The Ordo

The four manuscripts listed above in which this version of the Ordo ad regem benedicendum is included are the only ones from Sicily that contain such an ordo. Two of them have maintained the original disposition of the coronation ordines of the PRG: the one for a royal coronation is followed by two imperial ones and one for the queen or empress, that is, PRG LXII–LXVIII, the German ordo, and OCI I–III. Ms. C , retaining from the imperial ordines only the old coronation mass of the emperor, contains the ordo for the queen or empress in a changed form,^[13] preceded by an ordo for the festive crown-wearings (Festkrönungen).^[14] The Syracuse pontifical refers only to king and queen and does not have anything on the emperor or empress. The other parts of the four manuscripts, not examined at this time, follow more or less the model of the PRG.

I have no doubts that the four manuscripts of our ordo derive from a single model and the changes introduced can be explained only by the particular historical situation in 1130. Three major modifications point to this historical conjunction. First, in chapter 21 (of the present edition, which corresponds to the PRG count) the text Postea sceptrum et baculum accipiat . . . was changed to Postea septrum et regnum accipiat . The scepter and the staff were thus replaced by scepter and orb. While this change is not exactly borne out by the rather general references in narrative sources to the coronation on Christmas Day 1130, it accords nicely with the Sicilian ordo for crown-wearing (see above), which was probably composed during the reign of Roger II. Second,

two of the prescriptions of the ordo in the PRG regarding the heredity of the throne were altered; a third was not. In cap. 7 we read: Vis regnum tibi a deo concessum iustitia regere . . . , while the original had after concessum the words: secundum iustitiam patrum tuorum . In cap. 25 the formula of the model Sta et retine amodo locum quem hucusque paterna successione tenuisti hereditario iure tibi delegatum per autoritatem dei omnipotentis was cut to Sta et retine amodo locum tibi delegatum per autoritatem dei . . . . It is evident, therefore, that the father of the person to be crowned according to this ordo was not the king. Yet the person who rewrote the text may not have been in principle against hereditary succession, since in cap. 14 the words Reges de lumbris eius egrediantur regnum hoc regere totum were not changed.

The first change, the replacement of the staff with the globe points to Norman Sicily, where we know that these were the insignia of rulership. The second set of changes suggests that the coronation for which this text was conceived was none other than that Roger II, who was the first Norman king of the kingdom. This assumption is also confirmed by the third change in the text common to all manuscripts: in cap. 13 the passage ut sis benedictus et constitutus rex in regno tuo has been abbreviated to ut sis benedictus et constitutus rex . Roges had just become king, but up to that moment he was not in possession of a regnum in the strict sense of the word.

We can omit the discussion of other, rather slight, variations in this ordo vis-à-vis its model in the PRG, since they do not appear to have any relevance for the coronation of Roger II nor for any analysis of political ideas prevalent in the Norman kingdom of Sicily.

In studies of ordines one of the major problems is always the dating of the text. Here we have one of the rare occasions when this questions can be easily resolved. I believe the arguments sketched above make it clear that this ordo can be linked unequivocally to the coronation of Roger II on Christmas Day 1130 A.D. It was this text that contemporaries saw as the valid ordo Romanus . Having inserted some minor ad hoc changes, necessitated by the given conditions—different insignia, new dynasty—they were convinced they had compiled an authoritative version. Whatever was not changed from the tenth-century model (and its eighth-century original) can be interpreted in two ways: either the redactor of 1130 accepted it, or, even if he held it for outdated, he did not find it important enough to alter the text. This, of course, places the historian in a quandary: it is easy to interpret textual changes if found, but much less easy to explain passages which, though obviously obsolete, were not changed sometimes for centuries. The attentive reader of this corrected ordo will find, for example, in paragraph 11 that the new king is supposed to ascend the throne of his father (ad paternum decenter solium . . . conscendere mereatur). This passage, however inappropriate for the occasion, was not altered, just as the one on the emperor's duty of the governance of the church (ad regendum Ecclesiam) was not changed in the

imperial coronation ordines (ordo XXXIX in the MGH edition) after the Investiture Contest, down to 1530.^[15]