The very nature of the relationship between church and kingship is very much, a long and complex history. In the following paper it is unlikely that all aspects of this relationship will be covered down to the minutia of details. However, it is hoped that the main areas of interaction, between the secular and temporal world of the early medieval period will be sufficiently covered, providing a concise and clear definition of how and why this relationship flourished.
In attempting to tackle the above topic it will be necessary to break the subject down into five component parts. These five parts will be comprised of areas where the relationship between church and kingship, can be clearly defined and investigated. In doing so the following paper will draw upon as many (and varied) primary written sources as possible.
The proposed five component parts will consist of the following:
With both Britain and Europe being mentioned in the above topic, it will also be necessary to focus upon specific examples of interaction between church and kingship in Europe, and in Britain between the sixth-century AD and the tenth-century AD. The five component parts, or sub-topics, will therefore be focused upon the interactions of church and kingship as experienced in three specific royal do. In Britin the proposed areas of focus will be the royal dynasty of the kingdom of Northumbria (during the late sixth, seventh, and eighth centuries AD), and the reign of Alfred the Great of Wessex. In Europe focus will be securely centred upon the dynasty of the Carolingians, placing express interest upon the reign of Charlemagne.
Hopefully in following the above plan, the resulting paper will shed some light upon the interlaced and entwined nature of the links and connections between the established (and growing) Christian church, and the newly developing ideal and institution of kingship, which began to develop in both Britain and Europe in the early medieval period.
The almost symbiotic relationship between church and kingship, and its subsequent development can perhaps be discerned in the need of kings (those in royal / aristocratic authority), to effectively disperse / disseminate their authority, will, and orders. Though orders and authority can of course be relatively effectively transmitted orally, it was the growth and development of the church, virtually the sole suppository of literacy in the early medieval world, which provided the framework and know-how to more fully develop this vital area of the king’s authority. The capability to effectively impose the king’s will, out with his own immediate presence, by use of the written word. The church apparently aided this capability in providing both an environment and framework in which skills in literacy could be taught and disseminated to the future generations of ruling classes (i.e. the nobility), as well as also providing an already up and running framework of literate and educated officials (i.e. priests / monks) who could themselves be used to transcribe and transmit the word and will of the king. The growth in the church also meant potential growth in authority of kingship, as church growth came largely due to the patronage of kings. As well as largely due to the patronage of the nobility who themselves derived much of what they had from the patronage of said kings. The growth of the church through the founding of religious houses and churches, which in turn came through the financial support of those from the developing establishment of kingship (nobility and kings), greatly added to the growth of kingly authority. These new religious houses and churches quickly became central to the communities in which they were established, becoming not only centres of employment but cultural and social centres as well. People were baptised, married, and buried by the church. The church therefore, increasingly became a central focus to peoples lives, and the authority of the king and his direct instructions (proclamations) could thus be transmitted through the church and thence throughout the kingdom. This was then a self supporting relationship between church and kingship. The church needed the financial support and benevolent tolerance of the nobility as a whole and the king in particular (at least initially) in order to establish itself and grow. While the developing establishment of kingship itself in turn, required both the aid of the church in disseminating the authority and will of the king, as well as aid in providing for a growth in literacy which could be further utilised as a tool of royal authority.
The royal dynasty of the kingdom of Northumbria utilised the church in much the same way as I have already mentioned. At its height the kingdom of Northumbria made strenuous efforts to utilise the literate skills of the church. Several of Northumbria’s strongest kings knew the value of the written word, not only for the purposes of transmitting instruction but also as a symbol of true royal, and kingly authority. King Aldfrith of Northumbria (685-705 AD) was according to Bede, “a man most learned in the Scriptures” [1], in other words he had probably been educated by the church and was able to read and possibly write. It is safe to assume then, from his subsequent actions during his reign that he knew the value of the church and its literate traditions. He knew that these traditions could be put to good use to further his own ends in extending his authority throughout his kingdom, as well as bringing greater overall stability. One possible example of Aldfrith using the inherent literacy of the church can perhaps be discerned in the introduction of the first known ‘Northumbrian’ coinage, the sceatta or silver penny, which apparently had its origins sometime during his reign. The introduction of even a limited issue of such coins would undoubtedly have required at the very least, a small group of able and, most importantly, literate men to formulate and design said coin as well as to ensure its issue (even though perhaps limited) throughout the kingdom. It is probable then that Aldfrith exploited the church’s literary abilities in order that he could accomplish this particular symbol of kingly authority, the issue and control of a kingdoms ‘currency’. Equally there is no doubt that the church probably thought, and hoped to gain from their compliance with the kings will. There is also some evidence that Aldfrith wished to extend and encourage the growth of literacy. Though probably largely as a means of extending his own control and will over the kingdom of Northumbria. This desire to spread literacy is hinted at in an anecdote by Bede describing Aldfrith’s alleged scholarly interest in the reading and collecting of books. Aldfrith managed to acquire a copy of Adoman’s book ‘Holy Places’ (given to him personally by the author). With the book now in his possession, he then set about having it copied and “circulated for lesser folk to read” [2]. Though virtually all the Northumbrian kings utilised the church in their pursuit of power and authority; initially through close associations with the Celtic church and latterly the church of Rome; it would appear that Aldfrith is amongst the few who more fully sought to do so by harnessing the church’s skills in literacy.
