The subject of this thesis is the peculiar presence of the term imperator in a small, but still significant, number of 10th century documents from the reign of Asturia and León and from Britain. The fact that these two “imperial phenomena” coexisted and developed in two very distant contexts, without an apparent connection, makes a comparative study necessary. Also, in both areas the previous century was characterized by a particularly favorable moment for culture - el renacimiento asturiano and the alfredian renaissance - made possible by the action of two monarchs, Alfonso III of Asturia and León (866-910) and Alfred of Wessex (871-899). In these sovereigns’ courts, chronicles were drawn up (the Crónicas Asturianas and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle), proposing an interpretation of history which tend to seek a new identity for the respective peoples, highlighting the central role of the respective ruling dynasties. The aim of the thesis is therefore twofold: on the one hand, to understand in what way and in what sense the term imperator was used in the documentation examined; on the other hand, to estimate what weight the new ethnic, religious and territorial identities had within these imperial phenomena. For a better performance of the argument, it was decided to divide the thesis into two parts, the first dedicated to the chronicles of the 9th century and the second to the documents of the following century in which the imperial title appears. In turn, each part is divided into two chapters focused on Hispanic and Anglo-Saxon cases. The thesis opens with the presentation of the criteria used in the selection of the corpus (Ch. 1), which amounts to a total of 38 imperial documents, of which 20 Asturian-Leonese (private and public) and 18 Anglo-Saxon (exclusively public). The historical context (Ch. 2) and the status quaestionis (Ch. 3) are provided below. The first chapter of the first part (Ch. 4) deals with the three chronicles produced in the Asturian-Leonese court at the end of the 9th century. Also known as Crónicas Asturianas. they are respectively entitled Crónica Albeldense, Crónica Profetica and Crónica de Alfonso III. This chapter starts treating the Asturian library, available to the authors of the chronicles, and follows with the description of each chronicle, focusing on their paternity and dating. It then provides information about the manuscript tradition of each chronicle and it finally ends with an overall reading of the sources. Here, concepts such as identity (ethnic, religious and geographic) are clarified, and we observe the origin of historiographic themes such as those of the Reconquista and neo-Gothicism. These elements constitute the starting point for a reflection aimed at bringing out the ideological background common to all three chronicles. In the corresponding English chapter (Ch. 5) is outlined a profile of the literary production, in particular historiographic, which characterized the last two decades of the 9th century in England. We start by framing the men who formed part in the so-called alfredian reinassance and then analyze the role played in this moment of cultural rebirth by the translations in Old English of the great historiographic works. Finally, we propose a rereading of the only historiographic work written ex novo, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, where the concept of overlordship emerges as a common thread. Overlordship is the name that modern scholars have given to the authority that some Anglo-Saxon kings were able to exercise over other kings in the island. It is a predominantly military supremacy which leads a king, for often short periods, to impose his sovereignty - and sometimes tributes - on populations other than his own. This idea of overlapped sovereignty was already present in Beda and is recovered by the Anglo-Saxon chroniclers who relate it, explicity, to the dynasty of the kings of Wessex, coining for those kings who held it the term bretwalda. At the end of the first part there is a comparison chapter (Ch. 6) that draws the conclusions of the first half of the thesis. Some points in common (here called "macrocongruenze") between the two case studies are reiterated: both Britain and Spania formed part of the Roman Empire, but not of the Carolingian Empire and both suffered an invasion during the Early Middle Ages (Danes / Norwegians and Muslims); in both cases the production of written culture, during the 9th century, orbited around the figure of the monarch; the chronicles celebrate the reigning dynasty as the centre of "national" history to legitimize its authority; among the pages of these chronicles new identities are proposed for both populations. However, beyond these obvious similarities, it has been noted that the chronicles adopted two different ways of self-representing themselves, their kingdom, their people and their geographical context. The comparison chapter therefore reflects on three key points: the recovery of the past, the territorial conception of the geographical environment and the identity issue. In fact, we cannot neglect the different importance that the memory of the Visigoth kingdom and of the Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy (and therefore, respectively, the works of Isidore of Seville and the