THE INTER-RELATION OF THE DIFFERENT RITES
The coronation rite first appears in Constantinople, and was there
a developed and religious form of the old ceremonies with which the
accession of a new Emperor had always been observed. In the West a
religious ceremony in connection with the accession of a king first
appears in the seventh century in the Visigothic kingdom of Spain. Here
we are told that the kings on their accession to the throne took an oath
to govern justly, and were then solemnly anointed. But there is this
noticeable point, that no mention is made of any crowning, and though the
royal gear (_regius cultus_) is mentioned, there is no reference to an
investiture of any kind.
Whence did this Spanish rite come? There is no definite evidence which
will permit us to say for certain. It may be that the idea of a religious
ceremony of inauguration was borrowed from Constantinople. The barbarian
peoples, as they became the new nations, imitated so far as possible the
institutions of the Empire, and so it is possible that the Visigoths
adopted their coronation rite in imitation of the imperial rite of
Constantinople. But if this was so, it is no more than the idea of a
religious rite of inauguration which they borrowed. We have seen that
the central feature of the Eastern rite was the coronation, and there is
no evidence of any unction before the latter part of the ninth century,
while on the other hand the central feature of the Visigothic rite was
the anointing, and there is no reference to any crowning in Visigothic
times. It is true, again, that in the later Spanish rites of Aragon and
Navarre there appear very special and peculiar features which we may
be tempted to refer to a Byzantine origin, but as we have seen, these
features will bear quite well another interpretation. Until we have
definite evidence of any connection between the two, it is unsafe to
derive the Spanish rite from the Eastern. The outstanding fact is that
here in Spain we have, so far as the West is concerned, the beginnings
of the coronation or consecration rite of kings, and that its central
characteristic clearly consists of the anointing.
In the middle of the eighth century we find France also using an
inaugurating rite. In 750 Pippin-le-bref was consecrated by St Boniface
as king of the Franks, and at the end of the eighth century we find
on two occasions, both of which were exceptional, Saxon kings being
consecrated.
The question now arises, where did the French rite, and the rite used in
England originate? We have no definite evidence and can only surmise.
The fact that Boniface the anointer of Pippin was an Englishman, together
with the fact that it has generally been taken for granted that the
so-called Pontifical of Egbert is really Egbert’s, and therefore belongs
to the middle of the eighth century, has led to the tempting theory that
the French rite was imported from England by St Boniface on the occasion
of Pippin’s consecration as king of the Franks. But there is no evidence
in support of this theory, and above all there is no evidence of the
existence of an Anglo-Saxon rite of this period for St Boniface to import
into France.
The consecration of Pippin is referred to, not as a coronation but as an
unction. Of it we are told that ‘Pippin was elected as king according
to the custom of the Franks, and was anointed by the hand of Boniface,
archbishop of Mayence of holy memory, and was raised by the Franks to the
kingdom in the city of Soissons[155].’ Here no formal act of coronation
is mentioned. Pippin was elected ‘according to the custom of the Franks,’
and it is possible that this same ‘custom’ covers the unction, and refers
the ceremony of inauguration back to pre-Carolingian times, but it is not
probable, for everything points to the importation of an inauguration
rite to give recognition to the new dynasty of Pippin. Possibly again in
the expression ‘was raised to the kingdom’ we may see some reminiscence
of an enthronization. But the central feature of the rite is clearly the
anointing, and this is the only feature mentioned in the account of the
second consecration of Pippin by Pope Stephen, where we are told ‘Pope
Stephen confirmed Pippin as king with holy unction, and together with him
anointed his two sons, Charles and Carloman, to the royal dignity[156].’
And so we find the same feature, the unction, the central point of the
rite both in Spain and France. It is natural to draw the conclusion that
the French rite was brought from Spain and was of the same type as the
Spanish, just as the other liturgical books of France and Spain are of
the same type, commonly called the ‘Gallican.’ The rite, when it was
introduced into England, most probably was brought over from France,
for there was considerable intercourse between the Saxon and Frankish
kingdoms, and some intermarriages between the Frankish and Saxon reigning
families.
To a Frankish origin may also probably be assigned the early German
rites, such for example as that by which Otto of Saxony was crowned in
the tenth century.
In the year 800 Charlemagne was crowned by the Pope at Rome as Roman
Emperor. For this purpose it was necessary to have a coronation rite, and
hitherto no Roman Emperor had ever been crowned at Rome, though a Pope
had travelled into France to consecrate a Frankish king.
But this was the case of a Roman Emperor. We are told little of the
details of the rite by contemporary writers. None of the Western
contemporary historians mention any anointing, though they all speak of
the crowning. On the other hand a contemporary Greek writer, Theophanes,
does definitely speak of the unction, but it has been suggested that
he is here confusing the coronation of Charlemagne as Emperor with the
anointing of his son Charles as king of the Franks, which took place on
the same occasion.
The central feature of the coronation rite was his crowning, and this is
a feature that seems to have been lacking in the Western rites for the
consecration of a king, while on the other hand it is in strict agreement
with the Byzantine procedure. Charlemagne always pretended that the
whole affair was unexpected by him, and that the Pope alone arranged the
coronation and took him by surprise. But there can be little doubt that
the whole business, except perhaps as to the details of the rite, was
premeditated and arranged beforehand. Charlemagne was crowned as Roman
Emperor, and therefore in theory was the colleague and the equal of the
Emperor at Constantinople. Hence it would seem natural that the ceremony
by which Charlemagne was crowned should follow in essential details
the rite used on such an occasion at Constantinople. It may be added
that there is no mention of any anointing in the earliest forms for the
coronation of an Emperor at Rome. It would seem, then, that the rite by
which Charlemagne was crowned, was, so far as the West was concerned, an
entirely new rite, following in outline the rite used at Constantinople.
Thus then, in the West, in the ninth century, we find two groups of
rites, quite independent of each other, (1) The Spanish-Frankish rite,
(2) The Roman Imperial rite. In later days these two groups speedily
reacted on each other, and produced a definite type of Western rite.
The forms of the first group, French and English (no early Spanish forms
are extant), probably do not represent their earliest state. There is
not only an unction but a coronation, and also a formal delivery of
kingly insignia, in the English rite, of Sceptre, Verge, and Crown; in
the French rite, of Crown and Sceptre. It will be noticed that if the
act of crowning was first observed in the West at the coronation of
Charlemagne, it was very speedily introduced into the Western rite for
the consecration of a king.
There is no Roman coronation rite for a king at this date, but there is
a Milanese rite of the ninth century, and with some such rite probably
Berengar Margrave of Friuli was crowned at Milan in 887. It is noticeable
that this Milanese rite for the coronation of a king is more or less
identical with the imperial rite of the same date. It is very simple,
the king being crowned and invested with a sword. This Milanese rite may
perhaps be taken as representing the Roman rite of the coronation of a
king in its earliest form.
It is at the second stage of the rite where the interaction of the
two groups of rites is most clear and evident. In the tenth century
the second recensions of the English and French rite not only shew
considerable developements and a much more fixed and definite form,
but they are almost identical, and the French order bears certain marks
of English influence. Whence did this elaboration come? In the first
place the English and French rites can be taken together from this time
forward. Recension by recension they have been subjected to much the
same influences and are very close to each other. This was only natural
considering the closeness of the communications between England and
France. Between the Saxon royal families and the Court of Rome there was
considerable intercommunication, and on several occasions we hear of
Saxon princes going to Rome. Of Alfred we are told that he was invested
by the Pope at Rome with the insignia of a Roman consul, an investiture
which the Saxons seem to have mistaken for a coronation rite; and we are
also told that the insignia were preserved henceforth among the royal
ornaments. Of the Roman rite at this time we have no forms, in fact
nothing between the simple forms of the first imperial recension and
of the Milanese order and the elaborate order of Hittorp of the tenth
or eleventh centuries. Yet whereas in the former of these there were
investitures of Sword and Crown only, in the latter the king is invested
with Sword, Ring, Verge, and Crown, and the unction is elaborate, being
made on head, breast, shoulders, bends of arms, and hands. It is clear
that influences have been at work in the intervening period. We know that
France had great influence on the Liturgical books of Rome in the ninth
and tenth centuries, and it would seem that here is yet another instance
of this influence, and that the elaborations in the Roman rite were at
some time adopted from France and at Rome reduced into order and fixity.
Doubtless at Rome even the rite underwent some developement, but it is
noticeable that after the time of the rite of Hittorp’s order the rite at
Rome returned to something of its earlier simplicity and drops out many
of the elaborations which we find in Hittorp’s order. Thus we may perhaps
presuppose an intermediate order at Rome similar to Hittorp’s order.
In the case of Edgar of England, the English writers made much of his
coronation in the year 973. It was an occasion which called for special
pomp and circumstance, and much stress is laid on the magnificence of
the whole ceremony. It is likely that this is the occasion for which
the second recension was composed, and the natural source of this
developement and revision would seem to be a Roman order similar in
character to that of Hittorp. This rite of the second English recension
was adopted almost word for word in France in the order of Ratold.
In England and France the third recension of each country is clearly
influenced from Rome, to the extent even of replacing with Roman forms
some of the forms of the old national rites. In the fourth recension in
both lands there is a return to the older national forms by the simple
means of conflating the second and third recensions, and this fourth
recension marks the final form of the rite, except in so far as in
England in its English form it has since been modified as circumstances
have required.
The earliest German rite, that of Otto of Saxony in the tenth century, is
unfixed in character, and approximates perhaps to the earliest Frankish
rites. There are investitures with Sword and Belt, Armills and Chlamys
under a unique form, Sceptre and Verge, again with a unique form, and
then after the anointing, with the Crown. The use of the word _Chlamys_
is very striking and bears witness to at least a knowledge of Eastern
imperial vestments. By the thirteenth century the German rite had been
subjected to considerable Roman influence, as would naturally be expected
from the close connection existing between Germany and Italy. The
unctions are on head, breast, and shoulders, and the investitures are
with Sword, Ring, Sceptre and Orb, and Crown. The German rite changed
very little after this date.
The Spanish rite, as we have seen, contains much that is very ancient and
also has been subjected by the fourteenth century to Roman influence,
none the less preserving much of its ancient peculiar characteristics.
Unfortunately we have only few forms of this rite, and it was early
discontinued altogether.
The Roman imperial rite in its first state is short and simple. There
are investitures with Sceptre and Crown only. No mention is made of
the unction, and this fact, inconclusive in itself, accords with the
absence of any mention of unction in the contemporary Western accounts
of Charlemagne’s coronation. The imperial rite served as a model for
the order for crowning a king when need arose, as is evident from the
fact that the early ninth-century Milanese order for the crowning of
a king is almost identical with it. In the process of its developement
the order for crowning an Emperor was influenced to some extent by the
order for the crowning of a king, which had been subjected early to
considerable outside influences. Then in the twelfth century we find in
the imperial rite investitures with Sword, Sceptre, and Crown; a little
later with Ring, Crown, and Sceptre. The Ring is quite non-Roman and has
been introduced from the rite for the crowning of a king, into which it
has come from outside sources. The Ring however soon disappears once
more from both Roman rites. In the fourteenth century the investitures
are with Crown, Sceptre and Orb (without a form), and Sword. In the
sixteenth century, after which date the order has varied very little, the
investitures are with Sword, Sceptre and Orb (under one form), and Crown.
We have seen that in the ninth century the Milanese rite was very
simple and almost identical with the Roman imperial rite. Here at Milan
the Roman Emperor was nominally crowned as king of Italy, before his
coronation at Rome as Emperor. In the eleventh century this rite has
become very elaborate, containing the whole of the matter of ‘Egbert’s’
order, and also much that is Roman. There are investitures, of Crown,
Sword, Verge, and Ring, an unusual order, which are made with Roman
forms. In the fourteenth century we find the unctions restricted to
the shoulders only, and the investitures are of Ring, Sword, Crown,
Sceptre, and Verge. In the last Milanese recension, that of the fifteenth
century, the unction is made on the head, and the investitures are
of Sword, Ring, Crown, and (under one form) Sceptre and Orb. Thus the
Milanese rite was subjected to the same early influences as the Roman,
but never regained so much of its earlier simplicity as did the Roman
rite.
The coronation rite was introduced into other lands only at a time when
the Roman rite had gained a position of special prestige, and therefore
these rites seem to have been more or less Roman, and yet contained
some national characteristics. Of these we have only the Hungarian
rite extant. Of the Scandinavian countries, and of Scotland no rite of
pre-reformation date survives, but the post-reformation rites, which
are based to some extent on the older rites, perhaps contain some of
the older features, for example, the retention in Sweden of a key of
knowledge among the Regalia.
The general conclusions as to the inter-relation of the rites would
seem to be as follows. There are in the West two original groups, both
independent compositions:
(1) The Spanish-French-English, derived from Spain.
(2) The Roman Imperial, which was called into existence on the occasion
of the coronation of Charlemagne as Roman Emperor. From this latter is
derived the Roman rite for the coronation of a king.
There seems to have been from an early date until the fourteenth
century a continuous interaction of these groups upon each other, and
beyond that date outside influences ceased to be exerted, and whatever
developement may have taken place in any particular rite was due to
natural and internal developement.
At this day in the West the rite is retained in England and Austria, that
used in Austria being the order of the Roman Pontifical.
The only other country, except Russia, in which a coronation rite
survives is Norway.