Skip to main content

Full text of "The beginnings of the temporal sovereignty of the popes, A.D. 754-1073"

See other formats

Digitized by tine Internet Arciiive 

in 2007 witii funding from 

IVIicrosoft Corporation 


The International Catholic Library 

Edited by 


Vol. XI. 

Censor deputatus. 

Imprtmt potest. 


Episcopus Arindelensis, 
Vicarius Generalis. 


die 30 AprilU 1907. 




A.D. 754-1073 







(Db Jure Earl of Landaff, of Thomastown, Co. Tipperart) 






All rights reserved. 

Printed by Ballantynb, Hanson 6^ Co. 
At the Ballantyne Press, Edinburgh 


MoNsiGNOR Duchesne's volume on the beginnings 
of the temporal power of the Popes appeared to me 
to be the most accurate and concise of any of the 
treatises on this important question which have 
hitherto appeared. I accordingly sought his per- 
mission to translate the work into English, feeling 
assured that it would prove interesting to a very 
wide circle of readers. 

For the kindness and readiness with which the 
learned author acceded to my request, I desire to 
record here my sense of gratitude. 

I have endeavoured to express the meaning of 
the original, rather than the actual words or idioms 
of the author, in order to avoid the awkwardness 
and clumsiness of diction, which a literal rendering 
would have involved. 


Chelsfield, Kent. 


The learned author of this volume is well known, 
and deservedly esteemed, by a very wide circle of 
appreciative students of ecclesiastical history. His 
honesty and trustworthiness in publishing the results 
of his laborious investigations earned for him the 
praise and encouragement of Pope Leo XIII. 

In the hope that this short treatise may be of 
service in an English version, I have ventured to 
translate it, and for his permission to me to under- 
take this work I must express my thanks to 
Monsignor Duchesne. 


Chelsfield, Kent. 



This book is the outcome of a course of lectures 
given at Paris some twelve years ago. They made 
their first public appearance, collected and printed, 
in a Review, and, afterwards, a fairly large selection 
of them was placed at the disposition of the public. 
As the first edition of the lectures is now exhausted, 
I am, in accordance with request, bringing out 
another. This, however, is rather out of deference 
to the advice of my pubhsher, than to any deep 
sense of the book's importance. So many people 
have written on the subject, and with so much 
erudition ! At least, I suppose so ; but not being 
a person of unlimited leisure, I have, as a rule, 
confined myself to the study of original documents, 
without unduly troubling myself about the lucubra- 
tions to which they have given rise. Few foot-notes 
will be found in these pages, for I have been chary 
of references, even with regard to my own first- 
hand investigations. Many details are explained in 
my notes on the Liber Pontificalis, to which the 
learned and conscientious reader is respectfully re- 
ferred. Small works of this kind are intended for 
the average reader. 

For the benefit of the latter, then, I have tried 
to explain the formation of the little pontifical state 

'- b 


in the eighth century, and how the conditions under 
which it worked during the first three centuries of 
its existence are connected with the great religious 
conflicts in the time of Gregory VII. It is true 
that the subject may appear remote, but as long 
as it is a question of the Church and of Italy, its 
interest can never pall. 



I. The Situation in the time of King Liutprand 
II. The Duchy of Rome 

III. The Sovekbignty of the Pope and the Frankish 

Intervention . 

IV. Stephen II. . 
V. Paul 

VI. Roman Institutions in the Eighth Century 
VII. Christopher the Primicerius 
VIII. Hadrian and Desiderius . 
IX. The Pontifical State in the time of Charlemagne 
X. Restoration of the Empire 
XI. The Constitution of Lothaire 
XII. The Saracens at Rome 

XIII. The Emperor Louis II. 

XIV. The Troubles of John VIII. 
XV. The Empire of Spoleto 

XVI. The House of Theophylact 
XVII. Alberig and John XII. 
XVIII. The Popes of the Empire . 
XIX. The German Popes . 
Conclusion . 





Lombard and Byzantine Italy — Progress of the Lombards — Leo the 
Isaurian, Liutprand, and Pope Gregory II. — Roman politics under 
Gregory III. — Zachary, the peace-loving Pope. 

The unity of Italy was first established by the 
Romans, who, in the second century before our era, 
conquered Cisalpine Gaul, and reached the barrier of 
the Alps. This unity really consisted in unfailing 
submission to the Romans and to the masters who 
were appointed by them. Next to the senate and 
the magistrates of the Republic came the Italian 
and provincial emperors, and then the Gothic kings 
of Ravenna. These were replaced, in the middle of 
the sixth century, by a re-establishment of the imperial 
rule, under the auspices of the Emperor of Constanti- 
nople. All these revolutions had taken place without 
any parcelling out of the land, for although there had 
been frequent change of authority, it had always been 
of the same nature. The last change resembled the 
close of a long and disastrous war. Now, however, 
people were beginning to forget not only the 
prosperous reigns of Theodoric and Amalasontus, 
but even the miseries of the Gothic war, and con- 


gratulated themselves on living peacefully under 
the distant though unmistakable rule of the Emperor 
Justinian : Erat enim iota Italia gaudeus} 

This happy state of affairs was interrupted in 569 
by the Lombard invasion. At the same time the 
unity of Italy received a mortal blow, from which it 
took many centuries to recover. Not that Alboin 
wished to harm it, for he would willingly have sup- 
ported it could he have done so to his own advantage. 
But his people had neither military power, nor unity 
of purpose enough, to set themselves against the 
whole of Italy, nor could they hold the same 
position of authority as the Goths had done. Be- 
sides, the Byzantine empire, suffering from the in- 
roads of the Avaris in the north, and the Persians 
and Arabs in the east, w^ no longer in a condition 
to live up to the high ideals of Justinian. The 
dilapidated state of its military and financial power 
enabled it to offer but a desultory opposition to the 
attacks of the German barbarians. Towards the 
close of the sixth century the Roman defence was 
represented by two efforts not tending in the same 
direction. One — that of a boundless, unconquer- 
able, but impotent hopefulness — was embodied in 
the person of the Exarch Romanus — a lieutenant 
of the Emperor Maurice. The other, that of local 
interests and practical claims, was led by the diplo- 
matic Pope Gregory. This last effort was the only 
one which, under the circumstances, had any chance 
of success. It resulted in peace, but at the same 
time, in the loss of Italian unity, for the imperial 
rule was divided with the Lombards. 

Henceforward there were two Italics — the 
Lombard and the Byzantine. The former was 

* Liber Pontificalis, Life of John III. 


subject to the barbarian masters of Northern 
Tuscany and the Valley of the Po, and the latter 
to the Roman Emperor of the East. The Byzantine 
power in Italy was steadily declining, and, being 
driven from the interior, was with difficulty sustained 
on the coast of Genoa, the Venetian lagoons, and the 
southern peninsulas. The two parties were never at 
peace for long together, and the Lombards did not at 
all agree with the Byzantines, who considered that 
they had yielded enough. The Lombard power 
became more and more firmly established in the 
conquered territory, and they finally found them- 
selves in a position to accomplish issues for which 
the strength of Alboin and his followers had been 
inadequate. On all sides their plans of conquest were 
renewed, and they were rapidly gaining control of 
the coast. As early as the seventh century Rotharis 
had annexed the Ligurian sea-coast as well as the 
remaining imperial territory at the end of the 
Adriatic. The duchy of Beneventum was rapidly 
increasing its power ; it took possession of Salerno, 
the Lucanian coast and maritime Apulia, and, follow- 
ing in the wake of the retreating Byzantines, extended 
its sway as far as Otranto and Calabria. In the time 
of St. Gregory it was still possible to journey from 
the Venetian islands right down to the Straits of 
Messina without leaving imperial ground. But 
now things were changed. The Lombard power 
was making itself felt all along the line of Byzantine 
possession, attacking any undefended positions, and 
breaking up the imperial domain. The possessions 
that remained in the far south — Otranto, Gallipoli, 
and Reggio — looked to Sicily for help, and, thanks 
to the friendly sea, the promontories of Sorrento, 
Naples, and Gaeta held out with fair success. The 


island of Rialto, on which Venice was beginning to 
rise, became the centre of the lagoons of the north. 
Rome and Ravenna, though but poorly equipped, 
were engaged in a painful struggle in mid-Italy. 
While Rome, on her side, enjoyed a religious 
deference inspired by her sanctuaries, Ravenna's 
only protecting influence lay in the majesty of the 
frail and distant empire. Liutprand, evidently at 
deadly enmity with them both, was gaining great 
successes. Sutri, Narni, Sora, Cumes, Osimo, 
Ancona, Bologna, Cesena, and even Ravenna's own 
port, Classis, all yielded to the Lombard king, or 
to the Dukes of Spoleto and Beneventum. Negotia- 
tions, and even strategical manoeuvres were essayed, 
not always in vain. The Pope tried the effect of 
entreaties and offers of money, but in spite of an 
occasional success it was obvious that the country 
surrounding Rome and Ravenna would soon be 
completely subjugated, and that finally the cities 
themselves would be obliged to yield. 

Aff'airs in Italy were already going badly enough, 
when the Byzantine government contrived to quarrel 
with the Holy See. They disagreed on the fiscal 
question, and, .what was more important still, on 
religious matters. Pope Gregory II., as the defender 
of the Church's patrimony, thought fit to protest 
against certain new impositions. This opposition 
had an adverse effect upon the emperor's financial 
plans, for the Church of Rome owned valuable pro- 
perty in Sicily, Calabria, and the other Byzantine 
districts, and the Pope was the richest contributor 
in Italy. But the final blow was the quarrel about 
images, in which the government interfered with the 
services of the Church and tried to impose upon the 
Pope religious regulations which had not even been 


submitted to his approval. Gregory II., in alarm, 
protested, and all Italy, Romans and Lombards 
alike, rallied round him. 

He was, however, always a faithful subject of the 
empire, and though he organised resistance, he did 
not for a moment intend it as an act of rebellion. It 
must be admitted that the Byzantine officials tried 
his loyalty severely, for, from their point of view, it 
was the Pope, and not the Lombards, against whom 
they had to fight. They were under orders to 
despatch him, and if the worst came to the worst, 
they did not mean to stop short of assassination. 
The Exarch Paul even sent troops to Rome, which 
was on the side of the Pope. But the Lombards 
came to their assistance, and Paul had to retreat 
to Ravenna. There he soon found himself in an un- 
pleasant position, for the Venetian and Pentapolitan 
troops refused to obey him, and even threatened to 
announce the fall of Leo the Isaurian, to proclaim 
another emperor, and to lead him to Constantinople. 
The Pope, however, managed to calm this undue 

The unfortunate Exarch perished at Ravenna, in 
a riot, brought about by the general discontent. 
Another, Eutychius by name, was sent by the 
emperor to take his place. He was the last of the 
Exarchs. Having been furnished with the same in- 
structions as his predecessor, he at first adopted the 
same tactics ; but the resistance which he encountered 
led him to try to break through the bond, which 
rehgious defence had established between the Pope 
and the Lombards. From the Byzantine point of 
view this alliance was most undesirable. There was 
no great harmony between the Lombards of the 
kingdom and those of the two duchies of Spoleto 


and Beneventum. These duchies had, from the first, 
enjoyed the privilege of self-government, a privilege 
which had only strengthened as time went on. 
They were, it is true, attached to the Lombard State, 
but with ties as loose as those which, on the other 
side of the Alps, bound the duchies of Aquitaine, 
Alamanny, and Bavaria to the Prankish kingdom. 
King Liutprand sought every opportunity of making 
his authority felt in these detached provinces. He 
responded to the overtures of the new Exarch, and 
they both united in an effort to restore Spoleto and 
Beneventum to the royal dominion, and Rome to 
that of the imperial representative. 

This amiable alliance gave general satisfaction, 
though the result was hardly what the emperor 
would have desired. The king entered Spoleto 
and received the submission of the two dukes ; then, 
accompanied by the Exarch, he went on to Rome, or 
rather to St. Peter's, where they were received by 
Pope Gregory. Liutprand was a Christian prince, 
as well as an experienced politician, and he and 
the Pope agreed to sacrifice the aggressive policy of 
the emperor against the Holy See. There seems to 
have been much interchange of courtesies, and the 
king overwhelmed St. Peter's with gifts. Then, to 
show that they harboured no ill-feeling towards the 
Emperor of Constantinople, the Romans, headed by 
the Exarch, set out under the imperial banner to put 
down a rival of Leo the Isaurian, who had seized a 
favourable opportunity to land in a corner of Roman 
Tuscia. This Petasius or Tiberius, as he was called, 
was killed at Monterano, and from that time the 
Exarch of Ravenna ceased his machinations against 
the Roman pontiff. The emperor, if not the empire, 
was practically ignored, and the administrative power 


was distributed in such a way as enabled them to 
arrange matters among themselves without asking 
the imperial opinion. 

The situation soon became clear. As a result 
of the iconoclast dispute the patriarch Germanus 
of Constantinople (730) was compelled to resign. 
Gregory II. not only refused to recognise his 
successor, but severely reprimanded the prince who 
was the cause of all these disturbances. The Pope 
died soon after (731), but his policy was continued by 
Gregory III., who came after him. He even added 
force to his convictions by sending ambassadors 
to Constantinople, but Leo, far from giving way, 
managed to rid himself of these unwelcome guests 
by means of bribery and intimidation. Most often 
they were stopped on their way by the cruisers of the 
Sicilian patrician. The property of the Holy See in 
Sicily and in the other Byzantine possessions in the 
south of Italy was seized, and the bishops of these 
districts were despatched to Constantinople. Once 
there they could not go to Rome for consecration, 
and they were regarded as subject to the authority of 
the patriarch of the imperial city. 

The Exarch's reconciliation with the Pope did 
not tend to increase his popularity with his chiefs, 
and availed but little against the Lombard attacks. 
Gregory II. had almost succeeded in protecting the 
Roman territory against his enterprising neighbours. 
Liutprand had yielded to his claims upon Lutri, 
though Narni was still in the grip of the Duke of 
Spoleto. Round Ancona and Ravenna the imperial 
power was decreasing to such an extent that Ravenna 
herself succumbed to the Lombards, and the Exarch 
Eutychius was obliged to take refuge at Venice. In 
compliance with the wishes of Gregory III. the 


Venetians soon sent him back to Ravenna, and the 
Exarchate continued for some years longer. 

Just then the tranquillity of the situation was 
almost upset by a political indiscretion. The Dukes 
of Spoleto and Beneventum reasserted themselves, 
and assumed an independent attitude towards King 
Liutprand. Their neighbours at Rome, who could 
no longer resist the temptation to take an active part 
in Itahan affairs, were unfortunately inspired to inter- 
fere in the quarrels which ensued. The king invaded 
Spoleto, expelled Duke Trasimund, and installed 
another in his place. The outraged duke sought 
refuge at Rome, and when the Romans refused to 
give him up to Liutprand, the latter seized upon 
Ameria, Orte, Bomarzo, and Blera, four places in the 
north of the duchy. Being now at open enmity 
with the Romans, his followers organised a series of 
pillaging expeditions in their domains, pushing their 
depredations even to the very gates of Rome. 

Their interference seemed likely to cost the 
Romans dear. Gregory III. in this extremity besought 
Liutprand to restore the four towns that he had taken. 
This request being, not unnaturally, refused, the Pope 
had recourse to the extreme measure of imploring help 
from France. Relays of messengers, charged with 
eloquent letters and presents, and bearing the Keys 
of the Confession of St. Peter, were despatched to 
Charles Martel. Special attention was called by them 
to the plundering of the Roman territory, which was 
exhausting the revenues of St. Peter to such an 
extent that the illumination of the apostolic sanc- 
tuary had to suffer curtailment. Charles received 
the Pope's representatives with due respect, and 
even sent an embassy in return. The Romans, how- 
ever, could expect but little help from this quarter, 


for the relations between Charles and Liutprand were 
too harmonious to be disturbed. Only a short time 
before, the young Frankish prince, Pepin (the future 
conqueror of Astolphus) had been sent by his father 
to have his head shorn by Liutprand, in token of 
military adoption. In the same year (739), the 
Lombard king had, in response to Charles's appeal, 
united with him against their common enemies, the 
Saracens, who were invading Provence. Besides, 
the Franks were not ignorant of the state of affairs 
in Italy, and they realised that the Romans had 
themselves to blame, in some measure at least, for 
the position in which they found themselves. If 
they were in difficulties, they must get out of 
them as best they could, such was the Frankish 

In time, the Romans succeeded in overcoming 
the difficulty, but not without bloodshed. With 
unwonted and commendable energy, they under- 
took to subjugate the duchy of Spoleto, not for 
themselves, but for their confederate, Trasimund. 
One division of the army fell upon Abruzzo, while 
the other devoted its attention to the despoiling 
of Rieti and Spoleto. An entry was easily secured, 
and Trasimund, after giving orders that Duke 
Frederic, Liutprand's protege, should have his throat 
cut, established himself in his place. This was in 
December 740. 

After this, it seemed that the least he could do was 
to show his gratitude to the Romans by helping them 
to regain the places they had lost in supporting his 
cause. There were, however, difficulties in the way. 
Trasimund saw that he would have his work cut out 
to maintain authority in his duchy, and apparently 
he did not feel equal to engaging in operations so 


far from home. Liutprand, meanwhile, was leisurely 
preparing to bear down upon his refractory vassal 
of Spoleto, his ally, the Duke of Beneventum, and 
their good friends of Rome. The year 741 was 
passed in expectation. The Romans in vain de- 
manded their towns from the helpless Trasimund. 
In the midst of all this, in the month of December, 
the Pope died, just a year after the triumphal entry 
into Spoleto. The same year also witnessed the 
passing of the two great Princes of the East and 
West, Leo the Isaurian (June 18), and Charles of 
France (October 22). 

The Romans were in sore need of a man of 
wisdom who would guide them with his counsel. 
Pope Zachary, who was immediately elected, had 
no difficulty in explaining to them their situation 
and prospects. Liutprand and his army were about 
to descend upon them, secure that no opposition 
was to be feared on that side of the Alps. Had 
not Spoleto and Beneventum already twice suc- 
cumbed to the king of the Lombards, and was 
it probable that the Roman forces, though not to 
be despised, could hold out against him ? There 
seemed every chance that they would be defeated, 
and it was hardly likely under the circumstances 
that the king would yield to the Pope's petitions 
that Rome should be spared. Their best course 
would be to forsake their faithless ally, Trasimund, 
and enlist themselves on the stronger side. They 
might then have occasion to render the king 
some service, which would redound to their ad- 

So it was arranged. The king, being approached by 
the Pope, promised not to molest the duchy of Rome, 
and further, to restore to them their lost towns. 


As soon as he drew near to Spoleto the Roman 
army advanced to his assistance. Trasimund made 
an unconditional surrender, and the Pope, fearing 
that the king's promises might be as easily broken 
as those of the Duke of Spoleto, sallied forth to 
remind him of them, and at the same time to come 
to an understanding with him on other matters, 
ecclesiastical as well as political. The interview, 
which took place at Terni, was most satisfactory. 
The king agreed to keep peace with the duchy 
of Rome for twenty years, and restored not only 
the four towns, but also the imperial prisoners and 
the estates of the Holy See which had been annexed 
in the foregoing years. 

The Romans were not alone in experiencing 
the truth of the saying that persuasion is often more 
effective than force. The following year Liutprand, 
not content with Bologna and Imola, seized upon 
the town of Cesena and even upon part of the land 
belonging to Ravenna. In response to the terrified 
appeal of the Ravennese, Pope Zachary hastened 
to their help, leaving the government of Rome to 
Stephen, patrician and duke. On 29th June, 743, 
he interviewed I^iutprand at Pavia, and once more 
the Lombard king yielded to the peaceful tactics 
of the Pope, and Ravenna, for the time being, re- 
mained under the Byzantine sway. 

At the beginning of the next year, 744, the long 
and glorious reign of Liutprand came to an end. 
Impertinently enough, Zachary 's biographer attri- 
butes his death to the prayers of the Pope, who had 
had so much reason to be grateful to him. We 
must, however, for Zachary's honour, look upon this 
as the slander of an unprincipled eulogist. Be this 
as it may, the new king, Ratchis, at first appeared as 


well disposed as his predecessor. Like him, he 
granted the Pope's request for a twenty years' peace. 
But this was only to affect the duchy of Rome, and 
the Lombard king soon resumed the war against the 
emperor, in the neighbourhood of Pentapolis and 
Perugia. He was besieging the latter when he was 
surprised by the Pope. Once more was the king 
obliged to yield to his irresistible eloquence, and 
deliver up the prey that he had already grasped. In- 
deed, Zachary's blandishments were so effectual that 
Ratchis not only abandoned the siege of Perugia 
but he actually abdicated the Lombard throne (749) 
and entered upon a religious career. He, with his 
whole family, withdrew to St. Peter's at Rome, and 
finally settled at Monte Cassino. 

Zachary's ambition had overleapt itself. He 
might have been thankful at having to deal with 
such kings as Liutprand and Ratchis, instead of 
rejoicing at their deaths or driving them into con- 
vents. The new king, Astolphus, proved himself 
less amenable to the Pope's influence, and matters 
began immediately to assume a threatening aspect. 
He began by settling the affairs of Ravenna and 
Pentapolis, and at Zachary's death, in March 752, the 
imperial rule was definitely abolished in those regions. 
In fact, to the north of the Apennines, the lagoons of 
Venice alone acknowledged the dominion of the 
Byzantine emperor. 



Political position of the Pope, in Rome, in Italy, and elsewhere — The 
radius of his immediate influence — The Duchy of Rome, its limits 
and its autonomy — The moral and the political authority of the 
Pope in this province : the people of St. Peter — Relations with the 
Greek Empire 

St. Gregory the Great was, in modern parlance, 
an excellent patriot, in spite of the fact that he was 
the chief representative of the submissive policy 
which assented to the division of Italy between the 
Lombards and the empire. In theory his sorrow 
was as keen as the hopes of the Exarch Romanus, 
but in practice he was as much interested as anybody 
in the safety and prosperity of the empire. Fortu- 
nately for the imperial progress, his successors were 
animated with the same spirit. The Pope, indeed, 
was a mighty moral power which, had the boundary 
line between the spiritual and the temporal sphere 
been less jealously defined, would probably have 
become a powerful political factor. Over the 
frontiers he held communication with other races — 
the Franks, the Visigoths, the Anglo-Saxons, the 
Bavarians, and, in particular, with the Lombards, 
who heard him the more willingly as their converts 
increased in number. He held quite an exceptional 
situation in the interior of Byzantine Italy. It is a 
mere theological quibble to speak of the Bishop of 
Rome at any time as of an ordinary bishop. It is an 
historical quibble, in connection with a Pope of the 



sixth, seventh, or eighth century, to lay stress on his 
subordinate relation to the Emperor of Constanti- 
nople. Undoubtedly, from a theoretical point of 
view, he was a subject, for the emperor was supreme 
ruler of the empire. But in reality the Pope was 
elected by the Romans at Rome, and his appoint- 
ment received the imperial sanction, merely as a 
matter of form. He was in this way distinguished 
from the highest dignitaries, particularly from the 
Exarch. His authority was independent of the 
emperor, and though his renown shone forth both 
within and without the empire, it was certainly with 
no reflection of Byzantine glory. Indeed he really 
owed his prestige and position to the influence of 
St. Peter. The succession of St. Peter, the See 
of St. Peter, the authority of St. Peter, the tomb 
of St. Peter — all these counted for much in the 
atmosphere of respect and admiration which sur- 
rounded the apostolic representative. 

The Papal influence was by no means confined 
to the Church. The Pope's experience, his moral 
authority, his sound financial position, and his powers 
of administration were a valuable help in the conduct 
of temporal affairs. We see him concerning him- 
self, apparently in no meddlesome spirit, with war 
operations, the arrangement of treaties, the appoint- 
ment of officials, the management of the State ex- 
chequer, as well as with municipal enterprises, such 
as the repairing of ramparts and aqueducts and 
schemes for the public food supply. 

But, in spite of the solicitude for the general 
welfare, the Pope's influence was more particularly 
concentrated on his own immediate surroundings — 
above all on Rome. He certainly busied himself in 
both the^political and military affairs of Ravenna and 


Naples, but it was the needs, temporal though they 
might be, of his spiritual flock which specially claimed 
his attention and sympathy. As might have been 
expected, the result of this condition of affairs was 
the creation around the apostolic sanctuary of a kind 
of holy ground, whose limits spread beyond the city, 
even to the boundary line of the duchy of Rome. 
The extent of the duchy, which was the province 
of the duke^ and other military authorities who 
resided at Rome, had been defined by the limits of 
the Lombard invasion. In Liutprand's day it in- 
cluded, between the Tiber and the coast, part of 
ancient Tuscia, called Roman Tuscia, to distinguish 
it from Lombard Tuscia, now Tuscany. The most 
northerly places on this side were Centumcellae 
(Civita Vecchia) on the sea, and Orte on the Tiber, 
and, between the two, Blera (Bieda), Sutri, and 
Bomarzo. On the other side of the Tiber, not very 
far from Orte, on the line between Perugia and 
Rome, was the town of Amelia, which was under 
Roman jurisdiction. Except for this one place, the 
left bank of the Tiber, as far as the outskirts of 
Monte Rotondo, belonged to the duchy of Spoleto.^ 
The first Roman towns were Nomentum and Tilsur ; 
then the frontier line followed the mountains behind 
Prenesto, Anagni, Alatri, and Veroli as far as the 
Liris, where it turned off to Terracina.^ 

1 The Commanders-in-Chief formerly bore other titles ; that of 
duke is used for the first time in 712. 

2 This had not been the case for long. Narni was taken about 
725^ and Sabina, properly speaking, twelve years earlier. (L. P., 
t. i. p. 403, 428.) If the first two parts of the Farfa register were 
authentic (which is not the case), the taking of Sabina was rather 

^ For an account of the administration and politics of this 
town, see the Memorandum by M. J. Gay, The Papal State, &c., 
in the melanges of the Ecole de Rome, t. xxi. (1901), p. 487. 


This ducatus Romanus had originally been merely 
a military province, like the duchies of Naples or 
Venetia. The duke was subject to the Exarch, and 
the exerdtus Romanus was a division of the Byzantine 
army commanded by the vice-emperor of Ravenna. 
But these relations did not last very long. There 
arose divisions, induced by the peculiar configuration 
of Byzantine Italy, the difficulties in the way of 
communication, and the differences of outlook 
fostered by such conditions. Matters were worse 
still when, about the year 727, in virtue of their 
resistance to the iconoclastic fiats of Leo the 
Isaurian, the commissioned officials were banished 
to Constantinople, and native dukes elected in their 
places. Henceforth each duchy was practically in- 
dependent, though there was a kind of federation 
among them. This state of affairs was all the more 
unavoidable as the superior authority, the Exarch, 
had apparently freed himself from the imperial 
power, and was disporting himself, like an ordinary 
duke, in the province of Ravenna, which was visibly 
disappearing as the Lombard conquests increased. 

Under these circumstances it is far from surprising 
that Rome should embark on a political career of her 
own. We see her concluding alliances, declaring 
war, and signing treaties. She it is and not the 
Exarch with whom Trasimund,^ Duke of Spoleto, 
negotiates at different times, and with whom King 
Liutprand arranges the Peace of Terni in 742. 
Ravenna is treated in quite a different manner. 
Without so much as asking permission the prince 
seizes upon her lands, towns, and even her capital. 
On the other hand, if he feels inclined to annex parts 

1 L. P.J t. i. p. 420 (Affaire de Gallese), 426 (treaty for its restora- 
tion to Spoleto). 


of the duchy of Rome, Sutri, Blera, Bomarzo, Orte, 
or Amelia, he restores them without much difficulty. 
This was, undoubtedly, an idiosyncrasy, for the Duke 
of Spoleto, who in his reign took possession of both 
Narni and Sabina, was by no means so easily pre- 
vailed upon to part with them. Still ther? is no 
doubt that Rome was treated very differently from 
Ravenna. The real reason for this favouritism was 
that Rome was under the protection of St. Peter 
and his vicar, and not that the Lombard king con- 
sidered that they had any special claim upon his 
good will. Owing to the repeated solicitations of 
the Pope, who spared neither pains nor money in 
the cause, Sutri was restored, after an occupation 
of several months. The king intended it as a gift 
to the Apostles Peter and Paul.^ Gallesa,'* on which 
the Duke of Spoleto had long cast a covetous 
eye, was finally included again "m cowpage sanctce 
reipublicce atque corpora Christo dilecti exercitus 
Romani''^ But this was really due to a money 
arrangement entered into by Pope Gregory III.* 
It was Pope Zachary with whom Liutprand, on 
two different occasions, both directly and indirectly, 
settled the question of restoring the four towns by 


1 This document is lost, and we derive all oiir information on 
the subject from the L. P. We cannot therefore thoroughly 
understand the terminology used, and we do /not know whether 
or not it was a question of the duchy of RomVi or of the empire. 
The biographer, whose account is, above all Cj se, practical, simply 
wishes us to understand that if Sutri was recovered it was owing to 
the Pope. 1 

2 A village not far from Viterbo. 

3 These subtle expressions denote the imperial domain [sanctce 
reipublicce) and the military command (exlercitus) or duchy of 

* According to his biographer it would glppear that the Pope 
bought the place and gave it back to the diichy of Rome : annecti 
precepit in compage, &c. / 

I B 


official charter. There is no mention of any military 
representatives accompanying the Pope to Terni. 
He and his clergy were alone, and, under these 
circumstances, a twenty years' truce was concluded 
with the duchy of Rome. Again, it was with 
Pope Stephen II. that Astolphus negotiated, before 
making war on the Romans. 

In keeping with all this is the form by which the 
inhabitants of the duchy of Rome were introduced 
to the foreign princes, whose aid was sought. They 
were called the " peculiar people (peculimis populus) 
of St. Peter and the Church." ^ Apart from any 
rhetorical exaggeration, this expression seems to be 
typical of the relations between the Pope and his 
people. There was a very strong feeling among the 
Romans that they must look for help and sympathy 
in the approaching crisis to the Pope and St. Peter 
rather than to the distant empire of Constantinople. 

Peaceable relations with the latter were now 
resumed, following upon the iconoclastic quarrel, 
there had been a series of disagreements, one 
counterbalancing the other, the final effect of 
which had been to produce a kind of equilibrium. 
True, the emperor's decision had been opposed, his 
representatives banished, and his authority reduced 
to a mere name. But to have no relations at all 
with the Romans was surely better than to have 
disagreeable ones. The emperor had been obliged 
to relinquish thi; Pope's help in his plans for religious 
reform, but, on che other hand, the imperial treasury 
had been considerably augmented by the confiscation 
of the papal patrimonies in Sicily. The union, in brief, 
was not dissolved , but there was no longer any intimacy 
between the parties. The result made for peace. 

1 Letters from Gregory III. to Charles Martel. 


There was even an exchange of amities. Pope 
Zachary sent envoys with letters to his contempo- 
rary, Constantine V., with intent as much personal 
as ecclesiastical. These letters, unlike the despatches 
of Gregory III., arrived safely, but the messengers, 
on reaching Constantinople, found a revolution in 
full swing. This was brought about by the claims of 
one Artavasde to the imperial throne. Constantine, 
the legal heir of Leo the Iconoclast, was himself 
an iconoclast, while his rival held orthodox views. 
There ensued a sharp and exciting struggle, in which 
Constantine hastened to besiege Artavasde in his 
capital, and finally succeeded in gaining the upper 
hand, 2nd November 744. The envoys wei;'e treading 
on delicate ground, but as soon as Constkntine was 
reinstated at Constantinople they appeared before 
him and were graciously received. He acceded to 
the Pope's request that, to make up for the loss of 
his Sicilian estates, he should be granted ?.t least the 
two domains of Norma and Nimfa, in the neighbour- 
hood of Rome. The envoys, after this/ satisfactory 
interview, returned home with a substan/tial present. 

The effect of the iconoclastic stJruggle upon 
Italian affairs has been greatly exaggerated. Cer- 
tainly there were at first a few critical years to be 
passed through, but, as the imperial (power in the 
north and centre of Italy was pracljtically extinct, 
its interference in religious affairs wals no longer to 
be dreaded. The necessary declara/tions had been 
made by the Popes Gregory II. ami Gregory III., 
and constant reiteration would have] been futile. It 
was no longer an Italian but an ifcastern question. 
The Holy See was particularly inlvolved, not only 
because all religious matters, howejiver distant, were 
her peculiar province, but also because the forfeiture 



of her Sicilian patrimonies and the dividing up of her 
ecclesiastical department which ensued ^ affected her 
very deeply. Again, as was shown by the gift of 
Norma and Nimfa, certain mitigations might be 
hoped for. After the embittered attitude of the 
first few years, a new phase of a more or less diplo- 
matic nature had been entered upon. 

The Roman duchy, in brief, was about to become 
a self-governing state, nominally subject to the Greek 
empire, but really attached to it by very loose bonds. 
Venice and Naples were in the same position. In 
both places a local autonomy was being organised 
on the strength of their strong maritime positions. 
Naples cotild also rely upon efficient support from the 
Patrician Of Sicily. That island was being organised 
under a military government, presided over by the 
local duke. 

These three autonomies contrived to exist for 
many a long year. That of Naples received its 
death-blow at the hands of the Norman King 
Roger in 1139. The other two were much longer 
lived. As late as 1797 they were attacked by 
Buonaparte, «,nd again in 1870 by General Cadorna. 
Indeed, these officers might almost be said to have 
fired on the Roman empire. 

Let us noiw turn our attention to the duchy of 
Rome, to its situation at the death of Zachary (752), 
and to the series of events which, while delivering it 
out of the hanjds of the Lombards, yet indirectly 
strengthened th(i opposition of the other two. 

^ As a matter oS fact, these consequences survived the re- 
conciliation of the 'two Churches. The Byzantines retained 
Calabria and the S,icilian patrimonies, and the bishoprics of 
these countries were j not restored to the Roman rule till after 
the Norman conquest^ 



King Astolphus seizes on Ravenna — He threatens the Roman Duchy — 
The Annexation from a Religious Standpoint — Roman National 
Attitude Antagonistic to Lombards — Roman Autonomy could only 
be organised under the Pope's direction — How the Franks under- 
stood the Question. 

Astolphus, who succeeded Ratchis in 749, did not 
long leave Ravenna in peace. The exact date of his 
seizure of the town is not known, but there is no 
doubt that the Exarchate came to a miserable end, 
so miserable, indeed, that we have no record of its 
last moments. All that we know is that, from the 
month of July 751, the Lombard king was estab- 
lished in the Exarchal palace, and that thenceforward 
his sway extended over the whole of the ancient 
imperial territory between the Po, the Adriatic, and 
the Apennines. Even Gubbio, the otheir side of the 
mountains, had succumbed to him, but Perugia, Todi, 
Amelia, and the duchy of Rome were not yet cap- 
tured. Astolphus was meditating a dfescent on the 
latter, when the newly elected Pope! Stephen, de- 
spatched ambassadors, who succeedfod in bringing 
about a peace which was to last for foj^ty years. They 
were Ambrose, the chief {primicerius) of the notaries, 
and the Pope's own brother, Paul. | These negotia- 
tions took place in June 752, but, jby the following 
autumn, the treaty was violated. 'The Pope's bio- 
grapher does not enlarge upon tIaQ fact, and the 



Lombard king's reasons for perjuring himself are not 

Hostilities, however, were not renewed, and Astol- 
phus seems to have contented himself with levying a 
poll tax of a gold sou on the inhabitants of Rome. 
He further proposed, greatly to the consternation of 
the Romans, to extend his jurisdiction over Rome 
and its dependencies, thus creating a sort of protec- 
torate. The Pope, not thinking it discreet to send 
any of his own ambassadors to the king a second 
time, despatched two Lombard subjects, the abbots 
of Monte Cassino and St. Vincent of Vulturno. 
These could, of course, represent things from a re- 
ligious point of view only. They had no effect on 
Astolphus, who sent them back to their convents, 
with orders not to return to Rome. 

The situation was becoming serious. The Romans 
and the Pope, preoccupied with the dangers which 
threatened them at home, naturally did not give 
much thought to the late Exarchy. At Constanti- 
nople, on tne other hand, they could not realise the 
changes that were taking place in Italy, and inno- 
cently imagined that a little diplomacy was all that 
was required in order to insure the return of the 
annexed provinces. An important dignitary, John 
the Silentiary, was sent to Rome with one imperial 
letter for the dng of the Lombards ; and another to 
the Pope, invoking his good offices. Stephen, there- 
fore, deputed his brother Paul to support the Silen- 
tiary at his int^erview with Astolphus. The king 
was then at Ravenna, and, though his reply was 
somewhat vague, he gave orders that a Lombard 
ambassador should accompany John back to the 
emperor. On h^s way through Rome, the Byzan- 
tine envoy acquaii\ited the Pope with the non-success 


of his errand, and the latter entrusted him with 
letters explaining the position of affairs once more, 
and urging the emperor to take definite steps in the 

With the approach of winter, the outlook became 
still more gloomy. The most alarming rumours 
sprang up and grew apace. Astolphus, it was said, 
meant to have all the Romans beheaded. The pro- 
tection of religion was sought. The most sacred 
mysteries were carried in procession, in particular 
the great acherophite picture of the Saviour, which 
is still preserved in the Lateran. The Pope was 
prolific in prayers, litanies, and exhortations, and a 
copy of the treaty, broken by the terrible Lombard 
king, was fastened to the stational cross. 

So far, however, Astolphus had confined himself to 
threats. The only noteworthy event of the war seems 
to have been the seizure of the Castle of Ceccano, part 
of the ecclesiastical patrimony. This castle was situ- 
ated close to the southern frontier, on the side of the 
duchy of Beneventum, and was a somewhat import- 
ant centre of agricultural operations. Astolphus was, 
at this time, awaiting the return of his ambassador 
from Constantinople, and the seizure of Ceccano was 
probably due less to his efforts than tO/ those of the 

What was to be the result of these negotiations, 
and what could be expected from the Pope's repre- 
sentations to the emperor of the neeci for his inter- 
vention ? Constantine had so much ,to do at home, 
that he could not effectually enter irito the affairs of 
these distant provinces. He would probably advise 
them to get out of their difficulties as best they 
could. It would not be the first ti|ine that this atti- 
tude had been adopted towards the Romans. From 


the beginning of the Lombard war the Emperor 
Tiberius II. had maintained it. 

If the goodwill of the Lombard king could not be 
counted on, the only solution of the problem was 
either to resign themselves to the annexation, or to 
prevent it by calling in the help of the Franks. 

There was, apparently, no insuperable religious 
objection to the annexation. There is certainly no 
sign of it, either in the papal correspondence, or in 
the other documents of the time. We must not be 
misled by the frequent evangelical allusions to the 
" lost sheep " {oves perditce) which the Pope, like a 
good shepherd, wishes to wrest from the wolf, or, in 
other words, the liOmbard king. The sheepfold in 
question was a political, rather than a religious one, 
and there was nothing to fear for the sheep from an 
ecclesiastical point of view. The Pope had often to 
deplore the Lombard depredations in the Roman 
territory, but these were merely the accidents of war, 
or psychological means, similar to the bombardments 
of modern times. The Lombards, to defend them- 
selves against the Romans, or to effect their sur- 
render, laid waste the country by fire. They followed 
the universal custom and plundered, in order to live, 
and also to gain some advantage from the war. In 
more than orie case the havoc made among church 
property savoured of sacrilege, but, at that time, 
warriors with any respect for ecclesiastical belongings 
were few and far between. The followers of Astol- 
phus are accused of having stolen some sacred corpses 
from the Catacombs, in order to cherish them in 
their monasterie;^^. The theft of relics in the eighth 
century and sincO, has been, all over Christendom, a 
very common ancj readily condoned sin. 

These unpleasant occurrences were, however, all 



connected with the conditions of war. The ordinary 
relations between the Lombards and their Roman 
neighbours were by this time again of a tolerably 
friendly nature. The Aryan and pagan element 
brought into Italy by the Conquest had long been 
absorbed. The Lombards were all Catholics, and 
had recently proved their faith by helping to defend 
Pope Gregory II. against the proceedings of the 
Exarchs. Their princes, Liutprand, Ratchis, Aistulf, 
and Didier, far from being infidels, were men of 
piety, with a taste for founding monasteries and 
supporting churches, and full of the deepest respect 
for the sanctuaries of Rome and the apostolic See. 
The Romans, indeed, would not have lost much, 
in passing from the Byzantine to the Lombard rule. 
Even as part of the Lombard kingdom, Rome 
would have remained a holy city and a living link 
with the rest of Christendom. She would still have 
been the resort of pilgrims, and the Pope could have 
continued his somewhat restricted interest in the 
religious affairs of both the East and the West. 
Astolphus had his traditional capital at Pavia, and 
he had just conquered Ravenna, the capital of the 
Exarchs and of the Gothic kings. It was, therefore, 
improbable that the seat of governmen/. would have 
been moved to Rome. From the conditions which 
the Lombards wished to impose upon the Romans, 
we gather that the latter would in some measure 
have retained the power of self-government, under 
the protection of their pontiff, and that it would have 
been a case of ordinary annexation. 

The stumbling-block in the wa.y was that the 
Romans in general, and the Pope i;n particular, did 
not wish to be Lombard subjects. They considered 
as derogatory any alliance with a people whom they 


regarded as barbarians, and who were personally 
distasteful to them. All kinds of rumours concern- 
ing the Lombard inferiority obtained credence. It 
was said that leprosy flourished among them, that 
they were malodorous, and so on. Their laws, as 
well as their manners and customs, were uncongenial 
to the Romans ; the Lombard law was strongly 
imbued with German tradition, while the Roman 
law had been religiously preserved from the tables 
of stone up to the time of Justinian. Then again, 
the Lombards and the Romans had quite a different 
way of dressing, and of wearing their hair and beards. 
Any change of nationality, such as was bound to 
accompany an annexation of this kind, would im- 
mediately be followed by a modification of these 
habits. In those days the barber followed closely 
in the wake of the conqueror and the diplomat. 

These are but trifles, we say. Truly, but one 
might go far to seek the Englishman who would 
not object to wear the pigtail and flowing garb of 
the Chinese, or the Chinaman who would willingly 
adopt our national habits. Apart, too, from these 
material considerations, there was a certain subtle 
and sacred prestige attached to the mere fact of 
being a Roman. It was no mean thing, they 
thought, to be a member of the Holy Republic, 
and the subject of a man who was, after all, the 
heir of Augustus and Constantine. 

This question of escape from the Lombards was, 
therefore, a vital one for the Romans of the eighth 
century. Thr Pope and the clergy were at one 
with their coil patriots in this matter, fortunately 
for the maintenmce of the ecclesiastical influence. 
They espoused i^he cause of the autonomy without 
any coercion, but from no particular religious feeling 
in the matter. 



The main point, however, was, not that the 
autonomy should be established under the protec- 
tion of any outside monarch, but that its interior 
organisation should be under the supervision of 
none other than the Pope himself. Although at 
Naples and Venice the bishop was of some political 
importance, it was the Byzantine duke who was 
governor of the little republic. At Rome, too, they 
had a duke whose title corresponded precisely with 
that of his Venetian and Neapolitan colleagues. 
Like them he was, at one and the same time, civil 
chief and military governor ; it was upon him that 
depended the whole administration and the whole staff 
of the Judices, Tlie whole military body — the eocer- 
citus Romanus, as it was called — including the aristo- 
cratic cavalry, the urban foot soldiers, and the 
garrisons with their tribunes — all these were under 
his command. He was undoubtedly a most important 
personage. But besides the felicissimus exerdtus, the 
venerabilis clerus was no inconsiderable figure. He, 
too, had his district organisation, his aristocracy, his 
proceres Ecclesice, his deacons, his cardinal priests, his 
chefs de sei^vice, and his suburban bishops. This 
hierarchy culminated in the apostolic Lord, the 
Vicar of St. Peter, the High Priest of the Roman 
sanctuaries, the Primate of the bishops of the whole 
world, and doctor of the Church Universal,^ ix, a 
dignitary who, even apart from his religious import- 
ance, exercised over Italy a moral and political 
influence beyond compare. For the Pope to have 
been subject to the duke as the Venetian Patriarch 
was subject to the Doge would have been an in- 
congruous and untenable position. 

1 Formula of the Pope's Ordination, in use at that time. See 
Origins of Christian Worship, 3rd edition, p. 363. 


As a matter of fact, even at the first, affairs 
apparently showed not the slightest tendency to- 
wards this attitude. True, the Holy See had come 
into collision with the Emperor of Constantinople, 
during the monothelite crisis ; again, at the time of 
the Council in Trullo, and also at the beginning 
of the iconoclastic struggle. These were, however, 
but passing attempts at tyranny, and not the re- 
sult of regularly organised institutions. In ordinary 
practice, the Papal authority certainly tended in 
the direction of sovereignty, as may be seen from 
the documentary evidence concerning Gregory II., 
Gregory III., and Zachary. We have already seen 
the latter in his outside transactions, on behalf of 
the duchy of Rome. A strong light is shed upon 
his position at home through a significant remark 
made by his biographer in speaking of his journey 
to Ravenna and Pavia. He set out, it is said, 
"leaving the government of Rome to Stephen, 
patrician and duke." The duke is governor, during 
the absence of the Pope ! It is not thus that one 
could have spoken of either the Doge of Venice or 
the Duke of Naples. 

The natural and traditional trend of affairs 
pointed, then, towards the solution required by 
the pontifical dignity ; and, it may be added, this 
solution was the only acceptable and imaginable 
one for the Prankish princes, with whom explana- 
tions were to ensue. 

It was not the first occasion upon which the 
Romans had thought of invoking the help of the 
Franks. At the instigation of the emperor and 
the Exarch, the Austrasian Franks had made 
several descents on Italy, during the reign of 
King Autharis. Pope Pelagius II. was careful to 


explain to King Gontran that, as the Franks were 
Catholics like the Romans, they ought to look 
upon the Lombards as their common enemy, 
instead of entering into an alliance with them. 
St. Gregory, in his correspondence with the heirs 
of Gontran and Childebert, refrains from this 
attitude. Besides, in his day, the empire had left 
off inciting fresh Frankish incursions into Italy, 
having found them expensive and unprofitable. 
There was still stronger reason for discouraging 
them in the eighth century, when Liutprand's 
victories were threatening the safety of Ravenna 
and the Exarchy. Charles Martel and Pepin were, 
on the whole, fairly well disposed towards the 
Lombard king, and recked little of his disputes 
with the Greeks. This political archeeology affected 
them not at all. 

But the interests of the Roman ex-empire and 
of the apostolic sanctuary were quite another matter. 
This was obvious to everybody in France and in 
Rome. As Christian princes, the Frankish monarchs 
felt bound to listen to the common Father of the 
Faithful, and to support him in time of need. To 
neglect what appeared to them a pressing necessity 
would be to incur serious personal risks. St. Peter 
is the chief of the apostles, and he is also the 
doorkeeper of Heaven. Present-day politicians are 
not greatly affected by this fact, but it was weighty 
enough to give food for reflection to a Carlovingian 
prince, and even to influence his politics. 

We get an excellent idea of this state of mind 
from the History written by the Venerable Bede, 
a renowned writer of that period. 

The English King Oswy (664) had been sum- 
moned to arbitrate in a great religious discussion. 


which affected the organisation and general pro- 
gress of his people. The subject of dispute was the 
Easter offertory. The Irish party, on the one hand, 
laid stress on the patronage of their great Saint, 
Columba, while the Romans pinned their faith on 
the Apostle Peter. They had gone as far as quoting 
the celebrated Gospel passage : '' Thou art Peter 
... I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom 
of heaven," when the king stopped the discussion, 
and asked the Irish if they admitted that these words 
had been addressed to St. Peter. On their replying 
in the affirmative, he remarked, " Well, then, he is a 
doorkeeper with whom I should not like to have 
dealings ; for on my arrival at the portals of heaven, 
if I happened to be in bad odour with the keeper of 
the keys, he would very likely shut the doors upon 

Bede was only half English, and we may perhaps 
allow something for his somewhat humorous way of 
looking at things. The Pope's letters to Charles 
Martel and Pepin, though written in a different style, 
breathe the same spirit : " Let us work for St. Peter, 
and then we shall prosper in this world, as well as 
the next." 

It was not to be supposed that the Franks would 
risk a quarrel with the Lombards, with the object of 
procuring for the Romans the pleasure of remaining 
under Byzantine rule, and of enabling the military 
staff of the Palatine to enjoy this advantage in peace. 
The conditions of the Prankish intervention would 
obviously be as follows : The Lombards should leave 
the Roman territory alone ; the Romans should be 
under the protection of the Franks, instead of under 
the now enfeebled imperial power ; in dealing with 
the Greek monarch, everything inconsistent with the 


new relations should be suppressed ; and, finally, the 
Pope should be supreme at Rome and in the duchy. 

But '* there is many a slip 'twixt the cup and the 
lip," and what Gregory III. had proposed, Charles 
Martel had refused. It is true that the danger was 
not as imminent as the Pope imagined, and the 
Frankish prince had good reasons for not interfering. 
Nevertheless, the pontiff's proposal had created a 
great sensation, and the chronicler who succeeded 
Fredegarius and wrote under the direction of 
Childebrand, brother of Charles Martel, speaks of 
it with visible pride and pomp. This is all the 
more striking because, like his patrons, he usually 
displayed but a mild interest in the affairs of the 

Though Pope Zachary was constantly brought 
into contact with Pepin and Carloman, either per- 
sonally or through the medium of St. Boniface, it 
was always in connection with ecclesiastical affairs 
in France, the mission to Germany, and internal 
reform. There had never been any question of the 
Lombards and their quarrels with the Romans. 
The Pope was quite capable of managing Italian 
affairs, without any help from the Franks. Indeed, 
it was the Franks who required his advice and 
assistance in their political affairs ; and not until 
the papal sanction was obtained did they take 
the important step of substituting the family of 
Austrasian parvenus for the ancient royal race. 

From this fact we see the majesty of the posi- 
tion held by the Roman pontiff in relation to the 
Franks. As far as the new dynasty was particularly 
concerned, it was a service of no importance. It 
was still quite recent when the turn of events 
compelled Pope Stephen II. to avail himself of it. 



The Pope's journey to Pa via and to France — Interview at Ponthion — 
Negotiations concerning Rome and Ravenna — Dignity of Patrician 
Order bestowed on Prankish Kings — Attempts at ConciHation— 
Assemblies at Braisne and Kierzy — Pepin in Italy — Peace signed 
and then broken — Astolphus besieges Rome — Pepin's second expe- 
dition — Gift of the Exarchy and Pentapolis — Death of Astolphus — 
Negotiations with Didier.^ 

The Pope had not been idle during the winter of 
752-753. After a long period of consideration, the 
time for action had arrived, and Stephen began 
negotiations with the Prankish king. Everything 
was carried on with the greatest secrecy, a peasant 
acting as the medium of communication between 
the two parties. The first letters have been lost, 
but from the account in the Liber Pontijicalis we 
gather that it was purely a question of the Roman 
province and its escape from the Lombard yoke. 
Pepin appeared well-disposed, and despatched with- 
out delay, one after the other, two confidential 
messengers — Oroctigang, Abbot of Jumieges, and 
another of his intimates. They soon returned to 

1 Documents are scarce ; there are none of Byzantine or Lom- 
bard origin ; on the Roman side we have the Life of Stephen IL 
in the Liber Pontificalis, and this is our best source of information, as 
the writer seems to have accompanied the Pope to France. There 
are also two letters from Stephen IL addressed in 753 to Pepin 
and to the Prankish dukes. On the Prankish side, the successor 
of Fredegarius is about our only informant. In common justice, 
we must remember that it is the winning side from whom we hear 
most, and that the others have not a fair chance of stating their 



France with a verbal message, requesting Pepin to 
send a reliable escort through the Lombard kingdom 
for the Pope, who was anxious to come to France. 
Two letters, conveyed by the Abbot of Jumieges, 
were inserted in the Codeoc Carolinus ; they are 
couched in very general terms, and merely call upon 
the Frankish leaders to aid in furthering the interests 
of the Apostle Peter. 

Pepin, rising to the occasion, sent off two august 
persons — Chrodegang, Bishop of Metz, and Duke 
Autchaire, the Oger of legendary fame. On their 
arrival at Rome, they found Stephen quite ready to 
set out. The Lombard ambassador and the Silentiary 
John had returned from Constantinople, with orders 
for a personal interview between the Pope and 
Astolphus, to arrange about the restoration of 
Ravenna. Stephen had already obtained a permit 
for a journey to Pavia, so his way was clear before 
him. There was a public leave-taking at St. Peter's 
attended by many of the neighbouring citizens, as 
well as by the Pope's own people. The whole 
caravan set out together on 14th October 753. The 
papal retinue included representatives of the military 
aristocracy, ex militice optimatibus, a certain number 
of clerks of high degree, the two Frankish envoys, 
and the imperial legate. 

Autchaire, going on in front, was the first to 
arrive at Pavia. Astolphus, when he heard of the 
Pope's approach, sent to meet him, begging that he 
would refrain from any allusion to the Exarchy and 
the other imperial possessions {reipublicce loco) which 
he or his predecessors had conquered. The Pope, em- 
boldened by the presence of the Frankish envoys, 
declared that he would not comply with this request. 
The Lombard king was beset on all sides ; the Pope, 



aided by tears and presents, addressed him on the 
subject. The imperial legate and the emperor 
himself (by means of his letters) also said their say. 
All in vain was Astolphus warmly exhorted to ** give 
back the Lord's sheep which he had carried off, and 
the estates, to their owners," ut dominicas quas 
abstulerat redder et oves et propria propriis restitueret. 
He remained obdurate, and would concede nothing. 

In this affair Stephen II. was acting in the in- 
terests of the empire and as a subject of the emperor, 
under whose commands he had gone to Pavia. But, 
however great may have been his zeal for the 
Exarchy, there can be no doubt that his keenest 
sympathies were centred in the duchy of Rome. 
This fact is beyond question, although his biographer 
abstains from mentioning it. At Pavia the Pope 
was playing two roles. The one, which was perfunc- 
tory and lacking in confidence, was that of the 
imperial representative, demanding the restitution of 
Ravenna. The other, whole-hearted and sanguine, 
was that of the Roman pontiff, whose desire was to 
secure the independence of his fellow-citizens with 
regard to the Lombards, and his own independence 
with regard to his fellow-citizens. 

Having thus disposed of the question of Ravenna, 
the Pope, without more ado, begged permission to 
enter France. Astolphus did his best to deter him, 
but was overcome by the united representations of 
the pontiff and the Prankish ambassadors. 

Stephen's presence in France did not require the 
presence of the lay aristocracy, still less of a Byzan- 
tine diplomat. The latter, therefore, returned to 
Rome under the escort of the optimates militice, 
the clerks alone remained with the Pope. They 
started forth on 15th November, and soon arrived 


at the entrance to the Aosta valley {Francorum 
dusas) ; they were then on Frankish ground, and 
the Pope, beginning to breathe more freely, offered 
up thanks to God. Their journey was nearly ended, 
for the king had promised to meet them at the 
Abbey of St. Maurice, just on the other side of the 
St. Bernard pass. Their hearts were filled with a 
great joy, for they were conscious of the fulfilment 
of a grand task — the salvation of Rome : in Roma 
salvanda petebant regno Francorum,^ says the crude 
epitaph of Dean Ambrose, one of the party. He died 
at St. Maurice, the toils of the journey, which, for him, 
was not the first, having proved too much for him. 

When they arrived at the abbey they found that 
Pepin had not come to meet them, but had sent 
in his stead two ambassadors, Duke Rotard, and 
Fulrad, Abbot of St. Denis, who were to conduct 
the party to the royal palace of Ponthion. Near 
Langres, about a hundred miles from the palace, 
they encountered one of the king's sons — Charles, 
the future Charlemagne. Within three miles of the 
royal residence, on the Feast of the Epiphany, ap- 
peared Pepin himself, together with his family. He 
greeted the Pope with much ceremony, getting off 
his horse and prostrating himself on the ground. 
Then, taking hold of the stirrup, he walked for some 
time by the side of the pontiff's horse. This is the 
oldest example of that officiuin stratoris which later 
on became compulsion, and thus gave rise to severe 
quarrels. To the accompaniment of psalms and 
chanting the procession continued its way, and at 
last reached the palace of Ponthion. At the first 
official interview, which took place in the palace 
oratory, the Pope with tears besought the king to 

1 Liber Pontificalis, t. i. p. 458. 


intervene ** peacefully in order to arrange the affairs 
of St. Peter and the Roman Republic," ut causam 
beati Petri et^ reipublicce Romanorwn disponeret. 
The king promised to satisfy the Pope, and in due 
season to procure the restoration of the Exarchy 
and the rights or possessions of the republic, ut ilU 
placitum fuent exarchatum Raveniice et reipublicce 
jura seu loca reddere. 

So far we have followed the account of the Liber 
Pontificalis. But the French chroniclers are also 
well worth consulting. From the Moissac chronicle 
we learn that the Pope's entreaties were environed 
with a good deal of pomp and circumstance. The 
pontiff and his clerks, clothed in sackcloth and 
ashes, cast themselves on the ground, imploring the 
mercy of God, and calling to witness the blessed 
Apostles Peter and Paul. Nor could they be pre- 
vailed upon to rise until Pepin, his sons and his 
nobles, had extended their hands in token of co- 
operation and deliverance. 

From the biographer we get a different im- 
pression, but it is probable that his statements are 
not altogether reliable. He passes lightly over 
these doleful formalities, calling attention to the 
prostrations of the king rather than to those of 
the Pope. In his anxiety to give prominence to 
Ravenna, it is to be feared that he takes a somewhat 
distorted view of Stephen's claims. Probability and 
the quasi-official chronicler of Moissac alike incline 
1 us to believe that it was Rome, and not Ravenna, 
which was the leading theme of this interview. 

It is, however, not to be denied that, in his 
conference with the Prankish king, Stephen either 
claimed or accepted what is called the " restitution " 

1 The et is doubtful. 


of Ravenna, together with the Exarchy, Pentapolis, 
and other territories conquered by Astolphus. This 
'' restitution " was, in fact, brought about, or at 
least agreed upon, after Pepin's first Itahan cam- 
paign. But they did not restore propria propriis, 
for neither the duchy of Rome nor the Roman 
Church had the shghtest claim to be regarded as 
holding any right of sovereignty over these provinces. 
The Emperor Constantine alone could claim this 
right, and he alone could be made the ** subject " 
of a " restitution " in the strict sense of the term. 
Stephen's biographer treats the matter in a way 
which reveals his anxiety to gloss over anything 
at all questionable in the manner of the Pope's 
succession to the emperor. This attitude was also 
maintained among the pontifical officials. 

From our own point of view, as well as from that 
of the Franks, the right was unquestionable, being 
founded upon the basis of conquest. Astolphus 
had conquered the imperial provinces, and they 
belonged to him in the same way as Liguria, Friuli, 
and the duchies of Spoleto and Beneventum. But 
Pepin had conquered Astolphus, and could impose 
upon him what conditions he chose, one of these 
conditions being the surrender of the provinces in 
question. They were thus the legitimate property 
of the Prankish king, who presented them to the 
Pope, or rather to St. Peter, for this patron saint 
was considered capable of owning and governing 
them by means of his Church and his successors. 

All this is obvious enough. If the Roman 
chroniclers have given us confused accounts of the 
affair, it is for two reasons. To begin with, they 
found it hard to divest themselves of the notion that 
any part of Italy which did not belong to the 


Lombards must somehow or other be the property 
of the Romans. Their expression " respublica " ^ is 
a most unsuitable one, for it ought to be applied 
only to a definite state, governed directly by the 
Roman emperor. As a matter of fact, it is applied 
to the various conditions of the Roman nationality, 
whatever their link with the imperial power. In 
the pontifical world, on the other hand, there was 
a strong and pardonable objection to admit any 
responsibility for a disloyalty to the empire, exacted 
by circumstances ; for Rome apart from the Roman 
empire ; Rome ceasing to be Rome ; this was in- 
deed a political profanation. And yet there seemed 
no way of escape. Now, if ever, was the time to 
call upon the resources of literary style to deaden 
the compunction awakened in the national conscience 
by this violation of all loyal tradition. 

The idea of St. Peter as sovereign of the Exarchy 
naturally presupposes that he was sovereign of Rome ; 
for he who rules over the affairs of others may, not 
unreasonably, be expected to rule over his own 
as well. As far as the Carlovingian princes were 
concerned, at least, the papal dominion over Rome 
seems to have been accepted as an incontrovertible 
fact. At any rate they never sought to interfere 
(in early times at least) either with his position at 

1 This term is also employed by the successor of Fredegarius 
in expressions concerning the misdeeds of Astolphus : quod nequiie?' 
contra rempuhlicam et sedem Romanam apostolicam admiserat . . . 
quicquid contra Romanam ecclesiam vel sedem apostolicam contra legis 
ordinem fecerat . . . ulterius ad sedem apostolicam Romanam et 
rempuhlicam hostiliter numquam accederet." There is no reason to 
suppose that the chronicler was referring particularly to the 
Exarchy of Ravenna. His interests centre on the Pope and the 
Holy See, and though whatever there may be of " respublica " 
around the apostolic throne is mentioned at the same time, it is in 
an indefinite manner, which points to lack of any great interest. 


home or with his relations with Constantinople. 
They seem to have contented themselves with 
promising him their protection and assuring him 
of their good will in the most general terms, relying 
in return on his friendship, and leaving him to do 
the best he could for the papal prosperity. To assert 
that Pepin recognised the duchy of Rome as an 
independent state is rash, for we have no proof, 
not even an indirect one, that such was the case. 
Pepin always kept on good terms with the empire, 
and although he and his sons were honoured by 
the Pope with the title of '' patricius Romanorum,'' 
he never made use of it in his documents. Neither 
does his chronicler, the successor of Fredegarius, 
ever invest him with it.^ 

On the other hand, in the documents which 
emanate from Rome, whether drawn up in the name 
of the Pope or of others, the title is always used.^ 
There has been much discussion as to its origin and 
meaning. In the empire the title of "patrician" 
was merely an empty distinction, and had been borne 
by exarchs, dukes, and strategists. In France it was 
bestowed on the governors of Provence, e.g, Mum- 
molus and Dynamius in the sixth century, and 
Abbon in the eighth. But the title in question is 
not that of " patrician " in general, but of " Patrician 
of the Romans," for the word Romanorum is never 

1 The title is used in the Clausula de Pippino, which is a 
private document. 

2 It must, however, be remarked that the biographer of 
Stephen II. makes no mention of it. In the Hfe of the next Pope, 
Paul, a dead silence is maintained on the subject of the Franks 
and their prince. This is evidently intentional, for they would 
have naturally been referred to in the account of the translation of 
Saint Petronilla. To the author of this life, the Greek Emperors 
Constantine V. and Leo IV. are paramount, and the title of 
''patrician" only appears in the life of Stephen III. 


absent. Later on, after the year 744, Charlemagne 
made use of it in addition to his former titles of rex 
Francorum and rex Langohardorum, which all served 
as an expression of his rights over the Franks, the 
Lombards, and the Romans — the Romans of the 
Pope, be it understood, not the others. It is evident, 
then, that the term patricius Romanorum was of 
Roman rather than of imperial origin. 

It seems extremely probable, if we may venture to 
say so, that the title was given by Stephen to the 
Frankish princes, first of all as an expression of their 
protectorships over the new order of things in 
general ; and secondly, to avoid reviving the Exarch 
at Ravenna, and to maintain the duke at Rome. 
In fact, after the year 754, there is no mention of 
the Duke of Rome; there are dukes of Rome, in the 
plural, the title being used in either an administrative 
or a military sense; but the hov^ 'Fcojurj? no longer 
existed. With these two exceptions all the former 
offices are preserved, and it must be noted that the 
patriciate had been conferred on the holders of both 
the extinct titles. The Pope could henceforth dis- 
pense with Exarch and duke ; and, in order to re- 
press any inconvenient desire for reassertion on their 
part, he did his best to replace them by a patricius 
Romanorum, whose influence, though remote, was 
rendered important by the spell of his power and the 
memory of services rendered in past days. 

Before speeding the Pope on his homeward way, 
Pepin was anxious to form some idea of the direction 
affairs would take, as a result of their amicable inter- 
view. Besides, the time of year was not suitable for 
a long journey, especially in the case of a venerable 
old man. The king, therefore, established his guest 
at the Abbey of St. Denis, taking advantage of the 


occasion to confirm his title to the crown by a second 
coronation ceremony, which included not only him- 
self, but his wife and sons. Soon afterwards, the 
Pope, worn out by travelling, and tried by the 
rigours of the winter, fell so seriously ill that his 
life was despaired of. He recovered, nevertheless 
— an event which was attributed by the monks to 
the influence of their patron saint.^ 

Meanwhile, the negotiations were proceeding. In 
vain did Pepin's ambassadors surround the Lombard 
king with incessant and urgent petitions. Stephen's 
biographer tells us that they had been sent propte?' 
pads foedera et proprietatis sanctce Dei ecclesice rei- 
publicce restituenda jura. This curious expression, 
which is employed several times in these accounts, 
seems to contain incongruous elements. We get 
a much more coherent account from Fredegarius's 
successor, who asserts that Pepin requested Astolphus 
to avoid any display of enmity to Rome {in partibus 
Romce) out of respect for the Apostles Peter and 
Paul, and for his (Pepin's) sake, to abstain from un- 
accustomed impositions. History does not relate the 
Lombard king's reasons for refusing, but we know 
that he despatched to France an ambassador of sacred 
calling — no less a person than Pepin's own brother, 
Carloman, formerly king of the eastern part of the 
Prankish empire, and at that time a monk of Monte 
Cassino. This reverend personage proved as unsuc- 
cessful with the Pope and the Frankish king as the 
latter's envoys had been with Astolphus. Indeed, 
Italy saw him no more, for the Frankish authorities 
considered that he would more worthily fulfil his 
vocation in their own territory, and established him 

1 The Liber Pontificalis does not mention the intervention of 
St. Denis. 


in a convent at Vienna, where he soon afterwards 

A great national convocation was held on 1st 
March 754 at Braisne, and another at Easter (14th 
April) at Kiersy-sur-Oise. It was decided, though 
not unanimously,^ to make war upon Astolphus, and 
force him to yield to the Pope's demands. One 
last fruitless appeal was made to him, when the 
Prankish army was already on the way to Italy. 
The united letters of Pepin and the Pope produced 
no effect. The Prankish army continued its way 
towards the Mont Cenis pass. On both sides the 
passes were in Prankish territory, and the somewhat 
feebly garrisoned valley of the Susa was reinforced 
in order to prevent the Lombards from taking posses- 
sion. Astolphus made his appearance before he was 
expected, but the Prankish vanguard presented such 
a good front that the Lombards, in alarm and dis- 
order, fled back towards their capital. Pepin, followed 
at no great distance by the Pope, calmly crossed the 
Alps and laid siege to Pavia. 

Astolphus, utterly defeated, was obliged by 
solemn treaty ^ to deliver up Ravenna and the other 
conquered provinces ; he even agreed to yield Narni, 
a town in the north of the duchy, which had been 
seized by Liutprand. Pepin was quite satisfied, 
and gave no heed to Stephen II., who, having 
some reason to distrust the Lombard king, would 
have preferred a more reliable guarantee of good 
faith, and wanted the Prankish king to insist on 

1 Eginhard is responsible for this statement. (Fita Karoli 6 :) 
Stephana papa supplicante, cum magna difficultate (Jbellum) susceptum est. 
Qnin quidam e primaribus Francorum, cum quibus consultare solebat, 
adeo voluntati eius renisi sunt ut se regem deserturos domumque redituros 
libera voce proclamarent. 

2 L. P., vol. i. p. 403. 


the immediate restoration of the provinces in ques- 

Pepin provided the Pope with the escort of his 
brother Jerome,^ and other persons of consequence, 
as far as Rome, which he entered at the end of 
October 754. The clergy and the people ^ welcomed 
him with open arms, and thanks were rendered to 
God for His great mercies. 

These rejoicings were but of brief duration. 
Astolphus, plausible enough, had allowed the 
Prankish army to return home, and even began to 
carry out his promise of restoring Narni. But no 
sooner was Pepin at a safe distance than the faithless 
monarch absolutely refused any further concessions, 
and actually resumed his former plundering expedi- 
tions in the country round Rome. The Pope wrote 
two letters * of complaint to Pepin ; one was en- 
trusted to Wilchar, Bishop of Nomentum, and the 
other to Abbot Fulrad, who had possibly been one 
of the return escort. Meanwhile Astolphus, no 
longer concealing his animosity, prepared to invade 
the duchy of Rome. On 1st January 756 there 
arrived at Rome itself three military divisions. The 
first, which came from Tuscany, established itself 
before the gates of St. Pancratius ; the second, 
with the king at its head, passed over the left bank 
of the Tiber, and threatened the gate of Salaria ; 
while the third, which hailed from the duchy of 
Beneventum, blockaded the gates of the Lateran 
and St. Paul's. The surrounding country was 
ravaged and laid waste in a pitiless manner. The 

^ Reference is often made to these representations of the Pope 
in the letters of Stephen II. ; Jaffe, 2322, 2323, &c. 

2 One of the numerous illegitimate children of Charles Martel. 

3 The biography speaks only of the military aristocracy. 
* J., 2322, 2323. 


troops pressed closely around the city, but the 
Pope continued to smuggle out fresh ambassadors, 
who proceeded by sea to France, to seek help from 
Pepin. These were George, Bishop of Ostia, 
Thomaricus and Comita, two Roman nobles, and 
one of Pepin's own legates, a Frankish abbot named 
Warneharius. This latter had taken part in the 
Roman defence, wearing a suit of armour over his 
monastic habit, and mounting guard in the ramparts. 
Three letters ^ were entrusted to these messengers ; 
the first in the name of the Pope alone ; the second 
in the name of the Pope, the suburban bishops, the 
Priests, Deacons, Dukes, Registrars, Counts, Tribunes, 
the whole people, and the army. This was of the 
same import as the first, and was addressed not only 
to Pepin, but also to his two sons, and to all the 
Bishops, Abbots, Priests, Monks, Dukes, Counts, 
and the whole Frankish army. The third is ad- 
dressed to the same persons as the foregoing, but 
it is supposed to be written by the Apostle Peter: 
Ego Petrus apostolus. It contains, in this strange 
form, the ingenuous expression of the idea likely to 
prove most effective : the Prince of the Apostles, 
the doorkeeper of heaven, was threatened in his 
sanctuary ; to come to his assistance was a sacred 
duty, and those who responded to the call would 
have special claims on his gratitude and patronage. 
These cries of distress were heard. The Frankish 
army again turned towards Mont Cenis, and Rome 
was immediately set free. The Franks and the 
Lombards engaged in deadly warfare, and the van- 
quished Astolphus was driven to take refuge once 
more in Pavia. Meanwhile, John the Silentiary re- 
appeared at Rome, in company with another worthy, 

1 J., 2325, 2326, 2327. 


the great secretary George (proto a secret a). They 
were entrusted with a mission to the Frankish king, 
and the Pope provided them with a confidential 
escort as far as Marseilles. On arriving there, how- 
ever, they found that Pepin was already in Italy. 
The Byzantine diplomats, much perturbed at this 
discovery, made arrangements to detain the papal 
delegate at Marseilles, while George hastened to 
Pepin, whom he found in the neighbourhood of 
Pavia. His entreaties that Ravenna, the Exarchy, 
and the other contested cities should be restored 
to the imperial government {imperiali concederet 
ditioni)^ were fruitless. Pepin protested that he 
had only undertaken the campaign out of love for 
St. Peter, and to gain the remission of his sins, and 
that no amount of bribery could have any effect 
on him. Thus dismissed, the crestfallen envoy re- 
turned to Rome, on his way to Constantinople. 