By the time of the reign of Alfred the Great of Wessex, close association between kingship and the church had become virtually the norm in much of mainland Britain. Alfred himself was undoubtedly very adept at utilising the church with its many skills and benefices. He particularly excelled in the area of literacy, as can be seen in the many sources concerning his reign that have survived to this day. Sources such as ‘The Anglo-Saxon Chronicle’, Asser’s ‘Life of King Alfred’, and even Alfred’s own law code. The majority of the surviving sources appear to originate from the close circle (Royal Court) which surrounded Alfred. This would perhaps suggest, in the case of the chronicles and Asser’s ‘Life of King Alfred’, that they are largely the works of a form of concerted propaganda. A propaganda instigated at the will of King Alfred himself. Whether seen as out and out propaganda or not, the mere fact that so many contemporary sources have survived, as compared to other reigns and kingdoms in northern Europe (with the noted exception of the Carolingians), would point to a full and complete exploitation of the literary capabilities provided through a close association with the church. The church was still, as in previous centuries, the main suppository and conduit of literacy. The source which more fully highlights the importance of the church in disseminating the will and orders of the king would appear to be the law-codes drawn up by Alfred sometime around the late 880’s, early 890’s. Alfred undoubtedly had the support and help of churchmen in the drafting and drawing up of the code. The Bible is the basis for the laws which Alfred sets down and the code is full of references to, comparisons with, and quotations from the Bible. For example there are many references and quotations from the book of Exodus, dealing mainly with the Law (the Ten Commandments), given to Moses by God on Mount Sinai. There are also throughout the code, many references to the church and its position as regards the laws of the kingdom. There are throughout references regarding the church in the meeting out of punishment, for example, in the case of someone having failed to keep a pledge or oath, the ultimate punishment was that “he is to be outlawed and to be excommunicated from all the churches of Christ”[3]. In this case the church can be seen to be used as an organ of punishment. This in turn would seem to imply that the church played a relatively prominent role as regards not only the dissemination, but also the enforcement of the will and orders of the king. The rights of the church and its members were also secured and included in the code. There being laws / codes concerning “the penalty for bringing a nun out of a nunnery without permission” [4]. In addition there were also laws which were in direct relation to ecclesiastical law, i.e. a fine of 120 shillings to be paid by anyone breaking church law during Lent. The many references to the rights of the church in the code can perhaps be seen as being an example of how important a role the church played. These rights and laws being an acceptable concession on the part of the king. In return the church provided a relatively stable and reliable basis for the dissemination of the king’s will and orders throughout the kingdom.
The Carolingians having usurped the previous Merovingian dynasty (sometime around 751 AD), not only took the crown but also took on board and assimilated much of the already established traditions and methods of rule. Particularly in relation to the crown’s involvement with, and growing dependence upon, the church. The Merovingians had themselves begun the close association with the church and had developed it to a point of mutual support which the Carolingians themselves then took on to a new and more involved level. A level where the ambitions and objectives of the crown appeared to become ever more entwined with those of the church. The actions of the king, in both the fields of warfare and law, were often portrayed as being in accordance with both the will of god and the church. Success in war was by the will of god and furthered gods divine plan. As did the formulating and drafting of a statute / code, of laws and practices which was based upon the Bible, Roman law, and Frankish custom. The Carolingians became through this close and practised association with the church ‘the people of the book’. With this reputation and new found position in Western Europe they furthered their power and influence, utilising the church’s inherent abilities in much the same way as the Northumbrian kings had done, and as Alfred ‘The Great’ of Wessex was later to do as well. The Carolingians though, were much grander in position as well as in ambition, and thus acted accordingly in relation to the church. The church then had a central role in the dynasty of the Carolingians, and as in the two previous studies (Northumbria & 9th Century Wessex), it was in the area of the formulating and spreading of the will and orders of the king that it played a vital part. Charlemagne, arguably the greatest of the Carolingians, was himself illiterate, but he fostered through close association with varied churchmen (for example Alcuin) a growth in literacy in both his own royal family, as well as throughout the kingdom. Thereby instigating the so-called ‘Carolingian Renaissance’. This ‘Renaissance’ not only preserved and opened up to study various ancient texts, but also provided the necessary literate framework that the expanding and ambitious Frankish kingdom required. Charlemagne and his successors utilised the literary abilities of the church to more effectively spread and make known the will of the king. Both through encouraging the church to educate and make literate the population, as well as through using literate churchmen to formulate and transcribe statutes and laws. These laws could in turn be spread throughout the now slowly, increasingly (at least among the nobility) literate kingdom. Thereby hopefully, creating a more stable kingdom wherein the will of the king could be clearly and equally understood, regardless of geographical location. The number of laws / capitularies which were written; most of which were written by churchmen; points to the importance of the church in the governance and authority of the king over the kingdom. From the 46 year reign of Charlemagne around 100 capitularies and 200 royal charters have survived, while around 60 capitularies and 570 royal charters have survived from the reign of Louis the Pious (Charlemagne’s son and successor). These relatively large numbers, coupled with the additional fact that there is no hard evidence for there having been any kind of central bureaucratic archive or indeed any real kind of secular civil service. This then, would seem to point to the church (the acknowledged literary suppository of the early medieval world) playing an important, and vital role in the extension and comprehension of the kings will.
The church then, in all three main study areas, does certainly appear to have played an important and vital role. The church appears to have been at the heart of any successful reign in Europe between the sixth-century and the tenth-century AD. Playing a vital, and necessary part (through the written word) in the dissemination of the king’s orders and will. Especially in kingdoms which were slowly becoming more settled in structure and outlook (i.e. one king, one god).
