth, the roads around the church were repaired by paving them with cobblestones from the rivers21. This vast, overall building effort was intended as a genuine urban planning project and may also have received public support – in what form, it is difficult to tell. In this period the sources first mention a new settlement, different form the Roman *Mutina*: the *civitas Geminiani*, whose identity evidently revolved around the figure of the city's first saint22. Historians have always confidently identified this new *civitas* with the site of the Lombard episcopal church and its annexes23. In this regard, it is worth recalling Isidore of Seville's definition of *civitas* as a term describing the inhabitants of an urban space, rather than the material element – which is to say the buildings and stones of a city, for which the term *urbs* was used instead24.

This picture is further complicated by the fact that in the same period a second *civitas* made its appearance, with a more conspicuous royal investment: the fiscal estate of *Civitas Nova*. While the local elites who identified with Saint Geminianus were promoting the building of the new church and the restoration of the infrastructures on the outskirts of the ancient Roman city, King Liutprand (712-744) chose to strengthen an ancient rural settlement located nearby, which he turned into a royal estate. Its foundation is attested by an eighth-century monumental slab discovered near the *pieve* of S. Peter of Cittanova in 1559. The inscription reports that King Liutprand founded and fortified a new *civitas* in that area25*.*

The *curtis* of *Civitas Nova* was located along the *Via Emilia*, near the bridge of the Secchia, west of the Roman city, in an area better protected against flooding26. This *curtis* became a centre for the public authorities in the Modena area, and the seat of a gastald. Probably reinforced with stone walls27, it was directly connected to the great fluvial network of the Po Valley through the harbour of *Aqualonga* on the Secchia28. It is difficult to determine whether this represented King Liutprand's solution to the problem of establishing the Modena territory within the Kingdom of Italy once and for all, a

19 Benassi – Labate, *Le fasi costruttive*, pp. 396-397. 20 *Ibidem*, p. 397; Trovabene, *Il Museo Lapidario*, pp. 105-106. 21 Labate, *Modena alto medioevale*, p. 350. 22 On saint Geminianus' life and cult see Golinelli, *San Geminiano e Modena.* 23 See Golinelli, *Città e culto dei santi*, pp. 24-29. 24 Isidore of Seville, *Etymologiarum sive Originum*, 15, 2.2. 25 Gelichi, *Studi e ricerche*, pp. 577-578; Bonacini, *Terre d'Emilia*, pp. 141-142; for an edition of this epigraphic text, see Montorsi, *L'epigrafe modenese di Liutprando.* 26 Gelichi, *Studi e ricerche*, pp. 592-595. 27 The fortification work is attested by DD LdF, n. 204, pp. 502-505. Owing to the intense hu-

man activity of the last century, archaeological excavations have brought to light only some segments of the medieval water channels: Gelichi, *Studi e ricerche*, p. 595. 28 Bonacini, *Terre d'Emilia*, p. 143.

solution adopted while work on the new cathedral was underway. Certainly, in the last decades of Lombard rule, Kings Aistulf (749-756) and Desiderius (757-774) also contributed to shifting the territorial balance by introducing royal monasteries as a new way of managing the large fiscal complexes recently established in the area29.

Aistulf and his brother-in-law Anselm founded the Abbey of S. Sylvester of Nonantola around the year 752, and did so within one of the fiscal estates on the plain north of *Mutina*, the *curtis* of Gena30. Desiderius instead endowed the female monastery of S. Salvatore of Brescia – founded by him and his wife Ansa – with a large number of fiscal estates located between Reggio and Modena, most notably the estate of Migliarina31. Even the second monastic institution founded by Desiderius, San Benedetto of Leno, was endowed with fiscal estates in the Modena area32. In this case, however, it is difficult to propose any general reconstruction on account of the loss of the abbey's archives33. The surviving royal and imperial charters and a patrimonial management document, drafted by Abbot Hubert in 938 and now in the *Archivio Capitolare* of Modena34, show that San Benedetto's presence in that framework was significant, enduring, and consistently organised through the presence of the cell of S. Donatus in the *curtis* of Baggiovara, a few kilometres to the south of Modena35.

#### 3. *The 822 landmark charter of the Church of Modena*

Probably as a consequence of the turmoil caused by war and natural disasters, the Modena area presented itself as a complex territory which served as a playing field for several political actors directly in contact with the central authorities. There were many opportunities for self-affirmation, and they increased even further with the Carolingian conquest, when regime change opened up new possibilities for interaction. For example, as early as 780 Abbot Anselm of Nonantola successfully petitioned Charlemagne for the right to

29 Lazzari, *La tutela del patrimonio fiscale*, pp. 108-110. 30 On S. Sylvester of Nonantola see Manarini, *Politiche regie e attivismo*; Manarini, *Politiche*

*regie e conflitti*. 31 Manarini, *Politiche regie e attivismo*, pp. 27-29. On S. Salvatore of Brescia's estates in Emilia see Mancassola, *L'azienda curtense*, pp. 182-187; on the fiscal estates of Migliarina see Mancassola, *La corte di Migliarina* and Carboni, *La* curtis *di Migliarina*; on S. Salvatore's function within the royal fisc see Lazzari, *Una santa*; Lazzari, Bertha, amatissima. 32 On the foundation of San Benedetto of Leno see Azzara, *Il re e il monastero*; on its patrimony

see Baronio, *Il «dominatus» dell'abbazia*. 33 Barbieri, *L'archivio*, p. 255. 34 *Regesto della chiesa cattedrale di Modena*, n. 48. 35 On royal diplomas for Leno, beginning with the one granted by Berengar II and Adalbert in 958, see Baronio, *Il «dominatus» dell'abbazia*. The localisation of the cell of S. Donatus is not clear, relying on later attestations Girolamo Tiraboschi located it some eleven kilometres far from modern Baggiovara in the location of *Pradelle*, modern San Donnino (Modena): Tiraboschi, *Dizionario topografico*, p. 265.

manage the *curtis* of Cittanova – among the many others already granted by Aistulf36 – and its revenues through the levying of the *portaticum*37.

In the early Carolingian period, the bishops of Modena would appear to have been chiefly engaged in strengthening their patrimonial position by protecting themselves against possible outside interference. The Modena archives preserve only one original document from this period: a charter by Charlemagne granting immunity to Bishop Geminianus (782) in 78238. Later, thanks to the new sensibility towards the episcopacy shown by Louis the Pious39, the situation also changed for Modenese bishops. In 822 Bishop Deusdedit (813-828) obtained a charter from Louis the Pious that in terms of its size and content may be regarded as a genuine landmark charter of the Church of Modena. The text illustrates the Modenese perspective on the relationship between the Church and Lombard and Carolingian royal power during the previous century.

The charter was issued in Aachen in February 822 and it is preserved through its original parchment, still kept in the *Archivio Capitolare* of Modena40. Recent critical editions have identified two short interpolations attributed to tenth-century hands41. Some significant content features suggest that the Modenese must have provided a rough draft that the court then used to produce the final text. The central figures are Emperor Louis the Pious and the bishop of Modena, Deusdedit, who had been in office at least from August 813, but who on account of his advanced age and poor health, chose to be represented by a priest by the name of *Williarius*. The *narratio* continues by recounting how *Williarius* asked the emperor to issue a charter to confirm all properties and rights that the Lombard kings had either already granted to his Church or confirmed, after ascertaining the genuineness of the documents submitted by the priest. Louis then confirmed the confirmation charter by King Cunipert, four *praecepta* respectively by Kings Liutprand, Hildeprand (744), Ratchis (744-749), and Desiderius42, and two donations by Louis' father Charles. As a side note, it must be said that no trace of these documents is left in the *Archivio Capitolare* in Modena. The only Lombard royal document to have been preserved, albeit in an eleventh-century copy, is a *praeceptum* by King Aistulf43 – the only king not mentioned in the previous list – but it has nothing to do with Louis I's charter as far as its object and patrimonial context are concerned44.

36 See Manarini, *Politiche regie e attivismo*, pp. 18-23. 37 DD Kar I, n. 131, pp. 181-182. See also Manarini, *Politiche regie e attivismo*, pp. 24-25. 38 DD Kar I, n. 147, pp. 199-200. 39 See Patzold, *Episcopus*, especially pp. 105-184. 40 DD LdF, n. 204, pp. 502-505. 41 *Ibidem*, p. 503; ChLA2, LXXXVIII, p. 38. 42 CDL III, pp. 286-287. 43 *Ibidem*, n. 24, pp. 115-118. 44 The *praeceptum* concerns the donation of the estate of Gena, with its forest, to Bishop Lope-

cinus: CDL III, n. 24, pp. 115-118. This deed was copied into a scroll at some point in the eleventh century, along with another two deeds from 796 and 828, pertaining to the *pieve* of San Pietro in Sicculo (present-day San Pietro in Elda, Modena): *Regesto della chiesa cattedrale*, nn. 3, 11.

Louis' charter concerns four landed patrimonies, comprising either ancient and disputed properties or more recent acquisitions associated with joint involvement in the fiscal system. In this case, what the bishops obtained was control over the rural parish churches located within fiscal estates. In particular, it is worth noting the mention of the castle of Gavello, located in the *Saltus* to the north, towards the Po river – presented as a development of the patrimonial complex which in Late Antiquity was known as the *massa sancti Geminiani*45 – for which the Church had already obtained no less than three of the aforementioned *praecepta*, by Liutprand, Ratchis, and Desiderius. The Modenese bishops' difficulty in managing this property is further reflected by the fact that at this point in the document we find the addition – on an erasure – of the words *cum suis pescariis*, probably in a tenth-century hand. Among the fiscal acquisitions associated with parish churches, the document also lists the *pieve* of S. Peter of Cittanova and that of S. Thomas within the *curtis* of Ganaceto46.

Also relevant is the political-memorial perspective underlying the document. Through the charter's *narratio*, which we may regard as a genuine account of the history of the episcopal Church given to the emperor with the inclusion of its various *praecepta* and charters, the Church sought to present itself as a stable and constant counterpart to royal power. This narrative of continuity coincides with the beginning of the "new" history of the territory of Modena, a new history launched – after the late-antique break – by Cunipert's reign; indeed, through certain patrimonial elements, it may even be seen to serve as a link between the two phases.