Venerable Bede) had. It would also be wrong not to underline the differences between the two new identity proposals: the English one had a distinctly ethnic base (Angelcynn), while the Hispanic base was mainly religious base (regnum Xristianorum). The last paragraph if finally dedicated to the different relationships between the two areas studied and the contemporary Carolingian world could not be missing. In the second block imperial phenomena are examined. The chapter dedicated to the Hispanic context (Ch. 7) opens with a reflection on the various figures of scriptores of the kingdom of León and on the weight of Visigoth formulae in the early medieval documentation. At the beginning of the corresponding English chapter (Ch. 8) are presented two cases of a use of the imperial term preceding the 10th century: that of Saint Oswald of Northumbria (634-642) in the Adomnan of Hy’s Vita Sancti Columbae of and that of Coenwulf of Mercia in the charter S153. These cases are followed by two paragraphs dedicated to Edward the Elder’s and Æthelstan’s documentation, which highlight a substantial development of the royal title, pointing out an expansion of the authority of these monarchs. The center of both the chapters of the second block consists in the detailed analysis of the imperial documents and in the reflections that arise from it. In the Spanish case, it is possible to affirm with some certainty that the use of the imperator title began with his son, Ordoño II, who attributed it to his father to strengthen his position as king of León. Between the death of Ordoño II (924) and the ascent to the throne of Ramiro II (931), the title also began to be employed into private documentation, without disappearing in the public one. Unfortunately, it is not possible, as it is in the English case, to trace the Hispanic imperial phenomenon back to a particular scriptor. However, it should be noted that some texts dating from the second half of the century differ from the charters of Ordoño II in the use of the term, adopting it in reference to the living king, rather than the deceased father. The title, at least at the beginning of the tenth century, does not seem to reflect a superior (or imperial) authority, but recalls its most ancient meaning, of "victorious general" and constitutes a prerogative of the Leonese sovereigns. As for the English imperial phenomenon, however, it is possible to identify a starting point in the famous alliterative charters, probably drawn up by Koenwald of Worcester (928/9- 957), whose authorship is largely discussed in the thesis. It seems clear that imperator is nothing but the Latin translation of what historians have called overlord. Through the use of this title, the Anglo-Saxon rulers wanted to represent their growing hegemony over the other kingdoms of the island, thus claiming a more territorial than ethnic authority. However, it should be noted that the use of imperial terminology forms part of the broader process of evolution of the royal title that started with Edward the Elder. These reflections are then related to those of the first part and developed in the conclusions (Ch. 9). They focus on four fundamental points: the use of the documentation and the Latin language in the two areas; Britain and Spania as self-contained universes; the meaning of imperator in the two documentary contexts; the territorial conception as a theoretical and geographical assumption of this use. Reading the sources allows us to affirm that both contexts represented universes ideally self-contained for their respective sovereigns. The Leonese and Anglo-Saxon rulers inherited from their predecessors not only a political "mission" - reconquering for the former and control for the latter -, but also a specific conception - different for each case - of the geographical environment in which they found themselves operate. The Britannia of the Anglo-Saxon king-emperor is Bede’s Britannia, fragmented and divided, but spiritually united. The Spania of the Leonese kings is Isidoro’s Spania, united, homogeneous, but dramatically lost. However, for the Spanish case in the period examined here, the imperial title was never related to a geographical reference; in the English one, the geographical reference to Britannia existed, but was not exclusive to the imperial title. We can therefore say that, in the English case, the title was born out of the need to translate into Latin an indirect and hegemonic authority (like that of a rex regum), and then lost this meaning - and therefore the use - when the political situation of the kingdom changed. In the Spanish case, conversely, an almost symmetrically opposite processing took place. The title, initially used in its oldest meaning as "victorious general" or "powerful lord", was reinterpreted in the 11th and 12th centuries, when the political balance of the peninsula changed. In this period, we find in fact rulers like Alfonso VI and Alfonso VII employing titles such as imperator totius Hispaniae. In both cases, the emperor was intended as a synonym for rex regum, but in two different moments - always when it was more needed. The thesis is equipped with maps and bibliography, divided between sources and studies. Furthermore, it was considered useful to add a final appendix with the texts of the imperial documents.

