Note
There seems to be no evidence of the existence of any coronation rite among the Britons. Gildas is sometimes quoted as evidencing the existence of a British rite. He says as follows; ‘Kings were anointed, and not by God, but such as stood out more cruel than other men; and soon they would be butchered, not in accordance with the investigation of the truth, for others more cruel were chosen in their place[35].’ It is plain that this language is merely metaphorical.
There is a passage occurring in Adamnan’s life of St Columba which is more to the point[36]. It speaks of an ‘ordination’ (ordinatio) of King Aidan by the saint. ‘And there (i.e. in Iona) Aidan coming to him in those same days he ordained (ordinavit) as king, as he had been bidden. And among the words of ordination he prophesied things to be of his sons and grandsons. And laying his hands upon his head, ordaining him, he blessed him.’
I do not think that this occurrence can be regarded in any sense of the word as a consecration of Aidan. It appears to be nothing more than a very solemn blessing. The word Ordinatio is curious, but it is probably referring to the laying on of the hand in benediction.
CHAPTER IV
THE WESTERN RITE OF THE CORONATION OF AN EMPEROR AT ROME
The Western coronation rite came into existence on the foundation of the Neo-Roman or Holy Roman Empire by Charlemagne. The rite by which he was crowned was evidently regarded as the equivalent to that used at Constantinople, for the contemporary accounts claim that the ceremony was carried out ‘more antiquorum.’
The two earliest accounts of the coronation of Charlemagne agree closely but give only scanty details. The Chronicle of Moissac[37] describes the event thus. ‘Now on the most holy day of the Nativity of the Lord, when the king arose from prayer at Mass before the tomb of the blessed apostle Peter, Leo the Pope with the counsel of all the bishops and priests and the Senate of the Franks and also of the Romans, set a golden crown on his head, in the presence also of the Roman people, who cried: “To Charles the Augustus crowned of God, great and pacific Emperor of the Romans, life and victory.” And after the Laudes had been chanted by the people, he was also adored by the Pope after the manner of the former princes.’
Very much the same is the account given by the Liber Pontificalis[38]. ‘After these things, the day of the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ arriving, they were all again gathered together in the aforesaid basilica of the blessed Apostle Peter. And then the venerable and beneficent pontiff with his own hands crowned him with a most precious crown. Then all the faithful Romans, seeing the great care and love he had towards the holy Roman Church and its Vicar, unanimously with loud voice cried out, by the will of God and the blessed Peter, key-bearer of the kingdom of the heavens, “To Charles, the most pious Augustus crowned of God, great and pacific Emperor of the Romans, life and victory.” Before the sacred tomb of the blessed Apostle Peter, invoking many saints[39], thrice was it said; and he was constituted by all Emperor of the Romans. In the same place the most holy priest and pontiff anointed with holy oil Charles, his most noble son, as king, on that same day of the Nativity of our Lord Jesus Christ.’
The forms by which Charlemagne was crowned have not survived and we have only such short descriptions as these as to what took place, and a comparison in other cases of such descriptions with the rites actually used warns us how precarious it is to rely too much on the accounts even of eyewitnesses.
In the two accounts given above it will be noticed that the Chronicle of Moissac seems to desire to keep up the old fiction of a constitutional election when it speaks of the coronation as taking place ‘with the counsel of all the bishops and priests, and the Senate of the Franks and also of the Romans’; and also some sort of recognition by the people seems to be implied by the statement of the Liber Pontificalis that Charlemagne ‘was constituted by all Emperor of the Romans.’
Einhard[40], in his Life of Charles, expressly states that Charles had no idea beforehand of the intention of the Pope to crown him as Emperor, and that if he had known he would not have entered St Peter’s on that eventful Christmas Day. But the words of the Chronicle of Moissac certainly imply that it was a prearranged thing, and if Charlemagne was really taken by surprise, it was probably the method of the coronation, at the hands of the Pope, which constituted the surprise. The occurrence of the Laudes need not present any difficulties to the view that the whole affair was unexpected, for as we have seen they were a familiar part of great public functions, and it is possible that the people were led on such occasions by official cantors, as we know was the practice at Constantinople.
But the most important question connected with Charlemagne’s coronation is, Was Charles anointed? There is no reference whatever to any anointing in the contemporary accounts of the Chronicle of Moissac and the Liber Pontificalis, nor yet in other almost contemporary matter such as the verses of the Poeta Saxo[41], or the Chronicle of Regino[42]. To this must be added the fact, inconclusive in itself, that there is no mention of any unction in the earliest extant Order of the Western imperial rite, that of the Gemunden Codex. On the other hand it is expressly stated by a contemporary eastern historian, Theophanes, that Charlemagne was anointed ‘from head to foot[43],’ and this statement is repeated by a later Greek writer of the twelfth century, Constantine Manasses, who adds, ‘after the manner of the Jews[44].’
If Charlemagne was not anointed but only crowned by the Pope, then his coronation was strictly in accordance with the rite of Constantinople, for it is probable that there was no unction in the Eastern rite at this date, and thus the Western rite on its first introduction into the West would be similar in its outstanding feature to the Eastern rite.
Of course the use of an unction at the consecration of a king had long been the central feature of the Western rite of the consecration of a King. But it must be borne in mind that Charlemagne was here being crowned as Roman Emperor, and that he had been anointed as King of the Franks on the occasion long ago of his father Pippin’s anointing as Frankish King at the hands of Pope Stephen. Moreover it is added in the Liber Pontificalis that after the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor, the Pope anointed his son Charles as King. Duchesne finds here the explanation of the statement of Theophanes that Charlemagne was anointed, and thinks that he has confused the two events which took place on the same occasion, the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor, and the anointing of the younger Charles as King.
It may be noticed, before we leave Charlemagne, that at the coronation of his grandson Louis the Pious in 813 as associate in the Empire, he himself crowned Louis with his own hands, thus following exactly the Eastern precedent in such a case. It may be that here we have the explanation of the alleged dissatisfaction and surprise of Charlemagne at his coronation on Christmas Day, 800. He may have intended to crown himself instead of being crowned by the Pope.