Laudes Regiae. A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and Mediaeval Ruler Worship

310 Pages·1946·35.794 MB·English

by  Kantorowicz Ernst

LAUDES REGIAE
A Study in Liturgical Acclamations and
Mediaeval Ruler Worship
BY
ERNST H. KANTOROWICZ
W ITH
A STUDY OF THE MUSIC OF THE LAUDES AND MUSICAL TRANSCRIPTIONS
BY
MANFRED F. BUKOFZER
U N I V E R S I T Y O F C A L I F O R N I A P R E S S
B E R K E L E Y A N D L O S A N G E L E S
1946
University op California Publications in History
Editors (Berkeley): R. J. Kerner, G- fcb Gttttrldge, F, L. Paxsgn
Volume 33p pp. xxii + 1-2921 15 [n la tea
Submitted by editors January I0T 1941
Issued January 5* 1946
Price, *3.00
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS
BERKELEY AND LQ3 ANGELES
CALIFORNIA
CAURIUDGE UNIVERSITY I’ftLSS
LONDON, ENGLAND
I-H1 KTJh-d- IN THE Li H ITtD flTATKt OF AiitRITA
f
AMICIS OXONIENSIBUS
IÖU1
Digitized by C
PREFACE
of mediaeval liturgy, until the beginning of this century,
Th e s t u d y
fell almost exclusively to the theologian and the church historian. It
is true that some great students of mediaeval art and literature
found it profitable or necessary to break into this “reservation.” Rarely,
however, did it happen that the “professional” mediaevalist, the student
of political, institutional, or cultural history of the Middle Ages, swerved
so far from his usual studies as to lose himself in the magic thicket of
prayers, benedictions, and ecclesiastical rites. We need only skim over
the historical writings antedating the First World War or glance at the
standard bibliographies to realize that liturgical sources and studies had
not then penetrated the sphere of interest of the mediaeval historian.
Liturgical problems were rarely, if ever, incorporated in the body of
mediaeval history.
In this respect the ancient historian differed profoundly from the
mediaevalist. Not even in our age of habitual superspecialization would a
scholar in classics venture to study, or pretend to understand, the po­
litical and cultural history of antiquity without an intimate knowledge of
the cults and the religious customs of Greece, Rome, and the Near East.
In the ancient world there was no split between the holy and the profane.
The ancient historian, therefore, had the great advantage of being himself
the “theologian” and “church historian” of his period.
Far less favorable from the outset was the situation of the mediaeval
historian. Religious prejudices, nonexistent with respect to ancient his­
tory, have hampered or biased mediaeval studies until almost the twen­
tieth century. History itself seemed to have been split and to have
developed that dualism of holy and profane from which eventually the
specialized historians of either profession originated. Moreover, the
mediaevalist was saddled with an awkward legacy. Academic tradition
in almost all countries has it that “Mediaeval and Modern History” are
bound together but not “Ancient and Mediaeval.” The ideological ap­
proach to the Middle Ages, therefore, was much too often determined by
problems suggested in view of modern history; and modern problems are
far remote from cults of the gods, religious rites, and liturgical functions.
Hence, this cultual, or “liturgical,” sector—one of the essentials which
ancient and mediaeval history have in common—fell deplorably short in
the studies of mediaevalists. Eventually it became the task of the ancient
historian, church historian, and Byzantinist to account for the period of
transition from Hellcnistic-Roman cults to Hellenistic-Roman Christianity.
Through the combined efforts of these scholars the ground of the Late
Antiquity, a former no man's land, has been tilled so thoroughly that the
[v ii]
Preface
Vlll
integration of late antique problems into mediaeval history has become
imperative. The admirable and fascinating discoveries of two or three
generations of scholars in this field have disclosed the interrelations be­
tween the cults of the Mysteries and the early Christian cult, between the
worship of emperors and that of Christ. These disclosures, as is natural,
have greatly influenced the general appearance of the Middle Ages. The
early mediaeval Church, at least until about 1200 when Gothic
a .d .
mysticism and Renaissance trends of thought began to transform West­
ern religious sentiment, appeared to be linked to the cults of the Late
Antiquity—thriving in a near-to-earth climate—much more closely than
to any modern ecclesiastical institutions. There arose the necessity of
reconsidering early mediaeval problems. A study of the practices and
rites of the Early Middle Ages, approached by regarding the Church as
still an antique cult integrating within itself the orbits of holy and pro­
fane, recommended itself to the mediaevalists.