The charter presents another two points of great interest. The first concerns the *curtis* of Cittanova and the parish church of S. Peter, which is said to have been granted by *praeceptum* to Bishop John by King Hildeprand. When defining the location of the building, the text uses the formula «de ecclesia sancti Petri intra muros civitas Geminianae, quae nunc Nova vocatur»47. What is striking here is the assignment of the church of S. Peter – which is known for certain to have been located in the *curtis* – to the *civitas Geminiani*, which, as already noted, would instead appear to have been the new urban centre developed around the cathedral. This *civitas* is further described as *nova*, using the attribute applied to the fiscal estate. The passage is a problematic one, but these difficulties can hardly be due to slips on the

45 On *massae* as agrarian structures of late and post-Roman Italy see Vera, Massa fundorum, especially pp. 1011-1013.

46 Ganaceto is now a small village north of Modena. Other assets mentioned are the *villa Puziolo* (Portile, Modena), *Galaniticum* (unidentified), a watermill with a road and canal pertaining to the estate of Cittanova, the chapel of San Donnino near *Cluziam* (modern San Donnino, Modena), the chapel of Sant'Apollinare in Stagnano close to Monteveglio (Bologna), and finally some olive groves close to Monteveglio castle's wall. These latter properties in the Bolognese Apennines and the church of San Donnino had been previously donated to the Church of Modena by two *Romani homines* and their wives. 47 DD LdF, n. 204, p. 504.

scribe's part48. Instead, we may posit an attempt – a successful attempt – by the Modenese episcopal authorities to assert their influence over the *curtis* by altering the geographical description: the bishop thus obtained crucial access to the fiscal core of the area, in which Nonantola had already been operating for almost half a century.

A second point of interest is the formula used in the final section of the charter, which concerns the election of the bishops of Modena. In other words, Louis I granted the right to select the bishops from among the members of the Modenese clergy, as long as they respected the canons governing episcopal dignity and office49. In its tone and meaning, this formula immediately brings to mind the right granted to monastic communities to elect an abbot freely. Its use in relation to an episcopal church poses quite a few puzzling questions. The drafter of the charter himself must have found it at least somewhat obscure, since – when going through the document again – he added *inter se* at the end of the passage for the sake of clarity. This formula could be read as a reassurance in favor of the Modenese chapter given the precarious health conditions of bishop Deusdedit and therefore the imminence of a new election. It may also represent a claim to autonomy with respect to the royal power, which perhaps used to select episcopal candidates without consulting the Modenese50. Alternatively, this may be interpreted as an attempt to obtain the right to elect bishops, which emerged at the local level – although it is unclear what form this competition may have taken and what actors it may have involved. The *MGH* editor Theo Kölzer has acknowledged the peculiarly Italian nature of this formula, whose first occurrence he has identified in a charter issued to the Church of Piacenza in 81951. In this case, although the text has been preserved in a late copy of poor quality, the formula is much broader and more detailed52. In various parts it follows *verbatim* the second regulation in the *Capitulare ecclesiasticum*53, issued by Louis himself not long before. This point is certainly worth exploring in greater detail. For now, I believe it is interesting to note that this particular formula appears in charters granted

48 Addresses the issue, without however dwelling on the textual analysis of the diploma, also

Golinelli, *Città e culto dei santi*, p. 25. 49 DD LdF, n. 204, p. 505: «Concessimus etiam hoc privilegium memoratae ecclesiae, ut si post decessionem episcoporum ipsius sedis talis in clero inventus fuerit, qui secundum canones episcopatus honorem et officium habere possit, licentiam habeant eligendi inter se».

50 On bishops' enrollment under the Carolingians see Savigni, *L'episcopato nell'Europa carolingia.*

51 DD LdF, n. 157, pp. 390-393. 52 *Ibidem*, p. 393: «De pontefice vero per auctoritatem domini et genitoris nostri in eadem ecclesia, si talis inventus ibi fuisset, qui eandem ecclesiam secundum doctrinam evangelicam vel statuta canonum plenissime regere valeret et regibus Francorum fidelis existeret, licentiam inter se eligendi habent, ita nos licentiam pontificem eligendi adtribuimus, sicut autoritas sanctorum canonum sancit et sicut omnibus ecclesiis in imperio deo propitio nostro constitutis concessum habemus, videlicet ut per electionem cleri et populi, remota personarum et munerum aceptione, ob vite meritum et sapientie donum eliguntur, ut exemplo et verbo sibi subiectis prodesse valeant».

53 MGH, Capit. I, n. 138, pp. 275-280.

to two bishops who necessarily had to engage with the two major royal abbeys of Bobbio and Nonantola54.

To conclude, this charter offers a valuable snapshot of the development of the figure of the bishop of Modena in the early Carolingian period: the bishops of the Church of Saint Geminianus displayed a strong, solid connection with the royal authorities, through which they aspired to achieve a position of pre-eminence within the context of the ancient *territorium civitatis*, and to enjoy complete independence with respect to the other actors operating in this area. Furthermore, they aspired to gain stable access to the kingdom's fiscal patrimony and its management.

#### 4. *Bishop Leodoin and codex O.I.2: episcopal authority and the exercising of law*

Louis II's reign (844-875) witnessed a further increase in the Modenese bishops' participation in the Carolingian system of power. After Bishop Walpertus (865-869), who acted as a royal envoy55, the episcopal see was held by Leodoin, one of the leading bishops on the political stage in the second half of the ninth century.

We have no certain information about his background56. It seems reasonable to assume that he was descended from the gastald named Leodoin – a personal name of Germanic origin that is quite rare in Italy – who in 842, together with his wife Cristeberga, signed an emphyteutic contract with Bishop Jonas (840-856)57. This contract does not provide any detailed information about the gastald's patrimonial area or even the portion of the royal fisc assigned to him. However, the neat and steady handwriting in the subscription suggests the fair writing skills of someone used to dealing with documents. Prior to his election as bishop, Leodoin served in the royal chapel and also held various appointments at Louis II's chancery, for example as *grossator*  and *recognitor* between 869 and 87058. His career in the royal chapel was a swift one, as within a short time he was promoted from *sacerdos* to *archipresbiter palatinus*59*.* By August 871 he was already *episcopus*60*.* One biographical element which, if confirmed, would further illustrate his connections with the

54 On Modena-Nonantola relations during the ninth century see Bonacini, *Relazioni e conflitti* and Manarini, *Politiche regie e conflitti*; on Piacenza-Bobbio see Piazza, *Monastero e vescovado di Bobbio*, pp. 12-20. 55 See Manarini, *Politiche regie e attivismo*, p. 49. 56 The hypothesis that Leodoin hailed from Modena and was educated at its cathedral school

is upheld by Golinelli, *La città prima e dopo l'anno Mille*, p. 181 and Al Kalak, *Leodoino*, p. 5. 57 ChLA2, LXXXVIII, n. 11, pp. 50-51. On minor officials' presence and activities in the area see

Santos Salazar, *Ufficiali minori e società*. 58 DD Lu II, n. 49, pp. 161-162; n. 51, pp. 165-167. See Fleckenstein, *Die Hofkapelle*, pp. 129-131. 59 DD Lu II, n. 49, p. 162: «sacerdos iussu imperatorio advice Farimundi»; n. 51, pp. 166: «sacerdos archipresbiter palatinus».

60 ChLA2, LXXXVIII, n. 18, pp. 69-71.

court milieu and the upper echelons of Italian aristocracy is his role as deacon during the founding of the female monastery of Fontebona by the Count of Siena, Winigis, and the latter's wife Richilda in 86761. The uniqueness of the Germanic name Leodoin/Liutwin in the Italian context makes this identification very likely62. Moreover, the time frame and geographical location – although the latter is not specified in the copy of the cartulary – would appear to be consistent with the presence of Louis II's royal court in central-southern Italy in that period63.

Leodoin's political pre-eminence and cultural standing gave a decisive impulse to the consolidation process launched by the Church of Modena from as early as the eighth century. His twenty-year-long episcopate profoundly shaped the relationship between Modena and the royal authorities, a relationship which remained solid long after Louis II's death. The hallmark of Leodoin's pastoral measures is to be found in the creation and promotion of the Modenese ecclesiastical milieus, where we begin to identify a school, a library, a chapter, and the episcopal chancery64. The manuscripts in the capitular library bear witness to an active, dynamic community that was also prolific from a literary point of view, as is shown by the poetic compositions that constitute the focus of Giorgia Vocino's research65. Among the main codices to have survived from Leodoin's library we find the *Chronicon* and *Etymologies* by Isidore of Seville, a Gregorian missal, and Origen's commentary on the Book of Numbers66.

Also prominent are legal manuscripts, which shed light on the issues addressed by Leodoin, who devoted particular attention to ecclesiastical canons and pontifical decretals in his effort to assert episcopal social pre-eminence67. The library preserves a *Collectio canonum veterum* from the seventh-eighth century68, which the bishop used for his doctrinal reflections, including two important letters to the abbot of Nonantola, Theodoric, and to the abbot of Galeata Ilarus69. It also preserves a collection of decretals by pseudo-Isidorus (O.I.4) from the third-quarter of ninth century70. This codex represents a genuine product of the Modenese school headed by Leodoin: in addition to

61 *Il cartulario della Berardenga*, n. 53, p. 428. On Count Winigis and the foundation of S. Salvatore at Fontebona see Cammarosano, *La famiglia dei Berardenghi*, pp. 64-70; Cortese,

*L'aristocrazia toscana*, p. 102. 62 On the uniqueness of this anthroponym see Al Kalak, *Leodoino*, p. 3. 63 See Bougard, *Ludovico*. 64 Vocino, Ut hoc flagellum evadamus, pp. 351-358; concerning his patrimonial operations see Al Kalak, *Leodoino*, pp. 28-32. 65 See Vocino, Ut hoc flagellum evadamus; Vocino, *Una comunità minacciata*, pp. 162-171. 66 See Al Kalak, *Leodoino*, pp. 35-36. 67 Heil, *Bishop Leodoin*. 68 See Al Kalak, *Leodoino*, p. 34. 69 Both letters have been published *ibidem*, pp. 11-28; an edition and English translation of the

first is to be found in Heil, *Bishop Leodoin*, pp. 46-54; on its content see also Manarini, *Politiche regie e conflitti*, pp. 130-132. 70 See Al Kalak, *Leodoino*, pp. 36-39.

the collection of decretals, it includes a miscellany of legal and poetic-literary texts that capture the lively cultural milieu of Leodoin's Modena71. Finally, we may add the famous codex of *leges* and Carolingian capitularies (O.I.2)72. Recent studies, particularly – yet not exclusively – on the local context, have suggested a close connection between the bishop and this codex, which according to this hypothesis bears witness to the legal functions he acquired over the course of his lengthy episcopate – functions also attested by the famous charter issued by King Guy I (889-894) in 89173. I therefore wish to devote the last section of the present contribution to exploring this codex, as I believe it represents a significant element in the trajectory I have outlined so far, even though I do not accept its attribution to Leodoin and his teaching74.

