Lothar II

1
Lothar II’s marital problems show the elements of a declining Carolingian dynasty. The
unity felt during Charlemagne’s reign was gone; division had taken over. To fully understand
such division one must know how the realm was split into five separate kingdoms. Charlemagne
only had one brother, Carloman, early on who had given up his share of the kingdom by dying in
December 711. But, since then the child survival rate increased and adult heirs were a plenty.
With the Frankish customs of partible inheritance, all suitable heirs got a piece. The theme of
conquest that made Charlemagne famous could be seen as the reason why the kingdom spilt up.
Every king wanted more but instead of being powerful enough against the frontier they turned on
their kin. Internal turmoil wasn’t the only problem the Carolingians faced. They also had hostile
neighbors. Vikings to the North and even in the Mediterranean, had been testing the strength of
coastal and river based cities. The Vikings even took over some major cities for sometime.
They also had problems with their Arab neighbors to the Southwest.
Lothar II’s divorce was an event that the entire Frankish kingdom was watching. Many
people had a lot to gain or lose with the outcome. Charles the Bald was especially involved. He
had his eye on Lothar’s kingdom for some time. He was also in constant conflict and
disagreement with his nephew. Throughout the drama the bishops and noblemen help attack and
defend Lothar. This divorce can be seen at its highest tier as political, but many other variables
are involved. Issues of religion, succession, law, love, and many other institutions take part.
Essentially, what you have here is a ninth century soap opera, filled with lies, threats, adultery,
and dissent.
This whole event is remembered through different types of sources. The first type are the
primary sources. A common type of primary document that survived were the Annals. These

2
were records that recorded main events in each year. Another source, that recorded a great deal
of Lothar’s case, were letters, most of these were between bishops either stating their points,
asking questions or asking for help. Council rulings were also used during this period to decide
on cases. Most outcomes were recorded and reproduced, so as to be spread throughout the land.
A treatise, De Divortio Lothari, written by a very active player within the divorce, Hincmar
Archbishop of Reims, was also created during the divorce. This document discussed the varying
aspects, moral and legal issues of the case. Hincmar was an expert in canon law and one of the
most learned men of his day. There were also secondary sources written after the fact. These
include intellectuals that just barely predated the divorce as well as modern scholars. Lothar II
was the loser of this entire ordeal. Which causes the majority of these accounts to depict Lothar
II as a “black sheep.” A man that was weak and easily tricked by the wicked Waldrada.i
All of
these authors are biased. There was a lot of power on the table. Hincmar, for example, was
hostile towards Lothar II. Hincmar was the Archbishop of Reims which was situated in Charles
the Bald’s kingdom. If Lothar was to be dethroned, Charles the Bald would most likely get a big
piece of Lothar’s land. As a bishop to the king, it was his duty to serve Charles and help him
flourish, thus attacking Lothar was in his interest. Hincmar also took over the task of recording
the Annals of St-Bertin in 861, after the death of Prudentius.ii
This is evident from the lack of
description of the case in 857: “Lothar wickedly kept concubines, and put aside his wife the
queen.” Here you can see that Prudentius only has one sentence to describe the beginning of the
affair. He doesn’t even seem to know there was only one concubine. Prudentius does have a
paragraph right below the sentence that describes an unholy occurrence at both Bishops
Theutgaud and Gunther’s churches: “At Cologne, while Bishop Gunther was standing there, a
very thick cloud with frequent thunderbolts came down over the church of St-Peter. A flash of

3
lightning suddenly burst through the crypt of the church like a sheet of flame, killing a priest.” iii
These Bishops were very loyal to Lothar II and very involved in Lothar’s effort to divorce
Theutberga. This greatly shows the perdition of Lothar for forsaking his queen.
The division of the kingdom started after Louis the Pious’s reign. This three surviving
sons each got a share of the kingdom. Louis’s first son Lothar dies in September 855. His
kingdom is split up between his three sons, directly going against Louis the Pious’ Ordinatio
Imperii, a document explaining how the kingdom should be divided. In his decree he wanted
only one son to receive kingships after their father’s death. The eldest, Louis, inherited Italy and
the title of emperor. Lothar II received areas from Frisia to the Jura Mountains. Charles the
youngest got Southern Burgundy and Provence. This now separated the realm into five separate
kingdoms. Charles the Bald and Louis the German had much larger holding then their nephews.
With the new division of Lothar’s land came the inherent succulents in the eyes of his brother.
No longer was Lothar I’s land united under one banner, yet three much smaller divided ones.
This expanded the kingdom to include five kings.iv
The division of Lothar’s land also shows the relationship between kings and nobles.
They depended strongly on each other for survival. When Lothar was close to death he gathered
his most important nobles to him to discuss the succession of his sons. He looked to his advisers
for help and confirmation. Lothar I divided up his kingdom and his magnates accepted the new
king they would be subject to. The noblemen didn’t have much of a say in this case and
followed the wishes of the late king. The nobles can also be seen later on as intermediaries when
kings were in conflict, calming fuming kings and making sure things went smoothly. For
example, the magnates made sure that Lothar senior’s youngest son, the elven year old Charles,
was given his share of the inheritance in 856. Lothar II and his brother Louis, emperor and king

4
of Italy, met to try discuss how they should divide the land given to Charles. The argument got
so heated that it almost turned into a fight: “Louis and Lothar quarreled so fiercely about the
shares of their father’s realm that they almost decided to settle the issue by judgment of battle.”v
It was only when the magnates of Provence were able to free Charles from the grasp of Lothar,
who wanted to intern Charles as a cleric, that they were able to give Charles his rightful
inheritance.vi
There was a hierarchy within the king’s nobility. The top position would be his
councilors. These magnates would help the king in governing the realm. The king would give
these magnates large amounts of rich land and political offices. From this land they would be
able to support the king in economic and military duties; this created a circle of power from
which both kings and nobles benefit. Understanding such a system was an easy way for a king
to undermine his neighbor. A king could persuade a powerful magnate in his neighboring realm
to side with him. The king’s most powerful tool of persuasion lies in the land that he holds. If
he can cut a better deal than the one a noble has with his current king, it might cause the noble to
dissent. The balance of power becomes uneven and the weaker kingdom is easier to conquer.
Thus, power lay in the relationship between a king and his nobles, each were considerably
dependent on each other.vii
Marriage is a custom that has a lot of rules and regulation by the time of Lothar II. In
many ways the older customs of the Franks and the new Christian protocols surrounding
marriage contrast. From the middle of the eighth century, Bishop of Wurzburg, Magingoz, is
examined as looking for help in understanding some aspects pertaining to the institution of
marriage. He writes to Lullus, Bishop of Mainz, for support. His confusion were in part because
rules around marriage were different and not organized into a single document. There were

