 |
This will introduce a previously unknown daughter of Charlemagne. His daughter
was called by the nickname Aude (or Auge1 ) by the scribe or illuminist who left a picture-record as she died in Charlemagne's arms. Her baptismal name, Adelaide, is given to us by Einhardt who claimed that she was a daughter of the Pepin, the brother of Charles.2 However, Paul, the Deacon, a scholar at Benevento Monastery wrote the epitaph for her funeral. He identified her father as having two crowns. We can asssume that it was Charles's own crown and that of Pepin after Pepin died. Adelaide was never mentioned in the royal historical records. And even though female children were not considered important in the official records, Charlemagne's legally accepted daughters are duly recorded. These daughters were considered spoiled and over-protected.3 Common sense says that the dead never-to-be-mentioned Adelaide might have been the very reason Charlemagne never let his other daughters out of his sight. If he had entrusted her to the convent where she was mistreated, and she died, no other girl child would leave him. His other daughters would never leave his side. There he could, at least, see to their safety.
Adeleide (Aude/Auge), appears to have been counted in Einhard's numbering of Charlemagne's children, but since Adelaide was supposed to be an adopted child, it had to be a "mistake." According to Paul the Deacon, Charlemagne had four sons and four daughters. One son mentioned by him was the twin of Lewis, called Lothar, who died as a baby and was not mentioned by Paul. Einhard, on the other hand, stated that two daughters, Hildigard and Adelhaid, also died as infants. Unless Einhard erred in his identification of the children, there were actually five daughters.4 The possiblity that Einhard's Adelhaid is actually the Adelaide of Paul's poem is very strong. Even her nickname Auge shows evidence of Byzantine convents, when the Greek Cyrillic"g" duplicates the Germanic "d" in the spelling.
The small notation by Einhard in the historical document Monumenta Germania Historica is the one indication of her existence. However, long before births and deaths were officially recorded in Bibles, a picture-record of her death was actually placed in one of the first Evagelines, also known as the Four Gospels. When Charlemagne died, a book of the Evangelines was in his lap and his finger pointed to a specific page. One can only quess that the open pages included the miniature drawing of his daughter.5 She was a real person. A valid and legal reason for her disappearance from the royal records must be determined.
A valid reason for, such as the untimely death of an unidentified child, had to have been a severe trauma for both parents. If it was a trauma, bitter and unexpected, (and if there was a later need for deleting her name from historical records), there would be a singular method of remembering the cause of her death. After all Charlemagne was the most importatnt country-boy-made-emperor of that time period.6 Everything that pertained to him and his family was essential knowledge. He literally changed the face of Europe. Possible coded information which can be found in manuscripts purported to be from the sixth and ninth centuries may be relevant to Charlemagne's other child.7
It was 788 when Emperor Constantine refused Charlemagne's daughter, Hroutrude, as a bride. Chaplain Witbold, started out with an imaginary sealed pouch of Charlemagne's in order to negotiate a marriage contract for Hroutrude. In the meantime, Constantine also sent an imaginary sealed pouch in the other direction, which, one can assume was for the bride his mother had contracted in 781. Whether the envoys traveled by horse overland, or by boat on the Mediterranean Sea is not important. Each mode of transportation requires a different time scale, and a different route.
Apparently the ambassadors of Constantine and Charlemagne crossed paths without even being aware of the other. That would explain why it took almost two years for Witbold to go to Constantinople in 786 and return with a rejection of the offer while the ambassadors from Constantinople were making their original request in 787. One can only wonder why the marriage exchange fell through. Since Hroutrude, was actually offered to Emperor Constantine in 786, it has been assumed that she was the only princess offered to the Byzantine ruler. It was then, that Chaplain Witbold was sent to Constantinople to negotiate this engagement.8 His other girl-child was Adelaide, she would have been about nine to ten years old. That is the approximate age of the girl-child found in the miniature in the Evangelines. Nevertheless, we find that in the following year 787, ambassadors from Emperor Constantine were sent to Charlemagne to ask for hand of his daughter.9
It was in this same year (787), that Charlemagne resumed relations with Harun al-Rashid against Constantinople.10 Yet, it does not explain why Charlemagne took offense in 787 and turned against the Byzantines, nor why the Emperor Constantine attacked the Beneventans in 788. A clue for this particular political exchange and altercation appears to be found in the cipher at the end of Book XV of the Historia Romana. (See Appendix III.)
The girl-child Adelaide disappeared from the records somewhere between 744 amd 781AD. Her mother was a Lombard. Even though the father was Charlemagne, the child was also considered to be of Lombard blood lines. What did the Byzantine Church say about the marriage? |
 |
1 Lexikon der alten Welt, p. 398: Auge - Tochter des Königs Aleuos on Tegea, der sie, aus Frucht vor Otakeoprophezeiungen über einen Enkel, als Priesterin der Athene weilst, a wird aber von Herakles umaarnt und mutter des Telephos.
2 Grant, p. 35, Charlemagne never dined without his children when he was at home and never traveled without them. His sons rode along with him and his daughters followed in the rear. Some of his guards, chosen for this very purpose, watched the end of the line of march where his daughters traveled . . .. it is strange that he would give them in marriage to no one. . . up to his death he kept them all at home. . . And hence the good fortune that followed him in all other respects was here broken by the (p. 36) touch of scandal and failure. He shut his eyes, however, to everything, and acted as though no suspicion of anything amiss had reached him or as if the rumour of it had been discredited.
2 Geary, Patrick J. (ed.) (1997) Einhard in Readings in Medieval History Mississauga, Canada: broadview Press, p. 275.
3 Einhard and Notker the Stammerer, Two Lives of Charlemagne, trans. by Lewis Thorpe,Middlesex, England, Penquin Books, p. 73, Note 43 (p. 185).
3 Lamb, p. 302, A copy of the Evangelines was found in Charlemagne's lap and his finger was pointing to the page.
4 Lamb, pp. 13-19.
5 Pre-dating a manuscript was one method to ensure it's survival. The censors of the Inquisition during the next centuries were tricked also by minor alterations such as an overly ornate script or a script without any kind of punctuation which were difficult for them to read.
6 Scholz, p. 187
7 Scholz, p. 64.
8 Folz, p. 142. |
