Charlemagne and the Lombard Kingdom That Was: the Lombard Past in Post-Conquest Italian Historiography
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Carolingian conquest of Lombard Italy (774) was preceded by a massive effort on the part of the Church to convince the Frankish court of the legitimacy of the invasion. Relying on a terminology borrowed from Gregory I, the papal court produced an offensive portrait of the Lombards, depicted as treacherous, vile, and heathen. This article analyzes eighth-century papal epistolary and the Liber Pontificalis in order to establish the strategies behind this campaign. In a second moment, we turn to the Lombard response after the conquest, and the efforts of Paul the Deacon as well as the anonymous author of the Origo Langobardorum codicis Gothanis to question the papal portrait of the Lombards and to reclaim the Christian past of their people. Both Paul and the Gotha Origo focused on the importance of the conversion — and especially the role of Gregory the Great — in the rehabilitation of the Lombards. Their works, this article suggests, represent an attempt of the Lombards to dissociate their Christian faith from the conquest and to reclaim the narrative about their own past.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".