The codex is written in a Carolingian minuscule hand dated to the turn of the tenth century75. It comprises three parts; the main one, from f. 9 to f. 205, makes up a legal codex, to which two quires have been added at the beginning and the end. The first has a didactic content and is written in an early tenth-century Carolingian minuscule hand; the second quire is devoted to liturgical and accounting matters, and has been dated to the end of the same century76. The main section of the manuscript preserves the most complete version of the collection of laws called *Liber legum*. This has been traditionally attributed to Lupus of Ferrières (805-862/3), who is believed to have composed it around the 830s77. The collection includes the Salic, Ripuarian, Lombard, Alemannic, and Bavarian laws, along with a series of Carolingian capitularies issued between 779 and 82978, both for the general administration of the empire and for the specific governing of the Kingdom of Italy79. Lupus probably composed this work during the time he spent at

71 Heil, *Bishop Leodoin*, p. 15; see also Vocino, Ut hoc flagellum evadamus. 72 See Golinelli, *Il codice delle leggi*; a thoroughly new examination of the manuscript is now available online within the project *Capitularia*: *Modena, Archivio Capitolare, O. I. 2*, < https:// capitularia.uni-koeln.de/en/mss/modena-bc-o-i-2/ >. Especially on the Frankish *leges* see the

recent Faulkner, *Law and Authority*. 73 *Ibidem* and Nicolaj, *Il* Liber Legum *di Everardo*. Guy I's charter has been published in *I*

*diplomi di Guido*, n. 11, pp. 27-32. 74 On codex O.I.2 within the framework of the circulation of law codes in the Carolingian pe-

riod, see Pohl, *Le leggi longobarde*. 75 Fornasari, *Collectio canonum Mutinensium*, p. 251; *Origo gentis Langobardorum*, pp. 59- 61. Hubert Mordek has erroneously dated the whole manuscript to the late tenth century, based on the last quire, which includes the liturgical calendar for 991: Mordek, Bibliotheca capitularium, p. 256.

76 Golinelli, *Il codice delle leggi*, pp. 11-13. 77 Münsch, *Der* Liber legum *des Lupus*, pp. 65-69. Nicolaj instead suggests that the author of the Modenese copy of the *Liber legum* might be the *presbiter* Lupus who is the addressee of one of the two letters by Leodoin copied in codex O.I.4: Nicolaj, *Il* Liber Legum *di Everardo*, pp. 291- 292. On Lupus' life and political relations see Ricciardi, *L'epistolario di Lupo*. 78 See the detailed list in Mordek, Bibliotheca capitularium, pp. 257-267; Golinelli, *Il codice*

*delle leggi*, pp. 13-21. 79 Bonacini, *Le leggi germaniche*, p. 37. On manuscripts preserving collections of laws from

Lombard and Carolingian Italy, and especially on the *Liber legum* by Lupus of Ferrières, see Pohl, *Le leggi longobarde*, pp. 427-437, especially pp. 433-434.

the *scriptorium* of Fulda Abbey, under Hrabanus Maurus' supervision80. The monk then devoted the work to the Unruoching Eberhard, the emperor's son-in-law and a leading figure at the imperial court, who was also marquis of Friuli81. The purpose of the collection is clearly outlined in the introductory poem, where the compiler states that this *collectio* would enable the *prudens* Eberhard – «quisquis amat cunctas legum cognoscere causas arbiter et clarus vult omnibus ipse videri» – to fulfil the role of *arbiter clarus* in the best possible way82. Manuscripts such as this were therefore crucial for running the Carolingian empire, and were even accessible to – and owned by – leading lay officials83.

The hypothesis that the present codex O.I.2 was copied from the original or from another copy in Modena in the second half of the ninth century, which is to say through Leodoin's direct intervention, is certainly intriguing, yet it does not seem to me to be supported by sufficient evidence84. Hubert Mordek more prudently traces it back to northern Italy: indeed, an examination of the manuscript's extrinsic data does not allow us to be more precise85. Upon a first analysis of the contents, it is difficult to identify with any certainty the context of the reception of the manuscript. The impression we get, however, is that it does not coincide with the Modena of Leodoin's day. The general structure of the texts it features makes it impossible to point to any specific milieu as far as its reception is concerned. We may note that specifically episcopal topics, as well as that of the structuring of monastic institutions within dioceses, which we know were dear to Leodoin86, do not emerge in any prominent way from the series of capitularies copied into the codex. On the other hand, to affirm episcopal pre-eminence, Leodoinian texts rely exclusively on ecclesiastical canons, and not on material from the Carolingian imperial tradition. Besides, the impression we get from texts such as the letter addressed to Nonantola, or the collection of canons *De accusatione episcopi*, which Michael Heil has persuasively associated with Leodoin87, suggests a picture quite different from the situation which would emerge from the hypothesis of Leodoin's own-

80 Münsch, *Der* Liber legum *des Lupus*, pp. 66-67; see also Ricciardi, *L'epistolario di Lupo*, p. 14. 81 On Eberhard's family, life, and will see La Rocca – Provero, *The Dead and Their Gifts*; on his famous library see Riché, *Les bibliothèques de trois aristocrats*; on Lupus' dedication to him

see Münsch, *Der* Liber legum, pp. 57-63. 82 Lupus of Ferrières, *Versus*, p. 1059. 83 We must nonetheless bear in mind that the erudite character of this compilation is a rhetorical element typical of Carolingian poetics and derives from the Latin tradition: see Pohl, *Le leggi longobarde*, p. 433. 84 Golinelli, *Il codice delle leggi*, pp. 23-24; Nicolaj, *Il* Liber Legum *di Everardo*, p. 305. In the

past, the conventional dating of the codex to the mid or late tenth century instead had led to its attribution to Guy, Leodoin's successor as bishop of Modena between 940 and 967: Bonacini, *Le*

*leggi germaniche*, p. 43. 85 Mordek, Bibliotheca capitularium, p. 256. 86 See Heil, *Bishop Leodoin*, pp. 9-31. 87 Heil, *Bishop Leodoin*, p. 31.

ership of the codex: a situation in which the bishop, seated in a judge's chair, would be exercising jurisdictional duties over the whole Modena area88.

So far as we can tell, before reaching the Chapter library, the manuscript may have been used by lay officials active in that area, who like the marquis of Friuli needed to know what laws to follow in fulfilling their function as judges. This practical context also seems more consistent with the extrinsic features of the manuscript which, notwithstanding its fine illustrations, presents several gaps – as noted by François Bougard89 – and various editorial flaws90. In other words, its overall quality is quite far from the standards of perfection attained by certain codices that stand as genuine gems or monuments, such as the many sacred codices owned by religious institutions. In this respect, I believe it is problematic to identify codex O.I.2 with the actual law book that is depicted as a gift to Saint Geminianus by Emperor Jovian on the bas-relief on the architrave of the *Porta dei Principi* in Lanfranco's cathedral91.

After the sporadic interest shown by Count Autramnus during Lothar's reign92, the Widonid kings made conspicuous public investments in the Modena area in the last decade of the ninth century93. This may be a plausible context for the drafting of the copy of the *Liber legum*, the main section of our Modenese codex. King Guy entrusted a count – probably a nephew of his – also named Guy, with bringing the local societies of eastern Emilia together into a single administrative structure94. To paraphrase Tiziana Lazzari, the creation of this territory established Guy at the head of a polycentric public entity, which in private documents, is referred to as the *iudiciaria Mutinensis* – an entity so large as to include the territories of Reggio, Modena, and partly Bologna, and therefore reminiscent of a March95. The *placitum* of Cinquanta, presided over by Count Guy in 898, enables us to appreciate the royal authorities' action on the territorial level, and also the features of the *iudiciaria* from the point of view of public law96.

In addition to the count – who described himself as *Mutinensis* – the assembly was attended by public officials who were part of his entourage: an imperial *vasso*, the *vicecomes* and some judges from Cittanova, and three gastalds and vassals of the count, along with a throng of notaries, *scabini*, and *boni homines* representing the many local communities that made up the *iudiciaria*. Within this framework, the *civitas Mutine* too was represented by

88 This situation would indeed appear to have emerged in the Kingdom of Italy, but only towards the end of the tenth century: see Bougard, *La justice dans le royaume*, pp. 296-305, especially

p. 297; see also Bordone, *Vescovi giudici*. 89 Bougard, *Le livre de l'autorité*, p. 103. 90 For instance, the illuminations on *folia* 42r and 111r are incomplete. 91 Golinelli, *Il codice delle leggi*, p. 31. 92 See Bonacini, *Terre d'Emilia*, pp. 99-106; Manarini, *Politiche regie e attivismo*, pp. 40-45. 93 See Lazzari, *La creazione di un territorio*; Manarini, *A Marriage, a battle*, pp. 299-305. 94 Lazzari, *La creazione di un territorio*, p*.* 105. 95 On the *iudiciaria Mutinensis* and its development between ninth and eleventh century see

Manarini, *Struggle for Power.* 96 *I placiti del "Regnum Italiae"*, vol. 1, n. 106, pp. 385-396.

notaries and *scabini*, who, along with all the other representatives, engaged with the public authorities, taking an active part in the judicial assembly. The object of the *placitum* further clarifies the position of the episcopal Church with respect to the count: the assembly had been convened to certify the genuineness of the deeds that the Abbey of Nonantola was submitting to prove its ownership of a fiscal estate against the bishop of Modena, who had not shown up on this occasion97.

