Solomon Katz accepted the authenticity of the first five capitula and attributed the first four to Charlemagne, but the sixth he rejected as forged. François Louis Ganshof accepted the authenticity of the whole collection and tentatively connected the sixth to the reign of Louis the Pious. Amnon Linder rejects any connection with Charlemagne and considers the whole set "probably spurious". Michael Toch also rejects any connection with Charlemagne or any Carolingian royal policy, but accepts the connection with the "ecclesiastical polemics" of Agobard's circle. They are thus of no use as evidence for Jewish economic status. Johannes Heil writes that "there is no reason to doubt the authenticity of any of" the capitula, meaning that they were actual royal law at some point and not forgeries. He hypothesizes their ultimate "elimination from the official canon of Carolingian legislation", analogizing to the case of the Council of Meaux–Paris, which, under the influence of Amulo, passed several anti-Jewish measures only to have them overturned by King Charles the Bald.
