History of the City of Rome - Forgotten Books

GREGOROVIUS’

H ISTORY OF THE C ITY OF ROME

IN THE M IDDLE AGES .

VOL. I I I .

GEORGE BELL SONS,

LONDON YORK STREET, COVENT GARDEN ,

AND NEW YORK,66

,FIFTH AVENUE ,

CAMBRIDGE : DEIGHTON, BELL, co.

H ISTO RY

THE C ITY O F RO M E

IN THE

M IDDLE AG ES

FERD INAND GREGOROVIUS

TRANSLATED FROM THE FOURTH GERMAN EDITION

ANN IE HAM ILTON

VOL . I I I .

L IB RARY

KNOX C O LLEG E

TO RO NTO

L O N D O N

G EO R G E B E L L S O N S

1 895

C O N T E N T S .

BOOK V .

THE CITY OF ROME IN THE CAROLINGIAN EPOCHUP TO THE YEAR goo .

CHAPTER I .

1 . Altered Attitude of Rome to the World—Relations of PAGEEmperor and Pope to Rome—Leo again journeys to

Charles—Ardulf of Northumberland in Rome,2 . Death of Pipin , SI G

—Bernhard , King of I taly—Lewis I .

crowned at Aachen as Co-Emperor of the Romans

Death of Charles the Great—His Importance in Un i

versal H istory—Dearth of Local Trad itions concerninghim in Rome,

Tumults in Rome—Bernhard sent to investigate the CausesDeath Of Leo I I I . , 8 16 His Buildings in Rome

Character of contemporary Architecture and Art—Thet itular Churches and the principal Convents,

4. Stephen IV. Pope—His Journey to Lewis—His sudden

Death—Elect ion and O rdinat ion Of Paschalis I .—The

Privilegium of Lewis,

CHAPTER I I .

I . Lothar Co-Emperor—Rebellion and Fall OfKing BernhardLothar King of I taly—His Coronat ion in Rome—He

Establishes his Imperial Tribunal there—Act ion againstFarfa—Execut ion Of Roman Nobles—Paschalis evades

the Imperial Sentence—His Death,

vi CONTENT&

2 . Paschalis builds the Churches o f S . Cecilia in Trastevere,

S . Prassede on the Esquiline , S . Maria in Domnica on

the Coelian,

Eugenius I I . Pope—Lo thar comes to Rome—His'

Constitu

t ion o f the year 824—Death of Eugenius , August 827,

Valentinus I . Pope—Gregory IV. Pope

—The Saracens

invade the M editerranean and found their Kingdom in

S icily—Gregory IV. builds New Ost ia—Fal l of Charles ’sMonarchy—Death Of Lewis the Pious—Lo thar soleEmperor

—Part ition ofVerdun,843 ,

Mania for Relics—The Bodies Of Saints—Their removalCharacter of the Pilgrimages of the N inth CenturyGregory IV. rebu ilds the Basilica of S . Mark—Restoresthe Aqua Sabbatina—Builds the Papal Villa D raco

H is Death in 844,

CHAPTER I I I .

I . Sergius I I . Pope—King Lewis comes to Rome—His Coronation—His D ifferences with the Pope and the Romans

—Siconolf in Rome—The Saracens attack and plunderS. Peter

’s and S . Paul’s—D eath of Serg ius, 849 ,

2 . Leo IV. becomes Pope—Fire in the Borgo -League OfRome,

Naples , Amalfi, and Gaeta against the Saracens—NavalVictory at Ost ia, 849—Leo IV. builds the Civitas Leon ina—I ts Walls and Gates—Verses over its Chief Gates ,

Leo IV. for tifies Portus, and“

entrusts the Care of the Harbour

to a Colony of Cors icans—Builds Leopolis near Centum

cellae -C ivita Vecchia—Restores Horta and Ameria

Bu ilds Churches in Rome—His Votive Gifts- Wealthof the Treasury Of the Church—Frascati,

Lewis I I . crowned Emperor—Deposit ion Of Cardinal Anastasius—Ethelwolf and Alfred in Rome—Tr ial of Daniel

,

the Mag ister M ilitum ,before the Tr ibunal Of Lewis I I .

Death Of Leo IV. , 855—Fable of Pope Joan ,

PAGE

CONTENTS.

CHAPTER IV.

I . Benedict I I I . e lected Pope—Tumult in Rome on account of

the Election—Invasion of Cardinal Anastasius—Firmnessof the Romans towards the Imper ial Legates—BenedictI I I . ordained September 29th, 855 Lewis I I . soleEmperor Fr iendly Relat ions between Rome and

Byzantium,

2 . N icholas I . P ope—Reduces the Archbishop of Ravenna to

subject ion—The Greek Schism of Phot ius breaks out

Re lat ions of Rome to the Bulgarians—Visit of the

Envoys Of King Boris to Rome— Formosus goes as

M issionary to Bulgaria—Attempt to make the Countrya Province of the Roman Church—The Bulgar ian Constitution Of N icholas I . ,

D ispute concerning Waldrada —N icholas condemns the

Synod of M etz , and deposes Gunther of Cologne and

Theutgaud of Treves—Lewis I I . comes to Rome

Excesses of his Troops in the City—Defiance of the

German Archbishops—Firmness and Victory of the

Pope ,

Nicholas’s care for the City—He restores the Jovia and

Trajana—He fortifies Ostia anew—His few Buildingsand Vo tive Gifts—Condit ion of Learning—Lothar’sEdict concerning Schools , 825—D ecrees of Eugen ius I I .and Leo IV. regarding the Parochial Schools—GreekMonks in Rome—The Librar ies—The ManuscriptsCoins,

Ignorance in Rome -The Lz’

éer Pontg’

fi alz’

s of Anastasius—I ts Orig in and Character—Translations of Anastasiusfrom the Greek—Life of Gregory the Great by JohnD iaconus

,

CHAPTER V .

I . Rise of Papal Supremacy—The Ecclesias tical State—ThePseudo-I s idorian D ecretals—Death

,Of N icholas

,867

Adrian I I .—Lambert of Spoleto attacks Rome—TheEnemies of Adrian in Rome—Outrages Of Eleutheriusand Anastasius , and the ir Punishment,

PAGE

CONTENTS .

2 . Renewed Controversy regardingWaldrada—Lothar’s Perjury—II is humiliating Recept ion in Rome His sudden

Death Lewis in Lower I taly Conception o f the

Imperium at this Period—Lewis ’s Letter to the Empe rorof Byzantium—The Empire d isgraced by the Surprise inBenevento—Lewis comes to Rome—I s crowned againThe Romans proclaim Adalgisus of Benevento an Enemyto the Republ ic,

3 . John VI I I . Pope, 872- Death Of Lewis I I .—The Sons Of

Lewis of Germany and Charles the Bald contend for the

Possession Of I taly—Charles the Bald Emperor , 875Decay of the Imperial Power in Rome—Charles the BaldKing of I taly—The German Faction in Rome—ExcessesOf the Nobility—Formosus Of Portus ,

4. The Saracens devastate the Campagna—é-John’

s Letters of

Comp laint—League between the Saracens and the Sea

port s Of Southern I taly—Energy Of John VI I I .—He

forms a Fleet , negotiates with the Princes of South I taly,defeats the Saracens at the Cape of Circe—Condit ion of

Southern I taly -John VI I I . builds Johannipolis besideS . Paul ’s ,

CHAPTER VI .

1 . D ifficult Pos it ion of John VI I I . with regard to Lambert and

the Emperor—He again confirms Charles the Bald in

the Imperial D ignity—Synods of Rome and Ravenna,

877—D ecrees Of John with regard to the PatrimoniesPapal Exchequer Lands—Unavail ing attempts to resistFeudalism—Death Of Charles the Bald—Triumph of theGerman Party—Threatening Attitude of Lambert and

the Exiles—Lambert attacks Rome and takes the PopePrisoner—John VI I I . escapes to France ,

2. John at the Synod of Troyes—He favours Duke BosoAccompanies him to Lombardy—Failure of his

‘

PlansCharles the Fat becomes King of I taly, and is crownedEmperor in Rome in S8 I—End of John VI I I .—Hisambit ious Projects—His Character ,

PAGE

CONTENTS .

Marinus I . Pope—He restores Formosus—Overthrows Guido PAGEof Spoleto—Adrian I I I . Pope , 884—The Decrees falselyattributed to him—Stephen V. Pope

—Custom of Sackingthe Patriarchium on the Death of a Pope—Luxury of theB ishops—Famine in Rome—Deposition and Death Of

Charles the Fat—End Of the Caroling ian EmpireStrugg le between Berengar and Gu ido for the CrownGuido restores the Frankish Empire, 89 1—Death Of

Stephen V. ,

CHAPTER VI I .

I . Formosus Pope, Sg t—The Factions Of Arnulf and GuidoThe Rival Candidate Serg ius—Formosus summons Arnulfto march on Rome—Arnulf in I taly—Death of Gu idoLambert Emperor

—Arnulf advances against Rome

Takes the City by Storm—I s crowned Emperor , Apr il896—The Romans take the Oath of Fide lity—His disastrous Return—Death of Formosus in May 896,

2 . Disorder in Rome—Boniface VI . Pope—Stephen VI . Pope

—The Corpse Synod—Judgment pronounced upon For

mosus—Fall of the Lateran Basilica—Causes of the

shocking Sacrilege—The Libellus of Auxilius —The Invective against Rome—Terrible End of Stephen VI . ,

Romanus Pope—Theodorus I I . Pope—Serg ius’

s Attempt to

seize the Papacy on the D eath of Theodorus he is

Ban ished—John IX . Pope , 898—His Decree regarding

the Papal Consecrat ion—His Efi'

orts to s trengthen the

Empire of Lambert—D eath of Lambert—Berengar , Kingof I taly—The Hungarians in I taly—Lewis of Provence

Pretender—D eath of John IX . in July 900 ,

CONTENTS.

BOOK V I .

HISTORY OF THE CI TY IN THE TENTH CENTURY .

CHAPTER I .

I . Bened ict IV. crowns Lewis of Provence Emperor , 90 1

Leading Romans of the Time—Leo V . and Chr istophorus—Serg ius I I I . becomes Pope

—His Bu lls—Rebuilds theLateran Basilica—Anastas ius I I I . and Lando ,

2 . John X .—H is Past- Owes the Tiara to the Roman Theo

dora—Theophylact , Husband Of Theodora, Consu l andSenator of the Romans—The Ups tart A lberic—Hisrelat ions with Marozia—Theodora and Maroz ia ,

Fr ightfu l D evastat ion inflicted by the Saracens—Des truct ionOfFarfa—Subiaco -Saracen Strongholds in the Campagna—John X . Offers Berengar the Imper ia l Crown—Berengar

’

s Entry into Rome—His Coronation early in December9 15 ,

Campaign against the Saracens—Battles in the Sab ina and

Campagna—Treaty be tween John X. and the Pr inces of

Southern I taly—Ann ihilat ion of the Saracen Forces on

the Garig liano in August 9 16—The Pope and A lbericreturn to Rome—Posit ion of A lberic—Overthrow of

Berengar—I ts consequences in Rome

—Uncertainty con

cern ing Alberic’

s end,

Rudolf of Burgundy is expe lled from the Country—FeminineIntrigues with regard to Hugo

—John X . forms a Trea tywith Hugo

—Marozia marr ies Guido Of Tuscany—Per

plexit ies Of John X.—Banishment of his Bro ther Peter

Revolut ion in Rome—M urder Of Peter—Fall and Deathof John X

CHAPTER I I .

I . Leo V I . and Stephen VI I . —The Son ofMarozia succeeds to

the Papacy as John XI .—King Hugo

—Marm ia offers

him Rome and her Hand—Their Marriage—S. Ange lo—Revo lu tion in Rome—The young Alberic seizes the

Reins of Power,

CONTENTS .

BOOK V I .

HISTORY OF THE CITY I N THE TENTH CENTURY.

CHAPTER I .

I . Bened ict IV. crowns Lewis Of Provence Emperor , 90 1 PAGELeading Romans of the Time—Leo V . and Christophorus—Serg ius I I I . becomes Pope

—His Bulls—Rebuilds theLateran Bas ilica—Anastas ius I I I . and Lando,

2 . John X .-His Past—Owes the Tiara to the Roman Theo

dora—Theophylact , Husband Of Theodora, Consul andSenator of the Romans—The Upstart Alberic—Hisrelat ions with Marozia—Theodora and Marozia ,

Frightful D evastat ion infl icted by the Saracens—Destruct ionofFarfa—Subiaco -Saracen Strongholds in the Campagna-John X . Offers Berengar the Imper ial Crown—Berengar

’

s Entry into Rome—His Coronation early inDecember9 15:

Campaign against the Saracens—Battles in the Sab ina and

Campagna—“

Treaty between John X. and the Princes Of

Southern I taly—Ann ihilat ion of the Saracen Forces on

the Gar ig liano in August 9 16—The Pope and Albericreturn to Rome—Pos it ion of Alberic—Overthrow of

Berengar—I ts consequences in Rome

—Uncertainty con

cerning Alber ic’

s end,

Rudolf of Burgundy is expelled from the Country—FeminineIntrigues with regard to Hugo

—John X . forms a Treatywith Hugo

—Marozia marr ies Guido of Tuscany—Perplexities of John X.

—Banishment of his Brother PeterRevolut ion in Rome—Murder of Peter—Fall and Deathof John X

CHAPTER I I .

I . Leo VI . and Stephen VI I .—The Son ofMarozia succeeds to

the Papacy as John XI .—King Hugo

—Marozia Ofifers

him Rome and her Hand—Their Marr iage—S. Angelo—Revolut ion in Rome—The young Alberic seizes the

Reins of Power,

CONTENTS.

2 . Character of the Revolution—A lberic P r z'

ncep s and Senator

omm’

um Romanorum—Significance of the Title- TheSenate—The Senatrices—Foundations of Alberic’

s Power—The Ar istocracy—Pos it ion of the Burgher Class—TheCity M ilitia—The Judicial Sys tem under A lberic,

Alber ic’s Moderat ion—Hugo repeatedly bes ieges Rome

His Daughter Alda marries Alber ic—A lberic’s Relat ionswith Byzantium—Leo VI I .

, 936—Retrospect of Bene

diet ine Monast icism—I ts D ecay—The Reform Of Cluny—Alber ic ’

s Energy regarding i t—Odo Of Cluny in Rome—Cont inuat ion of the H is tory of Farfa—The SabineProvince

Stephen VI I I . Pope , 939—Alber ic suppresses a Revolt

Marinus I I . Pope , 942—Hugo again lays Siege to Rome

-He is Overthrown by Berengar of Ivrea—Lothar , Kingof I taly—Peace betweenHugO and Alberic—Agapitus I I .Pope , 946

—Berengar , King of I taly, 950

—The I tal ianssummon O tto the Great—Alberic refuses to admit him to

Rome—Berengar becomes his Vassal—Death of Alberic,954.

CHAPTER I I I .

I . Octavianus succeeds Alberic in the Government—He becomes

Pope as John XI I . 955—His Excesses—He forsakes hisFather ’s Po licy He un ites with the Lombards in

summoning O tto I . to Rome—O tto ’s Treaty with the

Pope—H is Oath —The Imperial Coronat ion , February

zud, 962

—Character of the new Roman Imperium Of the

German Nat ion ,

2. Charter of O tto—John and the Romans do Homage to

the Emperor—John consp ires aga inst him— Rece ives

Adalbert in Rome—Otto enters the City and the Pope

escapes—The Emperor depr ives the Romans of the right

of Papal E lect ion—The November Synod—Depos it ionof John XI I .—Leo VI I I .

—Unsuccessful Revolt Of the

Romans—Otto leaves Rome,

PAGE

CONTENTS.

Return of John XI I . —Flight of Leo VI I I .—He is deposedby a Council—John’

s revenge upon his Enemies—HisDeath

,May 964

—The Romans e lect Benedict V.—O tto

conducts LeoVI I I . back to Rome—Deposit ion and Exileof Benedict—The Papacy rendered subject to the GermanEmperors

—Privileg ium Of Leo VI I I

O tto returns to Germany—Death Of Leo in the Spring Of

965—John XI I I . Pope—His Family -His Ban ishment

O tto marches against Rome—The Pope is aga in se izedBarbarous Punishment Of the Rebels—The CaballusConstant ini—Lament for the fall of Rome into the powerof the Saxons ,

CHAPTER IV.

I . Coronat ion of O tto I I . —Embassy Of Liutprand to Byzantium-Praeneste or Palestr ina— The Senatrix Stephania re

ceives the Invest iture of the C ity in the year 970 ,

2 . Marriage of Theophano with O tto I I . in Rome—BenedictVI . Pope , 9 73

—Death of O tto the Great—Ag itat ion inRome—Family of the Crescentii—The Caball i Marmore i—Roman Surnames at this per iod—Crescentius de Theodora—Fall Of BenedictVI . —Ferrucius raised to the PapalChair as Boniface VIL His sudden Flight—Obscure

end of Crescentius ,

Benedict VI I . Pope, 974—He promotes the Cluniac Reform—He restores Churches and Convents—Monastery of

S . Bon iface and Alexius on the Avent ine—Legend Of

S . Alexius—O tto I I . ’S I talian Expedit ion—His presencein Rome at Easter, 98 1—His unfortunate Campaign inCalabria—John XIV. becomes Pope

—Death of O tto I I

in Rome, 7th December 983—His Tomb in S . Peter

’

s

Ferrucius returns to Rome—Terr ible end of John XIV.

Boniface’s Re ign of Terror—His Overthrow—John XV.

Pope , 985—Crescentius seizes the Patrician PowerTheOphano comes to Rome as Regent of the EmpireShe Tranquil lises the City—S . Adalbert in Rome,

PAGE

CONTENTS x“

CHAPTER V.

I . Deeper Decadence of the Papacy—Invect ive of the Gallic PAGE

B ishops against Rome—Host ile Attitude Of the ProvincialSynods—Crescentius usurps the Temporal Power—FlightOf John XV.

—His return to Rome—H is Death, 996

Gregory V. the first German Pope—Subject ion Of the

Papacy to the German Emp ire—O tto I I I . Emperor ,May 2 1 , 996,

2 . Condemnat ion of the Roman Rebels—Crescentius is Pardoned—Adalbert oblig ed to leave Rome—His MartyrdomO tto I I I . leaves Rome—Rebellion of the Romans

Strugg le of the C ity against Papacy and EmpireCrescent ius drives Gregory V. out of the City—Revolut ion in Rome—Crescentius raises John XVI . to the PapalChair

,

Rule Of Crescentius— O tto advances against the CityHorrible fate of the ant i -Pope—C rescentius defendshimself in S . Angelo—Varying accounts of his DeathMons Malus or Monte Mario—Epitaph of Crescentius,

CHAPTER VI .

I . Consequences of the Fall of Crescentius—His Relatives inthe Sabina—Hugo, Abbot of Farfa—Condit ion Of thisImperial Monastery—Remarkable Lawsuit between the

Abbot and the Presbyters of S . Eustachius in Rome ,

Legal Administrat ion in Rome—The Judices Palatini or

Ordinar ii—The Judices Dat ivi— Formula for the Institut ion of the Roman Judges—Formula for the bestowal ofRoman Cit izenship Criminal Judges Consuls and

Comites with Judicial Authority in the Country Towns ,

3 . The Imperial Palat inate in Rome—Imper ial Guard—CountPalat ine—Imperial Fiscus—Papal Palatinate and CameraTaxes D iminut ion Of the Lateran Revenues

Squander ing of the Property of the Church—Exempt ionsof the B ishops—Recognit ion of Feudal Contracts by theRoman Church about the year 1000,

CONTENTS .

4. O tto I I I . goes to Campania—Death of G regory V . in PAGEFebruary 999—Gerber t—S . Romuald in Ravenna

Gerbert as Sylvester I I .—O t to ’s Vis ions Of a Restoration

of the Roman Empire—He adopts the Forms Of the

Byzan t ine Court— Book Of Court Ceremonial—The

Patricius ,

5 . Beginning of Sylvester ’s Pontificate—Donation of O tto I I I .

—Earl iest presage of the Crusades—Hungary becomes a

Province Of the Roman Church—O tto I I I . on the Avent ine—His M yst icism—He returns to Germany—RevisitsI taly in the year I OOO—Difficult posit ion Of Sylvester I I .—The Basilica Of S . Adalbert on the I sland in the T iber, 474.

6 . Tibur or T ivol i— Insurrection of this City—Besieged and

spared by O tto I I I . and the Pope—Revolt in Rome

O tto’

s desperate Pos ition—His Speech to the RomansHis Flight from the City—His last Year—His D eath on

January 23rd , 1002,

CHAPTER VI I .

1 . Barbarism Of the Tenth Century—Superst ition—JgnoranceOf the Roman Clergy— Invect ive of the Gallic B ishopsRemarkable Reply—D ecay Of Convents and Schools inRome—Grammar—Traces of Theatrical PerformancesThe Popular D ialect—U tter Dearth Of L iterary Talentin Rome ,

2 . Slow return of Learning—Gregory V.—The Genius of

Sylvester I I . , a Stranger in Rome—Boethius—I talianHistor ical Writing in the Tenth Century—Benedict of

Soracte—The Libellus on the Imper ial Power in the C ityof Rome—The Catalogues of the Popes

—The Life of

S. Adalbert ,

3 . The Descr ipt ions of the City—The Anonymous Of E insiedeln—Act ivity of Legend and Tradit ion in Rome—TheSounding Statues on the Capitol—The Legend of the

building of the Pantheon—The Gr aphic: of the GoldenCity of Rome—The Memoria Julii Caesaris,

https://www.forgottenbooks.com/join

BOOK FIFTH .

THE C ITY OF ROME IN THE CAROLING IAN

EPOCH UP TO THE YEAR 900 .

HISTORY OF THE CITY OF ROME

IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

C H A P T E R I .

I . ALTERED ATTITUDE OF ROME To THE WORLD—RELATIONS OF EMPEROR AND POPE TO ROME—LEO AGAIN

JOURNEYS TO CHARLES—ARDULF OF NORTHUMBERLAND IN ROME .

CHARLES de rived the title Of his Empire from Rome ,

but the mate ria l which fi l led the ancient form had

become e ssential ly Teutonic and in cal l ing the New

Empire the Ge rmanic-Roman we bu t give expressionto the a l l iance Of those Opposing e lements on whichthe deve lopment Of Europe re sted . One nationa l itycontinued the history of mankind as an unbrokeninhe ritance i t handed the posse ssions Of the ancientcivi l izat ion

,toge the r with the ideas Of Christianity,

on to posterity — the othe r rece ived and re suscitatedor deve loped both c ivi l ization and re l igion . Romehad drawn the Ge rman world to he rself. The RomanChurch had subdued barbarism ,

had brought nationsunde r a social system

,and lastly, had united them to

a common eccle siastical-pol itical principle , which hadVOL . I I I . A

H ISTORY OF ROME

i ts sea t i n the E te rna l C i ty . On Byzantium nowseemed to be la id the task of a ccompli shing the

l ike wo rk for the Slav na t ions ; the task,howeve r,

remained unfulfi l led , be cause the Byzan tine Empirelacked the crea t ive soc ia l p rinciple posse ssed by theRomanChurch,

and al so be cause the Slav races ,unfitt edfor the higher ideas of the S ta te and Of c ivil iza t ion

,

rema ined incapable of re ce iving the inher i tance Of

He l lenic cul tu re . The thought of a Slavic-GreekEmpire sti l l linge rs in Russ ia , not, however, as the

nat ional obj ect Of an impe rfec t deve lopmen t , bu t ratheras the consciousne ss Of a neglected hi s tor i c oppor

tunity whi ch it i s now no longe r possible to rev ive.

Whi le Byzan t ium was thus banished from the

history of the Wes t , Rome for the se cond t ime ente redon a splendid posi t ion among the nat ions of theworld . Afte r the Rome Of the Caesars had des t royedthe pol it i ca l au tonomy of nat ions , new S ta tes hadarisen through the var ious migra tions of the pe oples

,

and the Church had proclaimed the mora l equa l ity ofraces , or the ir Chri s t ian ci tizenshi p . The idea l of aS ingle and indivis ible humani ty

,of the Chris t ian

republic , now appea red as the thought of a new age .

The ancient capital Of the restored Empire , the

Apostoli c cent re of the Chur ch,ca lled he rse l f the

mother Of Christ ian nations, and represented her se lft o th e moral Orbi t Ter ra r zm z as the Cz

'

m'

ta: Def.

The first impe rfect ou t l ine Of a soc ie ty of na tionsuni ted by means of a mora l idea had been advance d

,

but this Holy Empire ”had ye t to take form and

the entire Middle Ages we re , as even the presen tt ime is , nothi ng more than a continued struggle to

IN THE M IDDLE AGES. 3

give a l iving form to the subl ime Christian idea l Ofthe love and l iberty which encompass the world .

The city l ikewise rece ived a new S ign ificancewithin the narrower C ircle of her history . Her

escape from the repeated attacks Of the barbarians,

and her fina l re scue from the hands Of Lombards andGreeks

,was a fact of historic importance . Afte r Pip in

and Charle s had put an end to the fina l struggle ofthe Germans for Rome

,they drew a l ine round the

emancipated city and made the Pope lord Of all the

te rritory within . The Frank ish King,the new

Empe ror,vowed as ove rlord to defend this eccles i

as t ical State dedicated to S . Pe te r aga inst all foes,

within and without,for no pr ince or people could

exclusive ly posse ss Rome— the common property Of

mankind . In a highe r sense than ancient Rome,the

Me tropol is Of Christendom represented a unive rsa lprinc iple . She must

,the re fore , be free and accessible

to all nations a l ike ; the High Prie st within he r shouldbe subject to no king, but the supreme head Of the

Empire and Of the Church— that is to say ,to the

Empe ror. I t was this idea Of Rome ’s neutra l ity as

the ecclesiastical centre of nat ions , up to which the

wave s Of human ity, cease lessly st irred by pol it ica land social storms

,Should neve r advance

,that succeeded

in preserving the l it tle State Of the Church for thePope until our own day , while Charle s

’s greatmonarchy and a hundred kingdoms around fe ll todust. Who can deny that the idea Of a sacredmetropol is

,a temple of e terna l peace in the midst of

st ruggl ing human ity,a universa l asylum of culture

,

of law,and of reconcil iat ion is great and admirable ?

HISTORY OF ROME

Had the institution of the Papacy but rema ineddevoid of ambition and worldly des ire , had i t escapeddogmatic stagnation , and advanced with the deve lopment of a widening l i fe

,with the socia l force s of the

world and the discove ries of toil and culture ,i t would

have constituted a lmost the highe st cosmic form , i nwhich mankind Should have seen the expre ssion of itsunity and harmony. Howeve r, afte r the expiration ofits first and most glorious period , the Papacy became

the essentia l ly re tarding princ iple in the drama ofhistory. The greate st idea latent in the Church neve ratta ined fulfi lment but that it had once existed in thePapacy se rves to make the Papacy the most vene rableof all institutions which history has behe ld

,and that the

city ofRome was the classic receptacle of this idea suffices to secure for her the everlasting love of mankind .

Rome for'

the second time became the legitimatesource of the Empire . The great traditions of theRoman Empire as of the polit ica l orde r of the world ,were the re pre served ; Charle s ca l led himse l f therefore Emperor of the Romans S ince there was no othe rEmpire than that

,the origin and conception of which

we re a l l ied with Rome . On this account the Byzantine rule rs a lso continue to cal l themse lve s RomanEmperors . Rome

,it is true

,was pol itical ly a l i fe less

ruin,but the possession of the city by Charle s was

equa l to the possession of a lega l d iploma,genuine

and ha l lowed by antiqu ity. Neve rthe less,the cla im of

Rome to be stil l the root of the Empire would havebeen nothing more than an antiquarian recol lectionhad the Church no t re stored the conception of unive rsality . By means Of this idea Rome governed the

H ISTORY OF ROME

and this renunciation was one of the most momentous actions in the record of history. The independ

ent deve lopment O f the Western nations,and fina l ly

that of the Church,were the reby rende red poss ible .

The forged donation of Constantine had truly antic ipated the consequence s in store for the Papacy, ifthe head of the Empire aga in made his res idence inRome . The most imminent dange r threatened theRoman bishopric at the moment of the restoration ofthe Impe rium

,but happily for the bishopric the pe ri l

was averted . The opposition which existed be twe enGerman and Roman e lements d ivided for eve r Imperia land papal powe r ; and the antagonism be tween thetwo forces

,which mutua l ly curbed and l im ited one

anothe r,prese rved the freedom of Europe . For, as

the new Emperor was the product Of the conqueringenergy of the Ge rman race , and the Pope a creationof Rome and the Latin race , it fol lowed that thesetwo nationa l e lements Should further mould these twounive rsa l force s in themse lves ; that the North shoulddeve lop the pol itical , the South the Spiritual ins t itutions

,Germany the Empire

,Rome the Church . The

We st,according to Charles’s design

,was to have two

centre s,round which the great system of the Christian

republic Should revolve— the papal C i ty and the

Imperia l c ity, Rome and Aachen ; while he, the

Emperor, was to rema in sole head of the UniversalEmpire and the Church .

1

1 Rome was called head and fortress of the Empire ; thus the Diaconus Florus in his gnorela do dz

’

oz’

rz’

ono lmper z’

z'

post mor tem Ludow'

oz‘

P z’

z’

(Dom. B ouquet , vii . 302) excla ims :

Ofor tnnaz‘nzn

,nossot sucz sz

’

bond,regnznn ,

a ns Roma arx est .

I N THE M IDDLE AGES. 7

Inward opposition , however, and the force ofGerman individual ity

,which Opposed the sentiment of

l iberty and the obstinacy of individual independenceto the Roman principle s of authority and system ,

Soonshattered Charles’s fabric

,and the Papacy rapidly fe l l

from the pinnacle to which the pious monarch hadraised it. The Germans struggled against Roman andLatin influences . In the city itse lf a violent confl ictarose be tween civic aspirations and ecclesiasticalimmunitie s ; and the history of the two memorablecenturies conta ined in this volume revea ls the mostglaring opposition in the l ife of Rome unti l the tenthcentury close s with that period when the Saxons ra isethe Papacy from the ruin into which it had fal len, andrestore Charles ’s Shatte red system in a copy fromwhich , however, the theocratic ideas have gradual lydisappeared be fore the Impe ria l ism of anc ient Rome .

Charles spent the winte r following his coronat ion in CharlesRome , dwe ll ing not in the ancient Pa latium

,which he Spends thewinter

left to its decay,but in one of the episcopa l bu ildings (800-80 1 )

(which he converted into a pa lace) beside S . Pe ter’

s .

In Rome .

All the Carolingians who came to Rome made the i rabode in this quarter

,and here the Imperial Legate

al so dwe lt . The distance of Germany,and the

resolve not to make his residence in Rome,prevented

Charles from building any new Impe ria l fortress .Had he built a pa lace of the kind , chroniclers wouldnot have fa i led to mention and describe it

,as they

have described the palaces of Aachen and Inge lhe im .

1

1 The palace beside S. Peter’s is ment ioned in Regest . m n . 537

ad bas i l. b. Potr z'

Ap . z'

n palatz'

o a’. Karolz

'

. A d iploma Ludov. I I . A .

872 (Ckron . Faff . ) says Ad a z'

n Roma,P alatz

’

a lmperator z’

s ,

HISTORY OF ROME

The Emperor se t the affai rs o f Italy and the cityin orde r. He tranquil l ised the c ity and made i tsubject to Impe rial rule . He compe l led the Romansto acknow ledge the Pope as the i r te rritoria l ru ler,while

,at the same time

,as Impe ria l vassal s (nomines

imper iales ) they took the oath of fide l ity and obedienceto Charle s . Neve rthe le ss , the Impe ria l powe r existedonly as a principle in Rome . In an age whicha lthough rude was far removed from the system ofabsolute monarchy

,and e specia l ly unde r the curious

twofold system of the polit icial-ecclesiastica l o rgan isation, the re stored Impe ria l powe r was not fe lt e ithe rin taxation or in forced mil itary se rvice

,but

,with the

exception of a few roya l pre rogatives,found its sole

expression in the administration of law as the highe stconception Of civi l l ife . The Pope appointed hisj udice s

,but the Emperor was the supreme legal

authority. This authority was repre sented by hi sH is Legate Missus or Legate , who, as Often as he was Sent tom Rome ’

Rome,l ived a t the expense of the papa l chamber

bes ide S . Pe te r’s . He re

,or in the Hal l of the Late ran

,

known as“the Ha l l of the She-wolf,

”he he ld his

sessions (placi ta ) .1 He de fended the Pope aga inst

which corresponds to Ad am apua’ S . Petrznn . The L ibel]. a

’e Imp .

P ores . expressly says of the Imperial M issus : morabaz‘

nr gn iope in

pa lat io S . Petr i .1 L ibellus a

’o Impera tor ia Poz

‘esz

‘ate in Urbe Roma l nventam est ,

a t omnes maj ores Roma essen t i nzper ia les bomines , of m‘

suns missus

omn i tempor e mor ar etn r Rome . The L ibellas,compiled by an Imperial

ist abou t the year 950, d ispu tes the claims of the Pope to terr itorialsupremacy

,and is the writing of a part isan . That Charles ’s Legate

constan tly res ided in Rome is asserted only by this document . Ferd.

Hirsch considers the assertion very questionable, since there were only

IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

the attacks of the nobility,but at the same time

watched ove r Imperial rights within the city. He

pre sided at tribunals,appropriated the fines to the

Fiscus, supe rintended the papa l j udge s in the cityand duchy, rece ived appea ls from the sentences Of

these j ii dg es and reported them to the Empe ror. In

important case s the Emperor sent an ext raordinaryMissus to Rome

,and pe rsons guilty of high t reason ,

Roman nobles and bishops,we re tried be fore one

of these envoys,usual ly the Duke of Spole to . The

offenders we re occasiona l ly sent in to exile beyond theAlps

,as formerly unde r Byzantine rule they had been

sent to some part of Greece . The Legate of theEmperor was

,moreover

,his plen ipotentiary at the

ordination of a Pope,a ceremony which the Legate

was obliged to attend . For, a lthough the papa le lection was free , the decree of e lection was apparentlyhence forward sent to the Emperor, and his sanctionthus obta ined .

Coins testify to the Emperor’s supremacy ove r Romeand the ecclesiastica l State . The type of the Romancoinage in i ts ma in features was evidently fixed between Charle s and Leo the Third afte r the Impe rialcoronation . The Emperor now e ithe r re cognised thePope ’s right of coinage

,or

,toge the r with the immunity

with which he invested the Roman bishop , concededhim this right. Leo the Third

,the re fore

,as evidence

of his te rritoria l supremacy, caused his own name tobe engraved on one side of the Roman denarius ; on

it inerant regal envoys in the provinces . (D ie Sobenbnng Ka iser Car l’s

a’es Kablenfn r Paps t j o/zann VI I I . and a

’

er L ib. a’e imp . pot. Par sek. z .

dentsc/z Gesc/i . xx .

IO HISTORY OF ROME

the othe r,howeve r

,the name of his overlord

,the

Empe ror.1 We thus find repeated almost the samere lations as those which had existed between the

Byzantine Impe ria l authority and the Gothic kings ofIta ly

,who had the obve rse of the ir coins engraved

with the head Of the Emperor,the reve rse with the ir

own . And as long as the Carol ingian Empire re

tained its power,the e ssentia l Imperial rights in Rome ,

the highest lega l authority and the recognit ion of thepapal e lection we re thus continua l ly asserted .

I f the politica l authority of the new Emperor i sclear to us

, the re lation of the POpe as territoria lru le r to the city rema ins somewhat obscure . We

know nothing of the civi c constitution Of the t ime ,and nothing Of the l ibertie s of the noble s ( apparentlyadj usted by a stipulation) and the i r rights to a Share i nthe tempora l government nothing of the regulat ionof justice

,which lay primari ly in the hands of the

nobil ity,s ince the pre lates had not ye t monopol ised

the management of all secular concerns . The restore

ation of the Empire must nece ssari ly have beenfollowed by a municipal reorganisation of the city,which included a fresh division Of the mil itary d ist rict s and the regions . The S i lence of historians andof the archive s

,howeve r

,leave s us in ignorance on

these questions .Charle s prudently did not a l low himse l f to be

dazzled by visions of conquest in the South . Had he

but cherished that adventurous longing for the East

1 S . PETRUS round the edge , in the field LEO PA—CARLUSround the edge , in the fie ld I PA . For the type of Roman coins seemy treat ise “ D ie Munzen Alberichs

,Si tzg . a

'er b. Ab. a

’. Wiss. 1885 .

IN THE M IDDLE AGES.

which late r time s have attributed to him , his armsmight easily have extended the l imits Of the We sternEmpire to the Ionian Sea ; nor would the Byzantine

flee t have sufficed to defend Greece . His mission ,however, drew him instead to the North and West,whe re he had to seek the centre of gravity of his Stat e .

He therefore surrende red the kingdom of I taly to hisson Pip in ,

made over to him the war with Benevento, p ipin ,and le ft Rome afte r Easte r (April 2 5th, 80 1) to re turn

(

Sin.

to Germany. He was start led at Spole to , on the lastday of April , by an earthquake

,the Shock of which

was fe l t as far as the Rhine land . I taly had to mournthe ruin of some cities

,and in Rome seve ra l ancient

buildings must have pe rished . Contemporary writers ,however

,scarce ly be stow a glance on the monument s

of antiquity ; while a lmost all, German s as we l l as

I ta l ians,speak of the destruction of the roof of the

basil ica of S . Paul as of an important event .1

The Emperor went to Ravenna,thence to Pavia, the Charles in

capital of the I tal ian kingdom,and the re added some i i

’

fenna ’

Chartularies to the code of Lombard laws . He he re instyled himse l f “ Charle s

,by the will of God , Rule r of

the Empire of the Romans,most Serene Augustus ,

”

and added the consular title to his edicts .2 The

1 Lib. P ont . in Leone I I I . c. 3 1 . Anna]. E in/z. 80 1 . Anna].

Fu la’. Poeta Saxo

,&c . Gallett i erroneously ascribed to Leo I I I .

the inscript ion in the Clo ister of S . Paul’s where Leo I . speaksof the falling-in and restorat ion of the basilica ( l u ser . i . Charleswas in Bologna on May 29th , 80 1 Sickel , Reg esten a

’er Urbuna

’en

a’

er er sten Caroling” ,Vienna

,1867 , on this date .

2 Anno— oonsu lalu s au tem nostr i p r imo. The Caroling ians alsonoted the Post-consulate Imp . D un . Aug . H lua’owico a D eo ooronaz

‘

o

magnopaeifioo Imp . a . sexto e] P C. ej us a . sex to.

Nicephoru s ,Emperor of

H ISTORY OF ROME

Byzantine Court was loud in indignation aga inst bothFranks and Romans . I t saw i ts legitimate rightsove rthrown by a bold barbarian king

,who assumed

the t itle of Empe ror of the Romans,a t itle which be

longed to the he i rs of Constantine a lone . But theFrankish powe r was formidable

,the weakness of the

Byzantine great,and the tottering throne was sti l l

occupied by a woman . Irene , surrounded by rebe l s ,sought Charle s ’s friendship . She found herse l f a lmostreduced to the same ex t remities as those which hadonce compe l led the Gothic Queen Ama lasuntha toseek re fuge with the foes of her race . The ex trava

gant project of a marriage between Charles and

the Empress,by which the Easte rn and Western

Empire s Should have been united in the Frankishdynasty

, was impracticable . Charle s,howeve r, was

anxious to haVe the re spe ctive claims and frontie rs ofFranks and Byzantine s in Ita ly de termined by treaty.

He the re fore rece ived I rene ’s ambassadors,and sent

his own to Constantinople . His envoys,however,

only arrived at the Byzantine Court to witness theove rthrow of the Empre ss . Nicephorus , previouslyTreasurer of the Pa lace , se i zed the purple in a blood

Byzantium. le ss revolution ( 3 l s t O ctobe r and banished I rene802 .

to the I sland of Lesbos . The usurper was no le ssanxious to concil iate the friendship of the hatedFranks . He lent a wil l ing ear to the ambassadors

,

and on the ir re turn sent ministers of his own backwith them to Charle s . Afte r the exe cution of atreaty the ambassadors re turned to Constantinopleby way of Rome . The Pope a l so desired to s ee

re lations adjusted between the riva l courts, in orde r to

HISTORY OF ROME

ject of lasting d issensions , while the exorbitant demands of S . Pe te r awoke the indignation of theyou thful Pipin. The se demands interfe red with thereal isat ion of Pip in

’

s own des ign,that of founding

a powe rful I ta l ian kingdom ; and even if not sufficient ly far

-S ighted to de tect the seeds of the lastingdisunion of this country which lay concealed withinhis ance stor ’s donation

,Pip in probably a l ready

deplored that ance stor ’s generos i ty .

In 806 Pip in rece ived fresh confirmation in hisIta l ian kingdom . Charles

,advancing in years

,recog

n ised the impossibil i ty of pre serving the unity of hisvast kingdom unde r one sceptre . He feared a quarre lbe tween his he i rs, and unfortunately decided to dividethe monarchy between his three sons . He did honourto the Pope in sending the deed of partition to Romethat it might rece ive the Church ’s sanction .

1 In consequence of this deed

,Pipin announced his approaching

visi t. He did not come,but another k ing appeared

in his place . Ardu lf of Northumberland,driven by a

powerfu l party from his throne and kingdom in 808 ,fled to Charle s ’s court at Nimwegen to implore the

Frankish monarch to a id in his re storation . WithCharles

’

s consent he hastened to Rome to beg the

support of the Pope . Leo sent the Saxon Adolf,his

deacon and nuncio,to escort the fugitive back to

England, where two Impe ria l Legate s succeeded inplacing the prince aga in upon the throne .

2 Rome,i t

1 Anna]. E inb . ao’A . 806 : a’ivis io fmper i i in the Capitular . M on .

Germ. iii. 140 . Murator i shows from this that Modena,Reggio, Parma,

Piacenza be longed to the kingdom of I taly, and not to the Exarchate .

2 Anna]. E inlz. and Fula’

. ad A . 808 ; Leo’s Letters

, 5 , 6, 7 , in

Cenni .

I N THE MIDDLE AGES.

is true,had already behe ld kings

,more e specia l ly

from the British I sles,come to take the cowl . A rdulf

was, howeve r, the first to sue in the Lateran for the

restoration of the crown of which he had been de

prived . The instance Shows the views which werearising in the We st conce rn ing papa l authority. AndS ince

,after Pipin

’

s days,it was kings themse lves who,

for the sake of tempora l advantage,exa lted the con

cep t ion of the Roman ep iSCOpate i n the eyes of people sand princes

,we cannot be surprised that the se bishops

,

renounc ing the idea of spiritual i ntercession,soon

arrogated to themse lve s the divine power of givingand removing crowns .

z . DEATH OF P IPIN ,S I o—BERNHARD, K ING OF ITALY

LEWIS I . CROWNED AT AACHEN AS CO-EMPEROR OF

THE RoMANs— DEATH OF CHARLES THE GREAT

H IS IMPORTANCE IN UNIVERSAL H ISTORY—DEARTHOF LOCAL TRAD ITIONS CONCERNING H IM IN ROME .

The house of Charle s , the fate of which is so close lyinterwoven with the history of the city, was scarce lyless unfortunate than the house of Augustus . The

founde r of a new Imperia l dynasty saw his favouritechildren snatched away during his l ife-time . P ipin, Death

thirty-two years of age , died in Milan on July 8th , gf

ip

l

gj‘g

8 10 . His scheme for uniting I ta ly by the conquest o f July 8. 8 10 .

Vene tia and Benevento rema ined unfulfi l led , and hisdeath-bed was harassed by anx iety for the future ofhis only and i l legitimate son . Charle s nominated theyouthful Bernhard King of Italy. The formal in

H ISTORY OF ROME

ve st itu re O f the candidate did not take place,howeve r ,

unti l 8 13 ; meanwhile , i n 8 12 , the boy was sent toPavia unde r the e scort of Wala

,nephew of Charles

Marte l,andWa la

’

s brother Ade lhard,Abbot of Co rve i,

whe re i t was intended that he should rema in unde rthe guidance of the se distinguished men .

1 The Em

pe ror had aga in been sore ly stricken by the death ofhis son Charles . In his lone l iness

,and with the pros

pee t of death be fore his eye s,he resolved to appoint

Lewis of Aquita ine,the sole he i r of his monarchy

,

j oint-Emperor of the Romans w i th himse lf. With theconsent of the noble s of his Empire he inve sted Lewiswith the Imperial d ignity at Aachen

,Septembe r I 1th

,

8 13 . Frankish historians assert that Charles e itherhanded Lewis the crown , placed it on his head , orordered him to take i t with his own hands from the

a ltar and himse l f to se t i t on his head .

2 The parl iament consisted of the chief Frankish noble s and

clergy assembled from all parts of the Empire . Lewiswas a lso procla imed Empe ror by a unanimous act ofe le ction , but the manne r of this e le ction was entire lydiffe rent from that of his father. Charle s ’s e lectionhad taken place in Rome , and a l though the Senate ofthe Franks ” had borne a part

,the leading role had

fal len to the Romans and to the Pope , by whom the

coronation had been solemnised . The e levation ofCharle s to the dignity of [mpera tor R omanorum had

consequently appeared an act e ssentia l ly of the wil l

1 The year 8 12 is vouched for by the Anna]. E inb . , Lau r i ss . min . ,

Xant . 8 13 by the same source , and also Thegani , Vi ta Ladov.

2 Tunej uss i t eam pater , u t p ropr i is man ibus eleoasset coronam, gun

er at super altare, et capi ti suo impoueret . Thegani, Vi ta, c. 6 .


of the Romans,and of the consecration by the Pope ,

and in late r time s was expressly so regarded .

1 The

e lection of a Caesar at Aachen,on the other hand

,

proceeded from the consent of the parl iament of thea lready founded monarchy

,and ne ithe r the Pope

nor any bishop repre senting him anointed or crownedthe candidate . With his own hand the son s e t the

father’s crown upon his head . No Roman is men

t ioned as among the bystanders ; and if envoys ofthe Pope

,i f duces and bishops from Roman te rritory

were pre sent,they

,l ike the counts and pre late s of the

kingdom of Italy,were mingled in the gene ral d ie t

of the Empire . Charle s lo’

oked on the city of Rome ,the source of the Imperium ,

as comprised within hisEmpire l ike Pavia

,Milan

,or Aquile ia . The powe rful

Emperor accordingly opposed the pre tensions of thePope . He intended the bril l iant moment at Aachento se rve as a direct hint to his successors . Had buthis feeble descendants been able to unde rstand it, thehistory both of the Papacy and of the Empire mighteasi ly have taken a different course . We Sha l l see ,however, that the German act of e lection vanishedamid the current of dogmat ic opin ions of the t imewithout leaving any trace . The same assembly ofthe Empire l ikewise ratified the appointment ofBernhard, Pipin

’s son

,as King of I taly .

1 Letter of Lewis I I . to the Emperor Basilius gu i n is i Romanorum

Imp . essemus, u t ique nee F raneorum. A Roman is en im boo nomen et

a'zgm

'

tatem assumsimus , apua7

guos pr imo tanta cu lmen sublimi ta

tis efl'u lsi t , guooumgue gentem et Urbem a’io in i tus g ubernana

’am

,

et mai rom omn iumE cclesiarumDei defena’endam—suscep imus. Anon .

Sa lem . 0. 102.

VOL. I I I .

H ISTORY OF ROME

Charle s the Great,sage and hero

,died a few

months late r at Aachen,on January 28 th

,8 14 , at the

age of seventy-one . The re store r of the RomanEmpire was buried in the Church of S . Maria whichhe had built, and an ancient Roman sarcophagus

,

chise l led with the Rape of Prospe rp ine , apparentlyse rved as his coffin .

1 Ifwe compare one with another,

the three periods of Roman history which will eve rstand conspicuous as summits i n the l i fe of the

people— the period of Caesar and Augustus,when

the Roman world-monarchy was founded ; that ofConstantine

,when Christianity rose to dominion ; and

fina l ly,the ag e of Charle s , when the system of Ger

manic-Roman civil ization arose out of the ru in ofthe old Empire—we Sha l l find that the third doesnot yie ld in importance to e ithe r of the othe r two.

Charle s’s age was fe rti le i n new forms of l ife , and trulycreative . I t closed the period of barbarian migrationsand re conciled the Germans with Rome . I t didnot a llow antiquity— the buried treasure-chambe r ofknowledge and culture— to be lost to impoverishedhumanity ; but, laying prej udice aside

,began to re

vivify it and adopt it as an e ssentia l and imperishableforce in the proce ss of inte l le ctual deve lopment . The

great tradition of the Orbis Ter raram,or of the unity

of the world,formerly the pol itica l end and a im of

the Roman Empire of the Cae sars,which arose con

temporari ly with Christianity, was revived in the age

of Charle s the Great . This ag e transformed the

1 In such a marble sarcophagus the body of Charles was discoveredin the year 1 165 , during the reign of Frederick I . Simson, f abrb.Frank. Rez

'

o/zs unter Kar l a’em G

'roszen

,ii. 537.


ancient Imperium into the Western monarchy, whichfound its inmost bond of cohesion in the principle ofthe Christian re l igion . Charles was the Moses of theMiddle Ages

,who successfully led mankind through.

the dese rts of barbarism and be stowed on them a

new code of pol it ica l , ecclesiast ical , and civil cons t itut ions . In his theocrat ic Empire was exhibitedthe first attempt to establish the new federat ion ofnations in the form of a Christian republic .The Emperor bequeathed a portion ofh is treasure s

to the twenty-one me tropol itan churche s of the

Empire . Five of these churches were in I taly Rome,

Ravenna, Milan, Aquile ia, and Grado . Two si lvertables— one square

,and adorned with a re l ief of Con

s tant inople the other round,with a representation of

Rome— formed part of the curiositie s of the Imperia lpalace . The forme r of these table s Charle s presentedto S . Peter’s , the latte r to Ravenna . Both monuments of early mediaeva l art have perished . The tablepresented to Rome rema ins unnoticed in the l ife ofLeo the Third, although the L iber P on tifica lis make sfrequent mention of a large golden cross , anothe r ofthe Emperor’s votive gifts . The table

,howeve r

,with

the re l ief of Rome , which, following the instructionsof his father’s wil l

,the Empe ror Lewis sent to the

Archbishop Martin,reached Ravenna during the

boyhood of Agnellus , and was seen by the

historian .

1

1 Agnellus, Vi ta Mar t in i, c. 2 : mensam argenteam unam absque

lzlgno, babentem infra se anag lipbte totam Komam. Eginh . Vi ta , at the

end decreo i t , u t una ex bis , gue forma guadrangu la, descr ipt ion . u rbis

Constant in .

“

continet Roma in ad bas b. P etr i ap. defer atur , et altera

20 H ISTORY OF ROME

Rome rece ived a further beque st of valuable vesse ls ,and thus Charle s , who had endowed the Church withso many privi lege s, such vast possessions, and somuch gold and si lve r

,was more l ibera l than any rule r

Of e ither earl ier or later times . He was the truefounde r of the ecclesiastical State

,and of the power

of the Popes, of whose later i l l im itable expansion ,however

,he neve r even dreamed . For, although the

devout son of the Church,which he recognised a s the

strongest bond of his Empire and the divine principleof human civil ization

,he in no wise blindly surrendered

himse l f to her se rvice . He respected the immunity,which he himse lf had establ ished

,of the Metropol itan

of Rome,but neve r forgot that he was rule r of the

entire monarchy. His people regarded him as the

Chie f director of all e ccles iastica l affa irs ; he foundedbishoprics an

‘

d convents ; he issued canonica l regulat ions ; he instituted schools for the people , and byembodying the constitutions of the Church in hiscode

,gave these constitutions his supreme ratification .

Both episcopate and synods stood at the same timeunder his dete rmining influence .

The grate fu l Church late r inve sted him with then imbus of sa intship .

1 Her struggle s with the Hohen

gua’forma rotunda

,Romann u rbis efig ie deoorata est, episcop ioRaven

natis . oonfer atur . A third s ilver table,which represented the

world (minu ta figu rat ione), consisted of three parts , probably corresponding to the three divis ions of the earth . De Ross i (P ian te icnog rafiolze—d i Roma , p . 73) believes that these graphic ,

representat ions didnot belong to this century

,but perhaps to the t ime of the Not itz

’

a

u tr iusque imper i i .2 Paschalis I I I . , ant i-pope in the t ime of A lexander I I I at Barba

rossa’

s wish canonised Charles, and the beatification was ratified by

Insurrec

t ion inRome

agains tLeo the

Third,8 14 .

HISTORY OF ROME

3 . TUMULTS IN ROME—BERNHARD SENT To INVESTIGATETHE CAUSES DEATH OF LEO I I I . , 8 16 — H IS

BU I LD INGS IN ROME CHARACTER OF CONTEMPORARY ARCH ITECTURE AND ART—THE TITULARCHURCHES AND THE PR INCIPAL CONVENTS .

With the news of Charles ’s death the Pope s aw an

abyss Open at his very fee t . Scarce ly were the

Romans aware that the great ru ler was dead,when

they gave vent to the ir hatred aga inst the civi l powerof the Bishop . Did we attempt to enumerate the

Succe ss ive revolutions which the ecclesiastica l Stateendured from the time of its foundation in its morethan thousand years’ course , we Should stand bewildered by t he number. Ha l f of these insurrectionswould have more than sufficed utterly to overwhe lmthe greatest earthly kingdom . Neverthe le ss

,a l though

rebe l l ion aga inst the power of the bishop dated fromthe hour that witnessed its birth—a proof not onlythat an irreconcilable contradiction was involved inthe union of priesthood with royalty

,but also that

the ve ry existence of the ecclesiastica l State ma intained within itse lf a principle fully able to cope withrevolutions— the State of the Church has survivedunti l our own days .The followe rs of Campulus and Paschalis (both

men had been forgotten in the i r fourteen years’ exile)had conspired aga inst the Pope . The i r a ims were

,

howeve r,discove red

,and Leo had these offende rs

promptly executed as guilty of high treason . The

holy bishop was thus henceforward obl iged to steep


his hands in the blood of his own Romans . The

news of the executions ex cited the indignation ofeven Charles ’s pious successor. The Emperor Lewisblamed the Pope for having acted with such hasteand severity. And S ince it was the Emperor’s dutyto defend the Romans when the re was any questionof the ir privileges be ing violated

,he conside red that

his Imperia l rights had been infringed by the Papa lsentence be ing pronounced upon Roman nobles without any inte rvention on the part of his Legate s .1

He the refore sent the King of I ta ly to Rome toinstitute inquiries . Bernhard fe l l i l l on his arrival .Count Ge rold

,howeve r

,informed the Empe ror of the

result of his Obse rvations . The Pope now hastenedto justify himse l f to the suze ra in of Rome . HisLegates strove to exone rate him from the chargeswhichBernhard possibly

,and the Romans undoubtedly,

had brought before the Imperial throne . The ind ig

nation in the city was great, and in the same year

( 8 1 5) the enemie s of Leo rose ; while the Pope , Ano theragitated by these occurrences, lay seriously i ll . The

insurgents burnt the papa l farmsteads,not only such

as had been founded by Leo,but those a lso of earl ier

date .

2 The scene s of disturbance were generally

1 Anna]. Fuld . A . 8 15 Romoe gu idam pr imores in neoem Leon is P .

consp i rantes in terficiuntur . Astron . , Vi ta Ludov . c. 25 per latum est

Imperator i , guod Romanor . a ligu i poten tes con tr a Leonem apostol.

pranas in ier int conj u rat iones , quos suppli t io addixer i t capi tali ,lege Romanor . in id conspirante. Anna l. E inb . A . 8 15 .

2 Astronom c. 26 knows of Domuscultae of Leo I I I . : preedia omn ia,

gun i llio domooultas appellant , et noo i ab eod. apostolica inst itu ta orant .

Accord ing to Anna]. B inli . these farms were situated in singu lar .

cio i tatum ter r i tor i is.

HISTORY OF ROME

outs ide the city the Roman nobles armed the colon ior S lave s on the i r e states

,stirred up the towns in the

ne ighbourhood,and threatened to march on Rome ,

in orde r to compe l the Pope to surrende r the propertywhich he had confiscated from them or the ir friendsbeheaded by his orders

,and appropriated to the

benefit of the Apostoli c excheque r. The growingpowe r of the Roman nobil ity (a powe r destined in latert ime s to become so formidable ) first become s apparentin this revolt . Bernhard sent Duke Winig is of Spoletoto Rome with troops to que l l the rebe l l ion . The Popemeanwhile died in great d istress on June 1 1th

,8 16 .

Leo had occupied S . Pete r’s Cha ir for more thantwenty years— a period ferti le in great events

,and

during which,as priest of Humanity

,he had inaugu

rated a new epoch in its history . Hated by the

Romans because he had se ized on the temporal powerwithin the city, maltreated a lmost to death

,reduced

to fl ight,re stored to powe r, kept in pe rpe tua l te rror

by repeated disturbance s,he was not defeated by his

adversarie s . His was a powerfu l nature,capable of

shrewd reasoning and bold views . The brief momentin which he crowned the new Emperor of the We st inS . Pe te r

’s made him the instrument of the history ofthe world

,and a ssured him an undying renown .

1

In the numbe r and extent of his buildings inthe Ci ty Leo the Third almost outrivalled Adrian .

1 The Church canonised him it added his ashes to those of Leo I .

I I . and IV. which remain in an ancient Christ ian sarcophagus under

the altar of Leo I . ,in the Chape l of the Madonna della Colonna.

Above is Algardi’

s relief, and the names of the Popes are inscribed onthe pavement.


Ecclesiastica l Rome was restored in the Carol ingiantime-f i ts second monumenta l period , i f the age ofConstantine be accepted as i ts first. And S ince the

Popes of these times built so large ly,they must

necessari ly be regarded as the chie f destroyers of theancient city. Architecture was i n a state of constantactivity. Abiding by the traditions of the Church,whose greatest bui ldings had been erected in the

fourth,

fifth and sixth centurie s,i t could no longe r

attain to the greatest of its mode l s, but insteadshowed itse l f capable of nothing more than reproducing on a smal ler scale the buildings of earl ierdays . Columns and ornaments of ancient buildingswere appropriated the New was entire ly constructedfrom out the O ld . Hence the era of the Carol ingiansleft behind it many splendidly restored churches

,but

no independent monument of any importance inRome . With the ancient basi l icas as mode l s

,archi

tecture atta ined a ce rta in he ight ; but the countlessnumbe r of churches and convents rendered the

exe cution of great designs impossible . A certa i nl ittleness i s therefore everywhere perceptible inbui ldings of the pe riod . The brick decoration offriezes be low the roofs

,the composition of the usua l ly

smal l towers with arched windows (comorn ) dividedby columns

,the ornamentation of the towe r-facades

with round plates of various coloured marbles,the

stunted porticoes with the i r t iny columns and mosaicfriezes, adorned here and the re with medal l ions a l soin mosa ic, all give evidence of a lowe red standardof des ign .

’l

1 Such appears to me the character of all the churches belonging to

26 HISTORY OF ROME

In employing Roman architects in the restorationof the basi l ica of S . Apol linari s at Ravenna , Leo

may have been actuated e ither by a fee l ing ofnational pride or by a desire to give employmentto his fe l low-c itizens . I t by no means fol lows thatRoman workmen had atta ined any special renownsuch as the nat ive s of Como had previously acqu ired .

Neverthe less,the continued activity in Rome must

have fostered greate r artistic talent than was to befound in any othe r city of Italy. The biographerof Leo the Third conscientiously enumerates all the

e cclesiastical bui ld ings which Rome owe s to this Pope .

With his chief monument in the Late ran,the Tric

l inlum, we are already acqua inted . Leo a l so enlarged

or embe l l ished the papa l palace , and built an oratoryto the Archange l . He restored the ce lebratedbaptistery of Damasu s in S . Pe te r’s

,preserving

,or

imparting to it, i ts circular form .

2 He rebuilt theoratory of the Cross , a foundation of Symmachus

,

and adorned it with mosa i cs . He decorated the

shrine with lavish splendour, placed gold and S i lve rstatues of the Apostle s and Che rubim on si lve r pede stal s, and inla id the pavement with additiona l platesof gold . Furthe r

,and the fact deserves mention

,he

the Carolingian period . S . Maria in Cosmedin, Francesca Romana,Nereo and Achilles

,the tower of S. Cecilia, S . Maria in Domnica.

1 Agnellus , Vi ta M ar t in i , c. 1 Leo R . E . oi Urbis An t istes mis i t

cubicu lar . suum nom . C/zrj /sapbum et religuos mmen tar ios , r estaurao i t

teota B . Apollinar i s . The care of the Pope for the bas ilicas in thecountry d istricts is ment ioned for the first t ime in the life of Leo I I I . ,

a proOf Of the extended relat ions of Rome. Leo restored churches inVelletri, Praeneste , Albano, Portus, Ostia, Tibur, in the Sabina.

2 Lib. Pont. Vi ta Leonis [112c. 65 .


placed two S i lver shie lds engraved with the words ofthe Apostol ic Creed at each side of the tomb of theApostle in S . Pe te r’s, as we l l as in S . Paul

’s . Noobj ection was ye t ra ised to the Greek Confession ofFaith . Leo a lso bui lt episcopal dwe l l ings besideS . Pe ter’s

, and there e rected a beautiful tricl inium ,

the floor of which was inla id with variegated marble s .1

He restored the towe r of S . Pe ter,and e rected a

splendid circular bath-house for the use of pi lgrimsnear the obe l isk

,which after a long inte rva l of si lence

suddenly eme rge s as the Columna Major or greatcolumn .

2 Another ancient name a l so reappears .Leo founded a hospita l at the Spot ca l led Naumachia.

This hospital ‘, stood beside the Vatican,and was

dedicated to S . Pe regrinus, a Roman priest who hadsuffered martyrdom in Gaul in the second century.

Owing to his name he became the patron of pilgrims

(pereg r ini ) , who flocked to Rome i n vast numbe rs ,especial ly from anc ient Gaul . The pre sent l ittlechurch of S . Pe l legrino

,beside the Porta Ange l ica

,

serves to recal l Leo ’s foundation on the same spot ;and S ince the district was cal led Naumachia

,it fol lows

that here the Naumachia of Domitian must havestood in ancient days .3

1 E t in pao imen to marmor zzs exemp la stratis (c. There wereseveral build ings beside S. Peter

’

s cum en ter is amp lis ndifioi is, tamin aseensu scale

, guamguepost ipsum tr iclin ium, I think that this wasin Charles ’s palace .

2 Feci t et ubi supra j ux ta columnam maj orem balneum (c. The

word aga lia was not yet in use for the obelisk.

3 I n loco, gu i N aumao/zia dioitur (c. 80 , TheM

'

rabilia mentionthe sepu ler um Romu li in the Naumachia

,consequent ly the ent ire space

between the Vatican and S. Angelo must have borne the name . Cod.

28 HISTORY OF ROME

Near S . Peter ’s,Leo restored the monastery of the

proto-martyr Stephen,also the ne ighbouring convent

of S . Martin .

One of the oldest titular churches,that of S S .

Ncreus and Achilleus (Fasciola) on the V ia Appia ,having been destroyed by inundations , was nowrebuilt by Leo on highe r ground . With a few alte rations the church re ta ins its ancient form

,that of a

smal l basil ica with three naves . I t i s of harmoniousproportions , but of its mosa i cs nothing beyond somefragments rema in .

1 Judging from the catalogue ofLeo

’

s build ings,scarce ly a S ingle church e scaped

restoration at his hands,and the innumerable gifts

of vesse l s and draperie s testify to the weal th of theLate ran treasury. The love of Splendour

,conspicu

ous in the ancient Romans,seemed to be revived in

the Popes . I f we except some pa intings on glass andminiatures in manuscripts

,mosa ic would appear to

have been the form of art chiefly cultivated in Leo ’st ime ; and under the frequently recurring expressionP ictura we may boldly assume that mosa ic wasmore e specially unde rstood . The art of casting In

bronze,si lver and gold was dil igently practised

,and

Laurent . xxxv. I n N aumacbia est sepu lor um romu li oi oooatu r sei

petr i . The Anon . M ag liab. (xxviii . Cod . 53) thus speaks of the

Leonine city : cim’

tas gun dici tur in Almaelzia . The earliest ment ionof the Naumachia is that in the l ife of Leo ; hence the spot must befixed there . The name Dalmachia is first found in a bull of Leo IX.

Tomassett i, “ Della Campagna Rom.

”(Ar eli . d . soc. P om . iv.

1 The church owes its preservat ion to its Cardinal Baronius . In an

inscript ion there he admonishes posterity to refrain from modernisingit . After the Rococo-per iod had destroyed the character of the M iddleAges , the churches experienced a new method of restorat ion, which wemay call the drawing-room style.

30 HISTORY OF ROME

Georgius ; Lucia in septem vus,that is in Sept izonio ,

or ad septem sol ia ; Lucia juxta O rphea ; S . Maria’

Antiqua ( the present S . France sca Romana) ; furthe r,the churches o f 5 . Maria in Adrianio

,in Cosmedin ,

i n Cy ro or Aqu iro , i n Domn ica,i n Via Lata

,out

s ide S . Pe ter’

s gate ; Sergius and Bacchus ; Sylvester

and Martinus by S . Pe ter’s ; Theodorus, Vitus inMace l lo.

1

More than forty convents are a l ready named,and

the number existing was sti l l greate r.Five stood near S . Pe ter’s— i .e. Stephanus Maj or

or Proto-martyr, a l so Catagalla Pa trit ia,Stephanus

Minor ; John and Paul ; Martin , and the convent ofJe rusalem .

2

Near the Lateran are mentioned z— Pancratius,Andreas and Bartholomaeus, with the surnameHonori Stephanus , and the nunnery of Se rgius andBacchus .3

Near S . Maria Maggiore , Andreas, a lso cal led

Catabarbara Patrit ia ( perhaps identica l with Andreasin Massa Jul iana) ; Cosma and Damianus Hadrian

1 All these diaconates are found again in the Florent ine Codex,except Sylvester and Mart inus, S . Maria at S . Peter

’

s gate , and in

Adrianio ; i t also ment ions S . N icolai in carcer e Tu lliano,a d iaconate

which is absent from Crescimbeni , He has accord ingly the eighteenlater diaconates .

2 They are thus also specified as monaster io gu ingue constitu ta j ux tamagnam E cclesiam S . Petr i . B ull of j ob. X IX . A . 1024. P u llar .

Vat ican ,i . 17 .

3 Andrew and Bartholomew is the present well-known hospital .The Vi ta P asbalis I .

,n . 442 , mentions Sergius and Bacchus postfor

mam aguaductu s P a tr iarcbi i Lateran . pos i tum. I no longer findment ioned the ancient Benedictine monastery at the Lateran

,which

was again restored by Gregory I I I .

IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

us, also S . Laurentu . These also bore the surnamead Prmsepe .

”

Near S . Paul,without the gate , stood the convent

Cmsarius and Stephanus with the name ad quatuoraugulos ,

” 1 close to S . Lorenzo that of Stephen andCassian .

O the r Roman convents wereAgatha supe r Suburram,

Agnes outside the PortaNomentana Agapitus by the titu lar Eudoxia ;Anastasius ad Aquas Salvias ; Andreas on the ClivusScauri ; Andreas near the Santi Apostol i ; Bibiana ;Chry sogonus in Trastevere ; a convent on the CaputAfricae ; the convent de Corsas or Caesarii on theVia Appia ; the convent de Sardas, probably nearS . Vito 2 ; Donatus near S . Prisca on the Aventine ;Erasmus on the Coe l ian ; Eugenia outside the Latingate ; Euphemia and A rchangelus near SanctaPudent iana ; the convent duo Furna , probably inAgone

,on the Navona ; Is idorus, perhaps on the

Pincian ; John on the Aventine ; the convent deLutara 3

; Laurentius Pallacini beside San Marco ;Lucia Renati

,in Renat is , or de Serenat is ; 4 Maria

1 This surname is found in a document A . 967 , Cod. Sublac. of the

Sessorian . B ibl . ccxvii. p . 142 .

2 These two convents prove the existence of a co lony of Corsicansand Sardinians in Rome . Vi ta Leon I V. 11. 507 :M on Cor sar umj ux tabas i l . b. S ix t i M ar ty r i s Vignol i holds it to be S . Caesarius in Palatio.

Vi ta Leon I I I . 11. 406 in Orator io S . Vi t i quod pon i tu r in M onast .

quod appellatu r de Sardas . Vi ta Leon I V. n . 499 o icus gu i nuncu

pa tu r Sardor um the same street is designated 11. 541 mi lliar io ab

urbe P . tr iges imo. I t points to a co lony of Sardinians in the Campagna .

3 Mart ine lli and Vignoli misplace it on the Car inae the latter holdsit to be S . Mariae Purificationis n ear S . P ietro ad Vincula .

4 Mentioned inMuratori,An t ig. v. 772 , and B ullar . Cas in . 11. const .

32 H ISTORY OF ROME

Ambrosu , probably the same as that called Ambrosude Maxima in the Forum P iscarium ; Maria Juliaeon the i sland in the Tiber ; the nunne ry Of Maria i nCampo Marzo

,and the convent Maria i n Capitol io ,

a lthough not mentioned in the catalogue of Leothe Third

’s foundations , were undoubtedly alreadyfounded . S . Michae l

,unknown ; the convent Tem

pul i 1; Sylve ste r (de Capite) S . Saba or Ce l la Nova ;Semitrii, unknown ; Victor beside S . Pancratius onthe Via Aure l ia .

The twenty Abbeys of Rome which late r rose conspicuous out of the great multitude of convents hadnot ye t been e stablished . The number of conventswas continua l ly on the increase

,and at the end of the

tenth century it was asse rted that the re we re twentynunnerie s, forty monasteries and S ixty s imilar ins t itutut ions for canons or such clergy as l ived subject toCloistra l rule .

2

1 12 and 150 . Armellini (Le cbiese di Roma, p . 320) looks for it nearthe Trofe i di Mario .

1 Also in the 0rdo Rom. x11. (Mabillon, M us . I tal. 11. 206)M onas ter io Tempoli ; accord ing to Torrigius (Imagi ne di M Verg i ne

di S . S isto e D om. ) it stood in Trastevere accord ing to Mammachio

(Annal . 0rd. Pra d . i. 557) near S . Balbina on the Via App ia.

2 Arnoldus de S . Emmerammo lib . ii . c. 54 (Mon . Germ. VI

With regard to the twenty later Abbeys of Rome see 0rdo xi. in

M abi l]. ii. 160.


4 . STEPHEN IV . ,POPE H IS JOURNEY TO LEWIS

HIS SUDDEN DEATH— ELECTION AND ORD INATION

OF PASCHALIS I .—THE PR IVILEGIUM OF LEWIS .

Afte r an interva l of only ten days,an i l lustrious S tephen

Roman,the Deacon Stephen, son of Marinus

,was

e le cted Pope wi thout intervention on the part of theEmperor. Stephen hastened , howeve r, to inform the

suzera in of Rome of his loya lty . He caused the

Romans to swear fidel ity to the Emperor,and sent

messenge rs to Lewis to justify both himse lf and thecit i zens for the haste of his e lection .

1 The firstinstance of a change of pont iff after the restoration ofthe Empire gives rise to several questions concerningthe re lat ions be tween the Pope and the Empe ror . I t

caused Stephen the Fourth himse l f to unde rtake a

j ourney to France . The disturbance s which had

taken place in Rome , the discontent of the nobility,

the ne ce ssity of settl ing the question by a new act ofratification , we may a lso add the desire of anointingthe al ready crowned Lewis, and of having the coronation ceremony e stablished a s a papa l right no longe rto be evaded , were the motives which impe lled thePope to unde rtake the journey. Stephen ’s attitudetowards Lewis was a l toge the r diffe rent to the attitudeof Leo the Third towards Charle s . I f in the popular

1Qu i statim—j uss i t omnem pop . P om . fideli tatefn cum j u ramen to

promi ttere H ludozoico. Thegan . , Vi ta Lud . c. 16. A proof of theImperial sovere ignty over Rome . P ramis i t tamen legat ionem, gun

super ordinatione ej u s imperator i sat isfaceret . Astron ., Vi ta , c. 26. A

proof that Charles a lready claimed the r ight of ratifying the Papalelect ion the right , however , had not yet become law.

VOL . I I I .

HISTORY OF ROME

imaginat ion Leo,in setting the crown of the Romans

on the head of Charle s,had at once exalted himse lf

above his benefactor, and acqu itted himsel f of al lhis Obligations, Lewis stood in an entire ly independent position . The new Pope found himse l f faceto face with a powerful hereditary Emperor

,with

whom he himse l f had no pe rsona l re lations . Thisconside ration we ighed on Stephen ’s mind . He had ,however

,nothing to fear from the pious Lewis.

Accompanied by Be rnhard , he ente red Rhe ims inSeptembe r 8 16

,and was there rece ived with the

greate st re spect . The fortunate priest anointed and

crowned Lewis and his wife I rmengarde in the cathedra l

,and

,laden with gifts

,and

,above all

,furnished

with the ratification of the possessions,privilege s and

immunities of the Roman Church,he started on his

homeward j ourney.

1 To the discontented Romanshe brought as a solatium the pardon of the offende rssentenced to exile in France for the revolt aga inst

Leo the Third , and for whom he had inte rcededwith the Empe ror. These men

,and among them

Paschalis and Campulus , if indeed they stil l surv ived

,now accompan ied him back to Rome . The

Pope died three months after his re turn,on January

a4th, 8 17 .

1 Astron . c . 26. Thegan . c. 16, 17 . Stephen had brought a valuable crown with him Ermold . N igellus ( I I . v . 425) as a poet explainsit to have be en the crown of Constantine . He causes Stephen to

acclaim the Emperor and his heirs : gu igue r egan t F rancos nec non

Romamgue poten tem and informs us that the Chancellor Helisachar

had drawn up in documentary form the Imper ial rat ification of the

pr ivi lege s of the Church . Accord ing to the Anna]. E in/t . the Pope

s tarted on his journey as ear ly as the end ofAugust .

I N THE M IDDLE AGES. 3 5

The Romans unanimously e lected Paschalis,the F

as

ghalis

son of Bonosus,who was consecrated Pope on the

2 5th of January. Paschalis the First,a shrewd and

energetic man,had previously been Abbot of the

monastery of S . Stephen,beside S . Pe te r’s ; the refore ,

unlike his predecessors,who had all been e ither

deacons or presbyte rs,he passed stra ight from the

monastic ce l l to the papa l throne . His unusual lyhasty ordination shows that the Roman C lergy soughtto Oppose by rapidity of action the increasinglythreatening cla ims of the Emperor to his right ofratification ; and i t makes it at least doubtful whe the rthe de cree , attributed to Stephen the Fourth , whichorda ined that no Pope could henceforward be conse

crated without the Impe ria l consent,had ye t been

issued .

1 Like his prede cessor,howeve r

,Paschalis

judged it necessary to announce his hasty e levationto the Emperor, and to tranquill ise Lewis with the

assurance that it had fol lowed upon canonical e lection .

2

His Legate Theodore brought back an Imperiald iploma confirming the privi leges of S . Pe ter.Every change in the Imperia l crown , every fre sh

papal e lect ion,brought with it the reviva l of the

ancient privilege s. Bishoprics and abbeys fol lowedRome ’s example ; every occasion was se ized to con

firm ancient immunit ies by document,or to add

other privileges to those a l ready existing. The

1 Flosz (D ie P apstwab] unter den Ottonen , 1858) has assigned sucha decree to Stephen IV.

2 E xcusator iam Imperator i mis i t ep istolam . Anna]. E ink. 8 17 .

Legatos cum ep is tola apologet ica et max imis imperator i misi t muner ibus .Astron . , Vita, c. 27.

HISTORY OF ROME

archive s of the Church care ful ly treasured the serie sof Imperial d iplomaswhich had gradual ly accumulated .

Those of the Late ran already conta ined the greatdiplomas of Pipin,

Charles and Lewis,deeds of gift

,

confirmations of O ld and new immunities,and other

treatie s be tween the Empe ror and the Roman Church .

The va lue of these parchments to the historian,we re

they stil l extant and acce ssible , would be absolute lyprice less . To the se documents was added in 8 17the diploma of Lewis the Pious

,doubtless a renewal

of the earl ie r deed given by his Chance l lor to PopeStephen in the previous year.1 This document inlate r time s atta ined a great importance . Its contentswe re fa l s ified

,and having been exa lted to the same

leve l with the donation of Pipin ,it was regarded as a

donation ofg reatly enlarged extent,and from it new

and vast posse ssions were derived for the papal chairas importan t r ights .

Only to mention the most strik ing points,in addi

tion to the dominion ove r Rome and the Duchy,in

addition to the ratification of the donations of Pip inand Charle s , Lewis the Pious was represented ashaving given the Pope the patrimonie s of Ca labriaand Naple s

,and even entire possession of the islands

of Corsica,Sardinia and S ici ly. Lastly, complete

l iberty i n the e lection and ordination of the Popewas accorded to the Romans without any previoussanction of the Emperor. History , howeve r, refutesthis fiction

,showing by its facts that the Emperors

1 As tron . : Tlzeodorus nomencu la tor—negot is per acto, cl pet i t io impet

r at is super confi rmatione sci licet pacti et amici t in more pradocessorum

snorum,reversus est .

38 H ISTORY OF ROME

tions of Pip in and Charle s,entire ly ignore the deed

of Lewis . I t i s not unti l the t ime of Gregory the

Seventh and the bequest of the Countess Mati ldathat it is mentioned . I t was then interpolated withadditions in orde r to give a broad and ancient foundat ion to the Papal cla ims .

1

1 The diploma “ Ego Ludovicus is ment ioned for the first time inObrou . Vu ]tu rnense , end of saec. xi . (Murat . i . 2 , and Leo Os t ien .

i . c. 16, beg inn ing of sece . xv. They nevertheless on ly say that Lewishad drawn up a pactum const i tu t ion is et confi rmat ion is for Paschalis .

G ratian records the diploma in an abbreviated form in the D ecret . D i st .

63 , can . 30 ; Cencius introduces it in the Liber Censuum , probablyfrom Cod . Vat ic. 1984, saec. x i . or from Albinus ( Cod. Va t ic. I ts

spuriousness is ma intained by Pag i, ad A . 8 17 Muratori , Annal,D ist .

34 P iena espos . c. 4 Beretta ( Tab. Cbor . vi . ) attribu tes the fict ion tothe t ime of Gregory VI I . , to which date the falsifications of the P acta(which mere ly survive in copies ) of the years 8 17 , 962 , and 1020 prob

ably also belong . Ficker (Por sc/zung en zu r P eiclzs— und It'i rcbeng scb .

I ta liens ( Innsbrrick, ii. 347 fl ) be lieves that these celebratedd iplomas contain forged passages , but are not themse lves ent ire fabr icat ions . According to him ,

the Pr ivileg ium of Lewis is already de terminedby the deeds of g ift of Pipin and Charles of the years 754 and 774. He

holds the passage re lating toZCorsica , Sardinia , and Sicily to be forgeries ,and of the same Op in ion are S icke l and Boret ius , Cap i tu lar ia r eg .

P r ancor . i . 2 , n . 172 Sickel , Acta Karolinor . ii . 38 1 and D as

P r ivi leg ium Otto I . ( Innsbrtick, p . 50f

C H A P T E R I I .

LOTHAR Co-EMPEROR—REBELLION AND FALL OF KINGBERNHARD— LOTHAR KING OF ITALY—H IS CORONATION IN ROME—HE ESTABLISHES H IS IMPER IALTR IBUNAL THERE—ACTION AGAINST FARFA— EXECUTION OF ROMAN NOBLES — PASCHALIS EVADES THE

IMPER IAL SENTENCE—H IS DEATH .

LEWIS the Pious determined to follow the example Lothar Coof his father and to appoint his e lde st

,but sti ll very Emperor ‘

youthful son, co Emperor. This custom of the

anc ient Roman Empire had been a lready adopted bythe new

,in orde r that the unity of the State , and the

hereditary succe ssion to the Imperia l throne,might

thereby be secured . But scarce ly had Lothar assumedthe Impe r ia l dignity in presence of the Diet assembledat Aachen , when the envy Of the other prince s wasaroused . Filled with discontent

,the brothers Pipin

and Lewis returned to the ir roya l seats in Aquita ineand Bavaria ; while Be rnhard, the ambitious bastard

,

ra ised his arms in open revolt . Charle s,following the

example of P ip in,had instal led Bernhard simply as

his l ieutenant in the kingdom of I ta ly,but the natura l

de sire for independence a lready asse rted itse lf in theKings of I taly. The longing of the I tal ians fornational independence had been aroused

,more e speci

40 HISTORY OF ROME

a l ly in the northern province s,where the Lombards ,

a lthough long since Lat inised , stil l warmly che rishedthe i r ancient tribal law and the traditions of the i rfamily and race, and where Milan had begun tooutriva l the earl ier capita l , Pavia. The fa l l of theLombard kingdom had not crushed the receptive andi ndustrious race who inhabited the country from the

Alps far into Apul ia . If we except Rome,where

many Lombard familie s also dwe lt,and whe re men of

Lombard race had fi l led the papa l cha i r,this Ge rmanic

people reta ined the most important affa irs of I taly inthe ir hands . During the centuries ofgreate st darknessi t was e ssentia l ly the Lombards who gave heroes

,

prince s,bishops

,historians

,poe ts

,and lastly

,free

republics to the country, and on Lombard energyconsequently rests the greater part of the historic l ifeof I ta ly . This fact , which is irrefutable , is eagerlyd isputed by many I ta l ians of the present day ,

who,

i n defiance of history, speak of an I ta l ian nation incenturie s before any such nation had arisen

,or forge t

that when it did arise i t owed its origin to the fusionof the Gothic-Lombard and Latin races . In speakingof an I tal ian nation at this period , we have a lreadynarrowed the idea to its true historic proportions .The Lombard nobles no longe r dreamt of a res tora

t ion of the overthrown dynasty of De siderius ; butthey longed to emancipate themse lves from the hatedrule of the Franks . The bishops

,who

,through the

privilege s accorded them by Charle s and Lewis,had

attained and had already grown accustomed“

toprince ly powe r

,and who like territorial rulers possessed

the chief voice in all pol itical questions , urged Bern

IN THE M IDDLE AGES. 4 1

hard onwards. Among these pre lates was Thiodulf, Berrihard

who,a lthough Bishop of Orleans , was a Lombard by

birth ; Wolfold of Cremona,and more important than Empe mr'

any,Anse lm of Milan . The thoughtless king soon

found himse lf undece ived . The brothers Pip in and

Charle s rema ined motionless , and as the Imperia larmy approached the front ie rs of I ta ly, Bernhard Saw

himse lf deserted by his troops . The pe rplexed youthhastened to Cavil lon , and e ithe r trusting to somepromise already re ce ived , or prompted by despa ir,the re threw himse l f a t the feet of his uncle . The

forme r Suggestion seems to afford the more probablesolution of his conduct

,since in the absence of any

promise of the kind it i s scarce ly l ike ly that he wouldhave been accompanied by his confede rate s . The

Empe ror,howeve r

,threw both Bernhard and his

companions into prison . Bernhard was condemnedto death in Aachen

,and a l though he obta ined a

remission of his sentence,the Emperor had the um

fortunate prince deprived Of his S ight. This Byzantine punishment was

,according to report

,by command

of the vindictive I rmengard,so barbarously carried

out that Bernhard died three days afte r its infl iction

(Easte r The l ike fate was suffered by his friend His trag icReg inhar , son Cf Count Meg inhar, formerly Imperial

fa“,8 18 °

Count Palatine ; while the imprisoned bishops were de

prived of the i r benefices , and banished to monasterie sby sentence of the Frankish cle rgy. The Emperorin his weakness had yie lded to pre ssure from his wifeand had surrende red to her advisers . When informed

1 Concerning these events see B. S imson , j abrbu'

cber des f rank.

Reicbs un ter Ludw ig d . Frommen , Le ipzig , 1874, vol. i .

HISTORY OF ROME

of the death of h is nephew,he bitte rly bewa i led him

,

and acknowledged his e rror in having sanctionedthe crue l sentence . Four years late r he pe rformed a

publ ic penance for this and othe r offence s—an actionwhich weakened the Imperia l authority and increasedthe moral power of the bishops . They comforted theEmperor, reminding him of the example of the re

pentant Theodosius , and themse lves of the crimina lj urisdiction ofBishop Ambrose .

1 We are not in formedwhethe r Paschalis in te rceded with Lewis for a mitigat ion of Bernhard ’s sentence . But s ince the characte rof the time sugge sts the probabil ity of papa l inte rference

,we may take for granted that in a case so far

removed from the ordinary course of events the Popemust have brought his paternal counse l to bear uponthe Empe ror . The throne rema ined vacant for thespace of two years afte r Bernhard

’s death— a circumstance not entire ly displeasing to the Roman Church

,

to which the I tal ian kingdom had already becomeirksome .

The cond itions of Rome at this period are shroudedin darkness so intense that it i s only at interval s

,and

when interwoven with the history of the Emperor,that

we obta in a glimpse of the affa i rs of the city. Lothar,the e lde st son of Lewis

,al ready procla imed Empe ror

,

was also declared King of I taly, and the two dign itie s we re now united in one person for the first t imes ince Charle s the Great . Although Lothar had al ready

( in 820) re ce ived the crown of I ta ly from his fathe r,

1 Thegan . c. 23 . C/zron . P eg inen . tells the tru th : B ern/zardus do/ocapi tu r . Astron . , Vi ta , c. 30 ; Thegan . c. 22 Anna]. B ink. A . 8 17,

8 18 . Andreas Presbyter Hermengarda—oculos B ernardo cou ls it .


it was not until two years late r that he was sent toPavia . He had been married to Irmengarde , daughte rof the powerfu l Count Hugo and on the occasion ofhis son’s wedding the Emperor had pardoned theimprisoned bishops . In August 822 Lewis he ld an

Impe ria l Die t at Att igny, and the re commandedLothar forthwith to proceed to his kingdom . He gavehim as counse llors the Monk Wa la, who had a lreadybeen minister to Be rnhard , and Ge rung, an offic ial ofthe Court. Neverthe le ss , he did not intend to accordthe King of Ita ly a permanent residence at Pavia,but rathe r sent him the re to set the affa irs of thecountry in orde r and to admin ister just ice . No sooner,howeve r

,had the prince executed his commission than

he was commanded to return to France . I t i s thusevident that the suspic ious fathe r wa s not anxiousthat his son should rema in in Ita ly. Pa schalis

,who

heard of Lothar’s intended departure ( i t was justbe fore Easte r sent him

,from quite inte l l igible

motives,an urgen t invitat ion to come to Rome to

rece ive coronation and unction at the papa l hands .Lothar

,with the knowledge of his fathe r

,accepted 15 crowned

the invitation . He was rece ived with Imperia lhonours

,was crowned by the Pope in S . Pe te r’s on 823 '

Easter day , was procla imed Augustus by the Romans,and

,S ince the coronation of his fathe r had taken place

at Rhe ims,was the first Empe ror since Charles who

rece ived the crown in Rome .

1 The Roman Curia1 Astron. , Vi ta, c. 36 : diadema imper iale cum nom ine suscep i t

August i . Annal. Fu ld. H lotbar ius j uven i s , r ogan te P ascba lepapaRomam oen iens , ab cadem corona tur

,et apopu loRomano imp . Augus tu s

appellatu r . There are therefore two Imperial epochs in Lothar ’sdiplomas—that of 820 , and that of 823 .

44 H ISTORY OF ROME

thus uphe ld the principle that Rome was the sourceof Empire ,

and the furthe r principle that to an

Empe ror,a lthough a l ready e le cted and crowned by

decree of the Imperial Die t, papal unction was ind ispensable . Paschalis

,afte r having consecrated the

young Emperor,now admitted that Lothar

,l ike his

predecessors,posse ssed Imperial power over the

Roman pe0p1e 1; and Lothar forthwith proceeded to

exercise this powe r,pronouncing sentence during his

short sojourn in the city.

Lothar An action which the Pope brought aga inst the91

5

233315 Abbot of Fa rfa

,and lost

,me rits our at tention . The

in Rome o rich Benedictine monastery had previously stoodunder the protection of the Lombard kings

,and had

late r enjoyed the l ike privi lege s under the Carol ingians .I t could point to a charter of Charles the Great of theyear 803 which ratified its immunities . In 8 15 i thad obta ined a s imilar document from the EmperorLewis

,in which it was pronounced as standing unde r

his “ Privilegium,Mundiburdium and Imperia l pro

t ect ion,in orde r that the monks might pray in peace

for him and the continuance of his Empire .

” 2 NoExempt ion bishop could levy tribute or rate s on Farfa. TheO

XIDES. of monks enjoyed complete exemption . They Chose theFarfa'

abbot from the i r midst,and ove r the abbot the Pope

himse l f possessed no furthe r right than that of conse

cration . Be side s the diplomas of kings and emperorswhich lay in the ir coffe rs, the monks possessed bul ls

1 Fragment . Langob. H ist . (Murat . i. 2, Pasclzalis—potes

‘

taf

tem, guampr isci Imperatores babuerant , ci super populum Romanum

concess it .2 Cbron . Parf. (Murat . u . 2 ,

Paschalis

suppresses

a revolt inRomewithou t legalprocess .

H ISTORY OF ROME

of the Roman cle rgy, while the enemies of the temporal power of the Papacy eage rly attached themse lve sto the young prince . The division of the city into apapa l and an Imperia l party

,a division which lasted

for centuries , began with the new Empire,and was

revealed by an event which took place soon afte rLothar’s departure . The young Empe ror had re turnedto Lombardy . He had a lready me t his fathe r inJune

,when a tumult

,undoubtedly provoked by the

same cause s as those which had given rise to the

rebe l l ion aga inst Leo the Third,took place in Rome .

Messenge rs arrived at the Imperia l residence with theinformation that two of the ministe rs of the papalpalace

,the Pr imicerius Theodore and his son-in-law

,

the Nomenculator Leo,had been first bl inded and

then beheaded in the Lateran , and that Pope Paschal is himse l f had commanded or counse l led the deed .

1

These men (Theodore was sti l l nuncio in France i n

82 1) be longed to the highe st nobi l ity, were of pronounced Imperia l i st views , and occupying the influential position, which had a l ready been found favourableto rebe l l ious designs, had probably striven for theoverthrow of the papa l gove rnment. They werese ized and executed in the Lateran by the Pope ’sservants.2 The Emperor Lewis l istened to the com

quod se in omn ib. fideli ter erga par tes Hlotlzarzz j uven is imp .

agerent orant et gu i dicerent , velj ussu we] cons i lio P ascbalis pon t . r em

fu isseperpetratam. Anna]. E inb . A . 823.—Astron . c. 37 . That the

Romans were themse lves the accusers , is asserted by Thegan . c . 30 : im

pu tan tes ei , quod nonnu llorumbomicidafu isset . We see the nature of the

pos it ion in which the Popes stood towards the Romans even at this t ime .

2 The express ion of the Anna]. D ink. interj ectorcs pr a dictor um

lzominum, gu ia defami lia S . Petr i orant, does not point to a judicial act.

IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

plaints of the Romans,and ordered his Missi to

institute inquirie s . But before they had set forthmessengers from the Pope arrived to exone ratePaschalis

,and to expla in that the Pope himsel f would

court an inquiry.

1 The Impe ria l j udge s departed in The

July or August 823 , but were startled on the ir arriva lin Rome by the information that Paschalis decl ined ifj

i

ggge isto submit to the i r judgment . Whe ther or not he avoided .

feared the result, he avoided submitting himse lf to thesentence of the j udge s, and had recourse to an oldmeans of e scape . He took , that is to say ,

the oath ofpurgation in presence of the Legate s and the Romanpeople in the Pat riarchium of the Lateran . At thesame time he defended the murde re rs, anathematisedthe murdered as men guilty of high t reason , and pronounced the i r death an act of justice . The envoys

,

accompan ied by the papal Legat es , re turned to France ,there to impart the unexpected tidings. The Emperorwas indignant, he fe lt his duty as a protector and a

just judge towards his Roman subjects his ownrights a lso demanded the most searching inquiryinto the murder ; but since the Pope ’ s action hadprevented an inquiry, he was obl iged to le t the matterrest. Concerning his reply to the Romans and the

POpe , history does not inform us .

2

Paschalis meanwhile died unde r circumstance s repear

l}; if

asc 8 15

I . , 824.

1 Accusation i opponentes excusat ionem,et super vi ta imperator i

oj'cr entes examinat ionem. As tron . c. 37 . Anna]. E z

’

nb .

2 Imp . natura miser icordi ss imus , occi sorum o indictam u ltra per segu i

non oalens guanguam mu ltum volens,ab ingu is i t ione buj uscemodi ces

sandum ex ist imao i t , et cum respons is cong ru is missos Romanos absolo i t .

Astron .

HISTORY OF ROME

sembling those which had accompanied the death ofLeo the Third . He too foundered on the antagonismthat existed between the tempora l and spiritualpowers of the bishops . Agitated by recent events ,hated by a great part of the Romans , he was snatchedaway by death early in 824 . The Romans re fusedto al low his rema ins buria l in S . Pe te r’s

,and his

successor found himse l f obl iged to lay them in anotherchurch

,a basi l ica buil t by Paschalis himse lf

,probably

the basil ica of S . Prassede .

1

2 . PASCHALIS BU ILDS THE CHURCHES OF S . CECILIA IN

TRASTEVERE, S . PRASSEDE ON THE ESQU ILINE, S .

MAR IA IN DOMN ICA ON THE CCELIAN .

Rome sti l l re ta ins some intere sting monuments ofPaschalis the First. His l ikeness ( rare in Pope s of soearly a date) has a l so been preserved in thre e mosa ics ,each of which shows the same tonsured head and

long face . The art of the age could , however, do nomore than depict a portra it i n outl ine . These portraits are found in the three churches re stored byPaschalis : Ce cil ia i n Trastevere

,Prassede on the

E squil ine,and Maria in Domn ica on the Coel ian .

To Cecil ia,the muse of music in the heaven of the

Roman sa ints,legend of late r date has ascribed the

invention of the organ . Raffae llo in one of his love l iestpaintings has repre sented the saint with the attribute s

1 Thegan . c. 30 . According to the Anna]. E in/z. Paschalis died in824, a few days after the return of his envoys. Pag i assumes the dateFebruary 10 .


of the muse,

1 a figure than which scarce ly any moregracious has been depicted by Christian art . Anational saint l ike Agnes

,Ceci l ia was the favourite of

al l the noble matrons in Rome,who be l ieved that in

her they honoured the i l lustrious descendant of theMete l la family. Two ma iden figure s

,those of Ceci l ia

and Agnes,hovered as idea ls of virtue through the

darkness of Rome ’s most barbarous period . Legendre lated that Cecil ia had married the youthful Va le rian

,

and that the night after the ir marriage she informedher husband that an ange l protected her ma idenpuri ty. The dismayed bridegroom de sired to see herinconvenient guardian

,behe ld him

,and afte rwards

,

influenced by the spiritual nature of his bride , rece ivedbaptism at the hands of Bishop Urban . Ceci l iasuffered martyrdom

,and died Novembe r 22nd, 232 ,

with three sword wounds in her neck .

2 With her lastbreath she entreated the Bishop to transform her

house in the Trastevere into a church . Urban causedher to be wrapped in gold-embroide red robes, placedin a coffin of cypress-wood, which was enclosed withina stone sarcophagus

,and la id in the catacombs of S .

Cal ixtus on the Via Appia.

3 Her church,one of the

1 The first organ was brought to the Franks from the Greeks about

the year 757 . E inhard records that in the year 826,George , a Venet ian

Presbyter , who had learnt the art of organ-bu ilding , was employed in

Aachen by the Emperor Lewis . Murator i , D iss . xxiv.

2 She is thus represented in Maderno’

s p leasing statue in her own

church .

3 Spot and sarcophagus are Shown in these catacombs , on whichDe Ross i’s researches have thrown so much light . The lead p ipes of

an ancien t bath are st ill seen in one of the chapels in the churchdedicated to the saint .VOL . I I I .

so H ISTORY OF ROME

olde st in Rome,as early as the fifth century confe rred

a title on a cardina l . Paschalis found i t in ru ins andrebuilt it . He wished to remove the body of thesa int

,but since the coffin could not be found in the

catacombs,he came to the conclusion that it had been

carried away by the Lombards unde r A s tolf. Avision

,howeve r

,came to the aid of the Pope . As one

Sunday morning he lay S lumbering be fore the shrineof S . Pe te r

,an ange l ic ma iden stood before him . She

i nformed him that She was Ceci l ia, assured him thatthe Lombards had not d iscove red her ashe s , andencouraging the Pope to continue his search , She

disappeared . Pas chalis found the rema ins of Cecil iai n the Ceme tery of Prze tex tus , reposing in her goldendrape rie s by the side of Va le rian

,who had followed

her to death.

1

The restoration of the church was no sl ight achievement for the art of the age . The large basi l ica hada ga l le ry with a double row of columns like that ofS . Agnes . Late r restoration has a lte red the ancientplan

,but not entire ly destroyed it. A large atrium

,

at this time enclosed by a pil lared colonnade,stood in

front of the church,into which led the stil l existing

vestibule . The roof was supported by four ancientIonic columns and by two pillars with Corinthiancapita ls at each end . The frieze has a rough mosa ic

decoration : medal l ions over each column and pillarrepresent the sa int whose rema ins Paschalis la id beneath the shrine . The wa l ls of the ve stibule

,painted

perhaps in the thirteenth century, i l lustrated the

1 L ib. Pont . , Vi ta Pasc/za]. n. 437


history of Cecil ia. A fragment which sti l l exists ,built into the wal l in the interior of the church,depicts the buria l of the sa int by Urban , and the

vision of Pa schalis where the girl ish figure standsbefore the sleeping Pope— a remarkable picture , the

awkward drawing and tone of colour of whichbespeak a respectable antiquity . I t i s impossible

that it can be long to the time of Paschalis , but it

may not improbably date from that of Honorius theThird. The subj ect is pleasing and tender as a lyricpoem .

The interior of the church (now much a ltered) consisted of three naves . The two rows of twe lve columnsin the central nave supported the ga l lery, four at theentrance to the choir ; and a crypt conta ined the

tomb of the sa int . The mosaics of the tribune sti l lrema in . Christ, c lad in draperies of golden ye l low

,

and holding a roll in his le ft hand,stands between S .

Peter and S . Paul— utterly barbarous figure s . To theright of the spectator, and close to S . Peter

,Cecilia and

Valerian present the ir crowns of martyrdom ; on theleft

,beside S . Paul

,stands a sa int, perhaps Agatha, a lso

Paschalis— a tal l figure with large eye s,a blue square

nimbus behind his head and the mode l of the basil icain his hands .1 Palms enclose the mosaic , and aflame

coloured phoenix is seen over one branch . Lowe rdown Christ and the disciple s are depicted in the

customary form of lambs,and stil l lowe r are some

1 Paschalis had also built a convent beside the church in li on . mar ty r .

Agatka et Ce ci lia j ux ta ips iu s ecc]. in loco gu i dici tur col/es j acentes .Lib. Pont . n . 438 .

52 H ISTORY OF ROME

l ine s ce lebrat ing the work of Paschalis .

1 The style ofthese mosa ics ( those on the arch have perished) i sByzantine

,and Christ is even represented as bestowing

the blessing in the Greek manne r,with three finge rs

Closed on the thumb . The exe cution is rough,the

long,haggard figures be ing me re ly ske tched . NO dis

t r ibu t ion of l ight or shade has been attempted , andthe folds of the draperies are simply indicated bycoarse thick strokes . The supposition that the workis that of Byzantine artists rece ive s support fromthe fact that Paschalis Showed himse l f favourable toGreeks

,of whom there were many in Rome .

His second monument,S . Prassede

,the church of

which he had himse l f been cardinal,stands on the

E squil ine . After an existence of seve ral centuriesthe ancient basil ica had fal len into a tottering condition

,when the Pope had it thrown down and a new

one built . The later church,a lthough not so com

ple te ly transformed as S . Cecil ia, has a lso suffe red

many change s in the course of time . The plan of thetwo churches is very similar. A fl ight of twenty-five

1 He c domus amp la m icat oar zzsfabr icata metallis,Olim gue f uerat conf r acta sub temporep r isco.

Condi t i t in me]iu s P a scba]i s p re su l op imus

Hanc au lam D omin ifi rmansfundamine claro.