Astolphus soon found himself obliged to enter 
into a treaty, the terms of which were rather more 
stringent than the first time. Comacchio was added 
to the list of territories to be yielded, and Pepin not 
only imposed a heavy war tax, but revived the 
tribute which the Lombard kings had in former 
times paid to the Franks. 

To ensure the proper carrying out of this com- 
pact, the Abbot Fulrad, who had stayed behind in 
Italy with a military detachment, made a tour of the 
towns with the Lombard commissioners, everywhere 

1 The biographer uses this term in quite a different sense from 
the word respiihlica which, up to the end of the life of Stephen II., 
he employs, under circumstances in which it obviously cannot be 
applied to a country in submission to the empire. Thus Didier 
promises, in 757, to give back reipuhlicce^ the cities conquered by 
Liutprand; Pope Stephen, who died during the course of this 
transaction, ended rempublicam dilatans. 


demanding the delivering up of the city keys, hos- 
tages and delegates from the aristocracy. Then, 
together with these representatives of the conquered 
territory, he proceeded to Rome, and deposited in 
the Confession at St. Peter's, not only the keys of 
the towns, but the deed by which King Pepin made 
them over to the Apostle, to his Vicar, and to all his 

The exact wording of this deed of gift is no 
longer preserved to us, but in the life of Stephen II. 
we have the list of territories given up to the Holy 
See. They include, first of all, Comacchio and 
Ravenna, and then the tract of land between the 
Apennines and the sea, from Forli in the north as 
far as Jesi Sinigaglia in the south. There is no 
mention of Ancona and the remains of what was 
known later as the Marches, nor of Faenza, Imola, 
Bologna, and Ferrara. The papal State had still 
therefore much to acquire north of the Apennines. 
To the south of the chain, Eugubium (Gubbio) 
alone appears to be included. Perugia, which was a 
near neighbour, still belonged to the Romans. 

With the exception of Narni, which had formerly 
been annexed by the duchy of Spoleto, and which 
was restored in 756, the Lombard king's "restitu- 
tions " were what he himself had seized. Rome, 
though at first satisfied, had not forgotten the time 
when these provinces had other limits. It was 
hardly thirty years since the annexation of Bologna 
in the north and Osimo in the south, and now the 
Romans began to consider the possibility of recaptur- 
ing Liutprand's conquests in the same way as those 
of Astolphus. They had not long to wait for their 
opportunity. Only a few months after the departure 
of the Prankish army, Astolphus met his death 


through a hunting accident. There was great re- 
joicing among the Romans, who thought they saw 
the hand of Providence in the fact of the king's 
dying only a year after his last expedition. To make 
matters still more cheerful, the possession of the 
throne was disputed by two rivals, neither of them 
very formidable. They were Desiderius, Duke of 
Tuscany, and Katchis, brother of the former king, 
and at that time a monk of Monte Cassino. Desi- 
derius intimated his willingness to acquiesce in all 
the Pope's wishes, so Stephen sent him a deputation, 
consisting of his own brother Paul and the Councillor 
Christopher, together with the Abbot Fulrad. Desi- 
derius promised to restore to the "republic" the 
cities which were lacking, civitates quae remanserant, 
i.e., Faenza, Imola, and Ferrara, to the west of the 
Exarchy, and Ancona, Osimo, and Umana to the 
east of Pentapolis. An agreement was signed under 
Fulrad's supervision, and, with a little persuasion, 
Desiderius promised to give up Bologna as well. 

Stephen was beside himself with delight, and 
poured forth his soul in a letter to Pepin written 
in March or April 757. Thanks to the Prankish 
protection and Fulrad's vigorous action, the Pope 
already looked upon himself as the sovereign dis- 
poser of Italy. Desiderius, the new king, begged 
his good offices in recommending him to the favour 
of the Prankish monarch. The inhabitants of the 
duchy of Spoleto, who had just elected a new duke, 
and even those of the duchy of Beneventum, ap- 
proached him with the same end in view. We may 
add that the Dukes of Spoleto and Beneventum were, 
in theory at all events, officially connected with the 
Lombard kingdom. 

The Byzantine empire, however, did not join its 


note to this chorus. It was no longer in a position, 
as in Zachary's time, to benefit by the diplomatic 
successes of the Holy See, which, by the way, were 
not as complete as they had hoped. It was for the 
Pope to yield first. He sent one of his priests, 
Stephen, to Ratchis, exhorting him to go back to 
his monastic life. The Abbot Fulrad sallied forth 
at the head of his Prankish troops to support the 
eloquence of the legate. The Roman army was 
ready to follow him. Ratchis did as he was bidden, 
and Desiderius was proclaimed king of the Lom- 

The situation once conquered, he appeared in no 
hurry to divide up his kingdom. It is true that 
Paenza and Perrara ^ were restored to the Exarchy, 
but as far as Pentapolis was concerned, no change 
took place. 

1 With the two little towns of Bagnacavallo (Castrum Tiheriacum) 
and Gabello, the former between Faenza and Ravenna, the latter 
in the lagoons of Adria. 



Monumental Souvenirs— The Chapel of St. Petronilla— The Monastery 
of the Via Lata— The Abbey of Nonantola — Relations between the 
Pope, the Frankish King, the Lombard King, and the Greek Empire. 

Pope Stephen was, however, spared this disillusion- 
ment, for soon after the accession of Desiderius, on 
26th April 757, he was gathered to his fathers. He 
was immediately succeeded by his brother, the 
deacon Paul, in spite of opposition from a section 
who desired the appointment of the Archdeacon 
Theophylact. These two brother Popes, under 
whose auspices the temporal power began to rise, 
were members of an aristocratic family who dwelt 
at the end of the Via Lata, the rich quarter of that 
time. Paul turned the paternal mansion into a 
monastery, so that they were, in all probability, 
the last of their race. 

We must here make mention of the religious 
monuments which, at Rome and elsewhere, con- 
secrate the memory of many events of this time. 
One of the most important of these is the Chapel 
of St. Petronilla.^ In the cemetery of the Ardeatine 
way at Rome, the tomb of St. Petronilla^ was 
venerated, who, according to the fabulous records 

1 For further details on this subject see De Rossi, Bullettino, 
1878, 1879. 

2 There seems to have been a kind of revival of the worship 
of St. Petronilla in the eighth century. Pope Gregory III. (L. P., 
i. p. 420), established a yearly " station," to be celebrated in the 
cemetery of the Ardeatine way. 


50 PAUL 

of the saints Ndreus and Achilles, was considered 
to be the daughter of St. Peter. Pepin, whose 
interest in this cult had been by some means aroused 
during Stephen's stay in France, requested that 
the body of the saint should be removed to the 
Vatican, near to the tomb of her putative father. 
For her resting-place was chosen one of two circular 
mausoleums, constructed in the fifth century for 
the Theodosian family; the first, which had prob- 
ably never been used for purposes of interment, 
had been dedicated to St. Andrew by Pope Sym- 
machus (498-514), while the other became the 
temple of the saint beloved by the Franks. The 
necessary alterations were speedily completed, and 
on 8th October 757, the Pontiff Paul presided over 
the removal of the remains. Not long after, Rome 
became possessed of an important memento of the 
Carlovingian family, which was solemnly deposited 
by the Pope in the new sanctuary. It was nothing 
less than the sabanum ^ of Gisele, Pepin's baby 
daughter, to whom Paul had accepted the office 
of god-father. Thenceforward in his correspondence 
with the Franks, Paul always styles himself the 
** compere " (or fellow-father) of King Pepin. His 
brother Stephen, before him, had made use of 
the same title, though in his case it was probably 
an empty one, for there is no record of any 
children being born to Pepin during the preceding 

Thus, through these family ties, represented by 
Petronilla and Gisele, a close union was brought 
about between the Prankish princes and the heads 
of the Church — St. Peter and his successors. In 

1 i.e. the linen cloth in which the child was wrapped after her 

PAUL 51 

this connection we must also mention St. Sylvester 
and St. Denis. 

In the imposing legend of St. Sylvester, which 
dates from the fifth century, the vivid Eastern 
imagination had symbolised the remarkable effect 
produced on the world by the conversion of Con- 
stantine. One of the most prominent topographical 
features of this old story was Mount Soracte. 
This beautiful mountain, which towers over the 
course of the Tiber and Roman Tuscia, had, from 
early times, been the haunt of monastic colonies. 
In the eighth century the highest peak was crowned 
with a church dedicated to St. Sylvester, and lower 
down were three other convents in connection with 
the superior monastery. This was at one time 
the abode of Pepin's brother, Carloman, who had 
resigned his temporal position. The monastery and 
all its dependencies had been presented to him by 
Pope Zachary. Later on, however, Paul made over 
the rights of the property to Pepin, who immediately 
assigned it to the Roman Church. 

Paul proceeded to affiliate this royal gift to 
the monastic foundation which he had just estab- 
lished in his paternal mansion in the Via Lata. 
He named it in honour of the two saints, Stephen 
and Sylvester. The former was a third century 
Pope, who had left his mark on the legendary lore 
of the time, and with whose name were bound up 
memories of Stephen II., formerly joint owner of 
the estate to be consecrated. His remains were 
taken from the catacombs ; those of St. Sylvester were 
brought from his basilica in the Salarian way, and 
those two sainted Popes were installed in the 
interior church of the monastery. The convents of 
Soracte, St. Sylvester, and others, were annexed to 

52 PAUL 

the monastery in the Via Lata. Furthermore, the 
larger of the two churches of which the monastery 
boasted, the external basilica, to which the public 
had access, was dedicated to St. Denis of Paris.^ 

This was evidently to commemorate the Pope's 
visit to the royal abbey of St. Denis, whose abbot 
was distinguished by a burning enthusiasm for the 
Holy See. Pepin, Carloman, Stephen II., Fulrad, 
and all the other prominent names of latter years 
were to be found there under the rival protection 
of the saints of Rome and of Paris. The Via Lata 
monastery might, indeed, be called a memorial of 
the foundation of the early Roman State. 

But that St. Sylvester did not confine his pat- 
ronage to memorials of this kind will be seen from 
the following. King Astolphus had married the 
daughter of one of the principal Lombard dukes 
Anselm. This latter, like his contemporaries, 
Hunald of Aquitaine, Carloman of France, and 
Ratchis of Italy, had devoted himself to a monastic 
life, and his royal son-in-law bestowed on him a 
large estate to the north of Modena, in the district 
of Nonantola, as the site for a monastery. This 
was in 751, shortly after the capture of Ravenna. 
The following years (752 and 753) when the relations 
between Astolphus and the Pope were already 
somewhat strained, the Bishop of Reggio first, and 
then the Archbishop of Ravenna, proceeded to con- 
secrate the churches and oratories. The monastery 
had not long been established when the Lombard 
king undertook his expedition against Rome. 
The Abbot Anselm followed his king as far as the 
walls of the holy city, and though there is no 

1 In connection with this name, see my Memoire, St. Denis in 
Via Lata, in the Melanges of the Ecole de Rome, t. xx. p. 317. 

PAUL 58 

evidence that he actually engaged in fighting as 
did such other well-known monks as Hunald^ and 
Warneharius, there is no doubt that he received his 
share of the spoils. Among the treasures that he 
brought away from Rome was the body of St. 
Sylvester. Now, as this holy relic was preserved 
in a church in the Salarian way, just where the 
Lombard army had taken up its position, its 
removal to Nonantola may safely be reckoned 
among those depredations condemned as sacri- 
legious by the biographer of Stephen II. The 
idea that it may have been a gift from the pontiff 
is scarcely worth entertaining. The monks, later 
on, tried to gloss over the misdeed by manufac- 
turing letters of transfer, very difficult to reconcile 
with the foundation of St. Sylvester in the Via 

This is no place in which to investigate the 
authenticity of the relics claimed by the two con- 
vents. It is of no great moment whether the Lom- 
bards or the Romans were mistaken as to the tomb, 
or whether an unequal division was the result of a 
theft on the one hand, or of a pious appropriation on 
the other. The point to be accentuated is that the 
Abbey of Nonantola and its local worship of St. 
Sylvester, perpetuated in the Lombard district, and 
in an essentially Lombard style, the memory of the 
Roman crisis of 756, and the beginnings of the tem- 
poral power. 

No sooner was Paul elected than, without waiting 
to be ordained, he announced to Pepin the facts of 
his brother's death and of his own succession, assuring 

1 See L. P., t. i. p. ccxxvii. 

2 On this question, see the Memoirs of P. Bortolotti, Antica vita 
di S, Anselmo, Modena, 1892. 

54 PAUL 

him at the same time of his readiness to carry out 
faithfully the engagements made by his predecessor. 
A Frankish envoy, Immo by name, had just arrived 
at Rome, and he was detained by the Pope, in order 
that he might attend the ordination ceremony. A 
few weeks later letters arrived from France ; one of 
them was addressed to the aristocracy and the lay 
population, and urgently enjoined loyalty to the new 

We will come back later to a consideration of 
home affairs. Outside, serious transactions were 
taking place. The Pope continued to clamour for 
the towns that Desiderius had promised, but the 
Lombard king was by no means eager to respond. 
His reluctance was undoubtedly intensified by Paul's 
curious interference in the affairs of Spoleto and 
Beneventum. In demanding the Frankish protec- 
tion for these two duchies, the Holy See was en- 
croaching upon the political domain of the Lombard 
kingdom. It was going back twenty years to the 
schemes of Gregory III., afterwards abandoned by 
Zachary,^ under the pressure of circumstances. 

Obviously it was not for Pepin to follow the Pope's 
example, and involve himself in these perilous politi- 
cal affairs. He must have thought it odd that Paul 
should have enlisted himself on the side of the Dukes 
of Aquitaine and Bavaria, who were continually in 
rebellion against the central power of the Frankish 
kingdom. He, therefore, refused the protectorship, 
and gave no support to the Romans in their increased 
claims upon the Exarchy and Pentapolis. Desiderius 
imagined that he had a free hand in the matter, and 

^ See the answer to this letter in the Codex Carolinus, No. 13 

2 See L. P., vol. i. p. 426. 

PAUL 55 

began operations by starting forth to quell the re- 
bellious dukes. In order to reach them he had to 
pass through Pentapolis, most probably by way of 
Gubbio, and the ravages committed by his soldiers 
on the way created great indignation among the 
Romans. The Duke of Spoleto, Alboni, was taken 
prisoner with several of his " satraps," but the Duke 
of Beneventum managed to take refuge at Otranto. 
Desiderius installed another in his place, and then 
proceeded to Rome. The Pope met him outside the 
walls of St. Peter's, and pleaded persistently for the 
restoration of the promised towns. His eloquence, 
however, had no effect upon the king, who under- 
took to surrender Imola alone, and that only on con- 
dition that Pepin should deliver up the Lombard 
hostages who had been taken to France. The Pope, 
seemingly resigned, wrote to the Prankish king to 
this effect, but at the same time he contrived that 
Pepin should receive another letter from him, can- 
celling the contents of the first, maintaining all the 
Roman claims, and urging him to insist on a com- 
plete fulfilment of all the promises made by the 
Lombard king.^ 

Pepin despatched to Italy his brother Remedius, 
Bishop of Rouen, and the Duke Autchaire, and 
they succeeded in arranging matters on the basis 
of uti possidetis, Desiderius was to yield no other 
town, not even Imola ; the Pope was adjudged pos- 
sessor of the remainder ; the damage done by either 
party was to be repaired ; and many trifling ques- 
tions concerning boundaries, customs, and patri- 
monies were affably settled. Pepin did his utmost 
to persuade the Pope to submit, and even to cultivate 
the friendship of the Lombard king. Paul, there- 

1 J., 2340, 2341. 

56 PAUL 

fore, resigned himself, though not without grief and 
recriminations, to the dispelling of his dreams. It was, 
nevertheless, extremely evident that the Frankish 
king could neither undertake to place himself at 
the disposal of the Romans and their plans, nor to 
cross the Alps every time that there was a frontier 
skirmish between the Romans and the Lombards. 

Moreover, it was to the interest of the Lombards 
to cultivate peace; henceforth they had a common 
enemy, the Byzantine empire, which was quite ready 
to take advantage of their disagreements. Constan- 
tine v., disappointed in his hopes of the Frankish 
intervention and the diplomacy of the Pope, con- 
tinued his designs on Ravenna, and sought to regain 
a footing in central Italy. His efforts were mainly 
directed against the Pope, who at that time held 
Ravenna, and was responsible for the emancipation 
of the Romans. Instead, however, of entering into 
direct communication with him, he began by making 
friendly overtures to Desiderius. On the other hand, 
he considered that the ecclesiastical disunion pro- 
duced by the images dispute was pretext enough for 
approaching the Frankish king. The iconoclastic 
reform did not, of course, affect the dwellers on the 
other side of the Alps to anything like the same 
extent as those of Byzantine Rome. Not only had 
they taken no part in the papal demonstrations, on 
behalf of the use of images and symbols in worship 
for thirty years, but the worship itself, in spite of the 
great decline of Frankish Christianity, did not appeal 
to them at all seriously. An attempt might be made 
to engage them in a struggle against what the em- 
pire proscribed as a religious perversion. Piety, thus 
understood, would provide a substitute for ground 
lost in the political arena. One proof that this 

PAUL 57 

ground was well selected is to be found in the fact 
that the Frankish Church, under Charlemagne and 
Louis the Pious, far from sharing the Pope's atti- 
tude towards the image question, rather supported 
the views of the iconoclast emperors. 

At Rome they were quite cognisant of this 
danger. Indeed, Pope Paul spent the whole of his 
pontificate in listening to rumours from the south, 
and quaking before the dread of a political alliance 
between the Greeks and Lombards, or a religious 
compact between the emperor and the Frankish 

But Pepin, who was a man of ability and common 
sense, did not let himself be beguiled by the half- 
theological diplomats who were sent to him from 
Constantinople. Nor did he allow himself to be led 
away, like the Romans, into constant plans for the 
re-division of the Italian territory. He saw at once 
that the important point was to bring about a recon- 
ciliation between his two allies, the Pope and the 
Lombard king, and with tact and energy he set 
about producing this result without wounding the 
feelings of either party. In spite of the Pope's 
demands for a Frankish missus to be in permanent 
residence at Rome, Pepin confined himself to supply- 
ing temporary legations, deputies entrusted to arrange 
transient or special diflftculties. If there was any 
need for the Frankish king to be represented in 
Italy as the Pope's protector, it was on Desiderius 
himself that the office devolved. The latter was 
induced to give up the intrigues formed with the 
Greeks at the beginning of his reign, and the Pope 
was persuaded to come to an understanding with 
him, and, if necessary, to claim his support. 

Towards the religious question, Pepin's attitude 

58 PAUL 

was just as sane and simple. He listened to the 
Pope's continual exhortations against the imperial 
unorthodoxy, and always acted in accord with him, 
both at Constantinople (by means of their respective 
ambassadors), and in France in the event of any dis- 
pute. The Byzantines finally recognised their mis- 
take; in Italy, Pepin's friendly relations with the 
Pope and the Lombards were an effectual hindrance 
to their political schemes, while, as far as the Franks 
were concerned, their loyalty to the great Head of 
religious affairs of the west was deep enough to 
discourage any further attempts on the part of the 
orientals to arouse ill-feeling against their powerful 

This is the impression that we get from the letters 
written by Paul to King Pepin, and preserved to us 
in the Codeoo Carolinus, Unfortunately we have no 
means of correcting or supplementing this corre- 
spondence, and, as the dates are lacking, it is often 
difficult to arrange the letters in their chronological 
order. Details on the subject are not easily obtained, 
for, from the Libe7^ Pontificalis we learn nothing, 
and from the Prankish chronicles, but little, of these 
events. But there is conclusive evidence that the 
two Byzantine diplomats of 756, John the Silen- 
tiary and George, the chief secretary, continued their 
mission in the following year. The former installed 
himself at the Prankish court, and the latter in 
Italy, where he combined with the Lombard king 
in plotting against Ravenna. Later on, in 763, 
Pepin and Paul united in sending two ambassadors 
to Constantinople, where they stayed the winter. 
The pontiff's chief adviser at that time was 
Christopher, primicerius of the notaries. Among 
the people of Constantinople he bore the reputa- 

PAUL 59 

tion of taking an undue part in the writing or 
editing of the papal letters, and he was popularly 
accused of trying to corrupt the Frankish and 
Byzantine envoys. The imperial government was 
anxious to do away with the papal legates, and to 
transact business directly with the Frankish court, 
but their endeavours in this line were apparently 
unsuccessful. We hear of a conference held at 
Gentilly early in 767, where, according to the 
annalist of Lorsch, there was a discussion intei^ 
Romanos et Grcecos de sancta Trinitate et de sanc- 
torum imaginibus. From the presence of the Romans 
on this occasion, we conclude that Pepin continued 
to persevere in his principle of referring all religious 
discussions to the Pope.^ 

Very soon afterwards, on 28th June 767, Pope Paul 
breathed his last. Affairs at Rome itself were quiet, 
though with a superficial quietness which was speedily 
and seriously to be disturbed. Let us now glance at 
the ecclesiastical and military organisation of the 
little Roman State and at the beginnings of the 
contest which might have been observed or foretold 
even at that time. 

^ The mention of the Trinity is strange. From that time there 
seems to have been no difference of opinion between East and 
West on the subject of the Holy Spirit. At the Roman Council of 
769 no Trinitarian question was discussed. 



The military scholar and the staff of the Palatine — The Cardinal Clergy — 
The Lateran Palace and the general services of the Roman Church 
— The Recruiting of the Clergy — Pontifical Finances — Domus cultce — 
Charitable offices — Monasteries. 

The military organisation of Rome was as follows : — 
The population was divided, according to district, 
into twelve groups or scholce, and at the head of 
each schola was a patronus, afterwards called a 
decarco. The whole of the town on the left bank 
of the Tiber was included in this arrangement, but 
beyond this the inhabitants of the island {insulani), 
and the Trasteverians ^ formed at that time, or later, 
two other sections. We must also mention the 
Greek section, schola Grcecoi^um, which corre- 
sponded with the Byzantine quarter par excellence, 
the Palatine and its neighbourhood. Finally,^ there 
were in the unfortified suburbs of St. Peter's scholce 
made up of foreign colonies ; there were four of 
these (if not just at that time, very soon after- 
wards) belonging to the Saxons (Anglo-Saxons), 
Frisians, Franks, and Lombards. 

The headquarters were at the Palatine, in the old 
imperial palace, which was again officially repaired 
towards the close of the seventh century.^ This was 

1 See Les Regions de Rome au moyen age, in the Melanges of the 
tcole de Rome, vol. x. ; cf. L. P., vol. ii. p. 253, note 7. 

2 L. P., vol. i. p. S6, note 1. 

8 L. P., vol. 1. p. 386, note 1. 


the residence of the emperor on his one and only 
visit to Rome (663), and of the Exarch, who appeared 
there more often, as well as of the duke and the 
military staff. In connection with this palace there 
was an official chapel,^ St. Csesar in Palatio, the place 
of receptacle for the image of each emperor on his 
accession. St. Csesar,^ of which there is no trace left, 
was situated within the precincts of the palace itself ; 
while, at the bottom of the hill, was the church bear- 
ing the old priestly title of St. Anastasia. This had 
become the headquarters of the Byzantine district. 
In these times, when politics and religion were so 
intimately related, the festivals in connection with 
these churches were of the highest importance. 
One of the Christmas masses was celebrated at 
St. Anastasia, in honour of its patron saint ; and 
equally impressive was the festival of St. Ceesar, 
which was celebrated on 1st November at the 
Palatine, and distinguished by a grand procession.^ 
The superior degrees were those of duke, cartu- 
lary, count, and tribune, and next below these in 
dignity came the patroni scholaritm, the primicerii, 
domestici, and optiones. But we know very little 
of the details of these offices, or, indeed, of the 
military organisation in general. 

1 Bull. CriL, vol. vi. p. 417 ; L. P., vol. i. p. 377, note 12. 

2 The site indicated in the Forma Urbis of M. Lanciani is quite 
out of the question; in fact it is outside not only the palace but the 
Palatine also. 

3 We must not omit to mention here the Byzantine Church of 
Sta. Maria Antica, which recent excavations have brought to light. 
The flight of stairs connecting it with the Palatine is still to be 
seen. Its officiating clergy seem to have been monks, speaking 
the Greek tongue, and in the eighth century it was a very popular 
devotional resort, probably in consequence of its pictures and in- 
scriptions. We will not attempt to record the countless attempts 
which have been, and are still being made, to trace its origin back 
to the time of Pope Sylvester in the fourth century. 


We hear no more of a chief duke after the time 
of Stephen II. As was mentioned before, the title 
of patridus Romanoruvi seems to have been con- 
ferred on the Frankish princes, in order that the 
Pope might be relieved from the presence in his 
neighbourhood of a superior dignitary. The Pope 
is the head of the government ; and the army, like 
the rest, is subject to his command. He claims no 
other dignity than that which accrues to him from 
his ecclesiastical position, and it is as head of the 
ecclesia JDei that he, at the same time, assumes 
authority over the respublica Romanorum, 

Then there were also the cardinal priests, who 
surrounded the Pope. They were generally about 
twenty-five in number, and constituted a kind of 
senate of the Church. At the present time they 
receive and manage the revenues of their churches, 
reside in the ecclesiastical establishments attached 
to them, and superintend the religious ceremonies. 
But, although they constitute the official council of 
the Pope, and are conspicuous in the pontifical 
ceremonial, they are really of less importance than 
the cardinal deacons. 

These latter are always seven in number, and are 
the permanent assistants and ordinary servants of 
the Pope. Their special province is within their 
district limits. The archdeacon is the director of 
the ecclesiastical staff in general. Next below the 
deacons come the sub-deacons, who are divided 
into two groups of seven; some of them are 
specially attached to the district government, while 
others are in the more immediate service of the 

The deacons lived at the Lateran, which was 
the chief centre of the ecclesiastical administration. 


But there was, also, another papal palace, that of 
the Palatine ^ ; it was erected about the beginning of 
the eighth century, at a time when the safety of 
the Lateran was not to be relied upon. During the 
pontificate of Gregory II. the ramparts of Rome 
were repaired, and the Lateran, thus protected, be- 
came, from the time of Zachary onwards, the usual 
residence of the Pope. To the diaconal administra- 
tion were referred all matters connected with the 
ecclesiastical staff, the charitable arrangements, and, 
generally speaking, most of the temporal affairs of 
the Church. The Lateran was also the headquarters 
of the following : — 

1. The government of the palace itself, controlled 
by the vice dominus (vidame), in conjunction with, or 
instead of whom appears, after the end of the eighth 
century, the superista. Below the vidame are the 
cubicularii (chamberlains), the cellerarii (cellarers), 
the strato7^es (equerries), &c. The nomenculator is 
the grandmaster of the ceremonies ; the vestararius, 
or p?io7^ vestiarii, is the guardian of the stores of 
valuable furniture and other treasure. 

2. The chancellor's office, where the clerks were 
known as notarii or scriniariL These included the 
seven district notaries, the two most important of 
whom (the primicerius and the secundicerius) were 
numbered among the great ecclesiastical dignitaries. 
The primicerius of the notaries, together with the 
chief priest and the archdeacon, made up the trium- 
virate on which the government of the Roman 
Church devolved, in the event of the Pope's death 
or absence. He was also trustee of the archives 

1 Probably at the northern angle, above Sta. Maria Antica. 
The site is covered by a grove of evergreen oaks, and is one of the 
most delightful spots in Rome. 


and manager of the library, though by this time 
the functions of librarian were beginning to be 
separated from those of the notaries. 

As yet, there is no mention of the primiscrinius 
or protoscrinius, who, later, succeeded the primicerius 
as the real head of the chancellor's office. 

3. The financial administration presided over by 
the arcarius, chief cashier, and the saccellaiHus, or 
paymaster-general. Connected with them were the 
advocates, who had to do with the courts of justice, 
and particularly with the execution of ecclesiastical 
sentences. They, like the notaries, possessed an 
aristocracy of seven district officers, with a primi- 
cerius at their head. 

After the ninth century, some of these offices 
became secularised, while others remained in eccle- 
siastical ^ hands. These latter soon formed a special 
and distinguished category, the seven Palatine judges, 
viz., the primicerius and the secundicerius of the 
notaries, the arcarius^ the saccellarius, the proto- 
scrinius, the chief of the advocates, and the nomen- 

There were also the functions of the consiliarius 
and the ordinator. That of consiliarius, sometimes 
entrusted to the clergy and sometimes to the laity, 
seems to have been of great importance. After 
the eighth century, however, we hear no more of 
either of them. 

As a rule the Pope officiated at the Church of 
the Lateran, which was included, since the time of 
Constantine, in the domus ecclesice. He and his 
court, however, were often present at other cere- 
monies, either at Sta. Maria Maggiore or in some 

1 But generally, ecclesiastics who had not been promoted to 
the higher orders and were thus in no way bound to celibacy. 


other of the city or suburban basihcas. The daily 
reUgious service at the Lateran was presided over, 
in turn, by the seven bishops in the closest vicinity 
of Rome. It was through this system of papal 
assistants that the class of cardinal bishops was 

The Roman clergy were recruited from two 
sources, according to the social position of the can- 
didates. Those belonging to the lower classes were 
educated in a kind of seminary, the Schola cantorum, 
which was situated not far from the Lateran. It 
was also known as the Orphanage — Orpha7iotrophium, 
The children of the nobility were received into the 
papal palace among the cubicularii. Both classes 
received the tonsure at the outset of their careers, a 
rite which admitted them to the ranks of the clergy, 
and gave them the much appreciated privilege of 
decorating their horses with white saddle cloths. 
During their novitiate they took the position of 
acolytes ; the other lesser orders, owing to their 
practical disuse, had fallen into insignificance. The 
acolytes were distributed among the priestly offices ; 
they constituted the whole assistant clergy of the 
cardinal priests. These clerics took no vows of 
celibacy, but, as a rule, indulged in matrimony. It 
was not until several years later, after promotion 
to the higher orders, that they bound themselves 
to a celibate life. Even then, they only severed 
their family relationships as far as was absolutely 
necessary. The wives of the superior orders 
of clergy were not sequestered in cloisters, and 
they even shared, to a certain extent, in the 

^ See Le sedi episcopali nelV antico ducato di Roma, in vol. xv. of 
L'Archivio Romano di storia patria. 



promotion of their husbands, becoming diaconce, 
presbyterce, or episcopce. On the day of the clerk's 
preferment to the priesthood, or the diaconate, 
their wives were also honoured with a kind of 
consecration ceremony, in celebration of this access 
of dignity. 

Besides the ordained clerks, who, for the most 
part, had had time to found families, there was 
still a very large number who were not ordained, 
e.g, those engaged at the chancellor's office or in 
the administrative service, notaries, advocates, cham- 
berlains, cellarers, &c. All these constituted a kind 
of clerical reserve, from which the Schola cantorwn 
drew the necessary supplies. They also served to 
fill up ecclesiastical offices, and being strengthened 
in the cubiculum sacrum by the addition of an 
aristocratic element, they attained to the highest 
ranks of the sacred hierarchy, not excepting the 
pontificate itself. The temporal power once defi- 
nitely organised, it fell to the lot of the hierarchy 
to manage many matters which were originally 
foreign to it. Its importance and prestige increased 
perceptibly, and at the Orphanage there was much 
competition for the cubiculum as the means of entry. 
As will be seen, this was a severe trial for the 
ecclesiastical spirit. 

The pontifical finances^ were still drawn, in the 
main, from the landed property of the Church. 
Owing to the confiscations by the Byzantine govern- 
ment, a large portion of the immense estates men- 
tioned in the letters of St. Gregory had vanished. 
The ancient patrimonies of Sicily and Calabria no 
longer yielded any income, and it was only with 

1 Cf. Paul Fabre's book, De patrimoniis s. Romance ecclesice. 
Paris, 1892. 


great difficulty that the Pope obtained a small profit 
from the domains which remained to him in Istria, 
and the neighbourhood of Naples, and Gaeta. The 
chief part of the papal revenues was drawn from 
the Church property around Rome. But even this 
source had been seriously affected by the long lease 
system. In spite of all this, however, the constant 
reception of gifts and legacies had enabled not only 
Paul's predecessors, but also some of his successors, 
to reconstitute an important department. In order 
to minimise the covert estrangement of property 
which was continually going on, and also to re- 
populate the sparsely inhabited country, the Popes 
undertook to cultivate certain extensive districts 
themselves without any outside help. This was 
called the domus cultce. The peasants who worked 
for them were regarded as papal employes, and 
formed rural militice, which were not disarmed like 
the militia ecclesiastica. Thus the ecclesiastical 
revenues were being confirmed and strengthened, 
while, at the same time, a staff was being consti- 
tuted capable of military organisation, and having 
the advantage over the eocercitus Romanus of repre- 
senting no tradition at variance with the ecclesia 
Dei, If properly developed and employed, this 
would be a valuable aid to the Popes in confront- 
ing the internal difficulties of their temporal govern- 

In closing this review of the Roman institutions 
in the eighth century, a word must be said of the 
charitable establishments and monasteries. The 
former were abundant, comprising hospices and 
hospitals {xenodochia, ptochia, hospitalia), asylums 
for foundlings {brephotrophia), for aged men {gero- 
comia), and benevolent societies or deaconries. 


These establishments were founded on endowments, 
and, like the presbyteral churches, had their own 
incomes and official staff. 

The same might also be said of the monasteries 
which abounded at Rome. A large number of them 
were occupied by Greek monks, while others sheltered 
Orientals, Syrians, Armenians, &c. As a rule, they 
were established in the neighbourhood of such sacred 
places as St. Peter's, St. Paul's, St. Lawrence's, or 
even the city basilicas. Each foundation had an 
oratory of its own, though most of the services seem 
to have been held in the neighbouring basilica, 
several monasteries sometimes having one common 
celebration in the same church. There were, for 
example, four or five congregations meeting in the 
basilica of St. Peter's. This was the origin of the 
chapters. The vicissitudes of the convent system 
led to the formation of congregations of canons, 
both regular and lay, the most important of which 
have survived to the present day. 

As we mentioned before, the monasteries of 
Rome were of no great importance. The Popes 
seemed to have been warned by the ill-effects pro- 
duced on ecclesiastical discipline by large bodies of 
monks in other places — Constantinople, for example. 
Thus, while they encouraged the religious profession, 
they did not favour the formation of powerful con- 
gregations. Moreover, when the monks were offici- 
ating in the basilicas it was much easier to keep 
them under control. The large convents were else- 
where. Monte Cassino, which had been revived 
under Pope Zachary, was situated in the Lombard 
domains. So also were the Abbeys of Monte 
Amiata, St. Saviour of Rieti, and Santa Maria of 
Farfa. The latter, however, had been founded 


on part of the territory which the Lombards under- 
took to restore to the Pope. It was transferred 
to the papal jurisdiction during Hadrian's ponti- 
ficate, when it did not fail to become a subject of 



Government of Pope Paul — Divisions at the time of his death — Usur- 
pation of Constantine II. — Reaction led by Christopher, with the 
assistance of Desiderius — Constantine is expelled from the Holy 
See — Election in the Forum — Stephen III. — Sanguinary retaliation 
— The Council of 769 — Desiderius at Rome — Paul Afiarta — Assassi- 
nation of Christopher and his son Sergius — Deception and death of 
Stephen III. 

From the foregoing account of the institutions of 
the little Roman State, it is not difficult to under- 
stand that the existing conditions contained the 
elements of an important internal crisis. There 
were two great rival bodies, the clergy and the 
army, and the transfer to the Church of the political 
supremacy, hitherto enjoyed by the army, did not 
tend to sweeten the relations between them. Affairs 
seem to have gone on calmly at first, and we hear 
of no definite resistance during Paul's reign, except 
in the case of a priest called Marin. This man resided 
at the Prankish Court, and gave himself up to inces- 
sant plotting against the Pope. The latter might 
well have wished to be rid of him, through his 
promotion to a French bishopric, but when his 
parents were anxious to see him again, Paul formally 
requested that he should be sent back to Italy, 
promising to honour him with another ecclesiastical 
title. Marin, notwithstanding, remained in France 
during the rest of the Pope's lifetime, apparently to 
the complete satisfaction of the latter. 



If order continued to prevail at Rome, it was 
because Pope Paul ruled with a high hand. Even 
his biographer, while lauding the papal virtues, refers 
to the molestations practised by his " iniquitous 
sateUites," and relates that the prisons often har- 
boured prisoners under sentence of death. The 
Pope was accused of many extortions,^ and rapidly 
acquired a reputation for unjust severity. The 
power of the papacy, while having its advantages, 
was not without drawbacks. The army, ousted by 
the government, watched the flame of rebellion 
smouldering, and, if necessary, did what it could to 
fan it. In the early summer of 767 the Pope, who 
was living at that time in the neighbourhood of 
St. Paul's, was taken seriously ill. A reaction im- 
mediately followed. 

Under these conditions any change of authority 
was not feasible, and the idea of a Byzantine restora- 
tion does not seem to have occurred to anybody. 
As at the accession of Stephen II., the emperor 
was too far away and the Lombards too close at 
hand to enable the Romans to dispense with the 
intervention of the Franks, who would hardly have 
consented to the transference of the political power 
from the Pope to the army. The best way out of 
the difficulty, they thought, would be to elect as 
Pope a member of the military aristocracy, who 
would be inclined to restore to the army at least 
part of what it had lost during the pontificates of the 
two brothers, Stephen and Paul. The clergy, realis- 
ing that a crisis was at hand, had already taken pre- 
cautions, and felt safe as to the result of the election, 
provided that it was conducted in an orderly manner, 
and among the Roman inhabitants of Rome. 

1 L. P., vol. i. p. 463, 475. 


At this time the most important person in the 
ecclesiastical world was Christopher, the primicerius. 
From the time of Stephen II. he had been a con- 
spicuous figure, having accompanied the Pope on his 
Frankish mission^ in 753, in virtue of his office as 
district notary, or advocate. We hear of him again, 
three years later, as one of those engaged in negotia- 
tions for an alliance between Pope Stephen and 
Desiderius,^ the claimant to the Lombard throne. 
This time he bears the title of consiliarius. He was 
as devoted to Paul as he had been to his brother, 
and seems to have had no inconsiderable share in 
the most weighty transactions and correspondence of 
the time. At the court of Constantinople it was 
said that Pope Paul was nothing but a puppet, whom 
Christopher forced to dance to his piping, and that 
the latter was really responsible for the whole of the 
papal policy. It is, indeed, more than probable, that 
the primicerius was the chief promoter of the policy 
of the last few years, the instigator and mainstay of 
the Frankish alliance, as well as of the ecclesiastical 

The nobles, who were stronger in the outlying 
districts and the small towns than in the capital, 
promulgated the idea that as the Pope was now 
ruler of the whole duchy, it was only right that 
all his future subjects should have a voice in his 
election. Qui omnibus prceesse debet ab omnibus 
eligatur. This old maxim of canon law was now 
applied to the episcopal instead of to the monarchical 
election. This was all the more natural, because 
the provincial governors formerly, and in later times 
the dukes, had gained their position by election. 

1 L. P., vol. i. p. 446. 

2 Ibid., p. 455. 


How these ideas were translated into facts we shall 
now see. 

Residing at Nepi, but also owning a house at 
Rome, was a certain Duke Toto^ (Theodore). He 
arranged to confer with his three brothers, Con- 
stantine, Passivus, and Pascal, and some confede- 
rates, and together they plotted to hasten the Pope's 
death. Their evil designs were, however, thwarted 
by Christopher, who even succeeded in making Toto 
swear that the election should proceed in proper 
form. But the duke straightway broke his oath ; 
he summoned around him all the troops of Roman 
Tuscia, and these, reinforced by a large number of 
peasants, presented themselves before the gate of 
St. Pancratius, which was not barred or bolted. 

The rebellion was being organised in the city 
under the command of the new arrivals when the 
Pope suddenly expired on 25th June. A pre- 
liminary convocation was immediately held in the 
basilica of the Apostles, at which, thanks to Chris- 
topher's influence, the clergy and the army met 
in a friendly spirit, and overwhelmed one another 
with mutual pledges of good-will. The outlook 
seemed promising, and, according to custom, the 
election was put off for a few days, when Toto and 
his followers forced their way into the Lateran and 
proclaimed, as Pope, Constantine, the eldest of the 
three brothers. He was not a cleric, but a military 
man, for they had ignored the old Roman custom, 
often set forth in the canonical writings, and honoured 
by constant observance, which forbade such a choice. 

1 Our chief sources of information on these events are: (1) 
The letters of the Codex Carolinus ; (2) the lives of Stephen III. 
and Hadrian in the Liher Pontijicalis ; (3) fragments of the Council 
of 769 ; see my edition of the Liber Pontificalis, commentary on the 
Life of Stephen III. 


George, Bishop of Prenesto, whom they encountered 
in the vicedominium, was obliged, in spite of protests, 
to confer the tonsure on the newly appointed pontiff. 
Christopher was sought, in order that he might have 
a share in this usurpation, but he refused emphati- 
cally to have any connection with it. 

The next day Constantine was ordained sub- 
deacon, and then deacon and priest, in the oratory 
of St. Lawrence at the Lateran; he was then in- 
ducted in due form, with the administration of a 
solemn oath. On the following Sunday, 5th July, 
he was consecrated Pope at St. Peter's, again by the 
Bishop of Prenesto, who was assisted by his col- 
leagues of Albano and Porto. After this ceremony, 
Christopher, and the most faithful of his adherents, 
were alone in refusing to recognise Constantine's 
promotion. But Christopher was a force to be 
reckoned with. His influence over the two pre- 
ceding Popes had been marked, and now the vic- 
torious party hoped to get rid of him and his 
followers. Duke Gregory, one of the latter, was 
assassinated, and the priviicerius, feeling his own 
situation to be precarious, fled with his children 
to seek refuge at St. Peter's. Nor could they be 
induced to emerge from its friendly shelter, until 
Constantine himself assured them that their lives 
were not in danger. In return, they undertook to 
remain quiet until after Easter, when they were to 
retire into monastic life. There was some slight 
amount of local opposition, but it was speedily over- 
come, and this severe treatment of Gregory and of 
Christopher and his family was the only conspicuous 
case of the kind. Those who had scruples awaited a 
safer opportunity to declare them. It was, however, 
related, with some consternation, that the Bishop of 


Prenesto, who was paralysed in the right hand, had 
not been able to use it since he had stretched it 
forth at the consecration of Constantine. His death, 
which occurred shortly after, was looked upon as a 
token of divine displeasure. 

The gratitude of the Prankish king had still to 
be procured. Constantine immediately^ wrote to 
him to announce the fact of his accession, but 
Pepin, who must have had some inkling of the 
state of affairs, seemed in no haste to reply. A 
second letter ^ was despatched in September, osten- 
sibly to inform the prince of the arrival of oriental 
communications connected with the veneration of 
images. Constantine then proceeds to the sub- 
ject of the election, attempting to plead extenuating 
circumstances. He speaks of his unworthiness, of 
the violence offered to him, of the decrees of Provi- 
dence, in short, of all that might be urged in a 
parallel case. Pepin, at that time, was very much 
engaged with his war in Aquitaine, and although it 
is certain that he took no active measures against 
Constantine, there is no evidence that he made any 
exertions on his behalf. He appears to have held 
aloof from the whole affair, or, at least, not to have 
taken any serious notice of it. The Lombards, for 
their part, lay low, and made no attacks on the 
Roman State, a sign that they regarded the Prankish 
protection as including, if not the person of the new 
Pope, at any rate the domain consecrated to the 
Prince of the Apostles. 

About the middle of April (768) Christopher the 
primicerius and his son, Sergius, who, under the last 
Pope, had held the office of saccellarius, were left 

1 J., 2374. 2 j.^ 2375, 


free to embrace a religious career. For this purpose 
they selected the monastery of St. Saviour at Rieti, 
in the duchy of Spoleto. The abbot was sent for, 
and undertook the custody of the two novices. 
Once outside the Roman frontier, however, they 
succeeded in eluding his vigilance, and, upon reach- 
ing Spoleto, called on the duke for an escort to 
Pavia. Their plans were successful, and they came 
to an understanding with the Lombard prince with- 
out the intervention of their protectors on the other 
side of the Alps. Desiderius was delighted at the 
chance of profiting by the disordered state of affairs, 
and assured the Roman dignitaries of his sympathy 
and support. He had them escorted back to 
Spoleto, bearing a message to the duke, who, act- 
ing upon his instructions, put an army at the dis- 
posal of Sergius. The latter, accompanied by the 
priest Waldipert, a Lombard ambassador, set out at 
the head of it, and they arrived at the Salarian 
Bridge on the evening of 7th July, exactly thirteen 
months after Constantine's promotion to the Lateran. 
The next day they crossed the Anio and the Tiber, 
then, after an ineffectual attempt on the St. Peter's 
gate, they tried the gate of St. Pancratius, which is 
at the top of the Janiculum, and commands a view 
over the whole town. Here confederates were 
awaiting them, the gate was opened, and Waldi- 
pert's troops passed through into the city of 

The Lombards had been in Italy for two hundred 
years. They had besieged Rome many times, but 
never before, even by treason, had they succeeded 
in gaining admittance to it. The new arrivals, con- 
sequently, hardly daring to believe in their good 
fortune, remained in trepidation on the fortifications, 


without venturing to descend into the town.^ Their 
hesitation gave the Romans time to flock together. 
Toto and Passivus went up to the gate of St. Pan- 
cratius and succeeded in making the Lombards beat 
a retreat. But treachery stepped in for the second 
time. Duke Toto was struck down from behind, 
and his death threw the defending party into dis- 
array. Passivus hastened to the Lateran, and the 
unfortunate Constantine, quite broken-spirited, sought 
refuge in chapel after chapel ; he was discovered with 
his brother Passivus, and the Bishop Theodore, his 
vidame, cowering in the oratory of the sacristy. 

Christopher had stayed behind, evidently detained 
by some Lombard conspiracy. Waldipert, taking 
advantage of his absence, managed to divert the 
attention of Sergius, and the next day, which was 
Sunday, proclaimed, as Pope, a venerable priest 
named Philip, the superior of a monastery near the 
church of St. Vitus. He was not a cardinal, but the 
Lombards evidently thought him a suitable candi- 
date for the papacy. He was acclaimed with the 
customary ceremony, conducted to the basilica and 
palace of the Lateran, and even followed the custom 
of giving a banquet to the most important of his 
electors, clerical or military. 

This, however, was the only act of his pontifi- 
cate. Christopher, who had arrived before the walls 
of Rome during the day, had another candidate in 
view ; and he sent a message to the Romans, saying 
that he would not set foot in the town so long as 
Philip was at the Lateran. They submitted, and 

1 The biographer of Stephen III. seems to feel strongly about 
this ; in spite of his devotion to Christopher, he does not hesitate 
to describe as nefandissimi proditores those who opened the gate to 
the Lombards. 


one of Toto's assassins, Gratiosus, undertook the 
difficult task of conveying the Lombard Pope back 
to his monastery of St. Vitus. 

Christopher was now master of the situation. 
The next day, 1st August, he assembled the clergy 
and the lay aristocracy, in fact, the whole population 
of Rome, in Tribus Fatis, i.e, the ancient Forum, 
near the church of St. Hadrian. After some dis- 
cussion, they finally settled to appoint the candidate 
of the primicerius. This was Stephen, priest of St. 
Cecilia, a man of about fifty years of age. He was 
a native of Sicily, and his knowledge of men and 
things had been limited to an experience of life 
within the monasteries, the episcopal palace, and 
the churches. His piety was an undoubted recom- 
mendation, and the weakness of his disposition was 
sufficient to justify Christopher and his family in their 
intention of holding the reins of power in their own 
hands. He was escorted to the Lateran, of which 
he took formal possession, and his episcopal con- 
secration was celebrated on the following Sunday, 
7th August. 

But the victorious party did not wait for this 
ceremony before engaging in the most revolting acts 
of revenge. Those who had been captured on 30th 
July in the sacristy oratory were brought forth from 
their prison. Bishop Theodore and Passivus were 
incarcerated in monasteries, after having had their 
eyes put out. The wretched Constantine had first 
to undergo the humiliation of taking part in a mock 
cavalcade, and then, on the evening before Stephen's 
consecration, he was brought before an ecclesiastical 
tribunal, and declared to have forfeited the papal 
dignity. Finally, a few days later, some of his 
enemies forced their way into the monastery of St. 


Sabas, where the unfortunate wretch was imprisoned, 
dragged him outside, and put out his eyes. The 
same fate befell others, among them the tribune of 
Alatri, Gracilis, and Waldipert, the Lombard priest. 
The latter in vain sought refuge at Sta. Maria 
Maggiore behind a sacred image ; he was torn from 
the sanctuary and cast into one of the Lateran 
prisons. Finally he was dragged to the open space 
in front of the palace, where his eyes were taken out. 
They took him to a neighbouring hospital, but he 
expired almost immediately.^ 

Such were the edifying circumstances under 
which the new Pope, Stephen III., entered upon 
his pontificate. For lack of further victims the dis- 
turbances were at last calmed down, and the victors 
now hastened to acquaint the Prankish king with 
their success. Sergius, who was chosen as the dele- 
gate, was well adapted to represent things in their 
most favourable light. When he arrived in France, 
he found that the great Pepin had just passed away, 
so he presented himself to Charles and Carloman, 
the two Prankish princes, and succeeded in con- 
vincing them of the urgent need for repairing the 
breach of canon law caused by the election of 
Constantine.^ In accordance with his demand, a 
deputation, consisting of certain members of the 
Prankish episcopacy, was sent to Rome. They were 
chosen for their familiarity with the Scriptures, 
and the "ceremonies of the holy canons." First of 
all came Wilchar, the former Bishop of Nomentum, 
at that time Bishop of Sens, and bearing the title of 
Archbishop of the Gauls. Then came the Metro- 

1 We gather from this attack on a representative of King 
Desiderius that the Lombards had already left Rome. 

2 As a matter of fact they were not without qualms as to the 
validity of the election of Stephen III. 


politan Bishops of Mainz, Tours, Lyons, Bourges, 
Narbonne, and Rheims ; and finally the Bishops of 
Amiens, Meaux, Worms, Wiirzburg, Langres, and 
Noyon. On their arrival in Rome these thirteen 
dignitaries met, together with about forty Italian 
bishops, both from Lombardy and the Roman dis- 
trict. After the Easter festivals (769) the council 
assembled in the Basilica of the Lateran. The first 
to appear before them was the unhappy Constantine, 
jam extra oculos. His defence turned upon the 
violence to which he had been subjected, and the 
reaction against Paul's severity, which had culmi- 
nated in his own election. The breach of ecclesi- 
astical law upon which so much stress was being 
laid, had often occurred before for the benefit of 
others, he maintained. Prostrating himself on the 
ground, he implored mercy and forgiveness, but the 
priests were not to be moved. Following in the 
footsteps of Caiphas rather than of St. Gregory, they 
struck the poor blind pleader across the face, cast 
him outside, and ordered that his writ of election 
should be burned. Having performed these graceful 
acts. Pope Stephen, with his clerks and his faithful 
followers, abased themselves on the ground, con- 
fessing the sin they had committed in accepting 
Constantine, and beseeching penance for their mis- 
deeds. The very angels must have smiled at the 
hypocritical litanies which were chanted over them. 

But this was not all. The ordinations and enact- 
ments of Constantine were declared illegal, and he 
himself was condemned to a life of penance within 
a monastery. 

In order to prevent any recurrence of these dis- 
turbances, it was decreed by the Council that cardinals 
or deacons should alone be eligible for election, and, 


moreover, that "laymen, both military and civil," 
and in particular, persons not belonging to the city 
of Rome, should henceforth be excluded from the 
electoral body, strictly speaking; though, after the 
Pope's election and installation at the Vatican, the 
Roman laity would be allowed to go in and greet 
him, and confirm, by their signatures, the act of his 
election. This provision introduced a most important 
change, but though, as will be seen, it was in force 
for some time, it was eventually annulled. 

Finally, the convocation ratified the veneration 
of the images, and reprobated the decisions of the 
iconoclastic Council of 754. All these decrees were 
made public, with much solemnity, at St. Peter's, 
before a large audience of the clergy and people. 

Between France and the Holy See, harmony 
was again established. The military party was 
subdued, and the lay aristocracy excluded from 
the papal elections. But Christopher and Sergius, 
the Pope's advisers, and the virtual wielders of the 
papal authority, had given King Desiderius very 
grave cause for complaint. It was in virtue of 
his support that they had succeeded in overthrowing 
Constantine II., and in return for this friendly help, 
they had not only debarred his candidate from the 
papacy, but they had permitted the assassination of 
his envoy, Waldipert. It was no wonder, therefore, 
that Desiderius took umbrage. Besides, they did 
their utmost to strengthen the Prankish alliance by 
their influence on the papal policy. A good deal 
of correspondence bearing on the subject is pre- 
served in the Codex Carolinus} In it the Lombards 
are constantly accused of disregarding the satis- 
factions {justitias) due to St. Peter. One of these 

1 J., 2380, 2381, 2386, 2387. 


letters^ is written with the object of deterring 
the Frankish princes from a family alliance with 
King Desiderius. The popular gossip as to the 
leprous and malodorous conditions, and so on, ob- 
taining among the Lombards, is brought forward 
as an argument against the match, which took place 
notwithstanding. Desiderata was the first legitimate, 
or rather official, wife of Charlemagne, though, after 
she had enjoyed the honour for a very short time, 
she was cast off by her royal consort.^ Bertrade, 
the Queen-mother, had herself come to Italy, 
to arrange the affair ; she had even penetrated 
as far as Rome, where she seems to have re- 
ported to the Pope some favourable remarks of 
the Lombard king concerning the litigation between 

Stephen III. was beginning to weary of Chris- 
topher's continual supervision. Desiderius, whose 
path had been prepared, more or less consciously, 
by Queen Bertrade, made up his mind to confer 
with the Pope in person. In Lent 771, he under- 
took a pilgrimage to Rome, orationis causa. He 
had some confederates in the pontifical circle, in 
particular a chamberlain, named Paul Afiarta. The 
news of the Lombard king's pious intentions, 
did not fail to arouse the suspicions both of Chris- 
topher and Sergius. Summoning to Rome troops 
from the country, and even from the duchy of 
Perugia, they reinforced the gates, and prepared to 
show a good front. Carloman, the one of the two 

1 J., 2381. 

2Eginhard, Vita Karoli, 18 ; cf. Vita Adalardi, c. 7 (M. G., SS., 
t. ii. p. 525. Eginhard says "one year" later; but this is not 
possible. In 770 Desiderata was already replaced by Hildegard. 
See Julien Havet, Bibl. de Vblcole des Chartes, vol. xlviii. p. 50. 


Frankish kings whose estates bordered on Italy, 
had at Rome a missus named Dodo, who took their 
part with great zeal. It was pretty well known 
against whom Desiderius's animosity was directed. 
On his arrival at Rome, he took up his position 
near the Vatican, begging the Pope to come and 
confer with him. But instead of complying, Stephen 
proceeded to St. Peter's, and then went back to 
the Lateran without taking any notice of the 
Lombard king. This was the signal^ for a most 
bitter contest. 

Afiarta and Christopher were already at daggers 
drawn, and, as a result of their quarrels, Rome 
had for some time been divided into two factions. 
On the Pope's return, Christopher and Sergius, 
suspecting treason, appeared at the Lateran 
with a strong escort, declaiming against their 
enemies. The Pope succeeded in pacifying them, 
and even swore a solemn oath in their favour. 
But no sooner had the agitators taken their de- 
parture, than he went back to the king, and by 
means of fresh promises on the justitice S. Petri, 
he basely delivered over to him those to whom he 
owed his election. At his instigation two bishops 
repaired to the nearest gate, and called upon Chris- 
topher and his son Sergius to come to St. Peter's, 
to yield themselves into the Pope's hands. The 
two Roman nobles learned that day to what lengths 
cowardice and treachery can go. Their adherents 
forsook them, in order to listen to the voice of 

1 Besides the LiberPontificalis and the letter by which Stephen III. 
acquaints Queen Bertrade and Charlemagne with these events, we 
get valuable details in a Bavarian chronicle (in bad preservation, it 
is true) from which I have quoted in note 58 of the life of 
Stephen III. 


the Pope, who was morally a Lombard prisoner. 
The first to desert Christopher was no less a person 
than Gratiosus, the traitorous assassin of Toto (768), 
the initiator of attempts on the person of Con- 
stant ine II., as well as of many other crimes, a 
man who owed his elevation in rank to the one 
against whom he now so ignobly turned. To hasten 
to the Pope's summons he forced open the Porto 
gate, and this action gave a decisive turn to affairs. 
Sergius and Christopher, aghast at this sudden 
change of front, were misguided enough to commit 
themselves into the hands of the enemy. This took 
place in the middle of the night. 

The next day the Pope celebrated mass in the 
presence of King Desiderius, and then returned into 
the city, leaving Christopher and Sergius in the 
basilica of St. Peter. According to his biographer, 
Stephen's wish was that they should adopt a 
religious career, but he must have been aware that, 
in neglecting to bring them back with him, he was 
delivering them over to the discretion of those who 
bore them ill-will. Indeed, before nightfall Afiarta 
and his supporters had united with the king in a 
design against them. Christopher and Sergius, 
dragged from the most revered sanctuary in Chris- 
tendom, were taken to the bridge of St. Angelo, 
where their eyes were torn out. As a result of 
this inhuman treatment, Christopher died, only three 
days later. Sergius was cast into the great prison 
of the Lateran, where he survived for more than 
a year. A week before the death of Stephen III., 
Afiarta, and John, the Pope's brother, had him 
brought out of prison and assassinated. After being 
half strangled, he was buried, while still alive, under 
an arcade in the Via Merulana, quite near to the 


palace. Afiarta probably got rid of him thus, in 
the fear that he might be set free after the Pope's 

The unhappy Stephen III., after having be- 
trayed his benefactors, realised with grief that he 
was being made a dupe of by Desiderius, who re- 
fused him the least compensation. "What," said 
the king, " surely the Pope can expect no further 
concessions when I have relieved him of his 
guardians ! He had better mind his own business 
and not fall out with me ! Carloman is the champion 
of Christopher and Sergius, and he will require an 
explanation of their treatment. If I do not take 
Stephen's part he will be ruined."^ 

The Pope undoubtedly recognised the correct- 
ness of this reasoning, for he refrained from writing 
to Carloman, who was little inclined to listen to 
him. But he wrote to Charles and the Queen- 
mother a letter which is still extant, setting forth 
the above-mentioned sad events, from the stand- 
point of his mentor Afiarta and the Lombard 
king, whom he describes as being full of enthusiasm 
for himself, as well as for the temporal concerns of 
the Holy See. He lays great stress on the part 
played by Dodo, basely making the most of the 
discord between the two brothers, although two 
years before it was he who exhorted them to re- 

At the beginning of December (771) Carloman 
died, somewhat to the relief of the Pope and his 
new advisers. But their contentment did not last 
long. Only two months later, 3rd February 772, 
Stephen joined Christopher and Sergius, his some- 
time friends, in the unseen world. They had not 

1 J., 2388. 2 j,^ 2380. 


been mistaken in their expectation of finding in 
him a submissive agent. But such agents, however 
convenient they may be, require much discretion 
in handhng, and are by no means always to be re- 
Hed upon. 



Pope Hadrian — Restorative Measures — The Politics of King Desiderius — 
His attempts against Rome — Overthrow of Afiarta and the Lombard 
party — Appeal to Charlemagne — Charles in Italy — Siege of Pavia — 
Central Italy and the Pope — Charles at Rome for the Easter 
Festivals, 774 — Donation of Charlemagne. 

Fortunately for the honour of the Holy See, the 
election resulted in the appointment of a man of 
probity, energy, and capability, the deacon Hadrian. 
This new Pope was a scion of one of the noblest 
families of Rome. Having been early deprived of 
his father, he was entrusted by his widowed mother 
to the care of his uncle, Theodotus, consul and 
duke, afterwards priviicerius and *' father " of the 
diaconate of St. Angelo. Hadrian had been trained 
at the Lateran, and was distinguished for his piety, 
high principles, and learning. His supporters hoped, 
by electing him, to get out of difficulties, and to 
please both the Church and the nobility, by giving 
them a Pope who was at once a member of the 
ecclesiastical profession and of the aristocracy. They 
also wanted a man of action, who would avenge, 
without delay, the iniquitous proceedings which had 
disgraced the pontificate of Stephen III. 

The attack on the unfortunate Sergius was not 
the only offence of its kind. The death of Carloman 
seemed to have let loose the evil passions of Afiarta s 
adherents. Exalted members of the clergy and the 
military had suffered banishment in the last days of 



the deceased Pope. Hadrian lost no time in repair- 
ing their wrongs, but, immediately on his election, 
gave orders that they should be recalled. He at 
once resumed negotiations with the Lombard king, 
and awaited a favourable opportunity of bringing 
the assassins and their accomplices to justice. 

Since Carloman's death, the situation had become 
complex. He had left behind him only young chil- 
dren, one of whom was little Prince Pepin, born in 
770. The aristocracy of his kingdom decided, by a 
large majority, to amalgamate under the authority 
of Charlemagne. The latter was at Corbeny, near 
Laon, and thither were despatched deputies, em- 
powered to endow him with the kingdom of his 
brother. Gerberga, Carloman's widow, fled with 
her children to Italy, accompanied by a few faithful 
followers ; conspicuous among them was Autchaire. 
Desiderius welcomed them with open arms ; by ex- 
tending his encouragement and protection to these 
fugitives, he thought to undermine the formidable 
power which was springing up on the other side of 
the Alps. There was, at least, good reason to hope 
that the time would come, when a diplomatic inter- 
change might be profitably arranged. Great stakes 
were at issue, but Desiderius was to be on the 
losing side. 

He was not relying on this means of action when, 
on Hadrian s succession, he sent him greetings by 
the Duke of Spoleto, and two other officials, who 
urged the Pope to renew the agreement made with 
Stephen III., undertaking, in return, to render to the 
Holy See all the compensations {justitice) that it 
unceasingly demanded. Hadrian responded by send- 
ing him a deputation, conducted by Paul Afiarta. 
By this means, he succeeded in getting rid of the 


latter, while, at the same time, he was giving the 
Lombard king a pledge of his amiable intentions, by- 
despatching to him Sipei^sona g7^ata. 

But no sooner had the papal legates quitted 
Rome than disquieting news arrived. Desiderius 
had made himself master of Ferrara, Comacchio, 
and Faenza, and was now meditating a descent 
on Ravenna. There was no mistaking his political 
attitude, for he publicly posed as the supporter of 
Carloman's children, and claimed that the Pope, by 
his solemn consecration of the young princes, had 
declared himself on their side. Afiarta was of the 
king's opinion, and undertook, at any cost, to bring 
about a meeting between Desiderius and Hadrian. 
The sacellarius Stephen, who had accompanied him 
on his mission, seems also to have been of the same 

They were, however, deluded. Hadrian having 
got wind of their designs, changed Stephen for 
another envoy, and Afiarta's temporary absence be- 
came permanent, under the following circumstances. 
The Pope was determined to get to the bottom of 
the mystery surrounding the assassination of Sergius 
the secundicerius. The enquiry, which followed, re- 
sulted in the arrest of the criminals, three Campa- 
nini,^ the chamberlain Calventzulus, the priest 
Lunisso, and Leonatius, the tribune. These main- 
tained that they had been but tools in the hands of 
others, and denounced, as the instigators of the crime, 
Paul Afiarta, the Duke John, brother of the late 
Pope, a district advocate named Gregory, and 
another chamberlain, Calvulus. Concerning the 
fate of John and Gregory we know nothing, but 
Calvulus, and the three Campanians, were handed 

1 The Ciocian of the present day. 


over to the criminal judge, the Prefect of Rome, who 
now reappears, after an interval of more than a cen- 
tury and a half. Calvulus spent the rest of his life 
in prison, while the other three were banished to 

According to the Pope's instructions, Afiarta was 
to be arrested on his return, by the Archbishop of 
Ravenna, who, after communicating to him the 
result of the inquest on the murder of Sergius, and 
having verified his guilt, would condemn him also to 
exile at Constantinople. Hadrian even caused a 
letter to be sent to the Emperors Constantine V. 
and Leo IV., acquainting them with what had 
occurred, and recommending them to keep a strict 
watch over the banished culprit. 

On receiving these instructions, the archbishop 
had Paul arrested, on his way to Rimini, and placed 
in charge of the consularius of Ravenna, who, after 
making him listen to the reading of the indictment, 
received his depositions and admission of guilt. The 
archbishop and his party were greatly incensed 
against Afiarta, whom they justly regarded as an 
adherent of the Lombards. Maurice, Duke of 
Venice, was to have acted as intermediary between 
Ravenna and Constantinople, but, as his son was, 
at that time, a Lombard prisoner, the archbishop 
dreaded that he might be exchanged for Afiarta, and 
therefore wrote to the Pope, dissuading him from 
entrusting his captive to the Venetian duke. 

At this, the Pope, not without good grounds, 
feared that the Ravennese might adopt a more 
expeditious method of getting rid of their prisoner. 
He therefore despatched another envoy to the 
Lombard king, with instructions to fetch Afiarta 
on his return through Ravenna, and bring him back 


to Rome. Arrived at Ravenna, this new ambassador 
solemnly informed the archbishop and his circle of 
the commission which he had to fulfil on his return 
journey. But no sooner had he set out on his way 
to Pavia than the consularius, at the archbishop's 
behest, had the prisoner executed. The Pope dis- 
claimed any part in the matter, but, for all that, he 
was well rid of a most troublesome subject. As for 
Christopher and Sergius, they received an honourable 
burial in the basilica of St. Peter. 

Tradition was renewed, and the Pope withdrew 
from the Lombard alliance. It must be admitted 
that Desiderius did his best to promote ill-feeling 
between them, and to throw the Pope back upon the 
Franks. Not content with plotting against Charle- 
magne, and seizing upon Exarchal territories, which 
had been ceded fifteen or sixteen years before, he set 
the Dukes of Spoleto and Tuscany to lay waste 
Pentapolis and the duchy of Rome. Hadrian, in 
alarm, tried to come to terms, and kept a constant 
succession of envoys going between Rome and Pavia. 
The Abbot of Farfa, escorted by twenty venerable 
monks, was among them. But it was all in vain; 
no treaty could be made. The king, remembering 
his success with Paul and Stephen III., was most 
anxious for a personal interview with the Pope. He 
hoped to induce Hadrian to unite with him against 
Charlemagne. The former agreed to a meeting, but 
only on condition that the recently annexed territories 
should be first restored to him. 

At the same time he despatched a letter to Charle- 
magne by an envoy named Peter, who arrived at 
Thionville some time in the winter of 772-773. His 
welcome was not enthusiastic, for the king had been 
prejudiced by Desiderius, who had spread reports in 


France that the Pope's lamentations were without 
cause, and that he had received no injury. The 
continual plaints with which the Frankish court had 
been beset in the times of Paul and Stephen III. 
made these declarations the more credible. But that 
this time the case was really serious, was demon- 
strated by the fact that Desiderius set out for Rome, 
accompanied by Autchaire and some of Carloman's 
sons. The aim of this expedition was merely to 
obtain audience of the Pope, and not, as in the case 
of Astolphus (756), the conquest of the city. As 
Hadrian declined to meet them at Pavia, Perugia, 
or anywhere else, Desiderius did what he had done 
several times before, under former Popes, and went 
forward in the direction of Rome. 

But Hadrian viewed things in a different light. 
He imagined that he saw, or perhaps really did see, 
in the pilgrim king an invading foe. He therefore 
summoned the military forces from the neighbouring 
towns to Rome ; had the suburban basilicas stripped 
of their valuables and closed ; and the ramparts made 
ready for the defence. These precautions taken, the 
Pope stationed at Viterbo (at that time the nearest 
Lombard town) three bishops, charged to prohibit 
Desiderius, under pain of excommunication, from 
entering into Roman territory. This seems to have 
had a quenching effect on the king's spirit, for he 
retreated in the direction of Pavia. 

Just at this time the Lombard king had to 
contend not only with the papal displeasure, but 
also with the diplomacy of Charlemagne. George, 
Bishop of Amiens (formerly of Ostia), and Gulfard, 
Abbot of St. Martin, came over to Italy to satisfy 
themselves of the state of affairs. First of all, they 
paid a visit to Rome, from which they brought away 


urgent letters ; then they proceeded to Pavia, where 
they made fruitless attempts to obtain concessions 
from the king. 

Charlemagne, on being informed of what was 
taking place, sent fresh ambassadors to Desiderius, 
charging him to restore what he had taken from 
the Pope. He himself offered to pay down a sum 
of fourteen thousand gold sous, as compensation. 
But again the Lombard king remained obdurate. 

It was now about the middle of the year 773. 
Charles assembled his followers at Geneva, sending 
two military divisions to Italy. One of these, under 
command of his uncle Bernard, went by way of 
Valais and the Aosta valley, while the other crossed 
the Mont Cenis. History again repeated itself, 
and, as in the last campaign, there were summonses 
in extremis, an encounter, then defeat of the Lom- 
bards, and a siege of Pavia. This time, however, 
there was a second revolt at Verona. It was led by 
Adelchis, son of Desiderius, aid the Prankish Duke 
Autchaire, who had taken refuge there with the 
family of Carloman. But Charles, after having 
established his camp in front of Pavia, marched 
against Verona, and soon succeeded in subduing 
the rebellion. Autchaire and his royal comrades 
cast themselves upon his generosity, and Adelchis 
took refuge in Byzantine domains. The other towns 
in the north of Italy also surrendered. 

The days of the Lombard kingdom were 
numbered. The struggle wajj soon recognised to 
be an unequal one, and it Ivas evident that the 
patience of the Franks was nearly exhausted. The 
people of Spoleto, always on tjlie watch for a chance 
to assert their independence, took advantage of their 
Duke Theodicius' departure for the Cluses, and sent 


to Rome some of their most important inhabitants 
{utiles personce) to proclaim their allegiance to the 
Pope, and to receive the civil tonsure of the Romans. 
After the overthrow of the Lombard army the whole 
duchy presented itself, followed by the people of 
Ancona, Osimo, Fermo, and Citta di Castello {cos- 
teUum Felicitatis). So that, while Charlemagne was 
conquering the northern towns, the Pope was taking 
possession of the important districts of central Italy. 
He bestowed legal rights upon Hildeprand, the new 
Duke of Spoleto, elected by his subjects, and the 
latter in the beginning of his office certainly regarded 
himself as in subordination to the pontiff. 

The siege of Pavia was protracted. Charles spent 
the winter in camp, having sent to France for his 
young wife, Hildegarde, to bear him company. 
When spring came lie made up his mind to go 
to Rome for the Faster festivals. The Pope, 
although not aware until the last moment of the 
approach of such a distinguished visitor, found time 
to send a deputation of judices, i.e. army officers, 
with their banners, ae. far as Lake Bracciano. On 
the Saturday before Easter the king, with this 
additional escort, arrived at the meadows of Nero. 
There, drawn up before them, were to be seen the 
Roman militia under arms; the school children, 
palms in hand, singing laudes ; and, finally, the 
district crosses. It was in this ceremonious manner 
that the Exarchs^ had been received in bygone 
days. The king dismounted from his horse and 
advanced on foot towards the basilica of St. Peter's. 
The Pope, surrounded by his clergy, was awaiting 

1 The emperor himself was treated with greater pomp. In 
6QS Pope Vitalian himself, escorted by his clergy, went to meet 
Constantine II. six miles from Rome. 


him at the top of the great staircase leading to the 
atrium. Charles ascended this on his knees, kissing 
each step on the way. Arrived at the top, he 
embraced the Pope, accepted his right hand, and 
accompanied him into the atrium or paradise, and 
then into the church. 

The succeeding days were spent in religious 
festivals and official banquets. Nevertheless Charles 
and his Frankish subjects did not enter Rome until 
he and the pontiff had bound themselves by a 
mutual oath. On 6th April, the Wednesday after 
Easter, the great political agreements were drawn 
up. A meeting was held in the basilica of St. 
Peter, at which the Pope presented Charles with 
a document made out in 754 at Kiersy-sur-Oise, 
in the names of Pepin, Charles himself, and his 
brother Carloman. It was on behalf of St. Peter, 
Stephen II., his vicar, and successors, and con- 
tained a promise to surrender to the Pope a certain 
number of Italian territories. Hadrian begged the 
king for its fulfilment, and the latter, after re- 
reading it, had drawn up another document of 
the same purport {ad instar anterior is), and intro- 
ducing the same cities and territories. These are 
indicated with great precision by Hadrian's biogra- 
pher. It was, manifestly, not merely a question 
of the donation of the Exarchy and Pentapolis, 
placed by the Abbot Fulrad on the tomb of St. 
Peter, in 756. The new agreement, we are told, 
embraced, like that of Kiersy, the duchies of Spoleto 
and Beneventum, the whole of Tuscany, Corsica, 
Venetia, and Istria. Between Venetia and Tuscany, 
the Exarchy, which had greatly enlarged its borders 
in the north and west, included Parma, Reggio, 
Mantua, and Montselice, to the south of Padua. 


If this promise had been carried out, the Lombard 
kingdom would have been reduced to very narrow 
limits. Indeed, almost the whole of Italy would 
have belonged to the Pope.^ 

Several copies of the document having been 
drawn up, it was invested with much solemnity. 
One copy was placed on the altar and confided to 
the Pope ; another was deposited by Charles in the 
most sacred spot of the apostolic sanctuary. He 
then returned to Pa via, which surrendered shortly 
afterwards. The Lombard king and his queen, 
Ansa, were confined at Corbi, where they seem to 
have flourished for many years. Charles returned 
to France, leaving behind him at Pavia a garrison 
and a provisional government. 

1 In the introduction to the Liber Pontificalis, vol. i. p. cclxii, we 
have tried to explain the treaties of Kiersy (754) and Rome (774) 
by proceeding on the supposition that Pepin and Charles desired 
to produce in Italy a Roman state strong enough to hold its own 
against the Lombard kingdom. It would have allowed the latter 
a separate existence, but only within such narrow limits as would 
render it no longer formidable. M. P. Kehr, in the Historische 
Zeitschrift, vol. Ixx. p. 385 et seq. (cf. G'dttingische gel. Ans., 1895, p. 
694), has lately proposed a more fundamental theory which is worthy 
of consideration. According to his view, these conventions were 
plans of distribution for an expected contingency, the suppression 
of the Lombard kingdom. The Prankish kingdom would have 
taken possession of the whole of northern Italy as far as Magra 
and the neighbourhood of Venice, thus comprising the best part 
of the plain of the Po, as well as all the watercourses of the Alps ; 
the remainder would have constituted a separate state under the 
protection of the Pope. 



The Pope's authority at Ravenna — The Archbishops Sergius and Leo — 
Spoleto and Beneventum — Charles, King of the Lombards — Re- 
linquishment of the Peace of 774 — Arrangements of 771, in relation 
to Terracino, the Duchies of Spoleto, Tuscany, and Sabina — Con- 
cessions of domains in Tuscany and Campania (787) — The patriciate 
of the Frankish King, and sovereignty of the Pope — Election of 
Leo III. — The Lateran triclinium. 

Immediately after the fall of Pavia, Charles had 
commanded the Lombard authorities to evacuate 
the cities of Emilia, which, by the treaty of 756, 
Desiderius had made over to the Pope, but which 
he had since either retained or retaken. Among 
the latter were Comacchio, Ferrara, and Faenza, 
while Imola and Bologna had remained in his 
possession all along. The Frankish king would, 
for the moment, make no further concessions to 
the Pope, and even these were not likely to afford 
much satisfaction, considering the aggressive influence 
of the Archbishop of Ravenna. 

The honoured founder of the Church of Ravenna 
was the martyr saint ApoUinarius, reputed to have 
been a loyal disciple of St. Peter. His successors 
were not always characterised by the same fidelity, 
for their pride in the importance of their town soon 
made them conspicuous by their greed for titles and 
precedence, and by a marked inclination to resent 
what they, of their own accord, called the yoke of 
Roman servitude — jugum Romanorum servitutis, 

97 ^ 


The Popes of the seventh century had hard work 
to keep them under proper discipline. Old quarrels 
were continually being revived, for the resistance 
proceeded, not so much from the archbishops them- 
selves, as from the Ravennese clergy in general, 
and indeed from the whole population without 
distinction of class. 

In the last days of the Exarchy, when the 
Lombards were about to descend on Ravenna, the 
Pope's intervention was hailed with gladness. 
Zachary, when he passed through the town on his 
way to Pavia, was welcomed by the Ravennese as a 
deliverer and the father of the country. There 
was less enthusiasm, however, in 756, when the 
Abbot Fulrad and Pope Stephen II. inaugurated 
the new regime. The first consequence of this was 
the utter decapitalisation of Ravenna. If the 
Lombards had retained their supremacy, Ravenna 
would have retained its importance. Its inhabitants 
might hope that, as in the days of Theodoric and 
Honorius, it would become the residence of the 
Lombard kings, or that they would, at least, sojourn 
from time to time among the splendour of its historic 
palaces. They would still be citizens of a royal city, 
though no longer subjects of the emperor. But 
Pepin's donation caused the prospect to fade away. 
They would have to pass under the yoke of the 
pontiff and his Romans, and that without any re- 
deeming feature, for it was impossible that St. 
Peter's successor should leave the palace of his seat 
and tomb. The servitus Romanorum already made 
itself felt in the spiritual domain, and now it was 
getting involved in a temporal affair. The Pope 
claimed the right to ratify the appointment of the 
archbishop, to consecrate him with his own hands, 


to summon him to his councils, and to veto his 
decrees. There was nothing for it but to submit. 
Officials were already arriving from Rome, furnished 
with a papal commission, and with instructions to 
superintend the administration of the towns, the 
government of the province, and the collecting of 
the taxes. This was really a severe infliction. 

The Archbishop Sergius took a prominent 
position from the very first. The meaning con- 
veyed to him by the donation of Pepin was, that 
although St. Peter was undoubtedly to enjoy 
possession of the Exarchy and Pentapolis, it was 
in the person of his disciple, St. Apollinarius. With- 
out waiting for the approval of the Romans, he took 
upon himself to appoint officials, and placed himself 
at the head of the government in the provinces 
surrendered by Astolphus. Stephen II., annoyed 
at these proceedings, summoned the archbishop 
to Rome, and, thanks probably to the Abbot Fulrad, 
his command was obeyed. He even succeeded in 
detaining him for a time, and meanwhile the papal 
officials established themselves in the transapennine 
provinces.^ In 758, as Sergius was still being kept 
at Rome, King Pepin, who liked to encourage har- 
monious relations among his Italian proteges, inter- 
fered.^ He arranged matters with Pope Paul, with 
the result that Sergius was allowed to return to 
Ravenna. He was invested with a certain authority 
over the Exarchy and Pentapolis, but the right to 
receive taxes and appoint functionaries was reserved 
for the Pope alone. ^ 

1 J., 2408. 2 j^ 2338. 

3 J., 2408. We must compare with this letter the information 
evolved from the confused memories of the life of Sergius, collected 
by Agnellus (157, 158, 159). This Agnellus was aware of the 
archbishop's detention at Rome, in the latter days of Stephen II., 


After this Sergius and Paul continued on fairly 
good terms with one another. From a letter written 
by the Pope ^ we learn that the archbishop remained 
loyal to the new order of things, and did not fail to 
keep him informed of the intrigues which were 
growing up around him, in view of a Byzantine 
restoration. He sent a deputation to the Roman 
Council of 769. 

Pope Paul had been wise in his generation. It 
was absolutely necessary to keep on friendly terms 
with so weighty a personage as the archbishop of 
Ravenna. Since the dissolution of the Exarchy 
there had been no centre in the Adriatic provinces 
to compare in importance with his episcopal town, 
and no body so influential as his clergy. The 
difficulty with the Ravennese was that if they were 
given an inch they showed a strong tendency to 
take an ell, and thus to reduce the pontifical 
authority to little more than a name. 

This soon came to pass. On the death of 
Sergius, 25th August 769, the people of Ravenna 
appointed in his place one Michaelius, scriniaiius of 
his state, and perhaps tonsured, but not a priest, or 
in holy orders. Pope Stephen III., in conformity 
with the recent decree of the Roman Council, strictly 
forbidding this kind of preferment, refused to ac- 
knowledge him. But Michaelius, supported by at 
least a part of the populace and King Desiderius, 
who seems to have had an aptitude for conspiracy, 

his understanding with Paul (he reverses the names of these two 
Popes), followed by the remittance of considerable sums of money 
(wrongfully acquired), from the ecclesiastical treasury of Ravenna, 
to the Pope, or, rather, to his representatives ; the disapproval 
accorded to this deed by the Ravennese ; the punishment of 
certain leaders ; finally the supreme magistracy conferred on the 
1 J., 2358. 


succeeded in retaining his position for a year. That 
the Pope did not eject him was from lack of power, 
rather than from lack of will. This gives some idea 
of the weakness of the pontifical authority in the 
Exarchy. Eventually some envoys who had been 
sent to Rome by Charlemagne were led by Stephen 
to take an interest in the affair. Their united efforts 
resulted in producing a revolt at Ravenna, and 
Michaelius was ousted from his seat and despatched 
to Rome. In his place the Ravennese elected their 
Archdeacon Leo, whose confinement at Rimini by 
the rebels had, from the outset, procured him much 
sympathy. Immediately upon his promotion he 
came to Rome, and was consecrated by the 

This was the same Leo who had been so anxious 
to get rid of Paul Afiarta, the friend of Desiderius. 
He had excellent reasons for not feeling amiably 
disposed towards the Lombard king, who appears 
to have taken some part, or, at any rate, shown 
great interest in Charles's expedition into Italy. ^ 
He therefore considered himself entitled to the 
spoils, and claimed all the surrendered cities of 
Emilia, Bologna, Ferrara, &c., as the property of 
St. Apollinarius. He even went so far as to 
dismiss the papal officials from other parts of the 
Exarchy, and would doubtless have done the same 
in Pentapolis if the inhabitants had not risen in 
resistance. The Pope, annoyed at this impudent 
interference, wrote to Charlemagne,^ but the arch- 
bishop, nothing daunted, betook himself to the 

1 Hadrian's letter, J., 2467, mentions a missus called Hucbald. 
This, with the Liher Pontificalis (Stephen III.)* is our only source of 
information on the subject. 

2 This we gather from a very incomplete account by Agnellus. 
8 J., 2408, 2414, 2415, 2416. 


Frankish king in person, and came back more 
bumptious than before. We do not know how 
this affair ended, but in 775 Hadrian became con- 
vinced that Leo was playing Charlemagne false, 
and did not hesitate to denounce him as a traitor. 
Soon after this Leo died, in 777 or 778, and his 
successors appear to have maintained peaceful re- 
lations with Pope Hadrian. 

But the pontiff had other sources of worry 
besides those connected with the archbishop of 
Ravenna. Duke Hildeprand, of Spoleto, was 
adopting an independent attitude, which ill 
accorded with the promises of 773 or with the 
origin of his power. Neither was Duke Aricio of 
Beneventum above suspicion, and the Pope feared 
his entering into conspiracy with the former king, 
Adelchis, who had taken refuge in the Byzantine 
territories of the extreme south. Finally, the Patri- 
arch of Grado wrote to inform him of preparations 
for revolt that were taking place at Friuli. Even 
the Duke of Chiusi was plotting in Tuscany. 
Discontent grew into conspiracy. 

Towards autumn 775 two Frankish ambassadors, 
the Bishop Possessor and the Abbot Rabigaudus, 
visited Spoleto, Beneventum, and Rome, and en- 
deavoured in vain to bring about a reconciliation 
between the Pope and Hildeprand. Finally they 
returned to Charlemagne with such disturbing 
reports that he felt it his duty to intervene. In 
the spring of 776 he arrived in northern Italy, where 
Rotgaud, Duke of Friuli, had proclaimed his atti- 
tude and raised his standard. Unfortunately for his 
cause he perished in the first battle, and his followers 
were farther disconcerted by the death of the Emperor 
Constantine V. (14th September 775). Charles was 


thus enabled to begin his homeward journey, and 
even to conduct an expedition into Saxony. 

The Pope was desirous that he should come to 
Rome, and especially that he should undertake to 
carry out the Kiersy programme. But Charles, upon 
his entry into Pavia in 774 (30th May-2nd June) 
had assumed the title of king of the Lombards, and 
was now in nowise disposed to divide up a state 
which he looked upon as his own property. Hadrian 
did his utmost to bring him to his own way of 
thinking, but with very small success. 

In 780 Charles again visited Italy ; after spending 
the winter in Lombardy, he proceeded to Rome for 
the Easter celebrations of 781. In preceding years 
the Pope had been very much occupied with Terra- 
cina. He had taken possession of this place, which 
had apparently been hitherto in the hands of the 
Greeks of Gaeta and Naples, but the latter, led by 
the Patrician of Sicily, had recaptured it and laid 
waste the Roman Campagna. Hadrian had un- 
doubtedly succeeded in repulsing them, but they 
had returned to the fray. In this affair the 
Romans saw clearly the influence of Duke Arichis. 
As a matter of fact, the Pope did not lay great store 
by Terracina, which was difficult of access, except by 
way of the sea or through the territory of Gaeta. 
He would willingly have exchanged it for the privi- 
lege of enjoying his patrimonies in the Byzantine 
portion of ancient Campania. 

Some arrangement of this kind ought to have 
been made during Charlemagne's stay at Rome. 
He had at that time all sorts of reasons for 
wishing to be on good terms with the Greeks. 
An alliance was being arranged between his 
daughter, Rotrude, and the young Emperor Con- 


stantine VI., who had just (780) succeeded his 
father Leo IV., under the guardianship of his 
mother, the Empress Irene. From this time Terra- 
cina no longer made part of the papal state. On 
the other hand, the latter increased on the side of 
Sabina; the abbots of St. Martin, and of St. Denis, 
Itherius, and Magenarius were charged to define 
its limits on the side of Reiti, ie. towards the 
duchy of Spoleto. 

It was probably at this time that the Pope sub- 
mitted to an agreement by which he relinquished^ 
the duchies of Spoleto and Tuscany, conceding the 
tribute formerly paid by them into the treasury of 
the Lombard kings. 

Another very important matter was arranged 
between the Pope and Charlemagne. The latter had 
brought with him his two young sons, Pepin and 
Louis (both the children of Hildegard), and they 
were now crowned by the pontiff as kings of Italy 
and Aquitaine. As far as Italy was concerned, this 
was a second confirmation of the continuance of 
the Lombard kingdom, a second rejection of the 
distribution policy set forth in the treaty of 6th 
April 774. The fair dreams of the Romans were 
becoming fainter and yet more faint. 

A few years later, at the beginning of 787, 
Charles returned to Rome with the idea of settling 
the affairs of his distant possession of Beneventum, 
for the Duke Arichis was continually getting mixed 
up with Byzantine intrigues, and was by no means 
a satisfactory agent. One result of this expedition 
was that the Pope obtained an important increase 
of territory in Roman Tuscia, which henceforth 
included Viterbo, Orvieto, Soana, and all the inter- 

1 Privilege of 817. 


veiling places; while on the coast the territories 
of Eosellce (Grosseto) and Populonia (Piombino) 
were also conceded. But there were difficulties in 
the way. Charlemagne had taken all this from 
the ancient Lombard Tuscia, which really belonged 
to him. But, as regarded Bene vent um, affairs were 
more complicated. In order to succeed in his plans 
it was necessary that Charles should enter the terri- 
tory of the duchy in person. Arichis, in alarm, 
shut himself up at Salerno, but he agreed to the 
king's conditions, which included the surrender to 
the Pope of the left bank of the Liris, Sora, Arpino, 
and Arce, as well as the towns of Aquino, Teano, 
and Capua, on the way to Naples. 

The projected marriage between Rotrude and 
Constantine was given up. Soon afterwards Duke 
Arichis died, and Charles appointed as successor his 
son Grimoald, who had been taken by the Franks as 
hostage. The connection between the Greeks and 
the Lombards was then severed. The latter, i,e, the 
Dukes of Spoleto and Beneventum, displayed their 
goodwill to Charles by vanquishing the patrician of 
Sicily, in the Calabrian peninsula, in 788. Charles, 
for his part, did not interpret the terms of the sur- 
render of the Beneventine towns very strictly. To 
Hadrian this was a great grievance, but he was 
obliged to be satisfied with a very nominal authority 
in the regions beyond Ceprano. 

In short, setting aside these somewhat specu- 
lative rights, one may say that Pope Hadrian suc- 
ceeded in assigning to the Roman duchy limits 
which were preserved during the Middle Ages and 
up to the year 1870. He was also monarch of the 
Exarchy, Pentapolis, and the intermediate terri- 
tories, Amelia, Todi, and Perugia ; as for the 


duchy of Spoleto, that remained outside the papal 

Let us now try to realise the precise nature of the 
papal sovereignty of the time. 

Since the year 774, Charles had taken unto him- 
self the title of patricius Romanorum as well as that 
of 7'ex Langobardorum. Judging by the Codex 
Carolinus he must have attached a great deal of 
importance to this, and to the privileges connected 
therewith. Nevertheless, he does not appear to have 
considered that his authority over the papal states 
was on a level with his power over the rest of Italy, 
even including the duchies of Spoleto and Beneven- 
tum. Though, theoretically, the Dukes of Spoleto 
and Beneventum were his functionaries, in reality 
they were vassals. Owing to the distance, Charles 
was obliged to permit a kind of self-government, 
such as he would not have tolerated in the neigh- 
bourhood of the Alps ; but the governors of these 
far-away provinces received and held their authority 
from him. Whether they came into office by in- 
heritance or by election, it was he who confirmed their 
promotion, and his name in which they governed. 

With the Pope it was otherwise. Charles neither 
appointed him nor confirmed his appointment. He 
had, in fact, absolutely no voice in the installation 
of the Bishop of Rome. Once in possession of 
St. Peter's See, the Pope became, in consequence, 
the apostle's representative in all temporal affairs, 
and the agent through whom he exercised his 
rights of sovereignty. These rights originated in 
two ways: 1st, the donations of the Prankish kings, 
in virtue of which he acquired rights over the 
Exarchy, Pentapolis, Sabina, and the south of 
ancient Tuscan Lombardy ; 2nd, the ill-defined pre- 


cedent, by which the Pope replaced the emperor 
in the government of the ancient duchies of Rome 
and Perugia. However they may have arisen, 
the papal rights were recognised by the Prankish 
state, and upheld by it in the face of all outside 
claims, in particular, from that time, against the 
Greek empire. It was an understood thing that 
the Pope's subjects should remain loyal to the 
Prankish state, and should, under no circumstances, 
enter into alliance with their enemies. These were 
the essential points in the compact of "love and 
loyalty," so often referred to in the correspondence 
between the Pope and the Carlovingian princes. 

So far it was only a question of external rela- 
tions. But, from the beginning, the Pope had 
bestowed on Pepin and his sons the title of patridi 
Romanorum, and we have seen that this was a 
sign that internal affairs were under consideration. 
Originally, the patriciate had a purely negative 
significance, its chief use being to facilitate the 
suppression of the Duke of Rome and the anni- 
hilation of the Exarch. At first, therefore, the 
Prankish princes thought very little of the honour, 
but by degrees his experience of Italian affairs 
caused Charlemagne to consider the practical ad- 
vantages connected with it. He began by persuading 
himself that, as patrician of the Romans, he ought 
to have a voice in the appointment of the most 
important of the public officials. Among these was 
the archbishop of Ravenna, who, owing partly to 
the amiability of his disposition, had, to a certain 
extent, filled the place of the old Exarch. Charles 
claimed the right to be represented at his election, 
but Hadrian tried to convince him that neither by 
precedent, nor in any other manner, had he any 


rights in the matter. As far as the Pope himself 
was concerned, there was only one election (that of 
Leo III.) from the time of Charles's intervention in 
Italy to the end of his reign, and the king took no 
part in that.^ 

But there was another constantly recurring 
opportunity for the Prankish intervention. When- 
ever a pontifical official or any of the Roman nobility 
had any cause of complaint against their sovereign, 
he did not hesitate to appeal for redress to the 
Prankish court. That the king welcomed this 
attitude is clear from the frequent recriminations 
which occur in the Pope's letters.^ No definite 
arrangement was made. The Pope complained 
calmly, and the king, no less calmly, remonstrated 
with him as he thought fit. Their relations con- 
tinued quite amicable. Hadrian had sense enough 
to know when to give way, and not to involve 
himself in great conflicts or discussions under cir- 
cumstances in which he would assuredly have been 

f No constitutional progress, in short, was made 
during Hadrian's pontificate. All arrangements 
seem to have been of a provisional and indefinite 
kind. When the Pope died, at the close of the 
year 795, Charlemagne mourned as for a friend; 
he even caused a beautiful epitaph to be composed 
and engraved, which was, at the same time, a 
monument of royal sympathy, and of the revival 
of letters, which was beginning to make itself felt 
under the encouragement and patronage of this 
great prince. 

The new Pope, Leo III., was elected on the 

1 J., 2467, 2478. 

2 Especially J., 2413, 2442, 2478. 


very day of Hadrian's death, the 26th of December 
795, and his consecration took place on the day 
after, a Sunday. He was the head of the pontifical 
vestiarium, and as such had enjoyed the confidence 
of the deceased Pope. During the whole of his 
career he had been connected with the administra- 
tion, and even his elevation to the rank of cardinal 
had not severed his relation with it. His titulary 
church of St. Susanna speedily became the recipient 
of his lavish generosity. 

Immediately upon his installation, the new Pope 
sent Charlemagne a copy of the deed of his election 
{decretalis cartula), together with the keys of St. 
Peter's confession, and the standard of the city of 
Rome. There was also a letter, the purport of which 
can only be surmised from the king's reply. ^ From 
one of the Prankish annalists^ we learn that the 
Pope begged the king to send one of his dignitaries 
(optimates) to Rome in order to receive the oath of 
the Roman people. The abbot of St. Riguier, 
Angilbert, was chosen for this mission. 

We are still in possession of Charlemagne's reply 
to the Pope, as well as of the instructions provided 
for his missus, Angilbert. But there is no mention of 
the taking of the oath. The sending of the keys and 
the standard was clear enough demonstration of the 
gratitude felt towards the Frankish. prince for his 
protectorship of the tomb of St. Peter and his tem- 
poral domain, now become, to a great extent, politi- 
cal ground. It was only natural that each fresh 
person charged with the care of the Apostle's subjects 

1 Jaffe, Monum. Carol, p. S5^ ; cf. p. S5S, letter from Charles 
to Angilbert. 

2 Rogavitque ut aliquem de suis optimatihus Romam mitteret, qui 
populum Romanum ad mam Jidem atque suhjectionem per sacramenta 
^rmaret. (Ann. Einh.) 


and his confession, should testify his allegiance to 
their royal protector. Nevertheless, the preceding 
Popes had neglected this formality ; and there had 
been, apparently, no official notice of election given, 
before the time of Leo III. Whether these new 
manifestations w^ere spontaneous, or whether they 
had been agreed upon with Pope Hadrian, there can 
be no doubt that they had a beneficial effect upon 
the relations between the two powers. 

As to the taking of the oath, our evidence on this 
point is not very reliable, and we do not clearly 
understand whether it was to have been sworn by 
the Pope or by the king. As, however, the elec- 
tion itself was accompanied by promises of loyalty 
towards the one elected, we may surmise that in this 
case it was a question of swearing an oath to the 
king. However this may be, the intervention of a 
Frankish missus in such an afl[air must be regarded 
as a protective act. The Pope cannot be considered 
completely master of his subjects, when they swear 
political allegiance to other authorities. 

The letters from Charles to Leo III. and Angil- 
bert are full of moral exhortations. Leo is enjoined 
to be a good Pope, pious, faithful in the discharge 
of his duties, and strict in maintaining discipline, 
especially in repressing simony; to sustain the friendly 
relations existing between the Holy See and the 
Frankish court, and, in particular, to protect the 
rights of the royal patrician. In all these directions 
Charles displays a certain consciousness of moral 
authority, and of the advantage of having good 
ecclesiastical leaders in his kingdom. 

Leo appears to have accepted this advice with 
much amiability. It was, after all, quite in harmony 
with the spirit and the needs of the time. Not long 


after his accession he had constructed in the Lateran 
a large hall or triclinium, the apse of which was 
decorated with a mosaic representing Christ and the 
twelve apostles. On either side of the principal 
scene were two groups, each consisting of three 
persons ; Christ giving the keys to St. Sylvester, and 
the standard to Constantine ; St. Peter giving the 
pallium to Leo III., and the standard to Charle- 
magne.^ Nothing could more aptly have expressed 
the actual situation of Rome and of the Romans ; 
they were under two masters, the Pope and the 
Frankish king. 

1 This mosaic is now destroyed, but there still exist old copies, 
made at different times, and a reproduction, also a mosaic, executed 
in the time of Benedict XIV., on one of the outside walls of the 
Sancta Sanctorum. Cf. L. P., vol. ii. p. 35. 



Opposition to Leo III.— The Attack of the 25th April 799 — The Pope 
in Saxony — Insurrection and Legal Proceedings — The Purgaiio by- 
Oath— Christmas, 800 — Charles proclaimed Emperor at St. Peter's 
— Signification of this New Title — The Donation of Constantino. 

The year 799 was witness of a deplorable occurrence, 
which soon put to the proof the respective stability 
of the two powers, and afforded an opportunity for 
determining their mutual relations. 

Almost from the first there had been an under- 
current of hostility to Pope Leo. As his most 
powerful opponents numbered among them some 
relations of Pope Hadrian, there is good reason 
to suppose that the opposition was caused by a 
change, either in the manner of governing, or in 
the distribution of favours. As early as the end 
of 798, Arn, the archbishop of Salzburg, who was 
visiting Rome, remarked a spirit of discord and 
unreasonable resistance to the Pope's authority.^ 
A plot was set on foot, and culminated on the 25th 
April 799, the day of the rogations. The Pope was 
on his way to join the procession, which was to 
start from the Church of St. Lawrence, in Lucina, 
He, with his retinue, had already arrived at the 
new monastery of St. Sylvester, not far from their 
destination, when he was suddenly attacked by a 
body of armed men. He was thrown to the 
ground, and the ringleaders of the riot, the primi- 

^ Letter to Alcuin, JafFe, Monum. Alcuin., p. 445. 



cerius Pascal and the saccelarius Campulus, seized 
upon his person. Having failed in their first at- 
tempts to scoop out his eyes and tear out his 
tongue, they dragged him into the convent church, 
where they set on him anew. The Pope, terribly 
wounded and half-dead from the effect from blows, 
was left for some time lying in front of the altar, 
unconscious and weltering in blood. Finally he 
was removed at nightfall to the monastery of St. 
Erasmus, on the Coelian, where he was kept im- 

The traitors were disappointed in the success 
of their plans, for Leo speedily recovered both 
sight and speech. Neither did they succeed in 
keeping him prisoner, for, thanks to the assist- 
ance of Albinus, a friendly chamberlain, he 
managed to escape by night to St. Peter's. There 
he was met by Wirundus, a Prankish missus, and 
Winigis, Duke of Spoleto. They conducted him 
safely to Spoleto, where he was soon surrounded 
by a number of loyal Romans. 

From Spoleto, Leo proceeded to Paderborn in 
Saxony, where he was joined by Charles. The 
latter received him with enthusiasm, and, after 
detaining him for some time, sent him back to 
Rome with an escort, consisting of several counts 
and bishops, Hildebald of Cologne, Arn of Salzburg, 
and others, all charged to see the Pope reinstated, 
and to make an enquiry into the circumstances 
of his maltreatment. 

The situation of the Greek empire and of 
Italy, at that time, was such as to preclude any 
reliance on outside help. The insurrectionists, 
therefore, after a few plundering expeditions in 
the Church territories {domus cultce), resolved to 



alter their methods, and the revolutionists who 
had begun by sacrilegious attacks on the Pope's 
person, ended by instituting legal proceedings 
against him.^ 

If we may believe his biographer, Leo was 
received at Rome on 29th November with a public 
display of welcome and sympathy. But the Frankish 
commissioners immediately established themselves 
at the Lateran, in the beautiful new triclinium, 
containing the representation of Leo with Charles, 
and proceeded to institute their enquiry. It was 
no easy task, and, judging by certain details 
of the correspondence between Alcuin and the 
Archbishop Arn, the conspirators had not been al- 
together without justification for their grievances. 
The ringleaders, Pascal and Campulus, were sent 
to appear before the king. 

Charles had evidently reserved his judgment in 
the matter, for no decision had been announced 
when he arrived at Rome in person, one year after 
Leo's return. On 1st December he convened a large 
assembly at St. Peter's, including, among others, 
the two aristocratic sections of Rome, the upper 
clergy and the nobles. The prince was surrounded 
by his bishops, abbots, and barons. He expounded 
the object of his journey, which was to put an end 
to the existing strife. This was a difficult matter, 
for, on the one hand, the plaintiffs were abandoning 
the cause, and even if their grievances were real, there 
was no one left to confirm them ; while on the 
other hand, the ecclesiastical world was strongly 
imbued with the notion that no one could presume 

1 Z/. P., vol. ii. p. 6 : post dira iniqua incendia quce in possessionihus 
sen rehus h. Petri ap. gessenmi. 


to judge the Pope. The latter, therefore, remained 
under an accusation, which no one was quahfied 
either to prove or to refute. Following some rather 
hazy precedents, he decided to justify himself by 
swearing a solemn oath, an undertaking which, 
while implying a certain amount of personal 
humiliation, involved no principle and repudiated 
no claim. 

As far as the canon law was concerned, there 
was manifestly no higher ecclesiastical authority 
than the pontiff. There had never yet been any 
ecclesiastical tribune to pronounce judgment against 
a Pope. Three centuries before (in 501) the history 
of the lawsuit of Symmachus had demonstrated 
the difficulties of such a situation. But with 
regard to the civil law, the case was quite different. 
Crimes against common law, such as homicide, 
adultery, and high treason, were brought before 
the ordinary tribunal, whatever the rank of the 
accused, and, during the whole of the imperial 
regime, the Pope had formed no exception to the 
rule. But now the situation was changed. The 
Pope was a sovereign, and, as such, beyond the 
pale of judgment. 

It would be interesting to know the exact accusa- 
tion ^ brought against Leo, but unfortunately we are 
not in a position to judge whether it was a question 
of what the Roman law calls levia delicta, which 

1 From a letter from Alcuin (No. 120), we learn that he was 
accused of crimina adulterii et perjurii, but it is uncertain whether 
the word " adultery " is used here in the full legal sense. In 
another letter from the same writer (No. 127), we are told that the 
Archbishop Arn complained keenly de moribus apostolici. Fornica- 
tion, even in the case of clerks, is not a punishable crime according 
to Roman law. Clerks who commit this sin are only answerable 
to the ecclesiastical tribunals. Adultery, in the strict sense of the 
word, is dealt with quite differently. 


being committed against the ecclesiastical law, 
can be dealt with only by an ecclesiastical tri- 
bunal ; or of offences against the common law 
which were formerly amenable to the imperia. 

There is no doubt, however, that Pope Leo vindi- 
cated himself, by swearing a solemn oath before a 
public assembly at St. Peter's, to which all the people 
were bidden (23rd December 800). We still have 
the text of the declaration which he read from the 
top of the ambo, proclaiming that he was acting of 
his own free will, under neither pressure nor con- 
straint, and without claiming to establish a precedent 
for his successors, in the event of a similar case 

But, notwithstanding all these reservations, the 
fact remained that the Pope had taken the oath, 
and it was patent to everybody that he had done 
so because Charles had considered it essential. 
Indeed, Leo cut but a poor figure by the side 
of his protector, to whose clemency he clearly 
owed the continuation of his reign over the 

Two days afterwards, the Romans and their 
Prankish friends assembled at St. Peter's for the 
Christmas celebrations. As the king rose from his 
prostrations before the confession, the Pope placed 
a crown on his head, and the congregation, who had 
been prepared for this, acclaimed him with the 
words: "To Charles Augustus, crowned of God, 
great and peaceable emperor of the Romans, life 
and victory ! " Then the assembly burst forth into 
the imperial laudes, while the Pope anointed with 
chrism the forehead, not of the new emperor, who 
had long been consecrated, but of his young son 


Charles, who had accompanied him to Rome, and 
was standing by his side. 

The Prankish king, then, emerged from this Christ- 
mas mass with the title of Roman emperor. But, 
according to Eginhard, a competent witness, he was 
ill pleased at the turn affairs had taken. To judge 
from the general opinion of contemporary infor- 
mants, Charles seemed to have had no personal 
objection to this change, which, indeed, was in con- 
sonance with certain tendencies of western opinion. 
But he probably had his own ideas as to the best 
ways and means of bringing it about. At that time 
the imperial throne of Constantinople was occupied 
by the Empress Irene, a woman of marriageable 
estate. This alliance (afterwards sought when too 
late) was perhaps the means desired by the Prankish 
king. It may also be reasonably conjectured that 
the Pope's idea of an improvised coronation cere- 
mony was hardly in harmony with Charles's concep- 
tion of the form in which the new dignity should 
have been transmitted. There is no doubt that, as 
his end was approaching, he himself crowned and 
proclaimed his son Louis as his successor to the 

But the deed was done, and a precedent estab- 
lished. Charlemagne was emperor, and it was the 
Pope who had crowned him. That Christmas day, 
the first day of a new century, inaugurated an era in 
the history of the West, and of Rome in particular. 

As far as the West was concerned, it was, at 
first, merely a question of title and ceremonial, and 
no change occurred in the internal politics of the 
Prankish and Lombard kingdoms. Externally, it is 
true, there were efforts made to get Constantinople 
to recognise this Prankish revival of the old Roman 


empire. But this only slightly affected the Italian 

At Rome, the transformation of the patrician 
into the emperor, gave him a more clearly defined 
position. No one quite knew what were the exact 
rights attached to this title of patridus Romanorum, 
conceived by Pope Stephen II. and his advisers. 
On the other hand, there could be no mistaking 
the meaning of the title Imperator. History, 
tradition, and written law all shed a clear enough 
jUght upon it. The emperor was monarch of 
Rome, and every one, the Pope not excepted, 
stood to him in the relation of subject. As ad- 
ministrator, judge, and military chief, his authority 
was paramount. Only in the domain of religion 
did he yield to another, following the example of 
his predecessors. 

We must, nevertheless, remember that this 
conception of imperial rights was hardly as clear 
to the Romans in the year 800 as it is to us 
to-day. They were imbued with the traditional 
idea of the Pope's supremacy in the domain of 
local politics. Memoirs of St. Gregory and Hono- 
rius in the far past, and of Gregory II., Zachary, 
Paul, and Hadrian, of more recent date, arose and 
confronted the Justinian code with a commentary, 
out of harmony with the text, it is true, but for 
all that, irresistible. 

Moreover, a great impression had been produced 
by the form of the coronation, and as the memory of 
the circumstances became fainter, there finally re- 
mained in men's minds only the significant picture 
of Leo III. placing the imperial crown on the head 
of the kneeling Charlemagne. At Constantinople 
this was a frequent sight, for it was the patriarch 


who crowned the emperor. But, still more in evi- 
dence was the fact, that the patriarch was but the 
humble servant of the emperor, one might almost 
say his domestic chaplain. His right of occasionally 
placing the imperial crown upon his sovereign's 
head was really of no more consequence than the 
superior part which he played in the ordinary litur- 
gical ceremonies. 

At Rome it was different. Such a sight as that 
of an emperor being crowned by a Pope had never 
been seen before. The basilica of St. Peter was 
henceforth regarded as the cradle of the empire, 
which owed its rebirth to the Apostolic Vicar, the 
Pope. Charlemagne had inaugurated the custom, 
and who was greater than he ? What tradition could 
take the place of his ? 

There was, at first, no definite arrangement, no 
written agreement. The empire was restored with- 
out any decided plans having been made. But the 
false donation of Constantine, which occurred at 
least twenty-five years earlier, expresses clearly the 
conception of the new imperial regime which the 
Romans (and in particular the Roman clergy) 
adopted more and more definitely as time went 
on. What they desired was a benevolent and 
gracious protective sovereign, who would leave 
Rome to the Pope, and take up his own abode as 
far away as possible. The faithful successor of 
Constantine might set up his throne at Aix-la- 
Chapelle, or anywhere else, provided that it was 
at a safe distance from Rome, and that he did 
not interfere with the heir of St. Sylvester. At 
the same time he would be expected to come to 
the help of the Romans in the event of any special 


The donation of Constantine had already offered 
in 800 (for the few who accepted it at that time) 
an excellent judicial foundation for the Pope's 
intervention. According to the ideas which pre- 
vailed later, the emperor had rights over the whole 
of the West, holding them from his consecrator the 
Pope. But from whom did the Pope hold them? 
The donation tells us from Constantine, who had 
yielded to St. Sylvester, omnes Italice seu ocd- 
dentalium regionum provincias loca et civitates. He 
was thus in a position to do what he liked with 

Far be it from me to imply that Leo III. made 
such use of the donation as to infer from it his 
right to restore the empire and its constitutional 
theory. By most of the critics this document is 
dated back to the beginning of the year 744 ; 
it was manufactured at Rome, probably at the 
Lateran, the very palace where Leo was, at that 
time, beginning his career in the administra- 
tion of the sacristy. It is more than likely, 
therefore, that there was something in common 
between the idea with which it is inspired and 
the conceptions of the Pope and his party with 
regard to the theoretical, or, at least, desirable, 
relations between the two powers (800). As 
may readily be imagined, such notions were not 
calculated to please Charlemagne. It is doubt- 
ful whether he had any very definite idea of 
the extent of the ancient imperial power. Times 
were changed, and not even so mighty a king 
as himself, not even the Byzantine successors of 
the true empire, could lay claim to an authority 
as absolute as that of a Trajan or a Constantine. 
In the West, especially, the military aristocracy — 


the forerunners of the feudal system — were a force 
to be reckoned with. 

In short, Christmas Day, 800, had been witness 
of a great and remarkable event, the full importance 
of which was not understood at the time. And this 
is not an isolated instance of the kind. 



New plot against Leo III. — Severe repressions — Insurrection — Unpopu- 
larity of the domus cultce — Stephen IV. — Louis the Pious crowned at 
Rheims — Pope Pascal — The privilege of Louis — Lothaire — Crowned 
Emperor at Aix-la-Chapelle and at Rome — More plots and out- 
rageous repressions — Pascal an unpopular Pope — Election of 
Eugene II. — Lothaire comes back to Rome — Constitution of 824 — 
Roman Council — Elections of 827 — Valentine and Gregory IV. 

The Pope's relations with Charlemagne and with 
his own subjects do not appear to have been 
sensibly affected by the restoration of the empire. 
The Romans stood in wholesome awe of the im- 
posing person of the Prankish king, and the Pope, 
in some measure, reaped the benefit of this attitude. 
However, when Charlemagne died, on 28th January 
814, the Roman nobles began to assert themselves, 
conspiring to get rid of the Pope by assassinating 
him. It evidently did not occur to them to assail 
so firmly established an institution as the temporal 
pontificate. It was the administration of this par- 
ticular Pope which was distasteful to them, and they 
resolved to attack him in person. 

But this conspiracy came to nought. The ponti- 
fical police discovered it, and the numerous con- 
spirators were arrested, tried for the crime of high 
treason, condemned to death, and executed. This 
event caused a remarkable sensation at the court 
of Louis the Pious. The Prankish law, it was said, 
was much less severe. Had not the Pope exceeded 



his power in allowing sentences of death to be dealt 
out with so liberal a hand ? He ought, at any rate, 
to have consulted the emperor. What would become 
of the imperial authority at Rome if such things 
were permitted to take place without any reference 
to it? 

Possibly Louis may have seen, in the Pope's 
attitude, a kind of protest against the manner of his 
accession to the empire. For Leo had had no part 
in the matter, and was therefore inclined to ignore 
an emperor whom he had not consecrated. 

However this may have been, Bernard, the 
young king of Italy, and Gerald, count of the 
Eastern Marches (Austria), were commissioned to go 
to Rome and enquire into the affair. Gerald after- 
wards betook himself to the imperial court with his 
report of the proceedings. The Pope, in self-defence, 
sent three ambassadors to France, and their explana- 
tions or excuses seem to have afforded Louis satis- 
faction. Nevertheless, the disturbances at Rome 
continued. A revolt took place in the country, and 
the domus cultce was attacked and plundered.^ It is 
probable that this was an act of revenge on the 
militia for having assisted in putting down the con- 
spirators. Moreover, the continual development of 
these latifundia entailed a number of dispossessions 
which were regarded by those who suffered them as 
unjust usurpations. When the rural colonies had 
been burned, the insurgents marched upon Rome 
demanding redress. Pope Leo was seriously threat- 
ened, but the rebels were dispersed by Winigis, 
Duke of Spoleto, whom King Bernard had sent to 

^ Ann. Einh.y 815, prcedia quce idem pontifex in singularum civi- 
tatum terriioriis noviter exstruxit ; Vita Lvd., c. 25, prcedia om?iia quce 
illi domocultas appellant et noviter ab eodem apostolico institula erant. 


his assistance. The ringleaders were banished to 

Such was the situation when Leo III. passed 
away, the 12th June 816. The clergy, always in 
evidence at election times, were quite convinced of 
the propriety of choosing a more popular and 
accommodating pontiff than the late Pope. Their 
approbation fell on the deacon Stephen, the son of 
a noble family, and protege of Pope Hadrian. His 
biographer tells us that he was much liked by the 
Romans. In accordance with custom, his consecra- 
tion took place on the Sunday following his election 
(22nd June). He at once showed himself to be 
peaceably disposed and anxious to smooth away all 
traces of past discord, and freely to accept the 
imperial protection. He began his reign by obHging 
the Romans to swear allegiance to the emperor, and 
then sent notice of his election to the Prankish 
court, announcing at the same time his intention of 
meeting Louis. This interview actually took place 
at Rheims in the month of October. It resulted in 
the settlement of many questions, of which only two 
seem to have been of much consequence. Louis and 
his wife Ermengarde were crowned by the Pope 
with crowns of gold, which he had brought with 
him for the purpose. Thus the Roman ideas of 
propriety were satisfied. Whether this ceremony 
counted for much in the opinion of their contempo- 
raries is doubtful, but it nevertheless constituted a 
second precedent, and confirmed the predominance 
of the papacy over the empire. Moreover, Stephen 
brought back with him the exiles who were in France, 
perhaps those of the 799 insurrection, or perhaps only 
those banished after the last revolt. 

Stephen's pontificate thus opened with good 


prospects of peace. But, alas for the frailty of 
human plans, the month of January 817 had not 
come to an end when the new Pope was called to 
follow his predecessor. 

On the very day of his death (25th January), the 
priest Pascal, abbot of one of the monasteries of the 
Vatican, was elected in his place. He was not of 
the aristocracy, and seems to have been inspired with 
the spirit of Leo III. rather than that of Hadrian. 
As soon as his consecration had been accomplished, 
he sent to inform the emperor of his accession, 
protesting that he had been elected against his 

Shortly afterwards, another papal envoy, the 
nomenclator Theodore, was despatched to Louis 
the Pious, to request an official renewal of the 
compact between the Carlovingian House and the 
papacy. This agreement had already been recorded 
several times, under the preceding kings and Popes, 
but not one of these important documents has been 
preserved. The compact between Louis the Pious 
and Pope Pascal, is the oldest of which we know 
the terms. It contains a confirmation of the rights 
of the Roman Church over those Italian territories 
which, in one way or another, were included in 
its domain, the city of Rome, Roman Tuscia as de- 
fined before 787, the district of Perugia, ancient Cam- 
pania, Tibur, the whole of the Exarchy, Pentapolis, 
including Ancona, Umana, and Osimo, the territory 
of Sabina, Lombard Tuscia, as surrendered by Char- 
lemagne, the rent formerly paid to the palace at 
Pavia by the rest of Lombard Tuscia and the duchy 
of Spoleto, and, finally, the territories beyond the 
Liris and the ecclesiastical estates in Southern Italy, 
i,e, domains over which the Pope had theoretical 


rather than practical rights. The emperor under- 
takes to guarantee all these possessions or claims, 
and promises, besides, to allow the Pope a free 
hand in governing, and only to interfere in the 
event of violence or unjust oppression on the part 
of the potentiores, which evidently means the ponti- 
fical government itself. He also renounces any 
right of intervention in the election of the Pope, 
which is to be conducted in conformity with the 
canons, and carried by unanimous consent. The 
Pope, must, however, immediately after his conse- 
cration, send representatives to the Prankish king, 
charged to renew the friendly alliance. 

In short, this document corresponds with the 
actual situation, at the moment when it was drawn 
up : protectorate of the Prankish monarch, liberty 
of the Romans in the choice of the Pope, and free 
exercise of the papal sovereignty, except in the 
case of abuse of authority. 

Louis had permitted Stephen IV. to officiate 
at his coronation at Rheims, but, like his father, 
he regarded the papal intervention simply as a 
religious consecration of rights acquired from other 
sources. In 817 he himself crowned his eldest 
son Lothaire as emperor, before a large concourse 
of people at Aix-la-Chapelle. At the same time 
he created Pepin and Louis, his two other sons, 
kings of Aquitaine and Bavaria. Bernard, king 
of Italy and grandson of Charlemagne through his 
deceased father Pepin, refused to accept this new 
arrangement. He rebelled, but with ill success. 
His eyes were torn out, and he died immediately 
afterwards, in April 818. In 822, his kingdom was 
entrusted to Lothaire, who set out to take possession 
of it. Pope Pascal, on hearing of his arrival in 


Italy, took the opportunity to invite him to Rome, 
and in virtue, undoubtedly, of an understanding 
with his father, he consecrated the young prince 
as emperor, on Easter Sunday, 5th April 823. 
Already, in 821, Roman legates had journeyed to 
Thionville, in order to be present at his marriage. 
But in spite of these outward amenities the con- 
flict did not cease. The Frankish princes objected 
to be beholden to the Pope for their temporal 
authority, and the Pope refused to yield the privi- 
lege of consecrating them. He might be trusted to 
make the best of circumstances, and by his per- 
severance, finally succeeded in establishing the 

The emperor had never been seen at Rome 
since 800, the year in which the institution was 
originated. Lothaire ^ held a court of justice there, 
and the Abbot Farfa brought before him a grievance 
which he had long cherished against the pontifical 
administration. He won his cause, and Pascal 
renounced his claims to temporal power over the 
abbey, as well as to the right of appointing an 
abbot. The latter was of great importance in the 
Roman state. The opposition to the Pope was 
strengthened by the temporary presence of a young 
emperor, who was disinclined to submit to ecclesi- 
astical authority, and also by the prospect of his 
residence in the neighbourhood of Rome. The 
pontiff got deeper and deeper into difficulties. 
Those who had grievances against him, posed as 
champions of Lothaire and his imperial rights, and 
soon after the latter's departure, two dignitaries of 
the first rank, the priviicerius Theodore and the 

1 Compare Lothaire diploma of 840 (Bdhmer-Miihlb., No. 1043 ; 
Registr,-Farf., No. 298). 


nomenclator Leo, were pointed out to the familia 
S, Petri {Le, the militia of the agricultural colonies), 
as enemies of the Pope. Their disloyalty was 
avenged by their first having their eyes put out, 
and then being killed outright. 

Upon hearing of this, the Emperor Louis was 
about to send envoys to Rome with orders to 
enquire into the affair. They had not started, 
however, when three papal legates approached, pro- 
testing that their master had had no hand in the 
tragedy. Louis listened to their tale, but, none 
the less, despatched his envoys, the Abbot of Saint- 
Waast and the Count of Coire. The enquiry, how- 
ever, did not lead to any important result. The 
Pope submitted to the formality of the purgatio 
per sacramentu7n. He swore, before a solemn as- 
sembly which included twenty-four bishops, that he 
had taken no part in the assassination of the two 
victims, but adding that, being guilty of high treason, 
they were deserving of death. 

This was quite possible, but for all that, it was 
manifest that Theodore and Leo had been the 
victims of violence unsanctioned by law, and that 
the Pope was lacking in authority over his own 
followers, not to mention his opponents. 

Pascal sent a second detachment of legates to 
the Emperor Louis, who, finding the whole affair 
somewhat embarrassing, accepted the explanations 
which they offered. On their return to Rome, they 
found the Pope suffering from an illness which 
terminated his career on the 11th of February 824. 
So great was the aversion with which he was regarded, 
that the people refused to allow him to be buried at 
St. Peter s. 

A remarkably exciting election followed ; the 


two factions — the nobles and the clergy — stood out 
clearly : the exerdtus Romanus and the familia S, 
Petri, long at variance, now measured their re- 
spective forces. Neither of them had any voice in 
the ecclesiastical elections. Since the year 769, the 
papal appointment had been in the hands of the 
clergy only. But the clergy themselves could not 
agree on the practical problem of meeting the pre- 
sent exigencies, and the disunion became so great 
that two candidates were proclaimed. Happily, 
however, the strife did not last long. The cele- 
brated monk Wala, an adviser of the young em- 
peror Lothaire, happened to be in Rome at the 
time, and he succeeded in bringing about the elec- 
tion of the candidate nominated by the nobles, the 
arch-priest Eugene of Santa Sabina. 

His first act was to send a deputation to the 
Emperor Louis, and he lost no time in arranging 
that the remains of his predecessor should be in- 
terred in a becoming manner. 

The Frankish court was very much taken up 
with the affairs of Rome, which, since the death 
of Charlemagne, ten years before, had been gradually 
growing more and more confused. Plots, insur- 
rections, risings, and summary executions, all these 
were common talk, and for the second time in one 
generation the people had before them the pitiable 
sight of a Pope compelled to vindicate his character 
by taking a public oath. To make matters still 
worse, party strife arose, an infliction which had 
occurred but rarely during the last three centuries. 
The root of the evil obviously lay in the conflicting 
interests and ambitions of the clergy and the nobles. 
This situation was not peculiar to Rome, but in 
other places the sovereign power was strong enough 


to insist on peace, while at Rome the authority was 
held by one of two rival parties, and moreover by 
just the one less able to wield it successfully. Hence 
arose intrigues, schisms, violence, and abuse of 
power. To the Emperor Louis it seemed that the 
best way out of the difficulty was to make his 
sovereign power felt at Rome in a visible and 
palpable form, for up to that time, his authority 
there had been of a distant and intermittent 
nature. He would not, however, forcibly attack 
the papal sovereignty, which, after all, did not 
proceed merely from the concessions of his pre- 
decessors, who had not so much originated as guaran- 
teed it, and which, although under the gracious 
protection of the Frankish princes, was also sus- 
tained by tradition as well as by the dignity of its 

Lothaire was sent to Rome under the escort of 
Wala. It was a recognised fact that the present dis- 
turbances resulted from the obstinacy or the weakness 
of the Popes ^ Leo III. and Pascal, as well as from the 
rapacity of their officials. Many of the properties 
which had been amalgamated with the pontifical 
estates were restored to their original owners. 

The widows of Theodore, Horus, and Sergius, 
the murdered officials, were given compensation, 
and the exiles were recalled.^ A code of laws of 

1 It is true that these expressions do not occur in the two 
official documents of 824, which have come down to us, the 
Constitutio and the Sacramenturn, they are only found in the 
Frankish annals ; but the privilege of Otto (9^2) which reproduces 
the preceding official acts, and especially those of the time of 
which we are speaking, contains these words : propter diversas 
necessitates et pontificii?n erga populurn sibi subjectum. asperitates retun- 

2 We get this detail from the Liber Pontificalis. It is the only 
touch, in the short and inadequate account of Eugenius II., which 
betrays any knowledge of the grave events of 824. 


which the text^ is still preserved, was drawn up, 
to protect the rights of the individual. The Pope 
was treated with formal respect, but there can be 
no doubt that the new measures were, on the 
whole, directed against him. They may be summed 
up under five heads concerning: 1st, the imperial 
protection ; 2nd, the individual rights ; 3rd, the 
choice of functionaries ; 4th, the organisation of 
the protectorate ; 5th, the papal election. 

1st. On the first point it is declared that those 
who are under the special protection of the Pope 
and the emperor are inviolable.^ This must be taken 
to mean that the papal authorities have no power 
to bring about the execution of one of the imperial 
proteges. As the imperial protection was of the 
wide-spreading order, the Roman nobles and the 
ecclesiastical dignitaries found themselves exempt 
from the fear of execution for the crime of treason, 
a form of punishment which had been much abused 
in the past. 

2nd. The Romans should be judged according 
to the law of their choice, i.e. Roman, Salic, or 
Lombard. These last two, being less lavish with 
capital punishment than the Roman law, were 
probably preferred by some. 

3rd. The Roman magistrates should present 
themselves before the emperor, not to be invested 
by him, but in order that he might know their 
names and their numbers, and admonish them as to 
the exercise of their functions. 

4th. Two missi should be instituted, one by the 

1 This may be found in Migne, t. xcvii. p. 459 : Hardouin, Cone, 
t. iv. p. 1261 ; M. G. Leges, t. iv. p. 54>5 ; Capitul., t. i. p. 322, &c. 

2 Ut omnes qui sub speciali defensione domni apostolici et nostra 
fuerint siiscepti impetrata inviolahiliter justa idantur defensione. 


Pope, the other by the emperor. They should be 
in permanent residence at Rome, and every year 
should report to the emperor on the working of 
the administration. They should listen to complaints 
and retail them to the Pope, and if the latter should 
not do them justice, the emperor should be called 
upon to intervene. 

5th. The election of the Pope should be in the 
hands of the Romans alone. The laity as well as 
the clergy should vote, notwithstanding the de- 
cision of the Council of 769 ; finally, before his 
consecration, the chosen candidate should take a 
formaP oath before the imperial missus and the 

Secondary provisions prohibit plundering, and 
enjoin on all the Romans obedience to the Pope, 
whether or not they may be under the special pro- 
tection of the emperor. 

The difference, not to say the contrast, between 
these enactments and the state of things which we 
have been observing, is obvious. The election of 
the Pope was henceforth to be subject to the con- 
firmation of the emperor. This rule was not formally 
expressed, but we know from subsequent history that 
it became a stringent though unwritten law.^ The 

1 The oath is not mentioned in the Constitution itself, but in a 
formula which was at that time imposed on all the Romans, and 
which is inserted after the text of the Constitution. The reform of 
the electoral system is indicated in veiled terms : Volumus ut in 
electione pontijicis mdlus prcesumat venire, neque liber neque servus, qui 
aliquod impedimentum facial illis solummodo Ro7nanis quibus antiquitus 

Juit consuetudo concessa per constitutionem ss. Patrum eligendi ponti- 
Jicem. The ambiguity of these terms is clearly explained by the 
accounts of elections in the Liber Pontificalis and elsewhere. 

2 Before the time of Justinian neither the emperors nor the 
Gothic kings had interfered in the papal elections, except, in the 
case of schism, as arbitrators or guardians of the public peace. Under 


right of choosing functionaries was restricted to the 
Pope, but the emperor considered himself in a 
position to keep them, if he so desired, at his beck 
and call, to admonish, and above all, inspect them, 
and, if necessary, to reform their decisions. Certain 
privileged persons were exempt from the papal 
jurisdiction, and submitted only to that of the 
emperor. Finally, the latter was to be ever present 
in the person of his missus who kept a keen watch 
over the whole affairs of Rome. 

Pope Eugenius III. not only accepted this 
reform, but, of his own accord, instituted another 
in the ecclesiastical domain. In November 826, he 
assembled in conclave a council of his immediate 
assistants, sixty-two bishops in all, and together 
they drew up a code of some forty-five disciplinary 
rules to meet the exigencies of the present situa- 

The reign of this excellent and conscientious 
Pope was all too short. He died in the month of 
August 827, and, before many weeks had passed, 
his successor, the deacon Valentine, followed his 
example. The Romans then elected the priest 
Gregory, who bore the title of St. Mark, but he 

Byzantine rule, the election had to be confirmed by the emperor 
before ordination could take place. This, considering the distance 
of Constantinople, naturally occasioned great delay. After the 
sixth ecumenical council (681), the emperor empowered the 
Exarch to deliver the letters of ratification, which expedited 
matters considerably. This formality, of course, vanished with the 
Exarchy itself. The Romans had never acquiesced very heartily 
in this intervention, and the Prankish ratification was just as 
distasteful to them. Indeed, they never neglected an opportunity 
of evading it. 

^ According to Deusdedit (i. p. 123) this council would also be 
concerned in the papal election a sacerdotihus seu primatihus, nohili- 
bus seu cuncto concilio Romance ecclesixB. 


was not ordained until his appointment had been 
ratified by an imperial representative.^ This detail 
is suppressed by the Liber Pontificalis, which, on 
the other hand, gives a full description of the two 
elections of 827, showing that, in both of them, the 
lay nobility took part from the outset, and that 
they were concerned in the choice of the individual 
Pope, as well as in his enthronement at the Lateran. 
According |to the verdict of the Council of 769, 
they had no right to share in the matter until both 
these acts had been accomplished,^ and then they 
were permitted to sign the deed of election. Thus 
^the principle of the lay participation in the ap- 
pointment of the pontiff was preserved, and to say 
that he had been elected a sacerdotibus seu pro- 
ceiibus et omni clero necnon et optimatibus vel cuncto 
populo Romano, was, theoretically, correct. This is 
the formula employed in the Libe?- Pontificalis with 
reference to Leo III. and Pascal ; there is no special 
mention of Hadrian and Stephen IV. in this con- 
nection ; and in regard to Eugenius II. the vague 
expression a Romanis cunctis electus is used. After 
the time of Valentine, however, this part of the 
papal history is always given in detail and in such 
a way as to render prominent the part played by 
the lay aristocracy, so prominent, indeed, that often 

^ Ann. Einhardi. — Sed non prius ordinatus est quam legatus 
imperatoris Romam venit et electionem populi qualis esset examinavit. 
The ordination took place on the following day, as is noted in certain 
manuscripts of the Hieronymite martyrology. 

2 Et postquam pontifex electus fuerit et in patriarchium dednctus, 
omnes optimates militice vel cunctus exercitus et cives honesti atqtie 
universa generalitas hujus Romance urbis ad salutandurn eum sicid 
omnium dominum properare debeat. Et more solito decretum facientes 
et in eo cuncti pariter concordantes subscribere debent. 

The alternative and meaningless reading priusquam is omitted 
by Deusdedit. 


but little justice is done to the influence of the 

Thus, it will be seen that, on this point, as well 
as on many others, the position of the nobility had 
been perceptibly confirmed and strengthened. 



Dislocation of the Frankish State — The Saracens in the Tyrrhenian Sea 
— Gregoriopolis — Election of Sergius II. (844) — Louis II. and 
Drogo at Rome — Bad Government of Pope Sergius — Landing of the 
Saracens — Violation of the Apostolic Sanctuaries — Restorative 

Gregory IV. occupied the Holy See for fourteen 
years. His pontificate was darkened by the grievous 
lack of harmony between Louis the Pious and the 
sons of his first wife, Lothaire, Pepin, and Louis the 
German. The Pope was indiscreet enough to inter- 
fere in the affair and to take the side of the rebellious 
sons, but he found himself in a land of disillusion- 
ment, from which he emerged humiliated, a sadder 
if not a wiser man. 

Some years later (20th June 840), the Emperor 
Louis died, and, as is well known, the appointment 
of his successor gave rise to a great deal of strife. 
The breaking up of the Frankish kingdom was 
sanctioned by the Treaty of Verdun, and hence- 
forward it was divided into three parts — the kingdom 
of Western France, the kingdom of Germany, and, 
between the two, the kingdom of Lothaire, extend- 
ing from the mouths of the Meuse and the Rhine 
to the estuary of the Rhone. With this was as- 
sociated the kingdom of Italy, as well as Aix-la- 
Chapelle, the sacred town of Charlemagne. 

Since his early childhood (781), the Emperor 



Louis had never set foot ^ in Rome. In settling 
Italy upon Lothaire, he had also confided to him 
the management of Roman affairs, and, in particular, 
the protection of the Holy See. The great events 
of 840-843 did not then produce any very re- 
markable change in the pontifical relations, nor 
indeed, on the whole, in the Italian situation. The 
newly arrived Saracens were, however, beginning to 
create disturbances. 

The Saracens of the West had long since ceased 
to be subject to the same princes. Those belonging 
to Spain were under the dominion of the Ommiad 
Caliph of Cordova ; those of ancient Mauritania 
were governed by the Edrisite dynasty, whose royal 
seat was at Fez or at Tlemcen ; while those of 
Numidia and the eastern provinces of Africa (in- 
cluding Tunis and Tripoli), were under the Aglabites, 
whose headquarters were at Kairwan. It was mainly 
with these latter that the Italian states had to do. 
For a long time they confined themselves to piratical 
enterprises. The Sicilian patrician, supported by 
the fleets of Naples, Amalfi, and Gaeta, defended the 
Byzantine coast, together with the island of Sardinia, 
to the best of his ability. Corsica,^ which was a part 
of the Frankish empire, was placed under the 
guardianship of the Marquis of Tuscany, who shared 
with the Pope the supervision and protection of 
the coasts between Luni and Terracino. This was 
no light task. Since 831 Palermo had been in the 
hands of the Mussulmans, and the whole of Sicily 
was, by degrees, falling under their sway. More- 

^ In 837 he was on the point of making the journey ad limina, 
but was deterred by a Norman invasion. 

2 For information on the situation of the islands of Corsica and 
Sardinia in Carlovingian times, see the Memoir of M. A. Dove, in 
the reports of the Munich Academy, 1894. 


over, since 840, the duchy of Beneventum had 
been claimed by two rivals, Radelgiso and Siconulf. 
They both called Saracen troops to their help, thus 
affording the Mahometans every facility for getting 
a footing on Italian soil. 

During the latter part of his life. Pope Gre- 
gory IV. constructed, in the neighbourhood of Ostia, 
a fortress called Gregoriopolis, which is still in 
existence. It soon became evident that this pre- 
caution, far from being unnecessary, was even in- 
adequate for purposes of defence. 

Gregory died at the beginning of 844, and the 
appointment of a successor gave rise to some diffi- 
culty. By one party (not the nobles), the deacon 
John was proclaimed, and they even succeeded in 
introducing him at the Lateran. But the lay aris- 
tocracy had set their affections upon an old priest 
who directed the property of St. Martin on the 
Esquiline. He was weak-minded, passionate, foul- 
mouthed, and gouty ; but he belonged to the 
nobility, and was a member of the same family as 
Pope Stephen IV. and the future Hadrian II. His 
supporters escorted him from his church to the 
Lateran palace, in stately procession. The snow 
was falling at the time, a sign of happy augury 
in the eyes of the Romans. The unfortunate John 
was soon ousted from the papal residence, several 
of his opponents demanding that he should be cut 
in pieces. Sergius, however, was satisfied with 
ejecting him, and he himself was installed and 
consecrated at St. Peter's without the formality 
of consulting the emperor. 

Lothaire was of opinion that the Romans did 
not treat him with enough deference. He was 
anxious to arrive at a proper understanding of this 


contested election, and was especially determined 
to maintain his right of confirmation, which had 
been so calmly ignored. He despatched to Rome 
his son Louis, the future Emperor Louis II., and 
his uncle Drogo, Bishop of Metz,^ a natural son of 
Charlemagne. These two princes were accompanied 
by an army of considerable size, which, on arriving 
on Roman ground, began plundering and ravaging, 
as though on conquered territory. This unruly 
behaviour was apparently intended as a manifestation 
of the imperial wrath. When they reached Rome, 
the Pope received them at the Vatican with the 
customary honours. But, after the first act of 
ceremony, the enquiry was instituted. Besides 
Drogo, King Louis had been followed by twenty- 
five Italian bishops, belonging to the Lombard 
kingdom, and they had been joined by the Arch- 
bishop of Ravenna, who, though ostensibly a subject 
of the Pope, was always pleased to oppose him. 
After lengthy discussions with the diocesan bishops, 
and with the heads of the Roman clergy and of the 
lay aristocracy, they decided to recognise Sergius 
as the rightful Pope, and it was again settled that, 
for the future, no one could be consecrated as 
pontiff without the approval {jussio) of the emperor 
and the presence of his representatives. After 
anointing the young prince, Sergius and the Romans 
swore an oath of fidelity to the emperor, and, in 
order to give proof of his desire to please the latter, 
the Pope appointed Bishop Drogo apostolic vicar, 
conferring upon him a kind of supremacy over all 
the bishops of the various Frankish districts. He 

^ . . . Acturos ne deinceps decedente apostolico quisquam illic 
prceter sui jussionem missorumque suorum prcesentiam ordinetur antistes. 
— Prudence, Ann., 844. 


refrained, however, from restoring to their sees the 
Archbishops of Rheims and Narbonne, Ebbo and 
Bartholomew, who were recognised as adherents 
of Lothaire. Rheims and Narbonne belonged to 
the kingdom of Charles the Bald, and the Pope 
had the good sense not to wish to encourage ill- 
feeling between Lothaire and his neighbour brother. 

All this took place in June 844. When Louis, 
with his army and his council, had taken his de- 
parture, Sergius began to breathe more freely. Sad 
to say, his reign was one of simony. The traditions 
of Eugenius IL, the constitution of Lothaire, and 
the decrees of the Council of 826, all these were 
set at naught, and the buying and selling of dignities 
soon became the order of the day. To his brother 
Benedict, a rustic boor of vicious habits, the Pope 
gave the bishopric of Albano, and made over to 
him the cares of the government.^ Convents, as 
well as private individuals, were robbed, in order 
to gratify their rapacious greed and pay their ex- 
penses. Benedict, strange to say, was in high 
favour with the emperor, and had obtained from 
him the rank of imperial missus, or else the con- 
firmation of that of papal missus. He always seems 
to be represented as exercising at Rome a kind of 
tyrannical authority, though, at the same time, 
keeping within the bounds of the law. 

The Roman clerk who describes this situation 
can hardly speak too strongly in deprecation of the 
evils caused at Rome by the reign of Sergius II. 
He adds that, as no one had the courage to oppose 
him, God took the matter in hand and sent the 
Saracens as a scourge. 

Whatever may have been the exact intentions 

I L. P., t. ii. p. 79 and p. 103, note 30. 


of Divine Providence, it cannot be denied that the 
Saracens landed on 23rd August 846 at the mouth 
of the Tiber. Porto and Ostia, abandoned by their 
inhabitants, gave way before them. The chief 
group of pirates, following the right bank of the 
river, fell upon the basilica of St. Peter and plundered 
it. The foreign scholce, a mere handful of men whom 
the Romans had despatched to Porto, were easily put 
to flight, and the Romans themselves were defeated 
on the meadows of Nero. Louis II., who had come 
to their help with an insufficiently equipped army, 
also received a check. The invaders extended their 
pillaging operations to St. Paul's, but the militia of 
Roman Campania gained some slight success on 
the left bank of the Tiber. The Saracens, giving up 
all hopes of forcing the town ramparts, turned their 
attention in the direction of Fondi and Gaeta. 
Another royal army, commanded, it is said,^ by the 
Duke of Spoleto, followed and attacked them in a 
strong position, where they were entrenched. Once 
again the Saracens obtained the advantage, though 
they were prevented from following it up by the 
intervention of a fleet from Naples and Amalfi. 
Seizing their booty, they re-embarked for home, 
but before they reached the coast of Africa a huge 
tempest arose, and the plunderers of the apostolic 
sanctuaries were engulfed, together with their ill- 
gotten treasure, in the waves of the Sicilian Sea. 

This was but cold comfort for the Romans. The 
whole of Western Christendom was aghast at the 
gloomy news. At Rome many clerks and monks 

1 The texts relating to this event are confused, disjointed, and 
difficult to reconcile. I give here what I conceive to be the correct 
conclusion. Cf., L. P., vol. ii. p. 104, note 38.^ M. Ph. Lauer has 
taken up this question in the Melanges of the Ecole de Rome, t. xix. 
(1899) p. 310 and following. 


abased themselves before the divine judgment, by 
which the wrath of Heaven was manifested against 
the administration of Pope Sergius. But elsewhere, 
not understanding the details of the Roman affairs, 
they began to reflect upon the responsibility of the 
emperor. The tomb of the Prince of the Apostles, the 
great Holy of Holies of the West, had been profaned 
by the enemies of Christ. Mahomet had triumphed 
over St. Peter, and had waged his insulting warfare 
in the Apostle's own dwelling, perhaps even within 
his mysterious sepulchre.^ Was not the emperor the 
armed protector of St. Peter, as well as the actual 
ruler of Italy, and as such responsible for these 
events ? 

Lothaire, who had been joined by his son Louis, 
lent an attentive ear to these complaints. A large 
convocation was held, and it was decided^ : 1st, that 
the bishops, clerks, monks, and faithful should make 
serious efforts to reform their conduct, and, as far as 
lay in their power, to correct existing abuses ; 2nd, 
that the basilica of St. Peter should be surrounded 
by fortifications, of which the cost was to be defrayed 
by a tax, levied on all the imperial states ; 3rd, that 
an expedition under the command of King Louis 
should be undertaken against the Saracens who had 
settled in the duchy of Beneventum; 4th, that the 
latter should be divided between the two claimants, 
who, having arranged their differences, should join 
forces against the enemy of the Christians. 

Envoys were despatched to Radelgiso and Siconulf, 
while others journeyed to Rome, Venice, and Naples 

1 As to the damage done to the apostolic sanctuary, see Grisar, 
Anal. Romana, p. 279 {cf. Studi e documenti di storia e dirctto, 1892, 
p. 34.4). 

2 See this enactment in the Neues Arckiv, t. xii. p. 535, 2nd 
edition ; M. G. Legurn Sectio II. Capitularia, t. ii. p. 65. 


to organise a union of all the Italian states in view 
of the new undertaking. A fast of three days was 
ordered to precede the expedition, which was brought 
to a successful issue (847). The Saracens were, for 
the time, completely banished from Italy, though 
they afterwards regained their footing. The state of 
Beneventum was divided into two principalities, 
having for their capitals Beneventum and Salerno.^ 

1 Distribution Act, M. G. Leg., t. iv. p. 221. 



Election of Leo IV. — Louis II. associated with the Empire — The Leonine 
City — Leopolis — Leo IV. and Louis II. — Arsenius and Anastasius 
— Election of 855 — Rivalry of Anastasius — Death of Lothaire — 
Benedict III. — Nicholas — The Papacy under the Empire — Nicholas 
and the Archbishop of Ravenna — Contest in connection with Loth- 
aire II. and Waldrade — Hadrian II. and the Family of Arsenius — 
End of the Emperor Louis II. 

Pope Sergius died on the 27th of January 847. He 
was interred in the desecrated basihca, and a friendly 
hand inscribed upon his tomb words more charitable, 
alas, than veracious. The Romans elected as his 
successor the priest Leo, of the title of the Four 
Crowned Martyrs, a man with a reputation for 
integrity and prudence. His election, for some 
reason or other, was carried through without any 
reference to the emperor, and a year and a half 
afterwards, on Easter Day (10th April) the con- 
secration took place. They were, nevertheless, 
careful to justify themselves by the gravity of the 
circumstances, and formally to reserve the imperial 

Lothaire seems to have accepted the explanations 
of the Romans quite placidly. Although he still 
maintained a mild interest in Itahan affairs it was 
becoming increasingly difficult to prevail on him to 
leave his own country of Lorraine, and his residence 
of Aix-la-Chapelle. The Lombard kingdom was 
governed by his son Louis, who was made an 
associate of the empire, and, as such, consecrated 



by the Pope in April 850. From that time the 
pontiffs had to do with an Itahan emperor, who, 
in virtue of his residence in the neighbourhood, was 
the better able to intervene in the internal affairs 
of the Roman state. 

The first question to be settled was how best 
to deal with their enemies, the Saracen pirates. 
Since 848 they had been working on the fortified 
enclosure near St. Peters. The new walls were 
continued as far as the castle of St. Angelo, so 
that the fortifications reached the town itself, 
communicating with it by means of the Porta 
S. Petri, The enclosed area comprised not only 
the basilica and its dependencies, but also the 
quarters, or scholce, of the foreign colonies of 
Saxons, Frisians, Franks, and Lombards. Out of 
compliment to the reigning Pope it received the 
name of the Leonine City. Part of the cost was 
covered by the afore-mentioned imperial tax, aug- 
mented by gifts from France and Germany. The 
Pope, for his part, exacted contributions from his 
people ; the towns of the Roman state, the monas- 
teries, the rnassce publicce or domus cultce, all provided 
materials, money, or workers. Even to-day, on the 
remains of this fortification, may be seen inscriptions 
referring to the part taken in the work by various 
papal militice. The dedication was performed like 
that of a church on the 27th June 852. 

As if to prove the need for this protection, the 
Saracens reappeared, from time to time, at the 
mouth of the Tiber. In 849 they were followed 
thither by the squadrons of Naples, Amalfi, and 
Gaeta, under command of Csesar, son of Sergius, 
Duke of Naples. The Pope was at first somewhat 
perturbed at this alliance, but his fears were soon 



dispelled, and he went down to the shore to speed 
them with his blessing. A naval battle took place 
off Ostia, and the Neapolitans had already gained 
the upper hand when a great storm arose and 
parted the combatants. Many of the Saracen 
vessels were wrecked on the Roman coast; their 
crews were taken captive, and made to work on 
the fortifications of the Leonine City.^ 

The completion and solemn dedication of this 
great work (27th June 852) caused no abatement 
of Leo's energy. At his instigation the walls of 
Rome were restored, a colony of Corsicans was 
established at Porto; and Centwncellce (Civita 
Vecchia), which had been devastated by the 
Saracens and abandoned by its inhabitants, was 
rebuilt at a short distance from the original site 
under the name of Leopolis.^ The pirates seem 
to have been impressed by the Pope's capability 
and activity, for they did not obtrude themselves 
for several years. 

The relations between Leo IV. and the emperor 
were, apparently, irreproachable, but not genial. 
From the Pope's letters we gather that two of 
the imperial missi, Peter and Hadrian, gave him 
considerable cause for complaint,^ so that he mis- 
trusted their presence at Rome. With the help 
of George, Duke of Emilia, brother of the Arch- 
bishop of Ravenna, they assassinated a papal 

1 The Saracens are again mentioned in a letter from l^to IV. 
(J., 2620), probably dating from 852 ; but he only speaks of 
rumours and preventive measures. 

2 For Leopolis see^ Ph. Lauer, La Cite carolingienne de Cencelle, in 
the Melanges of the Ecole de Rome, t. xx. p. 147 ; cf. the inscription 
published by M. Or. Marucchi in the Nuovo Bullettino di arch, crist.y 
1900, p. 195, pi. vi. 

3 J., 2602, 2610. 

5^ uM^h^^ ^^^^:*^<*^^t^^' 


legate who had been despatched to Lothaire. The 
pilgrims who resorted to Rome had also good reason 
for dreading Italian roads/ for a certain Gratiano,^ 
a seeker after political power, ranged himself against 
them, and became distinguished for his outrages. 
All these personages appear to have been papal 
officials, more or less encouraged by the imperial 
government to ignore the authority of their 

Having made his complaint Louis set off to 
Ravenna^ with the intention of assisting his ill- 
treated subjects. George, Peter, and Hadrian were 
taken to Rome, and, in accordance with the Roman 
law, tried before the imperial missi. They were 
condemned to death, but the execution was de- 
ferred on account of the Easter festival (853), and 
this gave Lothaire time to intervene. He com- 
plained that, by coming so far, the Pope had 
defied the Constitution of 824. There was also 
question of one Christopher, of whom very little 
is known. The Pope, while protesting on behalf 
of his right, and of the Roman law, demanded 
that an enquiry should be made into his conduct, 
stipulating that it should be entrusted to envoys 
of honourable character.* 

Our sole information on this subject is gained 
from fragments of letters, which were preserved from 
the disaster which destroyed the papal registers. 
The Liber Pontificalis relates the following story 
with more details. 

A magister militum named Gratiano (perhaps the 

1 Cf. the capitulary of Louis II., M. G. Leg., i. p. 405 ; Capit., 
t. ii. pp. 84, 86; Migne, L. P., t. cxxxviii. p. 572. 

2 J., 2620. 3 j.^ 2627, 2628. 
4 J., 2638, 2639, 2643, 2646. 


same as the afore-mentioned), and at that time (855) 
governor of the papal palace, was accused of taking 
part in secret intrigues in favour of a Byzantine 
restoration. "The Franks," he said, "are not only 
of no use to us, but they actually entertain base 
designs upon our property. Why not call upon the 
Greeks to help us to expel them and their king from 
our midst ? " These revolutionary sentiments v^ere 
reported to the emperor, Louis II., by Daniel, 
another magister milituvi. They w^ere the more 
alarming, as Louis was at that time on bad terms 
with the eastern court,^ for, after having sought the 
hand of the daughter of the emperor, Michael III., 
he had altered his mind, and married the celebrated 
Engelberga instead. Suddenly, without any warning, 
Louis, full of rage, arrived at Rome. The Pope 
received him at St. Peter's, and they arranged to 
have a formal enquiry made concerning Daniel's 
representations. The affair was conducted in ac- 
cordance with the Roman law, and Daniel was con- 
victed of false testimony, and delivered up to his 
antagonist. But the emperor pleaded for him suc- 
cessfully, and even received him back into favour. 

Whatever may have been the truth of this 
matter, the effect produced by it leads us to sup- 
pose that Rome, at that time, was the centre, if not 
of an organised Byzantine party, at least of a certain 
element inimical to the Frankish protectorate, which 
might have been turned to profit, had the occasion 
offered, by the Greek empire. Just then the power 
of the latter in Italy was at a low ebb. The Sicilians 
and the Calabrians were having a hard struggle 
against the Saracens, as were also the practically 
autonomous cities of Gaeta, Naples, and Amalfi. 

1 Prud. Ann., 853. 


Louis II. had twice descended upon the Beneventine 
territory (847 and 852), and although, in his last 
campaign, he had not succeeded in capturing Bari, 
which was a stronghold of the infidels, he had never- 
theless obtained considerable success. He might, 
indeed, be regarded as the defender of Christendom, 
and the virtual master of Italy. Under these cir- 
cumstances it was futile to think of a Byzantine 

As may be readily supposed, having been so often 
at variance with the Frankish emperors, Leo IV. 
was not entirely a man after their own hearts. They 
could forgive the informalities connected with his 
accession, but they would have preferred a Pope 
more intent on carrying out the constitution of 824, 
and more faithful to his role of sovereign protege. 
Louis II. early began making plans for the election 
of Leo's successor. 

According to the constitution of 824, there were 
to be two misd charged with the affairs of the pro- 
tectorate, kept in permanent residence at Rome. 
One was appointed by the Pope, the other by the 
emperor. Louis II.'s first choice fell upon the 
deacon John, afterwards Bishop of Rieti ; moreover, 
he selected for papal promotion one of his most 
devoted adherents, Arsenius, Bishop of Orta. This 
dignitary was a member of one of the most import- 
ant families of Rome, and from the time of Leo IV. 
his influence had been predominant. As he was 
already possessed of a bishopric, there could be no 
question of making a Pope of him, but he had two 
sons, Anastasius and Eleutherius, who were quite 
worth considering. The latter enjoyed the pleasures 
of a lay life, but Anastasius was destined for the 
priesthood, and had received an excellent education. 


Not only was his knowledge of Latin and ecclesi- 
astical literature far in advance of his time, but he 
also boasted an acquaintance with the Greek lan- 
guage, probably acquired at the school of one of those 
Greek monks, who owned numerous and flourishing 
convents at Rome. His ecclesiastical career was 
sufficiently advanced at the beginning of Leo's pon- 
tificate, for the latter, in comphance, probably, with 
weighty recommendations, decided to ordain him 
priest, and entrust him with the monastery of St. 
Marcellus (848).^ 

As cardinal, Anastasius was eligible for the papacy, 
so why he did not await the ordinary course of events 
is not clear. But whatever may have been the 
reason, he vanished from Rome almost immediately 
after his ordination, and took refuge in Louis' do- 
mains, spending most of his time in Aquileia. This 
conduct excited the most lively suspicions, and Pope 
Leo did his utmost to prevail upon him to return. 
Embassies, summonses, councils, ecclesiastical sen- 
tences of excommunication, anathema, and depo- 
sition, all were, in vain, directed against the deserter. 
Louis II., on being appealed to, promised to deliver 
him up, but never succeeded in finding him. Leo, 
in exasperation, determined to invest his sentences 
with a remarkable and pompous publicity. Over the 
principal entrance to St. Peter's he erected a huge 
image of Christ and the Virgin, encircled by a series 
of inscriptions, reproducing the sentences successively 
pronounced against Anastasius, at Rome, 16th De- 
cember 850 ; at Ravenna, 29th May 853 ; and again 
at Rome, 8th December, of the same year. These 
sentences — as one of them expressly notes — resulted 

1 For information regarding Anastasius the librarian, see A. 
Lapotre, De Anastasio bibliothecario (now out of print). Paris, 1885. 


from the defection of the culprit, but it is obvious 
that Leo regarded Anastasius as a successor to be 
avoided at any cost.^ 

Both Anastasius and his father Arsenius had 
always maintained a warm friendship with Louis II., 
and were his chief political agents at Rome. Al- 
though they cannot be regarded as altogether desir- 
able persons, they seem to have atoned to a certain 
extent for their lack of virtue by a kind of methodi- 
cal reliability, often to be found in ambitious persons 
who are willing to restrain their natural tendencies, 
when, by so doing, they can further their own ends. 
If Leo IV. could find another pretext for condemn- 
ing Anastasius, he was not anxious to quote against 
him the third canon of the Council of Antioch, in 
reference to clerks who deserted. 

Moreover, Anastasius was not a man to make 
light of the pontifical rights, at least as far as 
spiritual affairs were concerned. From the letters of 
Nicholas I., which he edited later, with a considerable 
amount of licence, we gather that he had a high idea 
of the papacy, its relations to the rulers and its 
authority over the episcopate, even when the latter 
might be represented by a Photius or a Hincmar. 

IjCo IV.'s objection to him is, therefore, some- 
what difficult to understand. One can only con- 
jecture that he regarded the accession of Anastasius 
as the culminating political triumph of Louis II. — 
the absorption of the Roman state into the kingdom 
of Italy. It was possible, too, that once having 
attained the papal throne, Anastasius might change 

^ Sit illi . . . anathema et ornnes qui ei in electione, quod ahsit, ad 
pontificatus honor em adjutorium prcestare . . . voluerint, simili anathe- 
mate subjaceant. Leo, perhaps, was afraid that the emperor did not 
mean to await his death before encouraging Anastasius as his rival. 
This, however, is not at all probable. 


his attitude, ** scorning the base degrees by which he 
did ascend." These revulsions are not uncommon 
accompaniments of satisfied ambition. 

However this may be, Leo's death, on 17th July 
855, afforded the priest an opportunity of showing 
what weight he attached to the judgment passed 
against him. 

Louis had made an arrangement with the em- 
perors that the election of his successors should be 
juste et canonice. The Life of Benedict III. in the 
Liber Pontificalis is our only source of information on 
the subject. The election, it seems, was held im- 
mediately after the Pope's death. Two factions were 
present, the imperial party and the adherents of the 
deceased Pope, who were opposed to the aggrava- 
tions of the protectorate. Anastasius was nominated 
by the imperial party, though, according to the 
Liber Pontificalis, he kept entirely in the back- 
ground. The most popular candidate was Benedict, 
Cardinal of St. Cecilia, but the Romans, having 
elected him, postponed the coronation ceremony 
until, in accordance with the ancient custom {co7i- 
suetudo prisca ut poscit), they had sent his decree of 
election, invested with much solemnity, to the em- 
perors. The deputies, Nicholas, Bishop of Anagni, 
and Mercurius, the magister militum, encountered 
Arsenius at Gubbio on their way. Strange to say, 
he had been absent from Rome at the time of the 
election, and he now took the opportunity to try 
to prejudice these dignitaries in favour of his son. 

The decree of election was not approved by the 
Emperor Louis, who, by means of letters and 
envoys, made known his intention of sending special 
missi to Rome. They were Adalbert, Count of 
Tuscany, and another, named Bernard. At Orta 


Anastasius joined them, and together they continued 
their way. As they approached the city, the leaders 
of the imperial party, among them Radoald, Bishop 
of Porto, and Agatho, Bishop of Todi, hastened to 
meet them. At St. Lucius,^ some distance beyond 
the Milvian bridge, they encountered some ambas- 
sadors from Benedict. These they caused to be 
arrested and ill-treated. A large number of Romans, 
who had been summoned to hear the emperor's 
decision, were beguiled into the opposite faction, 
and it was at the head of a goodly procession that 
Anastasius made his way towards the basilica of 
St. Peter. 

Arrived there, his first proceeding was to seize a 
hatchet and hurl it against the eikon erected by 
Leo IV. as a protest against his usurpation. He 
then made his entry into Rome, and was escorted 
to the Lateran, where he lost no time in securing 
the person of Benedict. This was his day of triumph. 
The next day things did not go so smoothly. A 
large assembly, presided over by the Bishops of Ostia 
and Albano, met in the Basilica Emiliana (SS. 
Quattro), and the imperial missi presented themselves 
before the Roman clergy with the object of bringing 
them to terms. Both threats and cajolery were em- 
ployed, but the clerks held out, entrenching them- 
selves behind the ecclesiastical law, which forbade the 
promotion of deposed clerks. The missi were obliged 
to yield, and, in order to cover their retreat, agreed 
to a fresh election. Benedict was set at liberty; 
Anastasius departed from the pontifical palace ; and 
a three days' fast was proclaimed. As soon as this 
was over, an electoral assembly met at Sta. Maria 
Maggiore, and, with the full approbation of the 

1 At present Tor di Quinto. 


-^ imperial envoys, proclaimed Benedict Pope. Thus 
re-elected, he was once more installed at the Lateran, 
and on the following Sunday was consecrated at St. 
Peter's, always with the approval of the missi. These 
latter seem to have been quite satisfied that the 
candidate of the Romans would answer the emperor's 
purpose just as well as his own protege, Anastasius, 
would have done. 

Bishop Radoald of Porto was not allowed to take 
his customary part in the consecration ceremony. 
As for Anastasius himself, the Liber Pontijicalis does 
not say what became of him; but from Hincmar, 
who was not well-disposed towards him, and was 
always careful to record anything to his disadvantage, 
we learn that he was brought before Benedict in 
the synod and degraded by laicisation. It was un- 
doubtedly at this juncture that he was provided with 
the Abbey of St. Mary in Trastevere.^ 

In 855 Louis II. 's policy had received a temporary 
check. Not content with the possession of the two 
missi of the Vatican, the papal missus et apocrisiarius, 

J he maintained the right of superintending the actual 
choice of the Pope, and disclaimed any other foreign 
interference in the Italian policy of the Holy See. 
Anastasius, an excellent candidate as far as his 
personal qualifications went, was, as regards his 
antecedents, absolutely unsuitable. It is difficult, 
indeed, to understand how such a man could have 
presented himself in that capacity. But, whatever 

1 It is hardly necessary to remark that abbots, in those days, 
were not necessarily, or even usually, priests. The position of the 
Abbot of Santa Maria, i.e. the head of the community of monks 
who chanted the services in the basiUca, must not be confounded 
with that of the titulary cardinal. As a deposed priest, regarded 
as a simple believer, Anastasius was excluded from the clergy, but 
he might then take the position of either monk or abbot. 


may be the solution of this obscure point, it is 
probable that from the emperor's point of view the 
appointment of Anastasius was of less importance 
than the triumph of the principles of which he was 
the representative. Being unable to place him in 
the pontifical chair, and foreseeing that his future 
applications for candid ateship would not be more, 
successful than that of 855, Louis made up his 
mind to let him share his father s role of confidential 
adviser and guardian to the Pope. But for this 
end it was absolutely necessary that he should live 
a life of celibacy. Anastasius, therefore, for three 
years retired into private life, devoting himself to 
religious exercises and literary pursuits. As for 
Benedict III., Arsenius, who still kept his office of 
missus, was there to keep an eye upon him. 

The death of Lothaire was almost coincident 
with the accession of Benedict III. It caused but 
little change in Italian affairs, which for several 
years had been under the sole superintendence of 
Louis II. 

In 858 Louis had come to Rome for the Easter 
celebrations; he had already begun his return 
journey, when he was greeted by the news of Pope 
Benedict's demise (17th April). He immediately 
went back to Rome, and by his influence decided 
the election of the deacon Nicholas. The clergy 
were in favour of another candidate, but as the 
emperor's choice had fallen on a man of worth, the 
election was confirmed without more ado. Louis 
took part in the coronation which was held on 
24th April. From the papal biographer we get a 
lengthy account of the festivities, which appear to 
have been accompanied by many compliments and 
protestations of loyalty. 


Nicholas just suited Louis 11.^ He understood 
how to combine a nice respect for papal conventions, 
with an exalted idea of his duties as Pope and an 
intense enthusiasm for fulfilling them. As we shall 
shortly see, his occupation of the pontifical chair 
Larked a season of greater activity than had been 

:nown since the days of Gregory the Great. Unlike 
rregory IV., of whom he was the precursor, he 

iontrived to live on friendly terms with his emperor. 

it is true that the latter had surrounded him with a 
jivell-selected circle of confidential advisers better 
Qualified, perhaps, to help him in his political career, 
/than to be the familiar friends of so upright a man. 
Besides Arsenius, who continued his functions as 
missus, and was occasionally charged with important 
errands, we may mention his son Anastasius, the 
intruder of 855. This latter, it is true, was not 
reinstated in his priestly functions, but he was 
established at the Lateran as the Pope's secretary. 
Then there was Radoald, Bishop of Porto, one of 
the ringleaders of the Anastasius conspiracy, now 
the one of Nicholas's confidential advisers whom he 
most readily despatched on the pontifical business. 
Certainly the Pope had, later on, to rue the day 
when he took Radoald into favour, and, after having 
experienced his treachery several times, he was obliged 
to expel him from the episcopate. But this was only 
a last resource, after having borne with his faithless 
ways for many a long day. Arsenius did nothing 
worse than rob the Pope, and they seem to have 
lived together for a long time on friendly terms. 
As far as Anastasius was concerned, no cloud seems 
ever to have darkened their relations, although it is 

1 Nicolaus prcesentia magis ac favore Hludowici regis et procerum 
ejus quam cleri electione suhstituitur, Ann. Prud. 


beyond a doubt that the secretary, on more than one 
occasion, betrayed his master's confidence, and, in the 
most important documents, attributed to him senti- 
ments more in harmony with his own personal 
passions and prejudices than with the desires and 
tendencies of the pontiff himself. Fortunately for 
the latter, he was not only a man of letters, but a 
government official imbued with lofty conceptions of 
the papal authority. 

From the standpoint of local politics, the papacy 
had become very dependent on the empire. Louis II. 
held firmly to the constitution of 824, and taxed his 
people as well. After the death of Nicholas in 867, 
Hadrian, who seems to have been elected by an 
unanimous vote, did not receive consecration until 
the emperor had investigated the documents and 
circumstances of the election, and accorded his 
sanction. The fact that John VIII. succeeded to 
the papacy on the very day of Hadrian's death, 14th 
December 872, leads us to suppose that the emperor 
must have been in Rome at the time, for it is far 
from probable that any violation of the rule which 
required the imperial sanction of the papal election 
could have occurred. Moreover, we know that 
John VII I. was a personal friend of Louis 11. , and 
as long as the latter lived, his favourite continued to 
fill the most exalted positions in the Holy See. 

This system was continued until Louis' death 
in 875, when, as he left no children, the empire 
ceased to be Italian, and the papal situation was 
changed. It had lasted for twenty years (855-875), 
since the time when Leo IV., somewhat displeased 
at the secular guardianship, had yielded the position 
to the official candidates. 

It must not be supposed that this imperialist 


papacy was lacking in prestige. Nicholas I., the 
typical representative of the system, was undoubtedly 
one of the most influential Popes ever known in the 
history of the Church. 

Still, there was always reason to fear that the 
secular guardian might some day intrude upon the 
spiritual domain. This actually came to pass in 864. 
At the beginning of this year, the Emperor Louis 
appeared before Rome with hostile and not friendly 
intent. His object was to take the part of various 
priests who were under ecclesiastical censure. One 
of these was John, Archbishop of Ravenna, who, in 
conjunction with his brother Gregory, continued to 
oppress the Pope's subjects in Emilia. These, and 
other misdeeds of an ecclesiastical nature, had drawn 
down upon him the papal displeasure. He was 
summoned to appear before a Roman synod, but 
refused to obey, with the intention of appealing to 
Louis II. for support. But Nicholas was not to be 
foiled. In a synod held in 860 or 861, he issued a 
sentence of suspension and excommunication against 
the archbishop, proclaimed anew several points of 
dogma, on which he (the archbishop) was accused 
of holding heterodox views, and, finally, without 
regard to the emperor's feelings, renewed the decree 
of the Council of 769, which forbade the intervention 
of any foreigner in the papal elections. As we have 
seen, Nicholas himself had benefited by a certain 
infringement of this law. He probably had reason 
to fear that Louis II. wished to transform the fact 
into a right, and to claim the power of electing, as 
well as confirming, the choice of the Pope. When 
he died, the imperial missi demanded a place among 
the electors, having evidently received instructions 
so to do. The Romans succeeded in eluding their 


claim, but the very fact of the questions having been 
raised, was enough to justify the fears of Pope 
Nicholas, and his demonstration of 861. 

This demonstration was, as I have said, of a 
nature to cause ill-feeling between the Pope and the 
emperor. The Archbishop John, recognising this, 
immediately betook himself to Pavia, hoping to 
profit by the prince's annoyance. Louis indeed sent 
two missi back with him to Rome, but Nicholas 
was not to be alarmed. Entirely in his religious 
capacity, he rebuked the legates for consorting with 
one who had been excommunicated. He spoke 
kindly, but the missi were terrified. The arch- 
bishop was again summoned to appear before a 
council, convened for 1st November 861, and he 
afterwards returned to Ravenna. Nicholas there- 
upon, in response to the invitation of a large 
number of the people of Emilia and Ravenna, who 
were antagonistic to the archbishop and his brother, 
followed him immediately. On hearing of his ar- 
rival, John fled to Pavia, and while he was again 
soliciting the emperor's intervention, the Pope, in 
his capacity as sovereign, reorganised the Ravennese 
government, and made the necessary changes in the 
ministry. So strongly was he supported by public 
opinion that the emperor's hopes of defending the 
archbishop were soon damped. Invited to make the 
best terms he could with the Pope, the primate of 
Ravenna appeared before the Roman council in the 
month of November. He vindicated himself from 
the imputation of heterodoxy, and otherwise com- 
plied with the papal exactions. 

But a forced submission is not, as a rule, a 
satisfactory one. The archbishop, on his return 
home, lay low for a time, but his disposition had 


not changed, and it was evident that he meant to 
signaHse the increasing animosity between the Pope 
and Louis by another outburst of insubordination. 

An opportunity soon presented itself, in con- 
nection with the unfortunate divorce proceedings of 
Lothaire II. The divorce had been pronounced by 
the episcopate of Lorraine, in two or three synods, 
and afterwards sanctioned by the papal legates 
at the Council of Metz (June 863). In October 
of the same year, however, it was annulled by Pope 
Nicholas, who maintained that the discarded wife 
was so evidently in the right, that the divorce could 
not, in honesty, be confirmed. He therefore de- 
posed the leaders of the Lorraine clergy, Theutgaud 
and Gunther, and the Archbishops of Treves and 
Cologne, and awaited his leisure to deal with his 
own legates. 

This unexpected act caused a great sensation in 
the episcopacy. But the right, already expounded 
in the writings of Hincmar, was not to be denied. 
The prevaricators did not arouse much interest, and 
then finally compromised themselves by entering 
into alliance with the suspended Bishop of Ravenna, 
and Photius, the usurping patriarch of Constanti- 
nople. Not content with this, they sought out 
the Emperor Louis in the duchy of Beneventum, 
and excited his wrath against the Pope, with whom 
his relations had been somewhat strained ever since 
the Ravenna affairs. Gathering around him all 
the discontented bishops of Italy, they escorted 
him to the walls of Rome. The gates of the Leonine 
city, which were still fresh with inscriptions bearing 
the name of Lothaire, did not refuse to allow the 
entry of the emperor and his son. 

At Rome there were not lacking people ready 


to uphold the emperor s plans and to take part in 
an assault on the Pope's person. But Nicholas was 
impervious to fear. Against his temporal enemies 
he fought with spiritual weapons, especially prayer. 
Fasts and litanies were organised, in order to invoke 
the aid of heaven and to subdue the imperial anger. 
One day, as a large procession was making its way 
through the Leonine city to St. Peter's, it was 
attacked and dispersed by Louis' followers, who 
ill-treated the pilgrims, and trampled under foot 
the sacred banners. After these outrages there was 
indeed cause for alarm. One night the Pope emerged 
from the Lateran, and evading the sentinelled gates, 
reached the banks of the Tiber. A boat took him 
across secretly and he succeeded in gaining an en- 
trance to the basilica, where he remained for two 
days fasting and communing with the Unseen. 

His prayers were heard. Already one of the 
soldiers who had thrown the processional cross into 
the mud had been suddenly struck down by the 
hand of death ; and the emperor himself was 
attacked by fever. The Pope, in abandonment of 
soul, continued to pray, and only rose from his 
knees at the urgent entreaties of the Empress 
Engelberga, who begged him to accompany her to 
the bedside of her imperial husband. She was a 
proud woman, but the experiences of recent days 
had given her cause for reflection, and the inter- 
view which she had arranged between Nicholas and 
Louis ended favourably. The emperor agreed to 
abandon his proteges, and to leave the Pope full 
liberty in the ecclesiastical domain. In short, 
, the latter returned to Rome with his position 
strengthened, and Louis, on his recovery, regained 
the north of Italy. 


Henceforward the two powers continued on more 
or less amicable terms. At the council of 1st 
November Radoald, Bishop of Porto, received his 
well-merited sentence of deposition from the Pope. 
Up to that time, through fear of the emperor, every 
excuse had been made for him, in spite of the fact 
that his guilt, in the affair of Photius, could not 
possibly be denied. 

Old Arsenius was of opinion that the Pope took 
too much upon himself. Notwithstanding the favour 
which his son Anastasius continued to enjoy at the 
Lateran, and the profitable missions on which he 
himself was constantly being despatched, fearing, 
perhaps, that he might sooner or later be called 
upon to give an account of his proceedings, he 
found himself, towards the end of the reign, some- 
what in disfavour with Nicholas. 

Hadrian II., in celebration of his accession, dis- 
pensed marks of favour to various compromised 
persons, in particular to Anastasius and Theutgaud. 
The former was even promoted to the position of 
librarian of the Holy See. In the early days of the 
new pontificate there was some difference of opinion 
between his father and himself. Arsenius encouraged 
the reaction against Nicholas, and even the rescinding 
of certain acts to which the Emperor Louis had taken 
exception. Summoning the Archbishops Gunther 
and Theutgaud to Rome, he made them promises 
of reinstatement, which, at first delayed, ended by 
coming to nothing. Anastasius opposed his father's 
opinions. In the preceding pontificate he had been 
the advocate of strict measures, and he now saw no 
reason why they should be abated. Unlike Arsenius, 
who was a devout imperialist, he had a natural inclina- 
tion towards the papacy, and if Louis II. had sue- 


ceeded in making a Pope of him, the emperor would 
undoubtedly have met his match. He probably found 
occasion more than once to thank the fates for having 
crushed this project. In the disagreement with his 
father, Anastasius ended by getting the upper hand, 
and the family reputation does not appear to have 
suffered by their difference. Arsenius retained his 
post as missus et apocrisiarius, i.e. the Pope's secular 
guardian, and Anastasius continued to keep a high- 
handed supervision over the secretaryship and the 
affairs of the spiritual administration. 

At this period nepotism was beginning to be in 
evidence, and alliances with the papal family were 
eagerly sought. Anastasius desired promotion for 
his brother Eleutherius, who had aims of another 
kind. The nieces of Benedict III. and Nicholas I. 
had contracted marriages with members of the lay 
nobility. These unions, conspicuous for a lack 
of sentiment, were the stepping-stones to worldly 
advancement, though the wives were far from en- 
joying unalloyed marital bliss. Before entering into 
major orders, Hadrian II. had married, and his wife 
and daughter were still living. The latter, consider- 
ing the age and position of her father, could not have 
been in the freshness of youth, but, in virtue of her 
parentage, she was looked upon as a desirable match. 
When Eleutherius appeared as her wooer, Hadrian 
had already promised her to another. Arsenius, 
like a prudent father, always did his utmost for 
the advancement of his children, realising, too, that 
the desired marriage would have a decidedly beneficial 
effect upon his own position. 

Hadrian, faithful to his promise, refused his con- 
sent. Eleutherius, nothing daunted, succeeded in 
circumventing the object of his desire, carrying her 


and her mother away by force. The scandal that 
resulted may more easily be imagined than described ! 
But this was not yet the worst. Hadrian, sorely 
wounded, applied to the emperor for help in re- 
covering his wife and daughter, and in avenging 
their insulting treatment. Arsenius departed with 
all speed to the south of Italy, where the court was 
at that time established. He took care to provide 
himself with plenty of money, well realising the value 
of bribery in his present situation. No sooner, how- 
ever, had he joined the princes at Acerenza than he 
was overtaken by serious illness. He had just time 
enough to confide his wishes and his treasure to the 
empress, and then died, before he could receive the 
last sacraments, thus giving rise to a report ithat 
the devil had taken possession of his soul. His 
servants undertook to convey his body to Rome or 
to Orta, but on their arrival in the neighbourhood 
of Monte Cassino the rapid putrefaction of the corpse 
obliged them to resort to a hasty burial in a neigh- 
bouring field. ^ 

But this was not the last of the tragedies. The 
Emperor Louis had sent his 7nissi in pursuit of 
Eleutherius, and the latter, hard pressed, and in a 
dog-in-the-manger spirit, did not hesitate to assassi- 
nate the daughter, and even the wife of the Pope. 
Public opinion, reinforced by competent testimony, 
declared Anastasius to be the instigator of this double 
crime. Hadrian, infuriated, had him brought before 
an assembly of the Roman clergy at St. Praxedes, 
and renewed against him all the ecclesiastical cen- 
sures which he had incurred under Leo IV. and 
Benedict III., forbidding him to go beyond a radius 
of forty miles from Rome. As for Eleutherius, he 

^ See Hincmarj Ann.j 868; and Bihlioteca Casinensis, t. iii. p. 139. 


was arrested and executed by order of the imperial 

Hadrian's anger endured but for a season. It 
was on 4th October 868 that he had fulminated his 
condemnation of Anastasius, and before the end of 
869 the latter was reinstated in his position of secre- 
tary and pontifical librarian. This leads us to sup- 
pose that he had proved himself innocent of any part 
in his brother's crime. 

In the winter of 869-870, he set out, in company 
with two imperial dignitaries, for Constantinople, 
charged to negotiate an alliance between the daughter 
of Louis II. and a son of the Greek monarch, Basil 
the Macedonian. He arrived in time to be present 
at the last sitting of the eighth ecumenical council, 
and to witness the defeat of Photius, one of his most 
bitter adversaries. It is, indeed, thanks to him, that 
the Holy See was informed of the enactments of the 
council, for the copy confided to the papal legates 
was stolen from them on the way, and Photius 
contrived, later, to have the others burned. But 
Anastasius had taken the precaution of having one 
specially prepared for his own benefit, and he took 
good care not to let it be stolen. Not only did he 
bring it in safety to Rome, but he had it translated 
into Latin, in which form this important document 
is still preserved to us. 

These disturbances did not greatly affect the pon- 
tifical organisation, and had practically no influence 
on the personnel of the administration. Arsenius 
was replaced by the nomenclator George, a man as 
rapacious as his predecessor. 

The alliance between the empire and the papacy 
was distinguished by a touching episode. After 
many struggles, Louis II. had succeeded in taking 


possession of Bari, thus destroying the chief resort of 
the Mahometans in Southern Italy (2nd February 
871). He was staying at Beneventum after his 
campaign, when he was betrayed and taken prisoner 
by the Duke Adelgis, who, after having robbed him, 
only released him on condition that he swore not to 
avenge himself. After thirty-five days of captivity, 
the unfortunate emperor was set free, and he returned 
to Ravenna by way of Spoleto, sadly humihated by 
this attack on the representative of the imperial 
majesty. The following year he went to Rome, 
about the time of the Whitsuntide celebrations. 
Pope Hadrian welcomed him sympathetically, and, 
in order to reinvest him, to some extent, with his 
former dignity, he crowned him anew, and escorted 
him with great pomp from St. Peter's to the Lateran. 
The oath which the duke had extorted from him was 
solemnly pronounced invalid, and Louis thereupon 
resumed his campaigns against the Mahometans, in 
the direction of Capua and Salerno. 

He died on 12th April 875, near Brescia, and was 
buried at Milan, in the basilica of St. Ambrose, where 
his tomb is still preserved. 



The Pope and the Carlovingian family — Candidature of Charles the 
Bald — His Imperial Coronation (875) — John VIII. and the Saracens 
— The Formosians — Death of Charles the Bald — John VHI. and the 
Dukes of Spoleto — Council of Troyes — Destruction of the Carlo- 
vingian family — Charles the Fat, Emperor — Marino — Hadrian III. 
— Deposition and death of Charles the Fat.^ 

One characteristic of the alKance between the Carlo- 
vingian princes and the Pope was, that the latter 
was regarded by them as a kind of venerable parent, 
whose right, or even obligation, it was to take an 
interest in their concerns, and to act as their pro- 
tector in case of need. As regards external political 
questions this was quite natural. The papacy was 
no longer Byzantine, but Frankish, and the bare 
idea of a political understanding between the Pope 
and the Greek empire would have been considered a 
profanity. Neither could the Frankish empire enter- 
tain any thought of allowing the Greeks to resume 
the least power at Rome over the Pope. But even 
in the internal affairs of the Franks the Pope had 
a share. He did his best to reconcile wrangling 
princes,^ and sometimes, an even more delicate 

1 For information on John VIII. and his time, see A. Lapotre, 
U Europe et le Saint-Siege a Vepoque carolingienne, 1st part ; Le Pape 
Jean VIII. Paris, 1895. 

2 Stephen III. was interested in the reconciliation of Charle- 
magne to Carloman (J., 2380). 



matter, he interfered in their matrimonial affairs ; ^ 
then, too, his warranty was sometimes required for 
solemn acts, such as the division of the empire 
arranged by Charlemagne in 806,^ and he was often 
called upon to consecrate the princes, not only as 
emperors, but as kings. 

When the unity of the Frankish empire had been 
destroyed, these relations became still more delicate. 
It was not the papacy which was to blame for this 
dislocation. The fatal plan of division, which Charle- 
magne himself had sanctioned, was too strong for 
the Pope's influence to prevent its being carried out. 
Once there was, among several sovereigns, a Frankish 
emperor, resident in Italy ; the Pope was obliged to 
live on very intimate terms with him, not only 
because he was the emperor, but also on account of 
his neighbourly and protective attitude towards the 
Romans. Hence there was always a tendency to 
favour the particular political opinions of this prince. 
Gregory IV. followed Lothaire into Alsace, and sup- 
ported him against his father. When Lothaire died in 
855, Benedict III. interfered to prevent his sons from 
disputing the paternal heritage, and he even took to 
himself the credit of having brought about the peace 
which followed.^ A little later, in 857, he engaged 
in a vigorous attack against one of the foes of this 
peace, Hubert, the intruded Abbot of St. Maurice, 
who led a jovial life in this and various other holy 
places. Besides owning a principality between the 
Alps and the Juras, he was master of the passages 

1 Stephen II. prevented Pepin from sending away Bertrade 
and marrying his daughter Giseta to Leo. IV., son of Constantine 
Copronymus ; Stephen III. objected to the marriage of Charlemagne 
and Desideria. 

2 Annals of Eginhard, 806. Cf. J., 3000. 
8 Pacem quam munivimus (J., 2669). 


between Italy and the domain of Lothaire 11.^ The 
Emperor Louis II. cast a longing eye on these 
districts, and succeeded (859) in making Lothaire 
surrender them, and even, a few years later (864), in 
getting rid of Hubert. On the death of Charles of 
Provence in 863, his kingdom was divided between 
his two brothers, Lothaire II. and Louis II., and 
Pope Nicholas wrote to Charles the Bald, to Louis 
the German, and to their respective episcopates to 
pledge them not to offer any opposition to this 
division.^ When Lothaire II. went to Italy (869) 
in order to make his peace with the Pope, Hadrian II. 
charged these same two kings to refrain from any 
attack on the penitent's states.^ His wish was com- 
plied with, but as Lothaire did not live long after his 
return home, his uncles, Charles the Bald first, and 
then Louis the German, seized upon his estates. 
The Pope strongly remonstrated, by means of letters 
and legates,* for he rightly considered their behaviour 
as an attack upon the imperial authority. His 
efforts, however, were fruitless. The two uncles 
took possession of the coveted lands, and Louis II. 
was again reduced to Provence and Italy. The 
treaty of Mersen (870) bestowed the greater part on 
Louis the German, who was from that time in rather 
bad odour at Home. Charles the Bald, too, was 
unpopular, for though he had inherited less than 
Louis, it was he who had instigated the plan of 
robbing the emperor. In 871 Carloman, one of the 
two sons whom he had destined for a religious life, 
having broken his vows and taken up arms against 
his father, Hadrian supported him with energy. The 

^ J., 2669 (badly arranged summary). 

2 J., 2773-5. 3 j,^ 2895-6. 

4 J., 2917-23, 2926-32. 


letters^ which Charles received from the Pope on 
this subject were written in so bitter and insulting a 
style that he protested. Suspecting that the pontiff 
was not entirely responsible for the expression of 
these sentiments, Charles investigated the matter. 
His ambassador, Bishop Actard, succeeded in obtain- 
ing a private interview with Hadrian, and returned 
with a letter in which the papal opinions were can- 
didly set forth, uncontrolled by the supervision of 
Anastasius, who acted as the imperial representative.'^ 
The old Pope expressed, in this confidential 
epistle, not only his opinions with regard to his 
family, but also his views as to the future. 
Hitherto the papacy had been obliged to yield 
to circumstances, and to accept a close alliance 
with the Italian monarch, not untinged with sub- 
ordination. But this could not be permanent. 
While Charles the Bald was so abundantly supplied 
with male progeny that he was obliged to devote 
some of them to the priesthood, Louis II., on the 
other hand, had no son at all. His death would 
involve the succession, not of a prince, but of a 
system of government. One of the three branches of 
Charlemagne's lineage was arrested in its growth, and 
it remained to be seen which of the two survivors 
would be asked to act as protector of the Holy See, 
and which would receive the imperial title. Charles 
the Bald and Louis the German, the two heads 
of the French and German branches respectively, 
seem to have been on much the same level. Louis, 
it was true, was the elder, as well as the son of his 
father's first marriage, but these considerations were 
not likely to have much weight with the Romans, 
whether they looked upon the empire as the pro- 

1 J., 2940-2, 2946. 2 j,^ 2951. 


tector of their various interests, or as a magistrature 
emanating from themselves. Each of these princes 
was the possessor of several sons, who had all dis- 
tinguished themselves by insubordinate behaviour to 
their father. The kingdom of Charles was more 
civilised, though weaker, than that of Louis, and 
in facilitating its succession to the Italian crown it 
would be considerably strengthened. Affairs were 
thus tolerably well balanced, and it was probable 
that the scale would be turned by considerations of 
sentiment or personal convenience. 

The Romans are lovers of antiquity. Germany, 
at that time, was brand new, hardly free indeed 
from barbarism and paganism, while Roman Gaul 
was the home of the best survivals of the ancient 
Latin civilisation. An Italian or a Roman felt quite 
at his ease at Aries, Vienne, or Lyons, and even 
towns such as Rheims, Sens, St. Denis, and Tours 
were not altogether foreign to him. He was familiar 
with their names and traditions in his own language. 
But Ratisbon, Frankfort, Paderborn, Halberstadt — 
all these were in another world, and he was inclined 
to think it wiser to exhaust the resources of the 
ancient world before compromising himself in 
unknown parts. 

Charles, moreover, was a prince of piety, intelli- 
gence, and learning. His abilities are now cast up 
against him, but to the Romans they were an 
additional recommendation. It is probable, too, 
that there has been a considerable amount of 
romancing as to his actual valour. In the eyes of 
German savants his was the unpardonable iniquity 
of being the first king of France, and according to 
the chroniclers of Fulda, to whom we generously 
sacrifice the witness of Prudence and Hincmar, he 


was too much addicted to opposing the ambitions 
of Louis the German. The Romans were of a 
different opinion. We must make allowance for the 
prejudiced views set forth in the papal correspondence 
as long as it was controlled by Anastasius and, to a 
certain extent, by Louis II. From more reliable 
sources of information it is evident that, on several 
occasions, Charles lent his support to the Holy See 
in maintaining a salutary attitude with reference to 
the clergy of his kingdom. There can be no doubt, 
either, that the Holy See had designed him for the 
imperial crown directly there was any question of 
Louis II.'s succession. This was in the time of 
Hadrian II. 

Nevertheless, as long as Louis II. remained in 
the land of the living, these preferences could only 
be expressed with great caution and in purely con- 
fidential documents. Outwardly, the papal policy 
outside Italy remained in harmony with that of 
Louis II. On two occasions at least ^ John VIII. 
protested against the usurpations sanctioned by the 
treaty of Mersen. 

On 12th August 875 the settlement of the 
succession began. Largely attended councils were 
held at Pavia and at Rome. Charles the Bald set 
great store by his friends at Pavia, but he had an 
important opponent in the person of the Empress 
Engelberga, who had long ago set her desires on 
Carloman, eldest son of Louis the German, and 
already king of Bavaria. The assembly became 
divided into the opposite factions, with the result 
that two embassies were sent from it, one to Carlo- 
man, and the other to Charles the Bald. At Rome 
there was no opposition ; the nobility and the clergy 

1 J., 2961, 3000. 


with one voice acclaimed the king of Western 
France. Three bishops, Gaudry of Velletri, For- 
mosus of Porto, and John of Arezzo, immediately 
set out to invite Charles to come to Rome and 
receive the imperial coronation. 

The circumstances v^^ere momentous. The ^/^^ 
des tinies of Italy were hanging in the balance be- 
tween France and Germany. For the first time, 
too, the choice of the imperial person was being 
made at Rome under the auspices of the Pope. It 
was no longer a question, as it had been in 816, 823, 
and 850, of a mere consecration ceremony, nor, as in 
800, of a more or less obvious external initiative, but 
of a genuine election. The situation was indeed 
jchanged! Since 824 the Popes had been in .prin- [t^ 
ciple, and generally in fact, confirmed by the 
emperor; now the emperor --was chosen by the . ^v, 
Pope I John VIII., even in his short pontifi- ^ ^ 
cate of ten years, twice exercised this right of 

Charles did not require pressing. With alacrity 
he crossed the St. Bernard, and appeared at Pavia 
before the end of September. There, probably, 
he received the Roman envoys. But Louis the 
German had lost no time in despatching to Italy 
his younger son, Charles the Fat, king of Swabia. 
Charles the Bald had no difficulty in repulsing him, 
but Carloman gave him more trouble. The latter 
had descended the Brenner Pass at the head of an 
imposing army. Charles brought matters to a 
successful issue by diplomatic artifices, which have 
been the scandal of Germany for over a thousand 
years. Meanwhile Louis the German, with his 
other son, who also bore the name of Louis, turned 
his attention to Western France, which was de- 


fended by yet another Louis (Louis the Stammerer), 
son of the imperial candidate. 

The latter, in a hurry, arrived at Rome on 
17th December. He naturally lavished rich gifts 
upon St. Peter's tomb, and behaved generously 
to the Romans, vv^ho, in accordance w^ith custom, 
expected a display of bounty. It may be remarked, 
however, that although Charles showed himself 
thus munificent in December, four months had 
already elapsed since he had received his invitation, 
and longer still since his candidature had been ac- 
cepted and warmly welcomed. 

The coronation took place on Christmas Day, 
exactly seventy -five years after that of Charlemagne. 
According to the Libelhis de imperatoria potestate, 
Charles would have introduced considerable modi- 
fications into the relations between the empire and 
the Holy See ; in particular, he would have dis- 
pensed with the permanent 7?iissL This, however, 
is open to question ; for in 885, under Charles the 
Fat, the missus was still in office, and it is hardly 
likely that the function would have been abolished 
in 875, and re-established in 881, at Charles's ac- 
cession. There is no documentary evidence of this. 
In the Libellus there is also mention of territorial 
transfers, such as the duchies of Spoleto and Bene- 
ventum and the cities of Chiusi and Arezzo. As 
far as the duchies are concerned, they undoubtedly 
remained in the state, and Charles the Bald even 
appointed a Duke of Spoleto on his own authority. 
Moreover, the fact that the Bishop of Arezzo was 
one of the three envoys despatched to Charles the 
Bald, presumes that Arezzo was still attached to 
the Roman state at the time of Louis II.'s death, 
for the Pope was not in the habit of employing 


legates, other than his own subjects, for missions of 
this kind. 

In short, it seems probable that the author of 
the Libellus must have known of a privilege (now 
lost) delivered by Charles the Bald to Pope 
John VIII., in which the new emperor gave his 
sanction to certain papal claims, similar to those of 
which it was a question in the lifetime of Hadrian, 
though, as a matter of fact, very little change took 
place either in the extent of the pontifical state, 
or in the relations between it and the protective 

The Pope was not in a position to devote much 
attention to annexing territories, or making efforts 
to throw off the Frankish protection. In spite of 
some repulses, the Saracens were becoming more 
and more formidable foes. The Emperor Louis II. 
had ejected them from Bari in 871. In 876, in 
answer to an appeal from the inhabitants, a Greek 
fleet took possession of the town, and not long 
after (880) Tarento also gave way before one of 
the generals of the Emperor Basil. Before the 
Saracen occupation these places had been owned 
by the Lombard duchy of Beneventum, but as the 
Emperor Louis II. was no longer at hand to put 
forward the claims of the Lombard crown, Basil 
himself appropriated the conquered towns. From 
that time the Greek empire began to establish a firm 
footing on the south-east coast of Italy, meanwhile 
extending its influence over the Dalmatian isles, and 
the Croatian and Servian principalities of the in- 
terior ; its position at Venice was also strengthened ~ 
so that the Adriatic became Byzantine property. 
Being prevented on this side, the Saracens fell back 
upon the coast of the Tyrrhenian Sea, where they 


often profited by the disunion among the Greek and 
Lombard principalities. The heads of these little 
states got on much more amicably with the 
Mahometans than with the empire. Their egotis- 
tical spirit, and their unjustifiable claims had been 
an impediment to Louis II.'s plans. The Duke of 
Beneventum had even gone so far as to attempt 
the life of his sovereign, the defender of Christianity. 
At Naples, which owned a Mahometan garrison, 
the Duke Sergius openly proclaimed himself an 
ally of the Saracens. It was the same at Gaeta, 
and Campania was constantly the scene of military 
raids. Owing to the attitude of Duke Sergius, 
Louis II. effected but little during his several 
months' sojourn (872-873) in Capua and the neigh-' 
bourhood. Finally, tired of resistance, the petty 
princes of Amalfi, Gaeta, Salerno, and even 
Capua, entered into treaty with the Saracens, who, 
having no further occasion for plundering in those 
regions, betook themselves to the north where they 
carried on their operations in the district round 

Immediately on his election John VIII. was ob- 
liged to turn his attention to this quarter. Louis II. s 
campaign had been succeeded by a series of naval 
expeditions of which mention is made in his letters.^ 
A Roman fleet, manned by Greek sailors, had been 
organised at the mouth of the Tiber, and the Pope 
sometimes placed himself in command. In a letter 
addressed to Louis and his wife Engelberga,^ he 
relates various exploits such as his having seized 
eighteen Saracen vessels, delivered six hundred 
Christians, and killed numerous infidels. He did 

1 J., 2959, 2960, 2966, 3008. 

2 J., 3008 (February 875). 


not confine himself to fighting, however, but put 
forth all the might of his diplomacy in order to 
dissolve the treaties concluded between the Saracens 
and the Campanian principalities.^ Finally he com- 
pleted the fortifications of Rome by building around 
St. Paul's an enclosure, resembling the Leonine city. 
Following Leo IV. 's example, he desired that it 
should bear his own name and be called Johannipolis 
No trace of it remains at the present day, and even 
its exact site is not known. 

His first request to the new emperor was for 
help in his crusade. Charles's kingdom, invaded 
by Louis the German and continually threatened 
by the Normans, was in no position to be left 
without its chief, so Lambert, Duke of Spoleto, and 
his brother Guy, were deputed to go to the Pope's 
assistance, in default of Charles himself. These 
dignitaries having been implicated in the plot against 
Louis II. (871), had been deprived of their offices, 
but had just been reinstated by Charles. They were 
thus not very reliable allies, either from his point 
of view or the Pope's. John VIII. made his entry 
into Campania under their escort. He gained 
some measure of success at Amalfi and Salerno, 
but the final triumph of the expedition was pre- 
vented by the pertinacity of the Duke of Naples, 
who was secretly supported by Adakis of Bene- 
ventum, and even by the Dukes of Spoleto. 
The Saracens maintained their footing in Italy, 
and they soon reappeared in the neighbourhood of 

Besides these external foes, John VIII. had 
enemies at home. There were differences of opinion 
concerning the promotion of Charles the Bald. The 

1 J., 3012, 3016. 



Empress Engelberga, who took the part of Carloman, 
had aUies in the pontifical circle, particularly among 
the high officials who had been imposed upon the 
preceding Popes, by the policy of Louis II. and the 
influence of his wife. As long as Louis was alive 
the Popes had been obliged to tolerate them, but 
now the time had come to get rid of them, and the 
prospect was all the more attractive because their 
attitude was not favourable to the papal designs. 
John VIII. had a free hand, and his severity would 
undoubtedly have been approved by the imperial 

The adversaries suspected what was coming to 
pass, for they knew how things had happened at 
Rome on a like occasion. Rumours were already 
afloat of the probabilities of their being cast into the 
Tiber, mutilated, or having their eyes gouged out. 
Such things had already occurred often enough to 
render their repetition a possibility, and to strike 
fear into their hearts. One night they succeeded in 
escaping by the St. Pancratius' Gate, and their 
flight was not discovered until the next day. Among 
them were the nomenclator Gregory, who had suc- 
ceeded the celebrated Arsenius in the office of apoai- 
siarius; the two masters of the militia, George of 
Aventino and Sergius ; the secundicerius Stephen ; 
Constantine, Gregory's daughter; and, finally, the 
Bishop of Porto, Formosus. 

Most of these seem to have been rather a shady 
set of people, but there was no mistaking the genuine 
piety and austerity of Formosus. Pope Nicholas 
had confided to him the leadership of the Bulgarian 
mission, and his ministrations met with so much 
acceptance among the Bulgarians, that they vehe- 
mently desired him for their archbishop. Hadrian 


refused to gratify them, alleging that Formosus was 
already Bishop of Porto, and that translations were 
not admissible. Porto was at that time, as it is 
to-day, a more or less honorary bishopric. The king 
of Bulgaria was greatly annoyed at the Pope's atti- 
tude on this question of canon law, but he finally 
yielded to the importunities of the Greeks, and 
accepted an archbishop of their choice. In this way 
did the Latin Church sever itself from the Bulgarian 
mission, whereas if Hadrian had but given way on so 
trifling a matter, he would have gained two important 
advantages : the Bulgarians would have been retained 
in submission, and Rome would have been freed 
from a person who was in the future to be the cause 
of much discord. Already, in 872, there had been 
some question of raising him to the pontificate. This 
alone was enough to make John VIII., who was far 
from long-suffering, look upon him with disfavour. 
Whether he was opposed to the consecration of 
Charles the Bald, is not certain ; but if such was the 
case, it must be admitted that John VIII. made an 
odd choice in selecting him as one of the ambassa- 
dors to carry the invitation to that prince. There 
is no proof either that Formosus ever entertained 
" German sentiments." An exile from Rome, he 
took refuge, not in Germany, but in France. It 
cannot be denied that John did not like him, and 
that he probably had a reason for his dislike, but 
questions of nationality have nothing to do with this 

When the Pope heard of the departure of his 
enemies, he assembled a synod at the Pantheon 
(19th April), and solemnly conjured them to return 
to Rome. Then, as they were very far from com- 
plying, he censured them at another synod held at 


St. Peter's on 30th June.^ Notice of this condem- 
nation was sent to Charles the Bald and to the Synod 
of Ponthieu, where the prince, surrounded by papal 
legates, was just then being recognised as emperor. 

Having got rid of his internal enemies, John soon 
learned that they had been given shelter by the 
Dukes of Spoleto and the Marquis of Tuscany. 
These nobles, ostensibly his protectors, were in reality 
his persecutors. The Saracens, too, were becoming 
more and more offensive, and the Pope increased his 
appeals to Charles the Bald. 

But Charles found many obstacles in his way. 
He had profited by the death of Louis the German 
at Frankfort (28th June 876), to alter the treaty of 
Mersen to his own advantage, and, by annexing 
Louis' share of the inheritance of Lothaire II., to 
extend his frontier as far as the Rhine. He marched 
upon Cologne and seized it, but Louis (son of the 
German) defeated him at Andernach and forced him 
to retreat. The following year he made arrange- 
ments to go at last to the Pope's help, and after 
having taken measures to secure order during his 
absence, by the capitulary of Kiersy-sur-Oise, he 
crossed the Alps, and was met by John VIII. at 
Pavia. While there he received notice of the arrival 
of Carloman, who, while Charles was preparing to 
fight the Saracens, had come to dispute with him the 
possession of Italy. His intervention quite upset 
the projected crusade, besides, the vassals on whom 
Charles had counted the most, forsook him just at 
this moment, and refused to cross the Alps. Thus 
baffled, he relinquished his plan. He died on his 

1 In the papal circle the fugitives were ridiculed in song. See 
the Cena Ctjpriani, particularly the edition published by P. Lapotre 
in the Melanges of the Ecole de Rome, t. xxi. p. 321 . 


way back, poisoned, it is said, by his physician 
(6th October 877). His only surviving son, Louis 
the Stammerer, succeeded him without any diffi- 

The Pope's state of mind on returning to Rome 
may be imagined. He was in the hands of his 
adversaries. The Saracens might lay waste his 
states without fear of punishment ; and the exiles 
would not fail to engage the services of their allies of 
Lucca and Spoleto against him. From the moment 
of John's return, Lambert of Spoleto adopted an 
insulting attitude, which the Pope did not lessen by 
humiliating himself before Carloman. In the spring 
of 878, Adalbert of Tuscany and Lambert of Spoleto 
presented themselves before the Leonine city, and 
insisted on effecting an entry. The Pope thought it 
wise to have an interview with them, and with the 
exiles who had followed them, but their demands 
were so excessive that he opposed them. He was 
kept a prisoner for thirty days, during which they 
sought to assure themselves of the Roman fidelity to 
Carloman by instituting the taking of solemn oaths. 
The Romans swore, but the Pope was inflexible,^ and 
the enemy was obliged to retire without entering 
Rome. As soon as they were gone John's anger 
burst forth. He began by placing the basilica of St. 
Peter under an interdict as the scene of his outrage ; 
he wrote to all the Carlovingian princes, and to 
Carloman himself, feigning to believe that he had 
had no knowledge of the affair ; he even sent a pro- 
test to the Greek emperor, Basil the Macedonian, 
requesting him to come to his assistance. He then 
announced that Rome being no longer endurable, he 

1 Carloman was not emperor, and therefore the Pope was under 
no obligation to take the oath. 


was going to take refuge in France. In order to 
keep the Saracens at bay during his absence, he 
undertook to pay them a heavy tribute. Finally, 
after excommunicating the two dukes, he took his 
departure, going first to Genoa and then to Aries. 

The Pope's plan was as imposing as it was im- 
practicable. He wished to summon a convocation of 
the four Carlo vingian princes and their episcopates, 
and settle with them the important questions which 
had arisen. But it was far from probable that the 
sons of Louis the German would be inclined to meet 
him in France, or even to enter into serious negotia- 
tions with a Pope who, by the very choice of his 
place of refuge, seemed to imply that he would 
always support the claims of the younger and French 
branch. Moreover, poor Louis the Stammerer had 
quite enough to do at home without undertaking 
foreign expeditions. He himself may or may not 
have had cravings after the imperial office, but his 
people were not at all anxious for the honour. 
From the writings of Hincmar we see how little the 
episcopate, and the lay aristocracy, had appreciated 
the transformation of Charles the Bald into the 
successor of Augustus. 

The Pope soon realised that he must not expect 
much sympathy from this quarter. It is true that 
he held a great council at Troyes (878), where he 
met Louis the Stammerer and received legates from 
Germany, but all this led to no serious result. He 
was, however, given an escort back to Italy in the 
person of Boson, the ambitious Count of Vienne, 
who the next year transformed himself into an 
independent monarch. John VIII., making the 
best of the situation, tried to arouse his interest by 
holding up before him the splendours of Italy. 


Neither was there much to hope from the 
Germans. Carloman, having returned from his 
expedition of 877 in a feeble state of health, was 
afflicted with paralysis, and thus unable to govern. 
His brother Louis was far away in his provinces of 
Saxony and Franconia, while the youngest of the 
three brothers, Charles the Great, King of Swabia, 
was distinguished neither by ability nor by bravery. 
It was no easy matter to decide among so many and 
such candidates. 

After the departure and death of Charles the 
Bald, Italy remained practically in the power of 
Carloman. He came to Pavia, received the oaths 
of the ecclesiastical and lay leaders, and spent 
several weeks in the north of Italy. He then 
retired to Bavaria, already attacked by the disease 
which was to cost him his life. The other Frankish 
princes did not as yet recognise his claims upon 
Italy. From Louis the Stammerer in Western 
France there was no very definite opposition ^ ; he 
was content to keep Provence, leaving the German 
princes to settle the Italian question among them- 
selves. The next winter the following arrangement 
was made : the two kings in the Rhine district, 
Louis and Charles the Fat, were to share the old 
kingdom of Lothaire II., or rather such part of it as 
the treaty of Mersen had allotted to the German 
state; on the other hand they gave up Italy to 

But, on account of his ill-health, the latter was 
unable to take any active part in affairs. As we 
have seen, John VIII. had been accompanied into 
Italy after the Council of Troyes by Boson, son-in- 

^ Cf. Poupardin, Le Royaume de Provence sous les CaroUngiens^ 
p. 92, n. 3. 


law to Louis II., with whose daughter Ermengarde 
he had absconded. This ambitious individual had 
been made a duke by Charles the Bald, and deputed 
to represent him in the government of Italy. His 
appearance as bodyguard and adopted son of Pope 
John was calculated to arouse uneasiness. Boson, 
however, soon returned to France.^ For some time 
affairs were in an undecided state. The Pope 
turned a friendly face to all parties ; to Carloman, 
whom he treated as the actual sovereign ; to Charles 
the Fat, who was already posing as a candidate ; to 
Boson with whom he seemed to have some mysterious 
understanding; and even to Louis III., the most 
distant of Louis the German's sons. 

In 879 things began to fall into some semblance 
of order. Louis the Stammerer died in April, leaving 
two sons, who were both too young and weak to 
have any designs on Italy. In October Boson 
caused himself to be crowned king of Provence, 
which usurpation brought enough difficulties in its 
train to keep him for a long time a fixture on the 
other side of the Alps. In Germany, Carloman, 
realising the approach of death, surrendered Italy 
to Charles the Fat. At the same time Louis, King 
of Eastern France, after having profited by the 
death of Louis the Stammerer to invade the 
kingdom of the West, rushed into Bavaria and 
established himself in the place of the unfortunate 
Carloman. The latter passed away on 22nd March 
880, and his successor only survived him until 20th 
January 882. Three years later, at the end of 
December 884, the last of the two reigning sons of 
Louis the Stammerer died too, thus leaving the 
Carlo vingian dynasty with no other representative 

1 For Boson, see Poupardin, op, cit. 


in the Western kingdom than the posthumous son 
of Louis the Stammerer, Charles (the Simple) — a 
little boy of four years old. In Germany it was 
represented by the last son of Louis the German, 
Charles the Fat. This latter received all the Carlo- 
vingian heritage, and was recognised as sovereign 
all over the empire of Charlemagne and Louis the 
Pious, with the exception of Provence, where Boson 
continued to flourish. This monarchy lasted only 
three years, ending with the deposition and death 
of Charles the Fat. 

But these changes had no direct effect upon the 
history of Italy, for after the year 879 Charles the 
Fat is the only Carlovingian prince with whom the 
Romans and Italians had dealings. 

Having come to an understanding with his 
brother and even with the two young kings of 
Western France, whom he met at Aries, Charles 
crossed the Alps. From the month of November 
879 he was recognised as king in the north of Italy. 
About 6th January 880 he was solemnly proclaimed 
at Ravenna, in presence of the Pope and the chief 
bishops of his new kingdom, who took an oath of 
fealty to him. 

The Pope was anxious to take him to Rome that 
he might lend his aid against the Saracens. But 
Charles, who was in a hurry to get back to France 
to help his cousins in the subjugation of Boson, as 
usual deputed the Duke of Spoleto to take his place. 
He returned to Italy, however, the following autumn, 
in response to the urgent entreaties of John VIII. , 
who hurled maledictions at his former friend Boson, 
and protested that his relations with the Greeks 
implied no disloyalty to the king. This was quite 
true, for the Pope had merely requested them to set 


their fleets in motion against the Saracen navy. 
Charles arrived there again at the beginning of 
February 881, and on the 12th of the same month 
he and his wife Richarde received the imperial 

But the Pope's plans did not progress much, in 
spite of this event. Charles the Fat set off to the 
north of Italy, where he tarried for more than a 
year. In February 882 he had another interview 
with the Pope at Ravenna. As long as he was 
present the people of Spoleto were glib enough 
with their promises, but no sooner was his back 
turned than they declined to fulfil them. In May 
of the same year the emperor crossed the Alps to 
go and take possession of the dominions of his 
brother Louis, who had just departed this life, 
leaving Lorraine to be overrun by the Normans. 
John again found himself deserted and helpless in 
the midst of his enemies. 

He died on the 15th December 882 under the 
most distressing circumstances. A conspiracy was 
set on foot against him, some of his own kinsmen 
actually having a share in it. They began by trying 
to poison him, but, in order to precipitate matters, 
beat him to death with hammers.^ This was the 
first time that a Pope had met his death by assassina- 
^ John VIII. had been the victim of circumstances 

which no effort of his had succeeded in mitigating. 
Of the three branches of the Carlovingian dynasty, 
the first, the Italian, had come to grief under his 
very eyes ; the French branch, on which he had 
then relied, had failed to support him ; the German 

1 Ann. Fuld.f sole account, but must have been founded on 
the reports sent to Charles the Fat. 


branch, to which he had in desperation turned, had 
availed him just as Uttle. The Saracens did not 
cease to ravage the Roman state, and behind the 
ramparts of Naples, Gaeta, and Capua there were 
always found Christian allies ready to protect them 
against the expeditions organised by the Pope, and 
to assist them in enjoying their spoils. On the 
interior frontiers, the Duke of Spoleto and the 
Marquis of Tuscany were always undesirable neigh- 
bours. Even at Rome the malcontents, incited by 
the exiles, and perhaps also by the severity of the 
government, renewed the opposition against which 
John VIII. had fought in 876. The latter was 
indeed the victim of defeat, but only after he had 
fought a brave and unwearied fight. 

His successor, Marinus, was elected without dis- 
turbance. He was a man of intelligence, who had 
been sent three times under former Popes as a legate 
to Constantinople ; he had even figured in this 
capacity among the presidents of the ecumenical 
council of 869, at the time of the deposition of 
Photius. On his last visit to Constantinople he had 
come across this personage again, not as a criminal 
this time, but as the occupant of the patriarchal 
throne, and not at all disposed to show favour to 
one of his former judges. In order to keep on the 
right side of the Emperor Basil, and to obtain his 
assistance in his perpetual crusade, John VIII. had 
recognised Photius ; but for Marinus, Photius was 
not merely an ecclesiastical opponent, but a personal 
enemy. On this point he shared the sentiments of 

Besides sharing this opinion with the most con- 
spicuous enemy of John VIII., Marinus, it seems, 
had other sympathies, which diverged from those of 



his predecessor. His accession was the signal for 
a marked reaction. Formosus, the apocrisiarius 
Gregory, and the others who had been banished, 
were now recalled to Rome and absolved from their 
sentence of excommunication. The Bishop of Troyes 
had sworn, at the council of Troyes, to live hence- 
forth a secular life and never again to lay claim to 
his see; John VIII. had even forced him to take 
an additional oath, by which he bound himself never 
again to enter Rome. Marinus absolved them from 
all these vows. 

Whatever may have been the sentiment which 
guided him in this affair — and it is quite possible 
that the emperor may have had some influence — there 
can be no doubt at least that the recall of the exiles 
relieved the situation of considerable embarrassment. 

There had been some irregularity in the election 
of Marinus. When John died he was exercising 
the functions of archdeacon, but before that he had 
been for some time Bishop of Caeri (Cervetri), and 
though at the time no objection seems to have been 
made to his translation, attention was soon called 
to his origin by the case of Formosus. He had not 
been in the pontifical seat sixteen months when he 
was replaced by Hadrian III., whose reign proved 
just as brief. 

Of the relations between these short-lived Popes 
and the empire we know but little. In June 883 
Marinus had a meeting with Charles the Fat at 
Nonantola. Two years later Hadrian III. was 
summoned to Germany by the emperor, who wished 
the support of the papal authority in arranging for 
his succession. The Pope set out on the journey, 
but death overtook him near Nonantola, where he 
was buried. 


There is no evidence to tell whether the ancient 
right of confirmation was exercised in the case of 
either of these Popes. Both in 882 and 884 the 
papal seat appears to have been vacant for so short 
a time that the emperor could not have been ap- 
pealed to. It is possible, however, that the per- 
manent missus may have been authorised to confirm 
the appointment. There is no doubt that in 885 a 
missus existed in the person of John, Bishop of 
Pa via. He it was, indeed, to whom Hadrian III. 
committed the government of the city of Rome 
before responding to the imperial summons to 

The sudden death of Hadrian having left the 
papal chair again without an occupant, the Romans, 
assisted by the missus, chose the priest Stephen, a 
man of rich and noble family, who was ordained 
without delay (September 885). Charles the Fat, 
it appears, had other views on the subject, and was 
greatly provoked by not having been consulted in 
the matter. He even despatched his chief chan- 
cellor, Liutward, Bishop of Vercelli, with intent to 
depose the newly-made Pope. The latter, however, 
managed to assuage the imperial anger, and to 
convince him, by the presentation of his decree of 
election, that everything had been in order. 

Two years later the emperor himself suffered 
deposition at the hands of his own subjects. The 
event took place at the villa of Tribur in November 
887, but the deposed sovereign did not long survive 
this humiliation. Already in a few weeks (13th 
January 898) kindly death came and bore him away 
to a land where regrets for his past glories could no 
longer oppress him. 



Arnulph, King of Germany — Guy of Spoleto and Berengarius — Guy and 
Lambert crowned as Emperors — Embarrassment of Pope Formosus 
— Agiltrude — Arnulph at Rome and Spoleto — Lambert, master of 
Italy — Death of Formosus — The Council of the Corpse — The Roman 
Schism — Sergius III. and John IX. — The Councils of John IX. — 
Death of Lambert. 

The death of Charles the Fat gave rise to many 
claimants to the throne. In Germany opposition 
had proceeded from a natural son of Carloman, 
Arnulph, Duke of Carinthia, who, like his father, 
was a brave warrior. The only surviving legiti- 
mate Carlovingian prince was the posthumous son 
of Louis the Stammerer, Charles (the Simple), who 
was then but seven years of age. For the time his 
claim was ignored, both in France and in Germany, 
and Carloman's illegitimate son received the general 

It was, however, impossible for the latter to 
maintain the unity of the Frankish empire. He 
was obliged to recognise as kings the following: — 
Firstly, in France, Hugh, Count of Paris, son of 
Robert the Strong, the first Capetian to reign; 
secondly, in Provence, Louis (the Blind), son of 
the usurper Boson, but grandson of the Emperor 
Louis II., by his mother Ermengarda; thirdly, in 
the Juras and Switzerland [regjium Jurense), 
Rudolph, son of Conrad, Count of Auxerre, a 
rebellious functionary; fourthly, in Italy, Beren- 



garius, Marquis of Friuli, grandson of Louis the 
Pious by his mother, Gisele. 

Besides these four royalties who, without being 
actually under the dominion of Arnulph, never- 
theless profited by their political intercourse with 
the German sovereign, we must also take account, 
in connection with France and Italy, of the House 
of Spoleto. 

Guy of Spoleto was sole heir of the Dukes (or 
Marquesses) Lambert and Guy, whom we have 
seen at daggers drawn with John VIII. He did 
not belong, like Berengarius of Friuli and Louis 
of Provence, to the Carlovingian family, but he 
was none the less a man of parts. His ancestors, 
like those of Charlemagne, came originally from 
the banks of the Moselle, and sprang from as 
noble a stock as did the House of Pepin. Trans- 
planted, about the middle of the ninth century, 
to the centre of Italy, this Prankish family had 
continued to consolidate its position. The duchy 
of Spoleto had become for it a hereditary princi- 
pality, and this was only a centre for various i^adii 
of activity. 

Taking advantage of the parcelling out of southern 
Italy, and of the weakness of the central authority in 
these distant regions, the Lamberts and Guys made 
up their minds to be masters, not only of their 
own affairs, but also of their neighbours'. They 
contracted marriages in Tuscany and Beneventum, 
intervened in the concerns of Capua, Naples, and 
Salerno, protected (and, on occasion, oppressed) the 
Pope, and entered into negotiations with the Greek 
patricians, and even with the Saracens. These 
latter alliances, which were always open to suspi- 
cion, had already, on two separate occasions, incurred 


the imperial displeasure. Louis II. had deprived 
them of their principality (871-875). Charles the 
Bald reinstated them, but they managed to fall foul 
of Charles the Fat. In 883 Guy of Spoleto, the 
one with whom we are at present concerned, was 
arrested by order of the emperor, tried at a court 
of justice held at Nonantola, and dismissed from 
office. He succeeded in escaping, however, and 
returned to his duchy, where, supported by a troop 
of Mussulman mercenaries, he organised so decided 
a rebellion that the military had to be called upon 
to resist it. Berengarius of Friuli was placed at 
the head of the defensive army, but, though he 
was at first successful, the appearance of the 
plague among his men forced him to retire. Not 
long afterwards, at the beginning of 885, Guy was 
received into the emperor's good graces, but he 
never ceased to cherish a violent grudge against 

On hearing of the death of Charles the Fat, Guy 
promptly presented himself as a candidate for the 
crown of France. His supporters, who were 
numerous, were headed by the powerful Arch- 
bishop of Rheims, Foulques, the successor of Hinc- 
mar. Guy succeeded in having himself crowned 
at Langres, but the disquieting behaviour of Hugh 
compelled him to turn his attention immediately 
to Italy. Here fighting was the order of the day, 
and after an indecisive battle near Brescia (888), 
the Duke of Spoleto gained the victory of Trebbia 
(889). Berengarius, in spite of the German alliance, 
was obliged to content himself with his marquisate, 
augmented, it is true, by certain important towns, 
such as Verona. 

Both Guy of Spoleto and his rival laid claim to 


the title of king/ though the former had much the 
better right to it, being now master of Milan, Pavia, 
and the whole of Italy south of the Po. 

The kingdom of Luitprand and Astolphus was 
thus reconstituted to the advantage of a family 
which, though certainly of Prankish origin, had 
rapidly become Italianised, and that, not according 
to the tradition of Louis II. and the Carlovingians, 
but that of the old Lombard kings as opposed to 
the Pope. There was no family understanding 
between the princes of Spoleto and the Holy See, 
and though they had sometimes lent it their 
support, it was in their capacity as imperial func- 
tionaries carrying out the orders of their superior 
officers, the Carlovingians. Still, they were more 
given to furthering their permanent interests by 
making themselves troublesome to the Pope. 
They found as much difficulty in living at peace 
with the occupant of the Holy See as Astolphus 
had done in respecting the Byzantine provinces. 

Guy's kingship was, therefore, a serious menace 
for the papacy. But what could be done ? They 
might indeed follow the popular example, and, 
overlooking the fact of the illegitimacy of Carlo- 
man's son, accept him as the Roman emperor. 
But Arnulph, far away, was too much taken up 
with his own internal difficulties (in particular with 
his enemies the Normans and the Moravians) to 
be able to interfere in the affairs of Italy. At 
this time the star of the Greek empire was in the 
ascendant. Ever since it had re-established its 
footing in Southern Italy by settling at Bari, its 
successes, both military and diplomatic, had been 

1 M, G. Cap., t. ii. p. 104; documents on the election of King 
Guy by the bishops. 



continually on the increase. With a more forcible 
attempt, the vassalage of the Greek or Lombard 
princes in the interior and on the west coast 
might have been transformed into absolute subjec- 
tion. Since the accession of the Emperor Leo VI. 
(886) Photius had been turned out of the patri- 
archal see to which the Pope Marinus had again 
disputed his right; the bitter dissent between the 
Roman Church and the empire of Constantinople 
was at an end. He might have boldly interfered 
in Italian affairs, exhausted the claimants of Spoleto 
and Friuli by playing them off one against the other, 
and taken advantage of the weakness of the trans- 
Alpine kingdoms to emulate Justinian's work in 
Italy. The Greeks, however, let the opportunity 
slip. After the demise of Charles the Fat, Pope 
Stephen V. only had to reckon with two powers, 
the new king of Italy and the heir, such as he 
was, of Carlo vingian tradition. 

He adopted a crafty policy. Guy, who was 
much to be feared, was not openly thwarted. In 
order to obtain pardon for his rebellion of 883 the 
duke had set out to fight against the Saracens 
immediately after his restoration to favour (885), 
and had even demolished their establishment between 
Gaeta and the Garigliano ; it was only a temporary 
destruction, certainly, but one which gained him a 
great deal of gratitude. Pope Stephen writing the 
following year to the Archbishop of Rheims,^ a 
relation of Guy's, declares that he looks upon the 
latter as his only son. This paternal tenderness, how- 
ever, did not prevent him from appealing to Arnulph 
for help, in 890. It is true that he avoided direct 
letters, and had recourse to the medium of Zwenti- 

1 J., 3420. 


bald, duke of the Moravians, who in his name 
begged the King of Germany "to come to Rome 
to visit the sanctuary of St. Peter, and to resume 
dominion over the kingdom of Italy which had 
been appropriated by bad Christians, and was being 
threatened by a heathen people." ^ 

The following year, however, on 21st February 
891, this same Pope Stephen V. consecrated Guy 
as emperor at St. Peter's. Formosus, who suc- 
ceeded him some months later, performed the same 
action for Lambert, Guy's son (30th April 892). 
Thus the House of Spoleto stood possessed not 
only of tlie Italian kingship, but also of the imperial 

In performing these ceremonies the Pope was 
acting under compulsion. Formosus, like Stephen 
v., was playing a double part. He consecrated the 
Spoletans, and in his letters to his uncle of Rheims 
referred to them in terms of the highest praise, with 
protestations of loyalty and affection.^ But he, none 
the less, continued to beset Arnulph with lamenta- 
tions, beseeching him to come and deliver him from 
the ** bad Christians." ^ There can be no doubt that 
he alluded to the House of Spoleto and their oppres- 
sion of the Holy See, for there was, at that time, no 
question of the Saracens. It seemed like a return to 
the situation of 754, and Formosus, Arnulph, and 
Guy, being now in precisely the same relations as 
had been Stephen II., Pepin, and Astolphus. 

Arnulph, thus importuned, ended by coming. 
His first expedition, at the beginning of 894, though 
ill equipped with forces, succeeded in taking the 

1 Ann. Fuld. 

2 J., 3481, 3482, 3500, lost letters analysed by Flodoard. 

3 J., 3486, 3501, lost letters mentioned in the Annals of Fulda. 


territory north of the Po. Bergamo was captured 
by storm and plundered, and this victory led the 
other towns, even including Milan and Pavia, to 
open their gates. The Emperor Guy, having with- 
drawn to the Apennines, awaited Arnulph at the 
mountain pass. He was a doughty warrior, who, 
if he had lived, would have given the emperor a 
troublous time in Italy. But he died the same 
year, soon after Arnulph, who did not deem it 
discreet to attack him in his own mountains, had 
re-crossed the Alps. 

But, although Guy was dead, his cause was still 
in capable hands. The interests of the young 
Lambert were watched by the Empress-Mother 
Agiltrude, a woman of marked force of character. 
She was the daughter of that Adalgis of Beneventum 
who, in 871, had dared to attack the sacred person of 
the Emperor Louis II., and, both by family tradition 
and the exigencies of her present position, was the 
deadly foe of the Carlovingian dynasty. She united 
in herself the old grievances of the Lombard kings 
with the new feelings of resentment harboured by 
the princes of Spoleto. Arnulph was to find her 
an enemy not to be despised. 

In the autumn of 895 the latter reappeared in 
Italy, and in the following February advanced 
against Rome. His army had a trying time in 
Tuscany owing to illness, bad weather, and the 
dreadful state of the roads. The Marquess Adalbert, 
too, was a questionable vassal. Up to Arnulph's 
arrival at Rome nothing had been heard of the 
Spoletans. He imagined that the town was in the 
Pope's power, and expected to see a procession 
advancing to meet him. But he had reckoned with- 
out Agiltrude, who, with great intrepidity, had seized 


upon Rome, quite ignoring the papal protestations. 
She had already invested it with a garrison, and was 
making ready to receive the invading party. 

But her plans were checked by a chance incident 
which, contrary to all expectation, delivered the Gate 
of St. Pancratius into the hands of the astonished 
besiegers. The Spoletans disappeared, leaving the 
field to the Pope and the Carlo vingian represen- 
tatives. Arnulph was received on the steps of 
St. Peter's, and Formosus warmly embraced him, 
for whom he and his predecessor had awaited as 
the promised deliverer. On 22nd February 896 
the Vatican was the scene of an imperial con- 
secration, this time celebrated with whole-hearted 

It now remained to follow up their victory. 
Shut up in the castle whose ruins still crown the 
picturesque mountain of Spoleto, Agiltrude and 
Lambert awaited the coming of Arnulph. The 
latter left as his representative at Rome, not the 
peaceable missus of former times, but a substantial 
military commander, Farold by name, and set out 
on the road to Umbria. The Pope Formosus, 
countenanced by Farold, was preparing to follow 
the vicissitudes of the struggle between the two 
emperors whom he had consecrated, when some 
terrible news reached him. Arnulph had been 
struck down by paralysis, and now had to be carried 
on a litter, just as his father Carloman had been in 
877. There was no prospect that he would ever 
again be strong enough to fight for the Holy See 
in Italy. 

Overwhelmed by the overthrow of his plans, 
Formosus immediately died, on 4th April 896. 
Even more than in the case of Marinus, perhaps, 


his election had defied the laws of the Church, for 
at the time of his promotion he still held the bishopric 
of Porto. The two elections that followed, under the 
auspices of Farold the missus, showed no greater 
degree of respect for the ancient rules of discipline. 
Formosus was succeeded by Boniface VI., a priest 
who had twice (both as sub-deacon and as priest) 
incurred sentence of deposition. He seems to have 
been thrust forward as candidate by the populace. 
His reign was short, and in a fortnight's time there 
was another occupant of the Papal See in the person 
of Stephen (VI.), Bishop of Anagni. 

Meanwhile Lambert was regaining a footing in 
Northern Italy. He had returned to Pavia and 
Milan, and had come to terms with Berengarius 
who had not been conciliated by his submissive 
attitude with regard to Arnulph. The Adda and 
the lower Po were agreed upon as boundaries be- 
tween the kings of Italy. Lambert retained the 
better part — Milan, Pavia, Spoleto, and the im- 
perial title. There could be no further question 
of Germany and its princes before the Ottos. 

The affairs of Italy being thus arranged, Lambert 
and his mother turned their steps towards Rome, 
the final refuge of the German empire. On 20th 
August 896 Farold was still supreme, and he seems 
to have held his own until the end of the year. 
But at the beginning of 897, Agiltrude and Lambert 
again took possession of the town, though under 
what circumstances there is no evidence to tell. 
Then there happened an event of evil omen, which 
was to be the foreshadower of a long and sad 
series of disturbances in the heart of the apostolic 

Formosus had betrayed the House of Spoleto, 


having treacherously abetted and consecrated the 
barbarian candidate. He had now been dead and 
buried for nine months, a fact which would have 
sufficed to disarm any ordinary avenger on the 
principle of javi parce sepulto. But even the 
mysteries of death and the tomb were not sacred 
before the unholy rage of the daughter of Adalgis, 
for she, almost beyond a doubt, was the real insti- 
gator of the crime carried out by Pope Stephen VI., 
the pitiable tool of her vengeance. 

The withered corpse of the aged pontiff was 
dragged from its sarcophagus, and exhibited before 
a synod presided over by the Pope. Still dressed 
in pontifical garments, it was propped up on a 
throne, and by its side was installed a deacon, who, 
pale with terror, had to reply in the name of the 
deceased Formosus. The legal accounts of this 
abominable trial were burned the following year, 
but we get some of the details from contem- 
porary writers. The whole history of his past, his 
quarrels with John VIII., his oaths, his ambitious 
conspiracies, the perjuries imputed to him, were 
all brought up to his disadvantage. They revived 
old ecclesiastical canons, long forgotten by every one, 
including the president of this gruesome council, 
and ended by proclaiming the unworthiness of the 
accused, the irregularity of his promotion, and the 
invalidity of his acts, especially his ordinations. On 
this point, however, they confined themselves to 
the annulment of the Roman ordinations, con- 
tinuing to recognise those outside. Not one of 
the Roman clerks thus deposed was reordained.^ 
In accordance with the ancient ceremony, the papal 
mummy was stripped of its insignia, and of all its 

1 Auxilius, App. Dimmler, Auxilius and Vulgarius^ p. 95. 


clothing except the haircloth which still clung to 
the withered flesh. It was then thrown into an 
unconsecrated tomb, among the bodies of strangers. 
But the brutal populace, anxious to have a share 
in those outrages on the man before whom they 
had long grovelled, had the corpse cast into the 

In order that nothing should be lacking to the 
horror of this gloomy time, the old Lateran basilica 
collapsed. This catastrophe possibly preceded the 
ghastly council ; it seems almost a pity that it did 
not occur just at the time of it, and that the 
venerable building, which had so often been witness 
of the prayers of Sylvester, Leo, Gregory, and 
Nicholas, did not crash in upon the head of their 
unworthy successor. 

The latter, however, did not live long to enjoy 
the horrible triumph of which he had been the 
instigator rather than the hero. Whatever may 
have been his exact motives for taking part in this 
grim comedy, there can be no doubt that he thought 
it would be to his own advantage. The judgment 
pronounced against Formosus would have been his 
own fate, if by a revolting casuistry he had not 
been careful to have the ordinations of his pre- 
decessor annulled. It was Formosus who had con- 
secrated him Bishop of Anagni, but, the acts of 
Formosus being repealed, this episcopal ordination 
vanished with them, so that it could no longer be 
said that Pope Stephen VI. had been transferred 
from one See to another. 

But Stephen was to meet with his deserts. A 
rebellion arose, evidently incited by horror at his 
proceedings, and he was cast out of the papal See. 
As he had caused Formosus to be stripped while 


dead, so was he stripped while aHve ; a monkish 
garment was flung over his shoulders, and then he 
was thrown into a prison. But this was not con- 
sidered punishment enough and before long they 
strangled him. 

The reigns of the next two pontiffs, Romanus 
and Theodore II., were extremely brief. Romanus 
occupied the papal chair for four months, and 
Theodore for only twenty days. But under the 
latter reparatory measures were begun. The body 
of Formosus had been cast up by the Tiber near 
the church of St. Acontius, in his old diocese of 
Porto. A monk, warned, it is said, in a dream by 
the shade of the unfortunate Pope, found it and 
bestowed upon it a temporary burial. Several 
months later, Theodore II. having been elected 
pontiff, decided to restore it to its original tomb in 
the atrium of St. Peter's, in the midst of the other 
Popes. Clothed anew in his pontifical adornments, 
Formosus was conveyed, with chanting and prayers, 
to the last long home, of which he had been de- 
prived by unholy rancour.^ 

Theodore did more still. He restored the clerks 
deposed by the council of Stephen VI. to their lost 
positions. A special assembly was convened for this 
purpose, but its provisions, unfortunately, have not 
been preserved* 

Thus, in efforts to repair some of the ills that 
had been incurred, the year 897, one of the darkest 
in the long annals of the papacy, came to a close. 
But the spirit of unrest was abroad, and peace was 

1 The paintings in St. Peter's had been restored by order of 
Formosus. According to a legend related by Luitprand, when his 
body was brought back to the basilica, the statues of the saints 
bowed towards it. 


not yet to be established. There was strife over 
the tomb of Theodore II., two Popes, Sergius III. 
and John IX., being elected at the same time. 
The imperial authority appears to have supported 
John, who was a lover of peace. Sergius was a 
fierce and radical adherent of Stephen VI. and his 
council. The Emperor Lambert had the upper 
hand, and the idea of resorting to the transalpine 
protection could not be entertained. To extenuate, 
as far as might be possible, the scandalous be- 
haviour of the council of Stephen VI., to lessen the 
internal dissensions of the Roman Church, and to 
confirm the legitimacy and positions of the emperor, 
the bishops, and the cardinals, such was the self- 
imposed task of John IX. With this end in view, 
he held three councils, of which we only know the 
details of two, one held at Rome^ and the other 
at Ravenna. Bishops from every part of Italy were 
present. The decrees of Stephen's council were 
read and repealed, while those of Theodore's council 
were sealed with approbation. It was also decided 
that in future no corpse could be brought up for 
trial. The ordinations of Formosus were recognised 
as valid, as were also his decrees in general, with the 
exception of the " surreptitious consecration of a 
barbarian " — unctio ilia barbarica, per surreptionem 
eoctorta. Finally, the rights of the emperor in con- 
nection with the jurisdiction over the Romans were 
solemnly ratified. As regards the papal elections, 
it was declared that any disorders that had occurred, 
proceeded from the lack of the imperial participation 
in the choice of the Pope, and that, consequently, 
no future elections could be followed by consecra- 

1 For this council, reference must be made to Mansi's account, 
which is more complete than others 


tion without the presence of the emperor's legates — 
prcesentibus legatis imper^atoris. 

In this way the Church of Rome returned, on 
her own initiative, to the regime of the constitution 
of Lothaire. She recognised that, outside these rules, 
to which she had with so ill a grace resigned herself 
under Lothaire and Louis II., there could be no 
security, either for the papal elections or for the tem- 
poral government of the Roman state. 

The Pope's hopes, like those of the rest of Italy 
outside Berengarius's kingdom, thus began to centre 
upon the young Emperor Lambert. Unfortunately, 
however, he was killed by a hunting accident on 
15th October, not many weeks after the council 
of Ravenna. Like his predecessors, John VIII., 
Stephen V., and Formosus, John IX. had to gaze 
upon the ruins of the hopes which he had built on 
the empire. He died in January 900, having no 
doubt reahsed more than once the truth of the 
psalmist's words, NoUte conjidere in prindpibus filiis 
hominum, in quibus non est salus. 



The Empire annihilated — Theophylact and Sergius III. — John X. and 
the Expulsion of the Saracens — Alberic of Spoleto — End of the 
anti-Formosan quarrel — Marozia — Accession of Alberic II. 

Berengarius immediately assumed authority over 
the kingdom of Lambert, and took possession of the 
palace of Pavia. In the following year (899) the 
Hungarians penetrated into Italy for the first time, 
and laid waste everything not defended by fortified 
walls. The new king took up arms against them, 
but while trying to cut off their retreat, he sustained 
a crushing repulse on the Brenta — an unlucky omen 
for his future reign. On the 8th December Arnulph 
died; he was succeeded by his very youthful son, 
Louis the Child. 

Towards the beginning of the year 900, John IX. 
was succeeded by Benedict IV., a man who shared 
the same theories of government. Berengarius, 
whose defeat had brought him into disrepute, had 
now to struggle against a rival, King Louis of 
Provence, whose mother was daughter to the Em- 
peror Louis II. The success of the newcomer 
was great enough to cause him to be recognised at 
Pavia and even at Rome, where he was consecrated 
emperor by Pope Benedict in February 901. But 
his prosperity did not last long. Berengarius re- 
gained the upper hand in 902, and compelled him 
to retreat beyond the Alps, after having sworn never 



to reappear in Italy. This oath was broken in 90.5, 
when Louis was besought to come to the support of 
those ItaUan nobles who were ill-content with Beren- 
garius's government. He even succeeded in wresting 
Verona from his rival, but fell into his power through 
treachery, and after having his eyes put out, was 
banished for ever. 

Rome took no part in these quarrels. The par- 
ticularistic spirit prevailed more and more strongly. 
Nothing could be expected from the transalpine 
dynasties, and the King of Italy was too weak and 
beset by foes to be of any substantial support. But 
help came from within. From the very heart of the 
local aristocracy there issued an influential family, 
which straightway placed itself at the head of 
affairs, a position which it maintained for nearly 
sixty years under one form or another. 

At the time of which we are speaking, it was 
represented by the papal vestararius or vestiarius 
Theophylact, his wife Theodora, who bore the title 
of vestararissa, and his two daughters, Marozia and 
Theodora. The office of vestararius was one of the 
most important in the whole of the pontifical ad- 
ministration. It was early secularised, and its in- 
cumbent seems to have been specially charged with 
the supervision of the government of Ravenna and 
the neighbouring provinces. Theophylact was both 
duke and magister militum, and at Rome the titles 
of consul and senator were his in an exclusive 
fashion — he was not a consul, but the consul,^ not 
a senator, but the senator. 

1 Eug. Vulgarius (ed. Diimmler, p. 147) calls him dominus 
urbis. In 900 he appears for the first time at a court of justice, 
held by the Emperor Louis of Provence {Memorie di Lucca, t. iii. 
p. 639) ; his name appears second among the lay nobility. In a 
document of 915 (Gattola, Hist. Abb. Cassin, Ace, t. i. p. Ill) he 


Upon the death of Benedict IV., towards the 
end of July 903, they elected a priest forensis (i.e, 
one who was not a cardinal). He was known as 
Pope Leo V., but in less than two months he was 
supplanted by another priest, Christopher, by whom 
he was cast into prison. Hardly had the following 
year begun, when who should turn up again but 
Sergius, the exiled rival of John IX. (898). His 
return was supported by the " Franks," probably, 
that is, by Berengarius or the Marquess of Tuscany, 
whose help was claimed by one Roman party. His 
first proceeding was to send Christopher to keep 
Leo V. company in prison. These two unfortu- 
nates dragged out a wretched existence for some 
time longer, when it was decided, " out of pity," to 
relieve them of the burden of life. 

With such a beginning, the pontificate of Sergius 
III. seemed to shadow forth a period of passionate 
reaction against Formosus, John IX., and his suc- 
cessors. He revived in all its severity the tradition 
of Stephen VI., with whose ecclesiastical position 
he had much in common. He had indeed received 
episcopal ordination at the hands of Formosus, and 
that, too, for the See of Caeri, which had already 
in 882 supplied Rome with a Pope. Certainly 
Formosus was allowed to rest in his tomb, but on 
that of Stephen was engraved an epitaph exalting 
him for having " checked the licentiousness of the 
haughty and intrusive Formosus " : Hie primum 
repulit Formosi spurca superbly culmina qui invasit 
sedis apostolicce, A convocation was summoned in 

is spoken of as senator Romanorum, and named the first ; at the 
imperial consecration of Berengarius (fin. 915), his son appears 
under the title of Jilius consulis, together with the brother of the 
Pope (John X.), quite in the same rank, and above all the other 
Roman nobles. 


order to annul once again the ordinations of For- 
mosus, and its decisions were carried out with 
merciless severity. Bishops, priests, and deacons, 
all who had been consecrated by Formosus, were 
obliged either to resign their positions or to submit 
to reordination. It was forbidden to use the title of 
priest {sacerdos) with reference to Formosus, even in 
correspondence, and there is still preserved a letter 
from Sergius III. to Amelius, Bishop of Uzes, in 
which the latter is vehemently reproached for not 
having complied with this rule. John IX. and his 
successors, who were looked upon as usurpers, were 
designated on the epitaph of Sergius as ** ravening 
wolves." Sergius himself also uses the same ex- 
pression when he refers to them in the monumental 
inscriptions which he had placed in the Lateran 
basilica, restored during his administration. 

The unpleasant effect produced in the ecclesiasti- 
cal world of Italy by these measures may easily be 
imagined. Apart from the Roman clergy, strictly 
speaking, who appear to have been too much alarmed 
to make any show of resistance, there were in pen- 
insular Italy a number of bishops who had been 
consecrated by Formosus during his five years' 
pontificate. Not only were these consecrations ren- 
dered null and void, but the ordinations celebrated 
in their own dioceses by these bishops themselves 
were also annulled. In such places as Naples and 
Beneventum, which were not under the temporal 
power of the papacy, some resistance was mani- 
fested. There was even a series of polemical 
writings directed against the Pope, several of which 
have come down to us under the names of Auxilius 
and Eugenius Vulgarius.^ These latter defended 

1 Some of these writings have been pubHshed by Morinus, 
Mabillon, and Bianchini ; others have been collected by E. Diimmler, 


the ordinations of Formosus; Sergius III. wrote on 
behalf of the opposite side, but his writings have 
not been preserved. 

Eugenius Vulgarius appears to have steered a 
middle course between the two parties ; although he 
assailed Sergius III., there came a time when he 
deemed it prudent to ingratiate himself with him, 
lavishing flattery and compliments both in prose and 
verse. He also addressed himself to influential 

who has devoted to them " an ensemble study " — Auxilius and 
Vulgarius, Leipzig, 1866. Auxilius, a priest of French origin, 
wrote to Naples. He had been summoned to attend the council 
of Sergius III., but refused to comply. He wrote three works 
upon the ordinations of Formosus : (a) In defensionem sacrce ordina- 
tionis papce Formosi, in two volumes (Diimmler, pp. 59-95), with an 
appendix on the history of the Popes from Marinus to Sergius HI. ; 
this work must have been published in 908 ; (6) De ordinationibus 
papce Formosi, a collection of texts (Migne, t. 129, p. 1059), of 
which Diimmler has found a rather more extensive edition {op, cit, 
pp. 107-116); (c) a dialogue on the same subject (Infensor and 
Defensor; Migne, t. c. p. 1070), addressed with the preceding 
work to Leo, Bishop of Nola. These last two books date from 
911, or a little earlier. Besides these three works, Auxilius pub- 
lished an apology for the ordinations of Stephen, Bishop of Naples, 
who died in 907, or rather sooner, and who, like Formosus, had 
been transferred from a bishopric. 

Vulgarius^ it seems, was a grammarian, a professor of a 
school at Naples, or some other Greek town in southern Italy. 
Unlike Auxilius, he was not deeply versed in ecclesiastical 
literature, but, on the other hand, he had an extensive ac- 
quaintance with the classics, and tenderly cultivated the various 
poetical metres and forms of dialectic. His first work (Diimm- 
ler, p. 117) was issued in the form of a letter addressed to the 
Roman Church by a council of Gauls, held at Lutetia, the year 17 
of the Emperor Charles IV., i.e. Charles the Simple (910); the 
second is in the form of a dialogue {Insimulator^ Actor ; Migne, p. 
1 103) ; it was composed at the request of a deacon, Peter. Mabillon 
had published it under the name of Auxilius, but Diimmler dis- 
covered that of Vulgarius at the beginning of both works. Besides 
the letters and the pieces of verse mentioned in the text (Diimm- 
ler, pp. 139-156), we must also quote the Invectiva in Romam, pub- 
lished under John X. {i.e. between 914' and 928), the last of the 
known arguments on behalf of Formosus ; the latter was published 
by Bianchini {Anast. hihl, t. iv. p. Ixx). 


persons in high places at the Roman Court, the 
apocrisiarius VitaHan, the vestararissa Theodora, 
and many others. 

From his letter to Theodora, and also in one from 
Ravenna, discovered a few years ago,^ we gain some 
idea of the influence and power of the vestiarius and 
his wife. They made common cause with the Pope, 
dealing out his favours, and generally behaving as if 
they were the real masters of the Roman state. 
The understanding went further. Sergius III. was 
on terms of intimacy with Marozia, one of Theodora's 
daughters, and he even had a son by her, who, later 
on, rose to the papacy as John XI. There seems to 
have been no secret as to his paternity, for not only 
the chroniclers, such as Luitprand, but also the semi- 
official catalogues, by means of which the Liber Ponti- 
jicalis was continued, do not hesitate to make mention 
of it. From this we see how openly vice was tolerated 
among the most exalted personages at that time. 

Pope Sergius was spiteful, brutal, and a scoun- 
drel,* but it must be admitted that he knew how to 
retain the papal throne at a time when its occupants 
came and went in rapid succession. He held it for 
seven years, and then died a natural death. He also 
had the power of making himself feared and obeyed, 
in which he was greatly assisted by Theophylact 
and his family. Neither must it be forgotten that 
his pontificate was distinguished by the renewal of 
the Lateran basilica, in which he displayed the most 
lavish generosity possible. 

1 Neties Archiv., t. ix. p. 517. 

2 Sergius had been promoted to the sub-diaconate by Pope 
Marinus (882-84); he was therefore over forty years of age when 
his pontificate began (904). Marozia, who was married for the 
third time in 932, could hardly have been born before 892. There 
was thus a great disparity of age between her and Sergius III. 



The two Popes who succeeded Sergius were 
Anastasius III., who reigned rather more than two 
years, and Laudo, who was in authority for less than 
six months. We know nothing of their history, and 
it seems improbable that they could have opposed 
the influence of Theophylact, who was the virtual 
temporal ruler. John X., who came after them, 
maintained his position during fourteen years (914- 

It was even claimed that his promotion, due to 
Theodora, was the consequence of his adulterous 
relations with this woman, who, as Luitprand re- 
marks, governed Rome with vigour, Romance civi- 
tatis non inviriliter monarchiam obtinebat. However 
this may be, there can be no doubt that John's 
government was conspicuous for its force and 

The great question of the day was how best to 
bring about the expulsion of the Saracens. Since 
their defeat of 885, they had renewed their strength, 
and, always welcome at Naples and Gaeta, had estab- 
lished a fortified centre of plundering operations in 
the mountains commanding the lower course of the 
Garigliano. This was extremely unpleasant for the 
important possessions of the Roman Church in their 
vicinity. Moreover, the Saracens, invading Roman 
Campania, had set up at Sabina a kind of branch 
of their Garigliano establishment on the site of the 
Abbey of Farfa, which had been taken from the 
monks in 898. John X. directed all his energies 
towards the destruction of these two Mussulman 

He undoubtedly had this end in view when, 
about the month of December 915, he invited Beren- 
garius to Rome, and bestowed upon him the imperial 


crown. Louis the Blind (died 928) was still living in 
his kingdom of Provence. No attention was paid to 
his claims, which went back to Pope Benedict IV., 
unrecognised by Sergius III. The poet by whom 
the Gesta Berengarii were celebrated with so much 
pomp, has left us a description of the fetes with which 
his hero was honoured in 915. Berengarius, how- 
ever, took no part in the struggle against the Sara- 
cens ; after his coronation he returned to the north 
of Italy, leaving his subjects of Tuscany and Spoleto 
to help the Pope in his schemes for their overthrow. 
This time their help was really worth having. 
The governor of Spoleto, the Marquess Alberic, acted 
in concert with the Romans. The infidels were de- 
feated at Baccano and at Trevi, and forced to abandon 
their establishment, and to fall back upon the Garig- 
liano. But this was not all. John X. was well 
adapted for such an undertaking, and he succeeded 
in organising in Southern Italy a league of all the 
Christian principalities. Naples and Gaeta, indemni- 
fied at the expense of the pontifical estates, broke off 
their alliance with the Mussulmans ; the Greek 
strategist of Langobardium, Nicholas Picingli, ap- 
peared in the Tyrrhenian Sea at the head of an im- 
portant fleet; round him rallied the squadrons of 
Naples and the neighbouring ports, not to mention 
the pontifical vessels ; the Lombard princes of Bene- 
ventum, Capua, and Salerno, all lent their aid ; and 
the Roman state, Tuscany, and the duchy of 
Spoleto, sent a considerable contingent under the 
command of the Senator of the Romans, Theophy- 
lact, and the Marquess Alberic.^ So well managed 

1 The treaty signed near Garigliano is still preserved with all 
its signatures in a charter of 1014, published by Gattola, Hist. ahb. 
Cass. Ace, t. i. p. 109. 


was the whole undertaking that in August 916, after 
a two months' siege, the Saracens, hemmed in on 
every side, were utterly defeated. The Pope, who 
was a worthy successor of John VIII., did not hesi- 
tate to risk his own life in the fray, for on two 
occasions we hear of his charging into the ranks of 
the enemy. He himself does not disdain to boast of 
his prowess in a letter written shortly afterwards to 
the Archbishop of Cologne. 

The Marquess Alberic has equal claims to dis- 
tinction ; he fought ut leo fortissimus, and to his 
share fell the greater part of the laurels of the war. 
He had been, for a long time, a conspicuous char- 
acter. Already in the time of the Emperor Guy he 
had been one of the chief captains of Italy. He 
afterwards entered Berengarius's service, and re- 
ceived the spoils of the Lambert family in the 
duchy of Spoleto. He was by no means scrupu- 
lous as to the methods he employed, and the last 
member of this family, the Marquess Guy, was 
murdered by him on one of the Tiber bridges.^ 
Both Spoleto and Camerino were in subjection to 
him, and like his predecessors in the same situation, 
he cast longing eyes at Rome. The Romans, thanks 
to his prowess in the Saracen war, looked upon him 
with favour, and, after the Garigliano episode, Theo- 
phylact bestowed on him the hand of his daughter, 
Marozia, who, as we have already seen, had been the 
mistress of the late Pope Sergius III. 

John X., strong in his temporal supporters, 
recked little of the scruples of those who considered 
(and not without reason) that his promotion was 
illegal. As deacon of Bologna, John had been 
nominated as the successor of the Bishop Peter, but 

1 Gesta Berengarii, ii. 29; 89. 


the metropolitan throne of Ravenna being vacant 
at the same time, he preferred to accept the more 
important post. He retained the office for several 
years until, by the favour of Theodora, he was pro- 
moted to the chair of St. Peter. The Invectiva in 
Romam, which blazed forth from Naples, and the 
chronicles of Monte Cassino, treat him as an invaso7\ 
The Roman catalogues, which are more discriminat- 
ing, place him in his due rank, but otherwise pass 
over the circumstance without remark. John, like 
his predecessor Sergius, refused to recognise the ordi- 
nations of Formosus. They were strangely incon- 
sistent, these popes — Stephen VI., Sergius III., and 
John X. They were all three tarred with the same 
brush as Formosus, having all of them been bishops 
before their accession to the papacy, and yet they 
with one accord condemned him, his promotion, and 
his ordinations.^ 

The disagreement on this point of canon law 
came to an end in the course of time. Towards the 
end of John X.'s reign, serious events were happen- 
ing in Northern Italy. Rudolph II., king of trans- 
juran Burgundy, was called upon in 922, by the 
Marquess of Ivry and other local potentates, to fight 
against the Emperor Berengarius. This unlucky 
prince was assassinated at Verona, after many ups 
and downs of fortune, including the Hungarian 
invasion incited by himself. But Rudolph was not 
long to enjoy his success unmolested. Another 
rival appeared in the person of Hugh, Count of Pro- 
vence, the successor of Louis the Blind, and grand- 

1 It is probable that, like Stephen VI. and Sergius III., John 
X. got out of the difficulty by the shifty theory of his first episcopal 
ordinations having been annulled. If this is the case, his consecra- 
tion as Archbishop of Ravenna must have taken place before the 
time of Sergius III., i.e. 904. 


son of Lothaire II., and Waldrade, by his mother 
Bertha. Recognised at Pavia in 926, Hugh imme- 
diately attracted the attention of the Romans. Dis- 
sension again arose round the person of John X. 
Theophylact and Alberic were both dead. There 
could no longer be any question of the male descent 
of the former, of that filius consults who had made 
such a brilliant figure at Berengarius's consecration. 
Theophylact's daughter, Alberic's widow, however, 
was still alive, and had taken to herself a second 
husband, Guy, Marquess of Tuscany, without in any 
way yielding her claims upon the Roman state. 

But her ambitions were thwarted by the Pope, 
supported by his brother Peter, who had also taken 
part in Berengarius's consecration, in 915. Relying on 
his position as head of a principality at Orta, as well 
as on the papal influence, he sought to counter- 
balance the authority of Marozia. The Hungarians, 
whom he had bidden, took the Saracens' place in the 
Roman district, and made it the scene of all kinds of 
horrors. To these dangerous allies the Pope was 
anxious to add, or to substitute, the support of the 
new king of Italy. He met him at Mantua, and 
they concluded a treaty of which the details are 

This attempt at emancipation was not calculated 
to please Marozia, and owing to the united efforts of 
herself and her husband, a revolt sprang up at Rome. 
The rebels, strengthened by the Tuscan troops, seized 
Peter and murdered him in the sight of his brother. 
The Pope himself was cast into prison and shortly 
afterwards stifled under a cushion (928). 

As the monk of Mt. Soracte remarks, in his 
strange Latin : Subjugatus est Romam potestative in 
manu femince. Marozia employed her power in 


bestowing the Holy See on her tools, first on Leo 
(Leo VI., 928), priest of St. Susan's, then on Stephen 
(Stephen VII., 929-931), priest of St. Anastasius' ; 
and finally on her own son John (John XL), formerly 
incumbent of St. Maria in the Trastevere. It was 
only his youth, probably, which had kept him from 
promotion before. 

Meanwhile, Guy of Tuscany had died. Hugh, 
King of Italy, who lived like a sultan in his palace 
at Pavia, also lost his legal wife. Marozia, bursting 
with ambition, and not content with reigning at 
Spoleto and Lucca, saw no reason why she should 
stop short of becoming queen, or even empress. 
She, therefore, offered her hand to King Hugh, who 
accepted it with alacrity. The wedding was cele- 
brated at Rome, at the Castle of St. Angelo, where 
Marozia appears to have taken up her abode. There 
was every reason to expect that John XL, like a 
dutiful son, would adorn the heads of the newly 
married pair with the imperial crowns. Things, 
however, turned out differently. 

In addition to John XL, who was illegitimate, 
Marozia had had another son — the young Alberic — 
by her first marriage with the Marquess of Spoleto. 
He was displeased at his mother's new matrimonial 
alliance, particularly as King Hugh was imprudent 
enough to insult him publicly in the midst of the 
festivities. Alberic, goaded to desperation, rallied 
round him a number of the discontented Romans, 
and immediately laid siege to the Castle of St. 
Angelo. Hugh, with difficulty, succeeded in 
escaping, but Marozia was taken captive. 

When all is said and done, this event was nothing 
but a change of person. The power passed out of 
the hands of Marozia into those of Alberic, her son. 


Marozia herself had inherited it from her father, 
Theophylact, and the dynasty was continued. The 
Pope was obHged to submit to circumstances, and 
to confine himself more and more to his ecclesiastical 
province. After John XI. (931-935) came Leo VII. 
(936-939), Stephen VIII. (939-942), Marinus II. 
(942-946), and Agapitus II. (946-955). Neither of 
these Popes exercised any temporal authority ; they 
were princes merely in theory, like the last of the 
Merovingian kings. This had been the real state of 
. affairs ever since the time of Sergius III. (904). 
The Roman state had, from its constitution in 754, 
been placed under the direction of the Pope and the 
clergy, though evidently contrary to the inclinations 
of the lay aristocracy. After many ineffectual 
efforts, the latter had succeeded in obtaining a 
place on the staff of management, but only by 
means of allying themselves with the protective 
government and taking advantage of its support. 
When the Carlo vingian line had come to an end, 
and it had become obvious that the title of emperor 
was no longer synonymous with practical power, the 
lay aristocracy had no difficulty in getting the upper 
hand. The important question of who was to be 
the primus inter pai^es, then the master, was solved 
by Theophylact; circumstances with which we are 
but imperfectly acquainted favoured his plans, and 
for long generations the power was centred in the 
family of the clever and ambitious vestm^arius. 



Alberic, Senator of the Romans — Limitsjof his Principality — Character 
of his Authority — Relations with the Byzantine Court — Monastic 
Revival— Octavian, Alberic's Son and Successor — He is elected 
Pope — His Disorderly Life — Otto is summoned by him to Rome 
and consecrated Emperor — Quarrel between the Pope and Otto — 
Deposition of John XII. — Election of Leo VIII. — Otto's Privilege — 
The Papal Election annulled by the Emperor — Return of John XIL; 
his Death — Benedict V. and Leo VIII. 

Alberic, upon becoming prince of the Romans, 
immediately set himself to defend his principality 
against outside attacks. There was no longer any- 
thing to fear from the Saracens, and the relations 
with the Greek empire had long been of a diplomatic 
nature only ; under Alberic they seem to have been 
peculiarly amiable. He had no trouble with his 
neighbours of Spoleto or Tuscany, for his ambitions 
did not soar beyond the limits of the old duchy of 
Rome. As for the transapennine provinces of the 
Exarchate and Pentapolis, they were, as a matter of 
fact, already in the power of the King of Italy. 
Alberic did not attempt to interfere with them, 
but devoted his attention to plans for defending 
his territory against the king's claims, and for 
strengthening his newly acquired power in the 

Hugh of Provence made several attempts (933, 
936, 941) to take possession of Rome, and to gain 
access to the Vatican, i,e, to receive the imperial 
coronation. Alberic, however, was more than a 



match for him. After several truces, brought 
about by the intervention of St. Odo, the worthy- 
Abbot of Cluny, Hugh finally agreed to cede all 
the rights which had accrued to him through his 
marriage with Marozia. The same year he returned 
to Provence, leaving the kingdom in the charge of 
his son Lothaire. The latter, however, died in 
950, while still in the prime of early manhood, 
leaving behind him a widow, Adelaide, as youthful 
as himself. Thereupon Berengarius, Marquess of 
Ivrea, whose importance had remarkably increased 
during the last few years, had himself proclaimed 
king. But Adelaide was not a person to be 
ignored. She resisted Berengarius on the strength 
of rights acquired through her husband and her 
father, Rudolph of Trans-juran Burgundy, who had 
reigned between Berengarius and King Hugh. She 
was defeated, and imprisoned in a tower on Lake 
Garda, but managed to escape and take refuge at 
Reggio, when she appealed for help to Otto, the 
powerful king of the Germans. 

Otto responded to some purpose. On the 22nd 
September 951, while Berengarius was taking refuge 
in a fortress, he appeared at Pavia, and took to wife 
Lothaire's young widow. Henceforward, for many 
a long day, the destinies of Italy were to be closely 
bound up with those of Germany. Alberic was 
anxious not to encourage any resumption of the 
ancient tradition of the imperial protectorate, and 
coldly repulsed Otto's desire to come to Rome, 
even though the latter sent him an embassy con- 
ducted by the Archbishop of Mainz and the 
Bishop of Coire. 

Otto was not importunate. Returning to his 
kingdom, where there was still work enough to 


occupy him for a long time, he decided to commit 
the government of Italy to his rival, Berengarius, 
who accepted the position of vassal king. 

The Roman situation was not affected by these 
external events. Except for a slight family con- 
spiracy, which was checked and severely punished, 
Alberic's sway remained undisputed. Public acts 
were still dated with the papal year, but on the 
coinage the emperor's name was replaced by 
Alberic's,^ which appeared in conjunction with 
that of the Pope. As in the past, the judicial 
assemblies were held with the co-operation of the 
dignitaries of the papal palace and the lay nobility. 
In former times the pontiff rarely intervened, 
although the usual place of meeting was the 
Lateran palace, in a hall called ad Lupam, after 
the famous bronze she - wolf popularly known as 
matei' Romanorum.^ When the emperor was 
present these assemblies were held in the Vatican; 
under Alberic's rule they sometimes took place at 
his own dwelling in the palace of the Via Lata, 
which probably corresponded with the Colonna 
palace of to-day. In all this there was no 
essential alteration as regards outward forms, but, 
apart from the inscription of Alberic's name on 
the coinage, the real change that had taken place 
was well symbolised in his title of princeps et 
omnium Romanorum senator ; to the title of 
princeps he himself added the qualification of 
humilis, others that of gloriosus. 

In the early part of his reign Alberic had taken 
advantage of favourable circumstances to enter into 
family relationships with the Byzantine empire. The 

^ Benedict of Mt. Soraete. 

2 Libellus de imp. pot. Cf. Jaffe, 2QSS. 


actual emperor at that time in Constantinople was 
Romanus Lecapenus. He was the father of several 
sons, one of whom, Theophylact, he intended for 
the patriarchal throne. The child was then only 
thirteen years of age, and, as his promotion was 
strongly opposed at Constantinople, Lecapenus 
begged that legates might be sent from Rome 
with the Pope's sanction, in order to prevent 
further protest. John XI. did send four ambassa- 
dors, among them two bishops, and these, on 2nd 
February 933, by their presence at St. Sophia, in 
company with the patriarchal child, countenanced 
a tremendous breach of ecclesiastical law. Affairs 
at Rome had been conducted on the principle of 
Do lit des, Marozia, the possessor of a consider- 
able line of ancestors, offered a daughter to the 
Greek emperor, who, for his part, was plentifully 
provided with male offspring to be settled in life. 
These negotiations had most probably been begun 
as early as 932, before the revolution which had 
substituted Alberic for Marozia. Our chief in- 
formation about this affair is procured from a letter 
written by Romanus Lecapenus to John XI., and 
recently published by Cardinal Pitra.^ We gather 
from it that the Greek emperor, satisfied with the 
concessions relating to Theophylact, was not at all 
anxious to recognise them by making an alliance 
with the prince of the Romans. According to 
him the journey from Constantinople to Rome is 
too long for his son, though Marozia may bring, 
or even send, her daughter. If she has no ships 
suitable for the undertaking they can be provided 
for her. 

According to Benedict of Mt. Soracte, it was 

^ Analecta novissima, t. i. p. 469. 


Alberic himself who had set his affections on a 
Greek princess. He was even prepared to furnish 
her with a whole staff of maids-of-honour, chosen 
from among the aristocratic ladies of Rome, when 
the plan fell through. AVhether there were two 
successive plans of marriage, or whether .we only 
admit the one of 932-933, there can be no doubt 
that the ruling family of Rome sought alliance 
with the imperial parvenus of Constantinople. 
Moreover, this fact has all the more weight when 
we remember the determination with which Alberic 
severed all links with Provence, Germany, and Italy. 
Like the Popes Stephen and Paul before him, he 
preferred a distant protector to one close at hand. 
It was the principle of the Donation of Constantine, 
only with a different application. 

As regards Alberic's government we have nothing 
but favourable, not to say edifying, accounts. The 
four Popes who owed their promotion to him, seem 
to have been most estimable persons. He took an 
active part in founding and reforming monasteries, 
that of St. Mary on the Aventine being established 
in one of his paternal mansions. He also founded 
the convent of St. Cyriacus in the A^ia Lata, and 
endowed and remodelled those of St. Gregory, 
St. Paul, St. Lawrence, and St. Agnes. The 
famous abbey of Subiaco, laden with memories 
of St. Benedict, was, under his auspices, changed 
from a mere country chapel to a great monastic 
establishment. At Farfa he succeeded in restoring 
discipline, a feat which, considering the extreme 
decadence of conventual life, and the attitude of 
the monks, necessitated nothing short of military 
measures. In all this Alberic was led by St. Odo, 
Abbot of Cluny, who, during his long stay at 


Rome, made of him the instrument by which he 
carried out his much-needed reforms. 

In order that such an administration should pro- 
duce any very permanent good effects, Alberic must 
have Hved to a good old age, and have left behind 
him a capable successor, imbued with the same spirit. 
This, however, was not the case. While not yet in 
his fortieth year, the prince of the Romans recog- 
nised the approach of death. Possibly he imagined 
that his son, who bore the ambitious name of 
Octavian, would one day become Augustus, and 
that a native Roman empire would spring from his 
principality and family. He must have been much 
alarmed at the appearance of Otto upon the scene. 
So powerful a prince, once established at Pavia, 
could not fail to be stirred by thoughts of Charle- 
magne, whose memory was still green in the ecclesi- 
astical world of Rome. This could bode no good 
to the lay aristocracy, of whom Alberic was the 
triumphant leader and head. The papacy, monarch 
of the past, had less reason than ever to fear the 
future. It was manifest to Alberic that the only 
resource of his family when he was dead would be 
in the possession of ecclesiastical power. Octavian, 
therefore, was now destined for the pontificate instead 
of for the empire. Alberic assembled the Romans 
at St. Peter's, and made them swear that his son 
should be elected Pope on the death of Agapitus II. 
Octavian was, at this period, in his sixteenth year. 
Some time after, in the year 954, Alberic died, and 
his son immediately succeeded him as princeps 
et omnium Romanorum senator. 

It would have been well for Rome and for the 
Church, if Pope Agapitus could have postponed 
his departure until his successor had had time to 


gain a little wisdom. Unfortunately, however, he 
died towards the end of the following year, and, 
on the second Sunday in Advent, 16th December 
9v5, the young prince of the Romans became Vicar 
of St. Peter's, and head of Christendom, under the 
title of John XII. The fact of ^his promotion put 
an end to the struggle for supremacy between the 
nobles and the clergy of Rome. There was no 
longer even a titular emperor, nor a foreign pro- 
tector, patridus Romanoi^uvi, It was like a return 
to the days before Sergius III. and Theophylact, 
Nicholas and Louis II., Eugene II. and Lothaire, 
to that state of unstable equilibrium, in which the 
temporal sovereignity of the Popes had had its rise. 
John XIL, except for certain changes introduced 
by a tradition of two hundred years, was in much 
the same position as had been Pope Zachary, or 
Stephen II. before the expedition to France. The 
difference lay in the fact that while the young Pope's 
only substantial support lay in the memory of his 
father, the papacy of the eighth century had behind 
it a long past of service and influence. 

The situation was rendered still more unsettled 
by the danger resulting from the extreme youth 
of the new Pope. In his rash inexperience he set 
out upon a venturesome enterprise against the Lom- 
bard principalities of Southern Italy, but was de- 
feated and obliged to sign a treaty. The indiscretion 
of youth displayed itself in yet another way, and 
Rome soon became witness of the most revolting 
scandals. The young Pope took very little interest 
in the offices of the Church and was never seen 
at Matins. His days and nights were spent in 
the society of women and young men, and in the 
midst of the pleasures of the table and the chase. 


His illicit amours were a matter of public knowledge, 
for they were restrained neither by ties of blood 
nor by respect of persons. The Lateran became 
a resort of persons of ill-fame, and no virtuous woman 
could remain in safety at Rome. The ecclesiastical 
treasury was, at that time, maintained by the 
practice of simony, and was employed for such 
illegitimate purposes as the support of these licen- 
tious proceedings. We hear of a bishop consecrated 
at the age of ten, of a deacon ordained in a stable, 
and of dignitaries blinded or mutilated. Cruelty 
and impiety were conspicuous, and it is said that 
in the Lateran festivals the Pope even went so far 
as to drink to the health of the devil ! 

It is true that, from force of habit, the pontifical 
administration was carried on in the usual way, 
like well-organised machinery, from force of long 
custom. John XII. even issued a document in 
which he enjoined that the monks of Subiaco should 
every day chant a hundred Kyrie Eleisons, and as 
many Christe Eleisons for the salvation of his soul. 
He certainly was in a position to need the devout 
prayers of all earnest Christians ! 

Strangely enough, the very person who was to 
put an end to these scandals was summoned to 
Rome by John himself. His relations with the 
Italian kingdom were not altogether satisfactory, 
and there seem to have been a few frontier disputes. 
There was certainly no great need for alarm, but 
the good people of Rome, not knowing which side 
to take, were not at all sorry for the interposition. 
John chose from among them two ambassadors, 
the deacon John and the protonotary Azo, and 
despatched them to Germany with complaints of 
his royal neighbours. There is no doubt that they 


took advantage of the occasion to lodge (though 
unofficially) their own grievances against the Pope. 
They were not alone in their protestations. Many 
of the Italian princes were growing restive under the 
government of Berengarius II. and his son Adalbert. 
The Archbishop of Milan who had been expelled 
from his See, the Bishop of Como, and many 
others, joined with the Romans in begging Otto to 

Towards the autumn of 961, Otto bore down 
upon Italy and entered Pavia without opposition. 
Berengarius and his wife Willa took refuge in a 
fortress in the Apennines, while Adalbert set out 
to find assistance. In the middle of winter the 
King of Germany started for Rome, after having 
made arrangements with the Pope as to the con- 
ditions of his stay, and the results that might be 
expected to follow his demands.^ 

The coronation took place on 2nd February 962. 
The Pope and the emperor signed an agreement by 
which John XII. swore that he would be loyal to 
Otto and never lend his support to Berengarius and 
Adalbert. Otto, for his part, guaranteed to the 
Pope all his temporal claims and possessions. At 
the same time he stipulated for the imperial rights 
over Rome and the papal elections. There still 
exists a celebrated document relating to this com- 
pact. It is known as " the Privilege of Otto," 

1 The formula of the agreement, preserved by Bonizo of Sutri 
(cf. L. P., t. ii. p. 354), contains a clause which throws some un- 
certainty upon this : In Romam nullum placitum aid ordinationem 
faciam de omnibus quce ad te aid ad Romanos pertinent sine tuo consulto. 
Certainly the privilege set forth after the consecration presupposes 
quite a different relationship. The formula de futuro might, how- 
ever, bear more than one interpretation. 



and dates from 13th February 962, a few days after 
the imperial coronation.^ 

John XII. and Otto parted on excellent terms, 
and the emperor returned to Pa via. ^ He had hardly 
left Rome, however, when the Pope began to enter 
into conspiracy with the claimants to the Italian 
throne. On hearing of this. Otto, not disposed to 
hurry matters, affected indifference and set himself 
to quell the opposition which he still encountered 
in his new kingdom. But, the following year (963), 
while he was besieging Berengarius II. and his 
wife Willa in the Castle of Montfeltro above 
Rimini, he received news that John XII., displaying 
his true colours, had welcomed Adalbert to Rome. 
He now hesitated no longer, and, on the 3rd 
November, appeared before the town. John XII. 

1 '' The Privilege of Otto " (M. G. Diplom., t. 1. p. 322 ; cf. 
Lib. Censuum, No. 82) has been the object of an official investigation 
by M. de Sickel {T)as Privilegium Ottos I.fiir die romische Kircke), 
who has discovered that we possess a contemporary copy of this 
document, at present preserved in the Vatican Archives. It is, 
however, possible that this copy has been tampered with in this 
passage : Et ut ille qui ad hoc sanctum et apostolicum regimen eligitur 
nemine consentiente consecratus fiat pontifex priusquam talem in presentia 
missorum nostrorum vel Jilii nostri sen ^miversce generalitatis faciat 
promissionejn qualem domnus et venerandtis spiritalis pater noster Leo 
sponte fecisse dinoscitur. According to M. de Sickel's idea {cf. 
Ottenthal, in B5hmer, Regesta imp., 2nd edition, t. ii. p. 153) the 
Leo referred to is Leo IIL, and the Privilege of Otto here slavishly 
reproduces the terms of a promise made by this Pope to Charlemagne 
or Louis the Pious. Others think that it is Leo IV. who is meant. 
M. B. Simson (Neues Arckiv, i. xv. p. 577) points out the 
strangeness of applying the formula domnus et venerandus spiritalis 
pater noster to any other Pope than the contemporary one, in 
which case it would refer to Leo VIII. The same phrase, however, 
recurs in the privilege delivered by Henry II. to Benedict VIII., 
which is practically but a reproduction of Otto's formula, while 
the latter, although it may have borrowed something from previous 
documents, is undoubtedly in the main original. It is evident 
that the privilege of 962 is not yet free from obscurities. 

2 He set out from Rome on 14th February and celebrated 
Easter at Pavia (30th March). 


and Adalbert, powerless in face of the reaction 
caused by the emperor's arrival, speedily took flight. 
The Romans opened their gates and took an oath 
of fidelity, swearing that they would never again ^ f ^ 
elect or ordain any Pope without the consent and 
choice of the Emperor Otto and his son Otto 11.^ 

On 6th November a huge conference was held 
at St. Peter's. The emperor presided, around him 
being ranged his court, both ecclesiastical and lay, 
including German and Italian priests, the episcopate 
from the neighbourhood of Rome, the Roman clergy, 
and the local aristocracy. Many complaints were 
lodged against the Pope, and the council decided 
to summon him to appear. Legates were sent 
with the message, but John returned a disdainful 
and threatening response.^ A second summons 
was despatched on 22nd November to his residence 
at Tivoli, but this did not affect him personally. 
Finally, on 4th December, after a month of waiting, 
the council pronounced on him a sentence of de- 
position. Thereupon the Romans, with Otto's full 
consent, elected as Pope the protoscriniarius Leo. 
In accordance with custom he was introduced at 
the Lateran, and on the following Sunday (6th 
December) his consecration was celebrated at St. 

To return to the privilege of Otto. It was 
perhaps at this juncture that it adopted the form in 
which it has been handed down to us. The second 

1 Fidelitatem repromittunt, hoc addentes et Jirmiter jurantes, num- 
quam se papam electuros md ordinaturos prceter consensum et electionem 
domni imp. Ottonis ccesaris aug.Jiliique ipsius regis Ottonis. (Luit- 

2 Johannes episcopus, servus servorum Dei, omnibus episcopis. Nos 
audivimus dicere quia vos vultis alium papam facere. Si hoc facilis, 
excommtmico vos de Deo omnipotente ut non habeatis licentiam nullum 
ordinare et missam celebrare. 


part, which relates to imperial rights, is practically a 
replica of the constitution oi 824. As far as the 
papal election is concerned, it seems to be a revival 
pure and simple of the law of the ninth century. 
One point alone does not seem quite clear. By the 
privilege of Otto, the Romans were bound not to 
allow the consecration of any Pope until he had 
sworn, in presence of the people and of the imperial 
missi, an oath in conformity with that which domnus 
et venerandus spiritalis pater nosier Leo sponte fecisse 
dinoscitur. As regards words and signification, this 
part of the privilege is a reproduction of the pre- 
scribed form of the Sacramentuvi Romanorum at- 
tached to the text of the constitution of 824. It 
refers to a promise made in 824 by Pope Eugenius II., 
as well as to another made by a Pope Leo, perhaps 
Leo VIII. As, however, we do not possess the 
actual wording of these stipulations, we are not in a 
position to judge. It may, however, be asserted that 
the general tenor of the privilege of Otto does not 
imply any progress in the imperial authority at 
Rome,^ either in the elections or in any other con- 

This being the case, it is somewhat surprising 
that Luitprand should have spoken of a veritable 
renunciation of the right of election, for, according 
to the passage quoted above, the Romans actually 
relinquished their claims to the choice of the Pope. 
And this is not the only reference to the subject. 
In his account of the council of 964 at which the de- 
position of Benedict V. was pronounced, Luitprand 

1 No theoretical progress, be it understood, for since the death 
of Lambert the constitution of Lothaire had become a dead letter. 
But from the imperial standpoint, the mere reinforcement of the 
regulations of 824 was an enormous advance. 


relates that the archdeacon addressed the following 
reproach to the accused Pope : " Canst thou deny 
having, with the other Romans, taken a solemn oath 
before the emperor that thou wouldst neither elect 
nor ordain any Pope without his consent and that of 
his son, King Otto ? " It must here be pointed out 
that this evidence on the part of Luitprand is much 
more reliable than his prattle about Theodora and 
Marozia. It is the testimony of one of the most in- 
fluential bishops on the council, the confidential friend 
of the Emperor Otto, and one who actually saw and 
heard that to which he bears witness. 

This account, twice repeated in the same terms, 
obviously produces quite a different impression from 
that of the privilege. I have, nevertheless, no hesi- 
tation in maintaining that it is the correct one. 
With it accord all the statements concerning the 
elections during a period of nearly a century from 
the events of 963. As long as there was an emperor 
capable of doing so, he it was who actually chose 
the Pope; when the imperial power was monopo- 
lised at Rome by a patrician, or any other repre- 
sentative of the emperor, it was still, so far as one 
can tell, the responsible factor in the papal elections. 
This election was merely a formality, and did but 
confirm a choice made independently of those who 
appeared to take part in it. 

As for the privilege, it was not what it seemed 
to be. In the first part it recognises the Pope's 
right to a territorial domain as large as that of which 
it was a question in the life of Hadrian I. Otto, if 
we are to take the words literally, was to guarantee 
to the papacy the possession of Tuscany, Parma, 
Mantua, Venice, Istria, and the duchies of Spoleto 
and Beneventum, and was even ready to promise 


the Byzantine territories of Naples and Gaeta. No 
one will venture to maintain that these professions 
were put into practice. One might also suggest 
that, even in the second part, as far as the papal 
elections were concerned, there was a considerable 
discrepancy between the theory sanctioned by the 
document and the actual facts. This idea is con- 
firmed by Luitprand's evidence as well as by what 
we know of the elections under the new regime. 

That this was a very great change may be both 
affirmed and denied. As far as the Romans were 
concerned, it was not, for they had long exercised 
their right in appearance only. Ever since the 
beginning of the century there had always been a 
chief elector in the person of Theophylact, or 
Marozia, or Alberic. On the other hand, when we 
take into consideration the fact that the nationality 
of this dominating influence, up to and including 
John XII., had always been Roman, we realise that 
a serious change was taking place. The ruling 
power was now to be a foreign one, that of the 
Saxon family, which was, for the time being, charged 
to preside over the destinies of Germany. 

It must, of course, be clearly understood that all 
this is true, and is proved, in spite of the apocryphal 
documents^ by which it was later on sought to 
confirm the pretensions of the kings of Germany, 
by an alleged compact entered into between Otto 
and Leo VIII., to the right of investiture in general, 
to the appointment of the Popes, and to certain 

^ J., 3704-6. Of these and other documents it may be said 
that they bear a striking resemblance to those charters of donation 
which the monks took upon themselves to manufacture in place of 
the originals^ which had been lost. The forged documents, attri- 
buted by them to Leo VIII. and other earlier Popes, correspond 
with those of the period of 96O-IO6O. 


portions of the temporal estates of the Holy 

But John XII. and his followers did not meekly 
accept the sentence pronounced against him. When 
the Christmas festivities were over, the emperor 
dismissed part of his army, and himself prepared to 
undertake the siege of Montefeltro. On the 3rd 
January 964 a rebellion burst forth, and barricades 
were erected on the bridge of St. Angelo. The 
Romans expected to have no difficulty in dispersing 
Otto's frail forces, but they soon found out their 
mistake. The barricades were swept away, and a 
huge massacre was set on foot. The vanquished 
Romans the next day presented themselves in sorry 
plight before the emperor and delivered up their 
hostages, Leo being artless enough to interfere. 
The emperor had only just taken his departure when 
John XII. reappeared. His rival immediately de- 
camped. A council, of which the records are still 
preserved, was held at the Lateran in the early part 
of February. Heavy sentences were passed on all 
adherents of the imperial Pope (now regarded as an 
usurper) who would not retract their opinions. 
There were two very weighty arguments against 
the promotion of Leo: first of all, the prevailing 
idea that the Pope could not be judged by any one, 
sancta sedes a neviine judicature and, consequently, 
that the deposition of John having been pronounced 

1 Owing to this principle, Leo III. and Pascal had avoided the 
courts of justice, their innocence being established simply in virtue 
of their own oaths. It was quite different with John XII., who 
was involved in a notorious and permanent scandal ; the Pope 
would have been with difficulty made to undergo the piirgatio per 
sacramentujn, and even had he done so, it would have been univer- 
sally considered an additional sacrilege. There was nothing for 
it but a trial extraordinary. 


by an incompetent assembly, was null and void. 
Moreover, the appointed Pope did not belong to 
the clergy. It is not absolutely certain, though 
very probable, that his office of protoscrinius presup- 
posed the tonsure ; but there is no doubt that at 
the time of his election he did not possess any 
ecclesiastical orders, not even that of door-keeper. 
Ancient tradition required that the pontiff should be 
elected from the cardinal clergy, among the priests 
or deacons, and no deviation from this custom was 
allowed to pass without protest.^ 

From the Roman point of view it seemed that 
the council of February 964 had avenged the ancient 
right : John XII. was the rightful Pope, the repre- 
sentative of tradition, as well as of what may be 
called the national sentiment. Otto, of course, was 
far from seeing things in the same light. Never- 
theless he did not think fit to interrupt his military 
proceedings, with the result that John XII. was able 
to enjoy his success for several weeks. He was 
still in possession of the Holy See, when death over- 
took him on 14th May 964. 

Pope John XII. died, alas, as he had lived, his 
last hours being passed in the gratification of an 
illicit passion — in the bed of a young married lady. 
Luitprand maintains that he was struck mortally on 
the temples by the devil himself, but Gregorovius 
justly surmises that it was more probably the injured 
husband who acted as the avenging instrument of 
the prince of darkness ! However this may have 
been, by some means or other the chair of St. Peter 
was disencumbered of a most unworthy occupant. 

It might have been supposed that the Romans 

1 Silverius, Constantine II., Leo V. — John XII. himself was 
cardinal deacon at the time of his promotion. 


would now rally round Leo VIII. But nothing of 
the kind occurred. So far from troubling about the 
imperial Pope, they immediately took unto them- 
selves another — the Deacon Benedict. He was a 
suitable person, and of some literary attainments 
(grammaticus), and was apparently ordained on the 
22nd of May. The Romans were even good enough 
to send notice of his accession to the emperor, who 
was already advancing against Rome. The gates of 
the city were closed, but the defence did not last 
long. On 23rd June Otto and Leo VIII. having 
obtained the mastery, convened a new synod at the 
Lateran ; the unfortunate Benedict was brought 
before it, and, having received sentence of depo- 
sition, was despatched to Germany, where he was 
placed under the charge of the archbishops of Ham- 

The opposition being thus quelled, Leo VIII. 
was able to hold his own up to the time of his death, 
which took place shortly afterwards. 



John XIII. — Rebellion of the Romans — Death of Otto I. — Boniface VII. 
and the Popes of the Emperor — Crescentius and Theophano — Otto 
III. and Crescentius II. — Gregory V. — Sylvester II. — Tivoli : Otto 
and Sylvester Expelled — Crescentius III. — The Counts of Tusculum: 
their Authority at Rome — The Emperor Henry II. : his Privilege — 
The:Popes of Tusculum : Benedict VIII., John XIX., Benedict IX. 
— Conrad II. : Suppression of Personal Right — Revolt of the 
Romans — Sylvester III. — Gregory VI. : the Pontificate Sold. 

Towards the month of March 965, the Holy See 
was once more without an occupant. The Romans 
dared not run the risk of an election, and communi- 
cated with the Emperor Otto,^ whose choice fell upon 
a relation of Pope John XII., named John, Bishop 
of Narni, son of Theodora II., and nephew of the 
celebrated Marozia. It was a return to the family of 
Theophylact, but with the imperial countenance. 
John XIII. was installed on the 1st October, but 
in less than three months a rebellion broke out at 
Rome, caused, it was said, by the severity of the new 
Pope, but, in reality, directed against the imperial 
authority. John, after having suffered ill-treatment 
and insults, was imprisoned in the castle of St. 
Angelo, and finally banished from Rome. He took 
refuge in Lombard territory, at Capua, and then 

^ Cont. Reginonis : Legati Romanorum . . . hnperatorem pro insti- 
tuendo quern vellet Romano pontifice in Saxonia adeuntes suscipiuntur et 
remittuntur. The election took place at Rome, under the super- 
vision of two missi, Otger, Bishop of Spires, and Luitprand, Bishop 
of Cremona. 



returned by way of the Abruzzi, Sabina, and Tuscany, 
at the head of such an imposing army, that the 
Romans decided to receive him back. He made his 
re-entry with much pomp on 14th November 966. 
This change of front was in great part due to the 
report that the Emperor Otto had crossed the Alps, 
and was advancing for the fourth time on Rome. 
The monk of Mt. Soracte saw his army pass, and 
thereupon terminated his chronicle with lamenta- 
tions on the decline of Rome, once mistress of the 
world, and now in bondage to the Saxons. 

He was quite right. The Saxons had abolished 
the ancient form of the papal elections, and the 
Romans had now to learn what remained to them- 
of the political power. 

The chief instigator of the revolt, Count Rofred, 
had been killed in the reaction which followed, but 
some of his associates were still left at Rome. 
Several "consuls" were arrested, and banished to 
the other side of the Alps, and the twelve district 
chiefs were sent to the gallows, to serve as deputies 
for the common people. The prefect, who was 
deeply implicated, was handed over to the Pope 
for punishment. John had his beard shaved,^ and 
ordered him to be hung by the hair to the caballus 
Constantini, the celebrated equestrian statue of 
Marcus Aurelius, which at that time adorned the 
liateran palace. After having been made to ride a 
donkey, face backwards, with the animal's tail 
between his hands, he was cast into prison until 
the departure of the emperor, when he was also 
banished to Germany. Finally Otto had the bodies 

1 This ceremony, according to Byzantine custom, was the 
symbol of degradation. Even now, in the East, priests, on being 
suspended, have their beards cut off. 


of Rofred and the vestiarius Stephen exhumed, and 
thrown into the pubHc sewer. 

Thanks to these severe methods of repression, the 
authority of John XIII. was maintained without any 
further difficulty. In April 967 he held a synod at 
Ravenna in conjunction with the emperor, who then 
restored to him (in theory) his transapennine terri- 
tories, which had long been outside the power of 
the Holy See. On Christmas Day of the same 
year the young Prince Otto II. received the imperial 
coronation at the hands of the Pope in the basilica 
of St. Peter. John XIII. passed peacefully away on 
6th September 972, and Otto appointed in his stead 
Benedict, a cardinal deacon, whose ordination did 
not take place until January 973. This long interval 
is the only existing proof of the imperial intervention 
on this occasion, but, considering the circumstances, 
it is quite conclusive. 

The great Otto died in Germany, 7th May 973. 
The Romans, at first, did not make any disturbance, 
but a fresh revolution broke out a year later, when 
the young Otto II. was occupied in contending 
against the Duke of Bavaria and other of his vassals. 
The leader of the rebellion at Rome was Crescentius, 
the son of Theodora, and brother of John XIII. 
Benedict VI. was taken prisoner and confined in the 
castle of St. Angelo, and replaced by a so-called 
"national" Pope — Boniface VII., son of Ferruccius, 
and formerly the deacon Franco. All in vain did 
the imperial missus, Count Sicco, protest against the 
turn affairs were taking ; his objections only served 
to hasten matters. By order of the usurper, Benedict 
was strangled in his prison. Sicco, nevertheless, 
managed to gain the mastery, and succeeded in 
ejecting Boniface VII. In place of the unfortunate 


Benedict VI., they elected a new Pope, who adopted 
the name of Benedict VII. Franco, some time 
afterwards, fled from Rome, and took refuge at 

This was already the third time since the accession 
of Leo VIII. that the Romans had openly rebelled 
against the new order of things. They strongly 
objected to having their Popes appointed for them, 
and had not yet come to an end of their powers of 
resistance. Benedict VII. had a tolerably easy time 
of it during his reign, which lasted until his death on 
10th July 983. The Emperor Otto came to Italy at 
the end of 980, and from that time he often stayed at 
Rome, making it the headquarters for his campaigns 
in Southern Italy. He died there on 7th December 
983, just as he was preparing to avenge a serious 
defeat sustained the year before in Calabria. 

On the death of Benedict VII. Otto had ap- 
pointed in his place a bishop of his kingdom of 
Italy, the Chancellor Peter, who took the name of 
John XIV. This new Pope attended him on his 
deathbed, and permitted his interment in the atrium 
of St. Peter's, a ceremony which was the precursor of 
sad days to come. There were only two represen- 
tatives of the imperial family — a child of three years 
old, proclaimed in Germany under the name of Otto 
III., and the Greek Princess Theophano, widow of 
Otto II., and grand-daughter of the Emperor 
Constantine Porphyrogenetis. Theophano was a 
strong-minded woman, as was soon made manifest. 
But circumstances did not allow her to stay at 
Rome; she was obliged to hasten to rejoin her 
son in Germany, leaving the Pope to the mercies 
of the Romans. 
V Franco thought that his chance had come; in 


April 984 he came back from Constantinople, 
seized upon John XIV., and threw him into prison 
at St. Angelo, where the wretched victim died four 
months later, possibly from hunger. Boniface still 
regarded himself as the rightful Pope, and reckoned 
the years of his pontificate from the deposition of 
Benedict in July 985. Rome put up with him for 
more than a year, and in July 985 he died un- 
expectedly. His death gave rise to a temporary 
reaction ; his corpse was treated with disrespect, 
dragged through the town, and finally left in a nude 
condition in front of the " horse of Constantine." 

Crescentius, who had raised him (974) to the 
papal throne, and played an important part in his 
restoration (984), had died immediately after the 
latter event. His epitaph ^ is still to be seen at St. 
Alexis. The authority was boldly seized by his son 
Crescentius, who assumed the new qualification of 
patricius Romanorum, There was no longer any 
prospect of a complete independence. Though the 
emperor was but a child, the empire remained 
solid, and to attack it too severely would have been 
indiscreet. Crescentius, in adopting the title of patri- 
cian, appears to have posed as a kind of lieutenant 
or provisional manager during the interregnum. 
His name appears, together with the Pope's, in 
certain documents of the time ; possibly it figured 
on the coins as well, but of this there is no 

1 He was a monk at the time of his death, and richly endowed 
the monastery. His epitaph recommends him to the prayers : 

id tandem scelerum veniain mercatur habere. 

His conscience, indeed, must have been heavily burdened, for he 
and Franco between them had caused the overthrow and assassina- 
tion of two Popes. "^ 


John XV., who succeeded Boniface VII., pro- 
bably owed his promotion to Crescentius, but we 
have very little accurate information as to the ponti- 
fical history of this period. At the close of 989 the 
Empress Theophano reappeared at Rome, comport- 
ing herself as if she were the sovereign. The docu- 
ments are dated with her imperial year, and sometimes 
even dignify her with the masculine title of emperor. 
As we hear of no resistance, it is reasonable to suppose 
that she was on good terms with Crescentius, and did 
not dispute his patriciate. 

John XV. seems to have shed as dim a lustre 
round the papal throne as did the Pope appointed by 
Marozia and Alberic. But meanwhile the young 
king of Germany was growing up, and when, in 996, 
he reached his majority, he made up his mind to visit 
Italy where his presence was greatly desired. The 
Pope himself, who was beginning to weary of Cres- 
centius, had invited him to come to Rome. He had 
not, however, the pleasure of receiving him there, 
for he died at the beginning of April 996, when 
Otto III. had got no further than Pavia. 