L’oggetto di questa tesi è la peculiare comparsa del termine imperator in un numero esiguo, ma comunque significativo di documenti provenienti dal regno di Asturia e León e dalla Britannia del X secolo. Se già di per sé questa sorta di “incongruenza storica” cattura l’attenzione, il fatto che i due fenomeni imperiali siano praticamente contemporanei e si sviluppino in due contesti molto distanti nello spazio, senza un apparente collegamento, evidenzia l’opportunità di uno studio comparativo. Ad una più attenta analisi, non si può fare a meno di notare come, in entrambi gli ambiti, il secolo immediatamente precedente sia stato caratterizzato da un momento particolarmente favorevole per la cultura – el renacimiento asturiano e the alfredian renaissance – reso possibile dall’azione attiva di due monarchi, Alfonso III di Asturia e León (866-910) e Alfred di Wessex (871-899). Nelle corti di questi sovrani vennero redatte delle cronache (le Crónicas Asturianas e la Anglo-Saxon Chronicle) nelle quali si proponeva una chiave di lettura della storia tesa a ricercare una nuova identità per i rispettivi popoli e si sottolineava il ruolo centrale delle rispettive dinastie regnanti. L’obiettivo della tesi è pertanto duplice: da una parte si desidera comprendere in quale modo e in quale senso sia stato utilizzato il termine imperator nella documentazione presa in esame, dall’altra si prova a capire quale peso ebbero le nuove identità etniche, religiose e territoriali, elaborate nelle già citate cronache, all’interno di questi fenomeni imperiali. Per una miglior resa dell’argomentazione si è deciso di dividere la tesi in due blocchi, il primo dedicato alle cronache del IX secolo e il secondo ai documenti in cui compare il titolo imperiale, risalenti al secolo successivo. A sua volta ciascun blocco si divide quindi in due capitoli, all’interno dei quali le tematiche vengono declinate nel caso ispanico e in quello anglosassone. La tesi si apre con la presentazione dei criteri impiegati nella selezione del corpus di “documenti imperiali” (Cap. 1) – nome con cui si definiscono i diplomi al cui interno compare il titolo di imperator – che ammontano ad un totale 38, di cui 20 asturiano-leonesi (privati e pubblici) e 18 anglosassoni (esclusivamente pubblici). A seguire viene fornito il contesto storico (Cap. 2) e lo status quaestionis (Cap. 3). Nel primo capitolo del primo blocco (Cap. 4) vengono trattate le tre cronache prodotte nella corte asturiano-leonese alla fine del IX secolo: conosciute anche come Crónicas Asturianas, sono intitolate rispettivamente Crónica Albeldense, Crónica Profetica e Crónica de Alfonso III. Per rendere il quadro qui esposto il più completo possibile si inizia trattando il patrimonio librario a disposizione degli autori delle cronache. A seguire si delineano i profili delle tre opere, soffermandosi in particolar modo sulla loro paternità e datazione. Si forniscono quindi indicazioni sulla tradizione manoscritta di queste cronache per poi tracciare un percorso tra le fonti. In questa parte si chiariscono concetti come quello di identità (etnica, religiosa e geografica), e si assiste alla comparsa di temi storiografici come quelli della Reconquista e del neogoticismo. Questi elementi costituiscono il punto di partenza per un ragionamento teso a far emergere il background ideologico comune a tutte e tre cronache. Nel corrispettivo capitolo inglese (Cap. 5) si delinea un profilo della produzione letteraria, in particolare storiografica, che ha caratterizzato le ultime due decadi del IX secolo anglosassone. Si inizia inquadrando gli uomini che formarono parte della cosiddetta alfredian reinassance per poi analizzare il ruolo avuto, all’interno di questo momento di rinascita culturale, dalle traduzioni in Old English delle grandi opere storiografiche. Infine, si propone una rilettura dell’unica opera storiografica scritta ex novo – l’Anglo-Saxon Chronicle – dalla quale emerge come fil rouge il concetto di overlordship. Questo è il nome che gli studiosi