Au r ea g emmat is r esonan t be c Dy nd ima templis ,Le tus amor e D ei b io conj unx i t corpora sancta

Ce ci lie,et Soci is , r u t i la t b icflore j uven tus

Que pr iu s in cryp t i s pausaban t membra beata .

Roma r esu ltat ovans semper or na ta per ( er/um .

Dy ndima , instruments ofmu s ic in general . Concerning the mosaics ,see Ciamp ini , Vet . M on . c. 27 Laderchi

,Acta S . Ce ci lie et Transtyb.

B as i lica, Roma, 1722 ; Bondini, M emor ie stor iclze di S . Ceci lia , Roma,

1855 .

54 H ISTORY OF ROME

the tribune in its inne r circle displays,l ike that of S .

Cec i l ia,the monogram of Paschalis . And he re , as

there,we see above it the lamb enthroned

,the Seven

Candle st icks,the two ange ls

,the apoca lyptic symbols

of the Evange l ists and the E lders offering the ir crowns .The artist in fol lowing the mode l of SS . Cosma and

Damiano has not been entire ly unsuccessful,and has

endowed the ange ls more e special ly with a certa ingrace of motion .

In the same church Paschalis built and dedicateda l ittle Chape l to Zeno

,a Roman martyr of the time

of Dioc le tian . This chape l,which constitute s a re

markable monument of the art of this pe riod , sti l l rema ins in perfect preservation . I t i s entire ly covered

with mosaic,and was once deemed so beautiful as to

be ca l led “the Garden of Paradise .

”The mosai cs , how

eve r,are more barbarous than those of the tribune ,

whe re some good traditiona l feature s,more particularly

in the feminine figures,are at least re ta ined .

Neverthe less,the large picture in S . Prassede forms

the be st monument of a period when mosa ic art,

a l ready entire ly imbued by influence s s o-ca l ledByzantine

,emitted a last fl ickering ray be fore i ts fina l

extinction . I t i s possible that i t may have been thework of Greek artists , since C lose beside the churchPaschalis had built a monaste ry for bre thren of theorder of S . Bas il . The contemporary reviva l of theIconoclastic persecution in the East, where Leo the

Armenian had revived the principle s of his Isaurianpredece ssor

,obliged numbers of Greek monks ‘

and

artists to seek refuge in Rome ; and these men hererenewed re lations with Byzantine art .


The ancient diaconate of S . Maria in Domnica ( in S . Maria in

Greek,Kyriaka) , now cal led

“ de l la Navice l la ,” from

Dommca'

a mode rn copy of an ancient votive boat set up there ,stood on the Coe l ian .

1 Paschalis gave the church itspre sent form

,that of a basi l ica with three naves . Two

rows of n ine antique granite columns form the principalnave . The mosa ics of the tribune have un fortunate lybeen ruined by restoration . The Virgin enthronedwith the Child, ange l s standing be side her

,and

Pas chalis on his knee s clasping her right foot withboth hands

,are he re depicted . Flowers of various

kinds Spring from the ground .

We pass ove r the nume rous oratorie s and Chape l serected by this Pope . One fact a lone arre sts ourattention . The biographe r of Paschalis re lates thata fire reduced to ashe s the Saxon quarte r

,des ig

nated thus early by the German word burgus,

and

destroyed the entire portico of S . Pe te r ; that thePope hastened thither

,by his prayers quenched the

flame s, and that he rebuilt the quarte r, and restoredthe portico.

2

1 The custom of placing ant iqu ities in front of churches was popular.The bronze pine-cone stood in the courtyard of S . Peter

’s the porphyry

urn- now the coffi n of Clement X I I . in the Lateran—before the Pan

theon a large ancient marble vase still remains in the courtyard of S.

Cecilia a s imilar one in the cour t of S . Apostoli . I t is possible thatthe vot ive boat in front of S . Domnica may have come from the Campof the Fore igners , which had formerly stood only a short d istance fromthe church . The V. Cohors Vig ilum stood near the Vil la Matte i . D e

Rossi , Le Stazion i delle VI I . Coor t i dei Vigi li , Roma, 1859 , p . 27f2 Lib. Pon t . n . 432 g entis Ang lorum

—omn is—babi tat io, gue in

eorum lingua burg u s dicitur . This fire possibly took place in the

t ime of Leo IV.

HISTORY OF ROME

3 . EUGEN IUS I I . ,POPE—" LOTHAR COMES To ROME

H IS CONSTITUTION OF THE YEAR 8 24—DEATH OF

EUGEN IUS, AUGUST 8 2 7 .

Eugenius,Presbyte r of S . Sabina, son of the Roman

Boemund,whose name betrays a northern de scent ,

was the successor of Paschalis . Eugenius announcedhis e levat ion to the Emperor Lewis, and the Emperorsent Lothar to Rome i n orde r to adjust all pol iticaland civi l re lations with the new Pope and the Romanpeople by an Imperial statute .

1 Repeated disturbanoe s in Rome

, the open disunion which preva i ledbetween the Pope and the city, and the we l l-foundedcompla ints of the despotism of the papal j udges ,rendered the step necessary.

Lothar was rece ived with great magnificence byEugenius ( September The young Caesar informed the Pope that he had come to restore law ;bewa i led the attitude which the Papacy had assumedtowards the Emperor and Rome

,lamented that fa ith

ful adherents of the Emperor had been executed , andothe rs subjected to pe rsecution . He censured theavarice of the papa l j udges

,the incapacity of clerical

government,and the ignorance of forbearance with

which the Popes themse lve s regarded these abuses .The loud compla ints of the Romans demanded astrict inquiry into the deeds of violence perpetratedunde r Eugenius’s predece ssors and the a lready corrupt

1 (I t vice sua functus , ea gue rer um necess i tasflag i tare o idebatur,

cum now pontzfice popu logue Romano statueret atque fi rmaret . Anna].

E iub. 824.


ecclesiastical State,which

,be ing in the main nothing

more than a great e cclesiastical immunity unde rImpe rial protection

,demanded a firmer se ttlement .

Paschalis had succeeded in evading the Imperialtribuna l . He was now dead , and Lothar, unopposed ,e stablished it in Rome . The negligence of the past Imperialwas re trieved ; the Imperia l powe r proceeded ene r Sgihifii a.

get ically with its work , and acquired the since re 1

1133831 1112

gratitude of the people . The papal exchequer was Camera.

compe lled to surrende r all property confiscated fromthe Romans ; the unjust judge s we re punished withexile , and Lothar, without more ado

,banished them

to France .

1

Imperia l authority enjoyed a momentary degreeof splendour such as i t rare ly aga in atta ined . The

people we re devoted to the German Caesar who defended the ir rights

,and the promulgation of a statute

added to the gene ra l content. Thi s ce lebrated con The Civics t itut ion of Nov. 824 regulated in nine article s everyquestion concerning the administration of law and Lothar.

N . 8the system of relat IOnS between the Clty

’

,the Pope and

CV 24

the Emperor. The joint authority of the tempora l

gove rnment of Emperor and Pope,both in Rome and

the ecclesiastica l State,was recogn ised as a principle

,

the Pope as te rritorial ru le r possessing the init iativeof immediate powe r

,while supremacy

,ultimate appeal.

and the supe rvision of all tempora l affa i rs be longed

1 Astron. c. 38 : reddendo gue inj uste sublata orant , E lotbar ius

magnampopu li R . crea'o i t le t i t iam. Anna]. E inb. 824 : statumpopu li

R . j amdudum guorundamp re sulumpervers i tate depr a'oatum—cor rex i t .

In presence of such facts it is ridiculous to deny the Emperor’

s

supremacy over Rome.

D ist inctionbe tween

58 H ISTORY OF ROME

to the Emperor. Legate s we re to be appointed inthe j oint name of Empe ror and Pope . These envoyswe re annual ly obl iged to report to the Empe ror as tohow the papa l duce s and judge s admin istered justiceto the people

,and whe the r they obeyed the Imperia l

constitution .

1 All compla ints we re to be broughtbe fore the Pope i n the fi rst instance

,in orde r that he

might e ither repa i r the evi l through his own Legate ,or suggest the de spatch of specia l Imperial Missi .That the decree might be al l the more rigorous ,Lothar commanded all papal j udges to appear inpe rson be fore him

,i n orde r that he might inform

himse l f of the ir name and numbe r,and might impre ss

upon the mind of each the Sphere of work confided tohis care .

2

With this settlement of legal affa i rs in general

the various was close ly connected the specia l de te rmination oflaws ofpersons

in Rome.

the persona l choice of law,since Lothar summoned

noble s and people to de cide by which system theywished to be persona l ly judged henceforward . Eachindependent inhabitant of city or duchy was obligedto acknowledge one code of law . Were accounts ofthe registe rs which were taken— in Rome accordingto the regions

,in the duchy according to the various

1 Consti tu tio Lotbar zz I . (Mon . Germ. iii . 249) Volumas etiam,u t

M iss i consti tuantu r a D . Apos tolico et a nobi s, gu i annuatim nobis

r enunciant . These were miss i ex latere impera tor is (Astron . c.

and were emp loyed even earlier there were generally two , a layman and a pr ies t, a count and an abbot , a dux and a b ishop , for bothsp iritual and secular aflairs . Const i tu t io de [Wi ss is ablegandis , E ludo

vici et H lotbar i i Capi tu l. A . 828 (Mon . Germ. iii .2 Volumus et iam et numerum et nomina sci re

,et s inguli s de min i

ster io s ibi credito admoni tionemfacere. N . viii . of the Statute.

IN THE MIDDLE AGES. 59

districts—forthcoming, they would se rve as importantstatistical table s concerning the numbe r of inhabitantsand re lations of race , and would undoubtedly provehow thoroughly Rome itse l f had become saturatedwith Ge rman e lements . The Imperia l ordinanceabolished the principle of Roman territorial law ,

forthe ve ry reason that the Lombard and Sa l ic pe rsona llaw had long been in use in Rome and the surrounding te rritory. I t proved the increasing resistance ofthe German inhabitants, who , during the period whenthe city was subje ct to Frankish supremacy

,re fused

to submit to Roman law,which the papal judges

natura l ly tried to enforce . Not only was the Ge rmanjudicia l system general ly adopted in Rome

,but the

German system of magistracy a lso began to workgradua l changes in the Roman procedure .

1

The distinction of codes of pe rsona l law is characteris t ic of the Middle Ages , the socia l constitution ofwhich rested on the diffe rence s of individua l franchise s

,

and in the she lte r of which the individua l equa l lywith the guild could forti fy himse l f aga inst arbitraryOppre ssion . The distinction shows furthe r to what

1 The paragraph begins Volumus et iam,u t omn . Senat . et pop .

Roman . in ter rogetu r , gua li vu lt leg e viuere,u t sub ea meat . The

clergy for the most part adhered to the Roman law (Cap i tu l . H ladov .

I . u t omn is ordo eccles iar . secund . Romanum leg . wi fe/an t , M on . Germ .

iii . The earliest applicat ion of this const itut ion is seen in an

instrument of Farfa, A . 829 , in Galle tt i , p . 184 u tergue secund. suam

leg em. A . 869 : Ego Gregor iusfl]. Leon i s de Ciw'

tate Roma, Legem

nivens Romamam ( Cbron . Casau r . in Murat . D iss . xx ii . ) thus a lso isthe saloa loge mea in the form of oath of the Romans to be understood .

The earliest example of a judgment be ing g iven in Rome according to

Lombard law is in May 8 13 ( in Galletti, D el. Vestar . p .

HISTORY OF ROME

degree this separation must have nourished the de

fiant Spirit of individual ity which we admire i n the

character of the Middle Age s . I t shows clearly at thesame time the rude and insecure conditions of contem

porary society . The continual col l is ion of individua lrights must have caused endles s confusion and d iffi

cul ty in the system of justice . In Rome the law ofJustinian

,which the Lombards had abol ished in all

the cities they had conque red,st il l rema ined in force .

I t endured as the pe rmanent l ink between antiqu ityand modern time s

,as the ge rm of the civic l ife of the

Romans,and as the deepest source of Roman nation

a l ity. This l iberty to choose a law,as p resuppos

i ng the poss ibil i ty of any Roman acknowledging aFrankish or Lombard code

,must necessarily have

offended the Romans . The edict of Lothar,howeve r

,

never in the sl ightest degree called in que stion theimmense superiority of Roman law, or doubted thenational fee l ing of the Romans , which, although notso prominent as i t Showed itse l f a century late r,neve rthe le ss always existed . While throughout therest of I ta ly the Ge rmans , a lthough they had acceptedthe Roman language and cul ture , we re always nume rous both in cit ie s and province s, and fi l led all the

highest offices in Church and State , Rome a lonecould cla im to represent the purest Latin national ity.

The idea of Roman citizenship stil l survived evenoutside I ta ly in the Empire , and was sti l l synonymous with l ibe rty.

1 The blood of the Romans had ,

1 Two edicts of the Emperor Lewis—one to Bemwein, ArchbishopCrispolitanae Eccl . , from N imwegen , in May 821 ; the second to

Archbishop Adelram of Salzburg , from Frankfort on June 19 , 823

HISTORY OF ROME

to re lat ions of cl ientship,pronounced in favour of the

code of Justinian . They we re then solemnly procla im ed Roman citizens . A formula of the tenth ,perhaps even of the ninth century

,defined the

manne r in which the candidate was to be enrolledin the l ist of Roman cit izens .1

The right of the individua l was thus publ iclyacknowledged by Lothar’s edict the Sa l ic and Lombard law obta ined recognition in the ir respectivesphere s

,but the Roman was and rema ined the al

most unive rsal law,unti l i t was confirmed as the law

of the country by a late r edict of Conrad the Second .

The statute acknowledged the tempora l dominionof the Pope . The Romans we re expressly orde redto yie ld him obedience . To avoid all disturbance atthe papal e lection

,i t was orda ined that no free man

nor S lave Should venture to hinder the e lection,and

that only those Romans on whom age had conferredthe right of voting Should take part in the e le ctionof a pontiff. Exile was imposed as the penalty forthe transgression of this article .

The e lection of a Pope , an act of such importancefor the city, was thus supe rficia l ly regulated , but it i sto be observed that the constitution does not definethe part assigned to the Empe ror. The Emperorcla imed the right of ratification Odoace r, the GothicKings

,the Byzantines , had exe rcised this right

,the

Carol ingians could not renounce i t. I t has been fro

quently doubted whether the se ttlement of this quest ion between Emperor and Pope originated in a

treaty of Lothar. In spite of the fact that only one

1Qualiter Romanusfi er i debeat . See further below.


writer speaks of such a treaty, al l circumstance s of thetime seem in favour of its probabil ity. According tothis author the Roman Cle rgy and people took thefollowing oath

“ I promise by the Almighty God, by the fourGospe ls

,by the Cross of our Lord Je sus Christ, and

by the body of the holy Pe ter, Prince of the Apos tle s,that from this day henceforward I w i l l be true to ourLords and Empe rors Lewis and Lothar, accordingto my powe rs and inte l l igence , without fa lsehood orcunning

,without prej udice to the fa ith I have pro

mised to the Apostolic POpe : that I will not suffe rthe papal e lection to take place in this Roman seatothe rwise than as prescribed by the canon and law

according to my power and knowledge : and that thee le cted sha l l not with my sanction be conse cratedPope until he has taken such an oath in the presenceof the Imperial Missus and Of the people as the Lordand Pope Eugenius did in writing of his own accordfor the general good .

” 1

The se ttlement of al l public and personal re lationswas undoubtedly accompanied by a correspondingadjustment of the administration of the city. And

here we regret the absence of all documents re lating to a matte r so important a s that of the originalre lations Of the Pope to the city afte r the foundation

1 This oath under the Statute of Lothar is found in the new edit ionof the Cap i tu lar ia r eg um Francorum ( 1883 ) of Bore tius (M on . Germ .

Leg . sec. Cenn i rejects the fact , which rests solely on the author ityof this doubtful Fragment , Langob. H ist . (Murat . ii. p . 1 , A .

where i t is said, moreover,that Lothar came to Rome for the second

t ime in 825 . Pag i accepts the s tatement ; Murator i is inclined in itsfavour

,and supports it by the rat ificat ion of the elect ion of Gregory IV.

64 H ISTORY OF ROME

ofhis temporal dominion . As to whether the Romansobta ined by charte r the government of the city bymagistrate s , how the magistrates were appointed ,whether the prefect were re stored , consuls appointed ,we are complete ly in the dark . We cannot

,however,

doubt that change s of some kind took place,that

,in

orde r to reconcile the citizens to the Papacy, the cons t itut ion of Lothar conceded greater rights to the eve rincreas ing requirements of the people . The fact atleast that for a conside rable time afte r the const itu

t ion was granted no insurrection is heard of in Rome ,seems to speak in favour of such a supposition .

1

Such were the eventful transactions of Lotharduring his Second visi t to the city. His constitutionhenceforward rema ined the foundation for the tem

poral position of the Pope and his re lations with theEmperor

,who thus obta ined the supreme j urisd iction

in the e cclesiastica l State .

2 After the Romans and

the Pope had sworn a l legiance to the constitutionLothar could leave the C ity with h is mind at rest,and return to rece ive the pra ises of his gratifiedfathe r .Eugenius the Second died in August 827 , afte r

a brief but prosperous re ign . The peace which theWest in gene ral

,and the ci ty more e special ly

,had en

j oyed was in great part due to the mode rat ion of the

1 G iacinto G igl i (caporione di Campitel lo about 1644) writes (Mscr .

Sessor ian . per au tor i td di Lotbar io Imp . i ] Popolo Romano

tor nb a lla cr ea tione de’

M ag i strat i cbefu rono Consoli , P rcfi tto et 12,

D ecar cbon i nell’

anno di Cbr isto 825 . There is probably some truthin this supposit ion .

2 Ficker, Un tersucb . 11. 366.


Pope ; sti l l more , howeve r, to the Carol ingian edict,which for the first time had given the Roman peoplea certa in autonomy with regard to the Papacy.

1

VALENTINUS I . ,POPE — GREGORY IV .

,POPE — THE

SARACENS INVADE THE MEDITERRANEAN AND FOUNDTHE IR KINGDOM IN S ICILY— GREGORY IV . BU ILDSNEw OSTIA— FALL OF CHARLES’S MONARCHY— DEATHOF LEWIS THE PIOUS—LOTHAR SOLE EMPERORPARTITION OF VERDUN

,843 .

The successor of Eugen ius,Valentinus the First

,Valent ine

the son of Pete r,a Roman of the V ia Lata

,died ég7

Pope ,

W ithin forty days of his acce ssion,when another

Roman,the son of John

,a man of noble birth

,was

e lected to the vacant chair . The new Pope,who

ca l led himse lf Gregory the Fourth,did not

,howeve r

,Gregory

rece ive consecra t ion unt i l afte r he had obta ined the 51

322182222

Imperia l rat ificat ion .

2

The time s were fi l led with threats of approaching storm . In the North Charles ’s re cent ly foundedmonarchy was Shaken by the dissensions of hisa l ready degenerate house ; in the South Saracensand Moors from Africa

,Candia and Spa in advanced

with increasing powe r in the Medite rranean , eage r toga in posse ssion of I ta ly

,as the ir fe llow-be l ieve rs had

1 Lib. Pon t . , Vi ta E ug en . M ax ima au tem pax—nam ipse aci s

amicus . The Vi ta of Eugen ius occupies on ly a line or two .

2 Sed non pr ius ordinatus es t, guam lega tus imp . Romam ven i t , oi

elect ionem popul i , gua lis esset,exam inao i t . Anna]. E inb . A . 827 .

This is the passage which supports the probability of Lothar’

s decree .

VOL . I I I . E

66 H ISTORY OF ROME

a l ready ga ined possession of Spa in . Saracen pirate shad long cru ised in the Tyrrhene Sea

,and had

plundered the is lands and the shore s Of the ma inland ;and towe rs had be en e rected and guards stationeda long the Roman coast as early as the time of Leothe Third for de fence aga inst the pirates . In 8 13they at tacked Cen tumce llae (Civita Vecchia) , sackedLampedusa and I schia

,landed in Cors ica and

Sard in ia,and swarmed in Sici l ian wate rs . 1

The Patricius resident in S ici ly had ( in 8 13 )bought a ten years ’ peace ; a mil itary revolution

,

howeve r,broke out in the beginning of 827 , and

de cided the fate of the beautiful island . The Byzan

tine genera l Euphemius rose In Insurre ction . The

troops of the Armenian Pa lata who rema ined fa i thfulto the Empe ror drove Euphemius to Africa . He rethe tra itor made overture s to Z iéde t Allah

,ruler of

Kairewan,proposing with his a id to conque r the

wea lthy island on condition of obta in ing recogn i

t ion as Emperor. Arabs , Berbe rs , fugitive SpanishMohammedans

,the flowe r of Africa

,sa i led to the

coasts of S ici ly, and landed near Mazara on June17 th, 827 . Pa lata was de feated , the victors advancedbefore Syracuse ; -but, unable to take the city

,

1 Leo I I I . Ep . 4 to Charles li ttordr ia nostra et nostra ab inj iesta t ione

paganor um— tu ta r eddan tu r a tque defense . The Anna]. E inb . A .

8 13 , alone speaks of the devastat ion of Centumcellae . In 8 12 Leo I I I .

(Ep . 8 ) wr ites : ing r ess i sun t in insu lam guandam, gue d ici tu r I scla

maj or e, non longe a N eapoli t . u rbe mi liar ia XXX . Thus was the

ancien t Aenaria already called in the vulgar tongue . The defence of

Cors ica was t ransferred to Count Boniface of Lucca . Leo I I I . alreadymakes use of the name Moors

,Agareni (sons of Hagar), and the

quest ionable term Saracens. See d’

Herbelot on this word.


stormed first of all Pa le rmo on Septembe r 1 1 th,

With Sicily fe l l the bulwark which had defendedthe ma inland from the Saracens . The Southernprovince s henceforward formed the stage of deadlystrife between the Emperors of East and We st and

the African Sultans . The news of the fa l l of S icily,

whe re the enemies of Christendom established the

sea t of an Arab monarchy in the ne ighbouringPa le rmo

,must have caused the Pope to tremble for

the safe ty of Rome i tse lf. Seawards the c ity layopen to the enemy

,for the crumbling wal l s of Portus

and O stia could offer no resistance to the invaderwho wished to ente r by the Tibe r. A Romangarrison may stil l have been quarte red within the

wa lls of e ithe r fortre ss,bu t the number of inhabitants

of both one and the othe r was da i ly reduced by fl ight .

O st ia was now more act ive and populous than Portus,

the vesse ls which stil l made the i r way to Romefollowing the left arm of the Tibe r

,which remained

navigable . Amid the ruins of ancient temples,baths

and theat re s the church of S . Aurea had been e rected ,and here dwe lt the Bishop , the most important of allthe suburbicarian pre late s

,to whom be longed the

privilege of consecrat ing the Pope .

2 Gregory resolvedto fortify Ostia . The utte r ruin of the ancien t cityconvinced him

,howeve r

,of the expediency of found

1 S tor ia dei M u su lmann i di S ici lia , by M ichele Amari .2 Ep . Host iens is , gu i debet consecra r e et benedi r e Apostolicum p re

omn ibus ali is , says John D iaconus (Mabillon,M us . I t . ii . he

then enumerates in order the Bishops of S. Rufina,Portus

,Albano,

Tusculum,Sabina, Praeneste.

H ISTORY OF ROME

ing a new o ne .

1 He built the second city from the

mate r ial s of its predecessor, the monuments of which

we re now entire ly de stroyed . He surrounded hisfoundation with strong wal ls

,whose towers he pro

v ided with catapults . 2 His work finished,the Pope

ca l led the town afte r h imse l f,Gregoriopolis ; but

happily it d id not long re ta in its unwie ldy name .

The year of the foundation of New O stia i s unknownit must

,however , have fol lowed close on the conquest

of Pa lermo by the Mussulmen .

While the advance of the Saracens struck Christendom with dismay

,the wanton quarre l s between

Charles ’s successors made doubtful its de fence bythe Empire . The new Roman Empire seemed onthe point of disruption ; the crown of its greatfounde r was dishonoured on the head of his own sonand by the insolent hands of his grandsons . The

rude times of the Me rovingians were revived onCharle s ’s death lust of powe r

,avarice and l icentious

ness,characteristics of the ancien t Frankish dynasty

,

reappeared to corrupt the new . The sons rose aga instthe ir fathe r

,and the whole Empire was aflame with

the unnatura l rebe l l ion . The appearance of the

great Charle s may be compared to a flash of l ightning,

which,pierc ing the night , i l luminated the earth for a

moment,only to leave darkness behind .

Lewis the Pious married for the second time in 8 19 .

1 Vi ta Gr egor . I V. n . 476 feci t— in p re dicta civi tate Ost iens i civi

ta tem a liam a solo. Never the less , not in , but close to it . Thus ancientCapua was deserted abou t 84 1 , and a little later new Capua arose.

2 The expressions are por t is s imu ],ac ser is

,et catbar acti s—et

desuper—petrar ias nobi li ar te composu i t , et afor is—a ltiom'

fossato precinx i t

,nefaci lius mu ros con t ing ere ist i valer en t .

7o H ISTORY OF ROME

The Head of the Church had witnessed how,afte r

Lewis ’s de se rtion by his corrupt adherents,the fathe r

had been made prisoner by his sOns how the bishopshad supported the frivolous pol itica l grievance s ofthe prince s ; and he afte rwards learnt that a counci lat Compiegne had excommunicated the dethronedEmperor . He himse l f had only sought to e ffect anequ ivoca l mediation

,the re sult of which had dimin

ished his authority . Ca l led to the highe st mission ofthe priesthood— to soothe irritated humanity by love ,and to e stabl ish peace be tween princes and people she had Shown himse l f intent sole ly on his own

advantage .

Afte r the brothe rs had divided the Empire and hadquarre l led afre sh

,afte r

,with the a id of Lewis of

Ge rmany,the Empe ror had reascended the throne ,

Lothar came to I ta ly . The Pope,who dared not

openly acquiesce in his course Of conduct, was

obl iged to reprimand the undutiful son ; Lothar nowse ized on the e cclesiast ica l prope rty and his offic ial seven put some of the POpe

’

S followe rs to death . The

Empe ror wished himse l f to come to Rome to easehimse l f of his burthen of gui lt and mise ry at the

Apostle ’s grave,but

,unable to carry out his proj ect

,

because the bishops of France wished to depose him . Gregory wroteto him that he was m indfu l of the oath tendered to the Emperor , but

that he 2

must reprove him for all that he had done to destroy the unityand peace of the church . (Mans i XIV. N ithard (H ist . i . c. 4)says that the rebellious sons had won the Pope over to the ir

,

s idemagn is precibus in supplemen tum sue volun ta t is assumun t . He was

entire ly in Lothar ’s power , R . Baxmann,D ie Poli t ik der P aps te,

i . 343 Simson, j abrb. des f ranb. Reicbs un ter Ludw ig der F rommen ,

vol. ii .


he sent envoys to his son and to the Pope . Gregorya l so sent his nuncios to France ; Lothar, howeve r,expe l led them

,and it was only in secre t that the

papa l le tters we re conveyed across the Alps . Suchare the events of the year 836 . The history of Romeis ve i led in silence so complete that the anna l isteage rly se ize s on these occurrences in orde r to fi l l thevoid of time .

The unhappy Lewis died on July 20 th, 840 and Death of

Lothar,to whom he had bequeathed the crown ,

1

5 5353531;sceptre and sword of Empire

,now ascended the

throne as sole emperor. Strife,howeve r

,broke forth

with fresh fury,and a fierce c ivi l war began , which

Gregory st rove in va in to appease . Afte r Lothar hadunsheathed the Sword to de fend the un ity of themonarchy aga inst his brothe rs

,afte r he had been

vanqu ished on the deadly fie ld of Auxe rre (June2 5th, the comba tan ts at last came to te rms inthe memorable partit ion of Ve rdun of the year 843 , Par tit ion of

by which the monarchy of Charles was dismembe redand reduced to i ts nationa l racial d ivisions

,and 843 .

Germany,I taly and France became separate nat ions .

The Emperor Lothar rece ived the entire kingdom ofI taly with the “ Roman c ity

,and consequent ly

designated his son,Lewis the Second

,King of I ta ly.

1

Such was the form which the Empire of Char les—a

theocracy e rected on the principle s of Christendom

1 Omn ia r egna I talie cum ipsa Romana u rbe, gue et modo ab omn i

sancta eccles ia prop ter pr e sen t iam apostolor . P etr i et P au li speciali

guodam oenera tu r pr ivi leg io, et guond . p rop ter Roman i nomin i s inflictam poten t iam orbi s ter rar . domina dicta fuerat thus Regino , Abbotof Priim

,Cbron . A . 842 .

HISTORY OF ROME

assumed wi thin a generation after the coronation ofthe great Emperor.

5 . MAN IA FOR RELICS —THE BOD IES OF SAINTS—THEIRREMOVAL — CHARACTER OF THE P ILGRIMAGES OF

THE N INTH CENTURY GREGORY IV. REBU ILDSTHE BAS ILICA OF S. MARK—RESTORES THE AQUASABBATINA— BU ILDS THE PAPAL VILLA DRACO —H IS

DEATH IN 844 .

The historian of Rome at this pe riod is obl iged tofa l l back on the annal s of the Frankish chronicle rs ,which

,howeve r

,supply but scanty information

,and

on the biographie s of the Pope s,which conta in l i ttle

beyond l ist s of build ings and vot ive gifts . He the refore de spa irs of giving any account of civic l ife inRome ; but , S ince re l igious inte rests chiefly occupiedthe minds of the C i tizens

,we may bestow a glance

upon re l igious matters .Rome sti l l continued to scatte r re l ics ove r the

We st,as in the days of A s to lf and Desiderius . A

new pass ion,the singular desire for the posse ss ion of

the bodies of sa ints had mastered the Christian world ;and, foste red by the avarice and lust of powe r of theprie sts

,i t increased in the growing ignorance of the

age to comple te frenzy . We look back appa l led tothe time when a Ske le ton stood on the a l tar ofHumanity to rece ive its laments

,its desire s

,its

shudde ring rapture s . The Romans,who with pract i

cal insight a lways unde rstood how to make capita lout of the needs of fore ign nations , now drove a


regular trade in corpses,re l ics and image s of the

sa ints,and to this traffic and to the sa le of ancient

manuscripts the commerce of the city was entire lyrestricted .

1 The countless pilgrims who thronged tothe sacred capital could no t leave her without bearing away some consecrated memoria l . They broughtre l ics from the Ca tacombs

,as visitors of the present

day buy jewe ls, pictures and statue s . Only bishopsor princes

,howeve r

,were able to ga in possession of

entire corpse s . The guardians of the churchyardskept watch through anxious nights

,as i f aga inst

hyaenas,while thieve s prowled around and employed

a thousand frauds to atta in the ir obj ects . Thesethieves themse lve s were frequently the victims offraud

,for the amused priests did not hesitate to pro

cure fa lse corpse s and furnish them with desirablelabe ls .In 827 the Franks stole the rema ins of S S . Mar

cellinus and Pe te r,and carried them to Soissons . In

849 a presbyte r of Rhe ims took a body,which he

asserted was that of the mothe r of Constantine .

2 The

1 St ill later , G erman sat ire, jeering at Rome

,said

Tr uncast i viz/os cr udeli vu lnere sanctos

Vender e nunc bor um mor tua membr a soles .

Epig ram on Rome in Cod . Udalr ici XXI .

2 In the n inth or tenth cen tury Napoleon wou ld have imposed a

tribute of corpses upon Rome . Chron iclers record the arr ival of SS.

Marcellinus and Peter in Aachen (Annal. Xan t . and Astron . c .

Siegbert asser ts that the body of S . He lena lay in the church dedicatedto these martyrs . Baronius

,however

,ad A . 849 , says that there was

an old d ispu te between the Lat ins and Greeks concerning the possessionof her remains. They were also cla imed by the Vene t ians . The

French cla imed to possess the remains even of Gregory I . as well asthose of Benedict .

74 H ISTORY OF ROME

possession of rema ins of such exal ted sanctity wase steemed so va luable

,as entire ly to condone the dis

grace o f the the ft. I t was a lso provided that the se

rema ins should work miracle s while on the i r trave l s,

and thus announce the ir acquiescence in the i r enforcedtranslation and increase the ir own va lue . The customof the ancient Romans

,who brought the l ikenesses of

gods from fore ign c i tie s to place them in the ir temple s ,seemed thus to be revived . The Pope s frequentlygave the i r consent to the remova l of Roman sa ints toothe r lands ; and the storm of entrea t ie s from c i ties ,churches and princes for the possession of suchfavours was ince ssant . The dead we re borne out ofthe city on ornamenta l cars

,accompanied by a solemn

procession of prie sts and laymen,who

,bearing torches

and chanting hymns,followed the coffin some dis

tance on its way . The people streamed forth to mee tthe fune ra l car all a long its rou te . They imploredmirac le s

,chiefly in the form of hea l ing . Arrived

at i ts goal,i n some town of Ge rmany

,France or

England,the dead was honoured wi th a se rie s of

festiva ls which lasted severa l days . Disma l triumpha lprocess ions such as the se frequently le ft Rome forthe province s of the We st

,and while they advanced

from one city or country to anothe r,they diffused a

sort of morbid fa i th and a spirit of supe rstitiousenthusiasm

,of which we can now scarce ly form an

idea }

1 See for example Trans lat io S . A lexandr i (Mon . Germ . and

Einhardi,H ist . Tr ans la t . SS . M ar cel]. et Petr i , Act SS . Jun i 2 , p . 20 1 .

I n 836 the body of B ishop Severu s was s tolen from Ravenna and

brought to Mainz by Archbishop O tger.


The translation of two ce lebrated Apostle s prec ise lya t this period excited a universa l Sensation and in

creased the de sire for S imilar possessions . In 828

Vene t ian me rchants,amid many adventure s , brought

the body of S . Mark from Alexandria to Venice,the

patron of which city the saint now became .

1 In 840

the re arrived at Benevento anothe r apostle,Bar

tholomew,who had long previously swum in his

marble coffin from India to the island of Lipari . The

Saracens had plunde red the island late r in the year,and taken the bone s of the saint from the grave . Ahe rmit collected and carried them to Benevento

,where

Sicard,the re ign ing prince

,la id them in the cathedra l

amid unspeakable rejoic ings .2 The Southe rn I ta l ians ,a lready sunk in the grosse st supe rst itions

,made u se of

dead sa int s for polit ica l demonst rat ions . In 87 1 the

Capuans,bear ing the body of S . Ge rmanu s on the ir

shoulde rs,had ente red the camp of Lewis the Second ,

hoping by means of the ir sacred burthen to propit iatethe King . The anxie ty for sa intly re l ics was scarce lyanywhe re more fe rvent than at the court of the lastLombard rule r of I ta ly . As in the fifteenth and sixteen th centuries Popes or Prince s we re en thusiasticin collecting antiquitie s and manuscripts , so Sicard ,

1 Sa ints became patrons of cit ies . Rome placed S . Peter and S .

Pau l upon her columns,Ven ice the L ion of S . Mark , Genoa S .

George . The dead Mark worked his greatest m iracle in the bu ildingof the Cathedra l of Ven ice

,which was begun in 9 76 .

2 Leo Ost iens . i . c. 24. I,

saw at Mon te Casino two manuscripts ,n . 139 and 149 , of the end of the e leventh century

,which re late the

translation of S . Bartholomew to Lipar i and Beneven to they are s ilent,

however,regarding his removal to the island in the T iber in the t ime

of Otto I I . or I I I .

HISTORY OF ROME

sending his agents to the i slands and a long the coasts ,col lected bones and Skulls

,entire bodie s and re l ics ,

which he deposited in the cathedral of Benevento,thus

entire ly t ransforming the temple i n to a museum ofsacred fossil s . We may imagine the a lacrity withwhich he was se rved . As othe r monarchs ex tortedt ribute from the conque red

,he made u se of his wars

to extort corpses . He forced the people of Amalfi tosurrende r the body of Trifomena

,as his fathe r Sico

had previously obliged the Neapol itan s to surrende rthe body of S . Januarius,which a lso had been broughtto Benevento amid the enthusiastic rej oicings of theinhabitants .1

With this worship Of the dead was associatedthe great pilgrimage movement

,which at this

t ime and in succeeding centurie s stirred the We st.Movement is a natura l law of mankind ; wars and

business,comme rce and trave l

,have a lways kept the

l ife of socie ty in mot ion bu t in early mediae va l t ime sthe peace ful movement of mankind consisted chieflyin pilgrimage s

,which reached the ir he ight in the

Crusades,the greatest p i lgrimage i n the history of the

world . All race s , all age s and classe s took part inthe se pilgrimages the empe ror

,prince and bishop as

we l l as the beggar,the chi ld

,the youth

,the noble

matron . The old man wande red bare foot bea r ing thepilgrim ’s staff. The impulse foste red in mankind a

roman tic spirit,the longing for the adventurous and

unknown . Rome had ca l led the se proce ssions intoexistence in the We st

,and had drawn them within

her wal l s . And although they did not end in Rome .1 Anon . Sa ler u . c . 49 .

HISTORY OF ROME

inte rcourse with men who we re seve red from all familyt ie s

,the adventures and a l lurements offe red by the

j ourney,the seduct ive arts pract ised in the d issolute

c it ies of the South,wrought the ruin of countless

women,and many who had le ft the i r native country as

mode st ma idens,widows or nuns to strengthen the i r

vows a t the grave of S . Peter, re turned home fal len , orrema ined behind to lead an abandoned l i fe .

1

Pilgrims streamed da ily through the gate s of Rome .

If some bore the aspect of genuine pie ty,the begga r

l ike and fie rce demeanour of others must have st ruckt e rror into the beholde r. Many we re branded withthe most he inous crimes . The laws of modern socie tyobl ige the crimina l to be withdrawn from the publicgaze and removed from all assoc iation with the up

right,and leave him in sol itude to his punishment or

his re formation . A contrary course was pursued inthe Middle Ages . The cr iminal was sent forth prov ided wi th a ce rtificate from his bishop

,which openly

acknowledged him guilty of murde r or incest, pre

scribed his journey,i ts mode and its duration

,and at

the same time furn ished him with a ce rtificate ofidentity which granted him protection . He traded onhis crime

,atte sted by the episcopal S ignature

,as on a

passport,showing it to all abbots and bishops in the

places through which he passed . To this le tter of in

1 AS early as 744 Archb ishop Bon iface of M ilan wrote to Cuthbertof Can terbury that the Synod should forbid women and nuns i ter etf r e

guen t iam, guam ad Roman . civi tat . faciun t , gu ia mag na expar te

pcreunt , paucis remanen t ibus in teg r zs . P erpauce en im sun t civi tates

in Langobardia . Francia Gallia , in qua non s i t

meretr i x gener is Ang lorum The Synod of Fr IulI In 79 1 (Canon XI I . )forbade nuns from go ing on pilgrimages to Rome . Muratori , D iss. 58 .


t roduct ion and of condemnation the criminal owed hishospitable reception . He could trave l fre e of carefrom station to station unti l he reached the sanctuarywhich was his des t ined goa l .1 The penal code of theMiddle Ages shows a harsh contradict ion betweenbruta l barbarity and ange l ic mildness . The glor iousprinciple s of Christ ian ity

,of showing me rcy to the

fa l len,or open ing the way of reconc i l iat ion for the

sinne r,came into coll is ion with the institut ion s of c ivi l

socie ty. The same age which through a decree of asacred synod condemned offende rs gui lty of hightreason to lose the ir sight , or to ride through the c ityon a mangy ass

,provided the murdere r of fathe r or

mothe r with a pilgrim ’s passport,and shie lded him

from the vengeance of the Furies which had followedOrestes . Rome

,the great refug ium pecca torum,

gaveShe l te r to all sins that eve r had f orm or name . The

historie s of the pilgr images we re a t the same t ime thecrimina l historie s of the period . Te rrible figure s frequent ly cross the scene— men who

,l ike the pen itents

of India, carr ied cha ins , othe rs ha l f-naked , with ironrings round the ir necks

,o r with a band of iron we lded

round the arm . The se we re the murde re rs of paren t s,

brothers or the ir own children,upon whom a bishop

1 Tractor ia pro i t inereperag endo in the B oob of Formu le , Marculfi

Monachi , Paris , 16 13 , lib . v . 2 14 de boc a id. facto guod instzgan teadver sar io—p ropr iumfi lium suum

,s ine nepotem— in teiy

‘ecer i t . Since

the murderer was obliged to spend so many years in p ilgrimages , he was

not to be den ied mans ionem etfocum, panem et aguam . A pilgrimage

as pun ishment for the crime ofmanslaughter had taken the place of the

ancient German Wereg ild . Envoys on their travels were prov ided forsomewhat better . See the tractor ia legatorum, p . 33 , 11. xi .

,and the

long bill of fare for the ir entertainment .

H ISTORY OF ROME

had imposed a p ilgrimage to Rome . They threwthemse lve s down on the graves with shrieks

,scourged

themse lves , prayed , fe l l into ecstacie s. Sometime sthe i r sk il l succeeded in bursting the i r fetters at the

tomb of some martyr . And S ince the expiation of acrime offered an immediate passport to hospita l ity, i thappened not unfrequently that rogue s d isguisedthemse lves unde r the mask of criminal s

,s imply in

orde r to obta in Opportun ity of adventure and ga in .

They trave l led through the country with fa l se passports

,excited the thoughtless compassion of man

kind,obta ined food in abbeys or in pi lgrims ’ quarters .

Many fe igned to be possessed,ran with strange

ge sticulations through the towns,

and ,throwing

themse lves down bes ide the image s of the sa ints inthe convents, i n the ir pre sence suddenly rega inedsense and speech

,rece ived presents

,by no means

insign ificant, from the monks,and proceeded on

the i r way to ply the i r arts e lsewhe re .

1

The worship of re l i cs has no more powerful accuserthan the immoral ity and fa l sehood which we re i tsconsequence s in the Middle Age s .

Greg ory To Gregory the Fourth is ascribed the institutionof the festiva l of All Sa ints , a festiva l e specia l ly a l l ied

5 : Mark with the Pantheon , and ce lebrated throughout theentire We st on November I s t . The translation ofthe body of S . Mark to Venice may have promptedthe Pope to restore the basi l ica be low the Capitol

1 Charles had a lready issued an edict against frauds of this kindCap i tu lar e, n . 45 , Aachen ,

A . 802 u t mangones et cociones ct‘

nudi

bomines gu i cum fer ro oadun t , non s inan tu r oagar i et decep t iones

bomin ibus agere. M on . Germ. 100, Muratori,D iss . xxiii .

82 H ISTORY OF ROME

restored the Colony. The founde r of New O stiawas obl iged to provide the territory on the Tiberwith inhabitants he there fore e stabl ished the colonyof Draco . Here he a lso built himse l f a beautifu lcountry house

,adorned with porticoes— the first

instance on re cord of a papal vi l la .

1

Gregory the Fourth died , according to the statements of e cclesiastica l writers

,on January 2sth, 844 .

1 I bid . I n cur te, que cognominatur D racon is , domum satis d ig

nam, &c. I n qua tam ipse, quamque et iam fu tu r i Pon tifices cum

omn ibus , qu i eis obsequun tu r , quamdiu eis placuer i t ibidem stat iose

immor a r i va leant . The Domuscultae are here called cu r tes . N ibby(Anna]. de din tor n i di Roma

, i . 553) shows the fundus D racon is,and

the present tenute ofDragone and Dragoncello in this neighbourhood.

C H A P T E R I I I .

1 . SERGIUS I I . ,POPE— KING LEWIS COMES To ROME

—H IS CORONATION—H IS D IFFERENCES WITH THE

POPE AND THE ROMANS— SICONOLF IN ROME—THE

SARACENS ATTACK AND PLUNDER S . PETER ’S AND

S . PAUL’S— DEATH OF SERGIUS

ROME was soon stirred to excitement by a dividede lect ion . Cle rgy and noble s ( the Prince s of theQuirites

,as the L iber P ontifica lis with Roman de

corum begins to expre ss i tse lf) e lected Se rgius,Cardinal of S . Martin and Sylveste r ; while John ,

an

ambitious deacon , was forcibly conducted to the

Lateran by a body of armed re ta ine rs . The noble sque l led the disturbance , and Se rgius the Second was Serg ius I I .orda ined . Be longing himse l f to an i l lustrious Roman £7

132 844

family, he was favoured by the nobil ity .

1 His consecration

,however, took place W ithout the Emperor

’sratification , and was apparently performed in hasteowing to the tumult in the city. Lothar

,indignant

at the violat ion of his Imperia l right s,commanded

the King of I ta ly to advance with an army to Rome .

1 Mart inus Polonus invents a story to the effect that he was calledOs Por ci , and that he was therefore the first Pope who changed hisname . John XI I . , however, is the earliest instance of a Pope changinghis name .

H ISTORY OF ROME

Lewis s et forth accompanied by Drogo,Bishop of

Me tz,by a son of Charle s the Great

,and by severa l

pre lates and counts . Outrages committed on hismarch through the e ccle siastica l State announced hisindignation from afar. An imposing e scort, sent bySergius

,me t him a short distance from the city. At

the n inth mile stone he was rece ived by the judice s , amile ou t side the gates by all the schools of the mil itiaand the cle rgy. I t was the Sunday afte r Whitsun t ide .

The Pope awa ited him at the gates of S . Pe ter’s,

saluted and embraced him ,and walk ing at the pontiff’s

right hand he advanced through the atrium to theS i lver door of the basi l ica . But it and all other doorswe re shut . The wary pontiff

,turning to the dismayed

king,thus addressed him :

“ If thou comest with upright and benevolent intentions

,and for the we l fare

of the republi c,the city and this church

,then Shal l

these doors be opened unto thee ; i f otherwise , ne i the rI nor any at my command Sha l l open them .

” 1 The

King protested that he had . come with good imtent ions the doors were Opened

,and the solemn chant

,

Benedictus que venit in nomine Domini” gree ted

the entrance of both King and Pope . Togethe r theykne lt in prayer at the grave of the Apostle . Hereprinces were led on the i r arriva l

,and here the ir wrath

was frequently averted l ike a harmless flash of lightning by the bronze coffin of a sa int .The Frankish troops encamped outside the wa l ls,

1 L ib,Pont . in Sergio I I . n . 484. The Anna]. B er t in . , ad A . 844,

assign expressly as the cause of Lewis ’s arrival : no deinccps decedente

apostolico qu isquam i llic p re ter su i ( imperator i ? ) j ussionem missorum

que suor umpre sen tiam ordinetur ant i stes.

H ISTORY OF ROME

eve r, consented to appoint Bishop Drogo as his VicarApostol i c in Gaul and Ge rmany. He solemnly re

cognised the Frankish supremacy in Rome,and

Frankish influence was aga in restored in southernI taly. Precise ly at this time S icono lf, Prince ofBenevento and Sale rno

,appeared with a re tinue that

resembled an army . Harassed by the Saracens,he

hastened to Rome to conclude a treaty with Lewis,and pledging himse l f to a t ribute of ten thousandgold sol id i

,he acknowledged himse l f vassal to the

King of I ta ly . Lewis departed for Pavia , to the

unfe igned joy of the Romans . This was one ofthe rare moments in the history of the city

,when

Pope,nobles and people found themse lve s of one

accord,and when the united re sistance to the royal

wil l qu ickened Roman patriotism .

1

S icono lf le ft the city at the same time . Afte r themurde r of his brothe r S icard in 840 , he had beenre leased from his prison in Taranto

,had unsucce ssful ly

la id siege to Benevento,whe re Radelchis had se ized

on his brothe r’s throne,and had eventual ly been

obl iged to re st satisfied wi th the posse ssion of Sale rno .

The fa i r k ingdom of A r ichis hence forward remaineddivided into three parts

,Benevento— Sale rno and

Capua ; and the severance served to Open a path for

f aciant solummodo consent io. N am Hludoo ico ej us fi lio u t boc pora

g a tur nec ego, nec omn is Romanor . nobi li tas consens it . n . 487 .

1 Tunc zero laet i omnes cum conj ug ibus , ac li ber is , Senatus Popu lusq.

Rom . ( these ideas , like that of Qu i r i tum P r incipes , now become more

general) ing en t i pes te li ber a t i—sanct . Sergi um P r e su lem velu t salu t i s

auctorem ac rest i tu torem pacis oeneraban tu r . n . 489 . The L iber

Pon ti/icalis here interrupts its valuable account to resume its enumera

t ion of vot ive g ifts .


the Saracens into the inte rior. Radelchis himse l fhad summoned these robber horde s to his aid at Bari .They he re obtained a secure foothold

,whence they

made themse lve s masters of Taranto and devastatedthe whole of Apulia.

While the Arabs thus se ttled on the southe rn ma in Advance

land,the fleets of Kairewan or Pa le rmo scoured the

seas,threatened the islands

,even occupied some of

them . In 845 they se ized ancient M isenum in the

very face of Naples . But Rome was the goal of the irdesires . They hoped to plant the flag of the Prophe ton S . Pe ter’s

,and to enrich themse lve s with the

t reasures be longing to the churche s with which thecity was fi l led .

In August 846 a Saracen flee t sa i led to the mouth Theyat tack and

of the T ibe r. The papal guards In New O st i a were p lunder 3 .

e ithe r overpowered or despised . While one horde gf t

f

fi

filfsd

advanced to C ivita Vecchia anothe r sa i led up the 846 .

river,and at the same time a third de tachment forced

its way on from O stia and Portus . Whe the r or notthe Saracens actua l ly attacked Rome we do not know.

No chronicle r informs us of any attack. Neverthe

less,it i s probable that the Romans stoutly de fended

the ir wa l l s,and that the Vatican and S . Paul ’s

,be ing

unprotected,rema ined at the me rcy of the enemy .

The Saxons, Lombards , Frisians and Franks settledin the Borgo must a l so undoubtedly have made somere sistance . They were

,however

,overpowered

,and

the Saracens we re thus enabled to sack S . Pe ter ’sundisturbed .

1 This temple had been hal lowed to the

1 The resistance made by the Schools of Foreigners is shown byH i stor . Ignoti . Cass in . (M on . Germ. Saracen i Orator ium

88 H ISTORY OF ROME

whole of Christendom,not only by its five hundred

years’

existence,but a lso by the acts of universa l im

portance which had taken place within its walls .The footprints of ages

,the trace s of the earthly l ife ,

pilgrimage and death of humanity seemed to beimpressed upon its hithe rto unde se crated pavement .How many Empe rors and Kings whose names we reforgotten and whose realms had passed away hadente red and quitted its doors

,and on what solemn

occasions . How many Pope s re sted within its vaults .The reverence of the We st knew no more sacred spot .And this treasure-house of the Christian fa ith

,which

ne i the r Goths,Vanda l s

,Greeks

,nor Lombards had

eve r ente red,was now at the mercy of a brigand

horde from Africa .

Imagination fa i ls to real ise the wealth of the

treasure he re accumulated . Since the days of Cons tant ine

,the Empe rors

,the Princes

n

of the West,the

Carol ingians and the POpes had endowed the basil icawith splendid offe rings

,unti l S . Peter

’s might in truthbe regarded as the museum Of five centuries of art .

Among the objects here col le cted some were famouson accoun t of the i r form or historic va lue . Suchwe rethe ancient gold cross on the cofl‘in of the Apostle

,

the grea t Pharu s of Adrian,and Charle s ’s si lve r table

with the re l ief of Byzantium .

1 All these treasure s

totum devasta'oer un t b. P r inc. Ap . P etr i beat ique et E cc]. P au li,mu]

tosq. i bid. per emerun t Saxones . See the inscription from S .

M iche le in Sassia , quoted in vol. which serves as witness to the

trad it ion .

1 Lib. P on t . , Vi ta B enedict i , n . 576, ment ions a pbarum can tbar um

argenteum seden tem in pedibus quatuor a Saracen is ablatum. The

Romans also perp etrated robberies . The golden cross of Charles had

HISTORY OF ROME

sacked all the churche s . Benedict ’s statements , howeve r, with regard to a time a l ready distant are confused and inaccurate . He repre sents the EmperorLewis as de scending from Monte Mario and sufferinga disgrace ful defeat on the fie ld of Nero . He extol sthe Margrave Guido of Spoleto

,who

,summoned by

the Pope,appeared at the head of his va l iant Lom

bards . His force s,in conjunction with the Romans ,

defeated the infide ls i n a fie rce contest , and pursuedthem as far as Civita Ve cchia .

1 Guido ’s re l ie f,a des

perate struggle in the Borgo , or at the Bridge Of S .

Pete r ’s (at which point the Mahommedans hoped toga in an entrance ) , i s undoubted . The brigands atlength withdrew afte r they had pillaged the Campagnaand leve l led the Domuscu ltae and the bishopric ofS ilva Candida to the ground . Pursued by Guido, aparty of the Spoilers with the i r booty and prisonersmade for Civita Ve cchia

,While another horde de

parted,Spreading devastation along the i r route , by the

Via Appia to Fundi . A storm destroyed seve ra l ofthe pirate s ’ ve sse l s . The wave s washed up manyof the Saracen corpses

,which surrendered the jewe l s

which fi lled the i r pockets .2 The fugit ive s who hadre treated by land we re pursued by the Lombard

1 Bened. Cbron . c. 26 : Guido routed the Saracens a por tas Sass ie

civi tas Leon iano,and a pon tes S . P etr i . I t is true that the Leon ina d id

not yet ex ist . Concern ing the defeat of Lewis : prop ter boc popu li

Roman i u i der is ione abuerun t F r anci , u sque in odiernum diem. The

Cbron . Cas in . c. 9 a lso g ives an account of the defeat of the Franks(4 id . N but i t took place at Gaeta . M art inus Polonus transcribesBenedict as though in the form of an extract . For other passages see

Dummler,Gescb . des ostfra

'

nb. Reicbs . i . 289 .

2 Anna]. B er t in . A . 847 .


army as far as the walls of Gaeta. Here a battle

took place,when the arriva l of the brave Caesarius , a

son of the Magiste r M ilitum Sergius of Naples, alone

saved the Margrave from defeat . The unfortunate

Sergius the Second died on January 27 th, 847 , and

found a grave in the ve ry cathedral the sack of which

had perhaps broken his heart.1

2 . LEO IV . BECOMES POPE— FIRE IN THE BORGOLEAGUE OF ROME

,NAPLES, AMALFI , AND GIETA

AGAINST THE SARACENS—NAVAL VICTORY AT OSTIA,849

— LEO IV. BU ILDS THE CIVITAS LEONINAITS WALLS AND GATES—VERSES OVER ITS CHIEFGATES .

On the death of Sergius,Leo

,Cardina l of the

Quattro Coronati , a Roman of Lombard ancestry,and

the son of Radoald,was chosen to fi l l the vacant

throne . The city stil l lay in dread of the Saracens,and the people the refore desired the immediate consecration of the candidate . Leo the Fourth was con Leo IV. ,

sequently orda ined without wa iting for the Impe ria l {347-855 °

consent. The urgency of the circumstances may be

pleaded in behalf of the Romans, more e specia lly as

they sent a le tter to the Empe ror assuring him ofthe i r submission .

2

1 Epitaph in Baronius ad A . 847 . His monument is the Basilica of

SS . Mart inus and Sylvester, of which he had been Cardinal. He

rebuilt the church and added a convent . The building has beengreat ly altered, and Serg ius

’s mosaics have disappeared .

2 Vi ta Leon is I V. 11. 497 . The decrees quoted by Gratianus do not

prove, as Baronius believes,that Leo IV. had d isputed the right of

Imperial consent .

HISTORY OF ROME

An earthquake and a fire added the ir terrors to thepreva i l ing agitation . The Saxon quarte r was reducedto ashes , and the port ico of S . Pe te r’s was destroyed .

The fire found ready mate rial in the houses of the

German settlers,who had e ither brought with them

from the i r northern homes the custom of cove ring theroofs with shingle s

,or

,s ince the city re turned in its

period of decl ine to the primitive conditions of itsearl ie r days

,had found the usage al ready existing on

the ir arrival .1 Re l igious be l ie f ascribes the e scape ofthe basi l ica to the praye rs of Leo

,who quenched the

the flame s by making the S ign of the Cross .2 The

recollection of this fire in the borgo was long prese rved in the C ity

,and has been immortal ised by

Raffaello in a fre sco in one of the rooms of the Vatican now known as the Sala de l l ’ incendio .

The bootyWhich awa ited themin Rome meanwhi leinduced the African pirate s to unde rtake anothe rexpedition . While the Romans strengthened the i rwa l ls and fortified the quarte r of S . Pete r, newsreached them of the preparation of an immenseSaracen flee t in Sardinia . I t was the year 849 .

Fortunate ly at the same time the Southern seaportsformed a league— the first in the history Of the Middle

Age s . Amalfi,Gazta and Naple s

,a lready flourishing

1 Roofs of shing les were un iversal dur ing the republ ican per iod of

ancient Rome . NO s tamps of t ile manufactor ies have been foundearl ier than the t ime of Augustus . De Ross i , P ian te I cnog raficbe diRoma p. 20—The dwellings of the pilgrims had undoubtedlyshing le roofs . Scandula already appears in edicts of Rothar . Casa

scandu licia or scindolica in diplomas Farfa, saec. x. for instance, unadomo solor ata scandu licia

,in the Field ofMars .

2 Vi ta Leon is , n . 505.

Navalvictory atOs tia, 849 .

H ISTORY OF ROME

The solemnity ended,Leo re turned to the city, and

on the fol lowing day the Saracen sa i ls appeared ins ight of Ostia . The Neapol itans courageously rowedto mee t them ; the i r gal leys made an attack . But asudden storm threw everything into confusion and

put an end to hostil i ties ; the enemies ’ vesse l s we redispersed or sunk . Many Saracens were shipwreckedon the Tyrrhene Islands , and we re there sla in . Manyfe l l into the hands of Roman capta ins

,and we re e ithe r

executed in O stia or carried in cha ins to Rome . Andas the Sicil ian Gre eks had made use of the Carthaginian captive s in bui lding the temple s of Ag rigentumand Selinus afte r the great victory at Himera

,so the

Romans now compe l led Saracen prisone rs to labourin the e rection of the Vat ican city.

1 Rome had aga inslaves of war

,and afte r four hundred years ce lebrated

anothe r triumph . The eye-witne ss of these events is

s ilent, i t is true , concern ing the share borne by theRomans in this glorious V i ctory

,of which the young

Caesarius was the hero . If the column of Duilius ,

adorned with the rostra of vesse ls,restored by

Tiberius, sti l l remained e rect in the ancient Forum,

i t i s scarce ly probable that any Roman now unde rstood e ithe r its meaning or i ts inscription ; and the

victory at Ostia, in which papal ga l leys had doubtlesstaken part was ce lebrated amid solemn thanksgiving

appareat g lor iosum . Leo’s biographer relates the fact with the pre

cision of an eye-witness .

1 A liquan tos fer ro constr ictos vioere j uss ima s—et post be c no

ot iose,au t s ine ang ust ia apud nos w

’

oeren t a liquando ad mu r um,quem

ci rca ec . b. ap . P etr i babebamus inceptum,a liquandoper diver sa ar t i

fi cum oper a qu icqu id necessar ium videbatur, per eos omn ia j ubebamus

do er r i . Vi ta, n . 524.


in the churche s as a miracle due to the Prince of theApostles.

1 Nearly seven centurie s later Raffaello

depicted the battle in the same ha l l of the Vaticanwith the fire in the Borgo . Fifty years afterRaffe l lo had pa inted his fresco, the glory, but by nomeans the importance , of the battle was revived bythe deeds of a Roman admira l at Lepanto, and theRomans aga in looked with surprise on Mohammedanprisoners of war at work on the ir ru inous walls

,as

the ir ancestors had looked on the Saracens in the

time of Leo the Fourth .

A year before the battle of O stia the Romans hadbegun the re storation of the ir wa l ls . The impendingdange r worked miracle s , and the Pope displayed theutmost zea l i n supe rintending the work and in urginghaste . All the gate s we re strengthened and providedwith bars. F ifteen towe rs In ru inous condition we rerebuilt ; two at the Portuens ian Gate , one on eachbank of the rive r, we re so constructed that a cha incould be stre tched from one to the othe r . 2 But Leo ’smost ce lebrated unde rtaking was the fortification ofthe Vatican district- an event in the history of theCi ty

,for out of this fortification the Civitas Leonina

arose,a new quarte r of Rome

,and a new fortress

de stined to be of great importance in late r centuries .At the t ime that Aure l ian had enclosed the city

1 Super bis nor/is,my st icisque miracu lis . IVO (Docr . x . c. 83 ) and

Grat ian. (Dccr . ii. 23 , viii . c. 8) produces a fragment of a letter fromLeo to the Emperor , which Guglielmotti (S tor ia della M ar ina Pont i

ficia , i . , Rome , 1856) refers to the battle of Ost ia.

2 Vi ta , n . 5 16 (Murator i,ad A . 846) erroneous ly places these towers

at Portus . These were st ill to be seen in the t ime of Flavius Blondus(Roma , Instaur . i . 37) and also Torrig ius (Le sacre g rotto, p .

H ISTORY OF ROME

with wal l s the nece ssity of including the Vatican hadnot arisen . The district rema ined entire ly openand outs ide the city. Even afte r the building

.

of

S . Pe te r’s , and afte r convents,hospital s and dwe l l ings

of various kinds had grown up around it,and the

fore igne rs’ colonie s had been founded on its le ft s ide ,the necessity of building wa l l s for its protection hadnot pre sented itse l f to the mind of any Pope . Hitherto the enemie s of Rome had been Christians . Leo

the Third first conce ived the de sign of protecting theVatican quarte r, and had he carried his idea intoexecution the basi l ica could neve r have been sackedby the Saracens. The work begun by this Pope hadbeen suspended on account of disturbances in the

city,and the partial ly constructed wal l s had been

pul led down by the Romans for the sake of themate rial s

,which were at once appropriated by the

pOpu lace .

1 Leo the Fourth revived the project,and

worked hard to carry it out . He submitted it to theEmpe ror Lothar

,without whose consent he could

not have ventured on so great an undertaking.

Lothar readily a ided him with money. The expenseof the costly ente rprise was so distributed that eve rytown in the e ccle siastica l State

,al l the doma ins both

of the Church and the municipal ity, and the convents ,also bore an a l lotted share .

2

1 Civi tatem,quam Leo P . I I I .

—e dificare caper ai , cl cuj us mu lt is

j am in locisfundamon ta posuerat licet post suum trans i tum a qu ibusdam ablata fu issen t bominibus , i ta u t nec adi tus apparorot ubi pr ius

incboat ionompr efatus babuerat murus . Vi ta,n . 542.

2 Ut do s ing u lis cio i tatzbus , mass isquo unioer s is publicis , ac Monas

tor zzs per vices s uas g enerali ter adven irofi cissot , s icu t et factum est .

I have mentioned the inscript ion of Capracorum which refers to this

9 8 HISTORY OF ROME

new city with the Trasteve re . I t was named Posteru la Sax onum,

from the Saxon quarte r in which itstood . I t occupied the site of the present Porta diS . Sp irito .

l The l ine of Leo the Fourth ’s wal ls,built

a lmost in the form of a horse-shoe , is sti l l in part preserved

,and may be traced in the Borgo near the

passage of Alexande r the Sixth, near the Mint orthe papa l garden a s far as the thick corne r towe r,a l so in the l ine of the Porta Pe rtusa

,and at the point

whe re the wa l ls form a bend be tween anothe r corne rtowe r and the Porta Fabrica . Owing to the subse

quent building of the new Borgo,of the bastions of

S . Ange lo and S . Spirito,Leo ’s wa l l s we re broken in

place s and he re and the re de st royed . The build ingof the late r Vatican wa l l s unde r Pius the Fourth ,which enclose the ancient Leonine city, we re the

cause of the~

earl ie r fort ifications suffe ring, in miniature

,the same fate that the Se rvian wa l l s had endured

in re lation to those of Aure l ian .

1 Super postor u lam a liam, que r esp ici t ad Scbolam Saxonum. The

Ill i r abi l ia do not ment ion this gate , a lthough they speak of the two

o thers . The Gr apbia does not ment ion any the Anon . M ag liab. the

Vi r idar ia and M olona r ia (as Porta Castell i). Cod. Vat ican . 385 1 (descr ipt ion of the Reg ions of sece . x ii . or xiii . ) only ment ions two gatesCiv i tas Leon iana babot tu r ros XLI I I I . propugnacu la M CCCCXLI I I I .

Por tas duas . A Cod . M ag liab. (n . 24, xxu . of the beg inn ing of saec.

xvi . ) is acquainted with the Gate of S. Spiritus , but calls the PortaCavallegg ieri pos toru la Sax on . We may remember that the wall of theHadrianeum a lso had a gate (S . P etr i or Aenea ) . Three new ga tes

were later made in the wall of the Leon ine city por ta Per tusa , on the

Vat ican hill,now wal led up ; Cavalleggier i ( called in Fulvius

’

s t imedo] tor r ione

,from the st ill ex ist ing tower of Leo ) and the Fabr ica , now

also bu ilt up , so that the Leon ine city had s ix gates , or , count ing thatin the Hadrianeum

,seven . Concern ing the Leon ina and the surround

ing walls , see also C . Quarenghi , Lo M u ra di Roma con una p ian ta

d i rott i'oa (Rome,


Leo having finished his work,cal led the new city

Civitas Leon ina . The city of Rome,upon which the

Popes had now impressed the stamp of the i r dominion

,had for centurie s witne ssed no festiva l equa l to

that now ce lebra ted on the dedicat ion of these wal ls

( June 27 th, The ent ire c le rgy,bare foot

,the i r

heads strewn with ashes,wa lked in proce ssion sing

ing round the wa lls . F i rst came the seven Card ina lB ishops

,who sprinkled the se wa l ls with holy wate r.

At each gate the procession ha lted,and each time

the Pope invoked blessings on the new c ity 1 The

circuit ended,he distr ibuted gifts of gold

,silve r and

si lken pal l iums among noble s,populace and the

colon ie s Of fore igners .Inscript ions glorified the new foundation . The

ancient Romans,who we re distinguished beyond

other nations for the i r love of inscript ions ( those ove rthe gate of Honoriu s are st i l l legible ), had bequeathedthe taste to the Pope s . Since the t ime of Narse s

,

howeve r,the epigrammatic genius of ancient Rome

had disappeared . The Lat in of the ve rse s placed overthe three gates

,no less than the language of the

inscriptions in the churches , i s a l toge the r barbarous .Over the principal gate , that of S . Peregrinus , wasinscribed

Qu i uon is ac vadis decus boc adtendo viator ,Quod Quar tus s tr ux i t nunc Leo P apa libous .

1 The Pope first prayed at the pr incipal gate : D eus—banc

cio ita tem,quam nozzi tor to aay

'

uvan tofundao imu s, fac ab i ra tua in per

potuum manere secu ram,ot do bos t ibus

,quor um causa constr ucta est

,

novos ac mu lt ip licos babero tr iumpbos . Then at the Porta S. Angel i,and lastly at the posterula . (Lib. P on t . ) Plat ina confuses theseprayers super por tam with actual inscript ions .

l HISTORY OF ROME

M a r x/torepr e ciso r adiant be c cu lmina pulcbra ,

Que man ibus bomz’

n um aucta docor e placen t .

Ce sa r i s invict i quod corn i s i sto Holotbar i,

P r e su l tan tum ovans tempor e goss i t opu s .

Cr edo ma l ignor um t ibi j am non bella nocobunt,

N equo t r iumpbus er i t bost ibus u ltra tu i s .

Roma capud orbi s splendor spes au r ea Roma ,P r e su l is u t mon str at on labor a lma tu i

Civ i tas be c a Condi tor is su i nomine Leon ina vocatur .

Ove r the gate of the fortre ss

Romanus Fr ancus B ardusquo via tor ot omn is

Hoc qu i in tendi t opus cant ica d igna canant .

Quod bon u s An t is tos quar tus Leo r i te novavi t

P ropa tr ie acp lobz'

s ecce salu te sue .

P r incipe cum summo g audens be c cuncta Holotbaro,

P erfeci t cuj us em ica t a ltu s bonor .

Quos veneranda j ides n imio dev inx i t amoreHos D eu s omn ipotens porforat arcepoli .Civi tas Leon ina vocatur .

1

This new city was dedicated by the Pope to theSaviour

,and placed unde r the protection of SS . Pe te r

and Paul,whose l ikene sse s we re repre sented

,toge the r

with that of Leo himse l f, on a ltar cove rings . Pilgrimsst i l l continued to dwe l l i n the quarte r. Romans orTrasteve rine s we re induced by various advantage s tose ttle there . The foundation of the Leonine c itymarks an epoch in the monumenta l history ofmediaeva l Rome as we l l as i n the anna l s of papa lsupremacy

,which now for the first t ime had enlarged

the circuit of the Civic Pomoerium .

2

1 Both inscriptions are given in Muratori , D iss . xxvi . D e Ross i hasemended the text I nscr . Cbr is t . Ur bis R . , vol . ii . ( 1888) pars i .p . 326 .

2 I find the new city ment ioned for the first t ime in D ip l . xiii . , inMarini

,A . 854 : infr a banc nostr am nova civi t . Leon ina .

H ISTORY OF ROME

The harbour of Trajan had a l ready changed into alagoon or swamp . No ship eve r ente red it ; and i ft rading boats ventured to Lat ium

,they fol lowed the

course of the Tiber a long the O s t ian bank . Trajan’s

othe r harbour, Centumce llae,on the contrary, st i l l

reta ined some degree of animation during the timeOf Pip in and Charle s . In 8 13 the Saracens

,howeve r,

had a l ready attacked the old Tuscan town,and late r,

apparently in 829 , had destroyed it . Fears we re

ente rta ined that Centumce llae would share the fateof Luni

,which had been razed to the ground by the

Mohammedans in 849 . The harbour on the Tibe rwas de serted and choked with sand

,the wa l ls were

ove rthrown,and the fugitive inhabitants had been

l iving for forty years in the caverns of the ne ighbouring mountains . Cen tumce llae seemed so hope le sslyabandoned to de st ruction that Leo the Fourtha l lowed it to rema in in ruins

,and attempted to

e stabl ish its inhabitan ts on anothe r se ttlement,twe lve mile s fu rthe r in land . He s e t to work withinde fatigable ene rgy

,and churches

,houses

,wa l ls and

gate s arose at his nod . The new city was conse cratedwith ce remonie s s imilar to those obse rved in the consecrat ion of the Leonina in the e ighth year Of his

pon t ificate , and was named Leopolis .1 But ne i the rname nor place endured . The inhabitan t s of Leopol is yearned for the home they had forsaken ; and

Cors icans . The farms had been chiefly the proper ty of the Papal Exchequer , some in the possess ion of conven ts and private individuals . We

may observe the turn of the express ion , pon t ifica le ei s , quod socundopro

m i ser at ob soren iss imor um Lotbar i i ot Ludovici maj or um Imperatorum ,

suamque s imu ] mor cedem, porpotuamque memor iam, pr e ceptum emis i t .

1 Vi ta,n . 584.

I N THE M IDDLE AGES.

i t is sa id that Leande r,a respected ve te ran , sum

moued them in a counc i l to re turn to the ir forme rcity. They obeyed , and Centumce llae was hence forthnamed Civitas Ve tus (Civita Vecchia) .

1 Tarquin iaal so was probably, l ike othe r E t ruscan town s, destroyed a t this t ime by the Saracens

,but in the

course Of t ime Corneto arose upon it s site .

2

Leo the Fourth re stored two other Tuscan towns ,Horta and Amer ia

,or at least provided them with

wal ls and towe rs . Fort ificat ions,hence forward

,proved

the only means of keeping the inhabitan ts togethe r.

For while the Saracens pillaged the enti re coasts ofE truria and Lat ium

,unde fended places

,part icu larly

those in the pla ins,frequently became de se rted . The i r

inhabitants fled to the rocks and summ it s of themounta ins ; and with the beginn ing of the Moslemra ids in the early part of the n in th cen tury the nume rous fortre sse s and towe rs

,which we re late r conve rted

into feuda l s trongho lds , aro se on the Roman Campagna .

The renown of the c itie s founded by Leo cast into Churchesshade the fame of the churches which he built inRome . Neverthe le ss the Pope showed great zea lwith regard to churche s a l so . The fire i n the Borgo1 Frangipani ( I s tor ia di Civi ta-veccbia ) thinks that the inhabitants of

Leopolis returned about the year 940 . Guglielmotti ( i . 42) holds it tohave been abou t 889 , and believes Centumcellae to have been destroyedin 829 the for ty years of ex ile , however , and the bu ilding of Leopolisin the e ighth year of Leo IV. g ive the date of 8 13 . Anna l GinhardMaur i Centumcellas—bas taverunt . A place named C incelli existednear Tolfa

,and it is probable that this was Leopolis .

2 The date of the orig in of Corneto is uncer ta in ; it appears that asearly as the 6th saec. ,

before Tarquinia was ent ire ly destroyed, a place of

this name ex isted on this very spot . Lu ig i Dasti, N otiz. stor icbe ar eb .

di Tarqu in ia o Corneto (Rome,

I I ISTORY OF ROME

had worked immense havoc . The old basil ica of theSaxons , S . Maria

,had apparently been destroyed . I t

was rebuil t by the Pope on the spot whe re the churchof S . Spirito now stands . Leo probably also re storedthe Frisian Church Of S . Miche le in Sassia

,behind

which ran the new wa l l . Tradition at least assertsthat he built S . Miche le in remembrance of the un

be l ievers. He furthe r rebui lt the inj ured portico ofS . Pe ter ’s and restored the atrium .

The Saracen sack compe l led the Pope to replacethe church jewe ls . The money lavished on this workenable s us to form some idea of the inexhaust iblewea lth of the

_

Church treasury. Leo covered the higha ltar wi th plates Of gold s et with precious stones

,which

displayed among many othe r portra i ts those of himse l f and Lothar

,probably in ename l. One of the se

golden tables we ighed two hundred and sixteenpounds ; a si lver-gi lt crucifix , se t with ame thysts anddiamonds

,we ighed seventy pounds a si lve r cibor ium

ove r the a ltar,adorned with pillars and gilt l i l ies

,no

less than one thousand S ix hundred and six pounds ; across of massive gold

,gli tte ring with pearls

, eme raldsand opa l s

,was one thousand pounds in we ight. There

we re beside s vase s , cense rs , lamps hung on S i lve rcha ins and garn ished with golden bal l s, cha l ice s s et

with jewe l s,lecte rns or reading desks of wrought

s ilve r,and the new cove ring of the doors with many

plate s of l ight-diffusing s i lve r, on which sacred historie swere repre sented .

”1 To these we may add the tape s

1 Vi ta,n . 540 the official epithets mire magn i tud . ot pu lcbr i tud .

,

incly ta oper at iono celatum,which he generally g ives to the vessels , are

not without foundation.

W ealth ofthe Eccles i

as tical

T reasury.

Rebu ildingof the

Qua ttroCo ronat iand of S .

M ariaNuova .

H ISTORY OF ROME

Rome , on the score of her Assyrian luxury,might

justly have been termed the “ golden . The addit ional sums spent by Leo the Fourth on the build ingof the Leonina

,on the towns Of Portus

,Leopol is

,

Horta and Ame ria,Show that the treasury of the

Church was riche r at this t ime than in the days ofLeo the Tenth

,the vast sums spent by the earl ier

Leo having been derived chiefly from the directrevenue s of the S tate , not as ye t enriched by constantsubsidie s from fore ign countrie s

,by legacie s

,or by

gifts . The Pope s d id not in this age accumulatewea lth for themse lves

,and the extravagance of

nepotism was sti l l unknown . The l i fe O f the Curiahad not entire ly Shaken O ff the discipl ine of theCloiste r. Hence i t followed that the eccle siastica lcoffe rs rema ined ful l

,and that it was possible to

devote the wea lth of the Church to great and beneficen t a ims .Leo the Fourth rebuilt the Quattro Coronati, of

which he had been Cardina l . But the burn ing ofRome in the time of Robe rt Guiscard de stroyed thestructure

,and but few rema ins are preserved in the

church more late ly re stored .

1 Leo al so rebuilt thechurch O f S . Maria (hithe rto ca l led Antiqua , buthence forward known as Nova) on the V ia Sacra .

This church,which stands in the ruins of the Temple

of Venus and Rome , and close to the Arch of Titus ,re ce ived in the seventeenth century the name of S .

France sca Romana. Nicholas the First, who finished

1 The passage behind the tribune was bu ilt by Leo IV. , and a

marble tablet commemorates the saint whose remains he caused to beinterred there .

IN THE M IDDLE AGES . 107

the build ing,decorated the tribune with mosaics . I t

is scarce ly possible,howeve r

,that the mosa ics which

now rema in are those Of the ninth century .

1

Leo ’s care was extended to the churches and convent s of othe r towns as we l l . Some of these de se rvement ion— as

,for instance

,the convents of Benedict

and Scholastica at Subiaco (at that t ime s t i l l ca l ledSub Lacu) ; the monaste ry of Sylveste r on Soracte ;Churches in Fundi

,Te rrac ina and Anagni ; a lso in

Frasca t i,which now for the first time appears in

history. The name is used to denote a place apparently a l ready populou s

,severa l churche s be ing

mentioned . Hence i t fol lows that as early as the

ninth century the town on the Alban hills now knownas Frascat i was al ready built and was cal led by itspre sent name .

2

4 . LEWI S I I . CROWNED EMPEROR DEPOS ITION OF

CARDINAL ANASTAS IUS ETHELWOLF AND ALFREDIN ROME—TRIAL OF DAN IEL

,THE MAG I STER M ILI

TUM,BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL OF LEWI S I I .

—DEATHOF LEO IV.

,8 5 5

— FABLE OF POPE JOAN .

The Saracen War and the buildings of Leo castall othe r events in Rome into the background

,and

1 The L i b. P on t . three t imes speaks of the church as a bui lding of

Leo . IV. n . 568 , 569 , 592 . S . Mar ia Ant iqua was undoubtedly transformed into S . Mar ia Nova by Leo IV .

—Ciampini , &c. (c . 28 ) believesthe presen t mosa ics to be those of 848 . The many devia tions, however, from the character of this pe riod, and the inscript ion in Leonineverses , speak in favour of a later century .

2 B as i lica S . Sebas t ian i , que in Fr asca ti s cons ist i t .,L ib. Pon t . n .

5 15—n . 529 : S . M a r ia, que pon i tu r in Fr ascata ; n . 546 : S . Vin

cen t i i, que pon i tur in Fr ascata .

H ISTORY OF ROME

during Leo’s re ign the re are but few to chronicle .

In 8 50 ,afte r Lothar had

,according to custom

,already

crowned Lewis publicly before the gene ra l Imperia l

Die t , the Pope placed the crown Upon his head inS . Pe te r ’s . The precise date of the coronation is unknown .

1The new Empe ror made war aga inst the

Saracens in the South ; in 8 52 he la id s iege to Bari .He thence returned to Northe rn I taly

,and the

Romans compla ined to Lothar that he had donenothing for the i r de fence .

2 A Council which was

assembled to discuss matte rs of discipl ine in Decembe r8 53 arre sted publ ic attention for a time ; for hereAnastasius

,Cardina l of S . Marce l lus

,was condemned

and deprived of his sace rdota l d ignitie s . Anastasiushad entire ly neglected his church for five years, andhad fa i led to appear in answer to the papal c itation .

Excommunicated in the Spring, he had e scaped toAquile ia and the Emperor, from whom Leo demandedhis surrende r

, had search made for him ,but in va in .

3

The incident Shows the he ight to which the arroganceof such presbyters as we re ca l led cardina l s, and fromwhose midst the Pope s had for some time past beene lected , had risen . They gradua l ly supplanted the

influence of the ministe rs Of the pa lace un t i l theyafte rwards became the commanding Sacred Col lege

or Eccle siastica l Senate .

1 The on ly informat ion concern ing it is found in Anna]. B er t in .

Lotbar iusfi lium suum H ludovicum Ramam m i tt i t, qu i a Leone papa

bonor ifice susceptus , et in imperatorom unctus est . Murator i d isputesPag i

’

s date Of December 2 .

2 Anna]. B er t in . A . 853 .

3 The documents in Baronius , A . 853 , n . xxxv.,Labbe

,Conci]. ix.

p . 1 134, and the inscr ipt ions of Leo IV. in S . Peter’

s in Annal .

B er t in . A . 868.

HISTORY OF ROME

enough aga inst the Emperor. They scoffed at the

Frankish Empire which had been instituted for thede fence of Rome and the Church

,and asse rted that

it would be pre fe rable to re store the Empire to theByzantines . To such critics the Empe ror mighthave shown the Cinders of many Frankish c itie s

,and

the ru ins of the pa lace of Aachen itse l f, which he hadbeen unable to defend aga inst the Normans . Lewishad a l ready experienced the tempe r which preva i ledin Rome . The Pope himse l f had bee n accused ofdea l ings aga inst the Constitution o f the Empire

,or of

devising innovations . He had just ified his conductin writ ing

,and de clared his wil l ingness to subj ect

himse l f to any tribuna l , were he found guilty ofoffending aga inst the laws of the Empire . Had thisnot previously taken place

,the accusations of one

i solated Roman would neve r have excited to such a

degree the wrath of Lewis .1

Inflamed with unbounded wrath,

and withoutnotifying hi s coming to the Pope , he hastened toRome . Leo rece ived him with all due honour

,and

tranquil ly awa i ted the issue of the tria l . The Impe ria lPlacitum was he ld in the Pa lace of Leo the Third

,

beside S . Pe te r’s

,and Pope and Emperor

,the Roman

and Frankish nobil ity assembled toge the r. Accusers,

accused and witnesses appeared . Danie l was convicted of the most audacious fa lsehoods , and given1 In connection with this we must refer to the two fragments of

letters which are ascribed to Leo IV. Grat ian . 0. ix. d is t . 10 : D e

capz'

tu lzk we!prwcep t is 2'

mper z'

alz'

bm i r rq g aéz'

lz'

z‘

er and

Pars 2 , caus . 2 , qu . 7 N os sz’

z'

ncompetm fer a lz’

gu z’

a’egz

'

mm,ct

subdz'

tz'

s j u s tce legz'

s tr ami tem 22022 rom an /22712712us, vestro, ac M 2330222772

vestror um ( 22mm 72012277222: emendar ej udz’

a’

o,&c.


into the custody of the mal igned Gratian . The

Emperor,howeve r

,requested and obtained his re lease .

A few days afte r the tria l Leo the Fourth died ,July 17 th, 8 55 . He shine s like a second Aure l ianin the history of the City for the work which he

accompl ished in the restorat ion and extension of hiswa l ls and with pe rfect justice he might have te rmedhimse l f Res taunu

‘

or Urbz'

s . His memory sti l l survive s in the Leon ine city.

One of the st range st myths born of mediaeva l Fable ofPope Joan .

imag inat ion g ive s the ene rge t i c Leo an adventurouswoman as successor and through a course of seve ra lcenturies

,historians

,bishops

,even Pope s and the

world at large rema ined unde r the be l ie f that for twoyears the cha ir of Pe te r had been fi l led by Pope Joan .

The legend l ie s out side the sphere of historic fact,

a lthough no t out side the doma in of mediaeva l be l ie f.It must the re fore be given in brief. A beaut iful girl

,

who,though born at Inge lhe im

,was the daught er of

an Englishman,was dist ingu ished by he r unusua l

genius in the schools of Ma inz . Be ing be loved bya young scholar

,she concea led he r sex unde r the

monast ic habit which she adopted in Fulda,where

her lover l ived as a Benedictine . Toge the r theystudied the Humanit ie s and toge the r t rave l led to

England and Athens,whe re the disguised Joan fre

quen ted the highe r schools of the Philosophe rs , withwhich

,according to the fancy of the chron ic le rs

,the

city was ye t fi l led . He re her compan ion died,and

Joan or John Anglicus,as she ca l led he rse lf

,came

to Rome . Her atta inment s procured her a professorship in the School of the Greeks ( for into the School

I I Z HISTORY OF ROME

of the Greeks fable transforms the diaconate knownto us unde r the name of 5 . Maria Scholae Graeco rum) .She awoke the enthusiasm of the Roman philosophe rs

,

charmed the cardina l s,all unsuspicious of he r s ex

,

and be came the marve l of Rome . He r ambition,

howeve r,soared to the Papacy. On the death of

Leo the Fourth, the cardina l s unanimously voted thatno one was so fitted to preside ove r Christendom as

John Angl icus,the idea l of eve ry theologica l pe rfec

t ion . The female Pope ente red the Late ran,but

stooped to an intrigue with a confidential at tendan t .

The re su lt rema ined concealed unde r the ample pontifical ve stments unti l nature be trayed the s inne r. On

the procession to the Late ran she was ove rtaken bythe pangs of labour be tween the Colosseum and S .

Clement’s,gave birth to a boy and died .

1 The borrified Romans buried her on the spot, and the re e recteda statue which repre sented a beautiful woman

,the

papa l t iara on he r head, and a chi ld in her arms,as

a monument of the monstrous event. Hence forwardthe Pope s avoided the spot when on the way to takeposse ssion of the Late ran

,and submitted to an officia l

examinat ion on the Se l la Stercoraria,a pe rforated

marble seat in the portico of the Late ran .

2

1 P apa P a ter P a trum Peper z'

t P apz'

ssa P apel/um ,says one of the

invent ive au thors . Thus was explained an ancien t inscr iption ,which

refers to a priest of M ithra s (Pa ter P a tr um), but which was be l ievedinstead to apply to the female Pope . An ancient s tatue represent ing a

woman with a child stood on the Lateran Way, and for centuries wasbelieved to be the likeness of Pope Joan . I t was only removed by

Six tus V .

2 Plat ina in Job . VI I I as he calls the female Pope . Sella ster

eor ar z’

a was actually the chair on which the Pope took possession of the

I 14 H ISTORY OF ROME

figure was trans formed into the l ikeness of PopeZacharias .1

1 Since the t ime of the Reformat ion Catholics and Protestants haveassailed each o ther with d isser tat ions concerning this legend, so thata mythical woman has become the subject of a g reater number of

b iographies than the most ce lebrated queens of history. Even Fr iedr .

Spanheim,upheld the fact in a treat ise on which was based Lenfant ’s

H istoire de la P apesse j eanne (La Haye,

Leo Allatius had

prev iously wr it ten his Confa ta t io faéa lw a’e j oanna P ap issa (Colon .

and David Blonde l murders the fema le pope in a French workand D e j o/zam i a Pap i ssa (Ams te l . Le ibnitz, Eckhart , Labbé ,Baronius

,Pag i , Bayle , Launoy, Novaes wrote leng thy confutat ions ;

and even in our own t ime Bianchi G iovin i composed an E same Cr i t ico

deg/i att i e documen t i r ela t ivi a l/afaw la a’ella P apessa Giovana (M ilan ,

The last of these treat ises is Dollinger’

s D ie Papstin Johannain the P aps tfabeln a

’es M i ttelalter s (Munich , I note as important

for Num ismat ics : Garampius a’e N ammo Argen teo B enedict

(Rome , The coin has on its obverse H lotfi ar ia s Imp ; s ince itwas struck under this Emperor ; it proves that Bened ict I I I . was theimmediate successor of Leo IV.

C H A P T E R I V .

I . BENEDICT I I I . ELECTED POPE—TUMULT IN ROME ON

ACCOUNT OF THE ELECTION— INVAS ION OF CARD INALANASTAS IUS~ FIRMNESS OF THE ROMANS TOWARDS

THE IMPER IAL LEGATES— BENED ICT I I I . ORDAINEDSEPTEM BER 29TH ,

8 5 5—LEWI S I I . SOLE EMPEROR

FRIENDLY RELATIONS BETWEEN ROME AND

BYZANTIUM .

THE papal e lection which followed the death of

Leo the Fourth threw the c i ty into great confusion .

The majority of the Romans Chose Benedict, Cardinal Benedictof S . Ca l ixtus, and conducted him in procession to 5

1

321

52855

7

136

’

the Lateran . The decree of e lection was signed byclergy and nobil ity, in orde r that “

according toancient custom ” it might then be presented to the

Emperor for rat ificat ion .

1 Nicholas,Bishop of Anagni

,

and the Magiste r M ilitum Me rcurius we re Chosen as

the bearers . But while on the ir way A rsen ius ofEugubium succeeded in Changing the ir determination .

Arsen ius was the friend of Cardina l Anastasius,who

,

although suspended by Leo the Fourth, sti l l rema ined

1 This proceed ing is thus ment ioned for the first t ime , as it waspract ised in Byzant ine t imes D ecr etam componen tes propr i is man iba sroborar i mt et consa etaa

’o pr isca a t posci t , inflict iss imi s Lotbar io, ac

Ludovico dest inaver imt August is . L i b. P ant . in Bened . I I I . , n . 558.

HISTORY OF ROME

powerful , and, striving to reach the papal crown , mainta ined a party in Rome . Arsenius won the nunciosove r to his side

,and at the court of Lewis they uphe ld

the cause of Anastasius . Re turning to Rome,whe re

the cardinal had al ready arrived , they announced theapproach of the Impe ria l envoys , and concerted the i r

plans with Anastasius and his faction . The heads ofthe party were the Mag is tri M ilitum Gregory andChristophorus

,and the Bishops Radoald of Portus and

Agatho of Todi . Me anwhile the me ssenge rs of theEmperor

,Counts Bernhard and Adalbert, arrived at

Horta . Anastasius hastened to meet them,followed

by Nicholas and Mercuriu s, Radoald and Agatho .

Toge ther they le ft for Rome . At the fifth mile stonethey encountered the messengers of Benedict , thee lected Pope

,at the basil ica of S . Leucius , and loaded

them with cha ins . Benedict forthwith sent out a Duxand Secundice rius .

The Missi of the Empe ror—we may observe withwhat authority they confronted Rome— commandedC lergy

,noble s , and people to appear next day at

S . Leucius to rece ive the Imperia l inj unctions. The

Romans,hastening to Obey the command, we re me t

by the Imperial Counts , Anastasius and his fol lowe rs ,bringing the Supe ris ta Gratian and the Scrinar ius

Theodore as prisoners in the ir tra in . The cava lcaderode amid the Clank of arms across the Ne ronianF ie ld and through the gate of S . Pe regrinus into theLeonine city. Rome was in a state of wild exc itement . While the e lected Pope awa ited the issue ofevents in the Late ran , Anastasius forced his way intoS . Pe ter ’s , and indulged his revenge and his heretical

H ISTORY OF ROME

accept the anti-pope . On Tuesday,at another meeting

in the Late ran , the unanimous voice of the people wasgiven in favour of the canonical ly-e lected Benedict .The envoys yie lded . Anastasius was driven withignominy from the Pat riarchium and Benedict broughtforth with rejoicing from the custody in which hehad been de ta ined

,placed on the horse of Leo the

Fourth,and led in proce ssion to S . Maria Maggiore .

A three days ’ fast was orda ined as penance : the

followe rs of Anastasius threw themse lves at the feetof the Pope to sue for me rcy

,and on the 29 th of Sep

t embe r,i n pre sence of the Impe ria l envoys , Benedict

the Third rece ived consecration in S . Pe te r’s . 1

These events he ra lded one of the most dreadfi i'

pe riods in the history of the Papacy. They brougto l ight the eve r-increasing differences in the C ity

,

factions which seve red populace and nobi lity,ambitions of rebe l l ious cardina l s

, the difficult posit,

l

of the Church towards the Empire . The ex t raordinf

conduct of the Imperia l Legate s,who endeavoured

force to place a card ina l , previously solemnly Oi

demned by a decree of the Synod,upon the Apos t

Chair,shows that the Emperor sti l l reta ined the

pression which the trial be tween Danie l and Grahad left upon his mind , and was st i l l fi l led with?t rust . I t furthe r shows that he was not anxious fcv

‘

ru le of an energetic Pope such as Leo the Fourtlp

0 o o o o 0‘f1 [mper za lzbus m i ss i s cerneu tzbus

,212 Apostol i ca sea

’e, u t mf

‘h;

an t igua tr aa’i t io a

’ictat , con secr atu s , ord ina tusgue est P ou tij efll‘

B e72. , n . 566 . The d iploma of Lewis is therefore false , hereTh‘

Pagi. In spite of these even ts,Anas tas ius was absolved by N i313 »

but again excommunicated by Adrian I I . 18


on the contrary,hoped to see the Chai r of Peter fi l led

by a creature who would prove subservient to himse lf. His project was frust rated , howeve r, by the firmne ss of the Romans

,and on ly se rved to undermine

Impe ria l pre stige .

The ve ry day after the ordinat ion of the new PopeLewis became sole Empe ror. Lothar had divided hisempire be tween his sons . Weary and i l l

,tortured by

the stings of conscience ( the shade of his fatherhaunted him) he had assumed the Benedict ine cowlat Pr iim

,near Treve s

,and had there died on Sep

tember 28th.

1 Rome rema ined unmoved by the event .Her history during the short re ign of Benedict theThird is ut terly uneventful . Repeated disastrousinundations O f the Tiber are recorded in the papa lchronicle s . The biography of the POpe is fi l led

,how

eve r,with l ists Of votive gift s and restorat ions of

churche s,among which the rebuilding of S . Paul ’s

grave , destroyed by the Saracens , deserve s remark .

Benedict ma inta ined a friendly inte rcourse withByzant ium . The Emperor Michae l

,on his part

,sent

Lazarus,monk and painter

,to Rome

,who presented

to the Pope a copy of the Gospe l s sumptuously bound

1 See the long ep itaph in Baronius , A . 855 . Al though Baronius saysthat this inscription has been erroneously attr ibuted to Henry I I I . , Inevertheless hold it to be Henry’s . I t bears internal evidence of the

later period. The open ing lines

Ce sar tau tus eras guan tus et orbis ,

A t nunc ex igu a claua’er i s u r ua

are found word for word in the M ir abi lia as the inscr iption on the

fabulous grave of Caesar on the obelisk of the Vatican . Baronius is

acquainted with another ep itaph , which says of Lothar : qu i Franci s ,I talis

,Roman is prafu i t ips is .

Nicholas I .,

Pope, 858867 .

HISTORY OF ROME

and adorned with miniatures . The costly volumewas doubtlessly a work of the monk ’s own hands .1

2 . NICHOLAS I . , POPE—REDUCES THE ARCHBISHOP OF

RAVENNA TO SUBJECTION— THE GREEK SCHISM OF

PHOTIUS BREAKS OUT— RELATIONS OF ROME TO

THE BULGARIAN s—VI S IT OF THE ENVOYS OF KINGBORIS TO ROME—FORMOSUS GOES AS M ISSIONARYTO BULGARIA— ATTEMPT To MAKE THE COUNTRY A

PROVINCE OF THE ROMAN CHURCH—THE BULGARIANCONSTITUTION OF NICHOLAS I .

Benedict theThird died on April 8 th, 8 58 , precise lyas Lewis , who had come to Rome for unknown

reasons,had left the city. The Emperor immediate ly

re turned,with the object of preventing by his presence

any i l legal ities in the e lection,and with the further

Object of defending his own rights . He induced theRomans to give the ir united votes in favour of thedeacon Nicholas, a man of noble family and son of theRegionary Theodore . The candidate was consecratedin presence of the Emperor on the 24th of Apri l in S .

Pete r ’s,and Lewis , having attended the ordination

fe stiva l,left the city.

2 The regard which he showed

1 M icii ael—l wp .-772is i t ao

’ b. P etrum Apost . a’anum per mauum

Lazar i M ouac/zi et P ictor ia ar t is ie erudi t i, g enere vero

,Cbaza i ,

i . e. a ng etium, &c. The name of Lazarus may be regarded as one

of the oldes t names in the history of art . I m ay remark in pass ingthat g lass-pa int ing was at this t ime pract ised in Rome : j

‘euestras ver b

v i tr eis color i bus orua'o i t , says the L ib. Pou t . n . 572, on the occas ion of

Bened ict ’s restorations in S . Maria in Trastevere .

2 P ra’sente Cesare consecratus est,says the Vi ta N icol . 1. and the

122 H ISTORY OF ROME

Papal nuncio that the Archbishop of Ravenna was

not obl iged to appear be fore a Roman Synod .

Nicholas , having in va in summoned him three t ime s ,excommunicated him . John journeyed to Lewis at

Pavia,and ,

accompanied by the Emperor’ s Legates ,proceeded to Rome . Nicholas , howeve r, re solute lydecl ined all interce ssion on the part of the Empe ror,and the Archbishop left the C i ty. Envoys from the

Emilia and the Ravennese nobil ity now invited thePope to come in pe rson to the ir province to protectthem from the despotism of the Archbishop and hisbrother George .

1 John,who did not expect the

arriva l of the Pope , aga in went to the Emperor, whileNicholas in person tranquil l ised the Ravennese bythe re storation of the i r prope rty. The Archbishopmade his submissio n ; the Pope granted him absolution

,but a t the same t ime imposed on him the duty

of appearing in Rome once a year. He forbade himto conse crate bishops in the Emilia without pe rmission of the Sacred Cha i r, and unti l the candidates hadbeen e lected by the papa l Dux , cle rgy and people .

2

He forbade him a lso to extort tribute from the sebishops

,or to prevent the ir coming to Rome ; and

orda ined that all dispute s were to be submitted tothe sentence Of the tribuna l of Ravenna

,a tribunal

which the Papal Missus and the Ves tararius of the

1 E t ecce Aemi lienses , ac Senator es u rbis P aoeuu ce cum i 7272u 777ero

popu lo, L ib. P ou t . n . 588 . The term Senatus as applied to the

nob ility is of frequent occurrence in the biographies of the Popes afterthe t ime of Charles the Great .

2 N is i post E lect ionem D ucis,Cler i

,et popu li (n . The papal

duces in the larger cities , which were also the seats of b ishops , tookpart in the ep iscopal e lect ions the Ordo had disappeared .


city must attend .

1 After having signed the decree sof the Synod

,John left Rome

,and Nicholas scored

a signa l victory as temporal ru ler in the Emilia and

Pentapol is .The d ispute with Constantinople which began about D ispute

the same time was,howeve r

,more serious . I t led to in

an i rreconc i lable schism,and put the last stroke to Byzantium

the division between Rome and the Greek Empire .

The se events,in which the names of Phot ius and

Ignatius shine conspicuous, lie , however, outside the

history of the city, and can the re fore be touched uponbut br iefly .

2 Owing to the int rigues of the Min iste rBardas

,the orthodox patriarch Ignat ius had been

deposed from his office by the Emperor Michae l inDecember 8 57 , and the Pro tospathar Phot ius, a man

dist inguished by his learn ing beyond the leve l of hiscontemporarie s

,was ra ised from the condition of

layman direct ly to the Byzant ine Cha ir. A dispu tebe tween the followers of Ignatius and Photius brokeforth in the East . The disputants appealed to Rome ;the papal legate s

,Bishop Radoald of Portus (previously

supporter of the rebe l l ious Anastasius) and Zachariasof Anagni we re bribed to acquiesce in the appointment of Phot ius . The Pope excommunicated thesetra itors to his will , and in the Roman Synod of Apri l863 pronounced the condemnation of Phot ius, and

commanded him to resign the patriarcha l cha ir .Legates went to and fro between Rome and Con

1 D onec in pra sen t ia Apostolica , vet mi ss i e/u s , au t Vestar ar i i

Ravenna lega li ora’ine

_

i llas in j ua’icio convincas (n .

2 Pichler , Gescb. a’er [( i rcbticben Tr ennung zw iscben o

’em Or ient una

’

0ccia’ent (Munich , 1864, vol.

HISTORY OF ROME

s tant inople , and s ince the time of the Iconoclasticstrife Rome had not seen so many Greeks within he rwa l l s . The Imperial spathars , it i s true , instead ofcostly COpies of the Gospe ls , brought letters breathing hatred and contempt. The dispute assumed a

dogmatic aspect as soon as Photius had formulatedthe article s which taunted the Latin Church withheres ies . The charge s reproached her with her fastson the Sabbath ; the ce l ibacy of her priests ; butabove all with the filiogue, the be l ief in the proces

sion of the Holy Ghost from the Son— Opinions and

matte rs which happily fa i l to excite the inte l lect ofmodern days but which

,during centuries when man

kind was destitute of problems more worthy Of philoSophy

,served to inflame the reason and to create the

division which has for ever kept the two Churchesapart. Photius on his side excommunicated the Pope .

