AHISTORYOFTHECHURCH

INTHEMIDDLEAGES

‘Conceptuallywellorganized,stylistically clear,

intellectually thoughtful, andpedagogicallyuseful.’

ThomasHead,Speculum

‘For its humane and learnedapproach to its enormouscanvas, as well as for thecogency with which itpenetrates at speed to theessentials of a vanishedhistorical epoch, thisHistoryof the Church in the MiddleAges deserves a very wideaudienceindeed.’

BarrieDobson,EnglishHistoricalReview

‘To have written a scholarlyand very readable history ofthe Western Church over amillennium is a remarkabletour de force, for whichDonald Logan is to bewarmlycongratulated.’

C.H.Lawrence,TheTablet

‘Afeatofhistoricalsynthesis,mostconfidentinitstellingof

the coming of Christianity.Books like Logan’s areneeded more than everbefore.’

MiriRubin,TLS

In this fascinating survey, F.Donald Logan introduces thereader to the Christianchurch, from the conversionof the Celtic and Germanicpeoples to the discovery ofthe New World. He revealshow the church unified the

people of western Europe asthey worshipped with thesame ceremonies and usedLatin as the language ofcivilized communication.From remote, rural parish tomagnificent urban cathedral,A History of the Church intheMiddleAges explores theroleofthechurchasacentralelement indetermining1,000yearsofhistory.Thisneweditionbringsthe

book right up to date with

recent scholarship, andincludes an expandedintroduction exploring theinteraction of other faiths –particularly Judaism andIslam – with the Christianchurch.

F. Donald Logan isProfessorEmeritusofHistoryat Emmanuel College,Boston,andHonoraryFellowof the Pontifical Institute ofMediaeval Studies, Toronto.

His previous publicationsinclude The Vikings inHistory (third edition, 2005),The Medieval Court ofArches (2005) and RunawayReligions in MedievalEngland(1996).

AHISTORYOFTHE

CHURCHINTHEMIDDLE

AGES

Secondedition

F.DonaldLogan

Secondeditionpublished2013byRoutledge2ParkSquare,MiltonPark,Abingdon,OxonOX144RN

SimultaneouslypublishedintheUSAandCanadabyRoutledge711ThirdAvenue,NewYork,NY10017

Routledgeisanimprintofthe

Taylor&FrancisGroup,aninformabusiness

©2012,2013F.DonaldLogan

TherightofF.DonaldLogantobeidentifiedasauthorofthisworkhasbeenassertedbyhiminaccordancewithsections77and78oftheCopyright,DesignsandPatentsAct1988.

Allrightsreserved.Nopartofthisbookmaybereprintedorreproducedorutilizedinanyformorbyanyelectronic,mechanical,orothermeans,nowknownorhereafterinvented,includingphotocopyingandrecording,orinanyinformationstorageorretrievalsystem,withoutpermissioninwritingfromthepublishers.

Trademarknotice:Productor

corporatenamesmaybetrademarksorregisteredtrademarks,andareusedonlyforidentificationandexplanationwithoutintenttoinfringe.

First published 2002 byRoutledge

BritishLibraryCataloguinginPublicationDataAcataloguerecordforthisbookisavailablefromthe

BritishLibrary

LibraryofCongressCataloginginPublicationDataLogan,F.Donald.

AhistoryoftheChurchintheMiddleAges/F.DonaldLogan.–2nded.

p.cm.Includesindex.1.Churchhistory–MiddleAges,600–1500.I.Title.

BR252.L642012270.3–dc23

2011045206

ISBN: 978-0-415-66993-1(hbk)ISBN: 978-0-415-66994-8(pbk)ISBN: 978-0-203-11956-3(ebk)

TypesetinGoudybyTaylor&FrancisBooks

FORMYSISTER,MARYELEANORLOGAN,ANDMYBROTHER,JOSEPH

LOGAN

CONTENTS

ListofplatesListofmapsListoffiguresPrefacePrefacetothesecondedition

Introduction

1 ThePre-MedievalChurchTheapostolicchurchThespreadofChristianityThepersecutions:ahistoricalproblemConstantine,controversyandconversionFurtherreading

2 ThebeginningoftheMiddleAgesTheGermansConversionoftheFranksCatholicSpainConversionoftheIrishFurtherreading

3 JustinianandMohammedJustinian’sachievement

JustinianandthelawJustinianandchurchbuildingsTheLombardsIslamThelandofMohammedTheProphetTheKoranConquestsFurtherreading

Thesceneisset:St

4 GregorytheGreattoStBoniface

GregorytheGreatConversionoftheAnglo-SaxonsThetransmissionoflearningEnglishmissiontotheContinentFurtherreading

Church,Carolingians

5 andVikings

Franco-papalallianceTheCarolingiansandchurchpracticeTheVikingsFurtherreading

6 Thechurchindisarray,c.850–c.1050PopeNicholasI(858–67)Formosus(891–96)

PopeJohnXII(955–64)PopeBenedictIX(1032–45;?1047–48)

Furtherreading

7 Reform,theEast,crusadeEleventh-centuryreformTheEasternChurchTheFirstCrusadeFurtherreading

8 ThetwelfthcenturyPopesandanti-popesandemperorsNewreligiousordersPopulardevotionandpracticalpietyFurtherreading

9 Threetwelfth-centuryprofilesPeterAbelard(c.1079–1142)

ThomasBecket(c.1120–70)HildegardofBingen(1098–1179)Furtherreading

10 TheageofInnocentIIIThepoliticalInnocentTheFourthCrusade(1202–4)TheFourthLateranCouncil(1215)

Furtherreading

11TheemergenceofdissentandtheriseofthefriarsDissentThefriarsFurtherreading

12Twolegacies:universitiesandcathedrals

UniversitiesCathedralsAppendix:medievalcathedrals:aselectlist

Furtherreading

13Developmentsandfulfilments:thelaterthirteenthcenturyPopesandkingsReconquistaFurtherreading

14 DeathandpurgatoryTheBlackDeathTheemergenceofpurgatoryFurtherreading

15 ExileinAvignonandaftermathThePopesandAvignonTwoelectionsandthecomingofschism

Furtherreading

16 TheGreatSchismTheroadtoPisaTheroadtoConstanceWyclifandHusBacktoConstanceFurtherreading

17 ThefifteenthcenturyPopesandcouncilsChristianpiety

Furtherreading

Epilogue:1492:theanatomyofayear

Listofpopes,500–1500Index

PLATES

1 Churchandroundtower,Clonmacnois,Co.Offaly2 SantaSophia,Istanbul

3 StMartin’sChurch,Canterbury

4 ThroneofCharlemagne,royalchapel,Aachen

5 InvestitureofPopeJohnXII(955)6 Cracdeschevaliers7 Cloisterwalk,Fontevrault

8VirginandChild,tympanum,westportal,ChartresCathedral

9TombofHeloiseandAbelard,cemeteryofPèreLachaise,Paris

10 TheMartyrdomofSaintThomasBecket

11 HildegardofBingen’svisionofextinguishedstars

12 AlbiCathedral

13 StPaul’s-Without-the-Walls,Rome

14 Naveelevation,ruinsofJumiègeAbbey15 DurhamCathedral

16 Ambulatory,churchofStDenis,Paris17 Nave,LaonCathedral

18 Flyingbuttresses,LeMansCathedral

19 GreatMosque,Cordova

20Womenbeingledindancetotheirdeath

21DanteandVirgilwanderinginDante’spurgatory

22 PalaisdesPapes,Avignon

23 BurningofJohnHusforheresy

24Foundlings,façadeofOspedaledegliInnocenti,

Florence

MAPS

1 MediterraneanregionwithearlyChristiansites

2 Germanicsettlementpatternc.5343 EarlyChristianIreland

ByzantiumandtheexpansionofIslaminthe

4 Mediterraneanregion(seventhtoninthcenturies)

5ConversionoftheGermanicpeoples(c.350–c.750)

6 Vikings

7 Carolingianlandsafterdivision(843)

8CentresofreforminthetenthandeleventhcenturiesRoutesoftheFirst

9 Crusade

10 CrusaderStates

11Cisterciansandotherorders:majorhousesfoundedby1150

12 Constantinopleinthethirteenthcentury

13RepresentativesattheFourthLateranCouncil(1215)

14PlacesassociatedwiththeCathars(Albigensians)in

theLanguedoc

15Mendicantfriars16Medievaluniversities17 Reconquistatoc.1140

18Reconquistaduringthetwelfthandthirteenthcenturies

19 SpreadoftheBlackDeath,1347–50

20TheGreatSchism:betweenPisaandConstance

FIGURES

1 FloorplanofChristianbasilica

2 Cross-sectionofChristianbasilica

3 InternalelevationofChristianbasilica4 Formationofthebay

5 FloorplanofStSernin,Toulouse

6 Vaults:barrel,groin,rib7 Formationoftheribvault

PREFACE

This book is an introduction.It ismeant tobemorethanabrief survey and less –considerably less – than anencyclopedic work. Theemphasis here is largelychronological and thepresentation mostly in the

formofanarrative.Itisbasedon thepremise that the studyof history must begin withchronology.Ihopethatitwillnotendthereandthatreadersof this book will wish topursue aspects of the subjectto another level: the selectedreadingssectionsappendedtoeach chapter can provide astartingpoint.Asayoungscholar,Ifelt–

and would tell anyone whowouldlisten–thatnoserious

research scholar shouldwriteabooklikethis:therearejusttoo many areas of historycrying out for scholarlyinvestigation.Yet,without inany way abandoning a firmbelief in the fundamentalimportance of originalresearch, I have softened thetone and have even changedmymind.Itismyhopethatastraightforward narrativewhich presupposes nodetailed knowledge of either

the Middle Ages or theChristian religion willencouragethereadertosharethe author’s enthusiasm forthesubjectandwillstimulatean interest in the generalstudyofhistory.Abookofthiskind,which

covers 1,000 years or so,requires difficult choicesabout what to include and,conversely,whattoexclude.Irealize that no two historianswouldmakeexactlythesame

choices. I am all tooconscious that, in the natureofthings,thereisboundtobesomething arbitrary aboutinclusionsandexclusions,butI take some solace inknowingthatreaderscanturnto such books as StevenFanning’s work on mysticsand Jonathan Riley-Smith’sstudiesontheCrusadestofillin the lacunae left wherethese difficult choices havebeenmade.

Over the past few years Ihave taken advantage offriends by going on and on,almost shamelessly, abouttopics that appear in thesepages. I thank them for theirpatienceandtolerance.Itisapleasure to record my debtandgratitudetoscholarswhohavegenerouslyreadpartsofthe text and made helpfulsuggestions: KatherineCushing, Keith Egan, RobinFleming, Linda Grant,

Michael Robson, SarahStever and Daniel Williman.The readers for the press intheir thoughtful commentsand suggestions have helpedto improve the textenormously. To no one am Imore indebted than toMichael Clanchy, who readthe entire text, chapter bychapter, as it came frommyprinter. His comments andencouragement have been ofinestimable value to me in

preparing this book, and Icannot thankhimadequately.I greatly appreciate thesuggestions made by all ofthese scholars and havedeparted from them rarelyand then, I fear, at my ownperil.Writingabooksuchasthis

reminds one of the greatwealthofscholarlyworkthathas been done and is beingdone in the fieldofmedievalhistory.Thesubstanceofthis

book owes its existence tountold hundreds of scholarsworking in this field in thepast and in the present. It isanexceptionallyrichveinoneisprivilegedtomine.

F.DonaldLoganBrookline,Massachusetts

21September2001

PREFACETOTHESECONDEDITION

This book first appeared in2002. In the succeedingdecade a wealth of newliterature has appeared on

variousaspectsofthisgeneralsubject. It is immenselyreassuring for the author tosee such excellent work,much of it done by youngscholars,andtoknowthatthelightstayslitfromgenerationtogeneration.The author has benefited

greatly by this newscholarship and by thecriticisms and suggestionswhich he has had the goodfortunetoreceive.Thetextof

the first edition has beencorrected and revised in thelight of this. The FurtherReading sections after eachchapter point the reader tonew as well as standardworks.

F.D.L.

INTRODUCTION

Religion, the relationshipbetween humans and agodhead, has been anythingbutuniform. In the courseoftime there have been peoplewho found their gods in thenatural elements – the sun,the wind, etc. – and people

who worshipped human-likebeings with supernaturalpowers–thedeitiesoftheso-called pagan Greeks andRomans, for example. Andthere were people whobelieved in a unique God, abeliefwhichallowednootherdeities. Yet even thismonotheismisnotwithoutitsanthropomorphic elements:God sees, God knows, Godloves, God rewards, Godpunishes, God has a hand.

The great medievaltheologian Thomas Aquinasheld that our humanknowledgeofGodmustbebyway of human categories ofthought–thereisnoescapingit – and that one mustrecognize that theology (thestudyofGod)is,ofitsnature,bywayof analogy: thatGodisWhollyOther.All three of the great

monotheistic religions –Judaism, Christianity and

Islam – will be met in thecourse of this book withemphasis onChristianity, themonotheistic religion ofwestern Europe. These threereligions intersected at timesduring the Middle Ages.Christianity saw itself as thefulfilment of promises madeto the Jewish people, and attimes Christians not onlyrejected Judaism butruthlessly persecuted Jews.Islam also saw itself on a

continuum with the religionofAbrahamwithMohammedas the last of the prophets.Not only did Islam replaceChristianity in many lands(especially in North AfricaandIberia),but it toofelt theaggression of Christians,when crusaders claimed theHoly Land. Threemonotheistic religions – twoof them neighbours and onesubmerged in the others –sharedabeliefinasingle,all-

powerful God, yet each withits own emphases: the Jewswith their sharedhistoryofachosenpeopleandbelief inaMessiah to come, theMuslims with their stress onthe Day Of Judgement, andChristians with a god whowasthreebutone.The influence of religion

onapeople’scultureand thecorresponding influence ofculture on religion aredifficult to measure, so

interpenetrated did theybecome. The German andCeltic peoples who wereconverted to Christianity didnot lose their ethnicidentities: they were stillGermans and Celts but nowChristian Germans andChristian Celts. Theirethnicity was bound toinfluence the different waysinwhichtheyexpressedtheirsharedChristianbeliefs.Religions can have a

history because of theirhuman element. The humanbeingswhoareChristiansaresentient, rational beings withthe power of free choice.They make decisions abouttheir religious lives and thestructures that support them.They are capable ofmagnanimity and outrageousmisbehaviour,ofsanctityandsinfulness, of prudentjudgementandwoefulerrors.It is their deeds that provide

the material for historygenerally,anditistheirdeedsin the name of religion thatprovide the material forecclesiasticalhistory.The focus here is on the

history of a religion thatexpressed itself in a church,in this instance the Christianchurch of western Europe.Somemaywishtoextendtheterm ‘medieval’ to includeeasternEuropeandtheworldof Byzantium. A more

conventional definition isusedhere,andthehistorythatfollowsfocuseschieflyonthechurchoftheLatinWest.TheChristianchurchwasa

defining element inmedievalsociety.Therewereothers,ofcourse, but the Middle Ageswithoutthechurchwouldnotbe the historicMiddle Ages.It was the one internationalingredient which boundtogether disparate peoples inasharedfaithandritualanda

common learned language.Variations there indeedwere,but the same Creed wasrecited at the same kinds ofliturgical ceremonies fromIceland to Sicily and in tensof thousands of villagesthroughout western Europe.The general councils of thechurch drew members toLyons, Rome, Vienne,Constance and elsewhere inthe only truly internationalassemblies of the Middle

Ages.Theologiansandcanonlawyers not only spoke thesameLatinlanguage,buttheydiscussed the same issues.The existence of localcustoms and traditions addedtotheflavourofthereligiousculture of the times and alsoserved to emphasize theoverarching transcendence ofthemedievalchurch.The underlying

assumptions about the natureand purpose of life were

common currency. A triuneGodexistsandis involvedinhuman affairs. Christ is Godandman, who came to earthto redeem the human race.Life on earth is a pilgrimageto another life, where theobvious injustices of this lifewill be redressed in eternalbliss or eternal punishment.EvenChristianswhodivertedfromtraditionalChristianity–and who were labelledheretics – generally shared

the same basic world-view.Scepticism and disbelief, ontheevidence,wereextremelyrare but not totally absent.Yet it was the religiousassumptions of societygenerally,whetherquestionedor unquestioned, that helpedtodefinetheage.If themedievalchurchcan

be said tohaveabodyandasoul, then the externalinstitution pertains to thebody and the inner spiritual

life of Christian peoplepertainstothesoul.Ahistoryof the church cannot limititselftotheinstitutionnor,ontheotherhand,shoulditomitthe institution or treat italmost incidentally. Historyrecords how an institution,which was believed to havebeen divinely founded, wasruled by human beings, whowere not divine, sometimesfar frombeingevenspiritual.This institution grew and, as

itgrew,requiredorganizationand rules.From the time thatwe might want to use thewordmedieval,perhapsfromthe sixth century,wecan seea network of bishops withone, at Rome, claimingauthority over the others.That institution, then,following the mandate to‘teach all nations’, sentmissionaries to Celtic andGermanic peoples. And asthese new peoples began to

establishpoliticalcontrol, thechurchasaninstitutionmadethe decision to interact withthese new leaders, at timeseven asserting authority overthem. This external churchconstructedplacesofworshipand places of education,giving the world greatchurches and universities.Theleadersofthisinstitutionhelped to organize militarycampaigns to reconquer onceChristian lands in the East

from the hands of theMuslims. Yet, even as aninstitution, the church wasmore than the papacy, morethan its central government,which gained greater andgreater control over thecourse of time. It was aboutnew religious orders andpersons like Benedict andBernard and Francis ofAssisi, and the countlessnumbers of men and womenwho followed them. Since

recordstendtobekeptbyandfor great men, institutionalhistory can understandablybecomethestoryof thegreatmen – seldom women –popes and abbots rather thanof parish priests and simplemonks and nuns, or ordinarylaymenandlaywomen.Itwasa church whose fortunes canbe charted, particularly at itshigherreaches.Yet a church without an

essentialspiritualityisabody

without a soul, formwithoutsubstance, a hollow andempty contrivance.Nevertheless,theinnerlifeofthe church leaves lessobvious, less certain tracesthantheinstitution.Howdeepwas an individual’scommitment or what partprayer or contemplationplayed in one’s life or,indeed, how religious aperson actually was it isdifficult,nearlyimpossibleto

say. It is not given to thehistorian, mercifully, to beable to look into the soulsofothers,pastorpresent,yetthehistorian must try, howeverdiffidently, to examine theinner life of the church andtrytogetsomesenseofwhatreligion really meant toChristian people. Inferencescan be made from existingevidence such as acts ofdevotion andworks of piety,where these can be seen, but

oneremainseverawareoftheinherent difficulty in doingso.The history of the church

in a period extending over1,000 years, with itscontinuities and changes,demandsahealthyamountofcaution and constraint.Generalizations about theMiddleAgesmustrespectthevariationsandmodalitiesofalongperiodofhumanhistoryand of its different peoples

and places. The expression‘medieval church’ might beseen to imply a greatersameness than the historicalrecord would permit. The‘church in the Middle Ages’allowsustoregardthechurchin a historical period, duringwhich it experiencedprofound changes. In thisview, generalizations shouldnot be made lightly and,when made, spoken only inthesubjunctivemood.Caveat

lector.

1THEPRE-MEDIEVALCHURCH

The central figure of themedieval church died almost

half a millennium before thedate usually given for thebeginning of the MiddleAges. Enigmatic as it maysound, Christ was bornBefore Christ. When in thesixth century DionysiusExiguus used the birth ofChrist to date the beginningof the Christian era, hemistakenly believed thatChristwasbornintheRomanyear 754 ab urbe condita(‘from the founding of the

city’), and that year is calledthe firstyearof theChristianera: AD 1. In fact, KingHerod, during whose reignChrist was born, died in theRomanyear750,andthedategivenbymodernscholarsforChrist’s birth generally fallsbetween8and4BC.Thedateof Christ’s death – and,indeed,hisageat thetimeofhisdeath–arenotknownforcertain, but he was probablyexecutedintheyearAD30.

TosomeofhisfellowJewsJesus of Nazareth was thelong-awaited Messiah, thefulfilment of the prophecies,the saviourofhispeople, theexpectedofthenations.Theybelieved he was born of avirgin, whose cult was tobecome a significant featureof medieval religious life.Theyheardhimpreachnot anewlawbutthefulfilmentofthe Jewish law, summarizedin the Sermon on theMount

(Matthew, chs 5–6) in adoctrineofuniversallove:notaneyeforaneyeandatoothfor a tooth (lex talionis), but‘turn the other cheek’, ‘loveyour enemies and pray foryour persecutors’. Whenasked how to pray, he toldthemtosay,‘OurFather,whoart in heaven’ and gave theworld the central prayer ofthe Christian faith. Thepolitical problems that heposed for the rabbinical

leaders and for the Romanauthorities led to hisexecutionbycrucifixiononahill outside Jerusalembetween two thieves. Hisfollowers were stronglymotivated by the convictionthat he had actually risenfromthedeadthreedaysafterhisdeath.Manysaidthattheysawhimduringthenextfortydays and that then on thefortiethdaythattheysawhimascend bodily into heaven.

Huddled together in fear andconfusion ten days later, hisfollowers were said to havebeen inspired by the HolySpiritundertheappearanceoftonguesoffire.They believed that the

human race had fallen byreason of the sins of AdamandEve,theconsequencesofwhichaffectedallpeoples.ToredeemmankindfromthissinGod sent his Son to earth inthe form of a human being,

whosedeathonthecrosswasaredemptivesacrificeforthewholehumanrace.Christ,theGod–man, was redeemer,saviour, reconciler; it wasthrough belief in him thatsalvation–aheavenly life inthenextworld–wastocome.This was the message hisfollowersweretopreach.

Theapostolicchurch

Thebandoftwelve,theplaceof Judas the suicide nowtaken by Matthias, plusseveral scores of disciplesand a loyal band of holywomen–ascant100orsointotal–formedthecoregroupfrom which the Christianchurch was to grow. Theyhad been given no masterplan, no blueprint, for aninstitution, merely themandate to preach the goodnews (gospel) to all peoples,

baptizingtheminthenameofthe Father, Son and HolySpirit(Matthew28,19;Mark16,15;Acts1,8).Thepagesof the Acts of the Apostlestell in detail the story of theinfant church or, moreaccurately, the story of thegrowth of this small band ofJewish followers ofChrist toa movement. The author ofActs (probably theevangelistLuke) with unconcealedpleasure quotes the learned

rabbi Gamaliel: ‘If this ideaoftheirsoritsexecutionisofhumanorigin,itwillcollapse;butifitisfromGod,youwillnever be able to put themdown’ (5, 38–39). This bandof early Christians wascomprised of Jews, whoviewed themselves as part oftheJewishreligioustradition:we would say that theyformed a sect of Judaism.Theysoonmadeadecisionofmonumental historical

significance.The question they asked

themselves was: shouldgentileconvertsbecompelledto undergo circumcision (theJewish rite of initiation) andbecomesubject tothedietaryand other obligations ofJudaism? At what has beenanachronistically called the‘Council’ of Jerusalem (AD49 or 50) this issue wasdiscussed, and the assembledgroup of Christian leaders

endorsedtheopinionofPeter:gentilesneednotfirstbecomereligious Jews. This decisionopened the way to theconversion of non-Jews, itssignificance impossible toexaggerate. Tradition hastraced apostles to far-flungpartsof theworld.Christiansof south India trace theirChristianity back to theapostle Thomas, who theybelieveisburiednearMadras.John was believed to have

beenatthecityofEphesusinAsia Minor (Efes in modernTurkey). Matthew may havebeen active in Ethiopia.Pilgrims still climbmountainpassestothelegendaryburialplace of the apostle James atCompostela in northernSpain. On the historical sideoftraditionandlegendweseethe figure of the ‘apostle ofthe gentiles’, Paul, thepersecutor who was struckdown on the road to

Damascus and rose as themissionary par excellence.He has been well served byLuke, who, in great detail inActs, describes themissionary journeys of Paulthrough the Mediterraneanworld. Etched in theconsciousness of peoples forcenturiestocomewasLuke’spicture of this learned Jew,Paul, in theagora atAthens,where Socrates had spokenfour centuries earlier, and

alsothepictureofhimtalkingto men of wisdom on theAreopagus hill below theAcropolis.

Men of Athens, I see that ineverythingthatconcernsreligionyouareuncommonlyscrupulous.For as I was going aroundlooking at the objects of yourworship I noticed among otherthings an altar bearing theinscription ‘To an UnknownGod’.What youworship but donot know – that is what Iproclaim.

(Acts17,22–23)

Paul, when later arrested,claimedhisrightsasaRomancitizen–hewas fromTarsus– appealed to Caesar andarrivedinRomeinchains.AlreadyatRometherewas

a Christian community.Emperor Claudius c.AD 51expelled Jews from the citybecauseoftroubleconcerningacertain‘Crestos’.Itrequireslittlehistoricalimaginationtosee in this matter somediscord within the Jewish

community at Romeconcerning the believers inChrist. When Paul arrivedthere (c.AD 60), RomanChristians, to whom he hadalready sent an epistle,welcomed him. The Romanhistorian Tacitus relates thatin the year 64 Christiansconstituted a vast multitude(ingensmultitudo), and, evenif we allow here forexaggeration, it seems clearthat by then they formed a

definable group distinct fromthe Jewish community atRome.That the apostlePeterwas at Rome is undeniableand that he died during thepersecution of Nero (64–67)seems more than likely.Excavations under St Peter’sBasilica have unearthed ashrine built in the secondcentury on a slope of theVatican,whichmayverywellmark the spot of Peter’sburial. Also, it was from

Rome that a tradition holdsthat Paulwrote to a followerthewords,

Alreadymy life is being pouredoutonthealtar,andthehourformydepartureisuponme:Ihaverunthegreatrace,Ihavefinishedthecourse,Ihavekeptfaith.

(2Timothy4,6–7)

It is generally believed that,like Peter, Paul too perishedin the Neronian persecution,and there is a fairly early

tradition that his body liesbeneath the church of StPaul’s-Without-the-Walls.WhatishistoricallycertainisthatPeterandPaulbothdiedat Rome and a fairly earlytradition links them as‘founders’ of the Romanchurch, the ChristianRomulus and Remus, as itwere.

ThespreadofChristianity

How to explain the rapidgrowth of Christianity fromthe small band of Jews inJerusalem to the dominantreligion of the RomanEmpire, which it was tobecome?Somemay perceivein all this the workings of adivine providence, but the

historian as historian lacksthat kind of vision and, bydefinition, can and shouldonly see the workings ofhuman agents and naturalforces. Over two centuriesago Edward Gibbon, writingprobably with a considerablemeasure of irony, asked,‘What were the secondarycausesof therapidgrowthofChristianity?’ (Decline andFall, chapter 15). Modernhistorians eschew ‘causes’

and discuss ‘factors’: whatfactors contributed to thegrowth of Christianity? Twowill be singled out here: theexistence of the RomanEmpire and a spiritualvacuumintheRomanworld.It would be difficult to

exaggeratethesignificanceofthe where and when of thebirthoftheChristianreligion:JesuswasbornintheRomanEmpire, albeit at a remoteedge of that empire. The

Romans under Pompey hadconquered Palestine in 63BC,andatoncethistinylandwith an ancient peoplebecame part of a mightyempire which was to stretchfromScotland in thenorth tothe Sahara in the south andfrom Spain in the west toSyria in the east. Jesus wasbornwhileHerod,apart-Jew,ruled as local king andRomansurrogateinPalestine.Whenaskedabouttributeina

trick question, Jesus repliedto‘rendertoCaesarthethingsthatareCaesar’s…’.HewasexecutedwhilePontiusPilatewas theRomanprocuratorofJudea. A large diaspora ofJews lived outside Palestinein other parts of the RomanEmpire: perhaps fourmillion– four times the Jewishpopulation of Palestine – insuch cities as Alexandria,Ephesus, Antioch, CorinthandevenRome.Paulhimself

was from Tarsus, capital ofCilicia, in the south-easternpart of modern Turkey. HehadaGreekname,Paul, andwas a Roman citizen. Nofrontiers need be crossedwithin the Roman world.Roman engineers hadconstructed thousands ofmiles of roads, which, likemodern railways, linked theremotest parts. And theMediterranean Sea, as itsname implies (‘the water in

the midst of the land’), wasan inland lake with Romanlandsalongall its shores.Nowonder the Romans called itmarenostrum(‘oursea’).For200 years a population ofperhaps as many as 70millionpeopleatagiventimelived in a peace (PaxRomana) of a length seldomknown in human historybefore or since. Althoughwars were fought at troublespots along its long exterior

borders and two rebellionswere savagely put down inJudeaandtwobriefcivilwarsoccurred over theemperorship, the period wasessentially one of a general,prolonged peace andextensive, if not universal,prosperity. Two languages –Greek and Latin – werelinguistic equipment enoughto allow one to travel withease across the over two-thousand-mileeast–westaxis.

Problemswere toarise–andthesewillbevisitedshortly–but it is difficult to imaginemore favourablecircumstances for the spreadofChristianity.

Map1MediterraneanregionwithearlyChristiansites

Favourale in another waywas what we might call aspiritual void, a yearning forpersonal fulfilment of theinner person, a need largelyunsatisfiedbytheformalstatereligion of Rome. Whateverappealthecultsoftheancientgodsmighthaveoncehad,bythe first century they hadbecomeformalizedfestivities,

likeinourtimesthetroopingofthecoloursbythemonarchorFourth-of-Julyparadesandfireworks. Theywere largelycivic and even patrioticevents,which hardly broughtmeaning to the deeper partsof the human soul, wherereside questions of theultimate meaning of life.SomeRomansfoundanswersintheteachingsoftheirStoicphilosophers, like Seneca,who saw virtue, notmaterial

success, as the path ofwisdom leading to humanhappiness.Attractiveinmanyways, Stoicism appealed byand large to a small elite.Ofwider appeal were thereligions which entered theWest from the more remoteeastern parts of the Romanworld and even beyond.Usually said to have beenbrought back by returningRomanlegionaries,cultssuchas those to Mithras and Isis

touched a responsive chord.For many the search formeaning went beyond thecoolly rational teachings ofthe philosophers, and forthem these mystery religionscould have an appealingaffective element. Men whopledged themselves toMithras, thePersiansungod,were formally initiated, atemeals together, committedthemselves to such manlyvirtuesasloyaltyandcourage

and held secret meetings incavesorcave-likeplaces,anda happy life after death waspromised to its votaries.Hundreds of shrines ofMithras,frequentlyshowingasuffering Mithras, have beenfound throughout the Romanworld: one of the most wellknown lies far beneath thechurch of San Clemente inRome. Was Christianity butanother Eastern mysteryreligion,similarinsomeways

to the cult of Mithras?Despite obvious points ofexternal similarity,Christianity differed inessential ways from theseother religionsfromtheEast.Italonewasmonotheistic.Atits centre was not amythological person but anactual historical person. Areligion based on a rigidmoral code, Christianitystood apart from themysterycults, yet it tapped some of

the same human yearnings.Whatwasperceivedasahighmoral code – in Tertullian’sfamiliar phrase ‘See theChristians:howtheyloveoneanother’ – provided apowerfulattractiontosoulsinsearch of a religion whichaffectedtheirwholelives.With these favourable

factorscontributing,Christiancommunities were to befound by the end of the firstcentury in every city of the

empire,no longer submergedwithintheJewishcommunity.About theyear112Pliny theYounger, once consul inRome, wrote from AsiaMinor that Christianity wasreaching even into thevillages. By the end of thatcentury Christianity hadreached remotest Britain.Numbersaredifficulttocomeat in all this, but, by theconversion of Constantine in312, perhaps as many as six

or seven million Christianslived within the empire andan untold but no doubtsmaller number beyond itsborders. By any measure aremarkable achievement,perhaps unsurpassed inconversionhistory.

Thepersecutions:ahistoricalproblem

Few subjects in this processhave exercised the talents ofhistorians more than thesignificance of thepersecution of the ChristiansbytheRomanstate.Thefactsarenot really indispute; it istheir interpretation whichdivides their students. In 64theemperorNerosingledoutthe nascent Christiancommunity at Rome as ascapegoat for the burning ofRome. It was a local

persecution, restricted to thecity itself, and it lastedperhaps three years. WhatNero did was to create aprecedent that permitted thepersecution of Christians asChristians. Clearer reasonsfor their persecution were intime to be enunciated: theywere atheists in notworshipping the gods andtraitors in not honouring theemperor as a god. For thenext 200 years after Nero’s

scapegoating,Christianswerepersecuted sporadically butonly in specific locations –now at Alexandria, now atSmyrna,nowatRome,etc.–and never for a prolongedperiod in any of these. EventheseeminglybenignMarcusAurelius, whose Meditationscontinuetoinspirethoughtfulreaders, in 177 sanctionedpersecution, including thebrutal executions of 48Christians at Lyons: some

strangled and beheaded,others given, while stillliving, to the wild beasts intheamphitheatre.Aperiodofprolonged peace lasted from211 to 250.Matters changedin250whenEmperorDeciusorderedallChristianstodenytheir Christian belief and toworship the Roman gods;those who refused paid withtheir lives. Continued by hissuccessor, this totalpersecution finally ended in

260. The 40 years thatfollowed saw a de factotoleration, even to the extentof Christians becomingprovincial governors. Themightiest persecution – oftencalled The Great Persecution– was the last: Diocletianmoved against the Christiansin 303 and in the followingyear decreed death to allChristians throughout theempire. Before this generalpersecution ended in 311,

more Christians, it is said,were slaughtered than in allprevious persecutionscombined.Somemay see the Roman

persecutionsoftheChristiansas a main theme in the firstthree centuries of theChristianera,othersseethemat most as a minor theme.What is clear is that thepicture of Christians in an‘underground’ church,worshippingby stealth in the

catacombs, being ruthlesslysought out by a uniformlyhostile state and fed to lionsis a picture hardly borne outby the facts. Sporadic andaffecting only a very smallnumber of Christians, thepersecutions probably werenot major negative forces inthe process of the growth ofthe Christian religion. Yetthroughout this period fromthe time of Nero to theconversion of Constantine

(312) the Christian religionwas not only officiallyproscribed but, perhapsmoreimportantly,wastheobjectofsuspicion, hideous rumoursand popular outbursts of ill-treatment. Not totally securein theRoman state, the earlyChristiansdidnotknowwhenor where persecution orrioting might erupt againstthem. Also – and its weightdefies measurement – theheroic and peaceful way in

which many Christiansreceivedthe‘martyr’scrown’attracted the admiration ofpagans. Tertullian’s well-knownepigramthatthebloodofmartyrsactedasaseedforthe growth of the Christianreligion (semen est sanguisChristianorum) reflects theview that persecutionmerelystrengthened Christianity.Still, it is fair to say that anoveremphasis of the popularopposition and official

persecutionsprobablydistortsthehistoricalrealities.

Constantine,controversyand

conversion

At the time of Constantine’sconversion (312) and theEdict of Milan (313) the

Christians composed perhapsone-tenth or so of thepopulationoftheempirewitha somewhat largerconcentrationintheEastthanin the West. WhileConstantine’smotives canbedebated, the effect of hispolicy transformed thereligious culture of theRomanworldandwasclearlya defining moment in thehistory of the church. Freenow from persecution – a

tolerated church (ecclesiatolerabilis) – the Christianreligionprosperedas itneverhadbefore.Bytheendofthecentury the majority of thepeopleprofessedChristianity,which in 392, in effect,becametheofficialreligionoftheRomanstate.From apostolic times the

movement had someorganization:theunitwasthelocal church (ecclesia). Thelocal community at Corinth

was known as the church ofCorinth, and so it was withthe other local Christiancommunities.At eachchurchsomepersonpresided;hewascalledbydifferentnamesbuthas become known as‘bishop’. He and hiscommunity welcomed newmembers in an initiation rite(baptism with water andaffirmation of the Christianname). They worshippedtogetherinprivatehomesata

Eucharist (‘thanksgiving’)that memorialized the LastSupper of Christ with hisapostles. By the time ofConstantine the ‘bishops’ ofthegreatchurchesatAntioch,Alexandria and Romeexercised authority beyondtheir local churches.Constantine’s establishmentof a ‘new Rome’ on theBosporusat thesmallportofByzantium, towhichhegavehis own name, meant that

Constantinoplewouldtakeitsplace with these three andwould play a prominent partinchurchaffairs.The emergence of

Christianityintothefull lightof day provided theopportunity and, indeed, thenecessity for Christians toreflect on the nature of theirreligion.TheNewTestamentprovidedinspirationalreadingbutnotanorganizedbodyofChristian theology.

Differences soon emergedand focused on the centralissue of the Christianreligion: thenatureofChrist.The gospels declared that hewas the Messiah, thefulfilment of the prophecies,theredeemerofmankind, theexpectation of the nations.But what was he? Was hemerelyagoodandgreatmanwhose message of hope andloveand thepre-eminenceofthe spirit touched the hearts

of men and women? Or washe more? Did Jesus ofNazarethpartakeof thedeityin some way? If so, how?Was the ‘Son of God’ reallyGod? And if so, how couldthis be if there is only oneGod? Simply put, the tworelated issues which were totroubleChristianityinitslonghistory were the divinity ofChrist and the nature of theGodhead. The issues areobviously intertwined and go

to theveryheartofChristianbelief.In a moment of great

theatre Emperor Constantine,in325,tooktheplaceofpre-eminence at a council ofbishops at Nicaea to resolvethe dispute about the natureof Christ. A holy priest ofAlexandria, Arius, had beenteachingthattherewasatimewhen Christ was not, thatGod the Father created hissonoutofnothing(exnihilo)

and endowed his creaturewith extraordinary, divine-like powers. This was notChristtheGod,butChristthecreature. Before the matterwasofficiallyresolvedbythiscouncil at Nicaea and latercouncils at Constantinople(381) and Chalcedon (451),much of Christendom wasrivenintotwocampsovertheissueofthedivinityofChrist.In the fourth century, thedebate centred on which

Greek word accuratelydescribed the relationship ofChristtoGodtheFather:washe of the same substance astheFather δm¨όυσιος (homo-ousios) or merely of likesubstance to the Fatheró̔μοιύσιος (homoi-ousios)?Only the frivolous wouldscornthisasadebateovertheGreekletterι(iota):itwas,infact, a debate over whetherChristisGodoronlygodlike.Thecreeddevelopedbythese

councils, generally called theNiceneCreedandstillusedinthe rites of Christianchurches,assertsthatChristisGod (i.e., ó̔μούσιoς, of thesame substance as theFather). The Arians weredefeated, but their teachingwas to live on among manyGerman tribes who wereconverted to Christianity inits Arian form. SubsequentdebatecentredonhowChristcould be both the immutable

God and the clearly mutablehuman.HowcouldtheSonofGodbecomeincarnateintimeandplace?Whatisthenatureof this incarnate God (‘theWordmadeflesh’)?Aretheretwo persons, one divine andone human? The councils,while leaving room fortheological speculation,taught that Christ was onepersonwho is fullyGod andfully human. Theologianswere later to explain this

union of the divine andhuman (thehypostaticunion)by distinguishing betweenperson and nature: they aremetaphysically different and,hence, the person Christcould have two natures, onedivineandonehuman.Aclearlyrelatedissuewas

apparent to all: if Jesus isGodandisdistinctfromGodtheFather,whyare therenottwo gods? how couldChristianity escape from

polytheism? And the matterwas further involved by thebeliefthattheHolySpiritalsois God and also is distinctfrom theFather and theSon.Monotheismwasobviouslyatstakeinthistrinitariandebate.The Christian orthodoxy thatemerged held to a Trinity:one God and three divinepersons. It was later to besummedupintheAthanasianCreed:

Ita deus pater, deus filius, deusspiritussanctus,Et tamen non tres dii, sed unusestdeus.

(Thus, God the Father, God theSon,GodtheHolySpirit,YetnotthreegodsbutoneGod.)

Here, again, later theologianswere to apply to this‘mystery’ the samemetaphysical distinctionbetween person and nature:God can have one nature(divine) and three persons

(Father,SonandHolySpirit).The fourth and fifth

centuries witnessed more –much more – than doctrinaldisputes. The very councilsjust mentioned attest to thefact that therewasasenseofthe church, the widercommunity of Christianbelievers, which was morethan a collection of localchurches:thewholebeingnotonlymore but different fromthe sum of its parts. This

sense of the Christian –authorsby this timeused theword‘Catholic’–churchcanalso be seen in the body ofChristianliterature,fromEastandWest,whichwaswrittennot merely for the localchurchbutforthewholebodyof Christian believers. Ifexamplesareonlygivenherefrom the Latin West, it isbecause thesebecamepartofthe medieval library.Augustine(354–430)wasthe

greatest mind of his age anddevotedmuchofhistalentstowriting theological works(e.g. De trinitate, On theTrinity), which became thesubject of commentariesthroughout theMiddle Ages.HisConfessionsdescribesforthe ages the story of theanguishofasoulinsearchofrest. In the City of God hepresented a theological viewof human history which stillfinds an audience. If

Augustinewasanguished,hiscontemporary Jerome (d.420)was irascible.Anoften-repeated anecdote has amodernpope shakinghis fistatastatueofStJeromeintheVatican garden and saying‘How did you become asaint?’ Yet, despite hisirascibility, Jerome was togive the Middle Ages itsgreatest book, the translationoftheGreekBibleintoLatin,known historically as the

Latin Vulgate. AndcompletingthetrinityoftheseLatin‘FathersoftheChurch’is the urbane Ambrose (d.397), Roman official whobecame bishop ofMilan andhumbled the emperorTheodosius the Great. Hisprose reflected the sonoritasoftheproseofCicero,whoseDe officiis (On Duties)Ambrose used as amodel towrite about Christian ethics.These great Fathers of the

Latin church – to be joinedlater byGregory the Great –were impelled by a sense ofthechurchwhichtranscendedthe merely local andprovincialandwhichwasthecommunityofallbelievers.One of the most

remarkable events in worldhistory has to be theconversion of the RomanEmpire to Christianity, aprocess largely of the fourthcentury. Students of Roman

historyareused toadivisionof their subject into theRoman Republic and theRoman Empire. To these athird should be added, theChristian Roman Empire,which was clearly a part ofancienthistory.Fromasmallminority in 312 Christianscametoformthemajoritybyat least the 380s. Christianchurches were built in thebasilica style. In Rome, StPaul’s-Without-the-Walls,

built about 380 and rebuiltafter a fire in 1823 to theoriginal design, remainsperhaps the best example ofits type. By the end of thefourth century there wereseveral thousand monksliving in the desert outsideAlexandria inEgypt.Even indistant Britain, Christianityhad become firmlyestablished.Ithadalready,inthethirdcentury,haditsfirstmartyr, Alban, slain at

Verulamium, and afterChristian emancipation threebishopsfromBritainattendedthe church council held atArles in 314, and bishopsfrom Britain are known tohave attended the council atRimini in 359. Also, theremainsofaChristianchurchatSilchester,alargecemeteryatDorchester and a hoard ofChristian plate at WaterNewton (Northamptonshire)attest to a large Christian

communityinRomanBritain.At the other end of theRoman world, a Christiancommunity was beingestablishedinthelandsbelowthe Caucasus in Armenia,where Tiridates (d. 314),client king to the Romanemperor, was converted andhis people soon followed.These examples could bemultiplied. While the actualprocess of Christianizationchallenges precise definition

and measurement, it is clearthat, within decades after itstoleration by Constantine,rather than centuries,Christianity had apredominant place in thereligious life of the Romanworld.

Furtherreading

Thestartingplace,ofcourse,is the New Testament. Thefour gospels and the Acts oftheApostlesdescribe the lifeof Christ and the life of theearly Christian community,while the epistles of earlyChristian leaders provideinsight into the issues thatconcerned them and theirflocks.Of contemporary histories

the most accessible is TheHistory of theChurch:From

Christ to Constantine,published as a PenguinClassic (Harmondsworth,Mddsx, 1960, and frequentlyreprinted), by Eusebius(c.260–c.340), who sufferedimprisonment, became abishop and was a friend ofEmperor Constantine. Itsheds much light on theexperiences of the earlyChristians. An accessible,comprehensiveworkisHenryChadwick, The Church in

Ancient Society: FromGalilee toGregory theGreat(Oxford,2001).For theearlypost-apostolicperiodonemayconsult W.A. Meeks, TheFirst Urban Christians: TheSocial World of the ApostlePaul (New Haven andLondon,1983),whichadoptstheapproachofsocialhistory.On persecutions one may

begin with W.H.C. Frend,Martyrdom and Persecutionin theEarlyChurch (Oxford,

1965).Alivelydebateonthequestion can be found in thejournalPastandPresent,vols26 (1963) and 27 (1964).Also, one should see P.S.Davies, ‘The Origin andPurposeofthePersecutionofAD 303’, Journal ofTheological Studies 40(1989), 66–94. A volumeconcerned with thatpersecution is The GreatPersecution (eds D. VincentTwomey and Mark

Humphries; Dublin, 2009);seeparticularly the article byProfessorHumphries(pp.11–32).RamseyMacMullenmakes

interestingobservationsaboutthe spread of Christianity inChristianizing the RomanEmpire(A.D.100–400)(NewHaven and London, 1984).J.N.D. Kelly provides adescription of the theologicaldevelopments in EarlyChristian Doctrine (5th edn;

London, 1977) as doesJaroslav Pelikan in TheEmergence of the CatholicTradition,100–600 (vol.1ofThe Christian Tradition: AHistoryoftheDevelopmentofDoctrine, Chicago andLondon, 1971). For a morespecialized work see R.P.C.Hanson, The Search for theChristian Doctrine of God:TheArianControversy,318–381 (Edinburgh, 1988). TwoworksonStAugustineshould

be mentioned: Peter Brown,Augustine of Hippo: ABiography(newedn;London,2000)andSergeLancel,SaintAugustine(tr.AntoniaNevill;London,2002).

2THE

BEGINNINGOFTHE

MIDDLEAGES

The Middle Ages did not

begin in the year 500,although that date is oftenused in a shorthand way, ausage to which only thepedantic will take exception.Yet the world and westernEurope, in particular, werelittle changed between 499and 501. It makes morehistorical sense to see aperiod of time during whichtheancientworldwasendingand the medieval worldbeginning. This age of

transition, in which old andnew were intermixed, lastedfor several centuries, and thehistoricalrealitythatemergedwasessentiallydifferentfromthat which preceded, asdifferent as the world ofCharlemagne was from theworld of Theodosius I. Evenputting dates to this age oftransition is hazardous, butdates placing these twohistoricalfiguresateitherendwould fit the historical

realities, very roughly from400 to 750 (some call thisperiodLateAntiquity.)Attheendof the fourth century thehistorical focus was on theMediterranean Sea and thelands of the Roman Empirealong its entire littoral. Itssouthern boundary was theSaharadesertanditsnorthernboundary at Hadrian’s WallinBritainandalong the linesof the Rhine and DanubeRivers fromtheNorthSea to

the Black Sea. In the eighthcentury that political andcultural world no longerexisted. The Roman Empirethat existed by that timewasbut a fragment: the easternpart of the old empire northof the Mediterranean Sea.Thisregion–Iberiaexcepted– was under the politicalcontrol ofGermanic peoples.Andthesouthern,easternandeventhewesternshoresoftheseawerecontrolledbyanew

and powerful force, Islam,whose world stretched fromthePyreneestothePunjab.Inthe next chapter we shallbriefly view the East, theattempts of Justinian to sewtogether that which wasirreparable, and also theextraordinary emergence ofIslam. But our main focusmust be on western Europe,for the Middle Ages were aphenomenon of westernEurope, although, to be sure,

there were relations withneighbours, Byzantium andtheEasternChurchtotheeastand Islam to the south andsouth-west. The geographicalboundaries of medievalEurope had theMediterraneanas itssouthernboundary and, in time,extended beyond the ArcticCircle to the north. Itswestern boundary was theGreat Sea and its easternboundary the easternmost

lands of the Germans, yetbothoftheseboundarieswereto expand. Any cultural mapofmedievalEurope from thetenth and eleventh centuriesonwards would have toinclude Iceland and southernGreenland, and the easternlinemovedfurthereastward–amedievalDrangnachOsten– as Slavic peoples adoptedLatinChristianity.The peoples in these lands

were not the same at the

beginning and end of thistransition. The Romans andthe Romanized peopleinhabited theRomanEmpire,whereasmedievalEuropehada decidedly Germanicelement. Some scholarsdefinetheMiddleAgesasthefusion of three elements:Roman, Germanic andChristian. An absolutelycrucial phenomenon was theentrance and settlement ofGermanic tribes within the

old empire in theWest. Theempire after 487 – and somewould say evenearlier –hadlittle effective power in theWest. When the barbarianmigration ended, politicalunity in the West was nomore and a plurality ofsuccessor states had comeinto being under Germanickings, and, when largerpolitical ambitions werevoiced, they were in theGermanic tones of Frankish

kings. If the Roman worldcanbedescribedashavinganeast–west axis, then themedievalworldcanbesaidtohave a north–south axis thatlinked the Mediterraneanpeninsulas with lands to thenorth,even, in time,with theScandinavian lands to the farnorth. These were changesnotofadaybutofcenturies.

TheGermans

A word about terminology.Anthropologists see thecomplex elements in thesepeoples whom we callGerman and warn of thedangerincallingthesepeople‘German’,whereas ‘German-speaking’betterrespectstheirdifferences and their ownsocial structures, where

ethnic purity should not beassumed. Where the word‘German’ is used here, let itbe understood in this lattersense.Itwouldbeeasytoseethe

migration of Germanicpeoples into the RomanEmpire as the end result ofevents which took place incentral Asia in the late firstcenturyAD. Itmight be saidthat, if the Chinese had notinflicted a devastating defeat

on tribal peoples called theHiung-nu (Huns), theMiddleAges would never haveoccurred.Thisdominotheoryof history sees a series ofevents leading from thisdefeat of the Huns to thedismemberment of theRoman Empire. The Huns,fiercewarriors on horseback,licking their wounds, headedwestward and eventually(and, indeed, abruptly)appeared in south-eastern

Europe in the fourth century.To escape their fury thepeoplewhowereintheirway– various groups callingthemselves Goths – movedwestward,eventually into theempire,asdidothersimilarlypressed Germanic peoples.The integrity of the empirewas lost, and new structuresreplaced the old. So thedominotheorygoes.There is, no doubt, some

truth in this scenario and

those events can be sodescribed, but history as itunfolds is very rarely asequence of simple causes:monocausality reduces thestudy of history tomeaningless simplicities.Other factors occurred atevery stage in thesedevelopments,andtherewerealwayspressures–economic,social and military – whichcould force peoples to moveon.Andtherewereinevitable

minglings of peoples, whichmakes ethnic identitiesamong migrating tribesdifficulttoverify.Althoughasequence of migrations canbe plotted on the map, thehistorian must allow forunmappablecomplexitiesandmultiplecauses.TheGermanicpeopleswho

inthe370slayin thepathofthe Hunnic horde hadmigrated south fromhomelands near the Baltic

Sea over several centuries.Although these peoples hadnotbeenclearlydifferentiatedthere, the migrationsproduced more clearlydefined groupings, called‘tribes’inourhistoriography.The Goths – a reminder ofremoteoriginsremainsinthenameoftheislandofGotlandintheBalticSea–shouldnotbe seen on the eve of theHunnic invasions as existinginaclear-cutdivisionof two

groups, Ostrogoths andVisigoths. These terms areanachronistic. Theywere notused in contemporarysources, where the peoplesaresimply

Map2Germanicsettlementpatternc.534

commonlycalledGoths.Twogroups are indeed known tous, but it would be rashindeed to think that therewere not other Gothicpeoples. The groupings thatappear are (i) the Tervingi,who lived west of theDneister River in Moldaviaand perhaps in part ofWallachia, and (ii) the

Greuthungi,whowere in thesteppelandnorthoftheBlackSea and east of theDneister.The Goths were a peoplewho, no doubt withsignificant indigenouspopulations,livedinthelandsbetween the Danube and theDon Rivers. It was thesepeople, theGoths,whom theHunsmetastheyinvadedtherich lands of the modernUkraine in 376. Moreparticularly, it was parts of

these people living in theeastern regions of theseGothic lands who werestunned by the fierce –ferocious and beast-like, sayhardly impartial sources –horde of the Huns. Indesperation, refuge wassoughtwithin theconfinesofthe empire, and in that yearmost, but not all, of theTervingi and some of theGreuthungi, who had fledwest, were allowed to enter

the empire. Perhaps it wasbecause the emperor Valenswasdistractedby troublesonthe Persian frontier that heagreedthattheseGothscouldcrosstheDanubeandsettleinnorthern Thrace. He furtheragreed to provision them inreturn for their militaryservice when required. (Thedescendants of these Gothswhocrossed theDanube intoThracein376wouldsoonbecalledVisigoths,andwemay

now conveniently call themby that name.) Almostimmediate discontent – notenough food soon enough –turned into violence. ThiscaughtValens’sattention,butRoman miscalculationscontinued and the imperialarmy was defeated atAdrianople by theseVisigoths (378), the emperorfalling with his soldiers.While modern historiansdispute the significance of

this battle, its contemporaryhistorian AmmianusMarcellinushadnodoubtandprophetically called it ‘thisirreparable disaster, whoseconsequenceswilllongweighupon the destinies of theempire’.Thereafter,Germanswere tobe a constant featurewithin the Roman Empire,and, whatever the argumentsof some modern historians,theworldwasneverthesameafterAdrianople.