The church, especially in the period under study, has often greatly relied upon a generous and beneficent relationship with those in positions of authority and power. In particular, in the early medieval period, the king and the greater nobility. The church in almost all cases required the financial aid of the nobles in order to expand and grow. It was through grants of land and money by such beneficent landholders (noblemen, kings etc.), that the great houses of the church; the abbeys, nunneries and monasteries etc.; were able to be founded and financed. The church and these institutions which they developed also required more hard and fast protection, both in the realm of legal rights and in the more physical area of protection from attack. The growth of the great religious houses then, from the early medieval period onwards was largely dependant upon good and close relations with the nobility of the kingdom on the whole. Good relations with the king in particular were also vital, as it was from the king that the church required “...protection, endowment, largesse, the prosecution of Christian warfare, and, above all, obedience to its teaching” [5]. In the following chapter we will once again look for and study, any evidence which backs up the assertion that the church was to a great extent, both physically and financially dependent upon the greater nobility and the king.
The Northumbrian kings, from the late sixth-century and seventh-century onwards, do indeed appear to have been on the whole, generous supporters of the church. Once again Bede highlights the situation prevalent in Northumbria. This time in his book the ‘Lives of the Abbots of Wearmouth and Jarrow’, which provides a valuable insight into the establishment and continuance of the early monasteries of Northumbria. Bede in his ‘Lives’, illustrates the need for a close relationship with the local powers that be, in this case king Ecgfrith of Northumbria. Indeed both the monasteries at Wearmouth and Jarrow, only physically came into being through the donation of land belonging to the royal house of Northumbria. King Ecgfrith, sometime around 674 AD, giving Benedict Biscop “an area of land comprising seventy hides” [6], for the monastery at Wearmouth. As well as further donating around forty hides of land eight years later, for the foundation of a sister monastery at Jarrow. The importance of good relations with powerful benefactors can therefore be easily discerned from a close study of Bede’s ‘Lives’. Particularly, when one discerns a repeated reference within the text to King Ecgfrith being at the heart of deciding upon the founding of monasteries, the founding of Jarrow being “on Egfrid’s advice or, more accurately, at his command,” [7]. Similarly another area where the church was greatly dependant was in the continuance and further development of said ecclesiastical houses. There are many references in the ‘Lives’ to Benedict Biscop’s journeys to the continent, to gather skilled craftsmen for the completion of the building of the monasteries. This could only have been afforded through the financial support of powerful benefactors such as King Ecgfrith. The downside of course of this undoubted dependence, was that the active participation of such benefactors could mean a certain amount of unwanted interference, especially in matters like the appointment of Abbots. Bede in the text makes reference to the importance of gaining protection from such interference. The gaining of a ‘letter of privilege’ from Pope Agatho on Biscop’s fourth visit to Rome being described as a benefit “not to be despised” [8]. This benefit however was only sought, according to Bede, after gaining permission to do so from King Ecgfrith. This again indicates the importance of seeking and retaining favourable relations with powerful and influential secular authorities. Such as that embodied in the royal house of seventh-century Northumbria.
The Wessex of Alfred the Greats day (9th Century AD) was no different from seventh-century Northumbria, in that the church still required the support of the secular authorities, i.e. the nobility and the king. In some ways it can even be argued that they were somewhat more dependant. Thanks mainly to the ravages of the Norse, and partly due to the indifference of many of the English themselves, all that had been developed over the preceding centuries and decades had taken something of a body blow. The church was almost returned back to the position in which they had started. Alfred’s support for the church, as well as the support of the nobles of Wessex, was then vital if the church was to continue to develop and strengthen in ninth-century England. Alfred himself encouraged and financed many churchmen of learning, though admittedly for his own political ends. Churchmen such as Asser his biographer to whom he gave three monasteries and made Bishop of Sherbourne, and also Plegmund of Mercia who became Archbishop of Canterbury. Though Alfred needed them in order to further his own ends, it was only through the support and patronage of the king that they managed to achieve high office and be able to more comfortably pursue their scholarly interests. Alfred however did not only support individual churchmen but also supported, and protected. In the case of Asser, Alfred’s support meant much more than the patronage of one solitary churchman. Asser at the time of his recruitment by Alfred was certainly a monk, but possibly the Bishop, at St David’s. The religious community at St David’s had been experiencing some difficulties with the king of Dyfed. The community no doubt believed that closer links with a powerful king (Alfred) through one of their brethren (Asser), would hopefully dissuade any further attacks originating from the king of Dyfed. Alfred’s links with St David’s was then vital if they were to remain in peace and be allowed to continue to develop. As well as supporting and protecting established institutions, King Alfred also founded and financed them. Founding for instance a monastery at Athelney, as well as a nunnery at Shaftesbury. Both institutions continued to flourish, thanks to royal support, “Alfred abundantly endowed these two monasteries with estates of land and every kind of wealth” [9]. This support even continued long after Alfred’s death, with the monastery at Athelney surviving and flourishing into the eleventh-century. While the nunnery at Shaftesbury also flourished and became one of the richest nunneries in the kingdom. The church then as in Northumbria, needed the considerable support of the king, if it was to be sure to survive and flourish in ninth-century Wessex.