But afte r the assassination of the Emperor Michae l ,he was himse l f deposed in 867 by Basi l ius, the succe ssor to the throne ; and thus the bitte r conte stwas mainta ined throughout

’

the entire pont ificate ofNicholas .The quarre l with the East was sti l l further st irredby Rome ’s re lat ions with a barbarous people on thefrontiers of the Byzantine Empire . At the timewhen Gregory the Great extended a fathe rly handover Brita in , and gave the Anglo-Saxon Romanecclesiastica l law , the Greeks remained indiffe rent ;but when Nicholas sought to bring the Bulgariansinto the fold of the Roman Church , the i r j ea lousywas roused to the utmost pitch . The formidableSlav race had been se tt led for some centuries in the


opposition , had found the ir way into the mind of theKing

,who had hithe rto passed his l ife i n happy

heathen ignorance . The patriarchal Cha ir of By zant ium was at the time the object of furious stri febetween two rival s ; and Boris , who wished to keepaloof from Byzantine influence

,turned to the Pope

to obta in counse l and prie sts for his subjects .The Bulgarian envoys

,accompanied by the King’s

own son,came to Rome in August 866 . Among the

valuable pre sents which they brought,we re the

victorious weapons of the prince , borne by him in hiswars with the heathen rebe l s . The se he de stined as avotive gift to S . Pete r . The news of the se offe rings

,

however,excited aga inst the Pope the wrath of the

a l ready irritated Emperor Lewis, now in Benevento.

He demanded the surrende r of the weapons and therema inder of the Bulgarian gifts . He may haveconside red the se s igns of conque st gifts unfi tted forS . Pe ter, and have coveted them as warl ike trophie sof Bulgaria , a new province which he hoped to incorporate with the Empire . Nicholas surrenderedsome of the weapons , othe rs he re ta ined with apologie s .1

Meanwhile the Bulgarians were re ce ived in Romewith Open arms . The Pope se lected two bishops to

t each in Bulgaria , Paul of Populonia and Formosusof Portus

,who was destined later to wear the papa l

crown . They left accompanied by an embassy bound1 Lib. P on t . n . 608 . Andreas Presbyter , a con temporary , says

that the K ing himself came to Rome and was bapt ised by the Pope , et

fi a’e sancta confi rmata r ecep i i a

’octores ab eoa

’. apostolico et in m an:

r ever sa s est patr iam. (D om B o uquet , vii . The L iber P ontzfi ca/i s

would scarcely have been silent on this point . The King had alreadyassumed the name of M ichael from the Greek Emperor.


for Constantinople,which intended to pass through

Bulgaria on its way . The nuncios arrived safe ly .

The Legates bound for the Byzantine Court, howeve r,were not permitted to cross the Bulgarian frontiers

,

but were instead forced to return home . Formosusand Paul meanwhile baptised un interruptedly troopsof Bulgarians . They drove out the Greek missionaries ;they induced the king to rece ive only Latin clergy andon ly the Roman fa ith . A deputat ion even went tothe Pope to request that the wary Formosus mightbe given them as Archbishop .

1 Nicholas decl ined tocomply with the request, as he did not wish to deprivePortus Of it s shepherd ; he sent , however, seve ra lpresbyte rs to the distant province , and commandedthe Bulgarians to choose one of these men as

Archbishop .

He had a lready tranquil l ised the childish doubtsOf the Bulgarians, and his answe rs

,collected unde r

the title Responsa, form a specie s of code of civilconstitutions for an uncivi l ised nation . There i sscarce ly a duty or contingency Of C ivi l l ife aboutwhich the simple Bulgarians did not de sire instruction .

They a sk unde r what forms they may marry, at whattime they may consummate a marriage : at what timeo f day they may eat

,how they may dre ss , whe the r

they may condemn criminal s ; and remind us in shortof the savages of Paraguay and of the constitutionsdrawn up for them by the Je suits . They inform the

Pope that they had hitherto been accustomed to carrya horse ’s ta i l in the front of battle as a banner

,and

askwhat they are to substitute in place of this symbdl.1 Vi ta N icol . I . n . 609 .

I 28 H ISTORY OF ROME

The Pope sugge sts the Cross . They te l l him thatprevious to a battle they use all sorts Of incantationsto propitiate the gods in the i r favour ; and the Popeadvise s them instead to pray in the churches , to openthe prison doors and to l ibe rate the slave s and

prisoners of war . The king asks whethe r it i s consistent with Chris t ian ity

’

that he should dine alone,

apart from the queen and sold iers ; the Pope answerswith an exhortation to humil ity and assure s him thatthe famous kings of old had condescended to eat

with the i r friends and slave s . On a que stion morepol it i cal than practical , name ly, which bishops we reto be reve renced as true patriarchs

,Nicholas take s

the we lcome opportunity to answe r minute ly, and ina voice sufficiently loud to be heard at Constantinople .

The chief of all patriarchs, he replied , was the Popei n Rome

,whose church had been founded by the

Prince s of the Apostle s ; the second place be longedto Alexandria , a foundation of S . Mark ; Antiochwas the third , since Pe te r had pre sided ove r Antiochbefore he had come to Rome . These three we re

,

the refore,Apostol ic Patriarchate s . Constantinople

and Je rusalem,on the othe r hand

,could cla im no

such authority ; the seat in Constantinople had beenfounded by no Apostle

,and the Patriarch of the so

ca l led New Rome was only named Pontifex byfavour of the Emperor, and not through any inhe rentright .1

1 Qu ia CP . nova Roma a’ieta est favore pr inczp um pot ius , quam

r at ione, patr iarcba ej u s pon t ifex ,

appellatus est,n . 9 2 of the Respon sa

ao’ Consu lta B u lg ar . Labbe

,Conci l . ix . 1534 . The Pope forbids

the application of torture,and expressly prohibits baptism by force .

D ispu teconcerningWaldrada .

H ISTORY OF ROME

in this century) was outraged by scandalous i f notunusua l occurrence s . Judith , the daughte r of Charle sthe Ba ld

,and the widow of E the lwolf

,had marri ed he r

step-son E the lbald,without the a l l iance be ing con

s ide red immora l . On he r re turn to France afte r thedeath of he r

’

second husband,this voluptuous woman

roused the passion of Count Ba ldwin . He seducedhe r

,and King Charle s in consequence had him ex

communicated by a Synod . The love rs turned tothe Pope

,who e ffected a reconci l iation with the king.

At the same time anothe r woman acquired an un

enviable notorie ty by the l icentiousness of he r l i fe .

Ing iltrude , daughte r of Count Mact ifried,married to

Count Boso,had le ft he r husband

,and heedless of

the papa l anathemas,had led for years a d issolute l i fe

in company with her paramours . But the fate ofthe se women was thrown into the shade by the misfortune s of a queen and the t riumphant e ffrontery ofa roya l courte san .

Lothar of Lo tharing ia , the brothe r of the Empe ror ,put away his wife Thiu tbe rga for the sake o f hismistress Waldrada . This t ragedy se t countrie s and

peoples,Church and State i n commotion

, and

afforded the Pope Opportunity to rise to a he ightwhe re he was encompassed by a more glorious renownthan any which theologica l dogmas could lend him .

The attitude adopted by Nicholas with regard to thisroya l scandal was firm and lofty . Prie stly powe rappeared in him as a mora l force to re scue virtue and

to punish vice -a powe r n ece ssary i n a barbarous agewhen the publ ic opin ion which judges even princeshad as ye t no existence . The repudiated and


calumniated queen,whose crown Lothar had a lready

placed on the head of his mistress,invoked the aid

of the Pope . The Pope charged the Synod of Me t zto pronounce sentence

,and threatened the roya l

adulte re r with excommunicat ion i f he fa i led to appearbefore the t ribunal . The papa l legates , among themRadoald of Portus

,who had previously accepted bribe s

from Byzan t ium,proved accessible to the influence of

gold,which has possessed irre sist ible at tractions for

the Romans of eve ry age . They withhe ld the papa lle tte rs

,and pronounced Lothar ’s marriage to have

been legal ly dissolved,and Waldrada to be his lawful

wife . For the sake of doing some thing, howeve r,they sent the Archbishop Gun the r of Cologne and

Theu tgaud ofTreve s to Rome , to lay the re solutionsof the Synod be fore the Pope . Among the manybishops

,cove tous Of roya l immun ities and donat ions

,

who unscrupulously supported the wishes of Lothar,

these men we re his most trusted advocate s . Theyfurthe r he ld to the monarchy in orde r to st rengthenthe episcopate aga inst the Pope . Arrived in Rome ,they produced the acts of the Frankish Synod

,hoping

to win the Pope to the ir side by the i r powers ofpersuasion . Nicholas

,howeve r

,kept them wa it ing

three weeks,then orde red them to appear be fore the

Synod in the Lateran,and withou t a l lowing them any

defence , without judicia l examinat ion ,or any inte r

vent ion of the Frankish bishops , pronounced the ir deposit ion and excommunicat ion . A t the same t ime heannulled the decree s of the provinc ia l synod of Metz .

1

The se occurrence s took place in the autumn of 863 .

1 This was the complaint of both the archbishops in their

H ISTORY OF ROME

The Archbishops forthwith hastened to the Emperora t Benevento . They compla ined of the violence withwhich they had been treated

,and told him that both

he and his brothe r Lothar had been insulted in the i rpersons . They represented that the unchecked domin ion of the Pope threatened the Imperia l and roya lmaje sty, and a t the same time the Frankish Church ,and thus roused the wra th of Lewis . He immediate lydeparted for Rome with an army

,accompan ied by his

wife Enge lbe rga and by the two archbishops, whomhe intended to compe l the Pope to re instate in the i rdign it ies . In February 864 he entered the city.

1

Since,as report asserted

, he came with hostile intent ions , the Pope ordered genera l fasts and processions ,and plunged the whole city into mourning . The

Empe ror made his dwe l l ing in the palace bes ideS . Pe te r’s . He rece ived no we lcome from the Pope

,

who shut himse lf up in the Late ran and cease lesslyassai led heaven with praye rs aga inst the evi l working prince .

” Lewis ’s barons in va in repre sented thathe would only increase the ange r of the Empe ror byhis conduct. The proce ssions continued through theC i ty. One O f them on its way to S . Pe te r’s was in theact of ascending the steps of the a t rium when someof Lewis ’s vassal s and soldie rs , irr itated by the Pope

’scontinued re fusal , attacked the cle rgy, ma ltreated

memorial : s ine sy noa’o cl canon ico examine

,nu llo accusan te

,nu t/o

test ifican te—tuo soliu s a rbi tr io et ty r ann icofu ror e clamnar e nosmet

oolu is t i . Hincmar , Annal. A . 864 (M on . Germ .

1 I ob tain this date from a d iploma of Farfa a’at . VI ] . Kal . M ar t i i

anno Cbr i sto prop i t io Imper i i D omn i H ludov ici P i i s Aug . Xf ( shou ldbe X . acco rding to the era of Lewis of 855 , when he became so leEmperor) I ncl . XI ] . actnm Leon ina Civitate (Fatteschi , &c. , n .

HISTORY OF ROME

pre face to the ir memoria l,addre ssed to the bishops of

Lo thar ing ia , they ven tured to say ,

“Al though Nicholas ,who is ca l led Pope

,who reckons himse l f an apostle to

the Apost le s and professes to be Impe rator of thewhole wor ld

,ha s wished to condemn us

,he has found

re sistance in u s wi th Christ ’s he lp and has repentednot a l i t tle what he has done . The i r lette r

,which

was addressed to the Pope,conta ined seven heads .

Afte r the authors had condemned the Pope ’s un

canonica l dea l ing,they hurled back the anathema on

his own head .

2 Gun the r of Cologne,a man of great

re solut ion,entrusted this document to his brothe r

Hildu in,a priest

,to give to the Pope in person and

in case the Pope re fused to rece ive i t,the le tter was

to be la id on the shrine of S . Pe te r. Nicholas,as was

expected,refused

,and Hildu in ,

surrounded by a bodyof armed men

,defiantly ente red S . Pe te r ’s to fulfi l

his brothe r’s behe st s . The guards of the shrine ( theyformed a spec ia l Schola unde r the t it le M ans iona rzz

scbole conf ess ion is S . P etr i ) surrounded the Apost le ’ sgrave . The intrude rs struck one of them down l ifele ss

,threw the document On the shr ine , and forcing a

way with the i r swords , rushed out of the basi l ica .

The incident shows that the Emperor was by nomean s reconci led to the Pope . Lewis tranquilly

looked on while his soldiers,as i f in an enemy’s

country,committed the grossest excesses . They

1 A nna l . H incmar . A . 864.

2 With reference to the point of law concerning the validity of Wal

drada’s marriage , they advanced the argumen t o f the r ight o f natu re in

opposit ion to the canon ical command cl gu ia suo w’

ro par en tum

censu, fia

’e,afi

’

ectu,ac a

’i lect ione conj uga li sociata es t

, uxor profiecto, nonconcubina babena’a s i t .


plundered houses and even Churches,we re guilty

both of murder and of outrage s on nuns and marriedwomen . Lewis himse l f scorned to spend Easte r inRome . He left the city and purpose ly ce lebratedthe festiva l in Ravenna with John

,the resent ful

archbishop . John ,mindful of the humiliat ion he had

rece ived,gladly se ized on the Opportun ity afforded

by the discord which preva iled be tween the Ge rmanbishops and the Pope

,to hold out the hand of fe l low

ship to the condemned pre lates and to fan the wrathof Lewis . 1 The storm

,howeve r

,did not bend the

vigour Of the Pope . With the firmne ss of an anc ientRoman this proud and unyie ld ing spir i t rema inedunmoved . He threatened excommunicat ions

,which

were dreaded l ike actua l thunde rbolt s . The bishopsin Lo tharing ia sent contrite explanat ions . A rsenius

,

the papa l legate,furn ished with le t te rs breathing

menace s to the King,the bishops and counts

,ente red

Lo tharing ia with an arrogance that resembled that ofthe pro-consuls of ancient Rome . With one hand Victory ofNicholas led the repudiated wife back to the king,

the Pope'

trembling be fore the sentence of excommunication ,with the othe r he removed the paramour . The

kingdom,weak and disun ited

,threw up it s weak case

aga inst Rome,and le ft a brill ian t victory in the hands

of the Papacy. Neverthe le ss the drama was not ye tplayed out . N icholas himse l f died

,and it was only

under his succe ssor that the scanda lous tr ia l wasbrought to an end .

2

1 Our informat ion on all these occurrences is due to Hincmar .

2 Lothar again put away the unhappy queen and took back Waldrada ,

whereupon she was excommun icated by N icholas in 866.

N ICHOLAS’

S CARE FOR THE C ITY—HE RESTORES THE

JOVIA AND TRAJANA— HE FORTIFIES OSTIA ANEWH i s FEW BUILD INGS AND VOTIVE G IFTS — CON

D ITION OF LEARN ING— LOTHAR ’S ED ICT CONCERN ING

SCHOOLS,8 2 5

— DECREES OF EUGEN IUS I I . AND

LEO IV . REGARD ING THE PAROCH IAL SCHOOLSGREEK MoNKs IN ROME—THE LIBRARIES— THEMANUSCRIPTS— CO INS .

Nothing is heard of any disturbances in Romeduring the pont ificate of N icholas . On the contrary ,

abundant harve sts and gene ra l prosper ity are

recorded . Pove rty was l iberal ly re l ieved , and l ike a

Roman emperor the Pope had ticke ts for food markedwith his name distributed among the indigent.1

Nicholas re stored two aqueducts ; the so-cal ledTocia and the Trajana or Sabat ina, known at the

time in the Leon ine c ity,which it supplied

,as the

Aqueduct Of S . Pe te r.2 Since Gregory the Fourthhad previously re stored the same aqueduct

,i t follows

that i t must e ithe r have been injured by the Saracens,

or e lse that N icholas improved both its course and

1 Vi ta N icol. n . 600 . I t was at this t ime customary to reckon byholy days . Sunday was fer ia pr ima . Empty nutshells strung

together marked the days on which such t ickets were ava ilable .

2 Formam aqua , qua voca tu r Tocia (n . Variants, Acia

,

Accia , j ocia . Cass io ( i. 372 ) holds the Tocia to be the Trajana Tuscia .

The Aqua Tuscia is ment ioned in a Council as early as the time Of

Constan tine . I bia’. p . 369 . Costant . Corv is ier i , D ell Acqua Tocia in

Roma net mea’io evo (I l B uonarott i , vol. v . 1870 ) explains i t to be the

App ia . He po ints out that a brook Tuzia had existed in ancientt imes

,and that there was a fa no

’ns Aqua T ut ia in the Ager

Veranus in the t ime of Sylveste r.

138 HISTORY OF ROME

chronicler extols the fathe r of N icholas as havingbeen a friend to the l ibe ra l arts

,and as having

ini t iated his son in these studie s,but the inference

that Nicholas must,on that account

,have been ve rsed

in eve ry spec ie s of sacred d iscipl ine cannot be cons ide red to apply to learn ing o the r than that of a

theologica l nature .

1 The Carol ingian pe riod isgraced by the honourable endeavour to subduebarbar i sm by the encouragement given to learn ing .

Unde r the i nfluence of Charle s ’s genius and the

cu lture of his friends,ve rsed in the C lassic l iterature

of the Romans,education rece ived a sudden impe tus

,

and the succe ssors of the Empe rors followed in hisfootsteps . A conspicuous proof of this statementis given by the edict of Lothar of the year 8 25 .

While the Empe ror he re lamen t s that owing to theindolence of the authoritie s

,instruction had a lmost

ceased in eve ry part of I taly,he orde rs the e stablish

ment of n ine cent ra l schools for specia l d istrict s ;name ly Pavia

,the foundat ion ofwhose late r ce lebrated

un ive rsity has been e rroneously a t tribu ted to Charlesthe Great

,Ivrea

,Turin

,Cremona

,Florence

,Fermo

( for the duchy of Spoleto) Ve rona , Vicenza , and

Forum Ju lii (Civida le of Friul i) .2 The s ign ificant

1 P ater vero ej u s l iber a lium cumfa isset amator a r t ium,cl nobi liss i

mumpoller etfom i tem cunct is eum clemen t is,a lmzfi cisque r i t ibu s imbu

'

ens ,

l i tera r um s tudi is,et op t imis ar t ibus perornaba t , i ta u t n u lla sacr ar um

species r emaner a t discip linarum . Begi nning of the Vi ta N icol . I .

2 The Cons t i tu t io Lotbar i i dated from O lonna in May 825 , and not

as M urator i and T iraboschi think in 823 . M on . Germ . i ii . 248 . I t

beg ins : de doctr ina ver b, qua ob n im iam incu r iam a tque zgnamam

quor undamp rapos i tor um ,cunct is in loci s estfuna

’i tus ex t incta, p lacu i t ,

a id . a t ab lzis qu i nostr a d i spos i tione ad docendos alios per loca


remark concerning the decl ine of instruction te stifiesto the deplorable condit ion Of education throughout

the coun try. Any highe r inst itut ions for learningare a l toge the r out of the que stion , and the word“ doct rina ” on ly inc luded re l igious mat te rs , or at the

utmost the e lements of profane knowledge— that isto say , grammar.The edict of Lothar had re ference to the kingdom Decaxof

Learningof I ta ly a lone,and affected ne ithe r Rome nor the in Rome ,

province s of the Church. He re,howeve r, the re pre

va i led the same,perhaps an even greate r degree of

ignorance, as some of the Roman decree s of Counc i l

would seem to Show. In 826 Eugen ius the Secondissued the mandate that professors should be appointedin every bishopr ic and parish dil igent ly to t each the

science s and the sacred dogmas . This dist inctionproves that considerat ion was shown for secularlearn ing (a r tes liberales ) in express dist inct ion fromtheology ( sancta dog ma ta ) . Scarce ly any t eachers

,

howeve r, were forthcoming . All forms of profanetra ining disappeared

,and when Leo the Fourth in

8 53 confirmed the decree of Eugenius,he added in

so many words : “a lthough teache rs of the l ibe ra l

science s are,as usua l

,se ldom to be found in the

parishes, ye t maste rs of Holy Writ and inst ruction

in the eccle siast ica l office s should not be want ing.

” 1

denom inata sun t cons t i tu t i max imum detu r studium, quali ter s i bi

commiss i scli olast ici p rof ician t . We may note the term sclzolast icu s

for pupil .1 Decree of Eugenius in the Conci l . Roman . 826

, canon . 34M agi str i et doctor es con st i tuan tu r , qu i s tudia L i terar um ,

l iber a liumque

ar t ium,ac sancta baben tes dogmata ass idue doceant and Leo Iv .

’

s

addit ion ets i li ber alium ar t ium pr a cep tores in plebibus (now lep iem)

14o I I ISTORY OF ROME

The same lament might a lso have been ra i sed inRome . NO maste r

,no school of any note , could he re

be named . True , afte r the Benedict ine s had se ttledin the city

,schools had been e stabl ished in the

monaste rie s ; and the anc ien t school in the Late ran,

which owed its origin to the Benedictine orde r, and

whe re seve ral Popes had been educated,stil l survived .

These inst itutions could not,howeve r

,compare with

the schools of Germany or France,such as those of

Fulda,S . Gal l , Tours , Co rve i, or the school of Pavia

i n Lombardy . No distingu ished men such as JohnScotus

,Rhabanus Maurus

,Agobard of Lyons , such

as the Scotch Dung alus in Pavia , or Lupus ofFe rrieres

,dwe l t i n Rome . Law among profane

science s a lone might sti l l rece ive some encouragement

,and in consequence of Lothar’s statute some

t eache rs of law,who unde rs tood the code of J ust in ian

and taught it from compendia,must have been forth

coming,while at the same t ime advocate s and notarie s

could scarce ly have been ignorant of Sal i c and Lombard law .

Seve ra l Popes had e stablished Greek monks in new

conven t s . The se monks gave in struction to the

Roman cle rgy in the Greek language,and i f the

culture of He l len i c l ite ra ture did no t the reby profit,

the knowledge of Greek was a t least kept a l ive inRome

,and men who afte rwards became of servi ce

as nuncios in Constan t inople,as write rs and as in

t e rp re ters , we re tra ined in these seminarie s a t the

instance of the Pope s .

u t assolet,

r aro inven iun tur,tamen divina scr iptura magi str i , ct

inst i tu tor es eccles iast ici ofi lci i nu llatenus desu i t .

HISTORY OF ROME

Josephus,Pliny the younge r

,Philo

,the Fables of

of Avienus,Virgi l

,and

,among the grammarians ”

which we re e special ly in reque st at the t ime , Cice ro ,Donatus

,Priscian

,Longinus

,and Prospe r. 1 If books

such as these we re forthcoming in France,i s i t not

probable that they we re a l so found in Rome ? In 8 55the Abbot Lupus de Fe rriere s requested Benedictthe Third to send him manuscripts of Cice ro deO ratore , the i nstitu t ions of Quintil ian , the commen

tary of Donatus on Te rence,and a ssured the Pope

that a fte r he had had them Copied he would not fa i lto re turn the origina l manuscript . 2 In Romanaccoun ts a lone profane manuscripts remain unnoticed .

When books are mentioned in the biographie s of thePopes

,gospe ls

,antiphonarie s

,missals

,wi th which it

was customary to endow churches,are a lone to be

understood . Works such as these we re justlyesteemed precious

,and find mention in epitaphs .

The expense of a parchment manuscript was great,

and the labour expended in i ts writ ing and i l lustration far exceeded that b estowed by goldsmi ths orme ta l worke rs on the ir lamps and vase s .3 Monks

1 Cbron icum Cen tu lense in d’

Achéry, Sp ici leg . 11. c . 3 . Guinguené

(H i st . li tter . c . 72) m ight have learnt from this that the view ofAndres

i l n’

y awa i t pas dans toute la F rance un Ter ence, un Ciceron ,nu Qu in

t i lien,is erroneous .

2 In spite of the dearth of books at this t ime, people were more

l ibe ral in Rome than in the present day . Manuscripts wer e lent tofo re ign countr ies . Qua auctor . oper a s i ves tr a libera li tas nobi s larg i ta

fuer i t deo annuen te,una cum memorato S . II i eronJ/mi Codice fidel i ter

omn i no r est i tuenda cu rabimus . Lupi Ferr . Ep . 103 (Duchesne,ii .

3 The MSS. are works of art . Who cou ld look a t the Cod . Amia

t inus of the Vulgate , the ornament of the Laurentian Library,without

I N THE M IDDLE AGES .

skilled in art spent the ir sol itary l ive s over the transcript ion of these manuscripts of Holy Writ , or ofthe Fathe rs Of the Church . They drew rathe r thanwrote with brush and pen ,

sometime s in Roman um

cials,in capita ls or sma l l le tte rs

,some t ime s in the more

difficult Lombard characte rs,and occasiona l ly re l ieved

the i r work with pictures in miniature . O f thesei llustrations

,the first as a rule represents the write r

or the abbot who employed him , one or o the r,or

both of whom perhaps,he ld the parchment and pre

sented it to a sa int .1 The difficulty of the charactersoffe red a gre at Obstacle to the wri te r

,and forced him

to draw.

2 He the re fore i l lustrated his manuscripts

admirat ion ? Bandin i (D isser t . I . Suppl . ad Catal . 70 1 ) believes that itwas s ent as a presen t to the Monastery o fAmiata in the t ime of LewisI . ; his suggest ion ,

however,that it had belonged to Gregory I . is incap

able of proof. The Popes bestowed MSS . on the churches , and the

catalogues enumerate them alongs ide of candlest icks and ciboria . The

epitaph of the Archdeacon Pacificus of Verona of the year 846 says inhis pra ise B is cen tenos terque senos codices fecer a t (Murat . D i ss .

The inscript ion of the Presbyter George of S . Clemente in Rome saysthat he endowed this church ( in 743) with manuscr ipts as with thewidow’

s miteVeter i s noo ique Testamen tor um den ique l ibros

Octa teucbum,B egum ,

P sa lter ium,ac P r op/zeta r ium ,

Sa lomonem,E sdram

, S tor iar um I l ico P lenos . (I bid . )1 The celebrated Codex of Farfa in the Vat ican contains such a

front isp iece . But the most remarkable of the kind is the LombardCod . n . 3 53 , saec. x .

,which I saw at M onte Cas ino . The t i tle-page

represents the Abbot John offer ing the Codex to S . Benedict . The

p icture is inst ruct ive with refe rence to the r ich costume worn in Old

t imes by the Bened ict ines .

2 The Lombard wr it ing of ssec. ix . x . and xi . is d ifficu lt on

account of the letters a and t,which are easily confused on accoun t

of r and s, and of the runn ing toge ther of n and m ; o therwise i t is

invar iable in character . The D iplomas are hieroglyphical . Of this

144 HISTORY OF ROME

with artistic in itials in gold and colours. Of the

devoted industry of the age and i ts chaste art , sofe rtile i n arabesque device s

, we sti l l posse ss an

example in the ce lebrated Carol ingian Codex of theBible , which be longs to the ninth century and i s preserved in the monaste ry of S . Paul as its greate stt reasure ?These manuscripts at the same time i l lustrate the

characte r of the age , when art struggled w i th a deeprooted barbari sm

,and bore in its ha rd and awkward

characte r trace s of the confl ict . The spirit O f then inth and fol lowing centurie s has in i t

,l ike that of the

ancient Dorians , Egyptians and E truscans , some thingmyste rious

,en igmatic and symbolic

,which is c learly

expressed in portra iture and writing,in the u s e of

monograms on documents and coins,and in the em

ployment of arabe sque s . The coins more especial lyclear ly bear the impress Of the publ ic l i fe of this

pe riod, and the papa l coin s of the time display

t e rrible type s both in le tte ring and portra iture ?

fact the reader may conv ince himself from Mabillon (de ReD ipl . ) -e .g .

in the D iploma of N icho las I . (p. or the Bull of Paschalis I . to

Patronax of Ravenna , Bulls of Bened ict I I I .,and of other Popes of

saec. ix .

1 This work was carried off to Paris , but was brought back again toRome . I t was probably a gi ft of the Caro ling ians . Whether the firs tm iniature represen ted Char les the Great or Charles the Bo ld is uncertain . The drawing of the miniatures is rude the initials

,however, are

very art ist ic.

2 Co ins of Leo I I I . have on the obverse S . PETRUS LEO PA in

the cen tre ; on the reverse CARLUS , with IPA ( Imperator ) in the

centre . The co in attribu ted to Stephen IV . is doubtful . Denari i of

Paschalis have LVDOVVICVS IMP , in the middle ROMA,on the

o ther s ide SCS PETRVS, in the centre the monogram PSCAL .


Arabs who had plunde red the treasure s of S . Pe te r's

and S . Paul ’s could boast the i r unive rsities and philO SOphe rs , the i r theologians and grammarians, astronomers and mathematicians

,who adorned Ka irowan

,

Sevil le,Alexandria

,Bassora

,and Bagdad

,the

Mohammedan Athens of the East . Constantinople ,the great metropol is of theologians and sophists

,of

grammarians and learned pedants,found

,in the

Ca sar Bardas who had ove rthrown the PatriarchIgnatius a powerful Maecenas ; i n the i r princes ,such as Leo PhiIOSOphus , and late r his son Constantine Po rphy rogene tus , zea lous scholars ; and i nPhot iu s a new Pliny or Aristotle of barbarian times

,

who deposited but a smal l portion of his e rudit ion (extracts from 280 authors), in his famous Bibl iothe ca .

”

Conscious of the posse ssion of the purity ( re lative lyspeaking) of the Greek language , which the i r sciencere ta ined for centurie s to come , the Byzantines regarded Rome with contempt . The Empe ror Michae l

,

i n a le t t e r to Pope Nicholas the First,de r ided the

Roman s on account of the ir Latin,which he te rmed

a language of “ barbarian s and Sy thian s ,”and which

as spoken at that t ime by the populace,and written

by the notarie s and even by the chron iclers,gave the

learned Greeks sufficient grounds for scorn . The

Pope answe red in good Latin,and whe ther the

answe r was written by himse l f a lone,or was the

j oint production of himse lf and his Chance ry,sti l l

versed in style , the le tte r constituted by far the bestk ind of de fence . The Pope might we l l have retortedthat it was absurd for Michae l to c la im the title ofEmperor of the Romans

,a people whose language he


could not speak,and consequently termed barbarous

but the arguments employed by the Pope in defenceof the tongue of Caesar

,Cice ro

,and Virgil

,are mere ly

those derived from the Christ ian re l igion and the

Cross,the title of which

,was in Latin .

1

Even the ra ces Of Ge rmany and Gaul,reproached Culture in

Germany,by the Romans a s barbari ans

,we re i n advance of

the Latins in the i r at ta inments both in languageand learning. A Hincmar of Rhe ims was a prodigyin the eye s Of the Roman cardina ls . The voice ofpoe try

,both secular and re l igious , was dumb. But

at the time when the Romans scarce ly muste redsufficient ta lent to string toge the r a few couplets forthe mosa ics in the i r churche s

,for the gate s Of the ir

C ity,or the grave s of the ir dead

,Frankish Chron

iclers such as E rmold N ig e llus wrote the ir historiesin Latin ve rse

,and Ge rman poe ts of heathen paren t

ag e indited in the ir vigorous mothe r-tongue Gospe lharmon ie s

, the origina l ity of which st i l l awakens ouradmira t ion . NO theologica l work was any longe rcompiled in Rome . The history of the city

,its re

markable transformation since the days of Pip in and

Charles,found not a s ingle anna l ist

,and while Ger

many and France,and even Southe rn I ta ly (Where

the honoured monaste ry of Monte Casino sti l lencouraged the writing of history) produced nume r

1 (I t l ing ua La t ina inj u r iam i r rogar et i s , lzanc in epi stola vestra

barbaram et Scy t/zicam appellan tes .—Ep . N icol . I . in Labbe

,ix .

1320 . God had created the Lat in language u i cum Hebra a,a tqua

Gra ca in t i tu lo domin i a r eliqu is discreta in s zgnem pr incipatum tenen s

omn ibus na t ion ibus p ra dicet j esum N azar enum r egem j uda orumneverthe less there was always the consciousness that the Lat in tonguehad become the universal language of Christendom .

The Li ber

cali s .

H ISTORY OF ROME

ous chroniclers , the i ndolence of Roman monksal lowed the events of the i r city to rema in Shroudedin profound Obscurity.

Precise ly at this pe riod,howeve r

,the Papacy ene r

g e t ically continued its ancien t chron icles . Since thedeve lopment of the e ccle siastica l State

,since the

growth of the powe r not only of the Pope s but a l soof the bishops (whose dioce se s had become wea lthyimmunitie s) the nece ssity of leaving to poste rity ahistory of the churche s— in the form

'o f a Chrono

logical se rie s of the i r spiritua l heads and of the i rbiographie s —had made itse lf the more conspicuouslyfe l t . The want was not an isolated one

,for the same

period produced seve ra l collect ions O f the same kind ,all based on the l i sts of the bishops

,the i r le tte rs or

reg e s ta and othe r deeds . Outs ide Rome Agnelluscollected and wrote the barbarous but valuable historyof the Archbishops of Ravenna

,and the Neapol itan

Deacon John compiled the biographie s of the bishopsof his native C ity. I t i s be l ieved a lso that at thispe riod the mate rial s of the L iber P on tifical is we recollected and edited

,and that by Anastasius ; for

with his name is gene ral ly associated the Book of thePope s

,a lthough without jus t ificat ion .

1

This Anastasius,who bore the title of “ B iblio the

carius,

” l ived unde r N icholas the First and John theE ighth . I t i s uncerta in whethe r on ly the biographie sof the Pope s of his own t ime we re the product ofhis pen . Biographie s of the Pope s in the form ofca lendars and of cata logues , which re corded the years

1 This was first asserted by Panvinius, as the Abbé Duchesne hasshown (Etude su r lo liber Pon tificalis , p .

i so HISTORY OF ROME

The l ibrarian Anastasius was , moreove r, posse ssedof a knowledge of Greek . He translated the Chronograby of N icephorus , George Synce l lus , Theophanes,and othe r works of Greek eccle siastica l l ite rature . Hisfe l low-citizen the Deacon John also understood Greek ,and wrote the l i fe of Gregory the Great with the he lp Ofthe mate ria l s furnished by the Lateran archive s . The

product ion of such a monograph in the Carol ingianperiod and afte r the au thor had survived the pont ificate of Nicholas the First

,a Pope who in greatne ss

and activity reca l led Gregory,de se rve s att ention .

The work is an independent one,and of a characte r

strikingly diffe rent from the barren biographie s ofothe r Pope s . I t shows the author to have been a

man O f ve rsati le imaginat ion , who strove , ce rta inlyunsucce ssfully

,afte r e legance and ea se

,and who

posse ssed some knowledge of ancient l ite rature .

’

others , are attr ibuted to a Bibliothecarius Guillelmus . See Pertz on

the sources of the H istory of the Popes in the A rcli iv der Gesellscb . fura ltere deu tsclze Gesc/ziclztsbunde

,v . 68 . Giesebrecht on the orig in of

the L ib. Pon t . and i ts cont inuat ion in the A llg . M ona tssc/zr . fu r Wi ss .und L i t . Apr il 1852 . The latest researches are those of the Abbé L .

Duchesne , Etude su r le L ib. Pon t . , Paris , 1877, and Introduct ion to

his ed it ion of the work , Par is , 1884. Accord ing to his view the L ib.

Pon t . ( the first redact ion of which ends with Fe lix IV. ) was comp ileddur ing the Gothic period by a contemporary Of Anastas ius I I . and

Symmachus , (died Edited under Hormisdas ( 5 14 con

t inned unt il Fe lix IV. ( 526 to then carr ied on further . Edit ionsof the L ib. Pon t . : by the Jesuit Busaeus , E d . P r inceps , Mogun tiae, 1602

by C . A . Fabro ti , Paris , 1647 ; by Francesco B ianchini , Rome,17 18

by Murator i,1723 (Scr ip t . iii . p . 1 ) by T . Vignoli, Rome , 1724 ; by

L . Duchesne,Par is , begun in 1884.

1 Tiraboschi is very cursory with regard to this period, a fault forwhich we cannot blame him not to speak ofGuingu ené and Sismondi .Muratori

’

s D isser t . xl iii . deserves great praise .

IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

C HAPTE R V.

1 . R ISE OF PAPAL SUPREMACY — THE ECCLES IASTICALSTATE—THE PSEUDO-I S IDOR IAN DECRETALS— DEATHOF NICHOLAS, 867

— ADR IAN I I .-LAMBERT OF

SPOLETO ATTACKS ROME — THE ENEM IES OF

ADRIAN IN ROME — OUTRAGES OF ELEUTHERIUSAND ANASTAS IUS

,AND THEIR PUNI SHMENT.

THE persona l weakne ss of Charle s’s succe ssors,the i r

despicable passions,the ir quarre ls with regard to the

monarchy,which was irrevocably disorganised by

feuda l ism,had at this t ime great ly increased the

authority of the Pope . Nicholas the First united thesacred dignity with an int repid spirit such as but fewPopes have posse ssed . Dist inguished birth

,physica l

beauty,education

,as good as the time s permitted

,

were combined in him and since Gregory the Greatno Pope had been favoured to such a degree by thegood fortune which powe r attract s to itse l f. He

succeeded in humiliat ing the roya l a s we l l as the

episcopa l powe r,and the enfeebled Empire sank

unde r Lewis,who had no ma le he ir

,and who

,so to

speak,buried it in a serie s of ene rge t ic but pe t ty and

endle ss wars in Southe rn I ta ly ,into a more and more

empty name . Meanwhile,howeve r

,in the Papacy

the re arose the idea of universa l spiritual monarchy,

1 52 HISTORY OF ROME

which was late r e rected by Gregory the Seventhand perfected by Innocent the Third . The concep

t ion of Rome as the mora l centre of the world sti l ll ingered in imperishable tradition . The more the

Empire lost unity and powe r,and the less competent

it became to form the pol itica l centre of the Christiancommonwealth

,the easie r was i t for the Papacy to

advance the C la im which it put forth,that of be ing

the soul and principle of the Christian Republic,

while the secular rule rs now sank into mere changeable inst ruments .From stre ss o f circumstances

,as also from a great

historic impulse,the Papacy had restored the Roman

Impe ria l power,and scarce ly was the Empire created

when the secre t struggle of the spiritual aga inst the

pol itica l system began . Had the Roman Emperor

been able to gove rn as a Christian monarch likeConstantine and Theodosius

,had all autonomy in the

province s been suppre ssed,the Pope might then have

divided the dominion with the Empe ror,and

,resign

ing to him the trouble some task of tempora l gove rnment

,have reta ined the spiritua l supremacy. But

within the monarchy of Charles the motive power ofhuman nature had cal led into be ing a multitude ofseparate force s

,all a l ike in imica l to Papacy and

Empire : nat ional ities,provincial churche s, nationa l

duke s,nationa l bishops

,kings

,rights and l ibertie s ,

privi lege s and immunitie s of eve ry kind,— force s of

natura l d isintegration and of Ge rman individual itywhich declared war to the systems . They weakenedthe Empire

,the unity of which was only mechan ica l

and i ts basis of a material and changeable nature .

HISTORY OF ROME

crown .

l To the monarchic spirit of such a man the

crown was nothing fore ign,but Nicholas saw in it more

than the symbol of the tempora l statewhich the Churchacquired and soon lost . The spurious Donat ion ofConstantine rende red good service to the cla ims ofthe Pope s

,and the extent given to these cla ims by

this audacious forge ry shows at the same time howfar-reaching we re the a ims of the Papacy. Moreimportant

,howeve r

,we re the Pseudo-Is idorian Decre

tals,which incorporated in themse lve s that Donation

of te rri tory . These memorable fabrications of severa lle tte rs and decrees of bygone Pope s

,interspersed in a

col lection of Acts of Councils , and foisted upon thece lebrated I s idore of Sevil le , date from the middle ofthe ninth century. Nicholas was the first among thePopes to make use of them as a code of papa l rights ?

They furnished the Church with privilege s such as

made i t entire ly independent of the State ; theyplaced the roya l powe r far be low the papa l

,be low

even the episcopa l . At the same time , however , they

1 Novaes , Pag i and others asser t this , supporting themselves on the

coronatu r den ique of the L ib. P on t . The l ikeness of N icholas I . is not

d isplayed on his co ins . Serg ius I I I . (904) is st il l represented on a

co in with a mitre . The t iara , of ent irely O riental form ,and surrounded

with a d iadem ,was also called Regnum or P lzryg i um Innocent I I I .

consequent ly said in s ignum sp i r i tua lium con tu li t Al i tram, in s ignum

tempor a lium dedi t m i lzi Coronam, M i tr am quoque pro sacerdot io,

Coronam pro Regno. The Popes , wro te Innocent, seldom wore the

t iara , almost always the m itre . Vignoli, An t iq. P on t ij i P om . D enar i i,

p . 63 , and Novaes ’ In trod . 11. D iss . v . None of the ancient Papalcrowns have been preserved the ear liest dates from Julius I I .

2 The D ecretals were unknown to the Popes previous to the year864. They were compiled by a cler ic in France about 85 1 or 852 .

Hinschius , D ecretales P seudo-I s idor iana et cap i tu la Ang i lr ammi ,

Leipzig , 1863 (Introduction).


exalted the Pope high above the episcopate as in

accessible to the decree s of the provincial synods, and

represented him as the supreme j udge of me tropol itans and bishops whose office and powe r, removedfrom roya l influence

,should be subject to the papa l

command . In a word,they ascribed to the Pope

dictatorship in the ecclesiastica l world . In theseDecre ta ls Nicholas the First recognised the mostserviceable weapons for the struggle aga inst kingsand provincia l synods . Ove r both powers he

t riumphed ; while the Emperor,who fore saw the

danger which threatened the politica l princ iple , wasforced to play the part of spectator at the papa lvictory.

The death of this great Pope (Novembe r I 3th,867 )

created a profound impre ssion . The world te st ifiedto the fear and admirat ion in which it had he ld him 1

;

those,howeve r

,who had been struck or threatened

by his thunderbolts,cheerfully ra ised the ir heads

,

hoping for freedom and the abrogat ion of the papa ldecree s .The choice of the Romans fe l l upon Adr ian

,the Adrian 11

aged Cardina l of S . Marcus,the son of Talarus

,

‘

and13 0122 867

"

8 2 .

a membe r of the same family as Stephen the Fourth7

and Sergius the Second . The envoys of the Empe rorpresent in Rome

,offended because they had no t been

1 Anastasius announced the death to the Archbishop Ado ofVienne(Labbe, Con ci l . ix . E beu quam sero talem vi r um eccles ia

meru i t , quam ci to r eliqu it . Reg ino says,ad A . 868 post . b. Gr egor ium

u sque in pr a sens nu llus p r a su l in P omana u r be— i lli videtur a qu ipar

andus . Reg ibu s ac ty r ann is imper ao i t, cisque ac s i dominus orbi s

ter rar um auctor itate p rafu i t . Baronius,Ann . A . 867, g ives his

epitaph .

156 HISTORY OF ROME

summoned to the e lection,we re appeased by the

explanation that the Romans had not infringed uponthe rights of the crown

,s ince a l though the cons t itu

t ion undoubtedly prescribed the Imperia l ratificationof the e lected candidate

,i t nowhe re orda ined that the

e lection should take place unde r the eye s of theLegate s .1 They we re tranqu illised with this assurancethe Emperor himse l f ratified the e lect ion

,and Adrian

the Second was consecrated Pope on December 14th .

He ce lebrated his acce ssion to the pont ificate byan amne sty. He admitted some of the cle rgy ex

communicated by his predece ssor to his first mass,

among them the notorious Cardina l Anastasius and

a lso Teu tgaud of Treve s . He pardoned this repen tantoffende r

,and a l lotted him as dwe l l ing a ce l l in the

Monaste ry of S . Andrew on the Clivus Scauri .2 Someof the pre late s accused Of high treason lanqu ished inexile . The Empe ror had a lso sent the Bishops ofNepi and Ve l le t ri into banishment

,an action which

shows the completene ss of his impe ratoria l power .Adrian begged for the ir restora t ion . O ther Romans ,laymen

,had been sent to the ga l leys as guilty O f high

1 According to a decree,attributed to Stephen IV. , the election of

a Pope must be carr ied out by the assembled clergy, and the e lectedcandidate consecrated in presence of the Imper ial plenipo tent iary.

This decree was renewed by N icholas I . at a synod in 862 or 863 .

N iehues,

D ie Wahldecre te Stephan’

s I I I . and IV. (H i stor . j abrb.

a’

er Ga'

r r es-Gesellsc/zaft , 1880 , p . 14 1—1 5

2 Vi ta Hadr . I I . n . 6 16 . S . Gregory appeared to Teutgaud in a

d ream and commanded him to leave his convent . He escaped to the

Sab ina, where he died . Joh . D iacon . Vi ta S . Gr egor . I V. c . 94.

Ne ither d id Gun ther, who had been stricken by N icho las I .

’

s thunderbo lt

,recover

,although Adrian admitt ed him to the Communion in 869

(Hincmar’

s


he sacked churches and convents , and permitted hissold ie rs to ravish Roman ma idens both in the cityand ne ighbourhood . He then re tired . The Popewrote lette rs of compla int to the Ge rman Empe ror

,

and excommunicated all Franks and Lombards whohad summoned Lambe rt or had taken part in thesack . This inciden t revea l s the approaching dissolution of the Carol ingian Empire . I t ushe rs in thepe riod of utte r confusion in I ta ly, of the dispute s Ofthe dukes with regard to Rome , and of the war offact ions in the city itse l f, which we sha l l soon haveto de scribe .

1

Lewis was in Southern Italy. He had issued a

gene ra l summons to his I tal ian vassa ls to rise and

attack the Saracens at Bari , and was on the point ofbeginning the campa ign from Lucania .

2 He re the

compla in ts of the Romans reached him ; he lackedthe t ime

,however

,and perhaps the de sire to punish

Lambert by depriving him of the Duchy,which he

only did,and on quite othe r grounds

, in 87 1 .

Adrian the Se cond was severe ly tried in the early

1 Vi ta I-I adr . I I . n . 622 . Ig i tur Lamber tu s—tempore consecra t ion is

Romanam u rbem, p ra ter consuetudinem s icu t ty r annus in tr avi t

,

non r ebellan tem,s icu t victor satelli t ibus su is ad pr a dandum d istr ibu i t .

The Vi ta ment ions as part isans of Lamber t in Rome : Ai staldus,

Walterius,Hilpianus , Odo and Theopert , all Germans and probably

ances tors of the later As talli , Gualterii , I lperini , Oddoni , T ibe t t i .2 The Con st i tu t io promot ion is exer ci tus observa t ion is par t ibus B ene

ven t i is to be found in the H i stor iola Ig not i Cas in . in Camil . Peregr in .

A . 866 . The Tuscans were to march cum popu lo qu i de u ltr a ven iunt

through Rom e to Pon te Corvo . This Lombard fortress had arisenabou t this t ime in the ne ighbourhood of Aquino . I have made use of

the Cod . D ip lom . Pon t is Cu r vi in Monte Casino,which covers the

interval between 953 and 16 12 .


years of his pont ificate by some terrible experience s,

His enemies,adherents of the late Pope , grudged him

the tiara,and spread the report that from fear of

publ ic opinion he wished to annul the acts of his predece ssor by which the papa l powe r had risen to sucha he ight . Adrian hastened to silence the se reports ;he tranquill ised the Roman pat riots by the assurancethat he had neve r forsaken the path of N icholas theFirst

,and won the ir favou r by orde ring a public praye r

for the late Pope and by the solemn recognit ion of hisdecrees . Adrian furthe r commanded the completionof the basi l ica which Nicholas had begun . While hethus pac ified the friends of his predecessor, he irritatedhis enemie s

,who consequently gave him the am

biguous name of N icolaite .

1

O f this party,which was supported by the Franks

,Ou trag e

Cardina l Anastasius and his brothe r E leutherius we re fii’

i’

fit’ed

prominent membe rs . They be longed to the highest bro thersAnas tasius

ranks of the nobi l i ty,and we re sons of the wea lthy and

Bishop Arsen ius , who could not brook the fact thathis son had been excommunicated by Leo the Fourthand his hopes Of the tiara ru ined by Nicholas theF irst . Adrian had a daughte r born in lawful wedlockbefore he had ente red holy orde rs . On his e levat ionto the Papacy he be trothed the ma iden to a nobleRoman . E leutherius

,however

,impe l led e ither by love

or by hatred,carried off the bride-e le ct and married

her . The ou traged Pope,impot en t to pun ish a

powe rful man who he ld himse l f intrenched within thewa lls of a strong palace , sent urgent le tte rs to theEmperor begging him to dispatch envoys to judge

1 Vi ta,n . 6 18 .

l HISTORY OF ROME

the criminal . At the same time the fathe r of E leutherius hastened to Benevento to win ove r the

avaricious Empre ss by gifts,but was there ove r

taken by death . The Impe ria l Miss i came to Rome ,E leuthe rius

,in a transport of rage

,stabbed the

daughte r of the Pope and her mothe r Stephania , whowill ingly or othe rwise had accompan ied her child .

The Imperia l i sts,howeve r

,se ized the murde re r and

beheade d him .

Moved by these events, the unfortunate Adrian

summoned a synod . He renewed the ex communica

t ion aga inst Anastasius,to whom

,justly or unjust ly, a

share i n his brothe r’s crime s was attributed,threaten

ing him with the anathema if he withdrew more than

40 mile s from the C i ty or usurped any ecclesiastica lfunct ion . The Cardina l rece ived the sentence onOctobe r 12th,

868 , in the basi l ica of S . Prassede,and

swore to submit to it .

1 The se events showed the

he ight to which the defiance of the Roman nobil ityhad atta ined . At the time sti l l controlled byImperia l authority

,as soon as this author ity was

extinguished in the C ity,i t was to assume the control

over the papa l cha ir.

1 Hincmar , Annal. 868 . The mildness of the sentence deserves

praise . Excommunicat ion nevertheless was a terr ible pun ishment,excluding the offender from human society et qu i cum ea in locut ione

cibo vel potu commun icaver it , par i excommunicat ione cum eo teneatur

annexus .


treated by he r husband,hadfled to Charle s the Ba ld .

She had announced to Nicholas her in tention of dissolving her marriage with a tyrant

,and of seeking

peace in a convent . Nicholas instead condemned he r— the tragic victim of a dogma— to cont inued torture .

The Pope had re fused to sanc t ion her separation froman adul te re r

,and Lothar was

,the refore

,on his s ide

a l so condemned to ce l ibacy . Adrian ex communi

cated Waldrada . He addre ssed a furious le tte r toLothar

,and threatened him with the same punish

ment . 1 The King,s trong on ly in his weakness for a

woman,bent his head to the humiliation he implored

Nicholas to a l low him to appear in his own de fence .

The Pope,howeve r

,refused . On N icholas

’

s death,

Lothar turned to his successor,hoping to induce him

to yie ld to his wishe s,and Adrian appears to have

consented to the journey to Rome . The King hadimplored the Empe ror to us e his interce ssion with thePope

,to grant his separa t ion from Thiu tberga and

his marriage with Waldrada,and announced that he

would come in pe rson . In June 869 Lothar ente redRavenna . The Emperor was at this time occupiedin laying siege to Bari, but his envoys notified toLothar that the ir maste r desired to avoid all complications

,and that he must not, the re fore , advance furthe r.

The infatuated love r, however, cared for nothing butthe bl iss that awa ited him in the arms of Waldrada ,

1 Quam ob r em cavendum es t,ne cum ea par i mucr one per cellar i s

sen ten t ia,

ac p r o u n i u s mu liercu la pass ione et br evi ss imi tempor i s

des ider io, vineta s ct obliga tz/s ad su lp lzu r eos fa tores ct ad perbe nnetra lzar i s in i t ium. This letter and o ther documents relative to thismatter are to be found in Reg ino, Cbron . A . 866, 868 .


and for which he was ready to sacrifice all the treasure sof his kingdom . He hastened to his brother, helavished entreaties and gift s unt i l he won the EmpressEnge lbe rga to his s ide . The Empe ror summonedAdrian to Mon te Casino

,Whithe r Enge lbe rga accom

pan ied her brother-in-law . Lothar assa i led the Popewith presents

,but only succeeded in preva il ing on

Adrian to a l low him to partake of the Communion .

This Adr ian himse lf admin iste red to the shame lessKing

,afte r the latte r had sworn a solemn oath that

from the t ime of her excommunicat ion he had forborne all intercourse with Waldrada .

1 Enge lberga Lo thar’

s

journeyed from Monte Casino back to her husband gimp,the Pope re turned to Rome

,the shame le ss Lothar Casino .

following at his hee ls . Lothar’ s reception in the C itywas insult ing : no priest came to mee t him ,

he slunkwith his re t inue into S . Pe te r’s and took up his abodeunwe lcomed in the ne ighbouring pa lace

,the rooms of

which had not even been swept for his arr iva l .2 The

Pope refused to a l low him to at tend mass,bu t invited

him,howeve r

,to table in the Late ran

,and iron ical ly

made return for the handsome gift s he had rece ivedby presenting the King with a garment ca l led “ Laena

,

a palm,and a rod .

3 The weak prince left Rome satisfied

,and cont inued his j ourney to Lucca , whe re he

1 H incmar,A . 869 Ipse au tem infelix ,

mor ej uda— impuden t i fron teeamdam sacr am commun ionem—accipere non per t imu i t . Gun ther wasa lso admitted to the Commun ion on this occas ion . Reg ino erroneouslytransfe rs these occurrences to Rome .

2 I ndeque solar ium secu s eccl . b. P etr i mans ionem babi tu ru s , in travi t ,

quem nec et iam scopa mundatum inven i t H incmar . Reg ino callsLothar ’ s reception honourable Hincmar , however , is to be believed .

3 La na also s ign ifies procuress .

869 .

HISTORY OF ROME

and his fol lowers we re attacked by malaria . He proceeded

,furthe r

,to Piacenza

,and the re died on August

l oth. In his death men recogn ised the j udgment ofheaven on pe rj ury and p rofligacyWhile Charle s the Ba ld and Lewis of Germany

attacked the e state s of the dead,they afforded the

Pope the Opportunity Of deal ing with them as i f theywe re robbe rs . The inj ured Emperor was himse l freduced to beg for Adrian

’s inte rvention . Lewis wasstil l engaged in the war aga inst the Saracens inSouthe rn I ta ly . He at length conquered Bari , wherehe took prisone r the Sul tan in 87 1 , and the rebyaroused the j ea lousy of the Greeks, who had butfeebly supported him in his great undertaking. Basi lwrote him an i ron ica l le tte r

,in which he re fused Lewis

the title Basileus and sarcas tical ly cal led him R iga.

Lewis ’s answe r is de se rv ing of remark,and we quote

i t as confirming the idea which was enterta ined of theRoman Imperium a t this pe riod

,and to show that the

sanct i ty of the Impe ria l dign ity was,through the Em

peror’

s own admission,a lready he ld to proceed from

the anointing of the Empe ror by the hand of the Pope .

Our uncles , he sa id,

“ glorious kings,a lthough

older in years than we,ca l l us Impe rator without envy

,

for they take into conside ration the anoint ing and

consecration by which we,through the laying on of

the hands of the Pope and by means of his praye r,

have risen by the Divine Will to the Impe rium of theRoman Empire . One i s the Empire of the Fathe r

,

of the Son,and of the Holy Ghost

,whose portion is

the Church on earth,the gove rnment of which God

has, neverthe le ss , not committed e ithe r to thee or to

166 HISTORY OF ROME

through papal consecration , but only through nomina t ion by the Senate and People , a tta ined the Imperia l d ignity. Some even wi thout this have beenra ised to the Imperia l throne mere ly through acclam

a t ion by the soldie rs , or have in various ways se izedthe sceptre of Roman Empire . I f thou , howeve r,calumn iates t the action of the Roman pontiff, rathe rblame Samue l

,because that he

,rejecting Saul , whom

he himse lf had previously anointed,did not disda i n to

anoint David king .

”

Afte r Lewis had drawn this adroit para l le l be tweenSaul the rej ected or the Greek Empe ror and Davidor the Frankish King (we may remembe r thatCharles the Great was a lso pleased to be ca l ledDavid) he says in conclusion to the Byzantine : We

have there fore atta ined to the Roman Empire by ourorthodoxy, the Greeks , on the othe r hand

,lost it by

the i r kakodoxy . They have dese rted not only the

C i ty and the seat of the Empire,but a l so the Roman

people have even renounced the Roman language,

and have become utterly e st ranged .

” 1

This le tte r,the composition of a cleve r prie st

,forms

the we ightie st document with regard to the concep

tion of the Impe rium produced since the days ofCharle s the Great . Re ferring to the past

,i t draws

a definite conclusion from a long cha in of historicpremisses . The twofold usurpation opposed to thelegitimacy

,David opposed to Saul

,was now con

cealed unde r the grace of God and its ope ration

1 P omanorum Impera tor es ex istere cessaverun t,descr entes non solum

Urbem et sedem Imper i i , sed cl g en tem P omanam, cl ipsam quoqueli ng nam ami t ten tes

,a tque ad a lia transm igr antes .


through the high priest of re l igion . The unctionwhich the Emperor rece ived flowed from the samesource that had consecrated the Major Domus of theFranks when he robbed the Me rovingians of thecrown

,and since the rights of legit imacy could no t

tole rate the existence of othe r right s of a pol it ica lor actual nature

,these were s e t aside by the t it le of

the Divine Will . Lewis , it is true , sti l l quote s the

Romans in genera l as the source of the Impe r ium,

bu t on ly in a secondary degree ; and while he no

longe r bestows a thought on the e lect ion through thepeople or the Die t

,he a lways re turns to the sen tence

of the Church and the papa l unction . This view ispart ly to be traced to the pol icy of the Empe rorsthemse lve s

,who pre fe rred to de rive the ir Office from

papal consecrat ion— that i s to s ay ,from God— rathe r

than from the e lect ion by the vassal s,who waxed

ever more insolent,who de sired to make the Empire

dependent upon themse lve s,and who weakened and

spl it up the Empire of Charle s in orde r that theymight rise to power on it s ruins . I t the re fore followedthat the Empire had come to be conside red as a ltoge the r dependent on papa l consecration

,and that the

Pope s ventured to assert that the Imperia l powe r wasbe stowed by them a lone as a fie f and emanat ion ofthe ir supreme sacerdota l power.An unpara l le led act of violence furthe r showed the The

world how far the Empire had lost it s majesty in 87 1 .

The victor of Bari,the saviour of Sou the rn I ta ly

,had mime a

p ri soner i n

wi thdrawn to Beneven to with his spoils,while his Benevento .

dispe rsed army reduced some rebe l l ious towns to

subject ion . His wife,Enge lbe rga

,his nobles and his


soldie rs i rritated the people of Benevento by the i rrapacity and insolence Ade lchis

,howeve r

,the

re ign ing prince,cove tous of the spoils of the Saracens

,

conce ived the bold idea of se iz ing the Empe ror,whom

he had often offended by his disobedience,whose

ange r he dreaded , and whose yoke , he , as we l l as thewhole of Sou the rn I taly , unwilling ly bore . He the refore attacked him in his pa lace in August . Afte r awild scene of struggle and de fence prolonged forthree days

,he took prisone r his Imperia l gue st

,his

wife and all the Franks . He robbed them of the i rva luable s

,he kept them in prison for more than a

month,and forced a sworn promise from Lewis neve r

to ente r the Duchy of Benevento with an army,and

neve r to take any revenge for the injuries he hadsuffe red . Then

,te rrified by the landing of the

Saracens at Sa le rno,he re stored his prisone rs to

l ibe rty . Thus was the Empire outraged and dishonoured by its vassa l s . 1

The news of this insult caused inde scribable dis

may . Ba l lad s ingers sung it in the stree ts, the in

t e lligence spread through every land,and Lewis

was be l ieved to be dead ? Thirsting for revenge,but

1 Hincmar and Reg ino, A . 87 1 . Above all,the contemporary

Erchempert , c. 34 . The Anon . Saler u . c. 1 17 says that Lewis hadt roubled Benevento for three years . Andreas Presb . of Bergamo

,a

contemporary, also g ive s informat ion of these events (M on . Germ: v .

According to Muhlbacher (Regest . der Kar oling er ) the attacktook p lace on August 13 th, the liberat ion of the prisoners on September 17th .

2 The ballad (Muratori,D isser t . xl. Sismondi , L i te

’

r . der M idi , i . 15 )shows that the ling ua volgare was no t yet ( in 87 1 ) the language of

poe try. The s train is that of our street songs , beg inn ing G ive ear , allmen

,to the dreadful tale

17o H ISTORY OF ROME

Republ ic,and the rebe l l ious vassa l s we re placed unde r

the ban of outlawry.

1 Neve rtheless , the weakening ofthe Empire was regarded in gene ra l with secre t sat i sfaction . Romans and I ta l ian s

,dukes

,bishops

,counts ,

the Pope,the Saracens and the Norman s all eagerly

contributed to its overthrow . When,hastened by the

rapid degene ration O f the Carolingian house , the ove rthrow a t last took place

,it was followed by terrible

t ime s for Rome and the Papacy,which from the

summit of powe r suddenly sank to the depths ofhumil iation .

JOHN VI I I .

,POPE

,8 72

— DEATH OF LEW IS I I .—THE

SONS OF LEWI S OF GERMANY AND CHARLES THE

BALD CONTEND FOR THE POSSESS ION OF ITALYCHARLES THE BALD

,EMPEROR

,8 75

—DECAY OF THE

IMPERIAL POWER I N ROME— CHARLES THE BALD,KING OF ITALY— THE GERMAN FACTION IN ROME

EXCESSES OF THE NOB ILITY— FORMOSUS OF PORTUS .

The Church,howeve r

,was fortunate at this time

in having a succe ssion of Popes no le ss able thanthose who had freed Rome from the Byzan t ine yoke .

While the throne of the Ca rol ingians was occupiedby a series O f ever weake r ru le rs

,the cha ir of Pe te r

was fi l led by a s et of men immeasu rably thei rsupe riors in diplomat ic ski ll

,firmness and powe r.

1 Tunc a senatu Romanor . idem Ada lgisus ty r ann us a tque bos t i sr eipubli ca declar atu r , bellum adver sus cum decern i tu r . Reg ino , A . 872 .

The chron icler (who d ied 9 15 ) informs us that Adalgisusfled to Cors ica ,that the Emperor d id not advance in person agains t Benevento , butmade over the war to his wife .

I N THE MIDDLE AGES.

Adrian the Second died,and the ye t more vigorous J

p

ohn

2111;

John the E ighth,son of Gundo

,a Roman perhaps of agg

e’ 7 2

Lombard descent,was orda ined on Decembe r 14th,

The Emperor Lewis the Second,the last

Carol ingian of vigorous mind,and of ideas worthy of

the Empire,died in the course of a few years . Afte r

he had long and honourably striven in Southe rnI ta ly to re scue the kingdom from the Saracens and tohea l its divisions

,after he had va in ly endeavoured to

check the in te rna l decay,the inevitable resul t of the

feuda l principle and the immun it ie s of the bishoprics ,he died at Bresc ia on August 12th

,87 5 , and was g

e

3ggburied in the Church of S . Ambrosius at Milan ?

Emperor

Lewis was the first Emperor of mediaeva l t ime s 10 525

1

1

2111,entangle himse lf in the fata l labyrinth of I ta l ian 87 5pol it ics

,and having a lmost become an I tal ian

,he

pe rished in the t rouble s that ove rwhe lmed him . Hisdeath const i tute s an era in the history of the Empire .

With him the Empire,losing powe r and dign ity

,sank

to be a puppe t-Show in the hands of the Pope and the

Ital ian noble s ; while I ta ly he rs e l f fe l l into that stateof last ing chaos which has continued down to our

1 The Anna l . B er t in . or H incmar alone g ive the day of the ord inat ion : Adr ianus p . mor i tur

,et j obes ar cbdiacon . Roman . eccl . 19 [( al .

f an . in locum ej u s subst i tu i tur .—j obes , nat . Romanu s

,ex patre Gundo

—thus the Vi ta from the Catalogue in Wat terich i . 27 .

2 We here read his ep itaph, which says among other thingsI I iuc ubifi rma v ir um mundo pr oduxer at a tas ,Imper i i nomen subdi ta Roma dedi t

N u nc obi tum lug es , i nfelix Roma , patron i ,Omne s imu l Lat ium

,Ga llia tota debinc.

(D om B ouquet,V l l .

Andr. Presb . I bi fu i et par tem aliquam por tavi , et cumpor tan t ibu s

ambu lavi aflumine qu i dici tu r Oleo usque adflumen Adua . c . 17 .

17 2 H ISTORY OF ROME

own days , and which,owing to her geographical

position , has made her the apple of discord be tweenFrance and Germany.

Lewi s left no he ir but his daughte r E rmengard .

His uncles Charles the Ba ld of France and Lewis ofGe rmany each strove for the posse ssion of Italy and

the Impe ria l crown . A Die t of the Empire , he ld at

Pavia,a t the inst igation of the widowed Empress,

who favoured the Ge rman party,was devoid Of result

,

and the dec is ion of the que stion was le ft to arms .The sons of Lewis

,Charle s the Fat and Carloman

,

we re favoured by the powerful Margrave Berenge r ofFriul i , who through his mothe r Gise la was a natura lgrandson of Lewis the Pious . One after anothe rthey crossed the Alps to fight aga inst the i r uncle ,who

,howeve r

,by force of gold and fa lsehoods

reduced them to inact ivity . The Imperia l crownhad a lready been assured to the de spicable prince bythe Pope . For even in the t ime of Lewis the Second ,whose ene rgy had been fe l t and dreaded in Rome ,the Church had turned her eye s towards France ; andAdrian had secre tly promised Charle s the Bald thaton the Empe ror’s death he would give the Crown tonone but him .

1The thought of be stowing it on a

King,repre sentative of the German nationa l ity

,was

st il l far distant,or appeared dange rous on account of

the too close a l l iance O f I ta ly with Ge rmany. Johnthe E ighth the re fore did not hesitate to decide infavour of the Frankish party, which, be side s be ing the

1 Ep . 34 Hadr . I I . Labbe,Vi i . 443 . He heaps flattering epithets

on the King , whom he had irritated by his attacks on the GallicanChurch .

174 HISTORY OF ROME

which Charle s the Ba ld had formed with the Church .

But s ince he had rece ived the crown from the handsof a benevolent donor

,the conce ssions which he

made must have been great . Had the donation of afeeble prince been of equa l va lue with those of Lewisthe Pious

,a powe rfu l Emperor

,they would

,as an

important diploma,have occupied a marked place in

the history of the Papacy .

1 The Imperia l maje stysank wi th Charle s to the depth of degradation

,that

of the Popes rose to a lofty he ight . The Cons t itu

tions of Charles the Great and Lothar fe l l to decayin Rome the right s of the Impe rial powe r ceased orexisted only as an empty name . The Empire became the toy now of the Papacy, now of the greatfeudal vassal s ; and the Ital ian Counts could soon v ie

s tress on his elzgimus mer i to et appr obavimus—ad Imp . Roman i scept ra

p rovex imu s . Never the less he did not venture to pass over the ratifica

t ion of the clergy and amp li S enatu s , tot iusque P om . P op . g en t isque

tog ata . The rem in iscences of an t iquity became ever more d ist inct .See also the Roman Council of 877 , and a lso that of Pon tigon ,

Ju ly876. (Labbe, T . xi . A German chronicler says s imply a papa

accep i t bened ict ionem imper ia lem . Annal . Vedas t in i .1 According to Ep . ix. of John VI I I . to Landulf of Capua , Charles

the Bald awarded Capua to the Church de ter r a ves tra pacta—nostro

j ur i potes tatique commis i t the Libell . de Imp . P otes . adds to this Cala e

br ia, Samn ium

,Benevento

, Spole to , Arezzo,and Chius i . According

to it Charles renounced the Imperial right in Rome (perdonans i ll is j u r a

P egn i ), and the r ight of the presence of the M issus at the papal e lect ion . This s tatement must be accep ted with caut ion . Charles express lyrecognised the pr imate of Rome ( in the Conven t . Ticinens . Ferdin .

H irsch (Sclzenbung Car l's des [fa b/en fu r P . j obann 21nd der L ib. de

i'

mp . pot . ) has striven to prove that Charles had bes towed a Pr ivileg iumon the Pope , not on the occas ion of the Imperial coronation , but only inthe year 876. He rejects the account of this donation g iven in theLibella s .


on equal te rms with the crown of Charles, as vassa lsof whose Empire they had had the ir origin .

The new Emperor rema ined in Rome until January

5th, 876 . He hastened to Pavia , fol lowed by the

Pope himse lf,and he re in an assembly of the bishops

and noble s of the I tal ian kingdom he was no t on lyconfirmed in the Impe ria l dign ity, bu t a lso previouslye lected King of Ita ly and crowned by Anspert ,

Archbishop ofMilan . His predecessors since the daysOf Charles the Great had been simply nominated bya decree of the Empire and by a Die t out side I taly .

The e lect ion of Charles the Bald forms the refore a

turn ing point in I ta l ian history. In it was shown theextraordinarily increased powe r of the Papacy, of thebishops

,Of the noble s

,as a l so the dist inct appearance

of a nat ional spirit in Northe rn I taly .

1 The Kingresigned to Duke Boso, whose s iste r Richilda he hadmarr ied

,the administ rat ion of I ta l ian affa irs . He

himse l f trave l led to France , to rece ive recogn ition as

Empe ror from the Die t Of those provinces assembled

in July at Ponthion . He appeared on this occasionin magnificent Byzant ine vestments

,and re ce ived as

a vassa l a golden sceptre from the papal legate .

Afte r John had reduced the Imperia l powe r tosubmission

,he re turned from Pavia to Rome

,sum

moned by the advance s of the Saracens and the

hostile at titude of the c ivic nobil ity . To the victoryacquired over the Empire succeeded a condition ofsuch anarchy as soon re sulted in a se rious de feat forthe Papacy

,no longe r de fended by the Imperia l arm .

1 The Bishops and Counts announce : nos I talici P egn i Reg ent

eligi mus—a formal royal e lect ion . Acta Conv. Ticin .

Formosus .


Rare ly have the plans of ambition been turned intoridicule by a bitte r irony equa l to that which the

Popes now experienced . Within the City was a

powerfu l party favourable to the Ge rmans,who

ma inta ined communication with the widowed Empress

,with Be renger of Friuli

,Adalbert of Tuscany

and the Margrave s Of Spoleto and Camerino . Thisparty had opposed the e lection of Charle s the Bald .

I t aspired to independence,and was in eve ry

,way a

source of great anxie ty to the Pope . The characte rof its membe rs reflected the barbarism of the time s ,but s ince we find among them the name of Fo rmosus

,

a man e steemed by his contemporarie s as a sa int ,some doubt may be pe rmitted concerning the truthof the accusations leve l led aga inst them .

Formosus of Portus,famous for his m ission in

Bulgaria,prominent among the Roman cle rgy

through his learning and ta len ts,had incurred the

hatred of the suspic ious Pope and of seve ra l cardinal s .When previously sent to invite Charle s to his coronat ion

,the mission had e ithe r been unwil l ingly unde r

taken,or

,concea l ing the views which incl ined him to

the Ge rman party,he had acquiesced in it from motive s

of prudence . Be ing , as a prominent man,secure of

the adhe rence of a large faction ,he may have been

suspected of a iming at t he papa l crown . He had forunknown reasons le ft his bishopric Of Portus . ‘He

was consequently reproached with having conspiredwith the Romans aga inst both Emperor and Pope .

The noble s of the city formed a powerful familya l l iance . Among them we re Gene ra l s of Mil it ia orministe rs of the Palace , a Nomenclator Gregory and

H ISTORY OF ROME

any doubt that he and the fugitive Romans were inleague with the Margraves of Spoleto and Camerino ,as a lso with Adalbert of Tuscany

,s ince we find them

soon afte r under the protection of these prince s . Atreacherou s unders tanding with the Saracens i s

,

howeve r, improbable ; Formosus , at least, must beacquitted of so base an act .

THE SARACENS DEVASTATE THE CAMPAGNA—JOHN ’S

LETTERS OF COMPLAINT — LEAGUE BETWEEN THE

SARACENS AND THE SEAPORTS OF SOUTHERN ITALY-ENERGY OF JOHN VI I I .

—HE FORMS A FLEET,NEGOTIATES W ITH THE PR INCES OF SOUTH ITALY,DEFEATS THE SARACENS AT THE CAPE OF C IRCECOND ITION OF SOUTHERN ITALY—JOHN VI I I . BU ILDS

JOHANN IPOLIS BES IDE S . PAUL’S .

From the year 876 onwards the Mohamme

dans,advancing into the Roman territory

,plundered

the Sabina, la id waste Tuscany and Latium ,and

repeatedly appeared before the gate s of the c ity .

Convents,farms

,the Domuscultae

,the se ttlements

e stablished with such trouble by so many Popes,were leve l led with the ground , the coloni were slainor sold into slavery, and the Campagna was reducedto a feve r-stricken desert . In John ’s agonised lettersaddressed in 876 and 877 to Boso, Charles the Bald ,

deavoured to explain the relationship of the se nobles . L . Richter inthe Programm of the University Of Marburg , 1843 , publishes thedecis ions of the second Synod of John VI I I . of the 3oth June , whereFormosus is charged : venerabilia monaster ia buj us eccles ia qu ibus

praf ui t sacr i lege depra dasse.

IN THE M IDDLE AGES. I

the Empress Richilda,the bishops Of the Empire

,

and mankind at large,we hear Rome

’s cry of de spa i r,a cry such as had arisen in the days of Gregoryin presence of the Lombards . The soldiers Of

Mohammed proved,however

,more ruthless enemie s

than the troops of Ag ilulf. The city scarce ly knewhow to lodge and feed the swarms of monks and

C lergy who,

flee ing from the i r ruined churches, soughtshe lter within her wa l ls . “ Cities

,fortresse s , vil lage s

have perished with the ir inhabitants , the bishops aredispersed . Within the wal l s of Rome are col lectedthe rema ins of the wholly destitute populat ion ; without all i s devastation and desertion ; nothing moreremains

,save

,what may God avert

,the ru in of the

c ity. The whole Campagna i s depopulated,nothing

is left to the convents or other place s of re l igion ,nothing to support the Senate . The ne ighbourhoodof the C i ty has been so utterly devastated , that not asingle inhabitant

,man or child

,i s to be found .

” ThusJohn wrote to Charle s the Ba ld

,who in the depths of

his despai r he now wished could be transformed intoa powerful Emperor . “ Prostrating himse l f on the

ground before his magnificence,

”he now humbly

sol icits his he lp ? Charles,meantime

,had left Rome

,

the c ity which at his coronation he had sworn toprotect by his Imperial arm—a prey to the swordof the Saracen .

1 Ep . 2 1, 30, 3 1 , 32, 34. In the 32nd letter he says

,that the

Saracens frequently came up to the walls ; and we incidentallylearn that the Anio was already called Tiberinus (Teverone in the

vulgar tongue). I ta u t Tiber inumfluvium, qu i olimA lbu la dicebatur ,

j uxta Sabinor . confin ia per tr ans ier in t .

HISTORY OF ROME

The death of the warl ike Lewis the Second wasnow fe lt throughout Italy

,whilst the pol itica l condi

t ions of the South faci l itated the conquests of theSaracens . Re l igion was no hindrance to intercourseor even a l l iance between the Mohammedans and the

princes of Southern Italy. Even in the time ofLewis the Second these princes had made use of theunbe l ieve rs for the i r own purpose s

,and each Emperor

in turn had ra i sed the compla int that Naples hadbecome a second Palermo or a second Africa ? Comme rcial advantage

,as a l so the support which the

Saracens offe red aga inst each othe r and aga inst theEmpe rors both of the East and We st

,induced the

lesser prince s(

to form a l l iance s with the infidels . The

designs of the Roman Church were further we l l-knownto the Saracens . The Church had a lready castlonging glance s towards the patrimonie s in Naple sand Ca labria

,had advanced cla ims on Capua and

Benevento,and made use of the state of disorde r

which preva i led in Southe rn I taly to acquire te rritorythere . Re stricted after the fa l l of Bari to Tarento

,

the Saracens had equipped a fre sh flee t aga inst Italy.

When the refore the death of the Imperial conquerorremoved the greatest hindrance out of the i r way ,

theyforced Naples , Gaeta, Amalfi and Sale rno not only tomake peace , but to unite in attacking the coast of theState of the Church , and even Rome itse lf ? The i ronly energetic opponent was Pope John

,and the

1 Le tter of Lewis to Bas il .2 Salernum,

N eapolim,Ga ictam et Amalfim pacem Izabentes c um

Saracen is , navalibus Ramam g ravi ter angu st iabant depop ulat ion ibus .

Erchembert , A . 875-876 (Mon. Germ. v.

H ISTORY OF ROME

These vesse l s we re cal led,as in the days of Be l isarius

,

dromons . They were as a rule 170 feet long, werearmed with two castles

, one on the forecastle and

one on the poop,equipped with machine s of war for

projectile s,combustibles and grappling-i rons . They

were prope l led by one hundred oars rowed by gal leyS laves

,while the marines occupied the middle and

castles ? The possession of this l ittle flee t,which

took up its position at Portus,

fi l led the Pope withpride he wrote to the Empress Enge lberga rejoicingthat he no longer required men of Gaeta s ince hewas now able to protect himse lf ? His exertions inNaples

,howeve r

,had had but l ittle re sult

,s ince the

Duke Sergius the Second could not be induced to renounce his lucrative a l l iance with the Saracens . The

Pope hurled an excommunicat ion aga inst him and

his c ity,armed Guaiferius against him ,

and unhes i

tat ing ly beheaded twenty-two Neapol itan prisoners?

John immediate ly afte r returned to Rome , to discove rthat the coast by Fundi and Te rracina had beenpillaged by the Saracens . He only rema ined five

days,and sa i l ing with the flee t from Portus

,met the

Defeats the Mohammedans at the Cape of Circe , took e ighteenSaracens atthe Cape of

Circe.of the i r vesse ls

,l iberated six hundred Christian slaves

,

1 Guglielmot ti , i . 8 1 .

2Qua nostr a sun t defendimus—D romones vid . cum ca ter is navibus

construen tes,et ca tera vasa bellica . Fragment of a let ter in I vo B err et .

pars x . c . 69 also in c. 68 he Speaks of nostr i dromones in a le t ter toMarinus and Pulcharius .

3 N eapoli t is mi li tes apprelzensos decollar i fi ci t (sci l . Guaiferius ) s ic

en im monuer a tpapa . Erchempert . Joh. VI I I . later counselled BishopA thanasius S i maj or es Saracenor . quan tos meliuspotes , quos nominat im

qua r imus,

cum a li i s omn ibus ceper is, et j ug ulat is ali is,eos nobis

dir exer is . Ep . ccxciv.

IN THE M IDDLE AGES. I

and killed a number of the enemy. This i s the

first time in history that a Pope made war as an

admiral . While thus engaged in putting the Saracensto rout

,John turned his glance towards the dis

orde red provinces in Southe rn I ta ly,whose prince s

he hoped to bring into subjection to the SacredCha i r ?

He hastened to Trae t to ,which be longed to the

Church,with the Object of effecting a league between

the princes,while the Greek flee t Obta ined a st i l l

greate r victory ove r the Saracens in Neapol itanwate rs . Immediate ly after

,the Pope i s found support

ing a revolution in Naples . Bishop Athanasius hadhere se ized his brothe r Se rgius , torn out his eyes , andin this condition sent him to Rome . He re the Popeal lowed him to d ie a l inge ring death in prison . The

fratricide , the act of a bishop,was regarded by him

,

the Pope , as a we lcome occurrence . The murde re rwas rewarded with a stipulated sum of money and

praised by le tte r ? So far did the tempora l needs ofhis kingdom preva i l as to force the Pope out of thesphere of the apostol ic virtues O f the prie sthood

,with

which earthly interests we re mora l ly incompat ible .

Events soon afte r ( in the spring Of 878 ) compe l led

1 For this naval victory see I vo D ecret . x. c. 7 1 John’s undated

letter Imperator i et Imper atr ici . Cum r evers i fu issemus (from NaplesA . 877 , and not from France A . 878 )—non plu s quam qu inque d iebusin u rbe manen tes , quamvis corpor is non modica det iner emu r molest ia

,

ex ivimus cum fideli bus nostr is—cepimus naves 18 . Saracen i—mu lt ioccis2

'-capt ivosfere 600 liberavimus .

2 A pr opr io germano captus est , et Ramam mitt i tur efvss is ocu lis,

ibique miser abi li ter vi tam fin ivi t . Ep . lxvi . John ’

s letter to Athanasius rejoicing over this act of fratricide .

184 HISTORY OF ROME

John the E ighth to fly to France,and destroyed his

schemes in Southern Italy . Before leaving Romehe found himse l f obl iged to buy a peace with theSaracens

,and to consent to the payment O f a yearly

tribute of twenty-five thousand silver mancusi ?

Shortly before this he had concluded a treaty withAmalfi

,by which the inhabitants had pledged them

se lve s to the annual payment of ten thousand mancusi ,to protect the coas t from Trae t to to Civita Vecchiawith the i r vesse ls ; and the Pope was indignant thatthe republ ic had not fulfi l led its promises be fore hele ft Rome ? On his return from France in 879 hefound that he had been be trayed . The i nfamousAthanasius

,at

’

the same t ime Bishop and Duke Of

Naples,in min iature the l ikene ss of the Pope

,fol lowed

the course of his brothe r Se rgius and unhesitatinglyformed an a l l iance with the infide ls . This a l l ianceserved as a de fence aga inst the Emperor ofByzantium

,

with whom the Pope was now on good terms . In

vain John trave l led back to Naples and Gae ta ; inva in he showered his gold

,in va in thunde red his

anathemas aga inst the tra itor. The people of Amalfi

laughed at his measure s . The astu te merchantspocke ted the ir ten thousand mancusi . They expla ined

1 This he says in a letter to King Carloman dated from Genoa whileon his journey to France . Ep . 89 fesso mi lzi paganorumper secu tioneac g lad io, atque exact ion is census v ign i t i qu inque mi llium in argento

mancusor um annuali ter .

2 Amar i misplaces this treaty in the year 877 , and the Congress of

Traetto Guglielmotti in 879 , and after John ’

s re turn from France . I

think , however , that there is no more probable date than that at whichJohn was thinking of leaving Rome . See Ep . 69 to Landulf of Capua

dated N ov. I nd XI . therefore 877 . S ince the I nd . X I . began in Sept .

and Ep . 74. Later letters treating of this event are 209 , 225 , 242 .

H ISTORY OF ROME

camp near I tri,and then moved to the right shore of

the Liris or Garigl iano,in the ne ighbourhood of the

ru ins of that M inturnae,i n the marshe s of which the

fugitive Marius had once la in concealed . They herebuilt a huge fortress

,which they succeeded in re ta in

ing for forty years . From the banks of the Garigl ianothey wande red ove r Campania

,spreading death and

destruction over the beautiful land . Even the ce lebrated monaste ries of Monte Casino and S . V incens

on the Vulturnus, sol itary but flourishing centre s of

learn ing,went up in flame s and long rema ined in

ruins ?

As regards Rome itse l f, John’s letters formthe sole

memorial s of that te rrible period of embarrassmentby the Saracens . Another great monument, whichowed its origin to the dangers Of the t ime , has perished .

John the E ighth built a wa l l around the basi l ica ofS . Paul , as Leo the Fourth had built one roundS . Pe ter’s . The ne ighbouring rocky hil l offered an

exce l lent Support to the fortification , and the re the

1 Monte Casino was destroyed as early as 884, and the Abbot

Bertharius murdered. The monks fled to Teano,where in 889 the

autograph ru le of Benedict was burnt , afterwards to Capua. Monte

Casino was only restored by Aligern , who died 986 . To the monasterywe owe the preservat ion of the Regesta of John VI I I .

, which werethence brought to Rome

,and which form the first volume of theVatican

Regesta . G . Levi , I ! T07720 I dei P eg . vat ican i (Arc/2. della Societci

Romano,iv. 162f ) . Numerous archives are preserved at Monte Casino ,

which are far from being exhausted for the history of Southern I taly.Precious above all is the God . D iplom. Caj etanus (extending from 772unt il 1638 ) cop ied by Don G iov. Battista Frederici . I adorn this pagewith the names of Don Luigi Tos ti , and Don Sebastiano Kalefati , thekeeper of the archives of M . Casino, and gratefully record the readi

ness with which these learned men placed their archives at my disposal .


Pope must have erected a fortress . Making u se ofthe portico which led from the gate to the Church healso apparently enclosed the entire suburb with a wa l l ,and bestowed the name of Johannipolis on his building. O f this ce lebrated monument of papa l ene rgynot the sl ightest trace rema ins . No historian recordsthe building of John ’s town

,and our knowledge of

its foundation is sole ly due to the Copy of the

inscription which was engraved ove r a gate of thefortre ss

H ie M urus salvator adest invictaque Por ta,

Qua r ep robos arcet , susczpiatque P ios .

Hanc P roceres in tr a te,Senes

, j uvenesque togat i ,P lebsque sacrata D ei

,limina sanctapetens .

Quam P r a su l D om in i patr avi t r i te obannes ,

Qu i n i t idi sfu ls i t mor ibu s ac mer i t i s .

P ra su li s Octavi de nom inefacta j obann isE ccej oannzpolis u rbs vener anda clu i t .

Ang elu s bane D omin i P au lo cum P r incipe Sanctus

Custod iat Por tam semper ab boste nequam,

I ns ig nem n imium muro quam constru i t amplo

Sedi s apostolica P apa j obannes ovans .( I t s ibi pos t obitum celest is j anua regn i

Pandatu r , Cbr i sto sat miser ante D eo.

1

1 Muratori, D iss . xxvi . , Torrigius , &c. , p . 360 ; in addition De

Rossi, I u ser . clzr . Ur b. R . , ii . pars i . 326. The Anon . M ag liab. xxviii .Cod . 5 1 , n. 28

,ment ions this j obannzpoli s , qua in odiern is non videtur

,

et ant iqu i tus pu lclzer r ima a dificatafu i t , and says that it was more thantwo miles in circumference . A document of Gregory VI I . of the year1074 relat ive to S . Paul ’s confirms to this church totum Castellum

S . P au li quod vaca tur j oannzpolim,cum M ola j ux ta se (B ullar .

Cass in . ii. const .

188 HISTORY OF ROME

C H A PTER V I .

1 . D IFFICULT POS ITION OF JOHN VI I I . W ITH REGARD To

LAMBERT AND THE EMPEROR—HE AGAIN CONFIRM SCHARLES THE BALD IN THE IMPERIAL D IGN ITYSYNODS OF ROME AND RAVENNA, 8 7 7—DECREES OF

JOHN WITH REGARD To THE PATRIMON IEs— PAPALEXCHEQUER L ANDS—UNAVAILING ATTEMPTS To RE

S I ST FEUDALISM—DEATH OF CHARLES THE BALDTR IUM PH OF THE GERMAN PARTY—THREATEN INGATTITUDE OF LAMBERT AND THE EXILES—LAMBERTATTACKS ROME AND TAKES THE POPE PR ISONER—JOHN VI I I . ESCAPES To FRANCE .

THE Saracens and the compl ications in SouthernI taly have for a t ime diverted our attention from the

e vents originating in the a ltered re lations be tweenthe city and the Empire . The se re lations had

,how

ever,added to the difficultie s i n which Rome already

found herse l f. Lambert, re instated in the Duchy

o f Spole to, i n the hope of advancing his own aimstowards independence and increased authority

,had

done al l in his powe r to aggravate the disorde r whichprevai led in I taly . Rome had already fe lt his hand .

The noble s condemned by John had sought re fugew ith Lambert, and , afte r the manne r of fugitive s, hada ssailed him with entreaties for the i r restoration .

H ISTORY OF ROME

firmed in the Imperia l dignity, the cla ims Of the sonsof Lewis of Ge rmany (who had died on August 28th,876) were thereby set as ide , and a division in the

Empire was thus avoided . The dread O f the Saracens and of the exiles

,the hope of Imperia l he lp

,the

fear Of Lambert and of the German princes , lent acharacte r of utterly Shame less flattery to the speechmade by the Pope in the presence of the Germanbishops . Charle s the Bald might have been entitledto some pra ise for the protection he had extended tolearn ing the Roman Church might extol him for themany conce ssions which it owed him ; but John

’sexaggerated eulogy was such as to make the Imperialphantom ridiculous in the eyes of all. He cal ledCharles the Star Of Salvation which had risen on theworld ; he asserted that God had foreordained hise lection be fore the crea tion Of the earth . He investedthe wre tched monarch with a galaxy of virtues

'

such

as would have overpowered even Charles the Great ?

He wound up his spee ch by declaring that he hade lected and confirmed

”

him on account of thesevirtues

,in accordance with the bishops , the i l lustrious

Senate,all Romans , and all who wore the

'

toga . The

bishops on the i r s ide aga in ratified the e lection ?

1 E cce nobis Carolum Cbr ist ian iss . pr inczpem superna provident ia ,

p ra sci tum a se et pra electum ante mundi const i tu t ionem. Contrast

with this the just and well-expressed praise of Charles the Great atquein tra br eviss im. tempus i ta industr ia p ietatis s tudio eg i t , a t novus

quodammodo videretur mundus,wagn is luminar ibus venustatus

, et

var i is vernant ibus flor ibus adornatus . Conci l. Roman . mense Febr .

I nd. X 877 . (Labbe, xi .2 E leg imus lzunc mer i to, et approbavimus una cum ann isu et voto

omn ium f ratr um et cap iscoporum nostrorum,

amp lique Senatus ,tot iusque P oman i popu li , gen t isque togata and the Bishops comfirm


Thus far had the Imperium of the great Charlesa lready sunk .

Charles the Bald,accompanied by his wife and an

army, actual ly came to I taly . At O rba he receiveda Copy of the Acts of the Roman Synod

,and the

i nformation that the Pope would meet him at Pavia.

John was now at Ravenna, where he had he ld aSynod in August 877 . Among the resolutions herepassed we re some concerning the patrimonie s of theChurch

,and a decree had been promulgated forbid

d ing the al ienation of these territories under any titlewhatever of a feudal nature . The conception of theFeudum,

a word which had not yet come i nto use,

was gene rally expressed by B eneficium . Landede state s we re conferred as B eneficia othe rs

,i i i cou se

quence of a written petition (pr eca r ium), were given inusufruct as so-ca l led P raes ta r ia

, and from the ins tru

ment of investiture ( ca l led libel/um) the se estate swere termed libel/a r ia ? The ever-increasing confusion of all re lations

,where avarice and rapacity

,

violence and treachery of every kind,struggled for

the possession of wealth , and invented innume rablet itles to that end

,rendered the a l ienation of the

property easy . The benefice s thus transformed themse lves into the hereditary possessions of those whohad obtained them . The Roman magnates

,from

whose midst the Popes we re e lected , eagerly

quem eleg istis el igimus .—This Synod is ment ioned by Aimoinus v. c.

35 , and Hincmar , Annal . A . 877 .

1 The conception of the precar ia and pra star ia is explained by theFormulae of

“

Marcullus ; ii . 11. v. 109 , xxvii. 241 .—ii. n . 40 , 174 ,

xxviii . 243 pra star ia is thus explained : ad p ra st i tum benefi cium t ibi

pra stare, after the petit ion , the precar ia , had been delivered .

John VI I I .p rohibitsthe alienat ion of the

Propertyof the

Church .

HISTORY OF ROME

stretched forth the ir hands ove r the patrimonies ;and the Popes soon found themse lve s obliged to

squande r S . Pete r’s estates on these partisans unde rthe form of leases , repaying in this way the ir owne levation

,or Securing adhe rents . To prevent the

disintegration of the property of the Church, Johnappealed to the Synod of Ravenna in August 877 .

Under the Carol ingians it had become the cus tom,on

the ground of the patronage of the great, to investbishops

,counts

,and even women of noble birth with

convents or churches . John forbade the convents orchurche s in Ravenna

,in the Pentapol is

,in the Emilia ,

or in Roman or Lombard Tuscany, to be given as

benefices , excepting such only as had e ithe r beengiven for the special use of the Roman Church

,to the

inhabitants of the Roman Duchy, or had been al lottedto the Papa l Exchequer ? The possessions immediate ly be longing to the Papal Fiscus had beenexpressly specified . The Appian patrimony

, the

Labicanense or Campanum,Tibu rt in inum, Theat inum,

both the Sabine territorie s , the Patrimonium Tusciae ,the Portico of S . Pe te r’s ( the Leonine c ity) theRoman Mint , all public taxe s , the riparian dues ,the harbour (Portus) and O stia

? I t was express ly

1 Canon . xvn . exceptis i llis—qu ib. pro u ti li tatib. et speciali servitio

S . P om . E ccl . vel D ucatus vel un iuscuj usque loci li abi tator ib. p ra betur ,vel ad nostr a di spensanda co nsti tu t i sunt vel const i tuentu r . The ideaof the Duchy remained the extent of the ecclesiast ical State was thesame as it had been in the t ime of Charles . We hear nothing of Capua,Gaeta, Benevento, Corsica, Sicily or Sardinia. Can . xviii . determinesthat the payment of t ithes shall only be made to the pr iests of par ishchurches .

2 Art . xv. : I nterdicimus ut amodo et deinceps nullus qu i libet bomo

H ISTORY OF ROME

instead of this the Emperor of Rome was enclosed ina cask l ined with pitch and covered with leathe r, andwas la id in the ground of a hermitage near Lyons ?

The death of Charle s the Ba ld produced animmediate change in pol itica l affa i rs ; the Frenchparty fe l l with him

,while the Ge rman triumphed .

Carloman, who remained with his troops in Northern

I ta ly,succeeded in ga ining the vote s Of the bishops

and counts for his I tal ian e lection . He demandedthe Imperia l crown at the hands of the Pope

,and

John was obl iged to ve i l h is rea l intentions unde rnegotiations. The sudden rise of the German partyfi lled him with dread ; his enemies in Rome

,the

exile s in Spole to,rejoiced

,and Lambe rt assumed a

threatening attitude . The affrighted Pope wroteflatte ring le tters to Lambert , ca l l ing him the soleprotector of the Church and i ts most fa ithfulde fender . He had heard that Lambert wished tolead his enemie s

,the a l ready thrice excommunicated

Romans, back to the city he expressed astonishmenta t his intention , since he and Lambert we re at peace .

He forbade him to come to Rome , and la id the l ikeprohibition upon Ada lbert, Margrave of Tuscany

,

whom he termed his Open adve rsary ? Lambertre turned a contemptuous answer . He even violated

the forms of re spe ct due to the Pope as far as to

1 Obsequ ies worthy of a D iogenes : quem pro fa tore non valentes

por tare, 772iser unt cum in tonna ( I) in ter ius ex ter iusque p icata quamcor i is involverunt , quod n i/zi l ad tollendum fa torem perfeci t . Undo

ad cellam quamdam monacborum Lugdunens is ep iscop i i , qua N au toadis

dici tu r,vixperven ien tes , i llud corpus cum ipsa tonna terra mandaverunt .

H incmar , A . 87 7 .

2 Ep . 72 ad Lambert , Comi tem. N ovemb. I nd. X I .


addre ss him,as he would have done a layman , simply

with the title “ your nobi l ity,

”and thereby offended

John . Lambe rt furthe r requested that the Popewould not in future send him legate s without firstasking permission ? John fina l ly announced his intention Of going to France to t reat with Carlomanfor aid in his difficult ie s . The pre ssure to which hehad been subjected at the hands of the Saracensduring the last two years and the continued attacksof the se— the natura l—enemie s Of the Apostol ic Cha ir

,

rende red his longe r soj ourn in Rome impossible,and

furnished him with an additiona l pre text for thejourney. He admon ished Lambe rt

,unde r terror of

the anathema,to refra in from any attempts to injure

the te rritory of S . Peter or “the priestly and im

perial c ity of Rome .

The imprudent announcement of a j ourney toFrance

,which could have no other motive than that

of summon ing Lewis,son Of Charles the Ba ld

,to

arms against Carloman,and perhaps of giving him

the Impe rial crown , toge the r with the knowledge,

which had al ready become current, of the dea l ingsof the Pope , forced Carloman to a Speedy decision .

Pestilence , howeve r, which had a l ready broken out1 Ep . 73 . Cum dicis nobi s , Tua nobi litat is , vel

—monemus nobi li tatem

vestram .

2 Ep . 68 . The sequence of these letters is incorrect . I place

Ep . 68 after Ep . 73 . I t is there sa id : sed et iam innumer i s cl sup r a

madam g ravibu s oppress ion ibu s qua nobi s una cum domin ico g r ege

ab adver sar i is i llata su n t,cl quot idie inferun tu r , in g r emio sedis apos t .

qua capu t est orbi s et omn ium mater fidel ium ,qu iete ac secu r i ter

manere nobis min ime licet . He calls Rome civi tas sacerdotalis et r eg ia

imperial in the same sense as Byzantium,s ince it did not stand under

the King of I taly.

HISTORY OF ROME

in his army,

attacked him , condemned him toinactivity in Bavaria, and prevented his advanceon Rome . But the Duke of Spole to and the

banished Romans only awaited his signal to se izeDuke the Pope . In February or March 878 , LambertLambertattacks suddenly appeared before Rome . W i th him wasR°me’ 87 8 ’ Adalbe rt

,Margrave of Tuscany

,the son of

Count Bon ifacius and husband of his s isterRo thilda

,and in the i r tra in we re many of the

Roman exiles . Without be traying any hosti lei ntention , Lambe rt, in the name Of Carloman , des ired to speak with the Pope , and John was forcedto rece ive him in the palace by S . Pe ter’s . The

Spole tans meanwhile occupied the Leonine City,

and placed a guard at S . Pe te r’s gate to prevent

the entrance of the Romans . The Pope thus foundhimse l f a prisone r. While the soldie rs

,in orde r to

terrify him ,committed acts Of violence , Lambe rt

demanded the assurance of Carloman’

s e lection,to

which he compe l led the Roman noble s to givethe i r sworn consent ? But John would ne ither beforced to give this promise nor to consent to there storation of the exiles . He was the refore deta ined

John VI I I . for thirty days unde r such strict arre st that he

Jfi’

f’

fifoned compla ined it was only on urgent entreaty that

Vat ican Roman noble s and bishops,and even his servants

,

were admitted to his presence,and that he ‘

even

1 This alone can be the meaning of the oath of fide lity. Lantber tus ,

Wi ton is fi l. , et Ada lber tus B onifaci i fi l. P omam cum manu valida

i ngr ess i sun t,et f oli anne P om. pon t . sub custodia retenta

,Opt imates

Romanor . fi deli ta tem Kar lomanno sacramento fi rmare cagerunt .

Anna l. Fu ld. , A . 878.

He

crowned

Lewis theS tammerer.

Forms analliancewith Boso .

H i s PLANS—CHARLES THE FAT BECOMES K ING OF

ITALY, AND IS CROWNED EMPEROR IN ROME IN 88 1

END OF JOHN VI I I .-H IS AMB ITIOUS PROJECTS— H i s

CHARACTER .

John the E ighth arrived at Arle s at Whitsuntide .

Here he was rece ived by Duke Boso and by himaccompanied furthe r on his way . At the beginningof September he met King Lewis at Troye s . On the

14th of the same month , in presence of the Councilthere assembled

,he excommunicated Lambert and

Ada lbert,the proscribed Romans , and Bishop For

mosus,who afte r protracted wanderings had found

refuge wi th Hugo , Abbot of S . Germa ins,and had

been cited to appear before the Council . The Popehere crowned the stamme ring Lewis

,King of France ,

and afte rwards negotiated with him regard ing affa irsin I taly. John

’s hopes,which were dashed by the

incapacity of Lewis , were revived by the energy of anupstart . Boso, in possession of the duca l t itle inLombardy

,had previously been the brothe r-in-law of

Charles the Ba ld , and was now the husband ofI rmengard , sole he iress of the Emperor Lewis theSecond , a princess whom ( afte r having poisoned hisfirst wife ) he had wooed from politica l motive s . He

was a lso a man so powe rfu l as to seem fitted,in the

eyes Of the Pope , to oppose Carloman in Ita ly . The

astute John hoped to make the Duke the instrumentof his designs . He therefore made a treaty withBoso promised him his aid in acquiring the royal t itle


in Provence ; he ld out hopes of the Imperia l crown ,pronounced him his adopt ive son ; and rece ived inre turn the promise of Boso’s active inte rfe rence inIta ly . We he re perce ive the labyrinth of pol it ica lintrigue in which the Popes had become involvedby the ir tempora l position . John the E ighth

,ho t

blooded and revengeful to an a lmost unequal leddegree

,hurried on in bl ind passion . His enterprise s

foundered from the time that he first trod the soil ofFrance

,and he himse l f fe l l for ever from his high

estate .

He rema ined nearly a year in France , and then , Returns

accompanied by Boso,re turned to Italy ? In Pavia

he sought to a l ienate the Lombards from Carlomanand since Enge lberga had now become the mothe r-inlaw O f Boso , he was enabled to ava i l himse l f of herinfluence . The counts and bishops Of Northern I ta ly

,

under the leadership Of Berengar of Friul i and

Anspert of Milan , we re no t,however

,disposed to

exchange the ir King Carloman for an adventure r .The Lombard bishops

,more e specia l ly the proud

Metropolitan of Milan,we re st i l l far from admit ting

the authority of the Pope . They regarded with sus

picion his doings in the ir te rritorie s and opposed hiscourse of act ion . Having fa i led to achieve anything

,

Boso returned to Provence,and John the E ighth ,

1 Assumpto B osone comi te—cum magna ambi t ione in I taliam r edi i t,

et cum ea mac/i inar i studiu t, quamodo regnum I ta licum de potestate

Car lmann i aufer r et , et ei tuendum commi tterepotu i sset . Aunal. Fu ld . ,

A . 878 . In Ep . 125 , he wr ites to King Lewis that Boso had broughthim safely to Pavia . He addresses the K ing : di lect i ss ime fi li , ac

porpliy retice r ex . The assumpt ion of Sigonius and Baronius , thatLewis the Stammerer was made Emperor , is unhistorical .

H ISTORY OF ROME

bitterly dece ived , went back to Rome . When we

read the Pope’

s le tters we are forced to admirehis diplomatic skill . He possessed a capacity forpol itica l finesse such as but few Popes have Shared .

In the midst of the most intricate complications , suchas those occasioned by the dismemberment of theEmpire and the crowd of pre tende rs which the

occasion ca l led forth,he discerned eve ry possible

combination . He formed and dissolved a l l iance swith easy hardihood . In fear of the Saracens , in thehope of recove ring lost Bulgaria

,and for the sake of a

treaty with the Byzantine s,he unhesitatingly recog

n ised the condemned Photius as Patriarch and dist inguished him by his pra i se . He set the judgmentOf his orthodox contemporaries and of future gene rat ions at defiance

,esteeming politica l advantage

of greate r importance than the dogmatic subtletiesof the ‘

j ilioque,’

and poste rity has consequentlyshowered denunciations on his name . He wouldpe rhaps have followed the example of some towns ofSouthern I taly and restored Rome

,in name at least ,

to the Byzantine Empire , if such a re storation hadbeen possible . The lamentable decadence of theCarol ingian house formed , indeed, a glaring contrastto the splendid dynasty of the Macedonians

,which

,in

Basil the First, had in 867 ascended the Greek throne .

I f ever a time seemed favourable to make I ta ly aga inByzantine , it was under the re ign of this prince .

But the state of disorder in which he found theEmpire

, and the dread of the Bulgarians and

Saracens , prevented the execution of such a scheme .

He contented himse l f with sarcasms directed against

HISTORY OF ROME

cal led and e lected by us .

”1 The Milanese scorned theinvitation and did no t attend the Synod . The Popethe re fore la id him unde r the ban .

These endless stratagems of Papal diplomacy at

length re sulted in the three brothers,Carloman

,

Charle s and Lewis,agree ing that I ta ly should be le ft

to Charle s and in 879 Charles the Fat came with an

army to Lombardy and assumed the crown of I ta lyin Pavia . Nothing rema ined to John but to give

,

a lthough unwil l ingly, the Impe ria l crown to the

Ge rman prince . This he did after long negotiationsand a pe rsonal inte rview in Ravenna. His adoptiveson Boso, who

'

had se t up in Arle s as King of Provence

,was consequently now de clared a tyrant ?

Charles the Fat was assured of real is ing his hopes .The votes of I ta ly and Rome were in his favour the

dangerous Empress Enge lberga was removed fromher convent at Bre scia and sent to Ge rmany . He

now came to Rome in the beginning of 88 1 , whe re ,without contest or difli culty ,

he rece ived the Imperialcrown at the hands Of the Pope ? But John ’s hope s

1 Ep . 155 .

2 Ep . 2 16 and 249 ad Caro l Regem. Lewis the S tammerer of

France had died in 879 Carloman of Germany in 880 .

3 Hincmar assumes Christmas 880 . Baronius and Sigonius 88 1 .

Pag i attempts to prove that it was at Chr istmas 88 1 , from Ep . Joh . 269

to the Emperor Charles , dat . I V. Kal . Apr i l . I nd. X I V. But

who can answer for the correctness of the date ? Muratori observesthat the coronation must have fo llowed in January or February 88 1 .

See Campi (Hist . P iac. i . n . data 5 Ka l . ] an . A . 88 1 . I nd . 14

A . vero reg ni D . Karoli P egi s— in I ta lia 2 , consequently he was not

Emperor at Chr istmas 880 . On‘

the other hand , D ipl . xix. fromPavia : dat . 5 I d. Apr i l. A . 88 1 , I nd . 14 , anno vero 2

'

mp . D . Karo/i

pr imo he was therefore Emperor in the beg inning of April 88 1 . The


of bringing about an expedition aga inst the Saracenswere Shatte red . The Emperor hated the polit ica lpast of the Pope . He neve r ra ised his weak arm inhis aid . Sunk in impotence , he le ft Rome to herse l f,not even once sending his legates to the c ity

,whe re

he a l lowed his Imperia l right s to fa l l comple te ly intoabeyance .

The restle ss John spent the rema inde r of his pontificate amid eve r fre sh grievance s . The se were notoccasioned by the Saracens a lone ; his enemie s inRome and Spoleto continued to harass the Church ?

Lambert,indeed

,re leased in the changing course of

Papa l pol icy from excommun ication,had died ; bu t

Guido,his successor in the Duchy

,pursued a no le ss

violent course . He usurped property be longing tothe Church, and in va in the imprisoned Papa l tenant sstretched out the i r mutilated arms for rescue to thePope ?

In va in John implored the Empe ror to sendhis envoys to re store peace in Rome and the Duchy .

His prayers were use less,and were directed now to

the north,now to the south

,whe re his ambitious

schemes had been shattered,and whe re Naple s

,

Amalfi,and the Saracens a l lowed him not a moment

of repose,until death final ly re leased him from his Death of

h VI I I .,

dates of the dip lomas are frequent ly wrong thus,for example , in the

diploma of Charles I I I . in Margar ini (Bullar, Cass in . I I .,n . xliii . ) 882 .

where February 886 is reckoned as the 7th year of the Imperial reign .

The Op inion that the coronat ion took p lace in February 88 1 is alsoheld by Dummler , ii . 180 .

1 The Pope’

s tearful entreaties for aid st il l rouse our sympathy Ep .

269 , where he sends to the Emperor cum apostolica benedict ionepalmam

per quam s ignum dalu r victor ia (end of March The custom of

sending the claves confess ion is had ceased .

2 Ep 293. 299

H ISTORY OF ROME

troubled pont ificate . He died on Decembe r 1 5th ,882 . I f the sol itary statement of a historian is to betrusted , poison had been administered to him by one

of his re lations ; and poison working too S lowly, hisskul l had been fractured by a hammer ?

John the E ighth was the last of a se rie s of distin

gu ished Popes , since with him close s the short periodO f prince ly splendour to which the Papacy had risenafte r the foundation of the tempora l state unde r theCarol ingians . Like Nicholas the First he was fi l ledwith a high consciousness of the Papal powe r, but wastota l ly absorbed in a ims of tempora l dominion . He

drew the Papacy deep into the current of Ital ianpol it ics . He brought the Empire at first into sub

j ect ion ,but immediate ly experienced the consequence s

of its ene rvation . Scarce ly had he humbled the

Imperial power when he conce ived the thought ofmaking the I tal ian kingdom dependent on himse l f,and above all desired to ra ise the Cha ir of Pe ter onthe ruins of the Empire

,so that he might rule as his

vassal s the bishops and prince s of an I ta ly whichshould be central ized in “

a Roman theocracy. Hisambitious projects , howeve r, rema ined unfulfi l led ;ne i the r the diplomatic genius of John the E ighth, northe abil i ties of any othe r Pope we re capable of ove rcoming the chaos which preva i led in I taly. The

bishops of Lombardy,the feuda l duke s

,who had all

risen to powe r with the fa l l of the Empire , the prince sof Southern I taly, the Saracens , the Ge rman kings ,

1 Annal. Fuld., pars . v. A . 883 (M on . Germ. pri us dc

pr op inquo suo veneno patata s , deina’

e—malleolo, dum usque in cerebr o

constaba t , percussu s expi ravi t . For his Epitaph see Baronius, A . 882 .

HISTORY OF ROME

thrice visited Constantinople as Apostol ic nuncio .

The circumstance s of Marinus ’s e lection are unknownto us

,as are those of his short pont ificate

? We gathe r,

howeve r,from his acts that he be longed to the German

party Opposed to John the E ighth,S ince he not only

hastened to condemn Photius afresh,but a lso re leased

Formosus from the oath which he had taken neve r toenter Rome

,and restored the deposed bishop to his

d iocese . He had a friendly interview with the Emperorat Nonan tula , where he succe eded in ove rthrowing thebitte rest enemy of the State of the Church . Guidoof Spoleto

,accused of treasonable correspondence with

the Greek Emperor,was deposed by Charles the Fat

,

who had orde red Count Berengar to advance aga instthe duchy. The fugitive Guido turned to Southe rnI taly

,where he hoped to ga in the Saracens to his

cause,while his friends prepared for rebe l l ion . These

dark occurrence s Show the increasing disunion which

preva i led in I ta ly.

On the death of Marinus,in the beginning of the

year 884 , Adrian the Third,a Roman of I ta l ian

sympathies,be longing to the V ia Lata, ascended the

Papal chair. But ne ither of his e le ction nor Of theconditions then existing in Rome do we know any

thing whateve r. Fragmentary notice s O f historian s,

however, lead us to suppose that tumults preva i ledamong the nobility within the c ity ? Two decree s1 The Anna l. Fu ld .

, pars V .,A . 882 , say : an tea ep iscopus , con tra

statu ta canonum subrogatus est . He had been Bisbop of Caere . He

is occasionally erroneously spoken of as Mart inus I I .2 I ste Adr ianus cecavi t Gregor ium de Aben t inum et M ar iam

super istanam nudamper totam Romani fu st icavi t : B enedict of Soracte ,M Germ. v. 199 ; the Annal. Fuld . inform us , immed iately after the


attributed to Adrian are of doubtful authenticity,

a lthough the weakening of the Impe ria l power at thetime affords some evidence of the ir be ing genuine .

The decree s themse lve s appear as the consequence ofthe princ iple s promulgated by Nicholas the F irst andthe Pseudo-I sidorian decre ta l s . In these decreesAdrian commands that the e lected Pope shal l beordained without the pre sence of the Imperial envoys

,

and furthe r,that after the death of the chi ldless Charle s

the Fa t,an I ta l ian prince should rece ive the Imperia l

crown ? The incapac ity of Charle s,the ru in of the

Carol ingian house,and the disorders of I ta ly ( now

left to itse lf) natura l ly favoured the hope s of theI tal ian dukes

,more especia l ly those Of Berengar and

Guido. As early as the year 884, Guido had obta inedpardon of the Emperor in Pavia

,and had been re

in stated in his dukedom . In the beginning of thefol lowing year

,Charle s the Fat returned to Ge rmany

to hold a Die t,with regard to the Impe ria l succession

,

at Worms . Thither he invited Adrian , and the Pope ,having consigned the de fence of the City to the handsof John

,B ishop of Pavia

,as Imperia l Missus

,departed .

He died,howeve r

,on the j ourney at the Villa V ilc

zachare , or S . Cesario , near Modena, in the summe r of88 5 , and was bur ied in the ce lebrated convent Of

Nonantula .

2

election ofMar inus,that the r ich Superista Gregory was murdered by

his colleague in the paradise of S . Peter’

s .

1 Baronius is s ilen t concern ing this decr etum de ordinando Pontifices ine pra sen t ia Lega tor . Imper ial. Sigonius (D e P egno ad A . 88

carried away by I talian patriot ism , upholds bo th decrees . No chroniclerear lier than the untrustwor thy Mart inus Polonus is acquainted with them.

2 Annal. Fu ld . , and Vita S tepban i V.,n . 642 defuncto—Hadr iana

HISTORY OF ROME

The Romans immediate ly proceeded to the e lectionand consecration of his successor. The fact that

'

they

took no account of the Imperia l right of ratificationsupports the be l ie f that Adrian the Third had promulgated the decree ; but the indignation of theEmperor at the oversight shows that he had in nowise renounced the right. For no soone r d id the

news of the ordination reach him than he sent theChance l lor L iu tward and some bis hops to the C i ty todepose Stephen . He was

,howeve r, appeased by the

speedy arriva l of Papal legate s,who prove from docu

ments that the new Pope had been forma l ly e lected .

The Emperor now confirmed the e lection,which

,

neve rthe le ss,had been the entire ly free and independ

ent act of the Romans ?

Stephen the Fifth,previously Cardinal of the

Quattro Coronati,was a Roman of noble birth, son of

Adrian of the Via Lata , at this time , apparently, thearistocratic quarte r of the city. Stephen was unanimous ly e lected in pre sence of the Imperia l M issus

(who had been de ta ined in the city by his predece ssor) and conducted -to the Lateran . He foundthe treasure chambers of the palace complete ly empty .

The custom had long since arisen that,on the death

of a pope,his se rvants and the populace should fal l

on the apartments Of the dead and plunde r,not his

private rooms alone , but the entire palace,and should

P apa—super fi uvium Scu lt inna, in Vi lla , qua Viu lczaclzara nun

cupatu r .

1 Unde imper ator i r atus, quad eo inconsulto u llum ordinar e

pra sumpserunt , mis i t L iu t ivar tum et quosdam B amana sedis ep iscopos

qu i , eum deponeren t , a n. Anual. Fu ld.


played at dice,hunted and shot with the bow . They

left the a ltar,after ce lebrating mass, with spurs on

the ir feet,a dagger at the ir s ide , to mount the ir

horses— saddled Saxon fashion and furnished withgil t bridles—to fly the i r falcons . They trave l ledsurrounded by swarms of parasite s , and drove inluxurious carriage s which no king would have scornedto possess ?Stephen

,accompanied by the bishops and Roman

nobles,his witnesse s

,wande red through the empty

rooms of the Ve stiarium . He consoled himse l f withthe sight of one ancient and ce lebrated votive giftwhich had escaped the attention of the crowd . Thiswas the golden cross which the great Be l isarius hadpresented to S . Pe ter

’s as a memoria l of his victoryove r the Goths ? The treasury

,howeve r

,was empty.

Afte r his ordination,the Pope was

,according to

custom , obl iged to be stow gift s in money, or presbyteria , on the cle rgy

,the convents and the schools .

He was al so obl iged to distribute meat and bread tothe poor. The Lateran larders had been emptied

,and

Stephen was therefore now forced to satisfy the

hungry cla imants for his bounty from the resource sO f his own purse . The death of a pope was thusnecessari ly fol lowed by a two-fold festiva l in Rome

1 Such is the descript ion g iven by Ratherius of the I tal ian bishopsin sece . x . Praeloquoir , v. 6

, p . 143 , edit . Baller ini, P atber ius

van Verona und das 10 j a/i r/zunder t , by Albrecht Vogel . Jena ,1854.

2 Cr ux tamen au rea i lla famos iss ima quam B elisari us Patr icias ad

bonorem b. P r incip i s Petr i Ap . inst i tu i t , et p lur ima sacr at iss imm m

a ltar ium au rea vestes,cum reliqu i s pret ios is ornamen t is non defuem nt .

Vi ta S tep/z. V.,n . 643 , the last Vita in the L ib. Pant .


the sack of the palace of the dead, and by the bountiesof his successor.Meanwhile the Saracens advanced from the ir camp

on the Garigl iano far into Latium and E truria .

Stephen,l ike John the E ighth , demanded he lp from

the Emperors of the East and West , and rece ived itfrom Guido of Spole to . The overthrow of the Carolingian house was near ; the fa l l of the Emperor, whowas despised throughout the province s, was a lreadyprepared ; and Guido, the ne ighbour of Rome , was themost powerful man of the moment . The Pope

,who ,

perhaps , he ld out expe ctations Of the Imperia l crown ,preva i led on Guido to take the fie ld aga inst theSaracens . A victory on the Liris gave Rome an

inte rva l of re st . In Novembe r 8 87 the Germans Charlesdeposed Charle s the Fat at the Die t of Tribur 2 111182

6

1

3

321te lected Arnulf, the va liant son Of Carloman

,the ir 887

king. Upon the death of the wretched Charles in888

,the I ta l ians found themse lve s without e ither

emperor or king, while the ambit ious duke s disputedamong themse lves the crown of Charles the Great.The ext inction of the legit imate l ine of the Caro

lingians in Ge rmany ( in France , the Child Charle s theSimple

,son of Lewis the Stammere r

,continued the

unfortunate l ine) summoned pretenders from everyquarter. Since there was no longe r any he reditarycla imant , the people aga in resumed the right of e lection , or rathe r the powe rful bishops and barons ofthe anc ient Empire occupied the thrones . Odo

,

Count of Paris , had set himse lf up as king in France .

Provence , or the territory of Arles , had become the

kingdom of Boso and his son Lewis . Count Rudolf

HISTORY OF ROME

se ized the crown of Burgundy ; the bastard Arnulfwore the regal mantle in Germany. In Italy the

question whethe r the Crown of the Lombards andthe Empire of the Romans should fal l to Be rengaror Guido the Second was left to the decis ion ofarms .The country, utterly distracted and a prey to thenumerous tyrants who had suddenly arisen

,found

itse lf driven in its nece ss ity to rid itse l f for ever Offore ign influence and to trans form it se lf into a kingdom .

The task was one that demanded a great inte l lect ,and no great inte l lect was forthcoming

,or was any

whe re to be found . Nicholas the First or John theE ighth

,had e ithe r sti l l l ived

,might have endeavoured

to e stablish an I ta l ian theocracy,with Rome for its

centre . Stephen was weak,and the superior powe r

of innume rable vassal s— now become independentwould have crippled the genius of a more ente rpris ingPope . Nowhere was there a single I ta l ian prince oftrue Latin descen t in whom hope could be placed .

The powerful dukes were one and all of Germanrace . The difficulty, there fore , resolved itse lf into thequestion whe ther e ithe r of the two most powerfulrulers in I ta ly had force and fortune sufficient toovercome his riva l and Opponent and convert himinto his vassa l .

I l lustrious Frankish descent gave the Friul ianMargrave Berengar the greate r prominence . He

was the son of Gise la , daughte r of Lewis the Pious ,who had married Count Eberhard . Guido

,who ruled

Spoleto and Camerino ,1 had on the othe r hand pro1 The family of Guido was descended from Aus trasian nobles ; his

HISTORY OF ROME

was no I tal ian nation in any pol itical or social sense .

All the e lements nece ssary to such a nation,common

intere sts,language , l i te rature and pol itical un ity, were

entire ly absent . In Rome the Papacy, the greates t

power in Italy,was

,in virtue of its cosmopol itan

principle , se t above national ity,and in the North , as

in the South of the peninsula ,all the powerful bishops

,

duke s and counts were Franks or Lombards,or here

and there Greeks . Neve rthe less, on February 2 15 t ,

89 1 , Guido rece ived the crown in S . Pe te r’s,and

,

although a vassa l of the Carol ingians,boldly cal led

himse l f Augustus,the great and peace-giving

Empe ror,

and signed his decrees,according to

custom,with the date of the Post-consulate? Thus

afte r long centurie s was the Impe rium aga in be stowedby the I tal ians on a prince

,who

,i f not of Latin

descent,was at least a native of the i r country

,

Whethe r it would rema in with the I tal ians,and

whe the r Guido was capable of founding a new

dynasty,must now have been the all important

questions of the time .

Stephen , who set the crown on the head of hisadoptive son, must in so doing have admitted to himse l f that the policy of many of his predece ssors wasatta ined . The Imperia l majesty had become incon

1 The d iplomas in Ughelli , Sigonius and Murator i render the dateindisputable . Muratori

’

s D iss . xxx. and xxxiv . The first d iploma of

Gu ido has 9 Ka l. M ar t i i,I nd. IX . A . I ncarn . D om . 89 1 . Regnante

Domno Widane in I talia . Ann . P egn i ej us I I I . Imper u i llius die

pr ima . Actnm Roma . One s ide of the leaden seal displays his portrait,with shield and lance ; the other, the words RENOVAT IO REGNIFRANC . (Murat . Ant. ii . 87 1 ) whence it appears that Guido never

con templated a nat ional-I talian Empire .


venient al ike to the Popes,the Romans and the

Ital ians . I t had sunk to a shadow. The highestdign ity which re sted on the power and greatness ofthe Empire restored by Charles

,adorned the insigni

ficant person of a duke who possessed some te rritoriesin Centra l I ta ly and rece ived the title of Caesar fromthe Pope .

Stephen the Fifth died in September 89 1 . Romereta ins no monument Of his re ign , since the Church ofthe Apost les, which he entire ly rebuilt

,no longer pre

serves its ancient form . This bas il ica , which was theparish church of his family

,and stood in the imme

diate ne ighbourhood of his father’s palace,was the

specia l Object of his favour ?

1 Vi ta S tep/2. V. ,n . 648 , 650 . E ccles iam

, qua ad Apostolos dici tu r

fundament i s r enovavi t it st ill bore the t itle j acobi et P li i lzpp i also .

The life of Stephen enumerates some votive g ifts ; we st ill read of

Canthara, Regna, Vela, of prases , jacinths and of white gems .

C H A P T E R V I I .

1 . FORMOSUS , POPE, 89 1—THE FACTIONS OF ARNULF ANDGu iDo— THE RIVAL CAND IDATE SERG IUS— FORMOSUSSUMMONS ARNULF To MARCH ON ROME—ARNULF IN

ITALY—DEATH OF GU IDO— LAMBERT EMPERORARNULF ADVANCES AGAINST ROME—TAKES THE C ITYBY STORM— I s CROWNED EMPEROR , APRIL 8 96—THEROMANS TAKE THE OATH OF FIDELITY— H i s D IS

ASTROUS RETURN DEATH OF FORMOSUS IN MAY 8 96 .

FORMOSUS, Cardina l -bishop of Portus, ascendedI

S . Pe ter’s Cha ir in Septembe r 89 1 . This ambitiousman

,whose significant past i s a lready known to us ,

1

was,as i t appears

,a Roman by descent ! Ex com

mun icated by John the E ighth,he had sworn never

to re turn to Rome or his bishopric, but had beenre leased from his oath by Marinus and re instated at

Portus . He l ived in quiet unde r the pont ificate oftwo Popes unti l

,upon the death of Stephen the Fifth

,

1 The Catalog . Rom. Pontif. in Eccard ( Corp. H i st . M ed . , Aevi I I .

n . comp iled soon after 1048 , says Formosu s . nat . P or tuens is . On

the other hand , Watterich,i . 30 : Ep . Por tuens is ex patr e Leone. The

Annal . S . Columbae Senon . (Mon . Germ . , i . 103 ) call him civi s

u rbi s Roma,and this is also indicated by the I nvect iva in P omampro

Formosa P apa (p . lxx). He cannot have been re instated in Portus

before 883 a diploma of Marinus of 882 being s igned per man .

Va len tin i eccl. Por tuens . Ep . (Labbe, xi . , in Marino).

HISTORY OF ROME

The act must,however

,have been performed

unwill ingly, s ince i t was impossible that any Popecould sincere ly desire the e stablishment or confirma

t ion of a native Imperial dynasty in Italy . The

fortune of war favoured Guido ; and in vain the

defeated Berengar sought refuge with Arnulf ofGermany. His cause was supported by envoys ofFormosus , who was himse l f at the time sore harassedby the Spole tan party and by Guido

,who had

violated the frontier O f the ecclesiastical State and

had confiscated patrimonie s be longing to S . Peter .The struggle between the two factions in Romethreatened an oli tbreak; Formosus summoned Arnulfacross the Alps in 89 3 , and in the beginn ing of thefollowing year the King came to I ta ly ? Milan and

Pavia , terror-stricken , opened the ir gate s ; even theMargraves of Tuscany

,Adalbert and his brother

Boniface,surrendered themse lve s as vassals . Neve r

the less at Easter,without continuing his victorious

1 The year but not the day of Lambert’s coronat ion is estab lished .

Murator i, A . 892 , and D issert . , 34, be l ieves i t to have been the verybeg inning ofMarch 892 BOhmer,

'

Feb. 1 Dummler , the end of Apr il.To the d iplomas already known I add one from the Cod. D ipl .

Amiat inus (Sessoriana in Rome,ccxiii. 163 ) of the year 893 , Ind . xi .

VVido et Lan tber tus fi lio ej u s magn i Imp . Aug . ann i Imp . cor um

secundo et ter t io m. j un io intrante die 3. Murator i and Fumagallibelieve that Lambert had been a lready crowned in Rome in 892 but ,

according to Reg ino , the ceremony did not take place until after hisfather ’s death Ramam ven i ens

,dy adema imper i i—s ibi impon i

feci t . Mar ian . Scotus g ives the same accoun t . The two coins of

Formosus , g iven in Vignoli and Promis , have WIDO Imp . and the

monogram ROMA . Denar ii of Formosus with Arnulf’ s t itle are

unknown .

2 Con t in . Annal. F u ld. ,A . 893

—ad A . 894, follows the account ofthe first expedition .


progress through Guido ’s territory to Rome , whitherhe had been invited by the Pope

,Arnulf returned to

Germany.

Circumstances in Rome were not materially alteredby the sudden death of Guido . This Empe ror, or thetyrant of Ita ly

,as Ge rman Chroniclers ca l l him ,

died Death of

Guido, 894.

in consequence of a hemorrhage on the banks of theriver Taro

,in North Italy

,at the end of the year 894 .

Lambert immediate ly hastened to Rome , apparentlyto be confirmed in the Impe ria l d ignity

,and to be

solemnly crowned by Formosus . He was stil l ve ryyoung

,of attractive aspect and chiva lrous nature , and

in him the national party among the Ita l ian s centredthe i r stronge st hOpes . The Pope , unsupported byGe rmany

,accommodated himse l f to circumstance s .

He declared himse l f ready to protect Lambert with a

fathe r’s care,but at the same time sent envoys to

Arnulf urgently inviting him to Rome .

1 This act,

betraying them as i t did to Germany,must have

roused the utmost indignation of the Spoletan partyaga inst Formosus . Arnulf left Bavaria in the autumnof 89 5, to remove Berengar as we l l as Lambert

,and

final ly to se ize both the kingdom’

o f I ta ly and the

Empire for himse lf. His warl ike progress is the first Arnulf’s

in the l ist of the ominous de scents of German kings 33322326 ,

on Rome . He divided his army as soon as he crossedthe Po ; the Swabians we re directed to march to1 Liutpr . (Antapod. , c. 37) calls Lambert elegan tem j uvenem adlzuc

eplzabum . n im isque bellicosum. The attitude of Formosus is expla inedby Flodoard , H is t . E ccl. Remens . I V. c. 3 de ipsoLantber topa tr is secu ram babere,fi li ique car i ss imi loco eum di l igere, and also 0. 5 . p . 6 10

(Edit ion of For the embassy to Arnulf, see Cont. Annal. Fuld .

895 .

H ISTORY OF ROME

Florence by Bologna ; Arnulf himse l f led the Frankswe stward to Lucca . The report of the hosti le intent ions of Berengar and Adalbert of Tuscany hastenedhis progress

,and after having ce lebrated Christmas at

Lucca he marched aga inst Rome . The boyish Lambert Offered no re sistance

,mere ly seeking to defend

Spole to . But his resolute mother Ag ildruda , the

daughter of Duke Adelchis of Benevento ( ce lebratedthrough the imprisonment which the Empe ror Lewishad endured at his hands) endeavoured to drive backthe enemy from before the wa l ls of Rome . Withinthe c ity a violent revolt had a lready broken out . The

Spole tan or national faction , headed by Sergius and

by two nobles,Constantine and Stephen

,had a lready

se ized the Pope . Spole tans and Tuscans had entered ,had barred the gate s

,barricaded the Leonine City,

and fi l led it with armed men . And of all these warl ike preparations a brave woman was the soul .Rome for the first time was to be besieged by the

troops ofa Ge rman king,by German “ barbarians .” For

the first time the sacred c ity,and with it the Impe rial

crown,was to be conquered by the force of the ir arms .

Arnulf encamped be fore the gate of S . Pancrazioin the month Of February. He summoned the cityto surrende r

,but was answered with disda in ? The

1 Annal. Fu ld.,A . 896, and the confused statements of Liutprand .

Arnulf addresses the army,who can scarcely have understood his

pompous reminiscences . Pompey and Julius were no longer in the

city ; the ancient Roman Spir it had been removed by Constant ine to

G reece and the Romans of those t imes understood nothing beyondcatching fish in the T iber

H i s tota s tudiump ing ues captare s i luros

Cannabe,non clipeos man ibus gestare micantes .

HISTORY OF ROME

Arnulf had se t in orde r various affa irs concerning thec ity and the Imperial powe r, he rece ived the homageof the Roman people i n S . Paul ’s . The oath takenwas as fol lows I swear by all these mysterie s ofGod

,that 1

,without prej udice to my honour, my law ,

or my fealty to the Lord and Pope Formosus , in all

the days of my li fe,am and will be fa ithful to the

Empe ror Arnulf that I wil l neve r join with anyonei n disloya lty to him that I neve r

,for the atta inment

ofw orldly dignity,will give aid to Lambert

,son of

Ag ildruda, or his mothe r nor wil l I eve r surrende r toLambert or to his mothe r Ag ildruda , or to any ofthe i r people

,in

?

any wise or manne r, this city ofRome .

”

The Spole tan party had not Opposed any greatresistance to the victor. The Mausoleum of Hadrian ,which soon afterwards became an important fortre ss ,rema ins unnoticed by a syllable

,a lthough the re i s

l ittle doubt that Ag ildruda had placed a garrisonwithin it . Immediate ly after the first attack on thecity

,the widow of the Empe ror Guido had withdrawn

to her own country with her troops,and the Romans

,

her a l l ie s,had la id down the ir arms . The indignation

of Arnulf might have been soothed by the reflectionthat the taking of Rome , a city over which he possessedno right whateve r

,had cost him so l ittle effort . We

hear nothing Of executions,but the two eminent

of his d iploma for S. Sisto in Piacenza has the date Kalend . Mar

( t iarum) die anno incar . D D CCCXCVI . ind. X VI . anno imper i i

ej us pr imo. Aetum Rome Dummler , Gesta B erengar i i , p . 3 1 , and

the 0stfranb. Gescb . ,ii . 677 , of the same author. Jaflé, Reg . Pont . ,

2 Ed . p . 438 , g ives Feb . 22 as the day of the coronation.


Romans, Constantine and Stephen , were sent intoexile in Bavaria as gui lty of high treason . Arnulfonly remained fifteen days in Rome . He appointedFarold

,his vassal

,gove rnor of the city

,and left for Arnulf

withdrawsSpoleto, where the amazon Ag ildruda had made frompreparations for defence . A para lyt ic se izure attackedhim on the way , the effect

,more probably

,of his own

unbridled excesses and dissolute l ife than Of poisonadministered by his enemie s . A re treat

,which re

sembled a fl ight,followed his bri l l iant victory ; and

the first warl ike expedition Of a German King toRome left no permanent re sult .Death

,whether through illness or poison

,freed the

Pope at the same time from the dange r in which hemust have been involved by the remova l of his Ge rmandefende r, and the sudden turn of events consequenton a treaty be tween Lambert and Berengar . Formosus died on Apri l 4th, 896 , after a re ign of fouryears six months and two days ? No monumentrecal ls this dis t inguished Pope , a lthough to him the

City owed the complete restoration of S . Pe te r’s,as

we l l as the restoration of severa l othe r churche s ?

1 The day of his death is g iven only by Con t . Annal Fu ld . , and afteri t by Herm . Contract : defunctus est die sancta pascba . The Cata

logue of Farfa g ives him a reign of 5 years and 6 months . The ear lierone of M . Casino (Cod. 353 , of saec. x . only 4 years 6 months and

2 days , which agrees with Cod . Vat . 1340 .

2 The monk of Soracte says in his praise renovava i t a cles ia

pr incip i s ap . Petr i , p ictura tota so too Amalr. Augerius (Murat . iii .p . ii . 3 13) the Invectiva in Romain eccles ias rea dzficavi t , exstr ux i t .

Rome.

H ISTORY OF ROME

2 . D ISORDER IN ROME—BON I FACE VI . POPE—STEPHENVI . POPE—THE CORPSE SYNOD—JUDGMENT PRO

NOUNCED UPON FORMOSUS—FALL OF THE LATERANBAS ILICA— CAUSES OF THE SHOCKING SACRILEGETHE LI BELLUS OF AUXILIUS—THE INVECTIVE AGAINSTROME—TERRIBLE END OF STEPHEN VI .

The death of Formosus was the s ignal for prolongedtumults in the city. The Tuscan and Spoletan factionsse ized all authority. S . Pe te r

’

s Chair became the preyof the nobles , and was occupied by a series of Pope sin such quick success ion , that scarce ly had theyascended it before they sank into a bloody grave .

The Papacy, which under Nicholas , Adrian , and sti l lmore unde r John the E ighth , had risen to lofty aims ,sank in the midst of the genera l pol itica l disruptionto the lowest depths . A thousand spoi le rs la id handson the e cclesiastica l State , while the spiritua l powerof the Pope i tse l f sank into l i ttle more than an emptytitle . Sin iste r darkness brooded ove r Rome , scarce lyre l ieved by the doubtful gl immers which ancientChronicle rs le t fa l l upon this terrible pe riod . Afearful scene i s d isclosed violent barons cal l ing themse lve s consuls or -senators rising from amongst thembrutal or wre tched Pope s beautiful , fie rce and

debauched women ; shadowy Emperors who come ,struggle and disappear— al l pass before the sight intumultuous haste .

The Romans had placed Boniface the S ixth byforce on S . Pe ter

’s Chair ; fifteen days afterwards he

HISTORY OF ROME

dead “ Why hast thou in thy ambition usurped theApostol ic seat , thou who previously wast only Bishopof Portus ? ” The counse l of Formosus

,i f terror

al lowed him to speak,advanced no defence . The

dead was j udged and convicted ; the Synod signedthe act of his deposition

,pronounced sentence of

condemnation upon him ,and decreed that all the

clergy orda ined by Formosus should be ordainedanew .

The Papal vestments we re torn from the mummythe three fingers of the right hand , with which theLatins be stowed the benediction

,we re cut Off : with

barbarous shrieks the dead man was dragged fromthe hal l through the streets , and thrown amidst therush of the ye l l ing rabble into the Tiber ? No flashof l ightning

,such as so often worked miracles i n

beha lf of the Popes , struck this“ Synod of horror.”

NO martyr rose from his grave in indignation . Butaccident, which some time s takes the place Of Providence

,orda ined that precise ly at this time the Late ran

basi l ica,already totte ring from ag e , should fa l l . Men

were not wanting who, in the fal l of the Head andMother Church of Christendom ,

saw an omen of thedownfa l l of the Papacy itse lf ?

1 Anna l. Fu ld. ,Liutpr. ( i . g ives a more circumstantial account

of the proceedings , although he confuses Stephen with Serg ius ; theCbron . Fart:repeats his account. Chron . S . Bened . (M on . Germ. ,

v.

204) says that the corpse had lain 1 1 months in the g rave . The

Invectiva :cadaver j amque per 9 menses sepu ltam, per pedes de sepultura

extrax i st i—s i in ter rogabatur , qu id r espondet ? s i r esponderet , omn is i lla

bar renda cong regatio, t imore per ter r i ta—discederet . Auxili i Libellus

busta di ru ta,ossa fr acta, u t i quoddam mempbi t icum ej ectas est extra

publicum . The Council of John IX. again depicts the scene .

2 Baronius , A . 897,'represents the fall of the Lateran as following the


We may ,with Cardinal Baronius , take refuge from

this outrageous scene in the Opinion that the Churchcannot be disgraced by itse lf

,because the Church , l ike

the sun,i s at times obscured by clouds

,in orde r that

it may afterwards shine the brighte r. To the historian ,howeve r

,who rejects metaphor, this Synod se rves as

evidence of the mora l condition of the period . I t

serve s to prove that the Cle rgy,the nobles, and people

of Rome l ived in a state of utter barbarism ,than

which nothing more shocking can be imagined . The

savage hatred of the Romans condemned by Formosus ,of a Sergius

,a Benedict, or a Marinus ( cardinal-presby

ters) ; o f a Leo , Paschalis and John ( cardina l-deaconsspecial ly mentioned in the late r council of John theNinth) ; the thirst for revenge of the nationa l party,roused to fury by the coronation of Arnulf, the firstGerman Emperor

,at the hands of the Pope who had

deserted them ; the pol itica l conditions accepted byStephen the Sixth

,who was forced by stress of cir

cumstances to flatter Lambert—such we re the cause swhich led to the outrage . The hideous trial hadadduced some jurid ica l arguments from Canon Law :

the previous condemnation of Bishop Formosus ; hisbreaking of his oath

,from which Marinus had , how

ever, re leased him ; lastly, his e levation to the pont ificate from a bishopric . Decrees of ancient councilshad forbidden the translat ion of bishops from one

city to anothe r. O ther decrees had, however, pro

Synod bor renda . The basilica fe ll in 897 . The Annal. A lamann ici

(M on . Germ. ,i . 53) mention both events at the same t ime, but the fall

of the Lateran first B as . in Lateran is maj or i par te cecidi t et posteaStepbanus—Pormosum de sepu lcro ej eci t .

H ISTORY OF ROME

nounced the step justifiable , i f required by necess ity,and the Synod of John the Ninth

,i n 898 , with respect

to Formosus,decided in favour Of the latte r v iew

,

although it added that the uncanonical example wasnot to be imitated ?

Formosus,even at this time

,found his defenders in

some courageous men,name ly

,in the priests whom

he had consecrated,and who protested aga inst the in

j ustice which pronounced the i r consecration inval id .

Aux ilius wrote a letter, i n which he clothed with glorythe unfortunate Pope ; and another priest, whose namei s unknown

, di rected a fiery invective aga inst Rome ,i n which he blamed the entire city for the outragefor which the cle rgy were alone guilty. He recal l sthe fact that the Romans had a lways put the i r benefactors to death. Romulus and Remus

,the founde rs

of the city,had fa l len

,one by the hand of his brother,

the othe r by the sword of rebe ls on the Quirinal .O f Pe te r and Pau l (whom he might we l l have namedthe second founde rs O f the city

,and perhaps the

idea of doing so may have occurred to his mind) ,one had been crucified , the other beheaded . In l ikemanne r the city had given vent to its rage aga instFormosus , a holy, an upright, and a Catholic man?

1 Canon iii . Qu ia necess i tatis causa de P or tuens i eccles ia Formosus

pro vi ta mer i to ad ap . sedem p rovectu s est , s ta tu imus cl omn ino decern i

mus , cl u t id in exemp lum nu llus assumat .2 The Invect ive , l ike the Council of 898 , calls this Synod

lzor r ibi lis . The Libellas Auxilii is found , together with the othercontrovers ial wr it ings , in vol. cxxix. ofM igne

’

s P atrology . See on thissubject H ist . L i ttér a i r e de la Fr ance, vi . 122, &c. D l immler (Aux i lius

and Vu lga r ius , Le ipzig , 1866) has elucidated these writings of the partyof Formosus , and has added to them others taken from a Bamberg MS .

H ISTORY OF ROME

3 . ROMANUS, POPE — THEODORUS I I . POPE— SERGIUS’

S

ATTEMPT TO SE IZE THE PAPACY ON THE DEATHOF THEODORUS ; HE IS BAN ISHED—JOHN IX. POPE,8 98 H IS DECREE REGARD ING THE PAPAL CON

SECRATION H i s EFFORTS To STRENGTHEN THE

EMPIRE OF LAMBERT— DEATH OF LAMBERTBERENGAR , KING OF ITALY— THE HUNGAR IANS IN .

ITALY—LEW IS OF PROVENCE PRETENDER—DEATHOF JOHN IX. IN JULY goo .

Romanus,a man of unknown origin

,succeeded

Stephen in the pont ificate i n September or October897 , but died four months late r. His succe ssor

,

Theodore,designated the son of Photius

,but a

Roman,wore the tiara only twenty days ? Among

the few actions recorded of the latter Pope,that of

granting burial to the rema ins of Formosus redoundsto his honour. Some fishermen of the Tiber one

day re covered the corpse,and the rema ins of the

man,who ne ithe r in l i fe or death had found rest

,

we re borne to S . Pe ter ’s . Pious Obse rvers re latedthat the images of the sa ints in the chape l i nto whichthe rema ins we re transported, bowed the i r heads in.

reve rence at the sight .2 Theodore al so,by means of

1 Flodoard ; for Theodore he only g ives a reign of 12 days . Cod .

353 ofM . Casino assigns 772. I I I . to Romanus (Cod . Vat . 1350 , correctlyI V. Cod . 257 of M . Casino , i .a.

,the Cata l. P etr i D iacon i : 772. I I I . (1.

XXI I . and so too Cod . Cas in . 185 , of soce. to Theodore m. I . d.

X V. ,Cod . Vat . 1340 , d . XX . ,

and so too Cod . Cas in . 275 , Cod. 185 ,and the Catalogue which precedes the Cbr on icle af Fa 7fa) .2 Liutprand, c. 3 1 . The name of Formosus has not since been

borne by any Pope . In 1464 P ietro Barbo (Paul I I . ) wished to adopt

it ; the Card inals , however , reminded him of the fate of his only pre e

decessor of the name .


a synod,re instated the clergy who had been ordained

by Formosus . The party opposed to Stephen thusaga in returned to power unde r Theodore . The

aristocrats of the riva l faction,i t i s true

,sought to

snatch it after Theodore ’s early death,but the i r

attempts proved unsuccessful . With the a id of theMargrave Adalbert of Tuscany

,they had already

put forward the powerful Card ina l Sergius as candidate for the Papacy. The party of Formosus

,how

eve r, preva i led , and Se rgius, driven with his fol lowersfrom the city, aga infled to his Tuscan exile ?

Under conditions the detai ls of which have not {933221

331

98reached us , John the Ninth was orda ined in the goo.

’

spring or summe r of 89 8 . He was a man Of Ge rmandescent

,son of Rampoald of Tibur, a Benedict ine

and a cardina l-deacon . During his two years ’ re ignhe displayed inte l l igence and moderation . The profound silence into which the history of the city beginsto sink is inte rrupted by two councils, the importantdecree s of which have been pre se rved . The shortnessof the i r re igns had not a l lowed e ithe r Romanus orTheodore to purify the Church from the sta in le ftupon it by the Corpse Synod . John the Ninth, how He vind i

t thever, who had been orda ined pri est by Formosus , fiefiory

e

of

Formosus .1 The surest evidence of which is found in the epitaph of the later

Sergius 111.Cu lmen apos tolica Sedis in j ur epa ternoE lectus ten u i t

,u t Tbeodor u s obi t .

P ellitu r Urbe pa ter , per vadi t sacr a j oannes ,P omu leosque g reg es disszpat ipse lupus .

See Baronius , taken from P . Mallins , as Pag i has shown, wronglyattributed ad A . 70 1 , and to Serg ius I . Flodoard made use of the

epitaphs of the Popes for his verses .

H ISTORY OF ROME

assembled a council in S . Peter’s . The bishops and

presbyters who had S igned the decrees of Stephen ’ssynod were summoned ; they asserted that they hadbeen compe l led by force to give the i r signatures tothese acts . They threw themse lve s down be fore thePope and besought his mercy. Pardon was granted ,but the violators of the grave

,the fol lowe rs of Sergius

,

who stood ready armed in Tuscany,only wa i ting in

the i r banishment for an Opportunity to attack Rome,

were aga in excommunicated . The acts of the CorpseSynod we re condemned ; and we read with surprisethat i t was thought nece ssary to prohibit tria l of thedead for the future ? The memory of Formosuswas triumphantly vindicated by the Synod

,his e lec

tion to the Papacy was confirmed,and his ordinations

we re recognised .

The ten th Canon of the same Counci l decided thatthe consecration of the newly e lected Pope shouldhence forth only take place in the presence Of

Imperia l legate s . The scene s of bloodshed to whichthe e lection of John and those of his predecessors

had given rise , demanded this recognition of theImperia l powe r, which had now become l ittle morethan a shadow. The friendly re lations which existedbe tween John the N inth and Lambert a lso hadsome share i n the edict ? The conditions which

1 Qu ia ad j udicium vocar i mor tuus non potest—omn ibus patet , quad

mor ta i cadaver p ro se non r esponder e nec sat isfacer e potest . Canon 1.

Collect ion of Councils, in Labbé and Mans i .2 Qu ia S . B . E ccl. p lur imas pat i tu r violent ias pon tzfice abenu le

qu ia absque impera tor i s not i t ia , et s uor . leg ator . p ra sen t ia , pon t ij fcisfi tconsecr at io—volumus u t pon t if . conven ien t ib. epi scop is et un iver sa

clero elzgatur , expetente senatu et populo, qu i ordinandus est, ct s ic in

H ISTORY OF ROME

four bishops,memorable for some constitutions

passed in regard to the Imperial powe r. It wasordained that no Roman should be preventedfrom appeal ing to the Impe rial Majesty, or fromdemanding justice at his hands . Any person whoprevented a Roman from appeal ing

,and in this

way injured his property,was declared amenable

to the secular jurisd i ction ? The Imperial tribunalHe restores was there fore to be restored as a protection to the

fiifigh ’sweak aga inst the usurpation of the noble s, and we

Empew ‘” may the refore reasonably infer that the Emperoragain sent his

,

Missus to Rome . At the same timethe treaty which Guido had a l ready concluded withthe Church was renewed ; the State of the Church ,the Pope

’s rights of sovere ignty within Rome and hisown territory, were confirmed . Lambert promisedto re store the i l legal ly acqu ired pa trimonie s . He

promised to support the Pope aga inst the Romanexiles . The Pope at the same Synod lamented theterrible devastation suffe red by the province s , whichhe had witne ssed on his way to Ravenna, and bewailed the fal l of the Lateran basi l ica . He complained that his people , sent to procure beams torebuild the basil ica, had been hindered in the i r workby the rebe l s . He deplored the exhaustion of theeccles iastical revenue s, and the fact that not evensufficient funds rema ined to pay the cle rgy and the

servants of the Papal Court, or to give a lms to the

1 Pet it io Synodi , Mon. Germ. , i ii . 563 . S i qu is Romanus—sive de

clero, s ive de senatu ,seu de quocumque ordine, g r at is ad ves tr . imper ial .

maj estatem ven ir e voluer i t , au t necess i tate compu lsus ad vos voluer i t

proclamare, nu llus eis con tradicere pra sumat , One.


poor. To such a degree of poverty had the RomanState sunk

,and this

,too

,in the course Of only forty

years,since the time when Popes had suppl ied mil l ions

from the i r coffe rs for the building of new cities , onwhich

,l ike Pompey or Hadrian

,they had bestowed

the i r own names .The energetic Lambert had made a genuine peace

with Rome,where he had gloriously restored the

Imperia l power. The Pope , though compe l led bynecessity, had with equal s incerity striven to secureLambert in the Imperium . We look with readysympathy on the e fforts Of both men to s e t in orderthe chaos of affa irs in Italy. Freed from all fore igninfluence

,i t seemed now for the first time possible

to form an independent kingdom within the I tal ianfrontier. The inte rva l of rest which the unhappyland enjoyed appeared to bear in it the security ofa brighter future , and the youthful spiri t of theEmperor was ra ised with lofty hope s . But anunfortunate accident suddenly ended this happydream .

He had gone from Ravenna,following the upper Death of

course of the P0, to the pla in of Marengo or 58

1

22212

Marincus,at that time covered with fore st

,and

here remained spending his time in hunting. Afal l from his horse shattered the hopes of I ta ly at a

blow. The lamented youth, the handsomest and

most chivalrous hero of the age , breathed his laston the fie ld which

,n ine hundred years later

, was toacquire a fatal renown . Voice s we re heard attributing his death to the revenge of Hugo , whose fathe r,Count Mag infred of Milan , had been executed by


Lambert. The supposition,howeve r

,rested mere ly

on idle rumour.1

The sudden death of the young Emperor changedthe entire aspect of a ffa i rs in I taly. Berengar im

mediate ly hastened from Ve rona to Pavia to se ize theLombard kingdom ; and for a time fortune seemedto smile upon his hopes . Many of the noblesacknowledged him

,and the death Of the Emperor

Arnulf in 899 freed him from the fear of any armedcla im on the part of the Ge rmans . Meanwhile

,

a lthough secure of Ada lbert ’s friendship,in spite

of the fact that Lambe rt ’s affl icted mother,the

widow of Guido,had entered into a l l iance with him

,

Berengar could not achieve his object. Guido andLambert had each in a short space of time atta inedthe Imperia l crown

,and had quickly forfe ited it by

death ; but Berengar, i n spite of long years of toil, wasnever able to acqu ire i t . Not even as king of I taly

,

when eve ry C ircumstance seemed in his favour, whendeath had removed the Cla ims of Arnulf andLambe rt

,was he a l lowed to grasp the fata l crown

in Rome . This striking fact shows that in 899 the

Hungarians had already made the ir first incursioninto I ta ly

,and that in the same year Lewis of

Provence had appeared as a pretende r.The terrible horde s of Magyars forsook the i r

1 Liutpr. ( 11. c. 12 ) believes that he was murdered at Hugo’

s in

stigation ; the P anegy r . B erengar i i only knows of the fatal fall . The

Annal. A lemann . and Laubacenses s imply s tate his death in the year898 . Berengar reckoned the second year of his reign as early as Sept .899 ; thus in the God. Amiat . , ccxiii. p . 167 Regn ante D omino B er in

cli ar i P ox pos t obi tum Lanber to Imperatore in I talia A . 2 . 777 . Sep t .

intrante die 12 . I nd . I I .

H ISTORY OF ROME .

defeat of Berengar had removed the greatest hindrance from his path ?

Whethe r or not he had rece ived an invitat ion fromJohn the Ninth is uncerta in . The friendly receptionwhich awa ited him from John

’s adherents in Rome

shows,at least , the rapidity with which he acquired

the goodwil l of the people . They had not forgottenthat his father Boso had once given an asylum toJohn the E ighth , and that Boso had been consecratedKing Of I taly by John in opposition to Berengar

and Arnulf. John the Ninth did not survive theseevents. Bewa i l ing the destruction of his hopes , hedied in July 900 , afte r witne ssing the close of the

century of Charles the Great and the dawn of its successor. The tenth century, which had now begun ,was de stined

,amid the terrible suffe rings Of Rome

,

to witness a reviva l of the Roman Imperium in theGerman nation . No monument in the city survivesto recal l the memory of John the Ninth ?

1 Although Liutprand speaks of a second coming of Lewis , hisstatements are very doubtful. According to Reg ino , the s trugg lesbetween Berengar and Lewis took p lace as early as 898, and in the

same breath the chronicler recounts the coronation of Lewis as

emperor .

That he restored or consecrated the Church of S. Valentine , weare informed by the inscript ion of the Op ifex Teubaldus, taken from the

ruins , which tells us that he presented the Church with houses, manuscripts and vessels. I t ends

Temporepont ificis non i summiquej obann isE st sacrata die supprema ba c au la novembr is

D um qu inta elaben tem indi ct io cur reret annum.

G iven by Angelo Mai,Scr iptor . Veter . Vat ican , Collect . t . v. 2 18.

The Indiction does not accord with the t ime of John IX.

B O O K S I X T H .

H ISTORY OF THE C ITY IN THE TENTH

CENTURY.

242 HISTORY OF ROME

of the diplomas which he promulgated Show that heactual ly exercised Imperia l powe r in the City. ARoman placitum

,of February 4th, 90 1 , has been pre

se rved , in which the leading noble s are enumeratedas his judges . These are , Stefanus , TheOphylactus ,Gregorius , Gratianus , Adrianus , Theodorus , Leo ,

Crescent ius, Benedictus , Johanne s and Anastasius .

These men are all ca l led Judice s of the city,and

doubtlessly all bore the title of consul and dux .

1 We

shal l frequently encounte r the same men or the irdescendants , and may notice that amongst them nota s ingle German name i s to be found .

Benedict theFourth,a mild and prie stl ike man

,as

Flodoard te rms him,died in the summer of 90 3 , and

Leo the Fifth from Ardea succeeded to the sacredchai r ? A month late r he was overthrown by Cardina lChristophorus . But a l ike fate was i n store for theintruder : a few months later he too was thrust aside

by Sergius and was forced to retire to a monastery,

maj ore ips ius P alaci i ann . Imp . Domn i Ludovici pr imo, m. Febr . I nd .

I V. , in Fioren t ini,M emor ie d i M at i lda , &c. , iii . 1 14. Lewis ’s

d iploma for Monte Amiata is dated I st June of the same year . D at .

Kal . j un i i A . 90 1 I nd . I V. Anna vera Domn i H ludovici g lor ios i Imp .

pr ima. at ium P ap ia : Cod. D ip l. Amiat . , ccxiii. p . 167 .

1 See the sentence in Mansi , xviii. 239 . Peter , Bishop of Lucca ,

claims rest itution from Lambert of Lucca , on account of some ecclesiast ical property which he had appropr iated .

2 Amalr . Aug er . allows Benedict a reign of 3 years and 2 months .

The Catalogue of Monte Casino g ives 3 years and 10 months . The

God . Vat . 1340 , 5 years and 5 months . That he died before July 26,is shown by Pantuzzi , i . 102 . The chronology of the Popes , in the

beg inn ing of saec . x . , is very doubtful . Joseph Duret (Gescbicbtsbl.

Sclzweiz, ii . 1856 ) and the editor of the second edition of J aflé’sReg esta have subjected it to a fresh criticism, without , however, comingto any definite conclusion.


where he d i sappears from history? Thus,in a space

of only e ight years e ight Pope s had been e lected and

ove rthrown,a striking te stimony to the horrors of

civi l war in Rome . Out of this state of Chaos the regradua l ly rose to the surface a few civic families ,one of whom at length Succeeded in se iz ing the re insof government .Se rgius

,the son of Benedict , be longed to this family.

His repeated promotions i l lustrate the period ofaristocratic tyranny into which Rome entered at the

beginning of the tenth century. We have a lreadyseen this ambitious cardinal as the opponent of Johnthe Ninth later in the exile

,in which he spent seven

years Of his life (beginning in his eyes invariablyturned towards the Papal throne , until he fina l lysucceeded in at ta ining it . Although we are informedthat he was reca l led from banishmen t and ra ised toS . Pete r’s Chair at the entreaty Of the people

,his

e levation could on ly have been accomplished after hehad ove rcome his opponents

,and had expe l led or put

to death the hosti le cardinals ? I t i s possible that he1 With respect to these two Popes , Flodoard says

Pos t quem celsa subi t Leoj ura , notamine qu in tu sEmigr at an te suum quam Luna bis imp/eat arbam.

Cbr istop lzoru s max sar t i tus moderamina sedis ,

D imidio,u lter iusque par um, dispen sa t in anno.

The Catalogue of Monte Casino, 353 (compiled about the yearg ives Leo one month’s reign , Christophorus 6 months , which harmonisefa ir ly well with Flodoard

’s statements . The Catalogues Vat . and

E ccardi g ive 7 and 6 months . The date of Serg ius’s e levation wou ld

,

it is true , al low of but 4 mon ths at most , the t ime specified in the

Catalogue of the Cbron . B ernold i and Herm . Contr .

2 His epitaph is as followsE xu l erat pa tr ia septem volvent ibus ann is .

P ost popu li mu lt i s Urbe r edi t precibus .

HISTORY OF ROME

may have come to Rome under the escort of troopsbe longing to Adalbert

, the powerful Margrave ofTuscany . This

,howeve r, remains unce rta in , and since

Tuscan influence now disappears,and s ince Sergius

reta ined the pont ificate for seven years , i t follows thatthe rul ing faction of the nobil ity to which he be longedmust have ove rcome the i r Opponents . Se rgius a l soma inta ined his own position while leaving the government of the c ity more or le ss in the i r hands . At thehead of the Roman aristocracy stood Theophy lact ,

whose influentia l wi fe Theodora was the friend andprotectress of Sergius the Third .

Sergius became Pope in January He im

mediate ly condemned Formosus afresh and pronounced all his ordinations inval id . His predecessorsin the Papacy

,Leo and Christophorus , he a l lowed

e ithe r to pe ri sh or to be murde red in the i r ce l ls ?

This man of violence,seven years of whose l ife

were spent in exile,seven in the Pont ificate , behind

whom stood the outraged rema ins ofFormosus and the

blood-sta ined shades of other Popes,whose re ign is

hid in myste ry,compe l s us to regre t the unce rta inty

in which this period must eve r rema in shrouded .

E ccle siastica l historians,above all Baron ius , have

heaped denunciations on his memory,as on that of a

monste r. His share in the tria l of Formosus,‘his

forcible e levation , the intrigue s with Marozia (a Romanand the daughte r of Theodora), with which he i s

1 He was consecrated between January 25th and February I st , 904,as Jafié, following Muratori (An t . v. shows .

2 D u ro damans ergastu lo vitam eor um cruda macerat ione decox i t

E u en i i Vu lg ar i i de causa Formos iana libel/us , in Dummler , p. 135 .

246 HISTORY OF ROME

Va luable works of early Christian art and gifts ofConstantine , in which the Lateran especial ly gloried

,

were then lost for ever. Here also the golden : crossof Be l i sarius seems to have disappeared ? The

Romans desired the re storation of this,the hol iest of

the i r temples . I f, s ince Charle s’s coronation

, the

Cathedra l of S . Pete r had become the centre of allthe re lations be tween Rome and the pol itical and

dogmatic world,the mee ting-place of the greater

number of Councils, the Lateran,neve rthe less

,re

ma ined the treasury of re l ics , the image of Jerusalem ,

the Head and Mothe r Church of Christendom . The

tranqu il l ity ma inta ined in the city under the re ign ofterror of Sergius ’s adherents a l lowed the Pope torebuild the basi l ica . And to the memory of the greatDe l inquent redounds the honour of the restoration

of a Church , which gradual ly became fi l led with the

monuments of history, and which endured for nearlyfour hundred years unti l it was eventua l ly destroyedby fire .

Sergius entire ly rebuilt the basil ica and endowed itwith othe r votive gift s . He apparently re ta ined thefoundations and proportions of the ancient Church

,

2

but added the portico of ten columns and divided the

1Joh . D iacon. DeE ccl. Later an . (Mabillon

,M us . I ta l . , i i . 575)

in i llis vero tempor ib. , qu ib. invasores apostol . tenebant sedem, tu ler an t

de bac bas . omnes tbesau ros , et cuncta ornamen ta . The same writersays of Serg ius

’s bu ilding : temp . au tem i llins (Stephen VI . ) ru i t , et

fu i t in r a in is diss ipata cl comminu ta usque ad tempus , qua revocatus

est dom . Serg ius . See also Vi ta Sergi i , Catalogue in Watterich , i. 32 ,and Cbron . of B enedict , c. 27.

2 I ncipiens ab an t iqu is laborare f undamentis, fi netenus op us boc

consummavi t,says Joh . D iacon .


interior into five a i sles. The columns , partly ofgranite ,partly of verde-antico

,were ancient. The tribune

was adorned with mosa ics . A long i nscription ce lebrated the building of the Pope , and verse s to thesame effect were placed over the principa l doors ?

The basil ica continued to bear the name of the Saviour,but in his inscription Sergius recognised S . John theBaptist

,to whom the Church had origina l ly been

dedicated by Constantine,as its patron . Thus— and

the fact is significant in Rome—the name of theSaviour began to fade from the principa l church . The

Lateran aga in stood erect,and, as a temple which

had risen out of utter ruin,more than eve r strengthened

the reverence of the fa ithful . Hence forward,during a

course of two hundred years , i t served instead of S .

Pe te r’s,as the buria l place of the greate r numbe r of

the Popes .The build ing of a church is the sole historic monument of the age , all rema in ing events be ing wrappedin obscurity. The unfortunate Lewis

,it is true was

cal led Emperor. He remained , however, mere ly.

a

shadow or a name , and had vanished a ltogether fromI tal ian history after the year 90 5 . Berengar had

attacked him in Ve rona , had put out his eye s, and

1 See the inscription from the tribune in Rasponi (D e B as i l cl

Patr iarcbio Lateran , p . Of which the last lines areSpes dum nu llaforet ves t igia pr isca r econdi

Sergi us ad cu lmen perdux i t Ter tius ima ,Cesp i te ornavi t ing ens ba c ma n ia P apa .

The reading p ingens is better. The inscr ipt ion over the door is givenby Joh . D iacon

Serg ius ipsep ius P apa li anc qu i cap i t ab imis

Ter t ius , exemplans istam quam consp icis aulam.

I I ISTORY OF ROME

had sent him back to his home . But Berengar himse l fwas prevented from acquiring the depreciated Imperialcrown

,less by the lawful rights of the bl inded Lewis

than by the confused state of the country, the continned struggle s w i th the Hungarians , and lastly, bythe aristocrats of the city, who no longer desired an

Emperor? Sergius the Third died in the course ofthe year 9 1 1

? He was succeeded by the RomanAnastasius the Third

,whose two years

’

pont ificate , as

a lso the l ittle more than six months’ re ign Of hissuccessor Lando

,are hid in utter darkness . Lando ,

the son of Ra ino,a Lombard count, who owned

prope rty in the Sabina,died in the spring of 9 14 .

A remarkable man su cceeded to the Papal throne ,and fi l led it with no common ene rgy for fourteenyears . 3

1 Ne ither the denari i of Serg ius 111. nor those ofAnastasius I I I . aremarked with Lewis ’s name

,while coins of Bened ict IV. bear the

inscript ion LVDOVICVS IMP . The two former Popes consequentlyd id not recognise Lewis as Emperor .

2 According to Jaffe, P eg . Pon t .,2,Ed . by Lowenfeld, in June ;

according to Duret , on April 23 lor May 24. Benedict of Soracte

obi i t Sergi us P . nonas Kal . M aj as , c. 29 .

3 The Catal . Cas inen, 353 , closes with Joh . X, whose reign it does

not reg ister . I t g ives Anastas ius a . I I . 772. ( Cod. Cas in . 257, a . I I .

772. I I . , like Cod. Va t . Lando, a . I . (God. 257 , an . I I I . d . XXXI I I .

Cod . Va t . 1340 , m. V. et cessavi t ep . (1. Bened ict of Soracte g iveshim 772. 6 , and Flodoard m. 6 dies 10 . The Cata log ue E ccardi writesTrano instead of Ra ina (Rayner) , as the Cata l . Vat . correctly g ives i t.The celebrated Cata l Vat ic. , 3764 , from La Cava, which contains theL ib. Pan t . and very ancient catalogues , says , on the contrary : Landonat . Sabinense ex patre ta ino sedi t m . VI I . dies XXX VI .

HISTORY OF ROME

career in Bologna, where he was consecrated deaconby Bishop Pete r. He succeeded Peter in the episcopa ld ignity, i t is sa id , by violent means . Be ing an ambitious and able man he attained to the throne ofRavenna on the death of Archbishop Ka i lo

,and fi lled

it not ingloriously for the space Of nine years beforehe became POpe .

l In violation o f the decree ofcounci l of John the Ninth

,he passed directly from a

bishopric to S . Pe te r’s Cha ir . The act,a l though nu

canonical,was not accounted dishonourable

,and were

John actua l ly the love r O f a beautifu l woman,a fact

which cannot be c learly proved,he was ne ithe r the

first nor last Pope who enjoyed the l i ke privilege .

The rul ing faction of the nobil ity to which Theodorabe longed summoned John , and overcoming the

resistance of the clergy and of his opponents inve stedhim with the Papa l crown . He Owed the Apostol iccha ir to an influential woman

,but the more immediate

circumstance s of the e le ction are unknown to us .

2

Theodora,a bold and beautifu l Roman of unknown

family,eme rge s suddenly out Of the darkness of the

time—a myste rious figure , rul ing the city, as L iutprandsays

,with the vigour of an autocrat. She leads us to

enquire into the cause s by which a woman could1 The I nvect iva in Ramam re lates that John usurped the bishopr ic of

Bologna, and reviles him as a Lucifer . The Invective is a product ionof John ’

s own t ime , and its words in spite of be ing insp ired by partyhate , are not without weight .

2 The I nvect iva Liutprand, Leo of Ost ia , Cbron . S . B oned . , cal lJohn X . invasor et intr usus . Martin . Polon. ,

Andreas Dandolo,Bernard , Guidonis , confus ing him with John XI .

,make him the son of

Serguis I I I . Amal . Auger ius also maintains , l ike Bernardus , that hehad been ban ished from Ravenna by the people. Flodoard and the

Anon . B erengar i i take his part.


suddenly atta in to such greatness . She was the

wife of Theophylact , Papal Vestararius,Magiste r

M ilitum, Consul and Dux , a man who be longed to

the highe st nobil ity, and who first appears in 90 1among the Roman judge s of Lewis the Third ?

His name , which, l ike that of his wife Theodora , i sencountered whe reve r the Greeks ruled or had ruledin I ta ly

,by no means proves that he was of Greek

descent. Byzantine names had been common inRome for centuries . In the tenth century they fre

quently occur in diplomas, and Dorothea , Stephania ,Anastasia

,Theodora

,are as common as Theodore ,

Anastasius,Demetrius ; as Se rgius

,Stephen and

Constantine . Such names were not on ly an echo ofByzantine times

,but in the tenth century were pro

1 Mansi, xviii . p . 239 . In 906 a Theophylact appears as Sacellar ius

(Marini , n . The same man appears in 9 15 in the P lacitum ofMont’

Argenteum . In 927 Tli eopby l . , Cons . et D ux, perhaps thus early the

son of Theodora’s husband (P eg . Subl. , fol. 97 Cod . Sessor . ofFattescbi , p . In 939 a Tbeoplzy l. nobi li vi ro ( ibid . p . In the

judgment of A lberic I I . ,in 942 , the Vestiarius TheOphylact appears

among the Roman nobility. He and his wife Theodora Ves terarissa a rementioned on a gravestone from S. Mar ia Magg iore (Ga lletti , D el Vestar .

,

p . 46 ; A . Mai , Scr ip t . vet . n . Coll. V,2 15 n . set up by them to

their children ,Serg ia and Bonifacius the inscript ion records that they

had presented the Fundus Nzanus, in the territory ofNepi, to the churchof S . Mar ia pro an imabus fi lior . nostror . In 949 Maroza nob. fem.

conj ux vero Tlzeopby lact i eminen t . Vestarar io (Cod . Subl . Sessor .

The respect enjoyed by Theophylact and his wife is shown by a

remarkable letter, probably addressed to them by a Bishop of Ravenna,

which bears the inscr ipt ion : I ncli ta d ign itatis g lor ia decorato I li co/f

lacto g lor ios iss imo duci et mag istro mi li tum sacr ique palat i i vesterar io

et mi (n istro) et domina Tbeodora seren iss ima vesterat r ici salu t .

nostram semp i ternam. (From a rotulus discovered in the archives ofPrince Antonio Pio of Savoy, by Count Porro, communicated by S.

LOwenfeld, N eues Arcbiv. ix . ,

H ISTORY OF ROME

bably a sort of legitimist renascence or aristocraticfashion in Rome ; a protest on the part of the nobil ityaga inst the German Empire . They prove at thesame time that the national fee l ing of the Romanswas weak at the period . NO Scipio

, Cazsar or Mariusis heard of

,and whenever Latin name s appear

,they

are borrowed,l ike those of Benedict, Leo or Gregory,

from the sa ints . As soon,howeve r

,as the city fe l l

under the sway of a prince of the nobil ity, the nameof O ctavian , its first Empe ror, immediate ly reappearedas the name of that prince ’s own he ir?

Theo . Theophy lact atta ined to great influence in the

phyla“ beginning of the tenth century . If in 90 1 his nameConsul and

812

212

1

1

? only appears,toge the r with the name s of other noble s ,

Romans . as the second in the i r ranks,he must

,neverthe less

,

have borne the t itle Consul or Senator of theRomans

,

”

pa r excellence, as early as the late r t ime sof Se rgius the Third

,or under the weak successors

of that Pope . His wife Theodora possessed , moreove r, an all powe rful influence ove r the Papacy and

city ? In 9 1 5 his son was designated , not son of a

1 John X . ,formerly Archbishop of Ravenna

,may have been related

to Theodora or Theophylact . On the existence of a noble Marozia of

Ravenna (Fantuzzi , v . I lay no weight, this d iminutive of Mariabeing very common . Through Marozia

,TheOphylact became ancestor

of the Tusculan family, which preserved his name . L iveran i arbitrarilyrepresents Theodora I . as the daughter of Adalbert I . of Tuscany.That Theophylact was her husband we know from Benedict of Soracte,c. 29 .

2 Dummler (Auzi lius and Vu lgar ius p . 146) g ives a letter of Vul~

garius to this Theodora , taken from a Bamberg MS. in which theadherent of Formosus implores her protect ion , probably at the court ofSerg ius 111. The inscr iption runs : ad Tbeodoram ( two words are

missing here) Sma et deo amata venerab. matrona Tbeodora Vul

HISTORY OF ROME

same time,that a l so of S ena tor Romanorum ? In

this capacity we encounter TheOphylact ; and the

powe r of Theodora,

“the Senatrix, as she ca l le d

herse lf,

can only be expla ined by the positionoccupied by her husband . She was at the sametime the soul of the great family of noble s , and herdaughters Marozia and Theodora, inhe rited bothher seductive charm and her powerfu l influence .

I t was rumoured that Sergiu s the Third had

a lready enjoyed the love of Marozia,and that the

boy,who late r became John the E leventh, was the

child of the ir inte rcourse . The fa ir Roman afterwards introduced an upstart into the family of Theo

phy lact , by whom she became the mother of thefirst secular prince of Rome ?

First This was Albe ric,a stranger in the city

,where no

appearance

of Alberic,other bearer of hi s essent ial ly German name had

889 previously appeared ? We know nothing of his

1 The Placitum of Mont’

Argenteum,of the year 10 14, cites a bull of

John X . and ment ions first among the Roman nob ility Tbeop liylacta s Sena tores Romanor um, then Grat ianus Dux

, Serg ius Primicerius , &c. The original parchment actually has Senatores ; but s inceevery dign itary had his epithet , we must read Senator . Senatores is

merely an ungrammatical barbar ism ; Bened ict of Soracte also saysPetr us marcbiones . TheOphylact is there also represented as head of

the aristocracy. He disappears after the year 9 15 . His palace in Romeis heard of in later t imes .

2 Tlzeodora, scor tum impudens—P omana civi tat is non invim'

li ter

monarclcium obt inebat . Qua duas babu i t natas . , M arotiam a tqueTli eodoram s ibi non solum caquales , verum et iam vener i s exerci t io

prampt iares . Liutprand . An tapodos is , ii . c. 48.

3 The error of confusing A lber icu s M arc/t ia with Albertus 772. has

occas ioned great perplexity, Tuscany being confounded at the same

t ime with Tusculum . The I tal ians , who make Alber ic a Roman ,

ought to produce a Roman bearing the name, —a name which was as


undoubtedly Lombard ancestors,who dwe l t e ither

in Spoletan or Tuscan territory, pe rhaps in Horta .

He himse lf, howeve r, make s his appearance as vassa lunder the banner of Guido in 889 ; a banne r whichhe afterwards de serted to seek his fortune underthe rising star Of Berengar . He was the predece ssorof the condottie ri (such as the ancestor of the Sforzafamily in Milan), who appeared in I taly at a later age .

He became Margrave , perhaps of Camerino, and as

early as 897 bore the title of Marchio? Whethe ror not he acquired posse ssion of the dukedom ofSpole to by means of setting aside the last he ir ofthe re igning house

,i s unce rta in . No period could

possibly have been more favourable to the rise of anambitious man than the period which gave birth tothe se factions

,late r destined to be perpe tuated as

the scourge of I taly. Alberic suddenly appears as

common in Lombardy as Adelbert , Hilderic, Albuin , Alifred , Bonipert( I be lieve the Bonapartes to be Lombards of this name) . A lber icusfi l.Adelfus i ( Cod. Fa7f . Sessor . 2 18 . n . Albericus , M issus of a

Lombard judex (n . Albericus,scabinus , A .D . 897 (n .

A . D . 997, Albericus, Abbot of Farfa .

1 That Alberic was an upstar t and that he aimed at the lordship of

Camerino,we learn from the Paneg . B er eng ,

lib . ii

P auper adlzuc A lbr icus abi t, j am j amque r esu lta t .

Spe Camer ina . Utinam dives s ine mor te soda lis .

These lines hint at an ent ire history. The g loss to the poem saysthat he had s lain Wido of Camerino . The Farfa documents (Fatteschi ,n . 57) call him Comes about 800 tempor ib. Alber ici Comi t is a . ej u s I V.

m . M ar t i i I nd . I I I .

,Nos . 58, 59 the year 9 14 is reckoned as his 25th

year . Scheid (Or ig in . Guelff‘

,i . lib . 2) believes that he had his

res idence in Horta . There were Marchiones de Orta even in the t ime

of O tto I I I . ( ib. p . 138) while however , a Margravate of Horta is not

known in the beginn ing of sece. x . A lber ic may, however , have reallybeen Comes ofHorta .

H ISTORY OF ROME

one of Rome ’s most influential ne ighbours,and then

as taking part in the affairs of the city. During thescene s of bloodshed , amid which Sergius rose to S .

Peter’

s Cha ir,his name remains unmentioned . The

dange rous upstart had neverthe less been implicatedin the interests of TheOphy lact . He entered into anintrigue with Marozia and married her ? Thismarriage must have taken place previous to the year

9 1 5, and must have been arranged e ithe r by Sergiusthe Third or John the Tenth

,in order to convert a

doubtful ne ighbour into a friend ?

Theophylact , and afte r him Alberic,introduced a

new epoch in Roman history,or

,more correctly

speaking,the wive s of these two men subjugated the

city and he ld it unde r the ir Spe l l for a considerablelength of time . In the history of the Popes , to which ,as to a monaste ry or temple , only holy women shouldhave acce ss , these intriguing and voluptuous figure spre sent a profane spectacle . However exagge ratedmay be the te rms which various write rs in a spirit ofpe tty ma l ice have adopted when describing this darkperiod Of history, the fact neve rthe less rema ins that,even to the eyes of dismayed Cathol ics , the Churchof that time appeared l ike a brothe l ? The fact

1 Accep i t una de nobi libus Roman is , cuj us nomine superest , l eopbi

lact ifi lia , non quasi uxor , sed in consuetudinem ma lignam thus Ben.

of Soracte . But could the proud Theophylact have consented to suchconcubinage ?

2 1 do not hold , with Duret , that the family of Theophylact was

host ile to Serg ius. For how then could the report of his intrig ue withMarozia have ar isen P I bel ieve Serg ius to have been a member of the

family in which his name was preserved .

3 Liutprand borrows the epithets scor tum and meretr ices for his

H ISTORY OF ROME

achieved in the name Of Christ ian mora l ity over thepassions of a king

,prince s and bishops repl ied by an

outbreak of vices,old and new? The same condi

t ions of unbridled excess preva i led in Rome,and in

the patrimonies where wealthy and sensua l nobles ,secular or spiritual

,had sprung up in every district.

Out Of a process of decomposition such as this these

women arose . They repre sent no isolated case s .

O the r beautifu l women headed factions in othe rparts of I taly . A Theodora or a Marozia of thetenth century is not human ised by the outward Showof classic cu lture , such as that which surroundsLucre zia Borgia

,the daughte r of a later Pope . These

Roman women were probably unable e ither to read orwrite

,and

,l iving in a time ofu tte r mora l barbarism ,

can only be measured by the age to which theybe longed ? I t was , howeve r, an age scarce ly moreimmora l than the refined period of a Cathe rine O f

Russia or a Pompadour. In the re s tricted c i rcle ofthe R oman world we have i n Theodora andMarozia no later Mes salinas

,but ambitious women

of great inte l l igence and courage , cove tous a l ike ofpower and pleasure . The i r striking figure s awakenour astonishment, and form a curious inte rruption tothe Cloistral monotony of the history Of the Papacy.

1 In the Acts of the Council of Trosle we may read the descriptiong iven by Heriveus , Archbishop ofRhe ims , of the undiscip l ined life of theclergy ; see Labbe, Conci l . , xi . 73 1 .

2 In 945 Marozza and Stephania, daughters of the younger Theodora ,put the ir marks to a d iploma as unable to write S zgmtm "

I' man u

suprascr ipta M a rozza nobi l. femina donatr icequ i supr a lra Tn . ( that isto say, li tera nescia) , and s imilarly Stephania . Marini

, n . C. p . 157 .

FR IGHTFUL DEVASTATION INFLICTED BY THE SARACENS—DESTRUCTION OF FARFA SUBIACO SARACENSTRONGHOLDS IN THE CAMPAGNA— JOHN X . OFFERSBERENGAR THE IMPERIAL CROWN BERENGAR

’

S

ENTRY INTO ROME—H IS CORONATION EARLY IN

DECEM BER,”

9 1 5 .

John the Tenth ascended S . Pe te r’s Cha i r in the John XSpring of Although he owed the Papal dignity

92

13 0

8122 7 9 14

directly to the favour of Theodora and the influence 9

Of the Consul TheOphylact , he was no compla isantcourtier

,but on the contrary showed himse lf of SO

vigorous and independent a Character as to surpassthe fame Of his predecessor, John the E ighth

,and to

prove himse lf the foremost statesman of the age .

Precise ly at this time Rome was fi lled with dismay Raidsby the news of fresh inroads of the Saracens se ttled $2256 “on the Garigl iano . A tenulf of Benevento

,Landulf of

Capua, Guaimar of Sale rno, had in va in made war

aga inst them . The brigand horde s cont inued toravage Campania

,the Sabina

,and Tuscany. There

was no e loquent voice , such as that of John the

E ighth,to de scribe the suffe rings of these province s ;

but document s of Sergius the Third give utte rance tothe outcry which arose ove r the de solat ion infl icted onthe Campagna . Thanks to the honourable exertionsof earlie r Popes

,Rome itse l f was protected by its

wal l s. The surrounding district,howeve r

,had been

entire ly burnt by the Saracens,and more than one

1 Duret placed the consecrat ion of John X . in the second half ofMarch Lowenfeld (Jaffe, R. P . 2 somet ime in March .

HISTORY OF ROME

deserted church ( in deser tis pos i ta ,or des tructo ) in the

ne ighbourhood of the city is mentioned in diplomasof the t ime . The Sabine territory

,with its wea lthy

abbeys , had been repeatedly devastated . The Impe rialmonastery of Farfa was

,next to the Lombard Non

antula, the most beauti ful monastery in I taly. I t s

splendid church,dedicated to the virgin , was sur

rounded by five othe r basil icas . An Impe rial palaceand nume rous dwe l l ing-house s stood within its precincts . Both inside and outside the build ing werecolonnades (arcus deambula tor i i ) destined for the

pleasant exercise Of the monks,and the whole abbey

was surrounded ’ by wal l s and towers l ike a fortifiedcity ? I f we examine the va luable parchment manuscript of the Farfa Reges ta prese rved in the Vatican ,and read the s ix fol io page s which

,in minute

characters , conta in the catalogue of e state s , fortresses ,churche s and vi l las be longing to the monaste ry in theSabino

,in the March of Fe rmo

,in the Roman terri

tory,and even within the city itse l f

,the l ist seems

rathe r that of the possessions of some powerfulprincipal ity. The administrat ion of the domainswould have demanded an army of Officials ; thevassals , howeve r, great and pe tty L

barons of Centra lI taly, who rented the estates

,re l ieved the Abbot from

the burthensome re sponsibil ity ? From the middle

1 L iber Destruction is Fa 77¥2nsis , by the Abbot Hugo ( p. editedby the mer itorious Bethmann M on . Germ. , t . xiii .

2 He equ ipped a vesse l which had access to the ports of the Emp irefree of duty. Privil. of Lothar of 18th Dec. 882

,Reg . Far/i , n . 28 1

Unam navim concess imus,&c. The taxes to which vessels were then

subject are characteristic of the barbar ism of the t ime nu llam

telonat icum,aut r ipaticum, par aticum, pontaticum, salu tat icum

,ces

H ISTORY OF ROME

costumes and customs Of its inhabitants , sti l l standson its rocky mounta in ridge behind Tivol i . I t s

name is de rived from the Arabs who entrenchedthemse lves he re in the n inth century.

1On the other

s ide Of the mounta in l ie s , amid the rocky rece sse s

of the Sabines,Cicil iano, which in the days of John

the Tenth was a lso a stronghold of the Saracens?

Trave l le rs coming from the north to Rome foundthe i r way barred by the Spanish Moors who had beense ttled at Frejus or Frax ine tum s ince 89 1 . Did theysucceed in purchas ing the i r freedom , they fe l l intothe hands of the Saracens on the roads of Narni ,R ieti

,or Nep i . No pilgrim any longer succeeded in

bringing his gifts to Rome . And this re ign of terrorlasted for thirty years . All centra l authority had

ceased in the provinces , where every town , everyfortress

, eve ry abbey was abandoned to itse l f ?

John the Tenth at last took compassion on hiscoun try and became the de l iverer of I ta ly . The

infidels had no greate r enemy than this Pope , whomade i t h is m ission to rescue Rome and the Churchitse lf. He ca l led to mind al l that the Impe rial powe r

1 N ibby (Anal. , iii . 6 1 ) says that Arab ic names are st ill heard inthis neighbourhood , such , for instance , as Mastorre

,Argante , Morgante ,

Marocco , Merant , Manasse,Margutte . A second Saracinesco , formerly

a Moor ish fortress,st ill s tands in the diocese of Monte Casino .

Bened . Of Soracte,c. 29 : A udien tes Sar r acen is

, qu i er at in

N arn iens i comi ta to,Or tense

,et qu i or an t in Cica li , &c. The deriva

t ion of Fatteschi (Ser ie, &c . , p . 246) from Equicoli seems to be rightin some of the Farfa documents belong ing to the year 762 we find in

E cicu lis here the I-Equ i lived in former t imes, and the district wascalled casta ldatus E quanus .

3 P eg naverun t Aggar en is in Romano r egna ann i 30 , r edacta est terr a

in soli tudine. Pened . of Soracte , c. 27.

l I “ fi \ l


had once been able to e ffect. He remembered theuniversa l summons unde r Lewis the Second , who hadsuccessful ly led the I ta l ians aga inst the Saracens .He behe ld the eve r increas ing decl ine of pol it ica lorder

, the ruin of which must involve the ruin ofRome

, and would leave the city the prey of theboldest or most fortunate of the princes . He the refore resolved to restore the Imperia l powe r

,as John

the Ninth had done . The blind Lewis,i t i s t rue

,st i l l

bore the Imperia l t it le in Provence,but his cla im

had no longer any value in I ta ly. The northernpart of the country was swayed

,on the other hand

,

by the mild sceptre of Berengar, who was now,

as Lambert had previously been , the hope of thenationa l party. The Pope declared himse lf in favourof this party ; and afte r he had assured himse l f Of thesuccess of his design ,

he de cided to be stow the crownon Berengar , i n orde r through him to e stablish an

independent Ita l ian empire .

Berengar, summoned by Papal messenge rs, set John K.

forth for Rome in November. His solemn reception summons

Berengar

shows that the Pope had ga ined the vote of the to be

crownedRomans , and that the rul ing faction was that of the EmperorI tal ians . An unknown poe t of the Court , an ey e

witness , has minute ly de scribed the entrance and

coronation of his roya l maste r. His sonorous hexame ters , an isolated product of I taly’s now impov

erished muse , modestly adorned with flowers fromVirgil and Statius

,remind us of the ‘

en trance ofHonorius , once ce lebrated by Claudian ? Berengar

1 The P anog . B ereng . Imp . was written by a Lombard grammarianshortly before the death of the Emperor ; it was brought to light by

264 HISTORY OF ROME

l ike his predecessors , advanced across the NeronianFie ld under Monte Mario ; the noble s or Senate and

the city mil it ia gree ted him with the customarylaudes , and the poet remarks

o

that the ir lance s wereornamented with images of wild animals

,i .e.

,with

eagles,l ions

,wolve s , and the heads of dragons

?The

Scholae were present as usual,and at the i r head the

poe t,i nspired by reverence for C lassic antiqu ity

,

places the Scholae of the Greeks,with its Daedal ian

hymn of pra ise .

”The rema in ing companies sa luted

Be rengar, each in its nat ive tongue . The homage oftwo white-robed and distinguished youths

,name ly

,

Pe te r,the Pope’s brother

,and the son of the Consul

Theophy lact , d id not e scape the notice of the poet .While the Pope and the Consul of the Romans are

here placed toge the r s ide by side (one sending hisbrothe r

,the othe r his son , to mee t the King) , they

appear a lmost as two powers , the aristocracy standingbes ide the Papacy in the guise of a c ivi c powe r.

Adr ian Valesius (Par is , Pr inted in M on . Germ. , iv. ; most

correctly by Dummler , Ges ta B er . Imp . ,Halle , 187 1 . The poet indi

cates the pressure of the Saracens

Summus erat pastor tunc tempor is Urbej obannes ,Ofi cio afia t im claru s sopbiaque r ep letu s ,

A tque diu ta lem mer i to servatu s ad usum .

Quatenus lzu icprobibebat apes vicina Cbarybdis ,P u rpu ra quas dedera t maj or am spon te bea to,L imina qu i r eser at cast i s r u t i lan tia , Petra .

1 P rafig ens sudibus r ictu s s ine carne fer arum . The reg ions hadtheir badges . Henry V . was received by aqu i lifer i , leon ifer i , lupzfer i ,dr acanar i i ; Cli ron . Cas in . ,

iv . 0 . 37 . In the 0rdo Rom.

,xi . and

x iii . the standard-bearers are already called mi li tes draconar i i , portan tes X I I . vex i lla

, qua bandora vocan tu r (Mabillon, M us . I t . , ii .and s imply 12 bandonar i i cum 12 vex i llis r ubeis (p . This

then in saec. xii . and xiii .

HISTORY OF ROME

for unity, independence , and internal order, while thePope reckoned on the energetic activity of the new

Emperor.

CAMPAIGN AGAINST THE SARACENS—BATTLES IN THE

SAB INA AND CAMPAGNA—TREATY BETWEEN JOHNX . AND THE PRINCES OF SOUTHERN ITALYANN IH ILATION OF THE SARACEN FORCES ON THE

GAR IGLIANO IN AUGUST 9 1 6—THE POPE AND ALBER ICRETURN TO ROME— POS ITION OF ALBERIC— OVERTHRow OF BERENGAR—ITS CONSEQUENCES IN ROMEUNCERTAINTY CONCERN ING ALBERIC’S END .

The re sults of Berengar’

s coronation showedthemse lve s in the bril l iant campaign which was

immediate ly undertaken aga inst the Saracens . The

awakening spirit of national ity animated and unitedthe I tal ians

,so that they streamed forth in crowds to

follow the banner in this honourable crusade . The

new Emperor did not, however, place himse l f at the i rhead . Afte r having come to an agreement with the

prince s of Southe rn I ta ly and the Byzantines respecting a common enterprise aga inst the Saracens

,he was

cal led by urgent affa irs to the northern province s ?

He placed troops , howeve r, at the disposal of thePope ; name ly, the Tuscans unde r the MargraveAda lbert

,and the force s of Spoleto and Camerino

led by Alberic. The great league had been formedsucce ssfully. The prince s of Southern I ta ly were

united ; even the Byzantine Emperor suppressed his

1 The Chron icon Duc. Neapol . in Prattilli ( t . iii H ist . P r inc.

which describes these part iculars, is a fiction .


resentment and extended his hand to the Emperor ofthe Romans . The young Constantine had equippeda fleet and placed it under the command of thestrategist

,Nicholas P icing li. As a great part of

Calabria and Apulia aga in obeyed the Greeks, whocontinued to cal l the ir posse ssions in these parts bythe name of Lombardy, the Byzantine governmentdesired to appear prepared for war in Southern I taly ?

Picing li brought the sti l l cove ted title of Pat ricius tothe Dukes of Gae ta and Naple s in the spring of 9 16 .

He induced the se forme r friends of the Saracens totake part in the league

,and then stationed his flee t The united

off the mouth of the Garigl iano, while the army offigmflegéue

Southern Ita ly took up its position be low the Saracen 12YS S iegeto the

fortress on the seaward S ide . Landwards the troops Fortressadvanced

,led by John in pe rson . The Pope

,with &g

’

g

’

i aminde fatigable energy

,had collected the Roman mil itia

from Latium,Roman Tuscany

,the Sabina

,and all his

other states,and had united them with the troops sent

by Tuscany and Spole to . The army was under thecommand of Theophy lact and Alberic

,who probably

acted as gene ra ls ? The Saracens,ove rpowe red by

superior numbers , were driven out of the Sabina ,where

,and in Latin Campan ia , the first struggles took

1 The Thema Aoyy eBapMa s is the e leventh European theme in

the sys tem of Constantine Porphyrogenetos , and had apparently Bar i asits capital . Schlumberger, S igi llog raplt ie dc l

’

Emp i r e By zant in , Paris ,1884, p . 2 17.2 P apa j ob. (here confused with Joh . X I . ) und ique bost ium gen tes

cong regar i j uss i t in unum, et non tan tum Romanum exerci tum

,sed et

Tu scos , Spoletinosque in suum suf rag ium condux i t . Anon. Saleru . ,

c. 143 . The s ilence of the Panegyr . concern ing A lberic on the occas ionof the Imperial coronat ion shows that at this t ime he had no posit ionin the city.

HISTORY OF ROME

place . The Lombards of R ieti under Ag iprand threwthemse lves on the enemy at Trevi . The mil itia ofSutri and Nepi fought brave ly at Baccano unti l theMohammedans we re compe l led to fly to the Garigl iano, whither the ir d istre ssed bre thren might , apartfrom this , have summoned them . I t appears thatJohn had ga ined a victory near Tivol i and Vicovaro ,the remembrance of which sti l l l ingers in tradition ?

He me t the prince s of Lowe r I taly at Te rracina and

concluded a forma l treaty with them,these astute

rule rs demanding compensation for the i r share i n theleagu e . The Pope was obl iged to renounce severa lc la ims of the Church in Southe rn Campan ia . John ,Duke of Gaeta

,rece ived

,bes ide the patrimonie s in

Trae t to,the duchy of Fundi . Both these te rritorie s

had long been in the posse ssion of the Roman Church,

and by it had been administe red through lay officia l sbearing the title of coun t or consul and dux ? Johnthe E ighth

,howeve r

,unde r s imilar circumstance s

,had

ceded them to Docibilis and John of Gae ta,and John

the Tenth now found himse lf obl iged to confirm the

donation . The cession was concluded in the campof the a l l ied armie s on the Garigl iano . The Roman

1 The battle in the Sabina is described by Benedict of Soracte, c. 29 .

Tr ibu lana is probab ly the ancient Trevi . Mart in . Po lon . ,Dandolo and

Amalr . Auger, speak of a victory of John p rope P omanam Urbenz.

The tradit ion of the monastery of S . Cosimato near Vicovaro may referto i t .

2 The archives of the Cod. D ipl . Caj etanus in Monte Casino ment ionfor the year 84 1 , E nee Grosso Consu l cl Rector P atr imon i i Cafetan i ;85 1 , M ercur ius Consu l et D ux P a tr im. Traj ectan i . Long after thecession of Traetto the family of the Lombard count

,D aufer ius , Lando,

Ederad and M ar ina s , are found in the neighbourhood . The same

Cod . shows that there were duces at Fundi.

Defeatof theSaracens

in the

Summer

of 9 16.

John X .

and Albericre turn in

triumph toRome.

H ISTORY OF ROME

The attack upon the Saracen entrenchments beganin June 9 16 . The infidels defended themse lve s Obs t inate ly for two months . Having no prospect o f

re l ie f from Sici ly,they final ly resolved to make the i r

e scape to the mounta ins . One night they s e t fire tothe ir camp and rushed out

,but e i the r fe l l under the

sword of the infuriated Christians or were thrown intoimprisonment such as had e scaped to the mountainswere there put to death . The den of robbers on theGarigl iano

,which had been the te rror of I ta ly for

more than thirty years , was thus at last annihilated .

I ts destruction constitute s the most honourablenationa l achievement of the I ta l ians during the tenthcentury

,as the victory at O stia had been its greatest

triumph in the ninth ?

John the Tenth now returned to Rome l ike a herofrom a Punic war. Chroniclers are S i lent with regardto the thanksgiving fe stiva l i n the city and the en

trance of the l iberator. The Pope must have beenpre ceded by a troop of captive Saracens , led intriumph and we may be sure that , with the MargraveAlberic by his side , and at the head of the Romandukes and consuls

,he made his entry by one of

the southe rn gates , amid the acclamations of the

1 Leo of Ostia, who Speaks of Alberic, i . c. 52, wrong ly g ives August9 15 , I nd . I I I . , instead of 9 16, I nd . I V. Previously

,however, he says

j ob . X . tr icenn io an te Ramam invaser at . Lupus Protosp . , about 1088

(M on . Germ. , a . 9 16 ex ier un t Sar acen i de Gar i liano. Lintprand cursori ly ment ions this batt le, An tapod ,

i i. c. 52 Cbron .

Farf. Cbron . S . Vincent ; Bened . of Soracte . John X. himselfannounced his victory to Hermann, Archbishop of Cologne ; Flosz ,Leon is

, P . VI I I . pr ivi leg . , p . 105 in Dummler , Gescb . der ostfr c’

znb .

Ka i ser , ii . , 60 1. He had twice encountered the Saracens in person .


peOple .

1 Alberic,greeted with every mark of dis t inc

tion by the city, must have demanded and rece ived a

recompense . I t i s probable that the Pope not onlyrewarded him with estate s

,but a l so bestowed upon

him the dignity of Consul of the Romans. A shorttime before he had married Marozia

,daughte r of the

Senator Theophylact , and afte r the victory at the

Garigl iano he was assured of an influent ia l positionin Rome ? We must adm it

,howeve r, that we know

nothing of Alberic ’s act ions,nothing even of his many

years ’ sojourn in the city. The Senator Theophy lacta lso is lost to sight . I t is sa id that Alberic ’s son wasborn in the family palace on the Aven t ine

,and the re

the Margrave and Consul may have dwe lt . As longas Berengar

’

s power endured , and Rome rema inedunde r the ene rge tic rule of the pope who was friendlyto Berengar, no opportunity could have been offeredAlberic for the furtherance of his ambitious designs .On the contrary, he probably remained for someyears the chief support of the Pope .

The condition of affa irs in I taly was meanwhile

1 Bened. of Soracte (c. 29 ) express ly mentions Alberic with the

Pope as heroes of the war . E t preliaverun t p relium onagnum et

victares j obannes X . papa , et A lber icu s mar cbiones,li onor iyfce suscep

tum A lber icus marcb io a Romano popu lo. He extols him as elang i

forme (elegan ti s forma ) .2 Bened . of Soracte (c. 29) says that he became the lover of Theophy

lact’

s daughter I, however , place the date of this intimacy some years

earlier . H is son Alberic became ruler of Rome in 932 ,— i f on ly born

in 9 17 , he would consequently have only been 15 years of age. Mybelief is that John X. effected a marriage between Theodora

’

s daughterand Alberic when he became Pope , therefore in 9 14. I t is a remarkable fact that Bened. of Soracte never mentions Marozia by name .

Leo of Ostia, i . c. 61, calls Alber ic Consul of the Romans .

272 HISTORY OF ROME

changed by a violent revolution . The restless noblesof Tuscany and Lombardy, headed by Adalbert,Margrave of Ivrea ( the husband OfBerengar

’

s daughte rGise la), rose i n arms aga inst the Emperor. Thesepetty tyrants rid iculed Ital ian nationa l ity, or rathe rpossessed no conception of the idea , nor cherishedany higher interest than the i r own individual a ims .l nstigated by the ancient curse

, the de sire Of riddingthemse lve s of one maste r by means of another

,they

aga in invited a fore igne r into the country. Andagain it was I ta l ian prince s and bishops who needle ssly de stroyed the hOpe Of I tal ian independence

,

and sold the ir country to the strange r. The annal sof no othe r nation reveal a pol icy so d isastrous as

the pol icy pursued by I ta ly during a long courseof centurie s . I f i t cannot be denied that the Pope sfavoured I tal ian disunion

,sti l l the Popes we re not

alone and a lways gui lty. On the contrary,it must

candidly be adm itted that during a long period thePapacy was the sole powe r in I ta ly

,even in a poli tical

aspect,and that in its absence the country would

have sunk into ye t deeper distress .The innocent John the Tenth s aw the work which

he had created fal l to ru in . Rudolf,king of Cisalpine

Burgundy,crossed the Alps to take the offe red crown .

We make no attempt to describe the battles whichtook place be tween Berengar and Rudolf and the

I tal ian rebe l s , but only remark in passing that theunfortunate Empe ror was forced into treachery tohis country

,and in his despa i r summoned the dreaded

Hungarians to his aid . The Hungarians burnt Pavia,

the ancient seat Of the Lombard monarchy, which

I I ISTORY OF ROME

confused as to present but a labyrinth to the student,and are s i lent regarding Albe ric. Since

,howeve r, i t

l ie s in the nature of things that an ambitious man

should have se i zed the Opportunity to increase hispowe r

,and i f it must in al l reason be assumed that he

was goaded on by the ambition of his wife Maroz ia, ,

we may fa irly conclude that after the death of theEmpe ror he desi red the now vacant Patriciate . We

may be l ieve that, as late r chroniclers assert,he

quarre l led with the Pope,that he se i zed the gove rn

ment of the city,and ruled Rome with de spoti c power,

unti l the shrewd pon tiff,with the he lp of the Romans ,

succeeded in driving the a l ien from the C i ty. Further,that Albe ri c then defended himse l f in Horta

,probably

the chie f place in his possessions,that he summoned

the Hungarians to his aid,and that he was attacked

and sla in i n his fortress by the infuriated Romanmilit ia ? I t i s on ly too ce rta in that the horde s of theMagya rs now la id waste the Roman Campagna

,and

hence forward repeatedly appeared before the gate sof the city ?

1 Sed pos tea d i scord ia in terven ien te marcbio ex u rbe expu lsus in Or ta

Castr um ex tr uens ibi se r ecepi t—this , it is true , is only related by Mart inPolon . ,

P tol . Lucensis, Ricobald , Bern . Guidonis , Leo of Como, Gal

vaneus , Plat ina, Sigonius . Muratori,An t iclz. E stens i

,I . c . 23 . Pro

vana also believes in Alberic’s defect ion .

2 A document of the year 1044 says for i s pon te Salar i o ubi dici tu r

due sor or e et por tu ungar i scu Galletti , M scr . Vat . , 8048 , p . 127.

Bened . of Soracte (c. 29 , 30 ) represents the Hungarians as summoned

by Peter F r at—P etru s mar clziones germanus—papa . Tal is odium et

r ixa in ter P amanos et marcbio, u t non in u rbem R . ingr edi deber et

ing ressus P . marc/zio in civi tas Or tuense—edifi cavi t castr umfi rmiss imus ,

et p lus magi s sevieban t r oman i cl amp lius P . m . a rbam B . non es t ausus

ingr edi . S tat imque nun t ius t ransmis i t ad unga r or um g ens—ungaror .


Alberi c’s end rema ins ve i led in myste ry. His name ,his ambit ion ,

his courage and shrewdness he be

queathed, howeve r, to his more fortunate son , to whom

Rome was a few years later forced to yie ld Obedience ?

g ens in I talia ing r ess i sunt,s imu l cum . P . marenia in u rbem P .

ing ressus est . He descr ibes a battle between the Romans and the

Hungarians outs ide the Porta S . G iovann i in the t ime of John XI . ,and

says that the Lombard Joseph (probably Dux of the Sabina) ann ihilatedthe enemy at R iet i . Liveran i ho lds that Alber ic , having separated fromMarozia , hadfled with Pe ter to Horta that the populace had afterwards

put Peter (who had returned to the city) to death at the Lateran , and

had then likewise put A lber ic to death at Horta. Liutprand , however ,contradicts this sequence of events

,and Bened ict ’s account is u tterly

confused . I t was only afterAlber ic’s death that Marozia marr ied Gu ido ,and not unt il then (928) d id Pe ter and the Pope fa ll . But if A lber ichad been dr iven for th by Marozia and the Tusculans , how is i t poss iblethat he could have been ,

as L iveran i supposes , head of the Tusculanfamily1 Bes ides the Placitum of Corneto near Fermo, where in 9 10 Wald i

pert appears as Vicecomes A lber ici M arcbion is ( Cbron . Casau r . Murat,

ii . 2 , and besides a notice of some donat ions of A lber ic (Cbron .

Farfl , p . I know of no document concerning him . Innumerablegenealog ical trees represent him as head of the fam ily of Tusculum .

The Regest . Fa7f . does not ment ion Counts of Tusculum. Bened . of

Soracte is only acquainted with the Marchio Albericus . I t is thereforeabsurd to call Alberic

,as Duret calls him

, Count of Tuscu lum . For the

first t ime in 999 , Gregory i s Spoken of as“ Tusculanus .

”I have

carefully exam ined Galletti’s manuscr ipt (S tor ia Geneal . de

’Cont i

Tuscu l. , de’Stefanescbi , P apar escbi , N ormann i

,Cod . Vat . , 8042

and honour the insight of the man , who at that t ime knew nothing of

Tusculan Counts . So likewise Murator i and Coppi .

H ISTORY OF ROME

5 . RUDOLF OF BURGUNDY IS EXPELLED FROM THE

COUNTRY— FEM IN INE INTRIGUES WITH REGARD To

HUGO— JOHN X . FORM S A TREATY WITH HUGOMAROZ IA MARR IES GU IDO OF TUSCANY— PERPLEX IT IES OF JOHN X .

—BAN I SHMENT OF H IS BROTHERPETER REVOLUTION IN ROME MURDER OF

PETER —FALL AND DEATH OF JOHN X .

Rudolf of Burgundy meanwhile only re ta ined the

crown of I ta ly for three years . He was then ove rthrown by a powe rful faction headed by I rmengard

,

the second wife and now the widow of Ada lbe rt ofIvrea . In order to unde rstand the complex deve lopments of Roman history

, we are forced to introduce a

multitude of people,and to de scribe the re lations

which they bore to one anothe r. The charms of thece lebrated Waldrada had been inhe rit ed by her

de scendan ts the flame s ofpassion burnt with increasedstrength in her children and grandchildren

,and kindled

the length and breadth of I ta ly. Her daughte rBertha

,the child of an

'

illicit pass ion,had married

Count Theoba ld of Provence,and by him had become

the mothe r of Hugo . As a widow Bertha capt ivatedAdalbert the Second , the rich Margrave of Tuscany.

She married him and bore him three children , Guido,Lambe rt and I rmengard . The extraordinary in

fluence which she possessed in Tuscany she bequeathedto her Tuscan chi ldren . She had striven to acquire

the crown of I ta ly for Hugo of Provence , the favourite

son of he r first marriage . Death in 9 2 5 preventedthe fulfi lment of her design , but the scheme was taken

HISTORY OF ROME

howeve r, dece ived himse l f as to the re sult both of hisj ourney and his negotiations

,for Maroz ia

’

s powe r nowbecame more formidable than eve r. Scarce ly was thewidow of Alberic aware that Hugo was about tore ce ive the crown of I taly

,when

,with prudent fore

s ight, she tu rned her thoughts towards his powerfulstep—brothe r . She offered her hand to Gu ido , there igning Margrave of Tuscany ; and Guido on hispart scorned ne ither the rich Senatrix of Rome , northe inviting prospect of dominion ove r the city. The

faction of Theophy lact or of Marozia , which hadforme rly favoured nationa l inte re sts unde r Berengar,thus sided with

_the Tuscan s , who chiefly worked for

the e levation of the Provengal prince .

The pe rplexed Pope only re turned to Rome to fal la V i ctim to his opponents . During two stormy yearshe he ld his own aga inst the sword of the enemy

,and

the fact affords a striking proof of his prudence and

valour. His support, his armed prop was his brotherPe te r

,who has a l ready come prominen t ly forward on

the occasion of Berengar’

s coronation . John,i t i s

be l ieved , had s et Pe te r a t the head of the civicgovernment

,and afte r Alberic’s death had made him

consul of the Romans . I t was apparently Pete r wholed the {Romans aga inst Alberic

,and having van

qu ished his Opponent, conque red Horta . The

chronicle r of Soracte even cal ls him Margrave , andunless the chronicler confuses him with Alberic

, we

may suppose that Pe te r had appropriated the latte r’ s

title and possess ions . The meagre records of thet ime significantly remark that he stood in the way of

the faction that wished to overthrow the Pope in


o rder to place a creature of the ir own upon the Papal

c ha ir, and to rule Rome ? Guido and Marozia , whoo n the i r s ide a imed at the Patric iate

,we re by no

means as ye t rule rs of the city. They managed, howeve r

,to conceal t roops in Rome

,and these troops

one day attacked the Late ran . If we may be l ieve Fall of

the chronicle rs,Pete r had previously been banished {fiffugfi

to Horta ; he had summoned the Hungarian s , hadappeared with them be fore Rome

,and had now of M arozia,

rej oined his brothe r in the La te ran . He was cut926°

down by the people in sight of the Pope John himse l f was se ized by Guido’s mercenaries and thrown byMarozia into S . Ange lo . The Roman

.

people,i rritated

by the devastation of the country by the Hungarians ,cal led in i n the first instance by Albe ric

,in the second

by Pe ter,and ha i l ing with joy every change in the

government and in the Papacy,supported the revolu

tion . This revolution,of which unhappily we know

so l ittle,took place in June or July 9 28 . The Pope

died in the following year,having been e i ther strangled

or starved to death in prison ?

1 Wido in ter ea,Tuscia provincia marclzio, cum M ar acia uxor e sua

dej obann is papa dej ect ione cep i t vebemen ter t ractar e, a tque bocp rop teri nvidiam

,quam P etrafr atr i papa babeban t

,quon iam i llum papa s icu t

fr a tr em pr op7 ium bonor abat . Liu tpr . ,iii . c . 43 . H e i s therefore

unaware of Pe ter’s being dr iven to Horta and all this took p lace after

the death ofA lber ic.

2 The account is g iven by Liutprand , Bened . of Soracte (c . 29) alsoknew of the attack in the Lateran Roman i in i r a commot i unan imi ter

ad pala t ium Lateran . p roper antes , in terfecto P etr a mar cbio,ad aposto

l icos nu llu s adt igi t . He previously sa id, that Peter,after he had

summoned the Hungarians , had come from Hor ta to Rome. ThatMarozia was accessory to the death of the Pope is asser ted not on ly byLiutprand, but in the year 929 by Flodoard : dum a quadam poten t i

H ISTORY OF ROME

Thus a strange and undeserved fate ove rtook thebenefactor of Rome . Two women

,a mother and

daughte r, stand at one and the othe r end of his

pont ifical caree r ; Theodora who bestowed the Papa lcrown upon him ,

and Marozia who deprived him bothof crown and l i fe . The circumstance s of his e levationand his connection with these infamous women havecaused all eccle siast i ca l writers

,more e special ly

Baron iu s,to execrate his memory. John the Tenth

,

however, the man whose s ins are known only byreport

,whose great qua l ities are conspicuous in history

,

stands forth amid the darkne ss of the time as one o f

the most memorable figure s among the Popes . The

acts of the history of the Church pra ise his activity,

his re lations with eve ry country of Christendom .

And s ince he had confirmed the strict ru le of Cluny,

they furthe r extol him as one of the reformers of

monast i c ism . His attempts to adj ust the affa irs ofI ta ly

,with the he lp of Berengar, we re pra iseworthy,

and the honour of having de l ive red his country fromthe Saracens by the great league adds glory to hisname .

Rome pre se rve s no monument of his re ign . I t is

sa id that he fin i shed the Late ran basil ica,and decor

fem ina—M aracia p r inczpa tu p r ivatus s ub cus todia det iner etur,

u t

qu idam vi,u t p lu r es astruun t , actus angore def ungi tu r

—thus in hisverses P atr icia deceptus in iqua . Cbr on . S . B enedict i ab i llis

occu lto D ei j udicio tamen j usto vivus depos i tus es t ; ano ther redactionvivus laqueo confectus es t . A trad it ion re lates that the Pope was firstdragged to S . Leucio in Verol i, and then put to death in Rome. Intro

duct ion to the S tatu to di Veroli in Liveran i p . 535 . Liu tpr . aj un ten im, quad cer vical super os ej u s imponer en t , s icque cum pess ime

suf ocar en t . The A nnal . B eneven t . ( IPI . Germ. , v) in castro

j ug u la tu s .

C H AP T E R I I .

1 . LEO VI . AND STEPHEN VI I .—THE SON OF MAROZ IA

SUCCEEDS To THE PAPACY As JOHN X1.—K1NG

HUGO MAROZIA OFFERS H IM ROME AND HER

HAND— THE IR MARRIAGE—S. ANGELO—REVOLUTIONIN ROME—THE YOUNG ALBER IC SEIZES THE RE INSOF POWER .

TWO shadowy Popes succeeded John the Tenth,

creature s doubtless of the now all-powerfu l Marozia,who

,on account of his youth

,dared not y et place her

Leo VI . , own son upon the Papa l cha i r. Leo the Sixth, son of

5252 928

“

the P rimicerius Christopher,only re igned for a few

months . His predece ssor,so V iolently deposed

,sti l l

langu ished in prison . Leo was succeeded by Stephenthe Seventh , a Roman a l so ; but a l though the latterPope fi lled the Apostolic Cha i r for upwards of two

Stephen years (until February or March the events of hisre ign are unrecorded, 1 and the existence of these twoPope s rema ins buried in darkness so profound that

1 Ca tal . Va t . , 134o,'

g ives Leo VI . seven months . Ca ta l. Vat . , 2953of s sec . xii . , 6 mon ths and 13 days . Catal. Va t . , 136 1 , 7 months and

15 days . Catal . M ont . Cas . ,257 , 5 months and 12 days . The

Chronicle S . Benedfg ives , however, 10 months . Equally var ious are thestatements concerning the t ime of Stephen . Georg ius (on Baronius , A .

926) quotes a d iploma from the Reg . Subl. , 77 anno Deo pr op . P an t .

D om . S tep/zan i P . I . I nd. I I I . 772. D ec. d . 22 ( therefore, A . Pagi

bel ieves that he d ied onMarch 15th, 93 1 .


L iutprand, the i r younger contemporary, passe s themove r in si lence , and represents John the E leventh as

the immediate successor of John the Tenth . Unde rthe second of these two Popes the influence of Maroziar ose to an unbounded he ight.John the E leventh was the son of this infamous John XL.

woman,who styled herse l f not only Senatrix , bu t a lso 53

0

6132 93 1

Patricia,be ing

,as she actua l ly was

,the t empora l rule r

of the city and the arbitress of the Papa l e le ct ions.I t i s supposed that Se rgius the Third was the fathe rof the new Pope

,but the fact rema ins doubtful . A

woman now tyrannised ove r the Church and Rome .

Her second husband,Guido of Tuscany

,who had

undoubtedly been appointed Patricius by the Romans ,was dead

,and his tit le of Margrave had passed to his

brothe r Lambert . Marozia was no soone r a widowthan she planned a third marriage

,and Hugo

,the

King of I taly,was now the Object of her ambitious

schemes . Lambert was young and ene rge t ic,and

fi l led with lofty projects ; he was consequent lydange rous to the King, who hastened to se t him asideand to se ize the proffe red hand of the Patric ia ofRome .

Intrigu ing and dece it ful,Sensua l and cove tous , bold

and unscrupulous,striving by the most treache rous

mean s to extend the boundary of his I tal ian kingdom,

Hugo is the true representative of his t ime . S tateand Church in France

,as in I ta ly

,had fa l len in to a

state of ut te r dis integration ; while Ge rmany was onlycasual ly affe cted by this Roman contagion . P reserving

,as she did

,the principles of mora l ity and law

,upon

Germany devolved the task of restoring the Empireof Charles

,together w ith the Church . The time ,

H ISTORY OF ROME

howeve r,was not ye t ripe , and I taly was meanwhile

to be reduced to the dire st extremity. We re i tpermitted us to l inger long outside the c ity itse l f

,we

should describe how Hugo sold the bishoprics and

abbeys of I taly,or fi lled them with his insolent

favourites ; gave l icense to eve ry passion , and stifledeve ry fee l ing ofjus t ice . L iutprand , afterwards bishop,l ived as page at Hugo ’s Court at Pavia . His beautifulvoice had here won him the favour Of the King

,and

here he acquired that taste for frivolous and wittysocie ty which has impressed itse lf on his writings .He heaps pra ise s upon the tyrant Hugo, as Macchiave l l i does in late r time s upon Caesar Borgia . Wa rpedin his judgment by gratitude

,pol it ical inte re st

,and the

recollection of his youthful l ife at Court,Liu tp rand

extols Hugo as prudent,courageous and l ibe ra l

,

favourably disposed to priests and learning,and boldly

te rms him a philosophe r. The prince was undoubtedlygifted in no common degree . He ve i led his l icentiousn ess under a show of chivalry. He frequented the

socie ty of holy men,such as Odo of Cluny ; but

neverthe less rema ined the most dissolute voluptuaryof his time . Even L iu tprand , in whose eyes all womenwe re but wantons

,upbra ids h im on the score of his

sensua l excesses . The bishop,neverthe le ss

,finds

amusement in the witticisms of the populace,who

be stowed the names of Pagan goddesse s on Hugo ’svarious mistresse s . Pe zzola was ca l led Venus ; Rosa,Juno ; and the beautiful Roman

,Stephania Seme le .

Unscrupulous though he was, the Bishop could not

a ltoge the r s i lence the voice of truth,and himse l f

informs us that,in orde r to obta in the hand ofMarozia

,

H ISTORY OF ROME

the dread that sooner or late r the Romans would throwoff the humiliating yoke ? Maroz ia

’

s ambit ion wasflatte red by the thought of exchanging the title ofSenatrix or Patricia for that of Queen . And sinceher son

,John the E leventh

,dared not re fuse to se t the

Impe ria l crown on the head of his future step-fathe r,the King of I taly

,she a l ready s aw he rse lf wearing the

purple of an Empre ss . The events which nowfollowed imparted a new characte r to Roman history.

They led for the first time to a tyranny such as the

tyrannies of the Greek c i tie s of ant iquity,or those of

I ta l ian citie s in the late r Middle Ages .Hugo came in March 9 32 , and

,fol lowing the

example of his predece ssors,or of Roman laws

,caused

his troops to encamp outs ide the wa l l s . He himse l fente red with a re tinue of knights

,and surrounded by

the cle rgy and nobil ity,who gree ted him with the

homage due to roya lty. His marriage with Maroziawas solemnised in an ancien t tomb

,whe re brida l hal l

and nuptia l chamber had been prepared . The tomb,

the fortress Of the c ity,was the Mausoleum of the

Emperor Hadrian , whose porphyry sarcophagus sti l lstood in the vault . No other bui lding in the worldcan show a history so changefu l or so tragic as thi sCastle of S . Ange lo . Nor is its part even ye t playedout . Through centurie s—probably le ss tragic thanthose of its past— i ts history may sti l l be continued .

We have a lready had frequent occasion to mentionthe Mausoleum in the history of the city S ince the days

1 The disgrace was even felt by Benedict of Soracte subj uga tus est

Ramam potes ta t ive in manu femine, s icu t in prop/zeta legimus

Femin in i dom inabunt H ier usalem, c. 30 .


of Honorius,and last saw i t

,in the time of Pope

Gregory the First , i l luminated by the vision of theArchange l . As early as the e ighth century a church

,

dedicated to S . Michae l,had been built on the summit

,

cal led from its situation S . A ng eli usque ad ca los ( evento heaven)

? The worship of the Archange l was

a lready widespread,and as early as the beginn ing of

the century a sanctuary had been dedicated to him at

Avranches . Even in the time of Maroz ia the originalpurport of S . Ange lo had been almost forgotten . The

grave of Hadrian had a l ready served for age s as a

fortress,i t was the strongest fortre ss in Rome and i t

i s the refore S ingular that L iutprand , who saw the Moleof Hadrian with his own eye s

,briefly te rms it a

fortre ss,without giving it the surname Hadr ianeum.

Ne ither doe s the historian ca l l i t the house ofTheodoric

,unde r which name the Mausoleum is

mentioned by contemporary Frankish chronic le rs .While writing the history of current events it wouldhave seemed but natural to de scribe the fortre ss as

Procopius had described it at the time of the Gothicattack . The regard for antiquity was , howeve r,a lready extinct

,and L iutprand mere ly says :

“ Afortress of marve l lous workmanship and st rengthstands at the entrance to Rome . A splendid bridgecrosse s the Tiber opposite i ts gates . All who ente ror leave the city must cross this bridge , i f permittedby the guards of the fortress . The fortr e ss it se l f, not

1 M un i t io vero ipsa—tanta alt i tudin i s est , u i eccles ia qua in ej us

ver t ice videtu r , in bonore summi et celest is mi licia pr incip i s ar c/zangeli

M iclza li s fabr icata , dicatur S , Angeli E ccles ia usque ad ca los .

—Liutpr . , iii . 44.

H ISTORY OF ROME

to Speak of othe r things (which we regre t), i s so highthat the Church which is built to the Archange lM ichae l on the summit is called S . Ang eli usque ad

ca los .

”1 The Mausoleum must there fore have wornan imposing aspect and stil l reta ined much of itsmarble pane l l ing . Inscriptions to the Emperorsburied within must sti l l have been found upon itswa l l s. These were late r copied by the monk ofE insiede ln

,but if the statues and colonnade s stil l

rema ined , i t can only have been in utterly ruinouscondition . Ne ithe r is it probable that the statue swhich had once adorned the bridge of Hadrian stil lsurvived .

Hugo was admitted to S . Ange lo, and the re ce lebrated his marriage with Marozia

,which was probably

blessed by John the E leventh,son of the bride .

Annal ists are s ilent with regard to the solemnitie s ofthis strange marriage

,and bestow not a single word

on the preparations for the Imperia l coronat ion . I f,

as was doubtless the case,preparations were in pro

gress,a sudden change in the course of Roman affa irs

must have made the ce remony impossible . Hugo,i n

possession of the fortress and with his approachinge levation be fore his eye s , waxed more imperious . He

t reated the Roman nobil ity with contempt and gavedeadly offence to his young step-son Alberic

,who

must have regarded his mothe r’s marriage with ih

1 I n ing ressu P amana u rbis qua dam est m ir i oper i s ( thus alsoProcop ius) mi requefor t i tudin is const i tu ta mun i t io an te cuj us j anuam

pons est pra cios iss imus super Ti ber im fabr icatus . The o ther br idge( the Ncronian) , close by, had long been destroyed , and water m ills nows tood upon i ts ru ins .


Ange lo . Hugo and Marozia found themse lve s imprisoned . Hope less of long de fending himse l f againsthis assa i lants, the King resolved on fl ight . Like a

fugitive ga l ley-slave he let himse l f down from the fortre ss at night by a rope

,and

,happy to have e scaped

death , hurried to his camp. To his shame and disgrace , he then s et forth for Lombardy

,leaving behind

his honour,his wife

,and an Imperia l Crown .

Such was the unexpected end of Maroz ia’

s royalmarriage and its attendant fe stivities . The city was ,howeve r, free and fi l led with rej oicing . The Romanshad shaken off at one stroke the monarchy

,the em

pire , and the tempora l power of the Pope , and hadatta ined C ivic independence . They e lected Alberi cthe i r prince

,and the first act of the young rule r was

to send his mother to prison and to cause his brothe rJohn the E leventh to be kept in strict custody in theLate ran ?

1 E xpu ls u s zgi ter r ex Hugo cum prafata M arozia ( this is wrong )P amana u rbis Alber icus monar clzium tenu i t , fratr e suo f o/zannesumma atque un iver sali sedi pra s idente. Liutpr . , iii . 45. Bened . of

Soracte says , that Hugo had intended to deprive Alber ic of sight , andthat Alberic hereupon entered

'

into a consp iracy wi th the Romans .

Flodoard relates in the Cbron . ad . A . 933 , that travellers returning toRhe ims brought the news , that Alberic kept the Pope and Marozia in

pr ison.

OF THE T ITLE—THE SENATE—THE SENATRICESFOUNDATIONS OF ALBER IC ’S POWER—THE AR ISTO

CRACY—POS ITION OF THE BURGHER CLASS— THE CITYM I LITIA— THE JUD ICIAL SYSTEM UNDER ALBER IC .

The change s in Rome we re in no way prompted by Character

the romantic ideas which we shal l see deve lop in the

city at a late r age . They were e ssential ly aristocrat i c,

and Rome was an aristocratic republ ic . From the

time that the Pope s had acquired the secular government they had been continuously opposed by the

Roman nobility,with ever increasing success . The

strong hand O f the first of the Carol ingians had beenable to keep the nobil ity in check ; the fal l of theImperia l powe r left them uncontrolled . At the end

of the n inth cen tury they had become maste rs ofthe c ivic admin istration

,and unde r Theodora

,and

sti ll more under Marozia,they had usurped the re ins

of power. The i l lega l influence of a woman—an

influence which had rested on the powe r of he rfamily and on her non-Roman husbands—was re

moved by the revolution of 9 32 . The same revolu

tion had , howeve r, raised this woman’s son to be

head of the c ity,legal ising his power by e lection and

t itle . Depriving the Pope of the secular dominion,

it bestowed it on his brothe r,and the revolution was

at the same time a family and a State revolution . In

banishing Hugo, the Romans gave i t to be understoodthat they no longer recognised any fore igner

, e itherking or emperor, as the ir overlord, and that they ih

Of the

Revolution.

HISTORY OF ROME

tended to govern themse lve s by national institutions .Rome made the remarkable attempt to atta in pol iticalindependence and the capita l of the world suddenlyentered the ranks of the l i ttle I tal ian dukedoms, suchas Ven ice

,Naples , and Benevento . The Romans

wished to form,within the circu it of the various

donat ions which constituted the State of the Church ,a free se cular State

,and to l im it the Papal authority,

as i t had been l imited in e arl ier time s, entire ly toSpiritua l matters .The new title with which the c ity invested its new

overlord was ne ither that of Consul or Pat ricius ofthe Romans , t itles which , be ing gene ral ly in u se , werecommonly assigned him by his contemporaries . The

dignity of Pat ricius at this time s ignified the entiresecular and j udicia l powe r in Rome . I t was

,howeve r,

al l ied with the idea of V iceroyship,such as that which

the Exarch had once exercised,and the re fore pointed

to a supreme powe r above the Patriciate . The

Romans would not recognise this powe r,and there

fore gave Albe ric the title of P r incep s a tque omnium

Romanorum S ena tor,and Albe ric s igned his acts

according to the style of the period :“ We

, Alberic ,by the Grace of God

,humble Prince and Senator of

al l the Romans .” 1 O f the se associated dignities only

1 N os Alber icus Domin i gr at . bumi lis P r inceps a tque omn . Roman

orum Senator : thus in a valuable d iploma of 945 from S. Andrea and

Gregor io , edited by M ittarelli , Annal . Camald . ,i . App . 11. xvi . , by

Ughell i , 1 , 1026, by Marin i , Pap . C. In a bull on apitus I I . , A . 955

(Marini,n. 28

, p. 38 )!Alberic is called merely omn ium Rom . Senator ; in

chronicles occasionally g lor iosus P om. pr inceps thus in D estr uct . Fa7f ,

p . 536 . Benedict of Soracte always says Alber icus pr inceps Romanus ,or p r inceps omn . Romanor . His title Romanor . P alm

’

ei as , it is true,

294 HISTORY OF ROME

had been revived,reminiscence s of antiqu ity we re in

creas ing ly awakened and if the Frankish optimateswe re glad to ca l l themse lves Senatus

,

” how muchmore eagerly must the Roman nobility have se izedon the t itle . I t there fore came so genera l ly into use

that we read it even in the Acts of a Council, wherei t is decreed that the Pope shal l be e lected by the

assembled clergy on the motion of the S enate and

peOple .

1 The views,howeve r, of those write rs , who

infe rred the continued existence of the Senate in the

tent h century from the surv iva l of the ancient name,

are no longe r tenable . The ex istence of a Senateimpl ies the existence of actual senators , or individualmembers who cal led and s igned themse lve s senatorsbut a lthough we find Romans subscribing themse lvesas Consu l and Dux i n numberless documents

,both

before and afte r this period , we have discove red nonein which a Roman ca l l s himse l f “ senator.” The

t itle appears only in a collective sense,and i s used of

the Senate in General,of the noble senators

,i .e. of the

great men of the city . TheOphy lact was the firstRoman who

,since the extinction of the ancient

Senate,cal led himse l f Senator of the Romans ; and

the addit ion of all” shows that there i s no thought

of a formal ly constituted Senate . At the same timewe do not be l ieve that the title Senator in Albe ri c ’scase corre sponds to “ Senior or “ Signor

,but that

i t was used to express more definite ly his municipal

1 The Acts of the Synod of John IX . A . 898 com z‘z'

z‘uendzzspontfi x

—elz;gatur , expez‘ente sm am at popu lo and the Pe titio of the Synod of

Ravenna of the same year Si qu i: Romanus cuj zm umgue sz’

t ordz'

m'

s ,

s ive a’e clero,s ive a’e 5 5 7 mm.


“

power :1 W hile the Romans made ove r the Consulate

t o Alberic fo r l i fe,they expre ssed his enlarged

a uthority within the new Roman Republic by conferring on him the t it le of Senator of all the Romans

”

a nd we must no t overlook the fact that in later timesa l so Rome had frequently no more than one Senator.This title was

,moreove r

,hereditary in Alberic

’

s familya nd in none othe r. Even the women bore it . Hisaunt

,the younge r Theodora, and her daughters ,

Maroz ia and Stephania,were cal led S ena tr ix ,

and

e ven bore the ful l t itle omn ium Rbmanomm . Thus ,curiously enough

,women in Rome we re ca l led Sena

trix,while at the same time no man bore the title

S enator save Alberic, and afterwards his descendant ,Gregory of

’

Tu sculum.

2

1 Hege l ( i . 288) t akes Alberic’

s t itle to mean simply Senior or Lord .

T he concept ion of Sen ior was already in use in saeo. x . , even ou tsideI taly. Fonexample in a Roman document of 1006, where Rogata sayspro am

’

ma j oficmm'

s Patr z'

cz'

z’

Romanor . g armam’

77262, at Sem'

or z'

s

nostr z’

not therefore Sena tor z'r nostr zl Cod. Sessor . ,ccxviii . n . 472

( Farfa D ip loma). Hege l’s View is scarcely tenable . The ancient frag

ment H ist . Aquitan . (Pithoeus , Annal . ez‘ H z

'

sz‘

. E amon ,Par is

,1688

,

'p . 4 16) says indefinitely : et Roman i d’e Senator z’

éus s uz’

s elevaw rmzt in

r egna A Z éer z'

cum.

2 The Senatr ix : Romanom m all be longed to the same fam ily whichwas descended from Maroz ia . They continued to bear the t it le even

after marriage with outsiders . A . 9 70 : Stefan ia Senatr ix (Petrin i,‘

p . 394) A . 987 , Stefania, wife of the Comes Bened ict z'

Z Zma . Femz’

na,

Comz'

tz'

ssa,Senatr ix (Nerini , p . Theodora Senai r z

'

x,marr ied to

Duke John of Naples , is ment ioned in the introduction to the Lat inedit ion of the Pseudo-callisthenes of the Archdeacon Leo as senatr ix

romanor , and lauded on account Of her virtues . She d ied about 950 :

Landgraf, D z’

e Vi ta Alexandr i M agm’

a’es A r ckp resé . Leo, Erlangen ,

1885, p . 27 . In Gaeta, May 1002 nos s’

lz‘

a g r . D ei Senatr ix a tqueD ucz

'

sm per com em . D . j ofi. g lor . Consu lz’

at B zw’

ez‘nostr z

'

s’

or z’

s

Jzuj us supr em’. r ectores . What is remarkable is that her son

H ISTORY OF ROME

The dominion of Alberic there fore re sted ma in lyon the aristocracy ; its most secure foundation wasthe power of his own family. His father’s se rviceswe re not forgotten ; his father, however, in his laterdays had become an enemy of Rome

,and had always

been an intruder ; and the young prince was therefore neve r spoken as the son of Alberic

,but a lways

as the son of Marozia . For Marozia was for somet ime the head of the family which was afterwardsnamed the Tusculan

,and i t was e ssentia l ly from her

that Alberic inherited his powe r. The house of

Marozia ( she herse l f disappears from history, and he rend is unknown) embraced through marriage-al l iances .

many other families in the c i ty and i ts territory.

Alberic,powerful in Rome through his wea lth , his

vassals and the possession of S . Ange lo,attracted the

othe r noble s by the hope of the common advantage ofindependence . He endowed them with the highestoffices in the administration

,and pe rhaps a l so with

property be long ing to the Church . The circle o f

those on whom the gove rnment devolved , or whopossessed a right to take part in public affa irs, couldnow be de termined . All definite information regarding Alberic’s institutions

,howeve r

,fa i l us . We hear

ne ithe r of a Senate on the Capitol,nor of new

magistrates . Ne i ther Patri cia s nor Pre fect is named,

for Alberic un ited the au thority of both in his ownperson . Ne ithe r can we suppose the existence of

Leo calls himself Senaz‘

or . O ther women of the same family wereMar ia

,Theodora Senatr ix (A . Ageltmda, Comtz

'

ssa at Senm‘rz

’

x

(A . I have obtained these data from the collect ion of diplomas .

of Gae ta .

HISTORY OF ROME

commanding presence .

‘ And since otherwise in the

disturbed condition of affa irs Alberic would neve rhave been able to reta in his authority so long, the

i ron hand of the young ruler repressed the tumultsand protected the burghers aga inst the Oppression o f

the powerfu l .In order to strengthen his position , he was obl iged

to d irect his attention chiefly to the organisationof the mil itary power. The mil itia of Rome st i l lexisted as scholae

,as i s shown by the formula re

tained i n contracts,where the tenant is forbidden

to transfe r {rea l e state to re l igious places or to the

m umm y,s ea éema

’us mili tam. Alberic secured the

adhe s ion of the city Lmilit ia by taking it under hismanagement and pay. He strengthened and

Organised it afresh,and perhaps to him was due

a new divis ion of the c ity into twe lve regions , eachof which comprised a mil itia regiment under a

standard-beare r. As we sha l l presently s ee , the citymil itia ga ined increased importance after his time .

He made use of this force to defend himse l f aga instthe intrigue s of the hosti le clergy and the jealousnobles

,as we l l as aga inst Hugo’s attempts . The

Roman nobil i ty,cle rgy and people took the oath of

obedience,and henceforth this intrepid man appears

as monarch of the city and of the territory be longingto i t .1 A Z éer z

'

em pr inceps omn ium Romanor . vu lfum m’

z‘en tem si cu t pafer

ej us , g randma s vz’

r tus efa r. Emt em’

m tem'

éz’

lz’

s m’

mz‘

s,et agg rabatum

est j ug um super Romanos , et in s . sea’z'

s —Bened . of Soracte,c. 32. I t is evident from diplomas that the corporation s till surviveda d ip loma of 978 is signed by a S tepfiano pr z

'

or e eana’z’

eator e tesz‘

z'

s

(Galletti, D el P r im. p . 2 14, n.


His diplomas were dated , according to custom ,Alberic’s

with the pont ificate and year of the Pope ; the

papal money,however

, was stamped with his name ,as it had formerly been with the name of the

Emperor. 1 The extent of his powe r is no lessrecognisable in his j udicial acts . I t had been previous ly the custom to hold courts of justice in the

L ate ran or Vatican,in presence of the Pope , the

Empe ror,or the Imperial Missi . No sooner, how

eve r,had Alberic deprived the Pope of the tempora l

powe r,than the tribunal of the Princeps of Rome

became the highest judic ial court. The Princepscontinued to hold courts of justice at various places ;

1 The first coin of Alber ic (previously unknown ) was d iscovered a few

years ago in the Tiber, and has not yet been scient ifically appreciated.

I t is now in the Vat ican Cabinet , and is not iced for the first t ime in a

Catalogue of the auction of the Collezione Ross i di Roma, Rome,1880

, n.

3746,and illustration on tav. vii . ALBRC. PR ICIP . FIERI -JV. Rev.

SCS. PETRVS. In the field a cross,with I . P . O. E . , themonogram of

John XI . at the ends . The vigorous phrase , is very characteristic as the expression of Alberic’s pr incely power. We are

acquainted, besides this , with co ins of Alber ic of the t ime ofMarinus I I .and Agapitus I I . (Promis , p . 87 f. ) The first has SCS . PETRVS , in

the middle the monogram MARIN Rev. ALBERI PRI , in the m iddleROMA . The two coins of Agapitus have , the one : AGAPVS in

monogram, around i t ALBERICUS Rev. SCS . PETRVS, w ith hisbust ; the o ther : AGAPITVS PA , in the middle the bust of Peter ;

Rev. SCS . PETRVS , and the monogram ALER. Provana (S tud?!

p . 143 ) with Carl i , Scheidius and Argelati , strange ly reads

P atr icia s in the monogram AGAPVS . I have examined these co insin the Vat ican Cabinet, in the presence of the D irector, Signor Tassieri ,and

, like Promis , read Agapus . The erroneous inference of Provana,

that Alberic had resigned a share of power to Agapi tus, consequentlyfalls to the ground . See my treatise : D z

’

e M u‘

nzen AZ éer z’

efi’

s , a’es

Fu’

r stefz med Sevalors der Re'

mer, S z

’

z‘zung séer . def B az

'

er . Akaa’. a’er

Wzifseme/z. , 1885 .

judiciaryauthority.

3oo H ISTORY OF ROME

but it i s s ignificant of the change of affa irs thathe a lso instituted a tribunal in his own palace .

Although O

he owned the palace on the Aventinewhich had been his birthplace

,he neve rthe less dwe l t

in the V ia Lata,beside the Church of the Apostle s ,

and apparently on the spot now occupied by the

Pa lazzo Colonna,whose owners ( the present Colonna

family) cla im the Princeps as the i r ancestor . We

have a l ready spoken of this quarte r as the mostaristocratic in the c ity. I t was the quarte r of the

nobil ity,the most animated part of Rome , and was

surrounded by magnificent ru ins , not only those ofthe Baths o f

,

Cons tant ine , but a l so those of the

Forum of Traj an,and was adjoined by the Via

Lata,which included the uppe r part of the present

Corso.

A document which sti l l exists records a placitumhe ld by Albe ric in his palace . On August 17 th, 942,Leo

,Abbot of Subiaco

,appeared be fore him in a

dispute conce rn ing the monastery. The followingwe re the judge s of Alberic’s Curia : Marinus

,Bishop

of Po limart ium and Biblio thecarius,the Primicerius

Nicholas,the Secundicerius George , the Arcarius

Andrew,the Sacce llarius , the Protoscrinar ius of the

Apostol ic Cha i r,toge ther with the most prominent

noble s of the c ity ; Benedict cal led Campanino ( thati s to say , Count in the Campagna) , probably a re lativeofAlberic

,

1 Kaloleo,the Dux Gregorius de Cannapara ,

1 In 1005 he is spoken of as dead, and as having bestowedp ropertyin Trastevere on the Monastery of S . Cosma e Damiano guemaa

’mod.

B enedictu s 6m . mem . ym’

a’z

’

eebatvr Campam'

m ts pro 5 2m am’

ma donavz'

t .

(Bull of John XVI I I . for this convent , March 29th , 1005 , in the Cod .

ALBERIO’S MODERATION—HUGO REPEATEDLY BES IEGESROME—H IS DAUGHTER ALDA MARR I ES ALBER ICALBERIc

’

S RELATIONS W ITH BYZANTIUM— LEO V I I .

9 36—RETROSPECT OF BENED ICTINE MONASTIC ISM

ITS DECAY—THE REFORM OF CLUNY—ALBER IC’SENERGY REGARD ING IT— ODO OF CLUNY IN ROME

CONTINUATION OF THE H ISTORY OF FARFA—THESABINE PROVINCE .

None of the vices which disgraced his mothe r andKing Hugo have eve r been la id to Albe ric ’s charge ;and i f he awoke the ire of the chronicle rs

,i t was

sole ly because , he deprived the Pope of the tempora lgove rnment

,had kept him a prisone r

,and apparently

tyrannised ove r the Church .

1 The partisans of

Ge rman Imperial power denounce him as a usurper.Neverthe less his dominion was in no way a usurpat ion as regards the Empire , for the Empire was a t

the t ime extinct nor did the King of I ta ly posse ssany cla im over Rome . If i n the time of Gregorythe Second , when a lawful emperor stil l re igned

, the

Romans (among whom the tradition of the republicor the rights of Imperial e lection sti l l l inge red) arrogated to themse lves the powe r of a lte ring the Government and of transferring it to the Pope

,now

,when

there was no longe r an emperor,they he ld them

se lves al l the more entitled to assume a l ike privilege .

Rome had not been presented to the Popes by e ithe r

1 Hence Liutprand, Legatz'

o, c. 62 Verum cum impzzssz

'

mus AIber i

eus,quem non sea

’ve/uz

‘

tor rens, z

’

mp/everat , Romamam

cz'

vz’

taz‘

em s z’

oz'

usu rparez‘

, a’omz

’

uumgue apostolz'

eum quas i servum pro

pez’

am z'

n conclave'

teneret .


Pip‘

n or Charles ; it had surrendered itse l f wil l ingly

into the ir hands . The Carol ingian Imperial cons t itution , which recognised the temporal powe r of thePopes

,had fa llen with the Imperium . The Romans

now aga in resumed the ir ancient right,untroubled

by the thought that the Popes had acquired rightsotfer the city, not only such as had been given by

t iitae , but ye t more by the thousand glorious workswh

'

.ch had made new Rome the creation of the

C hurch . The Romans , there fore , as they had e le cteda Pope

,now e lected a prince from among themse lve s

,

to whom they transfe rred the tempora l power,as

formerly they had transfe rred it to the Pope .

Forced by circumstances to mode ration,Albe ri c

contented himse l f with dominion over the city and itsterritory

,SO far as the territory stood in his power.

He bore the mode st but dignified title of Prince andSenator of all the Romans , without al lowing himse l fto be dazzled by highe r ambitions ; for in orde r toacquire the title of Emperor of the Romans

,i t was

necessary first to ga in possession of the Crown of theLombard kingdom . Instead , howeve r, of st riving towrest this crown from Hugo , as an adventure r wouldhave done

,he wise ly restricted himse l f to the consol i

dation of his power in Rome , and scarce ly at anyothe r time has the city enjoyed peace and securitysuch as that which it enjoyed during the long re ignof Alberic .Hugo ’s desire for revenge was foreseen . He came Hugo

bW i th an army In 9 33 , burn i ng w i th Impati ence to 11

6

0

5

221punish the crty ,

to claim the rights which his marriage 932and

with Marozia had given him ,and to obta in the


Imperial crown . Although he attacked the wa l l s:dayafte r day ,

he was obliged to withdraw without havingachieved any result , and to satisfy himse l f with lay ingwaste the Campagna .

1 He returned in 9 36 and wasequal ly unsuccessful . His army was thinned bypestilence , and he found himse l f at length obliged tomake peace with Alberic

, Odo of Cluny probablyacting as mediator.2 Hugo conde scended to giveAlda , his legitimate daughte r, in marriage to ‘hisinvincible step-son . He hoped by this al l iance to

draw the brave Roman into his powe r. He dece ivedhimse l f

,however ; for a l though Alberic brought his

royal betrothed into the city he did not bring hisfathe r-in-law ,

to whose rebe l l ious vassal s,howeve r

,he

accorded an asylum in Rome . His efforts to obta inthe hand of a Greek princess having proved unava i ling

,he now married Alda . The chronicler of Soracte

re late s that he had sent Benedict of the Campagna as

his envoy to Byzantium ,and had prepared his palace

for the reception of a Greek bride . Bu t this marriage,

says the chronicle r, neve r took place .

3 Alberic

1 Collecta nzu lz‘

z’

tudz’

neprofi ez'

sez'

z‘ur

fRonzanz cuj us quamquam loea et

provz'

nez'

as ez'

reum ez’

rea nzz’

ser e devastarez‘

,eamgue zpsam

z'

nzpetu z'

nzpugnaret , ea7n tamen efifeetunz ootz'

nere non potuz'

t .

Liutpr. ; iv. 0. 2 . Flodoard, Cnron . ,A . 993 Hugo R . [talza Roman:

obsz’

a’et .

2 Flodoard , A . 936. Liutpr . , iv. 0. 3 . Vz’

z‘

a S . Oa’onz

’

s, Surius vi .

18 . Nov. I I . c . 5 . I I . c. 7 : cum Ronzu leanz u roem propfer

qua ez'

eran i cum Aloer z'

eo pr z'

nez'

pe, Hugo rex vz'

r sanctu s

et z'

n l ra et ex i ra u roenz dz'

seur rens, norz‘aoaz‘

ur eos aa’ mutuam

pacem,&c.

3 Consz’

lz’

o ini i!A Zoer zruspr z'

nezpes, u t a'e sangu ine Gra car . imperator .

sz’

bz’

uxore soez'

ana'anz. Transmz

'

ssus B enedz’

etus Campanz’

am ( it is

B ened. Campanino the chronicler was well informed) a Cons z‘anfin

H ISTORY OF ROME

eye .

1 The rule r of Rome now forced a Benedictinemonk to accept the t iara .

2 The yie ld ing dispositionof Leo the Seventh made him a serviceable Pope i nthe hands of Alberic

,and

,renouncing as he did the

tempora l power, the re lations be tween Prince andPope

,rema ined harmonious . Leo , suppressing a sigh ,

ca l led his tyrant and patron “the merciful Alberic,

his be loved spiritual son,and the most glorious prince

of the Romans .”3 The historian Flodoard dedicate ssome grate ful ve rse s to Leo

,because the Pope had

accorded him a friendly reception . Flodoard pra isedhim as a priest should be pra ised

,as a pious man who

strove afte r Go d and despised worldly things,and the

historian does not al lude to Albe ric by one singlesyllable .

4 He thus made a virtue of nece ssity .

The shrewd Prince of the Romans had placed apious monk in S . Pete r’s Cha ir, and there caused himto distinguish himse lf by his apostoli c virtue s . Pope

Vz'

vacuus , splendore carens , modo sacr a mz’

n z’

str ans,

F r atr e a P a tr z'

ez'

oj ur z'

s nzoa’erarn e

’

ne r ap to,

Qu z'

matrenz z'

neestanz r er unzfastzjgz’

a ma eno

Tr au’ere eonan tenz a’eez’rnufn suoclau stra j oannenz

Qua dederat , elaustr z'

vzgz'

lz'

et eustoa’e suoegz

'

t .

2 That the consecrat ion of Leo VI I . ftookplace before Jan . 9 th , 936, is

shown by Pag i from his bull, V. 1a’. f an . 1na

’. X1 . A . Ron t . 111 .

(Mabill . , Annal . iii .3 M z

'

ser z'

eor s A Zoer z'

eus—noster sp ir z'

tua tz'

s fi lz'

us et<gtor z

‘

osus P r inceps

Romanor . Reg . Subl. 45 , col. A . 937 , of which further.4 Sep tz

'

nzus exsurg z’

t Leo,nee tanzen z

'

sta vo/u tans,

N ee eurans apz'

ees uzuno’z'

,nee celsa roqu e'r ons

,

Sota D ei qua sunt alacr e’

suopectore votvens ,Cu lmz

'

naque evz’

tans,abla ta suoz

'

r e renu tans ,

Raptus ab ernz'

tur , a’zlgn usque nz

'

torep rooatur

Regmz'

nz'

s Petr ique z'

n sea’e loeatur

,ete.

F lodoard ends his Vz’

ta Pont . with Leo VI I .


a nd Prince together strove to restore cloistra l dis

cipline , and we must the refore bestow a glance onmonasticism .

In the course of four centuries the institution of After a

Benedict had accomplished its work in the history of2522?Of

civi l ization and had now fa l len into decay. I t s $ 311

nmiss ion had consisted in he lping to form the new dict ine

,

M onast i

Chr l s t i an soc i ety. In the m i dst of barbarIan nat ions cism fallsBenedictine monks had represented in the ir com- to decay “

mun it ies an orde rly, if one-s ided socie ty, whose formwas that of a family under the guidance of a fathe r,and united by principle s of authority and love . The

laws of civic l ife had perished ; but the Benedict ines had written a new code of civil law ,

and the

rule of Benedict was the most ancien t law book ofthe Middle Ages . Thus the seeds of a socie ty ofbrotherly love we re sown in the midst of barbarism .

While the world was reduced to a smoking c inderheap

,these societies led peaceable

,industrious and

holy l ives. They displayed a realm of mora l idea lsto the rude nations around

,a realm where temporal

wants were unknown,

and where obedience . and

humility flourished . With Apostolic zea l they converted the heathen . Unde r the ir guidance the gospe la ided the sword of Charles in the conquest of newprovinces

,and in extending the confine s of the

Church . The ir convents were the refuges of m isfortune and gui lt

,and at the same time the honoured

colon ie s of learning, the on ly schools left to the

impoverished human race,the asylum where the last

rema ins of classic culture found she lter. The i rdreams or ideas were lost to sight in the furthest

308 HISTORY OF ROME

distance of heaven . Neverthe le ss they sowed and

reaped and gathe red the fruits of the earth intospacious granaries . Since they themse lves possessede states , and laboured in the fie ld according to thepractical rule of Benedict

,they became founders of

c itie s and colonies,and numbe rle ss tracts of land

owed the i r cultivation,inhabitants and prosperity to

Benedict ine ene rgy. The orde r accomplished a greatwork of c ivi l ization by the socia l principle of Christianlove

,by schools

,by agriculture

,by the foundation of

towns,by a thousand peaceful means in the midst of

rude,opposing force s

,and by the association of secular

e lement s with , the Church . The glorious miss ionwhich the institution of Benedict thus achievedsecure s it a foremost place i n the annal s of mankind .

In Spite of the many reformations which fol lowed inafte r t ime s

,in spite of the new and i n part famous

orde rs which arose,no socie ty eve r atta ined e ithe r

the Christian virtues or the socia l importance Of

Benedict’s foundation , for all obeyed some specialimpulse

,were at the service of the Church , and were

the outcome of some tendency of the time .

The rapid decay of the Benedictine s was everywhere c lose ly connected with the decl ine of the

Empire and the Papacy. The ru in of both sprangfrom the same source . Monastic ism

,howeve r

,more

1 Of this we have innumerable examples in every country. I content

myself with one . The vis itor to Monte Casino,who has the villages

on the surrounding mountains po inted out to h im by name, will besurpr ised to find so many called after saints . They are all foundat ionsof the monastery : S . Germano, S . Pietro in Fine , S . E lia, S . Angelo,S . P ietro in Curris, S . Giorg io, S. Apoll inare, S . Ambrog io , S . Andrea,

S . Vi ttore .

H ISTORY OF ROME

pol itica l conditions . The repeated sacks of the convents by Hungarians and Saracens deal t them the i r '

death-blow . Many abbeys we re destroyed,and the

monks we re scattered . Where the monasteries .

rema ined stand ing,the i r rules had fal len into d isuse

, .

and monastici sm was disintegrated,as was al so the

canonica l constitution of the secular cle rgy which hadonce been a matter of so much concern to Lewis thePious .No sooner

,however

,had the decay of these ins t itu

t ions reached its uttermost l imit, than a remarkablere l igious reaction se t in . Holy men

,ris ing apparently

out of the dust of S . Benedict , suddenly appeared tosupport the fal l ing heaven of Christianity. In the

midst of the unive rsal dread of the approaching end

of the world, a new impulse to asceticism wasawakened . Out of the chaos of l icentious passionpenitent love rose triumphant . Founde rs of orde rs , .

he rmits,pen i tents

,enthusiastic as those of the ancient

Theba id,sprang from the soil . Missionarie s and

martyrs wandered from end to end of the wild Slavcountry

,princes and tyrants ve i led themse lve s aga in

in the cowl of the monks , and pie ty began to~

i llumine the darkest century of the Church’s historyas the radiance of stars i l luminates the darkness ofsome cheerless night .The Benedictine reform originated in France

,where

Be rno founded his ce lebrated monastery in Cluny

about the year 9 10 , Will iam ,Duke of Aquita ine

,

having presented him with the vi lla Clun iacum for thepurpose . The orde r of monast i cism revived by Berno r

on the foundation of the Benedictine rule spread


rapidly over Europe . Berno was , however, soon surpassed by his pupi l Odo

,the Abbot

,who

,as mission

ary of monastic re form ,trave l led from land to land .

Hence forward the rule of Cluny began to gove rn the

spiritua l world . I t s influence has been we l l l ikenedto that exe rcised by the late r Jesuits at roya l courts .The system of Cluny

,equal ly with that of Loyola, was

calculated to concentrate the mora l world under thedomin ion of the Pope . . _ Thus even in her t imes ofgreatest distress the Church has neve r fa i led todeve lop from within force s capable of invest ing herwith a new l i fe . The order of Cluny is the first l inkin the long cha in of spiritual mil itant orders whichreache s down to late st time s .Odo was highly honoured by King Hugo, not less Odo of

so by Alberic. He came several time s to Rome,

Chm )"

where Leo the Seventh and Albe ric employed him torestore cloistra l disc ipline . In 9 36 they made ove r tohim the Abbey of S . Paul

,the buildings of which we re

fal l ing to ruin , and whose monks had e ither desertedor we re l iving a l ife of license . Odo introduced otherbrethren and placed at the i r head Ba ldwin of MonteCasino ( a monaste ry which he had a lready re formed).

1

In 9 39 Alberic entrusted Odo w ith the Suppent ine2

1 Mabillon ,Annal . B en iii . 432 .

2[In both the German and I talian edit ions the word is printed

Suppontine . This word , which was not found in any dict ionary or

Church history, and which seemed to defy all explanat ion , proved a

source of great perplex ity. Signor Bonghi , Ex-M inister of PublicInstruct ion in I taly

,however

,has kindly sent the following solu

t ion :“ The Suppontino of Gregorovius,

” he wr ites , “ is a t itleadded to the convent of S . Elia. The bu ilding is s ituated on a

steep cliff, at the foot of which rushes a torrent that flows into theTreja. I t is believed that from this cliff is derived the word Suppen tonz

'

a ,

HISTORY OF ROME

monastery of S . E l ias in Roman Tuscany,presented

him wi th his own palace near S . Alexius and Bonifac ius

,for the purpose of founding a monastery.

Thus arose the convent of S . Maria— a monument ofthe ce lebrated Roman , and a building which

,as the

Priory of M alta,stil l exists on the Aventine .

1 Alberic,

moreove r,appointed Odo Archimandrite of all the

cemobite communities within Roman territory. The

chronicle of Farfa,which records the fact

,make s no

mention of the Pope,who stood behind the Prince in

the background . The convents of S . Lorenzo and S .

Agne se a l so owed the ir re form on the system of Clunyto Albe ric . The Prince of Rome careful ly enquiredinto the condition of all abbeys and bishoprics thatstood “ unde r his domin ion . The ir ru in

,which

enta i led the impoverishment of the peasant and theruin of agriculture

,could be to h im no matter of

indiffe rence . He strove to uphold the powe r of themonasterie s

,in order that he might fi l l them with

adherents of his own , who he lped to impose a checkon the refractory nobil ity. He a lso befriended themonastery of Subiaco in 9 37 , confirming the privi

the name g iven to the convent by S. Gregory in his D ialogues . A

med iaeva l document speaks of it as M onaster z’

unt z'

n P en tonz’

a

and three au thors , Tomasetti (Campagna Rontana) , Ranghiasca and

Moroni ,"

when wr it ing of the convent , make use of the same terms.”

TRANSLATOR.]1 Construct io Farf. , p . 536 : suamque a

’onzunz proprz

'

am uoz'

zpsenatus est Roma pos i tafn in Aventz

'

no nzon te eoneessz’

t aa’nzonast. con

struena’unz quao’ usque lzoa

’z’

e (beg inning of saec xi . ) stare vz'

a’etur z

‘

n

nonore S . M ar ia . Aligern , Abbot of Mon te Casino after Baldwin,came from this convent in 10 13 A imo is mentioned as Aobate mo nas t

S . M ar ie quz'

pon i tur z'

n Aventz'

no (M ittarelli, Annal. Camald. , App .

1 Constr . Fa ff B enea. 0f Sor aete, c . 33 .

3 I 4 HISTORY OF ROME

tyrant of Rome thus appears in a new l ight,as the

zealous promote r of monastic ism . Legend furtherascribe s the foundation of the convent of S . Stephenand Cy riacus near S . Maria in Via Lata to his s iste rs .1

But nowhe re was the reform more necessary than inFarfa . The ce lebrated monaste ry

,which the Pope s

had in va in striven to bring unde r the i r rule , no longe renjoyed the protection of an Emperor, since Emperorat this time the re was none . The ruler of Rome ,howeve r

,now regarded himse l f as overlord of Farfa .

We have a lready spoken of the fal l of the abbeyand must now continue i ts history. The AbbotRoffred had rebuilt Farfa

,and as a reward had been

murde red in1

9 36 by two of his monks , Campo and

Hildebrand . Campo,a noble Sabine

,had come to

the monastery while a youth,to be instructed in

grammar and medicine by the Abbot. The pupilgave tangible proof of his proficiency In the latte r artby the efficacy with which he prepared a cup of poisonfor his bene factor .2 By means of gifts

,he acquired

the dign ity of Abbot from King Hugo , and togethe rwith H ildebrand now entered on a l i fe of dissoluteenjoyment . In a year they were adversaries . Hildebrand

,banished from the monastery

,procla imed him

S zgnum‘

I‘ manu supr ascr ip ta S tepnanz

'

a, etc.

B er ta nobz’

lz’

ssz’

ma puetta , etc.

Sergi us D ez'

g r . Epz’

scop . S . N epesz'

ne E ccl . etc.

Constant inus z'

n D ei nom. nooz'

tz'

s vz'

r . , etc. Afuna’us Nzanus near

Veg i is ment ioned in the epitaph of two children of TheOphylact

ment ioned above it was probably connected with Mazzano .

1 M art inelli,P r imo Trofeo, etc. , p . 57 sq.

2 The dying abbot humorous ly exclaimed : Camn enas Campo, male

quam me—Hugo q arfa , p . 535 .

IN THE M IDDLE AGES. 3 1 5

se lf Abbot in the conventual estate of the March ofFermo

,and Farfa rema ined divided for years . Both

men had wive s , and Campo had a lso become throughLiuza the fathe r of seven daughte rs and three sons,whom he brought up in prince ly luxury . Under theguise of lease s and contract s he squande red the

monastic e states on his followe rs and soldiers, and

assumed the position of a prince in the Sabina .

Hildebrand pursued the same course at Fermo . One

day the latte r invited his mistresses,sons and

daughters and knights to a feast at his re sidence , S .

Victoria . The castle caught fire while the companywas in a state of intoxication . Countless treasure sbrought by Hildebrand from Farfa we re destroyed .

The monks had followed the example of the Abbot ;each of them had married a mistre ss according to therites of the Church .

1 They no longe r dwe lt in themonastery each had his vi lla , and they we re accustomed to mee t at Farfa on Sundays to exchange the i rj ovia l greetings . They had robbed the monaste ry of

all its va luables . They had even carried Off the goldseal s from the Imperia l d iplomas and replaced themby others Of lead . The consecrated ve stments of

brocade had been converted in to dresse s for the irmistresses , the altar vesse l s into earrings and ornaments . This state of things lasted for ha lf a century.

As soon,howeve r

,as Hugo left him free i n the Sabina

,

Alberic strove to suppress these disorde rs and to bringthe province under subjection to Rome . Odo foundful l occupation at Farfa . He sent monks to introduce

1 D estr uctz'

o Farf . , p . 535 , and the Ckron . Farf. , which frequentlyagrees with it word for word .

3 I 6 H ISTORY OF ROME

the rule of Cluny Campo,howeve r

,refused to rece ive

them,and after an attempt had been made to strangle

the brethren by n ight in the i r beds , they e ffected the ir

escape to Rome . Hereupon Alberic himse lf marchedwith the mil itia to the Abbey. He expe l led the

Abbot,i nsta l led the brethren of Cluny, and entrusted

the convent to Dagobert of Cumae , with orders thateve rything of which it had been deprived should be

restored . These events took place i n 947 . But inthe course of five years the new Abbot was poisonedthe former disgrace ful state of things was renewed ,and lasted

,with some inte rruptions, unti l , unde r the

O ttos , the monaste ry aga in arrests our attention .

1

Albe ric also re formed the monaste ry of S . Andrewon Soracte , thus ex tending his powe r over the Sabina .

This territory had hithe rto be longed to Spole to, butappears to have been afte rwards severed from the

province . For in 9 39 we find rectors of the Sabina,who we re ind iffe rently cal led dux

,comes

,or marchio.

The Lombard Ing ebald, husband of Theodoranda , adaughter of the Roman Consul Gratianus

,mee ts our

notice as the first rector of the district in

1 The monk who had poisoned Dagobert made a p ilgr image to

Garganus, but after having str iven in vain for a whole year to cl imbthe mountain he disappeared . D estr uct . Farf , p . 537.2 Fa ttesc/zz

'

, Ser ie 248 and D ept. 6 1 . The district is,as a rule

,c'

alledTerritorium or Comitatus . These documents are dated with the ruleof the Pope , of the Bishop, and of the Rector of the Sabina, A . 948

(n . Tenzpor z'

o. a’om. Agapz

'

tz°—PP . et j o/zannz

'

s Epz'

scopz'

et Teuzonz’sComz

'

tz'

s Rector z'

sq. Ter r z’

tor . Sabin . mense Sep t . Nothing is ever

dated from A lber ic,but with the coronat ion of O tto I . the date of the

Imper ial re ign is adopted . The Catalog . Imp . of the Cbron . Farfamentions Leo as first D ux Saoz

’

nens is after him Azo, Joseph , Teuzo .


the conspirators punished by Alberic, Stephen’s name

does not appear. That attempts to overthrow the

ru ler had been made i n Rome is,however

,evident.

The clergy,whose power he had usurped

,and many

envious nobles gave ear to Hugo’s agents and acceptedthe ir bribes . The chronicle r of Soracte suddenlydraws a ve i l over these occurrences . He a l lows us ,howeve r

,to perce ive a conspiracy at the head of which

stood the bishops Benedict and Marius . Alberic ’sown siste rs a lso seem to have been privy to the plot.One of them

,as the monk informs us

,betrayed the

scheme,and the guilty were punished by death ,

imprisonment or scourging .

1 The strong arm ofAlberic Succe ssful ly controlled both clergy andnobil ity ; no Pope dared stretch forth his handtowards the tempora l powe r during his l ife time . The

Vicars of Christ obediently ascended the Papal throneand S i lently passed from it .On the death of Stephen Alberic appointedMarinus the Second to the Papacy .

2 This shadow ofa Pope lasted more than three years

,timidly obeying

the commands of the Prince ,“ without which the

gentle , peace-loving man dared do nothing.

”2 Alberic

1 c. 34. Anna l. Saxo ao’A . 941 : Cor ruptz

'

s cunct is

op tz'

matz'

o. maxz’

meque qu ib. omnz'

a venalz’

a sun t .

2 Three years , 6 months and 13 days are g iven to M ar inus I I .Arguing from Ughell i VI I I . 50 ( 3 1a

’. N ov. ann . Pont . M am

'

nz‘

1na. 11 . t . e. concerning which Mans i refers to Baronius ao’. A .

943 , Jaffe bel ieves this consecrat ion to have taken p lace before Nov.

1 1 . In the Reg . Subl. , fol. 12 , Coa’. Sessor . ccxvii . p . 69 , the first

year of the pontificate is designated : anno D o. p . M ar z'

nz'—11 . PR ,

in sea’e 1nd . 772. Apr i l. die 15 therefore the same year 943 .

3 E lectus M ar inas papa non aua’eoat aa

’tz'

ng ere a lz’

quz’

s ex tra j ussz'

o

A loer z'

cz' —B en . of Sor acte, c. 32 .


t riumphantly withstood the continued attempts ofHugo

,who unweariedly strove to reach the Impe ria l

Crown shut up within S . Peter’s . As early as 9 3 1 ,

he had nominated Lothar his youthful son as kingt o re ign jointly with himse lf, and in orde r to strengthenhis position

,had married Bertha

,widow of Rudolf

, the

Second of Burgundy, to whose daughter, the afterwards ce lebrated Ade la ide , he had betrothed his son .

He sought a c loser a ll iance with the Byzantines,but

in spite of his having fi l led the highest episcopa l andothe r appointments with his Burgundian followe rs

,his

t hrone in I taly rema ined insecure . Men regardedhis cunning and tyrannical policy with hatred . The

Lombard nobility were wearied of him,and his

unsucce ssful undertakings aga inst Rome diminishedhis pre stige .

In 94 1 he aga in appeared before the city, and made Hugo

his head-quarters beside S . Agne se .

1I t i s possible

that he spent the entire winte r before the wa l ls,while

w ithin the city Odo of Cluny sought to negotiate apeace . Ne ither threats, force , nor insidious promisesava iled to open the gates . The Romans rema inedfa ithful to Alberic . They behe ld the towns and

vi llages of the i r territory ruthlessly la id waste,but

continued staunch,

and the historian L iutprand

marve l s at the fa i lure not only of Hugo’s e fforts,

1 A donat ion of Hugo to Subiaco is dated from 7 Ka t. j u lz'

i A . 941 ,1nd

,X1 V. ,

in the 15th year of Hugo , in the l oth of Lothar : actnm

j ux ta Ramam z'

n M onaster z'

o S . Vz'

rg z'

n z'

s Ag nes . M u r at . Annal. 941 .

I add further a document for the convent of S. Bened . in Telle,in the

Marsian terr itory, dated 6 Kat. j u lz'

as—Actum Roma . Archives of

M . Casino, cap . 12 , n. 8. The seal is lacking to the dip loma, whichhas not been edited by Gattula.

besiegesRome, 941 .


but also of his bribes,and i s forced to attribute the

re s istance of venal Rome to some mysterious d ivinedecree .

The city was at length and for ever re leased fromHugo . A storm burst ove r Lombardy which he

found himse l f unable to subdue . In spite of all hise fforts he had not succeeded in que l l ing the hosti lenoble s . B erengar of Ivrea , son of Adalbert, had beenmarried to Hugo’s niece

,Willa

,the daughte r of Boso .

The King hoped by this union to entrap the powe rfu lMargrave

,but Be rengar avoided the ne t which was

la id for him by fl ight,and sought re fuge

,first with

the Duke of Swabia,and afte rwards w ith O tto, the

Ge rman King. No soone r did he know the soil ofI ta ly to be sufficiently undermined beneath Hugo’sfee t than he returned in 945 . Several bishops boldlydeclared for him . Milan opened her gate s. The

Lombards de serted Hugo ’sflag to rece ive bishopricsand dign ities from a new autocrat . Hugo

,howeve r

,

sent his popular son to Milan,to entreat the noble s

to leave him ( Lothar) at least the crown ; and sowave ring was the pol icy of the I ta l ians

,that they

agreed to support him in Opposition to Berengar .

1

Hugo,having avowed the intention of carrying off

the treasures of the kingdom to Provence , Berengarin the name of the Lombards announced that

‘

theywould recogn ise him as here tofore King of I taly.

Hugo returned , howeve r, to Provence, leaving to his

1 1talz'

enses autem semper g emz'

nz'

s u tz’

volun t u t alter um

alter ius ter ror e coer cean t . This ce lebrated saying of Liutprand

(An tapod .,i . c. which is transcribed by the C/zronz

’

cle of Farfa (p .

4 16) has on ly now lost its force .

HISTORY OF ROME

vember 22nd, 9 50 , in Turin—a victim to fever or to

poison admin i stered by the Berengarians . WithLothar the Burgundian faction fe l l . The Italiannational party arose

,and resumed the attempt which

had proved fata l a l ike to Guido,Lambert

,and

Berengar the First . Berengar of Ivrea took the

Lombard crown on Decembe r 1sth, and caused hisson Ada lbert to be crowned co-regent . I taly thusaga in posse ssed two native kings

,the eye s of both of

whom were turned to the d istant Impe ria l crown .

Berengar, in the hope of ga in ing over the Bur

gundian party, may probably have desired to e ffect amarriage between his son and the widow of Lothar,but whethe r he eve r made any overture s for the unionrema ins uncerta in .

’The beautiful widow of his p re

de cessor on the throne of I ta ly was natura lly the

object of his jealousy. He consequently caused he rto be imprisoned , first in Como and afterwards in a

towe r on the Lake of Garda . The brave woman ,however, made her escape to Reggio, and soughtre fuge with Bishop Ade lhard ; and it is perhapsme re ly legend that the bishop placed her in the

Castle of Canossa unde r the protection of Azzo orAdalbert . A sudden change of affa i rs took place .

Ade la ide , her adherents of Lothar ’s party, the

enemie s of Berengar (more especial ly the Milanese) ,Pope Agap itus , who, Oppre ssed by Alberic in Rome ,

saw both Exarchate and Pentapol is in the power of

Berengar , all turned the i r eye s to Germany, and

instead of orgamsrng a national movement in the i r

1f anro. j aro. a

’. D . Gescb. Ka iser Otto o

’er Grosze, by Kopke

Dummler p . 19 1 f.


own country, they aga in summoned a fore igne r toItaly.

1

O tto, renowned in war, in wisdom and in power, O tto

a second Charles the Great,came from Germany at

the head of an armed force . The Lombard army 95 1 °

unde r Berengar dispersed at his approach . He

offered his hand to Ade la ide , and married her at

Pavia towards the end of the year 9 5 1 , when the

y oung Lombard queen ,clasped in his powe rful em

brace,seemed to be the symbol of the I taly which

y ie lded he rse lf to him .

The father of O tto , Henry the F i rst , a Saxon duke ,had

,in fierce struggles with the Slavs

,Hungarians

and Danes,and a lso with the duke s of German race ,

restored the East Frankish empire and created a

powe rful nationa l state . Impe rial ideas,howeve r

,

Surv ived the ove rthrow of the system of state s createdby Charle s the Great

,and in O tto the F irst

,who

a scended the German throne in 9 36 , the se ideas founda hero capable of giving them real ization . I taly wasd ismembe red and powerle ss . In civil ization and

culture,howeve r

,far surpassing the hal f barbarian

Germans,had she in the middle of the t enth century

been able to put forward a great nat ive prince,such

as Alberic , as her king, the expedition of O tto wouldneve r have succeeded .

Whether Agap itus’

s invitation to O tto was or was

1 That the property of the Church also p layed a part , we are shownby the Tr ans iat io S . Ep ipnan i i (M on . Germ .

,vi . c. 1 ) u t (B er en

g ar ins—j usfasque quaque conf una

’ens

,atiquan tum etiam ale termin is S .

Petr i pra a’ator ia v i s ioi ar r zper e p ra sumps isset , on which account the

Pope invited O tto .

H ISTORY OF ROME

not sent with the knowledge of Alberic remainsuncerta in . We assume

,however

,that he was privy

to the matte r. The Princeps of the Romans,fore

see ing,as he must have done

,that the King of I taly

would renew Hugo ’s attempts aga inst Rome,must

have des ired the weakening of Berengar’

s powe r.Ne ithe r Alberic nor anyone could fore see

,howeve r

,

the re sults of O tto’s expedition . The German King

had crossed the Alps under the pretext of makinga pilgrimage to Rome . He i ntended to shape hisplans in accordance with the circumstance s which hefound existing there

, and desired to vis it the city inperson as early as 9 52 . He sent the Bishops Of Ma inzand Chur to Rome

,where they were to take counse l

with the Pope concern ing his re ception , and probablyconce rning many more important questions . Theseenvoys we re sent to the Pope

,not to the Tyrant Of

Rome ; but the decided refusal to admit them camefrom Alberic and does no l ittle honour to his ene rgy.

The great k ing was repulsed by the Senator of all theRomans ; with his wife Ade la ide he submissive lyre turned to his dominions . 1

Berengar , so suddenly frustrated in all his hopes,

surrendered to Conrad , Duke Of Lorra ine , O tto’s

l ieutenant in I ta ly . He appeared with his son at theDiet in Augsburg, and here as a Ge rman vassa lrece ived the Lombard crown , while the Marches ofVe rona and Aquilej a, removed from the union of

I tal ian state s , were made over by royal desire to O tto’

s

1 Otlzo Rex Legat ionem pro suscept ione sua Romam a’i r zgi t.

Qua non ootenta , cum uxore in sua r egr edi tur .—Flodoard, Cbron .

A . 952.

H ISTORY O F ROME

from the Papacy in Rome was imposs ible for any

length of t ime . In the hope of the inte rvention ofGermany

,howeve r

,the Papacy had atta ined a new

powe r under Agap itus , and sooner or late r O tto theF irst must se ize the re ins of gove rnment in Rome .

Albe ric unde rstood this . What had been impossiblefor a man of his genius was utte rly impossible forthe mode rate talents of his youthful son . He therefore se cured dominion to O ctavian in thus inducingthe Romans to invest him with the Papa l crown , andhoped at least to thus bequeath to his family thesupreme powe r in Rome .

When we reflect that the rule of Alberic had

lasted twenty-two years,and throughout the change s

of four pon t ificates ,—when we consider that he victorious ly re s isted the tempora l c la ims of the Church andthe revolts of a nobil ity and people accustomed to astate of anarchy

,— when we remembe r that he a l so .

withstood the attempts of powe rfu l enemie s outside ,

and that on his death he was able to transmit hispowe r to his youthful son ,— we are forced to a l lowthe Senator the foremost place among the Romancitizens of the Middle Ages . Alberic is an honourto the I taly of his age , and was indeed worthy o f

the name Of Roman . The title of Great,which

his descendants,in the pride of the i r ancestry

,

seem to have bestowed upon him,might we l l have

been accorded him by his contemporaries . His race

1 The epitaph of a child , a grandson of Alberic, belong ing to the

year 1030 , says :Au rea proge nies facet lzic voci tata j o/zsF leta d igna g raviflor e tenet/a r ua

’i


did not die e ithe rWi th him or his son O ctavian , butsurvived in various branches

,and in the e leventh

century ruled Rome for the second time in the

Counts of Tusculum .

Gregor iopatr i fu i t et a’i tect io matr i

A tque nepos magn i pr incip i s A toer ici .

Coppi , M entor . Cotonnesi, p . 18 ; now bu ilt into the wall of the

monastery of S . Paul .

C H A P T E R I I I .

I . OCTAVIANUS SUCCEEDS ALBER IC IN THE GOVERNMENT-HE BECOMES POPE As JOHN XI I . 9 55

— H IS

ExcESSEs— HE FORSAKES H IS FATHER ’S POLICY— HE

UN ITES WITH THE LOMBARDS IN SUMMON ING OTTO

I . To ROME—OTTO ’S TREATY WITH THE POPE—H IS

OATH—THE IMPERIAL CORONATION, FEBRUARY 2ND,

962— CHARACTER OF THE NEW ROMAN IMPERIUM

OF THE GERMAN NATION .

THE youthful O ctavian , son of Alberic by Alda, wasrecognised without opposition as Princeps and Senatorof all the Romans on his father’s death.

1 The youngrule r continued the tempora l government of his fathe raccord ing to the accustomed forms . No Roman coinsof this period have come down to us

,but undoubtedly

O ctavian must have had coins engraved with his nameand his title of Princeps . He was l ittle more thansixteen years old when he was cal led to gove rnment

,

In his pride and ambition Alberic had bestowed thename of O ctavian on the boy

,thus perhaps giving

expression to the audacious hope that his race might

1 The barbarous Benedict of Soracte says gen iu t autem ex bis pr in

r ipem ex concubinamfi i ium,imposu i t eis nomen Octavianus (c. 34)

and he had previously spoken of reg ious Langobara’or um,

by which hecould only have meant Hugo. Eve n Alda mus t be a concubine , thesechroniclers treat ing women s imply as courtesans .


flict . Ca l led as he was in the immaturity of youth toa position which gave him cla ims on the reve rence ofthe world

,his judgment deserted him

,and he plunged

into the most unbridled sensual ity . The Late ranpa lace was turned into an abode of riot and debauchery.

The gilded youths of the city were his da i ly companion s . Cal igula had once made his horse a senator .Pope John , probably in a fit of intoxicat ion

,consequen t

on some reve l where he had drunk deep in honour ofthe ancient gods

,be stowed conse cration on a deacon

in a stable .

1

The conditions of Rome during the early years ofhis re ign are _ imperfect ly known to us . The heedle ssyouth forsook his fathe r’s mode rate l ine of conduct ;and be ing Prince and Pope at the same time , hede si red to accomplish some great unde rtaking , and toextend his dominion far into the south . With theunited Romans

,Tuscans and Spole tans he undertook

an expedition aga inst Pandulf and Landulf the Secondof Benevento and Capua but the movement of Gisulfof Sale rno in favour of the enemy induced him toreturn

,and he ente red into a treaty with the prince

at Te rracina .

2 Papa l greatne ss spurred him on .

From his fathe r he had inherited a certain courage ,but not wisdom . As Pope he wished

,in fact he

determined , to restore the ecclesiastical state to its

1 Vi ta P apar . in M ur . iii . 2, 327 . Liutprand and the Annals of

Rhe ims . Even the Simple Benedict says he was worse than a pagan

Izaoeoa t consuetudinem sep ius venana’i,non quas i apostolicus , sea

’ quas ifiomofer u s—a

’i izgeoat collect io feminar um (a splend id express ion) oa

’i

bi lis eccles iarum,amabi lisfaven is feroci tat i s .

2 The Anon . Sotern . ,c. 166

, g ives the only informat ion of thisevent .


former boundaries , and for the sake of recovering theExarchate he thoughtlessly appeared at the head ofthe German party aga inst Berengar . Meanwhile , asthe Romans we re no longe r re strained by the stronghand of Albe ric

,his rule was in dange r in the city

itse lf. The pol icy of his fathe r,based upon mode ra

tion,could not be cont inued by the son as Pope . The

work of Alber ic there fore fe ll to pieces,and John the

Twe l fth a t length found himse l f obl iged to cal l KingO tto to his aid for the sake of his temporal dominions .As O ctavian he might possibly have been powerfulin Rome ; as John the Twe lfth he was weak and un

popular. We thus s ee how strange ly the blending ofthe two natures

,the roya l and the priestly, influenced

the posit ion of the Popes .While O tto rema ined in Ge rmany, occupied with Bet engar

the rebe l l ion of his Children and of the Hungarians,Biifgfi i

Berengar and Ada lbert profited by his absence tosubjugate the recalc itrant counts and bishops ofLombardy. The ir enemies of the German fact ion ,e specia l ly the mal icious L iu tprand (offended , we knownot how

,by Berengar ) have represented the se princes

in the darke st colours . Wi l la,the wife of Berengar

was odious,part ly on account of her avarice

,but

ne ithe r her husband nor Adalbert had done more to

secure the i r sovere ignty than the ir predece ssors haddone , or more than German kings pe rmit ted themse lve s to do in later t imes . After the sudden deathof L iudolf, who had been sent by his fathe r O tto toI ta ly to keep Berengar in check

,Berengar seemed to

become invincible . He threatened the Emilia and

Romagna, and John the Twe l fth was too weak to


de fend the patrimony. The son of the same Alberic ,who had once driven O tto back from the ve ry gate sof Rome

,in 960 invited the German King to visit

the City. The papa l envoys we re accompanied bymessengers from seve ra l I tal ian counts and bishops ,amongst Whom was Wa lbert

,Archbishop of Milan ,

who came to O tto in person . O tbert , ancestor of theE ste family

,did l ikewise .

1

The German King accepted the invitat ion of Italy,which offe red him the coveted Imperial crown , and

resumed the work of the ene rgeti c Arnulf. Firstsecuring the Ge rman succession to his youthful sonin Worms

,he crossed the Alps above Trent with a

formidable army. While the two k ings , abandonedby the Lombards

,retreated to the ir fortre sses , O tto

ce lebrated the Christmas festival of 96 1 i n Pavia ;then

,sending Hatto of Fulda to announce his coming,

he s e t forth for Rome .

3 On the 3 l s t of January hereached the city and pitched his camp on the Ne ronianFie ld . He had come in virtue of a treaty with the

Pope and while he undertook the duties of guardianship and the re storation of the Church

,the rights of

the Carol ingian Empire with some restrictions wereoffered him .

“ If I , with God’s wi ll

,come to Rome ,

”

so ran his oath,

“ I will exa l t the Church and Theeits ove rseer according to my powers . Never shal t

1 E . Dummler , Ka iser Otto a’er G

'rosze

, p . 3 18 .

2 Benedict of Soracte (c. 36) describes the aspect of his followers ,who appeared to the writer like Huns E r a t en im aspectu s corum or r i

oi tis , et curois p roperan tes , carpen tes i ter,et ao

’

p re/ium u t fi r ro

s tan tes .

3 Rex Hattonem,Fu t

'

a’ensem aooatem

, ao’construena

’

a s ioi Izaoi tacu/a

Romampramisi t . Cont . Regi n . A . 961 .


he warned his sword-beare r,Ansfried von Lowen , as

fol lows : “ When I knee l to-day at the grave of theApostle , hold thy sword above my head

,for we l l I

know that my ancestors have O ften experienced thefa ithle ssness of the Romans . The wise ave rt evil byprudence on our re turn to Mons Gaudii thou may

’stpray for what favours thou wilt .”1 O tto and Ade la ide

Imperial were crowned at S . Peter’s with unexampled pomp .

After an interval of thirty-seven years the Empire was

522: 2 , aga in revived , and , withdrawn from the I ta l ian nation ,

was restored in the fore ign race of the Saxon Kings .

One of Charle s ’s greatest successors was crowned bya Roman

,who curiously enough bore the name

O ctavianu s . But the momentous transaction wasdevoid of all true dign ity and consecration . Charlesthe Great had rece ived the Imperia l crown at the

hands of an honoured and venerable man . O tto theGreat was anointed by an undisciplined boy. Meanwhile the history Of Germany and Ita ly was by meansof this coronation diverted into a new path .

Differences The Empire of Charle s when cal led into existencebetween

had possessed a lofty justificat ion in the imaginationthe

Imp erium of mankind . The great Frankish monarchy,in which

251311

1151

1

6

; national ities sti l l stood weak bes ide each othe r, hadO tto‘ been conce ived unde r the form of the new Christian

republic . The emancipation of the city from the

dominion of Byzantium ,the nece ssity of Opposing a

strong Christian power to the formidable domin ion of

I slam , and the needs of the Papacy, had contributedto the foundat ion of Imperia l powe r. But this theo

1 Thietmar , Cbron . ,iv. 22 : a

’

eina’e rea

’euna

’o ao

'montem Gaua’

zz

quantum votuer i s , or ato.

IN THE M IDDLE AGES. 3 3 5

c ratic Empire fe l l by the pressure of it s inward deve lopmen t . The fe rment in society

,where old and

new,Roman and Teuton ic e lement s

,mixed togethe r

,

divided the second Empire . The feuda l systemtransformed official s in to loca l hereditary prince s ;secular and re l igious powe rs were united . A pe rman ent revolution in possession and right was generatedin the body corporate of the monarchy, and the subdivision of estate s amongst the he irs hastened it s

decay. National itie s suddenly began to separat efrom one another ; the cent re of Europe fe l l into twohostile divisions, and afte r one hundred and fiftyyears of existence

,the Empire was dissolved and

reduced to the Chaotic state,which resembled the

conditions that had preva i led before i t had arisenthe pre ssure of new barbarians

,of Normans

,Hun

garians , Slavs and Saracens ; the devastations o f

province s,the overthrow of learning and art

,the

barbarism of manne rs , the re lapse of the Church intothe state in which it had been sunk before the timeof Charle s the enervation of the Papacy

,which had

lost it s spiritua l powe r, and the state created for it byPipin and Charles

,and a chaos of aristocrat i c factions

in Rome,more dangerous than that which had

existed in the time of Leo the Third . The I tal ians,

i t is t rue,had attempted to make the Roman

Imperium a national institution . The ir a t tempt had,

howeve r,fa i led

,and the Papacy itse lf sought its

salvation in the restoration of the Imperium througha fore ign prince ly house which stood far from Italyand Rome .

The Roman Empire was now restored by the


German nation,but mankind could no longe r return

to the ideas which had preva iled in the time O f

Charles . The tradition of the Empire did indeedstil l powe rful ly survive . Many voice s we re heard inGe rmany lamenting its fal l and desiring its res tora

t ion as a benefit to the world . The reverence ofmankind for the inst itution

,however

,had been

dimin ished by its unfortunate history of a centuryand a ha l f. The unity and cohesion Of Charles ’smonarchy endured no longe r. France , Germany and

Italy were a l ready separate countries,each striving

afte r independence in its pol itica l forms . While O ttothe Firs t now restored the Empire

,i t became clear

that the taskwas one which none but a great man

could accompl ish that a weakl ing could not susta inthe struggle aga inst the feudal system ,

the Papacy,

and national tendencie s . The Empire was there forerestored only in an ideal and artificial,though a lso ina great pol it ica l form . The conqueror of the Hun

g arians , the Slavs and the Dane s, the protector of

France and Burgundy , the lord of I ta ly, the he roi cmissionary of Christianity, to which he had Opened anew and wider fie ld

,deserved to be a new Charles .

His country was a lways ca l led the land of the Franks,

and his Ge rman tongue the Frankish . He nowbrought the Roman Imperia l powe r to the Ge rmannation

,and this energe tic people took to itse lf the

honourable but thankle ss task O f becoming the Atlasof unive rsal h istory. The influence of Germany soonbrought about the re form of the Church and the

re storation of learn ing, while i n Italy itse l f it was theGe rman e lements which fostered the City republ ics .


Ge rmany and Ita ly indeed,the purest repre sentative s

of the antique and the German characte r, the fa ire st

provinces in the kingdom of the human inte l le ct ,have been brought by a historic nece ssity into thislasting connect ion . When we consider it is e ssentia l lyto the connect ion of Ge rmany with I ta ly that man

kind owes the foundations of unive rsa l Europeanculture

,we ought hardly to regre t that the Roman

Empire was imposed l ike a destiny upon Germany,causing her for centurie s to shed her blood on the

othe r s ide of the Alps .

2 . CHARTER OF OTTO JOHN AND THE ROMANS Do

HOMAGE To THE EM PEROR—JOHN CONSPIRES AGAINSTH IM— RECEIVES ADALBERT IN ROME— OTTO ENTERSTHE C ITY AND THE POPE ESCAPES— THE EMPERORDEPR IVES THE ROMANS OF THE R IGHT OF PAPALELECTION— THE NOVEMBER SYNOD—DEPOS ITION OF

JOHN XI I .—LEO VI I I .

— UNSUCCESSFUL REVOLT OF

THE ROMANS—OTTO LEAVES ROME .

On February 1 3th the Emperor O tto gave John a The

document , which confirmed to the Pope and his 813; tOf

succe ssors all the rights and privi leges that the

Carol ingian s had in earl ie r t imes be stowed upon theSacred Cha ir. The restoration of the Empire

,its

transference to the roya l house of Saxony, and fina l lythe confusion which re igned in I ta l ian affairs and inthe eccle siastical state made the Charte r absolute lynecessary. The origina l deed is not extant , but a

Copy, which the late st research has pronouncedcontemporary, has been preserved among the Vatican

VOL . I I I . Y

HISTORY OF ROME

archives . I f doubts as to the authenticity of thisdocument cannot be entire ly refuted

,and both form

and contents appear somewhat suspicious,i t cannot

at all events be denied that O tto ratified the Carol inglan Donation in its full extent

,while at the same

t ime he he ld fast to the Imperial rights,as they had

been e stabl ished , particularly by the Constitution ofLothar in reference to the recognition of the Papale lection and the Roman administration of justice byImperia l mis s i . l

The Pope himse lf took the oath of fide l ity to theEmperor and promised neve r to de sert him forBerengar. The Romans on the i r S ide tendered the

oath of obedience,and the constitutiona l re lations of

Carol ingian time s between O tto, the Pope and the

c i ty appeared to be renewed .

2 But John ’s positionremained involved in contradictions . From his fatherhe had inherited the prince ly power in Rome ; with

1 P r ivi leg . Otton is , M on . Germ . , Leg . App . 164. Muratori,

Berret ta,Goldast , deny its au thent icity. The l iterature of the subj ect

is g iven byWa itz , j a/zro. a’. D . R . i . 3 , 207 . The Church is confirmed

in possess ion of Venice , I stria, Spoleto , Benevento , even Naples ,neenan patr imon ium S ici i ie, s i D eus i tina nostr is traa

’ia’er i t man ions .

The articles concern ing the M issi , the e lection and consecrat ion of the

Pope in their presence , are in order, and show that O tto determined toadhere to the earlier const itut ion of the Empire. W ith regard to thisdocument

,see Ficker, For sc/z. Otto

’

s 1. zur Rec/ztsgesc/z. I tal . ii. 335 ii . ,and Th . Sicke l , D as P r ivileg ium Otto

’

s 1. far a’ie rom. K i rene. vomj .

962, 1883 . Sickel holds the Vat . document , which was known to

Baronius and Cenni , for a draft , made with the Emperor’s knowledge

of his agreement , which renewed with some variations the Ludovicianum.

2 The Vi ta M atni ta’is Reg ina , (M Germ. , vi . 0. 2 1 ) even says ;

totus pop . Rom. se spon te suéiugavi t ips ius dominatu i , et s ioi solveoan t

tr z'

ou ta,et post i llum ceter i s su is pastor is . This, however, is a fable .


find the Imperial power an oppressive burthen . The

consequence s of O tto ’s Roman expedition had far

surpassed his cal cu lations . From a l ibe rator of thestate of the Church he had become a ruler— one whowould be Emperor in the highest sense—a monarchsuch as would never be satisfied to play the submis

s ive part of Charle s the Ba ld . John now wished thepast undone . Compe l led by the nobles , he conspiredwith Berengar and Adalbert. The Impe ria l partyin Rome watched all his movements

,and reported

them to O tto on his arriva l in Pavia in the spring o f

963 . The Impe rial agents described the l icentiousl i fe of the Pope , who had turned the Lateran into a

brothe l,and had squandered towns and e state s upon

his mistre sse s . They told the Emperor that norespectable woman dared any longe r make a pilgrimag e to Rome , from fear of fal l ing into the powe r ofthe Pope . They lamented the de sertion Of the cityand the ru in of the churche s , through the decayingroofs of which the rain streamed Upon the a ltarsbe low. The an swe r with which O tto attempted to

excuse John ’s conduct constitute s the bitte rest satireon the condition of the Papacy.

“ The Pope ,”he

sa id,

“ i s sti l l a boy, and will learn to control himse l fby the example of nobler men .

”1 He sent messenge rsto Rome to make furthe r enquirie s into the existingstate of things , and started for S . Leo to besiegeBerengar and Willa . As he lay be fore the fortre ssin the summer o f 963 , he rece ived the nuncios of thePope

,Demetrius , son of M eliosus and the Protos

1 P uer , inqu i t , est , faci le bonorum immu taoi tur exemplo viror um.

L iutprand, H ist . Otton is , c. 5 .


«crin iar Leo , who came to compla in that he occupiedthe ecclesiastical estates and sought to subdue S . Leo ,

the property of S . Pe ter . O tto, who had de layed therestitution Of seve ral patrimonie s , answered that hecould not restore the property of the Church beforehe had taken it from the usurpe rs . Holding in hishands the proofs of John ’s int rigues

,he could show to

the nuncios intercepted let te rs from the Pope to the

G reek Empe ror,and even to the Hungarians , whom

John had summoned to invade Germany. The

Imperial envoys went forthwith to Rome to expla into the Pope that the ir maste r was prepared to wipeo ut the suspicion of disloyalty by oath or by the

j udgment of God in a due l . They were , howeve r,ungraciously rece ived , and scarce ly had they left , inthe company of papal messenge rs

,when Adalbert He

a ppeared in the C ity. The young pre tender played $5212nt owards O tto the same miserable part to which 10 Rome

Ade lchis had formerly been condemned . While hisfather defended S . L eo

,he wandered inde fat igably

hither and thithe r to collect followers . He demandedhe lp from Byzantium

,he hastened to the Saracens a t

Frax inetum, he went , as Sextus Pompe ius once haddone

,to Corsica

,and he re entered in to negotiations

with the Pope ; lastly, he landed a t Civita Vecchia,

and the gate s of Rome were Opened to him .

On rece iving the news, O tto hastened from S . Leo O tto I .

to Rome in the autumn of 963 . The population ose

g’

g’

éfég3 ,

the C ity was Split into an Imperial and a Papalfact ion , and i t remained thus divided for centurie s .The Imperial ists

,who had summoned O tto on the

a rrival of Adalbert,he ld themse lves intrenched in

342 HISTORY OF ROME

Johannipolis , while the Papal or nationa l party , ledby Adalbert and the Pope himse l f ( John appeared as

a knight in armour and he lme t), he ld the Leoninecity. The Pope resolved to defend Rome ; he droveO tto back to the Tibe r. His heart

,howeve r

,soon

fa i led him , and his Opponents waxed stronge r eve ryday . The populace which had made a resoluteresistance to Hugo ’s attacks trembled in dread of anassault . The son of Alberic feared treason ; hecol lected the Church’s treasure s

, and with Adalberte scaped to the Campagna and apparently shut himse l f up in Tivol i .1 His adherents la id down the irarms and gave hostages

,and the Emperor ente red

Rome for the second time on Novembe r 2nd, 963 .

He assembled cle rgy,nobles

,and the heads of the

people,and forced them to swear that they would not

orda in or even e lect any Pope without his or his son’ s

consent . He thus deprived the Romans of the rights .

which they had hitherto prese rved as the ir jewe l andthe i r one s ingle act of civic independence— a rightwith which no Carol ingian had ventured to interfe re .

This right,that of e lecting the head Of the Church

,

prope rly be longed to the whole Christian community,and not to the insignificant body of Roman e lectors .But since i t was impossible that the whole ofChristendom could exercise a vote

,the e lection had

long since s ilently passed into the hands of the

1 Campan iamfugi ens , i t i in s i lvis et mon t ions more oest ia latu i t .

Vi ta j o/z. X11 ,Coa’. Vat . 1437 , Cit ron . Farf. , p . 476, and the Treves .

manuscript of the Pr ivileg ium of Leo VI I I . ( in F Cont . Regi n . ,

and Liu tprand, H i st . 0tton . ,where T iberis (Tivoli) is mentioned as

the abode of the Pope.

344 HISTORY OF ROME

P raeneste , Silva Candida and the Sabina ; further, theBishops ofGabium

,Ve l letri

,Forum Claudii (O riolum) ,

Bleda and Nepi , of Caere , Tibur, Alatri , and Anagni ,of Trevi, Fe rentino , Norma and Ve ruli

,o fSutri, Narni ,

Gal lese and Fa leri i,of O rta and Te rracina .

1L iut

prand only mentions thirteen cardinals of the followingt itulars : Balbina

,Anastasia

,Lorenzo in Damaso ,

Chry sogonus , Equ it ius , Susanna , Pammachius,

Cal ixtus,Ceci l ia

,Lorenzo in Lucina

,Sixtus

,IV

Coronat i and Santa Sabina . Seve ral cardina ls hadfollowed the fugitive Pope . Many titulars may havebecome extinct . The historian name s as present allthe ministe rs of the Papal palace

, the deacons andreg ionaries , the notaries , the Prim icerius of the Schoolof S inge rs . The mention of some Roman nobles

,

amongst whom we discove r many al ready we l l-knownnames

,excite s

,howeve r

,an even greate r intere st .

Stephen , son of the Superis ta John ; Deme trius, sonof M e liosu s

, Cre scent ius of the Marble Horse (he rementioned for the fi rst time) , John Mizina (be tte r deMizina) , Stephen de Im iza, Theodore de Rufina, Johnde Primice rio

,Leo de Cazunuli, R ichard, Pe te r de

Cannapara ,Benedict and his son Bulgamin , were now

the principal Romans be longing to the Imperial party .

Severa l of the nobles had accompanied the Pope inhis fl ight ; othe rs rema ined in the i r fortresses on theCampagna . The Roman plebs we re repre sented by1 There is here as little mention of the Bishop of Tusculum as in the

Synod of John X I I . of 964. The survival of Forum Claudi i and

Falerii with their ancient names is remarkable . Tres Tabernae had

d isappeared . Cen tumcellae is not mentioned , nor yet Polimartium,

bu t both endured . Liu tprand , 11is t . Otton . , c. 9 . For this Synod seeHefele

,Conci lieng esclzic/zte, iv. 582 .


t he captains of the mil itia,headed by Pe ter

,bearing

the surname Imperiola .

1 His pre sence,of which

s pecial mention is made,shows the independent

deve lopment in Rome of the plebe ian e lement,which

dated from Alberic . Had Albe ric given the Roman sa constitut ion

,had he appointed senate and tribune s

for the people,had he nominated two consuls annua l ly

,

c ivic dignit ie s such as these could no t have e scapedthe notice of an obse rve r such a s L iutprand . The

bishop , howeve r, neve r by a single syl lable mentionse ithe r senate , senators or othe r magistrates . He

mere ly speaks of the primate s of the C ity,of the

militia and of the ir capta in,as representative s of the

“ plebs,

”and quotes the other officers of the Palace

a lready known to us .The comple te repre sentation of all the e lective

c lasses caused the synod to resemble the synod ofLeo the Third . L ike its predecessor

,this synod was

a t the same time counci l,diet and court of justice .

The presidency of a powerful emperor, the pre senceof so many bishops

,dukes and counts of Ge rmany

1 E p leoe P etrus , qu i et Imper iola est a’ictus aa

’st i t i t cum omn i

Romanor um mi li zia . In documents this Roman is frequen tly calledP etr u s a

’o Imper io. Coa

'. Sessor . ccxvii . p . 13 1 , A . 966 : L ioellum

P etr i a’e [mper io vocat i . In 1006 Cr escen t ius a

’e Imper io, probably his

son ,ioia’. p . 247 . The name Impéroli st ill ex ists —Some of these

nobles are found again in documents . See the document of July 28th ,9 66, in G iesebrecht I . ,

Anhang , D . Demetr ius,son of the Consu l and

D ux M eliosus , possessed a for tress near Ve lletr i from the year 946

(Borgia , S tor . a’i Velletr i , p . perhaps the same

,who appears in

979 as uncle of Marozza (Murat . , Ant . V. S tephen’s mother

Imiza was at that t ime the most cultured woman in Rome,the friend

of John X I I I . and of Theophania ; she corresponded with Gerbert .Gerberti , Ep . 22 Domina 1miza .

H ISTORY OF ROME

as we l l as of I taly,lent it a characte r of the highest

importance . The attendance of Romans of all Classesprese rved it from the accusation of unlawful force .

The tria l was,however

,an act of Imperial dictatorship .

John of Narn i and John the cardinal-deacon appearedas the chie f accusers of the absent Pope . The deedof accusation was read by Cardinal Benedict . O ttodid not speak Latin ; the Empe ror of the Romanstherefore commanded his secre tary L iutprand toanswe r the Romans in his stead .

The writ of c itat ion repeated the accusationsbrought aga inst the Holy Fathe r. To the supremePontifex and Universa l Pope , to the Lord John , O ttoby the Grace of God Imperator Augustus , toge the rwith the Archbishops and Bishops of Liguria, Tuscany,Saxony and ofFrance , gree tings in the Lord— Havingcome to Rome in the se rvice of the Lord, we havequestioned the Roman bishops

,cardinal s and deacons ,

moreover the people i n gene ra l , as to the cause ofyourabsence and the reasons why you wil l not mee t us,the De fende r of yourse l f and your Church . Charge sso disgrace ful are laid to your account

,that were they

reported of even a comedian would make us blushfor shame . S ince a day would not suffice to enume

rate all the accusations levied aga inst you,we shal l

on ly bring one instance before the noti ce of yourExce l lency. Learn , the refore , that you have beenaccus ed

,not by a few pe rsons only but by the world

at large,by la ity as we l l as clergy

,of murde r and

pe rjury,of sacri lege

,of ince st w ith members of your

own family,with your s isters themse lves .1 Your

1 Via’uam Ra iner i i et S tep/zan iam patr i s concubinam et Annam

H ISTORY OF ROME

against the forms of canon law than of an outrageagainst the dign i ty of mankind .

A distinguished Roman was put forward by the

Emperor as candidate for the vacant cha ir ; he wase lected on December 4th and consecrated on the 6 th .

Leo the E ighth,contrary to ecclesiast ica l law , rose

from the condition of layman to S . Pe te r’s Cha ir, the

Cardinal-bishop Sico of O stia having in the mostsummary manne r conse crated him succe ssive ly O stiarius

,Le ctor

,Acolyte

,Sub-deacon

,Deacon , Presbyte r

and POpe .

1 His position was that Of Proto-scr in iarof the Church

,and his name appears in documents of

the pe riod .

2 He dwe lt on the Cl ivus Argentari i , thepre sent Sa l it

’

a di Marforio,a street which was hence

forth cal led ascent of Leo Protus (Pro toscrinar ius ) .A S late as the thirteenth century, a church on thespot was known as

“ S . Lorenzo a’e ascensa P roti .

”3

Leo ’s blame less l ife had recommended him to theEmpe ror . None but a man in eve ry way worthy ofre spect dared O tto put forward as successor to a

p rofligate .

In orde r to re l ieve the Romans from the burthenof ma inta in ing his army

,the Empe ror ordered a por

t ion of the troops to S . Leo . He himsel f ce lebrated1 John XI I . justly res isted this abuse Act io 2 of his Council of Feb

ruary 26 (Baron . ,A .

2 Mar in i,n . 10 1 , A . 961 , where Leo Protoscri narius is mentioned

as owner of a casale on the Via Appia .

3 A d iploma of Anaclete I I . (Casimero,1stor . A raceli , p . 434) calls

the Cl ivus descensus Leon is P rot/zi . Galletti (D el P r imic, p . 143 ) g ivesan inscr ipt ion with the name de Ascensa Prot i . The oldest cont inuat ion of Anastasius ( Coa’. Vat . , 1437) says : Leo nat . protoscr i /zio

ex patre/one. p rotoscr in io a’e r egi one clivus arg . sed. a . I , m . iv . and

following i t , Coa’. Vat . 1437 .


the Christmas fe stiva l in Rome,unconscious that a

conspiracy had been formed aga inst him . The de

position o f John the Twe lfth had made him an objectof sympathy. He was also the son of the greatAlberic

,and had been voluntari ly e lected Pope by the

Roman people . On January 3rd , 964 , the a larm be l ls Revolt

we re suddenly rung,and the Romans rushed to the

Vatican whe re O tto dwe lt ; the ir at tempts we re , howeve r

,unsuccessful . The Impe ria l ists repulsed the ir

assa ilants,broke down the barricade s at S . Ange lo

and slew the fugitive s , unti l O tto himse l f commandedhis soldiers to desist . l This was the first revolt of theRoman people aga inst a German Emperor. The

fol lowing day the Romans appeared be fore O tto tosue for me rcy . They swore obedience both to himand to Pope Leo on the grave of the Apost le . O ttoknew the va lue of the oath ; he took a hundred hostage s and a l lowed the humiliated citizens to depart .He rema ined an entire week in Rome . At Leo’sentreaty he re leased the hostage s

,and

,hOping to

acquire friends for the Pope of his creation by leaving him in a defence less position

,he se t forth to meet

Adalbert at Spole to about the middle of January 964 .

He quitted the c ity in ange r,leaving the Pope l ike a

lamb among wolve s . The blood which had beenshed on the 3rd January nev

'

e r dried in Rome .

Hatred to the fore igne r found nourishment therefrom,

and the Romans who had been repre ssed by force,

scarce ly saw the ir prisoners at l iberty and the Em

peror at a distance , when they hastened to give ven tto the ir de sire for revenge .

1 Con t . Reg in . , A . 964 Liutprand, c. 16 .

ELECT BENED ICT V. OTTO CONDUCTS LEO VI I I .

BACK TO ROME . DEPOS ITION AND EX ILE OF BENED ICT . THE PAPACY RENDERED SUBJECT To THE

GERMAN EMPERORS . PR IVILEGIUM OF LEO VI I I .

John the Twe lfth,hastily summoned back to the

c ity,arrived with an army of friends and vassal s

,and

Leo the E ighth found himse l f deserted . He e scapedwith a few followers to the Empe ror at Came rino .

Berenger and Willa,who had surrende red at S . Leo

,

had been sent by O tto to Bamberg, and Ada lbe rt’slatest attempt could scarce ly appear formidable to theEmperor. Neve rthe less O tto did not immediate lyadvance on Rome

,probably owing to the fact

,that

as he had dismissed a great part of his troops,it was

necessary first to col lect new re inforcements . Johnmeanwhile exercised a crue l revenge upon his enemies .On February 26th he assembled a counci l in S .