5
clerical writers known as decretals interpreting the bible and creating canon law, but they
sometimes contrasted each other.viii
There were also conciliar canons, synod decrees, papal
decisions, and many other forms of Catholic law that clergymen had to sift through. That wasn’t
the only problem, many bishops didn’t have a well-stocked library. They didn’t have the tools
needed to create a decisive decision. All in all, this created a fractured sense of canon law, each
region having its own views.ix
This was also met with Frankish custom, which had its own rule
and regulations. For one to get married in the Frankish society their needed to be a series of
events that made it legal. First, both had to be free people. Next they had to have the consent of
their relatives and in most cases it was an arranged wedding. A public betrothal would then
happen, in which the community would be aware that they had been bound to be married. A sort
of medieval engagement. Next there would be a bridal gift that both families decided upon.
Most likely property that would be given from the male to the female. A public wedding. Then
conjugal coitus and love.x
Magingoz and Lullus were asking questions at this time to better aid their patrons. They
wanted to know what the exact rules were, especially when deciphering dicey and sometimes
obscure problems. These rules would be made in local synods. Germanic regions were
distancing themselves from Rome and creating their own rules. The power of individual regions
were overshadowing the center.xi
There was also the creation of a new script called Caroline
Minuscule. This script was easier to learn and would lead to a more uniform understanding of
clerical works. Overall, these reforms gave the Carolingian clerics the tools needed to construct
and organize an authoritative text which the clergy in their region could use. The difference
between Carolingian and church law was becoming more homogenous. Much of the Church’s
laws were used in secular courts.xii
In the mid-ninth century the Pseudo-Isidorian Decretal was

6
created. This was a document that became very widely used by churchmen. The decretal
consisted of conciliar canons and papal letters. It also contains falsified canons that strengthened
bishop and papal authority. The authors remain unknown, but these canons did come from the
archdiocese of Reims. Sadly, this was a very popular document that many clergymen had their
hands on at the time and would be used down the line in Lothar II’s divorce.xiii
In 747, Pippin III, Mayor the Palace, wrote to Pope Zachary asking for help in
understanding church laws surrounding morals and discipline. The pope sent back a dossier
containing 27 rulings, 11 of them pertained to marriage. When Pippin III took over the kingship
from the Merovingians and started the Carolingian Era, he started, with many other things, to
implement laws around marriage. Marriage could not take place between any blood or in law
relationships; one cannot remarry or marry a woman that has been repudiated and divorced by
her husband; no adultery; nuns and clerics cannot marry. St. Boniface, an English missionary
(672-754), explained that there needed to be at least a fourth degree of separation in kinship to be
legally marriage (father or mother, grandfather or grandmother, uncle or aunt, first cousin).xiv
Pippin would expand the separation to seven degrees. But such a degree of separation threatened
the aristocracy. The aristocracy can be defined as an endogamous group, because an aristocrat
does not marry outside of the small aristocracy. The seven degrees of separation greatly limited
the amount of partnerships. Down the line he also forbade marriage between the free and unfree.
Pippin also legalized divorce if one goes into convent or monastery, if the lord has been in
capture and will probably not be released, and if they have fled from the kingdom. Pippin also
made remarriage permissible when the reason for divorce was incest. Incest defined as coitus
between two closely related relatives. In this situation, the innocent is allowed to remarry
whereas the guilty cannot.xv

7
By the time of Charlemagne there was an entire rule book written, the Collectio
Dionysio-Hadriana of 774. This religious legal manual helped navigate marriage laws. A large
amount of the trials which used this canon law were mostly interested in incest. Before a
marriage it was the duty of neighbors and friends to find blood relations. If they found a relation,
the marriage would be discontinued or the couple would have to get a divorce. The institution of
marriage also becomes a very holy sacrament in the Carolingian dynasty during Charlemagne’s
reign. This meant that marriages were both legal, religious, also adding extra sacramental
blessing to the procedure. Divorce was only allowed when a man repudiated his wife for
adultery or incest. And the guilty parties could not re-marry whereas a man that repudiated his
wife could.xvi
Yet, during this time Charlemagne did manage to get a divorce. His divorce is strictly for
and allowed for, political reasons. Charlemagne’s mother Bertrada was openly involved in
politics after Pippin’s death in 768. She looked for alliances which might be forged with hostile
neighbors, instead of going the militarized route. This led to Charlemagne’s marriage to the king
of the Lombards daughter, Desiderata. The papal state did not like this arrangement because the
Lombard king Desiderius was incredibly hostile to the papacy, wanting to take back Ravenna
and the lands of Saint Peter. But, the union between Charlemagne and Desiderata would not last
long because Charlemagne decided Hildegard would be a better choice; for either political or
other practical matters.xvii
The church was not too fond of this union and that is evident in the scalding message to
Charlemagne and Carloman from Pope Stephen. The papal state was hoping to use the Franks as
a sort of defensive measure against the Lombards. Keeping the Lombards too preoccupied in the
north to have the resource to attack their land. In this message, Pope Stephens harangued the