The church, though somewhat more secure on the continent also sought and received support from the Carolingian royal household, as well as of course from the Frankish nobility. As before royal support and involvement was a continuation of that originally instigated by the previous dynasty, the Merovingians. It was Merovingian kings who had initially supported some of the more important religious institutions. Institutions such as the Abbey / church of St Denis, near Paris, had been particularly sought out and favoured by the Merovingians, especially since the time of its great benefactor Dagobert. The Carolingians carried on supporting such institutions, through direct patronage as well as through continuing to instil a certain amount of royal importance or significance within them. One case in point being the continued use of St Denis as the final resting place of kings. Pepin the short, the first of the Carolingian kings was laid to rest at St Denis. This continued association assured the continued existence and growth of these already established religious houses. The Frankish nobility also, were responsible for ensuring the growth and strength of the church in Western Europe. Though at times they may have posed some problems for the church, such as interfering with church appointments and in using church funds sometimes as they would their own revenues. However there are many cases where the support of the nobility was beneficial and protected the church from outside interference. The founding and support of the Abbey at Cluny in 910 AD by Duke William of Aquitaine being one such case in point. From the ninth-century onwards royal authority began to crumble and disintegrate. This coupled with the sometimes slap dash nature of the foundation of religious houses led to many such houses / monasteries becoming more and more dependant upon the nobility for both financial and physical support. In some cases unfortunately, this support could be detrimental to the continued religious function of these abbeys, churches and monasteries. Cluny however was different, it had the support of a great noble and this self same noble ensured their independence. The foundation charter for Cluny, drawn up by the Duke of Aquitaine, gave the abbey freedom of interference in both the election of its abbot as well as in the general conduct of its affairs. Thus both in the original instigation of, and in the continued support of major religious institutions, the church on the continent still had to rely heavily upon the authority and beneficence of lay powers such as the king and the nobility.
Whether it was in the instigation and spreading of the church and its message, through founding religious houses. Or whether it was in the protection and support of established institutions, physically, financially, or in law. It can be seen and argued that the church was heavily dependant, throughout the kingdoms of Western Europe, upon the good will of the incumbent king and the nobility.
The emerging royal dynasties from the sixth-century onwards were often involved in dispute over legitimacy. For the most part they were new institutions which needed new points of reference if they were to survive and continue. The church, through the teachings and the word of the Bible provided these new points of reference, and in so doing helped to legitimise and make permanent the idea and concept of both kingly rule and dynastic kingship. The church for its part readily and eagerly attached itself to these emerging dynasties, gaining in return, land, wealth, and political influence. All of which ensured both the security and the continued growth of the church in a period of often unstable politics and societies, and definitely uncertain future. These emerging kings surrounded by their respective clutch of supporters (the nobility) had originally been pagan in origin. Unfortunately however, the pagan gods and the pagan society that went with it, had no frame of reference which could be used to fit round and adapt to the new development of kingship and dynastic continuity. So the emerging, successful and ambitious warlords of the late fifth-century and early sixth-century utilised and exploited all the advantages which the Christian faith, and its evangelists, brought with it, “a mythology more powerful than any the pagans knew,” [10], as well as a new “dynastic permanence”[11]. Later kings also continued to exploit the church in much the same way ensuring not only their legitimacy, but that of their successors as well.
The kingdom of Northumbria was among those kingdoms to firmly grasp hold of the church and its teachings. Adapting the power structures then developing, into something more like some kind of facsimile of kingship as portrayed in the Bible. Almost all of Northumbria’s kings sought legitimacy through close association with the church. Both Oswald (634 - 642 AD) and Oswiu (642 - 670 AD) used the church in this way. Oswald at the battle of Denisesburn called upon the support of God against the Briton king, Cadwallon. His subsequent success, with according to Bede, “an army, small in numbers” [12], was portrayed by the church as a vindication from God of Oswald’s right and claim to be king of Northumbria. Oswiu too called upon God for victory in his struggle against Penda. Vowing that if God should grant him victory he would dedicate his daughter Aelfflaed to be a nun, as well as grant twelve estates for the founding of twelve monasteries. In Bede’s ‘Ecclesiastical History’, we are again told that the Northumbrian army was outnumbered, but that “they met the foe trusting in Christ their leader”[13]. With their respective victories had come God’s sanction, thereby giving legitimacy to both Oswald and Oswiu. Both of these kings also managed to further utilise the church, more fully legitimising and reinforcing their respective positions, by taking on active roles within the decision making processes of the English church as a whole. Oswald for instance was prominent at the baptism of king Cynegils of Wessex at Dorchester, and further involved himself in establishing a bishop’s see at the same city. Oswiu convened and presided over the Synod of Whitby (664 AD), which was chiefly concerned with the inter-church dispute over the proper observance of Easter. Oswiu was entrusted with casting the deciding vote, which he cast in favour of the position taken by the Roman Catholic Church. It was a decision which would certainly effect the evolution of Christianity in Britain, if not also upon the continent. By so fully involving themselves in the activities of the church these kings, like so many other Northumbrian kings, were making themselves part of the fabric of the new emerging Europe. They were through their acknowledged participation, becoming part of the growing club of European Christian kings. Oswiu and Oswald, and others like them were themselves becoming legitimate, while their dynasties were becoming accepted as being more or less permanent. The church and its teachings was important not only in its association with other powerful Christian kings but was also important because of the model of kingship which it presented. The Bible made reference to the old kings of Israel, referring to them being anointed by God, ultimately only answerable to him. This gave the new idea of kingship a kind of sanctity, much like any other high religious figure, such as a bishop or even a pope. In the increasingly Christian world of early medieval Europe this sanctity gave substance and surety to the claims of kings to rule. This was particularly the case in kingdoms such as Northumbria, which had been welded together by barbarian warlords acting outside of their traditional pagan parameters. These early barbarian kings were exploiting, for them, a new situation, and they had to justify their new found positions. The church complied to give them their much needed justification. Thus the kings of Northumbria, with a little help, made themselves legitimate.