Pete r’s . Among the s ixteen bishops present weree leven who had signed his deposition . These pre late smight justly or otherwise represent the i r participationin O tto

’s Council as having been compulsory,and

the cardinal s might urge a l ike defence . Not“only

the insignificant numbe r of c le rgy present at John ’sSynod

,but a lso the ir adhe sion to the two Synods

,

show the wre tched state of confusion in which theRoman Church was sunk . John explained thatowing to the Emperor’s violence he had been driveninto a two months ’ exile , and that he had now re

H ISTORY OF ROME

anomalous position which he he ld as Prince and

Pope at the same time . His youth,the greatness of

his father, the tragic discords of his position , C laim

for him a lenient j udgment . 1

On the death of John the Romans broke the oathwhich had been extorted from them

,and on February

26th,deposing Leo the E ighth , whom they no longer

recognised as Pope , they aga in sought to defy the

Emperor. Benedict the cardinal-deacon was e lectedafter a violent dispute be tween the factions

,and was

accla imed by the militia . Benedict was a worthyman

,and one who in the midst of the preva i l ing bar

barism had acquired the rare title of Grammat icus bywhich he is d istinguished .

2 As one of the accusersof John the Twe l fth

,Benedict had signed the Act of

Deposition . He had,however, appeared at the Feb

ruary Synod which condemned the Imperia l Pope .

In him the Romans behe l d the man who wouldbrave ly de fend the Church aga inst the Imperialpower . In defiance of the Emperor ’s prohibition the

1 I n tempor i bus aa’eo a a

’iaoolo est percussus , u t infra a’ierum octo

spacium eoa’em s i t vu lner e mor tuus . Liu tprand, c. 19 , and s imilar ly the

Vita in Murat , I I I . 2 , p . 326 (God . Vat . 3764) know nothing of the

circumstance.—N am. 2 , 1a

’. M a i i—excess i t

,says Con t . Reg in . John

XI I . was , moreover, buried with every honour in the Lateran . His

ep itaph in the customary offi cial phrases (pr inted in Adinolfi, Roma—di mezzo I . has been preserved . I t beg ins

Quam soler s D ominop lacu i t quam men te moa’estaP ra su l apos tolicus orois et omne o

’ecus ,

H ic s tatu i t tumulo claua’i sua membr a suoi sto

,

Ha c eaa’em sperans u t s ioi r ea

’a’at numa s .

2 E rat en im vir prua’en t iss . g rammat ice ar t is imou tus

,una

’e ao

’

Romanum popu lo B enedictus g rammat icus est appellatus . Ben. of

Soracte , C . 37 ; and Gerbert, Cone. Remens . , c. 28 .

I N THE M IDDLE AGES . 3 53

e lected candidate was consecrated and ascended the

Apostolic Chai r as Benedict the F ifth .

Envoys from the Roman people had hastened to O tto I .

O tto at R ieti to inform him of the recent Papal e lec if’

ezd

i’

f

c

fis

l ,

t ion and to implore his rat ification . O t to had ex

pla ined that he would re turn in company with Leo ,

the i r lawful Pope,and would pun ish the c ity did it

refuse him obedience . He now departed for Rome .

The villages be longing to the Roman te rritory werepillaged and devastated by his troops the city itse l fwas besieged . As O tto lay encamped before the

wa l ls and demanded the surrende r of Benedict , heappeared in the l ight of an Emperor requir ing the

obedience of a C ity which he had subjugated . The

Roman s,howeve r

,on ly recognised a de spot who had

come to rob them of the last rema ins of independence ,

Of the right which they had inherited from the ir ance s to rs— the right of e lecting a pope . The infamyof John the Twe lfth was wiped out . A pious man

had been e lected as his successor,and the Impe ria l

ratification was implored . But could O tto s e t asideLeo the E ighth

,who had been e lected by a Counc i l

with his consent ? Could the Romans , on the othe rhand

,now renounce the attempt to ma inta in aga inst

the new Emperor the i r anci ent right of e lection without admit ting themse lves to be deserving of slave ry ?The ir Pope mounted the wal ls and encouraged the He

.

de fenders to resistance . Famine raged in the city,

and repeated attacks comple te ly shook the courageof the be sieged . They opened the gates on June2 3rd they surrendered Benedict the Fifth and againswore obedience at S . Peter’s grave . They awa itedVOL . I I I . Z

H ISTORY OF ROME

a me rciless punishment . The Empe ror,however

,

granted them an amnesty .

1

Afte r his entry Leo the E ighth assembled a

Counci l in the Late ran at O tto’s command . The

unfortunate Pope of the Romans , clad in pont ificalve stments

,was led into the Ha l l of Council . The

Arch-deacon asked by what right he had ventured toassume the insignia of the sacred dignity, s ince hismaste r and Pope Leo ,

in whose e lection on the deposition O f John he had himse l f taken part, was stil la l ive . He was further charged with having brokenhis oath to his sove re ign and Emperor here pre sentnever to e lect a pope without his consent . “

I f I

have sinned ,”answered Benedict

,

“ have pity uponme .

” And he stretched out his hands in entreaty .

O t to burst into tears . The Roman Church,unde r

N icholas the F i rst, so formidable a tribunal for kings,

now lay at the feet of the Empire . O tto addressedan inte rce ssion in favour of Benedict to the Synod .

The anti-pope clung to his knee s . Leo the E ighthcu t his pal l ium in two , took the fe rule from his hands ,broke it asunder, commanded Benedict to s it uponthe ground , tore the papa l vestments from him

,and

deprived him of his spiritua l dignitie s . He con

demned the anti-pope to perpe tual exile,and only to

please the Emperor did he a l low him to reta in therank of deacon .

2

The Papa l Chai r had long been at the mercy of

the city fact ions . Even women had appointed popes,

1 D imi s i t au tem ei s quanta et qua lia ma la perpessu s est ao i llis

Cbron . Farf . , p . 476 .

L iutprand’

s H istor ia Otton is closes with the Acts of this Synod .


the absolute renunciation of the e lective rights on thepart of the Romans

,and that his creature Leo the

E ighth acquiesced in carrying out his design . A chart e r of this nature i n the imperfect d iction of thee leventh century has been pre served , but its au thent icity i s open to grave doubts , evident fals ificat ions infavour of Imperial rights having placed its true import beyond recognition .

‘

1 I have compared the Privileg . Leo VI I I . (1vo P anorm. V111. I 35 ,

Gr at ian . D ecr et . 63 , C . 23 , M on . Germ .,Leg . I I . 167 ) in the Coa

’. Va t .

1984, fol. 192 , where a lso , fol. 19 1 , the spur ious Pr ivileg . ofAdrian I . is

found . I t g ives the Emperor the power ofchoosing Pope , King , Patriciusand B ishops , u t ips i tar/zen abeo invest i tu ram suscip ian t , et consecr at ionem

r ecip ian t unclecumque per t inuer i t— soli reg i roman i imper i i li ane rever

en t ia tr iou imus potestatem . Flosz has published a manuscript ofTreves ,of saec. XI . or XI I .

,in which he seeks to ’

recognise the orig inal Pr ivilegeof Leo VI I I . This Clumsy documen t rather appears to be a rhetor ical

product ion . The grounds for the spuriousness of the diploma are

g iven by Baronius , Pag i, Murator i, Curtius , Pertz, DOnniges , G iese

brecht, Hinschius , K irchenrecht . A second spurious Pr ivileg ium of

Leo VI I I . in B aron . , and M on . Germ . Leg . I I . 168,agree ing with

the Vi ta Leo V111 . in B ern . Gu ia’on is and Amalr icus Aug . , according

to which the Pope ceded the State of the Church , is only valuable on

accoun t of the specificat ion of the reg ions of the city.— See E .

Bernhe im ,D as unec/i te D ecr et Haa

’r ians 1 . im Z u sammen lzang e mi t

den unec/zt . D ecr eten Leo’s V111 ,

als D ocumen te a’es 1nvesti tu r strei ts

(For sclz. 2 . D . Gesen.,Bd . xv . , 1875 , p .


OTTO RETURNS To GERMANY . DEATH OF LEO IN THE

SPRING OF 965 . JOHN XI I I . POPE . H IS FAM ILY .

H IS BAN ISHMENT . OTTO MARCHES AGAINST ROME .

THE POPE I s AGAIN SEIZED . BARBAROUS PUN ISHMENT OF THE REBELS. THE CABALLUS CONSTANTIN I .LAMENT FOR THE FALL OF ROME INTO THE POWER OF

THE SAXONS .

Having ce lebrated the fe stiva l of S . Pe te r, O tto O t to leavesleft the c i ty on July I s t

, 964 . He took with him fitjn

géguly

Benedict the Fifth,whom he afterwards sent in exile

to Hamburg . Leo the E ighth, who rema ined behindunder such grievous condit ions

,was re leased by death

from his hope less fate in the spring of 96 5 . The

Romans dared no longe r assemble for the e lect ion ofa new pope . On the cont rary

,they sent Azzo and

Marinus,Bishop of Sutri

,to Ge rmany

,and resigned

the e lection to the Emperor. The i r own wishe swere cent red on Benedict the Fifth

,the man of the i r

choice,and they hoped that the Emperor might

rat ify his e lection . Benedict , however , died on July

4th, 96 5 , at Hamburg,where , unde r the custody of

Bishop Adaldag , he had led a saint ly l ife,

1and O tto

was thus re leased from the difficulty of re fusing therequest of the Romans . Courteously dismissing the i rambassadors

,he sent the Bishops O tge r of Spiers and

Liu tp rand of Cremona to Rome .

The choice fe l l on the Bishop of Narni, who was John x111. ,Pope, 965

1 Cont . Reg in . says no thing of the entreat ies of the Romans Adam 972 ‘

of Bremen , however (M on . Germ. ix . speaks of them . BenedictV .

’

s body was afterwards brought to Rome . See Thietmar , who

p raises him greatly (Gnron . IV . c.


e le cted to the Papa l cha i r on October 1s t, 96 5 . John

the Thirteenth,son of anothe r John

,Bishop of Narni

,

had be en educated in the Late ran . He had he remounted in succession the various steps of the eccle s ias t ical ladder

,and had acquired respect by his learn

ing .

1 He had been one of the accuse rs of John theTwe l fth

,and had a lso signed the deposition of Leo

the E ighth,in whose e levation he must have unw il

ling ly acquiesced . He was of distingu ished Romanfamily and nearly re lated to the Senatrix Stephania ,

whom he late r invested with the fie f of Pa lestrina .

He a l so e ffe cted a marriage be tween Bened ict (her sonby the count of the same name ) and the daughte r o fCrescent ius of the Marble Horse

,and then made

Benedict Rector of the Sabina .

2 Afte r the fa l l of

1 Catalog . E ccara’i and Vi ta Cod . Va t . 143 7, 3764 Ughell i ( I .

10 13 ) rightly calls the B ishop of Narni John, the son wrong ly Serg ius .

Catalog . I . in the Cod . Vat . 3 764 has correctly sea’. ann . vi . m . x i . a

'.

v . ; the second , or the cont inuation of Anastasius , wrong ly says anu .

v i i . (m . x i . a’. v . )

2 Hugo of Farfa (M on . Germ . xi ii . 540 ) j on. igi tu r papa qu i appellatu s est maj or , ingr essus papat icum sa ti s exa ltavi t quena

’am nepotem

suum nomine B enedictum,a’ecli tque oi Tneoa’orana’am uxor em sat is

nooi lem, filiam Cr escen t i i qu i vacatu r a Caballo marmoreo

,et comitatum

Sabinensem clea’i t ei et p lures a lios . Another Theodoranda was the

daughter of the Consul Gratian , whom I hold to have been the husbandof Theodora I I . ,

and was married to Ingebald, Rector of the Sabina .

Wilmans believes the former to have been the daughter of Crescentius ,who was executed in 998 the suppos ition , however , cannot be proved ,and is at var iance with the dates of the persons . Benedict was s til lrector of the Sabina in 998. H is sons John and Crescentius are foundfrom 10 10 as lords of Palestrina , with which S tephania had been invested in the year 9 70 . Count Benedict appears as husband o f

Stephania in 987 (D ipl . I I I . in Nerini , p . whose son was

probably the nephew of John XI I I . Stephania mus t theI efOI e havebeen the s ister of the POpe . Petrini, i ll e/n . P renest . p . 104. Was

3 H ISTORY OF ROME

cratic charac te r,for the leader o f the common people

(vu lg us populi ) appeared beside the City Prefect .And since the loss of the e lective privilege musthave i nvolved Rome in a state of continuous revolut ion , i t further signified the re lease of Rome from the

Papal government,as a lso from the yoke of the

fore igner. This outbreak of despa i r was also destinedto a t ragic end .

O tto came to Ita ly in the autumn of 966 . He firstpunished rebe l l ious Lombardy

,whe re the unfortunate

Ada lbert had aga in ventured on war,and aga in been

forced to fly to Cors ica and to wander re stle sslyhither and thithe r. As the Empe ror aga in advancedon Rome

,his approach effected a counter revolution .

John,son of Crescent ius

,and the followe rs of the

banished Pope,rose in rebe l l ion ; Roffred and Stephen

we re S la in , the Pre fect was forced to fly ; the Pope

was re cal led . John the Thirteenth was now at Capua,unde r the protect ion O f Count Pandulf. With a

Capuan e scort he crossed the Sabina,where his

nephew Benedict , step-son of Crescent ius of the

Marble Horse , ruled as Count, and after an exileo f ten months and twenty-e ight days he ente red

the city on Novembe r 12th.

1

O tto soon afte r a lso arrived . Although the city

Campan ino Comi te cum P etro P rafecto, et aa’

j u tor io Vu lg i Popu li qu i

vocan tu r D ecar cones , r ecluserun t cum in Castello S . Ang eli . Cont .

Reg in . Boned . of Soracte , c. 30 , after having comically described the

ill-treatment of the prisoner (ali i percu t ieoan t , capu t ej us , a li i a lapas in

facies ei us per cu t ieoa t , ali i nau tes nu t is cr ucieoan tu r ) . S ic—in Cam

pan iefi n ious inclusus .

1 Ben . of Soracte , c . 39 . The Pope had won over the Capuans

by raising Capua to an archbishopric.


o ffe red no resistance,his troops did not now spare

the inhabitants,and we do not doubt that on this

o ccasion Rome was both sacked and sta ined with theblood of her c itizens . The indignant Emperor resolved to punish the heads of the rebe l l ion with O tto I .

hesc n . s ers men ear

msseveri t The more 0 s Icuou Offend b fifeing the title of Consul

,were ban ished to Ge rmany.2

1

551112112

Twe lve leade rs of the people , ca lled in anc ient documents D eca rcones—possibly Capta ins of the Regions-expiated the ir love of freedom on the gal lows .Severa l were executed or blinded .

1 Barbarous and

strange as the ag e itse lf was the punishment infl ict edon Peter the City-Pre fect , who had been dragged a

prisoner to the dungeons of the Late ran . The

Emperor handed him ove r to the Pope and Johncaused him to be hanged by his ha ir from the

2 Vi ta j olt . X111 a’e vu lg i popu lo, qu i vocan tur D ecarcones a

’uo

a’ecim su spena

’i t in pat iou lis . The word D ecar cones is only used in thisvi ta . Reg ino counts 13 ex maj or i ons Romanor . , Without the prefects .Cod . Estens . only g ives 1 1

,and Murator i has the var iants a

’ecar tores

,

a’ecar t iones , a

’ecu r iones . In the Cod . Vat . 1437 I Clearly read a

’ecar

cones . Giesebrecht holds them to have been members of the Vu lg us

popu li or vi r i li umi les , which is contradicted by the epithet maj or es in

Reg ino . They were,nevertheless , leaders of the populace . I f the

word shou ld be read D ecar cliontes,then is it a translat ion of D ecem

pr imi . D ecarcones , or rather D ecar iones as it must be read, arose,

accord ing to my View ,from a

’ecem cap i ( tanei ) r eg ionum ,

which the

people joined together into a’e-car iones , as men afterwards said

i capor ion i , or in Orvieto an ter ion i . The i in r iones might eas ily bet ransformed into a c in writing . In 1 148 there were in Viterbo Ten

men”or Capua

’ece (Orio li in the Giorn . A r caa

’ico

,t . 137 , p . 2 S ince

Reg ino counted 13 ex maj or ib. Romanor . ,the 13th be longed to

Trastevere . There were 12 standard-bearers in saec . xi i. and xiii . also .

In Henry V .

’

s t ime the a’r aconar i i were st ill d istinguished from the

aqu i lifer i , leonzfer i , lup ifer i , so that Hegel’

s View ( I . that theright reading is D raconar i i , standard-bearers , is untenable .

HISTORY OF ROME

eque strian statue of Marcus Aure l ius,the Cabal lus

Constantin i .” Thus by a s ingular accident a ce lebra ted monument of antiqu ity emerge s out of thedarkness of the t ime .

This renowned work of art sti l l survive s as the

most beautiful ornament of the Capitol . The

trave l ler looks upon it with reve rence , rememberingthe seventeen centurie s which have passed over thebronze Emperor

,who with outstre tched arm s its his

horse in maj e stic sadness,and who may possibly re

ma in there while another l ike period of history runsits course . Created while the powe r of the Caesarswas at i ts he ight , .fhe statue has witnessed the fa l l ofthe Empire and

{

the growth of the Papacy in Rome .

Goths,Vanda ls

,He rul i

,Byzantine s

,Ge rmans , inten t

on pil lage and slaughte r,have passed it by and spared

it . The rapacious Constans the Second looked on itand left i t unheeded . Temple s and basi l icas have

fa l len around it . Colonnade s and monuments havebeen ove rthrown . The statue itse l f has rema ined un

harmed l ike the sol itary genius of Rome ’s great past .It s name

,howeve r

,had been forgotten , and afte r the

equestrian statue of Constantine on the Arch ofSeve rus had been destroyed

,i t was baptised in the

name of the Emperor who had been so great a benefactor to the Church . A rude legend conce rning itsorigin had arisen . Pilgrims re lated how Rome hadbeen besieged by a fore ign king a t the Late ran Gate ,while the Consuls sti l l ruled the C i ty. A gigan t icarmour-bearer

,or a peasant , had offe red to de l ive r i t

i n its stra its,bu t had demanded the sum of thi rty

thousand seste rces and a gilt equestrian statue in re

I N THE M IDDLE AGES . 363

turn for his services . The Senate consented . He

mounted a horse without a saddle , a sickle in hishand . An owl had reported to him where the kingwas to be found eve ry night at the foot of a tree .

He se ized the king and carried him off,while the

Romans attacked the enemy’s camp and possessedthemse lves of the ir t reasures . The Senate bestowedthe promised reward on the l iberator

, and orde red a

horse of gilt bronze without a saddle,on which the

ride r was represented,the right hand (with which he

had taken the king) outstretched . An image of theowl was placed on the horse ’s head

,and the king

himse lf with bound hands unde rneath his hoofs . 1

The s tatue of Marcus Aure l ius there fore stood in.

perfect prese rvat ion on the Late ran fie ld ( the CampusLate ranens is ) in the tenth century.

2 The Lateranbasilica was one O f Constantine ’s foundations . The

Patriarchium had been his palace,and it was con

sequently be l ieved that the equestrian statue was a

portrai t of this great Empe ror. Seve ral memorial s

1 E t equum a neum pr o memor ia a’eau ratum et s ine sella , ip so

a’esuper r es ia

’en te, ex tensa manu a

’ex ter a qua ceperat Reg em . M irab ilia

and Graphia . The horse has a tuft of hair on i ts forehead , which thepopular imag inat ion t ransformed into an owl and it is possible that afettered pr isone r of war may orig inally have been represented unde r

neath the horse . The legend probably belong s to the X . saec. I II

966 a Prefect of the city was hanged on this s tatue , and in 1847 the

I talian Tricolour was placed in the hand of the same Marcus Aure lius .

2 The Vi ta j ob. X111 does not specify the s ite of the equestrianstatue : per cap i llos cap i t i s cum suspena

’i t in caba llum Cons tan t in i .

The same Vi ta and Catal . E ccara’i,however

,have in the L ife of John

X IV. : in Campum an te Caba llum Constan t in i . The expression Campu sso frequently used of the Lateran Field has m isled Fea and others intothinking of the Campo Vaccino .

H ISTORY OF ROME

and monuments of ancient Rome had al ready foundrefuge in the Late ran . As early as the tenth centurythe bronze group of the nursing wolf had been placedin one of the Ha l ls

,where tribunal s we re he ld unde r

the presidency of the Imperial M issi , and from the

group this hal l rece ived the name acl L upam.

1

We return,however

,to the Prefect , whom we le ft

hanging by his hai r . Removed from this position , he

was placed backwards and naked upon an as s,the

tai l of which,furnished with a be l l

,he had to grasp as

re ins . A sack of feathers was placed upon his head ,two similar sacks we re fastened to his thighs , and he

was thus led through Rome . He was fina l ly exiledbeyond the Alps . Revenge was exerc ised even uponthe dead . The bodie s of Count Ro ffred and the

Ves t iar ius Stephen we re taken from the ir grave s byImperia l command and thrown outside the wa l ls .This act of seve rity a roused horror and i ndignat ionwithin the city, surprise and sympathy without, andhatred among all the enemies of the Empire . Johnthe Thirteenth a lone had reason for gratitude towardsO tto . He te rms him the l iberator and restorer of thet otte ring Church the i l lustrious gue st and thriceble ssed Empe ror. The Romans neverthe less could

1 L z'

oele. a’e 1mp . Potest . , p . 720 : in j udiciali loco ao

’ Lateran is,uoi

clici tur ao’ Lupam, qua mater vocaoa tu r Romanor . This is copied by

Benedict of Soracte , cap . 24 . The she-wolf s tood there until 147 1 , wheni t was b rought to the Cap itol . The Lateran . Ca tasto of 1450 ment ionsthe house, in which la lupa et oper a a

’o meta/lo stood : Eleury , Le

Latran, p . 498 . Stevenson , Annali a’. 1nst . 1877 , p . 380 .

2 Mans i ( Conci l. xviii . 509) in the Ravennese bull of the inst itutiono f the Archbishopr ic of Magdeburg : Roma capu t tot ia s muna

’i ci

eccles ia un iver sa lis ao inqu is pene pessum data,a D omno Ottone aug .

[mp a D eo coronato Ca sare, et magna, et ter oenea’icto—er ecta est

,ci in

H ISTORY OF ROME

thy powe r thou hast tr iumphed ove r nations,hast

cast the world into the dust,hast strangled the kings

of the earth . Thou hast borne the sceptre and the

great power . Thou hast been utterly plunde red andravaged by the Saxon king. As some wise men sa id ,and as i t wi l l be found written in thy historie s , thouhast forme rly fought with fore ign nations and beenvictor ious from north to south . The people of Gaulhave taken posse ssion of thee . Thou wast too beautiful . All thy wa l l s with towers and battlements werea s i t is found . Thou hadst three hundred and e ightyOne towe rs

,forty-s ix forts

,s ix thousand e ight hun

dred battlements : thy gates we re fifteen . Woe to theLeonine city ! long since wert thou taken

,but now

thou art desolated by the Saxon king .

” 1

Such is the lamen t ra ised by an ignorant monk forthe fa l l Of Rome unde r the Saxons . From the lone lyhe ights of Soracte the chronicle r could look on the

beauteous pla ins be low,and watch the armed pro

cessions as they t rooped year afte r year across theCampagna to attack the E te rnal C ity and to fi l l i twith blood and te rror . In the changed Conditions ofRome the lament of the monk cannot move us as didthe e legie s of his predece ssors . We may ,

however,place his lamentation beside that of Je rome on thefal l of the city unde r the Goths , beside that of Gregory

1 Ve Roma ! qu ia tant is g en t is opp r essa et conculcata . Qu i et iam a

Saxone r eg e appr eensa f ui st is,et g laa

’iat i popu li tu i , et rooor tua aa’

n ic/zi lum rea’acta est . A ur um et a rg en tum tuum in i llor um mar supp i s

depor tan t . The enumerat ion of the towers, &c. ,

appears as the second

since that of the Anon . of E insiedeln . These enumerations are basedessentially on the ancient reg isters , but this by no means excludes th enewer build ing s , especially the towers .


under the te rror of the Lombards , and lastly besidethe touching dirge over Rome ’s subjugat ion to theByzan t ine yoke . Comparing it with the se earl ie re legies

,we discover in the barbarism of its diction the

d epth to which the language and learning of theRomans had sunk in the tenth century.

C HAPTE R IV .

1 . CORONATION or OTTO 11.—EMBASSY OF LIUTPRAND

To BYZANTIUM—PRAENESTE OR PALESTR INA—THESENATR Ix STEPHAN IA RECEIVES THE INVESTITURE OF

TH IS C ITY IN THE YEAR 97 0 .

FOR s ix entire years affa irs demanded O tto’s pre sence in I ta ly

,the country in which afte r him count

le ss Ge rmans we re to win glory,but at the same

time a bitter hatred and the i r graves . During hissoj ourn in Rome he had inve sted Pandulf

,

“the I ron

head,

” of Capua with Spole to and Camerino. He had

entrusted a fa i thfu l vassa l with the fa irest doma ins ofSouthe rn I ta ly

,and had made ove r to him the war

with Byzantium,which stil l continued . He ce lebrated

the Easte r of 969 in Ravenna with Pope John , and ina Counci l re stored this C ity with its territory and

other patrimonie s to the Church .

1 He then broughthis son to I taly in order to secure the succe ssion inhis family and to make the I tal ian kingdom he reditary l ike the Empire .

O tto the Second ente red the c ity with his father onDecember 24th, and on Christmas Day rece ived theImperia l Crown at the hands of John the Thirteenth .

2

1 Con t . Regi non is , A . 967 .

2 Annal. Saxo, A . 967 , and letter of Otto I . to the Dukes of Saxony ,

HISTORY OF ROME

wit and courtier-l ike tact qual ified him for the mostdifficult of all embassies of the time . He wrote aminute account of his mission to O tto, and thisaccount, which we stil l possess, forms one of the mostamusing re cords of the age . The Bishop give s a

picture of the Byzantine Court,which

,a lthough

pe rhaps occasiona l ly coloured by ma l ice,is drawn

with l ive ly insight and rema ins in the highest degreevaluable . We quote i t t here fore

,so far as it re fers

to Rome and the Romans . 1

L iutp rand reached the capital of the East on June

4th, 968 . He wa s at length admitted to an audienceof N icephorus Phocas , the renowned conque ror ofCrete . The

” va in courtie r found himse lf in the

presence of a sove re ign of rude but vigorous and

heroic type , who conde scended to bestow a few wordsupon him . He revenged himse l f for his contemptuoustreatment by drawing the portra it of a monster . The

Emperor addre ssing him sa id We desired to rece iveyou with splendour and magnanimity ; the impietyof your sove re ign doe s not

,howeve r

,al low us to do

so. He has made himse l f master of Rome by hosti lei nvasion he has

,contrary to right

,deprived Adalbert

and Berengar of l ife . He has kil led,blinded or

ban i shed the Romans,and has presumed to subject

the C ities of our Empire by fire and sword .

” 2The

Bishop,who remained unembarrassed

,urged in reply

1 Relat io a’e Legatione Constantinopolit . , last printed in M on . Germ.

v . 347 . This Splendid pamphlet , ful l of life , encounters us l ike an

oasis in the midst of a desert of literature. Since leaving Procopiusbehind we have not met anything s imilar to it.2 Cap . 4 . The imprisoned Berengar had died in 966 at Bamberg ;

Adalbert , however, st ill lived, so that the speech is inaccurate .


t o these accusations that O tto had de l ivered Rome

from the rule of dissolute women and insolent aristoc rat s , and assured Nicephorus that sentence of ex ecut ion had only been passed upon perjured rebe l s andin accordance with the laws of Justin ian . In hisfurther deal ings, he expla ined that O tto had restoreda ll the Church property in his Empire t o the Pope

,

and he refe rred to the Donation of Constantine , at

this time esteemed genuine . The pride of the GreekEmpe ror

,the sanctity of his person

,the cla ims of

ancient legitimacy to powe r ove r Rome and I taly,

the con tempt for the barbarian,the unwie ldy and

theatrical ceremonial o f the Court,are attract ive ly

described . We may , however , be permitted to doubtwhe ther L iutprand actual ly displayed the courageousindependence of which he boasts . A S Basil hadformerly refused the Imperia l t itle of B as ileus to

Lewis the Second, so N icephorus now re fused it toO tto

,according him mere ly that of Rex .

1 N iceph

orus sti l l considered himse lf sole Roman Emperor,and

Liutprand was thrown into no sl ight dismay when a

letter of John the Thirteenth reached Constantinopleaddressed in audacity or ignorance to “

the Emperoro f the Greeks .” At table

,whithe r N icephorus con

descendingly, and with an i ll-concea led contempt,

invited O tto’s ambassador, he one day taunted L iutprand with the reproach that those who in Ita ly nowcal led themse lves Romans were barbarians or Lombards . The true Romans

,

” answered the Lombard,

1[Ipse en im vos non imperatorem,

ia’ est Baame’

a , sua lingua, sea’05

i ndignat ionem (i ii—ya, ia’ est regem, nostra vocaoat . Liutpr . , Leg . , C. 2 .

—TRANSLATOR .]

H ISTORY OF ROME

were descended from the fratricide Romulus and

from robbers . We,howeve r

,Lombards

,Saxons ,

Franks,Lotharingians , Bavarians , Swabians , Bur

gundians , de spise the Romans to such a degree thatwhen we wish to insult our enemie s we ca l l themRomans

,

’ for by this name we denote all that is ignoble

,cowardly

,cove tous

,sensual and fa l se .

” 1 The

Greeks smiled ; they hated fal len Rome,and since

they dared not Openly express the hope of recoveringthe city from the barbarians , they assured the envoysthat Constantine had brought the Senate and the

Roman knights to Byzantium,and had only left the

dregs of the population behind .

Meanwhile,

d

when L iutprand demanded the hand ofthe Emperor’s step-daughter Theophano for O tto

’sson

,he was answered : If you surrende r what be

longs to us,you Shal l atta in your des ire . Give us

the re fore Ravenna and Rome and all the land thatl ies be tween the se C i tie s and our provinces. Willyour lord ente r into an a l l iance without cementing itby marriage , then let him re store freedom to Rome .

To the argument,that O tto had made the Church

riche r than it had previ ously been , while the Byzan

tine gove rnment had not re stored the patrimonie swhich it had annexed

,the Impe rial m in ister replied

that the Emperor would do as de si red i s soon as he

1 Hoc solo i . e. Romanorum nomine qu ia’qu ia’ ignooi li tat is , qu icqu idt imia

’

i tat is, qu icqu ia

1avar i tia , q. luxur ia , q . mena’aci i , immo q. vi ti

orum est,compr efiena

’en tes c. 12 . With reference to this passage

we may remember the verdict of Salvian ,who 500 years before Lint

prand was forced to say : nomen civium Romanorum aliquando

magno a stimatum—nunc- nec vi le tantum, sea’etiam abomi

'

nabi lepcne

Izaoetur .

cerningancient

of its

HISTORY OF ROME

with Fulvia was Livia,

fi rst the enemy, afterwards thewife of Augustus . The balmy a ir of Praene ste hadcured the dissolute Tiberius . Emperors , poets, all

worshippers of Fortuno—Ovid , Horace , Virgil— lovedthe laure l-crowned city sacred to the Goddess . I t

had fal len to decay in barbarian times ; its temples ,bas i l icas and theatres had perished or stood in ruins

,

and the splendid maste rpiece s of three differentperiods of antiqu ity lay buried in dust .

1

Praeneste had,howeve r

,become one of the seven

suffragan bishoprics of Rome . Agap itus , a sa intlyyouth

,had here Suffered martyrdom on August 28 th, ,

274 ,and wa s now worshipped as patron of the city in

the cathedra l which had arisen on the ruins of the

John XI I I . Temple of Fortune . John now bestowed the town ininves’s me hereditary lease on the Senatrix Stephania . PraeSenatrixS tephania neste was to be long to her

,her children and grand

WIthPraeneste , ch i ldren , for a rent of ten gold sol id i , but It was afte r97 8 ° wards to re turn to the Church . The document

affords us an example of the introduction of thesystem of feuda l tenure into Roman territory.

2

We shal l presently encounter the descendants o fStephania in possession of Palestrina

,and Shal l fre

quently return to the city in deal ing with the historyof family wars of the e leventh century.

1 The celebrated p icture in mosaic, excavated at Palestrina in 1640 ,

is st il l the treasure of the baronial castle . The excavations in Palestrina have yielded many Etruscan articles of toilet te the gem of the

KircherianMuseum in Rome the Cista l lly s t ica , was also brought fromPalestrina . Need I also remind the reader that the ruins of Praeneste ,on these enchanting heights , gave b irth to the genius of modern

I talian music ?2 D iploma in Petrini, App . 394 Marini

,n . 32 Murat . , Ant . 1t . , i ii .

TheOphano

married to

O tto

and

crownedApri l 14th,97 2 .

376 HISTORY OF ROME

had seen her father die of poison,mixed for him by

he r mothe r,the Empress TheOphano ; she had Seen

this mothe r,

first in the arms of N icephorus andafterwards in those of his murderer Z imisces , who ,once possessed of the bloody crown

,banished the

adulte re ss to the sol itude of an Armenian convent.1

Accustomed to the skie s,the language and the arts

of the East,TheOphano re luctantly departed for the

West to l ive among the i ron warriors O f Saxony, incitie s whose cl imate and want of civil isation made

them seem as barbarous in her eyes .The Impe rial bride came unde r the escort of Gero ,Archbishop of Cologne

,two bishops

,and severa l

counts and d ukes . She landed in Apul ia and

entered Rome , where the bridegroom awaited her,on Apri l 14 , 972 . The young Caesar was onlyseventeen years old

,boyish and attractive i n appear

ance , highly educated,brave and amiable , conceal ing

within a’

S l ight and diminutive body the soul of ahero .

2 The youthful bride,l ittle more than sixteen

years of ag e , was beautifu l and inte l lectual . To the

hands of this pair the e lder O tto confided the futureof the empire . John the Thirteenth crowned Theophano on the 14th April , and the marriage tookplace immediate ly after in the pre sence of an

assemblage of the noble s of Germany, I taly, andRome .

3 Brill iant festivals were given in honour of1 Theophano, mother of the pr incess of the same name , was the

daughter of an innkeeper in Constant inople , and of such surpassingbeauty that Romanus I I . had made her his wife .

2 [n parvo corpore max ima v ir tus . Vi ta S . Aa’aloer t i

,c. 8 .

3 Anna l . Looiens . ; Annal . Saxo ; Annal . A . 972 . B ene

a’ict i Cli ron . ,

v. 7 18 .


t he occasion . Now that for the first time anEmperor of the We st was united to a Byzantineprince ss, a re concil iat ion seemed to have beene ffected be tween Rome and Constantinople . But

the splendour of the union brought no rea l advantage . I ts fruit was a child prodigy

,who

,imbued

w i th an almost morbid preference for Greece and

Rome , looked with contempt on his own country.

The Impe rial family returned to Germany after themarriage festivities

,and John the Thirteenth soon

a fterwards died on Septembe r 6th,

His successor was Benedict the Sixth , the son of51116

151

522Hildebrand

,a Roman of German ance stry. He had 973—984 .

previously been deacon in the E ighth Region , nowno longe r known as Forum Romanorum, but as S uoCap i tolio. Owing to the absence of the Emperor, andthe consequent de lay of the rat ification , Benedictwas not orda ined unti l January 19 th, Hise levation had been the cause of a schism , for theRomans

,notwithstanding the loss of the ir e lective

r ights,continued to put forward candidate s for the

Papacy. The Imperial faction had proposed Bened ict ; the Nationa l party had

,howeve r

,voted for

1 He was buried in S . Paul’s . H is epitaph says at the end : H ic

vero summu s P ont . j oannes in ap . Sea’e sedi t anuos septem . D e

p os i t ion is ej us clies 8 . 1a’. Sept . ab 1ncarn . D . A . , 9 72 (Baron . ,

ao’ A .

2 Coa’. E stens is (Murat iii . 2,

B enedict V1 . ,cliacon . a

’e

r eg . V111 suocap i tolio ex patre 1la’eorana

’o monacno ing ressus est m.

f an . cl. 19 . H ic fu it electus V. anno r eg is Otton is , 1na 1 ,D omnus

seclit a . 1,m. 6. This is the passage ou t of which arose the im

ag inary Pope D onus, who has been inserted in later catalogues

between Bened . VI , and Bon iface —Jaffe, p . 33 1 ; f anro. cl. D .

Reiclzs , ii . 2, von Giesebrecht , Excur s . viii .

Death ofO tto I . ,

May 7 th,

97 3

TheCaballiMarmore i.


Franco, son of Ferrucius . Benedict the Sixthbecame Pope , fear of the power of the old Emperorsufficing to keep Rome in check during his l i fe time .

Afte r having made Germany the most powerfulcountry of Europe

,the great monarch died on May

7 th, 9 7 3 . The Romans immediate ly deserted the

Pope , and hastened to bring forward the i r owncandidate i n his stead . The youth of O tto the

Second , his absence in Germany,where he was

obl iged to se cure the sovere ignty,the promises of

he lp on the part of the Byzantine commanders inSouthern I taly gave courage to the Romans . The

moment seemed to have arrived when it m ight bepossible to re cover the ir ancient rights , and perhapsobta in re lease from fore ign rule .

The powe rful family of the Crescentn stood at thehead of the national i sts . I ts ancestors , l ike the

ancestors of Albe ric,are ve i led in obscurity . The

names Cre scens and Crescent ius , howeve r, frequentlyoccur during Imperia l t imes

,a lthough perhaps not

until the third century. In the Placitum of Lewisthe Third

,of the year 90 1 , the name of a Crescent ius

appears for the first time . We observe it aga inamong the nobles of Alberic , and have seen Crescent ius of the Marble Horse take part in the

November Synod of O tto the First . The booksof Farfa further mention the marriage of Theodoranda

,daughte r of this Crescent ius , with Benedict ,

nephew of John the Thirteenth . Another John ,undoubtedly son of the same Crescent ius , led the

counter revolution of 966 .

The surname a cabal/o marmoreo i s one of the


Tiberius replied : ‘If you are indeed able to do this

,

then I will give you whateve r you desire .

’ Theyanswe red : ‘Money we do not de sire

,but a monu

ment .’

After they had revealed his inmost thoughtsto the Emperor on the following day ,

Tiberius commanded the i r memorial s to be erected

,i .e . two pran

cing horse s , symbols of the powerful ru lers of theearth : a mightier k ing was

,however

,to come to

mount the horses,that i s

,to subdue the powe r of the

prince s of the world . Hal f-naked men were therefore represented standing near the horse s with the i rarms raised and the i r fists clenched . The se men

fore te l l the future,and

,as they are themse lve s naked ,

so all knowledge l ies naked be fore them . The womanwho sits surrounded by serpents

,and holding a bowl

,

s ignifies the Church,which is surrounded by many

documents . N0 one,however

,can understand these

writings who has not previously bathed in that bowl .”

Such is the legend of the Cabal l i Marmore i . I t consequently appears that close to the horse tame rs stooda statue of Hygie ia

,with the serpent drinking out of

a patera,and that this statue was popularly regarded

as the symbol of the Church .

1

Thus from the place of his dwe l l ing Crescent iusrece ived a surname

,which was late r borne by othe r

1 M irabilia, D e Caballis M armor eis in Roma . The Romans saida Cabal/o M armoreo in the s ingular . So too the Quirinal is calledMonte Cavallo at the present day . Signor ili also wrote in saec. XV

172 clivio Caoalli (De Rossi, 1 c pr ime r accolte, p . The Anon .

o f Einsied . thus specified the horses : Tnerwa Sallust iana ,Sca

Susanna et Cavalli i ll armorei . Buffalini 5 plan of the city ( about155 1 ) marks them as standing beside the Baths of Constantine, beforeS ixtus V . in 1589 had them placed on the piazza of the Quirinal .


Romans also.

1 These Crescentn had undoubtedlyerected a fortress for themse lves in the ruins of theThermae of Constantine

,perhaps on the spot where

the Pa lazzo Rospig lios i now stands . People oftencal led themse lves a fte r the quarter where they dwe lt ,and s ince these quarte rs were usual ly marked bymonuments

, the Romans of the tenth century are

frequently designated by curious sounding names .The se names arrest our attention

,recal l ing as they

do the monuments of antiquity,and frequently form

ing our sole evidence of the i r continued existence .

We thus encounter Romanus and Gregorius a CampoMartio

,Johanne s de Campo Rotundo

,Se rgius de

Palat io,Benedictus a Mace l lo sub Templo Marce l l i

( of the meat marke t unde r the theatre of Marce l lus) ,Durantus a V ia Lata , I ldebrando a Septem Viis

,

Gratianus a Balneo Miccino,Johannes a S . Ange lo ,

Franco a S . Eustachio , R iccardo a Sancto Petro inVincula

,Petrus de Cannapara , Bonizo de Colossus ,

Andreas de Pe tro : all of them derived the ir name sfrom the al leys of the Colosseum .

2 From these local1 A Lanclolfo a

’e caba llo marmoreo, A . 1005 . Reg . Suolac. , fol . 156

and a B era la’u s etfi lius pr imus clefensor a’o Cavallo M armoreo

,A . 10 14

(Galletti, D ei . P r im. ,n . 30 ) seem to belong to this fam ily. Aga in , in

1 148 , I find a Sena tor Georg ius ab equo marmor eo M scr . Va t ican of

Gallett i, n . 8043 .—A . 1259 again nerea

’es Cr escen t i i a

’o caballo—M ser . ,

n . 8044, p . 3 1. Document of Alex. IV. of August 1, 1287—3. L ion

ara’u s cavaler io a

’e cavallo ioia

’.

2 Andreas a’e Petro qu i a

’iceoatur cle Viola a’e Colosso tes t is . M ittar

elli, p . 235 , dipl . 104, A. 10 19 .—The Cannapara was a street which in

sece. x . and later lay in the Velabrum opposite S . Theodore , betweenthe Palatine and the Capitol . Casimiro, Gescnicli te von A raceli

, p . 438 .

The name Cannapara is as yet unexplained ; i t probably referred to

some ancient building . See Vol . V. An ancient church called S.

Maria in Cannapara stood within it .


n ickname s the family name s of the nobi l ity, such asS . Eustachio or Santo Stat io, were occasional ly der ived . The populace

,however, a l ready named indi

viduals afte r the ir’

peculiar characteristics , and in thisway many proper name s arose . Thus we find Cre scent ius

,Five-teeth Adrian

,Short-neck ; Benedict,

Sheep smouth ; John , Hundred—swine Leo ,Short

hose .

1 The custom,howeve r

,of naming the children

after father or mother continued to exist ; as,for

instance,Stephanus de Imiza

,Leo de Calo Johannes

,

A zone de O rlando , Benedictus de Abbat issa ,Johanne s

de Pre sby tero , Cres cen t iu s de Theodora .

As early as the tenth century the name Crescent iuswas as common a s the women ’s names

, S tephanio ,

Theodora,Marozia .

2 As one Cres cent ius was calledof the Marble Horse

,so others were known as de

Bon izo,de Ro izo

,de Duranti, Raynerii , Crescent ius

Cannu lus , Crescent ius Stellu to , sub Jan iculo ,de Polla

or Musca Pul lo , de Flumine , de Imperio, a Puteo deProba (of the founta in of Proba) , and Squassa Casata

( of the ru ined house ) .3 I t i s utterly improbable that

1 Cr escentius qu i vaca tur Qu inque D en tes ( Gall . a’. P r im. , n . 28

,

A . Aa’r ianus qu i capu t in collo vocor ( i bid . ,

11 . 29 , A .

B enedictus qu i supernomen B uccapecu vocatu r n . 30 , A .

j o/zannes Cen tum P orci ( ibid . , n . 259 , A . Leo Cur taor aca,also

a Cu r tafemor a ( ioicl . , n . 26, 27, A . The Curtabraca survived

unt il saec. xiv. in saec. x iii. there was a Torre de’Curtabrachi in the

Reg ion Par ione (Gallett i , Gaoio, p .

2 Duret, j olzann s X . P on tzficatsantr i tt , p . 302 , only knows of the

two Roman Marozias and one of Ravenna in soce . x . I have read the

name,however, in countless ten th century documents of Subiaco and

Farfa, and equally often the name of Crescentius .

3 The copy (attributed to the year 1002) of the spurious donat ion of

Euphemianus (Nerini, p . 33) has the signatures : Cr escent i a s suo

j an iculo, Cresc. a’e Polla—Crescent

, nob. vir , qu i vocor a puteo a’e P roba


Crescent ius stirred up an i nsurrection the Romansse ized Benedict the Sixth

,threw him into S . Ange lo ,

and he re strangled him in July 9 74 . Meanwhile the yra ised a deacon , the son of Fe rrucius , to S . Pe ter ’sCha i r as Boniface the Seventh .

1 The Pope th'

usforcibly instal led is sa id to have been a Roman , buthis family is unknown . Since he bore the surnameFranco

,i t has been supposed that he be longed to a

family of the name which is frequently mentioned indocuments of the tenth century

,and which may have

been ofFrench origin .

2 Boniface,who stepped to the

of an inscription have been discovered in the crypt of S . Lorenzo,

re lating to the death of a Landulfus,who had been adopted by the

Senatrix Marocia . The father of Landulfus i s here specifi ed as a

Roman,a descendant of Senatr icis Tlzeoa’ora atque j onann is consu lis

et a’ucis . In him D e Ross i thinks he recognises Crescentius de Theo

dora (B u ll. a’i A rc/i . Cr is t . , 1864, n . The date of this inscription

is D ep . X V. R 7. Aug . Temp . D . j olt . X11 , P . P . 1na’. V1 . , A .D . ,

[n D CCCLXJ Z Z . D e Rossi has , in accordance therewith , boldlybrought the Crescentii into connect ion with Theophylact .

1 Caa’. Vat . , 3 764 : Comprelzensus a quad . Cr escen t io Tneodora

fi lius et in castellum S . Angeli r etrusus ioiq. str ang u latus es t p rop ter

bon ifa t ium a’iacon i , quem miser unt vivente eo papam. Amal . Aug

a’e mana’ato Cenci i Tneoa’ora fili i , ioi interfectus a tque str ang u latus .

Herm . Contr . , A . 974 a Roman is cr iminatus , et Crescent ia Tneoclora

fi lio—et eo vivente B on ifacius Fer rucci i fi l . , Pp . ord inatus . L . Fer

rucci wrote I nvest igazon i—su la per sona ed i l pont ij l a’i B ou if V11. ,

fig liuolo a’i Fer r uccio, 1856, in which he strives to whitewash his

b lackamoor namesake . Instead of co vivente he invents the reading ea

j uvante ( se. T —The installat ion of Boniface and the murderof the Pope probably took place about the same t ime . Amal . Aug .

Roman i ipsum B ou if sublimaverunt statim cum a’icto B enea. per eos

strangulato.

2 Fr anco a’e B r i tto, Franco a S . E ustacbio. The epitaph of Boned .

VI I . calls Bonif. Franco. I have read at Monte Casino d iplomas of

this period, according to which Ferrucci lived in Gaeta itself ; inNerini , p . 392 : A . 1072 Fer rucius a

’e j o/zann is a

’o Crescent io testis .


papal throne across the body of the l iving or dyingBenedict, i s described as a monste r ” by his con

temporaries,who assert that he was sta ined with the

blood of his predecessor.1 The events of this periodin Rome are unfortunate ly only known to us throughthe most scanty notice s

,and we are scarce ly aware of

the e levation of Boniface before we hear of his over Bonifacethrow . In the course of a month and twe lve days hecollected the e cc lesiast ica l treasure s toge the r andfledto Constantinople

,where

,l ike other fugitive s

,he found

protection . This fact makes it probable that hise levation had been assoc iated with the policy of theGreek Emperor

,who precise ly at this time was striving

to supplant German influence in Sale rno . The banishment of the anti—pope could only be the work of theGerman party

,which was aga in triumphant in Rome

,

and was st i l l headed in the south by the va l iantPandulf the Ironhead .

2

Cre scent ius a lso vanishes from history. He doesnot appear to have sought the Patriciate

,and what i s

more he seems to have rema ined quie t ly in Romeafter the victory of his opponent s . A document ofthe year 977 mentions Cre s cent ius Illus t ris s imus ,

cal led de Theodora , as a peace ful tenant of a fortress

I f any one wishes to assert that Boniface VI I . was related to Crescentius,

I have nothing to the contrary. I cannot,however , des ign genealog ical

tab les .

1 Hor renclum monstrum B on if . (M alifacius ) cunctos mor ta les nequ it iasuperan s , et iampr ior i s P on t . sang u ine cruen tus . Thus wrote Gerbertat the Council of Rhe ims, and Gerbert had been under O tto I I . Abbot

of Bobbio, and therefore res ident in I taly.

2 Coa’. Va t ican . Catal . E ccara’i — secl . m . 1 , cl . 12 . Herm. Con tr . ,

A . 974 post unum m. expu lsa s, Constant inop . postea pet i i t .

VOL . I I I . 2 B

H ISTORY OF ROME

near Ve lle tri . l Another document dated O ctobe r 1sth,9 89 , refe rring to him as al ready dead

,speaks of him

as Consul and D ux,husband of the i l lustrious Sergia,

and fathe r of John and Crescent ius .

2 We be l ievethat we final ly d iscove r him as monk in the conventof S . Alexius

,where he rema ined making expiation

for his s ins unti l his death.on July 7 th, 9 84. An inscription in the church informs us that “ Here l ies the

Crescent ius ce lebrated Cres cen t ius ,‘

the most distinguished Romand e Theodora d iesas a monkA . 984 .

citizen,and the great leader . His father John ,

and

his mother Theodora,bequeathed him renown . Christ

,

the loving Saviour of souls, la id hold of him ,so that

,

renounc ing the world , he cast himse lf down on thethreshold of the holy martyr Boniface , and he re , inthe habit of a monk , dedicated himse l f to the Lord .

He enriched this temple with gifts and many farms .Pray for him

,thou who readest

,in orde r that he may

at last obtain forgiveness for his crime s . He died July

7 th,in the year of the Incarnat ion of our Lord ,

1 Lateran document in Galletti’

s Va t ic. M ser . ,n . 8042, p . 7 : The

Abbot John leases the fortress Crescenzo i llmo vi ro qu i appellatur de

Tneodor a , 9 th Apr il 9 77 .

2Va t ic. M ser .

,n . 8043 (pages unnumbered) Lateran documents of

15th Oct . 989 nos j o/zannes et Cr escen t ius i llmi vi r i atque g ermane

fi li i D . Cr escen t i i olim Consu lis et D ucis qu i diceoatu r de T/zeodora ,

seu Serg iae i llmefemine olim j uga lium o. m. Among those who gavethe ir consent there is a Constantia , bu t no Theodoranda . From thisd iploma Wilmans (Excurs . X . ) seeks to prove that the elder Creseu t ins had really two sons

,as Specified above .

3 Corpore nic r ecuoat Cr escent ius incli tu s ecce,E x im ius civi s Romanus D ux quoque M agnu s

Se DN O tradidi t lzaoi tum monac/zor um adeptus

H ic omn is qu icunque legi s rog i tare memen to,

Ut tandem scelerum ven iam mereatur baber e.

E t ooi i t d . D CCCCLXXX] V.

C. R . M j am ante anuos duodecim.

The M on

as tery of S .

Bon1face

and Alexiuson the

Aventine .

388 HISTORY OF ROME

five O tto rema ined absent from I taly. The Opposing party was

,howeve r

,repressed by the Ge rman

faction,under c ircumstances which rema in unknown

to us .

1

Benedict the Seventh zea lously furthered the re formof Cluny

,and provided for the restoration of churches

and convents . A stone with rude re l iefs , in the

courtyard of the convent of St Scholastica atSubiaco

,re ta ins an inscription which te l ls us that

the Pope consecrated the new convent Church onDecembe r 4th,

He a lso restored the new mona s te ry of SS . Bon i face and Alexius on the Aventine ,which was now the most ce lebrated monaste ry inRome . Although the city had been fi l led with conven t s for centuries , none had atta ined the importanceof the abbeys of I taly, Ge rmany, or France . The

foundation of Gregory the First on the Coe l ian hadformer ly been distingu ished as the seminary of themissionarie s of England . The venerable abbey ofS . Andrew and Gregory sti l l survived ; but variousother monasteries had fa l len to decay, and we have

a l ready spoken of Alberi c’s care for the i r res to ra

tion . At the end of the tenth century S . Boniface

on the Aventine revived , and soon became an ins t itu

t ion for missionaries to Slavic lands.

1 Pag i and Sigonius believe that Otto I I . had created the Counts of

Tusculum ,from whom Benedict VI I . had sprung . The documents

of the t ime are s ilent on this subject . Leo, Gesc/z. 1t . , i . 346, pro

bably m isled by this passage in Leo of Ostia,makes a certain Alberic

leader in Rome .

2 E di/fcat io uj us-E_

c

-le Sce Scolastice Tempore D omn i B enedict i

V11. PP . Ab 1pso. 23m D edicata S . A t . 1no.

Dm . CCCCCCCCCLXXX1. 111 D eco. D . 1111 . 1nd . V111 ( read


The church dedicated to the sa int was ancient,legend re lat ing that Euphemianus had given hispalace for its e rection in the t ime of the EmperorHonorius . Alexius

,son of that senator

,was the

he ro of one of the most beautiful legends of Chr ist ian Legend of

se lf-renunciation . On the day of his marriage the Alexius

young nobleman had sudden ly forsaken his bri lliant ly l ighted hal ls and his guest s

,and instead of

embracing his Imperial bride,had addressed a

sermon to her on the vanity of all earthly pleasures ,and, clad in mean attire , had s e t forth on a pilgrimageto the remotest deserts . Like Odysseus he re turnedhome a beggar afte r many years

,and

,unrecog

nised,la id himse l f under the steps of his ancestra l

palace , where troops of servants passed him by inscorn . Here he l ived seventeen ye ars

,trodden

on and fed l ike a dog, then died in silence l ike a

he ro . The story of his l ife,written by himse l f and

found in his hand,revealed his ident i ty, and ange l i c

voices testified to his parentage,as a l so to his great

ness . The dead son of the senator was carried fromunder the steps , and

,amid a concourse of Roman s

of both papa l and imperia l fact ions,was bur ied in

S . Pe te r’s .1 His name was lat er associated with thatof S . Bon iface , and a lthough

,in the epitaphs of the

1 I t is quest ionable Whether A lexius was a Roman his legend be ingeven assigned to Byzant ium . A rm SS . ,

17th Ju ly, t . iv . The o lderLat in M artyrologies and the Martyrol . Roman . (comp iled in saec. viii . )are s ilent concern ing him . H is legend was very popu lar in the M iddleAges . Conrad of Wurzburg sang of i t in his well-known poem ; and

aga in ,in 1859 , Cardinal Wiseman brought S . Alex ius from under his

wooden staircase on the platform of the stage . The s taircase is s t il lseen in S . Alessio

,where the fest ival of the saint is celebrated on the

17th of July.

HISTORY OF ROME

t ime of Benedict the Seventh,Boniface stands alone

,

the two sa ints are mentioned toge ther at the end ofthe tenth century. Probably a convent a lready stoodnear the ancient church

,a diaconate. Both had

fa l len to decay when Benedict consigned them to thecare of Se rgius

,the Greek Me tropol itan , in 97 7 .

Sergius, flying before the Arabs,had forsaken his

bishopric , that of Damascus , and had come as afugitive to Rome . He here founded the monasteryof S . Bon iface , and be came i ts fi rst abbot . Althoughthe convent acknowledged the Benedictine rule

,fol

lowe rs of Basi l dwe l t within it s ide by side with theLatins

,and the fact that the monastery had been a

Greek colony had undoubtedly de te rmined Se rgius’s

choice . The surrounding d istrict was ca l led Blacbernac ; S . Boniface himse l f had me t his death a t

Tarsus ; and Euphem ianus , his wife Ag lm, and her

son Alexius were Greeks , as the i r name s inform us .He re Se rgius of Damascus l ived unti l 9 8 1 , when Leosucce eded him as abbot, and the new monastery soonbecame the centre of a distinguished band , of whomwe sha l l later have to speak .

1

Benedict the Seventh meanwhile could abandonhimse lf in peace to his care for cloistral d iscipl ine .

Did we possess more definite informat ion concern ingthe time

,we should doubtle ss find him engaged in

confl i ct wi th his opponents , perhaps even flyingbe fore them . With the othe r motive s which led toO tto the Second’s expedition to Rome , was associatedan urgent summons from the POpe , praying for de

1 I have already spoken of Nerini’s important work on» this monastery . For Serg ius

’

s epitaph , see p . 68 .


of Caracal la,the Emperor gave a banquet beside the

steps of S . Pete r ’s , and how during the repast hecaused some of the guests to be beheaded , while therest of the company rema ined at table : a stupidlegend

,which is sti l l occas ional ly repeated by Ital ian

historian s .1 The young Emperor, before whose wrath

Crescent ius had sought refuge in the cowl , le ft Rome

in June or July for Southe rn I ta ly. He re the Greeks

( the brothe rs of TheOphanO, Basi l the Second , and

Constantine the Ninth, now ruled in Byzantium) , and

the Saracens , unde r Abul Kasem of Pa le rmo, were

arming themse lve s for his reception . The struggle of

O tto in the province s , where the empire s of East andWe st and the powe r of I slam had so long been atstrife , was unsucce ssful . Afte r the battle , first won

and then lost, a t S t i lo,on July 13 th , 9 82 , where the

flower O f the German and I tal ian nobil ity fe l l under

the sabres Of the Saracen ,and after hi s adventurous

rescue from the Greek ve sse l,which had carried the

fugitive to Rossano , O tto returned to Capua .

2 Hisplans were shatte red the Byzantine s triumphed and

1 I t is der ived from the Pantheon of Gotfried,after whom Ricobald ,

H z'

s i . Imp . ,repeats i t . M urator i blames Sigonius for having accepted

this fable ; s til l more deserving of censure are the most modern

I talians Ferrucci and Amari,the latter of whom

,on the streng th of

the myth is pleased to call O t to Sang uz’

nar z’

us . Concerning the legend ,see G iesebrech t

’

s E x czzmu s X[J] .

2 Amar i (Sforza dei M um lflz,11. 324) shows the harmony exist ing

between Thietmar and Tbn-el-Atihr . Four thousand Germans fell,

and Abul-Kasem on the s ide of the Saracens . Amar i ’s thanks to O ttofor his endeavour to free I taly from these brigands takes the shape of

delight that the Emperor d ied“a’z’

r abbz’

a .

” With him the Saracens

become Guelfs , the ba ttle of St ilo a pr imer Legnano. I reg ret this inan author whom I respect . How high Murratori stands above all

party prejud ice


had they been able to ava i l themse lves of the greatvictory of I slam

,the Greek Emperor might perhaps

have e stablished his exarchs in Ravenna, his Pope sin Rome . Filled with dismay

,the noble s of the

Empire surrounded O tto in Verona in June 9 83 . The

chi ld O tto ( the Third) was he re e lected king of Germany and I ta ly

,and the Emperor hastened back to

Southern I taly to unde rtake a fre sh campaign . He

went to Rome , where the death Of Benedict the Ninth ,in September or Octobe r 9 83 , rendered his presencenecessary.

1

The Emperor caused Peter of Pavia, Imperial {john IV

éChance l lor

,to be e lect ed as John the Fourteenth, bu t 9511

136 , 9 3

scarce ly had the e lection taken place when the

Emperor fe l l dangerously i l l . The exert ion s of thelast few years had exhausted a constitut ion that wasnot formed of stee l l ike his father ’s . His friends and

companions gathe red round the deathbed Of the

young Emperor. He bequeathed his wealth to theChurch and the poor, to his mothe r, his on ly s iste rMati lda

,and lastly to the soldiers who O i1t of love to

him had left the i r native country. He confe ssed to

1 H is ep itaph is st ill preserved in S . Croce D . X . M f u l. in Apost .sede r esz

'

a’em 1X . ar m. abz

’

z’

z‘

aa’C/zr z

'

smm 1nd . X I ] . Ind . XI I . began

in Sept . 983 ; July, perhap s , has only to be altered to October .

Baron . g ives the inscrip t ion from S . Cosmo and Dam ian with the date,j oamz. X ] V. P apa m . F 5 67”. a

’. 22 , 1na. X1] . A . 984 , which correct

chronology he then changes into A . 985 and I na’. XI I ] . Jaffé and

Giesebrecht seek to prove that Benedict . d ied in Oct . 983 . His

epitaph, which is modelled on that of Stephen VI . says

H i: pr imus r epu li t F rancom’

spm'ca saperéz

’

,

Ca imz'

na qu i z'

nvasz’

z‘sea

’z'

s apos iolz'

ca,

Qa z’

a’omz

’

num suum ( af fi rm in casz‘m lzaéeéaz

‘

.

394 HISTORY OF ROME

the Pope i n pre sence Of the bishops and card inal s ,rece ived absolution

,and died in his e ight and

twentieth year,i n the Imperial palace bes ide S .

Pe te r’s,on December 7 th, 9 8

The only Empe ror O f German race who died andwas buried in Rome rece ived a grave in the atrium Of

S . Pe ter’s,to the le ft of the entrance . His rema ins

were la id in an ancient coffin,on which was sculptured

the l ikeness of a consul and his wife . Ancient coffinschanged hands in Rome as we l l as the columns ofbeauteous temple s

,and as l iving Emperors of Ge rman

race disguised themse lves unde r the titles and formsOf antiquity

,so the dead were la id to rest in the sar

cophag i of bygone times . A mosa ic representing theSaviour in the act of blessing

,and standing between

SS . Peter and Paul , was placed above O tto’s grave .

This remarkable picture,now built into the wall of the

Vatican crypt,rema ins a monument of the art of the

period . The execution , a lthough bad , i s bette r thanthat of the time of John the Seventh . The character ofChrist’s head

,with its long black ha i r

,i s d ignified

,but

the drawing and l ight and shade are both de fective,

e specia l ly in the case of the two apostles . The

mosa i c was doubtle ssly executed by orde r of Theophano

,and was placed by her over the pagan coffin

which conta ined the rema ins ofher husband . Through

a course of seven centuries, the German pilgrim was

1 C/zronag r . Saxo, A. 983 . He alone speaks of the appointment ofJohn XIV. by O tto. R icher, I I I . e . 96 relates , that O tto succumbed

to dysentery after having swallowed four drachms Of aloes . Siegbert ,

C/zron . i a a’z'

a et angore am’

mz’

a’

qficz’

em Roma mor z'

lnr . His

character is wel l drawn in the Vi ta Ada/ber t, c. 8, and still better byThietmar , I I I . I .

HISTORY OF ROME

FERRUCIUS RETURNS TO ROME— TERR IBLE END OF

JOHN XIV.— BON IFACE ’S RE IGN OF TERROR— H IS

OVERT‘

HROW JOHN XV. POPE, 9 8 5 CRESCENTIUS

SE IZES THE PATR ICIAN POWER—THEOPHANO COMES ToROME AS REGENT OF THE EMPIRE—SHE TRANQU ILLISES THE C ITY— S. ADALBERT IN ROME .

Standing beside Otto’s coffin

,John the Fourteenth

was able to s ee his own speedy overthrow. The

Romans now fe lt themse lves free from the dreadedEmperor. His he i r

,a crowned child of three

,under

the guardianship of a woman,was menaced by the

arms of an ambitious re lative,Henry of Bavaria

,who

had assumed the rega l title in Ge rmany. Theophano

had the re fore left the city in the spring of 9 84. The

desire for a Roman Pope became general,and the

sti l l l iving pre tender appeared in Rome at a highlyfavourable moment .For more than nine years the son of Fe rrucius had

l ived in exile at Byzantium,his thoughts eve r fixed

on the throne in S . Pe te r’s . He had j oined the

league of Greeks and Saracens , had heard with satisfaction o f the de feat

,with j oy of the death Of the

Emperor. He now came to Rome . He found theCha i r of Pe ter occupied by the Bishop of Pavia ; buthis followers ra l l ied round him ,

and his treasury orthe gold Of the Greek acqu ired him new friends .Boniface had been dismissed with best wishes fromConstantinople he was accompanied by Greeks

,and

a treaty had probably been made between him and


the Byzantine Court . The lack of documents,howeve r

,

leave s us in ignorance concern ing this transaction,and the history of Rome appears more than everconfused .

The overthrow of John the Fourteenth was suddenand terrible . Afte r having fa l len into the hands ofFerruciu s he lanquished for four months in the dungeons of S . Ange lo, and at last fe l l a victim to e itherstarvation or poison .

1 The revolution must havetaken place about Easte r 9 84, and the death of John Fanof

have followed in the summe r. Boniface , who had ]caused a synod to depose John as a usurpe r

,neve r

ceased to regard himse lf as lawful Pope,and afte r his

re turn re ckoned his re ign as dating from the yearBoniface must have therefore fi l led the papal

cha i r for e leven months,but of this period of history

we rema in in utte r ignorance . The casua l mentionof the fact that he had caused Cardinal John’s eye s tobe torn out

,give s us reason to suppose that other

1 Cara]. E ccam’z'

: quem B on if . rever sa s a Consz‘

am‘.—compre

fiensam in Caste/lo s . Aalga—per 4 m . z

'

nea’z'

a atlr z'

z‘

um j a ssz'

t

Coa’. Vat . 3 764, and,in agreemen t therewith , 1437 — Qa em z

'

sz‘e

sapr anomz’

n . B on if . F er r ucci fi lz'

a s r eversa s a Coa st — comp refiena’z'

t ac

depose/ci t et in casteZ /o s . ang elz’

in cu sz‘oa

’z'

a mz’

s z’

i et

famz’

s z’

nop z’

am per [V2m . sustz'

nu z'

z‘

ac mor tuus es t cc‘

a z‘

fer fa r eccz'

su s

est . Coa’. Va t . 1304 : qu i benefacz

’

a s f ever s . a Consz‘. a’ans pecam

’

am

z’

m‘eefecz

’

t p i'ea

’z'

cmm pelr um . Herm . Aug . Cbron . adds : ez‘

,a t

perfiz'

een t,fox z

'

caw'

z. This catalogue and Cinema. B ernoldi g iveJohn XIV. e ight months the Cbron . Vu lcan alone has n ine months(wrongly annos ), and reg isters his starvat ion in I nd . X I ] . A . 984 .

Baron . somewhere found the epitaph, which g ives Aug . 20 th.

Gerbert , Acta Conci l . Rem .

2 Ferrucci produces some documents which reckon the X . ,XI . , even

XI I . year of Boniface VI I . ,in the Ind. XI I I from which we see

how untrustworthy these dates are .

Ohn

XIV . 9841.

Fall ofBonifaceVI I . 985 .

HISTORY OF ROME

atrocit ie s were probably committed in the des ire forrevenge fostered by his long exile . He himse l f hadbecome a strange r to the Romans , and his suddendeath shows that he had grown inconvenient to hisown followe rs . This faction was not SO much Byzant ine as national-Roman the party which had forme rlybeen unde r the leadership O f Crescent ius , and wasnow headed by his sons . They overthrew the papaltyrant, hoping themse lve s to se ize the government ofthe city under the present favourable conditions .Boniface the Seventh undoubtedly suffered a violentdeath . His rema in s

,exposed to the insults of the

populace , we’

re dragged through the streets, and at

length thrown aside unde r the statue O f MarcusAure l ias . Thus repeatedly was this statue , the monument of one of the noble st Emperors of Rome , usedas a sort of scaffold in times of revolution . The fol lowing morning

,servants of the palace removed the corpse

and gave it Christian burial . And after a re ign ofe leven years

,during which he had ove rthrown two

popes,and a l lowed them to perish in S . Angel o,

Boniface the Seventh ended his career in the summerOf 9 8

John the Fifteenth succeeded to S . Peter’s Chairunder circumstances unknown to us . He be longed

1’

Coa’. Vat . 1340 : veneno God . 37 64 and 1437 : r e

pen ta'

na mor te and they relate the story g iven in the text .

From them Herm. Aztgz'

en . aa’. A . 985 borrowed . Catal . E ccard i

agrees therewith. Boniface was s till l iving in May 985 . P ent D .

B en zfacz’

z‘

,S . P . et zmz

'

ver s . V1] . P ape in Sacr . Sce’e B . P . At . A . X] .

1na. XI I ] . m . Maa’z'

a die [I ] . (Galletti , M scr . Va t . 8048 , p . After

984 he caused a Denarius to be s truck OTTO IMPE . ROM . on the

other side , SCS PEV BONIF ; in the middle , PAPAE . See P romis .

H ISTORY OF ROME

store the authority of Alberic,and for some years

succeeded in mak ing himse l f ru le r in Rome . We findhim as head of the nationa l party

,a lthough not invested

with the title of Princeps and Senator of all the

Romans . NO document at least speaks of him by

Crescent ia s these t itles . In 9 8 5 , howeve r, he adopted the dignityP

g‘rid us ’ of Patricius .

1 This he might safe ly do,since there

9 So

was no Emperor at the t ime . He the reby gave i t tobe understood that he was the representative of theRoman Senate and people

,and possessed the t em

pora l powe r in the city,a l though not regarding

himse l f as an independent prince . I ta ly made nofurthe r effort to rega in her nationa l independence ,

She put forward no native king, no fore ign princeThe Counts he ld the balance of powe r be tween thebishoprics

,which

,having grown powe rful unde r Guido

and Lambert, and sti l l more powe rfu l through the

privilege s accorded to them by both the O ttos , hadnow become a lmost state s within the state . Theyrema ined favourable to the Empire , while not a s ingle

man possessed of adventurous Spirit seemed forth

1 The Vz'

ta f ofz. X V] . (XV. ) in Murator i calls him P atr icia s u rbi s

Roma : Romuald. Salem z’

t . Murat . , vii . 165 Roman i Capz'

taz'

net

P atr z'

cz’

atas sz’

bz’

ty ranm’

a’em wena’z

'

caver e,which is word for word sa id

by Bon'

izo,who l ikewise adds a Crescen t io N amen tano

, guz’

P atr iciusa’z’

ceéatu r . A document in Gattu la Accessz'

en . ,i . 1 15 , thus expresses

itself : amzo D eo p repzcz'

o pen t . D . f eamzts s . pen t . et zmz’

ver . pape

l a a’. X] V. 772. f an . a

’. 3 . Imperan te a . p r ime D em. j obamze Cr escen

t t'

enefi lz'

e Romanor . P atr icio. The phrase [mper an te-P atr z’

cz’

o denotes

the Vicariate in the Emperor’

s s tead the d iploma contains the donat ion of a fishery at Terracina to the Monastery of S . Stephen . Thatthe t itle of Patricius appears in Rome ear lier than 10 10 is shown by

M ittarelli , I . Ap . 4 1 , p . 9 7 , a documen t of the year 975 , which is signedB enedictus patr z

’

tz’

zts a Stefanus r egata s .


coming from among the nobles . After the death ofO tto the Second , I taly, in continuing to re spect therights of a Saxon child and to fix he r eyes on Germany

,condemned he rse lf anew to fore ign servitude ,

while i t was inevitable that Germany, by reasonof her politica l power

,should rule the divided

country.

The attitude of the Romans a lone caused anxietyto the regent Theophano . She therefore hastenedher re turn to the city, summoned thither by the distracted Pope . On her arrival in 9 89 , the usual ly Theophano

re stless I taly yie lded obedience to the Greek,whose fixi

m

two brothers meanwhile,by a curious coincidence ,

ruled the Empire Of the East. The gate s of the citywe re not closed against her by the Patricius ; she

me t with no resistance from the Romans,who instead

yie lded obedience to the mother of the young childwho was to wear the Imperia l crown . This at titudeof submission is not satisfactorily explained by the

assumption that the German faction was very strongat the time ; i t can only have been the re sult of atreaty which Theophano had a l ready concluded withCre scent ius . She did not admit that the Impe riumhad been extingu ished by the death of her husband,but rather regarded the Sove re ignty ove r Rome as

the he reditary right of her son . The Impe ria l government of a woman was unprecedented in the We st.Theophano , howeve r— a Byzan t ine— reca l led the

example s Of Irene and Theodora,and exercised as

Imperatrix , nay , actual ly as Impe rator,

” full Imperia lpowe r both in Ravenna and Rome . She he ld Plac ita in person , and j udicial dec isions were rat ified inVOL. I I I . 2 C

402 HISTORY OF ROME

he r name .

1 We may conclude that she made the

Romans swear to acknowledge her son and all s t ipu

lated Imperial rights , and that unde r these conditionsshe confirmed Crescent ius in the Patriciate .

She ce lebrated Christmas in Rome , and left thecity in the Spring of 990 . She honoured the

memory of her husband by a lms and masses, and

the exhortation of a sa int somewhat assuaged hergrief.2 Adalbert, Bishop of Prague , a pious enthu

s ias t , and a man destined later to exe rcise immensei nfluence on her son , was in Rome at this time .

In Adalbert the restle ss nature of the Slav wasunited with the fe rvour of a Roman sa int of O ld .

Christianity had but late ly reached the Slavs , and

Ada lbe rt was the second Bishop of Prague . Condemned to l ive among the Bohemians

,he was

repe l led by the i r barbarism , and instead Of exertinghimse l f in the work of

'

the ir civi l isation,he s e t the

law at defiance , and le ft his bishopri c to make apilgrimage first to Rome and then to Je rusalem .

Theophano gave him money for his j ourney ; he1 Annal . [f t/desk ,

A . 989 (M ,

Germ. , v. 68) s eep/zauu [mperatr z’

x

mater P eg z'

s Remamper rexz'

t,z'

bz'

g. N atale a’emz’

m’

celebr aw’

t et omnem

r eg im ent P egi In the P eg . P aef ,n . 436 , we find the

suffi ciently r idiculous phrase : Tfieop/zau z’

us<gratz

'

a dz’

w’

ua Imperator

Aug u stus ; and lmper z’

z‘

a’emm

’ Tkeep/5am? Imper ater z'

s X VI I ] . The

Ravennese documents of I . Ap . 990 has : Imper tz'

D omm Tlzeopfi‘

amt

lmperatr tcz'

s X VI Z ] . 1nd. actum Ravenna felz’

cz'

ter,where the

Imper ium was consequently reckoned from her marriage with O tto I I .

O ther documents : Cit ron . Vu lturn ,Murat . , i . p . 2

, 484 , of the 4

N on . j am , A . 990 . Actum Rome Tfieepkauu a’

z’

w’

fla g r . [mperatr z’

x

Augus ta . Mabillon, Annal . B ened . , iv. 69.2 E rat au tem z

'

psz’

s a’z’

eéus Roma z'

mperatr z'

x augu sta Tfieopfianu , &c. ,

Wta S . Au’ala

,M on . Germ. , vi . c. 13, 14, and Bruno

’s Vi ta S .

Aa’alé. , c. 12,

C H A P T E R V .

I . DEEPER DECADENCE OF THE PAPACY— INVECTIVE OF

THE GALLIc B ISHOPS AGAINST ROME— HOSTILE ATTI

TUDE OF THE PROVINCIAL SYNODS— CRESCENTIUSUSURPS THE TEMPORAL POWER— FLIGHT OF JOHNXV .

— H IS RETURN To ROME -H IS DEATH, 996

GREGORY V. THE FIRST GERMAN POPE— SUBJECTIONOF THE PAPACY To THE GERMAN EMP IRE—OTTO I I I .

EMPEROR ,MAY Z I ST, 996.

THE Papacy now seemed to have reached the utmostl imit of its degradation . Not in Rome a lone

,but

e l sewhe re,reve rence for the Cha ir Of Pe te r had been

extinguished by the criminals who had fi l led it .The ce lebrated synod Of Rhe ims

,of the year 99 1 ,

affords a striking proof of our assertion . Arnulf,

Archbishop of this ci ty,the first metropolis of France

,

had treacherously surrende red it into the power of hisuncle Charles

,Duke of Lorra ine

,and

,at the instance

of Hugh Cape t, the usurper of the Carol ingian throne ,had been handed over for tria l to an assembly ofbishops . On the demand of a priest that the questionshould be refe rred to the supreme authority, the Pope ,

Invective of Arnulf, Bishop of O rleans, rose and spoke as fol lows :

32212235 O unfortunate Rome , in the silence of the past thouaga ins t the gave st our ancestors the l ight of the Fathers of thePapacy ofthe time . Church . Our t imes, however, thou hast darkened


with a night so te rrible as shal l make them notoriouseven in the future . Once thou gavest us the renownedLeos

,the great Gregories . What sha l l -I say of

Ge lasius or Of Innocent,who surpassed all the philo

sophe rs of the universe in wisdom and in learning ?What have we not witnessed in these days ? We

have seen John,who bore the surname of O ctavian ,

wal lowing in the mire of sensual ity, and even consp ir

ing against O tto, whom he himse lf had crowned .

John was banished,and Leo

,a neophyte

,made Pope .

The Emperor O tto le ft Rome ; Octavian returned ,banished Leo

,deprived John the Deacon of his nose ,

the fingers of his right hand,and his tongue ; in his

passionate fury he executed seve ra l of the noble s,

and soon afte r himse l f d ied . The Romans e lectedthe grammarian

,Benedict

,in his place . The neo

phyte Leo,with his Emperor, soon after se ized Bene

dict,deposed and banished him into l ife-long exile

in Germany. Empe ror O tto was succeeded byEmpe ror O tto , who exce l led all princes of our time sin arms

,in wisdom

,and in knowledge . A dreadful

monster,howeve r

,dripping with the blood of his pre

decessor,

fi lled the Cha ir of Pete r : Boniface , a man

who in crimina l ity surpassed the re st of mankind .

Ban ished and condemned by a synod,he re turned to

Rome afte r O tto ’s death. In spite of his oath hehurled Pope Pe te r

,formerly Bishop of Pavia ,

from the

highe st position in the city,and afte r deposing his

vict im and subject ing him to fr ightful torture i nprison , final ly murdered him . Where i s it writtenthat the innumerable company of priests of God

,

scatte red over the earth, and adorned by learning and

H ISTORY OF ROME

merit,should be subject to monsters devoid of all

knowledge,human and divine , and a disgrace to the

wor ld P The bo ld speake r then asked the assembledbishops

, who in terror or satisfaction had listened tohis unprecedented discourse

,by what name the Pope

who sat in v e stmen ts of gold and purple on S .

Pe ter’s Cha i r was to be cal led .

“ If,he sa id ,

“ he

has not chari ty and i s not fi lled with learn ing,then i s

he anti-Christ,who

,enthroned in the temple of God ,

l ike a god,attracts the regard of mankind . I f he lack

Christian charity as we l l as learn ing,he i s an idol in

God ’s temple,from whom we may as we l l expect

oracle s as from a block of marble . The speakerfurther insisted that there we re many enl ightened

bishops in Be lgium and Germany to whose decisionthe affa irs of Rhe ims might be submitted

,instead of

making appeal to the spiritua l forum of a city whe reeverything was vena l

,and whe re judgment was

measured according to the we ight of gold .

1

This was the Catil inarian oration pronouncedaga inst the Papacy of the tenth century . But sofirmly was the great institution based on the needsof mankind that it remained proof aga inst condit ionsof dissolution which would have sufficed to shatter1 Qu id lzunc—in suélirn i solio r es ia

’en tetn

,neste pu epu r ea et aur ea

r adian tem, guz’

cl nunc,z’

uguum ,esse censet is ? N imi rum s i car i tate

des ti tu i tu r , solaque scien tia inflatu r et ex tolli tu r, An t icfir istus est

,in

temple D ei sea’ens

,et se ostena

’eus tamquam s i t D eus . S i au tem nec

car i tatef una’atu r

, nec scien t ia er zlgi tur , in Temp loD ei tamquam s tatua ,

tamquam ia’elum est

,a que r esponsa petere, mar inara consu ler e est .

That everything in Rome was corrupt was the universal opinion of

contemporaries . The Abbot Abbo of Fleury found John XV. turp is

lucr i cup ia’um

,atque in omn ibus su is act ibus venalem.

—Aimou , Vi taS . Abbon i s Muratori, Anna l . A. 996.

Roman

HISTORY OF ROME

to the Margrave Hugo in Tuscany in 99 5 . Hugobe longed to the German party, and John sent a summons imploring the boyish O tto to undertake an

expedition to Rome . The news of O tto’s approachinduced the rebe l l ious Romans to recal l the Pope .

They accorded him an honourable reception and

made the i r peace .

1 John,howeve r

,did not see the

arriva l of his de l ive rer,dying in March or Apri l

The youthful O tto left Regensburg and crossed theAlps by the Brenne r in the spring of 996 . He came

Exped ition at the head of a great military force and with aofO tto I I I

996.

° retinue of severa l bishops and nobles,among whom

was Willigis of Ma inz,the true leade r of the

expedition . He ce lebrated Easte r at Pavia,where

he first heard of John ’s death ; At Ravenna Romanenvoys brought him letters from the nobil ity

,assuring

him that the Romans looked forward to his arrival,

that the death Of the Pope had placed them in a

n is i quem Crescent ius t i rannus mercea’e cona

’uctus voluer i t aéselver e

,

velpun ire.1 Baronius assumes 985 to have been the year of John’

s fl ight ;Muratori records i t with doubt in 987. To me 995 seems the r ightdate . The Catalogues of the Popes are now s ilent . Ama lr . Aug er .

p ropter per secu t . P atr ici i Urbis P omce et Senatus,ipsum oper tu i t aé

ipsa Ur ée r ecea’er e. Sea

7

pestmecl . prae t imore Otton is Imp . ipsum

miserunt gua s i tum.—Sim ilarly j orclan i Cit ron . (Murat

,Ant . I t . iv.

2 The questionable epitaph of John XV In Baronius, A . 996,

reg isters the death on May 7th . Jaffeassumes the date to have been inthe beg inning ofApril , s ince it was at Easter (April 12th) that O tto I I I .rece ived the news of John ’

s death at Pavia (C'nren . Venetum

, M on .

Germ vii . M arin i, P ap ir i , n . 36, has a diploma of John XV.

of the year 992, where in the B ishop of Portus is g ranted a piece of

ground for a fish-pond . The Lacus Trajanus is ment ioned here ; the

harbour had become a marshy lake.


difficulty, and that they therefore awaited his wishesconcerning the new e lection .

1 This submissive

attitude was due to fear, for Crescent ius possessedne ither the powe r nor the gen ius of Albe ric . Duringthe short time that he ruled his native city ( in lessfavourable circumstances

,i t i s true

,than those of

Alberic), he appears sole ly as the head of a faction ,never as a prince .

2 The Patricius was forced tore spect in the grandson of O tto the First the rightsusurped by his ancestor with regard to the Papa le lection ; and the boy

,O tto the Third , disposed at

his wil l Of the tiara,as his grandfathe r had rece ived

the Imperial crown from the hands of a boyish Pope .

He awarded the Papacy to his cousin and chaplainBruno

,a son of the Margrave Otto of Verona, Duke

ofCarinthia,and through his grandmothe r, L iu tgarda ,

a great-grandson of O t to the First.3 Bruno was

only twenty-three or twenty-four years of age , had

1 Vi ta S . Aa’alber t i

, c. 2 1 I éi in ej us occur sum venz’

unt ep istola

cum nunci is,quas mi ttunt Roman i preceres et senator ius ora

’o. We

hear no longer of cleru s , ora’o,and popu lu s the nobility had seized the

entire power. Concerning O tto’

s Roman exped it ion , see G iesebrecht , I .

2 No Papal coins of his t ime have been preserved . After the co insof Bened ict VI I . (OTTO IMPE ROM ), we possess no Papaldenar ii for the space of 150 years , some of Leo IX . ( 1049—1055 ) andof Paschalis I I . ( 1099-1 1 18 ) excepted. The coins of the Calabr ianJohn (XVI . ) in Cinagli are to be rejected and that in Maffe i ( Ver enaI llu str . iii . where Crescentius is des ignated as IMP . AUG .

R R ,and is represented on horseback addressing the army

,is an

absurd ity of the 17th century,as the drawing in the style of Domen i

chino is enough to prove .

3 Conrad , son ofWerinher , in 943 Duke of Lorraine , married Luitgarda , daughter of O tto I . ,

and d ied like a hero at Lechfeld, A . 955 .

H is son O tto was invested with the Dukedom of Carin thia, and alsothe Margravate ofVerona .

—A . O tto, Papst Gr egor V ,Munster

,188 1.

H ISTORY OF ROME

rece ived a good secular education,and was posse ssed

of distingu ished abil ities ; but he was of a passionateand headstrong disposition . With the consent of theGe rman and Ital ian nobil ity

,who surrounded him in

Ravenna, O tto sent the Pope-designate , e scorted byWilligis of Ma inz and Hildebald of Worms

,to Rome ,

whe re he was rece ived with honour. A SO-cal lede lection saved appearance s, and the first Pope ofpure ly Ge rman de scent ascended the papa l thronea s Gregory the F i fth on May 3 rd, The frightfulconditions in which Rome now found he rse l f provedthat she could no longe r furnish a fitting candidatefor the papal cha ir. The friends of the Papacy inI taly, Germany, and France there fore ha i led the

e le ction of Bruno as an unexpected stroke of goodfortune ; the orde r of Cluny rejoiced at the accessionof the i r friend

,and hope s we re unive rsa l ly che rished

that a Pope of the Imperia l l ine might e ffe ct there form of the degene rate Church . On ly the Romansmurmured . The Apostol ic Cha ir had fal len into thehandsZof the Saxon house— a triumph Of the Impe rialpowe r

,which threw eve rything e lse

,even the victorie s

Of O tto the Great,into the Shade .

The e levation of the G erman B runo thus put anend to the reprehensible cu stom ,

which had silen tlyb ecome law

,that none but a Roman Should be e lected

to the Papa l Cha ir. In the course of the two hundredand fifty years whi ch had e lapsed since the re ign ofthe Syrian Zacharias

,out of the forty-seven bishops

1 Pag i already recogn ised that Gregory V. must have been conse

crated at the beg inning of May ; Mans i , in the N ote to B aron ius , A .

996, p . 349 , assumes, with great probability, the date May 3rd .

HISTORY OF ROME

Afte r the insta l lation of his cousin,O tto came to

Rome to take the Imperial crown from the hands of0 11° 111° the Pope of his own creation . He was rece ived withcrowned as

Emperor great solemn Ity ,and was crowned In S . Pe ter’s on May

if’ffiizg

y

or”2 I s t ; and with the coronation ended the authority

2 1 5 11 996' of Crescen t ius as Patricius . Afte r the Imperial t itle

had been in abeyance for thirteen years,Rome aga in

saw a new Augustus within her wal l s , and with him a

new Pope .

1 The forme r a imed at the restoration ofthe Empire of Charles

,i f not that of Trajan

,and by

his side the Pope desired , l ike another Gregory,to

e stablish the unive rsal power of the Papacy— a imse ssential ly at v ariance with one anothe r . TheseGerman youths

,both as ye t but boys , one twenty

three,the other only fifteen years of age , re lated to

one anothe r,and standing together on the utmost

pinnacle s of powe r to which morta l could atta in, pre

sented a singular spectacle in Rome . The Romansdoubtle ss looked with indignation on the fa ir-ha iredSaxons who had come to rule the i r city and with itChristendom

,and fore igners so inexperienced can

hardly have 1nsp1red reve rence . Did the Empe rorand Pope eve r find themse lve s a lone toge ther inthe chambers of the Lateran

,they may probably

have sworn eterna l friendship,and formed visionary

scheme s for unive rsa l dom inion or for the benefit o fthe human race . The world

,howeve r

,offe rs pro

blems beyond the grasp Of enthusiastic boys . The

1 The author of the Vi ta S . Ada lb. therefore exclaims : La tanturcum p r imat ibus m inores civi ta t is cum aflz

’

cto paupere exu ltant

agm ina w’

cluarum, Qu ia nevus imperator a’at j ura popu lo, a

’at j u ra

nevus papa . c. 2 1 .


dream begotten of Roman inspiration scarce ly lastedfour months . In three years the young Pope , in s ixthe young Emperor

,were no more .

1

2 . CONDEMNATION OF THE ROMAN REBELS— CRESCENTIUSIS PARDONED—ADALBERT OBLIGED TO LEAVE ROME

H IS MARTYRDOM—OTTO I I I . LEAVES ROME—REBELLION OF THE ROMANS— STRUGGLE OF THE C ITYAGAINST PAPACY AND EMP IRE—CRESCENTIUS DRIVESGREGORY V. OUT OF THE CITY—REVOLUTION IN ROME

—CRESCENTIUS RAISES JOHN XVI .TO THE PAPAL CHAIR .

On May 2 5th, 996 , O tto and Gregory assembled inS . Peter’s a Council of the two nat ions , which, l ikeearl ie r Councils

,assumed the character of a Court of

Justice . Now that a member of the Imperia l partyhad been appointed to the Papacy, it was necessary

1 Dummler, Aux i l . una’ Vu lg ar .

, p . 57 , g ives from a Bamberg MS .

a remarkable poem on the joint government of the wor ld by GregoryV. and O tto I I I . I t says

Surgat Roma imper io, sub Ottone ter t io I

Sa lve, papa noster,salve, Gr egor i a

’zgn iss ime

Cum Ottone te augusto tuus P etr us excip i t .

Vos a’uo luminar ia per ter r ar um spat ia

I llustrate eccles ias , ef ugate tenebr as

( I t unu sfer ro vzgeat , a lter verbo ti nn iat .

Compare with this a song in the par'ous ora

’o Roman . printed from a

Cod . Casin . by D i Costanzo. S . Rufino Mart Ass isi , 1797 ,

p . 423 f.Sancta D ei Genetr ix P omanam r esp ice plebem,

Ottonemguefove Sancta D ei Genetr ix .

Ter t ius Otto tue nixus solaminepalmeP r esto s it 7/en ie ter t ius Otto tue.

Gaua’eat omn is bomo qu ia r egnat ter t ius Otto.

I llins imper io gaua’eat omni s bomo.

Crescent ius

does hom

age to the

Emperor.


that, i n order to remove every hindrance to the greatscheme of the Christian universal Empire

,the secular

and spiritua l powers should unite in the subjugationO f the City. The rebe l l ious Romans who had ban ishedJohn the Fifteenth we re cited to appear. The i r submiss ion

,howeve r

,to this Pope

,whom they had aga in

admitted i nto the C ity,a s we l l as the ir subjection to

the wishes of the Emperor,at whose hands they had

rece ived his successor,mitigated the sentence of the

j udges . The majesty of the young ideal ists wouldnot perm it them to stoop to the hated dictate s Of

fear. No Roman was punished with death, but somepopular leade rs

,amongst them Cres cent ius , were

ban i shed . The noble spirit of Gregory the Fifth,

inexperienced to powe r, shrank from imposing eventhis punishment

,and in hOpe of conci l iating Rome

by clemency,he implored the equa l ly forgiving young

Empe ror to grant entire remission of the sentence .

Crescent ius tendered the oath of submission and re

ma ined in Rome , leading the l ife of a private citizen .

This act of impol itic forbearance , howeve r, doeshonour rathe r to the hearts than to the j udgmen t ofO tto and Gregory .

1

While a rebe l in the hands of barbarians e scaped1 Habi togue cum Roman is p laci to, guema

’am Cr escen t ium,

qu iapr ior em P apam inj u r i is sape laceraver at , ex i lio statu i t a

’epor tar i , sea

’ao

’

pr eces nom'

Apostolz'

ci omn ia i ll i r emi si t .—Annal . SaxoA. 996. Hock ’sassert ion Gerbert ,

”c. 9 ) that Gregory had pardoned Crescentius in

order to use him as a counterpoise to the Germans in Rome,is utterly

absurd . O tto dates 3. Pr ivileg ium for the convent of S. Salvator on

Monte Amiata on the 25th May (D a t . VI I I . Ka l. f un . A . D . j . 996,

I ncl . IX . Imp . I . Actum-P ome.—Cod . Amiatin . u t supra , p .

On May 27th, Gregory V. issued his bull for the same convent , whichhe exempted . p . 592.

—See Stumpf on this period .

H ISTORY OF ROME

to the savage country of the Slavs . Conspicuousamong them was Guadent ius

,the first bishop of the

Church dedicated to his brother at Gnesen he wasfol lowed by Anastasius

,who had previously accom

pan ied Adalbert to Bohemia , and who now becamethe friend and counse llor Of Stephen the First

,King of

Hungary,and died as the first Archbishop Of the

Magyars in Ko locza ; last came Boniface , a re lativeOf O tto the Third , who took the cowl in Rome in 945,and later went to preach the Gospe l to the Prussiansand Russians .Meanwhile O tto the Third , having e stablished his

tribunal in the E te rnal C ity and tranqui l ised the

Romans by an amnesty, re turned to Ge rmany as

Emperor in the beginning ofJune .

1 The Charm whichRome exe rcised ove r his imagination was not yet sopowe rful as comple te ly to e strange his heart from hisnat ive country, and he sti l l fe lt himse lf a GermanKing. NO historian has recorded the measure s whichhe took to secure Gregory against the enmity of theRomans . The device Of permanent garrisons

,by

means of which kings are enabled to hold C i tie s and

provinces in obedience , was at this t ime unknown .

Sovere igns could only re ly on the fide l ity of vassal s,

to whose hands they entrusted the highe st Office s,

name ly, the administration of j ustice . I f O tto now

appointed to the Patriciate a man devoted to hisinterests, made anothe r Prefect, and nominated the

1 On May 3 l st , O tto I II . , then in Rome, took the convent of SS.

Bon iface and Alexius on the Aventine under his protect ion. As earlyas June 12th he issued a charter from Foligno . On Sept . 15th he was

at Ingelheim. Stumpf , pp. 9 1, 92 .


j udges from a number of doubtful adhe rents, his measures we re Of no ava i l . His absence was the signa lto the Romans for revolt . The nationa l party madea desperate effort to shake Off the German yoke

,and

the ir e fforts to break the fatal spe l l under whichPapacy and Empire he ld the city de serve our deepestsympathy.

Individual ism for ever struggles aga inst system,

The right of the individual , a lthough more l imited in Relat ion of

historica l va lue than the right of system,i s y et of

the C ity OfRome

earl ie r origin . In ancient republican Rome the long towau ds the

continued struggles of the plebe ians aga inst the aris thipacy and

tocracy present a spectacle worthy of admiration .

Emp ire ‘

They were healthy revolutions of the body pol iticit se l f, and out of the se struggle s the greatness ofRome deve loped , unti l the ba lance of the adve rsee lements was at tained and the democracy gave placeto the Empire . Rome no longe r struggled unde r therule of the Caesars , the Opposing e lements Of Civic l i fehad been uprooted , and the revolutions were restrictedt o the Pa lace and to the Praetorian Guards . Afterlong centuries we find the Impe ria l and Papa l C i ty

"

aga in excited by contending fact ions— the aristocrats,

the C it izens , the mil itia fight ing aga inst the Papacyand the Empire . These various forces summoned tothe i r a id from the a l ready myth-enshrouded grave s ofan t iqu ity the ghosts of consuls, tribunes, and senators ,who seem to have haunted Rome throughout the

entire Middle Ages . The Empire , which the revolu

t ionis t s desired to overthrow,was in no wise the

terrible despot ism of the ancient Caesars,but an idea l

theocratic system which preva i led outside the city.

VOL. I I I . 2 D

4 I S HISTORY OF ROME

The territorial power of the Popes against which theycontended was l ikewise a government far removedfrom all absolut ism

,i n itse l f devoid of powe r and

means,and strong only through a moral principle

that pe rvaded the whole world . The C ity of Rome,

howeve r, found herse l f condemned to O ffe r her civicfreedom a sacrifice for eve r to the greatness and inde

pendence of her high priest . Nature , which impe lsman to extend his powers in the state and in socie tyambition and glory , the eve r swee t i f vain hopeswhich goad forceful men to strive for distinction

,

found themse lves in harsh Opposition to a state inwhich secular energies were stifled and where priestsalone obta ined advancement . I f the Roman optimate s reflected on the glory of the counts or prince sin othe r C itie s of I taly— such as Venice , Milan , andBenevento—and i f in late r days the citizens Of Romecontemplated the l ibe rty and power Of the i r equa l s inthe northern or southe rn democracies, they must havei nve ighed aga inst heaven or its repre sentative

,who

had condemned them to an ete rna l pol itica l death .

All the more must they have murmured when theyremembered the ir great fore fathe rs . The efforts ofthe Romans to uphold the right of the i r individua l ityaga inst great universal systems were continued forcenturies , and gave rise to the strange st contradict ions . Roman empe rors of German race te rmedpeoples and kings the i r vassals

,pacified the ir d is

pute s , rece ived the i r homage , disposed of the i rd iadems , but we re themse lve s forced to fight theRoman aristocrats in the streets of the city

,and were

Often attacked and maltreated by the populace . The


Revolt of for complaint in the fact that fore igners , ignorant of

ill

imans Roman law, administe red justice and appointed

under judge s, who, not be ing in the pay of the state ,C rescentius

were corrupt and one-SIded . If thIS reproach wastrue of the Counts in the non-Roman citie s

,Rome

a l so had reason to murmur aga inst the partisanshipOf the j ua

’ices ela tivi

,or ove r the judge s of the crimina l

courts,who had punished many citizens with imprison

ment,confiscation of property

,and exile .

1 The pre

ceding revolutions had made a firm rule necessary.

Many Roman noble s we re deprived of the i r Office s ,while men of the most pronounced Imperial tendencie s we re ra ised to the highest administrative posts

,

and to judge ships . Gregory the Fifth himse l f wasnot exempt from the rep roach

'

of having disposed ofOffices for money . While the Ge rman Pope surrounded himse lf with Germans and his creatures , anddecided to impose the strict discipl ine of Cluny, infact to e ffect an e ccle siastical re form in the corruptC ity

,the new orde r Of things appeared to the Romans

in the l ight of an odious tyranny.

Flight of A revolt broke out ; the Pope fled on September215 6n

29 th, 996. I t seems strange that Gregory had notassured himse l f of the Castle of S . Ange lo

,or that if

1 This is said in ,the fragment , quot s un t g ener aj ua

’icum

, published byBlume in the P bein iscbes Museum

, 129 , and by Giesebrecht , i . 825 .

I saw it in the Code Va t ican,2037 , of saeo. xi ii . ceter um postguam

peccat is nostr is ex igent ib. Romanor . imper ium barbaror . patu i t g lad i is

fer iena’um,

P omanas legespen i tus ignor an tes in li tera t i ac barbar i j ua’ices

legi s per i tos in legem cogentes j u rare, j ua’ices creavere quor um j ua

’z’

cio

l i s ven t i lata terminar etu r . I I i accepta abus ioapotestate, a’um stz

’

pena’ia

a r epublica non acczpz'

un t , aoar i t iw face succens i j us omne conf unclunt .

Comes en im i lli teratus ac barbarus nesci t vera a fa ls is discernere, et


he did so assure himse lf,his adherents should have

made no resistance . The only fortress of the citymust have been wre sted from the nobles afte r O tto

’scoronation . Although it had frequently fal len intothe hands Of the Roman nobil ity, the fortre ss had not

yet become private property. On the contrary,as

one of the chie f monuments of the city, i t be longedto the State , and l ike the Leon ine c ity

,the ir own

work,was in late r times regarded by the pope s as

the ir peculiar property, and recogn ised as such by theRomans . S . Ange lo was Of no use as a place ofre fuge

,since the pope s did not l ive in the Vatican

,

but remained instead in the unprotected Lateran,

de fence less aga inst any sudden attack . Crescent ius

se ized the fortre ss and fi l led it with armed men .

Gregory meanwhile hastened to North I ta ly, whe rehe had summoned a Counci l at Pavia . In the be

ginning Of 997 , he he re promulgated severa l statute si n matters regarding the churches of Ge rmany and

France . He showed prince s as we l l as bishops tha thenceforward they must bow to the supremacy Of

Rome , and that the sacred cha i r would ene rge tica l lyuphold the decre ta ls Of I si’dore aga inst the provincia lsynods. He showed an exemplary calm with regardto his own banishment, and in mode rate languagerequired the German bishops to ratify the ex commu

n icat ions pronounced aga inst the spoile rs and robbersOf the Church .

1 But while the banished Pope ex

1 The letter is addressed to Willigis ofMainz , the Pope’

s Chancellorin Germany N otum nobis et iamfacimu s , quali ter per communem con

sensum fratrum, Crescen t ium s . P om . E ccl . invasor em et cleprcea’a

tor em a g remio s . a clees ia et omn ium fidelz’

um commun ione

422 HISTORY OF ROME

cluded Crescent ius from the communion of the fai thful , the bold rebe l had e stabl ished his ephemera l rulein Rome before O tto returned , summoned probablyby urgent le tte rs from the Pope .

A genera l revolution had taken place in the administ rat ion afte r Gregory’s fl ight. The existing judice swere expe l led ; the ir places we re fi l led with mational ist s

,and Crescent ius aga in styled himse l f Patricius or

Consul of the Romans . Aware Of his own weakne ss ,he sought an a l ly in Constantinople ; and that theGreek Court did not stand a loof from the revolutionwe may gathe r from the following events . B eforeO tto had rece ived the Impe ria l crown , he , l ike hisfather, had sent envoys to Constantinople to sue forthe hand Of a Greek princess . The embassy was

conducted by John,Bishop of Piacenza

,a Ca labrian

Greek from Rossano,origina l ly known as Philaga

thus . He owned his rise from low e state to the

favour Of Theophano , at whose court he had arrivedin extreme pove rty. He re he soon became powerful ; he Obta ined Nonantula

,the wea lthie st abbey

in I ta ly,and during the regency Of the Empre ss

acquired the bishopric O f Piacenza,which was

created an archbishopric by John the Fifteenth,and

separated from the metropol is of Ravenna for hise spe cia l benefit .1 Philagathus had gone to Constan t i

seg reg am’

mus,et u t unusgu isgue vestrum in suo ep iscopatu bu ic facto

aa’sen sum pra beat , car i tat ive r og avimu s .

—M on . Germ. v . 694.

1 The German chroniclers say : H ie j olt . nat ione Gr ecus,cona

’i t.

serous,actu callicliss imus

,aa

’ Imper . I I . Ottonem sub pauper e aa’iens

habi tu ,in terven tu T/zeopbanu Impera tr icis r eg ia pr imum a l i tus est

st ipe a’eina

’e—pene in ter p r imos babebatur . Anna l .

Cbronog r . Saxo, Tlzietmar Cbron . , iv. 2 1 . l e Excerpta e Cata

HISTORY OF ROME

3 . RULE OF CRESCENTIUS OTTO ADVANCES AGAINST

THE C ITY HORRIBLE FATE OF THE ANTI-POPE

CRESCENTIUS DEFENDS H IM SELF IN S . ANGELO

VARYING ACCOUNTS OF HIS DEATH—MONS MALU s

OR MONTE MARIO—EPITAPH OF CRESCENTIUS .

Had the occupant of the Greek throne been a manof courage he would undoubtedly have gone towar to rega in posse ss ion Of Rome . Basi l and Cons tant ine

,howeve r; ingloriously dragged the ir burthen

Of powe r through an unusual ly long term of years,and I taly rema ined safe from anothe r Byzan tine invas ion . NO army advanced to Rome from Ca labriano flee t appeared at the entrance of the Tibe r, andPhilagathus soon repented that he had defied the

warning Of his sa inted countryman Nilus. Gregorythe Fifth despised the usurpe r of his cha ir, and the

united bishops of I ta ly,Germany

,and France

thundered anathemas aga inst the treacherous Greek .

In the meantime, the Imperial party having been

subdued by the te rrorism Of the usurpers,Philagathus

was recognised as Pope . by the Romans,and even

the Campagna yie lded him Obedience . Re lations of

M edz'

ol , i . 1 1 ) says of the Ant i-pope a’e guo dictum est

,quou’ Roman i

a’

ecu s imper i i astu te in e cos tr ansfer re ten tasset. Benzonis , P anegy r .

in He inl . iii . Menken . , i . 968 : Otto decollavi t Cr escent ium et secavi t

papam Sergi um ex guoa’cum Grmcz

'

s fr equen taban t inlici tum

commercium . Bonizo’

s fragment (M scr . Va t . , 7 143) contains nothingon the subject i t even says of the Ant i-pope : cum Ramam or at ion i s

cau sa ven i ret,a p ruj i Crescen t ia et a Roman is cup i tur ct tenetur et

l icet invi tu s tumen P apa infelix ordina tu s . H is statement that Crescentius made the court ier of O tto Pope in order to gain over the

Emperor, is truly absurd . (Ao’amicum

,lib . iv. 800, in Oefele, ii . )


Cre scent ius dwe lt in the Sabine mounta ins, andCount Benedict

,the husband Of Theodoranda, and

his sons John and Cre scent ius , had profited by the

rule of the ir cousin to annex prope rty be longing tothe Imperia l monaste ry of Farfa . The Abbot of the

monaste ry was Hugo, a man afte rwards distinguishedfor his se rvices

,but who neverthe less had stooped to

purchase his dignity from Pope Gregory.

1

The usurpe rs we re forced to recognise that the pre

parat ions for the ir de fence were insufficien t . O ttothe Third

,who had been deta ined in Ge rmany in

tedious wars aga inst the Slavs , crossed the Alps at

the end of the year 997 . His exiled cousin , Gregory,me t him at Pavia

,where they ce lebrated Christmas .

They then proceeded to Cremona, and afte rwards toRavenna and Rome . The monk Benedict, i f stil la l ive

,may have watched the progre ss of the ir hosts

as they marched past the foot of Soracte , and havera ised a fresh lament ove r the fate of unfortunateRome .

O tto, arriving be fore the city at the end of February O tto I I I .

998 , found its gates open , its wal ls undefended . S .

Ange lo alone was occupied by Crescent ius and his

1 Hugo succeeded the Abbot Alberic at the end of 997 ; in D e

struct io Farf. , c . 17 , he accuses himself : i llo mor tua,uen i egopeccator

Hugo, non u t leg i t imus , sea’u t abbor t ivus . Hofler

,D eu tsc/ze P upste, i.

130 , believes that he had bought the abbey from Joh . XVI . , but in

this case O tto I I I . wou ld scarcely have said in the P lacitum of 998

( Cit ron . Farj . qu i s ibi Imper ialis Abbat in— absque nostro assensur eg imen u surpaoer at—et guoa

’a’eter ius est , pr etto emera t a Romano

Pon tifi ce s ince this wou ld have been a recogn it ion of Philagathus .

Gregory V. was accessible to go ld ; see the P lacitum of O tto I II A .

999 (Cbr on . P arf . from which it appears that the monks of S .

Cosma had gained him over with money.

conducts

G reg oryback to

Rome ,Feb . 998 .

HISTORY OF ROME

adherents , who thought to de fy death in this fortressor tomb .

1 The Romans here showed that theymerited the i r fate . I t was unnece ssary for them tore ca l l the de fence of the city under Be l isarius ; it wassufficient to remembe r the times of Albe ric

,and re

mind themse lve s that a l ike victory was sti l l possible .

But the people we re torn by factions,and a great

part Of the cle rgy and nobil ity were Imperia l ists .Philagathus fled te rror-stricken to the Campagna and

hid himse lf in a tower,hoping to reach the Greeks

e ithe r by land or s ea . Impe ria l horsemen broughthim back . The sham Pope was barbarously deprivedO f nose

,tongue

,and ears ; his eye s we re torn out he

was dragged back to Rome and thrown into the ce l lof a monastery.

2 O tto, who had ente red the City un

opposed,required Cre scent ius to lay down his arms ,

but,a lthough he re ce ived a defiant answe r

,he de layed

his attack on the fortre ss . He ca lmly he ld tribunalsin the Lateran

,and i ssued decree s for convents and

churches , while the Pope a llowed the wounds of Phila1 Cbr on . Venet . , p . 3 1 Rodulfi G laber

,H ist , i. ; M on . Germ . ,

ix .

56 : conscena’ens cum su is tu r r im

, qua:s i ta es t ex tra civ itatem trans

Tiber im,ob a lt i tua

’inem su i I ntercelos voca tam val/amt eam

,defiensu r us

pro vita . Annal . Quea’l . Cbronog r . Saxo. O tto was certain ly inRome on Feb . 22 , s ince his Placitum for Farfa is dated 8 Ka l. M ar t ti

A . 998, I ncl . A’

I . Anno Otton is I I I . Regn . X V. Imper . I I .

Aetum P omwf elici ter .

2 Cbron . Venet . pr ecut a Roma inexpug nabi lem tur r im int ram'

t,

in qua non d iu,ven to imper ator e, i llum manere licu i t . Sea

’

ab efu s

mi li t ibus captus , proj ect is ocu lis—P omam in quoclam monas ter io a’elatus

est . Vi ta in Ekkard ab Otton i s Vassor e B i r t/zi lone cor r eptu s , ampa

tat is nar i bus , etc. G laber, Bonizo , Amalr . Auger . a lso ascribe the

ill-usage to the Emperor . The German chroniclers call his captors

non tan tum Imperator i s , sea’ Cbr ist i amici (Annal . Saxo. Annal.

Quea’l . ,

428 HISTORY OF ROME

Crescent ius defiant in S . Ange lo. Crescent ius here found himse l fd efends

himself inS . Ang elo .

without prospect of escape,even through fl ight

,which

he seems to have scorned . Deserted in Rome , wherethe populace immediate ly abj ured him to become thespectator of one of the bloodiest of tragedies

,while

the Imperia l i st faction united with the Ge rmans inattacking the fortre ss ; unsupported by the baronson the Campagna

,whe re his cousins in the Sabina

rema ined expectant in the i r fortresses , Cres cent iussaw no othe r prospect of rescue than in the swords Ofthe fa i thful friends who had shut themse lve s up and

were ready to die with him . For a lthough his end

was to be foreseen , he was not betrayed by his followe rs

,and his short but brave de fence i ncreased the

glory of his'

name,which the populace long associated

with S . Ange lo . The ce lebrated Mausoleum , i n itse lfstrong as a tower

,in the course Of time had become

a castle . As early as the days Of Charle s the Greati t had re ckoned six towe rs and one hundred and

sixty-four battlements ; Crescent ius had furthe r enlarg ed it .

1The Mausoleum was deemed impreg

nable the knowledge of its defence by the Greeksmust have sti l l survived ; Hugo

’s fl ight from it wasfresh in the memory Of all; as we re the facts that thefortress had been the stronghold of the invincibleAlberic, and that it had rema ined unconquered since

1 Thi etmar,iv. 0. 2 1

,and Annal. Saxo, A . 998, call S . Angelo

a’omus T/zeoa

’er ici for the first t ime it is

,however

,spoken of as Cas

tettum Cr escent i i in Cencius . P ier Damian i calls it M ons S . Angeli ,

e ither on account of i ts s ize , or because the mountainous Mausoleum of

Augustus was called at that t ime M ons Augu stus . Rud. Glaber andAdemar (H i st ,

iii. c. 3 1) call S. Angelo ta rr i s I n tercelos, from the

church on its summit .


the time of the Goths . Crescent ius successfully re

pulsed severa l attacks , and O tto was forced to laysiege to the Mausoleum according to the rules ofmilitary science .

He entrusted the siege to the Margrave Eckhard OfMe iszen

,who Opened the attack immediate ly afte r

Sunday in Albis . Crescent ius manfully defendedhimse l f for a time . But the huge wooden towers andmachine s

,built by the Ge rmans

,shook the fortre ss

and the be l ief in its impregnabil ity . The end ofCrescent ius i s ve i led in fable . I t was said that

,de

spairing of a lengthy re sistance he disguised himse l fin a cowl

,came secre tly to O tto s pa lace , and begged

for mercy at his feet . The young Emperor asked hisattendants why they had admit ted the P rince of theRomans

,who had made emperors

,popes

,and laws

into the dwe l l ing of the Saxons ? Take him back,

he sa id,to the throne of his highness , until we have

prepared a recept ion worthy of his dignity. Cre scent ius

,reconducted to the fortre ss, va l iantly defended

himse lf,until S . Ange lo was a t length taken by

assault,when the Emperor commanded that the

prisoner should throw himse l f from the battlement sin the sight of the people , in orde r that he might not

be accused by the Romans Of having secretly madeaway with the i r prince .

1 Another legend re late s that

Crescent ius was se ized in attempting to e scape,was

1 Such is the romance of Glaber , a monk of C luny, in the m iddle of

saec. xi . Cur , inqu iens , Romanor . pr incipem ,impera tor . clecr etor um

( this refers to the Byzantine alliance ) clator emqu e legum atque aru’inatorem pontificum,

in trare s in is t is maga lia Saxonum N unc quoquer educi te cum ao

’t lzronum sum sublimi tat is , clonec ej us bonor i cona

’zgnam

m’

a’elicet pruparamus suscep t ionem .


led, seated on an as s

,through the stree ts of Rome,

was torn l imb from limb,and was final ly hanged out

side the city.

1 Rumour a l so attributed his fal l toshame le ss perjury on the part of O tto . I t was sa idthat the Emperor

,through his knight Tammu s ,

assured Crescent ius of safe ty,and that the Pat ricius ,

having surrendered himse l f into the Imperia l power,was executed on a charge of high treason . Althoughthis act of treachery rema ins unproved , the fact thatTammu s embraced the monastic profession ,

and thatO tto pe rformed various penitentia l exe rcise s , lends anaspect of probabil ity to the statement . Cres cent ius

’

resistance was hope le ss,and the Emperor was by no

means obl iged to resort to measure s so unchival rousto obtai n the surrende r of the fortress .2 I t i s notimprobable that the Consul of the Romans was forcedto capitulate ; and he may e ither have surrende red atdiscre tion or

,covered with wounds

,have la id down

his arms on re ce iving the assurance s Of the generals .These assurance s

,howeve r

,were not ratified by the

Emperor . Crescent ius,who had previously rece ived

1 Sigbert , Gembl. , A . 100 1 .

2 P ier Damiani,who wrote nearly ninety years later Vi ta P omuala’i

,

Paris,1664, i . Cu i Tammus cx pru cep to P eg is j usj u rana

’um

secur i tat is p ra st i t i t , et ita i lle deceptus . G laber re lates that O ttochivalrously let him go to the fortress , in order that he might take i tby assault . G laber thus contradicts his younger contemporary Damiani . Landulfus

, senior, ii . c. 19 Crescen t ium ingen io, non armis cep i t .

Before him (about 1085) Arnulfus wrote (H is t . M ea’z'

ol,c. pacto

u tr imque composi to, i llius se tr aa’ia

’i t potesta te. Leo Ostiem, ii . 0. 18

sacr amen to a’ecep tum cep i t , et max quas i reum maj estat i s cap i te obtrun

cao i t , which he borrows from Dam ian i . Bonizo mere ly says a’

iu obses

sum cep i t et cap i te tr uncam’

t . Ademar (H ist . iii. c. 3 1) has the notice

cap tus est ins ia’i is sure conj ug is . We see how many d ifferent vers ions

there were concerning the fate of the unfortunate hero of Roman liberty.

IN THE M IDDLE AGES. 43 I

the Imperial pardon,had broken his oath , banished

the Pope , set up an Anti-pope,and negotiated with

the Byzantine s he was,therefore

,we l l aware that his

life was forfe it.The fortress was taken by assault on April 29 th, 998 .

Crescen t ius was beheaded on the battlements ; hisremains were then thrown down

,and we re lastly t iu s, Ap ril

placed on a ga l lows be low Mont e Mario .

1 When29’h’ 998 '

I ta l ian Chronic lers re late that his eye s we re first tornout

,that his l imbs we re muti lated

,and that he was

dragged through the streets of Rome on the skin ofa cow

,we ne i the r make any attempt to discuss the

question nor to speculate a s to whether or not theinfl iction of such crue lt ies would have outraged thefee l ings of O tto the Third or Gregory the Fi fth , bothof whom had calmly permitted such hideous torturesto be infl icted on the Anti-pope . The Romans them

1 Thietmar wr ites as a contemporary, be ing twenty-one years old at

the t ime of Crescentius’ fa ll ( Cbron . ,

iv. 0. -2 1,Annal Saxo

,which

transcribes from him) : Tandem per mac/zinamenta alto constr ucta

ascendi t (Eckhard) , et eundem decollatum vot e Imperator ia per pedes

laqueo suspendit cum a li is duodecim . Catal . E ccardi : Cap tus et

tr uncatus per pedes in M on te M alo su spensus est . The Vi ta M einwerci,

c. x. p . 520 (Leibnitz, Scr ipt . B runsw,i . ) says : cum duodecim su is .

The Annal. Quedl . on ly : i llumque captum decollar i,et e summo arcis

pra czpz'

tatum in pat ibu lo pedibus su spendi j uss i t . The Chron icle of

Luneburg Cr escen t ius quam do to str ide mi t deme Ka tser e an dat Velt‘

,

unde war tg evang en , uncle scbendliclze erbang en (Eccard . I . xix .

Arnulf of M ilan records that he was beheaded on the Neron ian Fie ldLandulf, that he was first deprived of all his limbs , and that his eyeswere torn out . The Venet . Cbron . (of Otto I l I .

’

s t ime) : Cr escent .ven iam miser abi li voce adclaman tem in summi tate u t ab omn ib. vider

etur decollauer unt , et proj ecto tellu r e a li i s imi li poena in M onte

Gaudio imper ia li decreto su spens i sunt . Glaber has the tale of his

be ing dragged on the skin of a cow, etc.

432 HISTORY OF ROME

se lves could only look with hatred on those gal lowson Monte Mario

,the hil l of the northern pilgrims ,

which rise s ove r Ponte Molle l ike a monument Of thehistory Of the Holy Roman Empire of the Ge rmannation . At the foot of this lofty hil l , traversed bythe ancient Via Triumphalis , lay the Neronian Fie ld

(campus N er on is ), whe re the Impe ria l army had e rectedthe ir tents . He re Cre scent ius was hanged , and withhim twe lve Romans

,the Regionary capta ins of the

C ity, who , l ike the i r leade r, we re sentenced to death—awful trophie s of the hated yoke of the fore igne r.A chronicle r consequently trace s the derivation of thename of the hil l from this ( for the Germans) fortunateoccurrence .

‘

He speaks of the hil l as M ons Gaudi i,

the Mount of Joy ; ca l led by the Romans, however,M ons M a lus .

1 Anothe r write r describe s the unfortu

nate widow of Cres cent ius i n the arms Of brutal1 C/zron ica Reg ia S . P an ta leon is of sece . x11. idemque mons u sque

bodie ob tr z'

ump/zalem ty r ann idis pru sumptor em a Teu ton icis M ons

Gaudi i , a Roman is au tem M M a lus voca tu r . I,however , derive the

name of M ons Gaudi i from the rejo icings of p ilgr ims at the first s ightof Rome . My V iew is supported by the fact that the crusaders calledthe spot named B iddu, outs ide Jerusalem ,

M ons Gaudi i , because herethe sacred city first came into View . The hill is called M alus for the

firs t t ime by Ben . of Soracte , c . 26 he was acquain t ed with a churchdedicated to S. Clement there . From M . Malus the name Monte

Mar io was probably der ived . The ancient Romans called a part of

the hill Clivus Cun iu . Martial , Ep igr . 4H inc sep tem dominos v idere mon tes

E t totam licet wst ima re P omam .

The present Monte Mar io was perhaps called M ons Vaticanus in

ancient t imes. See on this subj ect Cos tant ino Maes in Cr acas , n . 42

(March The Tr iumphal Way led across the hill ; to the

Tr iumphal Way I refer an A r cu s Ildi li tor um,as Ben. of Soracte calls

what was probably an ancient tr iumphal arch on the Field of Neroa P rato S . P etr i , lzubi dici tur arcus M i li torum (c. 3

434 HISTORY OF ROME

breathe s the sorrow-laden spirit of the past as inspired

by the ruined world of the Ete rnal C ity.

Poor worm , who fain in palaces wouldst dwell,Thy home must be this strict confining cell .He to whom Rome her g lad alleg iance gave,Lies now unhonoured in this obscure grave ,The mighty Duke Crescent ius , to whose shareFe ll noble ancestry and beauty rare .

Strong s tood the land of Tiber in his day,Then turned submissive to her Pontiff’s sway.For round the fickle wheel of Fortune spun ,And horror closed what g lory had begun .

Oh thou, whoe’

er thou art , who passest by,

Under l ike chance ’tis thine to live and die

Then spare thy fellow man at least a sigh .

1

1 Vermis bomopu tredo, cin is , laquear ia quaer is .

H i s aptandu s er is sed brevibus gy ar is .

Qu i tenu i t totamfeliciter ordine P omam

H is latebr is teg i tu r pauper et ex tguus,P u lcber in aspectu dominus Crescent ius et dux

I ncly ta progen ies quem peper i t sabotem.

Tempor e sub cuj us va lu i t Ty ber inaque tellusj us ad Apostolici valde qu ieta s teli t .

N am for tuna suos conver t it lus i bus annos

E t dedi t ex tr emum fin i s babere tetr um.

Sor te sub bac qu isqu is vi ta sp i ramina carp is

Da mibi vel gemi tum te r ecolens socium.

[For the translation I am indebted to a friend.—Translator . ]

Baronius read this epitaph in S. Pancrazio , and pub lished it for the

first t ime,Annal. E ccl. A . 996 . The penul timate couplet shows that

it refers to the ill-fated hero . The fourth couplet is obscure the poet

seems to speak in ve iled language of the government of Crescentias andthe return of Rome to subject ion under Gregory V. He dared not

speak the truth , but the Nam in the fifth d istich expresses a conclus ionfrom his hidden thought . He means to say that Rome, which Crescentius had vigorously ruled, again became papal , for the hero wasoverthrown by the fickleness of fate. The reader will have not icedthe first appearance of Leonine rhymes.

IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

CH A P T E R V I .

1 . CONSEQUENCES OF THE FALL OF CRESCENTIUs—HIS

RELATIVES IN THE SABINA—HUGO ,ABBOT OF FARFA

-COND ITION OF TH IS IMPER IAL MONASTERY— REMARKABLE LAWSUIT BETWEEN THE ABBOT AND THE

PRESBYTERS OF S . EUSTACHIUS IN ROME .

OTTO’

S criminal tribunal , even more appal l ing thanthe tribunal of his grandfathe r, fi l led the C ity withterror. The young emperor in one of his diplomas

,

however,records with satisfaction the day of Cre s

cent ius’

s execution ; he fully be l ieved that he hadfinal ly subdued Rome .

1 The re lations of the rebe lalso fe lt the consequences of his tragic fal l . In the

hope of extending the ir authority in the Sabina, theyhad clung to Crescent ius as long as he was powerful

,

but at the time of his ove rthrow had prudentlyrema ined aloof. The sense Of national ity neverexisted in the Campagna ; there were no Romansoutside Rome no fee l ing of oneness eve r united theinhabitants—severed by race and laws—Of Romanterritory. While the Roman Curial constitution had

1 Otto’

s Writings in Mabi ll Annal. B en , iv. 1 17, dated I II . Kal.

M aj i A . 998 , quando Crescent ias decollatus suspensusfu i t .

436 HISTORY OF ROME

long perished in the provincial towns,a free citizen

C lass had scarce ly arisen before barons,bishops and

abbots rose powerful above the mass Of the coloniand bondsmen . All strove to Obta in possession ofthe country towns or fortresses

,and in many cases

the popes invested influentia l families or bishopricsand convents w ith e states . Feuda l i sm spread throughout the Roman territory ; in some instances noblestook possession of entire districts

,and from the

middle of the tenth century, the baronia l system ofa se cular as we l l as a spiritua l nature became rootedin the soil

,to survive as a curse of agriculture unti l

our own days .From the e leventh century onwards

,we shal l find

Tusculum and Praeneste the centres Of feudal ism inthe immediate ne ighbourhood of Rome . At theend of the tenth

,howeve r

,the family Of Count Bene

dict,which was re lated by marriage to Cre scent ius ,

ruled in the Sabina . This powerful noble dwe lt inthe fortress of Arci . He had se ized and subjugatedsevera l places be longing to Farfa, and his sons , Johnand Cre scent ius , strove to emulate his example .

Benedict se ized the episcopal town of Cacre,the

ancient Etruscan Agylla, not as ye t known as Cu re

vetus (Ce rve tri) . The fal l of Crescent ius fi l led him

and his sons with dismay. Count John forthwith

surrendered half of an e state which he had takenfrom Farfa

,and the Abbot gave him a deed of

tenure of the“ third class over the other hal f,

together with the disputed fortress of Tribucum.

1

1 Hugo, D estruct . Farfi , p. 541 . Concerning the d ispute betweenFarfa and this Count, see Galletti

’

s treatise on the Sabine Gabil.

HISTORY OF ROME

immediate ly returned to Rome . Although the

refractory baron solemnly vowed to renounce hislega l cla ims

,his son ridicu led the oath and pressed

Farfa yet more close ly than before .

1

With the object of curbing the arrogance of thepetty tyrants in the Sabina

,both Emperor and Pope

strove to ma inta in themse lves in possession of Farfa .

On the death of Campo in 966, the Abbey had beenmade over per commendam to Leo , Abbot of S .

Andrea on Soracte,a step which had only se rved to

hasten its decline . John , an unbridled debauchee ,was e lected Abbot, but was deposed by O tto theS econd

,when the Emperor appointed Adam in his

stead . The latter appointment caused a divis ion inthe Abbey

,and on Otto

’s death,John se ized the

Sabine,Tuscan

,and Spole tan property, while Adam

ruled in the March Of Fermo . On his arrival at Farfain 996, O tto the Third fixed the exact extent of theAbbey lands in a diploma

,and thus united the

monastic territory under the Abbot John .

2 On John ’s

death in 997 , Hugo, in opposition to the Canonica lrules

,purchased the dignity of Abbot from Gregory

the Fifth . He had entered the monastery of MonteAmiata at the age of six teen ; i n his twenty-fourthyear he seized the croz ier Of Farfa, to enter on a long

1 In 988 John was Comes and Rector of the Sabina ; in 994 Crescentius (Fatteschi , Ser ie, Appendix ). Between 994 and 999 no Comes

i s any longer ment ioned here . In 999 Gerardus , an adheren t probablyof Emperor and Pope, he ld the offi ce , but in 1002 John again appears

as Comes , and in 1003 Rainerius and Crescentius .

2 Pr ivilegium in the Cli ron . Farf , p . 479 .—Act . Sabin is in Cur te S .

Get/tu tti VI I I . Kal . j uni i A . 996 ej us Imp . P egn i X I I I . Imper zz

quoque I .


and honourable re ign,and to compile the valuable

volumes which describe the conditions of the time .

1

He was deposed as a usurper by Otto the Third , andthe Abbey was then made over to othe r hands . The

entreatie s of the monks, however, and the ta lents ofthe deposed Abbot, found favour with the Emperor.He re instated Hugo on February 22md

, 99 8 , and

revived the ancient law,by which the Abbot of Farfa ,

after having been e lected by the monks,was first to

obta in ratification from the Emperor as patron of themonastery

,and afterwards be consecrated by the

Pope .

2

Hugo’s restoration was a benefit to the Abbey.

He was zealous in furthering the re form of Cluny,

and inde fatigable in’

his exert ions for the recovery ofthe monastic property. We frequently discove r himbefore the imperial tribunal in Rome

,armed with the

diplomas Of his monastery,and invariably see him

issue victorious from the tria l . The re cords of thesetr ials, which bring us into immediate contact withthe administration of justice in the tenth century

,stil l

awaken our interest . The account of one may servethe historian as a picture of the conditions thenexisting. The age portrayed, a lthough rude and

violent,was human ised by the respect which eucom

1 Bethmann has edited them as Hugon is Opuscu la , and has collectedvar ious writ ings relat ing to Farfa under the t itle of H i stor ice P ar

fenses in tom. viii . of the M on . Germ. Hugo wrote his L iberD estruct ion is Farf . after the year 1000 .

2 E lectus qu i sque ab eadem Cong r ega tione p r ius ej u sdem Imper ia li

patrocin io pra sen tatu s g rat is robor etu r,et tune a S . P on t . canon ice

consecretur . D at . 8 Kat. M ar tti A . 998 . I nd . XI . ann . Otton i s I I I .

P egnantis X V. Imper . I I . Act . P oma j el. in D ei nom. Amen . ThisP ra ceptum in the Cbron . Farf. , p . 492 .

HISTORY OF ROME

passed the law. Popes and kings of present timeswould consider themse lve s humil iated were theyreque sted to descend in person to the presence of acivil tribunal to settle C ivi l d ispute s . The conceptionof the royal powe r has long been removed from the

province of immediate and pe rsonal Operation , andbeen transformed into an impotent abstraction. Butin these semi-patriarcha l time s

, the judic ial maje stywas accounted the highest and most sacred functionof the sove re ign powe r

,and after the days of Charle s

the Great emperors frequently took the ir place onthe j udge ’s seat . These tribunal s gradua l ly becameless frequent

,and unde r the O ttos we mee t with only

a few Roman Placita particularly associated with theImpe rium .

Tr ial of the On April 8 th, 99 8 , the presbyters of S . Eustachio in

1& 1?n Rome took proceedings aga inst the Abbot of Farfa .

998 The presbyte rs cla imed the surrende r of the churche sof S . Maria and S . Benedict in the Thermae ofAlexande r, which be longed to the monaste ry, andasserted that this monastery had pa id them taxe s forthe churche s . The regular Roman tribunal , whichconsisted of impe rial and papal j udice s

,assembled

outside the doors of S . Pe te r’s,near S . Maria in Turri .

The Emperor appointed the Archdeacon Of the

Imperia l Pa lace as his repre sentat ive and as

President, and nominated John the Prefect of theCity and Count Pa latine as his succe ssor

,while two

Pa latine judge s,the Chief De fensor and the A rcarius

,

with three Judices Dativi , were added as assessors onthe side of the Pope . Farfa had a lways stood underLombard law

,and the Abbot Hugo consequently

442 HISTORY OF ROME

Advocate of the Monastery,as j udge

,and forced

him to swear on the Gospel s that he would judgeuprightly . The Abbot remonstrated that he was leftwithout an advocate

,and a native of the Sabina was

consequently appointed counse l for the defence .

The Sabine , who was unacquainted with law,knew

not how to answe r ; he was therefore consigned toHubert

,now acting as j udge or asse ssor, for ins truc

t ion . The Lombard judge , in conformity withLombard law,

insisted on the accused party swearingthat for forty years the monaste ry had been inpossession of the two churches . The presbyte rs

,

howeve r,tried to de stroy the e ffect of the oath ; in

accordance with Roman law,they sought through

witne sse s to prove that within the forty years theyhad levied taxes on the monastery. The witnesse s ,be ing separate ly examined

,were found contradictory

and fa lse ; and afte r the presbyters had refused toprove the truth by oath

,the ir compla int was rejected

,

and they were sentenced to resign the churches inquestion to the monastery.

1 According to lega lusage

,the document conta ining the subject of com

plaint,or

,in case of forge ry

,the spurious document

,

was taken from the hands of the condemned . Ajudge cut a cross in i t with a kn ife

,and gave i t into

the hands Of the succe ssful disputant,in order that

it might be reta ined as an archive,and produced in

case of necessity. At the same time a renewa l of thesu it was forbidden

,on penalty of a fine of ten pounds

in gold,one-half of which was to go to the Imperial

1 The customary legal expression is : refictare ( I tal ian, r zfi u tare)r efutare ipsos eccles ias domno abbat i .


Pa lace , the othe r to the monaste ry .

1 Owing to thegreat unce rta inty which preva i led both in Civi l andpol itica l affa i rs

,the same suit was as a rule repeated

time s innumerable . It was even dragged on withincredible obst inacy for nearly a whole century

, and

Was in fact renewed as O ften as the disputan t s foundthe Circumstances favourable

,and hoped

,e ithe r by

bribery of the judge s or through the change ofauthorities

,to succeed in the i r t reacherous design .

2

The acts of the tria l we re entered in a document,

which was signed by the Judges and Proctors and

given to the Abbot . This document is stil l foundamong the Farfa archives

,and shows us how na ive

and curt were the forms of judic ia l procedure of thisage ; a l so the difficulty and confusion with which,owing to the different lega l systems

,they were

encumbered . The uncerta intie s of law we re endlessall doors we re open to fraud and bribery ; and we

may judge what protection rema ined for the burgheror colonus.

1 Ar car iu s Leo—tu li t cu ltrum et s ignum s . cr ucis in ea ( that is tosay, car ta per quam li t igaban t ) abscindendoper mediumfeci t , et r eliqu itin manu D omn i abbat is . Murator i refers to this Placitum in his D i ss .

34, in order to show how many forged documents were at this t ime in

circu lat ion . I refer further to D ipl . xxiv. in Gallett i (D el P r im. A .

where the Abbot of S. Cosma and Damiano in Trastevere triesto fraudulently acqu ire property by means of a false diploma .

2 This case Of Farfa was repeated in 10 10,and several t imes in the

XI th century . The monastery went to law again on account of the

fortresses Arci and Tr ibuco in 1068 . A law-su it with S. Cosma and

Dam iano in M ica aurea (Trastevere) , on account ofS . Mar ia in M inione,near Civita Vecchia, lasted unt il 1083, consequently nearly a hundredyears .

2 . LEGAL ADM IN ISTRATION IN ROME—THE JUD ICESPALATIN I OR ORD INARI I—THE JUD ICES DATIV IFORMULA FOR THE INSTITUTION OF THE ROMANJUDGES— FORMULA FOR THE BESTOWAL OF ROMANC ITIZENSHIP CRIM INAL JUDGES CoNSULs AND

COM ITES WITH JUD ICIAL AUTHOR ITY IN THE COUNTRYTOWNS .

The Roman Placitum affords us an Opportunity formaking some remarks upon the system of j ustice i nRome in the time of O tto the Third . In eve ry tria lwe find two Classe s of j udge s— the Palatin i and the

Dativi . With the former class we became acqua intedas early as the e ighth century, in the form of theseven papa l ministers . They continued to form the

ordinary Court of Justice i n civi l matters after there storation of the Empire . As the Late ran , howeve r,assumed a lso the form Of an Imperia l Palatinate

,the

Judice s Pa latin i became at the same time imperia lj udges

,and could be employed by the Emperor as

we l l as the Pope,as assessors taking part in the

j udgment . The peculiar circumstances in whichRome stood—her overlord the Emperor

,her terri

t orial rule r the Pope—foste red the curious blendingof the two powers

,which we re represented in common

as the judicia l system . The Primicerius and the

Secundicerius,the A rcar ius and the Saccellarius , the

Pro toscriniar,Primus De fensor and Adminiculator

we re invested at the same t ime with the dignity ofimperia l Official s . The time s when these papalministers had tyrannised over Rome were past ; the

Dativi.

H ISTORY OF ROME

disappeared under Frankish rule to make way forfreer German institutions

,such as were deve loped in

the system of assessors . Thus,afte r the middle of

the tenth century, we discover Judice s Dat ivi inRome itse l f, and afte r 96 1 frequently come acrossthem in documents, while mention is made of them inRavenna as early as 838 .

The,nature of these dativi i s not as ye t entire ly

clear to us . According to the ir name they wereappointed in the capacity Of assessors by the highestlega l authorities—by the Emperor

,Pope , Patricius ,

or in the provincia l towns by the Comes . They havej ustly been regarded as a German institution

,and

been compared with the Scabini , permanent Frankishofficial s

,who we re e lected under the influence of the

Counts from the yeomen of the district or the juris ‘

diction,in orde r to s it in j udgment and to pronounce

sentence , as learned in the law.

1 Documents Showthat in North I ta ly the dativi rece ived the ir namesfrom the cities where they acted as judge s

,and tha t

they reta ined the title even in death .

2 With regardto Rome , however, i t cannot be proved that they werechosen by consent of the citizens . On the contrary ,

they appear invariably as having been given alone1 Sav igny, i . sect . 68 ; Leo, E ntw . der Verj i der lombard. Stadte

,

p . 57 The X. D iss. Of Muratori . According to a law of Char les theGreat , seven Scabini were obliged to attend every Placitum as asses

sors , bu t the number was se ldom complete .

2 The passages are given after Fantuzzi in Hege l , i . 329 Savigny, i .

372. Be thmann'Hollweg (Ur spr . ,&c. ,

193—400 ) calls them a sort of

hybrid between assessors pronouncing judgment and magi strates. The

word data s was somet imes used instead of dativu s : Adr ianus datus

j udex . La tus Dei gr at. dat j ud . Placitum of O tto I I I . A. 999, Cbro n.

Farf , 50 1 .


by the Emperor or the Pope , and SO far from be ingassessors appointed by the community, as in Northe rnI taly

,that they could occasional ly be designated a s

Palatine judge s .1 The highes t secular d ign itari e sappeared as Dativi . We find Theophylact as

Consul and Dativus Judex , and John as Pre fect,

Count Pa latine,and Dativus Judex

,while aga in other

Dativi appear without any othe r d ignity. Thus, as

soon as Hubert,Counse l for the Abbey of Farfa

,

became transformed into a judge pronouncingsentence

,he was ca l led Hubert Dativus . 2

The Roman courts of j ustice were the reforecomposed of the Ordinari i and the Dat ivi . Unde r the

presidency of the judge , ordinari i and dativi were , asa rule , united to the numbe r of seven

,while an

indefinite number Of optimates (nobiles vi r i ) assistedat the tribunal . 3 Ordinari i and dativi we re classed

1 I find at least B enedictus D omin i nu tu dat ivus j udex S . P a lat i i,

in Marini,n . 102 , A . 96 1 .

2 This by itself shows in oppos it ion to Savigny ( i . 373) that thejudicial office of the dat ivus could also be commissar ial . I t is also a

mistake to use prafectus as synonymous with da t ivus . D at ivus denotes

the office of a judge the adjuncts, however , such as consu l et dat ivu s,

tr ibunus et d . ,comes palat i i et d .

,relate to the rank of the person , and

have nothing to do with the da t ivus . Savigny ( i . sect . outsidethe Exarchate and Rome

,only knows dat ivi in Pavia and M illa .

Documents nevertheless show dativi de civi tate N arn ien si,de civ .

Har tand (Cod . Farf. Sesser .,ccxviii . , n. 466, A. and dativi of

T ibur ( ibid. , 11. 453 , A .

3 A document of July 28th, 966, shows the three constituent parts ofthe Roman tribunal : cum ordinar izs j udicib. et j olz. atque Gu ich dat ivij ud ices , nec non et nobi li vir is , vid . Gump izo , j olt . de Ildi tzina etc.

qu i adstan t . Here dat ivi and nob. vir i evident ly correspond , as the

Frankish scabin i and bon i nomi’

nes ( in general , freemen of the rank ofassessors)—Giesebrecht, i . 822.

Formulaon the

appointment of the

Dativus .

H ISTORY OF ROME

together as essential ly Roman judge s (j udices Romanior Romanorum) , and cal led themse l ves By the graceOf God

,judge s of the Holy Roman Empire ”

(Dei

Gra tia sacr i Romani Imper i i j udex ) . In the timeOf the O ttos the appointment of the dat ivi appearsto have been associated with a solemn ceremony.

When a judge i s to be appointed he must be led bythe Pr im ice riu s to the Emperor, who, addressing thePrimice rius

,says : Primicerius

,s ee that he i s ne i ther

poor nor the slave Of any man,so that he may not

injure my soul by bribery.

’ To the judge the

Emperor must say :‘Take care neve r to subvert

the laws of our most sacred predecessor Justin ian ’

;

and the judge must answer,

‘May I be for everaccursed i f I do .

’

The Emperor then must make thecandidate swear never on any occasion whatever toinfringe the law. He must inve st the newly-madej udge with the mantle , turning the buckle of it to theright

,the clasp to the le ft , as a S ign that the law

should a lways be Open before him,fa lse wi tness si lent

In his pre sence . The Emperor must then place thebook of the law in his hand , saying :

‘ Judge Romeand the Leonine city and the whole world accordingto this book

,

’ and dismiss him with a kiss .

1 E t det ei in manum li br um codicum et dicat secundum bune libr um

j udica P omam et Leon ianam Orbemque un iver sum et det ci oscu lum

et dimitta t cum. Formula, quali ter j udex cons t i tuendu s s i t,in the Col .

Va t . 49 17, of sece . xi and the copy in the Cod . Va t . 1983 , at the end

of the history of Paul D iaconus , and at the end of the Grapbia . Here

we have undoubtedly the appo intment of a judex of Otto I I I .’

s t ime .

Compare with this the later papal formula , qual i ter j udex et scr inar ius

a Romano P on t if . insti tuantu r , after Cencius Camerarius in Murat

Ant . I t . , i . 687 .

450 HISTORY OF ROME

divided according to the regions of the City,and was

probably committed to the Pre fect Of the city,since

i t was scarce ly l ike ly that these Consuls acted simplyas j udge s outs ide Rome

,or that the i r courts were

mere ly loca l courts outside the city .

1 As little as we

know Of the Roman juridica l system ,so l ittle do we

know of that of the cities outside . These citie s werestil l administered by duce s , comite s , and vice-comites ,even by Gasta ld i and apostol i c Miss i

,who in the ir

turn appointed the ir judge s . The duces hence forwardvery rare ly appear. They were evidently supplantedby the Frankish Counts who sprang up in everydire ction

,so tha t the ancient duchies became trans

formed into counties .2 The former tribunes al so

distr ibu ti per j udicatus a l i i P edanei a Consu libus cr eat i ( i . e. nostr i

j udices according to the Gloss . , Cod. Vat . and further : qu idicuntur consu les j udica tu s r eg unt et r eos legi bus pun iun t et p ro qualitate cr iminum in nox ios d ictant sen tent iam. This fragment , quot suntgenera j udicum,

from Cod . Vat . , 2037, has been edited by Mabillon,

recen tly and completely by G iesebrecht .1 In a document from Ve lletri, of

‘

the year 997 , Consuls appear as

judges in civil matters, and are appointed by an abbot . See furtherbelow . Hege l ( i . 332) refers the j udicatus defin ite ly to the papalterr itory outs ide Rome . Bunsen ( i . like Savigny, refers it toRome . Why should not these

,institut ions apply to Rome as well as

to the papal terr itory ? I remark fur ther that the t itle consu l is veryfrequent in documents of the x . saeo.

2 Papal diploma A . 10 18,in Mar ini, n . 42, for the Bishop of

Portus : qu icumque vero pr esump tor s ive D ux , s ive Comes,vel Vice

comes , au t cubicu lar ius , vel a n ra Aplica sede M issus , au t quali scumqu e

in terven iens P otestas ( the later podestd) que de ipsa civi tate Por tuense

domina tum tenuer i t,&c . Portus stood under a comes . A Gastaldus

,

however , in the capacity of papal overseer , levied the taxes . The

diploma consequen tly calls Portus a Cas ta/datus,so that the t itles of

Lombard mag istrates appear in the immediate neighbourhood of Rome.

In the fragment quot sunt g enera j udicum, the office of the comes is


ceased to be rectors of the smal le r towns . The irt itle s are frequently mere ly honorary

,or e lse are used

to mark the actua l position Of municipal Officials andjudges of these places .1

THE IMPER IAL PALATINATE IN ROME IMPER IALGUARD — COUNT PALATINE IMPERIAL FISCUs

PAPAL PALATINATE AND CAMERA—TAXEs—D IM INU

TION OF THE LATERAN REVENUES— SQUANDER INGOF THE PROPERTY OF THE CHURCH— EXEMPTIONS OFTHE B ISHOPs—RECOGN ITION OF FEUDAL CONTRACTSBY THE ROMAN CHURCH ABOUT THE YEAR 1 0 0 0 .

We have spoken at length Of the Roman Pa latine The Im

judges the nature Of the Imperial Pa latinate,never gagi ng ,

the les s , remains somewhat obscure at this period .

O rigina l ly intended to be un ited with the papalpalace

,in the ordinary course of things the two soon

became distinct. Each had its own household,its

specified as something non-Roman Comes en im i lliter atus ac bar bar u s .

Tivoli and Segni stood under Counts (Murat .,An t . , v . 379, v . 773 ) and

Gastald i (Marini,Annot . , n. 3 1 , p . Tusculum

,Alife , Horta

,

Terracina, Traetto under Counts . Albano stood under a Dux (Mu rat

An t . , V .1 Savigny ( i . sect . 1 15) wrongly says that tribunes do not appear

after sece . x . They are found , however , in Hor ta, Su tri , Camer ino .

Ego Adalg is i tr ibunus tabellio civ . Su tr ine A . 948. Galle tti,M sr .

Vat . , 8048, p . 8 ; Cod. Farf . Sessor . , ccxvi ii . n . 46 1 , A . 1004 ; n . 466,A . 1005 Cod , ccxii . p . 154, as late as A . 1068. Leo tr ibu nu s et

dat iv. j ud. et Tabellar ius civ . Hor tanee. Petrus tr ibun . et dat iv . L eo

tr ib. B er ing er ius tr ibun . et D ei g r . j ud . et tabellar . civ. Hor tance.

This corresponds to the consu l et dat ivus j ud. in Rome . These tribuneswere therefore no longer military tribunes . An ancient Roman t itleis thus found in saec. xi. among the Lombards in Tuscan and Spoletan

terr itory.

H ISTORY OF ROME

own revenues . Afte r the t ime of Charles , the

Emperors dwe l t at S . Pe te r’s,occasional ly in the

Lateran , but possessed no res idence in the city .

Al though O tto the First had built a palace in

Ravenna,he had never contemplated build ing one

i n Rome . The idea of such a palace first seems tohave been conce ived by O tto the Third , who , but forthe mass of ruins on the Pa latine , would probablyhave const ructed an Imperial fortress within the

ancient Pa lace of the Caesars . He e rected one

instead on the Aventine beside S . Bonifazio , or moreprobably transformed some ancient palace to answe rto his needs .1 He here l ived encompassed by By zant ine ce remon ia l

,and surrounded himse lf with a host

of palace dign itarie s,on whom he be stowed the most

curious t itle s . At the ir head stood the MagisterPalat ii Imperial is .2 An Imperial guard

,composed

exclu sive ly of nobles, Ge rman as we l l as Roman,

surrounded his pe rson . The formula of admissionto this body has been prese rved in the Grapbia . The

Mile s rece ives from the tribune the spurs ; from the

Dictator the coat of mai l ; from the Cap iductor the

lance and shie ld ; from the Magister Mil itia the i rongreaves ; from the Caesar the plumed he lmet ; fromthe Impe rator the girdle , with the insignia

,sword

,

1 Gesta Ep . Camerae. i . c. 144 : in an tiquo Palatio, quod est in

monte Avent ino ver sabatur , and the Avent ine is descr ibed as a splendidquarter. Tangmar ( Vi ta B er nwardi , C. 19) Otto fest inans a palat ia

fere duo mi liar ia ad S . P etrum. This distance su its the Avent ine.

2 Albericus , son of Gregory (qu i de Tu scu lana ), is thus mentionedin the Reg est . Farf . ,

n . 470 (A. He appears aspr afectus navalis ,G regor ius M iccinus as vestar i us S . Pa la ti i . A logotbeta S . Palat i i

appears in a diploma of Classe , A. 100 1 (Mittarelli, App . , 66, p .

HISTORY OF ROME

monasteries such as Farfa and S . Andrea on Soracteshould pay taxes to the treasury of the i r protector ;the existence

,howeve r

,of domains of anothe r charac

te r may be noticed .

1 When,in 874 , the Emperor

Lewis endowed the monastery of Casa Aurea,which

he had recently founded,he pre sented it with al l the

revenues he possessed in the Romagna, in Spole to,Camerino

,and Tuscany.

2 I f among these revenue sfi scal rights are to be understood

,i t would prove how

insignificant we re the Imperia l possessions in Romeand Roman territory. The amount of the revenue swhich the Empe ror drew from the city is

,howeve r

,

unknown . In Carol ingian time s the gift of ten

pounds of gold, one hundred pounds Of si lve r

,and

t en fine pal l ia was yearly sent to the palace of Pavia,while the Impe ria l Missus was ma inta ined at the

expense of the Apostol ic treasury.

3 NO tribute fromRome i s mentioned ; only one half of the fine s

,

amounting in c ivi l case s usua l ly to ten pounds of1 L ibell . de Imp. Potest . (p . eran t den ique monaster ia in

Sabin i s—seu ceter a fi sca lz’

a pa tr imon ia in tr a P omanos fi nes ad usum

imper ialem. In the D ip l . of Conrad I I A . 1027, for Farfa (P eg .

Farf , qu idqu id de pr a dict i monast . possess ion ibus fi scus noster

sperare potuer i t . Among the Lombards the Fiscus was called the

cu r t is r eg ia , among the Caroling ians pala t ium,for which , after the

t ime of Lewis the word camera was somet imes used . As early asthe beg inn ing of saec. xi . we find camer a nostr a for the papal fiscus the

same expression is used for the imperia l as ear ly as the t ime of O t to I .

Privileg . for Subiaco , A . 967 : medietatem in pra dicto monaster io, et

mediet . Kamere nost ra .

2 Omnes r es nostr as , quas j u sto ac legali tenor e acqu is ivimus tam

infr a u rbem Romam quam ex tr a— Cbron . Casaur . , p . 8 1 1 . Murat

i i . 2 ; Papencordt , &c. (pp . 143 , hence infers the insignificance ofthe imper ia l domains .

3 I take this from the Libella s de Imp . Pot .


gold , was pa id to the Imperial Palatium . Owing tothe numerous tria l s, these revenues amounted to noinconsiderable sum . They rema ined

,howeve r

,vari

able , and other revenues also we re of a l ike casualCharacter, such, for instance , as the Foderum, the

Parata , the Mans ionat icum,the duty of ma inta ining

horses and soldie rs,of repa iring roads and bridge s ,

and of providing quarte rs for the army. Wheneve rthe Emperor came to Rome his army and court werequarte red upon the City

,as i s evident from the fact

that O tto the First on one occasion removed his troopsin orde r to spare Rome the expense of ma inta in ingthem . The duty of Foderum extended to all the citiesOf I taly

,and proved no smal l burthen to the country .

1

The Apostol ic Came ra,on the other hand

,was Of The Apos

an entire ly different Characte r. The papal treasury , Sigmaorigina l ly the Ve stiarium

,was at this period equal ly

cal led Pa latium . The rents of the ecclesiasticale states

,which in gene ra l were comprised as da tiones

( dazio in Ital ian) , tr ibu ta ,s ervi tia

, functiones , and

pens iones were pa id to the papal treasury. The

separate names of these taxes were endless , and

those of the tolls for bridges,roads

,gate s , meadows,

woods,marke ts

,rive rs

,harbours

,& c.

,form a long l ist

Characte ristic of the barbarous S tate economy O f the

age .

2 The officials exacted money from all the pos

1 Fotrum orfoderum (fourrage, foraggio) Murat. , An t .,I I . 1 D iss . ,

xix . 64 . The Vi ta M atbi ldis Reg ina , 0. 2 1 , says of O tto I . et totus

pop. Roman . se sponte subj'

ugavit ips ius dominatu i , et s ibi solvebant

t r ibu ta , et post i llum ceter is su is pos ter i s . Ekkard Chron . for the year1043 : Anno Colon ien . Ep i sc. et Hermannu s B abenbergens is Ramam

miss i sun t pecun iam qua reg i debebatur congr egandi g rat iam.

2 Pon taticum, pedag ium, por tat icum, escaticum,

ter rat icum, g landa

H ISTORY OF ROME

sessions of the Church , and in the city itse lfwe find thepapal Came ra owner of taxes imposed on the banks ofthe river and the gates of the city and at the bridge s . ’

We know nothing of direct tribute in Rome,and

entire ly doubt whether the free Romans pa id polltax or ground rent to the papal Fiscus . That Romeshould not be Oppressed by taxe s was a principle Of

papal pol icy. Neverthe less,extortions were levied

under the name of gifts,col lections

,tithes

,and

customs . Barbarous although the time may appear,i t was ye t not far removed from the late r system ofextortionate monarchies . The idea of sovere igntywas ma inly repre sented in the supreme judicialauthority

,and all the customary service s of subjects

rested on a pactum or agreement, by which tributewas pa id on all of which the subj ects made use as

be longing to the State . Thus the Church couldcla im no more than the tax which

,as Census

,

be longed to the Camera , and her e ssential revenue srested on her nume rous patrimonie s . On the otherhand, fines and compositions fe l l to the papa l Fiscus

,

as a lso the property of all who died without he i rs .2

t icum,lzerbaticum

,casat icum, platea ticum, r ipat icum, palzfi ctur a

,

navalta telon ia,testat icum

,and so forth . D i ss . xix. of Muratori .

The pens io on leased property often amounted to only ten pounds ayear ; we may note at the same t ime the expression a t per solvat

pens ionem in nostro pa lat io, in the D ip loma of John XI I I . for Praeneste .

1 Lib. D iurn . , c. 6, tit . 20, speaks of act ionar ia de diver s is por t isbuj us Romana u rbis . The editor dates this formula (secu r i tas ) fromthe ix . or x . sece . Toll was levied at the Pon te Molle . Mar ini

,n . 28

pon tem M olvium in integ r um cum omn i ej us ing ressu et eg ressu et

dattene et tr ibu tu,which Agapitus I I . presented to the convent of S .

Silvest ro in Capite in 955.2 Mar ini, n . 42 , D iploma of Bened ict VI I I . for Portus, A . 10 18.

458 HISTORY OF ROME

n ificance . Wars,Hungarians

,and Saracens sti l l furthe r

reduced the property of S . Pe te r. The greate r partof the e state s was ru ined

,and the Popes found them

se lves obl iged to bestow entire districts on bishopsand barons.The exemptions a lso multipl ied in the Roman

territory. Ancient prerogative s we re lavished withincreasing frequency on bishops and abbots

,who , as

we l l as the nobles,se ized possession of towns . We

have seen this happen with regard to Portus andSubiaco

,but it i s stil l more remarkable that Gregory

the Fifth confe rred the counties of Comacchio and

Cesena,and even Ravenna itse lf, with its te rritory, all

the public taxe s and the right of coinage in pe rpe tu ity,on the Archb ishop ; and that O tto the Third addedto the gift the podestas or jurisd iction . The Pope sthus renounced the ir rights ove r this long-guardedpossession .

1 Abbots and bishops a lso made overthe i r e state s to powerful noble s , who then becamethe i r vassals or mil ite s in this way they were assuredof having these lands protected aga inst the Saracensand othe r enemie s . In orde r that the towns mightbe de fended

,or waste districts colonised

,they bestowed

these towns in fief, and thus during the tenth centurymany fortresse s and towers arose on the Roman

The feudal Campagna . Although the se contracts we re a lwayssys tem in

vades

Roman

territory .

Of the nature of Emphyteusis , unde r the influence ofencroaching feudal i sm the ir character soon becamea ltered , and as early as 997 we mee t with a contract1 Ughelli, 11. 353 , and Labbe, xi . 10 1 1

,dat . 4 Kal. M aj c, in Gre

gory’

s second year . Donamus t i bi , tua que eccles ia d istr ictum Raven

na t is u rbis , r ipam in in teg rum,monetam, teloneum,

mercat um, muros et

omnespor tas civitat is .


of feudal nature . John, Abbot of S . Andrea in Se lc inear Ve l letri

,inve sted the ce lebrated Crescent ius de

Theodora with Castrum Ve tus,with the significant

duty of “ making war and peace according to thecommand Of the Pope and the abbot of the monastery.

”The more immediate condit ions are a lso

noteworthy. The monastery rese rved to itse l f theright of manning a gate of the fortress a lso the rightof sending its consuls ( judges) and i ts viscounts

( ove rseers) into the districts it had leased , to guardit s right s

,to collect its taxes

,and to decide in civi l

disputes, Crescent ius re se rving to himse l f the pena l

j udicature and the command of the t roops . The

taxes took the form of a payment in kind , includinga fourth of the vintage

,and

,on the festiva l of S .

Andrew,the tr ibute of a pa i r of torches and of half a

sextarius Of oil . Although the treaty appears as a

lease of the third c lass,the Obligat ion Of mil itary

service invests it with a feuda l Characte r.1 This

1 Lateran document in the Collectan . Vat ican . of Galletti , 11. n . 8043

( the pages are'

unnumbered). I t supplements Borgia’

s history of Velle tr i,

which only quotes the D iploma of D emetrius M eliosi for sece . x . I t

is dated on April 8th, A . I I I . B enedict i VI I . I nd. VI . Locat io et

conduct io—unum castrum s ine aliquo ten imen to quod d ici tu r vetu s

pos i tum subtu s str ata— ta li qu id . condiciqne u t g uer r am et pacemfaciatad mandatum s . pon t if . et p ra d . Abbat is et successor ib. ip s iu s et u t

ipsum castr um ad maj or . cu ltum perducer e debea t . Por ta que est a

par te monaster i i semper cr i t in potes tate eccles ie et u t p r edictum j u seccl. non per ea t ipse abbas vel successor e/us babebun t pro temp . con su les

vel v icecomes qu i mi t ten t bandum supra pr edict is r ebus bandum

sang u in is cl forfactur e et oj‘ension i s str ate et proibi tiones l it ium et

exerci tus conducere et omn ia alia ipse pr ed . Cr escen t ius fi li i et nepotesej u s—poss ider e— debent . I t is signed by the abbot

,five presbyters and

monks , and five nob. vi r i . P andolfus Corvinus nob. v i r . Adt inolf usnob. vir . B irardus Corvina s nob. vir . B onus ltoma Coranus (of Cori)

460 HISTORY OF ROME

document is the first Roman deed Of the kind withwhich we are acquainted ; anothe r document of theyear 1000 shows us , howeve r, that the system ofbeneficia was recognised by the Roman Church .

Sylveste r the Se cond conferred the town andcomitatus of Te rracina on the Lombard Dauferius

and his family,upon whom he imposed the duty of

mil itary service,whe re in lay the e ssential character

of feuda l vassalage . Such were the results of partyst rife and the ra ids of the Saracens. The ancientadministration of the estate s of the Church throughsub-deacons became t ransformed into a system ofprivate contract ; this system passed into feuda ltenure

,and after the middle of the tenth century the

great patrimony of S . Peter was occupied throughoutby mil ites

,who eagerly strove to transform the estate s ,

with which they had been mere ly temporarily inve sted ,i nto hereditary property.

1

nob. vi r . Ama tus comes S ign ie. The remarkable d iploma of 946, in

which the B ishop of Velletr i invests D emetr ius,son of the Consul and

Dux M eliosus , with a mountain and the surrounding terr itory, in order

that he may bu ild a fortress , is to be found in Borg ia , p . 158 . The

Canon cons isted,among o ther things , in the de l ivery of one-fourth of

the wine produce , and of one out of every herd of cattle .

1 Sylvester I I . laments in his bill of enfeoffment (pra cept ion i spag ina )R . E ccl . pon tzfices . nom ine pens ion i s per cer tas indict iones ba c et alia

nonnu lla attr ibu isse nonnu llis indzfifer en ter constat

,cum lucr i s oper am

daren t et sub parv iss imo censu max imas r es eccles ia perder en t (Jaffe,P eg , p . As he says : Concedimus sub nomine bene/z

'

ci i,et

s t ipendia m i li tar ia sun t . We have here a formal fief. DauferiusWasdescended from the Dukes of Gaeta ; in 94 1 a Dauferius and his son ,

Lando Of Gaeta, were invested with Traetto (Federici, p.

HISTORY OF ROME

visited Monte Casino in a spirit of deep reverence ,was cut short by an important occurrence ; the newsreached him of the death ofGregory the Fifth in Rome .

The first Ge rman Pope had ended his earthly caree r inthe beginn ing of February

,and the suspicion that his

death was due to poison seemed but too we l l founded .

1

O tto resolved now to re turn to Rome ; he fi rst,

however,made a pilgrimage to Mount Garganus , a

wild headland in the Apul ian Sea, whe re stood an

ancient chape l dedicated to the Archange l Michae l .The worship Of this Semitic guardian Spir it hadpassed through Juda i sm down to the Christianmythology

,and had made i ts way from Byzantium

to the We st . Legend re lated that the Archange lhad appeared

,

on Garganus in 49 3 , where a churchhad been built in his honour within a cave . Thischurch became the centre of the worship of the saintfor the entire West . The fame of its sanctity

,its

remoteness, the sol itary grandeur of its s ituation ,made i t the most frequented sanctuary of the ag e, sothat Mount Garganus became to the We st whatAthos or Hag ionoros was to the Christian East. The

miracle-working Apulian shrine possessed a specia l

at traction for O tto, be ing dedicated to the sameArchange l M ichae l whose fortress in Rome he hadbesieged . Barefooted he climbed the sacred hill, and

1 The Vi ta M einwer ci Ep . , 0. 7 (abou t says : Gr egor ius—“

post

discessum ej us a Roman i s expu lsus , ac deinde veneno peremtus—4 I d .

M ar tti mor i tur . The Vi ta S . N i li , c . 9 1 , seems to point to a second

expulsion ; it also says , c'ba rrep T t s p aw as 3 l ixt 7 1231! gli der

The epitaph g ives the 18th February as the day of his death Thietmar,

iv . c. 27 , the 4th February. The representat ion of the sarcophagus is

g iven in D ionys ius , xlvi .


c lad in the robe of a penitent , l ingered in the caveamid the chanting monks . And while thus mortifyingbody and soul he could tu rn his longing gaze fromthe lofty cape towards He l las and the East . Advanc

ing furthe r,he a lso visited S . Nilus , who with othe r

enthusiast s now dwe lt in m iserable tents in the

ne ighbourhood of Gae ta . The Emperor fe l l at thefee t of the sa int

,reverently conducted him to the

Chape l and there prayed in his company. In va in heinvited N ilus to re turn with him to Rome

,and Offered

to grant him any boon he de sired . The patriarch’sonly wish was for the salvation of the Imperia l youth.

Otto la id his golden crown in the hands of theprophe t

,as a te stimony to the nothingness Of earthly

grandeur,and a token that the t rue k ing was the

saint who knew no tempora l desire .

1

O t to entered Rome in the last days of March . He

found the city tranquil ; the Romans had made noattempt to e lect a Pope

,but patiently awa ited the

successor to Gregory who should be given them bythe Emperor. This was Gerbert , a member O f theImperial ret inue , the Emperor ’s own tutor

,and a

gen ius who far outshone all his contemporaries .This extraordinary man was Of French

,not German

birth,a Burgundian of humble origin .

2 As monk in Gerbert .

1 EI'ra 7 6V a r e'gbavor RAH/a s er T od

’

s xepol 7 08 dy fov, it a l 6 137107 776625:

orap’

a l’

r ro i} 7 620 1 7 011

3 p er’

a i’

r r oi} e’

7ropebe'ro 7 11V 686V. Vi ta S .

N i li , c. 93 . Neverthe less , says his b iographer, he did not escape the

judgment of God , but died banished from Rome . S . Nilus came to

Rome in 1002 , and founded the monastery of Grotta Ferrata, the churchof which was consecrated by John XIX . in 1024. Domenichino paintedthere the meet ing of the Emperor and monk at Gaeta .

2 For the circumstances of his life , see C. F. Hoek , Gerber t oder

HISTORY OF ROME

Aurillac he had devoted himse l f to mathematics,a

science which then flourished owing to the impetusgiven to it by the Arabs . He had studied phi losophyin Rhe ims with such success that he was afterwardshonoured there as a teache r. He became acqua intedwith O tto the First in Ita ly

,and the Emperor

,

attracted by his learn ing, took him into favour. O ttothe Se cond admired him

,and presented him with the

rich Abbey of Bobbio. Gerbe rt,however

,soon

escaped from the persecutions which he the resuffe red

,and returned to Rhe ims ; thence he went to

the Ge rman court,where he successful ly ingratiated

himse l f with the Impe ria l family. Afte r aga in dwe l ling for some time i n Rhe ims, he rose to the archiepiscopal chair of this me tropol itan city

,owing to

the favour of the new King,Hugh Cape t, to whose

son Robert he had been tutor. In his reports of theSynod

, Gerbert had recorded the bold transactions ofthe schismatica l French bishops at the Council whichpronounced the deposition of his predece ssor

,Arnulf.

Fina l ly,compe lled by the papal legate

,Leo of S .

Boniface,to renounce the throne of Rhe ims at the

Synod Of Mousou in 99 5, Gerbert went'

to Rome onaffa irs of the Pope . O tto had ju st rece ived the

crown . The young Emperor invited Gerbert tore turn with him to his court in Magdeburg ; here hebe came the instructor of the Empe ror in Greek andmathematics unti l 998 , when O tto bestowed the

archbishopric Of Ravenna upon him .

Through the v irtues of a saint, this ce lebrated city

Papst Sy lvester I I . and sein f abr ic Vienna, 1837 ; Jules Havel ,Lettres de Gerber t (983 Paris , 1889 .

HISTORY OF ROME

of mystic ignorance . The most renowned princes ,howeve r

,sat at the feet of Romuald and humbly

l istened to his d iscourse ; and the same O tto who , inadmiration for the genius of his tutor

,had written

him letters addressed,

“ To the most wise Gerbert ,crowned in the three classe s of philosophy,

” fe l lprostrate be fore the ignorant hermit , reverently kissedhis cowl

,and stretched himse l f

,a penitent, on his

hard bed of rushes . Gerbert meanwhile had onlyretained the Archbishopric of Ravenna for a year

,

when fortune ra ised him to the sacred cha i r, and hispupi l proved that the instruction of so great a teacherhad not been thrown away.

1

His appointment did honour to Otto , and reflectedshame on the Roman clergy. T he genius of the new

Pope,who had formerly so severe ly critic ised the

ignorance of his prede cessors,only caused the dark

ness of Rome to appear the denser . Gerbert was

ordained in the beginning Of Apri l 999 . He boldlytook the name of the Pope who was revered as mostholy

,but had al ready become mythical ; Sylve ster

the Second saw in O tto a second Constantine , and

the choice Of a name was not mere ly accidenta l , s ince

friendship and gratitude united teacher and pupil .This idea l a l l iance be tween Papacy and Empire,

1 Baron . ,A . 999 , calls him bominem alioqu i astu tum, et in g rat iam

se P r incipum ins inuand i max imum ar t ificem,tanta sede (u t liber e

fatear ) indzgn iss imum. His artifices and his character have brandedthe necromancer with undeserved reproach ; and the Annal. Sa xo

already says that he ought by r ight to be excluded from the list ofPopes . Even Herm. Contr . (A . 1000) calls him secu lar i li tter atu ra

n imium dedi tus . H is verse on Rhe ims , Ravenna, and Rome is wellknown : scandi i ab P . Gerber tus ad P . post papa vzget R .


which Otto had striven to attain through his cous in ,Gregory the Fifth

,was now to be real ised under the

new Sylveste r. Be l ievers in the Donation of Cons tant ine might we l l te l l the Emperor that the nameSylvester poin ted to the re storation of the ecclesiastica l state and to fresh donat ions . The satire of theRomans

,on the other hand , might have reminded

O tto that immediate ly afte r the donat ion Constant inehad re signed the E te rna l C ity into the hands of thePope

,and had himse l f re tired to a corner of Europe

on the shore of the Bosphorus . O tto, on the contrary,desired to make Rome the Imperial residence

,and to

be the creator of a new universa l monarchy. The"

15216 1

366

aideal of Charles hove red before his eyes . The in 0 115111.experienced youth was

,howeve r

,incapable of con

ce iving any political system such as was necessaryfor the Germanic-Roman west. His Greek educat ionhad al ienated him from the north ; and instead Of

considering,as Charle s had done

,that Rome— fa l len

for ever political ly— was mere ly the source of hisImperial maj e sty

,the seat Of the Church over which

he ruled— instead of establishing the centre of theEmpire in Germany, Ot to de sired to exal t Romeaga in into the seat of Imperial residence . The

thought that it was first nece ssary to reduce the

Roman Church, by a series Of confl icts,to the leve l

Of a Patriarchate , such as the Chu rch of Byzant ium ,

never crossed his bra in . The boundaries of Churchand State we re confused in his imagination , and withthe de spotic principles of Justinian , he un ited recol

lect ions Of the inst itutions of the Roman Republic .The energy of Germany had saved the Papacy from

HISTORY OF ROME

rum,and had reconque red Rome ; and the nobil ity,

who,more practica l than Otto himse l f, had sought to

l imit his dominion to the measure possessed byAlberic

,the Empe ror be l ieved himse l f to have sub

dued . Having sent to the ga l lows the patriots whohad striven to acquire a sl ight importance for the

E terna l C ity , O tto appeared l ike Augustus after thevictory of Actium

,and his extravagant imagination

invested ruined Rome with the proportions of theuniverse . He dreamed of extending his rule asCaesar ove r fore ign nations , and of restoring the

Roman Empire . On one Of his leaden sea ls Romeappears as a woman

,ve i led

,bearing shie ld and lance

,

and surrounded by the inscription,Renova tio Impern

Roman i .1 With de l iberate ostentation he revived theancient idea of the Republic ; he even Spoke Of

i ncreasing the powe r of the Roman people and of theSenate . He cal led himse l f by preference Empe rorof the Romans, but a l so Consul of the Roman Senateand people ; and had he l ived longe r he would havere stored the Senate .

2 Although no document informs u s

,we can scarce ly doubt that he gave some

kind of civic constitution to the Romans . The powe rof the nobil i ty had already become too great ; the1 Murator i, An t iq.

,v. 556.

2 D ecr etum de r escindendis inj ust is r er um eccles iar . a lienat ion .

(P eg . Fa rf ,n . 244 , 20 Sept . Otto D ei g ra t . Romanor . IMP .

A UG. COS . A r clziep i scopi s , Abba t ibu s , M ar cbion ibu s,

Comi t ibus et cunct is j udicibu s in H i ta liam const i tu t is . So I read i t in

the or ig ina l Farfa M S . ,and expand not Cons ulibus

,as Giesebrecht

does , who bel ieves that O tto had p laced consuls at the head of a newlyconstituted senate

,but Consu l Senatus Popu lique Roman i . The COS

is wr itten in majuscu le , like IMP . AUG .

, and in muchsmaller characters .

470 HISTORY OF ROME

order to win his favour the courtiers affected Greekmanners

,and

,as i n the e ighteenth century

,and even

in the present day ,French is stamme red at eve ry

German court , so in the time ofO tto German knightsand he roes tried to stammer Greek ; so early is thedate at which the p itiable passion of Ge rmans, tofal s ify the i r own nature by the adoption of fore ignsupe rficialit ies , shows itse lf. Among the signature sof O tto

’

s Ge rman judge s we stil l discover the name sof S iegfried and Wa lthe r written in Greek characters ,i n the same way as Latin sentences were written inGreek le tters according to the fashion which pre

va i led in Rome and Ravenna during the Byzantinepe riod .

O tto studied the ceremonial Of the Byzantinecourt , with which he , the son of a Greek , wished toal ly himse l f by marriage . Probably for his use

,a

Lat in formulary was comp iled ,which i s partly de rived

from the “Origine s ” of I sidore , and partly agree s

with the Book of Ce remonies of Constantine Porphyrogenitus . The Byzantine dignitie s are here de scribedwith antiquarian learning

,and are appl ied to Rome ,

Imp . in locum Porpby r zz a se i llu stratum (Mabillon, Vet . Annal. , i .1 22 ) N e sacrum pa lat ium torpu isse pu tet I talia, et ne se solam j actet

1 Thus at the foot of the Placitum of Pavia Of Oct . 14th, 100 1

Szgef r edus j udex P alat i i CTI‘

HTPHAOTC and thus Waltar z

OTAA®APT (Murat . , Ant . E sten . , i. In 1002 the Prefect of

the city s igns a legal document : CTE<I>ANO HPETEKTTOO OTPBH

P0 : ME. Underneath, however , simply and intelligibly, B enedict usnobi li viro B aldu inus nobi li vi ro : M S . Vatican . ,

8043 , of Gallet ti .Less surpr ising are such Greek s ignatures in Naples at this period ;see the many documents of saec. x. in the M onum . Regi i N eapo/i tan i

A r cbivi i .


and the fantastic vestments of the Emperor,the ten

different crowns,are enume rated and expla ined .

According to the statements of the unknown author ,these were crowns of ivy

,olive leaves

,poplar branches ,

oak and laure l, the mitra of Janus , the Trojan

Frig ium of Paris,the I ron Crown ( in token that

Pompey, Julius, Octavian , and Trajan had conqueredthe world with the sword), the crown of peacock

’sfeathers ; lastly, the golden crown se t with preciousstones

,which Diocle tian had borrowed from the

Persian kings,and on which ran the inscription ,

Roma capu t mundi reg it orbis f rena rotundi .” 1

Horses, weapons

,musica l instruments

,even the

eunuchs,are

i

described the various kinds of triumphsare distinguished . NO dignity

,no powe r

,no l iving

soul in the Roman world,not even the exalted

Monokrator,was permitted to ascend the Capitol of

Saturn,the Head of the World , othe rwise than in

white ra iment . The Sole Rule r must assume the

white robe in the Mutatorium of Julius Caesar, andmust advance to the Golden Capitol surrounded byall kinds of musicians

,while rece iving acclamations in

Hebrew,Greek , and Latin from the bystanders .

There all must bow three time s to the earth beforehim

,and entreat God

,who has placed him at the

head of the Roman world , to prese rve his hea lth .

” 2

1 Grapbia aurea Urb. P om. The legend Roma caput mundi , a

customary phrase of that t ime,was since then borne by the coins of

the Roman Senate . The iron crown is that of Lombardy the s ilvercrown of Aachen is wan ting ; the third one

,of gold , is the Imper ial .

Concerning these three crowns, see Sigonius de P egno, vii . 288 .

2 Ozanam quotes in this connect ion an extract from Const . Porpby r . ,

i . app : I ng ressus j ustin ian i in u rbem Constant in unfiur naav

472 HISTORY OF ROME

O tto, however, was obl iged to be sat isfied with reading of this antique pageantry in the Book of Ceremonies . His fantastic whims contributed in greatdegree to nourish the va in ideas cherished by the

Romans of the e te rna l capita l of the world . De ludedenthusiasts might comfort themse lve s for the loss Ofthe i r c ivic freedom by the thought that Hungary,Poland

,the north of Spa in

,Germany itse l f, we re

provinces of Rome,that they themse lves were pro

consuls of these provinces . The ignorant aristocratsscarce ly smiled ove r the youthful foible s of the

Emperor, who flatte red the i r nat ional pride . Theythronged eagerly forward to obta in the offices in thecourt and -Mil itia offe red them by O tto. If the

Emperor did not create tribune s of the people,

consuls,dictators

,and senators

,neverthe less other

officials with high sounding name s were found at hiscourt Protove s t iarii

,Pro toscriniarii , Logothetae ,

Archilogothe tm,Protospathari i

,as in Constantinople .

The new title of Pre fect of the Flee t was borne byGregory of Tusculum . In consequence of the decl ineof the ecclesiastical state the papal nava l station at

Ostia had ceased to ex i st, and O tto the Third, intending to create a Roman navy

,hastened to further his

purpose by the appointment of an admiral .1

Soueafrmof

,a t érr'ra ao af, teal ne

'r’

a im-obs r p iBoiix/oz, it al

mitt-ar es , mi t/

“r es ,ue

'raAer/R631!a mEfwu. In the passage , bebr a ice,

‘

gr ece,

et latinefausta acclamant ibus , I recognise the continued existence of theRoman Jews as a Schola .

1 Reg . Farf . ,n. 470 . Document concerning the Cella M inionis ,

16th December 999 : Gerardo g r ci a’ci incli to comi te atque imper ia li

mi li tia mag istro Gregor io excellen t . viro qu i de tuscu lana atque

prafecto navali Gregor io vi ro clar . qu i miccinus atque vestaran’

o

HISTORY OF ROME

own palace he holds a Placitum . Crescent ius , Pre fectOf the city , stood by his side— the Patricius occupying,however

,the foremost place .

’l There was a suggestionof rebe l l ion in the Office

,which had a charm for the

Romans,since the Roman magnates who had fought

aga inst papal and imperial authority had invariablycal led themse lve s Patricius . I t was

,the re fore , afte r

wards obscured by the dignity Of the Pre fect, theimportance of which office O tto the Third seems a lsoto have exalted . In the years 9 55 and 9 56 the CityPre fect

,who has rema ined out of s ight during the

Carol ingian period,aga in appears . His position soon

becomes more important,s ince we s ee him as the

specia l representative of Imperia l authority, i nvestedwith the eagle and sword, and exe rcising the penalj urisdiction in the C ity and i ts territory. At the

same time he i s the pe rmanent advocate of theChurch

,endowed with judicial powe r.

BEG INN ING OF SYLVESTER ’S PONTI FICATE— DONATION OFOTTO I I I .

— EARLI EST PRESAGE OF THE CRUSADESHUNGARY BECOMES A PROVINCE OF THE ROMANCHURCH OTTO I I I . ON THE AVENTINE—H IS MYSTI

CISM—HE RETURNS TO GERMANY—REVIS ITS ITALY INTHE YEAR 1 0 00—D IFFICULT POSITION OF SYLVESTER11.— THE BAS ILICA OF S . ADALBERT ON THE I SLAND IN

THE TIBER .

The papal Sylvester the Second meanwhi le gave evidence ofi

é

’

y

’

iiliftir the spirit in which he meant to rule . He compe l ledI I . 1 Reg . P atti , 649 Galletti , del . P r im xxvi . Placitum of the year

1003 . I t is s igned first byj ob . D omin i gr at . Romanor . patr icia s , and

next by Cr esc. D om. g r . Urbis prefi ctus .


Robert, the French king , to break Off an uncanonicalmarr iage ; he excommunicated the rebe l l ious Lombard , A rduin . The bishops were informed that thenew Pope was re solved seve re ly to punish simonyand unchastity

,in orde r that the episcopal office

should aga in stand Spotless above the authority ofkings, which it as far outshone as the splendour ofgold ou tshone common lead .

1 Sylvester found readysupport from O tto in eve ry matte r conce rning the

furtherance of the ecclesiastica l reforms planned byGregory the Fifth . The Emperor was necessary tothe Pope al ike for the accomplishment Of this noblea im

,and to uphold him in Rome . While Sylve ster

resolved to found a new tempora l supremacy for thePapacy, he saw beside him a young Emperor eagerfor fame , intoxicated by the ideal of ancient splendour,and hopeful of inaugurating a new era in the Empire .

The re lationship of the worldly-wise master and hisromantic pupil i s

,consequent ly

,in the highest degree

remarkable , for at bottom the i r ideas we re at variance .

O tto the Third undoubtedly fe l t that he was Empe ror,that he had made two Popes

,and that he must fol low

in the path of his grandfathe r . He announced theseprinciple s when he grac iously presented the Popewith e ight counties cla imed by the Church in the

Romagna . He declared Rome the capital of theworld

,the Roman Church the Mother of Christianity,

but asserted that , in squande ring the ecc le siastica lproperty for gold , the Popes had diminished her

prestige . He furthe r mainta ined that, in the con

1 Sermo Gerber ti de infi rmat ione Ep i scoporum, in Mabillon,Vet .

Ana lecta,11. 217 . The time of Gregory VI I . is foreshadowed .


fused state of the law,the Popes

,i n virtue of the

O tto I I I .

’

s pretended Donation of Constantine , had usurped partof the Empire

,and had invented an equa l ly fal se

V6 5 1“ 11 Donation of Charle s the Ba ld . He despised thesefictions , but neve rthe le ss presented his tutor, whomhe had made Pope

,with the countie s Of Pesaro, Fano,

S in igaglia, Ancona, Fossombrone , Cagl i, J e si , and

O simo . This declaration,which was probably made

at the instigation Of earnest men,his Chance l lors ,

Showed a consciousness of Imperial maje sty whichmay we l l have struck Sylveste r with dismay

1

The Pope avoided,howeve r

,disturbing the che rished

dreams of the noble youth,for in ra i s ing his tutor to

the Papacy,-O tto hoped to find in him a pontiff whowould furthe r his ideas

,and death alone prevented a

bitte r d is il lus ion . Sylve ster hoped to educate the

young idea l ist,and unde r his rule entire ly to re store

the eccles iastical state . He agreed to the project ofmaking Rome the permanent imperia l residence , sincethe Emperor

’

s presence formed a safeguard aga instrebe l l ion . He flatte red Otto in eve ry way. He was

1 P omam capu t mundi profi temu r , in Duchesne,11. 73 , where the

diploma is falsely called D ecretum E lect ion is S i lvestr i I I . Pag i ando thers dispute i ts authent icity. Murator i , Pertz, Giesebrecht , GfrOreraccept it . The pr incip les of the d iploma agree with the L ibell. dc Imp .

P otest . the squandering of their prerogat ives by the Popes Wascensured by Sylvester himse lf in the feudal diploma of Terracina ;the ir tone and character be long to the t ime . The g ift of e ight count iesvestr um ob amorem is again mentioned by O tto in Epist. Ger b.

, 158.

These cit ies had hitherto been administered by Hugo of Tuscanytoge ther with Spoleto and Camer ino . L ike these the Romagna.

belonged to the Emp ire. The s trong attack on the spuriousness of

the Donat ion of Constantine is very s triking , in Otto’s mouth

,in

cons ideration of the time, although not impossible.

47 8 I I ISTORY OF ROME

first time invested a fore ign prince with the diademas a gift of Peter.1 Hence forward the city gaveshe lter to peace ful Magyars , for whom Stephen builta pilgrim-house near S . Pete r ’s . At the same timethe King founded a seminary for Hungarian priests—a building which was afte rwards united with theGerman College . The first Hungarian King is stil lhonoured in the church of S . S te fano degli Ungari ,which occupie s the site of the earl ie r house for pilgrimsnear S . Pe te r’s . The Hungarian church

,however

,i s

S . Ste fano in P iscinula ,i n the region Parione

,whe re

the ancient col lege dedicated to the ProtomartyrStephen must forme rly have stood .

The conversion Of Hungary was the result of themission of Ada lbert, whom O tto now began to ideal i seas his patron sa int . In his devotion to the monasteryon the Aventine where Adalbert had dwe lt, he addedto its prope rty

,and presented to it

,as a covering for

the a l tar, the mantle , embroide red with apocalypt icfigure s

,which he had worn at his coronation .

2 He

e stablished his Imperia l fortre ss in a ne ighbouringbu ilding

,and dated some documents thence as from

the“ Pa lace beside the monastery .

” 3 ' None of the

1 The crown , with which Stephen I . was crowned in 100 1 , is the

same as that which the Hungarians carried off and hid in 1848, and

which was afterwards d iscovered as a treasure . The diploma of

Sylvester for Stephen is given in Calles Annal. Austr ia,v. 299 .

2 The d iploma of Otto I I I . for this monastery is g iven by N erini it

has no date, but nevertheless appears genuine . 355 t iny gold bellsin the form of pomegranates hung on the fringe of the coronat ionmantle , as on the mantle of the Jewi sh H igh-pr iest ; it displayed a

golden zodiac g littering with precious stones—Grapbia.

3 They are of Nov. I st, 1000 , for Vercelli : actnm Roma in P alat ia

IVIonaster zo ( Ii/on . H ist . Patr ia , i. 338, The well-known read


hills of Rome was more animated at this time thanthe now utter ly de serted Aventine . Besides the convents of S . Maria and S . Bonifazio and the Imperialfortress

,constantly fi l led with holy men and women

and distinguished guests,there were severa l sump tu

ous palaces,and the air was considered pecul iarly

healthy.

1

While O tto assumed the name s of ancient Romantriumphators

,such as I talicus , Sax on icus , and RO

manus,he at the same time ca l led himse l f servant of

Jesus Christ and of the Apostle , and deemed the

work of bringing prosperity to the Church of God as

we l l as to the Empire and the Republic of the Romanpeople to be his highe st mission .

2 In spired by these Mystic teni deas he sank from time to time into fit s of mystic a

r

t

’

sfiff

abstract ion . Greece and Rome ra ised his spirit tothe realm of the ideal , but monks ensnared and drewit back within the province of monastic fa ith . Thusthe imaginative spirit of the Impe ria l youth wavered

ing in Palatio M ont is is to be rejected . As on other occasions documents were dated in P a latia s . Petr i or apud. s . P . , so here wasmeant in Pal . M onas ter i i , but barbarously wr itten P alat ia Monaster io.

1 I n Avent ino mon te, qu i p ra ceter is i llius u rbis mon t i bu s ades

decoras kabet,et sua pos i t ion i s cu lmen tollens a s t ivos fervor es au rar um

a lgor e tolerabi les r eddi t , et li abi lem in se babi ta tionemfac it . Vi ta S .

Odi lion is (Acta S . P ened. VI I I . ,1.

2 D iploma of May 7th, 999 , in which he presents Leo , Bishop of

Vercelli, with this city and county, cum omni publica potestate in per

petuum,u t libere et securepermanen te D ei eccles ia

, prosper etu r nostrum

imp . tr iumpbet corona nos tra mi li t ia pr opag etur potent iapopu li Roman i

et r est i tu tatu r respublica . H is t . Patr . M on . , i . cxciii. 325 . A

diploma of Otto I I I . for S . Maria in Pomposa, A . 100 1,Ravenna V.

Kal . D ec. I nd . X V.

’

beg ins in nom s . et individua Tr in i tat is Otto I I I .

servus Apostolaram (Federici , i . like the preceding deed of g ift toSylvester.—Otto I I I . servus/esu Cbr isti , in Wilmanns , p . 138 .

HISTORY OF ROME

to and fro between the dreams of Caesarism and therenunciation of the penitent . He shut himse l f up forfourteen days in a hermit ’s ce l l at S . Clemente inRome with Franco

,the young Bishop of Worms ,

then went in the summe r to Benevento, and aga inmortified the fle sh in the monastery Of S . Benedict atSubiaco .

1 He thence proceeded to Farfa, accom

panied by the Pope , by Roman noble s, and by hisfavourite , Hugo of Tuscany. He desired to returnto Germany

,and while at Farfa apparently made

provision for the administration of I ta ly during hisabsence , appointing Hugo his V iceroy.

2 Saddenedby the loss of his aunt Mati lda

,who in his absence

had conducted the gove rnment in Germany withpower and wisdom

,troubled by the death o f Franco

in Rome,sti ll grieving for Adalbe rt and Gregory the

Fifth,O tto le ft the E te rnal C ity in December 999 .

He was himse lf i l l,and soon afte r suffered the

further loss Of his grandmothe r, the Empress Ade laide .

The affa i rs of Germany demanded his presence the

dreaded year 1000 was at hand,and he had vowed a

pilgrimage to Adalbert’s grave . He took severa lRomans with him , the Patricius Z iazo and some car

dinals,while Sylve ster

,fi l led with terror, remained

behind in Rome . The Pope sent le tters after O tto

1Quandam speluncam j uxta s . Clem . eccl. clam cuncti s intr aver unt

—quatuordecim d ies latuer un t . Vi ta B u rcardi , c. 3 . A diploma of

O tto is dated 3 I d . Aug . 999 actum Sublaci in S . B enedicto, Murat .

An t . , v . 625 .

2 Pr ivileg . for Farfa , 5 N on . Octobr . Quali ter nos quadam die

Romam exeun tes pro r est i tuenda Republ i'

ca Annal . B en . ,

iv. 694, In Ep . Gerb. , 158, O tto calls Hugo expresslynostrum legatum.

O tto I I I .returns to

Rome inOctober

1000 .

O tto I I I .consecra tes

the Bas ilicaof S. Adal

ber t on the

island inthe T iber.

HISTORY OF ROME

of ruin to mankind . While O tto spent the summeri n Lombardy

,the spirit of revolt aga in ra ised its head

in Rome . The Sabina set the Pope at defiance .

From Horta,whithe r he had gone to enforce the

rights Of the Church , a threatened insurre ction com

pelled him hurriedly to fly to Rome .

1 He urgentlyentreated the young Emperor to re turn . O tto,informed by Gregory of Tusculum of the dange rouscondition of affa i rs awa iting him

,ente red the ci ty at

the head of an army in O ctobe r. He was aecom

pan ied by German bishops and by the Dukes Henryof Bavaria

, O tto of Lowe r Lorra ine , and Hugo ofTuscany. He took up his abode in his fortresson the Aventine

,which he resolved to make his

permanent dwe l l ing. He caused the bas il ica whichhe had built in honour of S . Ada lbe rt to be cons ecrated by the Bishop of Portus

,to whose diocese

the i s land in the Tiber be longed . He would gladlyhave e rected temples to his canonised martyr all ove rthe world, as Hadrian had e rected them to hisfavourite Antinous. O tto founded churche s toAdalbert’s memory in Ravenna and Aachen

,as we l l

as in Rome,and the . prox imity Of the i sland to the

Aventine was probably the reason that induced himto choose the i sland as the seat of the worship of thesa int . Adalbert had l ived in the monaste ry on the

Aventine,and from the adjacent fortress the young

Empe ror could gaze on the basi l ica be low. The

1 Letter of Gerbert in HOfler, i . Be il xv. Sed que nobis ap ud ar tam

in ter sacra m issaram solempn ia pervenerunt , non levi tu r acczpz'

enda

censet . Hock , c. 1 1, expla ins the letter qu ite wrongly. The subj ectis a r is ing in Hor ta ; the Pope requires the Emperor to commandobed ience in the Sabina on his account que nostr i j u r i s in sabz

’

no, &c.


ruins of the Temple of IEsculapius stil l existed on theisland, which in ancient times had been dedicated tothe god ; and from these ruin s the church was now

built. AEs culap ius , the‘ son of a god

,rece ived a

successor in the canonised barbarian Woytech orAdalbert . Descending through the l itt le garden ofthe monastery to the rush-grown bank of the riverwe stil l d isce rn the rema ins Of the travertine wal l swhich once gave the i sland the form of a vesse l we

s ti l l trace the image , carved in stone , of the se rpentwreathed staff, which reminds us that it was namedin ancient time s “ I nsula serpentis Ep idaur i i

” fromthe sacred serpent from Epidaurus .1

O tto was at pains to provide valuable re l ics for thechurch of his sa int. He demanded the body of theApostle Bartholomew from the town of Benevento.Legend says

,however

,that the citizens dece ived him ,

and sent him instead the bones of Paul inus of Nola,

Which O tto carried to Rome , and the re inte rred as

the remains of the Apostle .

2 Afterwards,becoming

aware of the pious fraud,he desired to avenge himse l f

on Benevento,but his desire remained unfulfi l led .

1 The Gr apbia says I n insu la templum j ovis et E scu lap i i , corpu s

S . B ar tbolomei apostoli . The island was called Lycaon ia in the M iddleAges .

2 Leo of Ost ia , 11. c. 24. Martin P01. and some catalogues of

the Popes say that O tto I I . brought the body of Bartholomew to Rome.Ricobald says that it was intended for Germany, but that , owing to theEmperor

’s death , it remained in Rome . O tto of Fre ising , however ,

relates that O tto I I I . conquered Benevento,and really brought S.

Bartholomew to Rome . Benedict XI I I . put an end to the dispute bygrant ing Benevento the actual possession of the questionable relics .The E ccl. s . Adalber t i et Paulin i in I nsu la L icaon ia is mentionedfor the first t ime A. 1027 : Mar in n. 46, p . 77 ; afterwards in 1049,i bid . , p. 85 .

484 HISTORY OF ROME

The church which he founded rece ived and longretained the name of S . Adalbert and Paulinus, but

owing to his barbarian descent the Bohemian neve rbecame accl imatised in Rome

,and it was mere ly

owing to an act of imperial d ictatorship that he wasaccepted even for a time i n the worship Of the city.

The Romans soon let his memory d ie . They preferred to be l ieve that the Apostle Bartholomew wasactual ly buried within the basi l ica, and consequentlynamed it afte r him . The name O f Ada lbert was notmentioned in the inscription ( sti l l pre served) whichwas placed by Paschalis over the entrance when herestored the church in 1 1

This basil i ca is the sole monument of O tto the

Third in Rome . I t has suffered many alterations ;neverthe less the be l l tower and the fourteen ancientgranite columns in the nave stil l remain to us memorials of O tto’s re ign .

6 . TIBUR OR T IVOLI—INSURRECTION OF THIS CITYBES IEGED AND SPARED BY OTTO I I I . AND THE POPE—REVOLT IN ROME—OTTO’S DESPERATE POS ITIONH IS SPEECH TO THE ROMANS—H IS FLIGHT FROMTHE C ITY—H IS LAST YEAR—H IS DEATH ON JANUARY23RD,

1 0 0 2 .

On January 4th, 100 1 , O tto we l comed his‘ tutor

Bernward , Bishop of Hilde she im ,to the c ity

,and

accorded him a dwe l l ing near his palace . The

1 Ter t ius istorum Rex transtu lz’

t Otto Pior um

Corpora queis domus lza c s ic redimita veget .

Qua domus z'

sta g er i t sin nor a nascere qua r ts

Corpora Paulinz’

sint, credas , B ar tboloma i .

HISTORY OF ROME

of Christ had been revealed in a vis ion to O ctavian .

The ru ins of Hadrian ’s vi lla,s ituated amid ol ive

woods at the foot of the hill , s ti l l waken our wonder—the greatest pleasure hous e in the We st. The

ruins were at this time of such vast proportions thatthey we re supposed to be the remains of a town , andwe re known as Old Tivol i . Although countlessstatues

,mosa ics and costly marble s had already been

removed,the number wh ich remained in O tto the

Third ’s days must sti l l have been enormous . The

Flora , the Faunus, the Centaurs , the Ceres , the I s is ,the Harpocrates , Sosus

’ mosaic of doves,and the

various othe r works which now fi l l the museums ofRome and other cities must have la in in the ruins ofSplendid porticos , burled in dust and forgotten bymankind .

1 Goths,Lombards

,and Saracens had

sacked Tibur ; neve rthe le ss many ruins Of wa l ls andtemple s

,the rema ins of the Claudian aqueduct, an

amphitheatre,founta i ns , and here and there a statue

,

s ti l l rema ined e rect ; stree ts sti l l bore the ancientnames

,and churche s and convents had arisen out of

temples . In the documents of Tivol i be longing tothe tenth century w

/e stil l d iscover the names Forum

,

Vicus P a tr ici i,P or ta M aj or and Oscura ,

P os terula de

Ves ta ,P or ta Adr iana , Cas trum Vetus , P ons Lucanus,

where,l ike the tomb of Hadrian in Rome , the grave

of the Plaut ii had been transformed into a tete-de

pont .2

1 The first excavaticns in Hadrian ’s villa date from Alex. VI . and

Leo X. the beaut iful works of art had consequently remained in

oblivion for at least e leven centuries .

2 The dip loma ofthe fourth year ofBenedictVI I . one of themost

comp lete of the tenth cen tury (Marini,Papi r i , p . describes the


Although papal overseers watched over the privileges of the Roman Church in Tivol i, as in Portus orA ricia

,the citizens seemed to have preserved a spirit

of independence . The ir bishop had acquired ex emption from the j urisdiction of the count, and since nonoble famil ies are mentioned

,it is probable that unde r

episcopal protection Tivol i enjoyed a more independent municipal system than other Roman te rritories .1 The privi lege s of exemption had re laxed theallegiance of the cities . The se Citie s began to isolatethemse lves

,and Rome soon found herse lf carried

back to the days of her infancy, when , inspired byjealousy

,she made war on the districts in the

Campagna .

The Tivolese,mindful of the ir l iberty

,had sla in

the Dux Mazzolinus , who appears to have been sentas the i r rector by O tto . The Emperor hereuponsurrounded the town . I t de fended itse l f, but soonlost courage

,and was persuaded by Sylveste r and

Bernward to surrender. Ha l f naked,a sword and a

bundle of rods in the hands of each, the noblest of

bishopric of T ivoli. See also, p . 3 16, an instrument of 945 , in which

the Fundi of the church of T ivol i and its tenants are reg istered :Duces or Comites , Romans , but also Lombards and Franks , such asthe Coun ts Annualdus, Gundipertus , Wassar i

, Gr imo Dux, the Gast

aldus Teudemar . In a donation of June 14th, 1003 ( Cod . Sessor . ,

ccxviii . n . appear the villa of Hadrian, civi tas vetu s, que vocaturAlbu la , non long e a civi tate Ty bu r t ina , and the Vicus P atr i t ius

,the

Amp lt i t lzeatrum ,&c. See the first edit ion of the Reg esto della clt iesa

d i Tivoli , by Luig i Bruzza , in S tud i e Document i di S tor ia e D i r i tto,

Rome , 1880 .

1 E t nu lli comz’

t i , au t Castaldio, aut al icu i bomin i, qu i ibidem

publicas funct iones fecer int l iceat tua E ccl . servos au t anci llas,s ive

l iberos lzomines ad p laci tum vel guadiam s ine aliqua distr ictione

p rovocare. —s l . A. 9 78 .

Rebellionof T ivoliand its

subjectionby O ttoI I I .

HISTORY OF ROME

the citizens pre sented themse lves before O tto to suefor grace . O tto pardoned the c ity

,only razed a

portion of the wa l ls,and accepted hostage s .1 The

Emperor thus showed that he regarded himse l f inevery way as rule r of the Roman te rritory , for the

Pope,the territorial lord of Tivol i , appeared simply

as mediator to intercede for mercy towards the town ,and thereby aroused the indignation of the Romans .We might doubt the vindictive hatred of the Romanstowards Tivol i

,were i t not proved by history. Not

only in this instance,but aga in in the year 1 142 , a

l ike forbearance shown towards the l ittle town becamethe cause of a great revolution . The se l f-re spect ofthe Romans had been fanned by O tto

’s own enthus i

asms . Already they dreamed of the restoration Of

the rights Of the Senate,and cla imed jurisdiction

over the surrounding lands . The three pretendersto power— Pope

,Emperor

,and City— were thus

brought into lasting confl ict.In the last days of O tto the Third the Roman

optimate s we re Imperial ists ; and s ince the Emperordesired to m ake his abode in Rome

,they adopted his

Ideas of a new greatness for the Roman people,i n

orde r that they might replace the rule of the Pope bythe ir own . The Emperor may perhaps have promisedthem the posse ssions of Tivol i the Pope

,howeve r,

i n orde r to re serve the town for himse l f,prevented its

destruction . The Romans now saw themse lves deluded , and the ir hatred towards the Saxon yokefound in Tivol i a fitting opportunity to show itse lf.1 Tangmar ( Vi ta B ernwardi , c. 23 ) was an eyewitness. Damian

( Vi ta S . P omua ldi , c. 23 ) ascribes the mediat ion to Romuald.

490 HISTORY OF ROME

do, s ince I cannot entire ly banish from my heartthose whom I have che rished with a father’s love .

I know the leade rs of the revolt,and can distinguish

with a glance those who endure without shame the

looks of all men . And even those trusted fol lowe rs ,in whose innocence I rej oice

,are condemned to

stand stil l and unrecognised among the guilty. Thisi s a tru ly disgrace ful state of things .” The speechmade a great impression . All was si lent , then a cryarose . The leaders of the rebe l l ion

,Benilo and

anothe r,were se ized

,dragged up the staircase of the

towe r, and thrown half dead at the Empe ror’s feet .1

O tto’s dreams were crue l ly dissipated ; he fe l l intoa deep me lancholy. Like the Goth Theodoric informe r days

,he found himse lf in his be loved Rome

a strange r amid strangers . Although the Romansla id down the ir arms

,the city remained fi l led with

tumult . The ungrate ful Gregory of Tusculum stirredup the people . A plan of attacking the Emperorwas discussed, for his scanty troops were in partencamped outside the city. Henry

,Hugo

,and

B ernward besought him to save himse l f at once,and

O tto es_with them and the Pope the unfortunate Emperor

capes from le ft the city ( February 16th , His retreatRome Feb .

resembled a fllght , for several Germans remamed

1 Tangmar heard the speech (c. O tto’s self-condemnation is

confirmed by the Gesta Ep. Camer . ,which , besides his dream of

Rome’

s universal dom inion, reproach him with too g reat familiaritywith the Romans : s imilarly Sigbert , A . 1002 , Annal. Saxo, names

Gregory (of Tusculum) as the head of the revolt. His character isdepicted in the Vi ta S . N i li , c. 82. Gregor ius

—qu i in ty r ann ide ct

in iqu i tate not iss imus er at , n imium au temprudens et ingen i i acm’

monia


behind , and were treated as hostages by the Romans .Rome was aga in independen t

,and Gregory of

Tusculum,a grandson of the ce lebrated Alberic ,

whose house O tto had aga in exalted,assumed the

gove rnment of the city .

1

O tto turned northwards. He sent Bernward andHenry to Ge rmany to collect fresh troops ; hehimse lf remained to ce lebrate Easter at the monaste ryof Classe

,near Ravenna . Although he might we l l

have regarded his fl ight from Rome as the severestpilgrimage of his l ife , he , neverthe less, aga in adoptedthe dress of the penitent. Romua ld extended an

eager we lcome to the wounded soul , whom he hopedto re tain in his monastery. He had already succeededin estranging a Doge from the world he now hopedto achieve a greater triumph, and to exhibit an

Emperor as monk . But a lthough O tto’s visionarynature might stray for a few weeks amid the mysterie sOf monasticism

,i t could not rema in permanently

buried in the l ife of contemplation . He soon laidaside the pen itentia l dress . On a stolen visit toVenice

,Pie ro O rseolo the Second , son of the Doge

who had embraced the monastic l i fe , showed him the

splendour of the young Queen of the Sea , the resultsof his admin istrative virtues and the practica l wisdomof his rule .