The Roman Empiretowards theendof thefourthcentury, before the Gothicincursions across theDanubeand their military successes,waslittledifferentinsizeandshapefromtheempireof200years earlier. The externalboundarieswere virtually thesame.Thenorthernboundary,thegreatstretchoftheRiversRhine and Danube with asystem of fortifications(limes) standing between

them near their headwaters,wasalwaysthemostdifficultfrontier to maintain. It wasextended at one point toincludetheprovinceofDacia,from which Romania tracesitself. The major changesconcerned internal divisions,chieflytheworkofDiocletian(284–305): the one empirehadtwoemperors,oneintheWest in Rome and the otherintheEastinConstantinople,eachwith a Caesar assisting.

These internal administrativedivisionsnotwithstanding,theempirewasintactin376.Yetby the early sixth century itwas a different world. From476 therewas no emperor inthe West, and the Easternemperor had only nominalauthoritywestoftheAdriatic.In the West itself, Germanickings ruledwhereonce ruledAugustus, Hadrian, MarcusAurelius, Septimus Severusand Constantine. The

Vandals, their name now,perhaps unfairly, having apejorative meaning, hadcrossed the upper Rhine,pillaged their way throughGaul and Iberia beforesettling in North Africa.Behindthem,asitwere,camethe Visigoths, who, severaldecades after Adrianople,marched into Italy, briefly‘sacked’Rome(410)and,forwant of food, moved intosouth-western Gaul before

being pushed by the Franksinto what became theirhistorical home, VisigothicSpain. TheOstrogoths – i.e.,the Grethungi and others –followed later still, and theemperor adeptly sent themwestward,whereby500theyruled Italy, their leader therecalled patricius and neverimperator. Those Germanslivingeastof theRhinewereofadifferentsort,particularlythe Franks, who were to

become major players inmedievalhistory.TheFrankscrossed the Rhine and, invarious groupings, settled innorthern parts of RomanGaul. By 500 they had asingle ruler, Clovis, whoseland stretched from what issouth-western Germanyacross Gaul to the Atlanticwaters of theBay of Biscay.OtherGermanicpeoplesweretakingcontrolofonceRomanlands, as, for example, the

Burgundians in the Rhonevalley. Britain had beenabandoned by the Romanlegions(c.410),anditsnativeCeltic people (the Britons)were left with little defenceagainst invading Anglo-Saxons.This much different

situation of the early sixthcentury should not tempt usto conclude that Romanculturewas stampedout in aWestnowruledbyGermanic

kings: it was not. ThatTheodoric, the OstrogothickingofItaly,neverattemptedto use the title of emperor istelling. Earlier, according tothe historian Orosius, theVisigothic king Ataulf, whohadmarriedPlacidia,sisteroftheemperor,

decided to seek for himself theglory of restoring the fame ofRome in all its fullness and ofadding to it by thepowerof theGoths, for he wanted to beremembered by posterity as the

restorer of the Roman Empire,sincehecouldnotalterit.

Latin,itsclassicalpuritynowwell in decline, was still thedominant tongue, and thelanguages spoken today intheseplaces,withonlyminorexceptions, are Romancelanguages,offspringsofLatin(Italian in Italy, French inFrance, Spanish andPortugueseinIberia).Noonewould argue that thepartsof

Romania ruled by Germankings experienced a goldenage, but a period of culturaldecline might well haveoccurred even without thecoming of the Germans.Probably never large innumber – estimates yieldconflicting results – theGermans were never morethanaminorityinItaly,IberiaandsouthernGaul.The coming of the

Germansposedseriousissues

for the Catholic church.When these peoples enteredtheempire,noneofthemwasCatholic: they were eitherArianorpagan.Crucialinthefirst stage of the conversionof the Goths and others toChristianity was the missionofUlfilas(c.311–83).HewaspartGreekandpartGoth,andon his Greek side he wasChristian. His grandparentshad been taken away fromtheir native Cappadocia and

abductedbytheGothstotheirlands to thenorth. Itwas thebilingual, Christian Ulfilaswhowasthepivotalfigureinthe early Christianization oftheGermans.In341,whileatConstantinople with anembassy of Goths, he wasmadeabishopwithamissionto convert his fellow Goths.To say hewas aChristian isto tell only part of the story:he, in fact, was an ArianChristianandanArianbishop

and an Arian missionary tohis fellow Goths. Theirconversion to ArianChristianity contained theseeds of future problems.Besides his missionarysuccesses, Ulfilasaccomplishedtworemarkablefeats: he created the writtenGothiclanguagebyinventingits alphabet and then hetranslated the Greek Bibleinto Gothic. When theVisigoths entered the empire

in 376, they were led byFritigern, aconvert, and theyhadUlfilas in theircompany.That their holy book was inthe German language andtheir religious services werealso in the same language –not as surprising as it mayseem, since the West hadservices in the vernacular,i.e., Latin – served tofacilitate the conversion oftheir German brothers toArianChristianity,asthey,in

turn, entered the empire.Thus, theOstrogoths in Italypractised what the nativeChristians considered ahereticalformofChristianity.AndsoitwasinNorthAfricathat the Arian Vandalsharshly persecuted Catholics.The Visigoths, while insouthern Gaul and later inSpain, were long faithful tothereligionofUlfilas.Two societies, then, were

tobefoundintheWestinthe

fifth century, one Germanicand Arian and the otherRoman and Catholic. Thatthere were hostile relationsbetweenthesetwosocietiesisclearenough.ArianVisigothssackedRomein410andsenta chill through the empire,yet,intruth,theystayedonlya short while before movingon in their quest for food.After their settlement inSpain, the VisigothscontinuedtoprofessArianism

forover100years.Also,itistruethatStAugustinediedatHippo in North Africa whilethe Arrian Vandals besiegedhis city and that theVandalsdecimatedthehigherranksofold Roman, Catholic societyintheirnewland.Yetallwasnot hostility, and remarkablemen and achievements givean irenic tint to the picture.Theodoric, the OstrogothickingofItaly(493–526),whileat Ravenna, built the finely

decorated church of S.ApollinareNuovo.Ingeneral,he tolerated CatholicChristianity. During theperiod of Ostrogothic rule inItaly, eminent Catholicwriters wrote works whichweretoresonateforcenturies.Boethius (c.480–524),

representingthefullflowerofChristianRome, the scion ofa senatorial family, wasappointed magisterofficiorum by Theodoric in

522.His imprisonment in thefollowing year on charges ofconspiringwiththeByzantineemperor against the king(which he strongly denied)gave the world the classicConsolations of Philosophy,whichwouldlaterbefoundinvirtually every medievallibrary.Itwasamongthefirstbooks translated intovernacular languages – byKingAlfredintoOldEnglish,by Chaucer into Middle

English and by QueenElizabeth I into modernEnglish. At its end,Philosophy tellsBoethius, ‘Itis not in vain that you placeyour hope in God, nor areyour prayers to him in vain.…Your life isknownby thejudgewhoknows all.’ In theevent, Boethius was brutallyexecutedatPaviaasatraitor.In danger of being lost tosightbecauseofthebrillianceand dramatic circumstances

of the Consolations is thescheme thatBoethius started,but never finished, oftranslating the works of theGreek philosophers AristotleandPlatointoLatin.Helivedlongenoughtodothelogicalworks of Aristotle, but hisexecution deprived the WestofGreekthoughtatthattime,a loss which was not madegood until the twelfthcentury.It isnotentirelyidleto speculate how vastly

different the intellectual lifeof the Middle Ages wouldhave been if Boethius hadlived to complete his work.Sir Richard Southern hascalled him ‘the schoolmasterofmedievalEurope’.Theodoric, in need of

Latinists to compose officialdocuments, took on anothermember of the senatorialclass, Cassiodorus(490–c.583). HisVariae is acollection of documents

which he composed for theOstrogothic king; they reveala skilled rhetorician. Royalemployment was but aprelude to his founding themonastery of Vivarium inCalabria, where he was towrite the influentialInstitutiones (c.562). Adescription of the curriculumfor his monks, theInstitutiones exercised aprofound influence on thehistory of the West. By

dividing his treatise into twoparts, the first concerningbiblical studyand the secondconcerning secular study ofthe seven liberal arts,Cassiodorus allowed,probably not by design, theseparationofreligiousstudiesfrom secular studies.Knowledgeof the liberalartscouldhaveaplaceonitsown,separate from religiousknowledge. The full title ofthis work underlines this

distinction: Institutionesdivinarum et saeculariumlitterarum (Institutions ofdivine and secular learning).Only three of the survivingmanuscripts of theInstitutiones have both parts,the rest have either part oneorparttwo,thusemphasizingthis bifurcation. To a verylarge extent the position ofthe liberal arts in themedievalschoolsand,indeed,themodern universities owes

much to this sixth-centuryChristianRomanintellectual.More difficult to assess is

the historical importance ofthecontemporaryofBoethiusand Cassiodorus, the monkBenedict of Nursia(c.480–c.550). Although StBenedict is frequently hailedas the ‘Patriarch of WesternMonasticism’, it is highlydoubtful that such a title canbe justified by historicalevidence. Why such a

sobriquet in the first place?Traditional historiographydescribed this holy man in aversion which was longreceived.Hecame, it is said,toRomefromnearSpoletoasayoungstudent,but,appalledbytheexcessesofthecity,hewentofftoliveasahermitatSubiaco in the Sabine hillsnearRome.Laterhefoundedthe best known of ChristianmonasteriesatMonteCassinoon a hill above the town of

Cassianum near Naples, amonastery unnecessarilydestroyed by allied forces in1944. His posthumous famerestssolelyon theRuleofStBenedict,which,intime,wasto become the blueprint forthe monastic order in theMiddle Ages and beyond.The ruledescribes the lifeofcenobitical monks – they atetogether a common meal(coena) – under the kindlyauthorityofanabbot.Itwasa

lifeofdedication,yetalifeofmoderation, avoidingextremes of laxity andseverity. The rule strikes themodern reader as sensible,discreet, practical and, in aword, liveable. We read,‘Andsoweestablishaschoolfor God’s service (dominiciscola servitii), in which wehope we are founding aninstitution where there isnothing harsh or burdensome(nihil asperum, nihil grave).’

He outlined a stablecommunity with a life livedinprayer (opusdei, theworkofGod)andwork.Theabbotshould mitigate the rule fortheagedandinfirm.Thisrulewith its lofty idealism andpragmatic flexibilityrecommended itself to theages. It is on this subsequentsuccess of the Rule of StBenedict that hinges thehistoricalplaceofBenedictofNursia.Whatweknowabout

his life is largely, almostsingly, derived from hisbiography written by PopeGregorytheGreatabout593,over four decades afterBenedict’s death. A work ofhagiography, Gregory’s lifeattributes miracles toBenedict – he made waterflow from rocks – and givesthe essential lines of his life,summarizedabove.Abouttherule, Gregory merelycommended it for its

discretion and clarity, but heshowed no indication that hewas familiar with it. Thesixth-century abbot Benedictwould be but a minorfootnotetothehistoryofthatperiodwereitnotforhisrule.YetStBenedictdidnotwritetheRule of StBenedict as itnow stands. Very largesections of this rule weretaken substantially from theolderRuleof theMaster andothersectionscontainstriking

parallels and echoes of theolder rule too. The mostfamouspartsoftheRuleofStBenedict (e.g. the prologue,thechaptersonobedience,onsilence, on the steps ofhumility)arenot theworkofSt Benedict. Hugh Lawrencewrites that ‘all the essentialsof St Benedict’s Rule are tobe found in theworks of hisunknown predecessor’. Ofcourse, itmust be granted toStBenedictthatheorganized

what became known as hisrule and added some notablecontributions of his own tothe work of the Master andthat this rule became themodelformonasticismintheMiddle Ages. Benedict’shistorical place belongssomewherebetweenpatriarchofwesternmonasticismandaminorItalianabbot.

ConversionoftheFranks

It was as pagans, not ArianChristians, that the FranksenteredtheRomanEmpireinthe fifth century. Theirs wasnot an immigration enmasseinto Roman lands. Theyexpanded from lands northand east of the Rhine: theSalian Franks from the lands

nearthesalinesea(theNorthSea) north of the upperRhine, and the RipuarianFranksfromthelandseastofthebanks(ripa)ofthemiddleRhine. The former enteredinto the Roman province ofBelgicaSecunda,establishingthemselvesatTournai,whereamong their early chieftainswas Merovech, whose namewasgiventothedynasty(i.e.,Merovingian). TheRipuarians crossed theRhine

in the area now called theRhineland and Luxembourg,takingsuchcitiesasCologne,Trier and Metz. The twobranches of Franks becameunitedundertheMerovingiankingClovis.FewmomentsinEuropean history were trulyas momentous in theirconsequences as theconversion of the Frankishking Clovis to CatholicChristianity(c.500),aboutthesincerity of which

contemporary sources leavelittle doubt. It is unfortunatethat much of what we knowof Clovis comes from thedescriptiongivenbyGregoryof Tours in his Histories ofthe Franks, a hostilesecondary source writtenmore than six decades afterthedeathofClovis.Therewesee a cruel, treacherous,cunning perpetrator of rusesand assassinations, the verystereotype of the worst kind

ofbarbarian.Primarysources,the only truly reliableevidence for him, showanother Clovis: theembodiment of the synthesisof Roman, Germanic andChristianattributes,who,inaremarkableway,didmuch toshape the emergingmedievalworld.Bymovingsouth,first,to the lands between theSeineandtheLoireand,later,by defeating the ArianVisigoths (507), thus

incorporating much ofsouthern Gaul, Clovis gavethe general contours to whatwas known as Francia andnowFrance,which,thankstoClovis’s conversion (c.500),can claim to be ‘the eldestdaughter of the church’. Hiscontemporary Genevièveconstructed a substantialchurchat theburialsiteofStDenis near Paris, and, at hergrave on the hill that stillbears her name (Mont Ste

Geneviève) on the left bankof the Seine, Clovis built achurch, where in 511 hisbody was buried: the personwhoseconversionensuredtheeventual conversion of otherGermanicpeoplestoCatholicorthodoxy.Roman Gaul was long a

Catholic province, and, thus,to the Romans, the Frankishconverts were fellowbelievers rather than hostileheretics.Therehadlongbeen

bishops in Christian Gaul;they and their flocks couldview the Franks as liberatorsfrom the Arian Visigoths.Notable among thesebishopswas Caesarius of Arles (d.542), a dedicated pastor ofsouls, some of whosesermons still survive. In theyear in which Clovis was todie, Caesarius called theGallo-Roman bishops to acouncil at Orléans. TheFranks did not overturn nor

did they attempt to overturnthe existing ecclesiasticalorganization: each bishopruled over a diocese(parochia), whichcorresponded to the Romancity (civitas).By575 the sonof a senatorial family,Gregory, became bishop ofTours, within whosejurisdiction came thebishoprics of Le Mans,Rennes, Angers, Nantes andfourothers.Fortheyears575

to 591 Gregory’s Ten BooksofHistories – only centurieslater called History of theFranks – is a contemporaryaccount of Francia and,especially, of the church inFrancia. The conversion ofthe Franks was attained onlyin a limited sense by theceremonyofbaptism:whatinfact occurred, in RosamondMcKitterick’s words, was ‘avery gradual process bywhich the very complexion

and context of Frankishsociety, its religion, ethics,law and social institutions,became completelytransformed’.

CatholicSpain

The Arian Visigoths, nowpushedsouthof thePyreneesby the Franks, established

themselves in Spain as aminority in a Hispano-Roman, Catholic population.Before the sixth century wasout, there was accomplishedwhattheswordofClovishadnot, the conversion of theVisigoths. Their great kingLeovigild (568–86), facedwiththeconversionofhissonHermenegild (579), launcheda persecution againstCatholics. His successor,Recared I (586–601), was

converted shortly after hissuccession, and he thensummoned bishops, CatholicandArian,toameetingathiscapitalatToledo.ThereattheThird Council of Toledo(589)Catholicismbecametheofficial religion of theVisigothic state. Althoughsome Arians refusedconversion, the Visigoths, ingeneral, quickly adopted theCatholic faith. An aspect ofVisigothic rule that was

perhaps not a precedentstrictly speaking was thetreatment of the Jews,whichremindsoneofalaterchapterin Spanish history. KingSisebut (612–20) gave theJews the choice betweenbaptism and banishment.Those who remained – thebanished fled to Gaul –constituted a majority of theJews, and they became thefirst in a long lineof crypto-Jews. The scholarly

archbishopofSeville,Isidore,opposed this order and, withother bishops, succeeded inhaving it overturned at theFourth Council of Toledo(633). The effect was onlytemporary: subsequentcouncils of Toledo (notablythe Sixth in 638 and theEighth in 653) renewed anti-Jewish canons. Before thelightofVisigothicSpainwasextinguished by Islam (711–19), it had been dimmed for

some time. The only recentlight of any brilliance wasIsidore of Seville (d. 636),who knew, often throughintermediaries, many of thegreatworksoftheancientandearly Christian worlds. Withhis greatest work,Etymologies, Isidore joinedCicero, Augustine, Jerome,Boethius and Cassiodorus asone of the most popularauthors of the Middle Ages.Extant today in over 1,000

manuscripts, Etymologiescontained much more thanthe etymological derivationsof words: it was a virtualencyclopedia of what wasknown at the time. Its 20books treat such subjects asmedicine,law,theliberalarts,God and his angels andsaints, the earth anduniverseas well as pastimes, food,drink and furniture. It hasbeencalled‘thebasicbookofthe entire Middle Ages’.

Bede, in far-offNorthumbriaa century later, borrowedheavily from Isidore for hisDe natura rerum (On theNatureofThings).YetIsidorewasmore than a compiler ofextant knowledge; his use ofsources, particularly withregard to moral behaviour,reveals a practical emphasis.This bishop of Seville hasenjoyed a long life in hiswritings,alifethatinEuropelasted till the Reformation

and in Spain in some waysintomoderntimes.

ConversionoftheIrish

Events at the uttermostextremity of Europe were tohave enormous influences onmedieval history. TheRomanshadconqueredCeltic

peoples inmuchofBritain –fortifications across theForth–Clyde isthmus markedthe northern frontier – butnever attempted to extendtheir sway over the islandtheycalledHibernia.Despitethe boast of the Romangeneral Agricola that hecould take Ireland with ‘onelegionand

Map3EarlyChristianIreland

some auxiliaries’, the landwhich theRomansonaclearday could see to the westremained outside the Romanworld. The Celtic peopleliving there, the Scotti, wholater expanded from thenorth-east of Ireland acrossthenarrowwaters tothelandthat was to bear their name,played a remarkable part in

the development of theChristian church. About thetime that Christianity arrivedin Ireland only one thing iscertain: it was before thecomingofStPatrick.Historyand myth are not easy toseparate in this story. Thebest modern opinionidentifies two separatemissions to Ireland. Theearliest(from431)wasbythebishop Palladius, who wassent as bishop to Ireland by

Pope Celestine to care forChristians already there. Hismission was concentrated ineastern Ireland (later to becalled Leinster). The secondmission was by the bishopPatrick, sent by his fellowbishops from Britain in thesecond half of the fifthcentury. He was activeparticularly in the west ofIreland (modern Co. Mayoand surrounding regions).Some conflation of the

accounts of these twomissions occurred in theseventh century. Patrick’sinfluence has become thedominant one in theconversionnarrativeowinginlarge part to the fact thatPatrick, unlike Palladius, leftwritings, especially hisConfessions. From hiswritings we learn that theChristian Patrick was fromBritain, the son of a Romanofficial,thatatage16hewas

carried off into slavery inIreland, where he remainedfor sixyears, thatheescapedand that, back in Britain, heheardinadreamthevoicesoftheIrishcallinghimback.Heconfesses further that hebaptized thousands, ordainedcountlesspriests,receivedthesons and daughters of kingsasmonks and virgins, and inone place he describedhimself as ‘bishop to theIrish’. Yet he came not as a

missionary but as a pastor tothe Christians already thereandonlylaterpreachedintheplacesoftheheathen.Patrickmade the friendship of localkings, and he also createdbishopsasPalladiusnodoubthad alsodone.HadPalladiuswritten an autobiographicalwork, one can speculate thathe rather than Patrick mayhave become known as theApostleofIreland.

Plate1Churchandroundtower,Clonmacnois,Co.Offaly.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

Within 100 years ofPatrick’s mission dozens ofmonasterieswerescattered ineverypartoftheisland.Nearthe year 500 there was abishop-abbot at Armagh andawoman,onlycenturieslatersaid to be Brigid, hadfoundedacommunityofholy

women at Kildare, whichonly much later became adouble community of menandwomen under an abbess.Perhaps more important wasDarerca, who, early in thesixth century, established acommunity for women.About all thiswewould liketo know much more, but,alas, reliable sources fail us.To mention only somefoundersofothermonasteriesknown to have existed at a

slightlylaterdate:StEndaontheAranIslands,StKieranatClonmacnois,overlookingtheRiver Shannon on its eastbank,StFinianatClonard,StBrendanatClonfert,StKevinatGlendalough(‘thevalleyofthe two lakes’), St Finbar onthe island at Cork, StColumba at Durrow west ofDublin and also at Derry inthe north. In no moredramatic place did Irishmonks seek God in solitude

than near the top of the 700foot rock soaring out of theAtlantic eightmiles from theKerry coast: Skellig Michaelwith its bee-hive cells andoratories. Yet the view thatPatrick imposed anecclesiastical organizationbased on bishops which wassoon replaced by one basedon abbots can no longer beheld.The post-Patrician Irishchurch had a morecomplicated structure. There

were, indeed, greatmonasteries and theirdaughters, which togetherformed federations, but therewere also churches allied togreatfamiliesaswellas‘free’churches. Bishops, probablyfollowing the lines of thetuaths (local tribalgroupings), exercised apastoral role over theirchurches and clergy. Therewas no master plan fororganizing the Irish church:

what happened wasdetermined by localconditions, and that differentstructures existed should notsurpriseus.The Irish monasticism of

this period had threemarkedcharacteristics. First, themonks lived stark lives,exposed to the whims ofnature and intensified byphysical penances. Saints arereputed to have spent nightsstanding in ice-cold water,

while reciting the psalms.Denying the body food,imposing hardships on thebody by long vigils and byharshpilgrimageswouldhaveproduced an immediate andunmistakable impact as,indeed, would the vigiliacrucis (standing in prayerwitharmsextendedcross-likefor long periods), repeatedgenuflections, self-flagellations and prolongedtotalfasts.

Second, the emphasis onpenance. Penitentials,manuals for confessors,existedinIrelandinthesixthcentury and were to beintroduced to the Continentby Celtic and Englishmissionaries. Theirappearance coincided withthe practice of individualsconfessing their sins to apriest followed by absolutionand the imposition of apenance. Penitentials gave

lists of appropriate penancesforspecificsins.Forexamplein one Irish book of the lateseventhcenturyweread,

Thepenanceformurdersissevenyearsonbreadandwater.

The penance for a mother whokills her own child is twelveyearsonbreadandwater.

The penance for eating horsemeat is four years on bread andwater.

The practice of commuting

penalties to prayers relievedsome of their severity, but,later, the Franks were toobject to the commuting ofpenalties to the payment offines. For centuries suchpenitential books providedthe clergy–or at leastmanyof them – with practicalinstruction in the care ofsouls.Inthiscontextofpenances

shouldbe seen thepeculiarlyIrish practice of the

Pilgrimage for Christ(peregrinatioproChristo),bywhichmonkswouldleavethesecurityoftheirmonasterytolive in voluntary exile instrangeplaces among strangepeoples or in places wheretherewerenopeopleatall.Itwas this act of penance thatbrought not only monks likeColumba to Iona andColumbanus to theContinentbutalsounnamedIrishmonkstouninhabitedplaceslikethe

Faroe Islands, 190 milesnorthof theShetland islands,andeventoIceland,faroutinthe North Atlantic, and,further still, according tolegend,tolandstothewest.These peregrini were not

missionaries in the ordinarysense, yet it would beincorrect not to call thosewho travelled east to theEuropean mainlandmissionary monks. InProfessorRiché’swords,they

were‘missionariesinspiteofthemselves’. On theContinentColumbanustookitas his duty ‘to visit thepeoples and preach theGospel to them’. So did hisdisciples. The mind bogglesat the extent of the IrishmonasticjourneystotheEast.Columba’s monastery on theisland of Iona in the InnerHebridesoffthewestcoastofScotland served as a centrefor the conversion of the

Picts. It was at that thrivingmonastery that some timelater the Book of Kells, thefinest example of insularmanuscript illumination, wasprobablyproduced.IfwecandateColumba’sfoundationatIona to 563, as we perhapsshould, then it was only ascantthreescoreyearsbeforeIona answered the invitationof Oswald, king ofNorthumbria, to send monksinto his kingdom. In 635

Aidan and the usual twelvemonks left Iona and foundedLindisfarne, again on anisland,offthenorth-eastcoastofEngland.Theextentofthetravelsof

Columbanus is fairly wellknown to us. In 590 or 591thismonkofBangorinUlsterwentwithtwelvecompanionson their pilgrimage. Beforehisdeath in615Columbanushad travelled into what wetoday call France, Belgium,

Germany, Switzerland,Austria and Italy, meetingwith kings and bishops andopening influentialmonasteries at Luxeuil,CorbieandBobbio.These,inturn, spawned countlessdaughter monasteries. Howmanyotherswere therewho,while not so colourful andprominent as Columbanus,carried Irish monastic waysdeep into the Europeanmainland, we may never

know. We know that FergilwasatSalzburgandKilianatWürzburg and others atRegensburg and Vienna intheGermanlands.Stillotherswere atLucca andFiesole inItaly,andperhapsStCataldo,whodiedinTarantoinApuliaonhiswaytotheHolyLand,was an Irish monk namedCathal.This extraordinary spread

of Irish monasticism on theContinentbroughtwith it the

RuleofStColumbanus.ThisIrish rule reflected Irishasceticism and emphasizedseverity,particularlyphysicalseverity.TheIrishrulestatedas its guiding principle, ‘Thechief part of themonk’s ruleis mortification.’ Violationsof the rule were to bepunishedharshly:

Hewhofailstosaygraceattableor to answer ‘Amen’ will bepunished with six blows. Also,hewho speakswhile eating, not

because of the needs of anotherbrother,willbepunishedwithsixblows.

If through negligence,forgetfulness or carelessness amonk spills an unusual amountof liquids or solids, he will begiven the long pardon in churchby prostrating himself withoutmovinganylimbwhiletheothermonkssingtwelvepsalmsat thetwelfthhour.

A monk who coughs whilechanting the beginning of apsalmwill be punishedwith sixblows. Also, he who bites thecup of salvation with his teeth,

six blows. He who receives theblessed bread with uncleanhands, twelve blows. If a monkcomes late to prayers, fiftylashes. If he comes noisily, fiftylashes … If he makes a noiseduringprayers,fiftylashes.

Thisphysicalseveritydidnotrecommend itself to monkson the Continent. Mixedmonasteries,whichcombinedthe Columban andBenedictine rules, appearedin the sixth century, and, inthe end, it was the more

moderateandflexibleRuleofStBenedictthatprevailedandbecamethepredominantformof monasticism in medievalEurope.Third,theplaceoflearning

in the Irish monastery isuniversally acknowledged.The judgement of BernhardBischoff stands: ‘Ireland justacenturyafter its conversiontoChristianitybecameoneofthe dynamic forces shapingthe future civilization of

Europe.’Theextent towhichIrish monasteries usedoriginal textsofclassicalandearly Christian writers maynot have been great –intermediaries were used,perhapseventoalargeextent– but the significance of theIrish contribution to learninglies elsewhere, in twointerrelatedways. In the firstplace, by the sixth century away – a pedagogy – wasdeveloped in Ireland by

which a foreign language,Latin, could be learned frombooks. The holy books – theBible and the ceremonials –were all in Latin. It was notonlytheliturgicalbutalsothetheological language of thechurch to which they wereconverted. Hence, it wasrequired forministers of thisreligion to learn this utterlyforeign language, and theylearned Latin much asmodern students learn it:

throughthestudyofgrammarand word lists. AlthoughPatrick, calling himself ‘amost uncultivated man’, hadapologized for his Latin,Columbanus had no need toapologize: he had a vital,verboseandvigorous style, astyle developed from thebook-learning of Latin. Thisform of pedagogy created bythe Irishwas laterbrought tothe court of Charlemagne bytheEnglishmonkAlcuinand

became amajor influence onthesubsequentlearningoftheuniversal language of theMiddle Ages. And IrishmonkscontributedtoWesterncivilization in another way:they not only studiedmanuscripts, they copiedthem. Their biblical andgrammatical commentarieswent with them to theContinent. The libraries atBobbio, St Gaul and, later,Salzburg, which were to

become manuscript centres,owedtheirexistenceandtheirconsiderable influence astransmitters of ancientlearning to monks who hadcome as pilgrims from thewesternmost part of theknownworld.Beforecontinuingthestory

of the conversion ofGermanic peoples, we mustlook to the East and see thetransformation there thatdefinedtheMiddleAges.

Furtherreading

Alden Rollins has compiledtwo helpful works ofreference:The Fall of Rome:AReferenceGuide(Jefferson,NC, and London, 1983) andRome in theFourthCentury:An Annotated Bibliographywith Historical Overview(Jefferson, NC, and London,1991).Foranimportantwork

which is both learned andaccessible see Peter Brown,TheWorld of Late Antiquity,A.D. 150–750 (London,1971). Chris Wickhamprovides an importantdescription and analysis ofthe social and economichistory of this period in hisFraming the Early MiddleAges: Europe and theMediterranean, 400–800(Oxford, 2005). R.W.Southern has written the

enormously influential TheMaking of the Middle Ages(London,1953andfrequentlyreprinted). Examining thechanges within the Christianworld from the fourth to thesixth centuries is Robert A.Markus, The End of AncientChristianity (Cambridge,1990). For a description ofthe upheavals of the fifthcentury see Bryan Ward-Perkins, The Fall of Romeand the End of Civilization

(Oxford,2005).For the end of the Roman

Empire in the West and theimpact of the GermanicmigrationsseePeterHeather,The Fall of the RomanEmpire: A New History ofRome and the Barbarians(Oxford,2006),whicharguesthat it was not internalproblems that caused theRomanEmpireintheWesttoend but the barbarianinvasions. Guy Halsall

provides a detailed politicalsurvey with anthropologicaland archaeological emphasesinBarbarianMigrations andthe Roman West, 376–568(Cambridge, 2007).Describingresidualpaganismand the gradual assimilationof some pagan practices isRamsay MacMullen’sChristianityandPaganisminthe Fourth to the EighthCenturies (New Haven,1997).

For the history of specificGermanic peoples seeThomas S. Burns, A Historyof the Ostrogoths(Bloomington, IN, 1984),Herwig Wolfram, History ofthe Goths (tr. Thomas J.Dunlap;Berkeley,CA,1988)and three studies by PeterHeather,Goths and Romans,332–489(Oxford,1991),TheGoths (Oxford, 1996) and‘TheHunsandtheEndoftheRoman Empire in Western

Europe’, English HistoricalReview110(1995)4–41.Fora work that discusses ethnicidentity of ‘Roman’ and‘Gothic’ in an increasinglycomplex society see PatrickAmory, People and IdentityinOstrogothicItaly,489–554(Cambridge, 1997) and forthe period after theirsettlement in the old RomanEmpiresee thearticles inOnBarbarian Identity: CriticalApproaches to Ethnicity in

the Early Middle Ages(Andrew Gillett, ed.;Turnhout,2002).Acollectionof essays, many seminal tolaterdebates,isFromRomanProvinces to MedievalKingdoms (Thomas F.X.Noble, ed.; London, 2006).Volume3 ofTheCambridgeHistory of Christianity isEarly MedievalChristianities, c.600–c.1100(Thomas F.X. Noble, andJulia M.H. Smith, eds;

Cambridge, 2008), whichcontains scholarly articles onsignificant aspects of thisperiod. Boethius’s TheConsolation of Philosophy isavailable in a PenguinClassics translation by V.E.Watts (Harmondsworth,Mddsx,1969).For Visigothic Spain the

reader will find useful E.A.Thompson, The Goths inSpain (Oxford, 1969);EdwardJames,ed.,Visigothic

Spain: New Approaches(Oxford, 1980) and RogerCollins, Visigothic Spain,409–711 (Oxford, 2004) aswell as the latter’sThe ArabConquestofSpain,710–797(Oxford, 1989). PeterHeather, ed., The VisigothsFromtheMigrationPeriodtothe Seventh Century: AnEthnographic Perspective(Studies in HistoricalArchaeoethnology, vol. 4;Woodbridge, Suffolk, 1999)

is a remarkable series ofessays, including two on theearly history of theGoths.Alearnedstudyofoneaspectofthe influence of Visigothiclearning is Jocelyn N.Hillgarth’s article, ‘Irelandand Spain in the SeventhCentury’,Peritia3 (1984)1–16. The Etymologies ofIsidoreof Seville is availablein English translation (trs S.Barney, W.J. Lewis, J.A.Beach, O. Berghof;

Cambridge,2006).For the Franks see J.M.

Wallace-Hadrill, The Long-Haired Kings (London,1962), Edward James, TheOrigins of France (London,1982) and The Franks(Oxford, 1988), Patrick J.Geary, Before France andGermany: The Creation andTransformation of theMerovingian World (NewYork, 1988) and Ian Wood,The Merovingian Kingdoms,

450–751(London,1994).ForClovis, of particular use isWilliamM.Daly’s importantarticle, ‘Clovis: HowBarbaric, How Pagan?’,Speculum69(1994),619–64.GregoryofTour’sHistoryofthe Franks is available as aPenguin Classic (tr. LewisThorpe; Hammondsworth,Mddsx, 1974). The readerwill find useful MartinHeinzelmann, Gregory ofTours:HistoryandSocietyin

the Sixth Century (tr.Christopher Carroll;Cambridge, 2001). ForGregoryandothershistoriansseeWalterGoffart,Narratorsof Barbarian History (A.D.550–800)(Princeton,1988).The best introduction to

monasticism is C.H.Lawrence, MedievalMonasticism (3rd edn;London, 2000). There aremany English translations ofthe Rule of St Benedict,

amongwhich that in bookletform (Liturgical Press:Collegeville, MN, 1982 andfrequently reprinted) may bethe most accessible. Thelocusclassicus inEnglish ontherelationofBenedict’sruleto the Rule of the Master isDavidKnowles, ‘TheRegulaMagistri and the Rule of StBenedict’, Great HistoricalEnterprises: Problems inMonastic History (London,1963), pp. 139–95. A

challenge to the viewspresented in this chapter hasbeenmadebyMarilynDunn,‘Mastering Benedict:Monastic Rules and theirAuthority in the EarlyMedieval West’, EnglishHistorical Review 105(1990), 567–94, to whichAdalbert de Vogue hasrepliedin‘TheMasterandStBenedict:AReplytoMarilynDunn’, English HistoricalReview107(1992),95–103.

For Ireland there is themasterful work of T.M.Charles-Edward, EarlyChristian Ireland(Cambridge, 2000); chapters5 and6 treat themissions toIreland.Thereaderwillfindajudicious summary, analysisand translation of earlysources in Liam de Paor, StPatrick’s World: TheChristianCultureofIreland’sApostolic Age (Notre-Dame,IN, 1993). The often

neglected role of women isstudied in ChristinaHarrington, Women in aCeltic Church (Oxford,2002).Acharmingbookwithgreat learningworn lightly isLudwig Bieler, Ireland,HarbingeroftheMiddleAges(London,1963).StillofvalueisJ.Ryan,IrishMonasticism:Origins and EarlyDevelopment (2nd edn;Dublin, 1972). The approachof historians to the question

of the organization of theearlyIrishchurchcanbeseenin three stages: (1) KathleenHughes, Early ChristianIreland: Introduction to theSources (London, 1972), pp.44–110; (2) Richard Sharpe,‘Some Problems Concerningthe Organization of theChurch in Early MedievalIreland’, Peritia 3 (1984),230–70; and (3) ColmánEtchingham, ChurchOrganization in Ireland, AD

650 to 1000 (Maynooth,1999).OtherusefulworksareH.B. Clark and MaryBrennan, eds, Columbanusand MerovingianMonasticism (Oxford, 1981)andthearticlebyDonnchadhÓ Córráin, ‘Prehistoric andEarly Christian Ireland’, inTheOxfordHistoryofIreland(ed. R.F. Foster; Oxford,1992), pp. 1–43 (with abibliography, pp. 282–85).The Rule of St Columbanus

in facing Latin text andEnglish translation can befound in the edition byG.S.M. Walker, SanctiColumbaniOpera (ScriptoresLatini Hiberniae, vol. 2;Dublin, 1957). The foundingand early history of theColumban monastery atBobbio are described byMichaelRichter inBobbio inthe Early Middle Ages: TheAbiding Legacy ofColumbanus (Dublin, 2008).

Richard Sharpe’s translationof Life of St. Columba byAdomnánofIonaisavailableas a Penguin Classic(London, 1995). BernhardBischoff’s wide-rangingessays are available in anEnglish translation byMichael M. Gorman,ManuscriptsandLibraries inthe Age of Charlemagne(Cambridge, 1995). Forpenitentials see J.T. McNeilland H.M. Garner, Medieval

Handbooks of Penance: ATranslation (New York,1938)andLudwigBieler,ed.,The Irish Penitentials(Dublin, 1963). For a laterperiod see Sarah Hamilton,The Practice of Penance,900–1050 (Woodbridge,Suffolk, and Rochester, NY,2001).

3JUSTINIAN

ANDMOHAMMED

Twoexternalforcesservedtoshape the Middle Ages: the

ByzantineEmpire and Islam.More than merely definingthe geographical borders ofthe medieval world, theyinteracted with it, producing,attimes,frictionand,atothertimes,greatachievements.Asmuch as any two individualscan affect movements andinstitutions containing theirown inner dynamics, theemperor Justinian and theprophet Mohammed can besaid to have shaped the

Middle Ages by establishingcontexts, limits andopposition to the EuropeanWest. It was once said (byHenri Pirenne inMohammedand Charlemagne) that‘without MohammedCharlemagne would havebeeninconceivable’.Takingabroader view, itmay be saidthat without Justinian andMohammed there wouldnever have been a FrederickIIandInnocent III, i.e., there

never would have been amedieval empire and amedieval papacy. It is apropositionworthexamining.

Justinian’sachievement

Few perhaps expected it atthe time, but Justinian (527–65) was the last in a

centuries-long line of nativeLatin-speaking emperors.Although his uncle Justin(518–27)rosetothepurpleasa military commander,Justinian, Illyrian-born, waseducated at Constantinopleand played a substantialpolicy-making role in hisuncle’s reign. Among themost intellectual of Romanemperors and perhaps thehardest working, Justinian,judged in terms of his

territorial aims,must be seenas a failure. It is tempting,although not all historianswould agree, to see a granddesign and an overarchingaim inhis efforts topreserveand perfect the RomanEmpire, and, if necessary, torestore it to its formergrandeur.The territorial integrity of

the traditional empirerequired Justinian toundertake the reconquest of

the West from the Germantribes that now ruled thoseonce imperial lands. Itwas areconquest that was to proveexpensive, partial and short-lived.Britainwas recognizedaslostforever,butJustinian’sambitions saw North Africa,Italy,SpainandperhapsevenGaul under his effectiveauthority, with theMediterranean once again aninlandRoman sea.Twicehisgeneral, Belisarius, returned

to Constantinople, bringingdefeated German kings withhim: the Vandal Gelimer(534) and the OstrogothWitgis (540). And when thedust raised by the imperialarmies (always containinglarge numbers ofmercenaries) finally settled,Belisarius and other generalshad conquered North Africa,most of Italy and a swatheacross south-eastern Spain.This arrangement was far

from permanent and was, atthe best of times, tenuous.Although Justinian’s armiesconsigned the Vandals tohistorical oblivion, theindigenous Berbers byguerilla warfare almostconstantly kept the imperialrule in North Africa off-balance. The costly anddevastatingItaliancampaigns– Rome was thrice besiegedand Milan razed, its entiremale populationmassacred –

containedtheseedsofitsownultimate failure, for theimperial general Narsesrecruited forces from theLombards to fight theOstrogoths. Within threeyears of Justinian’s death,thesesameLombardsinvadedItaly and seized control overmuch of the north. And, inSpain,theempirewasbutoneof the players in the centuryor so before Islam was totransform the history of that

peninsula. The reconquestwasfarfromcompleteand,intheevent,short-lived.Justinian’s attempted

reconquest of the westernprovinces was more than ageopoliticalmove:itwasalsoa religious statement. Theterm ‘crusade’, coming as itdoesfromtheLatinwordfor‘cross’, belongs to a laterperiod, but, at the risk ofanachronism, it may beapplied to Justinian’s efforts.

TheVandalsinNorthAfrica,the Ostrogoths in Italy andthe Visigoths in Spain wereall heretics, whose removalfrom power the emperor,never having relinquishedtotal claim over the West,saw as a religious act.Justinian viewed his empireasaChristiansocietyandhisrole as the ruling of thatChristian society. In 545 hedecreedthatthecanonsofthechurch councils of Nicaea

(325), Constantinople (381)and Chalcedon (451) wereimperial laws. The locusclassicus of his view of theplaceofreligionintheempireisfoundinNovella6:

The greatest gifts God hasbestowed upon man are thepriesthood(sacerdotium)andtheimperialdignity(imperium).Theformerlooksafterdivinemattersandthelatterpresideswatchfullyoverhumanaffairs.Bothproceedfromoneand thesameprincipleandgovernhumanlife.

Theword ‘caesaro-papism’–theruler(caesar)asalsoheadof the church (papa) – hasfrequently been applied toJustinian’srule,buthewouldfind its usually invidiousconnotation whollyinappropriate. Justinian didnot dabble in theology: hewas a trained andexceptionallyabletheologian.In the East, theology wasseen as too important to beleft solely to the clergy. The

many religious divisions inthe empire needed remedy,and the taking of the Westfrom heretics was but onemeanstodothis.Justinian,inhis own view, was notinterfering in ecclesiasticalmatters:hewasmerelydoinghisdutyashesawit.In the East, religious

divisions were pronouncedand profound. JustinianconsideredmostofSyriaandEgyptheretical.Neverhaving

fully accepted thepronouncements of theCouncil of Chalcedon (451),manyinthoselandsprofessedabeliefinthenatureofChristwhich contemporaries called‘monophysite’. Rather thanbelievingthattheoneperson,Christ, has two natures, onedivine and one human, theybelieved that Christ has onlyone nature (monophusus).Justinian’s extraordinarywife, Theodora, was their

partisan, and, whateverrumour and snobbery havedone to defame her, shestands apart as one of theoutstanding persons of theage. Even the fault-picking,salacious Procopius in hisSecret History, yellow-dogjournalism of the time,described dinner-timeconversation at the palace,where the fine points ofChristological theology werediscussed by emperor and

empress. Justinian certainlymade conciliatory efforts toreconciletheMonophysitestoorthodoxy, but, in the end,monophysite churchesendured in Syria, Egypt andArmenia.Awordmustbesaidabout

the place of the pope – bynow theword ‘pope’ appliedonlytothebishopofRome–in the Christian world. Froman early date the bishop ofRomeclaimedaprimacyover

theotherchurchesnot,asonemightsuspect,becauseRomewas thecapitalof theempirebut because Rome was thechurchofPeter, chief amongthe apostles, to whomChristentrusted the power of thekeys(Matt.16,18–19).Fromsub-apostolic times,Alexandria in Egypt andAntioch in Syria wereacknowledged with Romeamong the great churches ofthe Catholic world. The

establishmentofaNewRomeat Byzantium in 330 meantthat the church ofConstantinoplewastotakeitsplace with these others. TheCouncil of Constantinople(381) asserted thatConstantinople should beaccorded precedence ofhonourafterRome.Thus,thefour great churches (latercalled ‘patriarchates’) in theCatholic world were Rome,Constantinople, Alexandria

and Antioch. (Jerusalem’srank as a ‘patriarchate’ hadlittle practical impact and, infact, was not granted until451). Justinian in 545provided his view of churchpolity:

The most holy pope of the OldRome is first of all priests. Themost blessed archbishop ofConstantinople, the New Rome,has second place after the holyand apostolic see of Old Romeand is to be honoured above allothers.

(Novella131)

Such a statement did notmean that the emperor heldhimself above manipulatingthepopeor, indeed,selectingthe pope. At a crucialmoment in the monophysitecontroversy Justinian soughttoreplacePopeSilveriuswiththe pope’s nuncio inConstantinople, a certainVigilius. Belisarius, then incontrol of Rome, had

Silverius deposed andreducedtothestateofsimplemonk (537), exiled to anisland off Gaeta, where hesoon died, probably ofstarvation and mistreatment.Pope Vigilius could notafford to offend his newmasters: on one dramaticoccasion Justinian’s menhauledhim from the altar, ashe clung to the altar cloth.Thereafter, he echoed thetheological views of the

emperor. Inall this, it shouldberememberedthattheseeofRomewasnotsubordinate toany other see – it wasacknowledged as prior to allothers–butthatthebishopofRome in the mid sixthcenturycameclosetobeingapuppet of the Romanemperor,as,similarly,hehadbeen to theGothickings andwasfairlysoontobeto localRoman aristocratic families.The break between East and

West – schism, to use theGreek-derived word for‘break’ – was to happen inthe future, but from theperspective of the sixthcentury the break is notentirely surprising. The twochurches were set on twoseparate courses: the Greek-speaking East with its futureclearly connected with thefortunes of the ByzantineEmpire and the Latin-speakingWestwithitsfuture

connected with the Christiandescendantsofoncebarbarianinvaders.

Justinianandthelaw

How better to solidify theRoman accomplishment thanto reduce to manageableorder the unwieldy bulk oflaws and legal opinions?

Justinian accomplished thistask, and it is arguably thecrowning achievement of theRoman Empire. The task ofcodifyingexistinglawsintoasystematic body produced in529acode,nowlost,and, in534,arevisedcode,whichwehaveastheCodeofJustinianin twelve books, containing4,652 laws.Bookonebeginswith the title De summatrinitate(Onthehightrinity),and the next dozen titles all

deal with ecclesiasticalmatters. Further, Justinianordered the jurisprudence –the opinions of the learnedjuristsofthesecondandthirdcenturies – together withimperial edicts to beorganized in the samemanner. In fifty books, thebest opinions were gatheredandgiven theforceof lawinthebookcalledtheDigest(orPandects), issued in 533.Thus, the great wealth of

Roman lawwas contained intheCodeofJustinianand theDigest: they were exclusivecollections, which abrogatedall other, earlier laws. Thelater laws of Justinian (andothers) were collected in theNovels. A textbook forstudents, the Institutes,completed the work ofJustinian. These four lawbooksareknowncollectivelyas the Corpus Iuris Civilis(Body of Civil Law), one of

the greatest achievements ofhumancivilization.Whatstrikesthestudentof

the medieval church is theafterlife of the JustinianCorpus.Itsimmediateimpactin the West was short-lived,for it perished with theunravellingofthereconquest.Notuntiltheeleventhcenturydid the works of Justinianresurface in the West. Thegreat schools of law thatemerged,firstatBolognaand

later at Montpellier andelsewhere, were essentiallybased on the great Corpus.And, as the church at thesame time was devising itsownsystemoflaws(canons),it used Roman law as itsmodel. The great collectionsof canon laws issued by themedieval popes bore clearresemblance to the Justinianmodel, and canon law asstudied at the medievaluniversities relied on the

principles of Roman law.Canonlaw,withitsenormousimpact on the medievalchurch, took its shape and,indeed,muchofitssubstancefrom the law reforms ofEmperorJustinian.

Justinianandchurchbuildings

IfJustinianhaddonenothingmorethanbuildSantaSophia(Hagia Sophia), he wouldhavehadanenduringplaceinhuman history. Everysubsequent age has sung theglories of this building,whether as Christian church,Islamicmosqueor,now,statemuseum. It stands today asJustinian’s greatest visibleachievement. In the Nikarevolt of 532 the previouschurch, built by Theodosius

(376–95), was destroyed.Justinian commissionedAnthemius of Tralles andIsidorus of Miletus, who inthe amazingly short time offive years – Notre-Dame ofParis tooknearly200years–completed their task.NeitherJustiniannorwecanknow iftheir building surpassed inbeauty the great temple ofSolomon – since the latterwas destroyed about 600BC– yet he may have spoken

accurately when at SantaSophia’s dedication (27December 537) Justinianreportedly said, ‘Solomon, Ihave surpassed you.’Problems with supportscombined with a minorearthquake in 558 to causetheoriginaldometocollapse.The structure was quicklyrebuilt, and it is this rebuiltSanta Sophia of 562–63 thatthe visitor sees today inIstanbul. The description of

the contemporary Procopiushardlyexaggerates:

… a spectacle of marvellousbeauty, overwhelming to thosewho see it, but to those whoknow it by hearsay altogetherincredible.Foritsoarstoaheightto match the sky, and, as ifsurging up from amongst theotherbuildings,itstandsonhighand looks down upon theremainderofthecity,adorningit,because it is a part of it, butglorying in its own beauty,because,thoughapartofthecityand dominating it, at the sametimeit towersaboveit tosucha

height that the whole city isviewed from there as from awatch-tower.

(Buildings,bk.1,chap.1)

The floor plan shows SantaSophia rectangular in shape,yet, subtracting the two sideaisles, what is revealed isvirtually a square area withadjacentareastotheeastandwest creating an oval shape.The dome – by definition asegmentofasphere–hadfor

some time been used byarchitects, perhaps the best-known example being thePantheoninRome–butthesedomes covered a round floorarea and simply placed thedome atop a drum-like wallbuilt along the perimeter ofthe circle. The vaulting of asquareareawithadomewasfirst accomplished byJustinian’s architects. Theyconstructedfourlargepiersatthefourcornersofthesquare

and joined them withsemicircular arches, thusformingfourarchesabovethesidesofthesquare.Theythenfilled in the spaces betweenthe arches, creatingpendentives, which wereshaped like inverse sphericaltriangles, rising from eachpier to the height of the topsof the arches. Thependentives, of necessity,weresomewhatconcave.Thetops of the four pendentives,

whenjoined,formedaperfectcircle, upon which the domecould rest. Externalbuttressing towers on thenorth and south as well asinteriorhalf-domestotheeastandwest(vaultinghighabovethe floor) served to carry thedownwardthrustofthedome.In diameter 107 feet, thedome at its centre pointreaches a height of 184 feetabove the floor. Near itslower part the dome has 40

small windows, spaced soclosely together that, lookingupfromthefloor,onealmostthinksthedomesuspendedinair.Procopiuscommented,

It seems not to rest upon solidmasonry, but this golden domeappears as if suspended fromheaven.

God holding a golden chainthatsuspendsthedomeinairabove Santa Sophia: it is animageoften repeated through

theages.NotcomparablewithSanta

Sophia architecturally butsignificantinotherwayswerethe churches built byJustinian inRavenna in Italy.SituatedneartheAdriaticSeasouthof themouthof thePoRiver, Ravenna had becomeanimperialcentreintheWestin 402. Belisarius recaptureditfromtheOstrogothsin540,restoring it to its vice-regalstatus. The church of

Sant’ApollinareinClasse,theport of Ravenna, althoughbegunearlier,wascompletedand dedicated in 549. Thechurch in Ravenna thencalledStMartin(butlater,asnow, called Sant’Apollinarenuovo) had its mosaicdecorations completed underJustinian. Also, Ravenna’schurch of San Vitale, begunbefore the reconquest, waslargely built under Justinianand was consecrated in 547.

Octagonal in shape, itcontains an outstandingprogramme of mosaics, evenin a city renowned for itsmosaics.Onfacingnorthandsouth walls above the altarare the figures of Justinianand Theodora, eachsurroundedbycourtiers,eachcarrying a gift for theEucharist. The imperialpresence in this reconqueredcity could scarcely be moreprominent than in these

realistic, non-idealizedportraits.

