Pope Innocent II (1130-43)

The World vs the City

John Doran, Damian J. Smith, John Doran, Damian J. Smith

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781317078302
• Edition: 1
• Topic: History
• Subtopic: European Medieval History
• Index: History

The pontificate of Innocent II (1130-1143) has long been recognized as a watershed in the history of the papacy, marking the transition from the age of reform to the so-called papal monarchy, when an earlier generation of idealistic reformers gave way to hard-headed pragmatists intent on securing worldly power for the Church. Whilst such a conception may be a cliché its effect has been to concentrate scholarship more on the schism of 1130 and its effects than on Innocent II himself. This volume puts Innocent at the centre, bringing together the authorities in the field to give an overarching view of his pontificate, which was very important in terms of the internationalization of the papacy, the internal development of the Roman Curia, the integrity of the papal state and the governance of the local church, as well as vital to the development of the Kingdom of Sicily and the Empire.

1 Two popes The city vs the world

†John Doran

DOI: 10.4324/9781315601342-1

The dual election of 1130

Innocent II’s pontificate began in a crisis and on one level was conditioned by that crisis until after the death of Anacletus II in January 1138. At its heart were the contentious and acrimonious circumstances of parallel papal elections, in which Innocent, the former Gregory, cardinal deacon of S. Angelo, was elected three hours before Anacletus II, the former Peter Pierleone, cardinal priest of S. Calisto (S. Maria in Trastevere), on the morning of 14 February 1130. How, precisely, this came about remains controversial, but, allowing for the pro-Anacletan bias of the majority of the sources,¹ the broad outlines can be reconstructed. When the health of Honorius II (1124–30) began visibly to decline, the cardinals present in Rome became alarmed at the prospect of a repetition of the confusion in which Honorius himself had been chosen in 1124. On that occasion, the cardinals elected Teobaldo, cardinal priest of S. Anastasia and had invested him with the red mantle,² when armed men, led by Robert Frangipani, stormed into the chapel of S. Pancrazio in the Lateran, seized Teobaldo, and proclaimed Lambert, cardinal bishop of Ostia (1116–24), in his place. Abandoned by his electors, the unfortunate Teobaldo renounced the papacy, making way for Lambert’s unanimous election as Honorius II, which was followed by his consecration on 21 February.

1 P. F. Palumbo, Lo Scisma del MCXXX: I precedenti, la vicenda Romana e le ripercussioni Europee della lotta tra Anacleto e Innocenzo II, col regesto degli atti di Anacleto II, Miscellanea della R. Deputazione Romana di Storia Patria (Rome, 1942), 173–229; F.-J. Schmale, Studien zum Schisma des Jahres 1130, Forschungen zur kirchlichen Rechtsgeschichte und zum Kirchenrecht, 4 (Cologne, 1961), 145–61. Many of the sources are conveniently gathered in: Pont. Rom. vitae, ii, 174–275. 2 He had taken the name of Celestine (II) and the Te Deum was being chanted: Liber Pontificalis, ii, 327; ‘Celestino II, antipapa’, Enciclopedia dei Papi, ii, 259–60 (S. Cerrini), who describes him as ‘un papa mancato (a failed pope)’; G. Schwaiger, ‘Celestine (II)’, The Papacy, an Encyclopedia, ed. P. Levillain, 3 vols, English translation (New York and London, 2002), i, 275, considers his election valid.

Just over five years later (1130), with these memories fresh in their minds, the cardinals, probably advised by Aimeric, cardinal deacon of S. Maria Nuova, who had been Chancellor and a major voice in papal affairs since 1123,³ transferred the dying Honorius from the Lateran to the greater security of the monastery of S. Andrea (al. S. Gregorio) in Clivo Scauri, on the slopes of the Coelian Hill,⁴ protected by the fortified towers of the Frangipani. This move alarmed the Romans and wild rumours of his death began to circulate. An eyewitness, a butler in the service of Bishop Guido of Arezzo’s representative in Rome,⁵ described people running through the streets shouting, ‘The pope is dead’, followed later by others shouting, ‘The pope is alive’,⁶ and, later still (March–April), Bishop Hubert of Lucca reported to Archbishop Norbert of Magdeburg that the cardinals had had to prop up the ailing Honorius in a window to reassure the populace after Peter Pierleone circulated rumours that the pope was already dead.⁷

3 Brixius, 32, 71 n. 2; Zenker, 142–4, 237–8. Anacletus II singled him out for particular obloquy in Veteris amicitiae (JL 8379), sent to an unidentified family friend on 1 May 1130: PL, clxxix, 699–700 no. 9, at 700. 4 Monastery founded by Gregory I in honour of St Andrew, also known as SS. Andrea e Gregorio or S. Gregorio. 5 For Guido, see Duggan, ‘Jura sua unicuique tribuat’, nn. 30–41. 6 Palumbo, Lo Scisma, 179. 7 Codex Udalrici, 425–7 no. 246. at 426; Pont. Rom. vitae, ii, 179–82, at 180. This letter is valuable evidence that the disabitato was then within easy reach of the abitato. Cf. M. Armellini, Le Chiese di Roma dal Secolo IV al XIX, nuova edizione… a cura di C. Cecchelli (Rome, 1942), 627–9, esp. 628, for the drawing by the ‘Anonimo Fabriczy’, which shows the rural character of the fortified monastery in the sixteenth century.

The pro-Anacletus account, later sent by ‘the whole clergy and people of the Urbs Romana’ to Archbishop Diego Gelmírez of Compostela,⁸ spoke of ‘the disturbed state of the city, torn apart by hatred and enmity and the bitter agitation of the clergy’. In this febrile atmosphere of rumour and suspicion, the assembled cardinals and bishops – having decided, pro necessitate et tempore, to set aside the sententia canonum which stated that no action should be taken about the election of a new pope before the death and burial of the current one – appointed a committee of eight of their number to whom they entrusted the election. But when some of the cardinals (including Peter Pierleone and a supporter, Jonathan, cardinal deacon of SS. Cosma e Damiano⁹) were sent to take charge of the fortifications of S. Adriano, where the election was to be held, they were, according to the ‘clergy and people’, prevented by ‘some bishops who inclined to the other side’, and, suspecting bad faith, ‘the pars maior et sanior did not dare to return to the said monastery’.¹⁰ Thus, only six members of the committee were present when Honorius II died on the night of 13–14 February. Having hastily buried the pope in a temporary grave, five of the six, joined by the other cardinals in S. Gregorio, elected Gregory, cardinal deacon of S. Angelo and archdeacon of the Roman Church, as Innocent II, against the protest (as the Anacletans alleged) of Peter of Pisa, cardinal priest of S. Susanna, the sixth member of the electoral committee.¹¹ The Pierleoni party, led by the aged Peter, cardinal bishop of Porto,¹² and supported by a multitude of Roman clergy and citizens, then gathered in the church of S. Marco, where Peter Pier-leone was chosen, three hours after Innocent II, and consecrated in St Peter’s nine days later (23 February), as Anacletus II.¹³

8 De obitu,?16 April 1130, the whole clergy and people of the Urbs Romana to Abp Diego Gelmírez of Compostela: Historia Compostellana, ed. E. Falque Rey, CCCM, 70 (Turnhout, 1988), i, 455–8 (Pont. Rom. vitae, ii, 187–90). 9 Brixius, 36 no. 25. He was rewarded with Anacletus’s former title of S. Callisto. 10 De obitu, 456–7 (Pont. Rom. vitae, ii, 187–8). A. Molien, ‘Conclave’, Dictionnaire de Droit Canonique, 7 vols (Paris, 1924–65), iii, 319–48; P. Jugie, ‘Conclave’, The Papacy, i, 392–4; P. Herde, ‘Die Entwick-lung der Papstwahl im 13. Jahrhundert’, Österreichisches Archiv für Kirchenrecht, 32 (1981), 11–41. 11 CP of S. Susanna: Brixius, 38–9 no. 37; Zenker, 103–4. 12 Brixius, 37–8 no. 22; Zenker, 25–6. 13 For the propagandist material, see Palumbo and Schmale, above, n. 1.

Whether or not the precise circumstances were as reported by the Anacletans, Cardinals Peter Pierleone and Jonathan withdrew from a process which would almost certainly have resulted in Gregory’s election, since the electoral committee was split five to three in Gregory’s favour.¹⁴

14 Robinson, Papacy, 74. The members are listed in Bp Hubert of Lucca’s reply to Abp Norbert of Magdeburg: Pont. Rom. vitae, ii, 179–82, at 180. For Gregory/Innocent: CBs: William of Palestrina (Praeneste) and Conrad of Sabina; CP: Peter Rufus of SS. Martino e Silvestro; CDs: Gregory of S. Angelo (Innocent II) and Aimeric of S. Maria Nuova. For Peter/Anacletus: CPs: Peter Pierleone of S. Callisto (Anacletus) and Peter Pisanus of S. Susanna; CD: Jonathan of SS. Cosma e Damiano.

Historians have attempted to explain the crisis in terms of deep fissures among the cardinals, between Romans and non-Romans, or between northerners and southerners, or the older generation and the younger – particularly between those appointed by Paschal II and the Honorius II intake. Professor Robinson, in line with recent scholarship, expertly dismisses or modifies nearly all of these explanations, except the division based broadly on generation, and on the intervention of the two leading families, the Pierleoni¹⁵ and the Frangipani,¹⁶ which fed on and exacerbated the volatility of the broader Roman population.¹⁷ Each family dominated segments of the city (Pierleoni: the Isola Tiburina and the ancient theatre of Marcellus, which is still commemorated in the Lungotevere Pierleoni; Frangipani: the region around the Colosseum, including the Palatine and Coelian hills) and competed for power and status as much in the City as in the papal administration. In 1124, the Frangipani had played a major role in the election of Honorius II, but in 1130, the Pierleoni had one of their own sons in the college of cardinals, while the Frangipani favoured the election of someone in the mould of Honorius. There is no doubt that the Pierleoni deployed financial and strategic power in sustaining Anacletus, just as the Frangipani used theirs to support Innocent. Since neither pope conceded, and their electors remained loyal, there ensued an eight year struggle for the allegiance of the wider Church.

15 M. Thumser, Rom und der römische Adel in der späten Stauferzeit (Tübingen, 1995), 181–4; M. Stroll, The Jewish Pope. Ideology and Politics in the Papal Schism of 1130 (Leiden, 1987), 10–20. 16 M. Thumser, ‘Die Frangipane. Abriß der Geschichte einer Adelsfamilie im hochmittelalterlichen Rom’, QF, 71 (1991), 106–63. 17 Robinson, Papacy, 68–73.

The struggle for recognition

i The Anacletan defence

It was the Anacletan party which issued the first declaration in a formal election decree published on or soon after 14 February 1130, the day of the election. One version survives in the the Codex Udalrici, the collection of materials assembled from diverse sources by Ulrich of Bamberg between 1125 and 1137,¹⁸ (a much fuller version was published by Anton Chroust in 1907, based on a different manuscript).¹⁹ After a solemn invocation, the document proclaims,

18 Published as the first item in Monumenta Bambergensia, ed. P. Jaffé, Bibliotheca rerum Germanicarum, 6 vols (Berlin, 1864–73), v, 1–469; for the decree, see ibid., 418–9 no. 240, where Jaffé provides the misleading title, ‘Commentary on the election of the antipope Anacletus II’. 19 A. Chroust, ‘Das Wahldekret Anaklets II’, Mitteilungen des Institut für Oesterreichisches Geschichtsforschung, 28 (1907), 348–54, at 348–9. Cf. the protocol annnouncing Gregory VII’s election: Das Register Gregors VII, ed. E. Caspar, MGH Epistolae Selectae, 2, 2 vols (Berlin, 1920–23), i, 1–2 (Rome, 22 April 1073).

On 14 Februa...

Table of contents

• Cover Page
• Half Title Page
• Series Page
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Dedication
• Table of Contents
• Preface
• Contributors
• Abbreviations
• List of figures
• Innocent II: A very short introduction—DAMIAN J. SMITH
• 1 Two popes: The city vs the world—† JOHN DORAN
• 2 Innocent II and the Empire—I. S. ROBINSON
• 3 Sicut ex scriptis vestris accepimus: Innocent II and the insulae Britanniae et Hiberniae—ANNE J. DUGGAN
• 4 Innocent II and Capetian France—PASCAL MONTAUBIN
• 5 From Aquitaine to Provence: The struggle for influence during the schism of 1130—URSULA VONES-LIEBENSTEIN
• 6 Innocent II and the kingdom of Sicily—G. A. LOUD
• 7 The men who would be kings: Innocent II and Spain—DAMIAN J. SMITH
• 8 Struggling for ecclesiastical independence in the North—TORBEN KJERSGAARD NIELSEN
• 9 The transmission of the councils from 1130 to 1139—MARTIN BRETT AND ROBERT SOMERVILLE
• 10 Jura sua unicuique tribuat: Innocent II and the advance of the learned laws—ANNE J. DUGGAN
• 11 The livery of loyalty: Innocent II and the pallium—STEVEN A. SCHOENIG, S.J.
• 12 Innocent II and the liturgy—JOHN F. ROMANO
• 13 Patronage of art and architecture—DALE KINNEY
• Index