8
two brothers, not knowing which one was to marry Desiderata. He accused the young men as
saddling up with the devilish sub-human Lombards. The pope used everything he had to explain
how wrong this marriage is, ranging from: it’s illegal, sacrilegious and your father would not
have wanted this, “It was madness to attempt a union of the most noble race of the Franks and
that fetid brood of the Lombards.” xviii
The pope also uses the power of religion to persuade them
to not marry Desiderata. That is the power of God’s judgment and omnipotence over one’s life.
Overall, Charlemagne’s divorce was allowed for political reasons. Understanding that point is
helpful when referring to Lothar II’s marriage and divorce struggles. Politics is always at play,
religion and other institutions are formed around the preservation of power and can always be
tweaked and amended when need be.
During Louis the Pious’s reign, the institution of marriage takes on an even greater role.
In a document known as the “mirrors for laymen,” Carolingian reformers sought to create a
manual that could guide aristocracy in leading a pious life. A marriage vow took a whole new
level of importance, considered almost like a religious vow a monk or nun might make, but for
the aristocracy. A way of living religiously within a non-clerical life. In this way, marriage
takes on a moral church role as well as secular. In De institutione laicali, Jonas of Orleans
outlines the rules and moral obligations of marriage: copulation only with wife only to procreate
never pleasure, abolishing the Frankish custom of Friedelehe when married and keeping with the
same ideology towards divorce. Other Carolingian reforms have differing ideals in divorce than
Jonas. We see that there is a rule from which a bishop can dissolve a marriage on religious
grounds, known as conscientia episcopi. In this circumstance, each individual would have to
join the monastic life after concluding the union.xix

9
Marriage is the key to the future and Lothar II understands its importance. Lothar I died
in 855. Shortly afterwards Lothar married Theutberga. Theutberga was a good match for
political reasons. Her brother, Huebert, was a powerful cleric. He descended from Count Boso
who was an absolute follower of Lothar I. Count Boso’s had two influential sons, Count Boso
junior of Italy and Huebert the abbot. Huebert was the Duke of the Duchy of Transjura, in the
modern day Swiss Alps, as well as the abbot of Saint-Maurice d’Agaune. Documents show
Huebert as an intermediary in many charters between nobles and Lothar I and II. This shows
that he was an influential counselor for both the kings. Theutberga’s family also had other
strong connections forged through marriage. Overall, this marriage was a very good political
match for both sides.xx
The divorce would begin two years later. The entire event would span the rest of Lothar
II’s life. Throughout this melodrama, many methods of religious and secular law are examined
concerning marriage. It begins in 857 when Lothar accuses his wife of incest and other
disgusting acts. Adventius of Metz’s defends his king down the line by writing of the vile acts
that occurred between Huebert and Theutberga, “rumor of the worst vile practices followed
Theutberga and she was reputed to be guilty of incestuous intercourse with her brother Hubert.”
xxi
Lothar accused his wife of incest but not of just any ordinary type of incest, rather “unnatural”
or “contra naturam.” Lothar had to go with this drastic act of incest because he had given his
wife a Morgengabe. This was essentially a gift after their wedding night to signify that she had
staid a virgin until then. That’s why the incest had to be “against nature.” Lothar also accuses
his wife of an abortion due to the incest! This accusation is almost too preposterous. Even in the
ninth-century, there was an understanding that “unnatural” intercourse would not end in a
pregnancy. An abortion would also rupture her hymen which he confirmed was intact. Yet,

10
Lothar lumps that into his accusation. Lothar doesn’t stop there. He also adds that Theutberga
was barren. Now this contrasts directly against his past claim! How could she barren yet fertile?
How could one get pregnant, have an abortion, and be barren? It’s an odd group of accusations
but clearly shows that he really did not want to be married to Theutberga. The incest charge
alone would make it possible for Lothar to divorce and remarry. In some churches, they view
the incest before marriage as an act that made the marriage invalid. In the Old Testament it goes
into great detail that any sort of adultery or incest is a profanity that cannot be cleansed. These
accusations are examined as very far-fetched, yet Hubert did have indecent sexual tendencies.
Pope Benedict III complains about Hubert having “actresses” at his Abbey in St-Maurice,
“scenicae mulieres”!xxii
If the man is known for having crude sexual relations, could he have
actually committed such acts with his sister?
Lothar had many reasons for wanting a divorce from Theutberga. All of these had
alterative motives that directly and indirectly were connected to his accusations. Lothar knew
the strength of the family he was going up against, he must have sensed that he had the strength
to take them out of power. He understood that taking away the offices and fiefs from Huebert
would create a great enemy. But that also created a power vacuum that would give incentive for
the other powerful noblemen to take his place. His uncle Liutfrid, on his mother’s side, would
fill this void.xxiii
Hugo, Liutfrid’s father, was the very powerful Count of Tours and held land in
Italy and in the Rhineland. Liutfrid used to have a strong connection to the royal family through
his sister, Ermengarde’s, marriage to Lothar I. But with Lothar II’s marriage to Theutberga,
Huebert took over the role Liutfrid once possessed, thus pushing him into the background.
Liutfrid had a chance to be back in an influential role if he supported Lothar II. Thus Liutfrid
supported and helped Lothar get rid of Theutberga.

11
Lothar II also had a more emotional reason for divorcing his wife. Waldrada had been
his lover since a young age. Yet her family was not influential enough to justify marrying into.
Lothar loved her, but he understood the importance of creating a strong political alliance through
marriage. A strong alliance is important but having an heir is more important. If Lothar can’t
produce an heir, his kingdom will be split between the other Frankish kings. In essence, his line
of rulers will stop and his legacy and kingdom will be partitioned between his uncles. After not
even two years of marriage, which is not that long, he must have been getting scared of
Theutberga’s lack of conception. That doubled with the fact he had children with Waldrada, must
have helped steer him into the realm of divorce and make his illegitimate children, legitimate.xxiv
The next step in the divorce was the trial. Theutberga was not going to accept these
charges against her and would fight against them. She decided to take this case to the royal
courts where her case would be decided by trial by ordeal. To have a trial by ordeal one must
have a priest ordain and judge the whole trial. The priesthood supported the decision and thus
were incredibly important in the outcome. This is important to understand because if the trial
was simply done by Lothar’s laymen, his loyal nobles, she would most likely be guilty. A trial
by ordeal was decided upon by three differing groups. First, the lay nobility had to approve of
the trial. Second, the bishops had to give their support. And third the king had to consent. The
trial was also mostly judged by the bishops.xxv
A trial by ordeal was based upon divine judgment. God was the ruler of this case. In
most cases the defendant would swear that they were innocent. They then go through with the
trial. But in this case Theutberga had a surrogate. The trial started with a church service in
which the mass was said. At the end the defendant or surrogate would have to grab an object out
of a boiling cauldron in the atrium of the church. The priest would first bless the water and the