Plate2SantaSophia,Istanbul.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

TheLombards

In a sense, the depiction ofemperor and empress atRavenna captured theimperial couple at theirmostfamous moment in time. It

wasafleetingmoment.Afewscant decades later much ofItaly fell to theLombards. Intheir expansion south thesebarbarian people bypassedRavenna,whichwasvirtuallyanislandinaLombardsea.In568, less than three yearsafter Justinian’s death, theLombard king, Alboin, ledthis fierce people from thelower Austrian Danuberegion into an Italy stillsufferingtheconsequencesof

almost two decades of war.Mostof Italynorthof thePoRiver fell to them within ayear. They soon crossed theApennines into the north-western part of the Italianboot. Soon they were innorthernTuscany,andbeforelongduchieswereestablishedin the south at Spoleto andBenevento.Shiftingterritorialboundariesweretooccur,butfromthetimeoftheLombardinvasions of the late sixth

century until 1870 Italy wasdivided and remaineddivided. The conqueringLombards,whentheyenteredItaly,werelargelypagan.TheBavarian princessTheodolinda, a Catholic,became queen to twosuccessive Lombard kings.She and her husband KingAgiluf (590–616) madeimportant contacts with theIrish monk Columbanus, towhom they gave land for a

monastery at Bobbio. HowquicklytheLombardsbecameCatholic, at this distance intime,itisnotpossibletosay,but it seems clear that therewas no instant conversion toCatholic orthodoxy, rather, aslow process, mostly hiddenfrom our sight. Paul theDeacon’s account of theLombard conversion is not aparticularly reliable source,sincehewrote hisHistoryofthe Lombards at the end of

the eighth century abouteventsthathadhappenedtwocenturies earlier and hewished to stress the Catholicvictory.TheconquestofthesepeoplebytheFranksatpapalinvitationbelongstothetimeof Paul and his patronCharlemagne.The Italyof theendof the

sixth century had a LombardnorthandalsoLombardlandsnorth-eastofRomeatSpoletoand south of Rome at

Benevento. The remainder –roughly lands around Romeand Ravenna as well as theGreek-speaking deep south(Nova Graecia) – were theonlyplaceswhere Justinian’ssuccessors could exerciseeffective control. Viewedfrom Constantinople, Italywas seen as a remoteprovince at the periphery oftheir world. Effectiveimperial power in Italy, nowweak where it existed, was

soon todisappearandwith itthelastvestigesoftheancientpolitical structures in Italy.The West and the WesternChurch were to continue ontheir way now with littlereference to the empire to itseast,whosepeoplestillcalledthemselves Romans(‘Pωµαι^οι). Schism andcrusades shall bring the Eastintoourfocusinlaterperiods,but these were to be butepisodes inmedieval history.

A wall severely limitingcontactswasupbetweenEastandWest,anditisanironyofsomerelevance that thegreatthinkers of classical Greeceonlycame to theWest in thetwelfth century, and then notdirectly but through anintermediary, Islam. It is toIslamthatwemustnowturn.

Islam

In the seventh century areligion of a simple butcompellingdoctrinetookrootbeyond the edges of theRoman world in Arabia. Itwas to have a profoundinfluence not only onEuropeanhistorybut, indeed,onworldhistory.Mohammeddied in 632, and within 100years his followers hadconquered a wide swathefrom the Atlantic to theIndianOceansandfarintothe

Asian interior. The rise ofIslamwasasunexpectedasitwas successful. From thedesert seas of the Arabianpeninsula came a religion, amovement, a political andspiritual force thattransformed the context inwhich the Christian religionlivedanddeveloped.

Thelandof

Mohammed

TheArabianpeninsulaispartof the desert lands whichform the Sahara desert andwhich become the Asiansteppeland. The rift valleythatcreatedtheRedSeagaveArabia its western border.The Persian Gulf forms itseastern border. Where theArabianpeninsulaendsinthe

northandtheAsianmainlandbegins is not susceptible toprecise definition, but theFertile Crescent and itshinterland (ancient Palestine,Syria and Mesopotamia, themodern states of Israel,Jordan, Lebanon, Syria andIraq) can be usedconvenientlyforthispurpose.The largest peninsula in theworld – one-third the size ofthe continental United Statesandalmostninetimesthesize

of the British Isles – theArabian peninsula was andremains not very congenialfor human habitation. Onlythesouthernregions(Yemen)between the coastalmountainsandtheseareceiveenough rain for agriculture.The remainder is chieflyaridsteppe-land and desert. Twovast areas of shifting sand-dunes,theGreatNefudinthenorthandRubal-Khali’inthesouth, the two joined by a

ribbon of sandy desert,comprise about one-third ofthe peninsula’s land area.Deep wells helped to createthe occasional oasis in thisdry land, and desiccatedriverbeds called wadis wereand are used for overlandtravel.The Bedouin people, to

survive in the interior ofArabia, had to be nomadic,living in tribes or kinshipclans,relyingonthepasturing

of camels and, to a lesserextent, other animals. A lifelived vulnerable to the harshforces of nature led thesepeoples to stress loyaltywithintheirgroupandenmityto other groups. Raids werealmostawayoflife.Bedouingods were many, usuallyheavenly bodies thought toinhabit places like trees androcks. Yet demons,threatening the Bedouins atany moment, perhaps played

a larger role in their lives.The town ofMecca,midwayalongthepeninsula’swesternside, had a special place inthe life of the Arabs. Thecaravan route from Yemennorth to the Fertile Crescentwasorganized atMecca, andMeccans ran it. The holyplace atMecca, theKaaba, ashrineformanyoftheirgods,was the centre of a peacezone (haram), where tribalhostilities were put aside.

Such a peaceful placeprovided an ideal climate forcommerce. It was into themercantile class at Mecca inthe latesixthcentury that thefutureProphetwasborn.

TheProphet

Forthehistoriannosubjectinthe history of Islam is more

challenging than the life ofMohammed, chiefly becauseofthenatureof thesurvivingsources.TheKoranitselfwasnot gathered together in itspresentformuntilmanyyearsaftertheProphet’sdeath.Thesira and hadith, latertraditions accepted byMuslims about the life ofMohammed and the earlyyears of Islam, present moreformidable problems for themodern Western historian,

whotendstowardscautioninacceptingtraditionalliteratureas history. While respectingthe religious sensibilities ofMuslims who, for reasonsthat transcend scientifichistorical methodology, mayhave deep convictions aboutthesematters,thehistorianashistorian can merely adopt acautious but not irreverentattitude towards thisevidence.What, then, can besaid of the historic person

who is the Prophet to about750,000,000 of ourcontemporaries?Mohammed was born

about570atMecca.Hemayhave been involved in thecaravan trade, though weknow that less certainly thanthe fact that he married thewidow of a wealthymerchant. At some point, atage forty according totradition, he felt a call topreach the message of a

single, transcendent God.Gaining some converts, hefelt that opposition inMeccarequiredhimtoleave.Thishedid in 622, when hewent toMedina (then Yathrib), 220miles to the north, and thisdate of the hejira (‘flight’)marks the point atwhich theIslamic calendar begins. Thewarring clans atMedina hadcalled Mohammed tomediate. The resulting so-called ‘Constitution of

Medina’ brought peace toMedina and converts toMohammed, although Jewishgroups were to suffer. Therefusal of Jews to follow thereligion of Mohammed, it issaid, ledtheProphet toceasefacing Jerusalem duringprayer and to begin facingMecca. In 630 MohammedandhisfollowersmarchedonMecca, and the Meccanscapitulated with littleresistance. Mecca became

what it is today: the spiritualcentre of Islam, its holiestplace and the centre ofpilgrimage, and the KaababecamethegreatestshrineofIslam. In 632 MohammeddiedatMedina.The central teaching of

Mohammed, repeatedmillions of times daily bypious Muslims, is ‘There isno God but Allah, andMohammed is his prophet’.BeliefinbutoneGod–Allah

being the Arabic word forGod used by Muslims andChristians alike – is the corebelief. The so-called Satanicverses of the Koran – whichmayhaveoncefollowedSura53. 19–20 – derive theircontroversial nature from theinterpretation thatMohammed, in amoment ofweakness, allowed richMeccanmerchantstopractisepolytheism.Theopeningsuraof the Koran provides an

exacttheologicalstatementofMuslimbelief:

In the Name of God, theCompassionate,theMerciful,PraisebetoGod,theLordofallbeings,the All-compassionate, the All-merciful,the Master of the Day ofJudgement.Theealonedoweserve;toTheealonedoweprayforhelp.Guideusinthestraightway,the way of those whom Thouhastblessed,not of those who have incurredThyanger,

norofthosewhoarenowastray.

The only God is the God ofall peoples, not merely thenational god of their ownpeople (as theearlyHebrewsbelievedtheirgodYahwehtobe only their god). The twoqualities, mentioned in thissura and repeated before therecitation of each sura, werecompassion and mercy. OntheDay of JudgementGod’sjusticewillseparate thegood

andtheevil.ItistothisGod,merciful yet just, to whomhumans should turn for helpand guidance so that theymayliveholylives.Throughout the Koran the

word ‘unbelievers’ meansthosewhorefusetobelieveinthe one God. The people ofthe book – Jews andChristians – are notunbelievers, but the Jewshavebeenunheedingof theirprophets and the Christians

seemtobelieveinthreegods.Unlike theChristianbelief inJesus – that he is the Son ofGod – Muslims steadfastlyrefusedtomakeanyclaimsofdivinityforMohammed:heishuman like other men. Hetraced himself in a line ofprophets that included Jesusand Moses and, ultimately,Abraham. Later Muslimswere tocallhimProphetandSeal,meaningthathewasthelastoftheprophets.

OntheLastDaytherewillbearedressingofthebalanceof justice, so obviouslyunbalanced in this life,according to Islamictheology. The evil will bepunished by eternal fire inGehenna and the good willlive in a verdant paradisewhere there flow coolingstreams that will never dryup. What a most invitingprospect paradise must haveheld out for desert nomads.

The bearing of life’stransitory troubles insubmission to God wouldlead believers to a mostrewarding heaven wherelife’s deficiencies will befully compensated for – andthen some – by a mercifuland justGod. Itwasapotentmessage, which in humanterms – the historian has noother – proved compelling,first to the tribesmen ofArabia and then to millions

elsewhere.

TheKoran

To the Muslim, the Koran(Qur-ān) was not written byMohammed: he was merelythevoicethatrecited–Koranmeans recitation – the wordof God as revealed to himthroughtheAngelGabriel.In

trance-likestates, itwassaid,Mohammed spoke, and hiswords were written down byothers on whatever was athand,evenamerescrap.Theprocess whereby theserecitations were collected toformthisholybookandhowthisbookreacheditscodified,canonical form are largelyhidden from our eyes. In apre-literate culturememorizers played aprominent role, and

memorizers committed tomemory with an exactnessthatamazesusinthetwenty-first century. In Arabia wemay assume thatmemorizersknew and repeatedMohammed’s recitations andtaught others. A network ofreciters might soon haveappeared. By the time ofMohammed’s death in 632 itisjustpossiblethattherewasa written collection of thisoral tradition. Accounts vary

aboutwhat happenednext. Itwasoncewidelyheld thatanofficialversionwasproducedwithin two years of theProphet’s death, during thetime of theCaliphAbu-Bakr(632–34). More likely, thesecond one to follow him,Uthman (644–56), wasresponsible for the collectionof the recitations in thenumber and order of thereceived text. Even allowingfor the possibility of later

insertions, the text of theKoran as we have it issubstantially a very earlywitnessofIslamicbelief.Itismore reliably closer to thetime ofMohammed than theearliestChristiangospel is tothetimeofChrist.The first-time and, indeed,

the many-time Westernreader of theKoran is struckby the frequency of biblicalreferences. We meet Adam,NoahandAbrahamaswellas

Moses,Saul,David,Solomonand several of the OldTestamentprophets. John theBaptist, Jesus and Mary(conflatedwithMiriam,sisterof Moses, in Sura 19. 28)appear frequently. Questionsarise about the Koran’sdependence on the Bible or,at least, on biblical stories.Since Islam was not arejection of Judaism orChristianity but saw itself inthe line of Abraham and

acknowledged the prophets,includingJesus, the inclusionof familiar biblical incidentsand characters should not besuch a great surprise.Traditions about the youngMohammed meeting Jewsand Christians along caravanroutes do not commandhistorical assent. Indirectrather than direct access tobiblical accounts shouldprobably be assumed, andattempts to identify the

sources tend topoint to JewsanddissidentChristianpeoplelivinginArabia.The arrangement of the

114 suras of the Koran,ordered by Uthman, followno chronological order.Official translations of theArabic Koran have not beenpermitted until the twentiethcentury and then only infavour of Turkish. Thelanguage of the Koran – itscadencesandsonorities–are

integral to its understanding.Westerners can gain somesmall sense of this bylistening to recordings. Thatthe language of the Muslimholy bookwas so integral toIslamic religion meant thatconvertswould learnArabic.In time, they would becomeArabic speakers. TheArabization of the conqueredpeoples owed much to thelanguageoftheBook.The Koran became a code

of living, reflecting the totalintegration of life. Religionwas not compartmentalized,evenif thatcompartmenthadthe loftiest place: nothingcould bemore antithetical tothe Muslim view of life.‘Islam’ means submission, atotal submission, to God.Hence, social behaviour andcustoms are spelled out.Rulesofinheritancearegiveninsomedetail(e.g.Sura4.8–16). Dietary regulations

introduce a sense of restraintanddiscrimination:

Forbiddenyouaretoeatputrifying flesh, blood, the fleshofpigs,what has been offered to otherthanGod,the flesh of animals strangled,beatendown,animalsdeadfromafallorfrombeinggored,animals disturbed by beasts ofpreyandalsofoodsacrificedtoidols.

(Sura5.4)

Slavery was not forbidden(nor was it forbidden in theWest for well over amillennium later), but to freeslavespleasesGod:

Emancipatethoseyouownwhowishtobefree,ifyouseegoodinthem,andgivethemoftherichesGodhasgivenyou.Andforcenotyour slave girls into prostitutionforyourprofit,iftheydesiretolivechastely.

(Sura24.33)

The status of women wasgreatlyelevatedbytheKoran,their protection from theinjustices of society afrequent theme in its pages.Polygamy (four wives) wasallowed, among otherreasons, to give a place insociety to spinsters andwidows,whowereamongthemost vulnerable persons insociety.Divorcewasallowed,but a woman could not bemerely ejected from her

husband’s household. Shewas entitled to the weddinggifts without deduction. Themandatory three-monthwaiting period woulddetermine if she waspregnant, in which casedivorce could not occur untilafter birth of the child; thewaiting period also gavescope for a possiblereconciliation. A divorcedwomanwasfreetomarryandeven to remarry her former

husband. Women could alsohold property. Theimprovement in the status ofwomen isoneof thegreatestachievementsoftheteachingsof the Koran.Modern criticswho ahistorically imposemodern ideals on earlyhistory and, thus, harshlycriticize these provisions ofthe Koran rip history fromcontextandwoulddowell toreflect on the fact that in theseventh century the most

enlightened attitudes towardswomen and slavery wereamong the followers ofMohammed. ChristianEuropelaggedbehind.Few aspects of traditional

Islamic belief can be morecontroversialthantheconceptof jihad, which, althoughmeaningageneralstruggletostayontherightpathofGod,has become almostsynonymouswithjihadofthesword or ‘holy war’. Verses

can be found in the Koranthat might support thismeaning.Forexample,‘Fightthose who do not believe inGod and the last Day andwho do not forbidwhatGodand his messenger haveforbidden’ (Sura 9. 29), and‘Obey not the unbelievers,but struggle with themmightily’(Sura25.54).Someof these sayings and othersimilaronesseemtohavehadimmediatereferencetoevents

of the time. In the course ofcenturies the complex notionof jihad underwentdevelopment. At first, it wasundoubtedly involved in themotivation for the initialexpansions and wassubsequently influenced bysuch events as the crusades.That jihadcanbeundertakennotbyindividualsbutonlybythe umma (the Muslimcommunity) seems to haveemerged as the consensus

understanding.And,althoughlife for non-Muslims inMuslim lands was notuniversally benign, it shouldbe remembered that forcedconversion was not theIslamicpractice.ThehighethicoftheKoran

maybebestseeninapassagereminiscent of the Christiangospels(Matt.25,34–46):

Bekindtoyourparentsandyourkinsmen,toorphansandtotheneedy,

toneighbourswhoareof familyandthosewhoarenot,tothosewhotravelwithyouand to the traveller youmeet onthewayandtoyourslaves.Godhasnoloveforthearrogantandboastful,who are miserly and encourageothersalso to be miserly, whilethemselvesconcealingthe wealth with which God hasfavouredthem.

(Sura4.40–41)

It was this book the menfrom the Arabian peninsula

tookwiththemaswarriors.

Conquests

Theprophetdied in632,and100yearslaterthereligionofIslam stretched from theAtlantic coasts of NorthAfrica and Spain in thewestto the area beyond the OxusRiverincentralAsia.History

knows no equal to theextraordinaryspreadofIslam,not even Christianity, whichfor several hundred yearsafter its founder’s death wasstillaminorityreligionintheRoman world. The stages inthe remarkable expansion ofIslamcanbeeasily sketched,although tantalizing gapsexistinourknowledge.The death of Mohammed

left a leadership vacuum.Noprovisionshadbeenmadefor

his succession. He had nosurvivingsons,but,evenifhehad, tribal chiefdoms werenot necessarily hereditary.Whatever the exact nature ofthe consultation, Abu-Bakr,father-in-law of Mohammedand an early convert, waschosen. He was only latercalled‘Caliph’,i.e.,deputyorsuccessor, but not successorto Mohammed’s propheticoffice; the caliph served as apolitical leader, one might

say, as sheik of the ‘Islamictribe’. First of the fourOrthodoxCaliphs,Abu-Bakr,who ruled for less than twoyears,didsofromMedinaasdid his successors: Umar(634–44), Uthman (644–56)andAli(656–61),husbandofMohammed’s daughterFatima. The immediate needafterMohammed’sdeathwasto recover so-called apostatepeoples, those who hadwithdrawn their loyalty and

theirtaxpayments.Abu-Bakrrecovered the secessionisttribes and also succeeded inbringingotherArabicpeoplesunder the sway of Medina.BythetimeofhisdeathAbu-Bakr controlled the entirepeninsula.The second phase,the breaking out of theArabianpeninsula,tookplaceunder his successorUmar.Apowerful military force wasin place and, havingsucceeded in internal

conquest, was restless. ThelargelyBedouin army cravedthe rich lands of the FertileCrescent. Mass movementshave their own innerdynamics, that mixture ofgreed and idealism andshifting ambitions born ofevents as they occur. Thegreat Muslim expansion wasnoexception.Whatmotivatedthose warriors who wereresponsible for this greatexpansion? Historians,

lookingforcauseswhichtheycananalyse,cannotaffirmtheprovidentialworkingsofGodbutcanonlyseehuman

Map4Note:Shadedareasare‘Islamic’lands.ByzantiumandtheexpansionofIslamintheMediterraneanregion(seventhtoninthcenturies)

beings moved by complexforceslargelyhiddenfromus,but religious and materialmotivations were bothundoubtedlypresent.The second step, then, in

the expansion of Islam sawthe Fertile Crescent andEgypt submit to the Arabs.

RaidingattacksinthetimeofAbu-Bakr revealed landsmilitarily weak and peopleswith little loyalty to theirByzantine masters. Theselands were ruled by theemperor at Constantinople,butpooradministration,over-burdening taxation, stronglocalloyaltiesandtheologicaldifferences had drained thepopulations of any sense ofallegiance to their foreignoppressors.To say theArabs

were viewed as liberatorswould overstate the case, yeta later Christian writer inSyriawastosay,‘TheGodofvengeance has delivered usfromthehandsoftheRomansby means of the Arabs.’ In635Damascus(Islam’sfuturecapital)andin637Jerusalem(fromwhichMuslimsbelievethe Prophet ascended toheaven) were in their hands.The Persian Empire lay totheir east, a once mighty

empire, now weak andvulnerable to the attacks ofArab warriors. SoonCtesiphonfell(637),andinagreat battle in 642 thePersians were defeated, andwith them fell their ancientempire. In 639 under othergeneralsArab armies enteredEgypt. Their success wasquick and with it the richvalley of the Nile and thegreat harbour of Alexandriaas their prizes. They

controlled Egypt by 642 andbuilt a navy, which soonchallenged the greatByzantine fleet and, in 649,capturedCyprus.After these immediate

conquests, the third stagecouldoccur.Totheeastfromthe Taurus Mountains at thenorthern edge of Syria theycould raid and conquerArmenia, Georgia andAzerbaijan. Then on to theOxus River in central Asia,

the border between Persiansand Turks. These events andtheir consequences go wellbeyond the confines of thisbook,yettheysignaltousthebreadth and depth of theneighbour of medievalEuropetoitssouthandsouth-east. More relevantly, theArab armies in Egypt foundno opposition to theirimmediate west in the vastWesternDesertandalongtheLibyan coast beyond Tripoli.

They halted at the border ofTunisia, short of Carthage.BynowtheOrthodoxCaliphshad passed from the sceneafter serious civil wars athome, and the UmayyadCaliphs (616–750) soonmoved the capital fromArabiatoDamascus,whereitwas to remain until it wasmoved to Baghdad in 762.When the campaignscontinued, the Muslims tookCarthage and, with the

support of the North AfricanBerbers, made their wayacross modern Morocco totheAtlantic.Standing at Africa’s

northernmost point, theycouldseeSpaina scanteightmilesacrossthestraits.Inthespringof711TariqIbnZiyadlanded at the massive rockjuttingintotheMediterraneanSea,apillarofHercules,andgaveithisname‘JabalTariq’(i.e., Tariq’s mountain),

which by corruption became‘Gibraltar’.Atacrucialbattleon19July711,TariqandhisBerber warriors defeated theVisigothic forces of KingRoderick. The country laybefore them. BypassingSeville, the Muslims headednorth for Toledo, theVisigoths’capital,whichtheyquickly took. By the end ofsummerTariqcontrolledhalfofSpain, includingthetownsofArchidona,Elvira,Malaga

and Cordova, their futurecapital. Musa, the Arabgeneral who had led therecent African campaigns,arrived with 10,000 mostlyArab troops to join theBerbers.HebesiegedSeville,which, in June 713,succumbed. With the fall ofSaragossa in that same year,the conquest was virtuallycomplete, and Musa,accompanied by Tariq, led atriumphal processionwith 80

Visigothic princes andthousands of other prisonersacross North Africa andentered Damascus inFebruary 715. The mopping-up continued and in 719 theconquest was complete, savefor a Visigothic Christianenclave in the north-west(Asturias) and in themountainousarea to theeast.Asmall splintergroupof theMuslim army crossed thePyreneesandwasdefeatedby

CharlesMartel nearTours in732, aminor incident in thiswhole story and, in no way,theturningpointinEuropeanhistory as it has sometimesbeen portrayed. The lineswere too long, and a majorMuslim assault north of thePyreneeswasimpossible.Inabrief eight years the greatVisigothic kingdom hadfallen and Spain was nowruledbyMuslimsinwhatwascalled al-Andalus. It was not

till 1492 that the last vestigeof Muslim rule disappeared,when Catholic monarchsenteredGranada.InSpainandelsewherethe

Muslim conquerors did notconvert the defeated peoplesby the sword. UnlikeCharlemagne, the ChristiankingoftheFranks(768–814),who gave Saxons the choicebetween baptism and death,the Arabs allowed theirsubjects the tolerance

necessary to practise theirreligions. The non-Muslimspaid a tribute, but oftenconsiderably less than whatthey had paid to theByzantine emperor. Theprocess of conversion toIslam was a slow process,taking several hundred yearsandeventhenleavingpocketsofChristians.For the student of the

medieval church what Islamaccomplished was to

demarcate the southernboundary of medievalChristian Europe. The worldof Islam began at thePyrenees and extended far totheeast.EvenSicilyandpartsof southern Italy came underMuslim rule.Twowalls nowexisted. The Mediterraneanwas a wall which separatednorthern Christian Europefrom an alien culture to itssouth.Anotherwall, this oneanorth–southwall, separated

Latin Christians from GreekChristians. To the north andwestofthesewallsEuropeoftheMiddle Ages was to liveits life. It is this Europeanworld of Latin Christianity,often called western Europe,whosestorywenowfollow.

Furtherreading

On Justinian good places tobegin are John Moorhead,Justinian(London,1994)andJ.A.S. Evans, The Age ofJustinian:TheCircumstancesof Imperial Power (NewYork, 1996). RobertBrowning, Justinian andTheodora (rev. edn; London,1987) is quite useful. Also,Andrew Louth has written achapter on Justinian in TheCambridge History of theByzantine Empire (Jonathan

Shepard, ed.; Cambridge,2008). About questions ofimperium and sacerdotiumsee Francis Dvornik, EarlyChristian and ByzantinePoliticalPhilosophy:Originsand Background, (2 vols;Dumbarton Oaks Studies 9,Washington, DC, 1966); andJohn Meyendorff, ‘Justinian,the Empire and the Church’,Dumbarton Oaks Papers 22(1968), 45–60. On SantaSophia see Rowland J.

Mainstone, Hagia Sophia:Architecture, Structure andLiturgy of Justinian’s GreatChurch (London, 1988) andRobert Mark and Ahmet S.Cakmak (eds),Hagia Sophiafrom the Age of Justinian tothe Present (Cambridge,1992). The Buildings byProcopius, which provides acontemporary description, isavailable in Loeb Classicsseries as vol. 7 of theworksof Procopius (Cambridge,

MA, 1961). His SecretHistory may be convenientlyused in the translation byRichardAtwater(AnnArbor,MI, 1961). Sensible andimmensely informative isAveril Cameron, Procopiusand the Sixth Century(London, 1985). The texts ofthelawbooksintheiroriginallanguage comprise theCorpus Iuris Civilis (3 vols;Berlin,1872–95).AnEnglishtranslationofallthelawtexts

can be found in The CivilLaw (tr. S.P. Scott; 17 vols;Cincinnati, 1932). MoreaccessibleisthetranslationofThe Digest of Justinian,edited by Alan Watson(Philadelphia, 1985;paperback,1998).StephenC.Manning discusses thereligion of the Lombards in‘Lombard ArianismReconsidered’, Speculum 56(1981)241–58.Anumberofgeneralworks

are available on Islamichistory. The mostcomprehensive book inEnglish is IraM. Lapidus,AHistory of Islamic Societies(2nd edn; Cambridge, 2002),which goes beyond thechronological andgeographical bounds of themedieval West. Also, thereareMatthew S. Gordon, TheRise of Islam (Westport, CT,2008); Fred M. Donner,Muhammad and the

Believers: At the Origins ofIslam (Cambridge, MA,2010); Jonathan P. Berkey,The Formation of Islam:Religion and Society in theNear East, 600–1800(Cambridge, 2003); andBernardLewis,TheArabs inHistory (6th edn; Oxford,1993). Of particular interestare Hugh N. Kennedy, TheProphet and Age of theCaliphates:TheIslamicNearEast from the Sixth to the

Eleventh Century (London,1986)andhisTheGreatArabConquests: How the Spreadof Islam Changed the WorldWe Live In (London, 2007),which, although principallyconcerned about theconquestsintheMiddleEast,provides an excellentsummaryofthecampaignsinIberia.Forastudyofhowthejihad started see ReuvenFirestone, Jihād: The Originof Holy War in Islam (New

YorkandOxford,1999).Thestandard reference work isThe Encyclopedia of Islam(new edn; London, 1960–).Volume One of The NewCambridge History of Islamis aptly entitled TheFormation of the IslamicWorld, Sixth to EleventhCenturies (Chase F.Robinson, ed.; Cambridge,2010) and contains learnedessays on aspects of thesubject.

Many translations of theKoranareavailable:ArthurJ.Arberry’s The KoranInterpreted (London, 1964)attempts to providesomething of the rhetoricaland rhythmic patterns of theoriginalArabic.Anumberofuseful studies on the Korancan be found in The Qur’ānin Its Historical Context(Gabriel Said Reynolds, ed.;London, 2008). For abalanced, judiciousviewofa

controversial subject seeYohanan Friedmann,Tolerance and Coercion inIslam: Interfaith Relations inthe Muslim Tradition(Cambridge,2003),astudyoftheclassicallawandtraditiononreligioustolerance.

4THESCENEIS

SETStGregorytheGreat

toStBoniface

Theyears fromtheaccession

ofGregorytheGreataspope(590) to the death of StBoniface (754)witnessed thefashioningofthesetonwhichwouldbeplayedoutthestoryof the church in the MiddleAges. To suggest this doesnot imply that no dynamicsfollowed. On the contrary,dynamics there indeed wereaplenty, but the generalcontext had been establishedby the middle of the eighthcentury: an active papacy,

allied with the Frankishkings, and a Christianpopulation throughout allwestern Europe exceptScandinavia.Savingtheplaceof the Frankish kings, whichwill be treated in the nextchapter,hereweshallseethedevelopment of papal power,themovementofChristianityinto the islands off Europe’snorth-west shores and fromthere back to large parts ofthe Continent, and the role

which learning played. NobetterstartingplacethanwithPopeGregoryI.

GregorytheGreat

Itmightseemidletoraisethequestion, Who was thegreatest pope of the MiddleAges? Many candidates willappearinthesepages,yetthe

historian knows that themeasure of greatness revealssomething of the historian’sownvalues,and,inanycase,different times requiredifferent human qualities ofleadership. That having beensaid, a strong case might bemade that at the head of anysuch list should be the nameof Pope Gregory the Great(590–604). A nearcontemporary description ofGregory is unique for popes

of the earlyMiddle Ages. Apicture of him was made athis death, and it wasdescribed by John theDeacon, who saw it in theninthcentury:

Hisfigurewasofordinaryheightandwaswellmade.Hisfacewasa happy medium between thelengthofhisfather’sfaceandtheroundness of his mother’s face,sothatwithacertainroundnessitseemed to be of very comelylength. His beard was like hisfather’s,ofarathertawnycolourand ofmoderate length.Hewas

ratherbald,sothatinthemiddleofhisforeheadhehadtwosmall,neat curls, twisted towards theright.Thecrownofhisheadwasroundand large,hisdarkishhairbeing nicely curled and hangingdownasfaras themiddleofhisear. His forehead was high, hiseyebrows longandelevated.Hiseyeshaddarkpupilsand,thoughnot large, were open, under fulleyelids. His nose from thestarting point of his curvingeyebrows was thin and straight,broader about the middle,slightlyaquilineandexpandedatthe nostrils.Hismouthwas red,hislipsthickandsubdivided.Hischeekswerewell-shaped,andhis

chin of a comely prominencefrom the confines of the jaws.His colour was swarthy andruddy … His expression waskindly. He had beautiful handswithtaperingfingers,wellsuitedforwriting.

(ConsulofGod,p.44)

Amodernartistmightindeedbe able to reconstruct a fairlikeness of the only pope towhom history has given thesobriquet ‘the Great’.Gregory came from a

distinguished Roman family,influential inaffairscivilandecclesiastical. His great-grandfather was Pope FelixIII (483–92), and he wascollaterally related to PopeAgapitus I (535–36).Responding to the exigenciesof the time, Gregory, as ayoungmanofthearistocraticclass, served in the civicadministration of the city ofRome, almost certainlybecoming prefect in 572.

When his father died in 574,heusedwhatmusthavebeena substantial inheritance tofound six monasteries inSicily and turned the familyhome on the Caelian Hill inRome into a monasterydedicated to St Andrew.There,at themonasteryofStAndrew,Gregorybecamenotabbotbutmonk-founder.Thenear crippling circumstancesofthetimesdidnotallowhimthequiet lifeofamonk.The

popemadehimadeaconandhis closest adviser. Gregoryadopted the title ‘servant ofthe servants of God’ (servusservorum dei), a title whichhe later used as pope andwhichhasbeenusedbypopeseversince,ifnotalwayswiththesameappropriateness.A fewwordsmust be said

about the stateof Italy at thetime of Gregory. It will berecalled that Justinian’s warsagainst the Ostrogoths were

prolonged (535–54) and leftin their wake widespreaddevastation. Rome itself wasbesieged three times in 546.Milan was almost entirelylevelled. At the end of thewaraPragmaticSanctionwasimposed by Justinian: Italywould now become aprovince of the empire ruledfrom Constantinople by anexarch at Ravenna (notRome). Before the details ofthis settlement could be

worked out, the Lombardstook over much of Italy,establishingthemselvesinthenorthandinthetwosouthernduchies of Spoleto andBenevento. The results leftthe city of Rome and itsenvironsconnectedonlybyanarrow corridor (the ViaFlaminia)totheterritoryheldby the exarch in the north-east.Inafluidsituation,withtheLombard lust for landfarfromsatisfiedandboundaries

far from fixed, the parts ofItaly still under imperialcontrol stood in dire perilfrom the Lombard invaders.With the meagre imperialforces largely concentratedalong the corridor, Romeitself was left with sparsedefences.In this situation the

pressing need of assistancefrom the empire was clearlyseen, and Pope Pelagius(579–90), whose predecessor

diedwhileLombardshad thecity under siege, almostimmediatelyuponhiselectionsent his deaconGregory, thefuture pope, toConstantinople with amessage pleading with theemperor to come to the helpofancientRome:

So great are the calamities andtribulations we suffer from theperfidyoftheLombards,inspiteoftheirsolemnpromises,thatnoone could adequately describethem … The Empire is in so

critical a situation that, unlessGodprevailson theheartofourmost pious prince to show hisservants the pity he feels and togrant them a commander orgeneral,thenwearelost.Fortheterritory around Rome iscompletely undefended and theexarch writes that he can donothing for us, being unablehimself to defend the regionaround Ravenna. May God bidthe emperor to come to our aidwithallspeedbeforethearmyofthat impious nation, theLombards, shall have seized thelands that still form part of theEmpire.

Gregory’smission failed,notleast because the emperors,stretchedalmostbeyond theirresources in the East, weresimply unable to providemuch help. In 582 the newemperor,Maurice (582–602),sent as exarch the ableSmaragdus to reorganizedefences and to try for analliance with the Franksagainst the Lombards. WhenGregory returned toRome in586, he again served as

deacon toPopePelagius.Butthe difficulties of the citywere soon compounded bythe affliction of the plaguethat had been present in theMediterraneanbasinsincethetime of Justinian.Concurrentflooding of the Tiber,reducingmuch of the city tomarsh,heightened thehumantragedy and sense ofArmageddon. Pelagiushimself died, a victim of theplague. Without waiting for

imperial consent theRomanselectedthedeaconGregoryaspope. Viewing the ancientcapitalofaoncegreatempire,thenewpopelamented:

We see what has happened toher. She who was once themistress of the world hassufferedmisfortunesincalculablein number and intensity: herpeople are desolate andthreatened by external enemies.Everywhere there is only ruin,nothing but ruin … We, theremnant, are menaced by thesword and by trials without

number…Weno longerhaveaSenate, no longer a people. Forthose still living only sorrowsand tears … Rome is desertedandinflames.

The Roman Gregory foundnot only his city in anguish,but Italy had ‘its citiesdestroyed, its fortifications inruins, its countrysidedepopulated and the earth awasteland’.This pope, who, as legate,

in Constantinople had lived

likeamonkandwhonow,aspope, turned the LateranPalace virtually into amonastery,undertookthetaskof saving Rome and Italyfrom the threats to its civilandreligiouslife.Hisregistersurvives, containing 854letters,whichshowhiseffortstomanage–almost,attimes,to micro-manage – this task.When the Lombard duke ofSpoleto threatened Rome, itwas Gregory who took

control,dispatchedtroopsandtacticaladvicetotheimperialcommander in the field.When in 592 the exarchrefused to appointcommandants at Lepe andNaples, which were key tothe imperial defences ofRome, it was Gregory whosentLeontiusandConstantiustotakechargeoftheimperialgarrisons.When, at the sametime, the garrison in Romewas near mutiny for lack of

pay,itwasGregorywhopaidthem from the church’streasury. When the Romandefences proved inadequate,it was Gregory who boughtpeace by paying 500 poundsof gold from church funds.When the civil authoritieswere unable to feed theRomans, thepopedid.WhentheexarchRomanusappeareduninterested and evenindifferent to securing ageneral peace with the

Lombards, it was Gregorywho negotiated with theLombardkingbut,refusingtomakeaseparatepeace,waiteduntil 598, when the newexarch agreed. In addition,the Patrimony of Peter, thelandsheldbythepopes,nowenlargedbytheacquisitionofthe estates of the Arianchurches after the defeat oftheOstrogoths, enabledPopeGregory to relieve thesufferings of people in Italy

and in Sicily. Not even theharshest critics of themedieval popes suggest thatGregory took advantage ofthe situation to enlarge thepower of the papacy.On thecontrary, it was a reluctantGregory who stepped in toensure public order in themost desperate ofcircumstances. Of othermedieval popes whom weshall meet in this history itcan be said that they made

power plays with littlespiritual justification, but notof the monk-pope in theLateran Palace. Thisextension of papal authorityinto civil matters and farbeyondthecityofRome, theresultofexigenciesofthelatesixth century, meant that thepopes had become secularrulers, one of the definingcharacteristics of themedievalpapacy.Intime,thearea over which the popes

ruled de facto would growand become known as thePapalStates.Gregory’s tombin St Peter’s bore theinscription, ‘Consul of God’(consuldei).Living at the end or,

indeed, after the end of theperiod of classical culture,Gregory was not, as issometimessaid, itsopponent.Hedidchastise thebishopofVienne for teaching boys thepagan classics, and he

showednointerestinlearningeithertospeakorreadGreek,although he lived inConstantinople for six years.Thelattercanbeexplainedbythe superior attitude ofeducated,aristocraticRomanstowards all things Greek.Classical learning was aseparate matter. Not itsenemy,Gregory,livinginthemost turbulent of times,thoughtthatclassicallearningshould be used to serve the

Christian faith. His ownLatinity knew neither thesubtlety nor the sonority ofclassical Latin. It waspractical, direct, unnuanced.Astaplepartof themedievallibrary was to be his bookPastoralCare (Regulae liberpastoralis). Althoughintended for bishops, itbecameaclassicguidetothespiritual life and care ofsouls,itsimpactimpossibletomeasure. King Alfred had it

translated into English in thelate ninth century and sentcopiestoallhisbishops.Thistreatise and other worksattributed to Gregory,particularly a collection ofmiracle stories of Italiansaints (called theDialogues),caused Gregory the Great’sname to be placed withAmbrose, Augustine andJerome as a Father of theChurch,thefourthandlastintheWest. That his name has

beenwronglyassociatedwithGregorian chant since theninth century diminishes innowayhisplaceinhistory.

ConversionoftheAnglo-Saxons

ThestorywastoldinEnglandin the early eighth centuryabout the motivating reasons

that impelled Gregory theGreat to send Christianmissionaries to England. Inits earliest form (c.710) thestorybyananonymousmonkor nun of Whitby Abbey inthe north of England runsthat, before he became pope,Gregory was eager to meetsome fair-skinned and light-haired boys or youths whohadcometoRome.Heaskedthem what people theybelongedto.

They answered, ‘The people webelongtoarecalledAngles.’‘AngelsofGod’,hereplied.Then, he asked, ‘What is thenameofthekingofthatpeople?’Theyreplied,‘Aelli.’Whereupon Gregory said,‘Alleluia. God’s praise must beheardthere.’Thenheasked thenameof theirowntribe.Theyanswered,‘Deire.’Gregoryreplied,‘Theyshallfleefromthewrath(deira)ofGodtothefaith.’

(EarliestLifeofGregorytheGreat,p.91)

A charming story, andprobably nothing more. Butwhatliesbehinditisprobablyan incident found inGregory’s own letters. InSeptember 595 Gregoryordered his administrator inGaul to buy English boys of17 or 18 years of age on theslave market so that theycould be brought to Romeand taught in monasteries,quitepossiblywithaviewofsending them on a future

mission to their own people.It is easy to see how thishistorical episode, wellgrounded in fact, could havebeen elaborated, distendedandevendistortedduring thenext century till a writer atWhitby gave this version.Within three decades of thetelling of the story, a monkfrom the north of England,BedeofWearmouth, told thesame story in a slightlydifferent version. These later

tales, hardly historical,nonetheless witness theEnglish devotion to the popewhofirstsentmissionariestotheir people and who, in thewords of the Whitby writer,‘will present the Englishpeople on the Day ofJudgement’. More generally,it should be said that theselattertaleserrinexaggeratingthe mission of Augustine, amonkofGregory’smonasteryon the Caelian Hill, who in

597 was sent by Gregory toEngland,andinthusbelittlingthe historical significance ofother Christian missionariestoBritain.The island to which the

Italianmissionariescamehadhad Christian inhabitants forhundreds of years. TheRomano-British Christiansmust have formed aconsiderable part of thepopulation,when,intheearlyfifth century, pagan,

barbarian, Germanic peoplescame from Frisia and moreremotely from lands near theJutland peninsula as peacefulinhabitants of the so-calledSaxon Shore, coastal areasalongtheeastandsouthcoastof Britain. Later, the Saxonswere joined by kindred butlesspeacefulpeoples,and, inthe first half of the fifthcentury, the Romansabandoned the Britons totheir own devices. Centuries

of hostilities followedbetween Britons and Anglo-Saxons, the fortunes of warfluctuating from one side tothe other. The mingling ofpeoples no doubt occurred,but the hostilities were farfrom over at the time ofAugustine’s mission to Kentin 597. The picture of theCeltic Britons pushed to thewest – to Cornwall, WalesandStrathclyde–belongstoafuture time. In the 570s,

shortly before Augustine’sarrival, the pagan WestSaxons were fighting theChristian Britons forGloucester, Cirencester andBath and continuedcampaigns for some time inthe upper Thames, Severnand Avon valleys. To thewest, thelandsofDorsetandSomersetwerestillcontrolledbyBritishprinces.Intheveryyear of Augustine’s coming,597, a new pagan king of

Wessex took power, and hecontinued the struggle of thepagan West Saxons againstthe Christian Britons. Thesituation inotherpartsof thecountrywasalsofluid,andinNorthumbria the Britishpresence was to remain afactor for some time, itsimportance difficult tomeasure.Augustine arrived in Kent

not unexpectedly. PopeGregory, in 596, had written

to two Frankish princes that‘it has come to our ears thatby the mercy of God theEnglish race earnestly desireto be converted toChristianity.’ In Kent, theChristian Bertha, a formerFrankish princess and nowwife of the local pagan king,lived at Canterbury andworshipped in a church onceused by Romano-BritishChristians, almost certainlythe present St Martin’s

church or another church onthe same site. The dramaticmeeting of Augustine withKingEthelbert on the Isle ofThanet, held at the king’sinsistence in theopenair lestthe visitors unleash evilspirits,mayhavebeenmerelypart of a carefullychoreographedritual.InKentconversionsfollowedswiftly.Gregory the Great wrote inJuly 598 to the patriarch ofAlexandriathat

the English race, who live in acorner of the world, have untilnow remained, unbelieving,worshipping sticks and stones,but, aided by your prayers andpromptedbyGod,IdecidedthatI ought to send a monk of mymonastery to preach to them.With my permission he wasmadeabishopbythebishopsofthe Germanies and with theirhelp he reached their people atthe end of the world, and nowletters have just reached meabouthissafetyandhiswork…AtthefeastofChristmaslast…more than 10,000 Englishmenare reported to have beenbaptized by our brother and

fellowbishop.

The precise figure of 10,000should be understood notliterally but as meaning avery large number. The dateof King Ethelbert’sconversion is not known, butby 601 he was almostcertainly a Christian. InEngland, as elsewhere, theconversion of the king wasgenerally followed by theconversion of the tribal

aristocracy.This initial success in but

one,smallpartofthecountryemboldened the pope in 601to reveal his organizationalplan for the English church.TheprincipalseewastobeatLondon,andAugustinecouldconsecrate 12 other bishops.Inaddition,a

Plate3StMartin’sChurch,Canterbury.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

bishopcouldbesenttoYork,and, if successful, he couldcreate 12 bishops for hisprovince. This stress onorganization at such an earlystage in the conversionprocess was indeedpremature. Never did thearchbishop of York have 12subordinate bishops. More

importantly, the choice ofLondon must have beenbasedon a recollectionof itssignificance inRoman times,for at this time the Romancity of London was desolateand a small Anglo-Saxonsettlement stood to its west.The later importance ofLondon as a national capitalshould not be read back intothe seventh century. And,most importantly, theGregorian plans for church

polity were premature,because within a generationof the coming of Augustinethe mission came within anaceoffailing.Ethelbert’sson,who succeeded his father in616,revertedtopaganism.Ataboutthesametimethethreepagansonsofthelatekingofthe East Saxons, who hadconverted, were openlyhostile to Christianity.Meanwhile, Raedwald, kingof the East Angles, who had

been baptized in Kent,hedged his bets and kept inhisplaceofworshiponealtartooffersacrificetoChristandanotheraltartooffersacrificeto the old gods. He diedc.625,and, if theSuttonHooburial ship was associatedwith him, as seems quitelikely, itbearsnosignof theChristianfaithsavetwosilverspoons with SAUL andPAUL inscriptions andpossibly silver bowls with

crossdesigns,and it lies inafield of pagan burials. WithKent, Essex and East Angliareverting to paganism, thethree remaining Christianbishops – Laurence ofCanterbury, Justus ofRochester and Mellitus ofLondon, the latter expelledfrom London – decided toleave. Justus and Mellitusfled to Gaul, there to awaitevents. Laurence lingered atCanterbury, where (the

historian Bede tells us) by amiracle Kent’s new paganking accepted baptism, andthe two other bishops wererecalled. Progress thereafterwas slow, and the ChristianinroadstootherregionsoftheAnglo-Saxon settlementscame not from Canterburyand the successors ofAugustine but from othersources and over a period ofmany decades in the seventhcentury. Yet before they can

be visited, two commentsneed be made about theAugustinianmission.In the first place, there

exist detailed instructionsfrom Pope Gregory to hismissionary about the processof acculturating pagans to aChristian way of life. Thetemples need not bedestroyed – only the paganshrines–buteventheycanbeconverted to Christian use.Dowehearnotonlythevoice

of the shepherd of souls butalsothepracticalvoiceoftheformer Roman civil official?Substitute, he said, thesacrifice of oxen to devilswith some other festivals,Christianfeasts,atwhichtheymay kill animals inthanksgiving to God forgenerousbounty.

It is certainly impossible toeradicate all errors fromobstinate minds at one stroke.The highest peaks are reached

not by leaps but gradually stepbystep.(Bede,EcclesiasticalHistory,bk

1,ch.30)

Gregory sounded this earlynoteofcautionandrespectedthe process by whichreligious belief and practicewere translated into culturalforms.The second point that

needs be made about theAugustinianmissionconcerns

thetreatmentbyAugustineofthe nativeBritish church. Tosayhisattitudewastaintedbyhubris and condescensionwould be putting a gentlegloss on this embarrassingaspect of his mission. Thecrucialepisodebearstellingiffor no other reason than toillustratethehumanproblemswhich got in the way of thespread of Christianity. TheRomano-Britons were notrecentconvertsbutbearersof

the Christian name forcenturies.Theyhadwithstoodthe attacks of the pagans fornearly two centuries beforetheRomanAugustinearrivedon their shores, rebukingthem for not converting theirenemies. He insisted on ameeting,andonewasheldatthe border of the British andEnglish peoples, probably inthe Severn valley. Augustinereproved the Britons forcelebrating Easter at a

different date from theRomans(although,aswenowknow, the Roman date hadbeen adopted at Rome onlyfairlyrecently).Thestorythatreaches us from the Englishhistorian Bede, almostcertainly via a Kentishsource, recounts how theBritons refused to yield toAugustine in thismatter. Letthematterbesettledbyasignfrom heaven, they bothagreed.Andthenablindman

wascurednotby theBritonsbut by Augustine. That thisblindmanwasanEnglishmanmay have made Augustine’sdeed less impressive to theBritons. In any case, theycouldnotaltersosignificantacustomwithoutconsultingtheBritish people. Anothermeeting was planned. Sevenbishops and many learnedmen of the Romano-Britishchurch were to attend. Ontheirwaytothemeeting,they

consulted with a holyanchorite.HisadvicewasthattheymustfollowAugustineifhe is truly a man of God.Howarewetodeterminethis,they asked. Arrive at themeeting place afterAugustine’s party, and, if herisesuponyourarrival,knowthat he is of God, for he is‘meek and humble of heart’.Whentheyarrived,Augustinerefusedtorise,andtheBritishbelievedhimnotofGodand

spurnedhisdemands.Inwhatmust have been considerableanger, Augustinepropheticallythreatenedthemwith destruction. And Bede,the Northumbrian monk,writing over a century laterand apparently revealing hisown anti-British feelings,seemed to takedelight in thefulfilment of Augustine’sprophecy of doom againstthis‘nationofheretics’,whenherecountedthathundredsof

unarmed British monks ofBangor were ruthlesslyslaughtered. WhetherAugustine walked with theswagger of a colonial officerwe shall never know, yet hisattitude, told by friendlysources, reveals anunattractive sense ofsuperiority in a Christianmissionary whose disciplesand immediate successors, inthe face of reversals, all butabandonedtheirmission.

Ifthefinaljudgementmustbe that Augustine’s missionwaslessthansuccessful–thereversion to paganism afterhisdeathandhisalienationofRomano-British Christiansare persuasive indications ofthis – he did establish aRoman connection, and theAugustinemythitselfbecameestablished in the firmamentof English Christianity. Itmust be further emphasizedthat much of the conversion

in southern England wasindependent of CanterburyandAugustine’smission.Forexample, when Christianitycame toEastAnglia, it camefrom Gaul, where an exiledEnglish king had beenbaptized, and the first bishopoftheEastAnglescamefromBurgundy. And the ascetictradition of the East Anglesderived from the Irish monkFursey. Christianity came tothe West Saxons, again, not

through Canterbury butthrough the missionaryBirinus, probably of Germanorigin,whobaptizedthekingin 635 and who took hisepiscopal see at Dorchester.Even there in Wessex, massconversion did notimmediatelyfollowtheking’sconversion butwas theworkoftime,tobemeasurednotinyears but in decades. Thisslow, almost hidden processbest describes the spread of

Christianity in the south ofEngland. In the north therewasaverydifferentstory.Two stages marked the

coming ofChristianity to thenorth,thefirstamissionfromthe south, which was largelyunsuccessful, and the secondamissionfromIreland,whichhad astonishing success. In625 the pagan king ofNorthumbria – i.e., the landsnorth of the Humber –married a Kentish princess,

who was a Christian. Shebroughtwithher to thenortha certain Paulinus, an ItalianmissionarysenttoCanterburybyGregory theGreat in601.Now consecrated a bishop,Paulinus met with almostimmediate success. KingEdwin accepted baptism atYorkin627,andamemberofhis council, the high priest,said that ‘the temple andaltars which we havededicated to no advantage

should be immediatelydesecrated and burned’.Paulinus, at one time, wassaidtobestayingattheroyalpalace, spending his longdaysteachingthecrowdswhocame to him and baptizingthem in the River Glen. Wecan also see Paulinusbaptizing in theRiverSwale,near Catterick. After almostsix years of remarkableeffect, the Paulinus mission,closelyalliedtothepersonof

the North-umbrian king,ended abruptly in 632 withthe death of King Edwin inbattle. Paulinus fled south,abandoning the infant churchof Northumbria. It must beemphasized that Paulinus’smissionwastotheEnglishinNorthumbria, for there wasclearly a British populationthere, its size difficult toestimate.WhilePaulinuswasbaptizing in the Glen, theremay indeed have been

villages of Christian Britonsinothernearbyvalleys.Themoreenduringmission

to the north came from Irishmonk-missionaries,anditisastorywithanendingedgedinsadness.WhenKingEdwin’senemieswereoverthrown,theEnglish kingdom ofNorthumbria was re-established with Oswald asking. During Edwin’s time,Oswald, then heir to Englishopponents ofEdwin, lived in

exile (c.617–34) in the farnorth, where he receivedbaptism from Irish monks.Now king, Oswald almostimmediately sent to Iona, themonastery founded byColumbaonanislandoff theRoss of Mull, for assistanceso that ‘his people mightlearnfaithintheLord’.WhatOswald got in response, in635, was the remarkableAidan, whom Bede was tocall ‘a man of outstanding

gentleness, devotion andmoderation’.Aidanknewthathemust firstoffer thepeople‘the milk of gentle teaching,and gradually, as they grewstrongon thenourishment ofGod’s word, they could livemore perfectly and grasp themore sublime aspects ofGod’s commands’. KingOswaldestablishedthenewlyconsecrated bishop Aidan onthe high-tide island ofLindisfarne (known since the

twelfth century as HolyIsland), about five milesacrossthebayfromtheking’schief seat at Bamburgh. Onecan see vividly (throughBede’saccount)thepictureofthe Irishmonk preaching thegospel toOswald’smenwiththe bilingual king himselfacting as interpreter. Andother Irishmissionaries cameafter Aidan to preach inOswald’s kingdom. Theenduring conversion of the

north was beingaccomplishedby Irishmonksandapiousking.And itwasfrom the nascentNorthumbrian church thatmissionaries went south in653toconvert thestillpaganMercians, whose first bishopwasoneoftheseIrishmonks.A major problem loomed.