It would therefore not be implausible to assume that the copy of the *Liber legum* was in use as a legal instrument among lay royal officials, possibly even count Guy and his officials, and that it was possibly kept on the fiscal estate of Cittanova, which, at the time, continued to serve as a seat of public power.

#### 5. *Conclusion: Bishop Gotfredus and the* castrum *at Cittanova*

In the current state of research, this hypothesis, which places a copy of the *Liber legum* in the hands of count Guy of Modena, requires further studies. However, I believe that it helps to frame the presence and use of the law code in a broader context than the only episcopal cultural centre of the second half of the ninth century, by setting it within a social network in which the practice of law represented a common element shared by the representatives of many local communities. The pre-eminence achieved by the bishop of Modena in this territory over the course of the tenth century therefore represents the outcome of a process of construction of power which should not be assigned to earlier decades of the ninth century, despite the unquestionable impact of the figure of Leodoin. Possibly the scion of a family of public officials, by virtue of his training and charisma, he crucially contributed to the establishment of a close relationship between the Church of Modena and the royal authorities, not least in the light of the political and ideological changes that occurred at the Carolingian court.

The famous charter that Guy granted to Leodoin in 891 undoubtedly bears witness to a position of strength, which nevertheless does not overshadow the wide range of actors operating in the area in question. The main feature of the concession is the definite recomposition of the episcopal polity, centred on the Lombard cathedral, with the ancient urban centre of *Mutina*: after assigning the Modenese Church immunity in its own lands with respect to public officials' prerogatives, King Guy explicitly granted the Church those *loca* on which the episcopal *civitas* had been built over the course of the previous centuries98. Although Guy invoked what had been done «ab antiquis antecessoribus nostris regibus», it is clear that his action constituted a highly signif-

97 On this patrimonial dispute see Manarini, *Politiche regie e attivismo*, p. 62. 98 *I diplomi di Guido*, n. 11, p. 30: «concedimus etiam eidem sanctae Motinensi aecclesiae, sicut ei ab antiquis antecessoribus nostris regibus loca, in quibus civitas predicta constructa fuerat».

icant moment of legitimation for the bishops of Saint Geminianus: incapable of independently attaching themselves to the tradition of the Roman *Mutina*, as late as the end of the ninth century the bishops of the *civitas Geminiani*  felt the need to officially assert their authority over the very episcopal buildings that, *de facto*, constituted the heart of the new urban settlement. From that moment onwards, Leodoin was also able legitimately to endow the new *civitas* with the infrastructures and defensive constructions it required99: the material component of the city, the *urbs* of which Isidore of Seville speaks and which *Mutina* had lost over the course of the previous centuries. In the late ninth century, however, episcopal influence was limited within the one-mile circumference around the cathedral100. The bishops' situation must therefore be viewed within the broader territorial framework of Modena, in which royal officials, the Abbey of Nonantola, and even local communities continued to enjoy considerable leeway.

At this point, I believe that we can make new sense of bishop Gotfredus' construction of a castle in the immediate environs of the *curtis* of Cittanova101, as though to recall the other *civitas Geminiani* mentioned in Louis the Pious' landmark charter. Royal recognition was immediately granted by Berengar I in 904 and also entailed the transfer of the market and related tax exemptions from the *curtis* to the castle102. This gave the episcopal Church an advantage over the fiscal estate, and it was to prove permanent. In the tenth century, Cittanova progressively lost its autonomy to the benefit of increasing episcopal and urban influence, so much so that over the course of the eleventh century the ancient settlement was abandoned103. After some time, all that survived was the parish church of San Pietro104. When Cittanova fell under the bishop's control and the Church obtained the fiscal jurisdiction hitherto exercised by the *curtis*' gastalds, this marked the end-point in the process of affirmation of its power at the local level, which the bishops of Modena had begun in the eighth century.

99 *Ibidem*, p. 31: «liceat ei fossata cavare, molendina construere, portas erigere et super unum miliarium in circuitu aecclesiae civitatis circumquaque firmare ad salvandam et muniendam ipsam sanctam aecclesiam suam constituta canonica et aquam aperire et claudere».

100 *Ibidem*: «et super unum miliarium in circuitu aecclesiae civitatis». 101 DD B I, n. 46, pp. 132-134. 102 *Ibidem*, p. 134: «et si fortasse iam fatus Gotfredus reverendus episcopus aut quilibet successor eius aliquando inibi mercatum constituerit atque collegerit quicquid regiae aut publicae parti de mercato pertinere videtur, per hoc nostrae inscriptionis statum parti ipsius aeclesiae concedimus vindicandi, omni publica functione summota».

103 Bonacini, *Terre d'Emilia*, p. 145; Vocino, *Una comunità minacciata*, p. 159. 104 On these further developments based on archaeological excavations see Gelichi, *Castelli vescovili*, pp. 176-179.

1. The Modena area in the 8th century: a polycentric territory.

2. The lands and estates mentioned in Louis I's diploma (822).

3. Places related to the *placitum* of Cinquanta and to the *iudiciaria Mutinensis* (*c*. 890–*c*. 950).

#### **Works cited**

*Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters*, 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXXVIII, Italy LX, Modena-Nonantola I, publ. G. Feo – M. Modesti – M. Al Kalak – M. Mezzetti, Dietikon-Zürich 2008.

*Codice diplomatico longobardo*, vol. 3, 1, ed. C. Brühl, Roma 1973 (Fonti per la storia d'Italia, 64). M.E. Cortese, *L'aristocrazia toscana. Sette secoli (VI-XII)*, Spoleto 2017.

*I diplomi di Guido e Lamberto*, ed. L. Schiaparelli, Roma 1906 (FSI, 36).

Lupus of Ferrières, *Versus*, ed. K. Strecker, Berlin 1923 (MGH, Poetae, 4.3), p. 1059.

A. Ricciardi, *L'epistolario di Lupo di Ferrières: intellettuali, relazioni culturali e politica nell'età di Carlo il Calvo*, Spoleto 2005.

Edoardo Manarini Università di Torino<EMAIL_ADDRESS>
### **Writing, textuality, politics in the Lucca of Bishops Berengar and Ambrose (837-852)**

by Paolo Tomei

The article consists of two intertwined sections. In the first one, I intend to reconstruct the processes of political and social transformation that took place in Lucca under the actions of Bishops Berengar (837-843) and Ambrose (843-852): foreigners appointed in succession by the Court. In order to do this, I will take the viewpoint offered by the numerous private charters preserved in the Archivio Storico Diocesano of Lucca. Secondly, I will present the first results of a study on the manuscripts of the same period preserved there – a heritage not yet fully explored and appreciated. I will focus in particular on the most-recently entered text in ms 490: the so-called *Dicta Gelasii papae*. It was written in a Carolingian hand that Armando Petrucci has compared to that of Bishop Berengar. The text constitutes an exceptional insight into the turmoil that animated the sacred palace after the «penitential reform» of 813, and which spread throughout the Empire within a general movement of *correctio*.

Middle Ages; 9th century; Italy; Lucca; Carolingians; Gelasius I; Lothar I; *correctio*; penitential reform

Paolo Tomei, University of Pisa, Italy<EMAIL_ADDRESS>0000-0002-3358-8336

Referee List (DOI 10.36253/fup\_referee\_list)

FUP Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (DOI 10.36253/fup\_best\_practice)

Paolo Tomei, *Writing, Textuality, Politics in the Lucca of Bishops Berengar and Ambrose (837-852)*, © Author(s), CC BY 4.0, DOI 10.36253/978-88-5518-623-0.09, in Gianmarco De Angelis, Francesco Veronese (edited by), *Networks of bishops, networks of texts. Manuscripts, legal cultures, tools of government in Carolingian Italy at the time of Lothar I*, pp. 157-180, 2022, published by Firenze University Press, ISBN 978-88-5518-623-0, DOI 10.36253/978-88-5518-623-0

Abbreviations

ASDL = Archivio Storico Diocesano di Lucca

AAL, D = Archivio Arcivescovile di Lucca, Diplomatico

BA = Biblioteca Arcivescovile di Lucca

BCF = Archivio Storico Diocesano di Lucca, Biblioteca Capitolare Feliniana

ChLA2, LVIII = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LVIII, Italy XXX, publ. N. Mastruzzo, Dietikon-Zürich 2001.

ChLA2, LXXV = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXV, Italy XLVII, publ. F. Magistrale, P. Cordasco, C. Drago, Dietikon-Zürich 2005.

ChLA2, LXXVI = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXVI, Italy XLVIII, publ. F. Magistrale, C. Gattagrisi, Dietikon-Zürich 2007.

ChLA2, LXXVII = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXVII, Italy XLIX, publ. F. Magistrale, C. Gattagrisi, P. Fioretti, Dietikon-Zürich 2008.

ChLA2, LXXVIII = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXVIII, Italy L, publ. M. Palma, Dietikon-Zürich 2009. ChLA2, LXXIX = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXIX, Italy LI, publ. F. Magistrale, Dietikon-Zürich 2010. ChLA2, LXXX = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXX, Italy LII, publ. F. Magistrale, C. Gattagrisi, Dietikon-Zürich 2010.

ChLA2, LXXXI = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXXI, Italy LIII, publ. A. Mastruzzo, Dietikon-Zürich 2011. ChLA2, LXXXII = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXXII, Italy LIV, publ. C. Gattagrisi, P. Cordasco, C. Drago, Dietikon-Zürich 2013.

ChLA2, LXXXIII = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXXIII, Italy LV, publ. N. Mastruzzo, Dietikon-Zürich 2013.

ChLA2, LXXXV = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part LXXXV, Italy LVII, publ. N. Mastruzzo, Dietikon-Zürich 2015.