Crescentius did not venture to appoint John's 
successor, and a solemn embassy was despatched to 
Otto at Ravenna, begging him to undertake the re- 
sponsibility. The young emperor was at this time 
barely sixteen years old, and he selected one of his 
cousins, Bruno, son of the Duke of Carinthia, to 
take the vacant post. He was a clerk, a young man 
of only twenty-three. His consecration took place 
at Rome, on 3rd May, under the title of Gregory V., 
and then, on the 21st of the same month, he cele- 
brated the imperial coronation of his cousin. Though 
this was not the first time that the Romans had 
suffered the infliction of a young and immature 


^ pontiff, it was the first time that they had had one 
of transalpine origin foisted upon them by the 
Roman court. After Gregory V. came Sylvester 
II., so that, thanks to Otto III., the chair of St. 
Peter was occupied successively by the first of the 
(j German and the first of the French Popes. 

Otto's arrival heralded the fall of Crescentius, 
who had to render an account of his misdeeds before 
the imperial tribunal. His trial resulted in a sen- 
tence of banishment, which, however, through the 
ill-advised intervention of Gregory V., was never 
carried out. 

Three months after the emperor s departure, when 
he had only just crossed the Alps on his homeward 
way, a rebellion broke out against the German Pope. 
The latter was probably not altogether blameless : a 
contemporary writer, John Caneparius,^ speaks of him 
as multuni fervidce juventutis. But it is evident that 
the old national leaven was fast fermenting. The 
movement was headed by Crescentius himself, and 
Gregory V. fled ignominiously. The emperor was 
just then busy fighting against the Slavs, and the 
Pope was not in a position to do more than hurl 
denunciations against the insurgent. A council was 
held at Pavia, in February 997, at which Crescentius 
was solemnly anathematised. He, however, in no 
way disconcerted, brought forward a rival to Gregory 
v., in the person of Philagath, Bishop of Piacenza, 
who was passing through Rome on his way back 
from Constantinople, where he had been sent on an 
imperial embassy. He was a Calabrian Greek, who 
owed everything to the favour of Theophano and her 
son, but at the instigation of Crescentius he con- 
sented to turn traitor to his benefactors, and, in the 

1 Life of St. Adalbert, M. G. Scr., t. iv. p. 591. 


month of April 997, he was installed as Pope under 
the title of John XVI. 

But, less than a month afterwards, Otto came 
back, in company with the German Pope. Rome 
opened her gates ; Philagath took flight, and Cres- 
centius shut himself up in the castle of St. Angelo. 
While they were preparing to besiege it, according 
to rule, the unfortunate John XVI. was caught on 
one of the Campanian roads. His captors hastened 
to cut off his nose and his ears, and to tear out his 
eyes and tongue. In this pitiable plight he was 
brought before a council at the Lateran, formally 
deposed and delivered over to the populace, who 
subjected him to the humiliating process of riding 
backwards on a donkey. In vain did the venerable 
St. Nilus, the patriarch of the Greek monks of 
Southern Italy, intercede on his behalf. His life 
was spared, but that was all. He managed to sur- 
vive his ill-treatment for another fifteen years, when 
he died, probably at the abbey at Fulda, in the 
year 1013. 

To return to Crescentius. The assault on the 
castle of St. Angelo was successful, so that on 29th 
April 998 the fortress was seized by the Germans. 
Crescentius, taken prisoner, was beheaded on the 
battlements, and then his body and those of twelve 
other Romans were hanged upon gibbets erected on 
Mte. Mario {mons Malus, vions Gaudii), 

But this torture did not succeed in suppressing 
the patrician race. There still remained, in addition 
to the collateral branches, a son called John Cres- 
centius, of whom we shall presently hear more. The 
Romans had been profoundly impressed by the hardy 
resistance and tragic death of Crescentius, who soon 
passed into a legendary hero. 



Otto, from that time, made Rome his permanent 
abode. His presence was absolutely necessary to 
keep the Romans within bounds, although he applied 
himself to winning them over by means of all kinds 
of flattering attentions, and by reviving for their 
benefit a sort of imperial court in the fashion of 
bygone days. On 18th February 999 Gregory died, 
either from poison, or in some even more tragic way. 
Otto thereupon raised to the pontificate his former 
tutor, Gerbert, at that time archbishop of Ravenna. 
Sylvester II., as he was called, does not appear to 
have been any more at ease than his predecessor as 
chief shepherd of the Roman flock, and no sooner did 
Otto leave him for a moment than he implored him 
to come back. 

The young emperor had a propensity for pious 
companions, and he devoted much time to pilgrim- 
ages. Close to his residence on the Aventine arose 
the convent of Saints Boniface and Alexis, just then 
in all the first fervour and enthusiasm of its founda- 
tion. Otto was on terms of friendship with the 
monks there, some of whom were compatriots of his 
own. He was known to perform his devotions at 
Beneventum before the shrine of the Apostle Bar- 
tholomew ; at Monte Cassino and at Monte Gargano 
amid the solitudes of Campania, where St. Nilus, 
hunted out of Calabria by the Saracen invasion, had 
found a temporary refuge. At Ravenna he visited 
another monkish patriarch, St. Romuald. Some- 
times these devout pilgrimages led him farther still 
to Aix-la-Chapelle, allured by memories of Charle- 
magne, or to Gnesen, in the south of Poland, where 
reposed the remains of his friend St. Adalbert of 
Prague, who had been murdered on the shores of the 
Baltic by the uncivilised Prussians. 


These journeys seemed very long to Pope 
Sylvester, but they had no disastrous conse- 
quences. The danger lay in another quarter. In 
the immediate neighbourhood of Rome there were 
at that time several important seigniories. Various 
branches of the family of Theophylact were in 
possession of large estates, of which Tusculum, on 
Monte Albano, Praeneste, Arci in Sabina, and 
Galera on the Tuscan road, were the chief centres 
and fortresses. The abbot of Farfa was likewise 
a baron of the first rank. But the one and only 
city which lived its own life was Tivoli. Thanks 
partly to a certain degree of preservation in the 
municipal institutions of ancient Tibur, as well as 
to the progress of the local organisation under the 
auspices of the bishop, Tivoli was of considerable 
importance. Not only did she exist by the side 
of Rome, but she also had the power of irritating 
the Romans by the very fact of her existence and 
prosperity. The Romans loathed Tivoli, as, later 
on, they loathed Tusculum, with a loathing as 
deadly as it was irresponsible. When, in 1001, 
the inhabitants of Tivoli were misguided enough to 
rebel against the imperial authority, the emperor, 
assisted by the Romans, who hoped for a share of 
the spoil, set out to quell them. The Pope and 
Bishop Bernard of Hildesheim^ urged the rebels 
to submit, and the emperor, having them at his 
mercy, spared their lives. This was the very step 
to displease the Romans, and, soon after his return 
to Rome, Otto III. saw the rebellious populace 
surging to the very doors of his palace in the Aven- 
tine. With difficulty he succeeded in escaping to 

1 His life, by Tangmar, is full of interest {M. G. Scr., t. iv. 
p. 754). 


Ravenna, taking with him the Pope Sylvester. 
This was on 16th February 1001, and from that 
time Otto never went back to Rome, although his 
military expeditions against the southern provinces 
must sometimes have led him to pass within sight 
of the ramparts. On 24th January of the following 
year, he died at Paterno, near Mt. Soracte. Rome, 
the city which he so loved, was closed against him, 
so that his body could not find a resting-place by 
the side of his father. Otto II., and they were 
obliged to take it to Aix-la-Chapelle. As he had 
never been married, the male issue of Otto the 
Great was now extinct, and the Germans rallied 
round Henry, Duke of Bavaria, grand-nephew of 
the great emperor. 

Italy, for the last time, appointed a national king, 
Arduin, Marquess of Ivrea, who was proclaimed at 
Pa via on 15th February. At Rome the power, 
without any pressure from outside, became once 
more centred in the family of Crescentius. It is 
probable that John Crescentius, son of the criminal 
executed in 998, had been in some way connected 
with the rebellion of 1001, and that from that time 
the Romans had vested the chief authority in him. 
After Otto's death he assumed the title of patri- 
cius Romanorum, which he maintained without any 

History was repeating itself. For thirty years 
Ottos and Crescentiuses had succeeded one another 
alternately. Though the actual individuals varied, 
it was always the same conflict between the 
national chief and the foreign prince. 

Sylvester II. returned to Rome, where the patri- 
cian allowed him to die in peace. This event took 
place on 12th May 1003, and the next Pope 


appointed was John XVII., who, after a reign of 
six months, was succeeded by John XVIII. This 
latter occupied the papal See until the year 1009, 
when his place was taken by Sergius IV. {Bucca- 
porca), who, from being the son of a Roman shoe- 
maker, had risen to the rank of bishop of Albano. 
He died on 12th May 1012, the patrician having 
preceded him to the grave by a few weeks. 

Owing to the party strife among the aristocracy 
the vacancy of the Holy See gave rise to a double 
election. In opposition to the Crescentius family 
was the increasing influence of the Counts of Tus- 
culum, who were connected with the family of the 
great Prince Alberic, as well as with the far-away 
ancestor Theophylact. Gregory, the head of the 
house, figures in the time of Otto III. under the 
title of pi^cefectus navalis. To him, doubtless, was 
due the restoration and transformation of the acro- 
polis of the old Latin city, which had been aban- 
doned for centuries. He was the father of three sons, 
Alberic, Romanus, and the Cardinal Theophylact. 
There can be no doubt that this influential family 
had long cherished the ambition of succeeding the 
Crescentii in the government of the Roman state. ^ 
But there were obstacles in the way. The power 
was in the hands of the Crescentii, who represented 
the tradition of independence, as far as this had 
been possible, since the advent of the Saxon kings 
in Italy. According as the German authority was 
strong or weak, the Crescentii regulated their behavi- 
our, resigning themselves or objecting, as the occasion 

1 The chief country strongholds of the Crescentius party were 
between the Tiber and Farfa, at Monticelli, Nomentum, and Arci. 
At Rome they held the castle of St. Angelo, which was apparently 
inherited by the family of Theophylact. 


seemed to demand. In one way or another they 
managed to express the attitude of the people, or 
rather of the aristocracy, the only class which had 
any weight at that time. The Tusculans, in order 
to counter-check them, assumed a special devotion 
to the German interests, but, in point of fact, this 
was very little beyond assumption, though it un- 
doubtedly made them more favourably regarded on 
the other side of the Alps. 

The patrician of the Romans being no longer 
alive, the two papal candidates, Gregory, supported 
by the waning Crescentian influence, and Theo- 
phylact, the third son of the Count of Tusculum, 
turned to King Henry II. This latter had already 
made a campaign in Northern Italy in 1004, and 
had even gained an entry into Pavia, but the old 
Lombard capital had risen up in arms against him, 
so that, although the rebellion was checked by fire, 
Henry had thought it wiser to curtail his sojourn 
in the Italian kingdom. After his departure, 
Arduin, the national king, had regained his footing, 
and the internal difficulties of the German kingdom, 
combined with the diplomacy of John Crescentius, 
had sufficed to keep Henry II. on the north of the 
Alps. The present position of affairs seemed more 
promising. Henry spoke encouraging words to 
Gregory's ambassadors, but withheld his decision, 
which was clearly affected by the fact that Theo- 
phylact, who, through the influence of his father 
and brothers, had been proclaimed Pope under the 
title of Benedict VIII., had succeeded in consolidating 
his position. 

At the end of February 1013 Henry II. made 
his entry into Italy, thus causing Arduin to dis- 
appear from public view. On 1 4th February of the 


following year, the king of Germany and his wife, 
Queen Cunegunda, were crowned by Benedict VIII. 
at St. Peter's. Arduin made a last effort to reassert 
himself a little while afterwards, but with so little 
success that he was reduced to entering a monastery, 
where he spent the remainder of his days. 

Pope Benedict VIII., who reigned twelve years 
—to the 7th April 1024— left behind him a satis- 
factory record. He seems to have always main- 
tained amicable relations with the emperor. He led 
a naval expedition against the Saracens, who had 
seized upon Luni (1016), paid a visit to Germany in 
1020, accompanied the emperor to the south of Italy 
in 1022, and the same year united with him in holding 
a synod at Pavia, where the long-forgotten regula- 
tions concerning celibacy were once more brought to 

Benedict had plenty of time to occupy himself 
with religious matters. The burden of the temporal 
government was assumed by his brother Romanus, 
who bore the title of Senator omnium 'Romanorum^ 
revived in the time of Alberic, so that the whole 
power of the papacy, spiritual as well as political, 
was vested in the nobles of Tusculum. They had, 
however, to reckon with the supreme authority of 
the emperor as far as temporal affairs were con- 
cerned. Like the Crescentii, they were in the 
position of vice-governors, or permanent missi, rather 
than that of independent princes. Alberic had been 
free from any such restraint, for there had been no 
emperor in his day to impose it upon him. But the 
situation had utterly changed since the consecration 
of 962. Under the Crescentii, especially the first 
two, the lay chiefs of the Roman aristocracy had 
tried to resist the imperial authority, but with the 


Tusculans things were on a more friendly footing. 
When the emperor, as constantly happened, was 
away from Rome, the governing power was left in 
the hands of the Tusculum family ; but when he 
was in the city, he naturally took the headship of 
affairs, presiding at the courts of justice, and modify- 
ing the legislation if necessary. Thus we have an 
edict of the Emperor Conrad II. ^ addressed to the 
Roman judges, by which the personal right of the 
Lombards over Roman territory is annulled. This 
point of personal right had not been inserted in the 
privilege of Otto I., which reproduced so many con- 
ditions of the constitution of 824. Nevertheless, 
the abbot of Farfa, in an action brought before 
Otto III., appealed successfully to the Lombard 
law. But the curious documents from which we 
derive our information concerning this suit show how 
very few and far between were the Roman magis- 
trates who really understood the Lombard legalities. 
Conrad brought things into better order, and com- 
manded ut qucecumque negotia mota fuerint tam inter 
Romance urhis moenia quam etiam deforis in Romanis 
pertinentiis, adore Langobardo vel reo, a vobis dum- 
taocat Romanis legibus terminentur. 

This fact demonstrates how the emperors of the 
eleventh century, like those of the ninth, regarded 
themselves as genuine monarchs at Rome, particu- 
larly in connection with legislation. Certainly the 
privilege documents give no hint of this degree of 
authority, but that only proves how little these are 
to be relied upon in a question of defining the precise 
circumstances. Henry II. issued one for the benefit 
of Benedict VIII. on the occasion of his consecra- 
tion, and that is an exact reproduction of the privilege 

1 Mon. Germ. Leges, ii. 40. 


of Otto. It is probable that a document of this 
kind was produced at every imperial consecration. 

When Benedict died, the senator, without more 
ado, calmly established himself in his place, taking 
the name of John XIX. It was the counterpart of 
the accession of John XII. — the family traditions 
were being carried out. The new Pope, who, accord- 
ing to one of the chroniclers, uno eodemque die prtje- 
fectusfuit et papa,^ was not well adapted to fulfil the 
ideas of Benedict VIII., or rather of the Emperor 
Henry II., on ecclesiastical reform, and the old 
abuses cropped up again more vigorously than ever. 
John XIX. reigned until 1032, the most conspicuous 
event of his pontificate being the coronation of the 
Emperor Conrad II., successor to Henry. 

The only survivor of Count Gregory's three sons 
was the eldest. Count Alberic, who had no inclina- 
tion to assume the papal authority. He had four 
sons. On one of them, Gregory, he bestowed the 
temporal government, together with the title of 
Consul Romanorum ; another, bearing, like his distant 
ancestor and Benedict VIII., the name of Theophy- 
lact, was appointed to succeed his two uncles in the 
pontifical chair. That he was only twelve years old 
was no obstacle, and he was proclaimed Pope under 
the title of Benedict IX. To the German princes 
there was nothing objectionable in this hereditary 
transmission of the Apostolic Chair. They had 
recognised John XIX., who, though a layman, was 
a full-grown man, and they tolerated Benedict IX., 
a mere urchin, who was before long to become 
actively offensive. 

Indeed, as time went on, the young Pope revived 

1 John XII., at any rate, was a cardinal at the time of his 


at the Lateran the rule of revelry which had flourished 
under his ancestor John XII., eighty years before. 
Conrad II., who understood how to manage this 
papal puppet, not only encouraged him, but over- 
whelmed him with attentions. He benefited by this 
attitude in his struggle against the archbishop of 
Milan, when, on two occasions, at Cremona 1037, 
and at Spello 1038, Benedict went to meet him, 
and at his request, pronounced sentence of excom- 
munication against the Archbishop Heribert. Not 
until seven years had passed did Henry III., who 
succeeded Conrad in 1039, interfere and put a stop 
to the gross scandals over which every earnest- 
minded person in Christendom was obliged to 
lament in helpless silence. 

The Romans themselves were the first to grow 
weary of their Pope's proceedings. During the 
autumn of 1044 they rose in rebellion and expelled 
him from his See,^ together with his brother the 
consul, and all connected with the House of Tus- 
culum. However, the pontifical party succeeded 
in maintaining their own in the Trastevere, while 
Rome herself and the Leonine city remained in the 
power of the rebels. The latter, on 7th January 
1045 made an onslaught on the Trasteverans, but 
were put to flight by the vassals of Tusculum, 
under the leadership of Gerard, Count of Galeria. 
They fell back in disarray on the Saxon gate, which, 
however, was not forced, so the Romans, emboldened, 
elected a successor to Benedict. This was John, 
Bishop of Sabina, who took the name of Sylvester 

1 Ann. Rom. {L. P., t ii. p. 331). It is perhaps to this event 
that Raoul Glaber's account refers iv., 24 (cf. 17), only he con- 
founds the dates. The Roman annalist mentions a solar eclipse 
of 22nd November, immediately after having spoken of the ex- 
pulsion of Benedict IX. 


HI. The chief electors had been heavily bribed, 
but, as far as the new Pope was concerned, it was 
money wasted, for at the end of forty-nine days 
Rome had succumbed to her besiegers, and Sylvester 
returned to his bishopric. In order for him to live 
peacefully in Sabina, which was in the country of 
the Crescentii, the powerful members of his flock 
must have defended him against the re-established 
Pope, Benedict IX. There is every reason to 
suspect a revival of the Crescentian influence in 
the revolt of 1044 and the election of Sylvester HI. 

Benedict, forcibly reinstalled, and yet not able 
to prevail against the discontented attitude of the 
Romans, made up his mind to resign the pontificate. 
This he did on 1st May, in favour of his godfather, 
John Gratian, Archpriest of St. John-before-the- 
Latin-Gate. A charter of resignation was drawn 
up,^ but that probably did not prevent a counterfeit 
election. The new Pope, who took the title of 
Gregory VI., was not a cardinal, but he had other 
greater disqualifications than that. Benedict had not 
yielded the papal seat for nothing, and Gregory had 
been obliged to pay down ready money as the price 
of his promotion. The papacy had been sold, and 
ithat not by the electors as had been done some- 
I times before, but by the actual Pope himself. 

Gregory VI., who was an elderly man, found 
no difficulty in leading a steadier life than his 
predecessor had done. He took Hildebrand under 
his protection, so that the chroniclers connected 
with the latter speak of him with respectful con- 

His accession was, at any rate, welcomed by 

1 Per cartulam refutavit Johannij &c., Ann. Rom. This extra- 
ordinary document has not come down to us. 


people worthy of respect. From the recesses of 
his convent in the Apennines, St. Peter Damian 
wrote greeting him as the dove bringing back the 
olive branch to the Ark ; Hildebrand, who was at 
that time residing in the monastery founded by 
Alberic on the Aventine,^ became his chaplain and 
adviser. These friendships do him credit, and we 
can only suppose that these worthy persons were, 
at first, ignorant of the simony involved in his 
promotion. Moreover, it cannot be denied that the 
papal morality had fallen to such an extremely low 
level under John XIX. and Benedict IX., that 
people were not now disposed to criticise Gregory 
VI. too severely. 

1 S. Maria del Priorato. 



The Events of 1044 — Council of Sutri— The German Popes— Clement II. 
— The Marquisate of Tuscany— The Normans— End of Benedict IX. 
— Damasus II. — Leo IX. — His Crusade against the Normans — 
Victor II. — Affairs of Tuscany — Death of Henry III. — Hildebrand — 
Stephen IX. — Benedict X. and Nicholas II. — Hildebrand's Pro- 
gramme — His Alliance with the Normans — Defeat of Benedict — 
Enactment concerning the Papal Elections — Council of Melfi — 
Election of the Pope taken out of the hands of the Barons and 

All these changes had been brought about by the 
Romans ; Benedict IX. had been disposed of, and 
with him the House of Tusculum, without the 
sUghtest interference on the part of the King of 
Germany. The substitution of Gregory VI. for 
Benedict IX. presented two different aspects ; from 
one point of view it was the end of a scandal which 
for years had put all Christendom to the blush ; 
while, from another, it was an attack against a family 
which, for the last fifty years, had represented the 
German influence at Rome, and even against the 
rights that the German crown claimed in the election 
of the Popes. Things were arranged amicably by 
a written and signed agreement; but there can be 
no doubt that the rebellion of 1044, together with 
the invincible antipathy of the Roman people, had 
greatly influenced Benedict's decision. 

Having regard to these occurrences, Henry III. 
thought it well not to commit himself at first. The 
next year (1046) he came to Italy, and began by 



holding a great council at Pavia, in which simony 
was condemned in unmeasured terms.^ At Piacenza 
he had an interview with Gregory VI., who came 
to meet him. He welcomed him graciously, but 
made no definite assertion as to his rights. Arrived 
in Roman Tuscia, he held a council at Sutri on the 
20th December, which resulted in the deposition 
of Gregory VI. and Sylvester III. Both of them 
seem to have been quite resigned to their fate. 
Sylvester embraced a religious career ; and Gregory 
was detained that he might be transported to the 
other side of the Alps on the king's return. 
Benedict IX., who, from the height of his fortress 
at Tusculum, was quietly waiting for the storm to 
blow over, also received sentence of deposition, but 
not until a few days later, at a synod held at 
St. Peter's on the 23rd and 24th of December. 
Henry III. evidently considered Benedict more 
legitimate than his rivals. 

Having thus cleared the ground, they set 
about electing a new Pope. Henry III. appointed 
Suidger, the Bishop of Bamberg, who took the 
title of Clement II., and was ordained the next 
day (Christmas). At the same time he consecrated 
Henry and his queen, Agnes, as emperor and 

Among the oaths taken at this season figured, 
"^ as in 963, the renunciation by the Romans of the 
right of election. This fact is confirmed by the 
witness of the Roman Annals, as well as by that 
of St. Peter Damian, not to mention other less 
reliable sources. It was a new consecration of the 
established tradition of eighty years. 

Nevertheless, the German princes and their 

^ This is the council mentioned by Raoul Glaber, v. 25. 


substitutes, the Crescentii and the Counts of 
Tusculum, had, as a rule, chosen Roman Popes. 
The occasional election of a foreigner, such as 
Gregory V. and Sylvester II., had not been en- 
thusiastically received. It might, perhaps, have 
been more prudent to select a Roman, or even to 
retain Gregory VI. who had his good points. 
Henry III., however, thought otherwise, considering 
himself powerful enough to maintain a transalpine 
Pope at Rome. And, indeed, he succeeded in 
thrusting four upon her: the Bishops of Bamberg, 
Brixen, Toul, Eichstadt, who became respectively 
Clement II., Damasus II., Leo IX., and Victor II. 

But it was no easy task. Pope Clement II. 
followed the emperor into Southern Italy, sum- 
moned by the continual disturbances of the district. 
On his way back he was seized by sudden illness 
near Pesaro, and died on 9th October 1047. There 
is every reason to suspect that his death was caused 
by a poisonous potion, served at the instigation of 
the deposed Pope, Benedict IX. The emperor 
had already got to the other side of the Alps. 
Benedict reappeared at Rome, where, with the help 
of Boniface, Marquess of Tuscany, he was soon re- 
established. It was then 9th November, and he 
succeeded in retaining his position until 17th July 
of the following year (1048). 

Two new powers now appeared upon the Italian 
horizon, one to the north of Rome, the other to 
the south. The first was represented by the House 
of Tuscany, which had been founded in the last 
century by Azzo, the chatelain of Canossa in 
Emilia; the same who had posed as the protector 
of Queen Adelaide on her escape from imprison- 
ment by Berengarius II. He and his son Tedald 


had been reckoned among the most faithful ad- 
herents of the House of Saxony, and were very 
popular in the north of Italy (Mantua, Ferrara, 
Brescia, Reggio, Modena) ; finally, Tedald's son, 
Boniface, had become Marquess of Tuscany. The 
great Countess Matilda, so famous in the Gregorian 
annals, was his daughter. Altogether, Boniface 
was too influential a vassal not to be formidable. 

In Southern Italy the Saracens were keeping 
fairly quiet, except for some raids upon the coasts 
of Byzantine Calabria. The rest of the country 
had long been the scene of struggles carried on by 
the Lombards, either among themselves or against 
the Greeks. Of the three Lombard principalities 
of Capua, Beneventum, and Salerno, the latter was 
predominant at the time. It owed its prosperity 
to the arrival in the country of several bands 
of adventurers from Basse-Normandie, substantial 
warriors, not over-scrupulous as to their methods. 
While ready to work for any one who would pay 
them, they sought at the same time to further 
their own ends and to obtain a solid footing in 
the land. They had already succeeded in founding 
two establishments — one at A versa, near Capua, 
and the other at Melfi, between Beneventum and 
Byzantine Apuleia. These Norman colonies, formed 
by Prankish subjects (though for their own advan- 
tage, it is true), would have had no political position 
if the Prince of Salerno had not taken them under 
his feudal responsibility. The Normans of Melfi 
and Aversa were subject to Salerno, but the pre- 
eminence of the latter was destroyed as a result 
of Henry's expedition. The German emperor, 
however, extended his immediate protection to the 
two little principalities (1047). 


This did not tend to increase their popularity. 
The newly arrived Normans, who were always en- 
larging their borders at other people's expense, were 
regarded with great distrust. They were as much 
hated as the Saracens had been, and indeed were 
often designated by the same name of Agareni, as 
though they too were the disciples of Mahomet. 

These two new powers of Tuscany and Normandy 
played an important part in the period which followed. 
Henceforth Boniface, by supporting the cause of 
Benedict IX., acted in open opposition to the 
emperor. As soon as the death of Clement was 
made known, those of the Romans who had remained 
loyal to Henry III. had sent to ask the emperor to 
appoint a Pope. His choice fell upon Poppo, Bishop 
of Brixen, who took the name of Damasus II. The 
Marquess of Tuscany refused at first to escort him to 
Rome, on the pretext of Benedict's reinstallation, 
and only after many importunities and threats did 
the enthronement of the new Pope take place, 17th 
July 1048. His reign, however, was speedily termi- 
nated by death, and the 9th of August saw him 
committed to his last resting-place at San Lorenzo. 
Benedict IX. passed, more or less, into oblivion ; 
according to one report he became a monk at Grotta 
Ferrata; another, which seems more likely to be 
true,^ states that he came to an early grave in con- 
sequence of his continued dissolute way of living. 

The Emperor Henry replaced Damasus II. by 
Bruno, Bishop of Toul, who assumed the name of 
Leo IX. He was a man of great piety and full of 
zeal for ecclesiastical reform. Hildebrand, who had 

1 See the legend related by St. Peter Damian, De ahdicatione 
episcopatus, c. 2. This supposes that the unfortunate Pope died in 
a state of impenitence. 



followed Gregory VI. into exile, was now brought 
back to Rome. Later on it was said that he re- 
monstrated with Leo on his promotion, and that the 
latter defended himself by reference to the Roman 
freedom of election. If there is any truth in these 
stories, they can only refer to external formalities. 
Leo must have waited to be elected and installed at 
Rome in due form before being invested with the 
pontifical insignia. Indeed, like his two predecessors 
and his successor, he was actually chosen by the 
emperor, and the Romans could do no more than 
confirm this choice by a simulated election. 

It is certain that Leo displayed much energy on 
behalf of ecclesiastical reform, and that he was 
continually journeying about, preaching, excom- 
municating, and holding councils, even visiting 
Rheims for the latter purpose. He also made it 
his aim to rid Italy of the new Saracens — the 
Normans — and headed a kind of crusade against 
them. This, however, was a failure; at the battle 
of Civita in Capitanate (1053) the Pope's army was 
put to flight, and many of his men were massacred 
before his very eyes. He himself was forced to 
surrender to the conquerors, and to withdraw the 
sentences of excommunication which he had lavished 
upon them. They took him to Beneventum, which 
had for two years been a papal possession ; the in- 
habitants, finding in their Dukes Pandulph and 
Landulph inadequate protection against the Normans, 
had banished them from power and put themselves 
under the Pope's governance (1051). The Emperor 
Henry III. had sanctioned this change in return for 
the papal retrocession of the bishopric of Bamberg, 
which had been offered by his predecessor, Henry II., 
to St. Peter. It was from the Pope's new position as 


sovereign of Beneventum that the struggle between 
himself and the Normans had arisen. 

In the spring of 1054 Leo returned to Rome, but 
only in time to die. Gebhard, Bishop of Eichstadt, 
succeeded him as Victor II. He was accompanied 
by the emperor to Verona, where his stay was 
signalised by certain arrangements in connection 
with Tuscany. Beatrice, widow of the Marquess 
Boniface, had taken for her second husband Geoffrey, 
Duke of Lorraine, a rebellious vassal of the Emperor 
Henry. Geoffrey had a brother Frederic, who, 
under Leo IX., had become cardinal and chancellor 
of the Roman Church. Just then he was performing 
the function of papal legate at Constantinople. 

The ducal family of Tuscany had every reason to 
dread the emperor's arrival. Geoffrey did not wait 
for him, but repaired to Lorraine, and began opera- 
tions there, hoping in this way to relieve Italy. 
Henry III. seized upon Beatrice and her daughter 
Matilda, then went in person to Florence, and ap- 
pointed the Pope as his vicar in Italy, charging him 
to arrest the Cardinal Frederic on his return from 
the East. Warned in time, Frederic took refuge at 
Monte Cassino, where he took the Benedictine habit, 
and succeeded in getting sent to Tremiti, an obscure 
little island in the Adriatic. Thus sheltered, he let 
the storm rage on. 

The next year, 1056, Victor II. betook himself to 
Germany, hoping to arouse the emperor's interest in 
his plan of resuming the aggressive policy of Leo IX. 
with regard to the Normans. But death intervened, 
and the Pope had the grief of seeing Henry III. 
pass away on 5th October, leaving as his successor a 
little son, Henry, only six years old, and still under 
the guardianship of his mother, the Empress Agnes. 


This event seriously affected the Pope's situation. 
After spending several months in Germany, striving 
to support the regency which was just beginning, he 
returned to Italy, where he, in his turn, died, 28th 
July 1057. On being deprived of the powerful pro- 
tection of Henry III., he had at once realised the 
necessity of being on good terms with the House 
of Tuscany. He began by reconciling it with the 
empress. Duke Geoffrey was restored to favour, 
and his wife, daughter, and estates were given back 
to him, while his brother Frederic was appointed 
abbot of Monte Cassino and cardinal priest. The 
whole aspect of things was completely changed. 

Hilde brand had always united with the Popes 
Leo IX. and Victor II., whose counsellor he had 
been, in waging war against ecclesiastical abuses, 
though he had never unduly troubled about the 
incompatibility between ancient custom and the 
origin of his patrons. But in his inmost heart he 
cherished schemes for the enfranchisement of the 
papacy and the freedom of the election, or rather 
for its devolving upon those who could hardly do 
otherwise than choose wisely. 

When the Pope breathed his last at Arezzo, 
Hildebrand was with him. Without waiting for 
his return, the Romans proclaimed, as Victor's suc- 
cessor, the Cardinal Frederic of Lorraine, who hap- 
pened to be in Rome at the time. He was elected 
on 2nd August, and consecrated on 3rd August, 
without any reference to the court of Germany. 
This was a serious infraction of the agreement of 
1046, but, as the choice had fallen on a man both 
honourable and powerful, and the brother of the 
chief German vassal in Italian territory, the acqui- 
escence of the queen-regent might not unreasonably 


be anticipated. Hildebrand was despatched, in the 
hope of disarming her displeasure, and seems to have 
accomplished his mission with success. During his 
absence the new pontiff experienced a desire to 
confer with his brother Geoffrey, and set out for 
Tuscany. Before starting, however, he took the 
precaution of assembling the clergy and the faithful 
of Rome, and making them swear that, in the event 
of his death during the journey, they would await 
Hildebrand's return from Germany before electing a 
successor to the Holy See. 

But it was one thing to take an oath and another 
to keep it. Stephen IX. never came back, but died 
from poison in Tuscany. His death was reputed to 
have been brought about by the Romans, probably 
the leaders of the aristocracy, who had been obhged 
to bend under the yoke of the Emperor Henry III. 
as well as under that of the Duke of Tuscany, and 
who were strongly opposed to the government 
notions of reform. Their ideas on the freedom of 
election differed greatly from those of Hildebrand 
and his party. Both sides wanted to throw off the 
German supervision and to have the Pope to them- 
selves ; but while Hildebrand's party desired a 
pontiff who would have regard for the spiritual 
dignity of his position, and encourage ecclesiastical 
reform, the others wanted a sort of papal phantom, 
who would act as an external screen for the main- 
tenance of abuses of every kind, both in the govern- 
ment of the Roman state as well as in the moral 

Each of these two parties were soon provided 
with a Pope. The Roman aristocracy were first in 
the field, and, on 5th April 1058, installed at St. 
Peter's, John, Bishop of Velletri, surnamed "the 


Thin."^ He took the title of Benedict X. The 
Crescentii, the Tusculans, the Count of Galeria, 
all seemed in accord, and almost the only dissentient 
voice was that of a Trasteverian noble, Leo, son of 
Benedict the Christian, so called because he had been 
converted from Judaism. These were the leaders of 
the Pierleoni family, who rose to such renown in the 
following century. The faithful clergy, who were at 
that time headed by the holy monk, Peter Damian, 
Cardinal Bishop of Ostia, had, it must be understood, 
taken no part in the proceedings. 

The ecclesiastical chiefs succeeded in escaping ; 
they rallied round Hildebrand in Tuscany, on his 
return from Germany. The latter seems to have 
come to an amicable understanding with Duke 
Geoffrey, and, probably, also with the German 
court, which was represented in Italy by the chan- 
cellor Guibert ; they united in choosing as their 
Pope, Gerard, Bishop of Florence, who took the 
name of Nicholas II. Guibert, Geoffrey, Nicholas, 
and Hildebrand, together with the representatives 
of the clergy and the faithful laity, betook them- 
selves to Sutri in January 1059, and assembled a 
solemn conclave, at which Benedict was deposed, 
and Nicholas recognised. Then Hildebrand and his 
followers, aided by the internal disputes of the 
aristocracy, as well as by Leo's financial wealth, 
succeeded in gaining an entrance to Rome. Bene- 
dict X. was obhged to flee for shelter to his friends, 
the barons of the Campagna, and Nicholas II. was 
solemnly installed at St. Peter's, 24th January 

The names of both Benedict X. and Nicholas II. 

^ The description of his person is by St. Peter Damian {cp. iii. 
4), and seems to be somewhat forced. 


appear in the papal lists, but that is no criterion 
of their legitimacy. Benedict was certainly re- 
garded by Hildebrand, and by Nicholas II. and his 
successors, as an intruder, an invasor, but then what 
claim had Nicholas II. to be considered legitimate ? 
It is not a question of his personal qualities, with 
which St. Peter Damian seems to have been so 
deeply impressed. That an oath had been sworn to 
Stephen IX. cannot be denied. It was quite within 
the province of a Pope, during his lifetime, to ar- 
range the conditions of his succession, always pro- 
vided that they did not interfere with the liberty 
of the electors. It is obvious that Nicholas II. was 
not freely elected by the Romans, but that he was 
foisted upon them without their consent. Where 
then lies the explanation of his legitimacy ? 

There is only one reasonable answer to this 
question. The legitimacy of Nicholas II., like that 
of Clement II., Damasus II., Leo IX., Victor II., 
and Stephen IX. himself, hinged upon the co- 
operation of the German court. Ever since the 
time of Leo VIII. this had been the external 
guarantee of legitimacy. The signature of the 
chancellor Guibert, the future anti-pope, represented 
the official stamp, which enabled the world to dis- 
tinguish between usurpers and others. 

As time went on, the incongruity of this situation 
became more and more evident. Such a position 
might be tolerated for the Sees of Spires or Salzburg, 
but that the papacy should remain indefinitely in 
the condition of a German bishopric, within the 
nomination of the king and his council, could hardly 
be expected. Hildebrand had foreseen that, although 
the question of reform might be the most urgent, 
and that it might even be promoted with the sup- 


port of the imperial Popes, there was another no less 
'^ serious question to be settled, that of the re-conquest 
of the papacy by the Church. Since the days of 
Otto and Theophylact, or one might say, since 
Lothaire, or even Pepin and Charlemagne, the 
spiritual papacy had been adversely affected by the 
strife and contention connected with the temporal 
papacy. It would never be free, either in thought or 
action, until the day when it should have thrown 
off the authority of its temporal masters. 

Thus, by the logical and chronological sequence 
of events, the head of the reform party came to 
the conclusion that a stronger force than that which 
had hitherto been employed was needed, and that 
the case was urgent. But what was to be done ? 
To re-establish a prince of the Romans, an Alberic, 
a Crescentius, or a Count of Tusculum, or to deliver 
Rome over to the Duke of Tuscany, would have 
been to create round spiritual Rome a temporal 
Rome of much stricter limitations than had been 
the case under the intermittent protectorate of the 
transalpine kings. Hildebrand never recognised the 
much loathed rule of the barons of Rome ; he could 
resign himself to the kings of Germany, and even 
to the Tuscan princes, but that was the extent of 
his forbearance. He was haunted by the phantom 
of Benedict IX., and on beholding it embodied anew 
in Benedict X., he became exasperated. He there- 
upon ventured upon a remarkably bold measure, and 
threw himself into the arms of those ** Christian 
Saracens," the hated Normans, who had been not 
only excommunicated by the Popes, under his 
influence, but actually combated by Hildebrand 

As we have already mentioned, these Normans 


had established two colonies, one at Aversa, near 
Capua, and the other at Melfi, in Apuleia. It was 
to the former that Hildebrand first made application. 
Richard, Count of Aversa, had just taken possession 
of Capua, putting an end, as Leo IX. had done 
before him, to one of the three Lombard principalities, 
which, up to that time, had existed in those regions. 
Thanks to his help, they succeeded in taking the 
castle of Galeria, where Benedict X. was taking 
refuge ; or rather, by dint of many solemn oaths as 
to the safety of life and limb, and the comparative 
liberty of the unfortunate Pope, they prevailed upon 
him to deliver himself into the hands of Nicholas II. 
Meanwhile, a large conference was held at the 
Lateran, which resulted in the promulgation of 
an edict on the papal elections. This important 
act ^ preserved the honour and respect due to King 
Henry, in virtue of the concessions granted him, 
and the honour and respect which might be due to 
his successors by reason of possible personal con- 
cessions ; at the same time it defined the respective 
roles of the various categories of electors. The lead 
was to be taken by the cardinal bishops, who, after 
deliberation, were to combine with the other cardinals, 
and then with the remainder of the clergy and the 
people. The choice must fall on a member of the 
Roman clergy, if there was one suitable, if not they 
must seek further. Finally, if Rome itself was in 
too great a state of disturbance to permit of the 

1 There are two editions of this act ; one in which the imperial 
rights are accentuated, figures, according to the Vatic. 1984, in the 
M. G. Leges, t. ii. app. p. 177, and in Watterich, t. ii. p. 229; 
the other has been preserved by the canonists of the eleventh 
century, and is to be found in the Council collections. This is the 
more reliable, that of the Vatic. 1984, having been touched up by 
the Guibertists. 


election's taking place there, the cardinal bishops 
and the pious laity might, even though they formed 
but a very small number, proceed to hold the election 
outside the city. In that case, the successful can- 
didate, without being enthroned, would nevertheless 
have full possession of all the papal rights and 

This decree, after all, was nothing else than the 
legal transformation of all the circumstances which 
had brought about the promotion of Nicholas II., 
and it seemed exactly calculated to meet the needs of 
the present situation. It was clearly directed, first 
and foremost, against the feudal aristocracy of the 
Roman state ; its chief opponents would be the 
Crescentii, the Counts of Tusculum, Praeneste, 
Galeria, and Sabina ; but others also regarded it 
as an injury. Notwithstanding the outward and 
intentional demonstrations of respect for the im- 
perial authority, the cardinal clergy were credited 
with an initiative and an eligibility which over- 
stepped the bounds prescribed by the German 
authority, and seriously violated the traditional 
rights of the successors of Otto I. and Henry HI. 
Not only were Popes like Benedict IX. or X. 
debarred, but also such as Gregory V., Clement II., 
and Leo IX., were excluded from the powers 
symbolised by the tiara and the cross keys. 

But Hildebrand was not the man to make the 
serious blunder of issuing such a manifesto without 
having regard to the opposition which would follow. 
After having relieved him of Benedict X. and the 
Roman aristocracy, the Normans were commissioned 
to try to find a means of thwarting the plans of the 
German court, or, at least, of adopting towards it an 
awe-inspiring attitude. 


On 23rd August of this same memorable year, 
1059, Nicholas II. held a council at Melfi. The 
Norman chiefs of Aversa and Apuleia, Richard and 
Robert Guiscard, presented themselves before him, 
and were invested with the principality of Capua, 
and the duchy of Apuleia and Calabria respectively. 
The very fact that the Pope performed this act 
shows that he must have looked upon himself as 
the sovereign of the country. Now, with the ex- 
ception of Beneventum, which he had not yielded 
to the Normans, his rights were confined to the 
theoretical claims mentioned in the compacts or 
privileges of the French or German kings since 
Pepin and Charlemagne, but which had never been 
realised. Moreover, the emperors and kings of 
Germany arrogated the same rights over these 
provinces as the old Lombard sovereigns had done 
— the rights of the ItaHan crown, which they had 
exercised on several occasions, and in particular 
under the Emperor Henry III. 

Thus, over the question of the sovereignty of 
Southern Italy, as well as that of the papal elec- 
tions, a contest arose between the Holy See and 
Germany. It must be stated that in return for 
their recognition by the Holy See, the Norman 
princes held themselves henceforth in duty bound 
to support the Pope. They were his vassals, and 
he was their lord. Provision was even made for 
the event of rivalry among several claimants to 
the tiara — the Normans would then lend their 
countenance to the one upheld by the "best 
cardinals." ^ 

As might have been expected, the enactment 

1 The wording of these promises has been preserved by the 
pontifical canonists, Deusdedit, Albinus, and Cencius. 


concerning the elections and the alliance with the 
Normans excited the keenest opposition in Germany; 
a council was called to pronounce the decree invalid, 
and when the Pope despatched a cardinal to explain 
matters, he was not even granted a hearing. 

On the 27th July 1061 Nicholas II. ended his 
days at Florence. This was the signal for the out- 
burst of a violent conflict. The Roman party, who 
were not in favour of reform, communicated with 
the German regency, which, in accordance with 
ancient custom, appointed Cadalus, Bishop of 
Parma, Pope, under the name of Honorius 11. ; 
Hildebrand, on the other hand, acted in conso- 
nance with the decree of 1059, and the voting 
favoured Anselm, Bishop of Lucca, who assumed 
the title of Alexander II. The struggle between 
these two rivals was long and bitter, but finally, 
thanks to a change of opinion on the part of the 
German government, Alexander gained the day. 
By dint of making certain concessions in the form 
of election, he obtained, in 1064, the royal recogni- 
tion, which was solemnly awarded to him at the 
council of Mantua. 

In this last circumstance, just as at the accession 
of Gregory VII. in 1073, the right claimed by the 
German crown was, in some measure, taken into 
account. We know how affairs had become en- 
tangled, and how Henry IV., after having recog- 
nised Gregory VII., tried to get him deposed. 
But the days of Otto and John XII. were over 
and past, and Christendom no longer followed the 
lead of the German crown. The latter was engaged 
in a dangerous game, by which she finally lost all 
her authority over the papal elections. For the 
future she was only concerned with the election 


of anti-popes. The legitimate pontiffs, Victor III., 
Urban II., Pascal II., Gelasius II., and Calistus II., 
were all installed without any reference to her. When 
peace was concluded at Worms, 1122, the question 
of the papal elections ^ was not even considered, and 
from that time neither emperors nor kings were 
involved in them. 

This ultimate triumph of liberty was, however, 
quite a different thing from the particular success 
of Nicholas II.'s decree. This latter seems shortly 
to have been abandoned, not in its general tenor, 
but with regard to its characteristic feature, i.e. the 
predominant role played by the cardinal bishops. In 
its general drift and by what it had in common with 
the tendencies of the reform party, its aim was to 
free the papal elections: 1st, from all interference 
on the part of the Roman feudal aristocracy ; and 
2nd, from undue and harmful interference on the 
part of the kings of Germany. As far as these 
two points were concerned, its object was attained, 
and even surpassed as far as the German kings 
were concerned, for they did not even succeed in 
retaining the position marked out for them by 
Nicholas II. 

1 They seem, rather, to have been disposed of in these words 
appended to the rules on episcopal and abbatical investitures: 
exceptis omnibus quae ad Romanarn ecclesiam pertinere noscuntur (Jaff^, 


To prolong this account would be to exceed the 
limits which T have sketched out. Moreover, with 
the advent of the Gregorian papacy begins a new 
epoch in the history of the temporal power as well 
as in general history. This pontificate realises the 
potential might of its religious and moral power, and, 
with one vigorous stroke, rises above all the political 
considerations of the West. As a result of this great 
change, the relative importance of the little princi- 
pality is somewhat diminished. It was by no means 
destroyed, however, but, like all other rights con- 
nected with the Holy See, adhered to with tenacity. 
Sometimes it provided a temporary refuge from 
outside attacks; even in times of depression, when 
suffering the imperial occupation, hardly any change 
was made in the manner of government ; it was 
always the pontifical estate. Gregory VII., Urban 
II., and Gelasius II. might be compelled to live and 
die away from Rome, but in the interval it was 
occupied by the anti-popes. It was in their capacity 
of vicars of St. Peter that they posed as sovereigns 
of Rome. Although in and after the twelfth century 
the papal dominion was often interfered with (at least 
as far as Rome was concerned) by the commune, its 
claims were quite in accord with the theory of the 
pontifical sovereignty. 

The Pope, therefore, held the sovereignty after 
the time of Gregory VII. as before ; one may even 
say that the conditions were the same, with the 



double anxiety of his untractable subjects at home and 
of the empire abroad. But, though the sovereignty 
did not change, the same cannot be affirmed of the 
sovereign. Formerly he had been the high priest of 
the Roman pilgrimage, the theoretical head of the 
episcopate, the dispenser of benedictions and of privi- 
leges, and of anathemas. But, over the Church as a 
whole, his influence was lacking in vigour and conti- 
nuity. True, he had been known to organise or insti- 
gate certain missions, and occasionally, as in the time of 
Nicholas I., energetically to interpose in the general 
affairs of the Church ; but these cases were excep- 
tional. He had had no part in furthering the some- 
what evanescent reforms brought about under the 
early Carlovingian princes, though the author of the 
** Forged Decretals," recognising their decline, sought 
to make out that they were placed under the protec- 
tion of the earliest Popes, without succeeding in 
arousing in their successors any sustained interest. 
These latter, as we have seen, were drawn from an 
environment which, to put it mildly, bore but an 
indifferent reputation. Indeed, even if we eliminate 
the gross scandals which are on record, it must be 
admitted that the personal character of almost all of 
the Popes of those days was very far removed indeed 
from the apostolic ideal. 

What a contrast do they present with later times, 
when we have to deal with such men as Gregory 
VII., Urban II., and Alexander III. ! 

With so extensive a papacy it was impossible to 
avoid difficulties in connection with the old temporal 
establishment. There were often quarrels with the 
emperors, in which the Romans displayed but little 
interest, although they suffered considerably from 
their effects. When once they were organised into 


a commune, their wishes had more than ever to be 
reckoned with. On the other hand, the pontifical 
curia was gradually becoming less Roman. German 
Popes were no longer appointed, but there were 
several of French, and even one of English nation- 
ality. It naturally followed that the members of the 
second and lower degrees of the clergy were drawn 
from various nationalities. This fresh set had but 
few ties with Rome. The cardinals had long since 
ceased to take any personal interest in their churches, 
and rarely came into contact with the native popula- 
tion. As time went on, the personnel of the Holy 
See became more and more distinct from that of the 
old Roman days. Many complications arose, but, 
notwithstanding these, the combined pressure of ex- 
ternal influences, the emperors, the anti-popes, and 
especially the commune, finally succeeded in moving 
this venerable and weighty mass. By dint of con- 
stantly changing place it became accustomed to a 
wandering existence. Theoretically the centre of 
Catholicism remained at Rome, the Lateran being 
the official residence of the Popes. But, as a matter 
of fact, those who wished to come into touch with 
the head of the Churches, had generally to go further 
afield — to Anagni, Viterbo, Perugia, Cluny, Sens, or 
even to Avignon, not to mention the high roads of 
Italy and France, where the papal retinue often made 
a halt. 

As regards the finances, it is not to be supposed 
that pilgrimages or the revenues, such as they were, 
of the duchy of Rome, could afford adequate means 
of subsistence. Like the papal staff, the funds, as 
well as warrants of security, were drawn from various 
sources. The travelling Pope might meet with ad- 
ventures on the way, but he could always make sure, 


wherever he might go, in the whole of Latin Chris- 
tendom, of finding places where he could remain in 
absolute safety. As long as he was in opposition to 
the emperor, the Normans of Italy were on his side, 
and more than one common Itahan had the happi- 
ness of giving him shelter. In France, too, the 
kings, the monks, and the bishops always welcomed 
him with sympathy. 

It is easy to understand that, under these circum- 
stances, temporal politics should have been relegated 
to the background. Not that they were altogether 
forgotten, but they suffered from a certain neglect. 
It was not until the end of the fourteenth and be- 
ginning of the fifteenth centuries that they regained 
their former position of importance. 

Enough has now been said to justify the break 
that I have introduced in this history. It now 
merely remains for me to sum up the main points of 
the pages dedicated to the earlier period. 

The temporal power had its origin in the repug-— — 
nance of the Romans to becoming Lombards, and in 
their inability to organise their autonomy unless the 
Pope was placed at its head. From the very outset 
the new state felt and displayed a twofold weakness, 
an external incapacity to cope with the Lombards 
and Greeks, and an internal lack of cohesion, due to 
the constant dissensions between the lay aristocracy 
and the clergy. A protector was necessary to defend 
the Roman state against outside attacks, as well as 
to help the Roman clergy in the struggle against 
their rivals at home. The external enemy speedily 
ceased to give cause of offence, and indeed, except 
perhaps for the Saracen inroads of the ninth century, 
the Romans had very little to complain of on this 
score after the year 774. But the internal situation 



became more and more strained, as is evidenced by 
the tragedies which followed the death of Pope Paul, 
and the riots in the times of Leo III. and Pascal. 
But the crisis did not pass, and it became necessary 
to deal with it effectively. The sovereign protector 
intervened, and in 824 the new order of things 
became incorporated in the constitution of Lothaire. 

That this arrangement had been submitted to, 
rather than initiated by the clergy, is not to be 
gainsaid. On several occasions they sought exemp- 
tion from it, but as long as the emperor's authority 
had any weight, they were obliged to put up with it. 
Moreover, the clergy themselves, after some experi- 
ence, ended by recognising its inevitability. 

The charter of 824 was concerned with the pro- 
tectorate, and implied the presence of a resident, 
and the existence of a protector. At the close of 
the ninth century, however, these two essential 
elements were conspicuous by their absence, and 
the Roman clergy found themselves defenceless 
against the lay aristocracy. The nobles thereupon 
made themselves masters of the state, and for the 
space of a century and a half the House of Theophy- 
lact provided them with a succession of leaders, who 
undertook the direction of the political destinies of 
the pontifical estate. First of all they ruled alone, 
unimpeded by the Carlo vingian heirs, but after the 
time of the Ottos they were obliged, in some measure 
at least, to submit to the guardianship of the kings 
of Germany. In the main they managed to keep 
the upper hand, and if they had confined themselves 
to the retention of the political power, things would 
have turned out differently. But they took upon 
themselves the right of choosing the dignitary who 
was, at one and the same time, their theoretical 


sovereign and their bishop, and the Pope, therefore, 
was appointed by this incongruous company of feudal 
barons.^ After their first encroachments the conclave 
of 769 had excluded them from the electoral council, 
but they returned to it in 824 in company with the 
emperor, who was invested with the right of verify- 
ing and confirming the papal elections, a right which 
had been exercised by the Greek sovereigns since the 
time of Justinian. This intervention of a higher 
power might have acted as a check on the unsuit- 
able elections made by the nobility ; certainly the 
Popes of the ninth century, who were elected under 
this regime, seem to have no blot upon their fair 
fame. The empire, however, underwent some 
eclipses ; the princes of the House of Saxony either 
could not or would not intervene as often as was 
desirable. They apparently cared little for the holi- 
ness of the pontificate, so long as it remained in 
subjection to them, and it was for his intractability 
rather than for his unexampled licentiousness, that 
John XII. was deposed. Otto immediately took 
upon himself the actual choice of the Pope — not 
merely the confirmation of the choice of others. 
Afterwards the system became elaborated. The 
German emperor appointed his intimates, Gregory 
V. and Sylvester II., and then some of his own 
bishops. In the hierarchy of the Church under 
German influence the Pope was promoted from the 

^ Almost everywhere the same effects were produced by the 
same cause. Monopolised by the feudal aristocracy, the episcopal 
sees were often occupied by very unworthy bishops. With the 
lapse of time they have passed into oblivion, one result of which is 
that the scandals created by the feudal Popes stand out all the 
more conspicuously. It is only right to place these things in their 
proper perspective and not to represent the Roman milieu in a 
darker light than the others. 



lower ecclesiastical ranks, rather than from the 

But this state of affairs could not last indefinitely. 
On Gregory VII. fell the onus of setting matters on 
a different basis, and great was the scandal and affront 
among those who had long been nourished on the 
traditional abuses. But Pope Gregory VII. had 
confidence in the ark which he was steering through 
such devious ways — a confidence which was not 
misplaced, for the bark of Peter responded willingly 
to the guidance of her captain. 


Abbon, governor of Provence, jpatri- 
cius Romanorum, 39 

Abbots not necessarily priests, 154 note 

Abruzzo attacked by Romans for Tra- 
simund, 9 

Acolytes distributed among priestly 
offices, 65 

Acontius, St. , body of Pope Formosus 
cast up near church of, 201 

Actard, Bishop, ambassador of Charles 
the Bald, 170; interview of, with 
Hadrian II., 170 

Adalbert, Count of Tuscany, miisus of 
Emperor Louis II., 152 

Adalbert, Marquess, questionable 
vassal of Arnulph, 196 

Adalbert, son of Berengarius II., 225 ; 
welcomed in Rome by John XII., 
226 ; flies before Emperor Otto from 
Rome, 227 

Adda, the, one of boundaries between 
kings of Italy, 198 

Adelaide, widow of Lothaire of Pro- 
vence, 218; resists Berengarius, 
218 ; defeated, and imprisoned on 
Lake Garda, 218 ; escapes, and 
appeals to Otto, King of the Ger- 
mans, 218 ; marries Otto, 218 ; 
Azzo, chatelain of Canossa, pro- 
tects, 255 

Adelchis, son of Desiderius, leads re- 
volt at Verona, 93 ; when revolt 
subdued, seeks Byzantine refuge, 93 

Adelgis, Duke of Beneventum, takes 
Louis II. prisoner, 166, 196 

Administration, diaconal, 63 

Administration, financial, at Lateran, 
presided over by arcarius, 64 ; 
funds of, drawn from many sources, 

Adriatic, the, becomes Byzantine, 175 

Adultery, judged at ecclesiastical 
tribunals, 115 note 

Advocates of the Lateran, 64 

Afiarta, Paul, pontifical chamberlain, 
82 ; confederate of Desiderius, 82 ; 
at daggers drawn with Christopher 

(primicerius) 83 ; inhuman treat- 
ment of Sergius (son of Christopher) 
by, 84-5 ; Stephen III. takes stand- 
point of, 85; sent by Hadrian I. 
to Desiderius, 88 ; undertakes to 
arrange interview between Hadrian 
and Desiderius, 89 ; denounced to 
Hadrian, 89 ; arrested by Arch- 
bishop of Ravenna, 90 ; executed, 91 

Agapitus II., Pope, 216; Romans 
swear to elect Octavian on death 
of, 222 ; death of, 223 

Agareni, Normans often called, 257 

Agatho, Bishop of Todi, leader of 
imperial^arty, 153 

Agiltrude, Empress-mother (widow 
of Emperor Guy), 196 ; marked 
character of, 196 ; daughter of 
Adelgis of Beneventum, 196 ; 
watches interests of Lambert of 
Spoleto, 196; deadly foe of Carlo- 
vingians, 196 ; seizes Rome, 196-7 ; 
plans checked, 197 ; shut up in 
castle of Spoleto, 197 ; retakes 
Rome, 198 ; institutes mock trial 
of dead Pope Formosus, 199 

Aglabites, Saracens of Numidia and 
East Africa under the, 137 

Agnellus, Life of Sergius, Arch- 
bishop of Ravenna, by, 99 note ; 
reverses names of Popes Paul and 
Stephen II., 100 note ; incomplete 
account by, of revolt at Ravenna, 
10 1 note 

Agnes, Empress (wife of Henry III.), 
consecrated by Clement II., 254; 
guardian of Henry IV., 259 ; 
Victor II. reconciles House of 
Tuscany with, 260 

Agnes, St., convent of, remodelled, 

Aistulf , Lombard prince, full of piety, 

Aix - la - Chapelle, sacred town of 
Charlemagne, 1 36; much frequented 
by Emperor Lothaire, 144 ; visited 
by Otto III., 242 

Alamanny, duchy of, loosely bound 
to Frankish kingdom, 6 




Alatri, Roman frontier line followed 
mountains behind, 15; tribune of, 
cruelly treated, 79 

Alberic, Marquess, governor of Spoleto, 
211; acts with Romans against 
Saracens, 211; laurels of war fall 
to, 212 ; murders Marquess Guy on 
bridge of Tiber, 212 ; Spoleto and 
Camerino in subjection to, 212 ; 
marries Marozia, daughter of Theo- 
phylact and mistress of Sergius III., 
212 ; connected with Counts of 
Tuscany, 245 

Alberic, son of Marquess Alberic and 
Marozia, 215 ; insulted by mother's 
husband, Hugh, King of Italy, 215 ; 
lays siege to Castle St. Angelo, and 
takes mother prisoner, 215 ; title 
of princeps et omnium Romanorum 
senator, 219 ; defends territory 
against King of Italy, 217 ; repulses 
Otto's desire to come to Rome, 218 ; 
and coldly receives his embassy, 

218 ; name of, on Roman coinage, 

219 ; judicial assemblies sometimes 
held at dwelling of, 219 ; enters 
into family relations with Byzantine 
Emperor, 219; is said to have set 
affections on Greek princess, 220-1 ; 
severs links with Provence,Germany, 
and Italy, 221 ; favourable accounts 
of government of, 221 ; four popes 
owe promotion to, 221 ; founds and 
reforms monasteries, 221 ; founds 
and remodels convents, 221 ; makes 
Abbey Subiaco great establish- 
ment, 221 ; led by St. Odo, Abbot 
of Cluny, 221-2 ; alarmed by ap- 
pearance of Otto at Pavia, 222 ; 
death of, 222 

Alberic, Count (son of Count Gregory), 
no inclination for papal authority, 
249 ; bestows temporal government 
on son, Gregory, 249 

Albinus, pontifical canonist, on Nor- 
man promises to Pope, 267 note 

Alboni, Duke of Spoleto, taken 
prisoner by Desiderius, 55 

Alcuin, correspondence of, with Arch- 
bishop Arn of Salzburg, 114 

Alexander II., Pope (Anselm, Bishop 
of Lucca), 268 ; struggle with rival 
Pope, Honorius II., 268 ; gains the 
day against Honorius, 268 ; con- 
cessions in form of election of, 268 ; 
claim of German crown at election 
of, 268 

Alexis, St., epitaph of Crescentius in 
church of, 238 ; Otto III. friend of 
monks of, 242 

Amalasontus, prosperous reign of, i 

Amalfi, fleet from, intervenes against 
Saracens, 141 

Ambrose, chief of notaries {primi- 
cerius), sent by Pope to Astolphus, 

Ambrose, Dean, describes journey of 
Stephen II. to France, 35 

Amelia, town under Roman jurisdic- 
tion, 15; not yet captured by 
Lombards, 21 ; Hadrian I. monarch 
of, 105 

Amelius, Bishop of Uzes, forbidden 
to call Pope Formosus sacerdos, 

Ameria seized by Luitprand, 8 

Amiata, Monte, Abbey of, in Lombard 
domains, 68 

Amiens, Bishop of, with twelve other 
dignitaries, tries Pope Constantine, 

Anagni, Roman frontier line follows 
mountains behind, 15; Nicholas, 
Bishop of , Arsenius tries to prejudice 
in favour of son as Pope, 152 ; 
Stephen VL, Bishop of, 198 

Anastasia, St., Church of, below 
Palatine Hill, 61 ; important festi- 
vals connected with, 61 

Anastasius, son of Arsenius, Bishop 
of Orta, 149; destined for priest- 
hood, and possible future Pope, 
149; scholarship of, 150; becomes 
cardinal, 150 ; entrusted with 
Monastery St. Marcellus, 150; 
spends time in Aquileia, 150 ; Pope 
Leo desires return of, to Rome, 150; 
Leo opposed to successorship of, 
151; sentences pronounced against, 
150; warm friendship of, with 
Louis II., 151 ; has high idea of 
papacy, 151 ; nominated Pope by 
imperial party, 152 ; goes to Rome, 
and is met by imperialist leaders, 

153 ; hurls hatchet at eikon erected 
by Leo IV., 1 53 ; seizes Benedict III., 
153; leaves pontifical palace, and 
Benedict is released, 153-4; brought 
before Benedict, and degraded, 

154 ; provided with Abbey St. 
Mary, in Trastevere, 154 ; retires, 
for study, into private life, 155 ; 
secretary to Nicholas I., 156; 
betrays confidence, 157; favoured 
by Hadrian II., 162; made librarian 
to Holy See, 162 ; advocates strict 
measures, 162 ; desires promotion 
for brother Eleutherius, 163 ; con- 
sidered instigator of murder of 
Pope's wife and daughter, 164 ; 
ecclesiastical censures against, 164 ; 
reinstated, 165 ; negotiates alliance 



for daughter of Louis II., 165 ; 
attends eighth ecumenical council, 
Constantinople, 165 ; preserves copy 
of enactments of council, 165 ; con- 
trols papal correspondence, 1 72 

Anastasius III. reigns two years, 

Ancona yields to Lombard king, 4; 
decrease of imperial power in, 7 ; 
not mentioned in list of territories 
of Holy See— time of Stephen II., 
46 ; people of, declare allegiance 
to Pope, 94 ; included in compact 
between Louis the Pious and Pope 
Pascal, 125 

Angelo, St., Castle of, wedding of 
Marozia and King Hugh of Italy 
at, 215 ; Alberio, son of Marozia, 
besieges, 215 ; Marozia taken 
prisoner at, 215 ; Crescentius taken 
prisoner at, 241 ; taken by Germans 
under Otto III., 241 ; huge massacre 
before, 231 

Angilbert, Abbot of St. Riguier, 
mission of, to Charlemagne, 109 

Ansa, queen of Desiderius, confined 
at Corbi, 96 

Anselm, Bishop of Lucca (Alexander 
IL), 268 

Anselm, Lombard duke and abbot, 
52 ; adopts monastic life, 52 ; es- 
tate of, in district Nonantola, 52 ; 
daughter of, marries King Astol- 
phus, 5 2 ; follows Lombard king 
to Rome, 52 ; receives share of 
Roman spoils, 5 3 ; brings body St. 
Sylvester from Rome to Nonan- 
tola, 53 

Antica vita di S. Anselmo, Memoirs of 
P. Bortolotti, 53 note 

Antioch, Council of, third canon on 
deserting clerks, 151 

Anti-popes, Germany concerned in 
election of, 268-9 ; Rome occupied 
by, 270 

Aosta valley {Francorum clusas), 
Stephen II. reaches Frankish 
ground at entrance of, 35 

Apollinarius, St. , founder of Church 
of Ravenna, 97 ; Archbishop of 
Ravenna claims churches as pro- 
perty of, lOI 

Apuleia, Robert Guiscard, Norman 
chief of, and Nicholas IL, 267 

Apulia, maritime, taken by duchy 
Beneventum, 3 

Aquileia, Cardinal Anastasius takes 
refuge in, 150 

Aquitaine, duchy of, loosely bound 
to Frankish kingdom, 6 ; Paul I. 
on side of Duke of, 54 ; Pepin at 

war in, 75; Louis, son of Charle- 
magne, crowned King of, 104 

Arcarius (chief cashier) at Lateran, 

Archdeacon, director of ecclesiastical 
staff, 62 

Archives, primicerius of notaries 
trustee of Roman, 6^ 

Archivio Romano di storia patri, L\ 
65 note 

Arci in Sabina, fortress in hands of 
family Theophylact, 243 ; strong- 
hold of party of Crescentius, 245 

Ardeatine Way, cemetery of, with 
tomb St. Petronilla, 49 ; yearly 
" station " at cemetery of, 49 note 

Arduin, Marquess of Ivrea, ' ' na- 
tional " King of Italy, 244 ; op- 
posed by Henry II. , 246 ; regains 
footing, 246 ; Henry II. causes to 
disappear in 1013, 246 

Arezzo, transfer of city of, 174 ; 
Bishop of, envoy to Charles the 
Bald, 174 ; Pope Victor II. dies at, 

Arichis, Duke of Beneventum, in- 
fluence of, 103 ; mixes in Byzan- 
tine intrigues, 104 ; shuts himself 
up in Salerno, 105 ; death of, 105 

Aricio, Duke of Beneventum, not 
above suspicion, 102 

Aristocracy, Roman, element of, in 
Roman clergy, 65 ; Pope, as mem- 
ber of military, 71 ; disinclination 
of, for papal direction of Roman 
state, 216 ; internal disputes of, 
262 : Benedict X. befriended by, 
261-2; decree of Council of Lateran 
directed against, 266 ; decree of 
Nicholas II. against interference 
of, at papal elections, 269 

Armenian monks in Rome, 68 

Army, Roman, rivalry of, with clergy, 
70 ; influence of Christopher the 
primicerius towards friendlv spirit 
of, 73 

Arn, Archbishop of Salzburg, re- 
marks discord in Rome, 112 ; 
charged to see Pope Leo III. rein- 
stated, 113; correspondence with 
Alcuin, 114 

Arnulph, Duke of Carinthia, 190 ; na- 
tural son of Carloman, 190 ; re- 
ceives general support in France 
and Germany, 190 ; obliged to 
recognise many kings, 190 ; difii- 
culties of, with Normans and Mo- 
ravians, 193 ; Pope Stephen V. 
appeals to, for help, 194; Pope 
Formosus besets, withlamentations, 



195 ; takes territory north of Po, 
195-6 ; opposes Emperor Guy, 
196 ; recrosses Alps, 196 ; finds 
Agiltrude a foe not to be despised, 

196 ; advances against Rome, 196 ; 
which is seized by Agiltrude, 
196-7 ; on disappearance of Spo- 
letans, enters Rome, 197 ; received 
on steps of St. Peter's by Pope, 

197 ; leaves Farold in Rome, 197 ; 
struck by paralysis, 197 ; death of, 
204 ; succeeded by Louis the 
Child, 204 

Arsenius, Bishop of Porta, thought 
of by Louis IL for papal promo- 
tion, 149 ; not eligible for pope- 
dom, 149 ; has two sons, Anas- 
tasius and Eleutherius, 149 ; 
question of popedom for son, 
Anastasius, 140 {see Anastasius) ; 
meets imperial deputies at Gubbio, 
152; keeps office of missus under 
Benedict IIL, 155, and Nicholas I., 
156; robs Pope, 156; disagrees 
with Anastasius, 162 ; departs to 
South Italy, after scandal of son, 
Eleutherius, 164 ; death of, 164 ; 
story of burial at Monte Cassino, 

Artavasde besieged by Constantine 

v., 19 

Aryan and pagan element in Italy 
absorbed, 25 

Astolphus, King, conquered by Pepin, 
9 ; less amenable to Pope Zachary 
than Kings Luitprand and Ratchis, 
12; succeeds Ratchis in 749, 21 ; 
seizes Ravenna, 21 ; negotiates 
with Pope Stephen IL, 22 ; creates 
kind of protectorate at Rome, 22 ; 
copy of treaty, broken by, fastened 
to stational cross, 23 ; to have 
interview with Pope concerning 
Ravenna, 33 ; begs Pope not to 
refer to conquered possessions, 33 ; 
vainly exhorted to "give back the 
Lord's sheep," 34 ; property con- 
quered from, given by Pepin to St. 
Peter, 37 ; Pepin exhorts against 
enmity to Rome, 41 ; despatches 
Pepin's brother, Carloman, to 
France, 41 ; defeated by Pepin and 
Pope, 42 ; agrees to restore con- 
quered provinces, 42 ; faithlessly 
refuses concessions, 43 ; sends 
three military divisions to Rome, 
43 ; vanquished, 44 ; takes refuge 
in Pavia, 44 ; forced into treaty, 
45 ; death, through hunting acci- 
dent, 46-7 ; marriage with daugh- 
ter of Duke Anselm, 52 

Autchaire, Duke Oger, 33 ; legen- 
dary fame of, 33 ; escort of Pope 
Stephen II., ^3 ; arrives with Pope 
at Pavia, 33 ; sent by Pepin to 
Pope Paul I., 55; accompanies 
Gerberga, Carloman's widow, to 
Italy, 88 ; accompanies Desiderius 
to Rome, 92 ; leads revolt at Ve- 
rona, 93 

Autonomy, in Venice and Naples, 20 ; 
in Rome, cause of, espoused by 
Pope and clergy, 26 ; Roman, to 
be under supervision of Pope, 27 

Auxilius, polemics by, 207 ; a priest 
of French origin, 208 note ; three 
works of, on ordinations of For- 
mosus, 208 note ; publishes apology 
for ordinations of Stephen, Bishop 
of Naples, 208 note 

Avaris, inroads of the, 2 

Aversa, Norman colony, Richard, 
Count of. See Richard 

Azo, ambassador of John XII., 224 

Azzo, chatelain of Canossa, in Emi- 
lia, 255 ; protector of Queen Ade- 
laide on her escape from imprison- 
ment, 255 


Baccano, defeat of Saracens at, 211 

Bagnacavallo restored to Exarchy, 48 

Bamberg, bishopric of, offered by 
Henry IL to St. Peter, 258 

Bari, Louis II. attempts to capture, 
from Saracens, 149 ; Louis II. suc- 
ceeds in taking, 165-6, 175 ; Greek 
fleet takes possession of, in 876, 
175 ; Emperor Basil appropriates, 
175 ; Greek empire settled at, 193 

Barons of Rome, rule of, not recog- 
nised by Hildebrand, 264; incon- 
gruous company of, appoint Pope, 

Basil, Emperor, Tarento taken by, 
175; Bari appropriated by, 175 

Basil, the Macedonian, alliance of 
son of, with daughter of Louis II. , 

Basilica of St. Peter. See St. Peter's 

Basilica Lateran. See Lateran 

Bavaria, duchy of, loosely bound to 
Frankish kingdom, 6 ; Pope Paul 
I. takes part of Duke of, 54 

Beards, shaving of, Byzantine symbol 
of degradation, 235 note ; John 
XIII. orders shaving of , for prefect 
of Rome, 235 

Beatrice, widow of Boniface, Marquess 



of Tuscany, 259 ; marries Geoffrey, 
Duke of Lorraine, 259 ; seized by 
Henry III., 259 
Bede, the "Venerable, History by, 29 
Benedict, Bishop of Albano, rustic, 
vicious boor, elevated by Sergius 
II., 140 
Benedict III., Pope, Life of, in Liber 
Pontificalis, 152 ; Cardinal of St. 
Cecilia, 152 ; election of, 152 ; 
rival, Anastasius, nominated by im- 
perial party, 152 ; seized by Anas- 
tasius, 153 ; set at liberty, 153 ; 
proclaimed Pope at Sta. Maria 
Maggiore, 153-4; installed at 
Lateran, and consecrated at St. 
Peter's, 154 ; death of, 155 ; 
marriage of niece of, 163 ; inter- 
fered about heritage of sons of 
Lothaire, 168 ; attacked Hubert, 
intruded Abbot St. Maurice, 168 
Benedict IV., succeeds John IX., 204 ; 
consecrates King Louis of Pro- 
vence, emperor, 204 
Benedict V., deposition of, 228 
Benedict VI., appointed by Otto I., 
236 ; taken prisoner by Crescen- 
tius, 236 ; strangled in prison, 236 
Benedict VII., tolerably easy reign 

of, 237 
Benedict VIII., privilege of Henry 
II. to, 226 note ; proclaimed Pope, 
246 ; Gregory, rival candidate to, 
for popedom, supported by Crescen- 
tian influence, 246 ; was formerly 
Theophylact, son of Count of Tus- 
culum, 246 ; crowns Henry II. and 
Cunegunda, 247 ; reigns twelve 
years, and leaves good record, 247 ; 
led naval expedition against Sara- 
cens, 247 ; holds synod with Henry 
II. at Pavia, 247 ; (where regula- 
tions for celibacy discussed, 247) ; 
temporal government assumed for, 
by brother Romanus, 247 ; Henry 
II. issues privilege for, 248 ; death 
of, 249 
Benedict IX., Pope at twelve years 
old, 249 ; tolerated by German 
princes, 249 ; hereditary trans- 
mission for, 249 ; revives rule of 
revelry, 249-50 ; excommunicates 
Archbishop Heribert at request 
Conrad II., 250; Romans rebel 
against, 250; expelled from See, 
250; reinstalled, 251; resigns in 
favour John Gratian (Gregory VI.), 
251 ; suspected of causing death 
Clement II., 255 ; re-established in 
Rome, 255 ; on appointment Da- 
masus II. passes into oblivion, 257 

Benedict X. (John, Bishop of Velletri) 
installed by Roman aristocracy, 
261-2 ; regarded as an invasor, 
263 ; takes refuge at Galeria, 265 ; 
delivers himself to Nicholas II., 

Berengarius I., Marquess of Friuli 
(later Emperor), 190-1 ; grandson 
of Louis the Pious, 191 ; opposed 
by Guy of Spoleto, 192 ; in spite 
of German alliance, contents him- 
self with marquisate, 192 ; makes 
terms with Lambert of Spoleto, 
198 ; assumes authority over I<am- 
bert's kingdom on his death, 
204 ; defeated by Hungarians in 
Italy, 204 ; King Louis of Pro- 
vence rival of, 204 ; regains upper 
hand over Louis, 204 ; Verona 
wrested from, 205 ; supports pon- 
tificate Sergius III., 206 ; crowned 
Emperor, in Rome, by John X., 
210-11; fetes in honour of, de- 
scribed in Gesta Berengarii, 211 ; 
Rudolph II., of Trans-juran Bur- 
gundy, to fight against, 213; 
assassinated at Verona, 213 

Berengarius II., Marquess of Ivrea, 
proclaimed King of Provence, 218 ; 
Otto I. commits government of 
Italy to, 219 ; Italian princes 
restive under, 225 ; Otto inter- 
poses against, 225 ; takes refuge 
with wife, Willa, inj fortress in 
Apennines, 225 ; besieged in Castle 
Montfeltro by Otto, 226 

Bernard, Bishop Hildesheim, urges 
submission people of Tivoli, 243 

Bernard, King of Italy, inquires into 
Roman affairs, 123 

Bernard, missus of Emperor Louis 
IL, 152 

Bertrade, Queen - mother (Charle- 
magne), 82 ; goes to Rome on 
matter of family alliance, 82 

Bianchini publishes polemics against 
Sergius III., 207 note 

Bihl. dc VJ^cole des Chartes, Julien 
Havet, 82 note 

Bishop of Rome, unique position of, 
among bishops, 13 

Bishops, cardinal, formation of, 65 

Blera (Bieda), besieged by Luitprand, 
8 ; position of, in duchy of Rome, 

Bologna, surrender of, 4 ; not men- 
tioned in list of territories given 
by Pepin to Holy See, 46 ; in 
possession Desiderius, 97 ; Arch- 
bishop of Ravenna claims, for St. 
Apollinarius, loi 



Bomarzo seized by Luitprand, 8 

Boniface, Marquess of Tuscany, re- 
establishes Benedict IX., 255 ; son 
of Tebald, 256 ; father of famous 
Countess Matilda, 256 ; formid- 
able vassal, 256 ; in open opposi- 
tion to Emperor Henry, 257 

Boniface VI., Pope, irregular election 
of, 198; had incurred deposition 
as sub-deacon and priest, 198 ; 
short reign of, 198 ; taken pri- 
soner, 236; confined in Castle St. 
Angelo, 236 

Boniface VII., Pope (son of Ferruc- 
cius), formerly Deacon Franco, 236 ; 
so-called " national " Pope, 236 ; 
Count Sicco succeeds in ejecting, 
236 ; returns, and seizes John XIV. , 
237-8 ; death of, 238 ; corpse of, 
treated with disrespect, 238 

Boniface, St., Otto III. friend of 
monks of, 242 

Bonizo of Sutri preserves document, 
" Privilege of Otto," 225 note 

Bortolotti, Memoirs of, Antica vita de 
S. Anselmo, 53 note 

Boson, Count of Vienne, 182 ; son-in- 
law, Louis II., 183-4; absconded 
with Louis' daughter, Ermengarde, 
184; made Duke by Charles the 
Bald, 184; crowned King of Pro- 
vence, 184; bodyguard and adopted 
son of John VIII. , 184; JohnVIIL 
asks Charles the Fat for help 
against, 185 ; Louis the Blind, son 
of, 190 

Bourges, Bishop of, meets digni- 
taries in Rome to try Pope Con- 
stantine, 80 

Braisne, national convocation at, in 
754, 42 

Brephotrophia (asylums for found- 
lings), 67 

Brescia, indecisive battle at, 192 ; 
Azzo and Tebald very popular in, 

Brixen, Poppo, Bishop jof, Damasus 
II., 255, 257. See Damascus II. 