1 De por ta cum paucis evasi t Thietmar, iv. 30 ; Annal . Saxo,

100 1 ; Gesta Ep . Camer . And Tangmar says : immensis civium

lacr imis , which is naturally exaggerated. Otto imperator Roma expu l

sus est , say the Annal . Colon iens is A . 100 1 , simply and so too the Vi ta

S . N i li , c. 92 ar da ews &v'rq? 7 6 11014 69 113 c’

w exé pna'e ¢667 wm Sigl)ert ,

A . 1002 per industr iam Heinr ici—et Hugon is—s imu lato pacto vix

extractus, Roma deced it cum Sy lvestropapa .

HISTORY OF ROME

Breathing vengeance, O tto col lected his army and

advanced aga inst Rome . We do not,however

,hear

of any attack upon the city. On the 4th June wefind the Empe ror a t S . Paul ’s ; on the 19 th July, i nthe Alban Mountain ; on the 2 5th and 3 l s t July, atPate rno .

1 I t i s scarce ly credible that if the gates ofRome stood open to him

,he did not enter the city.

His army was insignificant . The expected re inforce

ments unde r He ribert,Archbishop of Cologne , had

not y e t arrived,and the Romans

,who in fear had

l iberated the imprisoned Ge rmans,would have pre

ferred the direst extremitie s Of a siege to a submission ,which would have brought on them the fate of

Cre scent ius .« The Emperor soon appeared before

the C ity,and soon la id waste the Campagna, which

she l tered an enemy in every stronghold . He himse l fwent to and fro be tween Rome and his headquartersat Paterno

,on Mount Soracte , near C ivita Caste l lana,

until the rebe l l ious prince s forced him to hasten tothe south . He went to Sale rno

,and besieged and

took Benevento . In the autumn,howeve r, he was

aga in in Pavia,whence he proceeded to Ravenna .

2

I f thou goest to Rome ,”Romua ld here warned him ,

thou wilt not aga in see Ravenna,

”and the sa int

spoke truth . O tto ce lebrated his last Christmas atTodi

,where he he ld a council with the Pope upon

the affa irs of Germany.

1 G iesebrecht, i . 80 1 . A d ip loma of O tto for the Marchio OldericusManfredi is dated July 3 1st , 100 1

,actnmpaterne (M on . H istor . Patr . ,

i . The documents from Paterno are g iven in Stumpf, 105 .

2 He was there in Nov. and Dec. His mood amid the whisperingmonks who surrounded him is wel l expressed by the words : Ottotercias servus Apostolor um,

which are found in one of his diplomasda t . X . Ka l. 100 1 Ravenna (Muratori, Ant . , v.

494 HISTORY OF ROME

such as not even the ancients have more fine lydescribed under the figure of Icarus . The Germanswho accompanied the cofli n

,which enclosed the

remains of the Empe ror, hurried through Tuscany inrapid fl ight. His fa ithful adherents, the Bishops ofLiege and Cologne

,of Augsburg and Constance ,

Duke O tto of Lower Lorra ine and othe r noble s, keptthe Empe ror

’s death a secre t unti l the ir troops we rea ssembled . Then they se t forth. In serried ranksthe brave Germans surrounded the mournful train ,and opened a way for it with the ir swords . And theEmpe ror who had so devotedly loved Rome was thusborne

,amid fie rce war-cries

,through the swarm of

Romans who crowded round his coffin , a corpse ,across the plains ove r which, fi l led by lofty enthus i

a sms,he had formerly ridden at the head of his

a rmy.

O tto the Third is perhaps the most i llustriouse xample history affords of a l ife sacrificed toenthus iasm for that beautifu l southern land whichhas a lways exercised so irresistible a spe l l ove r theGerman imagination . O the r nations of ancient andm odern times have turned to fore ign countries from

p ol itica l motives . Our only conque st has been I taly,

the land Of history,Of beauty

,of poetry

, the landwhich itse l f has repeatedly summoned us to herse l f.The intensity Of the re l igious fee l ing Of the Germanscaused them to become the protectors of the RomanChurch , and bound them with the bonds of necessityto Rome . The thirst for knowledge drove them tothe treasure chambe rs of antiquity

,and wil l ever

r ende r I ta ly and Rome dear to the German nation .


P ol itical combinations created that conception of theEmpire

,the pil lar of which was Germany. And for

the sake of these unive rsa l forms,the Church and

the Empire , forms which were to regulate and pres erve the peace of nations, the national ity Of the

Germans themse lve s has become enfeebled . Centurya fter century the i r kings have led them across theAlps to Rome to d ie for a pol itica l re l igious idea l .This fact

,howeve r

,has made of Germany a chosen

n ation . Eve r directed to the highes t a ims ofhumanity

,Ge rmany was enabled to become the

centre of the spiritual activity which was to emane ipate Europe . Through the influence of its O ttos

,

G e rmany established the continuity and current ofthe ages

,broke the seals from the grave s of antiquity

,

connected the civi l isations of the Ancient and

Christian worlds,wedded Roman to German charac

t er, thus forming a union whence i ssued the greatd eve lopment of mode rn culture—ra ised the Churchfrom its state of utte r decadence , and infused it withthe spirit of reform . Germany le t itse lf be drawn toRome as by a spiritua l magne t but the de scendantsO f those same Saxon kings who removed the cent reo f gravity of the i r nationa l history to Rome

, aga ine ffected the emancipation of Germany from Romeas soon as inte l lectua l freedom commanded the

s eparation .

O t to the Third , a lthough de sirous of becoming a CharacterG reek or Roman

,was

,neverthe less

,every inch a fif

mo

Ge rman . The very contradictions in h is nature,

d erived equal ly from classic antiqu ity and fromChristianity, were essentia l ly Ge rman . The powers


which then moved the world—Germany, Rome , theEast—moved his spirit at the same t ime ; and thetenth century

,which closed with him

,fore shadowed ,

through him and his friend Gerbert , the revival o fEuropean learning under the influence of antiquityand the East . Ne i the r the statesmanlike wisdom ofCharles the Great, nor the he roic powe r of O tto theFirst

,can be demanded of a prince who ended his

career at an age when kings entering upon a re ignare not ripe for kingship

,and the citizen is scarce ly

prepared for the s imple st duties of l i fe . The figure ofthis high-souled youth

,fi l led with asp irat ion towards

all that i s great,a lmost be longs to the province of

poetry rathe r than to that of history,on which he has

le ft no important mark . His countrymen buried himin the cathedral of Charle s the Great

,and legend has

ce lebrated him as a wonder of the world .

1

1 I quote only the following l ines from the p lanctus or P /zy tltmus

de ebi tu Otton is I I I . (pr inted from a Munich MS . by HOfler, D .

P upste, i. Beil . xvi . )P langat mundu s , p langat Roma ,Lug eat eccles ia .

S i t nu llum Roma canticum,

Ulu let pa latium .

Sub Ca sar i s absentia

Sunt turbata Sa cula .

HISTORY OF ROME

and of art. Poetry, pa inting and architecture werecultivated . Ancient works we re dil igently studiedand transcribed in legible characters . On the fal l of

the Carol ingian Empire,Saracens

,Normans and

Hungarians invaded the We st ; the Papacy becametransformed into a Roman barony

,and the Western

world re lapsed into barbarism .

The ignorance which preva i led among the clergythroughout the whole of I ta ly was more e specIally

conspicuous in Rome .

1 At Rhe ims the Gal l ic bishopsdeclared that “ there i s no one at present in Romewho has studied the sciences

,without a knowledge of

which,as it i s written , a man is incapable of be ing

even a door-keeper. The ignorance Of othe r priestsi s in some degree pardonable when comp ared withthat of the Bishop of Rome . In the Bishop Of Rome

,

howeve r, ignorance is not to be endured,since he has

to j udge i n matters of fa ith, mode of l i fe and dis

cipline , the Clergy, and in short the universa l Cathol icChurch . The Papacy defended itse lf from this

attack through Leo , the Apostol ic Legate and AbbotOf S . Boniface

,as follows The representative s of

S . Pete r and his disciple s wil l ne i the r have Plato,Virgi l nor Terence as the ir masters

,nor the rest of

the philosophic cattle , who, l ike the birds in the air,

soar in haughty fl ight , l ike the fish of the sea disappear in the deep, and l ike sheep graze on the earthstep by step . And therefore you say that those who

are not fed with such poe try should neve r even be

1 Read what Ratherius of Verona says of the I talian clergy in hisSynodika to the bishops of his diocese, and the Counci l of Trosle in

909 (Labbe, xi .


invested with the rank of door-keeper. I tel l you ,however

,this assertion i s a lie . Peter knew nothing

Of these things , and he was appointed door-keeper ofheaven

,and the Lord himse l f sa id to him :

‘ I will

g ive thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven .

’

His

repre sentatives and disc iple s are there fore instructedin Apostolic and evange l ical teaching . They are not,however

,adorned with the parade of e loquence , but

with the sense and unde rstanding of the word . I t iswritten that God choo ses the simple Of the world toput to shame the mighty, and from the beginning of

the world God has not chosen philosophe rs and

Orators,but the i l l iterate and unlearned .

” 1 Such wasthe bold avowal of the Papal Curia in the tenthcentury. The Church Open ly confessed her ignoranceof humane learning and even her contempt forphilosophy ; she denied S . Paul, the learned doctor ofthe world

,but pointed out how the ignorant fisher

man Peter possessed the keys of heaven . The

educated bishops of Gaul and Germany final ly laiddown the ir spiritual arms before the rock of Pete r.Together with the convents , whe re for a time theBenedictines had cultivated learning, schools also fe l l1 Mon . Germ. v. c. 28

, p . 673 . The Epi stola Leon is Abbat i s et

Leg at i ad Hugonem et P ober tum Reg es— ibid. p . 686. P t qu ia vicar i i

P etr i et ej us discipu li nolun t babere mag istr um P latonem,neque Vi r

g i lium,neque Teren t ium,

neque ceteros pecudes pbi losopbor um, qu i

volando super be , u t avis a r em,et emerg en tes in p rofundum,

u t p isces

mare, et u t pecora g radien tes ter r am descr zpserun t— et ab in i t io mundi

non eleg i t deu s orator es cl pbi losopbos , sed i lli ter a tos et r u sticos . On

the contrary Ratherius Quo apt ius possum,quam Roma docer i ?

Qu id en im de eccles iasticis dogmat ibus a licubi sci tu r , quod Roma ignar etu r . He says this because it was necessary for him to fla tter Rome.

I ttner . P atber i i Romai ncun t is, Edit . Ballerini , p. 440.

500 HISTORY OF ROME

to decay. Even the school for choristers at the

Late ran , which from the t ime of Gregory the Greatmay be regarded as the re l igious univers ity of the

city, must have sunk to the lowe st depth , i f indeed itsti l l existed . The l ibrarie s mouldered to decay, themonks were scattered or worked no longe r. I f anypossessed Of l ite rary taste s sti l l rema ined , they were

prevented from writing by the dearth of pape r. Forsince Egypt

,the ancient home O f the papyrus, had

fal len into the powe r of the Arabs,the scarc ity of

writing material had been keenly fe lt in Ita ly, and tothis cause Muratori in part ascribes the i nte l lectualbarbarism of the tenth century. The production ofmanuscripts was exorbitantly dear ; 1 consequentlythroughout I taly parchments a l ready written on were

util ised,the origina l contents having previously been

e rased in order that the parchment might serve a

second time . To these pal impse sts , unfortunate ly,we more frequently owe the loss than the pre servationof the writers O f antiqu ity. The ignorant monkde stroyed the books of L ivy

,Cicero or Aristotle , and

upon the leave s, from which he had e rased the wisdomof antiqu ity, wrote antiphonaries or l ives Of the sa ints .

The manuscripts of the past were thus transformedl ike its temple s . The godde ss who had inhabited asplendid pil lared portico made way (Pagan lsm havingbeen expunged) for a martyr ; the subl ime ideas of

1 The writers Occas ionally remark how much the ir mater ials had costthem . Thus in the Reg es ta q arfa , be low the miniature portrait whichrepresents the wr iter in the act of Offer ing his MS. to Mary

,we read

P r esby ter i P etr i sun t ba cpr imardia libr i ,Soldos namque decemp ro car ti s optuli t ipse.

Theatres.

502 HISTORY OF ROME

thought Of any such inst itution were cherished . On

the other hand,however

,the surv ival of a Roman

school of law is unquestionable , more especial ly in aperiod when the lex Romana Obta ined new lustre andthe Roman judge s rece ived the code of Justin ian withsolemn ceremonial

,in order to judge Rome , Tras

tevere , and the universe in accordance with itsinstitutions . Although the Grapbia describe s thisand other forma l i t ies of Otto

’

s court with minuteness ,and speaks of various court Official s , i t mentionsne ither doctors of law

,scholars

,nor grammarians . I t

speaks , however, of the theatre as of a pageantnece ssary to the court.The pass ion for theatrica l s , formerly so predominant

in Rome , began to revive during the Carol ingianperiod in the guise of Chris tian festival s . Scenicplays , though condemned by the Church as works ofthe devil, had eve rywhe re survived . Te rence was

studied wherever classic antiqu ity was cherished , andRoswita Of Gandershe im wrote he r Latin dramas or

moral ities on purpose that they might supplant thePagan Te rence in the hands of her nuns . The

Vatican stil l pre serves as a highly valued treasure amanuscript of Te rence of the ninth century. I ts

miniature imitations of classic art repre sent scenesfrom the comedies of the poet ; the name Of i tscompi le r (Hrodgarius ) seems , howeve r, to point toFrance as the country to which the manuscript owedits origin . I t i s a fact that plays were acted inNorthern I ta ly in the tenth century ; and at a timewhen so many Greek express ions were in vogue ,the actors were cal led Thyme l ic i . And thus, in an


age when the Greek tragedie s themse lves were for

g otten , the Thyme le of the stage of Sophocles lentits name to comedians. Atto of Ve rce l l i compla inedof the sympathy shown by the clergy for theatricalr epresentations . He counse l s them to rise from tableas soon as the Thyme l ici enter, and informs us thatat ancient banquets the gue sts were a lways entertained with mimes ; that plays were acted at marriagefestiva ls, and further

,that such enterta inments we re

genera l,and that it was usua l to give them in Easte r

week .

1 Throughout Christendom the story o f the

Passion and other Bibl ical representations wererepresented at this season . Profane dramas alsowere acted on festival occasions . If such repre sen

t at ions took place in Northern I taly,we may assume

that they we re a l so given in Rome . I t i s doubtful ,howeve r

,whethe r comedies of Te rence or Plautus

were the re enacted,the immediate ne ighbourhood of

the saints probably preventing these maste rpiecesbe ing represented even as a luxury of the court inthe palace of O tto the Third . Of games in the

amphitheatre or of the chase of anima l s we hearnothing. Gladiators and venatores we re mere ly r emembe red as antiqu itie s . Mime s, singers, actors, anddancers , however, undoubtedly existed

,and we may

1 Attonis Ep . Capitulare,”in d

’

Achery, Spici l . , i . 400 :N on oportet—cler icos spectacu lis aliqu ib. qua au t in nupt i is , au t in scen is cx li i

ben tur , inter esse sed antequam tbymelici ing r ediantu r , surgere eos de con

vivio and (p . 410) spectacula tlzeatrorum are spoken of max ime qu iaS . Pasclzi octavar ium diepopu li ad ci rcum mag is quam ad eccles ias con

ven iunt . Ratherius : qu i lt istr iones quam sacerdotes,temelicos quam

cler icos—mimos car ius amp lectuntur quam monaclzos . P ra loqu ior v.

6, p . 143 , Edit . Ballerini .

H ISTORY OF ROME

suppose that they appeared not in churches andpalace s a lone

,but a lso occasiona l ly acted in the

Colosseum , or in the ruins Of some theatre , as theydo in the arena at Ve rona

,or in the Mausoleum Of

Augustus in Rome at the pre sent day. The

Grapbia has dedicated two paragraphs to theatricalamusements the only notice of the drama s ince thedays of Cassiodorus . Poets , comedians, tragedians,scenery, orchestra , histrione s , saltatores , and gladiatorsare enume rated

,and the expression “ thyme l i c

then actual ly current shows that the amusementshere mentioned we re something more than anti

quarian re collections .1 I t i s not too much to assert

that mythological scene s we re represented at the

courts of Hugo,Maroz ia

,and Albe ric

,and if John the

Twe l fth drank to the hea lth of Venus and Apollo ina boisterous freak

,his imagination was at the time

probably excited by some theatrica l pe rformances inthe Lateran in which these Pagan de i ties had beenrepre sented .

With regard to classic l iterature the Romans a lwaysposse ssed the advantage of re ta in ing the he ritage ofthe i r ancient spee ch

,and the further advantage of hav

i ng a key to i t in the i r vulgar tongue . While acqua intance with the ancients , both in France and Germany,rema ined exclus ive ly the hard-won acquis ition of thelearned

,a possess ion in which the people claimed no

1 Paragraphs de scena et orcistra de ofii t i is scene. The Grapbia

confuses present and past . When i t says Comedi vanor um acta dict i s

aut gest is can tan t , et v irg inum mor es et mer etr icum in su is fabu lisexpr imun t . Tlzomelici in organ is et li r is expr iman t ad ci tlzar as .

Tlzomelici stantes vero in orcistra , cantan t super pu lp i tum quad temela

vacatur , we must understand something actually existing .

506 HISTORY OF ROME

to the Ital ians . And although Horace,Virgi l

,and

Statius were no longe r recited in the Forum ofTrajan,

they were sti l l expla ined by the grammarians in the irschools , miserable though these schools may havebeen .

After the revival of learning under the Carol ingians,

acquaintance with the ancient poe ts was e steemed anece ssity of l iterary education , and the schools foundedby the Carol ingian prince s in I ta ly cultivated a knowledge Of classics . At the end of the tenth century acurious case

,which made a sensation in Ravenna

,

shows the zeal with which the study of the ancientswas occasional ly cultivated . The Scholasticus Vilgard was s o deeply enamoured of Virgil , Horace ,and Juvenal

,that these poets appeared to him in a

d ream and promised him immorta l ity. He openlyavowed that the ir teachings possessed the strength Ofarticle s of fa ith , and he was consequently summonedas a Pagan before the spiritua l tribunal. Theserefined studies we re diligently pursued in Ge rmany.

O tto the First, i t i s true, spoke scarce ly any Latin ;his son and grandson, howeve r, we re thoroughly versedin ancient literature

,.and his brothe r, the Archbishop

Bruno,a Saxon Maecenas

,restored the pa lace schools

of Charle s,and even surrounded himse l f with Greek

grammarians . Among Roman matrons Imiza, towhom Gerbert wrote various le tte rs, appears a s thesole instance of an educated woman of the time .

O ther Ita l ian women Of noble family were li tera

S . Ga l/i monacbus me rematam a scient ia g r ammat ica ar tis,licet

a liquando r etarder usu nostra vu lgar is lingua , qua lat in itat i vicina

est . Wat tenbach, D eutsclzl . Gesc/zicbtsq. , p . 162 .


nescia , ignorant of writing, while in Germany, Hed

w ig Of Swabia read Virgil and Horace with the monkEkhard, and ma idens Of noble birth were unwill inglyforced to study the—to them uninte ll igible—classicsin the convent schools of Gandershe im and Quedlinburg. Although they remained ignorant of the geo

g raphy and history Of the ir native country,they we re

made acquainted through Virgi l with the mostfabulous districts Of Italy. The German nun , Ro swita, wrote Latin epics and dramas

, and Ade la ide , aswe l l as TheOphano ,

might have cha l lenged comparison with the Lombard princess , Adalberga . Romethus derived no advantage from her familiarity withthe classic languages

,and in education Roman soc ie ty

rema ined behind that of e i the r Germany or France .

While O tto the Third proposed to re store the EmpireOf the philosophe r

,Marcus Aurel ius, the Romans

be l ieved that the eque strian statue of this Emperorwas that Of a peasant who had taken a king unaware sand made him a prisone r. And a lthough fables may

remain the peculiar possession of the uneducated , themuse O f l ite rature has neverthe le ss a perfe ct right tocomplain of the ignorance which preva i led in Rome ,where , throughout the e ntire course of the tenthCentury, not one single name appears conspicuous

for ta lent or l iterary attainments . l

Meanwhile fore igners l ike Ratherius of Ve rona, an

errant nat ive of Liege , who owed his learn ing to the

1 To the beginning of the x . sece. belong the polemical writings of thefollowers of Formosus , which offer a more important contribut ion to

the history of the Papacy of that t ime than to literature . In thesewritings , too, the cont inued influence of classic l iterature is evident .

HISTORY OF ROME

monast ic school of Laubes , or natives l ike Atto ofVe rce l l i

, the panegyrist of Berengar, and Liutprand ofCremona

,rose to fame in Lombardy. Each of these

men shows a pedantic erudition , and the ir writings,both in poetry and prose

,are adorned with fragments

from the class ics— fragments which look as com

plete ly out of place as the rema ins of friezes and

columns inserted in the churches and pa lace s of theMiddle Ages . The same characteristics are found inJohn Diaconus

,the biographe r of Gregory, and a l so

in some Roman authors of the tenth century. Theyare a lso d isplayed in O tto the Third , by whom fragments of the Roman Empire

,title s

,vestments

,ideas

were eagerly adopted into the mediaeval state,where

they appeared as a complete patchwork of the classics.The robe worn by the age was coarse in material , butadorned by ant ique trimmings and figures. The

passion for ennobl ing a barbarous time with recollec

tions of the past was universal . From the days ofCharle s onwards, passages from Virgil or Statiushad been re cited with enthusiasm ,

and the art ofmaking ve rse was so common in the time of thepanegy rist of Berengar , that in the opening of hispoem the author make s an apology

,saying that in

those days there was no demand for poetry,since

ve rses were written in the country as we l l as in thetowns.1 Meanwhile i n Rome the sole evidences ofpoetry were found on grave stone s

,the . doors of

churches,or in tribunes

,which were as formerly

covered with couplets. Some of these verses were

1 D esz’

ne nunc et iam nu llu s tua carmz‘

na carat

Hm facz'

zmt ztrbz'

, fiwc guogue r are u’

r z'

.

Gerbert .

HISTORY OF ROME

re forming Roman monasticism he must have furtheredthe restoration of ecclesiastica l learning

,for

,since

education and schools were in the hands of the

monks, they must have shared the re form whichove rtook the order. I t is true that we know nothingof any papal decree concerning convent or parishschools at this date

,such as the decrees promulgated

by Rather ius and Atto in Lombardy ; we may , however, assume that such we re i ssued by the bette rPope s in the days of Alberic . Learning S lowlyre turned to the Roman monasteries

,and we have

a l ready seen a monaste ry on the Aventine distin

gu ished as a centre round which pious monks gathered .

The se enthusiasts,with the i r title of “ Simple ” or

S ilent,” offe red by the ir learning no contradiction to

the audacious apology for ignorance which the i rAbbot Leo Simplex made on the score of Rome

’sd ivine rights . The ir influence

,neverthe less

,contri

buted to the restoration of the more se rious occupations on the part of the monks .The terrible darkness in which Rome had lain had

been already interrupted in the latte r part of thetenth century. The succession of obscure Pope s hadcome to an end

,and a German and a Frenchman had

swept away the barbarism which had so long preva i led at the Late ran . Had the cultivated Gregorythe Fifth been granted a longer and more tranqui lre ign

,he would doubtless have directed his ene rgies

towards the re form of scientific learning . Sylve ster

the Se cond would have been stil l more zealous in thesame task . Gerbert in Rome i s l ike a solitary torchin the darkness of the night . The century of the


grossest ignorance closed strange ly enough with theappearance of a renowned genius ; and the e leventhwas Opened by the same Sylveste r as by a prophe t

,

foresee ing, as he did , the Crusades which were tofollow. Rome

,i t is true

,can mere ly cla im the honour

of having se rved , during some unquiet years, as thescene of his studies, which he re met with no response .

I f the Romans noticed their aged Pope watching thestars from his observatory in a towe r of the Late ran

,

or surrounded in his study by parchments and

drawing geome trica l figure s , design ing a sun dia lwith his own hand

,or studying ast ronomy on a globe

covered with horse ’s sk in,they probably be l ieved himin league with the devil .1 A second Ptolemy seemedto wear the tiara

,and the figure of Sylves ter the

Second marks a fre sh period in the Middle Ages,that

of the scholast ics .The knowledge of Greek philosophy—and the fact

redounds to the honour of Rome —was acquired bythe Pope through the medium of one of the last ofthe ancient Romans that is to say , through1 Gerbert i, Ep . 148 D efi ez

’

liz’

mz’

open } z'

m epz'

mus Spkaemm gem ez‘

tor no j am exposz'

m ez‘

ar tzfi ez'

ose egu z’

no eor z'

o oer/alum cum or z’

zen te ac

diver se; ccelorum pu leizr z’

z‘

udz’

ne z'

m zzgm'

z‘am thus to Rem ig ius of

Treves . He tells the monk Constant ine how to make a g lobe(M abill. , Vet . Anna l

,11. and the descr ipt ion of the g lobes is

given in Richer, H i st . , iii . c. 50 . Concerning Gerbert’

s literaryact ivity and his letters , see the Hz

'

s Z'oz'

re L i tter . de [a Fr am e ,vi . , at

the end ; M . Budinger , Ueber Ger éer t’s Wz

'

srem efiaf tl . zma'po/zZ z

'

se/ze

S lellung , Cassel , 185 1 Olleris,Oeuvr es d ’e Ger éen

‘

pape sous le nom de

Sy lvestr e Paris , 1867 Ed . de Barthelemy, Ger éer t, Etude seer m

we et ses ouvmg es m ime de [a t raa’uclz

'

m d’e ses Jeffr ey, Paris , 1868

Carl Werner,Ger éen ‘

71m Au r i llac, a’

z’

e [( z'

mke and W'

z’

ssem efiaf t seinerV ienna, 1878. The opinion that Gerbert had learned Arabic in

Spain is devoid of all foundat ion.


Boethius . Boethius’

s translations , of and commen

tarie s on the works of Aristotle and Plato , as a l so hisve rsions of the mathematicians Archimede s

,Eucl id

,

and N icomachus,served to keep a l ive the fame of the

Senator. In the tenth century Boethius shone as astar of the first magnitude . He was studied as eagerlyas Te rence or Virgil . His Cons ola tion: can be recogn ised as the mode l of the writings of L iutprand, who,l ike him

,mingled verses with prose . Alfred the

Great translated the works O f Boethius into AngloSaxon

,and commentaries upon them were later

written by Thomas of Aquino . Ge rbe rt himse lfunited

,l ike Boethius

, _

a multitude of gifts and atta inments . He honoured his teache r in a panegyric inve rse

,and i t i s curious to note that the writing of the

poem was prompted by O tto the Third . The sameEmperor who brought the ashes of Bartholomewfrom Benevento

,who la id the re l ics of Adalbe rt in

the basi l ica at Rome,e re cted a marble statue to the

philosophe r Boethius at Pavia,for which Ge rbert

apparently wrote some ve rse s .1

1 Roma polen s , a’um j u ra suo a

’ea

’er al in oroe,

Tu pa ler el patr ia“

lumen Seuer ine B eet/i i,

Consu lis ofi ez’

o r er um a’ispon is fiaoenas ,

[nfuna’is lumen studi is

,el cea

’er e neseir

Gra eor u fn ing en i is sea’ mens a

’ivina ecercel

Imper ium mundi . Glaa’io oaee/zante Got/zorum

L iber i a: Romana per i l . Tu Con su l oi exsu l

I ns ig nes t i tu lo:p ra elara mor le r elz'

nguz’

s .

N unc o’ecus l mper i i , summas qu i p raegr aoat ar/es ,

Ter t ius Otlzo sua d ign um tej ua’ieal au la

,

E ter numgue tu i s ia tu i t monumen la labor is ,

E l oene promer i tum,mer i l is exor nat li onesz‘ir .

—P ra *

fa l . a’e Cons . P laid , Amsterdam,


studying the rise of the Ital ian language , as otherwritings

,more e special ly other documents of the

same time . The Latin language in this chronicle ,and perhaps a lso in that of Andrew of Be rgamo ,reminds us of the rude ecclesiastical ornamentalsculpture s of the tenth and e leventh centuries , inwhich the natural outl ines are set at naught in everyleaf and eve ry figure .

Benedict made use of the tract of an Impe rial istcontemporary entitled

,

“ Of the Impe ria l powe r in

the City of Rome .

” This remarkable production

g lorifies the Impe rium of the Carolingians, de scribe sthe nature of the Imperia l power ove r Rome

,and

laments its decl ine through the coronation of Charlesthe Bald . The author fal l s into various e rrors whenspeaking of the condition of the city before the timeof Charles the Great

,and also awakens many doubts .

The scrappy style of the production is barbarou s ;the language , howeve r, i s readable , and i t is probablethat the author was not a Roman

,but a Lombard ,

writing e ither in the Imperia l monastery of Farfa,or

in the convent on Soracte, hefore the re storation of

the Imperium by O tto the First .1 If written inFarfa

,however, i t was probably the sol itary product

of this utterly corrupt monastery in the tenthcentury

,since i t is only after the re storation of the

orde r that we are able in the e leventh century to1 Pertz wrong ly holds Benedict to be the author of the L ibellus a

’e

Imp . P olest . in u rbe Roma (M on . Germ. , The reasons whichWilmanns , j anrb.

,ii. 2

,238 , adduces to the contrary are excellent.

See the treat ise of Jung , e er a’en sog en . L ioellus a

’e imp . poles/ale,

For sckungen zur D en i se/z. Gescb . ,B . xiv. ( 1874) and that of Ferdin.

H irsch,ibid . , B . xx. p. 127


extol the ex ertions of the Abbot Hugo,and the great

activity of Gregory of Catania in the cause ofl iterature .

In Rome itse l f the invaluable L iber P on i ifiea lis , Continua .

which was interrupted a t the l ife of Stephen the‘

L

‘

jgeff ‘he

Fifth, was continued in the tenth century in the form P 0724?

of Short tables,cal led cata logues . As the re we re no

fimm

longe r buildings or votive gift s to be descr ibed,the se

cata logue s briefly give us the names,descent

,and

length of re igns of the Popes,and add some meagre

accounts of isolated events . Nothing shows moreclearly the barbarism of Rome in the tenth

—

centurythan the continuation of the ce lebrated Lioer

P on tzfiea lzlr, which now sinks back to the leve l ofits first beginn ings .1

Soon after Adalbe rt’s death

,at O tto ’s de sire a The bio

monk in the monastery of S . Boniface wrote the 32

223211?history of the sa int . The Abbot

,John Cannaparius , be“

a Roman,i s the supposed author of the l ittle book ;

and the l ife of a Slavic Apostle is thus the mostimportant l ite rary work of the tenth century inRome . The l ife i s serviceable for the knowledgeit affords of the time , the author having beenacqua inted with the most prominent persons of hisage . He a l so shows himse l f to have been inspiredby the ideas of O tto the Third conce rning the greatness of Rome . Like John Diaconus in his l ife ofGregory

,in his enthusiasm he soars at t imes into a

1 These Catalogues of the Popes have been edited in part by Ekhard ,Muratori

,and Vignoli they exist in var ious manuscr ipts. With John

XI I . begin somewhat fuller not ices , last ing unt il Gregory VI I . Giesebrecht

,A llgem. M onalse/i r zfi ,

April 1852 .


lofty fl ight . He does not posse ss,i t i s true

, the

knowledge of his predece ssor ; his language , howeve r,a l though frequently di sfigured by bibl ica l phraseology, i s not bad, and he rise s far above the prolix ityof S . Bruno of Querfurt

,who in 1004 amplified this

same biography.

‘

THE DESCRIPTIONS OF THE C ITY THE ANON YM OUS

OF E INS IEDELN—ACTIVITY OF LEGEND AND TRAD ITION IN ROME—THE SOUND ING STATUES ON THE

CAPITOL—THE LEGEND OF THE BU ILD ING OF THE

PANTHEON—THE GRAPH IA OF THE GOLDEN C ITY OFROME—THE MEMOR IA JULI I CE SAR IS .

A greater intere st than these writings awakenedwas aroused by a Specie s Of l ite rature which was

origina l ly and rema ined the local production ofRome , a lthough shared by other nations . We speakOf the books of de scriptions of the monuments , theholy places

,and the great past of the city. When

pilgrims visited E te rna l Rome , the i r countrymen In

the scholae of fore igne rs usua l ly acted as the i r guide sto the wonde rs o f the ancient capital

,where many of

the creations of Christianity we re a l ready regarded as

antiquitie s . The visitors,howeve r

,a lso found books

of de scriptions which se rved as brie f guide s . Somepilgrims

,Franks or Ge rmans

,i n whom the inte rest in

antiqu ity awakened by Alcu in was stil l cultivated,

began to look on Rome with the eye of the historianor antiquary, and made plans of the monuments of

1 Vi la S . Adaléer l i Efi ,and Brunoni

’s Vi la S . Ada lber l i , in tom.

vi . of the M on . Germ .

HISTORY OF ROME

The published them .

1The compi lation of this ce lebrated

work be longs to the end of the e ighth or the beginE insiedeln . ning of the ninth century

,before the building of the

Leon ine city. On two sheets the write r enume rates,

without de scribing, in two columns , the monuments ,as they stand right and le ft of the stree ts as far as the

gate s,making use evidently of some plan of the city.

He adds inscriptions Copied from the monuments andchurches . The work inaugurate s the science ofepigraphy, and this first l ittle col lection of ancientinscriptions , the work of an enlightened northerntrave l ler

,remained

,until the beginning of the fifteenth

century,the only work of the kind with which we are

acqua inted ? The ancient Reg ionarii occupied themse lve s exclusive ly with Pagan Rome , but the A nony

mous enume rates both ancient and Christian buildingsand thus place s the city be fore us in the topographicaloutl ine s which it bore in the time of Charles theGreat. As a scholar he speaks of the monumentsunder the name s used in the N ol i l ia ; he scorns t oemploy Coliseus instead of Amphitheatrum ,

but never

1 In tom. iv . of the Ana leela,best edited by Hane l in Seebode

and Jahn , A r ebiv fu’

r P lzi l . una7P ridag .

,v . 125 , and aft er that

edition by HOfler, D . Paps te, i . 320 ; then by U lr ich ’s Coa'. Topog rapli . an . R . and by H . Jordan, Topogr aplzie a

’er S laa’l Rom.

im Aller lum,vol. ii. Regarding this collect ion , see De

Ross i,l nscr zpl . Clzr is l . Urbi s Roma

,vol. 11. pars . i . , 1888

, p . 9 f.He attributes it to the monastery of Re ichenau . I have alreadyquoted a little work of the time of Alcuin on the churches of

Rome .

2We owe to the Anon . many elucidations : thus concerning the

remains of the three temples on the Capitol , the inscription on the base

of the Caballus Constant ini, that on the Triumphal Arches of Gra tian,

Valentinian, and Theodosius, &c.


theless uses the popular word Palatium whenspeaking of some ru ins which never formed part ofany palace .

1 Likewise in the inscriptions he cal lsthe Arch of Titus “

VI I . Lueerna rum,

”as the people

cal led it from the representation of the seven-branchedcandlestick. He also note s the greate r numbe r ofthe baths , the rema ins of which were stil l extensivehe speaks of Forum Romanum and Trajan i by name ,but i s si lent conce rning all the o ther forums . He

s t il l behe ld the Circus Flaminius and the CircusMaximus

,and the Theatre of Pompe ius ; he quote s

the inscription on the equestrian statue of Constantineon the Capitol

, and mentions the Umbil icus Romae .

He sti ll wa lked through the colonnade s of the V iaLata , sti l l saw the Aqua Virgo and the Aqua Claudia ,the Nymphaeum of Alexande r, and the Sept izon ium

with its name s unde stroyed . He recorded the ancientname s of the gate s and streets , and made an officiall ist of the number of towe rs, batt lemen ts, exits andIoopholes Of the restored wal ls of Aure l ian .

2 Notrace of fable i s pe rceptible . On the contrary

,this

dry registe r shows that its author was an expe rienceds cholar

,we l l acquainted with the N ol i l ia . Beside s

the N ol il ia,there were a lso othe r official documents

,

1 P alal ium P i lal i . Sea . M ar ia M aj or perhaps the remains of the

Mace llum of Livia near S . M . Magg iore , the ru ins of which , on thatspot , have considerably raised the leve l of the soil . The reader mayremark how early Pilate figured in the popu lar imag inat ion. The

Casa P ilati , beside the Ponte Rotto , is well known at the present day.

Pa lal iu s neron is . e ccles ia s . Pelr i ao’vincu la . These are the remains

of the Golden House of Nero,or the Baths of T itus .

2 Sun l s imu l la r r es 383 , propug nacu la 7020 , poslerna' 6

posteru la , doors), necessar ia 106, feneslrae maj oresfor inseeus 2066.

520 HISTORY OF ROME

drawn up apparently by orde r of Pope Adrian or ofLeo the Third , on which the author may have basedhis work . Plans of the city or topographica l charts ,on which it is poss ible that the principal stree ts andthe most important monuments were marked , wereperhaps al ready designed . Apart at least from the

existence of such works we can scarce ly understandhow the va luable table s

,engraved with the represen

tat ions of Rome and Constantinople,which Charle s

the Great rece ived apparently as gifts from the

Pope and the Empress I rene,

could have beenprepared . In the absence of official documents ofthe kind , i t would have been impossible e ithe r toacqu ire a knowledge of Rome or to describe it .Tradition , which fastens on monuments as soon as

they become deserted , had a lready long woven itswebs round the marve l s of the city, and had broughtmany legends and names into vogue among the

populace . The more distant grew antiquity,the

more i ndustrious we re the Romans in ve i l ing the

Pagan monuments in fable , while legend was equal lyactive with regard to the Christian churches . Owingto the twofold character of the city, tradition and

legend— for both these muse s of the populace are

twin S isters— frequently produced a curious combination . Conce rn ing the year 1000 many loca ltraditions must have become fixed in the minds of

the people , and we have the re fore no hesitation inassigning the legends of the Marble Horse s and of

the Cabal lus of Marcus Aure l ius to this period .

Anothe r fable may Show that in the tenth century,and probably even earl ier, many legends had arisen

HISTORY OF ROME

The union of a Roman local tradition wi th the

contemporary history of Byzantium is curious . The

same legend,howeve r

,reappears in a description of

Rome itse l f without any re ference to Byzantium,and

give s an explanation of the origin of the Pantheon .

I t runs as follows -A t the time when Agrippa,

Pre fect of the Roman Empire,having overcome

Swabians , Saxons , and othe r Weste rn nations,re

turned to the city, the be l l of the statue representing

Pe rs ia , which stood in the Temple of Jupiter and

Moneta on the Capitol,sounded to announce his

arrival . The senators immediate ly appointed him toconduct the Persian war . Agrippa begged for arespite of three days . When on the third n ight hehad fal len asleep

,Oppre ssed with care , a woman

appeared to him and spake :“ Agrippa

,what a iles t

thee ? thou art in great d istress .”He answe red

Yea,lady .

”She sa id : Be comforted . Promise

me to build a temple as I sha l l d ire ct,and I will te l l

thee whe the r thou wilt conque r.” She showed himthe form of a temple in a vis ion , and he asked :Lady

,who art thou ? ” She answe red :

“ I am

Cybe le,the Mother of the gods : sacrifice to the Sea

god Neptune and he wil l he lp thee . Dedicate thistemple to Neptune ’s honour and to mine , for we willboth be with thee and thou sha lt conquer.” Agrippa

re lated his vis ion to the Senate he departed with a

great flee t and five legions , conque red the Pe rsians,and made them aga in tributary to the Romans . On

his re turn he built the temple and dedicated it to theseven wonders of the world were the Capitol , the Pharos of Alexandria

, the Colossus of Rhodes , the flying Be llerophon in Smyrna, theLabyrin th of Crete, the Baths of Apollo , the Temple of D iana.

IN THE MIDDLE AGES.

Mother of the Gods,to Neptune , and to al l Spirits ,

and gave it the name of Pantheon . He placed a

statue in honour of Cybe le over the open ing on the

top of the temple , and covered the building with a

wondrous roof of gilt bronze . Two bulls of the same

meta l also stood on the top of the temple .

1

Such is the account conta ined in the remarkable ggzpbi a ‘

book known as the Grapbia aur ea u ré is Roma, which

succeeds the not ice s of E insiede ln in this series oftopographical l ite rature . In the time of the O ttos ,perhaps even as early as the days of Albe ric, a newdescription of the city appeared , and

,in harmony

with the secularisation of Rome , conce rned itse lfsole ly with the Pagan monuments, while at the sametime books of notices respecting the s tage s and

cemeteries existed for the use of the pilgr ims . Ascholar acqua inte d with ant iquity enumerates themonuments of Rome

,and adds some of the popular

legends . He no longe r adhe re s to the Regionarydivis ions of the N ol i l ia . While the Anonymous ofE insiede ln he ld fast to the ancient names , the late rauthor

,on the contrary

,occas iona l ly make s u se of

the popular one s . The words Pa lat ium ,Templum

,

‘

Theat rum , Circus lose the ir strict significance , for

1 Gr apbia and the M i raoi lia . The Saxons indicate the t ime of

the O ttos , the Suev i (Succin i in the Grapb ia ) that of the Hohenstaufens . The s imilarity of some phrases in the Anon . of Salernoshows that the chronicler had read some such Graplzia . I bel ievethat the legend arose after the Pantheon had been consecrated to

Mary. I t is said of Agrippa z—E l dedicar i eam feci t ao’li on . Cyoeles

matr i s a’eor . , el N ep lun i , el omn . demon ior . el imposu i l lemp lo

nomen P anl/zeon . The ep itaph of Boniface IV. says -D eluora

cunelorumfuer unl qua a’amon iorum.

524 HISTORY OF ROME

the populace at the time ca l led all the great ruins of

the i r temple s and forums “ Pa latium ,

” baths and

circuse s,as a ru le

,

“ Theatrum .

” A description ofthe city such as this

,replacing or extending the

ancient N ol i l ia and the Cur iosum,had perhaps been

compi led before the tenth century. Benedict ofSoracte must undoubtedly have been acqua intedwith this work

,borrowing as he did the l ist of

Roman towe rs and fortresse s from some de scriptionof the c ity

,undoubtedly the Grapnia in its earl iest

form .

1 Unde r this t itle a description of the ci tybecame famous in the thirteenth century, and was

quoted by the Milane se Galvaneus Flamma as a

ve ry authentic ” book . Long known in the Laurentian Library as a manuscript of the thirteenth orfourteenth century

,it was not made use of, and was

only printed in I t was subj ected to various

1 Omnes lua ma n ia cum lu r r is el pugnaeu li s ieu l i moa’o r epper i lu r .

He counts 38 1 towers , 46 cast les,6800 prOpugnacula , 15 gates .

Adr ian I . probably caused such an enumerat ion to be made . The

Gr apbia 362 l . , e. 48 ,p . 6900 , 35por la the ancient breviaria have 37 .The numbers vary but litt le in all the redact ions of the M i r abi lia , s ixmanuscripts of which I have read at Florence. Although the reg istersof Imperial t imes were st ill employed , this fact does not excludeenumerat ions made under the Popes of Caroling ian times , as Jordani i . 156, asserts that it does in oppos it ion to Nibby

’

s and my own

views . Whoever , l ike these Popes , res tored the walls of Rome , must

have had the gates and towers counted and entered in the offi cialregisters (of the Prefect ). Had the papal geometers forgot ten how to

count ? The Turres,Pr0pugnacula , and portae of the Leonina were

counted very we ll in later t imes .

2 Caron iea , qua a’iei lu r Grapbia aurea u rbis Roma

, qua esl liber

uala’e au l/zenl ieu s

,eon l inens lzis lor ias Romanor an t iquas . Galvan

,

Flamma,M an ipu lusflor um,

c. 4 (Murat . xi . 540 ) ; in the D oeum. ingot ,

p . 84 , of Ozanam , the editor of the Gr apbia . About the middle of the

HI STORY OF ROME

city of Saturn ia on the Capitol . 1 King Italus , withthe Syracusans

,founded on the R iver Albula or

Tibris a city of the same name ; othe r kingsHem iles

,Tibe ris

,Evande r

, Coriba , Glaucus , fEneas ,Avent inus—built othe r c ities

,unti l final ly

,on April

17 th, 433 years after the fal l of Troy,Romulus

’

sur

rounded all these towns by a wal l and ca l led themRome

,and not only all I tal ians but a lmost all the

nobil ity of the whole earth wi th the ir wive s and

children flocked to this new city .

2 The associationof the Noah of O ld Testament history with the

foundation of Rome i s a proof of the faculty forcombination possessed by tradition . I t is , howeve r,impossible to discover the date at which this legendarose . Later

,in the thirteenth and fourteenth cen

turies,fable s recording the origin of the city were

re lated at length in various books,and thus arose

the L iber Imper ialis , the Romu leon,the F ior i ta

el’

l la lia, the H is tor ia Traj ana et Romana . The se

1 According to recent investigators the primit ive legend of Saturn

explains the name and foundat ion of the city of Rome . Remus or

Romus is, accordingfto them ,a Semit ic name ofSaturn (

“the

and appears in the Syrian forms Ah-Ram, Abu-Rom ,

Baa l-Ram .

Jul ius Braun , N atu rg eselzicfite a’er Sag e, on the names in question, and

his essay “ Rom in H i stor isefie Lana’selzaflen , Stuttgart , 1867 . On

the other hand , Corssen (compare Z ei lsenr . fu’

r Spr aeltf ,x . 18

,19) has,

with more simp licity and success,sought to derive the name of Rome

from the orig inal name of the T iber , Rumon , which s ign ifies r iver .

J . Gu idi, in Roma nei geografi arabi (A r e/ziu . a’. Soc. Rona ,i . p . 189

has recently attempted to confirm this view .

2 The M'

r aéi lia do not conta in this legend, which was known in

part to Ga lv . Flamma. The H ist . M iseella begins : pri mu s in I ta liau t qu ibusd. placet r egnao i l j anus , a

’eina

’e Satu rnu s

, &c. In the twelfthcentury Catalogues of the Kings , Consuls , and Emperors , beg inningwith Saturn and other mythical names , were very popular . One of


legends flourished more particularly at the time whenI tal ian cities began to attain civic independenceand each town de sired the ornament of an ancientpedigree .

1

Among the legends conta ined in the Grapnz'

a,Legend

.

one of the earliest is undoubtedly that of the buria l 33213?of Jul ius Caesar. I t was current ly reported among g

f l ufiusaesar .

the people that 1115 ashes reposed In the golden ba l lat the summit of the Vat ican obe l isk ; that this ba l l ,to which no spoile r had atta ined

,was set with

precious stone s and bore the inscription :

Caesar , thou wert so great as was the worldNow thou art hidden in a pe tty grave .

I t was sa id that Caesar had been buried at this loftyhe ight in orde r that the world should rema in subj ectto the dead ruler as i t had been subject to the

l iving. The obe l isk was the re fore ca l led M emor ia orS epulerum Ca sar i s , as the mausoleum of Hadr ianwas ca l led M emor ia . The latter expre ssion isspecial ly significant in Rome

,whe re eve rything

be longed to memory and the past . The obe l isk isthus de signated in a bull of Leo the Nin th of the

these genealog ies is g iven in Cod . 257 of Monte Casino , which beg insSatu r nus Ur an ius imper ator <gent is l roj ana . Satu rnus X . Abranam

nasei tur Yla liam u bique perag razzi l y sern iam eona’idi l .

But here Janus on ly comes after Pr iam . H ie j any eu lum cona’icli l .

This legend passed into other descr ipt ions of the city ; I have read it

in a distor ted form in a God. M ag liao. ( shee ts 10, 3 1, car t . 134

which was comp iled from the Gr aplzz'

a and M’

r aéi lia,but which does

not g ive the fable of Noah . In the M iddle Ages a monument in the

Forum ofNerva was called Noah’s Ark.

1 I t is we ll known that,the Franks traced their orig in from Troy .

This is already told us by Fredegar , who is referred to by PaulusD iaconus , Gesta Ep . M elt . (Mon . Germ ii .

HISTORY OF ROME

year 10 53 , where i t is also cal led Agulia, a namewhich it sti l l re tains in I tal ian . I t i s possible thatin the mouth of the people the word Agulia may

have been early corrupted into Jug lia, and thatthe latte r name may have given rise to the legendconcern ing the great Cmsar, so that a myth may

have thus deve loped from a word . This is renderedthe more probable by the circumstance that thebase of the monument bore the inscription D ivo

Among the local traditions given in the Grapbiaor M irabilia , there i s scarce ly one

,not even the

legend of the Sibyl and O ctavian , which had notarisen earl ie r than the year 1000 . We pre fer, howeve r

,to introduce these legends where opportunity

seems most fitt ing .

2

1 Ca sar tan lu s eras , quan lus et orbis

Seel nune in moa’ieo elaua

’er is an lro.

The same lines are found in the epitaph of Henry I I I . (who d ied in1056) on ly with the varian t : at nune ex igua elaua

’er is u rna . The

same thought appears in the epitaph of the ce lebrated Crescentius, andin that of another Crescent ius in 1028 : lzoe j aeel in parvo mag nus

Cr escen t ia s an lro. Bull of Leo IX . (B u llar . Va l . , i . v ia qua

ven i t ab Ag u lia , qua voeatu r Sepu ler um j u li i Ca sar is . The L io.

Imper iali s of G iov. Bonsignari (Magliabech , xx iii . Cod . ix . ) says : la( the cinerary-urn)puosono in su r un alla pietra elze oggi s i ebiama la

g lzug lia a’i s . Pietro. The Tuscans , he observes

,say, agfiug lia , from

which j u lia arose . Signoril i says la Gug lia— in euj us summi tate est

vas a reum ubi sun t einer es eorpor is Oelavian i , in De Rossi,Lepr ime

r aeeolle, p . 78 . See also A . Graf, Roma nella memor ia a’el mea

’. evo, i .

292 f. Wh en Sixtus V. had the obelisk removed, it was found thatthe ball was of plaster , and was solid . Fea, su ll . Rov . , p . 345 , note.

Plans of the city in the fifteenth century mark a monument resemblingan obe lisk in the d istr ict of M inerva , as the sepu ler um B r u t i .

2 The Gr apbia and the M i r abi l ia , which end after the middle of saec.

12 , are , as far as the monuments are concerned , recens ions,agreeing

H ISTORY OF ROME

unde r the doubtful name Of a’eea rones , in the year 966 ,as influential leade rs of the Roman people .

1

O f the twe lve regions of this period we have notbeen able to determine the position of the tenth and

e leventh .

2

The first region embraced the Aventine , and

stretched across the Marmorata and R ipa Graeca to

the rive r. From the granarie s s ituated within it, i twas

,and i s st i l l

,cal led Horrea .

3

The second region included the Coel ian and a partof the Pa lat ine as far as the Aventine , al so the

Quattro Coronati, the Forma Claudia , Circus Maxi

mus, S ep t izon ium,

Porta Me trovia or M e trobi,

front of which lay the marshy tracts of the P ra la

D eei i or D eeennia .

4

1 AS this name is only found in one passage of the Vi la j olz. X111"Adinolfi (Roma nell

’eta a

’i mezzo, i . 165 ) is ent irely arbitrary in speaking

of a a’eear eonale reg ionary divis ion .

2 To my l ist of the mediaeval reg ions , which for the first t ime threwsome light on this topographical quest ion , Jordan , Topogr . a

’er S laa

’t

Rom. , has made some addit ions (vol . ii . 3 15 ff. His efforts to provethat the Augustan d ivis ion of reg ions endured unt il about

”the twe lfth

century are , however , by no means successful . I t can only be mainta inedthat some of the old ord ina l numbers of the reg ions were traditionally

preserved in the M iddle Ages .

3 M ittarelli,n . 12 1

, p . 273 (A . and n . 122 : Reg ione pr ima,

qua appella tur Or rea . In the Privil . Joh . X . for Subiaco, of Jan. 18,

926 (Reg . Sublaeense D oe. is ment ioned an orator ium S . Gemi lian i

eum su i s per t inenl i is pas i l i s in p r ima regi one super Tioer im,and

further , in p r ima r eg ione in r ipa g ra ea j ux la marmoralam. I observe

that as early as the t ime of Gregory I . (about 59 1) the Aventine was included in the first reg ion in r egi onepr ima anlegr aa

’us S . Sabina . Reg .

Gr eg . ii . 10,Jaffe, 2 Ed . n . 1 160 , p . 15 1 . In this passage of Gregory,

however , the first reg ion is not the eccles iastical reg ion, s ince i t doesnot correspond with the latter In the Gregorian pen itent ial process ion.

4 The Privileg . of John X . quoted above . zn seeuna’a r eg . a r t is

j uxta eee. I V. eoronator,and j uxta formam elaua

’

iam and por tam


The third region is marked by the Porta Maggiore,

Santa Croce,the Claudia (which inte rsected two

regions), the Me rulana,the convents of S . Vito and

S . Lucia Renat i,S . Pastor

, and the Arcus P ie tat is .

I t the re fore embraced districts which be longed to thefifth Augustan region— Esqu ilia .

1

The fourth is marked by the Campus S . Agathae

in an i solated documen t . I t was possibly boundedby S . Agatha in Suburra in the seventh region

,and

included the Quirina l and Viminal .2

In the fifth region lay a part of the Fie ld of Mars,

which conta ined the mausoleum of Augustus,the

maj orem. The same document quote s S . Erasmus in this reg ion, andDoeum . 24, S . Stephan . Mar in i

,n . 102 , p . 160 , A . 96 1 , has the convent

S . P etr i el M ar t in i in r eg ione seeuna’a suoAvenl ino in loeo qu i a

’i ei lur

Or rea , which can only be a m istake of the notary. Reg . Su l lae. , p .

134, A . 9 53 ler ra pos i ta Reg ione 2 j ux ta a’eeenn ias

,and eampus qu i

voealur D eeenn ias fur ther, prata D eei i—for is por ta M etrooi . The

name of this gate , from which no road star ted , is unexplained . I t

is thus named as early as A . 866 . Reg . S uol . , p . 127 . Concern ingthe M el rovea , see Tomassetti, “ Campagna Romana,

”A r e/11. el. Soe.

Rome, viii. p . 9 ff.1 Gallett i, P r im. , n . 8 , p . 195, A . 924 r egi o 3 , j

'

ux la por la M aj ore

it was also the boundary of reg ion 2 . A church to S . Theodore s tood

there ab uno later e forma elaua’ia , el a see. lat . or lu a

’e M r eur io.

Reg ione ter t ia non longe a’a H ier usalem (n . 9 , p . 196 , A . A

Massa Ju liana in the t ime of Bened . VI . in reg io 3 (Murat . , An t . , v.

774 M ittarelli , p . 197, App . , A . 10 1 1 r egi one ter t ia , in loeum

qu i voeatur S . P astor e, s ive ar eum P ietat i s .2 Reg . Sublae. Doe. 79 A . 9 76 : r egi one quar ta in loeum qu i

appellatur Gampum S . Agalne. The reg ion there was called CaballiM armorei : Or lam eum Casalino in Regi one Caéalli M armor ei fere

ante eeeles . S. Aga l/ta in D iacon ia pos i tum. Bull,of Ce lestine I II . , A .

1 192 , Bu ll . Vat ican , i . 74. Jordan adds other passages , which showthat the Suburra and Gallina aloa lay in this mediaeval reg ion . The

church of S . Susanna and the Baths of D iocletian stood in the fourthreg ion D e Rossi, B u ll. a’i Arek. Cr isl . , 1870, pp . 89, 1 1 1.


Anton ino column,the V ia Lata

,S . Silvestro in Capite

,

and the Pos te rula S . Agathze by the Tibe r,and

probably a l so the Pincian and the gate of S . Va lentine

(de l Popolo) . This d istrict previously be longedpartly to the ninth region (Circus Flaminius), partlyto the seventh region (V ia Lata) .

1

The s ixth i s marked by the church of S . Maria inS in ilfeo

,in the present quarte r of Trevi .2

In the seventh stood the church of S . Agatha super

S ubur ram,the column of Trajan , and the ne ighbour

ing Campus Kaloleonis .

3

1 These places are specified in Marini,n . 28, p . 45 , A . 962 : s i la

namque Roma r eg io qu inta , A . 1008 . Regi one qu in ta j ux ta areo'

marmor eo on the Via Lata . Gallett i, M ser . Vatiean ,8048 , p . 53 .

The Capu t Taur i (por ta eli S . Lorenzo), which was compr ised in theancient fifth reg ion (E squ i lia ) in the L ib. P onl ij l A lex . I .

”and

Anast. I I . appears in the tenth century to have been included inregion 3.

2 Reg ione Sex ta ao’ S . M ar ia in Sin ibeo

,in which a house is

mentioned in 10 19 . Documents from S . Cyriacus and N icho las inVia Lata in Galletti, M er . Val iean . , n . 8048 ; and frequently thesame designat ion of the s ixth reg ion in Acts of this t ime . S . M ar ia in

S in ibeo was also called in Sy noa’o or in Xenoa’oebio i t is the present

S . M ar ia in Tr ivio or o’ei Croeifer i . Jordan , ii . 320, g ives a passage

from the Aela S . Susanna (2 Aug ., p . 632) Reg i one sex laj ux ta vieum

M amer t in i (al. M amur i ) ante forum Sallust i i . A place called D iburoin the same reg ion—Adinolfi , Roma—a

’

i mezzo, i . 176.

3 Galletti , D el . P r im. , p . 232 , A . 1003 r eg . sepl ima j ux ta eampo d’

e

quona’am Ka loleon i . S . N ieol . sub. eol . Traj ana in r eg . nona in

eampo Ka loleon . is mentioned here by Gallett i, p . 375 but i t must be

a mistake of the wr iter . Marini, n . 43 , A . 1025 . Regi one sept im . in

loeo, qu i voealur P r oba j ux ta M on . S . Agatbe sup . Sobora . Here

stood an ancient fountain called Pu leus a’e P roba . In the work D e

Vetuslate Ur bis , attr ibuted to Pomponius Letus , we read : I n eo

Qu i r inali temp lum est S . Agatba et in ipsa valle,non long e a temp/o

S . Vi talis es t pu teus , qu i a’iei lur pu teus a

’omine P roba . Also in the

Privil. of John X . for Subiaco the Suburra is again spoken of thisreg ion must consequently have extended as far as region 3 .

S treets .


(Avent inu s ) was apparently me rged in the first region,

which embraced the Avent ine . Trastevere,on the

other hand,i s stil l known as the fourteenth region in

the e leventh century as in ancient t ime s .1

As the name s V ia Lata , Caput A fricae , and Suburrahad survived

,so must othe r streets have stil l retained

the ir ancient des ignations . In the meantime,how

eve r,the majority were cal led after churche s

,some

afte r conspicuous monuments , such as the Colosseum ,

the Theatre of Marce l lus,and the Marble Colossi .

The chief thoroughfares were frequently spoken of indocuments a s V ia Publica or Communis

,and a Via

Pont ificalis,which led through the Fie ld of Mars to

S . Pe ter’

s,existed as early as the tenth century.

2

These irregular streets,of which some we re ancient

,

others recent ly constructed amid ru ins and rubbish,

must have worn a gloomy and curious aspect . The i rnarrowness and the ir confused characte r

,combined

with the rough exte rior of the ir dwe l l ings,would

probably have repe l led the beholder, while the picture squenes s of the ir architecture would have wakenedh is admiration . As at the present day , eve ry Romanhouse had a separate fl ight of steps ; doors and windows were i n the form Of Roman arche s the cornices

1 Reg . XIV . , Tr ansl iber in i in loeo qu i voealur miea aur ea, the

bull (quoted above) of John XVI I I . of March 29 , 1005 , for S . Cosma

e Damiano,recently printed in P ent . R . inea

’i la , ii . 11 . 93 ( 1884) by

Pflugk-Hartung . Regi one quar ta a’eeima Tr anst iber in i , Document

of A . 1037 from S . Maria in Trastev. Galletti , M ser . Vat ican . , n.

805 1 , p . 6 .

2 P er viam eommunem, que eslpergens ao’viampontzj fealem euntium

ao’ b. P etr um Ap . Gallett i , Del . P r im. n . 3 1 Cbron . Far fa . , p .

539 , A. 10 17 .


were marked with the edges of tiles ; the roofs werefrequent ly cove red with shingle s ; the wa l ls, built of

bricks , were probably devoid of plaster. The housesas a rule possessed an attic

,which expla ins the

expression easa solora la so frequently encounte red .

Entrance hal ls,which we re known throughout I taly

by the German word laubia,supported by pil lars or

antique columns,we re unive rsa l and long survived in

Rome . In the presen t day we must explore the

Trastevere or the P igna and Par ione quarter to discove r the last rema ins of this specie s of medize val

architecture . NO authent ic descr ipt ion of a Roman Houses .

dwe ll ing—house of the upper c lass of the tenth cen

tury has come down to us, and that of a palace ofthe Duke s of Spole to seems to apply to an ancientbuild ing.

1 The building is divided into twe lve distinct parts

,which are thus explained : the Proau lium

and Sa lutatorium the Con s is torium ,in which the

inmates assembled and washed the ir hands beforemeals the Trichorus or dining-room the Ze tasHyemalis

,a warmed room for winter use ; the Ze tas

E s t ivalis , a cool room for summe r ; the Ep ikas torium

(perhaps Epid ikas te rium) , a room for bu siness ; beside it Tricl inia , each conta in ing three couches ;baths ; a gymnasium or place for amusement ; thekitchen ; the Columbum,

from which wate r flowedinto the kitchen ; the Hippodrome , and Arcus de

1 Descrizioned ’un Palazzo—in un Cod . delX . o XI . sec. ne ll ’ archivio

della Basil . Vat icana ,”in Fatteschi , D uebi a

’z Spoleto, p . 349 . The

F ragmen t of Farfa somewhat d iffers from this see Mabillon,Annal.

B en . aa7 A . 8 14 , and Muratori for the same year . I have found yet

another fragment in God. Val . , 385 1 .

H ISTORY OF ROME

ambulatorn, colonnade s with which was a l so con

nected the treasure chamber. 1

Some of the ancient palaces which had formerlybe longed to the noble familie s of Ce thegus

,Maximus

,

Gracchus,or Anicius may have survived to the tenth

century, a lthough ruin and repeated transformationsmay have rendered them unrecognisable . For whyshould not a private house

,constructed of the same

imperishable mate rial s,have endured as we l l as a

temple or a triumpha l arch ? O the r fortress-l ikedwe l l ings had recently arisen

,and in a lmost every

instance on the foundations of ancient buildings .We re we permitted to visit the palace of Marozia onthe Aventine , the palace of Albe ric near S . Apostol i

,the dwe l l ings of the Baruncii

,of the Cencii,

and of the Cre s cent ii in the ne ighbourhood of thePantheon

,or the imperial fortre ss of O tto the Third ,

we should find buildings of brick marve llously decorated with ancient console s and friezes , the i r surfacebroken by arched windows with the ir l ittle columns,such as may stil l be seen in the s o-cal led Casa diCrescenzio

,the olde st private bu ilding of the Middle

Ages now known in Rome . Ancient monumentsbestowed the ir finest ornaments on churche s and

palace s , and when we look with surprise at the pre sent

day at the many Splendid columns of Corinthian and

Ionic architecture used as supports in wretched buildings in some of the ancient quarte rs of the city

,we

may imagine how in the tenth century a lmost all the

1 De Ross i believes that this descrip tion refers to the Roman Imper ial palace. See on this subject his Roma soller anea

,iii . 458 f. and

his P ian le ienografielze, p . 123 sq.

HISTORY OF ROME

existence . The Romans we re le ft at l iberty to

plunde r the c ity ; prie sts purloined columns and

marble s for the i r churche s,noble s and c le rgy built

towers upon the splendid buildings of antiqu ity ;the burghers e rected the i r forge s

,looms and spinning

factorie s in bath and circus .1 When the fishe rman ofthe Tiber offe red his spoils for sale on the bridges

,or

the butche r displayed his meat,or the baker his loaves

,

i n the Theatre of Marce l lus,the se wares were exposed

on blocks of rarest marble,which had once perhaps

served as seats in theatre or circus for the rulersof the world

,for Caesar, Mark Antony or Augustus ,

and for many a consul and senator. The sarcophagiof hero esiwe re employed as c iste rns

,wash-tubs

,or

troughs for swine,even as they are to-day . The

table of the shoemaker or the ta i lor may with equa ll ike l ihood have been the cippus of some i l lustriousRoman

,or a slab of alabaste r at which some noble

matron had performed her toi lette in days long past .Although in the tenth century the city probablyreta ined but few of her ancient statue s in bronze

,the

numbe r of marble statue s must sti l l have beenconsiderable . In almost eve ry street or square the

ey e must have re sted'

on the prostrate or mutilatedworks of ancient art ; and porticos

,theatre s

,and

baths had not even yet so hope lessly degeneratedinto dust-heaps as to have become complete lydivested of all the i r sculptured ornament . Statuesof emperors and i llustrious Romans stood or lay

1 The name of the present street Le bol teg lze oseu re originatedfrom the booths erected in the dark port icos of the Circus Flaminius.

An example of the way in which art isans made use of the monuments

of ant iquity is still to be found in the Theatre of Marcellus .


uncovered on the ground ; many ancient frescoe ssti l l rema ined on the wa l ls . The fee l ing for worksof art

,however

,was so utterly ext inct that no author

of the time accords them a single word . The

Roman s themse lves regarded them simply a s s er

viceable mate rial . For centurie s the city had

resembled a vast l imekiln into which the costl iestmarble was thrown and the re reduced to mortar. I t

i s not without reason that i n diplomas of the tenthand e leventh centurie s names such as Calcarius

,the

l ime-burner,

are of frequent occurrence . Thesenames were not used to denote the occupation ofthe ir owners

,but as sign ifying that the se men we re

the possessors of,or l ived beside , l imekilns .

1 Thus,

for centurie s,Romans sacked and destroyed the ir

ancient city, cutting and breaking it to pieces ,burn ing and transforming it ; y e t there was a lwayssome thing remaining.

1 A . 1023 Roelu lplzo, qu i r esea’i l ao

’ Ca lear ia (Gall . D el . P r im .,n .

Reg . Fa if ,n . DCCCI . A . 1043 : Cr eseentius vi r magn if. calea

rar ius . S . N iccolo de’

Cesarini was then called a’o Calearar io in

r eg ione vinea Tbea’emar i i . The Ora’o Rom.

,xii . (Mabill . , i i . ) in

saec. xi i . also ment ions S . Lawrence in Calear io. Even in 1426 a

mandate of M art in V. speaks of Romans as eivibus el ealearen s ibu s

Roman is a’o r egi one P inee. E . Muntz,Les Au l iq. de la vi lle a

’e Rome

,

Paris , 1886, p . 3 7. There were such limekilns more especially in theFie ld of Mars

, but traces of them have a lso been discovered on the

Forum, on the marble pavement of the B as i liea j u lia , and in front ofthe Temp le of Faust ina . Jordan, Topog r . Roms . , i . 65 . In 1883 limekilns were d iscovered even in the newly excavated Atrium of the House

of the Vestals .

HISTORY OF ROME

WALK THROUGH THE C ITY IN THE TIME OF OTTO

THE TH I RD —THE PALATINE—THE SEPTI Z ON IUM

THE FORUM—SS. SERGIUS AND BACCHU s— THE

IN FERNUS— MARFOR IO—THE CAPITOL—S. MARIA IN

CAP ITOLIO— CAMPUS CALOLEON Is— THE COLUMN OF

TRAJAN— THE COLUMN OF MARCUS AURELIUSCAM PO MARzo—MONS AUGUSTUS—THE NAVONATHE CHURCHES BELONGING To FARFA—S. EUSTA

CH IUS IN PLATANA— LEGEND OF S . EUSTACH IUS— S.

MAR IA I N THE M INERVIUM — CAM IGLIANO ARCUSMANUS CARNE Z E—PAR IONE—THE BR IDGES OVERTHE TIBER—TEMPLES OF FORTUNE, VIRILIS, AND

VESTA—CONCLUD ING REMARKS .

The reader will perhaps accompany us in a briefsurvey of Rome i n the time of O tto the Third

,or

rather in a vis it to a few of the more renownedquarters of the city. Le t us first turn to the Pa latine .

The imperial palace s stil l survived as colossa l ru ins,

fi l led with forgotten works of art of eve ry kind .

Many rooms in this deserted labyrinth sti l l re ta inedthe i r costly wa l l-coverings . A hal l hung withdraperie s of cloth of gold

,and chambe rs whose

wal ls we re l ined with plate s of silve r or shee t lead ,we re discovered even in the days of Innocent theTenth .

1 The Palatine,howeve r

,could have been but

sparse ly populated ; and its churches were both few

1 Imper ial coins of Lothar were found in excavations on the Palat inein 1869 nevertheless i t is a mistake to infer in consequence that Char lesthe Great or his successors inhabited the ancient fortress of the Caesarswhen they came to Rome . Such coins could have been scattered thereby the Romans themselves .

HISTORY OF ROME

monasteries a lso . Many ancient monuments hadpassed into private hands and were used as fortresse s .The great Sept izonium had thus become the propertyof the monaste ry and a lready bee n transformed into afortress . The monks of S . Gregorio at this time a lsoowned the Triumpha l Arch of Constantine

,which

was undoubtedly converted into a towe r, and the

monastery had thus intrenched itse l f behind variousmonuments of antiqu ity. The Arcus Triumphalisand the Circus (Max imus) are both mentioned

( though only by name) in a document,and we

learn that Stephen owned a part of the impe ria lpalace

,a portico with thirty-e ight crypts or vaulted

chambe rs be ing more e special ly ment ioned .

1 As tothe aspect worn by the Circus Maximus—where thetwo obe l i sks we re a l ready prostrate in the dust

,

though the triumpha l arch at each end i s stil lmentioned by the Grapbia

— we are comple te lyignorant

,nor do we know how the Colosseum , which

was not y e t a fortress,may have impressed the

beholder. We have good reason,howeve r

,for sup

posing that these dilapidated bu ild ings stil l re ta inedthe greate r portion of the i r oute r wal ls as we l l as the i rrows of seats .1 D ip loma from S . Gregorio, M ittarelli, i . App . 41 , p . 97 : [d est

i llud meum templum,quod Sep tem solia minor diei tur u t ab bae d ie

vestre s ib polestat i el volunta l i pro lu i l ione lur r i s vestre, que Septem

solia ma7'

or d iei lu r , ad destruendum et sup la s dep r imendum quan tumvobis plaeuer i l . N ee non el omnes eryp tas quas babee in par t ien qu ivoea lur mwapc

'

bmpww supra dieta septem solia—numero t r zgin tas et

oeto—pos i ta Rome r eg . seeunda pr ope septem vi is,a quar to latere via

publiea j ux ta ei r eum, qu i duei l ad areum tr iumpbali vestr is j um'

s—dal .A . 1 , B ened. V11.

,A . 8 , Otton . I nd. 3 , m. j u lio, d. 22. The Greek

word has been expla ined as por t icus M ater ian i . See Jordan , ii . 354,and Stevenson.


The utterly ruinous Temple of Venus and Rome Thewas a lready ca l led

,as in the Grapbia , the Templum

Forum

Coneordia el P ieta t is . I t s gigant i c monol ithic pillarsof blue granite st i l l stood in unimpa ired splendour.The wayfarer stil l trod the ancient pavement of theV ia Sacra as he passed through the Arch of theSeven Candle sticks ” to the Forum . He re the slopeof the l it tle Ve l ian hil l sti l l sank abruptly, the Forumnot be ing buried so deep in dust as at the presentday .

1 Temples,port icos

,and basil icas stood in

imposing desolat ion on eve ry side,and the Roman

wande red amid the countless ru ins of columns,

architraves,marble figure s

,i n this his nat iona l

mu seum,the haunted de sert ion and ru inous majesty

of which must have produced an inde scribable impression . The Forum could not ye t have sunk tosuch utte r decay as to have afforded a pasturage forcatt le . But the statues had probably long beenremoved from the numerous pedestal s which stood infront of the Basil ica Jul ia and opposite the Capitol .I f O tto the Third had followed the path we have

d escribed accompanied by a Roman antiquary,the

ignorant successor of Varro,his guide would have

made these monuments of antiquity known to the

Empe ror unde r a curious medley of true and fa l sename s . He would have shown him the TemplumFatale

,the Arch of Janus near S . Martina

,a Templum

Refug ii be side S . Adriano in the ruins of the ancient

1[This is no longer the case. The Forum has for some years been

e xcavated to the or ig inal level , and so far from “ be ing bur ied deep indust ,

”it is kept in a state of exemp lary but inartist ic neatness .—“

TRANS

LATOR.]


Curia he would have pointed out the Arcus Fabianus near S . Lorenzo in Miranda as the templum

L a tone,but would have accorded its rightful name

to the Temple of Concord bes ide S . Sergius . Thisce lebrated bu ilding

,which had once echoed to Cicero

’

smagnificent ‘ orations

,had perhaps been partial ly

destroyed in the e rection of a l ittle church . The

A nonymous of E insiede ln had a lready behe ld the

church be tween the temple and the arch of Severus ,which served it apparently as a be l l towe r . I t seemsto have stood in the ne ighbourhood of the Rostra ,and had apparently served to uphold as many of theancient statue s be longing to the earl ie r bu ilding as

had survived the s ixth century.

1 The church wasdedicated not only to S . Sergius , but a lso to S .

Bacchus,a sa int who

,curiously enough

,appears on

this ancient Pagan site . His appearance , howeve r,was not singular in Rome

,whe re the name s of

ancient gods and he roe s are aga in found amongChristian sa ints , as S . Achilleus

,S . Quirinus

,Diony

s ius,Hippolytus

,He rme s ; thus a lso S . Bacchus .

In the huge rema ins of the Basil ica Jul ia,or in

those of one of the sanctuarie s of Vesta , perhaps thedwe l l ing of her ancient priestesses , the tenth centuryarchaeologist would have shown us the Temple of theterrible Catil ine

,and close by it the church of S .

1 Sei Serg i i ibi umbi lieum Roma ,says the Anon . ofE ins iedeln . The

exact s ite of the church is still d isputed , the building having been re

moved by Paul I I I . Camillo Re tries to d iscover it near the Arch of

Severus and oppos ite the Rostra I l Camp idogl io e le sue adiacenze nelsec. B ull . della Commiss . A r elt . Comunale, 1882 , x . p . 125) he

therein follows the view of Jordan,Sy lloge l user . For i Roman i in

p em. En r . ,1876, iii. 2539 .

546 HISTORY OF ROME

of Saturn and Ve spasian,and between countless

ruins of ancient magnificence,Up to the Capitol .

Who can de scribe the tragic s ight that there met the

eye ? Cassiodorus had called the Capitol for the lasttime the greatest wonder of Rome

,and we have seen

that even in the e ighth century it was regarded as

the chief marve l o f the universe . But for a long timepast we have not once heard its name . I t had

vanished from history,and the Grapbia m ere ly te l l s

u s that its wa l ls were in la id with glass and gold,

without ente ring into any furthe r description .

1 The

convent of S . Maria i n Capitol io is mentioned asearly as the year 882

,but the adjacent church in Ara

Coel i,a lthough probably already built

,is nowhere

spoken of.2

The once sumptuous Impe rial Forums rema inburied in comple te s i lence

,the Forum of Trajan

excepted . That of Augustus had become so fi l ledwith ruins and vege tation as to have rece ived fromthe populace the name of Hor lus mirabilis . The

1 Preller’

s op inion i . i. that in the year 850 , Lewishad been crowned on the Capito l by Adrian I I 13 erroneous . Nibby ,Roma nel

,1838 , took this s tatement from the Cbron . Casaurense

(Murat . , ii . which was not wr itten unt il after the restoration of the

Roman Senate . I t also speaks merely of a tr iumph : Romamque

r ever sas Imper iali laur ea pro tr z'

umplzo a Dom . P . Adr iano, et omn i

popu lo, el Senalu Rom. in Cap i tolio est coronatus . Preller sees in a

fable “the first symbol of the bel ief in the Capito l as the centre of

Roman power .

”This idea was strange to the time the Cap itol was

a ruin,and the not ion of a coronat ion taking p lace there, instead of in

S . Peter’

s,wou ld have been regarded as a b lasphemy.

2 God. Sessor . , ccxvii . p . 19 : Tenzo abb. ven . M onas . S . M ar ia

D ei Gen . Vi rg . in Cap i tolio A . 882 . M onast . S . Al ar ia in

Capi tolio Marini , n. 28 , A. 955, n . 29 , A . 962 .


Forum 0 1Trajan was a lso in such ruinous condition Forum of

that the documents in which it is mentioned speakTralan‘

o f the pel ra or s tone s which lay within it. The name

Magnanapoli, borne by the stree t which leads fromthe Forum to the Quirina l, dates from this t ime .

1

On the other s ide of the Forum lay the CampusCaloleonis , now abbreviated into Carleone , so ca l ledfrom the palace of one of Albe ric’s Roman Optimat es .2

Above the majest ic ruins of the Ulpian l ibraries and

basil icae,the lordly column of Trajan stil l towered

unimpa ired . Beside it stood the church S . N ieola z

sub eolump nam Traj anam. This Church had greatlycontributed to the ruin of the Forum

,from which the

materia l s of which it was built had been taken . I t

be longed to the parish of Santi Apostoli , and the

column itse l f was probably a l so the property of thesame basil ica .

3

1 Adr iano quoddam de banneo neapolin i : Cod . Sessor . , ccxvn .

p . 60 , A . 938 . I recognise there in the name magnanapoli , or properlybagnanapoli , which must be derived from ba lneum

,and not as in

Becker,i . 382, from magnan imi Pau li , nor from the vado ad N eapolim

of the enchanter Virg il . The exp lanat ion of the word N eapolin i is

d ifficult in some documents N eapoli s stands in its place . Thus wehave in the will of G iovann i Conti, M ay 3 , 1226 mons ba lnei N eapoli s .

S ignor Corvis ier i remarked to me that the t itle of the B a lneum mayhave come from the name Napoleo , borne by one of the Cont i, dwe llingon the spot . I t is uncertain how o ld the name Napoleo may be . I t

became very common among the Ors ini in later t im es .

2 The combinat ions Kale-Leo,Kala-P etra

,Kalo-j olzannes are very

frequent in documents of the t ime I have never , however, d iscoveredN apo-Leo.

3 Galletti, D el . P r im. , p. 375 (A . In 1 162 the church of S .

N icolai was deprived of the Column bf Trajan, which was awarded instead to the Abbess of S. Cyriacus, later S . Maria in Via Lata . Jbzd ,

P 323

HISTORY OF ROME

The great column of Marcus Aure l ius stood as i tstands to-day . In 9 55 Agap itus the Second confi rmed it in possession to the monaste ry of S .

Silvestro in Capite,and seven years late r John the

Twe l fth renewed the diploma .

“ We confirm in

in teg r um,

” so runs the document,

“the great marble

column cal led Antonino,as i t stands with its sculp

ture s,toge ther wi th the church of S . Andreas at its

base,and the circumjacent soil

,surrounded as it i s

on all s ides by publ ic streets in this Ci ty of Rome .

” 1

I t is thus evident that it was encompassed by anopen space

,and a l ittle church had consequently

arisen beside this column a l so . These chape l s wereguard-houses

,the monks who dwe l t there in were the

guardians,and to them we owe the pre servation of

the se renowned monuments which tower in solitarygrandeur above the ruins of history. Upon thesecolumns S . Pe te r and S . Paul now stand as types ofRome

’s twofold dominion ; and no more fitting sitecould the Apostle s have found than the columns ofthe two Emperors , fol lowe rs of a philosophy whichprepared the way for Christianity. Pilgrims cl imbedthese columns by the i nner spira l sta ircase

,as we

C l imb them now to enjoy the magnificent view of the

1 Marini,n . 28 , 29 : two important topographical documents of saec.

x . Columpna maj u re marmorea in integ ra qu i diei lu r Anlon ino seu l

p i ta u l videtu r esse per omn ia eum eeel . s . A ndr ee ad pedes et terra in

ei r eu i tu suo s ieu ti undique a publiee v ie ei r eumda la esse videatu r in tra

li ane Civi ta tem Rom . eonsl ruela (n . In 11 . 28 is added eam eel/a

s ub se, and this perhaps served the monks as a wine-cellar . In the

M idd le Ages the column was called Antonini , the name already usedby the Anon . of E ins iedeln. We hear nothing more of the statue of

the Emperor on the summi t .


city from the i r summits . The monks must a lso haveimposed a tax for the ascent ; at least an inscript ionbe longing to the year 1 1 19 , now placed in the port icoof S . Silvestro

,records that the pilgrims offered the i r

oblations in the Church of S . Andrea beside the

column of Marcus Aure l ius,and that the monaste ry

on this account leased the column as a lucrat ivesource of revenue . I t i s curious to discove r that thesame practice had been in vogue in ancient times .Soon afte r the erection of the column

,we learn that

Adrastus,the freedman of the Emperor Sept im iu s

Seve rus,built a house in the ne ighbourhood of the

column,in orde r to watch ove r it

,or to col lect the

revenues which it yie lded . Two marble inscriptionswhich inform us of the usage were discove red in the

excavations of 17 77 , and the se inscriptions had beenplaced in the guard-house by Adrastus .1 The smal lercolumn a lso

,which was e rected by Marcus Aure l ius

and L . Verus to the ir father Antoninus Pius , stoodin the ne ighbourhood of the present Monte Citorio .

I t was of red granite,and only fifty fee t in he ight ;

and as it i s mentioned ne ithe r by the A nonymous ofE insiede ln , nor by the Grapbia or M i rabilia ,

it isprobable that it was leve l led to the dust in the

e leventh century.

2

1 Fea,Su lle Rov .

, p . 350 . In the firs t Adraslo’

P r oeu ralor i Colum

na D ivi M a r ei u l ad volup latem suam Hosp i t ium s ibi ex tr ua l . Quodu t babea l su i j u r is et ad ber edes transmi ttal . Li ttera D a ta vi i i . Jdus

Aug . Roma Fa leono et Claro Coss .

2 I t was excavated in 1704 . P ius VI . had it sawed in p ieces and

utilised for the Vat ican Library. I ts pedestal st ill stands in the

Vat ican garden . Vignoli, D e columna Imp . Anton in i Pi i,Rome,

1 705 .

HISTORY OF ROME

In the tenth century the Fie ld of Mars,a l ready

cal led Campo Marzo,displayed the magnificent ruins

of a c ity of marble . O f the various construct ions ofthe Anton ines

,the vast rema ins of the basil ica or

temple sti l l existed,as i s shown by the rema in s of

the pillared front of the Dogana . Picture the spacefrom the Pantheon to the Mausoleum of Augustu sfi l led by the ruins of the Baths of Agrippa and

Alexander,of the Stadium of Domitian , and of the

Odeum,all of which stood side by side . Imagine ,

furthe r,the countle ss porticos which extended from

the V ia Lata,the Porta Flaminia

,and the Bridge of

Hadrian across the Campus Martius,and we have

be fore us a world of wonde rs ha l f in ru ins . Withinthe gloomy vaults of the se various bu ild ings wre tchedbe ings

,l iving l ike trog lodyte s, had made the i r miser

able homes,othe rs had constructed piti ful dwe l l

ings which clung l ike swal lows ’ ne sts to the ruinouswa l ls . The se people planted vegetables and vineson the mounds of rubbish which had arisen on theFie ld of Mars ; streets gradua l ly took Shape , and ledto churches

,which

,built from ruins in the midst of

ruins , lent the stree ts a purpose and a name . The

black tower of some Roman ca l l ing himse l f Consulor Judex rose he re and there from the midst ofdecay.

The Mausoleum of Augustus had not ye t beenconve rted into a fortress . Cove red with earth andove rgrown wi th tree s

,it bore so much the aspect of a

hil l as to rece ive the name of one , and was known inthe tenth century as M ons A ug us tus , a name corrupted in the vulgar tongue into A us la or L ’

ans ta

Navona .

552 HISTORY OF ROME

t ime i t also bare the name S . Va lentini , from the

Church outs ide the gate . An ancient monument ,cal led Tru lla s

,stood in its ne ighbourhood . This was

apparen t ly a tomb,and was known to the people as

the tomb of Ne ro .

1 A series of ruinous sepulchra lmonuments stood at each side of the Via Flaminiaoutside the gate

,and among them was the tomb of

the ce lebrated chariotee r Gutta Calpurn ianus .

2 The

space covered by the present Piazza de l Popolo wasfi l led by fie lds and gardens , as was the M ans P inz i

”

of those days,on which stood a church of S . Fe l ix .

Anothe r ancient tomb in the form of a pyramid a l sostood on the piazza at the foot of the P incio

,possibly

on the spot now occupied by S . Maria de i Miracol i .I t was cal led the M eta . The entire Fie ld of Marswas cove red by vineyards and vegetable gardens .The Stadium of Domitian lay in ru in . The A nony

mous of E insiede ln wrongly terms it “ Circus Flamin ius

,whe re S . Agne s l ie s

,from the ancient region

of that name,to which it be longed . In the tenth

century,howeve r

,i t was known in popular speech as

Ag onis , from Ag an or Circus Ag ona lis . From the

name“ in Ag ona

” bestowed on this d istrict gradua l ly arose the corruption n

’

Ag ona ,finally N avona

,

the name by which the large st and finest of the

1 A p lan of the city of the fifteenth century shows a representat ion of

the tower-shaped Tr u llu s , which it calls Tu rr is ubi umbra neron i s din

mans i tavit . P ian te ienagr ayfclze of de Rossi , tav. i ii .2 The inscription of Gutta

’

s monument was cop ied by the Anon . of

E insiedeln . Concern ing the surroundings of the Porta Flaminia, seethe treat ise of Viscont i and Vespignani , D elle scoperte avvenute per la

demol. del le torr i de lla Porta Flaminia (B u ll. della Comm . Ar elzeal. , 1877,

v. 184


Roman public piazzas is known at the presentday

}

Severa l churches had been a l ready built out of themate ria l s o f the circus . On one side was the

diaconate of S . Agne s in Agone , the scene of thelegend of the sa int ; on the othe r, the parish churchof S . Apoll inaris

,built apparently on the ruins of a

temple to Apollo,who now gave place to his canon

ised name sake , the first Bishop of Ravenna .

2 The

church of S . Eustachio, l ike othe r Roman monaste rie sand basil icas

,which gradual ly appropriated the soi l

of the c ity together with its monuments,had annexed

possessions in this region,and even the distant Abbey

of Farfa owned fie lds,houses , gardens and crypts 01

the ruined stadium,or of the adjacent Baths of Alex

ande r Severus . Beside the se ruined baths, three

smal l churches al so be longed to the Abbey , S . Maria ,S . Benedict

,and S . Salvator. The monaste ry stood

in constant strife with the presbyters of S . Eustachioon account of these posse ssions, and i t i s to thedocuments of this trial that we owe our topographica lknowledge of the region in Ag one or in S ear t iela r i is .

3

S . Maria of Farfa must be the pre sent church of S .

Luigi de i Francesi the Chape l of S . Benedict fe l l1 Ros i ta Rome r egi ane nona , ubi d ici tur Aganes . Reg . Farf. ,

n . 690 .

Galle tt i , D el . P r im . n . 27 , A . 10 11. Ter r a et campus Agon is cum cas is

bar t is cl crypt is Cli ron . Farf , p . 42 1 . Hence Becker , i . 67 1, has convinced himself that N avana actually arose from Ag on . In saec. xv.

the Roman archaeolog ists again wrongly placed the Circus Flaminius inthe Navona .

2 First ment ion of this church in the L ib. Fau t if . ,

“ Vita Hadriani I . ,

n . 332 .

3 S . M ar ia j ux ta l ermas A lexandr inas . Galletti , Gabia, n . 17 ,after Reg . Farf . , 461 , A . 998. Gallet ti , D el . P r im. n . 26, 27 , 28.

Churchesbelong ingto Farfa In

the fi eld

of Mars .


i nto ruins,but S . Salvator sti l l remains bearing

the suffix in Tbermis . He re,Close to the Stadium

of Domitian,stood the Baths of Ne ro

,enlarged by

Alexande r Seve rus,and extending from S . Eustachio

to S . Apoll inare .

1 The newer quarter, where S .

Eustachio,the Madama

,and Giustiniani palaces and

S . Luigi stand , had arisen from the ir ruins , and herein sti l l late r times the magnificent rema ins of hal l s ,arche s, columns , and ornaments of eve ry kind werediscovered . An ancient church , S . Trifon in P as te

rula, stood on the s ite of the pre sent founta in of the

Scrofa , and bes ide the ruins of an ancient buildingwhich had served for the cremation of dead emperors .S . Trifon was splendidly rebuilt about the year 9 56 ,and endowed with nume rous privi leges by Crescentius , Prefect of the city,2

The church of S . Eustachio, entitled in P la tana,

perhaps from some ne ighbouring plane-tree , had ,according to tradition

,been built in a palace in the

Baths of Alexande r. I t s foundation must have beenof early date

,S ince i t was already a diaconate i n 79

i n the time of Leo the Third . I t formed the centreof a quarte r in the Middle Ages

,and gave i ts name

a l ike to the region and to a ce lebrated patricianfamily. The legend of the sa int , whose Pagan namewas Placidus

,deserves our attention . As one of

1 I not ice in B enedict aj Soracte, C. 33 : inf r a civis Rama nan longe

ab a eeles ia s . Apalenar is a templum Alexandr in i . The Anon . of

E ins iede ln d istinguishes to the left Sci Apollinar is to the rightTberma A lexandr in i et sci E us laclzi i .2 The hull of John XI I . concerning i t, in Corvisieri, D elle Poster ule

t iber ine, p . 165 . S . Agostino took the p lace of S . Trifonis after 1470.

3 Mar iano Armellini,Clziese di Roma, p. 234.

H ISTORY OF ROME

Opened the bul l he found Eustachius,his wife

,and

children dead but unconsumed . The Christiansburied him in his own house ; the Romans causedthemse lves to be baptised

,and the repentant Hadrian

swal lowed poison at Cumae.

1

Eustachius possesses a sti l l furthe r importance forRome . He became the hero of a most curiou sgenea logy. In the twe lfth century

,and probably

even earl ie r,the Romans took pleasure in tracing the

origin of the i r noble familie s back to antiqu ity.

The i r genea logica l trees we re suddenly found to havebeen offshoot s of the ce lebrated laure l of Augustuson the Palatine

,or to have grown in the gardens of

Mae cenas .or of Pompey,of the Scipios or the

Maximi . Since the family of the Counts of Tusculumhad become transformed into the Counts of S . Eus ta

chio,they traced the i r de scent, by a bold stroke of

imagination , from the renowned O ctavius Mamil iusof Tusculum

,who had fal len in the battle of Lake

Regillus . From him the Octavi i we re descended ;from the Empe ror O ctavian the Senator Agapitus

O ctavius, the fathe r of Placidus or Eustachius.Te rtul lus , father of S . Placidus ( the pupil of Benedict) ,a l so be longed to the same family , and from the timeof Mamil ius this family had re ta ined possession of

1 S imon M etaphrastes, in ,

Surius,vi . ad. 1 Nov.

,and Anast . Kircher,

Histor ia E ustac/zia-M ar iana , Rome , 1665 . According to legend , Constantine and Sylvester had built the stil l existing place of p ilgrimage onM onte Guadagnolo . Trajan again appears in mediaeval legend on the

spot near the Pantheon . The M i rabi lia ment ion the Arcus Pietatis in

the d istr ict of Mar ia Rotunda,and transfer the fable of the suppliant

widow to this spot . Clzron. Farf. says : S . E ustaebius in Plato/la

Mart inelli wrong ly wr ites in Platea .


Tusculum,which Tertul lus pre sented to the monastery

o f Subiaco . Te rtullus was natural ly a l so a cousin ofthe Empe ror Justinian

,and to the O ctavian house the

great Pope Gregory and the Anician family natura l lyt raced the i r origin . Thus from the fabulous O ctaviusMamilius were descended not only the Counts ofTusculum

,but a l so the P ie rleoni, the Count s of

Segni,of Pol i

,and of Valmontone

,and the Frangi

pani,who founded the house of Austria .

1

On the othe r s ide of the Pantheon the A nonymous The M iner

o f E insiede ln a lready found the conven t of S . Maria mm‘

in the M inervium ,-that is to say , the ruins of the

ancient Temple of Mine rva, and the Grapbia recordsthat “ near the Pantheon is the Temple of Mine rvaChalcid ie .

” But a short way off stood a triumphalarch ascribed to Camillus

,whence this ne ighbourhood

was cal led Camigliano. A stre e t of great antiquitya t the same place was named at the two love rs

,

and the adjacent monaste ry of S . Sa lvator was henceca l led ad duos amantes .

2 The I seum stood at the

s ide,and in i ts ruins the beautiful groups of the Nile

and of the Tiber, now in the Vatican , st i l l rema ined ,having , l ike the Marforio

,happily escaped destruction .

1 See these genealog ical trees in Z azzera and Kircher . These childishj ests passed into history.

2 Gallett i, D el . P r im. p . 259 (D ipl . A. 1026) and p . 3 54, whereh e tries to find the d istr ict ad duos aman tes , as this neighbourhood isa lready called , in the Vi ta S . Sy lves tr i by the Colleg ia Romano. The

Grap/zia in Cami l iana, ubi nunc es t s . Cy r iacusfu it temp lum Vesta.

Cyriacus is the present S . Maria in Via Lata. The Arch of Camilluss tood beside S . Marta . C lement VI I I . first allowed Cardinal Salviat it o breakZup the arch in order to obtain lime for ,

building his palace (DoriaPamfili). Mart inelli, P r ima Trafaa, p . 122 ; Galletti , D el . P r im. , p .

3 74.

Par ione .

H ISTORY OF ROME

Anothe r triumpha l arch frequently mentioned inthe Middle Ages stood in the ne ighbourhood of S

.

Marco . I t was cal led,of the stone hand

, a rcus

manus ca rnea, and was S ituated at the entrance o f

the present V ia Mace l lo de ’ Corvi (Raven-market) ,a name which, corre ctly or othe rwise , has been he ld tobe a corruption ofmanus carnea . I t i s probable thata hand, the emblem of a cohort

,wa s the re displayed

,

and legend re late s that i t was the hand of the ex ecu

t ioner who, in the re ign of Diocletian , had been turnedto stone for having put the pious Lucina to death .

1

Although the Theat re of Pompey is stil l mentioneda s Templum or Theatrum , we know nothing as to itscondition . I t s ru ins , l ike those of othe r ancient buildings

,we re of such extent that even in the tenth cen

tury the surrounding quarter was ca l led Parione,

”

the name borne by the s ixth region in the presentday. I t was further defined by a large ancient urn ,a striking obj ect in the eyes of the people .

2 The

1 The legend in the Graplzia . The explanat ion of U rlich in Stadtbesebr . ,

iii . 3 , p . 89. In the Anon . M ag liab. , manus carnea is alreadyd is torted into ear r i li : et vu lgar i ler manum carne

,i . e . car r i li nan

babel ep i taplzium.

2 Ad eaneam Par r ian is fu i t templum Gnai P ompej i mi r e magn it cl

pu lcr i tudin is .—Gr aplzia . I explain this name through P ar ian i fromP ar iet is

, great ru ined walls, as Ar cion i from Ar cus , g reat ru ined arches ,and this is proved beyond a doubt by a diploma of the year 850 , inGalle tt i, D . P r im. p . 187 lerr a semen lar icia—in qua sunt pam

'

etina

destructa que vaca tur P ar r ian i , that is near S . Sebastian . The regionParione owes its name to the ru ins , be they those of the Theatre of

Pompey or of some other great monument . For that an actual monument bore the name Parione through the entire M iddle Ages is evidentfrom the descript ion of the coronation of Boniface VI I I . ( in Cancell ie t i, D e Possessu , p . where we read


Circus Flaminius only rece ives a cursory notice ; i tappears aga in

,however

,as the Golden Fortre ss .

The Theatre of Marce l lus reta ins its ancient name indocuments

,a lthough it is probable that it was a lready

ca l led A ntonin i by the populace ; and along the riverwe encountered the a lready famil iar s ites

, the R ipa

Gra ca, opposite S . Maria in Cosmed in

,and the ancient

M a rmora ta .

1

A memorable document of the year 10 18 , i ssued Bridgesby the Bishopric of Portus , the jurisdiction of which $ 182?extended over the island in the Tiber and the Trasteve re ,

has preserved the name s of some of theRoman bridge s at this period . I t describes the

diocese of Portus according to its boundar ies,and

begins its narration “ from the broken bridge,where

the water flows,through the wal l o f the Traste

verine city, through the Sept im ian Gate , throughthe gate of S . Pancratius

,

” then goes in the Campagnaacross the rive r Arrone past the l ighthouse to the s ea ,

then back “ through the middle of the great river to

Rome , as far as the broken bridge near the Marmorata ,

to the Bridge of S . Maria,to the Bridge of the Jews

into the middle of the river, and stra ight on in the

Tu r r i r elicta

D e Campo, j udaa canens , qua ca cu la carde est ,

Occur r i t vesana D uei , P ar ione sub ipso.

The Campus is the Campo d i Flore . In the e leven th century, and

apparently even earlier, the Tu r r is of Cencius stood in Parione,and

was also called P ar ian is it is thus spoken of in the fifteenth century byLeon Batt ista Alberti, D escr ipt io Urbis Roma in De Rossi, P ianteicnog r . , p . 137 .

0

1 D iploma of Otto I I I . for S. Bonif. ,Nerini, p . 347, and MarInI ,

n . 42 and 49 .

H ISTORY OF ROME

middle to the broken bridge already mentioned,which

is the nearest to the Cathol ic churche s in Trastevere ,S . Maria, S . Chry sogonus , and S . Cecil ia

,and to the

monaste ries of S . Pancratius and S . Cosma and

Dam ianus .

”I t i s thus evident—as the description

starts wi th the present Ponte Sisto— that this bridgewas a lready broken the boundary fol lows the Trasteverine wal l

,and continue s through the Sept imian

Gate . I t appears a l so that there was a second ru inedbridge at the Marmorata

,and this bridge

,which was

cal led P robi or Tbeados i i in R ipa rmea ( r ipa ma rmorea )i n the Middle Age s

,may sti ll be seen be low the Aven

tine . I t a lso follows that the present Ponte Rotto ,now a cha in bridge

,was at that time ca l led S . Maria

,

from a Church which stood bes ide i t and lastly,that

the bridge,now known as Qua ttro Cap i ( formerly

Fabr ici i ) , was then cal led the Bridge of the J ews ,because the Jews even then dwe l t in its immediatene ighbourhood .1

Three remarkable build ings rose side by S ide closeto the Pa latine Bridge—the so-cal led Temple of Fortuna Viril is

,the circular temple cal led that of Ve sta ,

and the mutilated bridge-towe r known as the Houseof Pilate , of Cre scent ius , or even as that of Cola diR ienzi . The first of the se temples

,a Pseudoperipteros

1 See the d iplomas ment ioned in Marini . N . 49 is the ratificat ionof Leo IX . of 1049 , and is clearer than n . 42 . The Gr apb ia notes ( 1 )the P . S isto with An lon in i in arena ta—the Anon . M ag liab. thus alius

r up lus l r emu lus (corrupted from in arena la ), ean icu lar ius (corruptedfrom j an ieu lens i s et au relius) . (2) Pans Tlteadas i i in R iparmea , pans

Valen t in ian i , which I hold to be identical . ( 3 ) Pans Senatorum S .

M ar ie ; Anon . M ag l. bet ter Senalar um at S . M ar ia . (4) Fabr ici i

in pantej udeorum Anon . M ag l. better P . Fabr icius et j ua’ear um.

562 THE H ISTORY o r ROME .

build ings and streets ; the district beside the Forumwas inhabited

,the Suburra sti l l survived . The most

splendid quarter, howeve r, was the Via Lata . Traste e

vere must also have been thickly populated . Final lyLeo IV . had founded a new civic colony in the Vatican suburb by build ing the Leonina

,the so-cal led

Port ico of St Pe ter’s .”

NE ILL AND COMPANY, PRINTERS, ED INBURGH .

History of the City of Rome - Forgotten Books

Documents

Transcript of History of the City of Rome - Forgotten Books