moderni hanno dato all’autorità che alcuni re anglosassoni poterono esercitare al di sopra degli altri regni dell’isola: si trattava di una supremazia principalmente militare che portava un re, per periodi spesso brevi, ad imporre la propria sovranità – e talvolta dei tributi – a popolazioni diverse dalla propria. Questa idea di sovranità sovrapposta era già presente in Beda e viene recuperata dai cronisti anglosassoni che la ricollegano, in maniera evidente, alla dinastia dei re del Wessex, coniando per quei re che la detennero la parola bretwalda. A conclusione del primo blocco è presente un capitolo di confronto (Cap. 6) che permette di tirare le somme della prima metà della tesi. Si ribadiscono alcuni punti in comune tra i due casi di studio qui definiti “macrocongruenze”: sia la Britannia che la Spania erano parte dell’impero romano, ma non di quello carolingio e subirono un’invasione durante l’Alto Medioevo (danesi/norvegesi la prima e islamici la seconda); in entrambi i casi la produzione di cultura scritta durante il IX secolo orbitava attorno alla figura del monarca; le cronache del periodo celebrano la dinastia regnante come elemento cardine della storia “nazionale” e così facendo ne legittimano l’autorità; fra le pagine di queste cronache vengono proposte nuove identità per entrambe le popolazioni. Tuttavia, al di là di queste evidenti somiglianze, si è notato come, all’interno della cronachistica, si sia arrivati a due modi particolari di rappresentare sé stessi, il proprio regno, il proprio popolo e il proprio contesto geografico. Sono queste differenze a suscitare un particolare interesse dal momento che, come è stato chiaro sin dalla sua fase embrionale, in nessun modo lo scopo di questa ricerca è l’omologazione: non si sta cercando di uniformare la storia inglese del IX e X secolo con quella spagnola dello stesso periodo, per quanto esse abbiano sicuramente dei punti in comune. Nel capitolo di confronto si riflette quindi sulle particolari soluzioni autorappresentative soluzioni a cui sono giunti i cronisti asturiani e anglosassoni riguardo a tre punti chiave: il recupero del passato, la concezione territoriale dell’ambiente geografico e la questione identitaria. Non si può infatti trascurare il differente peso che ebbero nei relativi ambiti il ricordo del regno visigoto e quello dell’Eptarchia anglosassone e dunque, rispettivamente, le opere di Isidoro di Siviglia e Beda il Venerabile. Sarebbe inoltre sbagliato non sottolineare le differenze tra le due nuove proposte identitarie: quella inglese su base spiccatamente etnica (Angelcynn) e quella ispanica su base principalmente religiosa (regnum Xristianorum). Non poteva infine mancare un paragrafo dedicato ai differenti rapporti tra i due ambiti studiati e il mondo carolingio contemporaneo. Nel secondo blocco vengono sviscerati i fenomeni imperiali. Il capitolo dedicato all’ambito ispanico (Cap. 7) si apre con una riflessione sulle varie figure di scriptores del regno di León e sul peso avuto dai formulari visigoti nella documentazione altomedievale. Al principio del corrispettivo capitolo inglese (Cap. 8) vengono invece presentati due casi di utilizzo del termine imperiale precedenti il X secolo: quello di sant’Oswald di Northumbria (634-642) nella Vita Sancti Columbae di Adomnano di Iona e quello di Coenwulf di Mercia (796-821) nel documento S153. Seguono due paragrafi dedicati alla documentazione di Edward the Elder (899-924) e Æthelstan (924-939) che mettono in luce un sostanziale sviluppo della titolatura regia, indice di un progressivo ampliamento dell’autorità di questi monarchi. Il centro di entrambi i capitoli del secondo blocco consiste nella dettagliata analisi dei documenti imperiali e nelle riflessioni che da questa scaturiscono. Nel caso spagnolo è possibile affermare con una certa sicurezza che l’uso del titolo imperator ebbe inizio con il figlio, Ordoño II, che lo attribuì al padre per rafforzare la propria posizione di re di León. Tra la morte di Ordoño II (924) e l’ascesa al