Fastrada, redeemed?

Recently a coin came to light that throws new light on Fastrada, Charlemagne’s third wife from 783 – 794. To unpack this discovery let’s first look at the coin itself. Then a quick refresher on Fastrada, before we move onto why this discovery is significant. With your indulgence I’ll end with a completely unsupported idea of how to square the seemingly irreconcilable views of Fastrada in the source material.

Earlier this year the Centre Charlemagne in Aachen acquired a coin, a single silver denier.^1.I have not been able to find the who, what, why, and how behind this acquisition, but suffice it to say that somebody either gave or sold the coin to the Centre. A denier is a silver penny, the closest thing to a standard medium of exchange in an otherwise barter-based economy. Charles worked hard to standardize his coinage, and the denier is one result.^2.Look for a coinage post soon.

Read more: Fastrada, redeemed?

Charlemagne appears to have drawn inspiration for this coin from his contemporary, King Offa of Britain.^5.Reigned 757 until his death in 796. Francia and Britain enjoyed a brisk trade in various goods, and English coins have been found in Francia, and vice versa. In the mid-780s some British coins began to feature Offa’s Queen Cynethryth, not only naming her but even including her image. This would have been unheard of in Francia, where coinage bore the king’s name and no one else.^6.Only in the early ninth century did Charles permit a portrait of himself on his coins.

No doubt Charles, who exchanged letters with Offa and came close to marrying at least one son to a daughter of Offa^7.Offa came back with a counter-offer, in which one of his sons would also marry another daughter of Charles – that set off a trade war. I’ll see about putting all that together some time. must have seen these new coins. Coupland believes that Charles introduced the Fastrada coin in 793, while she was still among the living.^8.He notes a numismatic controversy that Carolingian coins that named anyone besides the king were a form of posthumous commemoration, but he doesn’t buy it.

Why did the king of the Franks chose this queen, one of four in total, to immortalize on his coinage? Perhaps an anniversary present, or a gift from a grateful husband for bringing another healthy child into the world. Whatever the reason, the queen did not have long to enjoy her new-found numismatic fame, for she died in 794.^9.Her brief time as a queen with a coin might explain why there is only this single example, while, per Coupland, there are more than 50 of the Cynethryth coins.

We’ve looked at Fastrada’s life, as well as her (alleged) relationship to two minor rebellions against Charlemagne. Going by the most prominent sources, Einhard and the Royal Annals, Fastrada contributed nothing but trouble to the kingdom. Janet Nelson, however, has contributed a more nuanced portrait, and dives deep to present Fastrada as a powerful queen and woman in her own right. These include those (non-disparaging) mentions in the Royal Annals and a letter from Charles to his wife. The seemingly indecent speed with which Charles wed Fastrada after the death of his second wife Hildegarde is put down to the fact that his mother Bertrada had also passed recently, and his children needed a mother. Fair enough.

Coupland reiterates much of Nelson’s case for the exceptional nature of Fastrada as a wife and queen. Like Offa and Cynethryth, the Fastrada coin “is surely further proof of Charlemagne’s feelings towards his wife.” No doubt. Yet the accusations of cruelty in two separate, otherwise well-regarded, sources still stand. What to make of this?

What if all of the sources are true, but simply reflect different facets of the truth? Consider Charles in 783 – his wife and mother have died within months of each other, and he needs to find a woman who can assume the roles of wife, mother to his children, and queen. He has also realized, at perhaps forty-two years of age, that the book of his youth is now concluded. While not a topic of state, his sexual appetites are well known and no doubt were a consideration.^10.A poem from around 826 by Walahfrid Strabo describes the vision of a monk named Wettini, in which a damned Charles suffers from a ferocious beast “tearing at his genitals.” Poetry, p. 215. This next wife would be the first in which his mother, the formidable Bertrada, did not have a chance to meet. Was the great king seduced by a desirable woman, who kept him on a string? While the strong man and the beguiling woman is a literary trope, no doubt many of us have watched similar relationships unfold.

Think of Fastrada as an agent, an instigator, not a direct actor. She could be delightful, as in 787 when king and queen met in Worms, “where they rejoiced and were happy in each other’s company.”^11.Royal Annals, 787, p. 85. In 791, the honeymoon well over, his letter to her remarks that, “we have been surprised that no missus or letter has reached us from you since we set out from Regensburg. As to which, it is our desire that should notify us more frequently concerning your health and any other matters, as you should decide. And once again we send you abundant greetings in the Lord.”^12.Letters, no. 3, p. 310. The very next year his son Pippin led a rebellion, “because they could not endure, so they declared, the cruelty of the queen Fastrada.”^13.Revised Royal Annals, 792, p. 124.

Einhard takes a somewhat different slant, and does not accuse Fastrada of direct cruelty to those who rebelled against Charles. Rather that her behavior led him, “in giving in to the cruelty of his wife,”^14.Einhard, Vita, ch. 20, p. 40. to generate such ill-will that others could no longer endure his rule. Maybe his underlings felt the verbal lash of the good king when another mailbag contained no letters from home.

All pure speculation, of course. We’ll never know what kind of person was Fastrada, nor the nature of the relationship between she and her husband. But it is fun to speculate!