Adopt, adapt and improve
Dealing with the Adoptionist controversy at the court of Charlemagne
in Religious Franks
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact for pricing options.


If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

This chapter shows that the Carolingian way of dealing with the Adoptionist challenge was to allow a conversation between the Spanish bishops and their Frankish opponents to take place. It also explores some of the ways in which the Carolingians used this controversy to claim for themselves the authority to determine the difference between orthodoxy and heterodoxy. In so doing, the Adoptionist controversy helped them further to consolidate a sense of ecclesiastical unity with the sacrum palatium at its centre out of the many different visions of community within the emerging empire. Among the rulers who could serve as an exemplary arbiter to Charlemagne, Constantine's place in both Spanish and Frankish ecclesiastical history represented the risks and rewards inherent in such an involvement. Both sides in the Adoptionist controversy wanted to make sure that Charlemagne would follow in Constantine's footsteps without making the same mistakes.

Religious Franks

Religion and power in the Frankish Kingdoms: studies in honour of Mayke de Jong


All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 82 33 8
Full Text Views 30 0 0
PDF Downloads 24 4 0