Recent studies have proved that this approach yielded very consider­
able results. Mediaeval liturgy, like the rites of the non-Christian cults,
turned out to be suitable, not only to theological, but also to politico-his­
torical interpretations. Moreover, an enormous firsthand source matériel
was unlocked, and uncounted mediaeval service books, hitherto not
utilized by the mediaevalist, were made available for new studies.
The evaluation of these liturgical sources for the purposes of political,
cultural, and constitutional history, as well as for the knowledge of medi­
aeval thought, ideas, and political theories, is as yet in its first phase.
Liturgical history in the sense indicated is a new branch of historical
science. Edmund Bishop—whose Liturgica Historica, published after his
death in 1918, discloses a whole program in its title—may be claimed in
many respects as the initiator of these studies. On the whole, England and
English learned societies have been leading in interpreting and making
accessible the liturgical sources. In England, now as in the days of Henry
VIII, state and liturgy are still tied together. Only in England has there
survived that great mediaeval pageantry, the royal coronation, which
evinces the ancient blend of state and liturgy ; and perhaps owing to this
tradition the ground has proved particularly favorable for liturgico-his-
torical studies. Continental scholarship, however, has contributed its full
share. Since 1887 the Roman Catholic Church has published the Ephe-
merides Liturgicae, an official periodical of the Congregation of Rites and
at the same time an excellent liturgico-historical review. The great
Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, in process since 1907,
is the monumental contribution of French scholars whose leading figure
for a long time was L. Duchesne. Germany followed with the Jahrbuch
für Liturgieioissenschaft, published since 1921, which must be considered
Preface
IX
as one of the most important historical periodicals. These publications,
along with the works of a great number of individual scholars whose
names will be found in the following pages time and time again, are
eloquent testimony to the fact that historical and liturgical studies no
longer pursue their separate ways; now their courses intersect continu­
ously. It is really no longer possible for the mediaeval historian to ignore
these studies and to deal cheerfully with the history of mediaeval thought
and culture without ever opening a missal. The liturgy, to say the least,
is today one of the most important auxiliaries to the study of mediaeval :
history.
Presumably fom-fifths of the liturgical sources are as yet unpublished
or uncatalogued.COf the sources published, a considerable section is
almost inaccessible owing either to the purely “local” character of the
publications or to their being out of print. Every study in this field,
therefore, is bound, despite extensive consultation of manuscripts, to be
incomplete and provisional. The non liquet as well as the “surprise” up­
setting or confirming of a theory will occur more often in this than in
other branches of historical research. Moreover, studies on liturgico-
political subjects are inevitably technical, hence not easy reading, and
the student will notice that many roads are as yet unpaved and that even
the highways are not always reliable.
Of these difficulties, which I found stimulating rather than discourag­
ing, indications will be found not rarely in the present volume. I do not
pretend to submit a final work on either “Liturgical Acclamations” or
on “Mediaeval Ruler Worship.” The book offers no more than I have
promised in the title, a “Study,” or rather a collection of “Studies”
braced by a common subject which by chance I became interested in
many years ago. It contains the history, if incomplete, of a single liturgical
chant, the Laudes Itegiae. This “Caesarean Litany” received its classical
form during the eighth century in the Gallo-Frankish Church under
Anglo-Irish and Roman influences, but it represents at the same time the
liturgical survival of acclamations tendered to the Roman emperors. The
seemingly insignificant changes in the texts of the laudes, traced here from
the eighth to the thirteenth century, reflect the various changes in theo­
cratic concepts of secular and spiritual rulership. New light, I believe, is
shed on the development of the mediaeval equivalent of the ancient ruler
cult. Other items will be likewise new to the reader. The episcopal and
papal acclamations have not before been studied in this connection. The
laudes of Dalmatia with their strongly legal character hardly have been
known to the historian. The liturgical interdependence of Sicily, Nor­
mandy, and England is illustrated by some new details. The modern re­
vival of the laudes, here only touched upon, broaches the problem of
Preface
acclamations, and their function, in modem dictatorial states in which
they appear as an indispensable vehicle of political propaganda, pseudo­
religious emotionalism, and public reacknowledgment of power. More­
over, the collection of a widely scattered and hitherto unsifted matériel,
gathered from published and unpublished sources, opens several views
into bypaths which often may appear as more important than the subject
matter itself. I have tried, not always successfully, to resist the tempta­
tion of being sidetracked. Well-known facts have been repeated as little
as possible, but the most recent studies on the late antique acclamations,
on the rites of coronations and festal crownings of kings and popes, and on
political thought in the liturgy have been used amply—and gratefully.
Even so I am convinced of having erred more than once, of having neg­
lected important points and having overstressed the importance of
others. The liturgiologist, to whose indulgence I must appeal, will prob­
ably find other faults as well with my conclusions or interpretations.
The studies here offered have been carried through at different times
and under various conditions. The first chapter, serving here as a kind of
general introduction, started from an investigation on the legend of the
Sicilian gold bullae of Frederick II. Chapter VI on the laudes in the Nor­
man realms originated at Oxford as far back as 1934, when I was for­
tunate enough to enjoy the hospitality of New College and its late
Warden, the ever-lamented H. A. L. Fisher. In substance the Norman
chapter was read as a paper to the Mediaeval Society in Oxford presided
over by Professor F. M. Powiçke. These chapters, together with parts
of IV, V, and VII, were ready for the press by 193G. Conditions made
publication impossible, but other students at least could utilize my
manuscript; in the first place Professor Percy Ernst Schramm, who pub­
lished some extracts and who, in turn, generously placed at my disposal
his own collection of matériel on the subject so that some gaps could l>e
filled. Chapters II, III, and parts of IV were added at Berkeley in 1940,
when the generosity of Mr. Sidney M. Ehrman, in San Francisco, and of
the Emergency Committee in Aid of Displaced Foreign Scholars, in New
York, enabled me to revise and translate my manuscript and to complete
my studies in leisure.
Some difficulties arose from the war. It was impossible to get any addi­
tional information from European libraries about manuscripts which I
either had consulted or had failed to consult in former years. For this
reason the plan of adding an analytic list of laudes formularies had to be
abandoned. My often casual notes, taken years ago, did not always yield
a clear answer to questions which arose at a later stage of my studies.
Another difficulty derived from the fact that I had no specialized litur­
gical library at my disposal. These troubles were at least smoothed down
Preface xi
by the untiring readiness of the staff of the University of California Li­
brary to provide through the Inter-Library Loan the books which I
needed, an assistance which I gratefully acknowledge. However, even the
extravagant use which I made of this expedient could not replace the sets
of periodicals and books which should have been consulted continuously.
Gaps in my bibliography and my knowledge may have resulted from this
limitation.
The manuscript of this book was handed over to the University of
California Press in January, 1941. By a concatenation of unfortunate cir­
cumstances the printing had to be postponed. There is, however, an
advantage in the disadvantage. I was fortunate in arousing the interest of
Professor Manfred F. Bukofzer in the musical side of my subject and
even more fortunate in persuading him to add an appendix on the music
of the laudes which, no doubt, the reader will appreciate and for which I
wish to express my profound gratitude. So far as Professor Bukofzer’s
analysis is based on my manuscript-notes I have to bear the full responsi­
bility for the exactness of my copies. The results of the musical investi­
gation which, needless to say, was carried through quite independently
by Professor Bukofzer and without his being acquainted with my analysis
of the laudes, fully support the conclusions of my own investigation.
Several conclusions which in the text I had to provide, as it were, with a
question mark, might subsequently have been rephrased in a more posi­
tive form. However, I refrained from making considerable changes and
merely referred in the footnotes to the musical excursus.
Finally I wish to express my gratitude to Dr. G. C. Jefferis, Mr. Patrick
O’Mara, Professor Max Rad in, Mr. Edouard Roditi, Professor Howard
M. Smyth, Professor and Mrs. Raymond J. Sontag, Professor John S. P.
Tatlock, Mr. Leopold G. Wickham Legg, and Mr. G. II. Williams for
various helps, suggestions, and courtesies; to the Committee of Publica­
tions for allotting the funds for the printing; and to Miss Lucie E. N.
Dobbie of the University of California Press for carefully revising my
manuscript. F h k
Digitized by C