Alfred too throughout his reign continued to use the church and its teachings to reinforce and legitimise his claim to the throne of Wessex. Alfred was one of four brothers who had some kind of claim to the throne, a situation not uncommon in many of the kingdoms of England. The Anglo-Saxon dynasties which had survived into the ninth-century still had no clearly defined line of succession, therefore when a king had many sons, it often led to a certain amount of internal strife. In the case of Wessex a deal was made wherein all four brothers agreed to pass on the crown from one brother to the next (Alfred was the youngest and therefore last in line of succession). This agreement for the most part worked, though largely due to the short life spans of Alfred’s brothers. There was however a certain amount of potential dispute concerning the male children of the brothers (particularly Aethelred’s sons), they had effectively been disinherited but could still cause difficulties. Alfred therefore throughout his reign continued to use the church and its teachings to legitimise and strengthen his claim to be king. One way in which he sought to do this was probably through the so-called cultural programme; the encouragement of literacy, the writing of new books (Anglo-Saxon chronicles etc.) as well as the translation of Latin texts into English (Saxon); which he instigated with the aid of the church. They generally focused on, and promoted the idea of the troubles with the Vikings, then being experienced in Wessex and in many other kingdoms, as being some kind of punishment, or test from God. Alfred was portrayed as God’s solution. It was through Alfred and his reforms (both religious and moral) that the Saxons could atone for their past sins and thereby rid themselves of the Vikings. Alfred’s eventual victory over the Vikings was in this context viewed as a vindication of his right to be king, the ‘anointed of God’. His close association with the church and his use of religious imagery and dogma allowed Alfred to take this stand. Eventually culminating, through his victory over the Vikings, in both a more stable reign and dynasty, as well as a greater increase in power and authority. One of the Key texts in his ‘cultural programme’ was Gregory’s ‘Pastoral Care’ which Alfred himself translated into English for wider distribution. Within the text there are many references to the duty of kings, comparing kingship to the offices held by bishops, both of them holding the sacred office of teaching, and protecting the greater community. The church then provided Alfred with the basis, and the wherewithal, to entrench his legitimacy in the dogma of Christianity, which combined with the defeat of the Vikings, created an aura of superiority for himself and his successors. So much so that it allowed the later kings of Wessex in the tenth-century to build the kingdom of England.
The Carolingian dynasty also placed great reliance upon the church for its standing and legitimacy in western Europe. They had as I have already mentioned usurped the previous dynasty, and so they needed to find a legitimacy all to themselves, which could be presented as an explanation for their new won position. They found their legitimacy like so many others in the ‘word of God’ - the Bible. Charlemagne in particular went some way to associate himself fully with the prominent characters of the Old Testament, so much so that he “began to represent a new type of ruler modelled on David, and like David he was the anointed of God” [14]. As such he was virtually unassailable (in theological and ‘moral’ terms) in his right to rule. His right was further strengthened by his success in war which itself was portrayed as being evidence of God’s favour. Charlemagne’s father Pepin (first Carolingian king), also used the church wherever possible to entrench his, and his successors claim to the throne. In 750 AD before taking over the crown the following year, Pepin sent an envoy to the Pope to ask for his blessing in his take-over. According to Einhard it was “by the authority of the Pope of Rome..” that Pepin “..was made king” [15]. When he had taken power he used ritual and ceremony to reinforce his claim, being anointed by the kingdom’s bishops, much in the same style as the kings of Israel in the Old Testament. His subsequent anointing by Pope Stephen in 754 AD, along with the Pope’s blessing of his wife and sons, set the seal on the legitimacy of his claims. In all his associations with the church and his seeking of church approval, Pepin was trying to set himself and his family apart, as different from the other aristocratic families of the kingdom, as something special. He was, through the church, creating a new and legitimate dynasty. Charlemange also followed his father’s example, having his sons - Pepin and Louis - anointed and blessed by the Pope in Rome in 781 AD. He however through close alliance with, and support of, the Church of Rome managed to go one step further than his father. When on Christmas day in the year 800 AD, at Rome, he was crowned Holy Roman Emperor by the Pope. The defacto lay leader of the Christian faithful of western Europe. Though this new title gave him no new powers it finally set the seal upon the right of the Carolingians to call themselves the kings of the Franks. This new title as well as further cementing their legitimacy, also gave them further encouragement and blessing to carry on their conquests, this time in the name of God. Thus both Pepin and Charlemagne utilised the church, cementing their claims to its sanctity in order to more fully reinforce and legitimise their dynasty.
It would appear then, that the emerging and developing kings and kingships existent in Britain and in Europe, between the sixth-century and the tenth-century were very much dependant upon the church. Both in seeking out and securing legitimacy for themselves, as well as for their successors.
One other area in which the close and almost symbiotic relationship between church and kingship can be discerned, is the practice and habit of the nobility and lesser royalty taking up holy office. No doubt for many there was a genuine need to express their faith and serve God. However it is also probably certain that for some, the genuine faith was tempered by the desire to attain yet more power and influence. Particularly if they were, for whatever reason, in the unenviable position of being out of the running in the inheritance stakes. The church and its high offices, offered the opportunity to attain not only power and influence, but also the control and exploitation of valuable tracts of property (Abbeys, Monasteries etc.). The church was always ready and willing to accept the greater nobility directly into high office and the higher echelons. Perhaps through such men and connections they sought to secure the position of the church in these new and developing kingships. However, whatever the reason, the lesser nobility who joined the church could also expect to rise, with a certain amount of confidence, if sufficiently talented and well connected. The church then was the closest the early medieval period had to offer in terms of a meritocracy, as in theory even the lowliest monk or priest could rise to become a bishop, cardinal or even perhaps Pope. In terms of the three areas / kingdoms under study, the church provided for those on the outer edges of authority and power, the much needed outlet through which they could pursue their ambitions, as well as display their creativity. The church in so doing, would seem to point to there being no discernible difference in structure or indeed in the people and families involved. The structure of kingship then, can be seen to have been entwined with, and virtually part of the structure of the church itself. Of course this can equally be argued as being true in reverse.
The kingdom of Northumbria was no different from the other kingdoms of western Europe, in that both the lesser members of the royal family, and the nobility, often entered the church seeking high office and influence. Although there was no real tradition of primogenitor through out all of Europe, at this time, it was still vital for the younger sons of the nobility to make certain, and provide for their own futures. The lesser members of the royal households also needed to find some outlet for their ambitions. The church in both cases answered this need. The origin, life, and career of bishop Wilfrid is a fairly typical case of someone seeking to achieve a certain amount of power, influence and wealth through the structure and offices of the church. Wilfrid was born a member of the nobility, but at the age of fourteen according to Eddius Stephanus, “he decided to leave his father’s estates to seek the Kingdom of Heaven” [16]. With support from Queen Eanfled (the wife of King Oswiu) he entered the monastery at Lindisfarne, along with another noble by the name of Cudda. Wilfrid’s subsequent career would then, seem to point to the possibility that he was pursuing the religious way of life not only for its aesthetic and spiritual aspects, but also in order to gain more in terms of power / influence, as well as in wealth. The need to pursue a career in the church is not, initially, in itself evident, until one considers the almost throwaway remark made by Eddius Stephanus in his ‘Life of Wilfrid’ where he refers to Wilfrid’s stepmother being “harsh and cruel” [17]. Wilfrid had obviously fallen out of favour to some extent and therefore needed to secure his future through other means such as entering the church. His change almost midstream from the sphere of influence of the Celtic / Irish church as found at Lindisfarne, to that of the Church of Rome, is in my view evidence of his temporal and earthly ambitions. Clear and final evidence of his change of allegiance came at the synod of Whitby, called by king Oswiu around 664 AD. At Whitby Wilfrid spoke in favour of the acceptance of the Roman church’s rule concerning the observance of Easter, denying the legitimacy of the view held by the Celtic church. Wilfrid, in the years between first entering Lindisfarne and his declaration of support for the church of Rome at Whitby in 664 AD, had travelled extensively throughout western Europe and had visited Rome. During the course of his travels he had no doubt been exposed to the growing strength and extent of the pax catholica and the universalis ecclesia of the church of Rome. The opportunities for greater power and influence within the wider boundaries of the Roman church as compared to the more limited outlook and ambitions of the Celtic church perhaps lie at the heart of why Wilfrid turned away from the Celtic church, instead embracing the church of Rome and all it had to offer. This almost complete breakaway is hinted at by Bede, who describes Wilfrid as “the first bishop of the English race to introduce the catholic way of life to the English churches” [18]. In this context then the church, and the roman church in particular, offered greater opportunities and security for those that elected to join it, with the nobility who joined, thanks to both their wealth and contacts, being even more sure of advancement and opportunity.
The kingdom of Wessex during the reign of Alfred, did not experience quite the same involvement of the nobility and lesser royal family in the church (at least not initially), as that experienced in Northumbria through the seventh and sixth centuries. At the start of Alfred’s reign things had deteriorated so badly, according to Asser, that there was “no noble or free-born man .......who would of his own accord undertake the monastic life,” [19]. Alfred did however make strenuous efforts to amend the situation, identifying this lack of involvement and interest in the church as being one of the symptoms for the overall vulnerability of ninth-century Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Amongst the amendments which he made were the two religious houses which he founded, the monastery at Athelney and the nunnery at Shaftesbury, in which he appointed his daughter Aethelgifu as abbess. In a kingdom which was often under threat from outside forces (such as the Vikings) there was no real incentive for the nobility to enter the church, as there was not a stable enough environment in which a career in the church could be successfully pursued. Alfred managed, through his successes against the Vikings as well as through his many reforms, to bring about a greater stability which in turn encouraged a new revival in both the church, as well as in the recruitment and involvement of the nobility in it. For much of his reign though the practice of the nobility, and the lesser members of the royal household taking up ‘Holy Orders’, as experienced in Northumbria before the ninth- century, in the pursuit of power and influence by other means was in no way widespread or popular. However, by the start of the tenth-century the church in Wessex had, thanks to Alfred, begun to experience a revival in both fortune and in interest.
The kingdom which constituted the Carolingian Empire experienced, like the Northumbria of the sixth and seventh centuries, a growth in the practice of the nobility entering into careers in the church. An adequate amount of stability, along with a reasonable expectation that such stability would continue, existed under the rule of the Carolingians. Thus the interest and involvement of the nobility in the church could freely develop and grow, with the church being, in a relatively stable environment, a likely and rewarding avenue for those in pursuit of further power and influence. As well as the church being a likely avenue for the benefit of those amongst the nobility, it also offered the same opportunities to those lesser members of the royal family, such as daughters, nephews etc., and of course those born from relationships with concubines. Several of Charlemagne’s extended family along with two of his daughters (concubines included), became closely involved with the church. Theodrada, the daughter of Charlemagne and Fastrada, was abbess of Argenteuil, while Hugh, Charlemagne’s son by one of his many concubines, was abbot of both St Quentin and St Bertin. In the case of those born from the king’s relationships with concubines, the church provided the only real avenue of advancement open to them. Thus the church with it’s relatively open structure / meritocracy, and the support and connections which they as the offspring of the king fell heir to, meant that they could quite confidently expect to achieve a certain amount of power, influence, and freedom of action. Something which they would probably not have enjoyed otherwise. The same can be said of the females of the nobility and the royal family (i.e. Theodrada etc.). Noble women and the women of the royal household on the whole, could expect to be used as bargaining counters in the bringing together, through marriage, of families, they were in essence the cement of political alliances. Though they were probably sent to, or had to seek permission to enter, religious institutions, once having entered such religious houses, and perhaps even having achieved a certain position within them, they were in some ways more free than many of the noble women who remained out with the secular world. They perhaps even exerted, when in positions of rank, such as being an abbess of a nunnery, a certain amount of influence if not power, over the abbey itself and the area surrounding it. On the whole it can be seen that there was as much involvement, if indeed not more, in the church by the nobility of the Carolingian Empire as compared to that experienced in Northumbria. Furthermore it can also be argued that there was certainly more involvement in the church by the nobility of the Franks than that displayed by the nobility of the kingdom of Wessex during Alfred’s reign.
In conclusion, there is one final point which highlights, both the symbiotic nature of the relationship between church and kingship, and the apparent widespread practice of the nobility and the lesser, more junior members of the royal household taking up ‘Holy Orders’. The point in question is clearly expressed by Wallace-Hadrill in his ‘Early Germanic Kingship in England and on the continent’, wherein he clearly and succinctly stresses, “that the influential men among the Frankish bishops and abbots (as elsewhere) were mostly of aristocratic birth” [20]. In other words the so-called aristocracy of the church (abbots, bishops etc.) were themselves of the same stock as the lay aristocracy (counts, dukes etc.), being in virtually all meanings of the term, one and the same people. The church then can be argued as being almost entirely entwined within the same system and hierarchy of the aristocracy, dependant upon the same people not only for financial support, but in this case also for recruitment.
The existence of churchmen at court as advisers is another area in which the symbiotic nature of church and kingship can be discerned. The church could hope, through influential churchmen, to guide those in authority towards something akin to the church’s own intentions and objectives, such as the continued development of a more influential, united and materially wealthy / powerful church, a ‘universalis ecclesia’. While those kings who retained churchmen as advisers, could utilise the wealth of knowledge, organisational expertise and literary skills which these ecclesiastical advisors brought with them. Kingship and the church are so wound up, that at times it is difficult to discern and define whether the churchmen at court exerted and exploited their influence over the crown (for the benefit of the church), or whether it was the king(s) themselves, in having churchmen for advisors, who were exploiting and consuming (for their own ends) all that the church had to offer. Either way it can be argued, that the presence of such advisors at court is yet another proof of the symbiotic nature of the relationship under study.
The court of the kings of Northumbria though perhaps not so well set up as the court of the Carolingian kings, did on occasion have it’s fair share of ecclesiastical advisors. The first such adviser was Paulinus, archbishop of York, who persuaded king Edwin to convert to Christianity. In so doing he also gained the ear of the king, saying to Edwin (according to Bede), that the will of god will be “made known” [21] to the king through himself. This closeness to the heart of policy within the kingdom of Northumbria, followed on from the conversion of the king to the allegedly mass conversions of the people of the kingdom at the royal palace at Yeavering. All of which could have only been possible if, as part of a direct and close relationship with the crown, the advice of Paulinus was not only asked for but accepted. Later on other prominent religious leaders, such as Benedict Biscop, were favoured and kept close by the kings of Northumbria, who as well as exploiting and utilising the churchmen’s abilities, also took on board much of their advice. The prominence of ecclesiastical advisors within the royal court of Northumbria has, as already mentioned, much to do with Edwin. In the mid seventh-century Edwin had found himself, and his evolving kingship, in a considerably greater and more widely dispersed kingdom, consequently he needed to reassess and adapt to the new emerging political geography. The church with its hierarchical structure, centralised organisation and monotheism was no doubt a considerably attractive proposition to a warrior-king wrestling with the newly acquired problems of administration. Through churchmen like Paulinus (most prominent advisor from 626 - 633 AD), Edwin could hope to access both advice on matters of rule as well as the inherent capabilities and structure which the church brought with it. Thus the pattern of ecclesiastical advisors to king, was set in the Northumbria of the seventh-century and eighth-century. By the ninth-century Northumbria was once again under the rule of a pagan culture (the Vikings).
Alfred the great also surrounded himself with ecclesiastical advisors. They helped him formulate his policy as regards the disruptions caused by Vikings, and provided through their literate capabilities, the framework through which he could express his will and intentions. The churchmen who Alfred had placed around himself as advisors, drew upon the wealth of the teachings found within the Bible and other ancient texts, as well as more recent works penned by notable churchmen (i.e. ‘Gregory’s Pastoral Cares’ and ‘Augustine’s Soliloquies’). One of the most noted advisors to Alfred was his eventual biographer Asser. Asser had been sought out and brought to Alfred’s court initially, not to write a biography, but to give advice and help on matters of Latin translation and religious interpretation. As for most Christian kings of the early medieval period, religious interpretation often went hand in hand with political and moral decision making. It is therefore not beyond the bounds of possibility that Asser, as often as not, found himself giving some form of political advice. This advice though, was perhaps being given to Alfred under the general and generous heading of religious interpretation. Asser was however, only one of many learned clergy whom Alfred enticed to his royal court. Alfred initially had brought to his court four Mercian churchmen, Bishop Werferth, Archbishop Plegmund and two priests Aethelstan and Werwulf all of whom were reputedly well versed in both literary and ecumenical matters. So vital was their advice that, according to Asser, Alfred “could never tolerate being without one or other of them” [22]. Later on he brought to his court, not only Asser, but also a Gaulish monk by the name Grimbald and an ‘Old Saxon’ (i.e. a Saxon from the continent) monk called John. The reliance and dependence of Alfred upon advisors of a religious bent, coupled with the extent and distance he was prepared to go in order to obtain them, would seem to indicate the importance played by such men in both the government and in the very survival of the kingdom of Wessex, in the turbulent times of the ninth-century.