trono di Ramiro II (931) il titolo cominciò ad essere adoperato anche nella documentazione privata, senza per questo scomparire da quella regia. Non è purtroppo possibile cercare di ricondurre il fenomeno imperiale ispanico alla figura di uno scriptor in particolare – a differenza del caso inglese –; va però fatto presente che alcuni testi risalenti alla seconda metà del secolo differiscono dai documenti di Ordoño II nell’impiego del termine, poiché questo viene usato in riferimento al re vivente, anziché al padre defunto. Il titolo, almeno all’inizio del X secolo, non sembra riflettere un’autorità superiore (per l’appunto imperiale), ma richiama la sua più antica accezione, quella di “generale vittorioso” e costituisce una prerogativa dei sovrani leonesi. Per quanto riguarda il fenomeno imperiale inglese, invece, è possibile individuare un punto di inizio nei famosi alliterative charters, probabilmente redatti da Koenwald di Worcester (928/9- 957), sulla cui paternità si discute lungamente nella tesi. Sembra chiaro che imperator altro non sia che la traduzione latina di quello che gli storici hanno definito overlord. Tramite l’impiego di tale titolo i sovrani anglosassoni hanno voluto rappresentare la loro crescente egemonia sugli altri regni dell’isola, rivendicando così un’autorità più territoriale che etnica. Occorre però far presente che l’uso della terminologia imperiale forma parte di quel più ampio processo di evoluzione della titolatura regia già iniziato con Edward the Elder. Queste riflessioni vengono poi messe in relazione con quelle del primo blocco e sviluppate nelle conclusioni (Cap. 9). Esse vertono su quattro punti fondamentali: l’uso del documento e della lingua latina nei due ambiti; la Britannia e la Spania come universi a sé; il significato di imperator nei due contesti documentari; la concezione territoriale come presupposto teorico e geografico di questo utilizzo. La lettura delle fonti ci permette di affermare che entrambi i contesti rappresentavano per i rispettivi sovrani degli universi idealmente a sé stanti. I sovrani leonesi e anglosassoni ereditarono dai loro predecessori non solo una “missione” politica – di riconquista per i primi e di controllo per i secondi –, ma anche una specifica concezione – diversa per ciascun caso – dell’ambiente geografico in cui si trovavano a operare. La Britannia del re-imperatore anglosassone è la Britannia di Beda, frammentata e divisa, eppure tutto sommato unita. La Spania dei re leonesi è la Spania di Isidoro, unita, omogenea, ma drammaticamente perduta. Tuttavia, per il caso spagnolo e nel periodo qui preso in esame, al titolo non venne mai accostato un riferimento spaziale che rimandasse ad un dominio su tutta la penisola. In quello inglese, invece, tale accostamento ci fu, ma il riferimento geografico alla Britannia non fu un’esclusiva del titolo imperiale. Possiamo quindi dire che, nel caso inglese, il titolo nacque per il bisogno di tradurre in latino un’autorità indiretta ed egemonica (come quella di un rex regum), e perse poi questo significato – e quindi l’uso –, quando la situazione politica del regno si modificò; nel caso spagnolo invece, avvenne un’elaborazione quasi simmetricamente opposta. Il titolo, inizialmente usato nel suo significato più antico di “generale vittorioso” o “signore potente”, venne poi reinterpretato quando nell’XI e XII secolo cambiarono gli equilibri politici della penisola. In questo periodo troviamo infatti sovrani come Alfonso VI e Alfonso VII impiegare titolature quali imperator totius Hispaniae. In entrambi i casi, l’imperator venne inteso come sinonimo di rex regum, ma in due momenti diversi: ovvero quando ve ne fu effettivamente bisogno. La tesi è provvista di mappe e della bibliografia, divisa tra fonti e studi. Inoltre si è considerato utile aggiungere in appendice i testi dei documenti imperiali.

Imperi e identità nazionali; re e ceti intellettuali. Elaborazioni parallele in Spagna e Inghilterra, secoli IX-X / Collamati, Giovanni. - (2020 Feb 21).