ChLA2, XC = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part XC, Italy LXII, publ. G. Feo, G. Nicolaj, M. Calleri, C. Tristano, Dietikon-Zürich 2011.

ChLA2, CXVII = *Chartae Latinae Antiquiores. Facsimile-edition of the Latin Charters,* 2nd series, ed. G. Cavallo – G. Nicolaj, part CXVII, Addenda I, Dietikon-Zürich 2019.

EOMIA = *Ecclesiae Occidentalis Monumenta Iuris Antiquissima*, 2 voll., ed. C.H. Turner, Oxford 1899-1939.

MDL = *Memorie e documenti per servire all'istoria del Ducato di Lucca*, ed. D. Bertini – D. Barsocchini, Lucca 1818-1841.

MGH, Capit. I = *Capitularia regum Francorum*, I, ed. A. Boretius, Hannover 1883.

MGH, Conc. II = *Concilia aevi Karolini*, ed. A. Werminghoff, Leipzig-Hannover 1906-1908.

MGH, Conc. III = *Die Konzilien der karolingischen Teilreiche*, ed. W. Hartmann, Hannover 1984.

MGH, DD L II = *Die Urkunden Ludwigs II.*, ed. K. Wanner, München 1994 (Diplomata Karolinorum, 4).

The article will be organised into two complementary parts. First of all, I will present the context, a sort of fresco in movement: the processes of transformation in the social and political structures of the city of Lucca, the centre of early medieval Tuscany, which were triggered by the successive election and actions of two bishops of foreign origin and Carolingian educational training, notably in terms of writing, Berengar (837-843) and Ambrose (843- 852). Their arrival should be seen in the context of a profound and global reorganisation of the structure and balance of power in the region, carried out by Lothar I and, in his wake, by Louis II1 . I will trace the main outlines of these dynamics from the angle of the charters, which are exceptionally numerous in Lucca, illustrating them also through the changes discernible in the graphic and documentary forms.

I will then present the first results of an investigation into the manuscripts of the same period preserved in Lucca, helped in this by the cataloguing work carried out by the *Codex project*2. The Archivio Storico Diocesano of Lucca has a definite supremacy in this respect as well: it contains 11 of the 18 codicological units dating back to the ninth century preserved in Tuscany and listed in the project. After an overview, highlighting possible research directions, I will focus on the only codex of this group that has received targeted and constant attention, ms 490, expanding on a suggestion by Armando Petrucci. I intend to offer a new edition of the most-recently entered text in the codex, otherwise unknown, and hitherto somewhat neglected, written by a Carolingian hand that Petrucci has compared to that of Bishop Berengar3. These are the so-called *Dicta Gelasii papae* (cc. 272*v*-273*r*). Focusing on the theme of public penance, the text helps us to understand the instruments available to Berengar and his immediate successors to carry out their political activities. It also offers an exemplary insight into the turmoil that animated the sacred palace after the «penitential reform» of 813 and that spread from the Court, as part of a general movement of *correctio*, throughout the Empire4.

1 In addition to the classic Schwarzmaier, *Lucca*, see now Tomei, *Milites elegantes*, and the large number of articles published in the last fifteen years by Andrea Castagnetti, Simone Collavini, Marco Stoffella (punctual references in the following footnotes). For a general outline, Bougard, *La cour*; Bougard, *Italia infirma*. 2 < http://www406.regione.toscana.it/bancadati/codex/ >, [06/09/2021]. See *Conoscere il ma-*

*noscritto*, *In margine*, and the issues of «Codex Studies». 3 Petrucci, *Scriptores*, p. 96. 4 De Jong, *What was Public*; De Jong, *Sacrum palatium*.

#### 1. *The context*

After making peace with his father Louis the Pious and moving to Italy, Lothar succeeded in asserting in Lucca the Court's control over the highest offices, ecclesiastical and secular. In terms of the city's history, this was a real break. Bishop Peter I, the last to be recruited into the canonical body of the mother church, had already died on 10 July 834. Berengar was only in office from 10 November 837, after a long vacancy, which can be interpreted as a sign of some resistance to the attempt from outside to assert control over the episcopal succession5 . From then on, the succession was rapid and apparently painless: with Ambrose in 8436, like Berengar, probably of foreign origin, and then Jeremiah Aldobrandeschi in 852, a man belonging to the Court though of local extraction, chosen by Louis II7 .

Berengar's pontificate corresponded approximately to the period when, after the expulsion from Lucca of Count Boniface II, directly involved in the conflict on the side of Louis the Pious, the comital office was taken away from the Bavarian kin of the Adalberti and given to Hagano son of Guntram – count between April 838 and 17 January 8448. He was perhaps preceded by Matfrid, recorded by a numismatic source, who has been associated with the Count of Orléans of the same name, a loyal follower of Lothar, who died in Italy in the first of the two epidemics that decimated the circle of his close advisors between 836 and 8379. Just like Hagano, Matfrid was an exponent of a solidarity network opposite to that of the Adalberti. In short, there were the supporters of the Empress Judith, in Alemannia and Bavaria on the one hand, and on the other those of her stepdaughter-in-law Queen Ermengarde, based in Alsace10.

During the same period, a plan initiated after Lothar's first journey to Italy, when he had taken possession of the Kingdom, came to fruition. The ordination of Count Boniface II's sister Richilde as rectrix and abbess of the monastery of S. Benedict on 5 October 823 can be seen as the start of the construction of a new monumental seat of public power in Lucca: the suburban palace with *laubiae*, of which S. Benedict became the ecclesiastical cornerstone11. The initiative was carried out independently of the presence of the Adalberti in the city and ended when they returned to Lucca, after Adalbert

5 ChLA2, LXXVI, n. 43, pp. 152-155 (834 X 7, Lucca), LXXVII, n. 7, pp. 32-33 (837 XI 10, Lucca). 6 ChLA2, LXXVIII, nn. 10, pp. 36-37 (843 VI 12, Lucca), 16, pp. 48-49 (843 XII 15, Lucca). 7 ChLA2, LXXX, n. 18, pp. 72-73 (852 II 29, Lucca); MGH, DD, L II, n. 6, pp. 76-77 (852 X 3,

*curte Auriola*). 8 ChLA2, LXXVII, n. 12, pp. 45-47 (838 IV), LXXVIII, n. 17, pp. 50-51 (844 I 17, Lucca). He is

then called *olim comes*: ASDL, AAL, D, \* D 21; ed. MDL, V/2, n. 628, p. 375 (845 XII 12, Lucca). 9 Depreux, *Le comte Matfrid*; Kasten, *Königssöhne*, pp. 328-330. 10 Hummer, *Politics and Power*; Hammer, *From Ducatus*; Stoffella, *Le relazioni*; Veronese, *In*

*Venetiarum partibus*. 11 ChLA2, LXXV, n. 20, pp. 79-81 (823 X 5, Lucca). For the identification of the church, see the eleventh-twelfth century dorsal note. On the palace, Tomei, *The Power*.

I had established and consolidated his ties with Lothar and Louis II. In 25 June 847, a *placitum* was held «civitate Luca, curte videlicet docalis»12. The neighbouring city of Pisa must have followed a similar path, as on 23 March 858, a *placitum* was held in «sala olim Haganoni comiti»13.

The numerous series of *placita* and *inquisitiones* carried out under Lothair and Louis II not only sheds light on a new topography of power, but also clearly shows a new set-up given to Tuscany by the Court14. The region experienced the establishment of a «polyphonic balance». An articulated power system took shape, harmonised by an overarching superior imperial control15. Alongside the counts of Lucca, who now assumed the title of marquis, the role played by the *missi* from the Court is striking. The protagonists on the public scene stand out as follows. We see *a)* bishops from neighbouring cities, who were formerly chaplains, or who had a close relationship with the sacred palace (such as Rodingus of Florence, who attended the Council of Ingelheim in August 840 together with Joseph of Ivrea and Hagano of Bergamo)16; *b)*  notaries and judges of the sacred palace, a group of professionals that was progressively structured during these decades17; *c)* imperial vassals of foreign origin (such as John, formerly successively count in Seprio and count palatine), or local, such as the Aldobrandeschi18; *d)* transalpine immigrants who, thanks to their links with the palace, put down roots in certain parts of the region (the Ripuarian Hucpoldingi in the Florentine area, the Salian Berardenghi in the Sienese one)19.

The transformations in the social fabric and in the power structures are also evident when one looks at private charters. There was a formalisation and diffusion of *livelli*. In Tuscany, this type of charter remained, like the *placitum* record, a main feature of the documentary system for the whole period, a period during which the region was embedded in the political framework headed by the marquis, until the death of Countess Matilda (1076-1115)20. In the second quarter of the ninth century, there was an increase in the number of *livelli*, by now set in their formula. For the first time, these reached over

*Il vescovo Giuseppe*. 17 Bougard, *La justice*; Castagnetti, *Note e documenti*. 18 Castagnetti, *La società milanese*; Collavini, *Honorabilis domus*. 19 Cammarosano, *La famiglia*; Manarini, *I due volti*. 20 Tomei, *Censum et iustitia*.

50% of the total number of parchments preserved. It never fell below this threshold again. The peak, over 80%, was reached in the last twenty years of the tenth century21.

In the years of Berengar and Ambrose, *livelli* and charters of exchange display new elements, some of which are of lasting influence. *a)* The period is the window of greatest visibility and activism of the transalpine immigrants – Franks, Alamanni and a few Bavarians – generally close to the major fiscal estates, for which they are not infrequently employed as *gastaldi* (for example, the Franks Roderic and Balderic son of Aderic)22. *b)* A flow of charters linked to the reorganisation of the public land base is set in motion, to which the first transactions in land bordering on that of the king or the queen, and the attestation of *curtes novae,* refer23. *c)* From these same documents it is possible to grasp a long-lasting process: the affirmation of the Aldobrandeschi, imperial vassals of local origin, who succeeded in achieving the comital *honor* and in obtaining the bishop's chair in Lucca24. In their wake, the first and decisive period of formation of the aristocratic fabric of Lucca began. A second group of individuals of local extraction emerged, who followed a similar course, though one generation later than the Aldobrandeschi, by entering imperial vassalage and by gaining access to the court's redistributive flow during the years of Louis II. The turning point came with the election of Jeremiah Aldobrandeschi as bishop. He acquired by diploma the power to annul the *livelli* of his predecessors, and through this also the ability to shape clienteles. A network of power was thus formed that prevented the transalpine immigrants from establishing themselves in Lucca. It was made up of three major kin groups, that I have called Figli di Rodilando, Cunimundinghi, and Figli di Huscit25. *d)* There is another transitory factor: only in the cases of Berengar, Ambrose and Jeremiah are there mentions of the bishop's vassals, usually transalpine men such as the Franks Hebrohac son of Ildecherius and Warin son of Odulf26.

Scripts with marked chancery overtones (such as the hands of the deacon and *missus* Cristianus, Abbot Macedo and the *gastaldus* Dodo) can be found in the circle related to the Court, and are visible both in the *placita* and in private charters that throw light on the areas bordering on the fiscal estates. The Carolingian script is widespread here too27. Thus, for example, the sub-

21 Mailloux, *Modalités*; Ghignoli, *Libellario nomine*. 22 Hlawitschka, *Franken*, pp. 310-328; Schwarzmaier, *Lucca*, pp. 173-181; Castagnetti, *L'*inquisitio, pp. 127, 187-192.

23 ChLA2, LXXVII, nn. 43, pp. 130-132 (840 V 28, Lucca), 50, pp. 152-155 (842 I 4, Lucca), LXX-VIII, n. 19, pp. 56-59 (844 I 24, Lucca), LXXIX, n. 49, pp. 154-157 (850 I 20, *Curte Nova finibus Maritimense*), LXXX, nn. 3, pp. 20-22 (850 III 7, Lucca), 34, pp. 114-117 (853 XII 22, Lucca). 24 Collavini, *Honorabilis domus*. 25 Tomei, *Milites elegantes*. 26 ChLA2, LXXVII, n. 50, pp. 152-155 (842 I 4, Lucca), LXXIX, n. 19, pp. 73-75 (847 V 7, Lucca),

LXXX, n. 31, pp. 108-109 (853 X 21, Lucca), LXXXI, n. 38, pp. 114-117 (862 X 9, Lucca).

27 I draw these considerations from the portrait gallery provided by Castagnetti, *I vassalli imperiali*; Castagnetti, *L'*inquisitio; Bassetti-Ciaralli, *Sui rapporti*; Mastruzzo-Unfer Verre, *Pub-*

scriptions of, respectively, Bishops Berengar (of refined layout and closed with a sign of tachigraphic inspiration; which indeed keeps some cursive elements, such as the coexistence between the open *a* and the uncial *a*)28; and of Ambrose of Lucca (still linked to cursive models)29; of Rodingus of Florence (a pure, set and elegant Caroline)30; of the Frank Ratgaud son of Ermenric31; of the Archpriest Osprandus (a mixture of culture and elementary graphic education); and of the others who signed with him the *inquisitio* about the church of S. Fredianus in Lucca belonging to the fisc in April 838 – otherwise completely unknown figures in the albeit rich documentation32. The Aldobrandeschi family, with the imperial vassal Eriprand, played a pioneering role in this respect too among the local elites. His Carolingian script, which shows some cursive reminiscences, underwent a progressive solemnisation by lengthening the letters and enlarging the module under Louis II33.

Episcopal action, carried out by men close to the Court, moved on from this phase in Lucca along two lines, which were then pursued with some continuity at least until the second quarter of the eleventh century34. On the one hand, by taking advantage of the imperial legislation that emphasised the compulsory nature of tithes and the subordination of the *pievi* to the mother church35, the bishopric controlled more firmly centres which became the political-patrimonial coordination *foci* in the diocesan territory, which were then fortified at the beginning of the tenth century: in the Media Valle del Serchio, S. Mary of Sesto di Moriano, whose assets were directly managed by the bishop after having been governed for three generations by the same offspring36; in the Medio Valdarno, S. Hippolytus of *Anniano*, together with Santa Maria a Monte, where the bishop took over the management by choosing the rector, after the church had been governed for four generations by the same offspring37, and S. Gervasius of *Verriana*38.

*blici uffici*. On the spread and characteristics of the Early Carolingian script see now Gavinelli,

*Early Carolingian*. 28 ChLA2, LXXVII, nn. 18, pp. 54-55 (838 XII 16, Lucca), 26, pp. 84-85 (839 VI 14, Lucca), 38,

pp. 116-119 (840 III 24, Lucca). See Petrucci, *Scriptores*, p. 96. 29 ChLA2, LXXVIII, n. 21, pp. 62-64 (844 I, Lucca), LXXIX, nn. 6, pp. 31-35 (846 IV 1, Lucca), 17, pp. 66-69 (847 V 6, Lucca), LXXX, n. 5, pp. 27-29 (850 VI 22, Lucca).

30 ChLA2, LXXVII, n. 35, pp. 107-111 (840 II, Lucca). See Petrucci, *Scriptores*, p. 216. 31 ChLA2, LXXVII, nn. 41, pp. 125-127 (840 V 16, Lucca), 43, pp. 130-132 (840 V 28, Lucca), 47, pp. 143-145 (841 VI 9, Lucca), LXXVIII, n. 10, pp. 36-37 (843 VI 12, Lucca), LXXX, n. 40, pp. 131-133 (854 XII 31, Lucca).

32 Castagnetti, *L'*inquisitio. ChLA2, LXXVII, n. 12, pp. 45-47 (838 IV). 33 ChLA2, LXXVII, n. 27, pp. 86-87 (839 VI 14, Lucca). See Collavini, *Aristocrazia d'ufficio*. See also the deacon Gisulf son of Romuald, brother of the imperial vassal Cunipert: ChLA2, LXX-VIII, n. 12, pp. 40-41 (843 VII 13, Lucca).

34 Tomei, *Milites elegantes.* 35 The reference point still remains Violante, *Ricerche*. 36 ChLA2, LXXVIII, n. 31, pp. 86-87 (844 VII 28, Lucca). See Stoffella, *L'episcopato*; Tomei, *Locus*, pp. 33-35. 37 ChLA2, LXXVIII, n. 41, pp. 108-109 (845 III 21, Lucca). See Mailloux, *L'évêque*; Stoffella,

*Élites*; Tomei, *Locus*, pp. 39-40. 38 ChLA2, LXXIX, n. 19, pp. 73-75 (847 V 7, Lucca). See Giglioli, *Una pieve*.

On the other hand, profiting from the *Königsnähe*, the bishops drew from the Court's redistributive flow landed estates now structured as *curtes*, without, however, generally succeeding in keeping them for a long time. The first mentions of *curtes domnicatae*, attested as places of collection of *census et iustitia* in the *livelli*, are at this date: Capannoli and S. Quiricus of *Aniciano*, not far away from the *pievi* of S. Gervasius and Sesto di Moriano respectively; *Asilacto*, in the Maremma39. On the whole, there is a diminution of the bishop's power compared to the early Carolingian period40. This is clearly shown by the history of the prestigious suburban church of S. Fredianus. Despite Berengar's closeness to the Court, the bishop's attempt to reassert episcopal control over S. Fredianus, in 838, did not achieve the desired results41. This ambition was fulfilled immediately after the death of Louis II by the will of Marquis Adalbert I, who took centre stage in the political arena of Lucca. In the tenth century, S. Fredianus became a pool from which the bishops drew in order to assign *beneficia* and/or *livelli* to relatives and friends who, like themselves, were essentially components of the marquis' clientele42.

With Lothar, therefore, we see a turning point. Several elements came into play, which, in various combinations and, interacting with the pre-existing structures, activated a process of transformation. This led to an overall reorganisation of the spaces and forms of power – which were directly reflected in the forms of the documentation43. Some of the configurations that took shape at this time characterised the political game and the social body until the middle of the eleventh century. In particular, the field of action of the bishop, the producer and/or keeper of the vast majority of sources on Lucca, was defined then.

#### 2. *A text*

The Archivio Storico Diocesano of Lucca is a shrine that preserves an exceptional heritage from the early Middle Ages, not only in terms of charters, but also in terms of manuscripts. Gabriella Pomaro spoke of «gelosa stabilità». The extent of the work to be completed is still considerable. For a long time, the manuscript collection remained unexplored and lacking

39 ChLA2, LXXVIII, nn. 38, pp. 102-103 (844 XII 17, *Atriana*), 50, pp. 126-127 (845 VIII 12, *in finibus Castronovo ad plevem Sancti Casciani*), LXXIX, n. 49, pp. 154-157 (850 I 20, *Curte Nova finibus Maritimense*). 40 Collavini, *Da società rurale*; Collavini, *Spazi politici*. 41 Castagnetti, *L'*inquisitio. In April 838, the *inquisitio* promoted by Lothar's *missi*, the count

Hagano and the deacon Christianus, ascertained the thirty-year holding of S. Fredianus by the bishops of Lucca, until the death of Jacob, in 818. During that time it had been claimed by a royal vassal on behalf of the *pars palatii*, without success. Nevertheless, in the thirty years following the *inquisitio*, the church and its possessions do not appear in the bishop's availability. 42 Tomei, *Chiese*. Common fate for another suburban *Reichskloster*: S. Sylvester. 43 An interesting parallel is with the Bergamo of Bishop Hagano studied by De Angelis, *Poteri*

*cittadini*.

in scientific exploration with the appropriate tools. Its reference point was Bernardino Baroni's inventory of 1757 until, in 2015, the cataloguing work, conducted by Pomaro herself in the framework of the *Codex project*, was completed. The internal composition and history of the collection were thus clarified. It consists of two main blocks: the Chapter book collection, a not very large and stable corpus, marked in the twelfth century by a note of possession with an anathema formula, was merged in the eighteenth century with the collection donated by Bishop Felino Sandei, a jurist from Ferrara who died in 150344.

As stated in the introduction, 11 of the 18 ninth-century codicological units from Tuscany are preserved here: 10 are in the Biblioteca Capitolare Feliniana (mss 8, 13, 14, 19, 21, 23, 65, 123, 12545, and 490); one (ms 27)46 in the Biblioteca Arcivescovile. Two comments need making on this number: it includes three manuscripts from the Biblioteca Statale of Lucca (mss 96, 1382 and 1389) of definite external and late provenance, but does not take into account the manuscripts in the Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale and the Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana in Florence, which were not catalogued by the project. I will focus on the oldest codex of the group, which needs no introduction: this is the well-known ms 490, attributable to the pontificates of John (783- 800) and Jacob (800-818)47. In fact, I will focus on a particular section of this codex, which Schiaparelli called «a library in a small volume», and Petrucci called a proper «anti-book»48.

Other research directions, which I cannot take here, would be worthy of further in-depth study of which I will mention only two49. The most elusive codex of the group awaits close scrutiny: ms 27 of the Biblioteca Ar-

44 *I manoscritti* (the quote is from p. 4: the archive has jealously preserved its heritance, hence its stability).

45 ASDL, BCF, mss 8 (ninth century, last quarter; evangeliary; northern Italy); 13 (ninth century, second quarter; Ambrose, *De fide* and *De spiritu sancto*; northern Italy); 14 (ninth century, end; Ambrose's corpus; northern Italy); 19 (ninth century, third quarter; Augustine, *De civitate Dei*; local production); 21 (ninth century, middle; Augustine, *Tractatus in evangelium Iohannis*; local product); 23 (ninth century, first quarter; Augustine, *De Trinitate*; from Beauvais); 65 (ninth century, last quarter; Life of saint Martin; from Tours); 123 (ninth century, last quarter; catalogue of popes – interrupted with Benedict III and on two erased lines a later hand continues up to Agapitus II – and pseudo-Isidore's decretals; local production); 125 (ninth century, last quarter; canonical collection; northern Italy or more likely local production).

46 ASDL, BA, ms 27 (ninth century; Paul the Deacon, *Historia romana* and catalogue of emperors up to Justin I; northern Italy?). It was stolen, passed into the hands of Giuseppe Martini and was sold to the Biblioteca Casanatense. The affair, which ended with a conviction in 1901, can be inferred from the letters between Pietro Guidi and Giovanni Mercati. See Bandini, *Gio-*

*vanni Mercati*. 47 For its performative use in judgement by Bishop Jacob, see Michael Heil's contribution in this volume.

48 Schiaparelli, *Il codice*; Petrucci, *Il codice*. For the *status quaestionis* see Pomaro, *Materiali*; Unfer Verre, *Ancora*. 49 Mastruzzo, *Un'epistola*, p. 1447, recommended, for example, a more careful consideration of

the relationship between the documentary evidence and two Lucchese codices in Carolingian script with many hands: ASDL, BCF, mss 21, 19.

civescovile, also not included in the catalogue. Of central importance for the transmission of Paul the Deacon's *Historia Romana*, it presents marginal annotations of great interest50. Furthermore, by looking at the manuscripts, one could identify the traces of the origin and/or education of Berengar and Ambrose. Amongst the ninth-century manuscripts today in Lucca, two were certainly there in the twelfth century, but were produced elsewhere: ms 23 is from Beauvais; ms 14 is one of the rare codices containing the works of Ambrose that comes from Milan51. These two bishops have been considered Frankish on account of their Carolingian script and their absence in Lucca in the period prior to their episcopal election. Moreover, their anthroponymy, with all due caution, would suggest a transalpine origin for Berengar (perhaps a link with the Unrochings?)52, and a Milanese origin for Ambrose. Therefore, a more detailed analysis of the manuscripts could shed further light on the matter53.

I return to the focus of my investigation. On cc. 272*v*-273*r* the only Carolingian hand of ms 490 (DD for Schiaparelli) adds the so-called *Dicta Gelasii papae*. The text, of which the Lucchese manuscript is the only witness, is written in the blank space at the end of an independent block: the *Italica*, a canonical collection formerly called *Sanblasiana* (for Schiaparelli by scribe AA, who writes only here). It follows another addition, the *Decretum Gelasianum de libris recipiendis et non recipiendis* on cc. 272*r*-272*v* (for Schiaparelli by scribe CC, who writes only here), and ends before the middle of c. 273*r*54.

The script is, according to Petrucci, a «pure Carolingian minuscule», which would correspond in many ways to the signature of Bishop Berengar55. Nino Mastruzzo described it as follows: «diritta e di modulo piccolo, con *a* aperte che si alternano ad *a* onciali, rare legature corsive (*ri*, *rt*), nesso *nt* finale di parola (…), nesso *et* poco più grande delle altre lettere, poche abbreviazioni (…) una certa tendenza ad accostare le lettere con sporadica separazione delle parole»56. It presents numerous points of contact with the *epistola formata*, dated between 1 September 827 and 31 August 828 and signed by the bishop of Lucca Peter I (819-834), which is kept in the Roncioni collection of the Archivio di Stato in Pisa57. The letter is the only surviving original of its type,

50 Crivellucci, *Per l'edizione*; Mortensen, *The Diffusion*. 51 Gerzaguet, *Le De fuga*. 52 Castagnetti, *L'*inquisitio, pp. 35-36. On the name stock of the Unrochings, Le Jan, *Famille*, pp. 183-184; La Rocca – Provero, *The Dead*, pp. 238-239. 53 I would like to thank François Bougard and Miriam Tessera for the insights they gave me

during the discussion.

54 For a photo-reproduction see tables LXIX-LXX of Schiaparelli, *Il codice*. After a few blank lines there is a reference mark with an addition by a later hand to the previous text, the *Decretum*. On c. 273*v* are then copied cc. 1-8 of the Council of Orange of 529. 55 Petrucci, *Scriptores*, p. 96. 56 Mastruzzo, *Un'epistola*, pp. 1447-1448. 57 ChLA2, LVIII, n. 14, pp. 75-77 (827 IX 1-828 VIII 31, Lucca). < https://www.archiviodigitale.

icar.beniculturali.it/it/185/ricerca/detail/477765 >, [20/09/2021].

mentioned in Carolingian formularies, and can be traced back to northern France for its graphic features. According to Mastruzzo, who studied and edited the *epistola formata*, the script of its writer is even closer to Bishop Berengar's Carolingian minuscule, shown by his subscriptions.

The hands of the *Dicta* and that of the *epistola formata* betray a Frankish origin or education and are probably attributable to clerics close to the Court circles who came to Lucca at the time of Lothar, and during the pontificate of Peter I. Both remain anonymous. The two authors exist within the area of shadow on which the *inquisitio* of S. Fredianus also throws some light: like the subscribers in Carolingian script who intervene here, they do not appear elsewhere. They are complete outsiders with respect to those who, in the urban social body, gravitated around the mother church of S. Martinus, gaining visibility as writers or witnesses of the charters kept in its archive. An immediate comparison comes from the letter itself. See the signatures, opened by Bishop Peter I's uncertain elementary minuscule.

A final element from the graphic point of view: this is one of Pomaro's statements, which needs to be reconsidered, or more clearly discussed. The short text of the *Dicta* presents two *e*'s with a prolongation at the top: according to that scholar, they would be a very particular graphic trait, that would certainly lead back to the North, possibly to France. It can be followed throughout the ninth century and, by the middle of the eleventh century, it would become an identifying mark of Lucca's writing production58. If this were the case, this would be another important clue to the profile of the anonymous scribe of the *Dicta*. Nevertheless, it is precisely the *e* with apex that has been taken by Filippo Di Benedetto as an exemplary case of irrational habits and signs, found not in a single specific context, but in writings belonging to different systems, distant in time and space59.

From a textual point of view, the *Dicta* have received very limited attention. Until now, the reference edition, incorrect in several passages, has been the one by Giovanni Domenico Mansi of 1762, followed almost to the letter by Jacques Paul Migne in 1847 and by Andreas Thiel in 186760. The latter had already expressed doubts about its authenticity. The attribution to Pope Gelasius was undoubtedly influenced by the pseudo-Gelasian text, the *Decretum*, to which the *Dicta* are attached without a break, and is based on the heading in uncial *Incipiunt dicta Gelasii pape,* in which *Gelasii pape* is washed out. With all this evidence, even in the distant past, it appeared questionable and problematic. In spite of the questions raised, the issue has no longer been addressed, and the Gelasian authorship is still commonly accepted. The need for a new edition has therefore arisen, which I provide in the appendix. From

58 Pomaro, *Materiali*, pp. 165, 183; *I manoscritti*, p. 26. 59 Di Benedetto, *Sulla irrazionalità*. 60 *Sacrorum conciliorum*, vol. 8, coll. 124-126; PL, 59, coll. 140-142 (in Gelasius papa, *Varia fragmenta*); *Epistulae Romanorum pontificum*, pp. 509-510 (as *Fragmentum* 49). See also Maassen, *Geschichte*, p. 285.

this starting point, I would like to present the first lineaments within which the source can be set and valued.

The structure of the *Dicta* consists of three main sections. First, the definitions of catechumens, otherwise called *audientes*, and penitents are given61. Then, their position within the *ecclesia* is specified. A division of the ecclesiastical space is drawn up, to which corresponds a scansion of the liturgical action, between the following categories: *audientes*, *paenitentes*, *fideles laici* and *clerici*62. This constitutes the underlying backbone on which the nodal discourse is built at the conclusion of the *Dicta*, namely to specify the forms and times of public penance, through which men who have committed crimes, the most serious sins, can fully re-enter the *ecclesia*, in communion with other *fideles* participating in the sacrament of the Eucharist63. Constant in every passage is the reference to the legitimising authority of the ancient discipline, expressed in a generic way: «in canone»; «secundum preceptum canonis»; «antiquitus»; «in quolibet capitulo canonis».

In short, it is a sort of compendium, a brief handbook, that seeks to take up, systematise and provide the correct interpretation of sources, primarily canonical, on a subject that was highly topical in the years in which it was copied in ms 490. In terms of tension, themes and lexicon, the *Dicta* can in fact be compared to the sources that allowed Mayke de Jong to study the «penitential reform» of 813 and the Carolingian «penitential state»64, in particular the canons of the Councils of Arles (c. 26, later merged in *Karoli Magni capitula e canonibus excerpta*, c. 25)65, Rheims (cc. 12, 16, 31)66, Chalon-sur-Saône (cc. 25, 32-35, 38)67, and Tours (c. 22)68 of 813. The pattern continued after Verdun in all three *regna* of the Carolingian galaxy at the same time, the protagonists being, for Charles the Bald, Hincmar of Rheims (synod of Meaux-Paris, 845- 846, c. 61)69; for Louis the German, Hrabanus Maurus (synod of Mainz, 847,

61 «Cathecumini (…) publicae penitentiam». 62 «Et sciendum est (…) a clerici».

63 «Cumque autem (…) sanguinis Christi». 64 De Jong, *What was Public*; De Jong, *Transformations*; De Jong, *The Penitential State*. 65 MGH, Conc. II, n. 34, pp. 248-253: 253 (813 V 10-11, Arles) = Capit. I, n. 78, pp. 173-175: 175 (813): «Ut qui publico crimine convicti sunt rei publice iudicentur et publicam paenitentiam agant secundum canones».

66 MGH, Conc. II, n. 35, pp. 253-258 (813 V, Rheims). 67 MGH, Conc. II, n. 37, pp. 273-285: 278 (813, Chalon-sur-Saône): «Paenitentiam agere iuxta antiquam canonum constitutionem in plerisque locis ab usu recessit, et neque excommunicandi neque reconciliandi antiqui moris ordo servatur. Ut a domno imperatore adiutorium, qualiter, si qui publice peccat, publica multetur paenitentia et secundum ordinem canonum pro merito suo et excommunicetur et reconcilietur».

68 MGH, Conc. II, n. 38, pp. 286-306 (813, Tours). 69 MGH, Conc. III, n. 11, pp. 61-132: 113 (845 VI, Meaux; 846 II, Paris): «Ut pervasores rerum ecclesiasticarum, qui easdem res vel contra auctoritatem non solum retinere, verum et crudeliter depopulari noscuntur, quidam etiam et facultates ecclesiae in diversa conlaboratione et reditibus eas expoliant, sed et pauperes atque vicinos et circummanentes inmisericorditer expoliant, devastant et opprimunt, ut rapaces, qui secundum apostolum a regno Dei excluduntur, ex criminali et publico peccato publica penitentia satisfaciant».

c. 31)70; and for Lothar, Angilbert II of Milan and Joseph of Ivrea (synod of Pavia, 845-850, cc. 12, 1771; synod in *Francia*, 846, c. 672; synod of Pavia, 850, cc. 7-1273).

Incidentally, the *epistolae formatae* share not only the graphic layout, but also their origin, with the Pseudo-Gelasian *Dicta*, following the same direction. It was at that time that in the environment of the sacred palace a concern for the placement of the individual within society and its discipline gradually started to develop. According to the provisions insisted upon by the capitularies and pronounced by the Councils of Chalon-sur-Saône (c. 41) and Tours (c. 13) in 813, letters must accompany *clerici peregrini*, the ecclesiastics who wanted to move to another diocese, taking up the ancient practice of the κανονικαί έπιστολαί74. If the *epistola formata* certifies and legitimises such move, a change of position in the *ecclesia*, the *Dicta* are concerned with the path to reunite those who have been temporarily excluded from the consortium of the faithful.

Public penance was the spearhead of this general movement of *correctio* promoted by the *sacrum palatium*: the central core of the political community, and the point of reference for liturgy and doctrine. In an original experiment aimed at the symbolic "liturgisation" of power and the organisation of consensus and domination, the king was placed at the head of an Empire that was also an *ecclesia*. With the help of his *ministri*, he took charge of the salvation of the Christian people and of the remission of their sins before God. A direct relationship was therefore established between the public nature of the *ministerium* and *scandalum* in the *ecclesia* and the public nature of penance.

74 MGH, Conc. II, n. 37, pp. 273-285: 282 (813, Chalon-sur-Saône); n. 38, pp. 286-306: 288 (813, Tours). See Mastruzzo, *Un'epistola*, pp. 1448-1449.

70 MGH, Conc. III, n. 14, pp. 150-177 (847 X, Mainz). 71 MGH, Conc. III, n. 21, pp. 207-215: 214 (845-850, Pavia): «Sacra docet auctoritas, ut publice peccantes publicę penitentię subiciantur (…); quos ut episcopi publicę possint penitentię subiugare, petimus, ut comitum vestrorum auxilio fulciantur».

72 MGH, Conc. III, n. 12, pp. 133-139: 136 (846 X, *Francia*): «Volumus eciam et diligentissime praecipimus observandum, ut episcopi singuli in suis parroechiis diligenter examinent et sollicite investigent, quicunque publicis sint inretiti flagitiis, hoc est incestos, adulteros, sanctimonialium stupratores vel qui eas eciam in coniugium acceperunt, homicidas, sacrilegos, alienarum rerum pervasores atque praedones; et hoc per omne regnum nostrum sollicite examinetur, ut, quicunque tales fuerint inventi, penitentię puplicę subdantur, aut, si hoc noluerint, ab ęcclesia separentur, donec a suis flagitiis corrigantur».

73 MGH, Conc. III, n. 23, pp. 217-229: 225 (850, Pavia): clarifications concerning owners of assets in several dioceses and holders of public office. «Inveniuntur nonnulli per diversas provincias et civitates habentes possessiones, qui, cum aliquod publice scelus perpetraverint (…). Talis ergo ab episcopo civitatis, in cuius parrochia scelus commissum est, statim communione privati ad agendam penitentiam cogantur. Scribat autem, qui eum communione privaverit, aliis quoque episcopis, in quorum parrochiarum territoriis huiusmodi predia possidet, ut et ipsi rem scientes a sua illum communione removeant» (c. 11).

A «synergic-binary structure» took shape in which the royal and ecclesiastical spheres were in a reciprocal and complementary relationship. The political body coincided with the people of God who followed the correct doctrine emanating from the sacred palace75.

The «penitential reform» was carried out, according to the intention of its ideologists, *secundum canones*: it promoted the pseudo-restoration of an old discipline through the study and updating of the conciliar texts76. On the path of successive penitential stages, passing first through the *audientes* and then through a *paenitentiae locus*, of reference were the Councils of Ancyra of 314 (cc. 4-9, 16, 20-25)77, Neocaesarea of 314-320 (cc. 1-2, 5)78, Nicaea of 325 (cc. 11, 13)79, and then Epaone of 517 (c. 29)80. With respect to the Carolingian revival, they differ in their particular insistence on the theme of the *lapsi*, by now obsolete at the beginning of the ninth century – and, as a matter of fact, totally absent from the *Dicta*. On the necessity of a public penance for the crimes that upset the *ecclesia*, the starting point is the *breviarium Hipponense* of 393 (c. 30), later ratified at the Council of Carthage in 397 (c. 43)81.

The relationship between the *Dicta* and these texts is also evident on the material front. It is worth remembering that the former can be found in the block that contains the *Collectio Italica olim Sanblasiana*. It actually begins with Nicaea, Ancyra e Neocaesarea in the *Isidoriana vulgata* recension and closes with two letters of Pope Gelasius that make reference to penance (*Necessaria rerum dispositione*, cc. 2, 18, 20; *Probabilibus desideriis*, c. 1)82. The *Italica* is one of the collections formed at the turn of the fifth and sixth centuries, by assembling conciliar canons and episcopal letters, especially papal ones, up to the pontificate of Gelasius. They were compiled during the Acacian schism and its political-religious consequence in Rome, the schism between Symmachus and Laurentius. Specifically, the *Italica* was composed in Rome and revised under Pope Hormisdas to provide a Gelasian-Symmachian version of the events83. Their redaction marks the strengthening of the ecclesial community as an institutional body with-

75 De Jong, *Sacrum palatium*. 76 De Jong, *What was Public*; De Jong, *Transformations*. Law was one of the fields in which Italy's generous contribution to Carolingian renewal is particularly evident. See Bougard, *Was*

*There a Carolingian*. 77 EOMIA, 2, pp. 64-79, 92-99, 106-115. 78 EOMIA, 2, pp. 118-121, 124-125. 79 EOMIA, 1, pp. 211-221. 80 *Concilia Galliae a. 511-695*, pp. 20-37: 31 = *Concilia Galliae a. 314-506*, pp. 189-228: 227. 81 *Concilia Africae a. 345-525*, pp. 22-53, 173-247: 41-42, 185. 82 *Epistulae Romanorum pontificum*, nn. 14-15, pp. 360-380. 83 Wirbelauer, *Zwei Päpste*; Lizzi Testa, *La Collectio* (on *Italica* in particular pp. 158-163 of the

Appendice edited by Giulia Marconi and Silvia Margutti). For a *stemma codicum* see Elliot, *Collectio*, which prefers the old title *Sanblasiana*. The Lucchese witness would belong to a branch descended from a Roman autograph, which remained confined to central and northern Italy until much of the eighth century.

in the imperial structure as well as showing the pope's wish to build a more solid foundation for his authority and assert a juridical-theological primacy. More generally, together with the *Variae* and the *Liber Pontificalis*, they have been seen as the expression of a project aimed at maintaining *civilitas* under Theodoric84.

The subsequent fortune of Gelasius is determined by the selection of his letters: both because they are the *terminus ante quem* of the collections, which coagulated at the time of the schism, and because they are the bearers of an ecclesiology that claims Roman primacy and discusses the relationship between *regnum* and *sacerdotium*85. The use of his legitimising authority was mainly implemented in Gaul. The *Sacramentarium Gelasianum* was composed here at the turn of the seventh and the eighth centuries, containing a first *ordo agentibus publicam paenitentiam*, and perhaps also the *Decretum Gelasianum*86. Once again, ms 490 provides a concrete reflection of this diachronic and textual itinerary, on a trail that stretches, so to speak, from Constantine to Charlemagne. In the codex the *Decretum* follows the *Collectio Italica*, with a prologue to which it is the only witness87. Without a break, then, come the *Dicta*, borrowing initially the attribution to Gelasius. As I have tried to demonstrate, they represent a clear and distinct reverberation of the Carolingian *correctio* in Lucca.