The Carolingian court was no different from the two case studies above, in that it too wrapped around itself a host of advisors with a strong ecclesiastical background and predilection. Again, as in the two cases already mentioned, the main role of these churchmen was to provide advice on religious interpretation, as well as upon areas which touched upon the inherent expertise of the church, such as in areas concerned with literacy and organisation. Throughout the era of the Carolingian dynasty there were many clergymen who acted as advisors to the king. One of the most prominent was Alcuin, a scholar and churchman of Anglo-Saxon origin, who amongst other duties acted as the head of Charlemagne’s palace school at Aachen (between 782 - 796 AD). Alcuin fulfilled a vital role in the governmental structure which Charlemange attempted to set up during his reign. He was in charge of the further education and training of those, already church educated young men (such as Einhard), who were destined by the will of the king to become courtly officials and ministers. Alcuin would also, at times, fulfil the role of an advisor on religious / moral matters. These moral and religious questions would in themselves probably be intended to be a guide in the most general of terms, to matters of political / policy concern. In a letter to Charlemagne, dated sometime around August 799 AD, Alcuin recommends that the king should be more sparing with his subjects, quoting and making reference to both the words of the Roman poet Vergil as well as quoting the Bible, “ ‘Be merciful, as your heavenly father is merciful’ (Luke 6.36)” [23]. The mere fact that Carolingian kings such as Charlemagne should keep such religious men around them, seeking their advice upon both matters of scripture as well as upon how to interpret such scripture in accordance with kingly policy, would seem to shed some light upon the importance of the ideals of the church in the process of kingship in early medieval Europe.
The central role which churchmen appear to take in many of the contemporary accounts of the royal courts of Northumbria, Wessex, and the kingdom of the Franks, is then indicative of the close, almost symbiotic nature of the relationship between the Christian (Roman) church and the steadily developing concept of kingship.
From close study of the above five sub-topics, the nature and extent of the relationship between church and kingship, will (hopefully) have been made clear. During the almost incessant difficulties of early medieval Europe, the church needed both protection and financial support. The emerging kingdoms which the barbarian warlords of previous decades had caused to come about, needed a new frame of reference, in both terms of belief and organisation, as regards their newly developing forms of kingship. The church gave these warlords / kings the new and necessary world view and organisational structures which they required to continue to grow and develop, giving them “a new God who can be useful to them in a variety of ways” [24]. The church in return received the necessary support. Thus both institutions supported one another, and in doing so their own needs were met. The relationship between the two institutions of kingship and church was then, of a truly intimate, closely interconnected, and mutually self-seeking, self-supporting nature. In other words, both were completely in a state of symbiosis with one another. Developing together to such an extent, that in terms of structure, terminology, and frame of reference they became almost indistinguishable, a truly symbiotic relationship.
Return to articles
[1] J. D. McClure & R. Collins (eds.), ‘Bede, The Ecclesiastical History of the English People’, (Oxford University Press, 1994), page 222.
[2] Op. cit., page 263.
[3] S. Keynes & M. Lapidge (trans.), ‘Alfred the Great, Asser’s Life of King Alfred and other contemporary sources’, (Penguin Books, 1983), page 165.
[4] Op. cit., page 166.
[5] J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Early Germanic kingship in England and on the continent’, (1971), page 86.
[6] J. F. Webb & D. H. Farmer (trans.), ‘The Age of Bede’, (1988), page 189.
[7] Op. cit., page 191.
[8] Op. cit., page 190.
[9] S. Keynes & M. Lapidge (trans.), ‘Alfred the Great, Asser’s Life of King Alfred and other contemporary sources’, (Penguin Books, 1983), page 105.
[10] J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Early Germanic kingship in England and on the continent’, (1971), page 46.
[11] Op. cit., page 46.
[12] J. D. McClure & R. Collins (eds.), ‘Bede, The Ecclesiastical History of the English People’, (Oxford University Press, 1994), page 111.
[13] Op. cit., page 150.
[14] J. Beckwith, ‘Early Medieval Art’, (1964), page 9.
[15] L. Thorpe, ‘Einhard and Notker the Stammerer, Two Lives of Charlemagne’, (Penguin Books, 1969), page 57.
[16] B. Colgrave (ed. & trans.), ‘Eddius Stephanus, Life of St Wilfrid’, (Cambridge, 1927, reprinted 1985), page 135.
[17] Op. cit., page 135.
[18] J. D. McClure & R. Collins (eds.), ‘Bede, The Ecclesiastical History of the English People’, (Oxford University Press, 1994), page 173.
[19] S. Keynes & M. Lapidge (trans.), ‘Alfred the Great, Asser’s Life of King Alfred and other contemporary sources’, (Penguin Books, 1983), page 103.
[20] J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Early Germanic kingship in England and on the continent’, (1971), page 51.
[21] J. D. McClure & R. Collins (eds.), ‘Bede, The Ecclesiastical History of the English People’, (Oxford University Press, 1994), page 94.
[22] S. Keynes & M. Lapidge (trans.), ‘Alfred the Great, Asser’s Life of King Alfred and other contemporary sources’, (Penguin Books, 1983), page 93.
[23] S. Allott, ‘Alcuin of York, his life and letters’, (William Sessions Ltd., 1974), page 87.
[24] J. M. Wallace-Hadrill, ‘Early Germanic kingship in England and on the continent’, (1971), page 71.