Catholicism and Paganism in Latter Langobard Society

When one looks at the spirituality of the Winnili/Langobards in a historical sense, it's obvious that they ultimately traveled the full distance from Paganism (Wotanism) to Christianity (Catholicism). However, there were many grey areas in between.

Looking quickly through those fazes, we can probably guess that the Winnili very likely practiced some form of Wotanism. During their stay along the borderland with the Gauls, it's possible that there could have been some Cernic (Cernunnos worship) influence, as there was some crossover between Gaulic spirituality and Teutonic spirituality. By the time the Langobards had become Roman allies along the Danube River, they were possibly roughly half Wotanist and half Arian Christian. Arian Christianity was apparently a crude form of Christianity.

In the Langbard Kingdom, Queen Theodelinda officially turned the Langobards into a Catholic nation sometime during the 590s it appears. The native Romanized Gaulic population had already been Romanized and Catholicized for a long period of time. This appears to have been the first step to actually faze out Wotanism altogether. The Langobard nation, although linking themselves with the early Catholic Church, always seemed to have had a hot-and-cold relationship with the Papal institution. There were times where they seemed to float into the Eastern Orthodox camp.

Just a side note, but it's interesting that the Catholics always portrayed Queen Theodelinda as being "less than attractive," seemingly to de-sexualize her, when in reality, it was widely noted that the Queen was very beautiful. Early pictures of her, especially in the Monza Cathedral, portray her in this manner as well. For better or worse, Queen Theodelinda was the St. Patrick of Cisalpine Gaul/Langbard/northern nations, or whatever name one wants to give the land of our ancestors. From every account, and considering that this was a time of political and religious upheaval, she was a great Langobard leader. Strong, widely loved, a woman to remember. She did what she had to do.

Some of the laws of the Langobards give clues as to where they stood on the religious issue after the establishment of the Langbard Kingdom.

From the Wikipedia page Witch trials in Early Modern Europe and North America, under "Protests" (to witch trials and torture):

"There have been contemporary protesters against witch trials and against use of torture in the examination of those suspected or accused of witchcraft.

"643: The Edictum Rothari, the law code for Lombardy in Italy (‘Let nobody presume to kill a foreign serving maid or female slave as a witch, for it is not possible, nor ought to be believed by Christian minds')"

Obviously, at least under the rule of King Rothari, there was still some sympathy for the pagans. This seemed to vary from one ruler to the next, but ultimately going in the direction of Christianity. Although, the end came when they turned against the Church at a time of great inner turmoil in Langbard, and the Kingdom itself was destroyed by Charlemagne's Catholic Frankish army. Ironically the Langobards had long been strong allies with the Franks, and they shared a similar history, conquering and establishing Kingdoms on the lands of formerly Gallic nations.

From the Wikipedia page Val Camonica witch trials, under "Background" (regarding the Valle Camonica region):

"Christianity is not considered to have been strong in the area, though it was formally christened in the 400s. In 724, King Liutprando of Lombardy feared a rebellion after he had issued a ban against Paganism. In the laws of 1498, stern laws are issued against all "Devilish heresy". In 1499, it was accused of having participated in a "Black mass", and it was reported to be common with such "depravity" in the area."

From the book 'The Lombard Laws' (Fischer Drew; 1973), section III 'The Laws of King Liutprand', "From The Fifteenth Year (A.D. 727)," pages 180-181:

"[Concerning him who seeks the advice of a sorcerer]

"84.I. He who, unmindful of the wrath of God, goes to sorcerers or witches for the purpose of receiving divinations or answers of any kind whatsoever from them, shall pay to the royal fisc as composition half of the price at which he would have been valued if someone had killed him, and in addition, shall do penance according to the established canon. In like manner, he who, like a rustic, prays to a tree as sacred, or adores springs, or who makes any sacrilegious incantation, shall also pay as composition a half of his price to the royal fisc. And he who knows of sorcerers or witches and does not reveal them, or conceals those who go to them and does not reveal it, shall be subjected to the above punishment. Moreover, he who sends his man or woman slave to such sorcerers or witches for the purpose of seeking responses from them, and it is proved, shall pay composition as abovementioned. If indeed the man or woman slave goes to the soothsayer or witch without the consent of is or her lord and so without his authority, likewise for the purpose of seeking responses, then his or her lord ought to sell him or her outside the province. And if his or her lord neglects to do this, he (the lord) shall be subjected to the punishment noted above."

