Michael I. Allen here gives the text of the works of Frechulf of Lisieux, namely the Historia (Historiarum libri XII), certain prologues and dedication letters (Epistola ad Hrabanum Maurum De Pentateucho commentando, Prologus ad Karolum Caluum regem in libellos Flauii Vegeti Renati de re militari nuper emendatos and the prologues of the Historia to Helisachar and the dedication letter to queen Judith). Frechulf, probably a monk in Fulda and pupil of Hrabanus Maurus, as Allen argues (I, 12f.), took over the see of Lisieux at latest in 825. Little is known about the author, who had a successor as bishop of Lisieux in 853. Frechulf's main work is the Historia, the first Carolingian attempt to write world history. The work is divided into two parts, the first ends with the reign of Augustus and the following part begins with the birth of Christ. The second part is dedicated to Queen Judith in 829/830, surely before the first upheaval of the sons of Louis the Pious in 830, because he addresses Judith as "Domina Augustarum felicissima Iudith" and uses similar words of praise. The purpose of this second part, that contains the deeds of the Roman emperors, should serve for teaching the young Charles the Bald.
Frechulf's conception of the past found attention because of his supposed assumption of an end of the Roman Imperium. He continues telling history only up to the death of Gregory the Great. In his view, as he writes in the dedication letter to Queen Judith, with the Franks and Langobards new regna had risen, "deficientibus Romanorum imperatoribus seu iudicis ab Italia et Galliis" (II, 436). There is no need to suppose that he thought of an end of the Imperium Romanum in an eschatological sense. The possibility that he had no theoretically reflected preference in this question is to be deliberated. As Allen (I,67) remarks, Frechulf knows the commentary of Hieronymus on Daniel, but avoids a quotation of the "Theory of the four imperia" with Rome as the last of them. If that meant that Frechulf had a conception of an end of the Roman Imperium, he would have to explain. We have to be aware of the fact that the historical sources for the 'new' history of the Franks differ much from ancient historical writing. He probably had a problem with his sources that urged him to make a second cut like that between book one and two.
But the importance of Frechulf's Historia lies not in telling history from his own private view by working like a modern historian, even not like some historians of the twelfth century, as for example Otto of Freising. It is Frechulf's compilation of sources that makes his work important to us. There lies the main task for an editor. No doubt Allen has given a quite reliable reading of the texts. Critical annotation and proof of used sources are given comprehensively. The fact that the critical text differs only little from earlier readings like Migne's text doesn't reduce the value of Allen's edition. It was not the main task in this case. Much more necessary for the use by historians is the proof of sources. That is because of the work's main character as compilation. Frechulf compiled ancient Christian texts in a quite professional way. There he is, as Allen can show with his annotation, a real representative of Carolingian Renaissance. Frechulf does not try to give an own approach of historical understanding. There is no question for the truth behind the sources, no single valuing of contents, as known of historians of the twelfth century, but instead of this there is a very high requirement for the choice of a reliable source. Reliable in this context means first, that the source should correctly be telling history in a theological sense. Because of that he chose only Christian sources for his need. Then there was the need to search for an author who told the already known history as a whole in a very detailed way. So, Frechulf's Historia has been part of the canonisation of historical sources for the use in writing history for a long time ahead. This is characteristic for the Carolingian Renaissance. Like the finding of the best texts of the Bible or canonical regulations, Frechulf in his work is on the way to find a canonical History. There lies probably a reason for his ending telling history with the lack of ancient historical sources.
The history of the monarchy of Augustus, central in Frechulf's view of world history, is mostly told in the words of Orosius. So he could not make any mistake in valuing the reign of the first monarch in the time of Christ's coming on earth. When Allen discusses Frechulf's use of sources up to manuscript traditions, he does it in the right way.
The main question for a review lies in the choice of the main manuscript tradition of the Historia. Supposed his readings are correct, and I am convinced of that, his decision to put the ms. G (Sankt Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek 622, saec. IX) on the top of the tradition of the entire Historia is right. It makes sense to edit the author's last text and to value the tradition of single books less than the whole, especially because Allen can give reasons to suppose that Frechulf himself had authorised the tradition of G, perhaps by his own hand (I, 67). Migne (Patrologia Latina 106, 917-1258), like other earlier editors, gave the text of Nov., a later descent of G, printed by Melchior von Neufl in Cologne 1539 (I, 178). Allen's discussion of the manuscript's tradition leaves no question. Each manuscript is described and valued. For the new edition of the dedication letter to Queen Judith, Allen chose an individual manuscript tradition that allows him to give a little better text than Dummlers edition in the MGH. There are only little differences in the given texts.
The first volume (the edition is found in the separate volume two) contains a very short chapter dedicated to the life of Frechulf, chapter two and three to minor writings and the Historia, containing dating, history of editions and manuscript tradition. Chapter four discusses the sources, used by Frechulf in his Historia in a very comprehensive way. The regular chapters are followed by plates, an onomasticon with different spelling of names and single notion of citation place in the Historia, a Bibliography with the sigla Allen uses for sources used by Frechulf. Very useful are Indices of all citations from the bible and of the used sources.
The lack of an index of names is a little lack of the book, the onomasticon is no compensation and should not be. Augustus, for instance, figures only under Octaviani, Constantine is not listed, because of the correct spelling of his name by Frechulf. In the bibliography one important title is missing: W. Goez, "Zur Weltchronik des Bischofs Frechulf von Lisieux", Festgabe P. Kirn, 1961, 93ff.
The sigles for the sources could better be given at the front of the text, perhaps a second time. They are so eminently important for the whole edition, that they should to be found in front of volume one or two.
Allen's work is a very good philological approach, and one can regret the lack of an historical commentary (there are only Complementary Notes on pages 731-739), but editing a critical text was the task, and in this respect everything is satisfying.