The ascetic and learned Irishmonks had customs differentfrom the customs broughtfrom the Continent by other

missionaries. Three majordifferences stood out: theyconcerned thedate ofEaster,the form of the tonsure andthe rite of baptism. Nothingof detail is known about thethird.Tonsure, the form of

shavingoftheheadofmonksand clerics, was indeedslightlydifferent,butthiswasnot the matter of majormoment. What mattered wasthe date of Easter, the

principal Christian feast,which, since it was movable(based on lunar months),determined much of thechurch calendar. The disputeover Easter was neither newnorconfinedtoBritain.IthaddeeplydividedEastandWestfor some time and had beenaddressed at the Council ofNicaea (325). From veryearlytimesithadbeenagreedthat the Christian celebrationof Christ’s resurrection

should not be held on aweekday but on a Sunday.The question in dispute wasquitesimple:whentheJewishfeast of Passover fell on aSunday, should that SundaybeEasterorshouldEasterbecelebrated on the nextSunday?TheIrishheldtotheformer, the Romans to thelatter, but it was a Romanpracticeofonlyrecentorigin.Whythismatterwasraisedin664ata ‘synod’convenedat

Whitby is not clear. Thediscrepancyinthecelebrationdates of Easter between theChristians converted by theRoman mission and theChristians converted by Irishmissionaries was nothingnew. Differences had quitesimply been lived with. Butin 664 the tolerance ended,andtwofiguresappearastheprincipalplayersinsupportofthe Roman cause in theconfrontation at Whitby.

Ealhfrith, sub-king of Deira,was the ambitious son ofKing Oswy of Northumbria,and was eager to asserthimself. The other figure,Wilfrid, had lived atLindisfarne at the time ofAidanbutlaterspentayearinKent, several years at Lyonsin Gaul and some time inRome. He had returned toNorthumbria as a convert tothe Roman Easter. He metEalhfrith, who quickly

dispatched the Irish monksfrom Ripon and gave themonastery to his new friend,Wilfrid. Ealhfrith’s politicalambitions and Wilfrid’spaschal convictionscoincided.ItseemslikelythatEalhfrith’s purpose was togain a degree ofindependence fromhis fatherand that Wilfrid’s purposewastoimposethecontinentalcustoms. It was, then,EalhfrithandWilfridwholed

the party in favour of theRoman usage. The Celticparty was led by the holyColman, the Irish bishop ofLindisfarne, and the nobleHild, abbess of Whitby andone of the high-born womenthen ruling monasticcommunitiesmadeupofbothmen and women. Themeeting at Whitby – whichBede called a ‘synod’ – waspresidedoverbyKingOswy:it was not national in scope

but Northumbrian. Oswy’sown wife was a KentishChristian,and, itwassaid, inyears when the Irish andRomanEastersdidnotconcurshewasstillfastingwhileherhusband was feasting. Tospeak of the Irish traditionand the Roman tradition isprobably to misspeak, for in664 the southern Irish hadalreadyacceptedtheso-calledRoman tradition as had theBritish monks at Bangor in

Wales.What was at issue atWhitby was the Ionatradition, established byColumba and brought toLindisfarne by Aidan andnow defended by Colman.And what was called theRoman tradition was only arecentusageatRome.Inanycase, Whitby did not signifyanattemptbyRome tobringthe Celtic church into itsjurisdiction. Given theextremelypassiveexerciseof

papaljurisdictionatthistime,a jurisdiction not rejected inIreland, the event at Whitbyshould be seen as the localissue it was. The decision atWhitby in favour of the so-called Roman tradition wasmadenotbyashowofhandsof the clergy present but bythe king, who, it was said,preferred the tradition ofPeter, holder of the keys ofthe gates of heaven, to thetradition of the apostle John,

who held not those keys,whose tradition passed downthrough Columba. The storyof the ‘synod’ ends withColman, unable to comply,sadly leaving, a man ofsimple and austere life, aFrancis of Assisi before histime, who walked the dustytrackways back to Iona. Hissimplicity and humility werenot lost on thestraightforward Englishmonk-historianBede.

How frugal and austere he andhis predecessor had been, theplace itself [Lindisfarne] overwhich they ruled bears witness.When they left, there were veryfewbuildingsthereexceptforthechurch,infactonlythosewithoutwhich community life wasimpossible. They had nomoneyfrom the rich; they promptlygaveit to thepoor.Theyhadnoneed to collect money or toprovide dwellings for thereception of worldly andpowerful men, since these onlycametothechurchtoprayandtohear the word of God … Thepriestsandthemonksvisitedthevillages fornoother reason than

topreach,tobaptize,andtovisitthesick,inbrief,tocarefortheirsouls.Theyweresofreefromalltaintofavaricethatnoneofthemwould accept lands orpossessionstobuildmonasteries,unlesscompelledtodosobythesecularauthorities.(Bede,EcclesiasticalHistory,bk

3,ch.26)

A generous epitaph to asimple form of the Christianfaith, little bothered bymatters of organization andpower, committed to an

uncomplicated understandingof the gospels. In contrast tohis description of Colman,Bede’scool,almostdetached,words about Wilfrid leavelittledoubtinthemindofthereaderwhoBedethoughtwasmoreChrist-like.What the ‘Synod’ of

Whitby meant on the broadcanvas of the history of thechurch is a question with arange of answers. Theparticipants saw the issues in

terms of the debate aboutEaster and the subsequentdeparture of the Irishmonks.Bede,writing two-thirds of acentury later, gave itconsiderableattention,buthisfocus was largely on thecomputistics of the date ofEaster, a subject which heraised to an essential sign oftheunityofthechurch.Whatis clear to us, at our removefrom the events, is that theEnglish church was to

become organized in theRomanfashion.Bishopswithterritorial dioceses wouldreplace bishops of specificpeoples. In 672 the Councilof Hertford made clear theterritorialnatureofabishop’sdiocese, although somedecades would pass beforethesystemwasfullyinforce:by 737 there would be fourdioceses in the north and 13in the south. It is also clearthatEnglandwasnowfirmly

in the Roman orbit, not thatthe pope consistentlyexercised active jurisdictionover the internal affairs ofremote places such asEngland. Yet, when Englishmissionaries,asweshallsoonsee,went to theContinent, itwas under papal authority,and there they established adiocesanorganization.

Thetransmissionoflearning

In782,Charlemagne,kingofthe Franks and soon to be‘emperor’,invitedthedeaconAlcuinfromYork,inthefar-away English kingdom ofNorthumbria at the edge ofthe known world to join hiscourt and to advise him oneducationalmatters.Whydid

Charlemagne turn toNorthumbria? What eventslay behind this extraordinaryselection? How to explainthat, within 200 years of theadvent ofChristianity amongthe English, their school atYork helped to reintroducelearning to the Europeanmainland?WhenAugustinearrivedat

Canterbury in 597, he cameas a missionary of theChristian gospel, not as a

scholar intent on establishinga school. He and his fellowmonks brought very fewbooks with them, and thesealmost certainly wereliturgical books needed toconduct ceremonies ofChristian worship: Massbooks, psalters, etc. Hismission, it is widely agreed,was purely evangelical innature and did not advancethe cause of learning. Fromwheredid the learningof the

WestcometotheEnglish?There were two distinct

streams meeting to makeEngland one of the foremostcentres of scholarly learningin eighth-century Europe,althoughwemaynotbeablewith precision toweigh theirrelative contributions. Bothwere significant, and thediminutionofoneortheotherimperils our historicalunderstanding. One streamcame from Ireland, the other

from the Continent,particularly from Rome.Together they produced avibrant intellectual climatethatfosteredseriouslearning,making England, particularlyNorthumbria, arguably thepre-eminent centre ofscholarshipinwesternEuropeand creating a decisivemoment in the history of theChristian church. The detailsneedtobeseen.The most obvious line of

development came fromRome to Canterbury andthence to Northumbria. In669, the new archbishop ofCanterbury, Theodore ofTarsus, a Greek biblicalscholar, arrived from Rome,with the learned Hadrian, aNorthAfricanabbot,wholikeTheodore had long lived inItaly, and the Northumbriannoble Benedict Biscop, whohad been a monk on theislandofLerinsoff thesouth

coastofGaul.Aschoolinthesense of a centre of learningwas quickly established atCanterbury. No inventory ofbookssurvivesforanyof theEnglish centres of learningtracing their descent fromTheodore’s Canterbury, butthelibraryatCanterburymusthave contained the Bible,works of grammar andrhetoric as well as epitomesof classical and patristiclearning.Aldhelm,oneofhis

students at Canterbury,complainedthat,asastudent,he had not enough time tolearneverythinghewantedtolearn: law, prose and poeticliterature, music, arithmeticand the mysteries of theheavens. He describedTheodore‘likeanangryboarsurrounded by a pack ofsmirking hounds’. Moremeasuredly, Bede wrote ofthe school of Theodore andHadrianatCanterbury:

They were both extremelylearned in both secular andsacred literature and thusattractedacrowdofstudentsintowhose minds they daily pouredthe streams of wholesomelearning.Theygavetheirhearersinstructionnotonlyin thebooksofHolyScripturebutalsointheart of metre, astronomy andecclesiastical computation. Asevidence of this, some of theirstudents still survive who knowLatin and Greek just as well astheyknowtheirnativetongue.(Bede,EcclesiasticalHistory,bk

4,ch.2)

Erudite teachers, a broadcurriculum, eager studentsandlearnedbooksprovidetheessentials of any school, andthese were all present atCanterburyinthelastdecadesoftheseventhcentury.His name ‘Biscop’ might

suggest that Benedict Biscopwas of a priestly family; inany case, he was certainlyfrom a noble, wealthyNorthumbrianfamily.Duringthe course of his life he

travelled six times to Rome,the latter four journeyswhilehe was involved withestablishing new Englishschools.Among the foundersoftheschoolatCanterburyin669, Biscop, after perhapsthreewintersthere,undertooka journey toRome: itwas toset in motion events of far-reaching significance. Unlikehis previous journeys, thiswas a journey in search ofbooks,picturesandrelics,but

mostly books. At Rome heacquiredasubstantialnumberof books and, on his returnjourney, he collected a largenumber of books at Vienne,whichhehadaskedfriendstocollectforhim.Hisintentionsseem clear: to return toEngland and establish a newmonastery with relics for itsaltar, pictures for devotionand books for learning andliturgy. It was to his nativeNorthumbria, from which he

hadbeenabsentfor20years,thatBiscopwenttofoundhismonasteryon landgivenhimby the king of Northumbriaon the north banks of theWear River near its mouth.The Wearmouth foundation,in 673, was followed by afoundation,in681,atJarrow,overlooking the mud flatswhere the Don enters theTyne, only a fewmiles fromWearmouth.DedicatedtoSS.Peter and Paul and for some

time a single communityunder one abbot,Wearmouthand Jarrow became keycentresoflearninginwesternEurope,producinginthefirstgeneration the VenerableBede, considered the mostlearnedmanofhistimes.Often forgotten in this run

of events from Biscop toBedewas the great figure ofCeolfrid, who became firstabbot of the combinedmonasteriesin688.Tenyears

earlier he had accompaniedBiscoponthelatter’slasttripto Rome. During hisabbotship the librarycollection was doubled, andthenumberofmonks,almostincredibly, rose to over 600.Itwasalongabbotshipof28years and ended not withCeolfrid’s death but with hisretirementinJune716,when,laden with gifts, he left forRome,nevertoseehisnativeland again. He never arrived

inRome.Age and a difficultjourney combined to weakenhis physical strength, and inBurgundy on 25 September716 Ceolfrid died. Some ofhis companions continuedtheir way to Rome, wherethey presented PopeGregoryII with their gifts fromTyneside.Amongthemwasatruly exceptional book: theCodex Amiatinus, so-calledfromthemonasteryofMonteAmiata, where it resided in

the early modern periodbefore finding its presenthome in the LaurentianLibrary in Florence. It isconsidered one of the mostimportant manuscriptssurviving from earlymedieval Europe. To thepaleographer, who studieshandwriting, it may providelinks between the scriptoriaofsouthernItalyandnorthernEngland, but to the culturalhistorian it is more: it is the

earliest surviving completeLatin Bible and a clearwindowintotheageinwhichit was made. The dedicationrevealsmuch.It isapoeminpraiseofthePetrineheadshipof the church written byCeolfrid, this abbot fromremotest Northumbria. Hecalled himself ‘CeolfridusAnglorumextremisdefinibusabbas’(‘Ceolfrid,abbot,fromthe outermost parts of theEnglish’).Anenormousbook

(or codex) for its time and,indeed, formost times, ithasover 1,000 folios (i.e.,leaves), and each foliomeasures about 20 incheshighbyabout13incheswide.Someconsider that thisbookrepresents the greatestachievementofNorthumbrianlearning.The other towering

achievementofNorthumbrianscriptoria, the LindisfarneGospels, was a very near

contemporary of the CodexAmiatinus. There may besomedoubtwhetherthisbookof the gospels was producedat the island monastery ofLindisfarne, yet itsNorthumbrian origin isassured. It rivals the laterBook of Kells for thesplendour of its artisticdecoration. Each of the fourgospels is preceded by a‘carpet page’ (a full page ofdecoration, carpet-like,

fashioned largely of skilfullyinterlaced coloured ribbons)and a pagewith a portrait ofthe evangelist. Besides,virtually every page hasdecorated initial letters andborder designs, and manypages contain miniatures, socalled not because they aresmall but because they arecoloured (from miniare, tocolour). The LindisfarneGospelsisnowonpermanentdisplay at theBritishLibrary

inLondon.While these two great

books were being fashioned,the north of Englandproduced the greatest scholarof theage.Bede (c.672–735)was born on the estates ofWearmouth and at age sevenwas presented by his parentsto the monastic community.WhenJarrowwasfoundedin681,hewent there,whereheremained for the rest of hislife, using the library

developed by Biscop andCeolfrid.Travellinglittleifatall outside his monastery,Bede composed a flood ofworks:20booksofscripturalexegesis and six works onchronology as well ashomilies, saints’ lives,histories, hymns, prayers,letters and much more. Inshort, he was a genius. Thegreat twentieth-centuryhistorian Sir RichardSouthern observed that Bede

was ‘the first scientificintellect produced by theGerman peoples of Europe’and that in Bede’s lifetimeJarrowhadbecome‘thechiefcentre of Roman civilizationin Europe’. Bede is bestknown – perhaps unfairly tohis other works – for hisEcclesiastical History of theEnglish People. Its prefacehas almost a modern ring toit, as he describes there hisefforts to get reliable

evidence for his historicalaccount. For him history isnottheretellingofoldstories,the passing along oftraditionalaccounts.ForBedehistory is the attempt torecountthepastasaccuratelyas possible, acknowledgingthat to do so is the essentialtaskofthehistorian.The line which we are

tracing from Theodore andHadrian and Biscop andCeolfrid does not end with

Bede. Among Bede’sstudents was the son of theNorthumbrian royal family,Egbert, who about 732became archbishop of York.There atYork he establisheda school, which wouldsurpasseventheschoolofhisown training. To it wouldcome the sons of the greatnorthern families and booksand evenmore books.UnderEthelbert (c.766–79),Egbert’ssuccessor,theschool

atYorkhadprobablythebestlibrary in western Europe.Also under Ethelbert theschool had its greateststudent,Alcuin.Hence,itwasin light of these events of acentury or more in Englandthat we should seeCharlemagne in 781 invitingAlcuinfromYorkinthenorthofEnglandtotheroyalpalaceatAix-la-Chapelle(Aachen).This line of descent, just

described,fromthecomingof

Theodore to Canterbury in669tothegoingofAlcuintothe Frankish court in 783mightseemclearenoughandmight even be drawn asfollows:

Theodore/Hadrian > BenedictBiscop > Ceolfrid > Bede >Egbert>Ethelbert>Alcuin.

Yet such a straight,unambiguous line gives aninaccurate picture, for it tellsonly part of the story and

assumes (wrongly) a singleline of cultural transmission.There was another line thatoriginatedinIreland,whichisoverlooked at the peril ofhistoricaldistortion.Fromtheearly days of Christianity inIreland an emphasis wasplaced on the value oflearning, and great effortswere made to introducebiblical, patristic and evensecular works into Irishmonasteries.Theinfluenceof

the Irish foundation atLindisfarne in 635 continuedlong after the withdrawal ofColman in 664. Thefoundation at (Old) Melroseby Eata, a pupil of Aidan,was Irish in culture, and itwas there that Cuthbertenteredasanovice.When,in664, Eata came to replaceColman as abbot ofLindisfarne, he brought withhim Cuthbert as his prior.TheretheycontinuedtheIrish

monastic traditions of Aidanand Colman. In a curioustwist, when Colman leftLindisfarne after the ‘Synod’ofWhitby,30Englishmonkswent with him and soonestablished their ownmonastery on an island offthe west coast of Ireland,which, when Bede wrote hisEcclesiastical History (731),was a flourishing communityof English monks followingtheIrishways.Yettheywere

notthefirstEnglishmonkstomakesuchajourney.Alargenumber (multi) of Englishmonks in search of learningand an ascetical life hadalready gone to Irishmonasteries,where,inBede’swords, ‘they were mostgladlywelcomedby theIrishand given food, books andinstruction without anypayment’. Bede names 11 ofthese monks; other sourcesname still others. Therewas,

for example, the youngNorthumbrian nobleAethelwine, who afterstudying in Ireland returnedto England and became abishop.AbrotherofthegreatAbbot Ceolfrid ofWearmouth–Jarrow went toIreland to study thescriptures,andhewasamongthe many English monks inIrelandwhofellvictimtotheplagueof 664.OtherEnglishmonks formed a community

atClonmelsh (inmodernCo.Carlow), from which thesuccessful mission ofWillibrord to the Frisians setout.Moreover, Irish influences

were not limited toNorthumbria. In East Anglia(c.630), the Irish monkFursey established amonastery, again in Bede’swords, ‘in order to devotehimselfmorefreelytosacredstudies’.InWessex,Aldhelm,

whomwehavealreadymetatCanterbury, had been taughtby the Irish masters atMalmesbury, where he later(c.675) became abbot. SirFrankStentonhascalledhim‘the most learned andingenious western scholar ofthe late seventh century’. Atabout the same time thatAldhelm was studying atMalmesbury, there came toWessex Agilbert, who,although born in Gaul, had

studied the scriptures inIreland. He soon becamebishop. And, again, in the650s, Diuma, an Irish monkfromLindisfarne,becamethefirst bishop of the Mercians.His successor was Irish bornandtrained.Hissuccessor, inturn, was English but Irish-trained. There, among theMercians, in threegenerations the process ofassimilation can be seentakingplace.

TheIrishline,inallthis,isclearly unmistakable. Thehistorical reality reveals thatthegloryoflateseventh-andeighth-century Englishlearning derived from twosources: one continental andone Irish. The two combinedlike the interlacing in themanuscript illuminations, thetwo so closely interwoventhat one attempts to separatethem at one’s peril. Thehistorian, faced with this

complexity, should perhapsbe content to describe thisculture and learning as‘insular’,thusgivingcredittoundoubted Irish andcontinental influences and tonative English genius. Thefurther danger is that thehistorian, trying to separatethesestrands,mightlosesightof what truly happened inEngland in the seventh andeighth centuries: thecivilizing of the barbarian

English by reason of theirconversion to the Christianreligion. It was the Christianmissionaries, whatever theirorigins,whobroughtliteracy,book learning, scholarship –theframeworkforacivilizedsociety – to England. As itwas to be elsewhere,Christianity was in Englandthe means of introducingbarbarian peoples to thecivilizingeffectsoflearning.

EnglishmissiontotheContinent

Two names stand out in thestoryoftheconversionoftheGermanicpeopleseastof theRhine to Christianity. Theyare Willibrord and Boniface,two English monks, whounder papal authority set outon their missions. What isparticularly striking is that it

was from the English,themselves recentlyconverted and with recentmemories of paganism, thatthis general mission came tothe Continent of Europe. Itwas led by monks, productsof monasteries, where Latinwas taughtand the scripturesstudied. With the waters ofbaptismscarcelydryon theirbrows English missionariesundertook the conversion oflarge parts of the Germanic

peoples. How did this comeabout?It was not by a grand

design that English monkswent to the Continent asmissionaries.Itwasalmostbyaccident, at least in thebeginning. The irascibleWilfrid, whom we havealreadymetatthe‘Synod’ofWhitby (664), his enormousnortherndiocesehavingbeendivided and himself deposedby Archbishop Theodore,

decided to go to Rome toappealand,in678,setoutonhis journey. Somethingunplanned happened on theway. The direct route acrossthe Dover Straits was closedtohim,andsohesailedtothedelta of the Rhine, in themodernNetherlands,thenthelandsof theheathenFrisians.He stayed there during thewintermonthsof678–79andpreached the gospel, gainingsome converts. It was but a

brief episode in a busy life,and, in any case, theconverted Frisians soonreverted to paganism. In thenextcenturyBedeandothers,no doubt wrongly, attributedto Wilfrid the origins of thecontinental mission. His wasbut a passing adventure,remembered more for hisself-inflated image as achurchman than for its realeffect.ThetrueoriginsoftheEnglishmissionarenot tobe

found in England but inIreland at the EnglishmonasteryatClonmelsh (Co.Carlow). The NorthumbrianEgbert – to be distinguishedfrom the later Egbert,archbishop ofYork –was inIreland as a pilgrim, avoluntaryexile, in664,whentheplague struck Ireland.Hewas spared, vowed never toreturn to England and diedamong the Irish 65 yearslater,in729,attheageof90.

Ifwe can trust the details ofour sources, Egbert, whileabbot of Clonmelsh, plannedtogoasapilgrim-missionaryto the Frisians. Hismotivation for the missionmade nomention ofWilfrid:it was as a German thatEgbert was moved to bringthe Christian message tootherGermanpeoples. In theevent, he never went. It wasin 690 that the effectiveEnglishmissionbegan,when

Willibrord and other Englishmonks left Clonmelsh. TheEnglish mission thusoriginatedinIreland.The part of continental

Europe to which theseEnglish missionaries sailedlay just beyond the politicalcontrolof theFranks inwhatwasafluidpoliticalsituation.By the late seventh centurythe Merovingian kings,descendants of Clovis, theirpower now emasculated,

weremererois fainéants,do-nothingkings.Realpowerlayelsewhere, particularly in thehands of the mayors of thepalace of these kings. Thepolitical dust was still inmotion when Willibrordarrived in Frisia. Pepin II, amayorof thepalace(d.714),had control over most ofFrancia and now alsocontrolled western Frisia,includingUtrecht,andhehadthe ambition to expand his

power further north. Amongthe German peoples beyondFrankish control were notonly theFrisiansbutalso theSaxons, both of whom werestill pagan. Even within theFrankish kingdom, whereIrish monks had been activefor 100 years, there stillexisted pockets – even largepockets – of heathenism. Itwasintothisvolatilesituationthat, in 690, Willibrord and11otherEnglishmonkscame

from Ireland to preach theChristiangospel.Themissionaries,probably

well informedofthepoliticalsituation,arrivedinFrankish-controlled Frisia, and it wasundertheprotectionandwiththe support of Pepin II thatthe mission was to thrive.Willibrord went almostimmediately to Rome to getpapal sanction for hismission. This readily given,he returned to Frisia, with

relics in his bags to replacethe idols of his converts.Successwasimmediate:Bedesays thatmanyFrisianswereconvertedinashorttime.Arewe to believe that theseEnglish monks could preachin the language of theFrisians? The support ofPepin

Map5ConversionoftheGermanicpeoples(c.350–c.750)

must have been a majoringredient in all this. Inretrospect, the decisionmadeby Pepin and his council in695was tohave far-reachingconsequences in Europeanhistory. In that year Pepinsent Willibrord to Rome toget authority to establish anecclesiastical province.Authoritywas quickly given,

and Willibrord becamearchbishop to the Frisianswith his see at Utrecht andwith the power to createsubordinate dioceses and toconsecrate bishops. Withthese events is marked aturning point in thatrelationship which was to becentral to medieval history,the relationship between theFranksandthepope.Asmallenough turning, perhaps, buta precedent to be followed

and to be enlarged by PepinII’s son (CharlesMartel), hisgrandson (King Pepin) andhis great-grandson(Charlemagne).Willibrord’s commission

was clear: to establishChristianity among theFrisians. He is said to havepreached widely, gainednumerousconverts,appointedsubordinate bishops andestablished churches andmonasteries. His successes

were in west Frisia, in thelands between the Lek Riverand the Zuider Zee, leavingmuch of Frisia beyond hisreach.YetWillibrord, at onepoint, had the hope ofconverting the Danes andeven visited their land,bringing back with him 30boys to train. It all came tonothing, but the incidentindicates something of thescope of Willibrord’sintention. Puzzling in this

contextwashisfoundingofamonastery at Echternach,c.697, very shortly after hisreturn from Rome asarchbishop to the Frisians.Over200milesfromUtrecht,Echternach cannot beassociated with a Frisianmission. Willibrord’s secularsupportersprovidedhimwithland (in modernLuxembourg),wherethenewmonastery was built.Willibrord may have used

Echternach as a place ofretreat; it was there that hespent his final years andwhere he died, aged 81, in739,almost50yearsafterhisarrival on theContinent.Thescriptorium at Echternachfromvery early in its historyproduced illuminated booksof very high quality: theEchternachGospelsrivalstheLindisfarne Gospels and theBook of Kells. Once thoughtto have been brought from

Northumbria, theEchternachGospels is now recognized(by its use of goatskin) ascontinental, undoubtedly aproduct of the scriptorium atEchternach, the work ofmonks trained in thetraditions of their monasteryat Clonmelsh in Ireland. Theaccomplishments ofEchternach are not to beconfused with the principalmission ofWillibrord,whichwas to convert the heathen

Frisians.Hewassuccessfulindoing this at least amongthose Frisians subject toFrankish rule and inestablishing an infrastructureof churches,monasteries andclergy to nurture the newChristian life. He did thiswith theassistanceofsecularFrankishrulersandundertheauthority of the pope, twoelementsessential also to themissionofStBoniface.Themanwhose namewas

changed by the pope toBonifacewasbornWinfridinthesouth-westofEngland,inWessex,c.675.Hestandsoutas the singlemost significantfashioner of the direction ofthe church in the eighthcentury. And there arehistorians who, with somepersuasion,wouldmakeevengrander claims. The name ofBonifaceissynonymouswiththe conversion of theGermans,althoughthenature

of his role in this conversionneedscloseexamination.Whateverelsemustbesaid

about Boniface’s mission tothe Germans – and there ismuch – it has to beemphasized that his was apapalmission.Fromtheverybeginning he sought papalapproval: he traversed theAlps in 719 to ask – andreceive – Pope Gregory II’spermission to preach to theGermans. He returned to

Rome to be consecrated abishop in 722,when he tooktheoathoffidelitytoStPeterand his successors. The oathwas in the form used bybishopswithin the immediatejurisdiction of the pope incentral Italy. It was unusualand, indeed, novel for abishopofa far-awaymissionto swear in this way. Tenyears later Pope Gregory IIImade him archbishop andsent him the pallium, the

short woollen, scarf-likevestmentwhichwas the signof authority over a provinceof the church. A reader ofBoniface’s remarkablecorrespondence willencounter Boniface askingthe pope’s advice, sendingreports of his activities andhumbly giving his loyalty toeachnewpope.Bonifacewascalled missus sancti Petri(‘the legate of St Peter’).Hitherto, papal primacy,

accepted as it was in theWest,didnotimplyanactiveexercise of papal authority.The mission of St Bonifaceunder the direct supervisionof the pope transformed therole of the papacy from amostlypassivetoanowmuchmore active role in theleadership of the church inthe West. If Boniface haddone nothing else, he wouldstill be considered a majorfigure in medieval history.

Buthedidmuchmore.To us, the mission of

Boniface is both clear andvague.Itisclearinthatitwasa mission to the Germanpeoples living east of theRhine and north of theDanube. It is vague becausehe had no diocese, not evenafter he became anarchbishopwithapallium,atleastuntilverylateinhislife,when a see was establishedfor him atMainz. His was a

roving commission to apeople. From our vantagepoint, we can see that hisactivities were generallyconfinedtothelandsofHesseandThuringia.TheleadersofHesse had embracedChristianity onlysuperficially,andtheirpeoplewere still heathen. TheThuringians had beenconverted to Christianity atanearliertime,butthelackofcontinued instructionallowed

pagan practices to reassertthemselves. Boniface’schallenge, then, was toconvert and reconvert. Withwhat must have beenexceptional physical vigouranddrivingmotivationhehadquicksuccess.Thousands,weare told, acceptedChristianity. Of course, hehad companions and, equallyof course, he hadreinforcements from Britain:‘anexceedinglylargenumber

ofholymencame tohis aid,among them readers, writersand learned men trained inthe other arts’ (Willibald’sLife of St Boniface, ch. 6).Monasteries of men and ofwomen began to dot thecountryside.Tauberbischofsheim, wherehis cousin Leoba was firstabbess, became the nurseryfor abbesses of other houses.AtKitzingenonMainanotherEnglish lady became abbess.

Boniface’s countrymanWigbert was placed as thefirst abbot of Fritzlar. Andnear Marburg Bonifaceestablished an influentialmonastery at Amöneburg,andnearGothathemonasteryofOhrdruf.And the listgoeson, endingwith the crown inBoniface’s foundations, themonastery at Fulda (744), amonastery exempt from alllocaljurisdictionsandsubjectdirectlytothepope.Itwasat

FuldathatBonifacewastobeburied and where within 80yearsofhisdeath therewereover130monks.Boniface, the missionary,

faced the problemsencountered by mostmissionaries, and he soughtadvice from the pope andfrombrotherbishops.BishopDaniel of Winchester wiselycounselledhim,

Do not begin by arguing with

them about the origins of theirgods, false as those are, but letthem affirm that some of themwerebegottenbyothers,throughthe intercourse of male andfemale, so that youmay at leastprove that gods and goddessesbornafterthemannerofmenaremen and not gods, and, sincethey did not exist before, musthave had a beginning… Theseand many similar things youshould put before them, notoffensively or so as to angerthem, but calmly andwith greatmoderation.

(Letterno.15)

Pope Gregory II took asensibleapproach inadvisingBoniface about maritalmatters.Withinwhatdegreesof kinship is marriageforbidden?

Since moderation is better thanstrictnessofdiscipline,especiallytowards so uncivilized a people,theymaycontractmarriageafterthe fourth degree [i.e., beyondfirstcousins].

The pope went on to dealwith Boniface’s question

about a man whose wife,owing todisease,wasunableto have sexual intercoursewithhim:

It would be better if he couldremain in a state of continence.But,sincethisisamatterofgreatdifficulty,itisbetterforhimwhocannotrefraintotakeawife.Hemay not, however,withdrawhissupport from the one who waspreventedbydisease.

(Letterno.18)

Boniface worried about the

validity of baptismsperformedbybadpriestsorinan unacceptable form (e.g.without invocation of theTrinity). To which the poperesponded, that in such cases‘youaretofollowtheancientcustom of the church, for hewhohasbeenbaptized in thename of the Father, Son andHoly Spirit may on noaccount be baptized again’(Letter no. 18). Boniface’sscruple even extended to

baptismsperformedbypriestswho, in their ignorance,usedwrong Latin case endings,and the pope corrected himfor needlessly rebaptizing insuchcases(Letterno.54).Theexterminationofpagan

practices proved not an easytask. Boniface’s biographercomments,

Some continued secretly, othersopenly,tooffersacrificestotreesand springs, to inspect theentrails of victims; some

practised divination, magic andincantations; some turned theirattention to auguries, auspicesandothersacrificialrites.

(Willibald,LifeofStBoniface,ch.6)

OnecanpictureBoniface,axein hand, at Geismar,confronting a giant oak tree(theOakofJupiter), longtheobject of pagan worship,while a host of paganworshippers angrilywatched.He made a mere superficial

cut, his biographer tells us,when amighty wind toppledthe sacred oak, and it landeddivided in four equal parts,trunktotop.Andtheamazedonlookers acceptedChristianity.Unlike Wilfrid’s mission,

Boniface’s had lastingconsequences because heestablished a clearinstitutional structure whichwouldensure itscontinuationlong after he and his fellow

missionarieshadpassedfromthescene.Whenhewasmadearchbishop in732,heneitherhadadioceseofhisownnorany bishops under him. Aslate as 739 he was withoutbishops,butby741Bonifacehad eight suffragans. FourwereinBavaria,where,attherequest of the local duke, hecreated territorial dioceses atPassau,Regensburg,Salzburgand Freising. Boniface wastheir metropolitan (i.e.,

archbishop). Also, he hadsuffragan bishops withterritorial jurisdiction atBuraburg in Hesse, at ErfurtinThuringia,atWürzburgonthe Main and at Eichstätt inFranconia.Oftheselatterfourbishops, three were fellowcountrymen of Boniface. In739 Pope Gregory III hadwarned him, ‘You are not atliberty to linger in one placewhen your work is donethere.’ Perhaps as a

concession to his age, thennearing 70, Boniface in 745was made archbishop ofMainz, metropolitan of the‘German church’ which hehad created. With thecooperation–always–ofthesecular rulers he held synodsof bishops to address thepractical matters amongGerman Catholics. Thesematters, important thoughthey were, were lessimportanthistoricallythanthe

establishing of themechanism for dealing withthem.Ahierarchicalstructurewas in place, and it markedthe post-missionary phase inthehistoryofthesepeoples.As a final witness to his

senseofvocation,Bonifaceinhis old age left Mainz –provision for his successorassured–and returned to themission field. In 753 he andcompanions journeyed toFrisia to preach in the lands

beyond the Zuider Zee.Thousands apparently wereconverted, but, in June 754,Boniface and 53 others wereslaughtered by heathensseekingbooty.To the titleofbishop,archbishopandlegatewereaddedmartyrandsaint.Adispassionateviewofthe

English missions to theContinent in the eighthcentury cannot escapeconcluding that they gave ashape and direction to the

future history of the church.A strong church among theGermanicpeoplesanda firmlink of these peoples to thepapacy, with consequences,friendly as well as hostile,were to be hallmarks of themedievalchurch.

Furtherreading

On Gregory the Great thereader will find very usefulJeffrey Richards, Consul ofGod: The Life and Times ofGregory the Great (London,1980). Other studies includePierreBatiffol,SaintGregorythe Great (tr. John L.Stoddard; London, 1929);G.R. Evans, The Thought ofGregory the Great(Cambridge, 1986); CaroleStraw, Gregory the Great:Perfection in Imperfection

(Berkeley, CA, 1988); andRobert A. Markus, Gregorythe Great and his World(Cambridge, 1997). Aninterestingtextisanearlylifeof Gregory: BertramColgrave (ed. and tr.), TheEarliest Life of Gregory theGreatbyanAnonymusMonkof Whitby (Lawrence, KA,1968). About Gregory’sauthorship of the Dialoguessee Francis Clark, ThePseudo-Gregorian Dialogues

(2vols;Leiden,1987),aviewnot unchallenged: see PaulMeyvaert’s rebuttal inJournal of EcclesiasticalHistory 39 (1988), 335–82.On broader issues see T.S.Brown, Gentlemen andOfficers: ImperialAdministration andAristocratic Power inByzantine Italy, A.D. 554–800(Rome,1984)andJeffreyRichards,The Popes and thePapacy in the Early Middle

Ages(London,1979).OntheEnglishmissionone

should begin with HenryMayr-Harting,TheComingofChristianity to Anglo-SaxonEngland (3rd edn; London,1991), and with FrankStenton, Anglo-SaxonEngland (3rd edn; Oxford,1971). For the pre-missionperiod see Charles Thomas,ChristianityinRomanBritainto A.D. 500 (Berkeley, CA,1981). On St Augustine see

the essays in RichardGameson, ed., St Augustineand the Conversion ofEngland(Stroud,Glos,1999)and IanWood, ‘TheMissionofAugustineofCanterburytothe English’, Speculum 69(1994)1–17.JohnBlairinhisThe Church in Anglo-SaxonSociety (Oxford, 2005)emphasizestheimportanceofminsters. Robin Fleming,BritainAfterRome:The FallandRise,400–1070(London,

2010) describes in chapter 6the English mission and theChristianization of theEnglish, using valuablearchaeological evidence. Athorough analysis of theissues involved in the Eastercontroversy is Maura Walshand Dáibhi Ó Cróinín, eds,Cummian’s Letter DeControversia Paschali,Together with Related IrishComputistical Tract DeRatione Computandi

(Toronto, 1988). On thedispute about tonsure seeEdwardJames,‘BedeandtheTonsure Question’, Peritia 3(1984), 85–98. About theearly schools see MichaelLapidge, ‘The School ofTheodore and Hadrian’,Anglo-Saxon England 15(1986), 45–72. The moderncontroversies about theputative Lindisfarnescriptorium can be followedin the journals Peritia and

Anglo-SaxonEngland.OntheCodex Amiatinus see thescholarly article by KarenCorsano, ‘The First Quire oftheCodex Amiatinus and theInstitutiones of Cassiodorus’,Scriptorium 41 (1987), 3–34.An excellent introduction toan allied manuscript is JanetBackhouse, The LindisfarneGospels: A Masterpiece ofBook Painting (London,1995). A more detailed butaccessible work is Michelle

P. Brown, The LindisfarneGospels: Society, Spiritualityand the Scribe (London,2003).OnBede the literatureis vast.Onewill find helpfulsuchitemsasR.W.Southern,Medieval Humanism andOther Studies (New York,1970), ch. 1; Peter HunterBlair, The World of Bede(London, 1970); George H.Brown, Bede the Venerable(Boston, 1987). Nothing canreplacereadingtheactualtext

of Bede’s history, whichexists in many Englishtranslations, for example,Bertram Colgrave,Ecclesiastical History of theEnglish People, edited byJudith McClure and RogerCollins (Oxford, 1994), andLeo Sherley-Price,AHistoryof the English Church andPeople (Penguin paperback,1955 and later printings).Another facet of Bede’sgenius–hisbiblicalexegesis

– can be seen in InnovationandTraditionintheWritingsof the Venerable Bede (ScottDe Gregorio, ed.;Morgantown,WV,2006).Essential to a study of the

English mission to theContinent is W. Levison,EnglandandtheContinentinthe Eighth Century (Oxford,1946). The remarkablecorrespondence of Bonifaceis accessible in severalEnglish translations, most

notably in EphraimEmerton’s frequentlyreprintedTheLettersofSaintBoniface (New York, 1940).C.H. Talbot, tr. and ed., TheAnglo-Saxon Missionaries inGermany: Being the Lives ofSS. Willibrord, Boniface,Sturm, Leoba and Leben(London and New York,1954) has valuable texts.Forthe role of women in theconversion process seeRosamond McKitterick,

‘Anglo-SaxonMissionariesinGermany: PersonalConnexions and LocalInfluences’, inacollectionofher papers, Books, ScribesandLearningintheFrankishKingdoms, 6th–9th Centuries(Aldershot, Hants, andBrookfield,VT,1994).

5CHURCH,

CAROLINGIANSANDVIKINGS

It might be thought that theword ‘Carolingian’ derives

from the greatest person ofthat dynasty, Charlemagne(Carolusmagnus,CharlestheGreat), but such is not thecase.Theword ‘Carolingian’derives from Charles Martel,whose son Pepin became thefirst king of the dynasty. Atthe height of their powerunder Charlemagne, theCarolingianscontrolledavastarea of western Europe, notjust the area of modernFrance nor even of

Napoleonic France. TheFrankishcampaignintoSpainfamously failed atRoncesvalles(778),givingusthe epic ‘Song of Roland’(Chanson de Roland) andfixed the south-westernborder of their lands at thePyrenees. Yet their south-eastern lands extended deepinto central Italy. And theirpower extended from thewestern sea well into centralEurope, including Saxony,

Thuringia and Bavaria, thusneutralizingtheAvarthreattothe eastern borders. In thenorth, Carolingian dominionstopped only at theinhospitable Danish marsh.Europe was not to see suchmassive territorial control byone power until the time ofNapoleon in the eighteenthand nineteenth centuries andHitler in the twentiethcentury.Itwasinthecontextof this Frankish

aggrandizement that thechurch was to play a majorrole. The relationship of thekings of this dynasty,particularly Pepin III (751–68), Charlemagne (768–814)andLouisthePious(814–40),with the papacy profoundlyinfluencedthatinstitutionandthe Christian religion moregenerally. It became adynasty too soon; it was adynasty too ambitious in itsaimsandtooweakevenatits

strongest moment to survivelong. Within 90 years fromthecoronationofPepin(751)the Frankish lands, the new‘empire’, were divided intothreepartsandsoonintoevenmore parts as centrifugalforcesleftitinpieces.Yet,onthat account, itsaccomplishments should notbe denied: they wereconsiderable, like nothingbefore, and they touched thechurchonmanylevelsandin

many ways that continuedlong after the grandsons ofCharlemagne were engagedin unseemly fratricidalwarfare.

Franco-papalalliance

Events in Italy and Franciacombined to form thecentralpolitical alliance of the

Middle Ages. More thanpolitical and, indeed, morethan an alliance, therelationship of pope andemperor provided one of themost significant themes inmedievalhistory;somewouldsay the central theme. WithCharlesMartelrulingFranciaas mayor of the palace andnot as king, and with PopeGregoryIIIbeingharassedbytheLombardkings, thescenewas set in 739 for the first

approach by the papacy –whichwas not acted upon –to obtain Frankish militaryassistance. Other approacheswould be made and withmuch greater success. Thepapal concern was forsecurity of the republic ofRome (respublica romana),over which the pope had defacto authority, against thethreats of the Lombards, notonlyfromthenortherncentreof theLombard kingdombut

also from the two Lombardduchies (Spoleto andBenevento) separatedgeographically from theirnorthern brothers. At issuealso was the fate of theexarchate of Ravenna, nowwithout an effectiveByzantinepresence.Theeventsof751–54may

be central to the developingsituation. By 750 CharlesMartel’s son Pepin, the thirdof that name, had become

mayorofthepalace.Thekingwas Childeric III, a merefigurehead,who, in fact, hadbeen appointed by Pepin in743. For reasons notaltogether clear to us, Pepinfound his situationintolerable. According to theRoyal Frankish Annals,written after the events,Pepin, in 751, asked PopeZacharythefamousquestion:Who shouldbeking,hewhohas the title but no power or

hewhohasthepowerbutnotthetitle?Theannalsstatethatthe pope answered that hewhohasthepowershouldbeking.Ifthisistrue,thenPopeZachary would have beeninvolved in the creation of anew Frankish dynasty.Exactly what happened wemayneverknow.Perhapstheaccount in the annals isunreliable and Pepin becamekingmerely by the assent oftheFrankishnobilitywithno

papal involvement. Thescenario of the annals,however, was taken up byothers and became widelyaccepted. If its account isprecise and correct, aboutwhich there are now strongdoubts, then the pope haddonewhatnoearlierpopehaddone:popeshadneverbeforecreated a monarch or evenclaimed the right to do so.About two years later thepope (now Stephen II)

crossed the Alps to Francia,and there at Ponthion metKing Pepin, who acceded tothe pope’s request formilitary assistance to thwartLombard aggression againstpapallands.WhileinFranciain 754, Pope Stephenanointed King Pepin at thechurch of St Denis outsideParis. This anointing had asacramental element, whichgave the anointed king aplace and function in the

churchwithduties,privilegesand responsibilities, whichwould be spelled out in timebut were there in seed atPepin’sanointingin754.ThePopealsoconferredonPepinthe title ‘Patrician of theRomans’, the meaning ofwhich still exercises theminds of historians, althoughit was not as significant asoncethought.Inthespringof755 Pepin led a small armyinto Italy and quickly

defeated the Lombards. Oneneed scarcely be cynical toaskwhether therewasaquidproquoinallthis:ifthepopein 751 agreed to legitimizePepinasking–and itwouldbe prudent to have somedoubt about this – did he doso in return for a promise ofmilitary assistance from theFranks,apromisefulfilledbythe Frankish expedition of755? An alliance with thepope had been struck,

whetherin751orin755oratsomepointinbetween.Pepinmarched against theLombards, in 756, and notonly defeated the Lombardsbut took thekeys to22citiesand had them sent to Rome.To call this act theDonationof Pepin would be tomisconstrue the meaning.Pepin did not conquerLombardcitiesandthengrantthepopeauthorityoverthem.The cities in question were

notLombard butwere in theexarchateandduchyofRomeand had been only recentlyheldbytheLombards.Another donation of far

greatermomentcametolightat about this time: theDonation of Constantine. Aprecise date cannot be givento this forgery, but thedocument was drawn up atthe papal palace (theLateranPalace) quite possibly in theearly770s.Ittooktheformof

a fourth-century grant by theEmperorConstantine toPopeSylvester I, which gave thepope authority over the cityof Rome and over all theprovinces, districts and citiesof Italy and the westernregions. This claim of thepapacy to temporal rule overtheWestdazzles themind inits sheer audacity. Whoeverdrew up the Donation ofConstantinemight have beenmore concerned with

ByzantineemperorsthanwithGermanic kings, since itseemed to refute theemperors’ claims over Italy.Noevidenceexiststhatitwastrotted out in the eighthcentury against eitheremperors or kings. It was tofigureinlatertimeasaprimafacie indication of papalsupremacy in the West, yet,even then, there is noindication that these laterpopes knew it was a forged

document. Only in thefifteenthcenturydidLorenzoVallaproveitaforgery.The coming of

Charlemagne to power in768, apower sharedwithhisbrother till the latter’s deathin 771, promised acontinuation of the policy ofpapal alliance but in waysbeyond imagining. The riftbetween the Franks andLombardswasseenashealedwhen, in 770, Charlemagne

agreed tomarry the daughterof the Lombard king, yetwithin a year he rejected her–whetherheactuallymarriedherisnotclear.Whatisclearis that any rapprochementwith the Lombards hadended. As his father haddone, Charlemagne led anarmy into Italy and defeatedtheLombards,but,unlikehisfather, Charlemagne sent theLombardkingtoamonasteryandmadehimselfkingofthe

Lombards. During 774Charlemagne went to Rome,and at Easter time he andPope Hadrian I went to StPeter’s Basilica, where theyswore mutual oaths, thusconfirming the alliance ofCharles’s father with thepapacy. The meaning of thealliance was spelled out byCharlemagne in a letter toPopeLeoIIIin796:

It is our part with the help of

divine holiness to defend byarmed strength the holy churchof Christ everywhere from theoutwardonslaughtsofthepagansand the ravages of the infidelsand to strengthen within theknowledgeoftheCatholicfaith.

It is your part, most holyFather, to help our armies withyourhands liftedup toGod likeMoses, so that, by yourintercession and by theleadership and gift of God, theChristian people (populuschristianus)mayeverywhereandalways have victory over theenemies of his holy name andthat the name of our Lord JesusChrist may be glorified

throughouttheworld.

HereisavisionofaseamlessChristian society, to whosewell-being both king andpope were bound together inacommoneffort.Four years after this

statement, atChristmasMassin St Peter’s Basilica, PopeLeo crowned CharlemagneRoman emperor. ThisbarbariankingofaGermanicpeople received the title of

emperor in an event whosefull meaning still challengesmodern scholarship. Therehad been noRoman emperorin the West since 476; theonlyemperorwasthewomanIrene, ruling the remnant ofthe old Roman Empire fromConstantinople. Fourcommentscanbemadeaboutthis extraordinary happeningin St Peter’s. In the firstplace, whatever the internalconfusion of Roman politics

and the difficultiesexperiencedbyPopeLeo,theconferral of the imperial titlehad to have beenCharlemagne’s idea, and thetale told by his biographerdecades later of a reluctant,surprised Charlemagnecarriesnoconviction.Second,the conferral of this title bythe pope may have followedthe precedent of a pope 50years earlier possiblyconferringthetitleofkingon

Charlemagne’s father. Third,an empire was not createdthat Christmas Day. Thelands held by the Franks,considerably augmented asthey had been by theCarolingians, did not nowformanempirewithimperialadministration.Whatthe

Plate4ThroneofCharlemagne,royalchapel,Aachen.ReproducedbypermissionofFotoMarburg.

Franks had held theycontinuedtoholdinthesameway:aseriesofholdingseachwith its own structure ofgovernment, not unlike theHapsburg holdings in theearly modern period. And,fourth, the coronation ofCharlemagne as emperor, asitwere, crowned the alliance

between the papacy and theFranks. It was furtherconfirmed by his son Louisthe Pious (814–40),when hemetwithPopeStephenIVinFrancia in 816 and enteredinto a ‘pact of confirmation’(pactum confirmationis).Pope Stephen reanointedLouismuchasanearlierpopehadreanointedPepin.What needs emphasizing

amidst all these dates andevents is that the Frankish

kings took it as a religiousresponsibility to defend thepapacy. That therewere alsopolitical considerations fewwould deny, but theseanointed figures from northof the Alps, themselves notmany generations removedfrom worshipping trees andwinds,defined theirofficeashaving a spiritual dimension.With reason did those atCharlemagne’scourtcallhim‘David’.

As an active, formal,treaty-based relationship, theFranco-papal alliance did notsurvive the collapse ofCarolingianpower.WhentheCarolingian lands weredivided in 840 between thethreesonsofLouisthePious,there began the process ofdismemberment.Oneofthesesons died in 855, and hiskingdomwassubdividedintothree kingdoms. The processof dissolution and decline

was well under way. Thepower of the local nobles,whichwasheldundercontrolby Charlemagne, nowreasserteditself.Theofficeofemperor was to be held byincreasingly weak andinsignificant descendants ofCharlemagne. A meaningfulalliance could not survivesuchshiftsofpoliticalpower.

TheCarolingiansandchurchpractice

Einhard, in his biography,describes Charlemagne as adevoutChristian:

Charles practised the Christianreligionwith great devotion andpiety,forhehadbeenbroughtupin this faith since earliestchildhood … As long as hishealth lasted he went to churchmorning and evening with greatregularity, and also for early-

morning Mass and for the late-nighthours.