Bruno, Bishop of Toul, Leo IX., 257. 
See Leo IX. 

Buccaporca, Sergius IV., 245. See 
Sergius IV. 

Bulgarians, Formosus, leader of 
mission to, 178 ; desire Formosus 
as Archbishop, 178 ; King of 
the, annoyed by Pope, 179; Pope 
Hadrian refuses appointment For- 
mosus to the, 178-9 ; King of the, 
yields to Greeks about Arch- 
bishopric, 179 ; Latin Church thus 
separated from mission to the, 179 

Bulletino, De Rossi, 1878, 1879, 49 

Buonaparte and Italian autonomies, 

Byzantine Empire suffers from in- 
roads, Avaris, Persians, and Arabs, 
2 ; exceptional situation of Gregory 
the Great in Italy of, 13 ; power 
in Italy steadily declining, 3 ; not 
in agreement with Lombards, 3 ; 
government of, quarrels with Holy 
See,. 4 ; regards alliance of Pope 
and Lombards as undesirable, 5 ; 
Church of, and Roman Church, 20 
note ; non-success of envoy of, with 
Astolphus, 22 

Byzantine party organised in Rome, 

Byzantine quarter par excellence in 

. Rome, 60 

Cadorna, General, and Italian auto- 
nomies, 20 

Caeri, Pope Marinus I., formerly 
Bishop of, 188 

Cassar, son of Sergius, Duke of Naples, 
commands squadrons against Sara- 
cens, 145 

Caesar, St., festival of, at Palatine, 61 

Cassar, St., in Palatio, official chapel, 
61 ; receptacle for images of em- 
perors, 61 

Calabria, sway of Beneventum ex- 
tends to, 3 ; value of Church pro- 
perty in, 4 ; Byzantines retained, 
after reconciliation with Roman 
Church, 20 note ; yields no income 
to pontifical finances, 66 ; struggle 
of, against Saracens, 148 ; Saracen 
raids on, 256 ; Nicholas II. invests 
Norman chief with duchy of, 267 

Calventzulus, chamberlain, con- 
cerned in murder of Sergius the 
secundicerius, 89 ; handed over to 
criminal (judge, 89-90 ; banished, 90 

Calvulus, chamberlain, said to be 
instigator of assassination, Sergius, 
secundicerius, 89 ; imprisoned for 
life, 90 

Campagna, Roman, Greeks of Naples 
lay waste, 103 

Campania, Louis the Pious confirms 
rights of Pascal I. over, 125 ; in- 
vaded by Saracens, 210 

Campulus, the saccelarius attacks 
Leo III., 113; judgment of, re- 
served, 114 

Caneparius, contemporarj'^ writer, on 
Gregory V., 240 



Canon law, old maxim of, applied to 
episcopal election, 72 ; Frankish 
bishops familiar with, 79 ; inquiry 
into breach of, at election Constan- 
tino, 79 

Cantorum, Schola, seminary for 
priests, 65 ; draws from clerical 
reserre, 66 

Capua, Emperor Louis II. resumes 
campaign against Saracens near, 
166 ; petty prince of, enters into 
treaty with Saracens, 176 ; Chris- 
tian allies of Saracens in, 187 ; 
Dukes of Spoleto interfere in con- 
cerns of, 191 ; John XIIL takes 
refuge in, 234 ; Eichard, Count of 
Aversa, takes possession of, 265 

Cardinal bishops, leading part of, 
at papal elections, 265 

Cardinal clergy, power of, inconsis- 
tent with German authority, 266 

Cardinal deacons always seven in 
number, 62 

Cardinal priests, about twenty-five in 
number, 62 ; constitute kind of 
senate of Church, 62 

Carloman, brother of Pepin, monk of 
Monte Cassino, 41 ; formerly king 
eastern part Frankish empire, 41 ; 
despatched as ambassador to 
France, 41 ; mission of, unsuccess- 
ful, 41 ; monastery on Mount 
Socracte presented to, by Pope 
Zachary, 51 

Carloman, Frankish king, 82-3 ; 
Dodo, missus of, at Rome, 83 ; 
called champion of Christopher 
and Sergius, 85 ; Italy practically 
in power of, 183 ; afflicted with 
paralysis, 183 ; surrenders Italy to 
Charles the Fat, 184 ; Louis, King 
of Eastern France, takes place of, 
184; death of, 184; Arnulph, 
illegitimate son of, 190 

Carlovingian princes accept papal 
dominion over Rome, 38 ; alliance 
cf, with Pope, 167 ; one character- 
istic of alliance of, 167 

Carlovingians, Charles the Simple 
only representative of, in Western 
kingdom, 185 ; three branches of, 
fail to support John VIII., 186-7 ; 
A. Lapotre on time of, 167 note ; 
Poupardin on {Le Royaume de Pro- 
vence sous les Carolingiens), 183 

Cartulary, office of, 61 

Cassino Monte, convent of, revived 
under Pope Zachary, 68 

Catacombs, accusations of stealing 
sacred corpses from, 24 

Catholicism, centre of, theoretically 
at Rome, 272 

Ceccano, castle of, seized by Astol- 
phus, 23 

Celibacy not imposed on lower orders 
of clergy, 64 note, 65 ; regulations 
concerning, discussed at Synod of 
Pavia in 1022, 247 

Cellerarii (cellarers) of Lateran 
palace, 63 

Cena Cypriani, the, 180 note 

Cencius, pontifical canonist, on Nor- 
man promises to Pope, 267 note 

Cenis, Mont, Frankish army at pass 
of, 42 

Centumcellse (Civitb, Vecchia), posi- 
tion of, in Roman duchy, 15; rebuilt 
after devastation by Saracens, 146 ; 
called Leopolis, 146 ; Ph. Lauer on, 
146 note 

Ceprano, Pope's authority nominal 
beyond, 105 

Charlemagne, King and Emperor, 
meets Stephen II. at Ponthion, 35 ; 
ceremonious greeting of Pope by, 
35 ; uses title *' patricius Roman- 
orum," 39-40 ; Desiderata, first 
legitimate wife of, 82 ; Desiderata, 
wife of, succeeded by Hildegard, 
82 note ; aristocracy of Carloman's 
kingdom unite under, 88 ; de- 
puties sent to, at Corbeny, 88 ; 
Desiderius plots against, 91 ; and 
tries to induce Hadrian I. to oppose, 
91 ; charges Desiderius to make 
restitution to Pope, 93 ; offers four- 
teen thousand gold sous to Pope, 93 ; 
sends troops to Italy, 93 ; goes to 
Rome, 94 ; ascends grand staircase 
to atrium, on knees, 95 ; great 
political agreements of, with Pope, 
95 ; question of territory for Pope 
with, 95 ; pontifical state in time 
of, 97-11 1 ; commands Lombard 
evacuation of cities of Emilia, 97 ; 
arrives in northern Italy, 102 ; 
assumes title. King of the Lom- 
bards, 103 ; goes to Rome for 
Easter, 103 ; desires good terms 
with Greeks, 103 ; alliance arranged 
between daughter, Rotrude, and 
Constantino VI., 103-4; goes to 
Beneventum, 105 ; appoints 
Grimoald Duke of Beneventum, 
105 ; has no voice in appointment 
Pope, 106 ; papal rights recog- 
nised by, 107 ; claims voice in 
appointment Archbishop Ravenna, 
107 ; mourns death of Hadrian 
I., 108; has decretalis cariula tiovQ. 
Leo III., 109 ; joins Leo III. at 



Paderborn, 113; convenes assembly 
at St. Peter's, Kome, 114; is 
crowned Emperor of Romans, 116; 
according to Eginhard, ill-pleased 
with turn of affairs, 117 ; crowns 
and proclaims son Louis as suc- 
cessor, 117 ; has no definite idea of 
extent of ancient imperial power, 
120 ; death of, in 814, 122 ; division 
of empire arranged by, in 806, 168 

Charles the Bald, first King of France, 
171 ; charged by Pope Hadrian II. 
to accede to division of kingdom, 
Provence, 169 ; seizes estates of 
nephew, Lothaire II., 169 ; Pope 
remonstrates with, 169 ; son, Carlo- 
man, takes arms against, 169 ; 
Pope writes to, insultingly, 169-70 ; 
is head French branch of Charle- 
magne's lineage, 170; has intelli- 
gence, piety, and learning; 171; 
supports Holy See with reference 
to clergy, 172 ; question of imperial 
crown for, 172 ; opposed by Em- 
press Engelberga, 172; invited to 
Rome for imperial coronation, 173 ; 
receives Roman envoys at Pavia, 
173; diplomatic artifices of, 173; 
coronation of, 1 74 ; makes rich gifts 
to St. Peter's tomb, 174; question 
of wishes regarding permanent 
missus, 174; appoints Duke of 
Spoleto, 174; privilege of, to John 
VIII., 175 ; sends Lambert and Guy 
of Spoleto to Pope, 177; differences 
of opinion on promotion of, 177 ; 
notice of condemnation by synod 
at Pantheon sent to, 1 79-80 ; 
seizes Cologne, but is defeated at 
Andernach, 180 ; meets John VIII. 
at Pavia, 180 ; Carloman disputes 
possession of Italy with, 180 ; is 
forsaken by vassals, 1 80 ; death of, 
said to be due to poison, 180-1 ; 
is succeeded by Louis the Stam- 
merer, 181 

Charles the Fat (of Swabia), son of 
Louis the German, 173 ; is de- 
spatched by father to Italy, 173 ; 
repulsed by Charles the Bald, 173 ; 
function of missus retained by, 174 ; 
to share old kingdom of Lothaire 
II., 183 ; Carloman surrenders Italy 
to, 184; Carlovingians represented 
in Germany by, 185; deposition and 
death of, 185 ; had been recognised 
King of Italy, 185 ; his interview 
with Pope at Ravenna, 186; re- 
ceives imperial coronation, with 
wife Richarde, 186; takes pos- 
session dominions of brother Louis, 

186 ; provoked by election Stephen 
YL, 189 ; deposed by subjects, 189 ; 
dies at villa at Tribur, 1 89 ; many 
claimants for throne of, 190 
Charles the Great (of Swabia) not 
distinguished for ability or bravery, 


Charles Martel, aid of, asked by 
Gregory III., 8 ; refuses aid, 31 ; 
well disposed to Lombard king, 

Charles of Provence, kingdom of, 
divided between Lothaire II. and 
Louis II., 169 

Charles the Simple, posthumous son, 
Louis the Stammerer, 185; only 
Carlovingian in Western kingdom, 

Childebrand on Gregory III. and 
Charles Martel, 3 1 

Chiusi, Duke of, plots against Had- 
rian I., 102 

Christmas Day, 800 ; era in history 
of the West inaugurated on, 117, 

Christopher, primicerius of notaries, 
chief adviser of Pope, 58 ; popular 
accusation against, 58-9 ; events 
of time of, 70-86 ; important in 
ecclesiastical world, 72 ; accom- 
panied Pope Stephen II. on Frank- 
ish mission, 72 ; negotiates for 
alliance between Stephen II. and 
Desiderius, 72 ; Pope Paul called 
puppet dancing to piping of, 72 ; 
thwarts plot to hasten Pope's 
death j^ ; friendlier feeling of 
clergy and army due to, ys > 
opposes usurping Pope, Constan- 
tine, 74 ; seeks refuge in St. Peter's 
74 ; undertakes to be quiet till 
Easter, 74 ; then to retire with 
son Sergius to monastic life, 74 ; 
eludes Abbot St. Saviour of Rieti, 
76 ; asks Duke of Spoleto for 
escort to Pavia, j6 ; arrives before 
walls of Rome, jy ; refuses ac- 
knowledgment of Philip, proclaimed 
Pope by Waldipert, 77 ; selects as 
Pope, Stephen, priest of St. Cecilia, 
78 ; (Stephen III.) assembles clergy 
and lay aristocracy, 78 ; is, with 
Sergius, virtual wielder papal 
authority, 81 ; suspects designs 
of Desiderius, 82 ; reinforces gates 
of Rome, 82 ; appears at Lateran 
with strong escort, 83 ; is pacified 
by Pope, 83; deserted by Gratiosus, 
84 ; is treacherously treated by 
Pope, 84 ; dragged from St. Peter's, 
84 ; inhumanly handled, 84 ; death 



of, 84 ; honourable burial of, in 
St. Peter's, 91 

Chrodegang, Bishop of Metz, escort 
of Pope Stephen II., 33 

Chronicle, Moissac, on meeting of 
Pepin and Stephen II., 36 

Chronicle, Bavarian, valuable details 
in, 83 note 

Chronicler succeeding Fredegarius, 32 
note, 39, 41 ; use of term '' respub- 
lica" 38 note 

Church, Frankish, rather supports 
iconoclast emperors, 57 

Church property, depredations in, 
24, 66 ; pontifical revenue drawn 
from landed, 66 ; plunders in, 113 

Churches, Byzantine and Koman, re- 
conciliation of, 20 note; East and 
West, no difference between, in 
767 ; on Holy Spirit, 59 note 

Citta di Castello {Castellum Felici- 
tatis), people of, proclaim allegi- 
ance to Pope, 94 

Clausula de Pippino, title of "patri- 
cius Romanorum" used in, for 
Pepin, 39 note 

Clergy, Roman, recruited from two 
sources, 65 ; rivalry of, with army, 
70 ; meet army in friendlier spirit 
in convocation, 73 ; interests and 
ambitions conflict with those of 
nobles, 129 ; election of John XII. 
ends struggle of, with nobles, 223 ; 
Pope to be chosen from, 265 

Cluny, St. Odo, Abbot of, 218 

Code of Lothaire, 13 1-2 

Codex Carolinus, letters in, 33, 58, 
73 note ; correspondence in, on 
Desiderius, Sergius, and Christo- 
pher, 8 1 ; on Charlemagne and title 
*^ patricius Romanorum," 106 

Coire, Count of, envoy of Louis the 
Pious, 128 

Cologne, Archbishop of, deposed by 
Pope Nicholas I., 160 

Columba, St., Irish party lay stress 
on patronage of, 30 

Comacchio, yielded by Astolphus, 
45 ; named in list of territories 
given to Holy See, 46 ; taken by 
Desiderius, 89 ; Lombards to 
evacuate, 97 

Comita, Roman noble, sent by Pope 
to Pepin, 44 

Como, Bishop of, begs interposition 
of Otto I. with Berengarius, 225 

Compact between Louis the Pious 
and Pascal I., 125 

Conrad II., Emperor, edict of, 248 ; 
annuls personal right of Lombards 
over Roman territory, 248 ; corona- 

tion of, 249 ; knows how to manage 
Benedict IX., 250 ; Benedict IX. 
excommunicates Archbishop Heri- 
bert at request of, 250 

Consiliarius, functions of, 64 

Constantine, brother of Toto, plots 
for Pope Paul's death, 73 ; pro- 
claimed Pope, 7S ; ordained sub- 
deacon, deacon, and priest, 74 ; 
consecrated by Bishops of Pren- 
esto, Albano, and Porto, 74 ; is 
treated with treachery, yy ; takes 
refuge in chapel after chapel, 77 ; 
undergoes humiliations, 78 ; de- 
clared to have forfeited papal 
dignity, 78 ; eyes put out, and 
cruelly treated, 79 ; death of, re- 
sult of cruelties, 79 ; indignities 
suffered at trial, 80 ; ordinations 
and enactments declared illegal, 80 

Constantine V., Emperor, Pope 
Zachary sends envoys to, 19 ; an 
iconoclast, 19 ; besieges Artavasde 
in his capital, 19 ; designs of, on 
Ravenna, 56 ; makes overtures to 
Desiderius, 56 ; death of, 102 

Constantine VI., proposed alliance of 
with Rotrude, daughter of Charle- 
magne, 103-4 ; alliance of, given 
up, 105 

Constantinople, Emperor of, replaces 
Gothic kings, i ; Romans look for 
help from Rome, rather than from, 

18 ; Constantine V. reinstated in, 

19 ; little realisation in, of Roman 
changes, 22 ; collisions of Holy 
See with Emperor of, 28 ; Empress 
Irene occupies throne at, 117; 
efforts made in, to get recognition 
of Roman Empire, 117-8; Patri- 
arch of, crowns Emperor, 118-9; 
ecumenical council (eighth) in, 
165 ; bitter dissent between Roman 
Church and empire of, ends, 194 ; 
Emperor Lecapenus at, 220 ; John 
XI. sends four ambassadors to, 
220 ; presence of ambassadors in 
St. Sophias' at, breach of ecclesi- 
astical law, 220 

Constitution of Lothaire, 122-35 

Consul of Rome, Theophylact the, 

Convention, national, at Braisne, in 
754, 42 ; at Kiersy-sur-Oise at 
Easter, 754, 42 

Convocation, after death of Pope 
Paul I., 73 

Corbi, Desiderius and Ansa confined 
at, 96 

Council, ecumenical, at Constan- 
tinople, 165 



Cordova, Spanish Saracens subject 
to Caliph of, 137 

Corsica, placed under guardianship 
Marquess of Tuscany, 137; in Car- 
lovingian times, Memoir of M. A. 
Dove, 137 note 

Crescentius, brother of John XIII. 
and son of Theodora, 236 ; leads 
rebellion in Rome against Otto 
II., 236 ; raises Boniface VII. to 
papal throne, 236 ; death of, 238 ; 
epitaph on, at St. Alexis, 238 ; 
was monk at time of death, 238 

Crescentius the Younger seizes 
father's authority, 238 ; assumes 
title ^' patricius Romanorum,^^ 238 ; 
John XV. probably owed pro- 
motion to, 239 ; on good terms 
with Empress Theophano, 239 ; 
does not venture to appoint suc- 
cessor to John XV., 239 ; fall of, 
240 ; leads movement against 
Gregory V., 240 ; anathematised 
at Council of Pavia, 240 ; brings 
forward Philagath, Bishop Pia- 
cenza, as rival of Gregory V., 
240 ; on flight of Philagath, shuts 
himself in castle, St. Angelo, 241 ; 
taken prisoner, and beheaded, 24 1 ; 
becomes legendary hero, 241 

Crescentius, John, son of Crescen- 
tius the Younger, 244 ; assumes 
title *' patricius Homanorum," 244; 
diplomacy of, 246 

Crescentius, family of, opposed to 
Counts of Tusculum, 245 ; strong- 
holds of, 245 note ; action of, re- 
gulated by condition of German 
power, 245 ; support Gregory, papal 
candidate, 246 ; in position of per- 
manent missi, 247 ; as a rule, 
chose Roman Popes, 255 ; part 
taken by, in appointment Benedict 
X., 262 

Crotia, Greek influence in, 175 

Cuhicularii (chamberlains) of Late- 
ran, 63 ; nobles' sons, to be edu- 
cated priests, received among, 


Cubiculum, aristocratic element in, 

Cultivation of districts by Popes, 

Cumes surrenders to Luitprand, 4 
Cunegunda, Queen (wife, Henry II.), 

crowned at St. Peter's, 247 
Curia, pontifical, gradually becomes 

less Roman, 272 
Cyriacus, St., convent of, in Via Lata, 

founded by Alberic, 221 

Dalmatian Isles, influence of Greek 
empire in, 175 

Damasus II. (Poppo, Bishop of 
Brixen), 255 ; chosen by Henry 
III., 257 ; Marquess of Tuscany 
opposed to, 257 ; enthroned, 257 ; 
death of, 257 

Damian, St. Peter, greets Gregory 
VI. , 252 ; in convent in Apennines, 
252 ; on Roman rights at papal 
elections, 254 ; legend related by, 
concerning Benedict IX., 257 note; 
takes no part in election, Benedict 
X., 262 ; describes person of Bene- 
dict X., 262 note 

Daniel {magister militum), reports re- 
volutionary expressions to Louis 
II., 148 ; convicted of false testi- 
mony, 148 ; received back into 
emperor's favour, 148 

Deacons, cardinal, seven in number, 62 

Deacons-sub, cardinal, two groups of 
seven, 62 

Decarco, head of a schola (group) of 
Roman population, 60 

Decretals, forged, author of the, 271 

Denis, St., in Via Lata, Mimoire, in 
Melanges de VEcole de Rome, 52 note 

Denis, St., recovery of Stephen II. 
attributed to, 41 ; basilica dedi- 
cated to, 52 ; Stephen II. Pepin's 
guest at abbey of, 40 ; abbot of, 
to define limits of papal state, 104 

Desiderata, first legal wife of Charle- 
magne, 82 ; cast off, 82 ; replaced 
by Hildegard, 82 note 

Desiderius, King, Duke of Tuscany, 

47 ; claims Lombard throne, 47 
promises to restore cities to Roman 
republic, 47 ; becomes king, 48 
is in no hurry to divide kingdom 

48 ; Pope Paul clamours for resto 
ration of cities by, 54 ; attempts to 
quell rebellious dukes, 54-5 ; meets 
Pope outside walls, St. Peter's, 55 ; 
will surrender no town, except 
Imola, 55 ; comes to understanding 
with Pope, 57 ; assures Christo- 
pher the primicerius of sympathy, 
76 ; has grave cause of complaint 
against Christopher and Sergius, 
81 ; makes pilgrimage to Rome, 82 ; 
neglected by Pope, 83 ; makes 
dupe of Stephen III. , 85 ; Hadrian 
I. resumes negotiations with, 88 ; 
welcomes Gerberga, widow of Car- 
loman, 88 ; Pope Hadrian sends 
deputation, headed by Paul Afiarta, 



88 ; makes himself master of Fer- 
rara, Comacchio, and Faenza, 89 ; 
has designs on Eavenna, 89 ; plots 
against Charlemagne, 91 ; goes 
towards Rome, 92 ; perturbed by 
threat of excommunication, re- 
treats towards Pavia, 92 ; Charle- 
magne charges, to make restitution 
to Pope, 93 ; is obdurate, 93 ; troops 
of, defeated, and Pavia taken, 93 ; 
Adelchis, son of, leads revolt at 
Verona, 93 ; son, Adelchis, de- 
feated, 93 ; confined at Corbi, with 
queen. Ansa, 96 

Deusdedit, pontifical canonist on 
Council in 826, of Eugenius III., 
133 note ; on lay participation in 
papal elections, 134 note ; on Nor- 
man promises to Pope, 267 note 

Diaconce, wives of clergy, 66 

Diaconal administration, 63 

Didier, Lombard prince, piety of, 25 

Documents, forged, 230 note 

Dodo, missus of Carloman, at Rome, 
83 ; Stephen III. writes of, 85 

Doge of Venice, Venetian Patriarch 
subject to, 27 

Domestici, rank of, 61 

Dominus, vice (vidame), of Lateran 
palace, 63 

Domus cultce, cultivation of districts 
by Popes, 67 

Domus ecdesice, Church of Lateran, 
included in, 64 

Donation (false) of Constantine, 119, 

Dove, M. A., memoir by, 137 note 

Drogo, Bishop of Metz, natural son 
of Charlemagne, 139 ; sent to 
Rome by Emperor Lothaire, 139 ; 
appointed apostolic vicar, 1 39 

Duchy, Roman, 13-20 ; extent of, 
15 ; no mention of " the Duke of," 
after 754, 40 

Duchy of Naples, 20 

Duchy of Spoleto, 15 

Duchy of Venice, 20 

Duke, military degree of, 61 

Duke, Roman, subject to Exarch, 16 

Dukes, native, take place of commis- 
sioned officials, 16 

Diimmler, polemics against Sergius 
III. collected by, 207 note ; on 
work by Vulgarius, 208 note 

Dynamius has title of " patrician," 


East, Roman Emperor of the, 3 
Ecclesia Dei, Pope head of, 62 

Eclipse, solar, after expulsion Bene- 
dict IX., 250 note 

Ecole de Rome, melanges of, account 
of Terracina in, 15 jwte ; on Tras- 
teverians, 60 note ; on attack of 
Duke of Spoleto on Saracens, 141 
note; on Leopolis, 146 note; Cena 
Cypriani, in, 180 note 

Ecumenical council at Constanti- 
nople, 165 

Edrisite dynasty governs Saracens of 
Mauritania, 137 

Eginhard, on national conventions 
at Braisne and Kiersy, 42 note ; on 
Desiderata and Hildegard, 82 note ; 
on Charlemagne as Roman em- 
peror, 117 ; annals of, 168 note 

Eichstiidt, Gebhard, Bishop of, Pope 
Victor II., 255, 259. See Victor II. 

Election of Popes, by Romans, 14 ; 
crisis concerning, at death of Paul 
L, 71 ; question whether all future 
subjects should share in, 72 ; new 
rules for, 80-1 ; remarkably excit- 
ing case of, 128-9; by Romans 
alone, subject to imperial confir- 
mation, 132 ; lay participation in, 
134 ; necessity of emperor's ap- 
proval of, 139 ; of Leo IV., not 
referred to emperor, 144 ; of Bene- 
dict III. referred to emperor, 152 ; 
of Benedict III. not approved by 
Emperor Louis, 152 ; irregularity 
of, in case Marinus I., 188 ; no 
evidence of imperial confirmation 
in cases of Marinus I. and St. 
Hadrian III., 189 ; of Formosus, 
irregular, 198; of Boniface VI. and 
Stephen VI., defy rules of Church, 
198 ; law concerning, in privilege 
of Otto, 228 ; Romans rebel against 
new rules for, 237 ; renunciation 
by Romans of part in, 254 ; pro- 
mulgation of edict on, 265 ; con- 
test between Papal See and Ger- 
many on, 266 ; Alexander II. 
makes concessions in form of, 268 ; 
Germany finally loses authority 
over, 268 ; Germany concerned in, 
with i-egard to anti-popes, 268-9 

Election of Nicholas II. not free by 
Romans, 263 

Electors, Chief, Theophylact, Marozia, 
and Alberic, 230 

Eleutherius, possibility of Popedom 
of, 149 ; Anastasius desires promo- 
tion for, 163 ; wooer of daughter of 
Hadrian II., 163; carries her and 
her mother off by force, 163-4; 
pursued by missus of Louis II., 164 ; 
assassinates wife and daughter of 



Hadrian, 164 ; arrested and exe- 
cuted, 165 

Emilia, Charlemagne commands Lom- 
bard evacuation of, 97 ; claimed by 
Archbishop Ravenna, loi ; George, 
Duke of, helps to assassinate papal 
legate, John, 146-7 ; Archbishop 
Ravenna, oppresses Pope's subjects 
in, 1 58 ; people of, ask Pope to inter- 
vene, 159 

Emiliana Basilica (SS. Quattro), 
assembly in, 153 

Empire, Roman, restoration of, 112- 
21 ; Charlemagne crowned, in St. 
Peter's, as head of, 116, 119 

Engelberga, Empress, marries Em- 
peror Louis II., 148 ; entreats pre- 
sence of Pope, at bedside Louis, 
161 ; desires imperial succession 
for Carloman, son of Louis the 
German, 172, 178 

Episcopae, wives of clergy, 66 

Epitaph of Crescentius in St. Alexis, 

Erasmus, St. , Monastery of, Leo III. 
imprisoned at, 113 

Ermengarde, Queen, crowned at 
Rheims, 124 

Eugene, arch priest, Santa Sabina, 
elected Pope (Eugenius II.), 129; 
arranges for burial of predecessor, 
St. Pascal I., 129; sends deputation 
to Emperor Louis, 129; code of 
laws directed against, 13 1-2 

Eugenius Vulgarius, polemical writ- 
ings of, 207 ; steers a middle 
course, 208 ; grammarian and pro- 
fessor, 208 note ; first work. Letter 
to Roman Church, 208 note ; second 
work published under name of 
Auscilius, 208 note; letter to the 
vestararissa, Theodora, 209 

Europe et le saint siege a Vepoque 
Carolingienne, L. A. Lapotre, 167 note 

Eutychius, last of the Exarchs. See 

Exarch, Duke of Rome subject to, 16 

Exarch Eutychius, last of the Exarchs, 
5 ; opposes Petasius (or Tiberius), 
rival of Leo the Isaurian, 6 ; re- 
conciliation of with Pope unpopular, 
7 ; takes refuge in Venice, 7 ; sent 
ijack to Ravenna, 8 

Exarch Paul sends troops to Rome, 5 ; 
perishes at Ravenna, 5 

Exarch Romanus, lieutenant of Em- 
peror Maurice, 2 ; efforts for Roman 
defence by, 2 

Exarchs ceremoniously received in 
Rome, 94 

Exarchy, end of, 21 ; Stephen II. 

either claims or accepts "restitu- 
tion" of, 36-7 ; Archbishop of 
Ravenna assumes authority in, 99 

Exercitus felicissimus, 27 

Exercitus, Romanus, 16, 27 


Fabre, Paul, De patrimoniis Romance 
ecdesice, 66 note 

Factions in Rome, 83 

Faenza not mentioned in list of terri- 
tories given to Holy See in time of 
Stephen II., 46 ; Desiderius makes 
himself master of, 89 ; Lombards 
to evacuate, 97 

Farfa, register of, not authentic, 15 
note ; Abbey of Santa Maria of, 68 ; 
Abbot of, envoy of Hadrian I., 91 ; 
Abbot of, brings grievance before 
Lothaire I., 127; Abbot of, baron 
of first rank, 243 ; Abbot of, appeals 
to Lombard law, 248 ; Saracen 
establishment on site of Abbey of, 

Farold, military commander left in 
Rome by Arnulph, 197 ; counte- 
nances Formosus, 197 ; elections 
under auspices of, 198 

Fermo, people of, declare allegiance 
to Pope, 94 

Ferrara, not on list of territories of 
Holy See in time of Stephen II., 46 ; 
Desiderius makes himself master 
of, 89 ; Lombards to evacuate, 97 ; 
claimed by Archbishop of Ravenna, 
10 1 ; Azzo and Tebald of Tuscany 
very popular in, 255-6 

Fez royal seat of Edrisite dynasty, 137 

Financial administration at Lateran. 
See Administration 

Fiscal questions, disagreement on, 
between Holy See and Byzantine 
Government, 4 

Florence, Gerard, Bishop of (Nicholas 
II.), 262 

Forgery of documents, 230 note 

Forged decretals, 271 

Forli given up to Holy See, 46 

Forma Urbis,by M. Lanciani, opinion 
of, on site St. Caesar in Palatio, 61 

Formosus, Pope, as Bishop of Porto, 
invites Charles the Bald for im- 
perial coronation, 173 ; escapes 
from Rome, 178 ; genuine piety of, 
178 ; had been leader of Bulgarian 
mission, 178 ; desired by Bulgarians 
as Archbishop, 178 ; becomes Pope, 
195 ; crowns Lambert of Spoleto, 



195 ; plays double part, 195 ; re- 
ceives King Arnulph in Rome, 197 ; 
overwhelmed by failure of plans, 
197; death of, 197 ; mock trial of, 
after death, 199; corpse thrown 
into an unconsecrated tomb, 200 ; 
afterwards into the Tiber, 200; 
restored to original tomb in atrium, 
St. Peter's, by Theodore II., 201 ; 
legend regarding reburial of, 201 
note ; use of name of sacerdos for- 
bidden for, 207 ; Sergius III. once 
again annuls ordinations of, 207 

Fortifications of Rome, 145 ; cost of, 
and tax for, 145 ; dedication of, 
145, 146; John VIII. completes, 

France, Western, Kingdom of, formed 
from Frankish Kingdom, 136 

Franco, son of Ferrucius, "national" 
Pope. See Boniface VII. 

Franks, help of, invoked by Romans, 
28 ; Austrasian, make descents on 
Italy, 28; Pope Pelagius II. calls 
Catholics, like the Romans, 28-9 ; 
in suburbs of St. Peter's scholce, 60 

Frankish Kingdom broken up, 136 ; 
consequences of destruction of 
empire, 168 ; one emperor of, resi- 
dent in Italy, 168 ; number of kings 
recognised in, 190 ; Italianised, 193 

Fredegarius, successor of, as chroni- 
cler, 31, 32 note, 38 note, 39 

Frederick, Duke, Luitpraud's protege, 
killed by order of Trasimund, 9 

Frederick of Lorraine (Cardinal), 259 ; 
brother of Duke Geoffrey of Lor- 
raine, 259 ; Henry III. charges 
Victor II. to arrest, 259 ; takes 
Benedictine habit at Monte Cas- 
sino, 259 ; made Abbot Monte 
Cassino and Cardinal priest, 260 ; 
becomes Pope (Stephen IX.), 260; 
elected without reference to Court 
of Germany, 260 ; goes to Tuscany, 
261 ; dies from poison, 261 

Frisians, in suburbs of St. Peter's 
scholce, 60 

Friuli, right of Astolphus to, 37 ; 
Rotgaud, Duke of, raises standard 
of revolt, 102 ; Berengarius of, 191 

Fulda, chroniclers of, on Charles the 
Bald, 1 7 1-2 

Fulrad, Abbot of St. Denis, to conduct 
Stephen II. to palace of Ponthion, 
35 ; letter to Pepin, entrusted to, 
by Pope, 43 ; makes tour of towns, 
with Lombard commissioners, 45 ; 
deposits deeds and keys in Con- 
fession at St. Peter's, 46 ; supports 
return of Ratchis to monastic life. 

48 ; under rival protection of saints 
of Rome and Paris, 52; Pope's 
visit to abbey of, 52 ; enthusiasm 
of, for Holy See, 52; influences 
Archbishop of Ravenna to obey 
summons of Stephen II., 99 


Gabello restored to Exarchy, 48 note 

Gaeta holds out against Lombards, 
3 ; Pope's domains yield small 
profit in, 67 ; Terracina in hands 
of Greeks of, 103 ; autonomous 
city, 148 ; struggle of against 
Saracens, 148 ; petty prince of, 
allies himself with Saracens, 176 ; 
Christian allies of Saracens in, 

Galeria, Gerard, Count of, leads 
vassals of Tusculum, 250 ; Count 
of, in accord with appointment 
Benedict X., 262 

Gallesa included in " compage sanctae 
reipublicae atque corpore Christo 
dilecti exercitus Romani," 17 

Gallese, Affaire de, 16 note 

Gallipoli looks to Sicily for help, 3 

Garigliano, lower course of, Saracens 
plunder in mountains, command- 
ing, 210 

Gattola Hist. Abb. Cassin, 205 note 

Gay, M. J., Memorandum by, " The 
Papal State," 15 note 

Gebhard, Bishop of Eichstadt (Victor 
II.), 259. See Victor IL 

Gelasius II. lives and dies away from 
Rome, 270 

Genoa, Byzantine power sustained 
with difficulty, on coast of, 3 

Gentilly, conference at, in 767, 59 

Geoffrey, Duke of Lorraine marries 
Beatrice, widow of Marquess Boni- 
face of Tuscany, 259 ; rebellious 
vassal of Henry III., 259 ; wife 
and daughter of, seized by Henry 
III, 259 

George, Bishop of Amiens, sent to 
Italy, 92 

George of Aventino, master of 
militia, escapes from Rome, 178 

George, Bishop of Presento, confers 
tonsure on Constantine, pro- 
laimed Pope, 73-4 ; consecrates 
Constantine Pope, at St. Peter's, 

George, Duke of Emilia, helps in 
assassination of papal legate, 
146-7 ; trial of, before imperial 
missi, 147 




George, Chief Secretary, accompanies 
John the Silentiary to Rome, 44-5 ; 
ill-success of mission to Pepin, 45 ; 
continues mission, 58 ; plots, with 
Lombard king, against Ravenna, 

Gerald, Count of Eastern Marshes, 
inquires into affairs in Rome, 123 

Gerard, Count of Galeria, leads 
vassals of Tusculum, 250 

Gerard, Bishop of Florence, Nicholas 
II., 262. See Nicholas II. 

Gerberga, widow of Carloman, 88 ; 
flies to Italy, 88 ; received cor- 
dially, by Desiderius, 88 

Gerbert, Archbishop of Ravenna, 
appointed Pope (Sylvester II.), by 
Otto III., 242. 5g«" Sylvester II. 

German, Louis the, 136. See Louis 
the German 

German influence in Rome, 253 ; 
co-operation necessary for legiti- 
mate papal appointment, 263 ; 
incongruity of necessity for co- 
operation, 263 ; authority over 
papal elections lost, 268 ; concern 
in election of anti-popes, 268-9 

Germanus, Patriarch of Constanti- 
nople, forced to resign, 7 

Germany, Kingdom of, formed from 
Frankish Kingdom, 136; destinies 
of Italy bound up with, 218 

Gerocomia (asylums for aged men), 

Gesta Berengarii describes Roman 
fetes for Berengarius, 211 

Gis^le, daughter of Pepin, godchild 
of Pope Paul I., 50 

Gis^ta, daughter of Pepin, Stephen 
II. prevents marriage of, to Leo 
IV., son of Constantino Coprony- 
mus, 168 note 

Glaber Raoul, account by, of re- 
bellion against Benedict IX., 250 
note ; mentions Council at Pavia, 
denouncing simony, 254 note 

Gnesen, St. Adalbert of Prague 
buried at, 242 ; Otto III. visits, 

Gontran King, Pope Pelagius II. ex- 
plains religious position of Franks 
to, 28-9 

Gothic Kings of Ravenna, i ; war, 
miseries of, i 

Gottingische gel. Anz., 1895 ; 96 note 

Grade, Patriarch of, warns Pope 
Hadrian, respecting Friuli, 102 

Grandmaster of ceremonies, Lateran 
palace (nomenculator), 63 

Gratiano, magister militum, story of, 

Gratiosus conveys Lombard Pope 
Philip back to monastery, St. 
Vitus, 78 ; initiator of attempts 
on Constantine II., 84 ; deserts 
Christopher the primicerius, 84 

Greek Empire, Roman duchy nomin- 
ally subject to, 20 ; establishes 
footing on south-east coast Italy, 
175 ; star of, in ascendant, 193 

Greek section, Roman population, 
{schola GrcBCorum), 60 

Greeks, Pope Paul I. dreads political 
alliance of, with Lombards, 57 ; 
connection of, with Lombards 
severed, 105 

Gregorovius on death of John XII., 

Gregory, advocate, concerned in 
murder of Sergius, the secunderiug, 

Gregory, Duke, follower of Christo- 
pher, the primicerius, assassinated, 


Gregory the nomenclator, escapes 
from Rome, 178 

Gregory, St., the Great (Gregory I.), 
in modern parlance, a great patriot, 
13; correspondence of, with heirs 
of Gontran and Childebert, 29; 
mentions vast estates of Church, 

Gregory, St., convent of, remodelled 
by Alberic, 221 

Gregory II. protests against new 
flscal impositions, 4 ; and against 
religious regulations, 4-5 ; receives 
LuitprandandEutychius, 6; refuses 
to recognise successor of Germanus 
of Constantinople, 7 ; Luitprand 
yields to claims of, on Lutri, 7 ; 
declarations of, 19; Lombards de- 
fend against Exarchs, 25 ; docu- 
mentary evidence on sovereignty 
of, 28 ; ramparts of Rome repaired 
under, 63 

Gregory III. continues policy Gregory 
II., 7 ; sends ambassadors to Con- 
stantinople, 7 ; desires return of 
Exarch Eutychius to Ravenna, 7-8 ; 
beseeches Luitprand to restore 
four towns, 8 ; asks aid of Charles 
Martel, 8 ; death of, 10 ; money 
regulations of, about Gallesa, 
17; declarations of, 19; docu- 
mentary evidence concerning 
sovereignity of, 28 ; establishes 
yearly " station," in honour of St. 
Petronilla, 49 note 

Gregory IV. elected Pope, 133 ; 
election of imperially confirmed, 
134; pontificate of, darkened by 



discord between Louis the Pious 
and sons, 1 36 ; indiscreetly inter- 
feres, 136 ; constructs fortress 
Gregoriopolis, 138 ; death of, in 
844, 138; followed Lothaire into 
Italy, and supported against father, 

Gregory V. (Bruno of Carinthia), 
appointed by Otto III., 239; 
crowns his cousin, Otto III., 239 ; 
succeeded by Sylvester II., 240 ; 
ill-advised intervention of, against 
banishment Crescentius, 240; death 
probably caused by poison, 242 

Gregory VI. , John Gratian, archpriest 
of St. John-before-the-Latin-Gate, 
251 ; succeeds, on resignation 
Benedict IX., 251 ; not a Cardinal, 
251 ; pays for election, 251 ; steady 
life of, 251 ; St. Peter Damian 
greets, 252 ; has Hildebrand, as 
Chaplain, 252 ; interview of, with 
Henry III., 254; deposed, 254; 
sent to the other side Alps, 254 ; 
Hildebrand follows into exile, 

Gregory VII. lives and dies away 
from Rome, 270 ; has onus of sett- 
ling affairs, on different basis, 276 

Grimoald, appointed Duke of Bene- 
ventum, 105 

Grisar, on Saracen injuries to apos- 
tolic sanctuary, 142 note 

Grotto Ferrata, Benedict IX. perhaps 
monk at, after deposition, 257 

Gubbio succumbs to Lombards, 21 

Guibert attends conclave at Sutri, 
deposing Benedict X. and recog- 
nising Nicholas II., 262 

Guibertists, touch up account of 
edict on papal elections, 265 note 

Guiscard, Richard and Robert, Nor- 
man chiefs, invested by Nicholas 
II., 267 

Gulfard, Abbot of St. Martin, brings 
important letters from Rome, 92-3 

Gunther, Archbishop, leader of Lor- 
raine clergy, deposed, 160 ; receives 
promise of reinstatement, 162 

Guy, of Spoleto, deputed to assist 
John VIIL, 177 

Guy, Duke of Spoleto (later Emperor), 
sole heir of Dukes Lambert and 
Guy, 191 ; not Carlovingian, 191 ; 
a man of parts, 191 ; dismissed 
from office, 192 ; a candidate for 
crown of France, 192 ; crowned 
at Langres, 192 ; supporters of, 
headed by Foulques , Archbishop of 
Rheims, 192 ; gains victory at 
Trebbia, 192 ; master of Milan, 

Pavia, and Italy, South of Po, 
193^; kingship of, menace to papacy, 
193 ; documents on election of, 
by bishops, 193 note ; not openly 
thwarted by Stephen V., 194 ; Pope 
Stephen writes of, as his only 
son, 194 ; consecrated Emperor, by 
Stephen V., 19s ; Pope Formosus 
consecrates Lambert, son of, 195 ; 
opposed by King Amulph, 195-6 ; 
death of, 196 
Guy, Marquess of Tuscany, marries 
Theophylact's daughter, Marozia, 
214 ; death of, 215 

Hadrian I. made Pope, 87 ; man of 
probity, energy, and capability, 87 ; 
scion of noble family, 87 ; recalls 
banished member of clergy and 
military, 87-8 ; resumes negotia- 
tions with Lombard King, Deside- 
rius, 88 ; sifts mystery of assassina- 
tion Sergius, the secundicerius, 89 ; 
sends envoy for Afiarta, 90-1 ; 
withdraws from Lombard alliance, 
91 ; tries to come to terms with 
Desiderius, 91 ; agrees to meet 
Desiderius, 91 ; but sees in pilgrim 
king an invading foe, 92; threatens 
excommunication if Desiderius 
enters Roman territory, 92 ; Desid- 
erius refuses restitution to, 93 ; 
Charlemagne offers restitution to, 
93 ; people of Spoleto proclaim 
allegiance to, 93-4; takes pos- 
session districts of central Italy, 94; 
ceremonious reception of Charle- 
magne, in Rome, by, 94-5 ; political 
agreements with Charlemagne, 95 ; 
question of donation of Exarchy 
and Pentapolis to, 95 ; duchies 
embraced in agreement of, with 
Charlemagne, 95 ; denounces Leo, 
Archbishop of Ravenna, 101-2 ; 
troubled by Duke Hildeprand of 
Spoleto, Duke Aricio of Bene- 
ventum, and Duke of Chiusi, 102 ; 
has small success with Charle- 
magne, regarding Kiersy pro- 
gramme, 103; much occupied 
with Terracina, 103 ; relinquishes 
duchies of Spoleto and Tuscany, 

104 ; crowns sons of Charlemagne 
kings of Italy and Aquitaine, 104 ; 
has only nominal authority beyond 
Ceprano, 105; limits assigned by, of 
Roman duchy, preserved till 1870, 

105 ; recriminations of, in letters to 



Charlemagne, io8 ; no constitu- 
tional progress in pontificate of, 
io8 ; death of, in 795, 108 

Hadrian II. succeeds to papacy, 
157; John VIII. succeeds, 157; 
dispenses marks of favour to 
compromised persons, 162 ; was 
married, before entering major 
orders, 163 ; daughter of, carried 
off, by Eleutherius, 163-4; re- 
monstrates with Charles the Bald 
for seizing estates of Lothaire II., 
169 ; supports Carloman, son of 
Charles the Bald, against father, 
169 ; writes insultingly to Charles, 

Hadrian III., short pontificate of, 
188 ; summoned to Germany, by 
Emperor, 188 ; death of, near 
Nonantola, 188 ; during absence 
in Germany, missus, John, Bishop 
of Pavia, governs, 189 

Hadrian, Imperial missus, assassinates 
papal legate, 146-7 ; tried before 
imperial missi, 147 

Henry II. (Duke of Bavaria), King 
of Germany, 244 ; Germans rally 
round, on death of Otto III., 244 ; 
papal candidates, Gregory and 
Theophylact turn to, 246 ; had 
made campaign in Northern Italy, 
246 ; old Lombard capital had 
risen against, 246 ; entrance of, 
into Italy, causes disappearance of 
Arduin, 246 ; crowned, with Queen 
Cunegunda, by Benedict VIII. at 
St. Peter's, 247 ; issues privilege 
for Benedict VIII., 248 

Henry III., Emperor, succeeds Conrad 
II., 250 ; puts a stop to gross 
scandals, 250 ; holds Council at 
Pavia, condemning simony, 253-4 ; 
appoints Suidger, Bishop of Bam- 
berg, Pope (Clement II.), 254; 
consecrated, with Queen Agnes, 
254 ; pre-eminence of Salerno de- 
stroyed by, 256 ; on death of 
Clement II., asked to appoint Pope, 
257 ; chooses Poppo, Bishop of 
Brixen (Damasus II.), 257 ; Boni- 
face, Marquess of Tuscany, opposes 
choice of, 257 ; replaces Damasus 
II. by Bruno, Bishop of Toul (Leo 
IX.), 257 ; Geoffrey, Duke of 
Lorraine, rebellious vassal of, 259 ; 
seizes Geoffrey's wife and daughter, 
259 ; appoints Pope vicar in Italy, 
259 ; and charges him to arrest 
Cardinal Frederic of Lorraine, 259 
Henry IV., six years old, at father's 
death, 259 ; under guardianship 

of Empress Agnes, 259 ; Regency 
under, appoints Cadalus of Parma, 
Pope (Honorius II.), 268 ; after 
recognising Gregory VII., tries to 
have him deposed, 268 
Hereditary transmission of papal 

chair, 249 
Heribert, Archbishop, excommuni- 
cated by Benedict IX. at request 
of Conrad II., 250 

Hildebald of Cologne charged to see 
Leo III. reinstated, 113 

Hildebrand taken under protection 
of Gregory VI., 251 ; at monastery 
founded by Alberic, on Aventine, 
252 ; chaplain and adviser, Gre- 
gory VI., 252; follows Gregory 
into exile, 257-8 ; remonstrates 
with Leo IX., 258 ; is with Victor 
11. at his death, 260 ; despatches 
to Empress Agnes, regarding papal 
appointment, 260-1 ; ideas of, on 
freedom of election, differ from 
those of aristocracy, 261 ; ecclesi- 
astical chiefs rally round, on ap- 
pointment of Benedict X., 262 ; at 
conclave (Sutri) where Benedict 
deposed, and Nicholas II. recog- 
nised, 262 ; never recognised rule 
of Barons of Rome, 264 ; throws 
himself into the arms of Normans, 
264 ; applies to Richard, Count of 
Aversa, 265 ; discusses, with Nor- 
mans, means of thwarting German 
court, 266 ; in favour of appoint- 
ment Alexander II., 268 

Hildegard succeeds Desiderata as 
wife of Charlemagne , 82 note ; 
sent for by Charlemagne, to camp, 
94 ; two sons of, Pepin and Louis, 

Hildeprand, elected Duke of Spoleto, 
94; adopts independent attitude, 
1 02 ; Frankish ambassadors try to 
reconcile to Pope, 102 

Hildesheim, Bernard, Bishop of, 243 

Hincmar, papal rights expounded by, 
160 ; on Benedict III. and Anas- 
tasius, 154; on Charles the Bald, 
171, 182 

Honorius II., Pope (Cadalus, Bishop 
of Parma), 268; struggle against 
Alexander II. , 268 

Hospices, Roman, of eighth century, 

Hubert, intruded Abbot of St. 
Maurice, Benedict III. attacks, 

Hucbald, a missus mentioned in letter 
of Hadrian I., loi note 

Hugh, Count of Paris, 190 



Hugh, Count of Provence, grandson, 
Lothaire II., 213-14 ; often at- 
tempts to take possession of Rome, 
217 ; and to receive imperial coro- 
nation, 217 

Hugh, King of Italy, Marozia offers 
her hand to, 215 ; life in Pavia 
that of Sultan, 215 ; marriage with 
Marozia celebrated at Castle St. 
Angelo, Rome, 215 ; insults Alberic, 
son of Marozia, by first marriage, 
215 ; Alberic besieges in Castle St, 
Angelo, 215; escapes with diffi- 
culty, 215 

Hunald, fighting monk, 53 

Hungarians penetrate into Italy, 204 

Iconoclast, Leo the, 19 

Image of each Emperor in Church of 
St. Caesar in Palatio, 61 

Images, Pope's dispute about with 
Byzantine government, 4 ; ecclesi- 
astical disunion produced by dis- 
pute about, 56; Convocation ratifies 
veneration of, 81 

Immo, B'rankish envoy, attends coro- 
nation Paul I., 54 

Imola, not mentioned in territories 
Holy See, time of Stephen II., 46 ; 
Desiderius offers to give up con- 
ditionally, 55 ; Lombards to eva- 
cuate, 97 

Imperator, title substituted for 
" patricius," 118 

Institutions, Roman, in eighth cen- 
tury, 60-69 

Insulani, section of Roman popula- 
tion, 60 

Invectiva in Romam, 213 

Irene, Empress, guardian of Con- 
stantino VI., 104; occupies im- 
perial throne at Constantinople, 

Isaurian, Leo the, 5. See Leo the 

I stria, domains of, Pope yields small 
profit in, 67 

Italy, Lombard and Byzantine, 2 ; 
imperial power extinct in north 
and centre of, 19 ; peculiar con- 
figuration of Byzantine, 16 ; son of 
Charlemagne crowned king of, 
104; destinies of, in balance be- 
tween France and Germany, 173 

Italian unity first established by 
Romans, i ; mortal blow to, 2 

Itherius, Abbot of, to define certain 
limits of Papal State, 104 

Ivrea, Berengarius, Marquess of, 
218 ; proclaimed king, 218 

Jaffe, 43 note 

Jerome, illegitimate son Charles 
Martel, escort for Stephen II., 


Jesi-Sinigaglia in territory given up to 
Holy See, 46 

Johannipolis, named after Pope John 
VIII., 177 

John, Archbishop of Ravenna, under 
ecclesiastical censure, 158; papal 
action against, 158-61 

John, Bishop of Pavia, Hadrian III. 
commits government of city of 
Rome to, 189 

John, brother of Stephen III., cruel 
treatment of Sergius the secunderius 
by, 89 

John Caneparius on Gregory V., 240 

John Crescentius, power of, in Rome, 

John the Deacon, afterwards Bishop 
of Rieti, 1^9 ; at one time selected 
by Louis II. as future Pope, 149 

John the Deacon, ambassador of John 
XII. to Germany, 224 

John the Deacon proclaimed Pope by 
a party in Rome, 138 ; ousted from 
papal residence, 138 

John Gratian. See Gregory VI. 

John the Silentiary sent to Rome, 
22 ; bears imperial letter to King 
of Lombards, 22 ; non-success of 
errand, 22-3 ; has orders for inter- 
view between Pope and Astolphus 
about Ravenna, ^s 5 reappears in 
Rome with George, chief secretary, 
44-5 ; continues mission, 58 ; in- 
stalled in Frankish court, 58 

John III., Pope, Life of, Lther Ponti- 
ficalis, 2 note 

John VIII., Pope, succeeds to papacy, 
on day of death Hadrian II., 157 ; 
personal friend of Louis II,, 157 ; 
emperor probably in Rome at elec- 
tion of, 157 ; twice, at least, pro- 
tested against treaty of Mersen, 
172 ; situation changed, for two 
emperors chosen by, 173; privilege 
(now lost) delivered to, by Charles 
the Bald, 175 ; commands fleet 
against Saracens, 176 ; relates ex- 
ploits to Louis and Engelberga, 
176; builds Johannipolis, 177; 
makes entry into Campania, 177 ; 
attempts to dissolve Saracen 



treaties, 177 ; gains only partial 
success against Saracens, 177 ; has 
enemies at home, 177 ; tries to rid 
himself of enemies, 178; who fly 
from Rome, 178 ; sends Formosus 
to Charles the Bald, 179 ; dislikes 
Formosus, 179 ; assembles synod 
at the Pantheon, 179 ; censures 
enemies at another synod at St. 
Peter's, 179-80 ; Dukes of Spoleto 
and Marquess of Tuscany persecute, 

180 ; increases appeals to Charles 
the Bald, 180 ; meets Charles at 
Pavia, 180 ; on Charles's death is 
in hands of enemies, 181; Lambert 
of Spoleto insults, 181 ; places 
basilica St. Peter's under interdict, 

181 ; requests assistance of Greek 
emperor, Basil, 181 ; pays tribute 
to Saracens, 182 ; goes to Genoa 
and Aries, 182 ; wishes to summon 
convocation of Carlovingian prin- 
ces, 182 ; holds great council at 
Troyes (878), 182 ; escorted back 
to Italy by Boson, Count of Vienne, 

182 ; Boson, adopted son of, 184 ; 
turns friendly face to all parties, 

184 ; Charles the Fat proclaimed 
at Ravenna, in presence of, 185 ; 
anxious for help of Charles the Fat, 

185 ; hurls maledictions at Boson, 
185 ; finds himself deserted and 
helpless, 186 ; beaten to death with 
hammers, 186 ; had been victim of 
circumstances, 186 

John IX., elected with Sergius III., 
202 ; lover of peace, 202 ; holds 
three councils, 202 ; repeals decrees 
of Stephen VI., 202 ; decides that 
no corpse may be brought up for 
trial, 202 ; decides that presence 
imperial legates necessary for papal 
election, 202-3 ; death of, in 900, 

John X. reigns fourteen years, 210; 
rules with virility, 210; directs 
energy to destruction Mussulman 
resorts, 210; invites Berengarius 
to Rome, 210 ; bestows imperial 
crown on Berengarius, 2 10- 11 ; 
organises league against Saracens, 

211 ; risks life against Saracens, 

212 ; promotion of, considered 
illegal, 212 ; had retained metro- 
politan throne of Ravenna several 
years, 213 ; will not recognise or- 
dinations of Formosus, 213 ; though 
tarred with same brush as Formo- 
sus, 213 ; dissension arises round, 
214 ; thwarts Marozia, 214 ; Hun- 
garians dangerous allies of, 214 ; 

seeks support of King of Italy, 214 
rebels murder brother Peter, 214 ; 
cast into prison, and stifled, 214 

John XL, son of Marozia, 215 ; sends 
ambassadors to Lecapenus, 220 ; 
ambassadors of commit breach of 
ecclesiastical law, by presence at 
St. Sophia, 220 ; letter to, by 
Romanus Lecapenus, 220 

John XII. (Octavian, son of Alberic), 
222 ; in sixteenth year, 222 ; pro- 
motion of ends struggle between 
nobles and clergy, 223 ; venture- 
some expedition against Lombard 
principalities, 223 ; defeated, 223 ; 
dissolute life of, 223-4 ; simony 
and scandals under, 224 ; issues 
document to monks of Subiaco, for 
Kyrie Eleisons and Christie Eieisons, 
for soul, 224 ; sends two ambassa- 
dors to Germany, 224 ; King of 
Germany arranges with, for visit 
to Rome, 225 ; crowns Otto, 225 ; 
signs agreement with Emperor, 
225 ; conspires with claimants to 
Italian throne, 226 ; summoned to 
appear before Otto's council, at St. 
Peter's, 227 ; returns disdainful 
answer, 227 ; deposed, 227 ; does 
not meekly accept sentence of 
deposition, 231 ; reappears in Rome, 
231 ; question concerning incom- 
petent assembly, which deposed, 
231-2 ; takes repossession of Holy 
See, 232 ; last hours spent in gra- 
tification of illicit passion, 232 ; 
was cardinal-deacon at time of 
promotion, 232 note, 249 note ; 
unexampled licentiousness of, 


John XIII. appointed by Otto (John, 
Bishop of Narni, and son of Theo- 
dora II.), 234; relation of John 
XI I. , 234 ; rebelled against, im- 
prisoned, and then banished, 234 ; 
re-enters Rome, 235 ; humiliates 
leaders of revolt, 235 ; authority of, 
maintained, 236 ; death of, in 973, 

John XIV. (Chancellor Peter) ap- 
pointed by Otto IL, 237 ; attends 
Otto on deathbed, 237 ; Theo- 
phano, widow of Otto II., leaves to 
mercy of Romans, 237 ; Franco 
(Boniface VII. ) returns, and thrusts 
into prison, 238 ; death of, possibly 
from hunger, 238 

John XV. succeeds Boniface VII., 
239 ; very little information about, 
239 ; shed dim lustre on papal 
throne, 239 ; grows weary of Cres- 



ceatius, 239 ; invites Otto III. to 
Rome, 239 ; death of, 239 

John XVI. (Philagath, Bishop of 
Piacenza), rival of Gregory V., 240 ; 
brought forward by Crescentius, 
240 ; a Calabrian Greek, owing 
everything to Theophano, and son, 
240 ; installed Pope, 241 ; takes 
flight, but is captured and cruelly 
treated, 241 ; humiliations suffered 
by, 241 ; death of, probably at 
Abbey of Fulda, 241 

John XVII. reigns six months, 

John XVIII. , place of, taken by Ser- 
gius IV., 245 

John XIX. follows Benedict VIII., 
249 ; not adapted to fulfil ideas of 
Benedict VIII. and Henry II., 249 ; 
crowns Conrad II., 249; recog- 
nised by German princes, 249 

Jumieges, Abbot of, confidential 
messenger of Pepin, 32 

Justinian, rule of, 2 ; commentary on 
code, 118 


Kairwan, headquarters of Aglabites, 


Kehr, M. P., Historische Zeitschrifi, g6 

Kiersy sur Oise, National Convention 
at, in 754, 42 ; document made out 
at, presented to Charlemagne by 
Pope, 95 ; Hadrian anxious for ful- 
filment of programme of, 103 

Lambert, Duke of Spoleto (brother 
of Guy), deputed to assist John 
VIII., 177; insulting attitude of, 
to Pope, 181 ; insists on entry into 
Leonine city, 181 ; keeps Pope a 
prisoner, 181 ; obliged to retire, 

Lambert, Emperor (of Spoleto), son 
of Guy, 195 ; consecrated Emperor 
by Pope Formosus, 195 ; interests 
of, guarded by Empress-Mother, 
Agiltrude, 196; awaits with Em- 
press-Mother the coming of Ar- 
nulph, 197 ; makes terms with 
Berengarius, 198; takes possession 
of Rome, 198 ; hopes of Pope centre 
round, 203; killed in a hunting 
accident, 203 

Lanciani, M., opinion as to site of St. 
Caesar in Palatio, 61 note 

Landulph, Duke, banished from 
power in Beneventum, 258 

Langres, Bishop of, meets dignitaries 
in Rome and tries Pope Constantine, 

Lapotre, A., gives information re- 
garding Anastasius the librarian, 
1 50 note 

Lateran, troops of Astolphus blockade 
gates of, 43 ; synod of, held by 
Otto I. and Leo VIII., 233 ; con- 
ference at, resulting in edict on 
papal elections, 265 

Lateran, Basilica of, as a rule Pope 
oflSiciated at, 64 ; daily service at, 
presided over by seven bishops, 65 ; 
collapse of old, 200 

Lateran Palace, chief centre ecclesi- 
astical administration, 62 ; from 
time of Zachary usual residence of 
Pope, 63 ; some offices of, secular- 
ised, 64; resort of persons of ill 
fame under John XII., 224 

Laudo, Pope, in authority less than 
six months, 210 

Lauer, M. Ph., on Saracens in Rome, 
141 note ; on Leopolis, 146 note 

Law, Civil (not Canon), Pope could be 
judged for offences against, 115 

Law, Roman, Salic, or Lombard, 
choice of, for Romans, 131 

Lawrence, St., monasteries near 
church of, 68 

Lawrence, St., Alberic endows and 
remodels convent of, 221 

Laymen excluded in 769 from papal 
elections, 81 

Lecapenus Romanus, Emperor at 
Constantinople, 220 ; son of (Theo- 
phylact), intended for patriarchal 
throne, 220 ; asks for papal legates, 
220 ; legates to, commit breach of 
ecclesiastical law, 220 ; letter of, to 
John XL (recently published by 
Cardinal Pitra), 220 ; letter of, tells 
of offer of daughter, by Marozia, 

Legates, papal, Imperial government 
anxious to do away with, 59 

Leo, Archdeacon, elected Archbishop 
of Ravenna, loi ; had been hostile 
to Paul Afiarta, loi ; claims cities, 
loi ; visits Charlemagne, 101-2 ; 
denounced by Pope Hadrian, 102 ; 
death of, 102 

Leo, son of Benedict the Christian, 
opposes appointment Benedict X., 

Leo the Isaurian, Exarch Paul's troops 



threaten to announce fall of, 5 ; 
Petasius (or Tiberius), rival of, 
killed at Monterano, 6 ; bribery 
and corruption by, 7 ; death of, 10 

Leo, the nomenclator, accused of dis- 
loyalty to Pascal I., 127-8 ; eyes 
put out and then killed, 128 

Leo III., Pope, election and consecra- 
tion of, 108-9 ; at head of pontifical 
vestiarum, 109 ; sends to Charle- 
magne copy of deed of election, 
109 ; advised by Charlemagne, 
no; constructs triclinium in 
Lateran, in ; mosaic in hall, con- 
structed by, shows Komans under 
two masters, in ; current of 
hostility to, 112; attack on, by 
armed men, 1 12-13; escapes to 
Spoleto, 113; sent back to Kome 
by Charlemagne, 113 ; accused of 
crimincb adulterii et perjurii, 115 
note ; vague information about accu- 
sations against, 115 ; takes oath at 
public assembly at St. Peter's, 116 ; 
crowns Charlemagne Roman Em- 
peror, II 6-1 7 ; use made by, of 
donation of Constantine, 120 ; 
plots to assassinate, 122; con- 
spirators against, executed, 122 ; 
sends ambassadors to Louis the 
Pious, 123 ; revolt against, in 
country, 123 ; death of, 124; M. de 
Sickel's views on promise to Charle- 
magne by, 226 note ; principle on 
which, had avoided courts of justice, 
231 note 

Leo IV., Pope, election of, 144 ; title, 
"The Four Crowned Martyrs," of, 
144 ; complains of imperial missi, 
Peter and Hadrian, 146 ; objects 
to Anastasius as successor, 151 ; 
reason for objection to Anastasius, 
151 ; death of, in 855, 152 

Leo IV., Emperor, succeeded by 
Constantine VI., 103-4 

Leo v., Pope, imprisoned and sup- 
planted by Christopher, 206 ; im- 
prisoned, 206 ; relieved of burden 
of life, 206 

Leo VI., Pope, priest of St. Susan, 
215 ; tool of Marozia, 214-15 

Leo VI., Emperor, accession of, 194 

Leo VII., Pope, accession of, in 936, 

Leo VIII., Pope, protoscrinarius, 227 ; 
promise perhaps made by, 228 ; 
weighty arguments against promo- 
tion of, 231 ; did not belong to 
clergy, 232 ; obtains mastery over 
newly elected Benedict, 233 ; de- 
poses Benedict at synod at Lateran, 

233 ; holds his own till death, 
Leo IX., Pope (Bruno, Bishop of 
Toul), 255 ; appointed by Henry 
III., 257 ; man of piety and zeal, 

257 ; Hildebrand remonstrates 
with, 257-8 ; reforming energy of, 

258 ; possible external informalities 
in election of, 258 ; tries to rid 
Italy of Normans, 258 ; defeated at 
Civita in Capitanate, 258 ; sur- 
renders to Normans and taken to 
Beneventum, 258 ; returns to Rome, 

259 ; death in Rome, 259 
Leonatius, the tribune, concerned in 

murder of Sergius, the secunderius, 
89 ; handed over to criminal judge, 

Leonine City, the, 145 

rebuilt and called, 146 

Leprosy said to flourish among Lom- 
bards, 26, 82 

Letters of transfer manufactured by 
monks, 53 

Letters of St. Gregory mention vast 
estates of Church, 66 ; of Pope 
Paul I. to King Pepin (Codex Caro- 
linus), 58 ; of Stephen III. to 
Charles and Queen-Mother, 85 