12
hand of the person before the plunge. Afterwards the hand would be wrapped in bandages for
four days. After that four days the hand would be unveiled and judged if it were “cooked” or
not. They were most likely looking to see if the wound was healing correctly and if it had
mortified. Theutberga had lucked out because the hand had been judged as “uncooked.”
Theutberga was innocent and Lothar had to take her back. It’s not known for sure who judged
the hand, but it was most likely a mixture of the first three. Differing sources describe
Theutberga’s surrogate as being fully submerged into the boiling cauldron of water. Whichever
method, the bishops probably had the most sway and with enough of the lay nobility on their
side, they decided Lothar had to take Theutberga back. But this would not be the end.xxvi
In this same year, 857, there were numerous attacks from Danes and other Northmen.
These are largely recorded in the Annals of St.-Bertin. Most of these attacks recorded in this
Annal occur in Charles the Bald’s land: Paris, Tours; “Danish pirates attacked Paris and burned
it.”xxvii
Vikings had created a special sort of keel that made it possible for their longships to
travel up shallow rivers. Vikings used these special ships to move quickly up rivers, reach their
targets, burn, pillage and loot, then retreat with incredible speed. These attacks were very hard to
defend against and created a climate where kings had to use a considerable amount of treasure,
known as Dengeld, to defer the complete ransacking of their cities: “a great ransom was paid in
cash to save these churches from being burned.”xxviii
These invaders also lacked the sense of
divine damnation that kept most other marauders from destroying religious places or at least
Christian ones. Of course, this comes from the Annals of St.-Bertin. The Annal was named after
the Abbey of St.-Bertin because that is where the oldest complete manuscript was found. St.-
Bertin is located in northwest France. During this period the Annal was being written by
Prudentius (836-861). Prudentius was the archchaplain to Judith, Louis the Pious’s widow.

13
After Louis died, Judith went to live with her son Charles the Bald. Prudentius was part of her
retinue so he came as well and with Prudentius came the Royal Frankish Annals he was working
on. The Annals of St-Bertin was the successor of The Royal Frankish Annals, which ended in
829. It makes sense why the Annals of St.-Bertin were mostly occupied with events pertaining to
Charles the Bald.xxix
This is important when understanding Lothar’s divorce in the political realm. Charles the
Bald’s kingdom was bleeding financially. Giving out large ransoms to stave off invaders for
short periods of time must have really drained the king’s resources. Taking over his nephew’s
lands could help alleviate some of these burdens. Charles could create a stronger group of
support in which to fight off the Northmen. He would have a broader area to collect resources
from. Having more land is synonyms with having more power, especially when dissecting
Charlemagne’s rule which was heavily seeped in conquest. The recent past is in the mind of
these rulers. Having a reason to take land from a fellow king is advantageous. That is why
Lothar’s divorce becomes very important to his kin.
In the year 858, Lothar is recorded in Annals of St.-Bertin as giving two counties and
bishoprics to his brother, the sickly Charles of Provence. Lothar did this with the deal that if he,
Charles, were to die with no heirs, Lothar would inherit his land. Lothar understands the
importance for power and land and is retroactively trying to claim as much of it as he can. It is
also recorded in the same year, a couple lines down, that Lothar has to take back his wife that he
tried to divorce: “King Lothar was forced by his own people to take back the wife he had put
aside: but instead of readmitting her to his bed, he had her locked up.”xxx
Another good example
of the bias and propaganda recorded from Charles the Bald’s side of the event. Lothar is “forced

14
by his own people” to take her back, the idea that he is losing support of his “own people” shows
his decaying power and lack of control in his own kingdom.
The Annals of Fulda is another record that came from the eastern half of the kingdom.
Between the years 840-63, it is believed that the Annal was being recorded in Mainz under the
archchaplain Grimald, whose brother was the archbishop of Trier, Theutgaud.xxxi
The Annal
during this period is chalked full of evidence that support this claim, mostly because issues in
Mainz are abundant. Theutgaud was a very strong supporter of Lothar II during his divorce.
Between the years 863-69, the authorship is unknown and probably differs between communities
because of the differing views of Lothar’s divorce. Lothar’s divorce is not present in this record
until 863. Besides the divorce, there are other useful records that help examine the political
turmoil between Carolingian kings and neighbors.xxxii
The Annals of Fulda record Lothar II’s ascension to kingship in Lotharingia. It records
Lothar II as having to go to his uncle Louis the German to ask acceptance: “The prince and
leading men of his kingdom wanted his son Lothar to reign other them... With Louis’s agreement
and support they agreed that he should rule them.”xxxiii
An interesting interaction between uncle
and nephew. Showing a little glimpse of the power structure that was intact. Lothar had to ask
for the title but afterward he was in total control of his kingdom, he no longer had to answer to
his uncle. Seeing as this Annal is based out of Mainz, which is in Louis’s territory, this could
have been fabricated to give more strength to Louis’s regime. In the year 857, the beginning of
his divorce, Lothar is only mentioned as sending a political embassy to the King of the Danes
Horic.xxxiv
There is not much said about the event, but shows that Lothar two years into his reign
was having to deal with the northern raiders.

