Coronation of Charlemagne

[Timotheus]

There is the long held story that while praying Charlemagne was made Emperor by Pope Leo who snuck up on him.

I have read this several times. Some have argued that this is just a story. They say its common to show false modesty and that the coronation was actually long planned.

I have also heard to me an equally if not more likely story that Charlemagne did not want to be crowned least of all by the Pope becuase that would straight out say the Emperor was below the Pope and thus cold be removed by the Pope.

Which do you believe and why?

[Timotheus]

As a side note I am watching History Channel show "Barbarians". I have to say that this is a new low for the History Channel.

There other bad shows like UFO sightings we can easily throw away as junk. This one tries to be a real show on history and yet its terrible.

It takes scripture events as actual evidence. Ancient sources are all taken at face value and of course only one side a very pro-Christian Church side is taken on all things.

[Jona Lendering]

Of course it was prepared. There was an embassador from Harun ar-Rashid and representatives of the Roman city came to greet Charlemagne at the twelfth milestone, as was common when one saluted an emperor.

What went wrong, was the way the emperor was crowned. Our sources (Einhardt being the main one) are not really clear, but it seems that the celebration was planned for the 25th, when the Frankish army would proclaim Charlemagne Imperator, and the city council/Senate would recognize him as Augustus or Caesar. That would have been as it ought to happen, ancient Roman style.

The Pope had different plans. In Constantinople, the emperor was crowned by the Patriarch, just like Samuel had anointed Saul and David, and the Pope had anointed Charlemagne's grandfather and father. On 24 December, when Charlemagne went to the Saint Peter's Basilica, Pope Leo surprised him.

According to Einhardt, Charlemagne was furious and said that if he knew what was going to happen, he would not have gone to church that night. That makes sense, in the above context: the one who crowns is greater than the one who is crowned. Charlemagne was in fact humiliated.

Several years later, he personally crowned his son Louis, making sure that in the future, the imperial title could be obtained without Papal intervention. However, Louis later had himself recoronated by the Pope, creating a precedent.

[Epictetus]

Was the dubious Donation of Constantine commonly accepted prior to the crowning of Charlemagne?

[Jona Lendering]

Was the dubious Donation of Constantine commonly accepted prior to the crowning of Charlemagne?

No; it is now believed to date from the ninth century - go here (if I understood that review correctly).