Liber Censum, 226 note 

Liber Pontificalis, life of John III. 
in, 2 note ; life of Stephen II. in, 32 
note ; on Stephen II. in France, 35 
note ; on recovery of Stephen, 41 
note ; silent on matter of Pepin's 
religious attitude, 58 ; on accusa- 
tions against Paul I., 71 note; on 
Christopher the primicerius, and 
Stephen's Frankish mission, 72 ; 
lives of Stephen III. and Hadrian 
in, 73 note ; introduction to, on 
treaties of Kiersy and Rome, 96 
note ; on Stephen III., loi note ; on 
Eugenius II., 130 note ; suppresses 
detail of election of Gregory IV., 
134 ; gives account of Gratiano 
{magister militum), 147-8 ; life of 
Benedict III. in, 152; on paternity 
of John XL, 209 

Library, Lateran, primicerius of 
notaries manager of, 63-4 

Ligurian sea coast, annexed by 
Rotharis, 3 

Liris, the, 15 ; compact of Louis the 
Pious and Pope Pascal on territories 
beyond, 125 

Lombards, invasion of Italy by, 2 ; 
establishment of power by, 3 ; 
alliance of with Pope, 5 ; duchy of 
Rome delivered from, 20 ; sway 



of extended, 22 ; frequent depreda- 
tions by, in Roman territory, 24 ; 
all Catholics, 25 ; regarded by 
Romans as barbarians, 26 ; laws, 
manners, and customs of, differ 
from Roman, 26 ; Frankish inter- 
vention sought by Romans against, 
30 ; Pepin negotiates with King of 
the, 41 ; Pope Paul I. dreads 
alliance of, with Greeks, 57 ; in 
scholce of suburbs of St. Peter's, 60 ; 
lie low at time of accession of Pope 
Constantine, 75 ; in Italy two 
hundred years, and often besieged 
Rome, 76 ; retreat before Toto and 
Passivus, 77 ; Pope Hadrian with- 
draws from alliance with, 91 ; 
defeated by Charlemagne, 93 ; days 
of kingdom of, numbered, 93 ; 
question of portion of kingdom of, 
given to Pope, 95-6 ; Charlemagne 
takes title of King of, 103 ; con- 
tinuance of kingdom of, 104 ; 
connection with Greeks severed, 
105 ; expedition of John XII. 
against principalities of, in S. Italy, 
223 ; personal right of, over Roman 
territory annulled by Conrad II., 
248 ; Abbot of Farfa appeals to law 
of, 248 

Lorraine, Geoffrey, Duke of. See 

Lorraine, Frederic of, Cardinal. See 

Lorsch, record of annalist of, on 
Council at Gentilly, 59 

Lothaire I., Emperor, constitution of, 
122-35 j crowned by father, Louis 
the Pious, 126; kingdom of Italy 
entrusted to, 126 ; consecrated 
Emperor by Pope Pascal I., 127 ; 
marriage of, at Thionville, 127 ; 
holds court of justice at Rome, 
127 ; goes to Rome, under escort 
of Wala, 130 ; lack of harmony of, 
with father, 1 36 ; despatches son 
Louis, and uncle Drogo of Metz, 
with troops to Rome, 139 ; is 
armed protector of St. Peter, 142 ; 
holds convocation in Rome, 142 ; 
complains that Leo IV. defies con- 
stitution, 147 ; death of, 155 ; 
Benedict III. tries to prevent dis- 
pute of sons of, about heritage, 

168 ; Church of Rome returns to 
constitution of, 203 

Lothaire II., unfortunate divorce pro- 
ceedings of, 160 ; divorce of, 
annulled by Pope, 160; shares 
kingdom of Charles of Provence, 

169 ; makes peace with Pope 

Hadrian XL, 169 ; at death of, 
Charles the Bald and Louis the 
German seize estates of, 169 

Lothaire, son of Hugh of Provence, 
218 ; dies in early manhood, 218 ; 
Adelaide, widow of, resists Beren- 
garius, 218 

Louis II. King and Emperor, goes in 
father's lifetime to Rome, 139 ; 
checked in Rome, by Saracens, 141 ; 
expedition of, against Saracens in 
Beneventum, 142 ; governs Lom- 
bard Kingdom, 144 ; made associate 
of Empire, 144 ; revolutionary 
sentiments of Gratiano reported 
to, 148 ; sought hand daughter of 
Emperor Michael III., 148 ; alters 
mind, and marries Engelberga, 
148 ; arrives in Rome, full of 
rage, 148 ; descends on Beneventine 
territory, 149 ; regarded as de- 
fender of Christendom, 149 ; makes 
plans for election of Pope, 149 ; 
friendship of, for Arsenius and 
Anastasius, 151 ; decree of election 
of Benedict III. not approved by, 
152; sends missi to Rome, 152; 
maintains right to superintend 
choice of Pope, 154; claim of, 
not due to mere preference of 
Anastasius, 155 ; goes to Rome, for 
Easter, 155 ; goes back to Rome on 
death of Benedict III., 155; in- 
fluence of, decides election of 
Deacon Nicholas, 155 ; takes part 
in coronation of Pope, 155 ; John 
VIII. personal friend of, 157 ; prob- 
ably in Rome, at election John 
VIII. , 157; takes part of priests 
under censure, 158 ; wrath excited 
against Nicholas I., 160; sends 
missi to pursue Eleutherius, 164 ; 
negotiations for alliance of 
daughter of, with son of Basil 
the Macedonian, 165 ; taken 
prisoner by Adelgis, 166 ; crowned 
anew at Rome, 166 ; death of, 
near Brescia, 166 ; buried at St. 
Ambrose, Milan, 166 ; leaves no 
son, 170 ; John VIII. relates ex- 
ploits to, 176 

Louis III. son of Louis the German, 

Louis, King of Eastern France, 
invades Kingdom of the West, 184 

Louis, King of Provence, grandson 
of Emperor Louis II., 204 ; rival 
of Berengarius, 204 ; falls from 
power, 205 ; has his eyes put out, 
and is banished, 205 

Louis the Blind, son of the usurper, 



Boson, 190 ; succeeded by Hugh, 
Count of Provence, 213 

Louis the Child succeeds Arnulph, 

Louis the German, lack of harmony 
of, with father, 136 ; Pope Hadrian 
II. reproaches, for seizing estates 
of Lothaire II., 169 ; treaty of 
Mersen bestows lands on, 169 ; in 
ill odour at Rome, 169 ; head of 
German branch of Charlemagne's 
lineage, 170 ; sends to Italy 
younger son, Charles the Fat, of 
Swabia, 173 ; death of, 180 

Louis, son of Louis the German, 
defeats Charles the Bald at 
Andernach, 180 

Louis the Pious, Emperor, Frankish 
Church under, 57 ; crowned by 
father, Charlemagne, as successor, 
117; conspiracy against Pope 
causes sensation at court of, 122 ; 
crowned by Pope Stephen IV. 
with wife Ermengarde, at Rheims, 
124 ; crowns eldest son Lothaire 
Emperor, 126 ; crowns Pepin and 
Louis Kings Aquitaine and Bavaria, 
126 ; despatches envoys to Rome, 
128 ; resolves to make power felt 
in Rome, 130 ; lack of harmony 
with sons, 136 ; Gregory IV. con- 
cerned by quarrels in family of, 
136 ; death of, in 840, 136 ; strife 
subsequent to death of, 136 ; had 
not visited Rome except in child- 
hood, 136-7 

Louis the Stammerer succeeds father, 
Charles the Bald, 181 ; not inclined 
for secret negotiations with Pope, 
John VIII., 182; content to keep 
Provence, 183 ; death of, in 879, 
184 ; death of last two reigning 
sons of, 184 ; Charles the Simple, 
posthumous son of, 185 

Lucca, Anselm, Bishop of, Alexander 

II. See Alexander II. 
Luitprand, King of Lombards, 

successes of, 4 ; Christian prince, 
and experienced politician, 6 ; over- 
whelms St. Peter's with gifts, 6 ; 
desires to make power felt in 
Spoleto and Beneventum, 5-6 ; 
Dukes of Spoleto and Beneventum 
assume independent attitude to, 
8 ; expels Duke Trasimund of 
Spoleto, 8 ; seizes Ameria, Orte, 
Bomarzo, and Blera, 8 ; Gregory 

III. asks to restore the four towns, 
8 ; comes to understanding with 
Pope Zachary, 1 1 ; interviews Pope 
at Pavia, 11 ; seizes Cesena, 11 ; I 

yields to peaceful tactics of 
Zachary, 11 ; death of, 11 ; ar- 
ranged peace of Terni, 16 

Luitprand (author) on renunciation 
of right of election, 228 ; on de- 
position of Benedict V. , 228-9 ; 
prattle of, about Marozia and 
Theodora, 229 

Luni, protection of coasts between 
Terracino and, 137 ; seized by 
Saracens, 247 

Lupam, ad, hall in Lateran palace, 
called after famous bronze she- 
wolf, 219 

Lutri, Luitprand yields claims on, 7 

Lyons, Bishop of, meets dignitaries 
in Rome and tries Pope Constan- 
tino, 80 


Mabillon publishes polemics against 
Sergius III., 207 note 

Magenarius, Abbot of, to define 
certain limits of Papal State, 104 

Magistrates, Roman, to present them- 
selves before Emperor (Constitu- 
tion of Lothaire), 1 3 1 

Magra, position with regard to 
Frankish kingdom, 96 note 

Mainz, Bishop of, meets dignitaries 
in Rome, and tries Pope Constan- 
tino, 80 ; Archbishop of, envoy 
from Otto I. to Alberic, 218 

Mantua, Azzo and Tebald of Tuscany 
popular in, 255-6 

Maria Antica, Santa, Byzantine 
church of, connected with Palatine, 
61 note ; countless attempts to 
trace origin of, 61 note 

Maria, Santa, of Farfa, Abbey of, 68 ; 
transferred to papal jurisdiction, 69 

Maria Maggiore, Santa, Pope and 
court often present at ceremonies 
in basilica of, 64 ; Waldipert, Lom- 
bard priest, vainly seeks refuge in, 
79 ; Pope Benedict III. proclaimed 
in, 153-4 

Marin plots against Paul I., 7o ; pro- 
moted to French bishopric, 70 

Marinus I. elected Pope, 187; had 
been three times legate to Constan- 
tinople, 187; recalls , Formosus, 
188; absolves Bishop of Troyes 
from oath, 188 ; some irregularity 
in election of, 188 ; had been Bishop 
of Caeri (Cervetri), 188; meets 
Charles the Fat at Nonantola, 
188; replaced by Hadrian III., 



Marinus II., Pope (942-946), 216 

Marozia, daughter of Theophylact, 
205 ; has son, by Sergius III., 209 ; 
son of, becomes Pope John XI., 
209; marries for third time, 209 
note ; great disparity of age between 
Sergius III. and, 209 note ; marries 
the Marquess Alberic, 212 ; and 
afterwards Guy, Marquess of Tus- 
cany, 214 ; thwarted by John 
X., 214; organises revolt, ending 
in murder of Pope, 214 ; bestows 
Holy See on tools, Leo V. and 
Stephen VII., and then on her son 
(John XI.), 215; offers her hand 
to Hugh, King of Italy, 215 ; 
marries King Hugh in Castle St. 
Angelo, 215; is besieged and taken 
captive by son, Alberic, 215 ; had 
offered her daughter to Greek Em- 
peror, 220 ; John XIII., nephew of, 

Martin, St., Gulfard, Abbot of, sent 
to Italy, 92 ; charged to define 
limits Papal State, on side Reiti, 104 

Marucchi, M. Or. Nuovo Bulletino di 
arch, crist., 146 note 

Mater Romanorum, famous bronze 
she- wolf, 219 

Matilda, Countess, famous in Gre- 
gorian annals, 256 

Maurice, Emperor, Exarch Romanus, 
lieutenant of, 2 

Maurice, St. , Abbey of, Pope Stephen 
II. meets Pepin's ambassadors at, 
35 ; Benedict III. attacks Hubert, 
intruded Abbot of, 168 

Mauritania, ancient, Saracens of, 137 

Meaux, Bishop of, meets dignitaries 
in Rome, and tries Pope Constan- 
tine, 80 

Melfi, Norman colony at, 256; Nor- 
mans of, subject to Salerno, 256 ; 
Nicholas II. holds council at, 267 

Mercurius, a magister militum, meets 
Arsenius at Gubbio, 152 

Mersen, treaty of, 169 ; Charles the 
Bald alters treaty of, 1 80 

Messina, Straits of, within imperial 
ground, 3 

Metz, Council of, divorce of Lothaire 
II. sanctioned at, 160 

Michael III., Emperor, Louis II. 
seeks hand of daughter of, 148 

Michaelius appointed Archbishop of 
Ravenna, 100 ; Pope Stephen III. 
refuses to acknowledge, 100 ; 
ousted from seat, loi 

Milan retained by Lambert of Spoleto, 
198 ; Archbishop of, expelled from 
See, 225 

Militae ecclesiastica, 67 

Militae, rural, 67 

Military organisation of Rome, 60 

Missus, Pope's demand for permanent 
Frankish, at Rome, 57 ; interven- 
tion of Frankish at papal election, 

3Iissi of Pope and Emperor in perma- 
nent residence at Rome, 13 1-2; 
imperial (Peter and Hadrian) mis- 
trusted by Pope Leo IV., 146 ; im- 
perial (Peter and Hadrian) assassi- 
nate a papal legate, 146-7 ; Charles 
the Bald would have dispensed 
with permanent, 174 

Modena, Azzo and Tebald of Tuscany 
very popular in, 255-6 

Moissac, Chronicle, 36 ; account in, of 
meeting of Stephen 11. and Pepin, 

Monasteries, Roman, in eighth cen- 
tury, 67, 68 ; in Rome had Greek, 
Oriental, Syrian, and Armenian 
monks, 68 

Monks, ill effects produced by, in 
Constantinople, 68 

Monothelite crisis, the, 28 

Monte Amiata, Abbey of, in Lombard 
domains, 68 

Monte Cassino, Abbot of, a Lombard 
subject, sent by Pope to Astol- 
phus, 22 ; Pepin's brother, Carlo- 
man, monk at, 41 ; convent of, 
revived, under Pope Zachary, 68 ; 
Otto III. performs devotions at, 
242 ; Cardinal Frederic of Lorraine 
takes Benedictine habit at, 259; 
Cardinal Frederic made Abbot of, 

Monte Gargano, Otto III. visits, 

Monte Rotondo, left bank of Tiber 
to outskirts of, belongs Duchy of 
Spoleto, 15 

Montfeltro, Castle of, Otto I. besieges 
Berengarius and wife, Willa, in, 
226, 231 

Monticelli, stronghold of Crescentii, 
245 note 

Monuments, religious, consecrate 
events of their time, 49 

Moravians, difficulties of King 
Arnulph with, 193 

Morinus publishes polemics against 
Sergius III., 207 note 

Mosaic representing position of 
Romans, under Pope and Frank- 
ish king, in; reproduction of, 
III note 

Mummolus, Governor of Provence, 
has title of Patrician, 39 




Naples holds out against Lombards, 
3 ; local autonomy organised in, 
20 ; autonomy of receives death- 
blow, 20 ; struggle of against 
Saracens, 148 ; a Mahometan 
garrison in, 176; Duke Sergius, 
of, an ally of Saracens, 176 ; 
Christian allies of Saracens in, 
187 ; Dukes of Spoleto intervene 
in affairs of, 191 ; breaks off 
alliance with Mussulmans, 211 

Narbonne, Metropolitan Bishop of, 
meets dignitaries in Eome, and 
tries Pope Constantino, 80 ; Bar- 
tholomew, Archbishop of, adherent 
of Lothaire, 140 ; belonged to 
kingdom of Charles the Bald, 140 

Narni yields to King Luitprand, 4; 
Duke of Spoleto takes possession 
of, 17 ; Astolphus agrees to yield, 
42 ; had formerly been annexed by 
Duchy of Spoleto, 46 

Nepotism begins to be in evidence, 


Nicholas, Bishop of Anagni, meets 
Arsenius at Gubbio, 152 

Nicholas I., Pope, influence of Louis 
II. decides election of, 155 ; 
just siiited Louis II., 156; great 
activity of, 156 ; action of against 
John, Archbishop of Kavenna, 
158-61 ; annuls divorce of Lothaire 
II., 160 ; outrages against, 161 ; 
spends two days in fasting and 
prayer, 161 ; at Engelberga's re- 
quest, goes to bedside of Emperor 
Louis, 161 ; niece of marries 
member of lay nobility, 163 

Nicholas II., name of, in papal lists, 
with Benedict X., 262-3 ; was 
Gerard, Bishop of Florence, 262 ; 
supported by Hildebrand, Duke 
Geoffrey, and German Court, 262 ; 
recognised by Conclave at Sutri 
deposing Benedict X., 262 ; ques- 
tion of legitimacy of, 263 ; legiti- 
macy of hinges on German 
co-operation, 263 ; Benedict X. 
delivers himself into hands of, 
265 ; holds council at Melfi, 267 ; 
invests Norman chiefs, Kichard 
and Kobert Guiscard, 267 ; holds 
Beneventum, 267 ; rights, other- 
wise, theoretical, 267 ; alliance of, 
with Normans opposed in Ger- 
many, 268 ; death of, at Florence, 
268 ; decree of, soon abandoned, 

Nilus, St., hunted from Calabria, 
takes refuge at Monte Gargano, 

Nimfa, Constantino V. accedes to 
Pope's request concerning, 19, 20 

Nobles, Roman, measure forces 
against clergy, 129 

Nomenculator (grandmaster of cere- 
monies) at Lateran Palace, 63 ; 
disloyalty of Leo, the, punished 
by death, 128 

Nomentum, Roman town of, 15 ; 
stronghold of Crescentii, 245 note 

Nonantola, monastery in district of, 
given to Anselm, father-in-law of 
Astolphus, 52; body of St. Sylvester 
removed to, 53 

Norma, Constantino V. accedes to 
Pope's request concerning, 19, 20 

Normans, difficulties of King Arnulph 
with, adventurers of Basse Nor- 
mandie, in Salerno, 256; establish- 
ments of at Aversa and Melfi, 256 ; 
at Aversa and Melfi, subject to 
Salerno, 256 ; often called " Agare- 
ni," 257 ; Leo IX. tries to rid Italy 
of, 258 ; Leo IX. surrenders to, 
258 ; Hildebrand throws himself 
into hands of, 264 ; princes re- 
cognise Pope as lord, 267 ; of 
Italy support Pope, when he op- 
poses Emperor, 273 

Notarii clerks of Chancellor's office 
in Lateran, 63 

Noyon, Bishop of, with other digni- 
taries, tries Pope Constantine, 80 

Numidia, Saracens of, under Agla- 
bites, 137 

Oath, Leo III. asks Charlemagne 
to send dignitary to take of 
Roman people, 109 ; sworn either 
by Pope or King, 1 10 ; taken 
by Pope Eugenius II., 129; to be 
taken by Pope before imperial missus 
and people, 132 

Octavian, son of Alberic, 222 ; des- 
tined for pontificate, 222 ; Alberic 
assembles Romans at St. Peter's, 
who swear to elect, 222 ; becomes 
Pope as John XII., 223. See John 

Odo, St., Abbot of Cluny, 218 ; Alberic 
led by, 221 

Officium stratoris, oldest example of, 

Oger Puke Autchaire), of legendary 
fame, 33 ; escort of Stephen II., 33 



Ommiad, Caliph of Cordova, Saracens 
of Spain under, 137 

Optiones, rank of, 61 

Orders, higher, bound to celibate 
life, 65 

Orders, lesser, not bound to celibacy, 

Ordination, formula of Pope's, 27 note 

Ordinations of Formosus condemned 
by Stephen VI., Sergius III., and 
John X. (all tarred with his brush), 

Organisation, military, of Rome, 60 

Oriental monks in Rome, 68 

Oroctigang, Abbot of Jumi^ges, de- 
spatched by Pepin to Stephen II., 

Orphanotrophium,the Schola cantorum, 
not far from Lateran, 65 

Orta, Arsenius, Bishop of, father of 
Anastasius and Eleutherius, 149 

Orte, seized by Luitprand, 8 ; position 
in Roman duchy, 15 

Orvieto included in papal territory, 

Osimo yields to Luitprand, 4 ; Romans 
desire to recapture, 46 ; Desiderius 
promises to restore to Roman re- 
public, 47 ; people of, declare 
allegiance to Pope, 94 ; mentioned 
in compact, Louis the Pious and 
Pope Pascal, 125 

Ostia, George, Bishop of, ambassador 
to Pepin from Stephen II. , 44 ; gives 
way before Saracens, 141 ; naval 
battle off, 146 ; Bishop of, presides at 
assembly in Basilica Emiliana, 153 

Oswy, King, stops religious discussion 
by appeal to St. Peter, 29-30 

Otranto, sway of Beneventum extends 
to, 3 ; looks to Sicily for help, 3 ; 
Duke of Beneventum takes refuge 
at, 55 

Otto, privilege of, 130 note, 225-6 ; 
official investigation of, by M. de 
Sickel, 226 note ; juncture at which 
adopts form handed down, 227-8 ; 
was not what it seemed, 229 

Otto I., King of the Germans, 218; 
Adelaide, widow of Lothaire of 
Provence, appeals for help to, 218 ; 
marries Adelaide, 218 ; commits 
government Italy to Berengarius as 
vassal king, 219; presence of, at 
Pavia, alarms Alberic, 222 ; bears 
down upon Italy and enters Pavia, 
225 ; crowned in Rome by John XII., 
225 ; makes compact with Pope, 
known as " Privilege of Otto," 225 ; 
John XII. treacherous to, 226 ; be- 
sieges Berengarius and Willa at 

Montfeltro, and goes on to Rome, 
226; Romans open gates to, and 
swear fidelity to, 227 ; presides 
over Council at St. Peter's, 227 ; 
summons John XIL to appear at 
Council, 227 ; on deposition of 
John XIL, consents to election of 
protoscriniarius Leo, 227 ; alleged 
compact of, with Leo VIII., 230; 
troops of, disperse barricades on 
bridge St. Angelo, 23 1 ; too occupied 
tointerferewithreturnof JohnXII., 
232 ; convenes with Leo VIII. new 
synod at Lateran, 233 ; appoints 
John XIII., 234 ; has bodies of 
Rofred and vestiarius Stephen ex- 
humed and thrown into sewer, 
235-6 ; dies in Germany, 236 

Otto II, contends against Duke of 
Bavaria and other vassals, 236 ; 
often stays at Rome, 237 ; appoints 
Chancellor Peter, Pope (John XIV.), 
237 ; attended by new Pope at 
deathbed,237 ; defeated at Calabria, 
237 ; death of, 237 

Otto III., child of three years old, 
237 ; proclaimed in Germany^ 237 ; 
invited to Rome to appoint Pope, 
239 ; selects Bruno of Carinthia 
(Gregory V.), 239 ; when papal 
throne seized by John XVI., goes 
to Rome with Gregory v., 241 ; suc- 
cessfully attacks castle St. Angelo, 
241 ; on Gregory's death, ap- 
points Gerbert Archbishop Ravenna 
(Sylvester II.), 242 ; friend of monks 
of Saints Boniface and Alexis, 242 ; 
sees rebels of Tivoli at doors Aven- 
tinePalace, 243 ; escapes to Ravenna 
with Pope Sylvester, 243-4 ; never 
returns to Rome, 244 ; dies at 
Paterno, near Mt. Soracte, 244 ; 
buried at Aix-la-Chapelle, 244 ; 
never married, 244 

Paderborn, Charlemagne joins Leo 

III. at, 113 
Palatine, headquarters of military 

scholce, 60 ; old imperial palace of, 

60 ; papal palace of, 63 ; residence 
of Emperor on visit to Rome in 663, 

61 ; residence of Exarch, 61 
Palatio, St. Caesar in, official chapel, 

Palermo in hands of Mussulmans, 137 
Pallium, St. Peter giving to Leo III. 

mosaic of , i ii 
Pancratius, St., gate of, Rome, troops 



of Astolphus before, 43 ; Duke 
Toto's rebellious troops before, 73 
Pandulph, Duke, banished from 

power at Beneventum, 258 
Papacy could not remain in position 
of German bishopric, 263 ; Hilde- 
brand's views on, 264 ; strife about 
temporal, affects spiritual, 264 ; 
Gregorian marks new epoch, 270 
Papal Election. See Election 
Papal patrimonies confiscated in 
Sicily, 18 ; Calabrian and Sicilian 
retained by Byzantines, 20 notg 
Papal State, The, by M. J. Gay, 15 

Pape, Jean VIII., Le, A. Lap6tre, 167 

Pascal (brother of Duke Toto) plots 

against Paul I., 73 
Tsisc&l, primicerius, attacks Leo III., 

1 12-13 ; trial of, 114 
Pascal I., St., Pope, not of the 
aristocracy, 125 ; compact with 
Louis the Pious, 125 ; consecrates 
Lothaire Emperor at Rome, 127 ; 
renounces temporal power over 
Abbey Far fa, 127 ; in deep diffi- 
culties, 127 ; Theodore, primicerius, 
and nomcnclator Leo, enemies of, 
killed, 127-8; Emperor Louis sends 
envoys to, 128 ; regarded with 
aversion, 128 ; death of, 128 ; 
principle on which, avoided courts 
of justice, 231 note 
Passivus (brother of Duke Toto) plots 
to hasten death of Paul L, 73 ; 
incarcerated and eyes put out, 78 
Patrician, of Sicily, Naples relies for 
support on, 20 ; of Sicily defends 
Byzantine coast and Sardinia 
against Saracens, 137 ; title be- 
stowed on governors Provence, 39 ; 
title of, an empty distinction, in 
Empire, 39; "of the Romans," 
title of Charlemagne, 39-40 ; title 
of Roman rather than imperial 
origin, 40 ; title of, changed to 
*' Emperor," 118 ; title of, asserted 
by Crescentius, 238 
Patricius Romanorum, title of, used 
by Pepin, 39 ; by Charlemagne, 
40 ; title conferred on Frankish 
princes, 62 ; meaning of title, 107 
Patrimoniis De, Romanse ecclesiae, 

by Paul Fabre, 66 note 
Patronus head of schola (group) of 
Roman population, 60 ; rank of, 61 
Paul, St., Church of, in Rome, 

monasteries near, 68 
Paul the Exarch, sends troops to 
Rome, 5 ; perishes at Ravenna, 5 

Paul I., St., Pope (Paul the Deacon, 
brother of Stephen II.), 21 ; sent 
by Stephen II. to Astolphus, 21 ; 
and to Desiderius, 47 ; becomes 
Pope in 757, 49 ; of aristocratic 
family, 49 ; turns paternal mansion 
into monastery, 49 ; presides over 
removal of remains, St. Petronilla, 
49-50 ; is godfather to Pepin's 
daughter, Gisele, 50; founds monas- 
tery St. Stephen and St. Sylvester, 
51 ; announces his accession to 
Pepin, 53 ; clamours for restoration 
of towns, by Desiderius, 54 ; takes 
side of Dukes Aquitaine and 
Bavaria, 54 ; pleads with Desi- 
derius, outside walls of St. Peter's, 

55 ; writes to Pepin, maintaining 
claims, 55; Pepin urges submission 
to Desiderius on, 55 ; resigns him- 
self to dispelling of dreams, 

56 ; Constantino V. directs efforts 
against, 56 ; dreads alliance of 
Greeks and Lombards, 57 ; or com- 
pact between Emperor and Franks, 

57 ; desires Frankish missus in 
Rome, 57 ; persuaded into under- 
standing with Desiderius, 57 ; ex- 
hortations of, against imperial 
unorthodoxy, 58 ; in accord with 
Pepin, at Constantinople, 58; Pepin 
refers religious discussions to, 59 ; 
death of, in 767, 59 ; thought of, 
at Constantinople, as a puppet, 72 ; 
action of, respecting Sergius, Arch- 
bishop of Ravenna, 99-100 

Pavia, interview between Pope 
Zachary and Luitprand at, 11 ; 
traditional capital of Astolphus, 
25 ; Stephen II. goes to, as subject 
of the Emperor, 34 ; rent paid to 
palace at, 125 ; Council held at, on 
imperial succession, 172 ; John, 
Bishop of, a missus in 885, 189 ; 
Lambert of Spoleto retains, 198 ; 
success of Louis of Provence re- 
cognised at, 204 

Pelagius II., Pope, explains that 
Franks are Catholics, 28-9 

Pentapolis, restitution of, claimed by 
Stephen II., 36-7 ; Desiderius and 
ravaging troops pass through, 55 ; 
Dukes of Spoleto and Tuscany lay 
waste, 91 ; people of, resist Arch- 
bishop of Ravenna, loi ; Pope 
Hadrian I. monarch of, 105 

Pepin, King, military adoption of, 
by Luitprand (as prince), 9 ; fairly 
well disposed towards Lombard 
King, 29 ; asked to send escort for 
Stephen II. through Lombard 



kingdom, 33 ; sends Chrodegang, 
Bishop of Metz.and Duke Autchaire 
(Oger), 33; meets Pope at Ponthion, 
with much ceremony, 35 ; promises 
Pope to restore Exarchy, 36 ; 
presents imperial provinces to Pope 
and St. Peter, 37 ; question whether 
recognised Koman duchy, 39 ; has 
title patricius Eomanorum, 39 ; 
establishes Pope at Abbey St. 
Denis, 40 ; second coronation of, 
by Pope, 40- 1 ; lays siege to Pavia, 
42 ; has letter from Stephen II. 
with words : •' Ego Petrus apos- 
tolus," 44 ; army of, sets Rome 
free, 44 ; requests removal, to Vati- 
can, of body St. Petronilla, 49-50 ; 
Pope Paul I. announces succession 
to, 53 ; despatches Remedius, 
Bishop Rouen, and Duke Autchaire 
to Italy, 55 ; not beguiled by theo- 
logical diplomats from Constanti- 
nople, 57 ; attitude to religious 
question, sane and simple, 57-8 ; 
refers religious questions to Pope, 
59 ; usurping Pope Constantine 
announces succession to, 75 ; en- 
gaged in war in Aquitaine, 75 ; 
aloof from affair of Constantine, 
75 ; death of, 79 ; had arranged for 
return of Archbishop Sergius to 
Ravenna, 99 

Pepin, son of Louis the Pious, 
crowned king of Aquitaine, 126 ; 
lack of harmony with father, 136 

Perugia, siege of, abandoned by King 
Ratchis, 12 ; not captured by 
Astolphus, 21 ; Pope, monarch of, 
105 ; position of, in compact, Louis 
the Pious and Pope Pascal, 125 

Petasius (or Tiberius) rival Leo the 
Isaurian, killed at Monterano, 6 

Peter, envoy of Pope Hadrian I. to 
Charlemagne, 91 

Peter, imperial missus, helps to 
assassinate papal legate, 146 ; 
tried, and condemned to death, 


Peter, brother of John X., murdered, 

Peter, St., influence of, gives prestige 
to papal position, 14 ; position 
as "doorkeeper," referred to, 
by Oswy, to stop discussion, 
29-30 ; sovereignty of, over Rome, 

Peter, St., Basilica of, leave-taking 
of Stephen II. at, before journey 
to France, 33 ; keys of con- 
quered towns deposited in, 46 ; 
monasteries near, 68 ; decrees of 

iconoclastic council made public 
at, 81 ; Charlemagne crowned 
Emperor at, 1 16-17 ; Saracens 
plunder, 141 ; to be surrounded by 
fortifications, 142 ; Nicholas I. 
spends two days in fasting and 
prayer in, 161 ; John VIII. holds 
synod at, 179-80 ; John VIII. 
places under interdict, 181 ; Alberic 
assembles Romans at, 222 ; who 
swear to elect Octavian Pope, 222 

Petronilla, St., chapel of, 49; tomb 
of, in cemetery of Ardeatine way, 
49 ; yearly " station," in honour of, 
49 note; according to fabulous re- 
cords, daughter of St. Peter, 49-50 ; 
Pepin requests removal of body of, 
to Vatican, 50 ; body of, removed 
to mausoleum, 50 

Philagath, Bishop Piacenza, rival of 
Gregory V., 240 ; Calabrian Greek, 
owing everything to Theophano 
and son, 240 ; installed Pope, as 
John XVI. ^eeJohnXVL 

Philip, superior of monastery St. 
Vitus, proclaimed Pope by Waldi- 
pert, 77 ; conveyed back to monas- 
tery by Gratiosus, 78 

Photius, usurping Patriarch Con- 
stantinople, 160 ; has enactments 
of council burned, 165 ; personal 
enemy of Pope Marin us I., 187 ; 
turned out of patriarchal see, 194 

Piacenza, Henry III. has interview 
with Gregory VI. at, 254 

Picingli, Nicholas, heads fleet, in Tyr- 
rhenian Sea, against Saracens, 211 

Pitra, Cardinal, on letter by Romanus 
Lecapenus to John XI., 220 

Ponthion, royal palace of, Pepin and 
Stephen II, at, 35 

Pontifical State, in time of Charle- 
magne, 97-1 I I 

Pope, attempt to impose religious 
regulations on, 4 ; election of by 
Romans, at Rome, 14 {see Elec- 
tion) ; prestige of owed to St. 
Peter, 14, 17 ; Roman autonomy 
to be under supervision of, 27 ; 
"Apostolic Lord," " Vicar of St. 
Peter," "High Priest of Roman 
Sanctuaries," " Primate of Bishops 
of Whole Church," " Doctor of the 
Church Universal," 27 ; not subject 
to Duke of Rome, 27 ; Roman army 
subject to, 62 ; head of " ecclesia 
Dei" and " respublica Romano- 
rum," 62 ; idea that all subjects of 
should share in election of, 72 ; 
new rules for election of, 80-1 ; 
no ecclesiastical tribunal to judge, 



115 ; question from whom holds 
rights, 1 20 ; election of, according 
to constitution Lothaire, 132-3 ; 
election of subject to imperial con- 
firmation, 132; lay participation 
in election of, confirmed, 134 ; 
choice of emperor, for first time, 
under auspices of, 173 ; held 
sovereignty, from time Gregory 
VII., as before, 270 

Popes, of sixth, seventh, and eighth 
centuries, relations of to Emperor 
of Constantinople, 13-14; of 
seventh century, have troubles 
with Kavennese, 97-8 ; John XI., 
Leo VII., Stephen VIII., Marinus 
II. , and Agapitus II. exercised no 
temporal authority, 216 ; of the 
Empire, 234-252; German, 253- 
269 ; French, 272 ; one English- 
man, among, 272 ; often away from 
Rome, 272 

Popes, Anti", Germany concerned in 
election of, 268-9 ; Rome occupied 
by, 270 

Poppo, Bishop of Briscen, Damasus 
II. See Damasus II. 

Populonia (Piombino) conceded to 
papal territory, 105 

Porto, colony of Corsicans at, 146 ; 
Radoald, Bishop of {see Radoald) 

Possessor, Bishop, Frankish ambassa- 
dor, 102 

Poupardin, " Le Royaume de Pro- 
vence sous les Carolingiens," 183 

Praefectus navalis, 245 

Praeneste, in possession of Theophy- 
lact family, 243 

Prefect of Rome, humiliating degra- 
dation of, by John XIII., 235 

Prenesto, George, Bishop of, confers 
tonsure on Constantine, declared 
Pope, 74 ; consecrates Constantine, 
74; paralysed in right hand, 75 ; 
death of, regarded as token divine 
displeasure, 75 

Presbyterae, wives of clergy, 66 

Presbyteral churches, 68 

Primicerii, rank of, 61 

Primicerius, Christopher, 70-86 

Primicerius of notaries, with chief 
priest and archdeacon, makes up 
governing triumvirate Roman 
church, 63 

Primiscrinius (or Protoscrinius) suc- 
ceeds Primicerius, as head of 
chancellor's office, 64 

Princeps, et omnium Romanorum, 
senator, title of Alberic, 2 1 9 

Prior vestiarii, at Lateran palace, 6;^ 

Property, church, depredations in, 
24, 66 ; pontifical revenues drawn 
from landed, 66 ; arrangements for, 
in Privilege of Otto, 229-30 

Protoscrinius (or Primiscrinius) real 
head of chancellor's office, at La- 
teran, 64 

Provence, invaded by Saracens, 9 ; 
Louis the Stammerer keeps, 183 ; 
" Le Royaume de, sous les Carolin- 
giens," 183 note ; Boson crowned 
king of, 184 {see Boson) ; Louis the 
Blind of, 190 ; King Louis of, rival 
of Berengarius, 204 ; Louis of, 
consecrated Emperor, 204 ; Beren- 
garius compels Louis of, to retreat, 
204 ; Louis of, wrests Verona, but 
falls, through treachery, 205 ; 
Theophylact at court of justice 
held by Emperor Louis of, 205 
note ; Berengarius proclaimed King 
of, 218 ; Berengarius resisted in, by 
Adelaide, 218 


Quinto, Tor di (St. Lucius), 153 note 


Rabigaudus, Abbot, Frankish am- 
bassador, endeavours to reconcile 
Pope Hadrian I. and Duke Hilde- 
prand, 102 

Radelgiso, claimant to duchy Bene- 
ventum, 138 ; envoys sent to, re- 
garding expedition against Sara- 
cens, 142 

Radoald, Bishop of Porto, 153 ; did 
not take customary part, in con- 
secration Benedict III., 154; 
ringleader in the Anastasius con- 
spiracy, 156 ; now confidential 
adviser. Pope Nicholas, 156 ; 
treachery of, 156; expelled from 
episcopate, 156; receives sentence 
of deposition from Pope, 1 62 

Ratchis, King, succeeds Luitprand, 

11 ; grants Pope's desire for 
twenty years' peace, 1 2 ; abandons 
siege of Perugia, 12 ; abdicates, 

12 ; succeeded by Astolphus, 12 
Ratchis, brother of preceding king, 

Astolphus, claims Lombard throne, 
47 ; a monk at Monte Cassino, 47 ; 
Pope exhorts to return to monastic 
life, 48 ; complies, and leaves field 
to Desiderius, 48 
Ravenna, Gothic Kings of, i ; en- 



gaged in struggle in mid-Italy, 4 ; 
port of, Olassis, yields to Luit- 
prand, 4 ; succumbs to Lombards, 
7 ; receives different treatment 
from that given Rome, 16 ; restitu- 
tion of, demanded by Stephen II., 
34 ; Astolphus forced to deliver up, 
42 ; Pepin refuses to restore to im- 
perial government, 45 ; name on 
list of territories given to Holy See 
(Stephen II.), 46 ; Archbishop of, 
and Bishop of Reggio, consecrate 
churches and oratories, 52; de- 
signs of Constantine V. upon, 56 ; 
George, chief secretary, plots with 
Desiderius against, 58 ; Desiderius 
meditates descent on, 89 ; leaders 
of, conspicuous for greed, 97 ; 
Pope's intervention for, gladly re- 
ceived, 98 ; people of, welcome 
Pope Zachary, 98 ; decapitalisa- 
tion of, 98 ; formerly residence of 
Lombard kings, 98 ; Charlemagne 
claims voice in election of Arch- 
bishops of, 107 

Ravenna, Archbishops of, Gerbert, 
afterwards Sylvester II., 242 {see 
Sylvester II. ). John of, summoned 
to appear before Roman Synod, 
158 ; accused of heterodox views, 
suspended, and excommunicated, 
158 ; papal action against, 158-60. 
John X., formerly of, 212-13. 
Leo of, claims cities, as property 
St. ApoUinarius, loi ; visit Charle- 
magne, whom he treats falsely, 
1 01-2. Michaelius of, appointed 
by people, 100; Stephen III. re- 
fuses to acknowledge, 100 ; eventu- 
ally ousted, loi. Sergius of, ag- 
gressive influence of, 99 ; appoints 
officials, without reference to 
Rome, 99 ; summoned to Rome, 99 ; 
returns to Ravenna, 99 ; invested 
with authority over Exarchy and 
Pentapolis, 99 ; later, on good terms 
with Pope, 100 

Reggio, looks to Sicily for help, 3 ; 
consecration of church and ora- 
tories, by Bishop of, 52 ; Azzo and 
Tebald popular in, 255-6 

Regions de Rome, au moyen age 
(Melanges de I'Ecole de Rome), 60 

Reiti, limits of Papal State on side of, 

Relic of body of St. Sylrester taken 
from Rome to Nonantola, 53 ; ques- 
tion of authenticity of, 5 3 

Relics, frequent thefts of in eighth 
century, 24 

Remedius, brother of Pepin, sent to 
Italy, 55 

Republic, the Holy, no mean thing to 
be member of, 26 

Respublica, unsuitable expression as 
used in Chronicles, 38 ; sense in 
which used by Didier, 45 note 

Rex Francorum and Rex Langobar- 
dorum, title used by Charlemagne, 

Rheims, Bishop of, with other digni- 
taries, tries Pope Constantine, 
80 ; Stephen IV. crowns Louis the 
Pious and Ermengarde at, 124; 
Ebbo, Archbishop of, adherent of 
Lothaire, 140 ; belonged to king- 
dom, Charles the Bald, 140; 
Foulques, Archbishop of, supports 
Guy of Spoleto, 192 

Rialto, Venice beginning to rise on 
island of, 4 

Richard, Count of Aversa, applied to 
by Hildebrand, 265 ; has posses- 
sion of Capua, 265 ; presents him- 
self before Nicholas II. at Council 
Melfi, 267 ; invested with princi- 
pality of Capua, 267 

Richarde, wife of Charles the Fat, 
imperial consecration of, 186 

Rieti despoiled by Romans, for Trasi- 
mund, 9 ; Abbey of St. Saviour at, 
68 ; Christopher and Sergius retire 
to Abbey at, 75-6 ; possibility of 
Popedom for John, Bishop of, 149 

Riguier, St., Angilbert, Abbot of, sent 
to Rome by Charlemagne, 109 

Robert, the Strong, 190 

Robert Guiscard, Norman chief, 267 

Rofred, Count, instigates revolt 
against John XIII., 235 ; killed in 
reaction following revolt, 235 ; 
body exhumed and thrown into 
public sewer, 235-6 

Roger, Norman King, 20 

Romans establish Italian unity, i ; 
undertake to subjugate Spoleto, 9 

Rome, Duchy of, 1 3-20 ; extent of 
Duchy of, 15 ; Duchy of a self- 
governing state, 20 ; Bishop of has 
exceptional position, 13; election 
of Pope at, 14 ; treated very differ- 
ently from Ravenna, 1 7 ; people of 
called "peculiaris populis," 18 
reconciled with Byzantine Church, 
20 note ; sort of protectorate created 
at, 22 ; Astolphus levies poll-tax 
on people of, 22 ; copy of treaty, 
broken by Astolphus, fastened to 
stational cross at, 23 ; even as part 
of Lombard kingdom would have 
been Holy City, 25 ; no wish for 




Lombard rule in, 25 ; position of 
Duke of, 27 ; leave-taking of 
Stephen II. at, before journey to 
France, 33 ; no mention of Duke 
of, after 754, 40 ; Stephen II. wel- 
comed back in, 43 ; attacked by 
Astolphus, 43-4 ; set free, by Pepin, 
44 ; treaty of, 96 note ; Charle- 
magne convenes assembly at, 114; 
Charlemagne crowned at, 116; new 
empire of, 116-119; Saracens at, 
136-143 ; fortifications of, 145 ; 
Saracen captives work on fortifica- 
tions of, 146 ; walls of restored, 
146 ; Byzantine party in, 148 ; pro- 
cession in, attacked by followers 
Emperor Louis, 161 ; councils on 
imperial succession in, 172; gates 
of, opened to Otto I., 227 ; Em- 
perors, of ninth and eleventh cen- 
turies, regarded as monarchs of, 
248 ; occupied by anti-popes, 270 

Romanus, brother of Benedict VIII., 
assumes temporal government, 247 

Romanus, Exarch, 2, 13 

Romanus Lecapenus, Emperor in Con- 
stantinople. See Lecapenus. 

Romanus, Pope for four months, 201 

Romuald, St., Otto III. visits, 242 

Rosellse (Grosseto) conceded to papal 
territory, 105 

Rossi, De, Bullettino, 49 note 

Retard, Duke, ambassador from Pepin 
to Stephen II., 35 

Rotgaud, Duke of Friuli, sets up 
standard, 102 ; falls in battle, 102 

Rotharis annexes territory in seventh 
century, 3 

Rotrude, daughter of Charlemagne, 
103 ; proposed alliance of, with 
Emperor Constantino, 103-4 

Rouen, Remedius, Bishop of (Pepin's 
brother), despatched to Italy, 55 

Rudolph, son of Conrad of Auxerre, 

Rudolph II., king of transjuran Bur- 
gundy, fights against Emperor 
Berengarius, 213 

Sabanum (baptismal cloth) of Pepin's 

daughter, Gis^le, 50 
Sabina, taking of, 1 5 7iote ; papal 

state, increased on side of, 104 ; 

mentioned in compact of Louis 

the Pious and Pope Pascal, 125 ; 

Saracen establishment at, 210 ; 

in the country of the Crescentii, 


Saccellarius (paymaster - general) at 
Lateran, 64 

Sacramentum Romanorum, Privilege 
of Otto, reproduction of, 228 

Saddle Cloths, tonsure gives right to 
decorate horses with white, 65 

Salaria, gate of, Rome, troops of 
Astolphus before, 43 

Salerno, taken by duchy Beneventum, 
3 ; Emperor Louis resumes cam- 
paign against Saracens, near, 166 ; 
petty prince of, enters into treaty 
with Saracens, 176; John VIII. 
gains partial success at, 177 ; Dukes 
of Spoleto intervene in concerns of, 
191 ; Prince of, takes Norman 
colonies under feudal responsi- 
bility, 256 ; owes prosperity to 
Norman establishment, 256 ; Nor- 
mans of Melfi and Aversa subject 
to, 256 

Salic law, Romans to be judged by, 
if desired, 131 

Salzburg, Am, Archbishop of, re- 
marks discord in Rome, 112; 
charged to see Leo III. reinstated, 
113 ; correspondence of, with 
Alcuin, 114 

Saracens, the, at Rome, 136-143 ; 
begin to create disturbances, 137 ; 
Spanish, under command Ommiad, 
Caliph of Cordova, 137 ; of ancient 
Mauritania, governed by Edrisite 
dynasty, 137 ; of Numidia, under 
Aglabites, 137 ; land at mouth of 
Tiber, 141 ; unable to follow up 
successes, 141 ; re-embark, and are 
engulfed in Sicilian Sea, 141 ; 
banished for the time from Italy, 
143 ; reappear at mouth of Tiber, 
145 ; vessels of, wrecked on Roman 
coast, 146 ; captives from wrecked 
crews, work on fortifications, 146 ; 
are formidable foes, 175 ; ejected 
from Bari, by Emperor Louis, 175 ; 
fall back on coast Tyrrhenian Sea, 
175 ; have treaties with Amalfi, 
Gaeta, Salerno, and Capua, 176 ; 
exploits of John VIII. against, 1 76 ; 
reappear in neighbourhood Rome, 
177 ; ravage Roman state, 187 ; 
Christian allies of, 187 ; renewal of 
strength of, 210 ; great question of 
day, expulsion of, 210 ; defeated at 
Baccano and Trevi, 211 ; utter de- 
feat of, 212 ; Benedict VIII. leads 
naval expedition against, 247 ; 
make raids on coasts Byzantine 
Calabria, 256 

Sardinia defended by Sicilian Patri- 
cian, 137; account of, in Carlo- 



vingian times, by M. A. Dove, 137 

Saxons-Anglo, in scholce of suburbs 
of St. Peter's, 60 ; family, ruling 
power in Rome, 230 

Schola Cantorum, seminary for priests, 

Schola Gra3Corum, Greek section, 
Roman population, 60 

Scriniarii, clerks of chancellor's 
office in Lateran, 63 

Secundicerius of notaries, 63, 64 

Sedi episcopali, nell' antico ducato di 
Roma, Le, 65 note 

See. Holy, the. See Papacy 

Sees, Episcopal, often unworthily 
occupied, 275 note 

Senate of Church, species of, formed 
by Cardinal priests, 62 

Senator of Rome, Theophylact, 205 

Sergius II. ejects claimant, John, 
from papal residence, 138 ; member 
of same family as Stephen IV. and 
Hadrian II., 138 ; receives King 
Louis, son of Lothaire, and a great 
following, 139 ; appoints Bishop 
Drogo apostolic vicar, 139 ; anoints 
Louis, 139 ; reign of, one of simony, 
140 ; gives bishopric of Albano to 
brother, rustic, vicious boor, 140 ; 
evils caused by reign of, 140 ; 
death of, 144 ; interred in dese- 
crated basilica, 144 

Sergius III., elected at same time as 
John IX., 202 ; was supporter 
Stephen VI., 202 ; returns, after 
exile, supported by " the Franks," 

206 ; sends Pope Christopher to 
prison, 206 ; revives tradition of 
Stephen VI., 206 ; had received 
episcopal ordination from Formo- 
sus, 206 ; calls Formosus " haughty 
and intrusive," 206 ; summons con- 
vocation to annul ordinations of 
Formosus, 206-7 ; forbids Bishop 
of Uz^s to call Formosus " sacer- 
dos," 207 ; calls John IX. and 
successors "ravening wolves," 

207 ; consternation caused by con- 
demnation of ordinations by, 
207 ; has son by Marozia, after- 
wards John IX., 209 ; a spiteful, 
brutal scoundrel, 209 ; death of, 
209 ; showed generosity in renewal 
Lateran basilica, 209 

Sergius IV. (Buccaporca), son of 
Roman bootmaker, 245 

Sergius (son of Christopher primi- 
cerius) the secundicerius, 75 ; to 
retire to religious life, 75-6 ; eludes 
vigilance of Abbot of St. Saviour's, 

Rieti, 76 ; Duke of Spoleto puts 
army at disposal of, 76 ; sets out 
at head of army, with Waldipert, 
Lombard ambassador, 76 ; delegate 
to Pepin, 79 ; on arrival of, in 
France, finds that Pepin is dead, 
79 ; presents himself to Charles 
and Carloman, 79 ; urges princes 
to repair breach of canon law, in 
election of Constantine, 79 ; with 
Christopher, wielder of papal 
authority, 81 ; gives Desiderius 
cause of complaint, 81 ; news of 
pilgrimage to Rome of Desiderius, 
arouse suspicions of, 82 ; betrayed, 
84 ; commits himself to enemy, 84 ; 
left by Pope, in St. Peter's, 84 ; 
dragged from sanctuary, 84 ; eyes 
torn out, 84 ; cast into prison, 84 ; 
death of, 84 

Sergius, Archbishop of Ravenna. See 
Ravenna, Archbishop of 

Sergius, Duke of Naples, Csesar, son 
of, commands squadrons against 
Saracens, 145 

Sergius, master of militia, escapes 
from Rome, 178 

Sicco, Count, ejects Boniface VII., 

Sicily, Otranto, Gallipoli, and Reggio 
look to for help, 3 ; valuable church 
property in, 4 ; property of Holy 
See in seized, 7 ; Bishops of sent 
to Constantinople, 7 ; Naples relies 
for support on Patrician of, 20 ; 
Byzantines retain patrimonies of, 
20 note ; ancient patrimonies of 
yield no income, 66 ; falling under 
sway of Mussulmans, 137 ; struggle 
of against Saracens, 148 

Sickel, M. de, official investigation 
by, of Privilege of Otto, 226 note 

Siconulf claims Duchy of Beneven- 
tum, 138 ; envoys visit regarding 
expedition against Saracens, 142-3 

Simony under Sergius II., 140 ; under 
John XII., 224 ; condemned at 
Council of Pavia, 254 

Soana included in papal territory, 

Societies, Benevolent, in eighth cen- 
tury, 67 

Sophia, St., presence of papal ambas- 
sadors in, breach ecclesiastical law, 

Sora yields to Luitprand, 4 

Soracte, Mt., connected with legend 
St. Sylvester, 51 ; monastic colonies 
on, 51 ; convent of annexed to 
monastery in Via Lata, 51-2; 
monk of, comments on Marozia, 




and on decline of Rome, 

Sorrento holds out against Lombards, 


Spanish Saracens subject to Caliph 
of Cordova, 137 

Spoleto, Duke of, increases posses- 
sions, 4 ; Lombards of, not harmo- 
nious with those of kingdom, 5 ; 
self-government of, 6 ; Trasimund, 
Duke of, assumes independence, 8 ; 
expelled by King Luitprand, 8 ; 
Romans subjugate Duchy of, for 
Trasimund, 9 ; right of Astolphus 
to Duchy of, 37 ; inhabitants of 
approach Stephen 11. , 47 ; Desi- 
derius takes prisoner Alboni, Duke 
of, 55 ; Duke of, puts army at dis- 
posal of Sergius, son of Christopher, 
76 ; Duke of, stirred up by Desi- 
derius to lay waste Roman Duchy, 
91 ; Charlemagne bestows legal 
rights on Hildeprand, Duke of, 94 ; 
Duke Hildeprand, of, elected by 
subjects, 94 ; Hildeprand, of, as- 
sumes independence, 102 ; Frank- 
ish ambassadors try to reconcile 
to Pope, 102 ; Duke of vanquishes 
Patrician of Sicily, 105 ; Duchy of 
outside papal state, 106 ; Leo III. 
conducted to, on escape, 113 ; 
Winigis, Duke of, disperses rebels 
against Pope Leo, 123 ; Duke of, 
attacks Saracens, 141 ; transfer of 
Duchy of, mentioned in the Libellus, 
174 ; Charles the Bald appoints 
Duke of, 174 ; Lambert, Duke of, 
and Guy, to assist John VI IL, 
177 ; Lambert, Duke of, perse- 
cutes, rather than helps, Pope, 
180 ; Lambert of, insists on enter- 
ing Leonine city, 181 ; Lambert 
of, obliged to retire, 181 ; Duke 
of, takes place of Charles the Fat, 
185 ; Empire of, 190-203 ; Guy 
of, enemy of John VIII., 191 {see 
Guy) ; Dukes of, desire mastery of 
neighbours' concerns, 191 ; Dukes 
of, protect lor oppress Pope, 191 ; 
no understanding between princes 
of, and Holy See, 193 ; House of, 
has imperial title as well as Italian 
kingship, 195 ; Emperor Guy of, 
succeeded by Lambert {see Lam- 
bert) ; Marquess Alberic of, acts 
with Romans against Saracens, 21 1 

State, Roman, protector necessary 
for, 273 

Stephen, Patrician and Duke, gov- 
erns Rome in absence of Pope 
Zachary, 11 

Stephen, Priest, sent by Pope to 

exhort Ratchis, 48 
Stephen, St., and St. Sylvester, Paul 

I. names monastic foundation after, 

Stephen, St., a third-century Pope, 5 1 
Stephen II., Pope, negotiates with 

Astolphus, 18 ; brings about peace, 

21 ; deputes brother, Paul, to sup- 
port the Silentiary with Astolphus, 

22 ; is told of non-success of errand, 
22-3 ; prolific in prayers, litanies, 
and exhortations, 23 ; desires es- 
cape from Lombards, 26 ; nego- 
tiates with Frankish king, 32 ; 
starts, with escort, for France, 33 ; 
acts as subject of emperor, 34 ; 
enters France, 34-5 ; is met by two 
ambassadors at Abbey St. Maurice, 
35 ; received ceremoniously by 
Pepin at Ponthion, 35 ; account 
in Moissac Chronicle, of meeting 
with Pepin, $6 ; guest of Pepin 
at Abbey St. Denis, 40 ; falls ill, 
but recovers, 4 1 ; recovery of, attri- 
buted to St. Denis, 41 ; makes 
fruitless appeal to Astolphus, 42 ; 
distrusts terms made with Pepin, 
by Astolphus, when defeated, 42-3 ; 
wishes Pepin to insist on restora- 
tion of provinces, 42-3 ; sends 
Pepin three letters — one supposed 
to be by St. Peter, 44 ; sends depu- 
tation to new king, Desiderius, 47 ; 
delighted with result of deputation, 
47 ; regards himself sovereign dis- 
poser of Italy, 47 ; death of, 49 ; 
had prevented Pepin sending away 
Bertrade and marrying daughter 
to son of Constantino Copronymus, 
168 note 

Stephen III., Pope, native of Sicily, 
priest of St. Cecilia, 78; selected 
by Christopher {primicerius), 78 ; 
takes possession of Lateran, 78 ; 
episcopal consecration of, 78 ; 
grows weary of Christopher's super- 
vision, 82 ; Desiderius desires to 
confer with, 82; neglects Desi- 
derius in Rome, and causes bitter 
contest, 83 ; writes to Queen Ber- 
trade and Charlemagne, 83 note; 
leaves Christopher and Sergius to 
their fate, 84 ; realises that he is 
dupe of Desiderius, 85 ; relieved 
by death of Carloman, 85 ; death 
of, 85 ; had refused to acknow- 
ledge Michaelius, Archbishop Ra- 
venna, 100; had l3een interested in 
reconciliation of Charlemagne to 
Carloman, 167 note 



Stephen IV., election and consecra- 
tion of, 124 ; crowns Louis and 
Ermengarde at Kheims, 124 ; death 
of, 125 

Stephen V., election of, 189 ; crafty 
policy of, 194; does not openly 
thwart Guy of Spoleto, 194; writes 
of Guy as his only son, but appeals 
for help to Arnulph, 194 ; conse- 
crates Guy, Emperor, at St. Peter's, 


Stephen VI., Bishop of Anagni, 198 ; 
orders ghastly mock trial of dead 
Pope Formosus, 199 ; had been 
consecrated Bishop of Anagni, by 
Formosus, 200 ; cast out of Holy 
See, 200 ; imprisoned and stran- 
gled, 201 

Stephen VII., tool of Marozia, 215 

Stephen VIII., 216; exercises no 
temporal authority, 216 

Stephen IX., Cardinal Frederic of 
Lorraine, 260; election of, infrac- 
tion of agreement of 1046, 260 ; 
sets out for Tuscany, 261 ; takes 
oath of clergy and faithful not to 
appoint future Pope, without 
Hildebrand, 261 ; dies from poison 
in Tuscany, 261 

Stephen, the sacellarius, 89 

Stephen, the secundecerius, escapes 
from Kome, 178 

Stratores (equerries), of Lateran, 63 

Subiaco, Abbey of, made great estab- 
lishment by Alberic, 221 ; docu- 
ment issued to monks of, by John 
XIL, 224 

Succession to imperial crown, ques- 
tion of, 172 ; councils concerning, 

Suidger, Bishop of Bamberg. See 
Clement II. 

Superista of Lateran palace, 63 

Susa, garrisoned valley of, reinforced 
against Lombards, 42 

Sutri yields to Luitprand, 4 ; position 
of, in Roman duchy, 1 5 ; restored 
by Lombard king, as gift to apostles 
Peter and Paul, 1 7 ; conclave at, 
deposes Benedict X., and recog- 
nises Nicholas II., 262 

Swabia, Charles the Fat, of {see 
Charles the Fat) ; Charles the 
Great, of, 183 

Sylvester, St., imposing legend of, 
51 ; Mount Soracte, topographical 
feature of legend of, 51; remains 
of, brought to monastery Saints 
Stephen and Sylvester, 5 1 ; body 
of taken from Rome, by Abbot 
Anselm, 52-3 

Sylvester II. (Gerbert), succeeds 
Gregory V. , 240 ; appointed by 
Otto III., 242 ; had been Arch- 
bishop of Ravenna, 242 ; deplores 
absence of Otto III., 242-3 ; urges 
rebels of Tivoli to submit, 243 ; 
escapes to Ravenna with Otto III., 
243-4 ; ^^ies in Rome, 244 ; ap- 
pointment of, had not been enthu- 
siastically received, 255 

Sylvester III. (John, Bishop of Sa- 
bina), election of, 250-1 ; electors 
of, heavily bribed, 251 ; returns to 
bishopric, and Benedict IX. re- 
established, 251 ; re-elected, in 
1044, 251; deposed, 254; em- 
braces religious career, 254 

Symbolism in worship, different 
views of, 56 

Symmachus, Pope, dedicates mau- 
soleum to St. Andrew, 50 

Syrian monks in Rome, 68 


Tangmar, Life of Bishop Bernard of 
Hildesheim, 243 note 

Tarento, gives way before general of 
Emperor Basil, 175 

Tedald, son of Azzo, of Tuscany, 255 ; 
faithful adherent of House of 
Saxony, 256 ; popular in North 
Italy, 256 

Temporal power, strife about, affects 
spiritual, 264 ; difficulties con- 
nected with, 271 ; originated in 
repugnance of Romans to become 
Lombards, 273 

Terni, interview of Luitprand and 
Pope Zachary at, 1 1 ; Peace of, 16 ; 
no military representatives accom- 
pany Pope to, 18 

Terracina, frontier line of Roman 
Duchy, turns off to, 15; no longer 
part of Papal State, 104 ; protec- 
tion of coast between Luni and, 


Theodocius, Duke of Spoleto, Spole- 
tans declare allegiance to Pope 
during absence of, 93-4 

Theodore, Bishop, revolting cruelty 
to, 78 

Theodore II., Pope for twenty days, 
201 ; has body Pope Formosus re- 
buried in atrium, St. Peter's, 201 ; 
restores deposed clerks, 201 

Theodoric, prosperous reign of, i 

Theodotus, uncle and guardian of 
Hadrain I., 87 

Theophano, widow of Otto II., 237; 



hastens to Germany, 237 ; reap- 
pears at Rome, and comports 
herself as sovereign, 239 

Theophylact, Archdeacon, a section 
desire as Pope when Paul I. 
appointed, 49 

Theophylact, Cardinal, 245 

Theophylact, son of Count Alberic, 
249 ; made Pope (Benedict IX.) at 
twelve years old, 249 

Theophylact, House of, 204-16 ; 
Papal vestararius, 205 ; Theodora, 
wife of, 205 ; Marozia and Theo- 
dora, daughters of, 205 ; Duke and 
magister mUitum, 205 ; the Consul, 
and the Senator of Rome, 205 ; 
called, by Vulgarius, dominus 
urbis, 205 note ; Eugenius Vul- 
garius writes to the vestararissa 
Theodora, wife of, 209 ; letter of 
Vulgarius shows power and in- 
fluence of, 209 ; Sergius III. has 
son by Marozia, daughter of, 209 ; 
makes common cause with Pope, 
209 ; is virtual temporal ruler under 
Anastasius III. and Laudo, 210 ; 
relations of Theodora, wife of, 
with John X., 210; commands 
contingent against Saracens, 211; 
bestows hand of daughter Marozia 
on Marquess Alberic, 212; Marozia, 
daughter of, afterwards marries 
Guy, Marquess of Tuscany, 214 ; 
power, for many generations, in 
family of, 216 ; estates possessed 
by branches of family of, 243 ; for 
a century and a half family of 
direct pontifical destinies, 274 

Theutgard, Archbishop, leader of 
Lorraine clergy, 160; deposed by 
Nicholas I., 160 ; favoured by 
Hadrian II., 162; Arsenius pro- 
mises reinstatement of, 162 

Tiberius (or Petasius), rival of Leo 
the Isaurian, killed at Monterano, 

Tiberius II., Emperor, attitude of 
towards Romans, 23-4 

Tibur included in compact of Louis 
the Pious and Pascal I., 125 ; pre- 
servation of municipal institutions 
of ancient, 243 

Tilsur, Roman town of, 15 

Tivoli, summons sent to John XII. 
at, 227 ; prosperity and importance 
of, 243 ; loathed by Romans, 243 ; 
inhabitants of rebel against im- 
perial authority, 243 ; lives of in- 
habitants of, at emperor's mercy, 
spared, 243 

Tlemcen, Edrisite dynasty at, 137 

Tonsure, received at outset educa- 
tional course, 65 ; gives privilege 
of decorating horses with white 
saddle-cloths, 65 

Toto, Duke (Theodore), plots to hasten 
Pope's death, 73 ; summons troops 
of Roman Tuscia, 73 ; proclaims 
brother, Constantine, Pope, 73 ; 
death of, through treachery, 77 

Tours, Bishop of, with other digni- 
taries, tries Pope Constantine, 80 

Trasimund, Duke of Spoleto, expelled 
by Luitprand, 8 ; takes refuge in 
Rome, 8 ; restored by Romans, 9 ; 
Romans, in vain, demand towns 
from, 10 ; surrenders to Luit- 
prand, II ; negotiates with Rome 
rather than Exarch, 16 

Trastevere, pontifical party maintain 
their own in, 250 

Trasteverans, section of Roman popu- 
lation, 60 ; unsuccessfully attacked 
by rebels, 250 

Trebbia, Guy of Spoleto gains victory 
at, 192 

Treves, Archbishop of, deposed by 
Nicholas I., 160 

Trevi, defeat of Saracens at, 211 

Trial, mock, of Pope Formosus after 
death, 199 

Tribus Fatis, ancient Forum, 78 ; 
Christopher, primicerius, assembles 
clergy and lay aristocracy in, 78 

Triclinium, at Lateran, suggestive 
mosaic in, 11 1 ; inquiry in, on 
attack on Leo III,, 114 

Trinity, the Holy, strange mention 
of, 59 note 

Triumvirate, a — primicerius, chief 
priest, and archdeacon, 63 

Troyes, Council of, summoned by 
John VIII., 182 ; Bishop of, ab- 
solved from oath by Marinus I., 

Tuscany, Northern, Lombard Italy 
subject to, 3 ; Adelbert, Marquess 
of, persecutes John VIII., 180; 
insists on entry into Leonine city, 
181; keeps Pope prisoner, 181; 
obliged to retire, 181 ; Boniface, 
Marquess of, re-establishes Bene- 
dict IX., 255 ; House of, founded 
by Azzo, 255 ; Countess Matilda, 
daughter of Boniface, 256 

Tuscia, Lombard (now Tuscany), 15 ; 
ancient, called Roman, 1 5 

Tusculum, on Monte Albano, in 
possession of family of Theophy- 
lact, 243 ; loathed by Romans, 243 ; 
Counts of, oppose Crescentii, 245 ; 
Theophylact, son of Count of, and 



Henry II., 246 ; power of papacy 
vested in nobles of, 247 ; like the 
Crescentii, nobles of, in position 
permanent missi, 247 ; family of, 
govern, in absence of emperor, 
248 ; Gerard, Count of Galeria, 
leads vassals of, 250 ; House of, 
disposed of, 253 ; Counts of, had 
chosen Romans as Popes, 255 


Umana, Desiderius promises to re- 
store to Eoman Republic, 47 ; 
named in compact between Louis 
the Pious and Pascal I., 125 

Unity of Italy first established by 
Romans, i ; mortal blow to, 2 

Urban 11. lives and dies away from 
Rome, 270 

Uz^s, Amelias, Bishop of, forbidden 
to call Formosus sacerdos, 207 

Valentine, short pontificate of, 133 

Vatican, assemblies held in, when 
emperor present, 219 

Velletri, Gaudy, Bishop of, invites 
Charles the Bald for imperial coro- 
nation, 173; John, "the Thin," 
Bishop of, installed Pope, as Bene- 
dict X., 261-2 

Veneration of images, Convocation 
of 769 ratifies, 8 1 

Venetian lagoons, Byzantine auto- 
nomy organised in, 3, 12 

Venice, local autonomy organised in, 
20 ; patriarch of, subject to Doge, 
27 ; position of Greek empire 
strengthened at, 175 

Verdun, treaty of, sanctions disloca- 
tion Frankish kingdom, 1 36 

Vestariarius (or prior vestiarii) guar- 
dian of stores at Lateran, 63 ; 
importance of office of, 205 j Theo- 
phylact, the, 205 

Via Lata, paternal house of Pope 
Paul in, made monastery, 49, 5 1 ; 
monastery of, memorial of founda- 
tion of Roman State, 52 

Victor II., Gebhardt, Bishop of Eich- 
stadt, 255 ; succeeds Leo IX., 259 ; 
makes arrangements regardingTus- 
cany, 259 ; goes to Germany, 259 ; 
charged by Henry III. to arrest 
Cardinal Frederic of Lorraine, 259 ; 

grief of, at death Henry III., 259 ; 
sees need for good terms with 
House of Tuscany, 260 ; appoints 
Cardinal Frederic Cardinal-priest 
and Abbot Monte Cassino, 260 ; 
Hildebrand united with, 260 ; death 
of, at Arezzo, 260 

Vidame of Lateran palace {vice 
dominus), 63 

Vienne, Boson, Count of, 182 

Vincent, St., of Vulturno, sent by 
Pope to Astolphus, 22 

Vitalian, Pope, receives Constantino 
II. with great pomp in Rome, 94 

Viterbo included in papal territory, 

Vitus, St., Lombard Pope, Philip, 
taken back to monastery of, 77-8 

Vulgarius, Eugenius, polemical writ- 
ings of, 207 ; a grammarian and 
professor, 208 note ; Diimmler dis- 
covers authorship by, of work attri- 
buted to Auxilius, 208 note 


Waast, St., Abbot of, envoy of Em- 
peror Louis, 128 

Wala, adviser of Emperor Lothaire, 
129 ; Lothaire goes to Rome, under 
escort of, 130 

Waldipert, Lombard priest, accom- 
panies Sergius, the secundiceriut^ 
to Rome, 76 ; troops of, pass 
through city of Rome, 76 ; pro- 
claims Pope, Philip, superior of 
monastery St. Vitus, 77 ; cruel 
treatment of, 79 ; vainly seeks 
refuge behind image at Sta Maria 
Maggiore, 79 

Walls of Rome restored, 146 

Warneharius, Abbot, ambassador 
from Stephen II. to Pepin, 44 ; 
takes part in Roman defence, 
wearing armour over habit, 44; 
well known as fighting monk, 53 

Watterich, 265 note 

Wilchar, Bishop of Noventum, takes 
letter of Stephen II. to Pepin, 43 ; 
goes, as Bishop of Sens (bearing 
title Archbishop of the Gauls), to 
Rome, 79 

Willa, wife of Berengarius II., takes 
refuge in fortress in Apennines, 225 

Winigis, Duke of Spoleto, conducts 
Leo III. to Spoleto, 113 

Wirundis, Frankish missus, conducts 
Leo III. to Spoleto, 113 



Wives of superior clergy (married 
during time of lesser orders), 65 ; 
not sequestered in cloisters, 65 ; 
become diaeonce, presbyterce, or 
episcopce, 66 ; kind of consecration 
ceremony of, 66 

Worms, Bishop of, with other digni- 
taries, tries Pope Constantine, 80 ; 
question of papal elections not 
considered at Peace of, 269 

Wiirzburg, Bishop of, with other dig- 
nitaries, tries Pope Constantine, 80 


Xenodochia (hospital), 67 

Yoke of Roman servitude {jugum 
Romanorum servitutii), resented in 
Ravenna, 97, 98 

Zachary, Pope, election of, 10 ; comes 
to terms with Luitprand, 10, 11; 
peaceful tactics of, prevail, 1 1 ; 
death of Luitprand attributed to 
prayers of, 1 1 ; finds Astolphus less 
amenable than Luitprand and 
Ratchis, 12; ambition of, over- 
leaps itself, 1 2 ; had settled ques- 
tion, with Luitprand, of restoration 
of four towns, 17-18; sends envoys 
to Constantine V., 19 ; death of, in 
752, 20; documentary evidence 
concerning, 28 ; significant remark 
of biographer of, 28 ; relations of, 
with Pepin and Carloman, 31 ; 
presented monastery on Mcnte 
Soracte to Carloman, 51; was 
welcomed by Ravennese, 98 ; John 
XII. afterwards in same position 
as, 223 

Zwentibald, Duke of Moravians, 
medium between Stephen V. and 
Arnulph, 194-5 


Printed by Ballanttne, Hanson 6r> Co. 
Edinburgh «Sr» London 

;0i DEFT. DEC 191951 


to (Di 




University of Toronto 





DO NOT y^ 

1— i 




Q to 


THE 1 





1 - 



Acme Ubrary Card Pocket