Imperi e identità nazionali; re e ceti intellettuali. Elaborazioni parallele in Spagna e Inghilterra, secoli IX-X

COLLAMATI, GIOVANNI
21/02/2020

Abstract

The subject of this thesis is the peculiar presence of the term imperator in a small, but still significant, number of 10th century documents from the reign of Asturia and León and from Britain. The fact that these two “imperial phenomena” coexisted and developed in two very distant contexts, without an apparent connection, makes a comparative study necessary. Also, in both areas the previous century was characterized by a particularly favorable moment for culture - el renacimiento asturiano and the alfredian renaissance - made possible by the action of two monarchs, Alfonso III of Asturia and León (866-910) and Alfred of Wessex (871-899). In these sovereigns’ courts, chronicles were drawn up (the Crónicas Asturianas and the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle), proposing an interpretation of history which tend to seek a new identity for the respective peoples, highlighting the central role of the respective ruling dynasties. The aim of the thesis is therefore twofold: on the one hand, to understand in what way and in what sense the term imperator was used in the documentation examined; on the other hand, to estimate what weight the new ethnic, religious and territorial identities had within these imperial phenomena. For a better performance of the argument, it was decided to divide the thesis into two parts, the first dedicated to the chronicles of the 9th century and the second to the documents of the following century in which the imperial title appears. In turn, each part is divided into two chapters focused on Hispanic and Anglo-Saxon cases. The thesis opens with the presentation of the criteria used in the selection of the corpus (Ch. 1), which amounts to a total of 38 imperial documents, of which 20 Asturian-Leonese (private and public) and 18 Anglo-Saxon (exclusively public). The historical context (Ch. 2) and the status quaestionis (Ch. 3) are provided below. The first chapter of the first part (Ch. 4) deals with the three chronicles produced in the Asturian-Leonese court at the end of the 9th century. Also known as Crónicas Asturianas. they are respectively entitled Crónica Albeldense, Crónica Profetica and Crónica de Alfonso III. This chapter starts treating the Asturian library, available to the authors of the chronicles, and follows with the description of each chronicle, focusing on their paternity and dating. It then provides information about the manuscript tradition of each chronicle and it finally ends with an overall reading of the sources. Here, concepts such as identity (ethnic, religious and geographic) are clarified, and we observe the origin of historiographic themes such as those of the Reconquista and neo-Gothicism. These elements constitute the starting point for a reflection aimed at bringing out the ideological background common to all three chronicles. In the corresponding English chapter (Ch. 5) is outlined a profile of the literary production, in particular historiographic, which characterized the last two decades of the 9th century in England. We start by framing the men who formed part in the so-called alfredian reinassance and then analyze the role played in this moment of cultural rebirth by the translations in Old English of the great historiographic works. Finally, we propose a rereading of the only historiographic work written ex novo, the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, where the concept of overlordship emerges as a common thread. Overlordship is the name that modern scholars have given to the authority that some Anglo-Saxon kings were able to exercise over other kings in the island. It is a predominantly military supremacy which leads a king, for often short periods, to impose his sovereignty - and sometimes tributes - on populations other than his own. This idea of overlapped sovereignty was already present in Beda and is recovered by the Anglo-Saxon chroniclers who relate it, explicity, to the dynasty of the kings of Wessex, coining for those kings who held it the term bretwalda. At the end of the first part there is a comparison chapter (Ch. 6) that draws the conclusions of the first half of the thesis. Some points in common (here called "macrocongruenze") between the two case studies are reiterated: both Britain and Spania formed part of the Roman Empire, but not of the Carolingian Empire and both suffered an invasion during the Early Middle Ages (Danes / Norwegians and Muslims); in both cases the production of written culture, during the 9th century, orbited around the figure of the monarch; the chronicles celebrate the reigning dynasty as the centre of "national" history to legitimize its authority; among the pages of these chronicles new identities are proposed for both populations. However, beyond these obvious similarities, it has been noted that the chronicles adopted two different ways of self-representing themselves, their kingdom, their people and their geographical context. The comparison chapter therefore reflects on three key points: the recovery of the past, the territorial conception of the geographical environment and the identity issue. In fact, we cannot neglect the different importance that the memory of the Visigoth kingdom and of the Anglo-Saxon Heptarchy (and therefore, respectively, the works of Isidore of Seville and the Venerable Bede) had. It would also be wrong not to underline the differences between the two new identity proposals: the English