(Bk3,no.26)

It is at the risk of the chargeof moral arrogance that ahistorian would sit injudgementonthesincerityofCharles’s religious practicesor the depth of his spirituallife. Such knowledge liesbeyond the reachevenof themost imaginative among us.Yet the policies of the

Carolingian state, shaped byitskings, affected theway inwhich the Christian religionwas lived in the Frankishlands.The consecrated kings of

theFranks issuedcapitularies(each a series of chapters,capitula), which regulatedboth secular and religiousmatters, the two frequentlymixedinthesamecapitulary.This concern for the state ofreligiouspracticecanbeseen

mostvividlyinacapitularyof789, generally referred to asAdmonitio generalis, echoesof whose provisions can beheard in later legislation. Itwas directed entirely toreligiousaffairs,thefirstsuchcapitulary of Charlemagne’sreign.We shouldbackup15years, to 774, whenCharlemagne, whilebesieging the Lombardcapital of Pavia, receivedfrom Pope Hadrian a

collection of canon law.Essentially the collectionwhich had been made byDionysius Exiguus in theearly sixth century, to whichothercanonshadbeenadded,itisnowgenerallyreferredtoas the Dionysio-Hadriana.Without doubt it was thebasiccollectionofcanon lawusedatRomeand, indeed, inother places as well. ItbecamethebasisofsuchlawintheFrankishlands,andwe

are to findmuch of it in theAdmonitio generalis of 789.Thefirst60ofthe82articlesthat comprise this capitularywere drawn from theDionysio-Hadriana and, inProfessor McKitterick’swords, form ‘the basicoutlinesfortheadministrationof the Frankish church’. Thefirst chapter deals withexcommunication, citingearly general councils. Thecapitularymoves on to other

matters. Bishops are told toinvestigate candidates fororders.Priestswho sayMassanddonotthemselvesreceivecommunion act wrongly.Monksandclericsshouldnotenter taverns to eat or drink,nor should they engage inbusiness. No money shouldpasshandsintheordainingofbishops or priests. No oneshould become a bishopbefore his thirtieth year,because the Lord Jesus did

notpreachbeforehisthirtiethyear. Bishops should notadmit slaves to the clericalstate without the permissionof their masters. And so itruns, directives applying tobishops, clergy and laity, alldrawn from Hadrian’scollection and applied to aFrankish setting.Yet there ismore.An additional 22 chapters

reveal something of theCarolingian genius for

originality and invention,perhaps as close as we cancome to a Carolingianprogramme of churchdiscipline and reform. Theemphasis is clearly pastoral.Baptism and outwardacceptance of Christianity isnot enough: a knowledge ofthatfaithisnecessaryinorderto give it depth. Schoolsshouldbeestablishedateverymonastery and everycathedral,where boys should

read the psalms and booksabout grammar and musicand numbers as well as‘Catholic books’ (thescriptures) and whereexperienced copiers shouldpreparecopiesofthegospels,psalter and missal, if this isnecessary. Priests shouldexplain the Lord’s Prayer tothe people so that they willknowwhattheyareaskingofGod.Sundaywassingledoutin detail as a special day, a

day free from usualoccupations.Onthatdaymenshouldnotwork in the fieldsor vineyards or woods; norshouldtheysuepleasorhuntanimals or build houses ortend theirgardens.Theymaytake bodies to be buried.Prohibitionsalsorevealmuchof what women did on theother days of the week: onSundays they should notengage in weaving, makingclothes, embroidering,

cardingwool,beatinglinenordoing laundry in public.Sunday should be anhonouredday,adayofrest,adayonwhichChristiansgotoMass and praise God. Andpriests must instruct theirpeople by preaching: howGod is one and three, howGod became man and willjudge the dead, sending thewicked into eternal fire withthe devil and the just intoeternal life with Christ and

theangels.Theyaretopreachlove of God and love ofneighbour, faith and hope inGod, the virtues of chastityandcontinence,kindness andmercy, concern for the poor,admission of one’s sins andforgiveness of others, ‘for itisbylivinginsuchawaythattheywillpossessthekingdomof heaven’. A modernsyllabus of sermon subjectscould scarcely improve onthis list issued by

Charlemagnein789.Canon law was thus

established as an elementessential to the life of theChristian community. Ideals,expectations, desiderata areexpressedinthecanons.Thatthey were always observedneed hardly be believed, yetthey stood as expressions ofthe order needed in acommunity of Christianbelieversandoftheidealthatexternal behaviour conform

to inner beliefs. In thegenerationafterCharlemagnethere was produced in theFrankish kingdom the mostfamous canonical collectionof the period, and it was aforgery, known to us as thePseudo-Isidorian Decretals.To say itwas a forgery is totell only part of the story. Infact, the collection is apatchwork of authentic lawsand made-up laws, and thewhole was taken for

authentic. It contained realcanonsfromrealcouncilsandreal provisions from realpapaldecretals,butabout100decretals were falselyattributed to early popes andwere the creation of theforger or, more likely, of aworkshop of forgers, whoproduced the collection. Italso provided the means bywhich the Donation ofConstantinebecameknowntosubsequentcenturies.Pseudo-

Isidore was the creature ofdisputes in Francia betweenbishops and theirmetropolitan archbishop inthe middle of the ninthcentury. Fingers can bepointed at the suffraganbishops of Hincmar ofRheims, the powerful, self-assertive, not whollyattractivemetropolitanofthatregion. The collection mayhave arisen in an attempt ofsuffragan bishops to assert

their own role as pastors ofsouls and, by asserting adirect connection with thepope, to try to thwart theattempts of the metropolitantointerfereintheirdioceses.Sections of Pseudo-Isidore

weretohavealonglifewhenthey were taken up byreforming popes in theeleventh century, particularlyUrban II (1088–99), and bycanonists thenand later,whoincorporated ‘false decretals’

intheircollectionsofcanons.The formative collection ofGratian(c.1140)contains375chapters drawn from thissource. It should be quicklyadded that there is no reasonto suspect that popes orcanonistsknewthattheyweredealingwithforgeries.Inanycase, no matter what theirorigin,theywereclearlyusedas instruments to supportpapalpower.The formof life ofmonks

and clerics was seriouslyaffectedby theactionsof theCarolingian kings. A varietyofstylesofmonasticlifegaveway to an almost universaladoption of the Rule of StBenedict. Charlemagne wasinfluential in the adoption ofSt Benedict’s Rule in manymonasterieseastoftheRhineand in southern Gaul.Elsewhere monasteriestendedtofollowamixedrule.It was not until the reign of

his son Louis the Pious thatthe Rule of St Benedict wonout.CentraltoLouis’seffortswas another Benedict,Benedict of Aniane, the‘Second Benedict’. Broughtto Aachen by the newemperor-king, Benedictpresided over two meetingsof abbots, in 816 and 817,whichproducedtheMonasticCapitulary. Essentially thiscapitulary was anendorsementoftheRuleofSt

Benedict; it ordered that thisrule and only this rule beobserved in monasteries.Imperial officials visitedmonasteriestoensurethatthecapitularywas being obeyed.Yet, for all of Benedict ofAniane’s strictures aboutobservingStBenedict’sRule,what in fact emerged wasBenedict’s Rule altered inwaysthatchangedthesimpleform of life of pureBenedictinism. Now, thanks

to the second Benedict,prayerswereaddedtosuchanextent that monks spent vastamountsof time inchoirandwere consequently unable toperform the manual labourwhich was clearly part of StBenedict’svisionofamonk’slife.Thebalanceofworkandprayer was lost, and theliturgy was henceforth todominate monastic life. TheMonastic Capitulary waspromulgated by the emperor

in 817. Since its aim was togainobservanceoftherulebyall Frankish monasteries, allabbots were ordered to havecopiesoftherulemadeandtohave the rule read to theirmonks. The result was theemergenceoftheBenedictineform of monasticism as thestandardinwesternEurope.The life of monks was

seriously changed in anotherway. Hitherto the vastmajority of monks were not

priests and generally oneconventual Mass would becelebrated daily for thecommunitybyamonk-priest.Now, however, two mattersintersected. In the firstplace,more monks became priestsand, second, in anotherinnovation, each priestwantedtosayMasseachday.Massasprivatedevotionwasat odds with Mass ascorporate worship, and withthis innovation a corner had

been turned in the history ofChristianworship.And therewere architecturalconsequences.Sincenotonlythe priest but also the altarhad to fast before Mass, amultiplication of altarsoccurred in monasticchurches,aphenomenonalsooccurring in other, non-monasticchurches.The mention of priests

living in non-monasticchurches brings us to the

clergylivingintheworld(the‘secular’ clergy). Theirministry was to care for thepastoral needs of theChristian people, and thisthey did in ways that aremostlyhiddenfromourview.Some of the secular clergylived in remote places in thecountryside, baptizing,preaching and sayingMassesin churches usually providedby the local lord. In Englishthese churches are called

proprietary churches and inGermanEigenkirchen. Itwasfrom these that parisheswould eventually develop; itwasalsofromthispracticeofthe local lord appointing thepriest for his church that, intime, would lead to disputesabout the lay appointment ofpriests and even bishops.Othermembersofthesecularclergy lived in towns incommunities gathered aboutprincipal churches, and some

of these in cathedral citieswhere they lived with thebishop in his household.Chrodegang, bishop ofMetz,c.755, drew up an influentialruleforhishouseholdclergy.Theywere to live a commonorconventual life,eatingandsleeping in the same house,joining together for dailyprayers, yet, not bound by avow of poverty, they couldownproperty.Theyweresaidto live according to the

ancientcanonsandwerethuscalled ‘canons’, and, sinceeachdaytheywouldgathertohear the reading of a chapterof sacred literature, theircommunitybecameknownasa chapter. Other chapters ofsecular canons followingChrodegang’s rule speedilyappeared not only at othercathedrals but also at largechurches like St DenisoutsideParis.Weare tohearmore of this rule in the

twelfth century. Chrodegangis also credited withintroducing the Romanliturgy, especially Romanchants,intoMetz.It was the relationship of

Charlemagne and PopeHadrian that greatlyinfluenced liturgicaldevelopment.‘Sacramentaries’ (i.e., booksused by priests to celebrateMass and to perform otherrites) were commonplace in

Francia at this time, but nouniform usage prevailed.About 786, in response toCharlemagne’s request foranauthentic text, Pope Hadriansent him a deluxesacramentary,whichprobablyreflected contemporaryRoman usage. A supplementwas added to the text to suitFrankish needs, quitepossibly by the learnedAlcuin of York. This textcontainedthetextandrubrics

for the Mass, the centralliturgical act of theChristianreligion,are-enactmentoftheLast Supper, when CatholicsbelievethatJesustransformedbreadandwine intohisbodyand blood. In a quirk ofhistory, in the course of thetenth century this Hadrianictext as supplemented byAlcuin(orsomeoneelse)andasrefinedbyusageinFranciawas introduced into Romeand became the historic

RomanRite,which remainedinusewithlittlechangeuntilthe1960s.Lest one think that the

Carolingian kings,particularly Charlemagne,alwaysactedaccordingtothehigh principles of Christianteaching, which they openlysupported, this section mustconcludewith the sad taleofthe forced conversion ofpagan Saxons by theChristian king of the Franks.

Attempts by the Franks toconquer the Saxons longpredated the reign ofCharlemagne (768–814) butinvariably met withfrustrating failures. Toacquire Saxony made muchstrategic sense to the Franks.Itwould give them the landsnorthofThuringiaandeastofthe Rhine and would stoponce and for all the Saxonraiding on their borders. Itwould also lead to the

extension of Christianity tothese heathen people. Thecampaignsbeganinearnestin772 and continued withalmost annual regularity forover 30 years, ranging frommajor military efforts topunitive raids. At the end ofthewar,thevictoriousFrankshad extended their border tothe Elbe River, even to itsfurther bank. In one incidentin782Charles,furiousat theoutcome of an earlier

engagement, beheaded 4,500Saxon prisoners in a singleday. Although the figureshould not be taken exactly,the chronicler is telling usthattherewasavastslaughterofunarmedprisonersorderedby the anointed king of theFranks.Massive deportationsfollowed after subsequentcampaigns. In a celebratedcapitulary, possibly of 782,death was decreed as thepenalty for any Saxon who

refused baptism: mortemoriaturus (‘he will die thedeath’). The same penalty ofdeath applied to Saxons notonlyforburningthedead,forcannibalism and for humansacrificebutalsoforsuchsinsas not observing the Lentenpractice.Alcuin ofYork, theconsummate insider, theperfect bureaucrat, whocombined intelligence, aworldly wisdom andsensitivity to the words and

wishesofhissuperiors,someyears later wrote for theemperor’sattention:

Faith must be voluntary notcoerced.Convertsmustbedrawnto the faithnot forced.Apersoncanbe compelled tobebaptizedyetnotbelieve.Anadultconvertshould answer what he trulybelievesandfeels,and,ifhelies,then he will not have truesalvation.

The conversion of theSaxons, not the happiest

chapter in the history of theFranks,bearswitnesstowhatcontemporary theologianswould have called theuniversality of original sinand what moderns mightdescribe as the dark side ofourhumannature.

TheVikings

A profound influence onhistorical Christianity washad by the warrior-seamenwho left the islands andpeninsulasofScandinaviaforoverseas adventures andwhogave their name to an epoch,theVikingAge.Outoffjordsand viks (inlets) in theirhomelands, they sailedwestward to the British Islesand further west to Iceland,Greenland and the shores ofNorth America. They sailed

southward, coursing throughthe river systems of themodern Low Countries andFrance. And they sailedeastward across the BalticSea andby river andportagereached deep into Russia.They sailed as pagans, asworshippers ofanthropomorphic deities likeThor, the thunder god,Odin,the god of the spear, andFrey, the god of sexualpleasure. Unexpectedly, in

the years surrounding 800,Vikings first appeared,raiding the coast of theBritish Isles and the north-westerncontinentalmainland.Thereasonslyingbehindthissudden eruption of theseforces fromthefarnorthstilldivide historians, but anexplanation that includes apopulationfactorhasmuchtocommendit.Inaculturewithmassivepolygamyacrisisofpopulation can occur within

even one generation. Muchevidence exists that at thistimelandinScandinaviawasbeing used increasingly forcrops intended for humanconsumption and thatmarginallands

Map6Vikings

were being cultivated, bothfairly clear indications of agrowinghumanpopulation.Apopulation crunch may haveoccurred at the turn into theninth century. Whatever thereasons, these peoples of thesea soon took to the seas insearch of land. Except inIcelandandGreenland,itwasalready largelyoccupied land

whichtheywantedandwhichthey took only after violentencounters with nativeinhabitants,whowerealmostinvariablyChristians.It is not without

significance that among thevery first known attacks wasthe fierce Viking raid on themonastery at Lindisfarne inNorthumbria,defencelessandopen to the seas. Under theyear 793 the Anglo-SaxonChroniclereports:

Dire portents appeared overNorthumbria and sorelyfrightened the people. Theyconsistedofimmensewhirlwindsand flashes of lightning, andfiery dragons were seen in theair. A great famine immediatelyfollowedthesesigns,andlaterinthe same year, on 8th June, theravages of heathen menmiserably destroyed God’schurch on Lindisfarne withplunderandslaughter.

A later writer, using nearcontemporary sources,likened this attack on

Lindisfarne to ‘stinginghornets’ and ‘ravenouswolves’ and recounted thatthe Vikings slew priests andnuns and destroyedeverything insight, includingholy relics, and took withthem some monks as slaves.Even the far-off Alcuin, thenative Northumbrian by theninFrancia,wrotesevenlettersin response to news of thisraid.InthefollowingyeartheVikings were at Jarrow. Yet

these were but incidents inlarger movements. TheVikings were soon in theOrkney and Shetland islandsand sailed down the westcoast of Britain. In 794 theyattackedtheHebridesandthefamous island monastery atIona.Inthenextyear–thesewere summer raids – theyattacked Iona again and theisland of Skye, and off thenorth-eastIrishcoastRathlin,andeven islandsoff thewest

coast of Ireland. Iona wasattackedyetagainin802and806, and in the latter raid 68Irish monks were slain andthe survivors abandonedColumba’s monastery forKells on the Irish mainland.And so the raids on Irelandcontinued,notalwaysagainstmonastic sites but with achilling regularity. In 823they attacked SkelligMichael, the monasticsanctuary perched on rocks

eight miles off the Kerrycoast,and,attheotherendofthe island, the monastery atBangor,Co.Down,wheretherelics of St Comgall weredesecrated. In 832 alone themonastery at Armagh wasattacked three times in onemonth. At about this sametimeVikingsgainedaccesstotheIrishheartland,sailinguptheRiver Shannon, attackingthe monastery atClonmacnois. In 839 they

burned the monastery atCork.Suchraids–andmanyothers couldbe added to thislitanyofdevastatingattacks–were not against monasteriesasmonasteries(i.e.,asplacesof Christian worship) butagainst monasteries askeepers of gold and silvervessels and as placescontaining prominent men,who could be held forransom. Undefendedmonasteries were obvious

targets.BothinIrelandandinEngland the Vikings werefrequently referred to simplyas‘heathens’.Attacksbythese‘heathens’

were not confined to theBritish Isles. By 834 theywere attacking in largenumbers at Dorestad, thegreat entrepot situated wheretheRhine and Lek thenmet,at the modern Wijk in theNetherlands, and they werethereagainineachofthenext

threeyears.TheVikingsweresoon penetrating the riversystems of modern Franceand the Low Countries.Viking ships sailed up theScheldein836andsetfiretoAntwerp. Their ships sailedinto the Loire in 834,attacking themonastic islandof Noirmoutier at the rivermouth.Theysoonuseditasabasefor raidsupriver: in843they reached Nantes, where,on the feast of St John the

Baptist(24June),theyseizedthe bishop and slew him atthealtarofhiscathedral.Andit was at Nantes, if we canbelievelaterchronicles,thatascene of utter barbarityensued.TheVikings are saidto have killed whom theywilled in a butchery of epicproportions, stopping onlywhen, dripping with bloodand laden with bloodiedjewels, they returned toNoirmoutier. Other Vikings

saileduptheSeine,where,in841,theyattackedRouenandthen the monastery ofJumièges, before seizing themonastery of St Wandrilleand holding it for ransom.They harassed Paris and,later, in the 880s, besiegedthe townfora fullyear.Andtheywere inother rivers: theMeuse, Scheldt, Somme andDordogne.Onecontemporarylamented:

The fleets grow larger and theVikings themselves grow andgrow in number. On all sidesChristianpeople suffermassacreandburningandplunder…TheVikingscrusheverythingintheirpath: there is no defense. Theycapture Bordeaux, Périgeux,Limoges, Angoulême andToulouse. They destroy Angers,Tours and Orléans … Shipsbeyond counting sail up theSeine,whereevilprevails.Rouenis attacked, pillaged and burnt;Paris, Beauvais and Meaux areseized; the stronghold of Melunis razed; Chartres is occupied;EvreuxandBayeuxarepillaged;andallthetownsareattacked.

Monks, unprepared for suchattacks, fled from suchmonasteries as St Maixent,Charroux, St Maur-sur-Loireand St Martin of Tours. Fortwo generations fleeingmonks could be seen on theroads leading to Burgundy,Auvergne and Flanders,taking with them their‘saints’, the canons of Tourscarryingaway thebodyofStMartin at least four times

fromtheattackingheathens.When peace was made

with the Vikings, it waseverywhere accompanied bythe conversion of theheathens to Christianity.After thedefeatof theDanesbyKingAlfredatEdingtonin878, Guthrum, the Vikingleader, whose army was stillintact and still a threat,accepted baptism, and theconversion of his followersno doubt followed.When, in

the following year, theseVikings crossed the countryto ‘share’ out East Anglia,they did so as Christians.And,inthenorthofEngland,when the Viking kingGuthfrith died c.895, he wasburied beneath YorkMinsterwith full Christian rites.Integration in England wasfairly swift. For example,Oda, archbishop ofCanterbury(941–48),wastheson of a Danish settler who

hadconvertedtoChristianity.Thus Oda’s nephew, StOswald, the great monasticreformer,wasthegrandsonofa pagan Viking. Threegenerations from hammer tocross:byanymeasurearapidassimilation.In Ireland, the tale that

Brian Boru’s Irish Christianarmy defeated the Vikingpagan army at the Battle ofClontarf on Good Friday,1014, and that the defeated

Vikings accepted Christianbaptism has much fancyaboutit.TherewasaBattleofClontarf on that day, but itwasnotbetweentheIrishandthe Vikings, between theChristians and the heathens:the battle was between twoIrish factions, each of whichhadViking contingents in itsarmy. The process ofassimilation in Ireland hadalready begun in the lateninth century with the

intermarriageofsomeVikingleaders and Irish princesses,accompaniedby theVikings’conversion. Such marriagesbecame more frequent fromc.950 and continued apaceboth before and afterClontarf.In1169,whenotherstrangers came, they couldnot identify the Vikings, socomplete was theirassimilation: they wereindistinguishable from thenativeIrishCatholics.

The situation in Franciawarrants close examination.At least three attempts weremade by the Vikings toestablish permanentsettlements. Only one wassuccessful, in the lowerSeine, and it is this part ofFrancia that still bears theirname, Normandy. The exactdate is not clear, but it wasprobablyin911thattheWestFrankish king, Charles theSimple, made an agreement

withtheVikingleader,Rollo.The latter was allowed tosettle that probablyunderpopulated region, and,in return, he became aChristian and promised todefend the lower Seine fromfuture attacks, apparentlyfrom the Bretons and fromother Vikings. Intermarriagebetween newly baptizedViking men and ChristianFrankish women must havequickly followed. The

Vikings took new, Christiannames:RollobecameRobert;his daughter Geloc becameAdèle; Thurstein of theContentin became Richard;Stigand of Mézidon becameOdo;andsoforth.ThesonofRollo, William Longsword,becamesoferventaChristianthat he had to be restrainedfrom becoming a monk sothat he could succeed hisfather.HemarriedaChristianprincess and his sister

marriedaChristianprince.SoswiftwasthisintegrationthatWilliam’s son (Rollo’sgrandson)hadtobesentfromRouen to Bayeux to learnViking ways. Thus in lessthan 25 years the Vikingcapital at Rouen was aFrench-speaking city. Theyounger sons of Normanlords who were to land insouthern Italy and Sicily inthe decades after 1016 wereFrench, as was the Norman

dukewhowastosailwithhisarmytoEnglandin1066.Thelords of Normandy were toestablishmonasteries, to leadthe reforming movements ofthe eleventh century and,later, tobe in the front ranksof Christian warriors whowent to the Holy Land oncrusade. The conversion andassimilation of the northmenin Francia proved to have asignificant impact on thefutureofthemedievalchurch.

AnappraisaloftheVikingsthatstopsherewouldtellonlypart of the story.Perhaps themost fascinating aspects oftheirachievementstookplacefar, far west from the Seineestuary. Beyond Ireland andScotland and the islands tothe north, Viking sailorsdiscovered the empty landthey called Iceland, empty,thatis,exceptforIrishmonkswho lived in the south-westduring summer seasons.

Settlement on this land, thesize of Ireland, followedalmost immediately, and inthe60yearsfrom870to930a substantial migration tookplace, principally fromNorway itself but also fromNorse settlements in thenearerCeltic lands, includingsome Celts, many of themslaves. It was a migrationnumbering in the tens ofthousands, perhaps near30,000. There was no

assimilation needed, and,when their Christianizationcame, it came from theirNorse homeland. Tales weretold that a sudden volcaniceruption in theyear1000 ledthe settlers to acceptChristianity. Moreprosaically, mass conversiondid take place in the year1000 but came through twoIcelandic chieftains,whohadbeenconvertedatthecourtofKing Olaf, who, as a

Christian,hadbecomekingofNorway in 995. They weresent back to Iceland toestablish Christianity as theofficial religion of the land.And, so, Gizur, a convertedchieftainmissionary,attendedthe general assembly held attheir outdoor meeting place,the Law Rock. He and hissupporters demanded officialacceptance of the Christianreligion. For 24 hours theLaw Speaker pondered the

issues and decreed that thereshouldbebutone religion inIceland.Allpeopleshouldbebaptized and should publiclybe Christians, but, if theywished, they could privatelybeheathen.Heathenismsoonfaded away. Bishops wereappointed at Skalholt (1056)and at Holar (1106). Acodificationofcanonlawwasmade in 1123, well over adecade before Gratianproduced his Decretum at

Bologna.BeyondIcelandtothewest

theVikingssailed,andnotfarbehind them came theChristian religion. Fromwestern Iceland in 985 ErictheRedsetsailwestwardforalmost 450 miles, when hecaught sight of an enormousland mass with imposingglaciers reaching to a heightof 1,900 metres. He turnedsouth, following the coastaroundCapeFarewell,eastof

which he found green, rich-looking land on deep fjords,reaching out from themountains, a sight clearlyreminiscent of Norway. Twosettlements were made: onein the extreme south-west(the Eastern Settlement) andthe other 400 miles furthernorthalongthewesterncoast(theWesternSettlement).Inapractice not unknown tomodern landdevelopers,Ericcalled this glaciered land

‘Greenland’.Intruth,thelandin the south-west where thesettlements lay was verdantand warmer then than now.Greenland’s conversion toChristianity came as a resultof the conversion of Icelandand, also, about the year1000.TheEricSagarelates,

Eric was loath to leave the oldreligion,buthiswife,Thjodhild,wasconvertedatonceandhadachurch built at a distance fromthe farmstead, which was calledThjodhild’s church. It was there

thatsheandotherconvertswouldgo to pray. Thjodhild refused tolive with her husband after herconversion, and this greatlydispleasedhim.

His displeasure might haveabated as, in time, Eric tooprobablybecameaChristian.The Christian churchflourished in Greenland. Adiocesewithacathedralandaresident bishop wasestablished at Gardar nearEiriksfjord in 1126, and

bishops from Greenlandtravelled to Europe forecumenical councils. Amonastery of Augustiniancanons and a nunnery ofBenedictine nuns were bothfounded in the twelfthcentury. A total of 12 parishchurches in the EasternSettlement and four parishchurches in the WesternSettlement are signs of avital, if small, Christiancommunity. A thirteenth-

century Norse book (King’sMirror)commented,

The peoples in Greenland arefewinnumber,sinceonlypartofthe land is free enough from iceforhumanhabitation.TheyareaChristian community with theirown churches and priests. Bycomparison to other places itwouldformprobablyathirdofadiocese: yet the Greenlandershave their own bishop owing totheir distance from otherChristianpeople.

Forover400years these two

settlements were thewesternmost part of themedieval, European,Christianworld.Anditendedsometime before 1500withoutwitnesses, its demisea historical puzzle. Anexplanation stressing severeclimatic cooling and hostilerelations with displacednative peoplesmight be nearthe mark. Writing in 1492,PopeAlexanderVIspokeofadimlyrememberedoutpostof

Christendom:ThedioceseofGardarliesattheends of the earth in the landcalled Greenland … It isreckoned that no ship has sailedthere for 80 years and that nobishoporpriesthasresidedthereduring this period. As a result,many inhabitants haveabandoned the faith of theirChristian baptism: once a yearthey exhibit a sacred linen usedby the last priest to say Massthereabout100yearsago.

TheVikingsalsoreachedinto

areas to the east of theirnorthern homelands, but thatstory runs beyond the limitsofthisbook.Ironically more is known

about the conversion processof Vikings who journeyedabroad than about theconversion of their kinsmenwho stayed home. A fewmile-posts can be seen, butmuch of the northernlandscape lies in a historicalmist.Denmarkwasvisited in

the eighth century byWillibrord (see pp. 59–61)with no success and in theninthcenturybyAnsgaronlywith limited success. Theconversion of the Danishpeople occurred through theconversion of their king,Harald Blue-tooth(c.960–c.987). His motherwasChristianbuthisfatheraresolute pagan. It wasprobablyuponbecomingkingthatHaraldacceptedbaptism.

An early legend has it that aGerman missionary came tohiscourtandadebateensued.The Danes would acceptChristintheirpantheonofthegods, it was argued, but justasoneofmanygodsandasagod decidedly inferior to thechief gods. The missionaryasserted one God and threedivine persons. One mightwonder how the theologicalsubtleties of the doctrine oftheTrinitysoundedtoDanish

ears. In any case, the storyruns that the missionarywouldbebelievedifhecouldpass the ordeal of fire. Heplaced his bare hand in agloveheatedbyfire.Whenhewithdrew his hand, it wasseen to have been unaffectedby the ordeal, and Haraldthereupon took baptism anddecreed that Christianitywasto be the sole religion of hiskingdom. It is not only thecynical who can see here in

the conversion of Harald apossible political motivation– a smoother relationshipwith the German emperorOtto. At Jelling, midway upthe Danish peninsula, tworemarkable stones stand aswitnessestotheconversionofDenmark. One, the smaller,was erected by Gorm(Harald’s father) to his wife;itbearstheinscription:‘KingGorm did this in memory ofhis wife, Thyri, glory of

Denmark.’Nomentionofherbeing a Christian andcertainly no Christiansymbols. The other, a largerstone about eight feet tall,contains a large figure ofChrist and this inscription:‘King Harald had this stonemade in memory of hisfather,Gorm,andhismother,Thyri, the same Harald whoconquered all Denmark andNorway and who made theDanes Christian.’ A simple

act of state and the Daneswere officially Christian, butthe pastoral process ofinstruction in the new waysliesbeyondourview.Norway’s conversion

followed in the first third ofthe eleventh century, and,again,akingwasinvolvedor,rather, twokings,eachcalledOlaf. The first, OlafTryggvason, fought inEngland in the last wave ofViking attacks, which began

inthe990s.ThereinEngland,in 994, he became aChristian, the Anglo-SaxonChronicletellsusthat,aspartof a peace settlement afterextensive raids in south-eastern England, the EnglishKingEtheldredstoodsponsorat Olaf’s confirmation. Olafreturned home, probably in995, intent on seizing thecrown of Norway andconverting his people to theChristianfaith.Hesucceeded

in the former and ruledNorway until 1000, but heonly partially succeeded inthelatter,andthissuccess,aswehaveseen,was felt as farwest as Iceland andGreenland. It was anotherOlaf – Olaf Haraldsson(1025–30), known to historyas St Olaf – who madeNorway Christian. Saintthough he may be, hismethods were far frombenign: in Professor Jones’s

words, ‘he executed therecalcitrant, blinded ormaimed them, drove themfrom their homes, cast downtheirimagesandmarredtheirsacred places’. Olaforganized a churchwhich, atfirst, was to have bishopssubject to the archbishop ofBremen,but,intime,Norwayhad its own archbishop atTrondheim (Nidaros), site ofSt Olaf’s tomb, and thearchbishop’s jurisdiction

extended as far west as thetiny diocese of Gardar inGreenland.What happened in Sweden

cannot be described in termssimilar to those used todescribe the conversionprocess in Denmark andNorway, namely, a king’sconversion followed by hispeople’s conversion. Swedenwasdifferent.It is truethataSwedish king called Olafreceivedbaptismatthehands

of an English missionary in1008 and that his daughtermarried the converted KingOlaf of Norway. Yet theconversion of the Swedishpeopledidnotquicklyfollow.A long process of at least acenturyfollowed.Largeareasof Sweden remained loyal toold gods and old ways. AtUppsala,siteofagreatpagantemple,worshipandsacrifice(even human sacrifice)continued into the next

century. Writing c.1075,AdamofBremenrecounts,

It is customary to solemnize inUppsala,atnineyearintervals,ageneralfeastofalltheprovincesof Sweden. From attendance atthis festivalnoone isexempted.Kings and people all and singlysend their gifts to Uppsala and,whatismoredistressingthananykind of punishment, those whohavealreadyadoptedChristianityredeemthemselvesthroughtheseceremonies.

(Bremen,p.208)

A diocese was established atSigtuna, but in 1060 thebishop was driven out.Twenty years later theChristian King Inge refusedto worship at Uppsala andhadtofleeforhis life. In theopening years of the twelfthcenturythetempleofUppsalawasdestroyedandaChristianchurch, still surviving, roseonitssiteatwhatisnowOldUppsala.Our story has taken us far

into the future, beyond ourgeneral narrative. It is timenowtoreturntheretolookatthe state of the Christianreligionmoregenerallyatthetime of the break-up and,indeed, breakdown of theCarolingian synthesis andafter. Back to Europe of themidninthcentury.

Furtherreading

A general work containingseveralessaysrelevanttothissubject is RosamondMcKitterick (ed.), The NewCambridgeMedievalHistory,vol. 2, c.700–c.900(Cambridge, 1995). Oneshould see ProfessorMcKitterick’s Charlemagne:The Formation of anEuropean Identity(Cambridge, 2008), whichdrawsonhervastknowledgeof the period and applies

critical analysis: Chapter 5treatsreligionsandculture.Ausefulbook isRogerCollins,Charlemagne (London andToronto, 1998). Also, thegeneral subject is treated inHeinrich Fichtenau, TheCarolingianEmpire (tr.PeterMunz; Oxford, 1957) andJ.M. Wallace-Hadrill, TheFrankish Church (Oxford,1983). An excellentdiscussion of the Franco-papalallianceisThomasF.X.

Noble, The Republic of StPeter:TheBirthofthePapalState,680–825 (Philadelphia,1984).The traditionalviewofthe events of 751 isquestioned by RosamondMcKitterick in ‘Illusion ofPower in the CarolingianAnnals’, English HistoricalReview115(2000),1–20,andinHistoryandMemoryintheCarolingian World(Cambridge, 2004), pp. 133–55.

Lives of Charlemagne canbe found in convenientEnglish translation; forexample,EinhardandNotkerthe Stammerer: TwoLives ofCharlemagne (tr. andintroduction David Ganz;Penguin Books, 2008).Translations of keydocuments (e.g. theDonationofConstantine)canbe foundin S.Z. Ehler and J.B.Morrall, eds, Church andState Through the Centuries

(London,1954).The best general work on

theliturgyremainsJosephA.Jungmann, The Mass of theRoman Rite: Its Origins andDevelopment (MissarumSollemnia) (Eng. tr.;London,1959).SeealsoH.A.Wilson,ed., The GregorianSacramentary under Charlesthe Great (Henry BradshawSociety, vol. 49, 1915). ForChrodegang and his rule seethe study by Martin A.

Claussen, The Reform of theFrankish Church:Chrodegang ofMetz and the‘Regula canonicorum’ in theEighth Century (Cambridge,2004), and Julia Barrow’sarticle, ‘Chrodegang, HisRule and Its Successors’,Early Medieval Europe 14(2006) 201–12. AcontemporarylifeofBenedictAnianehasbeenpublishedinan English translation byAllen Cabaniss, Benedict of

Aniane,theEmperor’sMonk:Ardo’s Life (Kalamazoo,MI,2008).For general works on the

Vikings see Gwyn Jones, AHistory of the Vikings (2ndedn; Oxford, 1984), F.DonaldLogan,TheVikingsinHistory (3rd edn; London,2005) and Peter Sawyer, ed.,The Oxford IllustratedHistory of the Vikings(Oxford, 1997). A usefulwork of reference is Phillip

Pulsiano, ed., MedievalScandinavia: AnEncyclopedia (New York,1993). For Iceland thestandard work is DagStrömbäck, The Conversionof Iceland:A Survey (VikingSociety for NorthernResearch, 1975), to whichshould be added JennyJochens, ‘Late and Peaceful:Iceland’sConversion throughArbitration in 1000’,Speculum74(1999),621–55,

and Orri Vésteinsson, TheChristianization of Iceland:Priests, Power, and SocialChange,1000–1300 (Oxford,2000). For Greenland twoworks stand out: Finn Gad,The History of Greenland:vol.1,EarliestTimesto1700(London, 1970), and KirstenA. Seaver, The Frozen Echo(Stamford, 1996). For theconversion process inScandinavia see AlexandraSanmark, Power and

Conversion: A ComparativeStudy of Christianization inScandinavia (Uppsala,2004).For a contemporarydescription see Adam ofBremen, History of theArchbishops of Hamburg-Bremen(tr.FrancisJ.Tschan;NewYork, 2002)A book ofmuch helpful detail is ToreNyberg, Monasticism inNorth-Western Europe, 800–1200 (Aldershot, Hants, andBurlingon,VT,2000).

6THECHURCHINDISARRAY,c.850–c.1050

The disintegration of theCarolingian Empire had

serious consequences for thechurch. When the threesurviving sons of Louis thePious(d.840)dividedtheso-called empire – it never didhave a unified imperialstructure– into threeparts, itpresaged further divisions.The holdings of one of thesesons were soon divided intothreeparts,andsoitwenton.Internecine rivalries, outrightcivil war, Frankishinheritance customs – all

contributed to the centrifugalforce that destroyed theCarolingian politicalstructure.Whatevertherewasof central government diedwith Louis the Pious. Thetitle ‘emperor’ continued tobeusedbymenwithlessandless power until it was heldby such deservedly obscurepetty Italian kings as Wido(891–94)andBerengar(915–24). With the death of thelatter, the title ceased to be

used, and almost no onenoticed. The Carolingiandynasty that had producedgreat leaders such as Pepin,Charlemagne and evenLouisthe Pious was reduced tosmallmenwith embarrassingsobriquets: the Bald, theStammerer, the Fat, theSimple and the Child, towhich one is tempted to add‘the Irrelevant’. In what wasto become Germany realpower rested in the duchies.

In what was to becomeFrance realpowerwas in thehandsoflocalstrongmen.This atomization of

political power was true notonly in the Carolingian orbitbut even beyond. Englandwas little more than ageographical expression todescribe where the Anglo-Saxons lived, themselvesorganized into manykingdoms,andthemancalledAlfredtheGreat(d.899)was

great only in the kingdomofWessex, although it is truethat by the 950s Englandappears as a fledglingpolitical unit. Ireland,ScotlandandtheBritishpartsof Britain continued to havetribal structures ofgovernment. Personal safetyand security were not to behad from far-awaymenwithtitles but, rather, from locallords with local interest and,above all, with effective

power.Europewasinpieces.Local, too, was the

governance of the Christianchurch. The overarchingjurisdiction of the bishop ofRome as pope was notconsciously challenged bylocal bishops. Yet, in theenvironment which saw theweakening of the power ofthe kings, the stressing oflocalconnectionsand,indeed,thedifficultiesencounteredincommunications, the papacy,

particularlyafter thedeathofNicholas (867), can bedescribed as passive, rarelytakingtheinitiativetoinvolveitself in remote churches,eveninItaly.Althoughitmaybegoingtoofartospeakofa‘federal church’, it iseminently clear that localchurches looked to theirownaffairs, and tensionsfrequently became evidentbetween local bishops andtheir metropolitans. In Rome

theweakenedpapacybecametheplaythingof localRomanpolitical factions. If Europehad fallen apart, so too hadthechurch.

Map7Carolingianlandsafterdivision(843)

No attempt will be madeheretotellinnarrativeformaconnectedstoryofthechurchin these dark centuries. Thesurvivingdocumentationissoexceedingly thin andfragmented that an adequatenarrative is close toimpossibleandcouldgivetheimpression that there wasorder, when in reality there

was considerable disorder.Whileotherapproachescouldbe profitably taken, here weshall take as examplesof thegeneraldisarrayofthechurchfour popes, who ruled atvarious times in this darkestof periods for the church. Itwillnotbeacontinuousstoryof the popes. Instead, therewill be recounted thepontificates of popes whoruledatvariouspoints in thisperiod: through themwe can

seesomeof the issues facingthe church in general, and,further, they can showdramatically the descent ofthe papacy in power andinfluence from the height ofNicholas I to successorswhowere frequently little morethan the puppets of localRoman strong men andwomen.Thosehistorianswhowould plot the history of thepapacy on a chart wouldalmost all agree that,

whatever other low pointsthere were in the history ofthat institution, the absolutenadir would be the periodfromthelateninthcenturytothe middle of the eleventhcentury. The papacywas notthe church, but we may letthese fourpopes serve forusas prisms through which wecan get a partial andadmittedly inadequate viewof the church in its sorriestdays since the early Roman

persecutions.

PopeNicholasI(858–67)

An argument could be madethat Nicholas I was thegreatest pope betweenGregory theGreat (590–604)and Gregory VII (1073–85).Nicholas was to live out his

pontificate on a large stage,thelastof thepopes todosoforwelloveracenturyandahalf.He is better seen as thelastinaseriesofstrongpopesbeginning with Gregory theGreat rather than as theharbinger of the powerfulpopes of a later period. LikeGregorytheGreat,hewastheson of a senior Romanofficial. Associated with thethree previous popes,Nicholas, still a deacon, was

elected pope at the age ofabout 38. At that time (858)Louis II bore the title‘emperor’,buthis realpowerwaslimitedtoonlyonepart–Italy–ofthecentralkingdomcarved out for his father in843. Yet Louis exercisedinfluence in Rome and hadhastened to Rome when helearned of the death of thelate pope. The extent of hisinfluence on Nicholas’selection is difficult to

measure, but it is safe to saythatNicholaswouldnothavebeen elected by the clergyand nobility of Rome hadLouis opposed it. Quicklyordained a priest, Nicholaswas consecrated bishop ofRome and, thus, pope, on 24April858.Twodayslateratasolemn banquet he and theemperorembraced.Almost at once Nicholas

faced a serious problem inone of the Frankish

kingdoms. The emperor’sbrother, King Lothar II ofLotharingia(orLorraine),theMiddleKingdombetweentheEast and West Franks,renounced his queen,Theutberga,claimingthatshehad committed incest withher own brother and thenaborted the foetus conceivedof their coitus. She wasbanished to a nunnery, andthe king married his lover,Waldrada, who had borne

him a son. The exiled queenescapedfromthenunneryandappealed to the pope.NicholassentlegatestoMetzin Lotharingia to resolve thematter. Possibly under theinfluence of bribery, theyfoundfor theking.Whenthetwo great archbishops of thekingdom(CologneandTrier)brought this decision toRome,Nicholas deposed andexcommunicated them.Lothar’s brother, the

‘emperor’ Louis, supportingLothar,marched onRome in864, and his troops violentlyassaulted the clergy enteringSt Peter’s in procession andthrewto theground thegreatrelic of the holy cross. Theattack failed to sway thepope, and Lothar, in 865,bowing to circumstances,reconciled with Theutberga,although she later pleadedwith Nicholas unsuccessfullyto annul the marriage.

Nicholas’s successor had todeal with both Theutbergaand Waldrada, but the deathof Lothar, followed by theentrance of bothwomen intoconvents, ended this sorryaffair. Lothar had beenopposedinthismatterbytwoof his uncles, kings of thelands to his east and west,who may have desired tocarve out large chunks ofLothar’s Middle Kingdom,and, in this reading, thepope

was a player, himselfcalculating the place of thepapacy in a new politicalorder and, in turn, getting alesson in late Carolingianpolitics.Two great archbishops of

the Western Churchchallenged the authority ofNicholas I andwith nomoresuccess than the Frankishrulers. Hincmar, archbishopofRheims,themostpowerfulchurchmaninthekingdomof

theWestFranks– then ruledby Charles the Bald – and amanofconsiderablelearning,particularly in the law, hadsupported Lothar in hismarital concerns. Hincmarcameintomoredirectconflictwith the pope over histreatment of Rothad, hissuffraganbishopofSoissons.In 861, the archbishoprestored an adulterous priestof Soissons, whom Rothadhad deposed, and imprisoned

his replacement. Rothadstrongly objected to what heconsidered themetropolitan’sinterference and appealed tothe pope. At Hincmar’sinstigation a synod atSoissons summoned Rothad,who,citinghisappeal,rightlyrefused to appear; he wassummarily dismissed asbishop, imprisoned andreplaced by another bishop.The matter was joined.Nicholas became indignant,

firing off letters to Hincmar,Charles the Bald and others.HincmarmusteitherreinstateRothad or appear at Romeeither personally or by arepresentative; failure to doso would result in thearchbishop being suspendedfrom saying Mass. Thearchbishop released Rothadbut delayed in restoring him.New papal letters went toHincmar, who finallycapitulated and restored the

agedRothad to the bishopricof Soissons. In Hincmar’swords, ‘What Nicholas hasdecided I have notcontradicted, but, as hecommands, I have diligentlyobeyed.’ Nicholas prevailedover Hincmar, Rome overRheims.Nicholas was also much

preoccupied with anotherarchbishop, and whether hewon a moral victory ormerely a political victory the

reader may judge. Thedispute concerned thearchbishop of Ravenna.Ravenna had been made thecapital of the empire in theWest in 402 and, after itsrecapture from theLombardsbytheforcesoftheByzantineemperor, its power becamerestricted mainly to the areaof the exarchate (aroundRavenna) and to parts ofSicily and southern Italy. Bythe time of Nicholas I

Ravennahadlongsincefallento the Franks, and thearchbishop’s pretension of aspecial place supposed apolitical order no longerexisting. Such pretensionscollided with the claims ofpowerofthebishopofRome.Atleast,thatwasthespinputon events by contemporarypapal historians. ArchbishopJohn VIII of Ravenna, likehis predecessors, enjoyedmore than the usual

archiepiscopal independenceof Rome, to which must beadded that he also enjoyed aclose relationship withEmperor Louis II. Papalagents at Ravenna wereallegedly mistreated by thearchbishop and papalproperty there seized.Whether theological issuesreallymatteredorwhetherthematterreallyconcernedpapalmuscle-flexing we cannottell, but charges of heresy

were made against thearchbishop, who was said tobelieve that, when Jesussuffered on the cross, hesuffered as God and thatbaptism did not have thesame effects on all whoreceived it. Archbishop Johnwas summoned to Rome in861toanswertheseandothercharges.Herefusedtogoandwas excommunicated. PopeNicholas, in an extraordinarymove, journeyed to Ravenna

to remonstrate with thearchbishop face to face, but,wisely, John fled to thecomfortof the imperial courtat Pavia. Yet, nowexcommunicate, John foundhis position perilous eventhere.VirtuallyabandonedbyLouis II, he went later thatyear to Rome for ahumiliatingsubmission.Moresignificant than allegedtheologicalaberrations–afterall, the soaring rhetoric of a

preacher might not alwayspass doctrinal scrutiny –wasthe matter of John ofRavenna’s relations with hissuffragan bishops. Fourfurther charges surfaced atRome: (i) that he hadinterfered in episcopalelections, (ii) that, when onvisitations, he would comewith 500 men on horseback,demanding provisions fortheir needs, and would notleave until bribed to do so,

(iii) that he claimedjurisdiction over monasteriesintheirdiocesesand(iv) thathe prevented his suffraganbishops from visiting Rome.The council that reconciledthe archbishop formallyforbade him from indulgingin such practices. There thematterseemedtoend.The presence of strong

regional archbishops atRheims andRavenna did noteclipse the authority of Pope

Nicholas, nor should thepower and influence of thesemetropolitans inflate, for us,their roles in contemporaryevents. They were majorplayers but only in asecondary way: centre stagehad only room for Nicholas.Hincmar and John wereregional figures in afragmentedworld.Somemaysay that Hincmar and Johnwere but big fish in smallponds,whichwouldbeunfair

particularly toHincmar,whowould almost certainly beconsideredagreatchurchmanin any age. Yet Nicholas’sworld was much, muchlarger.It is for his relations with

the Eastern Church, if fornothing else, that PopeNicholaswillberemembered.The ancient patriarchates ofAntioch, Alexandria andJerusalem were by now inMuslim hands. Only the

patriarchate ofConstantinople remainedpowerful,itspatriarchcloselyallied with the Byzantineemperor. The patriarch’sattitude to Rome wascharacterized by theoreticaldeference but practicalindependence. UnderNicholas I a crisis occurred,for which the pope bearsmuchoftheresponsibility.Inthe shorthand way in whichwe deal with historical

events, historians havetraditionally called this crisisthe ‘Photian Schism’. Weshall soon see howinappropriatethislabelis.EventsintheEastdrewthe

pope into this dispute, notinevitably,forNicholascouldhave remained in dignifiedaloofness to theseevents,buthe chose not to. WhenMichael III becameByzantineemperorin842,hewas but three years old, and

his mother, Theodora, ruledas regent. In 847 sheappointed a new patriarchwithout observing theformalities of an electoralsynod.ThenewpatriarchwasIgnatius, son of a formeremperor,who, at his father’sdeath,hadbeencastratedandsent to amonastery.His fatewas tied to that ofTheodora.When Michael III assertedhimself in 857, he banishedhis mother to a nunnery and

his patriarch into exile.Forcedtoresign,Ignatiuswasto remain not far off stagewhileeventswereplayedout.A synod met and elected aspatriarch the laymanPhotius,who, in Henry Chadwick’sview, was ‘the most learnedman not only of hisgeneration but of Byzantinehistory generally’. Breakingwith recent custom, Photiuswrote to Pope Nicholas,informinghimofhiselection.

A more diplomatic popemight have answered withgracious words to the newpatriarch,but,forreasonsnotfully clear to us, Nicholas’sresponse was hostile andprovocative.Whywashenotconsulted about thedeposition of PatriarchIgnatius? And why was alayman selectedaspatriarch?Two papal legates were senteast to protest at thesematters. Without waiting for

further instructions from thepope, once inConstantinoplein 861, they agreed to act asmediators between Photiusand Ignatius. Although theywere later charged withhaving acted beyond theirbriefs, they found thatIgnatius was validly deposedand thatPhotiuswas the truepatriarch. Pope Nicholas,furious at the legates’ action,heldasynodatRomein863,atwhichPhotiuswasdeposed

and deprived of all hisecclesiastical dignities. Twoyears later, in response to aletterfromtheemperor,PopeNicholas wrote a letter,which,inProfessorDvornik’swords, ‘was destined to beone of the most importantdocumentsintheevolutionofthe papacy’. A forceful,exuberant, even belligerentletter, it began ominously byaddressing the emperor as‘our son’. There followed an

assertion of the divinelygivenuniversalpowersoftheRomanchurch.

The privileges of the Romanchurch came from themouth ofChrist, who conferred them onBlessed Peter. They can in noway be diminished, infringedupon or changed, because whatGod has establishedman cannotchange … These privilegesexisted before you becameemperor and will remain afteryou… They were given to theholychurchbyChristandnotbysynods … We are constitutedprincesovereveryland,thatisto

say,overthechurchuniversal.

It concluded by telling theemperor not to meddle inecclesiasticalaffairs.Echoingstatements of earlier popessuch as Leo I (440–61) andGelasius (492–96), thewordsofNicholas Iwere to have along life as they were to beadopted by later canonists todescribe papal power. As anattempt to heal the growingdivision, the papal letter not

surprisinglyfailed.Andotherevents added to the brewingdiscord.History like life can have

itscomplications,andhere,inthisdispute, thecomplicationwasBulgaria.TheBulgars, apeople of Turkic, Asianorigin, had migrated fromnorthof theBlackSea to thelands south of the lowerDanube and had by the lateninth century become largelySlavic in language and

culture through the twinforces of subjugation andintermarriage. In the 860stheir king, Boris (852–89),felt the attractions ofChristianity.Hismotivesmayhave been exclusivelypolitical, although a storyrelates that he was deeplymoved by a painting of hellon his wall, the work of aByzantinemonk,and,infact,he did retire to a monasterythree years before his death.

PeacewiththegreatChristianpowers was also a strongmotive. Whatever thereasons, in 864 Boris wasbaptized by the Byzantinepatriarch, Photius, with theemperor as his godfather. (Itis ironic that only half acenturyearlieroneofBoris’spredecessors had slain anemperor and made adrinking-cup of his skull).When theByzantines refusedto appoint a patriarch for the

Bulgars, Boris, alreadyfearful of his Byzantineneighbours, turned to Romeand to Pope Nicholas I. Thebishop of Porto, Formosus,was quickly dispatched toBulgaria, bearing with him106 papal answers toquestionsofapastoralnatureproposedbyKingBoris.Hadthe Roman mission beensuccessful, these answersmight have become asfamous historically as

Gregory the Great’sresponses to Augustine ofCanterbury and the papalresponses to Boniface inGermany. As it is, they arebut footnotes, knownprincipallybytheinclusionofsomepartsinlatercanon-lawcollections. This missionfrom Rome to Bulgariagreatlyexercisedemperorandpatriarch in the East: theEasternChurch had receivedBoris as a Christian, and the

Bulgars were immediateneighbours. The Romanmission was viewed fromConstantinople as amischievous intervention. Asa result, relations betweenRome and Constantinople,already bad, were madeworse.PopeNicholasrefusedBoris’srequestthatFormosusbe made archbishop of theBulgars. For this reason andfor other reasons the Romanmission to Bulgaria failed,

and Bulgaria entered theworldof theEasternChurch,where it has remained eversince. This short-lived crisisover Bulgaria served tointensify the growingtensions, suspicions andanimositybetweenRomeandConstantinople, betweenPope Nicholas and PatriarchPhotius.Inthisatmosphere,Photius

presided over a synod inConstantinople during the

summer of 867, the businessof papal involvement inBulgaria now added to theboilingcauldronofByzantinediscontentwithNicholas.Thesynod condemned,excommunicatedanddeposedPopeNicholas.Wehavenowalltheingredientsforamajorbreak(orschism)betweentheChristianchurchesoftheEastand West – the pope andpatriarch eachexcommunicating and

deposing the other – yet aschism did not occur. Twodeaths prevented it. EmperorMichael III was assassinatedon 24 September 867. ThenewemperordeposedPhotiusand, on 3 November, rein-stalled Ignatius. PopeNicholas I died on 13November without learningof his condemnation by thesynodofConstantinopleorofthedeathof the emperor andreinstatement of Ignatius.

Thus, by the time ofNicholas’s death the synod’sactions had been reversed byacoupd’état.Yet,evenafterNicholas’s death, events inthe East continued topercolate,andtheseunderlinethe historicalinappropriateness of theexpression ‘Photian Schism’.WhenIgnatiusdiedin877,hewassucceededaspatriarchbynone other than Photius,whose election was blessed

bythepopeoftheday.Therethen followed a return to thestatus quowhich had existedbefore Nicholas I, arelationship with its almostinevitable rivalries anddisagreements.Therealbreakwas not to occur until themiddle of the eleventhcentury.Paradoxically, while

Nicholas was disputing withPhotius about Bulgaria andother matters, he took an

interest in the work of twoByzantinemissionaries to theSlavic peoples. The brothersCyril (originallyConstantine)andMethodiushadbeensentby Emperor Michael III andPatriarchPhotiustopreachtothe Slavs in central Europe.In fact, Methodius was aprotégé of Photius. NicholasI, in 867, invited them toRome. They arrived onlyafter Nicholas’s death, andhis successor consecrated

Methodius as an archbishopandCyrildiedinRome.Theyhad already translated theBible and liturgical booksinto Slavonic (i.e., OldChurch Slavonic) anddisputed with clerics, Eastand West, about theappropriateness of avernacular liturgy.Cyrilsaid,‘IfIprayinalanguagethatIdo not understand, I amprayerful only in spirit andnot in understanding.’ (The

Latin church sanctioned avernacular liturgy only in1963.) Their mission, in asense, failed, but theysucceeded in being theprincipal architects of Slavicasawrittenlanguagewithitsownalphabet.Theconversionof the Slavs was to comethroughtheconversionoftheSlavs in Bohemia andthrough their missionaryefforts, led by their nobles,most notably Duke (and

Saint)Wenceslaus,butitwasnotuntil973 thatabishopricwas established at Prague.Owing to a maritalarrangementwithaBohemianprincess, the king of Polandwas baptized in 966 and hisnation became theeasternmost part of aWestern,Latinchurch.The death of Pope

Nicholas I in 867 saw thedeparture from the scene ofthe strongest pope of the

ninthcentury,whoseinterestswentfarbeyondItalyandtheremnants of the CarolingianEmpire. He had a granderview of his role. He spokewith kings and wrote toemperors and patriarchs anddealtwithstrongarchbishops.Bulgars, Slavs and Greekswerepartofhisvisionofhisoffice.Hisplace inhistory isdiminished because of whathappenedtothepapacyinthenext century and a half,

glimpses of which we shallsee presently, and theyprovideastarkcontrast.

Formosus(891–96)

Thefirstand,forreasonsthatwill soon become clear, thelastofthatname,Formosusismore remembered today forhis posthumous life than his

real life. He has been metalreadyasthebishopofPortodispatched by Pope NicholasItoBulgaria.Afterhisreturnto Italy, as bishop of Porto,Formosus served severalpopes as an adviser until amoment in the pontificate ofthe hapless Pope John VIII(872–82), when he wasexcommunicatedandstrippedof his office by the popehimself. The intrigues thatproduced this state of affairs

are unknown to us, butFormosus,thenowex-bishopof Porto, fled to France.When John VIII went northand convened a synod atTroyes, Formosus wasbroughtbeforehimandmadetoswear thathewouldneverattempt to regain his officenor would he ever return toRome. In 882, one of PopeJohn’s relatives apparentlyfailedinanattempttopoisonthe pope and then proceeded

tobludgeonhimtodeathwitha hammer. His successor(MarinusI,882–84)absolvedFormosus of the oaths takenatTroyesandrestoredhimtohis bishopric at Porto.Whenthe papal see fell vacant in891, Formosus was chosen,apparently by the clergy andpeople of Rome without anyoutside influence. That hewas already a bishop waslater to prove a source ofcontroversy. The custom of

both East and West held abishop to be ‘married’ to hisbishopric, from which therecould be no divorce. Thetransfer(ortranslation tousethe legal word) of bishopsfrom one diocese to anotherwas virtually unknown.Before the accession ofFormosus in 891 only onepope is known to have beenpreviously bishop of anothersee and translated to Rome:PopeMarinusI,whenelected

in 882, was bishop of Caere(modernCerveteri)inEtruria,buthiswasashortreign–ofperhapslessthanayearandahalf – and was withoutincident. The matter of thetranslation of Formosus fromPorto toRomewas topursueFormosusbeyondthegrave.Once elected and installed

on the papal throne, PopeFormosus found himselfinvolvedinthepettypoliticalsquabbles in Italy.Thedukes

of Spoleto had desired theimperial title, and theprevious pope had crownedDukeWido as emperor. Theruling family of SpoletoprevailedonFormosuswithinmonths of his election notonly to recrown Wido butalso to crown Wido’s sonLambert as co-emperor. Torelieve this pressure fromSpoleto, Formosus, in 893,invited Arnulf, theCarolingian king of the East

Franks (which we can nowcall Germany), to come toItaly to deliver it from ‘badChristians’(theSpoletans).Inearly 894 Arnulf’s invasionfell victim to fever. Shortlythereafter Wido died andLambert became soleemperor, but the real powerlay with his mother,Agiltrude. Itwasshewho, inOctober 896, took control ofthe defence of Rome againstanother invasion by Arnulf.

HemarchedonRomeonlytofind that Agiltrude hadimprisoned the pope andclosed the gates to the city.The German army batteredtheir way through the gates,scaledthecitywallsandsoonliberated Rome and freedPopeFormosus.Thepopeledthe German king into StPeter’s Basilica and thereplaced the imperialcrownonhishead, callinghim ‘CaesarAugustus’.Onhiswayhome

the newly crowned emperordied,and,beforenewsofhisdeath reached Rome,Formosushimselfhaddied.There the storymight end,

anothermediocrepope,rulingthe church in troubled times,apopelittledifferentfromhisimmediate predecessors andsuccessors.Butthestorydoesnot end there. In the nexteight years there were ninepopes.Formosus’simmediatesuccessor, Boniface VI, a

man already twice degradedfor immoral behaviour, livedonly two weeks. It is toBoniface’s successor,Stephen VI, that we mustlook for the sequel of thestory of Formosus. WithArnulf and Formosus bothdead, Lambert and hismother, Agiltrude, retookRome. It is difficult to viewthenewpopeasanythingbuttheir puppet, and he wouldexact for them their revenge

against Formosus. PopeStephen ordered the grave ofFormosus to be opened andthe body exhumed. By then,nine months or so after hisdeath, the body, althoughintact,exhibitedtothesensesall the indications of acorruptingcadaver.Thepopeorderedthebodytobecladinthefullvestureofapopeandset on a chair in the basilicaof St John Lateran, where aRomansynod inJanuary897

sat in judgement. Twocharges were made against‘him’:first,hehadbrokentheoath taken at Troyes, and,second, he had illegallymoved as bishop from onediocese toanother.Unable tospeak in response, Formosuswas represented by a callowdeacon, whose argumentslacked persuasion. Formosus– or, rather, the body ofFormosus –was condemned,andhewasliterallydefrocked

asthevestmentsofhisofficewereonebyonetornfromhisdecayingbody.Thefingersofhis right hand used inblessingwerehackedoffandhis body thrown into acommon grave.Contemporary sources bearunanimoustestimonytothesemacabreevents.Butthebodyof Formosus had not yetfound rest. It was disturbedapparently by grave robbers,who, seeing this fresh grave,

dug it open in the hope offindingtreasures.Insteadtheyfoundamutilated,unadornedbody. In disgust, they cast itinto the Tiber River. Onecontemporary relates thattorrentialrainsthatverynightcausedafloodingoftheTiberand that the body ofFormosus was carrieddownstream, coming ashoreat Porto. It was said that amonk, following theinstructions given him in a

vision, found the body andsecretly buried it at Porto.Meanwhile, back at Rome,Stephen VI had been seizedbyhisenemies,putinchains,placedinprisonandstrangledtodeath.AtaboutthistimeanearthquakecausedtheroofofSt JohnLateran, sceneof thetrial,tofallin.Thenewpope,Romanus, lived only twomonths, dying in November897.Thenextreignwasevenshorter – the20day reignof

TheodoreII–butitwaslongenough to effect therehabilitation of Formosus.Pope Theodore learned whathad happened at Porto andordered the body to be againexhumed. With reverenceand, finally,dignity thebodywas solemnly returned fromPorto to Rome. There it wasrecladinpapalvestmentsand,with solemn obsequies,replaced in its original tombin St Peter’s, where it still

rests.Not only the body of a

pope but the papacy itselfsuffered in these unedifyingdoings,andthepapacywastopersist for a dozen decadesand more in this unhealthystate. The political contextcontributed to this condition.The power and even the titleof emperor in the West didnot exist. Italy, likemuch ofthe rest ofEurope,was ruledby local factions. And the

local faction that ruledRomeruled the papacy. TheCrescenzi, the Theophylactand the Tusculani familieswere chief among thecontesting powers, seekingcontrol ofRome.Theymadepopes even from their ownfamilies, the papacy littlemore thananadjunct to theirpower base. Tension and itsattendantviolencewereneverfaraway.When,forexample,LeoVbecamepopein903he

was almost immediatelyoverthrown and cast intoprison by a priest,Christopher, who then calledhimself pope and whomhistory calls an anti-pope.Very soon a bishop namedSergius descended on Romewith an armed force, castChristopher into prison,murdered both Leo andChristopher and declaredhimself Pope Sergius III. Soclosely connected with the

Theophylact family wasSergiusthathefatheredasonby Marozia, the 15 year olddaughterofthatfamily,asonwho, in 931, was himselfcreatedpope(JohnXI)byhisownmother.Thepapacywasat its lowestpointever in thecentury and a half after thecadaver synod thatcondemned the rotting bonesofPopeFormosus.

PopeJohnXII(955–64)

In 955, a teenager becamepope: a certain Octavian,who,amongthefirsttodoso,changed his name andbecame John. Hisgrandmother was the sameMarozia whose papally siredson had become Pope JohnXI. Octavian’s father, half-

brother of John XI, wasMorozia’slegitimateson,andby the 950s he was ruler ofRome. On his deathbed hecoercedthe(willing)Romansto promise to elect his sonOctavian pope at the nextvacancy. In the event, onlymonths elapsed before thepapalseebecamevacant,and‘the people and clergy ofRome’ did his bidding. NomatterthatOctavianwasonly18 years old. No matter too

that hewas notorious for hisdebauched behaviour and forhis lack of spiritual feeling.Hewasacardinaldeaconandpromptly became priest andbishop of Rome, all withindays.And, ina short time, ifwecanbelievehisenemies–andhereperhapsweshould–he had turned the papalpalace into a bordello. Thatwas but one of the manycharges against him. Inaddition, it was said, he

celebrated Mass withouttaking communion, heordainedadeaconinastable,heconsecrateda ten-year-oldboy as a bishop, he invokedthepagangodswhileplayingdice, he hunted publicly, hestruck andmutilatedmen, hewas guilty of arson andadultery. Foreign womenwere said to fear coming toRome as pilgrims because ofthe lustfulways of the pope.And he died in 964when he

reputedly suffered a strokewhile in bed with a marriedwoman, dead in his latetwenties. This list ofscandalousbehaviour,eveniftrimmed a bit forexaggeration, must leave aremote modern reader inwonder at the depraved stateto which the see of St Peterhad fallen. Yet, remarkably,therewasanothersidetothissorrypontificate.John XII is said to have

revived the Holy RomanEmpireintheWest.Althoughhe himself saw little beyondthe needs of the day, theempirewhichherestoredwasto last into the nineteenthcentury. It was a local crisisthat prompted the pope toinvoke the military aid of aGerman king. In the earlytenth century, Germany, likemost of western Europe,knewno central government.In fact, the use of the word

‘Germany’ might bepremature for this period: itmay be more accurate tospeakofthelandsoftheEastFranksandSaxons.Theredidexist an extremely weak,loose confederation ofGerman-speaking duchies:Saxony, Franconia, Swabia,BavariaandLotharingia.OttoI, who was to becomeemperor in 962, followedhisfatherasdukeofSaxonyand,nominally, as king.Ottowas

not satisfied with a nominalkingship: he wanted theimperial title, now defunct,and quickly exerted greaterauthority over the otherduchies with the support ofbishops,manyofwhomweremembers of his family,placed in such greatarchbishoprics as Cologne,Mainz and Trier. Nooverriding principle ofemperorship guided the popein this whole matter. He felt

the need of armed helpagainst the so-called king ofItaly, who had some controlin northern Italy and wishedto extend his power furthersouth. King Otto, ambitiousfor the title of emperor,marched to Rome, where onCandlemasDay (2 February)962 inStPeter’sBasilica theyouthful pope crowned himemperor. The emperor, inturn, confirmed the previousdonations of lands to the

papacy,towhichheaddedhisown donation, leaving thepopeswithaclaimtomostofItaly, yet only a claim. Ottothen began to bring order toItaly, but, in doing so, healarmedthepope,whobegantointriguewithOtto’sformerenemies against the newlycrowned emperor. Word ofthis treachery reached Otto,whoreturnedtoRometofindthat John XII had fled toTivoli. When the pope

refused to return to face aRoman synod, he wasexcommunicatedanddeposedby it, and another pope waselected. Within six monthsJohn was dead in thecircumstances alreadydescribed.

Plate5InvestitureofPopeJohnXII(955).Seventeenth-centurypaintingoftenth-centurymosaic(sincedestroyed)attheBasilicaofStJohnLateran,Rome.ReproducedbypermissionoftheRoyalCollection©HerMajestyQueenElizabethII.

To call the coronation ofthe German king Otto asemperor the ‘OttonianRevival’ is to invest whathappened in 962 with moresignificancethanithadatthetime and runs the risk of

reading history backwards.What was ‘revived’ was notthe empire but the imperialtitle,whichhadbeenlastusedin 924 by a minor Italianprince. Yet, a long lookbeyond 962 sees thedevelopment of one of thekey institutions in Europeanhistory. Three points needstressingaboutthecoronationof 962. The first is themostobvious: the German kingrecognized that it was the

pope and only the popewhocould confer the imperialtitle, a papal right to beunchallenged for centuries.Second, the imperial titlebecame associated with theGerman kings. For nearly amillennium thereafter theman to be crowned emperorby the pope was a Germanking.And,third,theemperor,in turn, accepted obligationstowards the church. Ottohimself promised that, after

he defeated the pope’senemies in Italy, he wouldreturn to Rome to see to themoral improvement of thepope. This obligation to thechurchundertakenbypapallycrowned emperors could beviewedbypopes,attimes,asunwarrantedinterference,but,when the papacy rose fromthe great depths to which ithad sunk, it was largelybecause of the ‘interference’of the German kings in the

years in the middle of theeleventh century. In 962,John XII, the debauchedpope, had little idea what hehaddone.

PopeBenedictIX(1032–45;?1047–48)

With the close of thepontificateofBenedictIXthe

worstdaysinthelonghistoryofthepapacycametoanend.He was the third member ofthe Tusculum family who,one after another, becamepopes in the first half of theeleventh century. Tusculum,anancientsite,stoodatoptheAlban Hills, above modernFrascati, 15 miles fromRome. How the counts ofTusculumrosetosuchpowerwedonotknow,butitseemscertainthattheyderivedfrom

the Theophylacts, whom wehave already met. When themillenniumdawned,acertainGregory was head of theTusculum family, and it washewhocontrolledtheareaofRome and its environs. Hehad three sons:Alberic,whowas to succeed his father ascount; Theophylact, whobecame Pope Benedict VIII(1012–24); and Romanus,who became Pope JohnXIX(1024–32). The eldest son,

Alberic, had two sons:Gregory, who succeeded hisfather as count, and anotherTheophylact, who becamePope Benedict IX in 1032,thussucceedinghisuncle.

One contemporary, if notwholly reliable, account

relatesthatBenedictIXatthetimeofhisaccessionwasnotyet 12 years old. Thisallegationseemsexaggerated,for Benedict was sooncharged with behaviourwhich assumes that he hadreached the age of puberty.Thesourcesareexiguous,butthey seem to show that, in1036, political opponents ofthe Tusculums attempted tokill Benedict in St Peter’sBasilica and that the pope

escaped and fled into exile.He was restored by theGerman emperor, Conrad II.Little has been left to us bywhichwe can judge the nextseven years, and survivingcontemporary sources speakgenerally of how he stole,murdered and committedother, unspeakable deeds.Unable to bear his behaviourany longer, the people ofRome(wearetold)drovehimfrom the city. The truth was

probably that a rival factionseized upon his misconductas an excuse to rid Rome ofthe Tusculums. This faction,in January 1045, raised thebishop of Sabina to thepapacy as Sylvester III(traditionallylistedasananti-pope). Before the end ofMarchtheTusculumshadre-entered Rome and replacedtheir pope on the seat of StPeter.Sylvesterwassentbackto Sabina, but he will be

heardfromagain.The feckless Benedict IX,

now restored, decided toresign thepapacyfor reasonsthatareconfusing(tous)and,indeed, they may have beenseveral. In the first place, itwas said thatBenedict had atormented conscience and,thus,wantedtoberelievedofthe papal office, which hadbeen thrust upon him by hisfamily.Inaddition,hewantedto marry his cousin, whose

father was unwilling for hisdaughter to marry a pope.This sounds rather like hisenemies speaking. Yetanother factor entered thepicture.Benedictagreedwithhisgodfather,archpriestJohnGratian, to resign the papacyin favour of John Gratian inexchange for an enormoussumofmoney,andthishedidon 1May 1045. Truth beingstranger than fiction, we aretold that Benedict’s cousin

now refused to marry him,apparently reluctant tomarryanex-pope,andBenedictalsowillbeheardofagain.JohnGratian,whotookthe

name Gregory VI, was soonconfronted with twoopponents: Sylvester III, stillclinging to his claim to thepapacy, and the haplessBenedict IX, disappointed inlove and now anxious to bepope again. With threeclaimants to the papacy the

moment was ripe for theprotector of the church, theemperor,todescendonRometo sortmattersout.Henry III(1039–56), perhaps thegreatest of the Ottonian lineofGermankingswhobecameemperors, called a synod,which was held in 1046 atSutri, near Rome. SylvesterIIIwasdegradedandsenttoamonastery; Benedict IX wasrecognized as a resignedpope; and Gregory VI

resigned. The slate was nowclean for a new pope to beelected, but, alas, the newpope,ClementII,diedwithineight months. Seizing themoment (8November 1047),Benedict left his mountaincitadel at Tusculum, enteredRome and claimed the papalthrone. He held it for abouteight months, only to leave(for the last time) at theadvance of troops underimperial orders, and a new

pope, Damasus II, wasenthroned.Hisreignendedbypoisonormalaria in21days,andthewaywasthenopenin1049 for real reform (nextchapter). Benedict IX quitepossiblyfinishedhisdaysasapenitent at the monastery ofGrottaferrata in his ancestralAlban Hills (d. 1055),perhaps ill-served by thereformers who wrote hisstory.The tenth century was not

all gloom and doom, andreforming movements weretaking shape, particularlynorth of the Alps, whichwouldhaveaprofoundeffectonthelifeofthechurch.Itisto this reform that we shallnowturn.

Furtherreading

An excellent account of thetenth-century church with anemphasis different from thatgiven here is RosamondMcKitterick’s essay in TheNew Cambridge MedievalHistory, vol. 3 (ed. TimothyReuter; Cambridge, 1999).Heinrich Fichtenau studiessocial order and disorder atall levelsofsociety inLivingin the Tenth Century:MentalitiesandSocialOrders(tr.PatrickJ.Geary;Chicago,

1991). For a contemporarywitness to ecclesiastical andother events of the tenthcentury see The CompleteWorks of Liudprand ofCremona (tr. PaoloSquatriti;Washington,2007).An essential book of

reference is The OxfordDictionaryofPopes (Oxford,1986) by J.N.D. Kelly. Oldbut still of considerable use,particularly for its referenceto contemporary sources, is

HoraceK.Mann,TheLivesofthePopesintheEarlyMiddleAges(18vols;London,1902–32). Compelling, if notalways conventional, isGeoffrey Barraclough, TheMedieval Papacy (Londonand New York, 1968).MorerecentsurveysincludeEamonDuffy,Saints and Sinners: AHistoryofthePopes(Londonand New Haven, 1997) andRichardP.McBrien,Livesofthe Popes: The Pontiffs from

StPetertoJohnPaulII (SanFrancisco,1997).Chief among the

contemporary sourcesavailable tous inEnglisharethe translations of the LiberPontificalis prepared byRaymondDavis:TheBookofPopes (Liber Pontificalis):The Ancient Biographies ofthe First Ninety RomanBishops to AD 715(Liverpool, 1989), The Livesof the Eighth-Century Popes

(Liverpool, 1992) and TheLives of the Ninth-CenturyPopes (Liverpool, 1995).Two valuable chronicles areeasily accessible:The Annalsof St-Bertin (tr. Janet L.Nelson; Manchester, 1991)andThe Annals of Fulda (tr.TimothyReuter;Manchester,1992).On the Lotharingian

divorcecaseseeStuartAirlie,‘PrivateBodiesandtheBodyPoliticintheDivorceCaseof

Lothar II’, Past and Present16 (1998), 3–38, and KarlHeidecker, The Divorce ofLotharII:ChristianMarriageand Political Power in theCarolingianWorld (tr. TanisM.Guest;Ithaca,NY,2010),which emphasizes thepolitical dimension to thedispute.OnHincmarseeJ.M.Wallace-Hadrill, TheFrankish Church (Oxford,1983), and Janet L. Nelson,Charles the Bald (London

andNewYork,1992).OntheRavenna dispute see R.F.Belletzkie, ‘Pope Nicholas Iand John of Ravenna: TheStruggle for EcclesiasticalRights in theNinthCentury’,Church History 49 (1980),262–72. On the issuesbetween the Eastern andWesternchurchesseeFrancisDvornik, The PhotianSchism: History and Legend(Cambridge, 1948) andByzantium and the Roman

Primacy (New York, 1966)and Steven Runciman, TheEastern Schism (Oxford,1955).

7REFORM,THE

EAST,CRUSADE

The75yearsfromthemiddleof the eleventh century

witnessed crucial events inthelonghistoryofthechurch.Forms were cast that wouldshape integral features of theChristianchurchasitliveditslife in the centuries to come.The papacy, long inscandalous decline, woke upor, rather, was awakened toassume a role of activeleadership. In the exuberanceof its new awakening thepopes disastrously buteffectivelyseveredthechurch

from the Christians of theEast,asdisagreementbecameschism, and schism becamepermanent, yet not sopermanent that, whenthreatened by Turkishinvaders, Eastern ChristianswouldnotcallupontheWestfor help. That help was theFirstCrusade.A churchwitha strong papacy, often instrugglewithsecularrulers,achurch separated from itsGreek-speaking brethren and

a church embracing an idealof war against the infidels –these were henceforth to bebenchmarks of the medievalchurch.

Eleventh-centuryreform

The need to renew theChristian ideal, to reaffirm

the essential meaning ofChristianity, to revive thehuman spirit by a return tothe pristine elements ofChristian living was notlimited to any one period inhistory and was as old asPentecost and the earlychurch. Ideals of their natureare goals never attained yetstriven for, thehorizonneverreached yet still thedestination one headstowards. A central belief of

the Christian religion is theuniversality of the effects oforiginal sin: human nature,while not depraved, wasseriouslyweakenedbythesinof Adam. The frailty ofhumannature,inthisschema,excepted neither pope norbishop nor priest. It was achurch of men and women,childrenofAdamandheirstohis weakened humanity. Insuch a world, failure was aconstant fear and a frequent

reality.AlmostintegraltotheChristian religion as it waslivedwastheneedofreform,renewal, revival – the termsare really synonymous –which, at times, became sointense and sowidespread asto constitute a movement.Suchamovementoccurredintheeleventhcentury.Traditional historiography

haslabelledthismovementaseitherthe‘GregorianReform’or the ‘Hildebrandine

Reform.’BothnamesrefertoPopeGregoryVII(1073–85),who,beforehebecamepope,wascalledHildebrand.Theseareinappropriatenames.Twodangers lurk behind thisusage. First, it assumes thatthis was a papally ledreforming movement, which,onlypartiallytrue,distortsthehistorical reality. Second, itgivestoPopeGregoryVIIthecentralroleinthemovement,a role itwouldbedifficult to

sustain by the historicalrecord.The‘Eleventh-centuryReform’ better describes thevariegated and complexforcesatplaythroughoutthatcentury and into the firstquarterofthenext.A brief outline might be

useful. Itcanbesaid that theeleventh-century reform hadtwogeneralperiods.Thefirstwas the period up to 1049,when thepapacywascorruptand the plaything of local

strongmen (see precedingchapter) and when reformwas in the hands of localbishops, abbots and secularrulersoutsideofRome.Withthe coronation of Pope LeoIX (1049) the papacy beganto take control of themovement, yet with thepontificate of Gregory VII(1073–85) a clear shift tookplace. Leo IX and hisimmediate successors usedpapal power as a means of

effecting ecclesiasticalreform,butGregoryVIIusedthereformingmovementasameans of enhancing papalpower, or, to put it anotherway,heconsideredreformtoinclude the enhancement ofpapal power. This led himintoconflictwiththeGermanrulers, a conflict not settleduntiltheConcordatofWorms(1122), and even then onlytenuously. So much for theoutline,nowthedetails.

While the papacywas stillwallowing in its corruptingdependence on the localhouseofTusculum,soundsofChristian renewal could beheard off in the distance andeven in the far distance. Atdifferent times and indifferent regions reformsoccurred, some weremonastic, aimed at restoringfidelity to the spirit of theRule of St Benedict, whileothers were directed towards

the secular clergy, who hadthe care of souls at a timewhen churches – what wemight call ‘parishes’ – weremultiplying. The area whichwasthe‘MiddleKingdom’ofthe grandchildren ofCharlemagne – the landbetween the kingdom of theEastFranksand thekingdomof the West Franks –witnessed reforming effortsbeginning in the tenthcentury, which should force

us to see that century notmerely in grey tones. By theeleventhcentury theseeffortshad influenced other regionsofwesternEuropeandfinallyreachedRomeinmidcentury.The most famous is themovementassociatedwiththemonastery at Cluny in theFrench duchy of Burgundy.There in 909 William, thedukeofAquitaine, foundedamonastery which wouldspawn hundreds of daughter

housesandwhichwouldgiveits name to a monasticmovement.Itwasintendedasareformmonastery,returningto the Rule as articulated byBenedictAniane (see chapter5). Other monasteries withsimilar purposes werefoundedataboutthistimebywealthy patrons. What setCluny apart was itsindependence. The verycharter by which DukeWilliam set an abbot and

twelve monks down in thisvalley provided for the freeelection of the abbot by thecommunity and for thepope,rather than local bishop orduke, to be its protector. Intime, Cluny’s claim to beexempt from localjurisdiction and answerableonly to the bishop of Romegave Cluny the self-confidence to develop into amajor force for ecclesiasticalreform. William of

Aquitaine’s charter declared‘that our foundation shallserveforeverasa refugeforthosewhorenouncetheworldand, as poor men, bringnothingbuttheirgoodwill’.Cluny did not lasted ‘for

ever’,asWilliamwished, forit fell victim to the excessesof the French Revolution in1791, its bells melted downfor cannon and a road soonpushed through what hadbeen the centre of the great

abbey church. Yet, at itsbeginning, monks came tothis valley to live inwoodenhuts and to worship in awooden church. They spentlong periods of each day inutter silence, raising theirvoices seldom save forperiods of oral prayer. Thesetwo features – silence andoral prayer – became thehallmarksofCluny. ItsabbotOdo (926–44) crystallized itscustoms and became a

missionary for the reform ofothermonasteries.Bythemidtenth century only fivemonasteries were subject toCluny. In time, hundreds ofdaughter houses (calledpriories) were established orrecreated from existingmonasteries. Hundreds ofothers were to becomeassociated with Cluny,accepting its spirit andcustoms,althoughnotpartofwhatwasinrealityareligious

order. The abbot of Clunywas pater et abbas (fatherand abbot) not only of themonksatClunyitselfbutalsoof all the monks of itssatellite priories. UnderAbbot Mayeul, or Maiolus(954–94), these daughter andassociate monastic houseswere dotted throughoutFrance, extending beyond,even into parts of ChristianSpain and northern Italy. In1077 Cluny established a

priory at Lewes in Englandand,intime,had35housesinEnglandandfourinScotland.That would happen in thefuture. Cluny by the end ofthetenthcenturyhadbecomethe single most powerfulspiritual force in westernEurope. The reformedmonasteries of theRomance-language-speaking peopleslargely took their lead fromthe abbey of Cluny, whichstood then near the pinnacle

of its power. Before the endof the eleventh century itproduced two more long-ruling, sainted abbots, Odilo(994–1049)andHugh(1049–1109), and placed on thechairofStPetertwopopesofexceptionalabilities,UrbanII(1088–99) and Paschal II(1099–1118).Yet not by Cluny alone

was reform brought towestern monasticism. In theGerman-speaking lands,

notably in the areas of theMosel River valley and thenearby Rhineland, monasticreform took root. The abbeyof Gorze near Metz in 933provided much of thestimulus for this renewal ofBenedictinelife.MonksfromGorze revitalized the ancientmonastery at Trier, andmonks from Trier broughttheir spirit of reform into theregion centring on Cologne,where they founded new

monasteries and renewed oldones. And, even somewhatearlier,thebishopricofLiègefelt the reforming impulsesfrom the monastery atBrogne.AllthistookplaceinLorraine,

Map8Centresofreforminthetenthandeleventhcenturies

which made it one of theprincipalcentresofreformingideas in theeleventhcentury.In England, where thedislocations of the Vikinginvasionsandland-takingleftmost of the survivingmonasteries as little morethan communities of marriedclerics, it was St Dunstanwhowasthedrivingforcefor

reform, and he had lived atthe Brognean monastery atGhent. These centres ofreformweremerelythat:theydidnotblanketthemapnorthof the Alps. Yet they didrepresentagrowingsentimentinfavouroftherevivalofthechurch, in which strongpersonalities, ecclesiasticaland lay, played significantroles. The archbishop ofCologne, himself the brotherof Emperor Otto I,

encouraged events there. InEngland in the late tenthcentury there were threeexceptionally able monasticbishops, all intent on reform:Dunstan at Canterbury,Ethelwold atWinchester andOswaldatWorcester.AlsoinEngland,KingEdmund(939–46),KingEdred(946–55)andKing Edgar (955–59) gavethe reformers the supportessentialtotheirtask,andtherevived monasteries of strict

Benedictine observance suchas Glastonbury, Abingdonandothersweretheresult. InFrance,thesecondkinginthelong line of the Capetiandynasty, Robert the Pious(996–1031), supported themission of Cluny. Hiscontemporary in Germany,Henry II (1002–24),succeeded inbringing reformto the hitherto resistantabbeys of Fulda, Reichenauand others. His grandson,

HenryIII (1039–56),marrieda French noblewoman withclose connections to Cluny.Henry III’s association withCluny and with the broaderreformmovementprovidesanexample of a Christianmonarch not interfering inchurch affairs but fulfillinghis obligation as an anointedking. It was Henry III whowas to set in motion thereform of the papacy itself,which,inturn,wastochange

essentially the scope anddirection of reform. As theend of the first millenniumapproached, there was aclearly identifiable impetustowards reform, and Clunyand Lorraine were theprincipal instruments infostering a commitment tospiritualrenewal.The conditions in Rome,

withthepopelittlemorethanapuppetinthehandsoflocalfamilies,scandalizedmuchof

Christendom, and, whenHenry III marched on Romein 1046, he did so to set inmotion papal reform. ThesynodheconvokedatnearbySutri marks for manyhistorians the beginnings ofthe papal stage in themovement of reform. Threecontesting ‘popes’ weredismissed, and Henryimposed the German bishopof Bamberg on Rome as itsbishop,yetthenewpopedied

within ten months but notbefore crowning Henry IIIemperor. The new emperorimposed another German onthepapal throne,buthedied,probably of malaria, within23days. Itwaswith thenextpope,anotherGermanbishopimposed by Henry III, thatthe programme of papalreform began in earnest. LeoIX (1049–54), as bishop ofToul in Lorraine, hadvigorously sought the reform

of religiousmen andwomenaswell as the secular clergy.Now on a larger scale,strengthened by his ties ofkinship to the emperor, heinstigated a bold programmeto reform the universalchurch.FromthetimeofLeoIX the pope was takingcharge.Leo IX brought with him

fromLorrainemensteepedinthe culture of reform. Chiefamong them was the

passionate and, as eventswould prove, extreme andrigid Humbert ofMoyenmoutier, who soonbecame cardinal bishop ofSilva Candida. A politicallywell-connected reformerwhocame toRomewithLeowasFrederickofLorraine,brotherofGodfrey,dukeofLorraine:bothbrotherswillreappearinthis story,Frederick as abbotof Monte Cassino and PopeStephen IX, and Godfrey as

husband of the formidableMatilda,countessofTuscany.Also in Leo’s entourage wastheRomanmonkHildebrand,who, in the tumult of 1046,fled north with Gregory VI,whose secretary he was andwhose name he was later totakeaspope.FromItalyitselfthere came toRomeat aboutthis time a monk from anabbey nestled in theApennines, Peter Damian,himself later (1057) to

become cardinal bishop ofOstia.The newly chosen pope

approached the city ofRomenot in triumphal splendourbut in the garb of a humblepilgrim, and, once there, herefused to be crowned popeuntil the emperor’s selectionofhimwasconfirmedby theRoman clergy and people.Onemightseeinthisthefirststep in the papacy’s attemptto throw off the power of

secular rulers, even thewell-intentioned intervention ofmen like Henry III. Conflictabout the intervention ofsecular rulers lay in thefuture. The pressing issue in1049 was reform, and lessthan two months into hisreign as pope Leo IXconvened a synod at Romewhich deposed severalbishops and castigatedunworthy clergy. One monthlater he packed his bags and

leftRome toconvene synodsat Pavia, Rheims andMainz,at which his personalpresence vividly highlightedthe exigency of reform. In apapacy of only about fiveyears he also went in personto southern Italy and toLangres, Trier, Pressburg,Ratisbon, Augsburg andMantua, spending less thansix months at Rome.Energetic and vital, Leo wasclearlyincontrolinanactive

way unknown to hispredecessors, and his agendawasoneofreform.The reforming agenda

needs spelling out. TwomajorissuespreoccupiedLeoand his ‘cabinet’ of advisers:simony and clericalconcubinage.SimonytookitsnamefromSimonMagus,theman in the Acts of theApostles (8, 9–24)who triedto buy from St Peter themiraculous power of laying

on of hands. Although in ageneral way simony meantthebuyingandsellingofholythings, its meaning in theeleventh century focused onthe paying for anecclesiastical office (e.g. abishopric or abbacy) or forordination, and those buyingthese holy things weredenounced as simoniacs. Intime, Cardinal Humbert tookthe view, in his Adversussimoniacos (‘Against

Simoniacs’), that thesacraments conferred by asimoniac were invalid. Thus,inhisview,apriestordainedby a simoniacal bishop wasnot a priest and could notvalidly say Mass or performotherpriestlyfunctions.Moremoderately, Cardinal PeterDamian held that it wasindeed gravely sinful to buyan office but the sacramentsconferredbyasimoniacwerevalid: their validity did not

depend on the worthiness ofthe minister. And Damian’sview prevailed. If Humberthad won the day, one canonlywonderat theconfusionand severe crises for souls,even, and especially, for thedevout, that would haveensued.Goodsensesavedthechurch from the excesses ofradicalreformers.Clerical celibacy was

anothermatterandmuchlessclear-cut.Whilea fewwould

defendthebuyingandsellingof church offices orordinations as part of a gift-giving culture, the practicewas widely condemned.Clerical marriage, however,wasnotsoobviouslyamatterof right and wrong. Nobiblical text could be citedprohibiting it and requiringpriestlycelibacy.Mostof theapostles were known to bemarried. The practice of theEastern Church was – and,

indeed, is – to allowmarriedmen to become priests. Evenin the West an unmarriedclergyonlyslowlyandnotatalluniformlybecametherule.Individual councilslegislating for their regionsand even individual popes,responding to individualcases,calledformarriedmenwho became priests either toput their wives aside or tolivewiththemasbrotherandsister. Married clergy not

following these injunctionscould be found in almosteverypartoftheWest,andinDr Parish’s view ‘marriageremained the norm for asubstantial proportion ofparish clergy’. Even arigorouscanonistwouldhavehad to admit that thesesituations were allowed bylegitimate custom, at a timewhen long-standing customwas considered to replaceeven contrary law. A lively

debate on this issue ensued:Peter Damian arguing forcelibacy and others, like thebishop of Imola in centralItaly, arguing that celibacywas a vocation distinct fromthe vocation to thepriesthood. Those reformersfavouring a celibate secularclergy were mostly monks,who were by definition andchoice celibate. Damian wasa monk of Fonte Avellana,Humbert a monk of

Moyenmoutier, Hildebrand amonk of SantaMaria on theAventineHillinRome.From1073to1119thepapacyitselfwas held by former monks,something unrivalled in itslong history. More was atstake here than thematter ofclerical celibacy: it was theideal of Christian perfection.That ideal, it was held byDamianandothers,wastobefound in the life of a monk,but, if one could not become

a monk, one should live ascloseaspossibletothelifeofamonkintheworld.Andforthe secular clergy, thereformers believed, thatrequired a celibate life. Thereal struggle was over thesoul of Christian spirituality,and the monks won thisround,although thematterofclerical celibacy was notsettled until the SecondLateranCouncil (1139) ruledthat a priest, a deacon and

even a subdeacon could notcontract a valid marriage; ifany were already married,they were to lose theirbenefices.Against these two

perceived evils Leo IX andlater reformers appealed toancient practices byextracting texts from earlysynods, papal directives andthe teachings of the ChurchFathers. The reform wasaccomplished by invoking

traditionandpristinepractice,not by fulminating newdecretals, new laws, newtexts. Thus, collections ofsuch texts were compiled.One can almost see thereformers at Rome, scouringthrough existing collectionsof old texts in search ofreferences to use for theirown contemporary needs.The collection made byBurchard of Worms (before1020) had reached Rome by

midcentury.BothBurchard’sand a collection in 74 titles,which was made at Rome,were used by the greatestcompiler of canon-law textsof the time, Ivo, bishop ofChartres, in the 1090s. Tohimshouldbegivenmuchofthe credit for establishingcanon law as a scholarlydiscipline. And Anselm,bishop of Lucca, in the mid1080s produced a collectionofcanonsstronglysupportive

ofthepapalpowertoreform.With such canonicalreferences in hand thereformers could insist on arenewal of traditional churchpractices. Resistance theresurely was, but Leo IX,presiding over provincialsynods, simply rolled overopposition by intimidationand sanctions, not hesitatingto depose reluctant bishops.Reluctancetoacceptreforms,particularly clerical celibacy,

led to near riotous scenes atRouen and Paris, at Erfurtand Passau and elsewhere.But reforms were imposed,and canon law played aconsiderable role in thisprocess.Leo’s reign, however

successful its early years,ended in personal failure.Younger sons of noblefamilies in Normandy,serving as mercenaries (orfreebooters), had invaded

southern Italy by the time ofLeo’s accession and werethreatening church landsthere. Leo raised an armyunder the papal banner andpersonallyleditagainsttheseNorman Christians. It was afatal error. His army wasquickly defeated and PopeLeowascapturedandkeptinbenignimprisonmentforninemonths.Within a fewweeksafter his release in April1054, the first of the great

reforming popes died,dispiritedanddisillusioned.Subsequent popes

continued this programme,convening synods, but nottravelling so widelythemselves, instead, sendinglegatesacross theAlps toactin their name. There stillremained the crucial issue ofpapal elections. Leo’ssuccessor, Victor II (1055–57), was the last imperiallyselected pope. A change of

momentous significanceoccurredwithinmonthsofthecoronation of his successor,Nicholas II (1058–61). Heissued an electoral decreethat,withsomelaterchanges,has regulated the election ofpopes ever since. The popewas to be elected by thecardinal bishops. While‘saving the honour andreverence’ due to theemperor, the decree did notinclude him in the election

process.Awordmustbesaidabout cardinals. Sevenbishoprics in the suburbsaroundRomewereservedbybishopswhocameeventuallyto provide, first, liturgicalservices and, later,administrativeservicesforthepope. They became thecardines (hinges) of theRoman church; they werecardinal bishops. Thepresiding priests of the greatRoman basilicas adopted the

term ‘cardinal’ as, in time,did certain deacons in thepapal service. Thus, threeordersofcardinalsdeveloped:cardinal bishops, cardinalpriests and cardinal deacons.ByPopeNicholas’sdecree itwasthecardinalbishopswhohad the initial voice in theselection of future popes,their choice to be confirmedby the other cardinals and,finally and only formally, bytheclergyofRome.Itwasthe

function of cardinals in theelection of popes thatwas togivethemintimeacorporatesense, the sense of being a‘college’.Thepurposeoftheelection

decree was to make theelection free, devoid ofexternal influence whetherfrom German emperors orfrom the Roman aristocracy.The decree was soon testedbythedeathofNicholasIIin1061. The German king,

Henry IV (1056–1106), wasbut a boy, and a ten-yearregency complicated thesituation.Onlythefirmactionof Hildebrand ensured theapplicationofthenewdecree.The election of Alexander II(1061–73) created a storm inGermany, and the Germanselected their own pope(known tohistory as an anti-pope). Intense negotiationsand a flexible Alexander IIresolved the matter in his

favour.A long pontificate, longer

than his six predecessorscombined, gave Alexanderopportunity to carry forwardtheworkof reform, towhichhehadbeen long committed.He sent a legate to Aragon,one of theChristian outpostsin northern Spain. He eveninvolved himself in thesuccession of the Englishcrown. When King Edwardthe Confessor died early in

1066, Duke William ofNormandy sent a mission toRome, seeking papal supportfor his claim to the Englishcrown: Harold, the claimant,had perjured himself andStigand, the archbishop ofCanterbury, had received thepallium from an anti-pope.One source,whose reliabilityis not universally accepted,relates that the pope actuallysent a blessed papal banner,under which William

defeated Harold at Hastings.The dubious banner apart,papal support was given toWilliam, and Alexander IIsent two papal legates topreside over a synod atWinchester (1070), whichdeposed Stigand and otherbishops. The bishop ofLichfield,amarriedmanwithchildren,resignedhisseeandtook himself to amonastery.With the learned Lanfranc,abbot of Bec in Normandy,

now at Canterbury asarchbishop, the Englishchurch had become a part ofthe papal reform programmeand England was drawntowards the Continent fromits remote, comfortableinsularity.Central to any historical

viewofthiswholeperiodliesthe figure of Hildebrand,who, in 1073, underexceptional circumstancesbecame Pope Gregory VII.

His 12-year pontificatecreated considerablecontroversy not only for hiscontemporaries but also formodern historians. Hissupporters in the historicalprofession have given hisname to the reformmovement, of which he wasbut a part and arguably notthe principal part. The viewpresented here is that thepontificate of Gregory VIIwasa failure,perhapsevena

monumental failure. Hedisturbed the forwardprogressofreformbypickingunnecessary fights withsecular rulers.Whatbetrayedhispapacywasthatperennialscourge of the church, ‘thepriestinpolitics’.The unusual nature of his

election was an augur ofthingstocome.AtthefuneralofAlexander II, according tosympathetic accounts,Hildebrand was

spontaneouslyselectedbytheRomanpopulaceand,despitehis unwillingness, he wasordained priest andconsecrated bishop of Rome.Most obviously, thisprocedure, however the truthof his reluctance, stood theNicholas election decree onits head. In the futureGregory’s enemies wouldattack him for themanner ofhiselection.Not content to push

forwardtheusualprogrammeof reform against simoniacsand married priests, GregoryVII added a new issue: layinvestiture.To say succinctlythat lay investituremeant theinvestingofabishoporabbotwiththeinsigniaofhisofficeby a layman (a king orprince) is not to say enough.Lay rulers, as has been seen,viewed their office as a holyone, a view which, forexample, led King Henry III

of Germany to descend onRome in1046 tosortout theproblems there. Such a rulerwould have a voice, often adefinitive voice, in theselection of bishops andabbots. In addition, theseecclesiastical officialsgenerally held considerablelandsfromthekingorprince.Thus, when the person tookoffice,hetookanofficebothecclesiasticalandsecular,andthe ruler understandably felt

that he had rights. When aman became a bishop orabbot, the sacramental riteswere performed by theappropriateecclesiastic,butitwas the secular ruler whovery frequently invested himwith ring and staff. ToGregorythisconstitutedgrossinterference by the laity inecclesiastical matters. Papalclaims in the growingcontroversy were to changethe Gelasian image of God

handingonekeyeachdirectlyto the pope and emperor tothe image of God grantingbothkeystothepope,who,inturn,gaveonetotheemperor.There logically followed apapal claim to the power todeposesecularrulers.Mattersmovedveryfarveryfast,andthe catalysts were PopeGregory VII and King (laterEmperor)HenryIV.Trouble began early in

Gregory’s pontificate. In the

first week of Lent 1075 aRoman synod stronglyattacked so-called layinvestiture, an attack aimedwith little subtlety at theGermans:

If anyone receive a bishopric orabbey from the hands of a layperson, he shall not beconsidered a bishop or abbot…Likewise, if an emperor, king,duke,margraveoranyonevestedwith secular power presumes toinvest a person to bishoprics orother ecclesiastical offices, heshalllikewisebecondemned.

Henry IV, king but not yetcrowned emperor, was soonfreeoftroublesinSaxonyandturned his attention to theLombard lands which heheld,particularlytothevexedproblem about the great seeof Milan. Two claimants tothat see had been incontention for several years,and King Henry, perhapsimitating his father’s actionduring the papal crisis of1046,securedtheelimination

of the two claimants and theconsecration of a third. Thisinfuriatedthepope,who,on8December 1075, threatenedHenrywithexcommunicationanddeposition for interferingin the appointment ofbishops.WithinweeksHenryhad gathered a synod atTribur, which deposed thepope, claiming his electioninvalid.To about this same time –

possiblyinthespringof1076

– can be dated one of themost tantalizingandpuzzlingdocuments of this wholeperiod. It is the Dictatuspapae, which means thedictations of the pope to asecretary. It consists of 27simple statements. They allconcern papal power andseem to be chapter headingsfor a canonical collectionnevermadeor, ifmade,nowlost. Several of these‘dictates’illustrateitsgeneral

thrust:

9.Thatthepope’sfeetandnoelse’saretobekissedbyallprinces.

11. That his title isuniqueintheworld.

12.Thathemaydeposeemperors.

19. That he is to bejudgedbynoone.

27.Thathemayabsolvesubjects from their

fealtytoevilpersons.

The twelfth ‘dictate’ wouldnot be long in being tested,for at the Lenten synod atRome in 1076, the pope notonly excommunicated theGerman king but wentmuchfurther:

I deprive King Henry, son ofEmperor Henry, who hasaudaciously rebelled against thechurch, of the government overthe whole kingdom of Germanyand Italy, and I release all

Christiansfromallegiancesworntohim.

Henry quickly responded bypresiding over a churchcouncil in June 1076, whichexcommunicated Gregory‘not pope but false monk’.ButHenryhadmisjudgedhissupport among the Germans,a people not sympatheticallydisposed to centralizingkings. Confronted with thisopposition, Henry agreed, in

October 1076, to appearbefore an assembly atAugsburg in February of thefollowing year, an assemblyover which the pope wouldpresideandwhosepurpose itwouldbetoconsiderHenry’sposition.Fewwouldhavebeton Henry’s chances forsurvivingthegreatestcrisisofhisreign.Yethedid.PopeGregory,tobreakthe

long,hazardousjourneyfromRomeacrossthemountainsin

winter on his way toGermany for the assembly,stopped over in late Januaryat the castle at Canossa innorthern Italy, nestled in theApennine Mountains, wherehe was the guest of theformidable Matilda, countessof Tuscany. There hewas toreceive a visitor. Henry IV,desperate to keep his crown,donnedtheguiseofapenitentpilgrim, slipped out ofGermany with but a few

companions, fellow pilgrims,tointerceptthepope.ThishedidatCanossa.Henryarrivedthere on 25 January andbeggedthepope’sabsolution.For three days Gregory kepthim waiting, barefoot inmidwinter outside the castlegates.Whoknowswhatwentonwithin thecastle?Matildacounselled the pope toabsolve thepenitent king.Sodid Abbot Hugh of Cluny.One suspects that theymight

have played a behind-the-scenes role in this dramaticmeeting and that the wholechoreography might havebeen pre-arranged. On thethird day Gregory absolvedHenry. Having saved hiscrown, Henry immediatelyreturned to Germany. Asubstantial group of Germannobles refused to accept himand raised a reluctantRudolph of Swabia as king,andGermanywasengulfedin

a bloody civil war. Theusually decisive, evenimpetuous, Pope Gregorydelayed taking sides in thecivil war, and, when he did,infavourofRudolphin1080,itwastoolate.Henryhadallbut defeated Rudolph, who,in any event, died shortlyafter the papal decision. Thepenitent’sgarblongsinceputaway, an angry HenrymarchedonRome,installedanew pope and had himself

crownedemperor.Thirteenofthe cardinals – a majority –defected,andGregorywasinfullretreat.HefledRomeandsought refuge with hisNorman supporters, movingsouth toMonte Cassino and,finally, toSalerno,where,on25 May 1085, he died. Hislastwords,echoingPsalm44,aresaidtohavebeen,‘Ihaveloved justice, hated iniquityand, therefore, die in exile’,to which he might have

added,‘AndIdieafailure.’Therewasnowinnerinthe

investiturecontroversyjustasthere was no right party andnowrong party. It took over30 years for the controversyto be resolved bycompromise. Pope Urban II(1088–99) lowered thetemperature of papal rhetoricand pretensions, but mostremarkable was the solutionproposed by Pope Paschal II(1099–1118). He could see

that the core of the problemover investiture was the factthat bishops and abbots heldterritories from kings andprinces, since, besides beingspiritual rulers, they weresecular rulers. The poperecognized that the kingclearlyhadrightswithrespecttothetemporalpossessionsofthese ecclesiastics. Theproblem would not exist ifthese bishops and abbotsceased to be secular rulers.

Hence, with unassailablelogic, Paschal, in February1111,orderedthebishopsandabbots of Germany to returntheir temporal possessions tothe king. ‘The church,’ hesaid, ‘will remain free’,dependent on the free-willofferingsofthefaithfulforitsneeds. Many modernhistorians consider thisproposal a naive non-starter,but the danger here (aselsewhere) is to read history

backwards and to concludethat, because the proposalfailed to be accepted, it wasboundtofail.ThisgestureofPaschal II must be judgedamong the boldest made bythe medieval popes. Ourminds boggle at what thesubsequent history of thechurch would have been hadthe church renouncedtemporal possessions in theearly twelfth century. As itwas, the church held on

tenaciously to its territorialpossessions until 1870,whenPiedmontese troops tookRome and the pope became‘the prisoner in theVatican’.In 1111 vested interests,particularly among theGerman bishops, helped todefeattheinitiativeofPaschalII.The resolution of the

investiture struggle, when itcame under Calixtus II(1119–24), left the king and

pope both able to claimvictory. Troubles in Englandbetween King Henry I andAnselm, archbishop ofCanterbury, had been settledin 1107 in a way whichprovided a precedent for theeventual compromise: theking gave up his practice ofgivingthebishophispastoralstaff, and the bishop wouldgive homage to the king forlandswhichheheldfromtheking. The Concordat of

Worms(1122)madeasimilardistinction: the electionwouldbefree,althoughinthepresence of the king, but thelatter would not invest thebishop with symbols of hisoffice, receiving insteadhomagefromthenewbishop.Somewhat different termswould apply to parts of theempireoutsideGermany.Thefundamental issue betweenpope and emperor overjurisdictions still remained,

and future clashes wouldoccur.

TheEasternChurch

Aneventvividlyrememberedin the Eastern Churchoccurred in the afternoon ofSaturday,16July1054,atthegreat church of Santa Sophiain Constantinople.

Unexpectedly, while serviceswere about to begin, threewestern ecclesiastics walkedbriskly down the nave to thehigh altar. They turned andfaced the startledcongregation, said somethingunintelligible (probably inLatin) and then placed adocument on the altar. Notwaiting for a reaction, theyretraced their steps, and, atthe door, they turned andshouted, ‘Let God see and

judge.’ They were papallegates sent by Leo IX, andthe document was a bulldeposing andexcommunicating thepatriarch of Constantinople.Few events in the history ofthe medieval church haveprovoked such wildlydifferent interpretations.Dismissed by some as but aminor bump on the road ofEast–Westrelations,itisseenby others as the crucial

moment when the schismbetweentheChurchesofEastandWest occurred, a schismwhich, despite flickeringmoments of reunion in 1274and in the 1440s, hascontinuedtothepresentday.The situation in Italy

sparked these events, at leastinaproximateway,althoughlong-standing differencesbetween the churches of theEastandWestwereclearlyatwork here. The political

landscape in Italy wasseemingly straightforward atthis time: thenorthunder thecontrol of the Germans, themiddle under the popes, thesouth under the Byzantineemperors.Yet on the groundthesituationwasnotsoclear-cut, and thiswas particularlytrue in the south.Theoretically the Byzantinesheld jurisdiction south of aline drawn across the bootfromTerracinetoTermoli.In

fact, theLombardscontrolledtwo duchies in that territory(Spoleto and Benevento) aswell as several townsincluding Naples. Byzantinerule from ConstantinopleextendedtothealmosttotallyGreek province of Calabriaand to Apulia, which hadmixed Greek and Latinpopulations with churchesserving both peoples. Thematter became morecomplicated in 1020, when

Latin Apulians rose againstEastern rule and invited thehelp of warriors fromNormandy. These soonbecamethedominantforceinsouthern Italy, eventhreateningRomeitself.PopeLeoIXdecidedthatthecrisisrequired an alliance with theByzantine emperor againstthe rampaging Normans. Itprovedadisaster,when,afterthebriefestofcampaigns,thepope’s forces were defeated

inJune1053andLeoIXwasheld as an honoured prisonerof the Christian Normans.Not only were the NormansChristians, they were LatinChristiansandhadinsistedonLatin liturgical usages insouthern Italy and did notallow Greek churches tofollow their traditionalpractices.There entered the scene at

this point the redoubtablepatriarch of Constantinople,

Michael Cerularius, who, inresponse to the Normans,caused Latin rituals to ceaseat the Latin churches inConstantinople. Cerulariusalso objected, in the moststrenuous of language, to theLatin practice of usingunleavened bread at Mass.The pope, in January 1054,responded by sending threelegates to Constantinople,headed by the tactlessreformer, Cardinal Humbert,

whose extreme views onsimonywehavealreadymet.With two leading rolesbeingplayed by such unpredictablemen as Cerularius andHumbert, an explosivecondition existed. The firstmeeting of the papal legateswiththepatriarchendedwiththe legates abruptly walkingout.Mattersdeterioratedfromthere. The legates, thepatriarch was soon to assert,werenottruelegatesfortheir

documents had beentampered with and, in anycase,thepopewhohadissuedthem had already died (15April 1054), not anunreasonable objection. Atone point during thesubsequent weeks, Humbertinamomentofangerinsistedthat one of the patriarch’sspokesmen was the son of awhore. It was thus in thisatmosphereofmutualdistrustand of great ill-temper on

both sides that the legatesexcommunicated thepatriarchatSantaSophia.Thepatriarch responded with hisownexcommunications.Was this, then, the crucial

moment in the relationsbetween thechurchesofEastand West, the definingmoment of the schism? Thebump-on-the-road historianshold that contemporaries didnot see it as a decisivemoment.Afterall,theyargue,

the legates hadexcommunicated only thepatriarch, and, in any case,theirpowerhaddiedwithLeoIX before theexcommunications. Also,Cardinal Humbert, far frombeing seen as a failure, wastreated as a triumphant heroon his return to Rome.Furthermore, subsequentpopeswereincommunicationwith theEastwithoutawordof the events of 1054 being

whispered.There is much truth in all

this,yetthebeliefgrewintheWest that a schism hadoccurred at this time. Thiscan be seen in severalcontemporary chronicles.Also,subsequentpopescouldhavebutdidnotrepudiatethelegates for acting beyondtheir authority. Theexcommunication itselfmerits a closer look. Thecrucialpartreads,

We subscribe that our mostreverend pope has denouncedMichaelandallthosewhofollowhim in these errors andpresumptions,unlesstheyrepent.They are excommunicated.Maranatha.Amen.Amen.Amen.

What should be seen here isthatthelegatesdidmorethanexcommunicate Cerularius:theyexcommunicatedallwhosupportedhispositions,someritual and some theological.Of course, most of thepositions attributed to him

werepatentlyuntrue(e.g.thatcommunionwas forbidden tomen with beards), yet thecrucial theological issueconcerned the filioque (‘andfrom the Son’) clause in thecreedoffaith.Essentially,thefilioque dispute concernedhow the three persons of theTrinity(Father,SonandHolySpirit) were related to oneanother, especially the HolySpirit to the other two. TheEasternpositionheld that the

Holy Spirit proceeded fromthe Father through the Son,whereas theWesternpositionheld that the Holy Spiritproceeded from the Father‘andfromtheSon’(filioque).Thewholemattermightseemarcane to the modern mind,yetatthistimeitwasseenasa crucial element in thedescription of the ChristianGod. The Eastern Churchrejected the filioque, and,hence, the anathema

pronounced by the legatescouldbereadtohaveawiderapplication than we might atfirst believe and could betaken to include the wholeEastern Church. By thefourteenth century thewidespread view in the Eastwas that the schism datedfromtheexcommunicationof1054.Ithadbeenaviewlongheld in the West. Sopersistenthasbeenthisbeliefin both churches that, on 7

December 1965, Pope PaulVIandPatriarchAthenagorasof Constantinople, in adramatic expression of irenicgood will, embraced andmutually repudiated theexcommunications of 1054and expressed the wish thatthe excommunications andaccompanying offences andinsults be erased fromChristianmemory,awishthateven a respectful historiancannothonour.

TheFirstCrusade

The first thing that must besaidabouttheFirstCrusadeisthat noone at the timeknewitwasthefirstcrusade.WhenPope Urban II preached thiscrusadeatClermontinFrancein 1095, he had no idea ofbeginning a movement,whoseambitionswouldgrowbeyond the retaking of the

HolyLandtoencompassand,indeed,justifyattacksagainstthe infidels elsewhere andeven against fellowChristians. The very word‘crusade’ and the neatnumbering of the Crusadesweretheinventionsofa laterperiod. For all the romanceand adventure popularlyassociated with them, thecrusades were marginalevents in the general flowofmedievalhistory.Thecentral

lines of the history of thisperiod would remainessentially unchanged if thecrusades had never occurred:the crusades were but oneelement among many inmedieval history and clearlynot in the first rank. Anargument can be made thatthe Crusades featured moreprominently in the history ofthe Middle East than in thehistoryofwesternEurope.Nohistorianwoulddeny that the

life of the medieval churchwas influenced by soldiersfighting war with papalauthorization under thebanner of the cross, yet thetemptation to overemphasizethe place of the crusades inthe life of the church in theMiddleAgesshouldprobablyberesisted.Allthathavingbeensaid,it

must be added that in oneparticular aspect the crusadeshave had an enduring effect

on the history of Westerncivilization, an effect whoseinfluenceitwouldbedifficultto measure. In its beginningChristianitywasa religionofpeace.Thereresonated in theears of the early Christiansthe words of their founder:‘Turn theothercheek’ (Matt.5,39);‘Thosewholivebytheswordshalldiebythesword’(Matt.26,52).Thepacificismof the early church receivedreinforcement from the fact

that the army in whichChristianswouldhavefoughtwas the army of an empirehostile to Christianity. Theconversion of the RomanEmpire in the fourth centuryclouded matters, andChristianmen,particularly inthe West, took up arms insupport of Christian rulers.TheteachingofStAugustineof Hippo (354–430) allowedwarfare by Christian rulersunder severely limited

restrictions, but suchrestrictions were oftenforgottenoroverriddenintheturmoil of actual war. Aculture giving heroic statureto thewarrior developed andlong remained a fixture ofWestern life.Yet the pacifistview never died, andexponents of it can be foundin virtually every generation,reminding contemporaries ofthe injunctions of theirfounder. By restating the

ideal, ifonlyinapartialand,at times, half-hearted way, apeacemovementemerged. Inthe closing decade or so ofthe tenth century, churchcouncils in Aquitaine urgedthat the clergy and poor bespared from violence. AtPoitiers, in 1000, a councilforbade, under pain ofexcommunication, thesettlement of disputes byarms. The French kingsupportedthisforhislandsas

didotherregionalcouncils inFrance. Oaths were taken tothis end, and the Peace ofGod came into being, theexpressionoftheyearningfora settled life, free from thehuman consequences ofviolent warfare, a peacesupported by religiousprinciples. More importantwas the kindred movement,theTruceofGod.Thiscalledfor a total abstinence fromwar – a truce – during

specifictimes.Atfirst,itwaslimited to the daylight hoursof Sundays and holy days.(Even the troops on thewestern Front observed anunofficial Christmas truce in1914 to the consternation oftheirofficers.)By themiddleof the eleventh century, theperiod of the truce wasextended to include theperiod from WednesdayeveningtoMondaydaybreak,andmuchofEuropeaccepted

this, at least in theory. DukeWilliam of Normandy, in1042, not only accepted thetrucebutextendedit,yet thisdid not stop him fromfighting against King Haroldat Hastings on 14 October1066, a Saturday. Noteffective always andeverywhere, the peacemovement at least providedsome restraint againstunlimited violence in asociety containing some but

fewotherrestraints.

Map9RoutesoftheFirstCrusade

A war called by a pope,preached by bishops andpriests and fought under thebanner of the cross againstunbelievers seemed tolegitimize the use of armedforce to resolve humanproblems. The First Crusadeand the others whichfollowed served not only toallow war but to sanctify it:

warhadbecomeholy.Indeed,‘holy wars’ existed in theWest before 1095, but thesewere limited tocampaigns inSpain and Sicily. With theFirst Crusade we have thebeginnings of a movementwhose ideals were acceptedby the vast majority ofChristians in every part withonly some voices of dissent.In almost every subsequentwar between Christiancountrieseach sideprayed to

God for victory, believingthat God was on their side.Some may argue that thebrutalities of war needed anapproving God to justifythem.OnTuesday,27November

1095,PopeUrbanIImounteda platform in a field outsidethe gates of Clermont incentral France and before athrong numbering at least inthe hundreds announced aholy war. Four different

accounts, each writtensometime after the event,attesttothedramaticsermon.Three of the chroniclersmayhave been present; one saysthathewas.Theexactwordsof the pope were notrecorded, and what we haveareattemptstoreconstructthesubstance of Pope Urban’saddress. The Turks werethreateningChristianbrothersin the East and desecratingtheir shrines. It was time (in

thewordsofoneversion)for‘you, who are girt with thebelt of knighthood, whoarrogantly war against yourbrother, who cut each otherinto pieces, who oppresschildren, plunder widows,commit crimes of murder,sacrilege,robbery’tobecomesoldiers of Christ and nowfightagainsttheheathen.Didhe ask the warriors of theWest to recapture Jerusalemfrom the Muslims? Probably

not. At any rate, soonthereafter he was to includeasthegoalofthecrusadethe‘freeing’ of the Holy Cityand, particularly, the HolySepulchre, where it wasbelieved Christ had beenburied. Much of whathappened at Clermont mayhave been carefullychoreographed in advance.His listeners shoutedrepeatedly, ‘Deus le volt’(‘God wills it’), and the

crusades had a motto. ThebishopofLePuycasthimselfonhiskneesbeforethepope,offering to go, and manyothers did the same. Thecrusadeshadbegun.What lay behind this

dramatic pronouncement atClermont? We shoulddistinguish between remoteandproximatefactorsleadingto the pope’s call for acrusade. Historians, lookingattheremotefactors,agreein

seeing the meeting of twoelements here: pilgrimages,particularlytoJerusalem,andthe holy war. They disagreeon theweight to be given toeach of these. Pilgrims hadbeen going to Jerusalem forcenturies.Thecityhad fallentoMuslimArabs in 636, yetthey did not hinder thepilgrims from access to theholy places. From the tenthcentury pilgrimages from theWest became more common

andincludedhigh-bornladiessuch as the countess ofSwabia and the duchess ofBavariaaswell asprominentbishops and abbots. In theeleventh century monks ofthe Cluniac family helped toorganize pilgrimages, andthere was a correspondingincrease in the number ofpilgrims, especially fromFrance and Lorraine. Twogreat archbishops – of Trierand Mainz – were among

them aswasDukeRobert ofNormandy (1035). TheNorseman Harald Hardrada,who in 1066 was to try toconquer England, went onpilgrimage in 1034. In 1051Earl Swein Godwinson,whose brotherHaroldwas tosucceed Edward theConfessoraskingofEngland,for his many sins, includingthe seduction of an abbessand treacherous actiontowards the king, went as a

penitent pilgrim and died onhiswayhome in1051, ashewaswalkingbarefootthroughthemountainsofAnatolia.In1065 a band of Germanpilgrims,probablynumberingabout 7,000, travelled thepilgrim route to the sacredplaces. And so it went, theannual, largely untroubledtrek of pilgrims to the HolySepulchre. And after theconversion of the king ofHungary (975) an overland

route was possible.Alternatively, many sailedfrom ports on the west coastof Italy, especially Bari,across the Adriatic and thenoverlandthroughtheBalkans.The immediate destination ineither case wasConstantinople on theBosporus, from whichpilgrims, generally in largegroups, made their wayacross Anatolia (the AsiaticpartofmodernTurkey), then

south to Jerusalem. Eventswere to disturb this peacefularrangement.The caliphates that ruled

the Islamic world werelargely at peace with theirChristian neighbours. TheFatimid caliphate, centred atCairo, controlled Palestineand did not disturb Christianpilgrims. To the east theAbbasid caliphate, centred atBaghdad, provided a bufferagainstthewarlikepeoplesof

central Asia. A crisisoccurred at Baghdad in theeleventh century with theresult that it could no longerprevent the intrusionof largenumbersofTurksinsearchofnewlands,particularlySeljukTurks.AndaTurksoonruledat Baghdad. During theirmigration west from centralAsia the Turks accepted thereligion of Islam. By the1060s these Muslim Turkswere in Armenia and

threatening the ByzantineEmpire. The defeat of theByzantine army atManzikertin Armenia in 1071 leftAnatolia open to Turkishpenetration. In the sameyearTurks took Jerusalem fromthe Fatimids. Christians inJerusalemdidnotsufferharshtreatment from their newrulers,althoughin1091somepriestswhoweresuspectedofintriguing with the Fatimidswere expelled. Pilgrims

continued to travel toJerusalem, but their numbersweregreatly reducedbecauseofthedifficultpassageacrossAnatolia. The pilgrimage tothe holy places, which hadbecome a popular expressionof religious fervour, was nolonger feasibleexcept for theveryfew.ThecallofUrbanIIto recover the Holy Landresonated deeply in thereligious sensibilities ofWesternChristians.

Not somuch need be saidof the other factor, the holywar.TheChristian kingdomsin the north of Spain, neverconquered by the Muslims,hadbeguninearnestawartoreconquer the Muslim landsto thesouth(seechapter 13).In 1063 Pope Alexander IIsupported their cause byhelping to raise an army tofight in Spain; Gregory VIIactively supported anexpedition in1073andagain

in 1080. (He also toyedwiththe idea of sendingChristianknights to fight for theEastern emperor, but it allcame to nought as Gregorybecame involved in the greatconflict with Henry IV.)Knights from ChristianEurope, particularly fromFrance, crossed the Pyreneesto fight the infidel in Spain.Most of the ingredients forthe crusades are visible here:papallyendorsedororganized

military campaigns byChristian knights againstunbelievers. Add theingredient of regainingpilgrim access to Jerusalem,and we have the FirstCrusade.It is only when we draw

backadistancefromtheday-to-dayeventsofthetimethatwecanjointhesetwofactorsof pilgrimage and holy warand see that they created theclimate in which the First

Crusade took place. Yet itwas the day-to-day, year-by-yearadvanceofcontingenciesthat, in the final analysis,produced the crusade: evengiven the two powerfulremote factors, it is to theimmediate events that weshould turn in locating thereasonwhy thiscrusade tookplace. The essential fact isthatPopeUrbanIIwasaskedby Emperor Alexius I fortroopsagainst theTurks.The

what-might-have-beens ofhistory are not really history,but one may legitimatelywonderifthecrusadeswouldhavehappenediftheemperorhad not requested militaryassistance. His position wasnot perilous in 1095: he hadthe situation inAnatoliawellunder control and the Turksposed no immediate threat.What Alexius needed werefresh recruits for his army,sincethetraditionalrecruiting

grounds were not asaccessibleas theyoncewere.With onemajor offensive hefelt he could drive theTurkscompletely out of Anatoliaand, thus, effectively destroytheirmilitarypoweronceandfor all. To this end Alexiussentenvoystoapapalcouncilheld at Piacenza in March1095.They asked the fathersof the council to urgeknightlywarriors to fight forAlexius; itwould serve, they

argued, to reopen the routesfor Christian pilgrims toreach the Holy Land. And itwas later, in November, ofthat year that Urban II gavehis rallying cry at Clermont.What Alexius wanted wasWesternmercenaries;whathegotwastheFirstCrusade.Recruitment for the

crusade posed no problem.Leaving Clermont, the popepreached the crusade atLimoges, Toulouse, Angers,

Tours and elsewhere inFrance.Greatprincestookthecrusader’s oath, sewed thecross on their shoulders andpreparedforthejourneyeast:Raymond,countofToulouse,Robert, duke of Normandy(eldest son of William theConqueror),Godfrey,dukeofLower Lorraine, and hisyounger brother Baldwin aswellasothersfromthenobleclass, each with his ownarmy.BackinItalyinAugust

1096,UrbangotsupportfromGenoa, Bologna and,especially, after a slightdelay, from the Normans inthe south, where Bohemond,sonof their leader,Guiscard,tookthecross.Toavoidor,atleast ameliorate, discordamong these ambitiousprinces, Urban appointed thebishopofLePuyasleaderofthe crusade, directlyresponsibletothepope.Now, as happens

occasionally in history, aperson stepped out of nearobscurity to play anunexpected part. Peter theHermit began preaching thecrusade within weeks ofClermont, travelling bydonkey through parts ofFrance and Lorraine. Hisfervour and eloquence soelectrified crowds whereverhe went that, by the time hereached Cologne in April1096, he had with him

perhaps as many as 10,000who had responded to hiscall. At Cologne he attractedGermans to follow him, andwhenhelefttherehiscrusadenumbered about 20,000.Often called the People’sCrusade, Peter’s crusadewasmore than that. Indeed, hisfollowersweredrawninlargenumbers from the peasantry,but they also included manywarriors from the knightlyclass,whowouldprovide the

military leadership of theexpedition. A lack ofdiscipline soon appeared.Peter’scrusaderskilled4,000inhabitants of one town inHungary.When they reachedBelgrade, they savaged thepopulation and burned thetown. At Sophia they weregivenanescorttoaccompanythem to Constantinople,which they reached on 1August 1096. One can onlyimagine the interview

between the resplendent,sophisticatedemperorandtheunwashed, coarse, simplehermit fromPicardy.Alexiushad the sense to move themquickly across the Bosporus,but inAnatolia they suffereda disastrous defeat on 21October. A remnantdispersed,andPeter,escapingthefateof thearmyandlatersurviving the disgrace ofdesertion, was still later toenter Jerusalem with the

conqueringChristianarmy.Before following themain

part of the crusade in itsmarch across Europe andAsia Minor, a difficultquestionmustbeasked:whatmotivated the crusaders totake up the cross and join amilitary expedition to theHoly Land? The mostdifficult area of the pastwhich any historian faces isindividualhumanmotivation.What was in the minds of

countless men, whose namesare lost to us, as they lefthome, family and country togo on the crusade? At theremoveof900yearsanswersdo not come easily. Thesecautions should not stophistorians from asking whymen volunteered for thecrusades, but they shouldoblige us to think in thesubjunctivemood.An Italian priest’s remarks

on this subjectwere reported

by an early twelfth-centurychronicler:

Different reasons are given bydifferent people. Some say thatall pilgrims are moved by GodandtheLordJesusChrist.Otherssay that theFrankishnobles andamajorityofthepeoplehavesetout on their journey motivatedsolelybyfrivolousreasons.

Thatremarkplacesthematteratitssharpestdichotomy.Thenon-religious reasons can besummarized. A burgeoning

population,recentfloodingin1094, drought and famine inthenextyear,vulnerabilitytoattackbyoutlawsandhostileneighbours – these were allfacts of life in the yearsleading up to the crusade.Younger sons with slimprospects could be foundeverywhere in a societywhich set high store on themanly art of warfare. Theinfluence of regional lordsand, perhaps even more

importantly, the expectationsof gain in certain families,were factors not to beminimized. There was theprospect of gaining land inthe East and, for princes,perhaps their own kingdomsorprincipalities.Yet,whenaknight bade farewell to hiswife and children, he couldnot know what lay ahead,quitepossiblydeathinbattle,or, at least, years ofseparation. Since much

human motivation is veryoften mixed, one should notexclude a spiritual element.TogototheHolyLandasanarmed pilgrim, to enterJerusalem, to kneel at theHoly Sepulchre and tovenerate the cross of Jesuswould have moved many aconventionally piousChristian.Weshouldperhapsadd a penitential factor,including the ‘crusadingindulgence’, often

misunderstood even in theeleventh century. TheCouncil of Clermont grantedan ‘indulgence’ for thosegoing on the crusade. Thetextmeritsquoting,

To whoever solely out ofreligious devotion and not foracquiring honour or wealthproceedstoliberatethechurchofGodatJerusalemhisjourneywillcountforallpenance.

What the council meant wasthat the church would remit

thepenanceduefortheirsinsif theywentonacrusade forpiousreasons.Itdidnotmeanthat their sins would beforgiven – these had to besincerely repented of andconfessed – but that thepenance required to beperformedwouldberemitted.Inotherwords,thejourneytoJerusalem was considered totaketheplaceof therequiredpenance, and this appliedonly to those crusaders

motivatedbyreligiousideals.Allthishavingbeensaid,therhetoric of preachers couldlead audiences to concludethat the crusader would gainremission of all sins,although, it shouldbe added,the evidence of exaggeratedpreachingisscantyatbestforthis crusade. The promise ofheaven or something akin toitwouldhavemadetakingthecrossattractive,perhapsevencompelling,forthousandsfor

whom life after death witheternal rewards or eternalpunishments formed a fixedpartoftheirviewoflife.Three crusading armies

raisedinGermanytofighttheinfidelintheEastbegantheircrusade by slaughtering Jewsin the West. At Worms, inMay1096, theykilledall theJews in the ghetto and eventhose given sanctuary by theCatholic bishop. Thesecrusaders then went on to

Mainz, where there was amassacre of Jews that lastedseveral days. Next toRatisbon, and anothermassacre. They murderedJewishcommunitiesatNeuss,Wevelinghofen and Xanten.In Bohemia, theyexterminated Jews at Prague.Despite the attempts of localbishops to protect the Jews,barbaricsavagerywascarriedout in the nameof the cross.Many contemporary

observers saw a divinejudgementon thesecrusadersfor they met disastrousdefeats in Hungary. Whatmotivated these crusaders intheir treatment of the Jews?Probably greed and hatredand the excuse of having‘unbelievers’closeathand.The main body of

crusaderstravelledeast,usingthe traditionalpilgrim routes:either overland throughHungary and the Balkans or

across the Adriatic Sea toDyrrachion and then overland. Their destination wasConstantinople. Thecrusaderscameinfairlylargearmies,butthereweresmallergroups as well. The earliestjourneys of these armiesbegan in October 1096, andby the followingMay (1097)they had all reachedConstantinople. Provisioningan army whose total mighthaveexceeded60,000created

problemsenroute,and,whenlocal peoples were unwillingorunabletosellthenecessaryprovisions, violence erupted.Yet the movement of such alargenumberwasremarkablyfreeofmajorincident.Emperor Alexius had two

immediate aims: first, toacquire oaths of allegiancefrom the crusaders and,second, tomove them out oftheareaofConstantinopleasquicklyaspossible.Theoath

required the crusaders toreturn to the emperor anylands they captured whichwere previously held by theempire before the Turkishinvasion and to swear theirloyaltytotheemperorforanyother lands they mightconquer. Only Raymond ofToulousedemurred,but evenhe took a modified oath. Bythe end of May 1097, thecrusadingarmieshadallbeentransported across the

Bosporus to Asia and awayfromConstantinople.Alexiusaccomplishedbothobjectivesbydiplomaticpersuasionandby bounteous gifts to theleaders of the crusade. Hecould feel optimistic that hiscapital was safe and theprospectsof recovering landsgood.The armies were on their

way. On 19 June theycapturedNicaea,rememberedfor its council in 325. On 1

July theyhanded theTurksastaggering defeat, and theway was now open to crossAnatolia. Only the great cityofAntiochlayintheirwaytoJerusalem. They arrived atAntioch on 21 October, andthere the crusade becamestalled for eight months.Meanwhile, the ambitiousBaldwin, brother of DukeGodfrey, led a spur into thelands of the Armenians,wherehewaswelcomedasa

liberator from Turkishcontrol.On6February1098,heenteredEdessa,eastoftheEuphrates River, where hewas adopted by the localArmenian ruler as son andheir.BythefollowingMarch,BaldwinhadbecomecountofthecountyofEdessa.Havingattained what he had set outfor–aprincipalityofhisown– he abandoned the crusade,and the first crusader statehad been established in the

East.Antiochwithitshighwalls

anditscitadelinvulnerableonone sidebya steepprecipiceproved a formidable obstacleto the crusaders. It could notbe bypassed, lest there be anenemyat their back, andhadto be taken. A siege wasdecided upon, perhapsunwisely. It lasted eightmonths and ended only on 3June 1098 with a victoriousassault by the crusaders. It

took another battle, on 28June, for their possession ofAntioch to be secure. Theway was now open toJerusalem, only 200miles orso to the south. Yet beforethey could recover from thelong siege and brutal battleand march to Jerusalem, thecrusaders suffered a majorsetback: the bishop of LePuy,thepope’slegateandtheacknowledged leader of thecrusade, died.Much of what

followed might have beenavoidedifhehadsurvived.

Plate6Cracdeschevaliers.ReproducedbypermissionofA.F.Kersting.

Despite the proximity ofJerusalemittookmorethanayear for the less than unitedcrusaders to reach the HolyCity.A treacherous route laybefore them with manyfortifiedplacestobepacifiedbygiftsortakenbyarms.Thecrusaders took Maarat (latersite of Crac des Chevaliers),

and the hungry victorsactually ate their victims, thememory of which remainedwithArabsforcenturies.Notuntil the seventhdayof June1099didthepilgrim-warriorscatchsightofthewallsofthecity. A mighty fortress,Jerusalem was almostimpregnable to direct attack.If the crusaders couldconstruct a wooden siege-tower, built to the height ofthe walls and placed on

wheels,theymightgainentryand then open the gates.TheunexpectedarrivalofshipsattheportofJaffaprovidedthenecessary tools and foragingin Samaria provided thenecessarywood.About noonon 14 July 1099,Godfrey ofLorraineandhismenforcedabridge across from theirmobilesiege-towertothetopof the wall, and they weresoon in the city. Whatfollowedisoneofthesaddest

pictures in the history of theChristian church. In a wildbutcherythecrusadersslewagreat number of theinhabitants of Jerusalem.Muslims and Jews, men andwomenofeveryage,childrenand even infants fell to thesavagery of the Christiansword. An observer relatesthat the victorious crusaderswadedintotheTempleankle-deep in blood. And soon thecrusaders were at the Holy

Sepulchre, offering thanks toGodfortheirvictory.It was not long before

states were established inwhat Westerners would call‘Outremer’ (overseas). Inaddition to the county ofEdessa, a county of Antiochand even a kingdom ofJerusalem were created.Later, in 1109, a county ofTripoliwascarvedout.Thesefour Crusader Statescontinued as a presence in

mid-eastern affairs into thesecond half of the thirteenthcentury. And military ordersalsoappeared.

Map10CrusaderStates

In 1119, the crusaderknight Hugh de Paynes andeight other knights took thereligious vows of poverty,chastityandobedience in thechurchoftheHolySepulchre.TheytookupresidenceontheTempleMount,andthustheirname the Knights Templar.They did not give up theirarmsbutwere armedmonks,

dedicated to thereligious lifeand also to the protection ofpilgrimsand,moregenerally,totheprotectionofJerusalemfromtheMuslims.StBernardofClairvaux supported them,andtheygrewinnumbersandacquiredconsiderablewealth.Their round churches can beseen in the West, forexample, in London andCambridge. Another orderwas soon created. Certainlyby the 1160s – and possibly

as early as the 1120s – theknights who had given uptheir swords to care for poorand sick pilgrims took uparms again as KnightsHospitaller. They tooprospered, and Crac desChevaliers became their bestknown fortress. Later, in1198, the order of theTeutonic Knights developedfrom a German hospitalestablished in Jerusalem.Thankstogenerousdonations

from secular rulers,particularly German kings,they were to rule over vastterritories in eastern Europe,in the thirteenthcentury theirlands stretching along theBaltic Sea from Gdanskalmost to theRussianborder.(They feature in the greatEisenstein film AlexanderNevsky.) Some, but only afewofthesereligiousknights,found their missionanomalous.

Other crusades will enterintothesepagesfromtimetotime, but this might be theplace to quote the judgementofthedoyenofthehistoryofthe crusades, Sir StevenRunciman:

The triumphs of the Crusadewere the triumphs of faith. Butfaith without wisdom is adangerous thing. By theinexorable laws of history thewholeworldpays for thecrimesandfolliesofeachofitscitizens.In the long sequence of

interaction and fusion betweenOrientandOccidentoutofwhichour civilization has grown, theCrusades were a tragic anddestructive episode. Thehistorianashegazesbackacrossthecenturiesattheirgallantstorymustfindhisadmirationovercastby sorrow at the witness that itbearstothelimitationsofhumannature. There was so muchcourage and so little honour, somuch devotion and so littleunderstanding. High ideals werebesmirchedbycrueltyandgreed,enterprise and endurance by ablind and narrow self-righteousness;andtheHolyWaritself was nothing more than a

long act of intolerance in thename of God, which is the sinagainsttheHolyGhost.

Not all will concur with theRunciman judgement, yet itraises issues no seriousstudent of our history canneglect.

Furtherreading

Manyofthethemestreatedinthis chapter and in the nexttwochapterscanbeseeninabroader context in MalcolmBarber, The Two Cities:MedievalEurope,1050–1320(2nd edn; London and NewYork,2004).On reform as inherent to

the Christian church seeGerhardt B. Lardner, TheIdeaofReform:ItsImpactonChristianThoughtandActionin the Age of the Fathers

(Cambridge,MA, 1959). Fora measured, well-informedapproachtothereformoftheeleventh century and formuch else see Colin Morris,The Papal Monarchy: TheWesternChurchfrom1050to1250 (Oxford, 1989).Students of the subject willwanttoconsult theimportantaccount by Kathleen G.Cushing in Reform and thePapacy in the EleventhCentury: Spirituality and

Social Change (Manchester,2005). Gerd Tellenbach haswrittentwostimulatingbookson thisperiod, the firstwhenhewas29:Church,StateandChristianSocietyat theTimeoftheInvestitureStruggle(tr.R.F. Bennet; Oxford, 1940)and the second whichappeared when he was 86:The Church in WesternEurope fromtheTenth to theEarly Twelfth Century (tr.Timothy Reuter; Cambridge,

1993). Useful on severallevelsisThePapalReformofthe Eleventh Century: Livesof Pope Leo IX and PopeGregory VII (I.S. Robinson,ed.; Manchester and NewYork, 2004) with a valuableintroductionbytheeditor.An excellent summary of

the monastic reformingmovements of this period isJoachim Wollasch,‘Monasticism: The FirstWave of Reform’, The New

CambridgeMedieval Historyc.900–c.1024, vol. 3 (ed.Timothy Reuter; Cambridge,1999), pp. 163–85. For theLotharingian monasticreforms one will find a newperspective in JohnNightingale,MonasteriesandPatrons in Gorze Reform:Lotharingia, c.850–1100(Oxford, 2001). For theEnglishmonastic reforms theclassical text is DavidKnowles, The Monastic

Order in England (2nd edn;Cambridge, 1963). For areview of scholarlydevelopments one should seeCatherine Cubitt’s ‘ReviewArticle: The Tenth-CenturyBenedictine Reform inEngland’, Early MedievalEurope64(1997)77–l94.Opposing much of the

conventional interpretation isGeoffrey Barraclough’sstimulating The MedievalPapacy (London, 1969).

Every student of the periodshould have Brian Tierney,The Crisis of Church andState, 1050–1300(Englewood Cliffs, NJ,1964), whose valuableintroduction provides a viewof Gregory VII contrary totheviewpresentedhere.ForaworkofmaturereflectionseeH.E.J.Cowdrey,GregoryVII(Oxford, 1998). For a broadviewof theGermankingseeIanS.Robinson,HenryIVof

Germany, 1056–1106(Cambridge, 1999). Animportant study of a crucialpontificate is Mary Stroll,Calixtus II (1119–1124): APope Born to Rule (LeidenandBoston,2004).Theclassicstudy of the question ofcelibacy is Henry C. Lea,History of SacerdotalCelibacy (3rd edn; NewYork, 1907), which is nowreplaced by Helen Parish,ClericalCelibacyintheWest,

c.1100–1700 (Farnham,Surrey, and Burlington, VT,2010). An excellentdiscussion of the argumentssupporting clerical marriageis Anne Llewellyn Barstow,Married Priests and theReforming Papacy: TheEleventh-Century Debate(New York, 1982). See, too,the summary in James A.Brundage, Law, Sex andChristian Society in theMiddleAges(Chicago,1987),

especiallypp.214–23.For matters concerning

disputes between theChurches of East and Westsee Steven Runciman, TheEastern Schism: A Study ofthe Papacy and the EasternChurches during the XI andXIICenturies (Oxford, 1955)and Francis Dvornik,Byzantium and the RomanPrimacy (New York, 1966).More recently we have thesplendid summary of Henry

Chadwick inEast andWest:The Making of a Rift in theChurch fromApostolicTimesto the Council of Florence(Oxford, 2003). GilbertDagron discusses the role ofthe emperor in the EasternChurch in Emperor andPriest:TheImperialOfficeinByzantium (tr. Jean Birrell;Cambridge, 2003). Ofspecific interest is RichardMayne’s article ‘East andWest in 1054’, Cambridge

HistoricalJournal11(1954),133–48.The literature on the

crusades is prodigious andseems togrowexponentially.Thestartingplacewillbethework of Sir StevenRunciman, who towers overhis modern critics; see AHistory of the Crusades (3vols; Cambridge, 1951–54).A multi-authored work isKennethM. Setton, gen. ed.,A History of the Crusades

(2nd edn; 6 vols; Madison,WI, 1969–89). The works ofJonathan Riley-Smith havesignificantly opened up avariety of topics. One mightbegin with his one-volumework, The Crusades: AHistory (2nd edn; LondonandNewYork,2005)andhisThe First Crusaders, 1095–1131 (Cambridge, 1997). Acomprehensive account inone volume is ChristopoherTyerman,God’sWar:ANew

History of the Crusades(London, 2006). The readerwill also want to readJonathan Phillips, TheCrusades, 1095–1197(London, 2002), whichcontains a useful file ofdocuments, as well as hisHoly Warriors: A ModernHistory of the Crusades(London, 2009). AnanalyticalnarrativeisThomasAsbridge,TheFirstCrusade:A New History (London,

2004). Every student of thesubject should read AminMaalouf, The CrusadesThrough the Arab Eyes (tr.Jon Rothschild; London,2006). An important work isCarole Hillenbrand, TheCrusades: IslamicPerspectives (Edinburgh,1999). For a criticallyimportantstudyseeBenjaminZ. Kedar, ‘The JerusalemMassacreof July1099 in theWestern Historiography of

the Crusades’, Crusades 3(2004) 15–75. For themilitary aspects of the FirstCrusade see John France,Victory in the East: AMilitary History of the FirstCrusade (Cambridge, 1994).An excellent article is E.O.Blake, ‘A Hermit Goes toWar:PeterandtheOriginsoftheFirstCrusade’, inMonks,Hermits and the AsceticTradition (ed. W.J. Shiels;Studies in Church History,

vol. 21, 1984), pp. 79–107.Forwhataregenerallycalledthe later crusades see N.Housley, The ItalianCrusades: The Papal-Angevin Alliance and theCrusade Against Lay Power,1254–1343 (Oxford, 1982)and The Later Crusades:From Lyons to Alcazar(Oxford, 1992). For acontemporary Eastern viewsee the account by thedaughterofEmperorAlexius:

Anna Comnena, The AlexiadofAnnaComnena (tr.E.R.A.Sewter; Harmondsworth,Mddsx, 1969). In addition,the publisher Ashgate isissuingaseriesoftranslationsofcrusadetexts.For the peace movement

through the ages see RonaldG. Musto, The CatholicPeace Tradition (Maryknoll,NY, 1986), The PeaceTradition in the CatholicChurch: An Annotated

Bibliography (New York,1986) and CatholicPeacemakers: ADocumentaryHistory(2vols;New York, 1993–96). Forinformative essays on thepeace movement in Francesee T. Head and R. Landes,eds, The Peace of God:SocialViolenceandReligiousResponse in France Aroundthe Year 1000 (Ithaca, NY,andLondon, 1992) and for adetailed explanation of the

origins of the peacemovement in Aquitaine seeThomas Head, ‘TheDevelopmentof thePeaceofGod in Aquitaine (970–1005)’, Speculum 74 (1999),656–86.For a general overview of

the religious knights seeA.J.Forey, The Military Orders:FromtheTwelfthtotheEarlyFourteenth Centuries(Basingstoke and London,1992). For specific orders

several studies are availableto us: Malcolm Barber, TheNew Knighthood: A Historyof the Order of the Temple(Cambridge, 1994); JonathanRiley-Smith, The History ofthe Order of St John(London, 1999); HelenNicholson, The KnightsHospitaller (Woodbridge,Suffolk, 2001) and her TheKnights Templar: A NewHistory(Stroud,Glos.,2001);and Nicholas Edward

Morton, The TeutonicKnights in the Holy Land,1190–1291 (Woodbridge,Suffolk,2009).Averyusefulsource book is MalcolmBarber and Keith Bate, trsand eds, The Templars:Selected Sources Translatedand Annotated (Manchester,2002).

8THE

TWELFTHCENTURY

MedievalEuropecameofageinthetwelfthcenturyasalso,

it will be argued, did theChristian church. Growth,development, expansion,maturation and evenaffluence are all relative.Accepting that as a premise,we can still say that thetwelfth century experiencedallof theseinamarkedway.More and more land cameunder cultivation as woodswere levelled, marshlandfilled and marginal landsmade arable. No one knows

for certain whether thegrowth in population createdtheneedformorefoodsupplyorwhethertheincreasedfoodsupply contributed topopulation growth. Whenfarmers could grow morethansubsistencerequired,thepossibility of commerce wasopenedup.Sellingtheexcessto towns, which weregrowing in number and size,provided the seller withactual money with which he

could buy town-made goods,such as finished cloth.Commerce was the essentialingredientindefiningatown,and commercial towns soondeveloped a merchant classand an artisan class, both ofwhich organized themselvesinto guilds, which had areligious flavour. This rural–urban commercial nexuswasthe case particularly north ofthe Alps. Not just London,ParisandCologne,butplaces

like Worms, Bristol, Tours,Angers and dozens of othertownsdevelopedasplacesofrobust commerce. Mostimportantly, the great townsof Flanders –Bruges,Ghent,Ypres, Lille and Arras –became centres of aninternational trade in textiles.The fields of England andWales, many of them untilrecently woods, were nowdotted with sheep, owing inlarge part to thework of the

Cistercian monks (whom weshallsoonmeetmorefully)asEngland became the largestwoolproducer inEuropeandthe principal supplier to thelooms of Flanders. South ofthe Alps the story wassomewhat different. Theremaritime cities developedthanks to an expandedcommercewith theEast.Thecrusades had opened up sealanes, and luxury items (e.g.silks, spices) were imported.

Ports such as Genoa, Pisaand,aboveall,Venicethrivedonthistrade.Avastmarketininternational trade was heldin the French province ofChampagne, where fairsattracted merchants frommuchofwesternEurope,whocame there to deal in awidevariety of goods. Tin fromEngland,clothfromFlanders,horses from Lombardy,spices from Syria via Italy,furs from Scandinavia and

much else were bought andsold at what was Europe’sgreatestwholesalemarket.International commerce

demands some form ofinternational banking. Notesguaranteeing actual moneywere used to facilitatebusiness. Incipient capitalismneeded capital, and bankersloaned money at interest, apractice condemned by thechurchsincemoneycouldnotfructify and, in any case, it

was the duty of everyChristian to assist others inneed without receivinganything – like interest – inreturn.Tosatisfytheneedforinvestment capital, Jewishmoney-lenders, principally,stepped in and oiled thewheels of commerce. Onlylater did Christians findargumentstoallowtheirentryinto banking free of chargesof usury, but Lombardbankers and the great house

of Medici were centuriesaway.Perhaps as a consequence

and clearly as a concomitantof these economicdevelopmentswere sweepingcultural changes. Educationalfocus shifted from themonasteries to the towns.Secular schools (i.e., schoolsrunprincipallybythesecularclergy), clustered nearcathedrals and other greatchurches,becamecentresofa

new learning. Paris with itsthreeschoolsstoodabovetherest, but notable schools alsoexisted at Laon, Rheims,Tours, Regensburg,Northampton and elsewhere,where the fame of mastersattracted students.Universities were to developlater from some of theseschools. The curriculumstressed logic and grammar:how to think and how towrite. Fuelling this

intellectual ferment weretexts of the ancients, newlytranslated into Latin, whichbegan to enter into theWestin ever increasing numbers.TranslationsofancientGreektexts from Arabic texts weremade in Spain; translationswere made from Arabic andGreek texts in Sicily. Theresult was a torrent ofscientific, mathematical andphilosophical texts. Aristotlewas only partially known

before, but from the 1130snew translations of logicalworks began to appear, andby1240nearlyallhisworks,including his ethics andmetaphysics, were in thehands of Western students.Apart from the schools, aliterature in the vernacularblossomedastheselanguagesbecametheprincipalvehiclesforliteraryexpression.ElCidwasbeingrecited inSpanish,theNibelungenliedinGerman

andtheChansondeRolandinFrench. And the Arthurianlegend entered into worldliterature. In the south ofFrance troubadours sangsongs of courtly love, a lovelargely unrequited. Anincreasingly affluent agewasenjoying the finer things inlife.Andbeforetheendofthecentury Gothic churcheswouldbegintoappear.In this dynamic

environment the church

continued to live its life:babieswerebaptized,couplesmarried, dying men andwomenreceived the last ritesand the traditional words ofChristian burial were spokenover their bodies. Yet in thepractical life of Christiansnewformsdevelopedandoldforms changed as religiousorders sprang up anddevotional practices played alarger role in thedaily livingof the Christian faith. Popes

continued to look more andmore like great princes, andthe legacy of the FirstCrusade haunted theWest astwo further crusades were(unsuccessfully) fought in1144and1189–91.

Popesandanti-popesandemperors

With the reform papacy inplace in the early twelfthcentury and with fairlyamicable relations with theGerman emperor after theConcordat of Worms (1122)one would expect gentlebreezes and full sails for thepopes.Suchwasnottobethecase. Internal problemscentredabout thequestionofwho was pope, and externalproblems centred about thequestion of what role the

emperor shouldplay in Italy.Uncertainty, turmoil,disruption and even armedviolence accompanied theprocess of resolving thesequestions,andtherewaslittlethat was edifying in theprocess.Thepapalelection in1124

was to have repercussions tobefeltfordecades.ThedeathofCalixtus II only twoyearsafter he had brought peacebetween the papacy and the

empire exposed once againthe vulnerability of papalelections to the interest ofrivalRomanfamilies.At thattime, the rival families werethe Frangipani and thePierleoni.Themajorityofthecardinals supported thePierleoni candidate andelected Celestine II.Meanwhile, a minoritysupported the Frangipanicandidate and electedHonorius II. While Celestine

was being installed and thehymn of thanksgiving (TeDeum) was being sung, theFrangipani broke into thebasilica with swords drawn.They violently tore the papalmantle from Celestine’sshoulders and forced him toresign. Honorius alsoresignedbutwassoonelectedby the cardinals, and theintimidated Celestine agreedto accept this new election.Schismhadbeenavoided,but

at the next papal election itbecame a reality. In 1130 asHonoriuslaydying,theFran-gipani family, which hadsupportedhiselection, fearedthat the Pierleoniwould gaincontrol of the next election.Honorius’s frail body, stillclingingtolife,wasmovedtothe monastery of St GregorytheGreatontheCaelianHill.The convention concerningpapal elections was that anelectionshouldnottakeplace

until after the burial of thepope. Sometime during thenight of 13–14 February,Honorius died and his bodywasimmediatelyburiedatthemonastery.AnelectionbytheFrangipanicardinalsfollowedat once. This middle-of-the-night election by a rump ofthe college of cardinalsproduced Innocent II, themanner of whose electionwas to haunt his pontificate.Within hours of this election

the majority of the cardinalselected a cardinalmemberofthe Pierleoni family, whotookthenameAnacletusII.Western Europe was soon

divided in a schism whichlasted for eight years.Generally speaking, InnocentII gained support ofChristendom north of theAlps,whereChristiankings–LouisVIofFrance,LotharofGermanyandevenHenryIofEngland–acknowledgedhim

aspope.Thegreattransalpinechurchmen rallied to hiscause: Abbot Suger of StDenis (Paris), Peter theVenerable of Cluny, StNorbert, archbishop ofMagdeburg, and, especially,St Bernard, abbot ofClairvaux. The latter, themosteffectivespokesmanforInnocent’s cause,wasmovednot by a conviction of thecanonical validity ofInnocent’selectionbutbythe

belief that Innocent wasbetter suited to be pope.Anacletus II wasacknowledged as pope inRome and in southern Italy,where he entered into analliancewithRogerofSicily,theNormanking.ItwasonlywiththedeathofAnacletusin1138 that the schism ended.The triumphant PopeInnocent summoned thebishops of the LatinWest tothe Lateran Basilica for a

general council. Perhaps asmany as 600 bishops andabbots journeyed toRome in1139 for the reformingSecond Lateran Council –one evenwalked all thewayfrom Scotland – but thecouncil produced little newand Innocent used it to actvengefully against the latePope Anacletus by annullingallhisordinations.Fouryearsofrelativecalmensued,butastormwasnotfaraway.

When the storm came, itwas a violent storm, whichsaw armies pitted againstarmies and which, whenstripped of all excesses ofrhetoric, was really aboutwhowouldcontrolItaly.Inageneral way, it can be saidthat Italy was divided intothree parts. In the south thepower of the Norman kingsextended from Sicily in abroad swathe across theItalian boot. Central Italy,

with territories stretchingnorthward along the Adriaticcoast, formed what we maynow call the Papal States.Northofthiswasapatchworkofcity-states,eachwithahubcity and surroundingterritories, some havingextensive territories (e.g.Milan,Pavia,Cremona);overmuchofthenorththeGermanking-emperor held nominalauthority.Itwasatime-bombticking.All it neededwas an

ambitious emperor, and hecame in the person ofFrederick, whose red beardgavehim thenamebywhichhe is known to history,Barbarossa.Two popes entered into

conflicts with FrederickBarbarossa, Hadrian IV andAlexander III, and theirconflicts were not abouttheology or the spiritualmeaning of life but wereessentially about political

matters,particularlyabouttherelationship between popeand emperor with Italy thefocus of their conflicts.Nicholas Brake-spear, freshfrom successes inreorganizing and reformingthe church in Scandinavia,was theunanimouschoiceofthe cardinals in 1154 andbecame the only Englishpope,Hadrian IV (1154–59).His was not a tranquilpontificate. In the city of

Rome itself the ‘senate’ hadproclaimed a republicancommune under the sway ofthe reformer Arnold ofBrescia, who preachedevangelical poverty andinveighed against the wealthof the church. Arnold wasforced by Pope Hadrian toflee the city. He was sooncaptured by FrederickBarbarossa and handed overto the Roman Prefect, whosummarily executed him and

then threw his ashes into theTiber. Soon thereafter thepope crowned Barbarossa asEmperorFrederickI(18June1155).Ten days before the

imperial coronation, ominoussigns of things to come arevisible, at least from ourvantage point. Frederick andHadrian met each other atSutri, north of Rome: theaustere Englishman fromHertfordshire and the

handsome,vitalGermanfromSwabia. It was an awkwardmoment. By tradition,protocolrequiredFredericktoleadthepope’smule.Thisherefused to do. Whatever thereason for this – there couldsimply have been amisunderstanding byBarbarossa – three days laterheperformedtheritualact.Itwas an ill omen. Oncecrowned, Emperor Frederickfaced a hostile Roman

commune and returned toGermany with not totallyhappy memories of his visittoRome.Eager to consolidate his

power north of the Alps,Barbarossa convened a diet(assembly) at Besançon inOctober 1157. In themeantime, Hadrian, facingthe Normans to his southwithoutimperialsupport,hadlittle alternative but to enterintoalliancewiththeNorman

king ofSicily,William I.Tothe imperial diet, presidedover by an emperor unhappywith this papal-Normanalliance, the pope sent twolegates, one, RolandoBandinelli (the futureAlexander III), who read thepope’s letter in Latin, whichwas translatedbyFrederick’schancellor into German. Inthat translation it appearedthat the pope was claimingtherighttoconfertheempire

asabeneficefromthepopetothe emperor, thus subjectingemperor to pope. So angrywas one of the Germannoblesonhearingthisthathedrewhissword,butFrederickintervened and ordered thelegates to return to Rome.Later, but too late, the popeexplained that he meant theLatinwordbeneficium not inthelegalsenseofa‘benefice’butsimplyasa‘benefit’.Butthedamagehadbeendone.

Frederick now turned theattentionofhis largearmytothe wealthy Lombard cities,over which he wanted toexercise more than merenominal power. The pope,now allied not only withSicily but also with Milan,clearlysethimselfagainsttheemperor’s ambitions bythreatening Frederick withexcommunication. Withtensions at a high point andan imperial army in Italy,

Hadriandiedunexpectedlyon1September1159.Another disputed election

andanotherschismfollowed.The election of RolandoBandinelli as Alexander III(1159–81) could not havebeen more provocative toFrederickI:thiswastheveryman who had insulted theimperial office at Besançon.Five pro-imperial cardinalselectedVictor IV (1159–64).The ensuing schism was to

last nearly 20 years. Victorand his two successorsreceived virtually no supportoutside the empire, whereasAlexander III was widelyrecognized as pope even bythe reconciled kings ofFrance and England, LouisVIIandHenryII. (Itwas thepope’s need of Henry II’ssupport that complicatedAlexander III’s response totheBecketcrisis.Seechapter9.)ForthreeyearsAlexander

lived in France, for much ofthe time at Sens. Theresolution of the schismoccurred not by quietnegotiations but on thebattlefield.Encouraged by Alexander,

the northern cities, led byMilan, formed the LombardLeague to oppose theemperor. Two years later thearmies of the LombardLeague, in one of the majorbattles of medieval history,

thoroughly routed theimperialarmyatLegnano.Sogreat was the defeat that itwas thought that theemperorhimself had been slain, until,withoutbannerandshield,hecamestragglingintoPavia,anemperor almost beyondrecognition. Peace with thepope soon followed (July1177),and the schismwasatanend.Tomarkitsend,Alexander

convened a council (Third

Lateran Council, 1179). Itschief long-termaccomplishment was thereformofpapalelections,leftvirtually unchanged since1059:itgaveeachcardinalanequal vote and required atwo-thirds vote for election.For the next 200 years thepapacy was not troubled bydisputedelectionsand(exceptforabriefhiccupin1328)thechallenge of anti-popes, andthis procedure,with only the

slightest of modifications,still remains in force. Thecouncil also forbadetournaments and even deniedChristian burial to thosedying in tournaments.Alexander III died in 1181and Frederick I died bydrowning in 1190 in AsiaMinor as he led a largeGerman army in a futileattempt to recaptureJerusalem from the Turks(Third Crusade). He had

arranged,in1186,amarriagebetween his son Henry andthe Sicilian princessConstance, sister to the kingofSicily.Fromthismarriage,in time, came theinvolvement of Germanemperors in southern Italy, astate of affairs at odds withthe political interests of thepopes.If these disputes of the

twelfthcenturybetweenpopeand emperor appear to the

reader to be matters ofpolitics rather than religion,whocangainsaythat?Weseethe pope as one politicalplayer among others in thestruggleforpowerinwesternEurope,andreligionhadlittletodowithit.Apapaldefencewould claim that the popeneededtobeindependentandfree from the coercion ofsecular rules in order toexercise his sacred mission,and he thus needed strong

papal territories in centralItaly to guarantee thatindependence. For the trulyreligious movements of thetime we need look beyondRome to see the profoundchanges that affected thelivingoftheChristianlife.

Newreligiousorders

Thetwelfthcenturywitnessedcritical developments in thepracticeoftheChristianfaith.Newreligiousordersandnewforms of religious devotionproduced a flowering ofpractical Christianity, farremoved from the seeminglysordidworldofpapalpolitics.Historians may debate thereasons for theseextraordinarydevelopments–athrivingeconomy,pressuresof demographic growth,

maturing of the forms ofreligion, an individual questfor more than what thematerialworldcangive.Theymay even propose variousnames to describe thisphenomenon – reform,revival, renaissance, evenreformation. Yet, whateverthe reasons and the namesgiven, the reality is beyonddispute: a religiousenthusiasm seldom, perhapsnever,witnessedbeforeinthe

(by then) long history ofChristianity. Changes in thelifelivedbymenandwomenin religiousvows (whichwe,perhaps inexactly, call ‘thereligious life’) were anessential expression of thisenthusiasm and near itsepicentre.The traditional religious

lifewaslivedforcenturiesbymen and women followingthe Rule of St Benedict. Atthe opening of the twelfth

centurywecanseetwoformsof Benedictine monasticism.In the first place, there werehundreds of monasteries,eachindependent,unitedwithothersonlyintheiruseofthesameruleandthesamegarb,theblackhabitthatgavethemthe name Black Monks.When Benedictinemonasticismisreferredtoforthis and later periods, thereference is to this form ofmonasticlife.Theotherform,

which has been met already(chapter 7), was really anorder,subjecttotheauthorityoftheabbotofCluny.Scoresof priories and thousands ofmonks all over westernEurope owed their obedienceto him. Apart from thisunusualformoforganization,these monks followed theRule of St Benedict with anemphasis on silence andliturgical prayer. They weresimply called Cluniacs. The

Columban form ofmonasticism had recededfrom its great height of thesixth and seventh centuriesand, by the twelfth century,survived virtually only inIreland. Hermits leadingsolitary lives remained aconstant feature of religiouslife,buttheywerealwaysfewinnumbers.Thissettledstateof affairs was to betransformed in the course ofthe twelfth century, not

beyondrecognition–farfromit–but,onemightthink,withamore attractive diversity ofshapes and forms and, aboveall, with newly infusedspiritualvitality.New religiousorders came

into being in the twelfthcentury, chief among themthe Augustinian canons andthe Cistercian monks, buttherewerealsoother,smalleryet influential orders. Whatmustbesaid,aboveall,about

theAugustiniancanonsisthatthey were canons and notmonks and that they morethan any of the other newordersofmonksconstitutedabreak with past forms of thereligious life. Canons wereessentially priests who livedin a community and whonormally exercised the careof souls in someway. Thosewho followed a rule werecalled Canons Regular(regula, rule), while the

others were Canons Secular(saeculum, world). A wordmust be said about the so-called Rule of St Augustine.ThetraditionalstorygoesthatStAugustineofHippo (354–430) wrote a letter to hiswidowed sister to encourageherandtheotherwomenwholived in a religiouscommunity. Within a shorttime,stillinthefifthcentury,the text of that letter waschanged: the gender was

changedfromfemaletomaleand additions were made,aimedatprovidinganorderlylife for a male community.Much scholarly opinion nowbelieves that the masculineformoftheruleprecededthefemaleform.In1118someofthemoredetailedpartsofthetext were deleted, and whatremainedwasthe‘RuleofStAugustine’. It was this rulethat was adopted by theCanons Regular, who thus

became known asAugustinian canons. UnlikeBenedict’s rule, this rulecontented itself with generalprinciples, leaving details tobe filled in by customaryuses. It provided for a lifelived in a monastery – largehouses generally becameknown as abbeys, smallerones priories – by menvowing to live an unmarriedlife in obedience to theirabbot (or prior) and without

property of their own. Amoderate life resulted. Meatwas not absent from theirtable,and their formofworktendedtobemoreintellectualthan manual. The veryflexibility of this rule provedto be its greatest asset.Hundreds of Augustinianmonasteries were foundedwithin a few decades inGermany, England, France,Spain and Italy, usuallymodest foundations with

modest endowments andmodest ambitions. In Spain,they undertook the relief ofthe poor and the ransom ofcaptivesfromtheMuslims.InEngland they had largemonasteries at places likeColchester and Oxford andliterally scores of smallpriories, numbering in timewell over 300 in all. Inaddition, there wereimportanthospitalssuchasStBartholomew’satSmithfield,

London,aswell as lesswell-known hospitals with but aprior and a few canons,followingtheruleasbesttheycould. Many of the largerhouses provided priests forparishes in theneighbourhood.Theabilityofthe Augustinian canons tolead a common life and toadapt that life to other needsmade them successfuljourneymen in the monasticmovement. Nothing

glamorous or even faintlyflashy about them: they saidtheir prayers and led lives ofpractical Christianity. Onemedieval commentatorsummeduptheirlife:

The habit they wear is neithersumptuous nor ragged, and theythus avoid pride and theaffectation of holiness. They donotneedmanythingsandcontentthemselves with modestexpenditures.