15
In 858-59, Louis the German invades Charles the Bald’s land. All hell breaks loose in
the Frankish empire. New alliances are made and power shifts between nobles. In the Annals of
Fulda, Lothar is described in 858 as double crossing his uncle Louis the German and making a
deal with Charles the Bald: “the legates whom he had sent to Lothar his nephew came to him and
announced that Lothar would meet the king as agreed in the castle of Koblenz…Lothar was false
to his promise and did not come…he had made a treaty with Charles against the king.”xxxv
An
interesting technique used by Lothar II during his short reign, playing one uncle off the other.
Being able to stay on one or the other’s good side in order to distribute power to keep himself
safe. With the loss of an ally Louis the German turns to his other nephew Emperor Louis of
Italy.xxxvi
The clergy were also scrambling because they were fearful of the repercussions that can
come with a divided kingdom, mostly the invasion of neighboring non-believers. Lothar saw
this as an opportune time to try and get rid of Theutberga once more. The fighting ended
between Charles the Bald, Louis the German and Lothar II with the signing of the Koblenz
treaty. This treaty describes the confirmed peace that each brother would uphold. It is each
Carolingian king’s duty to keep the honor and peace of the Holy Church in order to save the
salvation of the people. This treaty echoes many of the past and future treaties in which family
support in stressed. It also follows the trend of most treaties in failing. This treaty also doesn’t
stop Lothar’s pursuit of divorce.
On the ninth of January 860, Lothar convenes a small council of clergymen in Aachen to
appeal the previous divorce verdict. This is made up of two abbots and four bishops.
Archbishops Gunther of Cologne, Theutgaud of Trier and Adventius of Metz were main
characters in attendance at this council and are important in the future of this event. This small

16
group of clergy men are very loyal to Lothar. At this council, Gunther revealed Theutberga’s
confession of incest with her brother. She described the encounter as non-consensual. The
bishops decided that she should be divorced from Lothar and enter a convent.
But on such a large scale divorce case as this one is, they looked to other clergymen for
advice in whether this was the right call. The bishops decide then to have an even larger council
in Aachen inviting bishops and laymen from Charles of Provence, Charles the Bald and Lothar
II’s realm. At this larger council Theutberga admits her guilt. It is briefly recorded in the Annals
of St.-Bertin, “he (Lothar) finally forced her to confess before bishops that she had had sodomite
intercourse with her brother Hubert. For this crime, she was immediately condemned to penance
and shut away in a convent.”xxxvii
Yet this time, in front of bishops that are not loyal to Lothar,
they ask him if maybe her confession is under duress? Did Lothar threaten or coerce her into
confessing such vile acts? The group decided to accept her confession and let her join a
convent.xxxviii
Yet, she did not stay long in the convent. At the end of the year 860, Theutberga is
described in the Annals of St.-Bertin, “fearing the hatred and dark schemes of her husband, fled
to her brother Hubert in the realm of Charles.”xxxix
Her fleeing makes it pretty clear that
Theutberga was coerced into the confession.
Archbishop Hincmar of Reims was invited to the larger council but did not come, having
several excuses. But that does not mean he didn’t have his own opinion in the matter. Unnamed
clergy and laymen from within Lothar’s kingdom write to Hincmar asking him to answer some
questions about the trial. Most of the questions were procedural and about the verdict. Hincmar
of Reims decides to write a two part Treatise called De Divortio in where he attacks many aspect
of the divorce.xl

17
Hincmar’s De Divortio, covers many aspects pertaining to Lothar’s and other divorce
cases. Essentially, this document is meant to explain many aspects of marriage, divorce and
remarriage. First off he describes that a lawful marriage consists of two defining traits, each
have to come together of their own free will and they must exchange lawful vows. Hincmar also
describes what a proper marriage consists of, these include: “the betrothal by parents and
kinsmen, the bridal gift, the blessing by the priest, the handing over of the bride by attendants,
and finally a few nights spent chastely in prayer.” Hincmar explains that people of importance,
especially kings, should have a proper marriage. Then he describes what an improper marriage
consists of: betrothal to another, to an unfree, and abducted women.xli
In the De Divortio, divorce is acceptable in certain situations. If both want to lead a life
of chastity they can divorce in order to serve God. Yet, they were only breaking their sexual
connection because, to Hincmar, marriage is “the bond forged according to God,” which cannot
be broken by serving the Lord. Adultery is another reason for a lawful divorce. Both man and
women possess this right. He stresses that men should not kill their wives if they are found to be
adulterous. For men are the “stronger sex” and can easily manipulate a “weaker” woman. If
there is a divorce due to adultery, neither can remarry while the other is alive, guilty or innocent.
One cannot divorce because of infertility either.xlii
In direct reference to Lothar’s case, Hincmar believes that the trial by ordeal should have
been the end. Theutberga was innocent from that point on. Hincmar also targets the councils at
Aachen, writing that they did not follow proper procedure. First, there were no witnesses or
plaintiff at the trials. Huebert, the one who actually committed the crime, was not in attendance.
He also attacks the accusations. The idea of conception without intercourse is absurd to
Hincmar. This is the main reason why he believes she was under duress while confessing. Next

18
Hincmar answers the question if the accusations were true could Lothar get a divorce. The
answer is yes but procedure was not followed correctly so he could not get a divorce. He also
believes Lothar should give penance because of his adulterous affair with Waldrada while he was
still legally married to Theutberga.
Hincmar also answers the question if Lothar could get remarried if Theutberga was
actually found guilty. The answer is yes, but he must do penance because of his unlawful
adultery with his concubine. Remarriage is acceptable when there is a death of either body or
soul, in this case the incestuous Theutberga’s soul died. In the Old Testament, cases of sodomy
and incest are treated with death. The Carolingian religious minds believed that the death of soul
equates the same as the death of one’s body.xliii
The second half of the treatise, written six months later, described Lothar as the sole
guilty member of this event. The question in this treatise that relates directly to Lothar and his
divorce case, revolve mostly upon Theutberga. Should she have to go back to Lothar after his
adultery? Hincmar writes that Lothar would have to abstain from women or make up with
Theutberga.xliv
Hincmar also brings up the role that kings and bishops have. Kings are the ruler of their
flock. They have been anointed by God to be a role model for the members of their kingdom.
Same with bishops, yet bishops also have the duty to make sure the king is doing their job right.
If a king is sinning and not doing penance, how are the people of the kingdom going to act? It is
up to the bishops to correct the wrongs of the king in order to save the morals of the Christian
people. This is in one way giving strength to his own argument. Believing he has the duty to
judge the kings actions. This idea of bishops having the power to audit the king is not held by
all. Many of the bishops that support Lothar disagree with Hincmar’s claim. They see the king

19
as omnipotent and only answerable to God. Hincmar also believes that this case should go to a
higher ruler, the pope. The idea that all of Christianity is united would make the pope the highest
ruler.xlv
One must look at politics as well, when understanding Hincmar’s Treatise. The first half
of the document writes that it is all right to marry Waldrada if Theutberga is guilty. There is still
the question of who is guilty and innocent. The second half of the Treatise, written six months
later, clearly states that Theutberga is innocent and Lothar is guilty of adultery. There was a
clear shift of thought in Hincmar’s argument. This might be attested to the shift in political
alliances in 860. Remember in 857, Lothar ditched a council with Louis the German and decided
to ally with Charles the Bald. They had an alliance which saw a campaign against the Vikings in
858.xlvi
Charles was besieging the island of Oissel in the Seine, where Danes had been fortified.
King Lothar arrived with backup and fought with Charles until September 23 when they gave up
and went home.xlvii
In 860, Lothar was starting to not trust Charles, which is recorded in the
Annals of St.-Bertin, “King Lothar, fearing his uncle Charles, allied himself with Louis king of
Germany.” The section goes on to describe that Lothar had to give up some of his kingdom,
mostly in Alsace, to win the alliance with Louis. This shows that Lothar was getting weaker,
having to give land away. What this doesn’t show us is the reason why Lothar did not trust
Charles. It’s speculated that it was the allegiance of Hubert, Theutberga’s brother, to Charles
that made him suspicious. This is evident in the last section which shows Theutberga’s escape to
Hubert in Charles kingdom, “Lothar’s wife, fearing the hatred and dark schemes of her husband,
fled to her brother Hubert in the realm of Charles.” xlviii
It makes sense why a powerful religious
figure within Charles’s kingdom would want a guilty Lothar, instead of a guilty Theutberga.xlix

20
After Theutberga left Lothar’s kingdom, her and her family worked extremely hard to
reverse her verdict. She took back her confession and turned to the Papal See to look over and
judge her case. Lothar also decides to ask the pope’s approval and sends two bishops down to
Rome. Pope Nicholas I (858-67) was a strong advocate of Papal superiority. He believed that the
pope had religious superiority over all. The idea that the secular world had no say in the
workings of the Church, yet the religious community’s duty was to oversee the moral compass of
the secular world, means Papal supremacy. At first this idea was created as a defensive in order
to keep the Christian world unified: overtime, it became an offense meant to keep the secular
world out of religion and to make sure no ruler became more powerful than the papacy.l
In 861, there was more significant political turmoil. Louis the German’s eldest son
Carloman, rebelled against his father which shook up the political makeup of the time.
Carloman had given land in Carinthia and the Pannonian march, to nobles that were loyal to him.
This power play by Carloman angered his father whom then decided to depose those magnates.li
All of Carloman’s marriage alliances thus lost their holdings and defected to Charles the Bald’s
territory, as well as the nobles that had defected from Charles during Louis the German’s
invasion years back. This created a large change in quantity of powerful nobles, which gave
Charles an upper hand in the political world. With this new found power Charles decides to try
and usurp his frail nephew Charles of Provence’s land unsuccessfully.lii
Charles’s action go
directly against the treaty of Koblenz. Louis and Lothar then decided to write to the pope asking
to rebuke the king.
Around the same time three of Charles’s children married without his permission. This
greatly angers the king who then exiles his children. Judith, the daughter of Charles, decides to
take up asylum in Lothar’s kingdom which strengthens Charles’s anger towards Lothar. All

21
three of these young Carolingians write to Pope Nicholas to rule on their behalf. This now gives
the pope much to think about: Lothar’s divorce, Charles’s aggression, and now the three
marriages. The pope sends letters out on November 23, 862 that announce that embassy will be
travelling to the region in order to rule on each dispute. In the meantime, Lothar gathers his
bishops in order to ask for their permission to marry Waldrada. His arguments are that he would
have kept Theutberga if she was not guilty of such vile incestuous acts and that he is in desperate
need of an heir. The bishops follow suit and once again confirm Theutberga’s guilt, as well as
grant him the right to remarry.liii
This event is recorded very negatively in the Annals of St.-
Bertin, “Lothar had been demented, so it was said, by witchcraft and ensnared in a blind passion
by the wiles of his concubine Waldrada for whom he had cast aside his wife Theutberga.”
Lothar then marries Waldrada, “while his friends grieved and spoke out against this action.”liv
Louis the German tries to mend the relationship between Lothar and Charles in 862. This
is recorded in great detail in the Annals of St.-Bertin. Charles is mad with Lothar for reasons
mostly attributed to his marriage. Before Charles will communicate with his nephew, he writes
up a list of accusations in a capitulary. The capitulary accuses Lothar on three separate accounts.
First, that he is allowing the adulteress Engeltrude to live within his kingdom. Second, that he is
giving asylum to Judith and Baldwin, Charles children and Lothar’s cousins, who had been
exiled by their father for illegal marriages. And lastly, that he needed to stop ignoring the advice
and judgment of other bishops and the pope, when it came to his own divorce and re-marriage.
Charles accusations were not an ultimatum to which Lothar had to adhere directly to. Charles
was just asking that Lothar look to these issues and “give a reasonable explanation on these
points or would show some improvement.”lv
Lothar replied that he would undertake a serious
inquiry into these issues, which was good enough for his uncle, allowing the three rulers to meet.