one had a distinctly ethnic base (Angelcynn), while the Hispanic base was mainly religious base (regnum Xristianorum). The last paragraph if finally dedicated to the different relationships between the two areas studied and the contemporary Carolingian world could not be missing. In the second block imperial phenomena are examined. The chapter dedicated to the Hispanic context (Ch. 7) opens with a reflection on the various figures of scriptores of the kingdom of León and on the weight of Visigoth formulae in the early medieval documentation. At the beginning of the corresponding English chapter (Ch. 8) are presented two cases of a use of the imperial term preceding the 10th century: that of Saint Oswald of Northumbria (634-642) in the Adomnan of Hy’s Vita Sancti Columbae of and that of Coenwulf of Mercia in the charter S153. These cases are followed by two paragraphs dedicated to Edward the Elder’s and Æthelstan’s documentation, which highlight a substantial development of the royal title, pointing out an expansion of the authority of these monarchs. The center of both the chapters of the second block consists in the detailed analysis of the imperial documents and in the reflections that arise from it. In the Spanish case, it is possible to affirm with some certainty that the use of the imperator title began with his son, Ordoño II, who attributed it to his father to strengthen his position as king of León. Between the death of Ordoño II (924) and the ascent to the throne of Ramiro II (931), the title also began to be employed into private documentation, without disappearing in the public one. Unfortunately, it is not possible, as it is in the English case, to trace the Hispanic imperial phenomenon back to a particular scriptor. However, it should be noted that some texts dating from the second half of the century differ from the charters of Ordoño II in the use of the term, adopting it in reference to the living king, rather than the deceased father. The title, at least at the beginning of the tenth century, does not seem to reflect a superior (or imperial) authority, but recalls its most ancient meaning, of "victorious general" and constitutes a prerogative of the Leonese sovereigns. As for the English imperial phenomenon, however, it is possible to identify a starting point in the famous alliterative charters, probably drawn up by Koenwald of Worcester (928/9- 957), whose authorship is largely discussed in the thesis. It seems clear that imperator is nothing but the Latin translation of what historians have called overlord. Through the use of this title, the Anglo-Saxon rulers wanted to represent their growing hegemony over the other kingdoms of the island, thus claiming a more territorial than ethnic authority. However, it should be noted that the use of imperial terminology forms part of the broader process of evolution of the royal title that started with Edward the Elder. These reflections are then related to those of the first part and developed in the conclusions (Ch. 9). They focus on four fundamental points: the use of the documentation and the Latin language in the two areas; Britain and Spania as self-contained universes; the meaning of imperator in the two documentary contexts; the territorial conception as a theoretical and geographical assumption of this use. Reading the sources allows us to affirm that both contexts represented universes ideally self-contained for their respective sovereigns. The Leonese and Anglo-Saxon rulers inherited from their predecessors not only a political "mission" - reconquering for the former and control for the latter -, but also a specific conception - different for each case - of the geographical environment in which they found themselves operate. The Britannia of the Anglo-Saxon king-emperor is Bede’s Britannia, fragmented and divided, but spiritually united. The Spania of the Leonese kings is Isidoro’s Spania, united, homogeneous, but dramatically lost. However, for the Spanish case in the period examined here, the imperial title was never related to a geographical reference; in the English one, the geographical reference to Britannia existed, but was not exclusive to the imperial title. We can therefore say that, in the English case, the title was born out of the need to translate into Latin an indirect and hegemonic authority (like that of a rex regum), and then lost this meaning - and therefore the use - when the political situation of the kingdom changed. In the Spanish case, conversely, an almost symmetrically opposite processing took place. The title, initially used in its oldest meaning as "victorious general" or "powerful lord", was reinterpreted in the 11th and 12th centuries, when the political balance of the peninsula changed. In this period, we find in fact rulers like Alfonso VI and Alfonso VII employing titles such as imperator totius Hispaniae. In both cases, the emperor was intended as a synonym for rex regum, but in two different moments - always when it was more needed. The thesis is equipped with maps and bibliography, divided between sources and studies. Furthermore, it was considered useful to add a final appendix with the texts of the imperial documents.
21-feb-2020
File allegati a questo prodotto
File Dimensione Formato  
Tesi_dottorato_Collamati.pdf

Open Access dal 26/03/2021

Tipologia: Tesi di dottorato
Licenza: Tutti i diritti riservati (All rights reserved)
Dimensione 4 MB
Formato Adobe PDF
4 MB Adobe PDF

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11573/1357790
Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact