Chapter IV: , VII (209)

"It was on the 25th of January, 1077, that the scene took
place, which, as is natural, has seized so strongly upon the
popular imagination, and has so often supplied a theme for the
brush of the painter, the periods of the historian, the verse
of the poet. … The king was bent upon escaping at any
sacrifice from the bond of excommunication and from his
engagement to appear before the Pontiff, at the Diet summoned
at Augsburg for the Feast of the Purification. The character
in which he presented himself before Gregory was that of a
penitent, throwing himself in deep contrition upon the
Apostolic clemency, and desirous of reconciliation with the
Church. The Pope, after so long experience of his duplicity,
disbelieved in his sincerity, while, as a mere matter of
policy, it was in the highest degree expedient to keep him to
his pact with the German princes and prelates. … On three
successive days did he appear barefooted in the snowy
court-yard of the castle, clad in the white garb of a
penitent, suing for relief from ecclesiastical censure. It was
difficult for Gregory to resist the appeal thus made to his
fatherly compassion, the more especially as Hugh, Abbot of
Cluny, and the Countess Matilda besought him 'not to break the
bruised reed.' Against his better judgment, and in despite of
the warnings of secular prudence, the Pope consented on the
fourth day to admit to his presence the royal suppliant. … The
conditions of absolution imposed upon the king were mainly
four: that he should present himself upon a day and at a
place, to be named by the Pontiff, to receive the judgment of
the Apostolic See, upon the charges preferred by the princes
and prelates of Germany, and that he should abide the
Pontifical sentence—his subjects meanwhile remaining released
from their oath of fealty; that he should respect the rights
of the Church and carry out the papal decrees; and that breach
of this engagement should entitle the Teutonic magnates to
proceed to the election of another king. Such were the terms
to which Henry solemnly pledged himself, and on the faith of
that pledge the Pontiff, assuming the vestments of religion,
proceeded to absolve him with the appointed rites. … So ends
the first act in this great tragedy. Gregory's misgivings as
to the king's sincerity soon receive too ample justification.
'Fear not,' the Pontiff is reported to have said, with half
contemptuous sadness to the Saxon envoys who complained of his
lenity to the monarch: 'Fear not, I send him back to you more
guilty than he came.' Henry's words to the Pope had been
softer than butter; but he had departed with war in his heart.
… Soon he lays a plot for seizing Gregory at Mantua, whither
the Pontiff is invited for the purpose of presiding over a
Council. But the vigilance of the Great Countess foils the
proposed treachery.
{2431}
Shortly the ill-advised monarch again assumes an attitude of
open hostility to the Pope. … The Teutonic princes, glad to
throw off an authority which they loathe and despise—not
heeding the advice to pause given by the Roman legates—proceed
at the Diet of Forchein to the election of another king. Their
choice falls upon Rudolph of Swabia, who is crowned at Metz on
the 20th of March, 1077. The situation is now complicated by
the strife between the two rival sovereigns. … At last, in
Lent, 1080, Gregory, no longer able to tolerate the continual
violation by Henry of the pledges given at Canossa, and
greatly moved by tidings of his new and manifold sacrileges
and cruelties, pronounces again the sentence of
excommunication against him, releasing his subjects from their
obedience, and recognizing Rudolph as king. Henry thereupon
calls together some thirty simoniacal and incontinent prelates
at Brixen, and causes them to go through the form of electing
an anti-pope in the person of Guibert, Archbishop of Ravenna,
an ecclesiastic some time previously excommunicated by Gregory
for grave offences. Then the tide turns in Henry's favour. At
the battle of the Elster (15th October, 1080), Rudolph is
defeated and mortally wounded, and on the same day the army of
the Great Countess is overthrown and dispersed at La Volta in
the Mantuan territory. Next year, in the early spring, Henry
crosses the Alps and advances towards Rome. … A little before
Pentecost Henry appears under the walls of the Papal city,
expecting that his party within it will throw open the gates
to him; but his expectation is disappointed. … In 1082, the
monarch again advances upon Rome and ineffectually assaults
it. In the next year he makes a third and more successful
attempt, and captures the Leonine city. … On the 21st of
March, 1084, the Lateran Gate is opened to Henry by the
treacherous Romans, and the excommunicated monarch, with the
anti-pope by his side, rides in triumph through the streets.
The next day, Guibert solemnly takes possession of St. John
Lateran, and bestows the Imperial Crown upon Henry in the
Vatican Basilica. Meanwhile Gregory is shut up in the Castle
of St. Angelo. Thence, after six weeks, he is delivered by
Guiscard, Duke of Calabria, the faithful vassal of the Holy
See. But the burning of the city by Guiscard's troops, upon
the uprising of the Romans, turns the joy of his rescue into
mourning. Eight days afterwards he quits 'the smoking ruins of
his once beautiful Rome,' and after pausing for a few days, at
Monte Casino, reaches Salerno, where his life pilgrimage is to
end."

_W. S. Lilly,
The Turning-Point of the Middle Ages
(Contemporary Review, August, 1882)._

Gregory died at Salerno on the 25th of May, 1085, leaving
Henry apparently triumphant; but he had inspired the Papacy
with his will and mind, and the battle went on. At the end of
another generation—in A. D. 1122—the question of investitures
was settled by a compromise called the Concordat of Worms.
"Both of the contending parties gave up something, but one
much more than the other; the Church shadows, the State
substance. The more important elections should be henceforth
made in the presence of the Emperor, he engaging not to
interfere with them, but to leave to the Chapter or other
electing body the free exercise of their choice. This was in
fact to give over in most instances the election to the Pope;
who gradually managed to exclude the Emperor from all share in
Episcopal appointments. The temporalities of the See or Abbey
were still to be made over to the Bishop or Abbot elect, not,
however, any longer by the delivering to him of the ring and
crozier, but by a touch of the sceptre, he having done homage
for them, and taken the oath of obedience. All this was in
Germany to find place before consecration, being the same
arrangement that seven years earlier had brought the conflict
between Anselm and our Henry I. to an end."

_R. C. Trench,
Lectures on Medieval Church History,
lecture 9._

ALSO IN:
_A. F. Villemain,
Life of Gregory VII.,
book 2._

_W. R. W. Stephens.
Hildebrand and His Times._

_H. H. Milman,
History of Latin Christianity,
books 6-8._

_E. F. Henderson,
Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages,
book 4._

See, also,
GERMANY: A. D. 973-1122;
CANOSSA;
ROME: A. D. 1081-1084.

PAPACY: A. D. 1059.
Institution of the procedure of Papal Election.

"According to the primitive custom of the church, an episcopal
vacancy was filled up by election of the clergy and people
belonging to the city or diocese. … It is probable that, in
almost every case, the clergy took a leading part in the
selection of their bishops; but the consent of the laity was
absolutely necessary to render it valid. They were, however,
by degrees excluded from any real participation, first in the
Greek, and finally in the western church. … It does not appear
that the early Christian emperors interfered with the freedom
of choice any further than to make their own confirmation
necessary in the great patriarchal sees, such as Rome and
Constantinople, which were frequently the objects of violent
competition, and to decide in controverted elections. … The
bishops of Rome, like those of inferior sees, were regularly
elected by the citizens, laymen as well as ecclesiastics. But
their consecration was deferred until the popular choice had
received the sovereign's sanction. The Romans regularly
despatched letters to Constantinople or to the exarchs of
Ravenna, praying that their election of a pope might be
confirmed. Exceptions, if any, are infrequent while Rome was
subject to the eastern empire. This, among other imperial
prerogatives, Charlemagne might consider as his own. … Otho
the Great, in receiving the imperial crown, took upon him the
prerogatives of Charlemagne. There is even extant a decree of
Leo VIII., which grants to him and his successors the right of
naming future popes. But the authenticity of this instrument
is denied by the Italians. It does not appear that the Saxon
emperors went to such a length as nomination, except in one
instance (that of Gregory V. in 990); but they sometimes, not
uniformly, confirmed the election of a pope, according to
ancient custom. An explicit right of nomination was, however,
conceded to the emperor Henry III. in 1047, as the only means
of rescuing the Roman church from the disgrace and depravity
into which it had fallen. Henry appointed two or three very
good popes. … This high prerogative was perhaps not designed
to extend beyond Henry himself. But even if it had been
transmissible to his successors, the infancy of his son Henry
IV., and the factions of that minority, precluded the
possibility of its exercise. Nicolas II., in 1059, published a
decree which restored the right of election to the Romans, but
with a remarkable variation from the original form.
{2432}
The cardinal bishops (seven in number, holding sees in the
neighbourhood of Rome, and consequently suffragans of the pope
as patriarch or metropolitan) were to choose the supreme
pontiff, with the concurrence first of the cardinal priests
and deacons (or ministers of the parish churches of Rome), and
afterwards of the laity. Thus elected, the new pope was to be
presented for confirmation to Henry, 'now king, and hereafter
to become emperor,' and to such of his successors as should
personally obtain that privilege. This decree is the
foundation of that celebrated mode of election in a conclave
of cardinals which has ever since determined the headship of
the church. … The real author of this decree, and of all other
vigorous measures adopted by the popes of that age, whether
for the assertion of their independence or the restoration of
discipline, was Hildebrand"—afterwards Pope Gregory VII.

_H. Hallam,
The Middle Ages,
chapter 7, part 1 (volume 2)._

ALSO IN:
_E. F. Henderson,
Select Historical Documents of the Middle Ages,
book 4, number 1._

PAPACY: A. D. 1077-1102.
Donation of the Countess Matilda.

"The Countess Matilda, born in 1040, was daughter of Boniface,
Marquis of Tuscany, and Beatrice, sister of the Emperor Henry
III. On the death of her only brother, without issue, she
succeeded to all his dominions, of Tuscany, Parma, Lucca,
Mantua and Reggio. Rather late in life, she married Guelpho,
son of the Duke of Bavaria—no issue resulting from their
union. This princess displayed great energy and administrative
ability in the troubled times in which she lived, occasionally
appearing at the head of her own troops. Ever a devoted
daughter of the Church, she specially venerated Pope Gregory
VII., to whom she afforded much material support, in the
difficulties by which he was constantly beset. To this
Pontiff, she made a donation of a considerable portion of her
dominions, for the benefit of the Holy See, A. D. 1077,
confirming the same in a deed to Pope Pascal II., in 1102,
entituled 'Cartula donationis Comitissæ Mathildis facta S.
Gregorio PP. VII., et innovata Paschali PP. II.'; apud Theiner
'Codex Diplomaticus,' etc., tom. 1, p. 10. As the original
deed to Gregory VII. is not extant, and the deed of
confirmation or renewal does not recite the territories
conveyed, there is some uncertainty about their exact limits.
However, it is generally thought that they comprised the
district formerly known as the Patrimony of Saint Peter, lying
on the right bank of the Tiber, and extending from
Aquapendente to Ostia. The Countess Matilda died in 1115, aged
75."

_J. N. Murphy,
The Chair of Peter,
page 235, foot-note._

See PAPACY: A. D. 1122-1250.

PAPACY: A. D. 1086-1154.
The succession of Popes.

Victor III., A. D. 1086-1087;
Urban II., 1088-1099;
Pascal 11., 1099-1118;
Gelasius 11., 1118-1119;
Callistus II., 1119-1124;
Honorius II., 1124-1130;
Innocent II., 1130-1143;
Celestine II., 1143-1144;
Lucius II., 1144-1145;
Eugene III., 1145-1153;
Anastasius IV., 1153-1154.

PAPACY: A. D. 1094.
Pope Urban II. and the first Crusade.
The Council of Clermont.

See CRUSADES: A. D. 1094.

PAPACY: A. D. 1122-1250.
Continued conflict with the Empire.
The Popes and the Hohenstaufen Emperors.

"The struggle about investiture ended, as was to be expected,
in a compromise; but it was a compromise in which all the
glory went to the Papacy. Men saw that the Papal claims had
been excessive, even impossible; but the object at which they
aimed, the freedom of the Church from the secularising
tendencies of feudalism, was in the main obtained. … But the
contest with the Empire still went on. One of the firmest
supporters of Gregory VII. had been Matilda, Countess of
Tuscany, over whose fervent piety Gregory had thrown the spell
of his powerful mind. At her death, she bequeathed her
possessions, which embraced nearly a quarter of Italy, to the
Holy See [see PAPACY: A. D. 1077-1102]. Some of the lands
which she had held were allodial, some were fiefs of the
Empire; and the inheritance of Matilda was a fruitful source
of contention to two powers already jealous of one another.
The constant struggle that lasted for two centuries gave full
scope for the development of the Italian towns. … The old
Italian notion of establishing municipal freedom by an
equilibrium of two contending powers was stamped still more
deeply on Italian politics by the wars of Guelfs and
Ghibellins. The union between the Papacy and the Lombard
Republics was strong enough to humble the mightiest of the
Emperors. Frederic Barbarossa, who held the strongest views of
the Imperial prerogative, had to confess himself vanquished by
Pope Alexander III. [see ITALY: A. D. 1154-1162, to
1174-1183], and the meeting of Pope and Emperor at Venice was
a memorable ending to the long struggle; that the great
Emperor should kiss the feet of the Pope whom he had so long
refused to acknowledge, was an act which stamped itself with
dramatic effect on the imagination of men, and gave rise to
fables of a still more lowly submission [see VENICE: A. D.
1177]. The length of the strife, the renown of Frederic, the
unswerving tenacity of purpose with which Alexander had
maintained his cause, all lent lustre to this triumph of the
Papacy. The consistent policy of Alexander III., even in
adverse circumstances, the calm dignity with, which he
asserted the Papal claims, and the wisdom with which he used
his opportunities, made him a worthy successor of Gregory VII.
at a great crisis in the fortunes of the Papacy. It was
reserved, however, for Innocent III. to realise most fully the
ideas of Hildebrand. If Hildebrand was the Julius, Innocent
was the Augustus, of the Papal Empire. He had not the creative
genius nor the fiery energy of his great forerunner; but his
clear intellect never missed an opportunity, and his
calculating spirit rarely erred from its mark. … On all sides
Innocent III. enjoyed successes beyond his hopes. In the East,
the crusading zeal of Europe was turned by Venice to the
conquest of Constantinople [see CRUSADES: A. D. 1201-1203],
and Innocent could rejoice for a brief space in the subjection
of the Eastern Church. In the West, Innocent turned the
crusading impulse to the interest of the Papal power, by
diverting it against heretical sects which, in Northern Italy
and the South of France, attacked the system of the Church
[see ALBIGENSES]. … Moreover Innocent saw the beginning,
though he did not perceive the full importance, of a movement
which the reaction against heresy produced within the Church.
The Crusades had quickened men's activity, and the heretical
sects had aimed at kindling greater fervour of spiritual life. …
{2433}
By the side of the monastic aim of averting, by the prayers
and penitence of a few, God's anger from a wicked world, there
grew up a desire for self-devotion to missionary labour.
Innocent III. was wise enough not to repulse this new
enthusiasm, but find a place for it within the ecclesiastical
system. Francis of Assisi gathered round him a body of
followers who bound themselves to a literal following of the
Apostles, to a life of poverty and labour, amongst the poor
and outcast; Dominic of Castile formed a society which aimed
at the suppression of heresy by assiduous teaching of the
truth. The Franciscan and Dominican orders grew almost at once
into power and importance, and their foundation marks a great
reformation within the Church [see MENDICANT ORDERS]. The
reformation movement of the eleventh century, under the
skilful guidance of Hildebrand, laid the foundations of the
Papal monarchy in the belief of Europe. The reformation of the
thirteenth century found full scope for its energy under the
protection of the Papal power; for the Papacy was still in
sympathy with the conscience of Europe, which it could quicken
and direct. These mendicant orders were directly connected
with the Papacy, and were free from all episcopal control.
Their zeal awakened popular enthusiasm; they rapidly increased
in number and spread into every land. The Friars became the
popular preachers and confessors, and threatened to supersede
the old ecclesiastical order. Not only amongst the common
people, but in the universities as well, did their influence
become supreme. They were a vast army devoted to the service
of the Pope, and overran Europe in his name. They preached
Papal indulgences, they stirred up men to crusades in behalf
of the Papacy, they gathered money for the Papal use. … The
Emperor Frederic II., who had been brought up under Innocent's
guardianship, proved the greatest enemy of the newly-won
sovereignty of the Pope. King of Sicily and Naples, Frederic
was resolved to assert again the Imperial pretensions of North
Italy, and then win back the Papal acquisitions in the centre;
if his plan had succeeded, the Pope would have lost his
independence and sunk to be the instrument of the house of
Hohenstaufen. Two Popes of inflexible determination and
consummate political ability were the opponents of Frederic.
Gregory IX. and Innocent IV. flung themselves with ardour into
the struggle, and strained every nerve till the whole Papal
policy was absorbed by the necessities of the strife. …

See ITALY: A. D. 1183-1250;
and GERMANY: A. D. 1138-1268.

Frederic II. died [1250], but the Popes pursued with their
hostility his remotest descendants, and were resolved to sweep
the very remembrance of him out of Italy. To accomplish their
purpose, they did not hesitate to summon the aid of the
stranger. Charles of Anjou appeared as their champion, and in
the Pope's name took possession of the Sicilian kingdom.

See ITALY: A. D. 1250-1268].

By his help the last remnants of the Hohenstaufen house were
crushed, and the claims of the Empire to rule over Italy were
destroyed for ever. But the Papacy got rid of an open enemy
only to introduce a covert and more deadly foe. The Angevin
influence became superior to that of the Papacy, and French
popes were elected that they might carry out the wishes of the
Sicilian king. By its resolute efforts to escape from the
power of the Empire, the Papacy only paved the way for a
connexion that ended in its enslavement to the influence of
France."

_M. Creighton,
History of the Papacy during the Period of the Reformation,
volume 1, pages 18-23._

ALSO IN:
_T. L. Kington,
History of Frederick II. Emperor of the Romans._

PAPACY: A. D. 1154-1198.
The succession of Popes.

Hadrian IV., A. D. 1154-1159;
Alexander III., 1159-1181;
Lucius III., 1181-1185;
Urban III., 1185-1187;
Gregory VIII., 1187;
Clement III., 1187-1191;
Celestine III., 1191-1198.

PAPACY: A. D. 1162-1170.
Conflict of Church and State in England.
Becket and Henry II.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1162-1170.

PAPACY: A. D. 1198-1216.
The establishing of Papal Sovereignty
in the States of the Church.

"Innocent III. may be called the founder of the States of the
Church. The lands with which Pippin and Charles had invested
the Popes were held subject to the suzerainty of the Frankish
sovereign and owned his jurisdiction. On the downfall of the
Carolingian Empire the neighbouring nobles, calling themselves
Papal vassals, seized on these lands; and when they were
ousted in the Pope's name by the Normans, the Pope did not
gain by the change of neighbours. Innocent III. was the first
Pope who claimed and exercised the rights of an Italian
prince. He exacted from the Imperial Prefect in Rome the oath
of allegiance to himself; he drove the Imperial vassals from
the Matildan domain [see TUSCANY: A. D. 685-1115], and
compelled Constance, the widowed queen of Sicily, to recognise
the Papal suzerainty over her ancestral kingdom. He obtained
from the Emperor Otto IV. (1201) the cession of all the lands
which the Papacy claimed, and so established for the first
time an undisputed title to the Papal States."

_M. Creighton,
History of the Papacy during the Period of the Reformation,
volume 1. page 21._

PAPACY: A. D. 1198-1294.
The succession of Pores.
Innocent III., A. D. 1198-1216;
Honorius II., 1216-1227;
Gregory IX., 1227-1241;
Celestine IV., 1241;
Innocent IV., 1243-1204;
Alexander IV., 1254-1261;
Urban IV., 1261-1264;
Clement IV., 1265-1268;
Gregory X., 1271-1276;
Innocent V., 1276;
Hadrian V., 1276;
John XXI., 1276-1277;
Nicholas III., 1277-1280;
Martin IV., 1281-1285;
Honorius IV., 1285-1287;
Nicholas IV., 1288-1292;
Celestine V., 1294.

PAPACY: A. D. 1198-1303.
The acme of Papal power.
The pontificates from Innocent III. to Boniface VIII.

"The epoch when the spirit of papal usurpation was most
strikingly displayed was the pontificate of Innocent III. In
each of the three leading objects which Rome had pursued,
independent sovereignty, supremacy over the Christian church,
control over the princes of the earth, it was the fortune of
this pontiff to conquer. He realized … that fond hope of so
many of his predecessors, a dominion over Rome and the central
parts of Italy. During his pontificate Constantinople was
taken by the Latins; and however he might seem to regret a
diversion of the crusaders, which impeded the recovery of the
Holy Land, he exulted in the obedience of the new patriarch
and the reunion of the Greek church. Never, perhaps, either
before or since, was the great eastern schism in so fair a way
of being healed; even the kings of Bulgaria and Armenia
acknowledged the supremacy of Innocent, and permitted his
interference with their ecclesiastical institutions.
{2434}
The maxims of Gregory VII. were now matured by more than a
hundred years, and the right of trampling upon the necks of
kings had been received, at least among churchmen, as an
inherent attribute of the papacy. 'As the sun and the moon are
placed in the firmament' (such is the language of Innocent),
'the greater as the light of the day, and the lesser of the
night, thus are there two powers in the church—the pontifical,
which, as having the charge of souls, is the greater; and the
royal, which is the less, and to which the bodies of men only
are intrusted.' Intoxicated with these conceptions (if we may
apply such a word to successful ambition), he thought no
quarrel of princes beyond the sphere of his jurisdiction.
'Though I cannot judge of the right to a fief,' said Innocent
to the kings of France and England, 'yet it is my province to
judge where sin is committed, and my duty to prevent all
public scandals.' … Though I am not aware that any pope before
Innocent III. had thus announced himself as the general
arbiter of differences and conservator of the peace throughout
Christendom, yet the scheme had been already formed, and the
public mind was in some degree prepared to admit it. … The
noonday of papal dominion extends from the pontificate of
Innocent III. inclusively to that of Boniface VIII.; or, in
other words, through the 13th century. Rome inspired during
this age all the terror of her ancient name. She was once more
the mistress of the world, and kings were her vassals."

_H. Hallam,
The Middle Ages,
chapter 7, parts 1-2 (volume 2)._

ALSO IN:
_J. Miley,
History of the Papal States,
volume 3, book 1, chapter 3._

_M. Gosselin,
The Power of the Pope in the Middle Ages,
part 2, chapter 3._

_M. Creighton,
History of the Papacy during the Reformation,
introduction, chapter 1 (volume 1)._

PAPACY: A. D. 1203.
The planting of the germs of the Papal Inquisition.

See INQUISITION: A. D. 1203-1525.

PAPACY: A. D. 1205-1213.
Subjugation of the English King John.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1205-1213.

PAPACY: A. D. 1215.
The beginning, in Italy, of the Wars
of the Guelfs and Ghibellines.

See ITALY: A. D. 1215.

PAPACY: A. D. 1266.
Transfer of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies
to Charles of Anjou.

See ITALY: A. D. 1250-1268.

PAPACY: A. D. 1268.
The Pragmatic Sanction of St. Louis,
affirming the rights of the Gallican Church.

See FRANCE: A. D. 1268.

PAPACY: A. D. 1275.
Ratification of the Donation of Charlemagne
and the Capitulation of Otho IV. by Rodolph of Hapsburg.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1273-1308.

PAPACY: A. D. 1279.
The English Statute of Mortmain.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1279.

PAPACY: A. D. 1294-1348.
The stormy pontificate of Boniface VIII.
His conflict with Philip IV. of France.
The "Babylonish Captivity."
Purchase of Avignon, which becomes the Papal Seat.

Boniface VIII., who came to the Papal throne in 1294, "was a
man of so much learning that Petrarch extols him as the wonder
of the world. His craft and cruelty, however, were shown in
his treatment of Celestine V. [his predecessor], whom he first
persuaded to resign the pontificate, five months after his
election, on account of his inexperience in politics; and
then, having succeeded to the chair, instead of letting the
good man return to the cloister for which he panted, he kept
him in confinement to the day of his death. His resentment of
the opposition of the two cardinals Colonna to his election
was so bitter, that not content with degrading them, he
decreed the whole family—one of the most illustrious in
Rome—to be for ever infamous, and incapable of ecclesiastical
dignities. He pulled down their town of Præneste, and ordered
the site to be sown with salt to extinguish it, like Carthage,
for ever. This pontificate is famous for the institution of
the Jubilee, though, according to some accounts, it was
established a century before by Innocent III. By a bull dated
22nd February 1300, Boniface granted a plenary remission of
sins to all who, before Christmas, in that and every
subsequent hundredth year, should visit the churches of St.
Peter and St. Paul daily, for 30 days if inhabitants of Rome,
and for half that time if strangers. His private enemies, the
Colonnas, Frederic of Sicily, who had neglected to pay his
tribute, and the abettors of the Saracens, were the only
persons excluded. The city was crowded with strangers, who
flocked to gain the indulgence; enormous sums were offered at
the holy tombs; and the solemnity became so profitable that
Clement VI. reduced the period for its observance from 100
years to 50, and later popes have brought it down to 25.
Boniface appeared at the jubilee with the spiritual and
temporal swords carried before him, the bearers of which
proclaimed the text,—'Behold, here are two swords.' … The pope
had the pleasure of receiving a … respectful recognition from
the barons of Scotland. Finding themselves hard pressed by the
arms of Edward I., they resolved to accept a distant, in
preference to a neighbouring, master; accordingly, they
tendered the kingdom to the pope, pretending that, from the
most ancient times, Scotland had been a fief of the holy Roman
See. Boniface, eagerly embracing the offer, commanded the
archbishop of Canterbury to require the king to withdraw his
troops, and submit his pretensions to the apostolic tribunal.
… Boniface got no other satisfaction than to be told that the
laws of England did not permit the king to subject the rights
of his crown to any foreign tribunal. His conflict with the
king of France was still more unfortunate. Philip the Fair,
like our own Edward I., thought fit to compel the clergy to
contribute towards the expenses of his repeated campaigns. The
pope thereupon issued a bull entitled 'Clericis laicos' (A. D.
1296), charging the laity with inveterate hostility to the
clergy, and prohibiting, under pain of excommunication, any
payment out of ecclesiastical revenues without his consent.
The king retorted by prohibiting the export of coin or
treasure from his dominions, without license from the crown.
This was cutting off the pope's revenue at a blow, and so
modified his anger that he allowed the clergy to grant a 'free
benevolence' to the king, when in urgent need. A few years
after (1301), Philip imprisoned a bishop on charge of
sedition, when Boniface thundered out his bulls 'Salvator
mundi,' and 'Ausculta fili,' the first of which suspended all
privileges accorded by the Holy See to the French king and
people, and the second, asserting the papal power in the now
familiar text from Jeremiah [Jeremiah i. 10], summoned the
superior clergy to Rome. Philip burned the bull, and
prohibited the clergy from obeying the summons.
{2435}
The peers and people of France stood by the crown, treating
the exhortations of the clergy with defiance. The pope,
incensed at this resistance, published the Decretal called
'Unam sanctam,' which affirms the unity of the Church, without
which there is no salvation, and hence the unity of its head
in the successor of St. Peter. Under the pope are two swords,
the spiritual and the material—the one to be used by the
church, the other for the church. … The temporal sword is …
subject to the spiritual, and the spiritual to God only. The
conclusion is, 'that it is absolutely essential to the
salvation of every human being that he be subject unto the
Roman pontiff.' The king, who showed great moderation,
appealed to a general council, and forbad his subjects to obey
any orders of Boniface till it should be assembled. The pope
resorted to the usual weapons. He drew up a bull for the
excommunication of the king; offered France to Albert of
Austria, king of the Romans, and wrote to the king of England
to incite him to prosecute his war. Meantime, Philip having
sent William de Nogaret on an embassy to the pope, this daring
envoy conceived the design of making him prisoner. Entering
Anagni [the pope's native town and frequent residence, 40
miles from Rome] at the head of a small force, privately
raised in the neighbourhood, the conspirators, aided by some
of the papal household, gained possession of the palace and
burst into the pope's presence. Boniface, deeming himself a
dead man, had put on his pontifical robes and crown, but these
had little effect on the irreverent intruders. De Nogaret was
one of the Albigenses; his companion, a Colonna, was so
inflamed at the sight of his persecutor that he struck him on
the face with his mailed hand, and would have killed him but
for the intervention of the other. The captors unaccountably
delaying to carry off their prize, the people of the place
rose and rescued the Holy Father. He hastened back to Rome,
but died of the shock a month after, leaving a dangerous feud
between the Church and her eldest son."

_G. Trevor,
Rome: from the Fall of the Western Empire,
chapter 9._

"Boniface has been consigned to infamy by contemporary poets
and historians, for the exhibition of some of the most
revolting features of the human character. Many of the
charges, such as that he did not believe in eternal life; that
he was guilty of monstrous heresy; that he was a wizard; and
that he asserted that it is no sin to indulge in the most
criminal pleasures—are certainly untrue. They are due chiefly
to his cruelty to Celestine and the Celestinians, and his
severity to the Colonnas, which led the two latter to go
everywhere blackening his character. They have been
exaggerated by Dante; and they may be ascribed generally to
his pride and violence, and to the obstinate determination,
formed by a man who 'was born an age too late,' to advance
claims then generally becoming unpopular, far surpassing in
arrogance those maintained by the most arbitrary of his
predecessors. … This victory of Philip over Boniface was, in
fact, the commencement of a wide-spread reaction on the part
of the laity against ecclesiastical predominance. The Papacy
had first shown its power by a great dramatic act, and its
decline was shown in the same manner. The drama of Anagni is
to be set against the drama of Canossa."

_A. R. Pennington.
The Church in Italy,
chapter 6._

"The next pope, Benedict XI., endeavoured to heal the breach
by annulling the decrees of Boniface against the French king,
and reinstating the Colonnas; but he was cut off by death in
ten months from his election [1304], and it was generally
suspected that his removal was effected by poison. … On the
death of Benedict, many of the cardinals were for closing the
breach with France by electing a French pope; the others
insisted that an Italian was essential to the independence of
the Holy See. The difference was compromised by the election
of the archbishop of Bordeaux, a Frenchman by birth, but owing
his preferments to Boniface, and an active supporter of his
quarrel against Philip. The archbishop, however, had secretly
come to terms with the king, and his first act, as Clement V.,
was to summon the cardinals to attend him at Lyons, where he
resolved to celebrate his coronation. The Sacred College
crossed the Alps with undissembled repugnance, and
two-and-seventy years elapsed before the Papal court returned
to Rome. This period of humiliation and corruption the Italian
writers not inaptly stigmatise as the 'Babylonish captivity.'
Clement began his pontificate by honourably fulfilling his
engagements with the French. He absolved the king and his
subjects. … If it be true that the king claimed … the
condemnation of Boniface as a heretic, Clement had the
manliness to refuse. He ventured to inflict a further
disappointment by supporting the claim of Henry of Luxembourg
to the empire in preference to the French king's brother. To
escape the further importunities of his too powerful ally, the
pope removed into the dominions of his own vicar, the king of
Naples (A. D. 1309). The place selected was Avignon, belonging
to Charles the Lame as count of Provence. … In the 9th
century, it [Avignon] passed to the kings of Aries, or
Burgundy, but afterwards became a free republic, governed by
its own consuls, under the suzerainty of the count of
Provence. … The Neapolitan dynasty, though of French origin,
was independent of the French crown, when the pope took up his
residence at Avignon. Charles the Lame was soon after
succeeded by his third son Robert, who, dying in 1343, left
his crown to his granddaughter Joanna, the young and beautiful
wife of Andrew, prince of Hungary. … In one of her frequent
exiles Clement took advantage of her necessities to purchase
her rights in Avignon for 80,000 gold florins, but this
inadequate price was never paid. The pope placed it to the
account of the tribute due to himself from the Neapolitan
crown, and having procured a renunciation of the paramount
suzerainty of the emperor, he took possession of the city and
territory as absolute sovereign (A. D. 1348)."

_G. Trevor,
Rome: from the Fall of the Western Empire,
chapters 9-10._

ALSO IN:
_H. H. Milman,
History of Latin Christianity,
book 12 (volume 5)._

_J. E. Darras.
History of the Catholic Church,
period 6, chapter 1 (volume 3)_.

PAPACY: A. D. 1305-1377.
The Popes of "the Babylonish Captivity" at Avignon.

The following is the succession of the Popes during the
Avignon period:
Boniface VIII., A. D. 1294-1303;
Benedict XI., 1303-1304;
Clement V., 1305-1314;
John XXII., 1316-1334;
Benedict XII., 1334-1342;
Clement VI., 1342-1352;
Innocent VI., 1352-1362;
Urban V., 1362-1370;
Gregory XI., 1371-1378.

{2436}

"The Avignon Popes, without exception, were all more or less
dependent upon France. Frenchmen themselves, and surrounded by
a College of Cardinals in which the French element
predominated, they gave a French character to the government
of the Church. This character was at variance with the
principle of universality inherent in it and in the Papacy. …
The migration to France, the creation of a preponderance of
French Cardinals, and the consequent election of seven French
Popes in succession, necessarily compromised the position of
the Papacy in the eyes of the world, creating a suspicion that
the highest spiritual power had become the tool of France.
This suspicion, though in many cases unfounded, weakened the
general confidence in the Head of the Church, and awakened in
the other nations a feeling of antagonism to the
ecclesiastical authority which had become French. The bonds
which united the States of the Church to the Apostolic See
were gradually loosened. … The dark points of the Avignon
period have certainly been greatly exaggerated. The assertion
that the Government of the Avignon Popes was wholly ruled by
the 'will and pleasure of the Kings of France,' is, in this
general sense, unjust. The Popes of those days were not all so
weak as Clement V., who submitted the draft of the Bull, by
which he called on the Princes of Europe to imprison the
Templars, to the French King. Moreover, even this Pope, the
least independent of the 14th century Pontiffs, for many years
offered a passive resistance to the wishes of France, and a
writer [Wenck], who has thoroughly studied the period,
emphatically asserts that only for a few years of the
Pontificate of Clement V. was the idea so long associated with
the 'Babylonian Captivity' of the Popes fully realized. The
extension of this epithet to the whole of the Avignon sojourn
is an unfair exaggeration."

_L. Pastor,
History of the Popes from the Close of the Middle Ages,
volume 1, pages 58-60._

PAPACY: A. D. 1306-1393.
Resistance to Papal encroachments in England.

See ENGLAND: A. D. 1306-1393.

PAPACY: A. D. 1314-1347.
Pretension to settle the disputed election of Emperor.
The long conflict with Louis of Bavaria in Germany and Italy.

See GERMANY: A. D. 1314-1347.

PAPACY: A. D. 1347-1354.
Rienzi's revolution at Rome.

See ROME: A. D. 1347-1354.

PAPACY: A. D. 1352-1378.
Subjugation of the States of the Church
and the return from Avignon to Rome.
Revolt and war in the Papal States, supported by Florence.

"Under the pontificate of Innocent VI. the advantages reaped
by the Papal See from its sojourn at Avignon seemed to have
come to an end. The disturbed condition of France no longer
offered them security and repose. … Moreover, the state of
affairs in Italy called loudly for the Pope's intervention. …
The desperate condition of the States of the Church, which had
fallen into the hands of small princes, called for energetic
measures, unless the Popes were prepared to see them entirely
lost to their authority. Innocent VI. sent into Italy a
Spanish Cardinal, Gil Albornoz, who had already shown his
military skill in fighting against the Moors. The fiery energy
of Albornoz was crowned with success, and the smaller nobles
were subdued in a series of hard fought battles. In 1367 Urban
V. saw the States of the Church once more reduced into
obedience to the Pope." Several motives, accordingly, combined
"to urge Urban V., in 1367, to return to Rome amid the cries
of his agonised Cardinals, who shuddered to leave the luxury
of Avignon for a land which they held to be barbarous. A brief
stay in Rome was sufficient to convince Urban V. that the
fears of his Cardinals were not unfounded. … After a visit of
three years Urban returned to Avignon; his death, which
happened three months after his return, was regarded by many
as a judgment of God upon his desertion of Rome. Urban V. had
returned to Rome because the States of the Church were reduced
to obedience; his successor, Gregory XI., was driven to return
through dread of losing entirely all hold upon Italy. The
French Popes awakened a strong feeling of natural antipathy
among their Italian subjects, and their policy was not
associated with any of the elements of state life existing in
Italy. Their desire to bring the States of the Church
immediately under their power involved the destruction of the
small dynasties of princes, and the suppression of the
democratic liberties of the people. Albornoz had been wise
enough to leave the popular governments untouched, and to
content himself with bringing the towns under the Papal
obedience. But Urban V. and Gregory XI. set up French
governors, whose rule was galling and oppressive; and a revolt
against them was organised by Florence [1376], who, true to
her old traditions, unfurled a banner inscribed only with the
word 'Liberty.' The movement spread through all the towns in
the Papal States, and in a few months the conquests of
Albornoz had been lost. The temporal dominion of the Papacy
might have been swept away if Florence could have brought
about the Italian league which she desired. But Rome hung back
from the alliance, and listened to Gregory XI., who promised
to return if Rome would remain faithful. The Papal
excommunication handed over the Florentines to be the slaves
of their captors in every land, and the Kings of England and
France did not scruple to use the opportunity offered to their
cupidity. Gregory XI. felt that only the Pope's presence could
save Rome for the Papacy. In spite of evil omens—for his horse
refused to let him mount when he set out on his
journey—Gregory XI. left Avignon; in spite of the entreaties
of the Florentines Rome again joyfully welcomed the entry of
its Pope in 1377. But the Pope found his position in Italy to
be surrounded with difficulties. His troops met with some
small successes, but he was practically powerless, and aimed
only at settling terms of peace with the Florentines. A
congress was called for this purpose, and Gregory XI. was
anxiously awaiting its termination that he might return to
Avignon, when death seized him, and his last hours were
embittered by the thoughts of the crisis that was now
inevitable."

_M. Creighton,
History of the Papacy during the Period of the Reformation,
introduction, chapter 2 (volume 1)._

ALSO IN:
_H. E. Napier,
Florentine History,
book 1, chapter 26 (volume 2)._

See, also,
FLORENCE; A. D. 1375-1378.

PAPACY: A. D. 1369-1378.
Dealings with the Free Company of Sir John Hawkwood.
Wars with Milan, Florence and other states.

See ITALY: A. D. 1343-1393.

{2437}

PAPACY: A. D. 1377-1417.
Election of Urban VI. and Clement VII.
The Great Western Schism.
Battle in Rome and siege and partial
destruction of Castle St. Angelo.
The Council of Pisa.
Forty years of Popes and Anti-Popes.

"For 23 years after Rienzi's death, the seat of the Papal
Court remained at Avignon; and during this period Rome and the
States of the Church were harried to death by contending
factions. … At last Gregory XI. returned, in January, 1377.
The keys of the Castle St. Angelo were sent to him at Corneto;
the papal Court was re-established in Rome; but he survived
only about a year, and died in March, 1378. Then came the
election of a new Pope, which was held in the Castle St.
Angelo. While the conclave was sitting, a crowd gathered round
the place, crying out, 'Romano lo volemo'—we will have a Roman
for Pope. Yet, notwithstanding this clamour, Cardinal
Prignani, Archbishop of Bari, and a Neapolitan by birth, was
finally chosen, under the title of Urban VI.—[this being an
intended compromise between the Italian party and the French
party in the college of Cardinals]. When Cardinal Orsini
presented himself at the window to announce that a new Pope
had been elected, the mob below cried out, 'His name, his
name!' 'Go to St. Peter's and you will learn,' answered the
Cardinal. The people, misunderstanding his answer, supposed
him to announce the election of Cardinal Tebaldeschi, who was
arch-priest of St. Peter's, and a Roman by birth. This news
was received with great joy and acclamation," which turned to
rage when the fact was known. Then "the people … broke in to
still fiercer cries, rushed to arms, and gathering round the
conclave, threatened them with death unless a Roman was
elected. But the conclave was strong in its position, and
finally the people were pacified, and accepted Urban VI. Such,
however, was the fear of the Cardinals, that they were with
difficulty persuaded to proceed to the Vatican and perform the
ceremonies necessary for the installation of the new Pope.
This, however, finally was done, and the Castle was placed in
the charge of Pietro Guntellino, a Frenchman, and garrisoned
by a Gallic guard, the French Cardinals remaining also within
its walls for safety. On the 20th of September they withdrew
to Fondi, and in conjunction with other schismatics they
afterwards [September 20, 1378] elected an anti-Pope [Robert
of Geneva] under the title of Clement VII. Guntellino, who
took part with them, on being summoned by Urban to surrender
the Castle, refused to do so without the order of his
compatriots, the French Cardinals at Avignon. Meantime the
papal and anti-papal party assaulted each other, first with
citations, censures, and angry words, and then with armed
force. The anti-papal party, having with them the Breton and
Gascon soldiery, and the Savoyards of the Count of Mountjoy,
the anti-Pope's nephew, marched upon the city, overcame the
undisciplined party of the Pope, reinforced the Castle St.
Angelo, and fortified themselves in the Vatican, ravaging the
Campagna on their way. The papal party now besieged the
Castle, attacking it with machines and artillery, but for a
year's space it held out. Finally, on the 28th of April, 1379,
the anti-papal party were utterly routed by Alberico, Count of
Palliano and Galeazzo, at the head of the papal, Italian, and
imperial forces. Terrible was the bloodshed of this great
battle, at which, according to Baronius, 5,000 of the
anti-papal army fell. But the Castle still refused to
surrender," until famine forced a capitulation. "The damage
done to it during this siege must have been very great. In
some parts it had been utterly demolished, and of all its
marbles not a trace now remained. … After the surrender of the
Castle to Urban, such was the rage of the people against it
for the injury it had caused them during the siege, that they
passed a public decree ordering it to be utterly destroyed and
razed to the earth. … In consequence of this decree, an
attempt was made to demolish it. It was stripped of everything
by which it was adorned, and its outer casing was torn off;
but the solid interior of peperino defied all their efforts,
and the attempt was given up."

_W. W. Story,
Castle St. Angelo,
chapter 5._

"Urban was a learned, pious, and austere man; but, in his zeal
for the reformation of manners, the correction of abuses, and
the retrenchment of extravagant expenditure, he appears to
have been wanting in discretion; for immediately after his
election he began to act with harshness to the members of the
Sacred College, and he also offended several of the secular
princes. Towards the end of June, 12 of the cardinals—11
Frenchmen and one Spaniard—obtained permission to leave Rome,
owing to the summer heats, and withdrew to Anagni. Here, in a
written instrument, dated 9th August, 1378, they protested
against the election, as not having been free, and they called
on Urban to resign. A few days later, they removed to Fondi,
in the kingdom of Naples, where they were joined by three of
the Italians whom they had gained over to their views; and, on
the 19th of September, the 15 elected an antipope, the French
Cardinal Robert of Cevennes [more frequently called Robert of
Geneva], who took the name of Clement VII. and reigned at
Avignon 16 years, dying September 16, 1394. Thus there were
two claimants of the Papal throne—Urban holding his court at
Rome, and Clement residing with his followers at Avignon. The
latter was strong in the support of the sovereigns of France,
Scotland, Naples, Aragon, Castile, and Savoy; while the
remainder of Christendom adhered to Urban. Clement was
succeeded by Peter de Luna, the Cardinal of Aragon, who, on
his election, assumed the name of Benedict XIII., and reigned
at Avignon 23 years—A. D. 1394-1417. This lamentable state of
affairs lasted altogether 40 years. Urban's successors at
Rome, duly elected by the Italian cardinals and those of other
nations acting with them, were:
Boniface IX., a Neapolitan, A. D. 1389-1404;
Innocent VII., a native of Sulmona, A. D. 1404-1406;
Gregory XII., a Venetian, A. D. 1406-1409;
Alexander V., a native of Candia,
who reigned ten months, A. D. 1409-1410;
and John XXIII., a Neapolitan, A. D. 1410-1417.
…
Although the Popes above enumerated, as having reigned at
Rome, are now regarded as the legitimate pontiffs, and, as
such, are inscribed in the Catalogues of Popes, while Clement
and Benedict are classed as anti-popes, there prevailed at the
time much uncertainty on the subject. … In February, 1395,
Charles VI. of France convoked an assembly of the clergy of
his dominions, under the presidency of Simon Cramandus,
Patriarch of Alexandria, in order, if possible, to terminate
the schism. The assembly advised that the rival Pontiffs,
Boniface IX. and Benedict XIII., should abdicate.
{2438}
The same view was taken by most of the universities of
Europe," but the persons chiefly concerned would not accept
it. Nor was it found possible in 1408 to bring about a
conference of the two popes. The cardinals, then, of both
parties, withdrew support from the factious pontiffs and held
a general meeting at Leghorn. There they agreed that Gregory
XII. and Benedict XIII. had equally lost all claim to
obedience, and they resolved to convoke, on their own
authority "a General Council, to meet at Pisa, on the 25th of
March, 1409. Gregory and Benedict were duly informed thereof,
and were requested to attend the council. … The Council of
Pisa sat from March 25th to August 7th, 1409. There were
present 24 cardinals of both 'obediences,' 4 patriarchs, 12
archbishops, 80 bishops, 87 abbots; the procurators of 102
absent archbishops and bishops, and of 200 absent abbots; the
generals of 4 mendicant orders; the deputies of 13
Universities …; the representatives of over 100 cathedral and
collegiate chapters, 282 doctors and licentiates of canon and
civil law; and the ambassadors of the Kings of England,
France, Poland, Bohemia, Portugal, Sicily, and Cyprus." Both
claimants of the Papacy were declared unworthy to preside over
the Church, and forbidden to act as Pope. In June, the
conclave of cardinals assembled and elected a third Pope—one
Peter Filargo, a Friar Minor, who took the name of Alexander
V., but who died ten months afterwards. The cardinals then
elected as his successor Cardinal Cossa, "a politic worldly
man, who assumed the name of John XXIII." But, meantime,
Germany, Naples and some of the other Italian States still
adhered to Gregory, and Benedict kept the support of Scotland,
Spain and Portugal. The Church was as much divided as ever.
"The Council of Pisa … only aggravated the evil which it
laboured to cure. Instead of two, there were now three
claimants of the Papal Chair. It was reserved for the General
Council of Constance to restore union and peace to the
Church."

_J. N. Murphy,
The Chair of Peter,
chapter 20._

"The amount of evil wrought by the schism of 1378, the longest
known in the history of the Papacy, can only be estimated,
when we reflect that it occurred at a moment, when thorough
reform in ecclesiastical affairs was a most urgent need. This
was now utterly out of the question, and, indeed, all evils
which had crept into ecclesiastical life were infinitely
increased. Respect for the Holy See was also greatly impaired,
and the Popes became more than ever dependent on the temporal
power, for the schism allowed each Prince to choose which Pope
he would acknowledge. In the eyes of the people, the simple
fact of a double Papacy must have shaken the authority of the
Holy See to its very foundations. It may truly be said that
these fifty years of schism prepared the way for the great
Apostacy of the 16th century."

_L. Pastor,
History of the Popes from the Close of the Middle Ages,
volume 1, page 141._

ALSO IN:
_A. Neander,
General History of the Christian Religion and Church,
volume 9, section 1._

_H. H. Milman,
History of Latin Christianity,
book 13, chapters 1-5 (volume 6)._

_J. Alzog,
Manual of Universal Church History,
sections 269-270 (volume 3)._

_J. C. Robertson,
History of the Christian Church,
book 8, chapter 5 (volume 7)._

_St. C. Baddeley,
Charles III. of Naples and Urban VI._