22
During their meeting they promise to love one another and keep the peace. But Charles makes it
clear to everyone that he will not be forgetting the immoral actions of Lothar.lvi
Currently, Lothar had what he always wanted. The nobles and bishops of Lotharingia
had accepted Waldrada as their queen. Yet, the current situation was fragile and under attack by
strong families mostly in Charles the Bald’s kingdom. Theutberga would not let these
accusations against her stand and she had the backing of her family to support her. With
Lothar’s promise to Charles, he needed to re-equip his defense and accusations against
Theutberga. In order to do this, Lothar’s bishops created more reasons why Theutberga could
not be his wife.
After the Aachen council in 862, Lothar’s bishops decide to look at the social customs
and norms of weddings pertaining to the Franks, instead of the religious. The marriage norms
require very importantly that one must be betrothed to the other with consent from parents. Here
the argument relates that Theutberga was the second woman to be betrothed to Lothar, Waldrada
being the first. Here we have an interesting change in the argument. It was very smart of the
bishops to drop the incest and guilt of Theutberga. Now, Theutberga’s appeal of innocence can
be approved by the pope and she still wouldn’t be rightfully married to Lothar. This leaves a
plethora of questions. Was Waldrada never truly a concubine? Why didn’t this betrothal end in a
marriage? Was Lothar the true guilty subject because he had left Waldrada whom he was bound
to?lvii
Adventius of Metz writes about the betrothal. He writes that Waldrada had been bound
to Lothar II by his father. The event took place during a public ceremony in which Liutfrid,
Lothar II’s uncle, and other great magnates and bishops were in attendance, “he (Lothar I) gave,
in the name of the divine faith, a noble virgin named Waldrada to his son.” Adventius was not in

23
attendance because he was not yet the bishop of Metz. This could be a ploy by Adventius to a
distance himself from the betrothal, playing only the role of messenger, just in case the argument
fails. Most likely, it was because he simply wasn’t in attendance. He would have been quite
young at the time, only ascending to the role of Archbishop of Metz in 855.lviii
Adventius goes
on to describe that there was also a bridal gift in which, a hundred homesteads had been passed
from Lothar’s family to Waldrada’s. The described betrothal then had everything it needed to be
legal: public ceremony, consent of parents, and an acknowledged bridal gift. At the time she was
a free virgin woman, from noble descent, given away with consent by parents and betrothed to
Lothar. Bishops Gunthar and Theutgaud both argue that Lothar’s union with Waldrada was
within the laws. His bishops had to be smart though and not say that Lothar was married to both
Waldrada and Theutberga at the same time, this would make Lothar a polygamist. If Waldrada
was betrothed to Lothar II then why was she considered a concubine and not a wife? What
exactly constitutes a concubine?lix
To be a concubine means a whole plethora of things. A concubine can be an unfree
woman who has been taken by a free man. There is also the relationship of two free individuals
that are not married. Sometimes it is because the males are too young and still living with their
father. Concubinage could lead to a marriage and those children could receive inheritance. They
could also be formed when one member was divorced but the other ex-spouse was still alive.
Some other cases deal with an older man that already had children set up for inheritance and
their wife is dead. This relationship ultimately meant that it had not been sealed with a public
ceremony and had not been dissolved for legal reasons. Waldrada had been Lothar’s premarital
lover and was when he still lived with his father, she could be described as Lothar’s concubine.
Yet, concubine brought bad connotations; a future queen cannot be respected and loved if she

24
was not a lawful partner to the king. Lothar did not officially marry Waldrada because of
political reasons. Theutberga’s family was more powerful, which a better match for a king was.
Yet, Adventius describes Lothar’s marriage to Theutberga as under duress, “[Hubert]
fraudulently united her with him, threatening that there would be a danger to the state of the
king’s kingdom if he did not listen to his counsel.”lx
But, after Theutberga was set aside it was
the job of the powerful bishops in Lothar’s territory to explain why Waldrada was a queen and
not a concubine.lxi
Adventius writes about the situation in detail. In Adventius words, Lothar had to marry
Theutberga out of threat of violence. And after the terrible crimes that Hubert had done to his
sister were acknowledged, it was Lothar’s prerogative to marry the women he was once
betrothed to.lxii
But Lothar wasn’t totally innocent in the mater. Even though, it was claimed,
that his marriage to Theutberga was under duress, he still broke the marriage law of leaving the
one he was betrothed to. Lothar needed the help of the bishops then in curing his soul of his sins.
This was done by cleansing his soul through penance and guiding him never to sin again. In this
way, the bishops and king were in a checks and balance sort of system. Each one making sure
the other was doing the right thing. This was all in theory though. In practice it was the bishop’s
covering for their king so he was not excommunicated because if Lothar did any penance it was
short and not recorded.lxiii
Lothar had the wide support of his bishops for a couple of reasons. Supporting your king
can lead to rewards, mostly in land. They also stood to gain political influence through office.
When Theutberga and Hubert were forced out of Lothar’s land, they left a considerable amount
of assets. These assets were power based, land and office. Someone had to fill this power void
and bishops fighting for their king were high on that list. Keeping Hubert out of Lotharingia was

25
very prosperous for the bishops. This task would become a lot harder though when Pope
Nicholas I gets involved.lxiv
In 863, Pope Nicholas I sends an envoy to Metz to hold a new council to understand and
judge the issue with his own papal ambassadors. Of course, being in Metz, only Lotharingian
bishops were in attendance, swaying the council to judge in Lothar’s favor. Gunthar and
Theutgaud, two prominent bishops loyal to Lothar, return with the papal ambassadors to present
the councils judgment first hand. What happens next is drastic. Nicholas doesn’t accept the
verdict of the council, and excommunicates Gunthar and Theutgaud. In Nicholas eyes the trail
of ordeal should have been the decider and the case closed. He believes that the bishops were in
favor of adultery and that they were then heretics. Nicholas also believes that Lothar should be
stripped of his kingship because he is not acting as a true king. Nicholas’s incredible distain for
Lothar and his bishops are intense and must be rooted in politics. He pretty much says that it is
his uncle’s god given duty to overthrow their nephew. But Lothar isn’t finished yet. Gunthar
and Theutgaud explain their case to Emperor Louis II, Lothar’s brother, and he takes up action
against the pope, believing that he has overstepped his boundaries. Louis introduced the bishops
to the pope and the pope exuded power that Louis believes he does not possess. He marches on
Rome as a show of power. Louis either wants the pope to reinstate the bishops or he will hurt
him, “In fury…he traveled…to Rome…with the intention of having the two bishops reinstated
by the pope or…laying hands on him to do him some injury.”lxv
Nicholas escapes to St. Peters
where he fasts and prays. During the campaign Louis gets sick, which is seen as god’s divine
judgment upon him, and he has to stop the siege. Louis gives up on punishing the pope with the
help of his wife. In the meantime, Charles of Provence and Hubert die. Charles land is spilt up
between his brothers Lothar and Louis.lxvi