Needless to say, this is a sharp contrast from the earlier attitudes towards paganism. Actually, most of the Lombard Laws were very fair and humane, usually requiring simple fines of varying degrees, depending on the nature of the crime. However here, the fine for breaking a law that could stem from simply praying to a tree, resulted in a fine of half that person's total wealth! Further oppressive was the move to outlaw the act of merely not reporting "acts of paganism" to the authorities.

Therefore, the Langobards went from allowing a large amount of personal freedom, albeit in a caste system, to moving to a system in which victimless crimes in this one area was punishable by rather extreme means. Practically "thought crimes." The very next law of Liutprand was labeled "What is to be done if the judge or other public officials of a place fail to seek out sorcerers or witches." I will not type out this law, which had much text, because I think that the earlier law presented the basic gist of where they were coming from. However, here we see that the law officials were not nearly as powerful as the religious institution. Only the king held power over the major Catholic regional theocrats, the representatives of the Papacy itself.

**************************************************

8-4-10 Addition: From the book 'The Lombard Laws' (Drew; 1973), page 247; footnote 55, we find another interesting clue to this subject. It states: "A belief in witchcraft must, at one time, have been widespread among the Lombards or among the naive population of the Italian peninsula. The Lombard kings approached the subject in an enlightened manner, practically denying the existence of this occult science and providing protection against random accusations of witchcraft or sorcery which might bring death or outlawry to the person accused. Such would seem to be the intent of the present law. On the other hand, there are laws in the code (Liutprand 84, 85) which specifically state that it is the duty of royal officials to seek out sorcerers and such like and apply the penalty of the law--sale outside of the country (Liutprand 85)."

.

"Lombard Laws" reflect a completely different society

Upon review of the first half of the book 'The Lombard Laws' (Drew; 1973), one can see that they lived in an entirely different society than in modern times. Present was a complex clan and family structure that was the basis for the entire society.

Part of the reason for the development of the law codes and it's courts was to avoid the Germanic "blood feud." If something bad was perpetrated upon an individual or family of a particular clan, it was perceived as an attack upon the entire clan. This attack, real or perceived, was thought of by the Langobards as something that "must be responded to." That was true for other Germanic societies as well.

The laws make no mention of any type of "prison" as punishment. Punishment almost always was sanctioned as repayments via various set monetary amounts. Only in a few rare occasions was someone put to death for particularly heinous or high crimes.

The courts did not seem to be formal. I got the impression that they could be held outdoors, and facilitated by a representative(s) of the law. Present would be legal guardians, witnesses, the accused, character witnesses, victims, clan representatives, etc. Rather than an all-powerful court where almost everyone was afraid to open their mouths, and where the judge would be seated above everyone; the court of law and the two clans seemed to hold a somewhat equal balance of power. Most issues seemed to be nothing more than some type of bodily damage from a fight (ex. "a broken arm") or some type of property damage, and the question of repayment.

Women held no legal status, although some could hold high positions of honor. In other words, the head of the family household would be the legal guardian of a woman. No woman was the legal head of a family household. That fact of life could mean different things in different situations. For example, a free woman held a much higher status than say a male slave, half-slave male, and many others. A man had the legal right to commit justifiable homicide against another man if he was sleeping with his wife, which was actually one of the law codes. To say the least, the modern concept of a woman living alone and having "sex in the city" would be insane to the Langobards, or probably any ancient society for that matter. The earlier societies of the Etruscans and the Gauls may have exercised much more gender equality than the invading Romans and later Langobards did.

A family household might consist of a male head, his wife, their children, other relatives or in-laws, half-slaves and slaves, their children, and sometimes even the children of the family head and slave or half-slave women (which would create very complex inheritance issues, but which were detailed in the codes). The issue of slavery, and how it pertained to the Langobards and the Romanized population has not been made clear. In other words, as to whether or not the Langobards had slaves who were not Langobards(?). It is clear that, for example, that Tuscans and other regional natives were well-represented in all governing bodies of the Langobard state. The head positions were, however, almost always held by Langobard males.

Free Langobard males were basically at the top of society, but it's not yet clear as to the next level in this class system. Free Langobard women? Other free men? It should be noted that under Roman law, there very likely was a slave caste system already present in the Cisalpine region. It should also be noted that when a war broke out, the Langobard men did the fighting. One time a Moorish army was marching to invade France. The Franks asked the Langobards for help. After word got out that a Langobard army would be present at the battle, the Moors didn't show up, and that's a fact.

Code number 381 from King Rothari's Law was particularly interesting. It concerned the charge of cowardice. In other words, merely calling someone a coward. The law states: "381. If anyone in anger calls another man a coward and cannot deny it, and if he claims that he said it in anger, he may offer oath that [it was said in anger and] he does not know him to be a coward. Afterwards he shall pay twelve solidi as composition for this insulting word. But if he perseveres in the charge, he must prove it by combat, if he can, or he shall pay composition as above." In the Spartan-like Langobard society, being called a "coward" seemed to be the ultimate insult.

.

Interesting excerpt from 'The Lombard Laws'

This excerpt is from the book 'The Lombard Laws' (1973; Katherine Fischer Drew). From the back cover of the book: "The Lombard Laws -- the laws of Rothair and Grimwald, Liutprand, Ratchis, and Aistulf -- are an extraordinarily important source of information about a people whose contribution to medieval civiliztion is just beginning to be understood.

The foreward of the book was written by Edward Peters, who was the man who edited 'The History of the Lombards'. This excerpt is of the paragraph from the bottom of page X to the top of page XI in the foreward.

"In a year of campaigning in Italy, taking cities by force or, more usually, by surrender, the Lombard armies under their king Alboin reached and captured Milan, the former imperial capital. From 568 until Alboin's death in 572 the Lombard conquest of Italy progressed erratically, the king remaining in the north and isolated bands of Lombards under war-leaders penetrating south and even westward into Frankish Gaul. After Alboin's death, the reluctance or inability of the Lombards to establish a successor led to ten years of fragmented rule by Lombard war-leaders called dukes. By the end of the sixth century Italy was divided irregularly between Lombards and imperial occupation forces, with the Duchy of Rome, ruled by a military duke and its bishop, caught uneasily between the two hostile forces. From the pontificate of Gregory I (590-604) to that of Stephen II (752-754), Italy witnessed a century and a half of this balance between Lombard and imperial forces. In 751, however, Lombard pressure finally penetrated the imperial city of Ravenna, and the Lombards won the whole of northern Italy. It was the Lombard triumph against the imperial Byzantine forces that turned their attention once again to the center of Italy and to Rome; faced by such a threat and with no assistance from Constantinople forthcoming, the pope appealed once again to the Franks in Gaul for aid. The successful expeditions of Pepin and Charlemagne precipitated the fall of the Lombard kingdom in 774 and the transformation of the imperial enclave that was papal Rome into the kennel of the later papal state. Lombard law survived in the Frankish north of Italy, however, and after the decline of Carolingian imperial power in the ninth century, Lombard principalities in the south of Italy remained, face to face with their old enemies, the Byzantine forces. Not until the eleventh-century Norman conquest of southern Italy and Sicily did these last Lombard territories fall."

There are a number of interesting items, which we have not covered before, in this illuminating paragraph. First, some Langobard factions actually invaded "Frankish Gaul," which shows a tremendous amount of restlessness because they had just conquered the northern Italian peninsula. Actually the Langobards had long maintained a good relationship with the Franks, including intermarriage of the ruling class, but that was when they were in Germany. It's still a little bit unclear, as "Frankish Gaul" is not an especially accurate term to use for the region at that time. It was more "Romanized Gaul" culturally, than it was "Frankish Gaul."

Second, the following quote: "In 751, however, Lombard pressure finally penetrated the imperial city of Ravenna, and the Lombards won the whole of northern Italy." Ravenna continued to be a Byzantine-Roman stronghold, but was indeed captured by the Langobards. Therefore, the Langbard Kingdom encompassed ALL of the north! The two satellite dukedoms of Benevento and Spoleto were independent. Some even smaller factions of Langobards continued to migrate south as far as Sicily, but research on that subject seems to be small and sporadic. That is likely the source for some Sicilians with surnames like Lombardo, Lombardozzi, etc.

Third, it was only when the Langobards moved against Papal Rome itself that forced the hand of the forces that be. Charlemagne saved the Papacy with a massive Frankish army. The Langobards were in disarray, with a lot of infighting, and coupled with the fact that they were moving against Rome, all led to probably their only real loss in war. They were trounced by the Frankish army. Had they kept their eyes on Langbard, and solidified themselves, Langbard may have survived long after 774.

Lastly, even after Langbard was destroyed, the southern duchies of Benevento and Spoleto continued on. Amazingly, they lasted until late in the eleventh century. In my fantasy mind, I imagine that they would not have even entered the south, or anywhere else at all, and focused their effort on maintaining the north. They could have continued on for centuries, and into modern history. They would have had to play ball with the powers of finance (Vatican, Switzerland, London, etc.), and maybe could have formed a USA-like colony in Argentina (minus the slave-trade). They could have stayed away from tribal territories as well, and exchanged certain technologies for peace. But that's just a fantasy.