26
Nicholas’s drastic position against Lothar and his bishops was a clear power move to try
and implement a supreme position over the Carolingian kings. The act of excommunicating a
king shows true power. The popes power over the kings, which is supremacy. That kind of
power can be a double edged sword for a king. For example, Lothar’s uncles now have a reason
to take over his land, but what’s from stopping the pope excommunicating an uncle. Of course,
this must be understood in context. Lothar is the weakest among his fellow kings. Deposing
him is only truly bad for himself. His uncles divide up his land and the pope’s position of power
is verified. But say, the pope deposes Charles the Bald that would most likely fail because
Charles is powerful. The pope can only act against someone that is weak.
In 865 Lothar is advised by his uncles to take back his wife. Lothar understands the
impact of this “advice.” Lothar’s political tool of using one uncle against the other is over.
Charles and Louis decided to ally with each other because a common interest, Lothar’s land. On
August 3, 865 Lothar takes back Theutberga as his wife. Waldrada is ordered to leave Lothar’s
land and give penance to the Pope in Rome. Halfway through the trip Waldrada refuses to go
any further and returns back to Lotharingian. In the same year Lothar signs a treaty with Charles
the Bald and both ask the pope to reverse his verdict. Even Theutberga, fed up with this whole
ordeal, and most likely wanting to be as far away from Lothar as possible, ask the pope to
dissolve the union. But, the pope does not give up. His verdict is final because he understands
that letting the divorce happen would diminish his power.lxvii
In 867, Charles the Bald and Louis the German are holding talks, secretly dividing up the
land of Lothar II and Louis II. But Lothar’s luck turns around when, in the same year, Pope
Nicholas dies. This is great for Lothar because he now has a second chance at arguing his case.
Pope Adrian II at first upholds Nicholas’s verdict, but after Theutberga pleads in person to the

27
pope, he reverses the verdict and lets her join a convent. The new pope summons Lothar in 869
and asks him if he had been with Waldrada after she was excommunicated. He promises on
communion that he hasn’t. This satisfies the pope and Waldrada’s excommunication is
overturned. On Lothar’s cheerful travel home, he dies in an epidemic that befalls his party. To
Lothar’s opposition this is seen as divine judgment. To the objection of his brother, Emperor
Louis, Charles the Bald and Louis the German divide up Lotharingia. Waldrada would end up in
a convent in Remiremont and Theutberga, a convent in Metz. Hugo, Lothar’s son, was a minor
when his father died. He made some alliance within the Carolingian family but his aim at
gaining land were cut short when he was taken prisoner by Charles the Fat in 885. lxviii
The divorce case of Lothar II was a tragedy. His entire adult life was spent fighting for a
marriage that he would never legally obtain. Throughout the endeavor, the Carolingian ninth-
century description of the institution of marriage is evaluated. This explains that there truly were
no clearly understood institutional rules pertaining to marriage. There were still the ideas of a
Frankish culture butting heads with the Christian church, as well as regional Christian
differences. At the core of these issues is power. Each bishop, noblemen, king, and pope all
have differing views because of power. Trying to obtain more power or trying to hold on to
what they have, an obvious point when remembering Charlemagne’s divorce. His divorce was
beneficial for the church and even if it wasn’t, he’d be too powerful to oppose. Overall, Lothar
II’s divorce was an important event in mid-ninth century Carolingian history because it
examined the argumentative fight for power through the institution of marriage.

i
Karl Heidecker, The Divorce of Lothar II: Christian Marraige and Political Power in the Carolingian
World, trans. Tanis M. Guest (London: Cornell University Press, 2010), 36.
ii
Heidecker, The Divorce of Lothar II, 30-48.
iii
Janet L. Nelson, trans., The Annals of St-Bertin: Ninth-Century Histories,Volume I (Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 1991), 84.
iv
Pierre Riche, The Carolingians: A Family Who Forged Europe (Philadelphia: University of
Pennsylvania Press, 1993), 170-172.
v
Nelson, The Annals of St-Bertin, 83.
vi
vii
viii
ix
James A Brundage, Medieval Canon Law (London: Longman, 1995), 23.
x
Heidecker, The Divorce of Lothar II, 19.
xi
Brundage, Medieval Canon Law, 23.
xii
xiii
Brundage, Medieval Canon Law, 26.
xiv
Frances and Joseph Gies, Marriage and the Family in the Middle Ages (New York: Harper & Row
Publishers, 1987), 84.
xv
xvi
xvii
Riche, The Carolingians, 85-86.
xviii
Paul Edward Dutton, ed., Carolingian Civilization: A Reader, Second Edition (Toronto: University
of Toronto Press, 2009), 25-26.
xix
xx
xxi
Dutton, Carolingian Civilization, 387.
xxii
xxiii
xxiv
Heidecker, The Divorce of Lothar II, 63-65, 69-72.
xxv
xxvi
xxvii
xxviii
xxix
xxx
xxxi
xxxii
xxxiii
Timothy Reuter, trans., The Annals of Fulda: Ninth-Century Histories, Volume II (Manchester:
Manchester University Press, 1992), 37.
xxxiv
Reuter, The Annals of Fulda, 39.
xxxv
xxxvi
Janet L. Nelson, Charles the Bald (London: Longham, 1992), 181.
xxxvii
xxxviii
xxxix
xl
xli
xlii
xliii

xliv
xlv
xlvi
Timothy Reuter, Germany in the middle ages c. 800-1056 (London: Longman, 1991), 72.
xlvii
Nelson, The Annals of St-Bertin, 87-88.
xlviii
xlix
l
Frederick A. Norwood, The Political Pretensions of Pope Nicholas I, in Church History, Vol. 15,
Nov. 4, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Dec., 1946), http://www.jstor.org/stable/3160046,
271-285.
li
lii
liii
liv
lv
lvi
Nelson, The Annals of St-Bertin, 103-104.
lvii
lviii
lix
lx
lxi
lxii
Dutton, Carolingian Civilization, 386-389.
lxiii
lxiv
lxv
lxvi
lxvii
lxviii

Lothar II

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (16)

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (10)

Similar to Lothar II

Similar to Lothar II (6)

Lothar II