For the sparkling splendour

of the religious life wemustlook elsewhere to the othergreat order founded at thistime.The achievements of the

Cistercian order must standout as the success story parexcellence of the medievalchurch.In1098ascoreorsoof somewhat discontentedmonks left a Benedictineabbey inBurgundy andwentdeep intoawoodedvalley insearch of a simpler, more

primitive monastic life. ThevalleywasCîteaux and fromthat valley came theCistercian order. Thesediscontented monks had nothought of founding a neworder, merely the wish tohave for themselves a moremeaningful monastic life.They found this meaning inthe utter simplicity of a poorcommunity situated in aremoteplace.Andsoitmighthaveremained,asinglehouse

or, at most, a few houses ofmonks who found theirvocationinanausteresetting,but events were to lead togreater things. In 1112, theson of a local aristocraticfamilyarrivedatCîteaux,andhis biographers would wantus to believe that it was thisarrival of St Bernard atCîteauxthatwasthedefiningmoment in the early historyof the order. They probablyexaggerate somewhat – for

multiplecausesareusuallyatwork in human history – yettherecanbelittledoubtoftheprofound impact of StBernardon thegrowthof theorder. Even before Bernard,Cîteaux had successes inrecruitment, yet his arrivalwitharetinueofbrothersandnoble friends breathed freshlife into this youngmonastery, and he was only22 years old. Three daughterhouses were established by

Cîteaux in 1113, 1114 and1115, and in that last year itwas the youngBernard, onlythreeyearsamonk,whowassent to found a newmonastery at Clairvaux inChampagne. He was to ruleas abbot there for 38 years.During that time Clairvauxestablished 68 daughterhouses, and the charismaticBernard became the mostinfluential churchman inEurope.

The growth of theCistercianorder,ofwhichtheClairvaux family was but apart, still amazes. Twentymonksor sowent toCîteauxin 1098.By 1152 therewere333 Cistercian abbeys, agrowth so rapid that in thatyear a halt was called tofurther expansion. Amongthese foundations wereRievaulx and Fountains inEngland, Melifont andBaltinglassinIreland,Tintern

andNeath inWales,Melroseand Kinloss in Scotland aswell as many others in theBritish Isles. There wereCistercian houses founded inPoland, the Scandinaviancountries, Austria, Hungary,Slovenia, Bohemia andPortugal.Theimpetuswassostrongthattheestablishingofnew

Map11Cisterciansandotherorders:majorhousesfoundedby1150

foundations, halted in 1152,begananew–14newhousesin 1162 alone – and by theendofthecenturytherewere525 Cistercian houses. Thisremarkable growth in thenumber of houses was morethanmatchedby the increasein the number of monks atindividual houses. Rievaulxin Yorkshire is a good and

representative example.Founded in 1132 as adaughter of Clairvaux, at thedeathofAbbotAilredin1167itnumbered140choirmonksand 500 lay brothers: theymust have filled the abbeychurch for the abbot’sfuneral.The mention of choir

monks and lay brothers(conversi)atRievaulxrevealssomething of the social andeconomic character of these

monasteries. Almost withoutexception whereverCistercian monasteries werefounded in the twelfthcentury,theywerefoundedinmarginal areas. The hills ofWales and vast tracts ofYorkshire, much of themforested,weremostlyunusedor underused. Monks settledin coastal Flanders (modernBelgium) amidst theinhospitable sand-dunes(Abbey of the Dunes).

Benefactors did not hesitateto hand over wasteland tothese piousmonks.What themonks needed was aworkforce not of paidlabourers but of monkscommitted to manual labour:what they needed were laybrothers. A two-tier systemquickly developed. Therewere the choir monks, whowere educated and devotedthemselves to the singing oftheoffices in thechoirof the

abbatial church. And therewere the lay brothers, whotook vows and were monksbut of a different sort. Theylived and ate together,separate from the choirmonks. They spent much oftheir time working in thefields. When they prayed inthechurch,theysatnotinthechoirbutinthenaveanduseda few memorized prayers.They remained by statuteilliterate: they were not

permittedtolearntoreadandwrite.Whatmayappeartousasanunattractive lifeprovedtobe immenselyattractive tocontemporary men. Theseconversi came by thethousands from thehomesofthe peasantry of Europe tolive livesofsimplepietyandhard work. And they came,generation after generation,although in decliningnumbers from the latethirteenth century until the

time of the Black Death(1340s), after which theyvirtually vanished. Thisunpaid workforce tamed thewilderness. The fields ofYorkshire soon became vastsheep runs. And sand-dunesbecamethehomeofafleetofCistercian ships, as westernFlanders itself became thecentre of northern Europeancommerce, and the monksthere farmed 25,000 acres ofproductive farmland. The

white monks were becomingveryrichveryfast.Not all the land taken by

the monks was uninhabited,and the clearing of land ofhumanbeings(notunlike thelater clearances of theScottish Highlands, wherelandlords preferred sheep –andprofit–topeople)revealsadarkersideoftheCistercianachievement.InLorrainetheydid not hesitate to destroyexisting settlements. Forced

evictions occurred on thelands of Fountains Abbey,wherepossiblyasmanyas23settlementsweredepopulatedbythemonks,andanother46settlements seem to havebeenclearedbythemonksofother Yorkshire monasteries.Some resettlement mighthave occurred, but theevidenceisincomplete.Smallwonder that onecontemporary criticscathinglycomplained,‘They

raze villages, destroychurches, evict parishionersand even brazenly cast downthe very altars; they leveleverything before theplough.’ And another criticcommentedthatthey‘makeasolitude so that they may besolitaries’.Theemergenceofthisnew

monastic force led, almostpredictably, to conflict withthe existing monasticestablishment, with

Benedictinemonksand,moreespecially, with Cluniacmonks. What in othercircumstance might havebeen a very minor incidentled to a serious conflictbetween the Cistercians andCluniacs. A young manrelated to Bernard, a firstcousin, entered Clairvaux,but,findingthelifetooseverefor his liking, he left andenteredCluny.WhenBernardheard of this, hewent into a

barely controlled rage andwrote a letter to the youngman, not only seething withanger but also, for mostreaders, lacking in elementalcharity.Noone ever accusedSt Bernard of a surfeit ofgentlenessandkindnessinhisletters. The prior of Cluny,said the irate Bernard,was awolfinsheep’sclothing,whocommended feasting andcondemned fasting, whocalled voluntary poverty

wretchedandcastscornuponfasts, vigils, silence andmanual labour. By suchsophistries the too credulousboywasledastrayandledoffby his deceivers. He wasbrought to Cluny andtrimmed,shavedandwashed.He was taken out of hisrough, threadbare and soiledhabit, and he was thenclothedwithanewneatone.Although Clunymay have

become somewhat lax in the

200 years from its founding,Bernard was objecting notonly to its laxity but to itsvery being. Even a stricterCluny was, to Bernard,inferior to Cîteaux. Later,Peter theVenerable, thewiseandmoderateabbotofCluny,felt constrained to answerCistercian attacks. He calledthe Cistercian critics ‘a newrace of pharisees’, who, inholding themselves superiorto all others neglect that

chapter of the Rule of StBenedict on humility, whereit is written that a monkshould consider himself andbelieve in the depths of hissoul that he is inferior to allothers. Cluny was far fromperfect even by its ownstandards–intime,Peter theVenerable instituted reforms– yet the seeming lack ofcharity by the Cistercians intheirself-righteousjudgementof the lives of other monks

must make the detachedperson wonder what hadhappenedtoanorderfoundedon a Charter of Charity(Carta caritatis). Initialfervour had apparently givenrisetospiritualpride,and,bytheendofthecentury,itwasan order little different fromtheothers inevident signsofholiness.Such decline, although

frequent and hardlyunexpected in religious

institutions, was notuniversal.OftheCarthusians,founded in 1109, it isfamously said, ‘neverreformed, because neverdeformed’ (nunquamreformata quia nunquamdeformata). The originalcommunitywasdrivenbyanavalanchefromitsplacehighup in the French Alps. Theythen settled on lower groundat La Grande Chartreuse,whichgave them their name.

There and in themonasteriesthat followed numbers wereintentionally limited to ascoreorso.Theirswasa lifeof simplicity and austeritylivedinsolitude,alifeforthefew. Each monastery wasessentially a community ofhermits. The hermit-monkslived each in his own littlehouse with a bijou garden,andthereinhis‘cell’hespenthis days and nights, foodbeingbroughttohimthrough

ahatcheachday.ThemonkswenttoamonasticchurchforSunday Mass, after whichthey had a communal meal.Foreveningandnightofficesthey also came together inchurch. Apart from theseoccasionseach livedhisownlife, confined to his ownspace, where he wouldcontemplate the meaning ofthe Christian life. There toosome work would be done,quite commonly the copying

and illuminating ofmanuscript books. Theorder’s growth, unlike theCistercian order, was in noway dramatic: by thesixteenth century there werejust over 200 Carthusianhouses(‘charterhouses’)inallof Europe, only nine inEngland.Amodernvisitor toMount Grace Priory inYorkshire – actually, to itsruins–withlittleimaginationcan picture the physical

arrangement of a typicalCarthusian priory. It was,later, at the LondonCharterhouse (at Smithfield)thatThomasMorewas to tryhis vocation, and it was itssaintedprior,JohnHoughton,whowas butchered in an actof extreme barbarity at theorderofHenryVIII.Other new religious orders

besides the Augustinians,Cistercians and Carthusiansfill out the picture. The

flexibleAugustinianrulewasadoptedbythefollowersofStNorbert at Prémontré, wholived a lifemore severe thanthe Augustinians. ThesePremonstratensians (orNorbertines) resembled inmanywaystheCisterciansintheir simplicity and austerityand in their emphasis onwithdrawalfromtheworldinsilence and prayer. Theseascetic followers of the Ruleof St Augustine, by the

middle of the thirteenthcentury, had 500 houses inplaces ranging from Irelandto Palestine. They first cametoEnglandinabout1143andestablishedNewhouseAbbeyin Lincolnshire and, by thetime of the dissolution, hadover30housesthere.Itwasalsotheflexibilityof

this same rule that gave risetoanotheremphasisinthelifeof Canons Regular: in 1108the famous scholar William

ofChampeaux–hewasPeterAbelard’s teacher – withroyal support established theabbey of St Victor in Paris,which attracted men whobecame scholars (particularlytheologians such as Hugh ofSt Victor), preachers, poetsand ascetics, men whofollowed the Rule of StAugustine. They lived acommon life with a strongliturgical element. TheVictorines,astheycametobe

known,grewbeyondParisasother abbeys of CanonsRegularadopted theirwayoflife, and by the end of thetwelfthcentury theorderhadreacheditszenithwithnearlytwo score houses in France.The original Parisian housesurvived to the end of theeighteenth century, when itfell victim to the excesses oftheFrenchRevolution.There had been houses of

religious women for

centuries. Almost from thebeginning of monasticism,holy women formedcommunities.ThesisterofStAugustine lived with otherwomen in a community atHippo. St Benedict’s sister,Scholastica, has been calledthefirstBenedictinenun:shelived in a community ofwomen a few miles fromMonte Cassino. In the yearsfollowing the conversion ofthe Anglo-Saxons and the

Germans a number of high-born ladies became abbessesof nunneries, which werepeopled with the daughtersand widows of thearistocracy. Also, ‘doublemonasteries’ had existed inChristianGaulasearlyastheseventh century: men andwomen lived separately andgenerally worshippedtogether in the monasticchurch. In reality, most ofthese double monasteries

werenunneriestowhichmalecommunitieswereattachedsothat the men could serve aspriestsat thealtarorperformmanual and business tasks.The head was almost alwaysa woman, frequently of aprincely family, who ruledboth communities. By theeleventh century suchinstitutions had virtuallydisappeared or wereessentiallychanged.WhenStNorbert established at

Prémontré the order ofcanons, he provided anunnery for women next tothemale house, yet the nunsacted not as co-equals to thecanons but almost as theirservants, sewing and doinglaundry for the men. Evensuch humble roles attractedhundreds of women.Norbert’ssuccessorseparatedthe two communities in sucha way that the nuns wererequired to move to a new

home some distance away.Even these Norbertine nunsfailed to survive muchbeyond the twelfth century,since it was forbidden toadmit new nuns in the late1190s. Benedictine nunneriescontinued much as they haddone for centuries just ashousesofBenedictinemonkscontinued. But theestablishment of theCistercian order presented aproblem.Womenweredrawn

to this life of austerity andsimplicity and evenestablished themselves incommunities, living aCistercian life, but the orderconsidereditselfamaleorderandwas adamant in refusingto accept such communitiesintotheirorder.Infact,whenthe order finally admittedconvents of women in theearly thirteenth century, itwas done only reluctantlyand, apparently, under

pressurefrompowerful,evenroyal, patrons. In practice, itis not always clear whichnunneries were incorporatedinto the order and whichmerely followed theCistercian customs andtraditions.Suchdevelopmentsare but part of a markedgrowth in the number ofnunneries in general. Thisdevelopment,oncethoughttopertain to the thirteenthcentury, is now known to

haveexistedinparalleltothegrowthofmaleinstitutionsinthetwelfthcentury.InFranceandEnglandaloneabout400new nunneries wereestablished in the yearsbetween1070 and1170.Theenthusiasm for the religiouslifeinthetwelfthcenturywasclearly not an exclusivelymalephenomenon.Twonewordersofwomen

stand out in the twelfth-centurypicture, eachwith its

peculiar characteristics, oneFrench and one English:Fontevrault andSempringham. Robert ofArbrissel (d. 1117), a Bretonhermit turned itinerantpreacher, attracted to himselfthe poor and outcast ofsociety, particularly womenin search of a new, oftenreformed, life. Some quitepossiblywere prostitutes andformer concubines of priests,others the victims of life’s

misfortunes, even lepers.About the year 1100 heestablished for them a houseat Fontevrault (near Saumurand the Loire River). Asubordinate house forreligious men was placedunder the authority of thefemale abbess. The abbey ofFontevrault quicklyprospered, and an early tallyrecorded a population of 150nuns and 50 brothers. Theoriginalemphasisoncatering

to the spiritual needs of theless fortunate continued forsome decades, but, almostinevitably, the monastery’svery successundermined thisearly intention as aristocraticladies showered gifts uponFontevrault and soon tookover. Principal among thesewomen was Eleanor ofAquitaine, wife of KingHenryIIofEngland,who, inthe final hours of her life,actuallytooktheveilasanun

of Fontevrault. She wasburiedthereas laterwereherhusband, KingHenry II, andher son King Richard I. Theoriginal crude buildings bythenhadbeenreplacedbythefine buildings which visitorscan still see. In time, houseswerefoundedinotherpartsofFrance, four in England(mostly under royalpatronage) and even somefewinSpain:atotalofnearly50 before the death of the

firstabbessin1149.In a remote Lincolnshire

village the local priest, eagerto encourage girls of theparish to devote themselvesto the spiritual life, built astructureforthemagainst thenorth wall of his church.Sevengirls (puellae) livedasanchoresses there, access tothem possible only by awindow, throughwhich foodwas brought to them by lay-women. From these

beginnings in 1131 was togrow the only specificallyEnglish religious order,sometimescalledtheOrderofSempringham (after thevillage)andsometimescalledtheGilbertineOrder(afterthepriest).The small structure at

Sempringham by 1139 hadbecome so inadequate to thenumbers who wantedadmission that a priory wasconstructed nearby for their

use. In that same year adaughter house wasestablished. Already theservant-women who broughtthe food had become laysisters andmaleworkers hadbecome lay brothers. Theattempt of Gilbert ofSempringham to have theCistercians accept his housesfailed. He soon provided hisnuns with a rule, and anindependent order emerged.Canons,whowouldlivewith

the lay brothers, were nowintroduced to serve theliturgical needs of the nuns,and double houses resulted.Asmanyas12such

Plate7Cloisterwalk,Fontevrault.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

communities, all founded inthe twelfth century, surviveduntil the dissolution underHenry VIII. At each housetwocommunitiesweretolivequite separately, a priestcomingtothenuns’churchtosay Mass, but neither priestnor nuns could see eachother, even at communion.

Themale community had itsown oratory and cloister.Such rigid separation of thesexes probably came as aresponse to the unspeakablybarbarous punishmentimposed, about 1150, on apregnant nun and her lay-brother lover at WattonPriory and to the charges ofsexually scandalousbehaviourraisedbyrebelliouslay brothers in 1165.But theintroduction of canons posed

a threat to Gilbert’s originaldesign,forafter1150allnewpriories were priories ofcanonsandthelaterhistoryofthedoublehousesshows thatrealauthoritylayinthehandsofthecanonprior.Thenewreligiousordersof

the twelfth centuryundoubtedly tapped acontemporary need. Theresponsewaswidespreadandcut through every social andgeographical part of sociey.

The desire to go to thewilderness at Cîteaux or tobecome enclosed atSempringham or to work inthe fields wearing a monk’shabit cannot be totallyexplained in social andeconomic terms nor in termsof mass psychology, as realasalltheseundoubtedlywere.Althoughwe cannot see intothedeeprecessesofanother’ssoul, we should give roomhere, in some measure at

least, for a higher vision, anidealism framed by religiousbelief,awillingnesstoendurephysical and emotionalhardships for spiritualreasons. It should beimmediatelyaddedthatallofthese new orders – savingalways the Carthusians – bytheendofthetwelfthcenturyhad diverted from their earlyintentions. The Cistercianshad become wealthylandowners, who often

depeopled their lands. TheAugustinian canons hadsettled into a comfortableroutine that wouldcharacterize their subsequenthistory. ThePremonstratensian canons,oncecommittedtopreaching,had become focused inwardalmost exclusively on theirown spiritual development.Fontevrault had been takenover by aristocrats andSempringham by males.

While institutions werechanging, so too were thereligious devotions andpractices of western Europe,towhichweshouldnowturn.

Populardevotionandpracticalpiety

Virtually every village inwesternEuropeinthetwelfth

century had a churchbuilding, usually a parishchurch but sometimes only achapel. They were mostlysimple structures in theRomanesquestyle,andscoresstill remain, for example, inparts of rural France wheretheywere not replacedwhenthe Gothic style became thefashion. The village churchserved as the centre ofChristian life for the localcommunity. Its walls were

covered with colouredpaintingsofsubjectsfromtheBible and from the lives ofthe saints, and in the mostprominent place was a largecrucifix,notamerecross,buta cross with the body of thedeadChrist, the emphasis onhis physical sufferings andhumanity. The local churchwas the usual place thatbabieswerebaptized,couplesmarried and the deaddispatched to their eternal

reward,anditwasmorethanthat. Itwas theplace that theChristiancommunitycametomark theLord’sDayand thegreat feasts of the Christiancalendar.ThecentralactofChristian

worship in all the churchesand chapels of Europe wasthe Mass, often called theeucharistic celebration orsimply the Eucharist, and itnowhadtakenonthedecidedaspectofadrama.Ambiguity

had existed for some timeabout what the Eucharistcelebrated. Was it the LastSupper, when the apostlesshared bread and wine? Orwas it the Crucifixion, whenChrist offered his life inpropitiationforthesinsofthewhole human race? Thesecond view was now in theascendancy.Thefaithfulwereattendants rather thanparticipants; they watchedrather than shared in the

Mass.Andwhat theywantedto see was the bread wafer(called the host) and chaliceof wine at the moment ofconsecration, when theseelements,theybelieved,weretransformedintothebodyandbloodofChrist.Theywantedto‘see’Jesus,whichtheydidas the priest elevated theconsecrated elements. It waswhattheyhadcometochurchfor. There was a reverentialhush within the church as

bells pealed above it.And inorder that the moment ofseeing Jesus could besustained, in someplaces thepriest was encouraged toprolongtheelevation.Intimethe exposition of theconsecrated host was doneoutsideMassinamonstrance.In the thirteenth century thefeast ofCorpusChrist (Bodyof Christ) was instituted bythe pope, and it was tobecome perhaps the most

popular religious festival ofthelaterMiddleAges.The consecrated host was

viewed as havingmiraculouspowers. There was thebleeding host and the hostbearing the sorrowful faceofJesus and the host providingthe sole source ofnourishment for a piouscommunicant. At Arras onEaster Sunday in 1176 awoman was said to havetakenacommunionhostfrom

herlocalchurchbywrappingitinacloth.Shesecreteditina well, but the host shonethrough the cloth, and, whenitwas removed, it had bloodstains. It was quickly placedin the cathedral – the writerGerald ofWales saw it thereon the Sunday after Easter –and the Host of Arras soonbecame a popular object ofpilgrimage. St Bernard ofClairvaux is said to havecured a bewitched man by

holdingabovetheman’sheada sacred vessel containingconsecrated hosts. Stories ofmiraculous cures multipliedand became the staple ofpreachers.By the twelfth century

extra-liturgical dramas wereadded to the liturgy. Theearliest, the Quem quaeritis,although known in a simpleform earlier, was nowfrequently performed atEaster with different persons

playing the parts of holywomen and an angel at theemptytomb:

‘Whomseekye(Quemquaeritis)inthistomb?’‘WeseekJesusofNazarethwhowascrucified.’‘He whom ye seek is not here,but go quickly to Peter and hisdisciples and tell them “Jesus isrisen”.’

From the core of these threelinesorwordslikethemtheredeveloped at the Easter

liturgy a dramaticpresentation with costumes,gestures, lamentations andadditional dialogue. Otherfeastssoonhadtheirdramaticscenes. For Christmas theEaster text was changed toread,

‘Whomseekyeinthemanger?’‘Weseekour saviour,Christ theLord, a child wrapped inswaddlingclothes.’

And so also there were

dramatic presentations forotherfeastsandotherbiblicalstories: the storyof theMagifrom the East, the story ofLazarusbeingraisedfromthedead, the story of Daniel(scenesofhandwritingonthewall, fiery furnace, lion’sden) and many others.Removal of such dramasfrom the church buildingsoon followed, and in thesedevelopments we shouldprobably see the birth of the

moderndrama.Beyond the Eucharist and

its associated devotions andpractices were the dramaticgrowth and vitality ofdevotiontoMary, themotherof Jesus. She was simplycalled the Virgin or theBlessedVirginortheBlessedVirgin Mary, since it wasbelieved that by divineintervention Jesus wasconceivednotbymanbutbythepowerof theHolySpirit.

She was called mater dei(motherofGod),whichisanincorrect translation of theGreek θεοτόκος (theotokos),bearer of him who is God.She was also called in LatinSancta Maria (St Mary). InFranceshewasusuallycalledNotreDame (Our Lady) andinItalyMadonna(MyLady).The multiplication of names,inaway,revealstheubiquityof Marian devotion, itsfamiliarity, its penetration to

aplacenearand,forsome,atthe centre of Catholicdevotional life. The twelfth-centuryphenomenonwasnotlimitedtooneareaofEurope:shewasveneratedinScotlandand Ireland aswell as in theMediterranean lands. EveryCistercian monastery fromCîteaux andClairvaux in theFrench heartland to StrataFlorida and Cymner inremotestWales bore the titleof St Mary. Every cathedral

inFrance,nomatterwhattitleit had previously, became acathedral dedicated to NotreDame. In Sicily themagnificent cathedral atMonreale was dedicated bythe Norman king William II(1172–89) to theVirgin, andacontemporarymosaicshowsthe king offering the newcathedral to her with theapproving hand of Godabove.InEnglandalmosthalfof the twelfth-century

monastic dedicationswere toSt Mary, and this figureexcludes the Cistercianhouses.St Bernard in hymn and

sermon sang and preachedher praises as the mediatorwhom the most wretched ofsinners could approach tointercede for them at thethroneofherson.Associatedwith St Bernard is the hymnAvemarisstella:

Ave,marisStella,

Hail,starofthesea,

deimateralma,

NurturingmotherofGod,

atquesempervirgo,

Andevervirgin,

felixcoeliporta.

HappygateofHeaven.

Sumensillud‘ave’

You,whotookthe‘ave’

Gabrielis FromGabriel’s

ore, mouth,fundanosinpace,

Reversingthename‘Eva’,

mutans‘Evae’nomen.

Grantuspeace.

And the Latin poet Adam, acanonofStVictor’sAbbeyinParis, composed a dozen orso hymns to the Virgin.Amongthem,

Imperatrixsupernorum,

Oempressofthehighest,

superatrixinfernorum,

Mistressofthelowest,

eligendaviacoeli,

Chosenwaytoheaven,

retinendaspefideli,

Fastholdingbyfaithfulhope,

separatosatelonge

Thoseseparatedfarfromyou,

revocatosadtejunge

Nowcalledbacktoyou,

unitetuorumcollegio. Inyourband.

When Dante in the DivineComedy approached thedivine throne in paradise, hechoseStBernardashisguidetopresenthimatthethroneoftheVirgin, so that shewouldintroduce him into thepresence of the veryGod. InBernard’s mouth the poet

placedthewords:Vergine madre, figlia del tuofiglio,umileedaltapiùchecreatura,terminefissod’eternoconsiglio,tuseicoleichel’umananaturanobilitastisì,cheilsuofattorenondisdegnòdifarsisuafattura.

(Paradiso,canto33)

Dante’sprayerofStBernard,inturn,wastranslatedinpartby Geoffrey Chaucer andplaced in the mouth of thesecondnunintheCanterbury

Tales:Thow Mayde and Mooder,doghterofthySone,Thow welle of mercy, synfulsoulescure,In whom that God for bounteecheestowone,Thow humble, and heigh overeverycreature,Thownobledest so ferforth ourenature,That no desdeyn the MakerehaddeofkyndeHis Son in blood and flesh toclotheandwynde.(‘TheSecondNun’sPrologue’,

ll.36–37)

Afigurenot justforpoets,Marywas a common subjectfor visual artists, particularlysculptors. The commonestimage of the Virgin had herseated on a throne, her lapserving as a throne for herson. Hundreds of statues ofthis image survive fromFrance alone.Later came theimage of the son sucking athis mother’s breast. FromCarolingian times thecathedral of Chartres had a

special shrine dedicated toNotreDame. It had themosttreasured relic of the Virgin,what was believed to be thegown which she wore whenthe Archangel Gabrielappeared to her. With thisbackground, it is no wonderthat she was given aprominent place in theiconographicalschemeforthecathedral’s grand westentrance, the Royal Portal,when it was built in the

middleofthetwelfthcentury.Aboveeachofthethreedoorsthere is a story in stone, andtogether they tell a singlestory. The tympanum abovethecentraldoorhasChrist inglory, surrounded by thesymbols of the fourevangelists. The lefttympanum has the figure ofChristwith angels about himas he ascends into heaven.Weare,ofcourse,readingthestory backwards, for above

the right door is the story ofthe coming of Jesus (the‘Incarnation’, God-taking-flesh). This tympanum hasthe Virgin crowned andseatedonherqueenlythrone,herseatedbodyservingasthethronefortheyoungJesus.AtSenlisthesculptorstook

yet anotherMarianmotif fortheirwestportal,amotiflongpopular in the East, thedormition (not death) of theVirgin and her assumption

intoheaven.StBernardwrotea series of sermons on theassumption of the Virgin.Devotion to Mary’sassumption led to thededication of the newcathedral at Salisbury to herunder that title in the nextcentury. Devotion to herunder the title of theImmaculate Conception canbefoundatthesametime,butcontroversywastoattendthetheology supporting it for

some centuries. TheImmaculateConceptionisnottobeconfused(asitoftenis)with the Virgin Birth. Itsimply held that alone of thehuman race Mary wasexempted from original sin:she was conceived in hermother’s womb without thestainofthesinofAdam,thatis, conceived immaculately.BernardandThomasAquinasboth opposed it ontheological grounds, yet it

persisted,wasapprovedinthefifteenthcenturywithitsownMassandwasfinallydefinedasadoctrineoffaithbyPopePiusIXin1854.This outpouring ofMarian

devotion raises questions noteasy to answer. The mostobvious question is why?WhydidtheChristianchurchand people place Mary onsuchan exalted level in theirdevotional lives? And whydid they do so with such

fervour? Why was thisdevotion so widespread,apparentlyuniversal,gainsaidby none, not even by theapparently impious andwicked? An easy answer isthat it was imposed by acelibate clergy, for whomMarywasthewomanintheirlives. Some would suggest alatent, subconscious sexualcomponent. Yet there is noevidence that Mariandevotion was imposed on an

unwilling people. On thecontrary, it was greedilyacceptedbymarriedmenandbywomen alike.Criticswhowould impose a feministanalysis–forexample,anearuniversal yearning for afemale goddess, particularlyin a rural society – have notbeenpersuasive.OthersseeinMarian devotion an oedipalcomponent for both malesand females.Besides these isthefaithfactor:thebeliefthat

Godwasseen to intervene inhuman affairs and, if oneprays to God through hismother, the prayer will beheard, for the son Jesus willnot contemn the will of hismother, who has the role ofmediatrix. Such explanationscan only point towards ananswer.

Plate8VirginandChild,tympanum,westportal,ChartresCathedral.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

This chapter has come along way from popes andemperor in dispute, thepolitical sideof themedievalchurch, to humble Christianmen and women in remotechurches, kneeling in prayerbefore the Eucharist andbefore images of the Virgin.

Two sides of the church: thechurch at its mostinstitutional, involved inaffairs of thisworld, and thechurch in its devotional,affective role, touching deepthesoulsofmenandwomen.Both sides formed essentialparts of the historical churchintheMiddleAges.

Furtherreading

The classic work on thetwelfth century is CharlesHomer Haskins, TheRenaissance of the TwelfthCentury (Cambridge, MA,1927;often reprinted).Still agood read for its enthusiasmandromanticflavourisHenryAdams, Mont-Saint-Micheland Chartres (Washington,1904; alsooften reprinted), abetter book than somemodern critics would allow.For a general study of

Frederick Barbarossa thereader may find useful PeterMunz,FrederickBarbarossa:A Study in Medieval Politics(London, 1969) and, in amore general context, AlfredHaverkamp, MedievalGermany, 1056–1273 (trs H.Braun and R. Mortimer;Oxford, 1992). Barbarossa’snephew, Otto of Freising,wrote an official life, TheDeeds of FrederickBarbarossa(tr.C.C.Mierow;

New York, 1953). AfascinatingLatin poem aboutFrederick Barbarossa’scampaigns in Italy has beentranslated into English withan introduction andbibliography, Barbarossa inItaly (New York, 1994). Forthe only English pope seeBrenda Bolton and Anne J.Duggan, eds, Adrian IV theEnglish Pope (1154–1159):StudiesandTexts (Aldershot,Hants.,2003).

An important book ofhistorical analysis (withcomprehensive bibliography)is Giles Constable, TheReformation of the TwelfthCentury (Cambridge, 1996),which focuses on thereligiousorders.Keychaptersonthereligiousordersofthisperiod, particularly theCistercians, can be found inC.H. Lawrence, MedievalMonasticism (3rd edn;London, 2000). An excellent

treatment for one region isJanet Burton, Monastic andReligious Orders in Britain,1000–1300 (Cambridge,1994). The distillation of alifetime’swork can be foundin Adrian H. Bredero,Bernard of Clairvaux:Between Cult and History(Eng. tr.; Grand Rapids, MI,1996), which contains adescription of the issuesinvolved in the Cluniac–Cistercian controversy. A

remarkable collection ofessays is Brian PatrickMcGuire, ed., A Companionto Bernard of Clairvaux(Leiden and Boston, 2011).David H. Williams haswritten about the Cisterciansfrom their founding to theBlack Death in TheCistercians in the EarlyMiddle Ages (Leominster,Herefordshire, 1998).Constance Hoffman Bermanargues that the Cistercian

movement developed into anorderonly in the secondhalfof the twelfth century: TheCistercian Evolution: TheInvention of a ReligiousOrder in Twelfth-CenturyEurope (Philadelphia, 2000).An excellent study of theCistercians in a regionoutside France is David H.Williams, The WelshCistercians (Leominster,Herefordshire, 2001). OtherregionalstudiesincludeBrian

Patrick McGuire, TheCistercians in Denmark:Their Attitudes, Roles, andFunctions in MedievalSociety (Kalamazoo, MI,1982)andJamesFrance,TheCistercians in Scandinavia(Kalamazoo, MI, 1992). Forthe social consequences ofCistercian land policy onlocalpeopleseeR.A.Donkin,The Cistercians: Studies inthe Geography of MedievalEnglandandWales (Toronto,

1978).GeraldBonnerdefinesthe state of modernscholarship on the Rule ofSaint Augustine in hisintroduction to the relevanttexts: The Monastic Rules(Hyde Park, NY, 2004),which contains texts andcommentary. The rule isavailable in ‘an interpretativetranslation’ (CistercianPublications,Kalamazoo,MI,1996). For religious womenthere are two useful

collections of articles: DerekBaker, ed.,Medieval Women(Studies in Church History,Subsidia, vol. 1, Oxford,1978) and John A. Nicholsand Lillian T. Shand, eds,Distant Echoes (MedievalReligious Women, vol. 1,Kalamazoo, MI, 1984). Seealso Bruce Venarde,Women’s Monasticism andMedieval Society: NunneriesinFranceandEngland,890–1215 (Ithaca, NY, 1997),

whichprovidesdataaboutthegrowth of communities ofnuns; Sally Thompson,Women Religious: TheFounding of EnglishNunneries after the NormanConquest(Oxford,1991);andPenelope D. Johnson, Equalin Monastic Profession:ReligiousWomeninMedievalFrance (Chicago, 1991).Definitive on its subject isBrian Golding, Gilbert ofSempringham and the

Gilbertine Order, c.1130–1300 (Oxford, 1995). ForRobertofArbrisselthereaderwill want to see JacquesDalarun,Robert ofArbrissel:Sex,Sin,andSalvationintheMiddle Ages (tr. Bruce L.Venarde;Washington, 2006),whichhas a reviewof recentscholarship by the translator.Professor Venarde has alsoprovided a translation ofcontemporary and nearcontemporary documents in

his Robert of Arbrissel: AMedieval Religious Life(Washington, 2003). Adetailed monograph isBerenice M. Kerr, ReligiousLife for Women, c.1100–c.1350: Fontevraud inEngland(Oxford,1999).On the Eucharist seeGary

Macy,The Theologies of theEucharist in the EarlyScholastic Period (Oxford,1984) and The Banquet’sWisdom: A Short History of

the Theologies of the Lord’sSupper (New York, 1992);also Miri Rubin, CorpusChristi:TheEucharistinLateMedieval Culture(Cambridge, 1991). OnMarian devotion in theMiddle Ages one must startwith themagisterial study ofMiri Rubin:Mother of God:AHistoryof theVirginMary(London, 2009). JaroslavPelikanhaswrittenaseriesofwell-informed, discursive

essays, Mary through theCenturies (New Haven,1996). Michael P. Carroll,The Culture of the VirginMary (Princeton, 1986),presents a psychoanalyticalexplanation. An examinationof sermon material can befound in Donna SpiveyEllington,FromSacredBodyto Angelic Soul:Understanding Mary in LateMedieval and Early ModernEurope (Washington, 2001).

Rachel Fulton explores atlength the ‘intellectual basisof this devotion’ in FromJudgment to Passion:Devotion to Christ and theVirginMary, 800–1200, PartII (New York, 2002), andmore briefly in her essay‘Mary in Christianity inWestern Europe, c.1100–c.1500’ (Miri Rubin andWalter Simons, eds, TheCambridge History ofChristianity, vol. 4;

Cambridge, 2009). Acollection of papers onMarian devotion is TheChurch and Mary (R.N.Swanson, ed.; Studies inChurch History, vol. 39;Woodbridge, Suffolk, 2004).For the iconography,particularly the intercessoryimagery; see CatherineOakes, Ora pro nobis: TheVirgin as Intercessor inMedieval Art and Devotion(London and Brepols, 2008).

More generally, the readerwill find that BernardHamilton’s Religion in theMedieval West (London,1986) provides an excellentexplanation of whatChristians believed and howtheyexpressed their religiousbeliefsatthistime.

9THREE

TWELFTH-CENTURYPROFILES

A period in history, such as

the twelfth century, can beseen as the rush of events –‘one damn thing afteranother’, in thewordsofonecritic – and as useful and,indeed, necessary as that is,occasionally one should stopthe projector and look at afewindividualframestogetamorenuancedview.Thus,weshall takeanother lookat thetwelfth century, a lookfocused on three individualswhose life experiences will

allow us to see the twelfth-century church in a fuller,more personal dimension.The threepersons– twomenand one woman – wereneither popes nor monarchs,yet they show us differentaspects of the church as itlived out its life in thecomplexities of a Europecomingofage.Onewasnearthe centre of power, ThomasBecket as chancellor toKingHenry II of England. And

through the experience ofanother, Peter Abelard, wecatchsightoftheworldoftheschools and thecontentiousness,personalandintellectual, in which hefound himself. We come toan entirely different placewhen we meet Hildegard ofBingen, not merely becauseshewasawoman inaman’sworld, but also because shewas a visionary prophet andperhapsmuchmore.Tothem,

then,letusturn.

PeterAbelard(c.1079–1142)

Peter Abelard has fascinatedobservers uninterruptedlyfrom the twelfth to thetwenty-first century.Depending on which glassesone may be wearing, he is

seen as a rebelliousmalcontent,amalechauvinistseducer, a paranoidpersonality, an original andseminal scholar or anunhappy monk, and there issome evidence to supporteach of these views. Everygeneration rediscovers PeterAbelard, and no generationfeels satisfied that it fullyunderstands him. Almostinevitably and probablyunfairly,heisknowninevery

generation largelybecauseofhisloveaffairwiththeyoungHeloise and equallyinevitably moral judgementsabouthisactions towardsherare made and are almostalwaysnegative.There is no scarcity of

sources about his life, buteven these, like Abelardhimself, are not withoutcontroversy. There are hisscholarly works on logic,ethicsandtheologyaswellas

sermons, letters, hymns andperhaps even love songs. Ithas been estimated that hissurvivingworks run to about1,000,000 words, and thatobviously does not includetheworkswhichheisknownto have written but whichhave not survived. Ourprincipalsourceforhislifeisa series of eight letters, thefirst of which is theautobiographical Historiacalamitatum (‘Story of My

Calamities’) and the nextseven letters are to and fromHeloise, his lover and thenwife. This correspondencewillbereliedupon toa largeextent inwhat followsand isquoted, but there is aproblem. Scholarly voices,fewinnumber,itistrue,havebeen raised, questioning theauthenticity of these letters.Their argument runs alongthese lines. Thecorrespondence, which was

reputedly written during the1130s, exists today only innine Latin manuscripts, theearliest ofwhichwaswritten150 years after the supposeddateofthecorrespondence.Inaddition,onelooksinvainforany reference to thiscollection of letters in theintervening century and ahalf. Computer analyses ofthe texts of the letters haveled to ambiguous results.Besides those who think the

whole correspondence a laterforgery, thereareothers, stilla very few,who suspect thatthe entire correspondence,including the letters ofHeloise to Abelard, werewritten by Abelard himself.Another collection of loveletters has been found, andsome scholars attribute it toAbelard and Heloise. ThemajoreventsofAbelard’slifeare attested to by othersources and are hardly in

dispute, yet, as we use thecorrespondence, it is alwayswith the faint, nagging fearthat some day new evidencemay appear, proving itfictitious. Suppressing thatfear, letus lookat the lifeofPeterAbelard.Born in the westernmost

regionofFrance, inBrittany,Peter was probably notBreton,butadescendantofaknightly familywith roots inneighbouring Poitou. Le

Pallet, his birthplace, was atthesouthernedgeofBrittany,southof theLoireRivernearNantes. Not much is knownabout his family.Hewas theeldest son, destined to be aknight, but he chose insteadto become a student. Hisparents, in later life, bymutualagreemententeredthereligious life.Hewas simplyPeter, and, perhaps only as anickname, he later addedAbelard.

Sometime about the year1093 Peter left his native LePallet and became aperipatetic student. By thenthe centres of learning hadlargely shifted from themonasteries and theirmonasticschoolstothenewlyemerging and maturingtowns,whereschoolsgrewuparound cathedrals and othergreat churches. Whatattractedstudentstoparticularschoolstendedtobethefame

of individualmasters.And itwasnotunusualforastudentto move from school toschool inorder to studywithdifferent masters. And so itwas with Peter Abelard: hewent on a circuit of schools,which led him eventually –almost inevitably – to Paris.As he wrote in hisautobiography,

Itravelledaboutintheprovinces,disputing, wherever I had heardthat the study of dialectic

flourished.

Bydialectic hewas referringto the study of logic. Peter’sexact itinerary cannot betraced,buttherewereschoolsand teachersnearbyatplaceslike Nantes and Vannes inBrittany. It is known that hestudied, perhaps for severalyears, at Loches and Tourswith the master Roscelin, alogician of internationalfame,amanwhoseforayinto

theology had createdproblems for him in 1092. ‘IarrivedfinallyatParis,whichwas truly outstanding.’ Thiswas in about 1100, and byParis he meant the cathedralschool atNotre-Dame.Therehe listened to the master,WilliamofChampeaux.Theysoon clashed. The youngAbelard–hewasabout21atthe time– gained the enmityof William and his fellowstudents by attempting to

refute the most renownedteacherat themostrenownedschool in Christendom. Twoyears or so at Paris andanxious to flee theresentments of his enemies,PeterAbelardleftnottostudyelsewhere but to open hisownschool,andhewasstillayoungman. First he went toMelun, south-west of Parisand then, after a couple ofyears, nearer to Paris atCorbeil, where he attracted

studentsindirectcompetitiontoWilliamofChampeaux.Byabout 1105 he had wornhimself out and experiencedwhat was probably a mentalbreakdown.HereturnedtoLePallet, where his familynursedhimbacktohealth.Abelard returned from

Brittany, not to Corbeil, hisprevious school,but toParis,and not only to Paris but toNotre-Dameasastudentonceagain of William of

Champeaux. Amateurpsychology has no place inthe study of history, yet onemay wonder if part ofAbelard’s health problemshadtodowithafixationwithhis old teacher and if he feltthatheneededtoreturntothesceneandtothepersonofhistribulations. Whatever thereason, he again attackedWilliam of Champeaux. Thepreciseissuewasuniversals.To the modern mind the

problem of universals mightseem particularly recondite,but it was hardly so tomedieval intellectuals. Whatis a universal? Whenschoolmen spoke ofuniversals, they referred to aword like homo (humanbeing), which applies to allhomines (like Plato andAristotleor,aswewouldsay,Jack and Jane). Does homoreally exist? Or, take acommonly used example:

tree.Doestheuniversal‘tree’exist or only individual trees(thismapleor thatoak)?Theproblem of universalsconcerned the kind ofexistence which one canattribute to a universal term.Two general positions weretaken.Realistswouldsaythathomoismorethanatermandexists apart from individualhuman beings and that ‘tree’exists independently ofindividual trees: these

universals and others likethem have a real existence.ButtheNominalistsheldthata universal ismerely a name(nomen) and nothing more:all that really exist areindividual things.William ofChampeaux championed theRealist position, whereasAbelard,followinghisformermaster, Roscelin, gave norealitytouniversals,assertingthe Nominalist position.Roscelin had said that a

universal (e.g. homo, tree)wasmerely flatus vocis (i.e.,an exhaling of the voice, asound). Abelard held thattheyweremorethanthat:theword has meaning and wasmore than just a sound. Themind recognizes,he said, theelements in common to Jackand Jane and uses a mentalconstruct forwhich thewordhomo stands. It has meaningas the spoken (or written)signof thatmental construct,

yet it has no real externalexistence. Jack and Jane donot ‘share’humanity: each ishuman independent of theother. We simply, by meansof abstraction, focus on oneaspect of each individualwhich they have in common(i.e.,humanity),abstractingitfrom other, differentiatingcharacteristics (age, sex,colourof eyes anddozensofothers), and construct aconcept of a universal and

givetoitthewordhomo.ForAbelardtheultimatebasisforuniversalswastobefoundinthe ideas which God hadwhen he created individualbeings having thesecharacteristics.But,whenoneturns one’s focus on Godhimself, problems arise.Roscelin was suspected ofheresy when he used hisNominalism to explain thedoctrineof theTrinity.Sincehe held that only individuals

exist, it could, therefore, beinferred that he held that theuniversal ‘divinity’ does notexist, merely three divinepersons, Father, Son andHoly Spirit, which soundslike polytheism. Later,Abelardwas toencounterhisown problems in trying toexplainthissamedoctrine.InAbelard’stellinghewas

so successful in challengingWilliam of Champeaux onuniversalsthatWilliamhadto

modifyhisposition–itmightmerely have been aclarification – and, as aconsequence, William wasabandoned by some of hisstudents. Abelard’s ambitionto be master at Notre-Damefailed at this time, and hewithdrew briefly to Melun.Whenhe returned toParis, itwas to the church of SainteGeneviève, outside the wallsofthetown,wherehesetuparival school. Dates are not

easy to come by in all this,but it was probably from1109 to 1113 that Abelardtaught at Mont-Ste-Geneviève,foritwasin1113thathislifetookanotherturn,which led to yet furthercontroversy.Up to this time Abelard

had studied philosophy (orlogic, we might say). Now,for reasons that elude us, heturned to the study ofdivinity, not at Paris, but at

LaontotheschoolofAnselmof Laon (not to be confusedwith St Anselm of Bec orCanterbury).PerhapsAbelardenvisioned a career as achurchman.Althoughhewasnot a priest at the time, hewas almost certainly a clericinminororders.Whateverhismotives,Abelard soon foundhimself in conflict with hisnewteacher.Likethestudentwho thinks he knows morethantheteacher,Abelardheld

Anselmincontempt,first,bycutting his classes and then,still but a novice student ofdivinity,bypresumingtogivelectures on the Bible. Quiteunderstandably, Anselm wasfuriousandsilencedAbelard,whoalsogainedtheenmityoftwo influential fellowstudents, Alberic of Rheimsand Lotulf of Lombardy.DespitethisunpleasantnessatLaon, Abelard returned toParis in 1114 to the place

whichhehadlongwanted:hebecame a master at Notre-Dame.The next three or four

years must have been themostsatisfyingofhislife.Hetaught within the cloister ofthe cathedral; he drewstudents from far and wide;hehadbecomethesuccessful,popularteacheratarenownedschool. But trouble was notfaroff.As amaster,Abelardwasacanonof thecathedral.

One of his fellow canons,obviously very senior, wasFulbert, who had a house inthe cathedral precincts.Canon Fulbert, by rentingrooms to Abelard and byarrangingforhimtotutorhisniece,theyounggirlHeloise,set in motion a string ofevents which have foreverlinked the names of Abelardand Heloise. Who was thiswoman?Shewasat this timeprobably a teenage girl, yet

shehadawidereputationforlearning: ‘Agift for letters isso rare amongwomen that itmade her even moreattractive’, Abelard laterwrote.Heschemed toseduceherandfearednorebuff:‘Myreputationwas sogreatand Iwas so youthfully handsomethatIfearedrejectionfromnowoman.’ So eager was thenaive Fulbert that heencouragedAbelard to spendmore time with his niece: ‘I

was astonished at hissimplicity.’ The hithertochaste Abelard abandonedhimselftohiscarnaldesires:

With our studies as an excuse,we gave ourselves to love. Wewithdrew to a private room,ostensibly for study, but ourbooks lay unread before us.Wespoke more of love than ofbooks, and there was morekissing than learning.My handswere more often on her breaststhan on our books. Love drewour eyes to each other far morethanthelessondrewthemtothe

pagebeforeus.

So absorbed was Abelard inhis love relationship that hespent less and less timepreparinghislectures,relyinginstead on old themes,delivered with no inspirationandwith increasinglyevidentboredom. Such blisswas notdestined tobe eternal and, in1118,endedingreattragedy.Fulbert caught them in the

act; like Mars and Venus,

Abelardwas to say.One canonly imagine Fulbert’s fury.The drama was accentuatedwhen Heloise joyfully toldAbelard that she waspregnant.Atonce,hesecretlysenthertohisfamilytohavethe child, a son, whom theycalled Astrolabe. Fulbert’sfury became uncontrollablewhen he discovered that hisniece had been sent toBrittany,asitwere,ahostageto his inflicting harm on

Abelard. In the most self-servingterms,Abelardsoughtan interview with theoffendeduncle:

I accused myself of the deceitforced on me by love … Ireminded him how, since thebeginning of the human race,women had brought the noblestof men to ruin. To assuage hisfeelings I made a magnanimousofferwhichhecouldneverhaveexpected: I offered tomarry thegirl Ihadwronged,providedthemarriagebekeptsecret.

Fulbert agreed to what waspatently not a magnanimousgesture. Why, we may ask,the condition of secrecy?Obviously Abelard did notwant the world to know, butwhy? There was no legalreason, since, not in priest’sorders, he was not bound bycelibacy, but he seems tohave been bound by anelephantine self-centrednessanddidnotwanthiscareerasa master of Notre-Dame

complicated by the fact hehad married. And so it wasagreed. A private ceremonytookplace.Heloise is said tohave protested, ‘We shallboth be destroyed.’ Howprophetic. Returning secretlyto Paris, Heloise joinedAbelard at daybreak at achurch, where, with onlyFulbert and a few otherspresent, they were married.What isoften lost sightof inthis almost stereotypical

shotgun wedding is the factthat Abelard and Heloiseactuallybecamehusbandandwife. Yet the secrecywas tobe their undoing, for it wasnot kept. Fulbert and hiskinsmen soon divulged thesecret, and it was Abelard’sresponse to this disclosurethat brought the issue to itsultimate point. Feelingbetrayed, he sent his newwife to the nunnery atArgenteuil outside Paris,

where she had been as achild. There she was nowdressed in the habit of aBenedictine nun save for theveil, the final sign ofcommitment. Abelard hadmadeatragicerror:itwashisdispatching of Heloise to aconvent and not his affairwith Heloise that raisedFulberttoamonumentalrage.Canon Fulbert believed hehad been betrayed, thatAbelard had rid himself of

Heloisebymakingheranun.The revenge was swift andcruel. Kinsmen of Fulbertburst intoAbelard’sbedroomand,whileheresistedinvain,they cut off his testicles. Itwas a barbarous act by anystandard, and news of itquickly spread around Parisand soon beyond to the farreaches of Christendom:Abelard, the great Parisianmaster,hadbeencastrated.Thenextmorningacrowd

of Parisians, crying andgrieving,gatheredoutsidehishouse: ‘My studentstormented me with theirunbearable weeping andwailing.’Yetnotallresponsewas sympathetic. Roscelin,his one-time master, cruellycommented that he could nolonger call him Peter sincethat is amasculine name.Assoon as he could, AbelardfledNotre-Dame to enter theroyal monastery of St Denis

as a monk. At his urgingHeloise agreed to take theveil and become a nun ofArgenteuil. In hisautobiography the ever self-serving Abelard had Heloisesay, as she took the veil, thewordsofanancientpoet:

Whydid Imarry you and causeyourdownfall?

The story could end there,tragicasitwas,withAbelard,an emasculated monk, and

Heloise, an unwilling nun,butitdidnot.WhereverhewentAbelard

seems to have createdproblemsforhimself,andthepatterncontinuedatStDenis.He denounced the monks asworldly and scandalous andtheir abbot as notoriouslyevil-living. His positionbecameuntenable,anditwasarranged that he go to adependent priory, not anunheard of way of dealing

with difficult monks. Thispriory, it seem likely,was inChampagne, near one of thegreat crossroads of France.Studentsdiscoveredwherehewasandcrowdswenttheretobe taughtby themaster,nowfamous not only for histeaching but for his physicalmutilation. They would havelikened him, as he didhimself,tothegreatFatherofthe churchOrigen (d.c.254),who had suffered (but at his

own hand) a similarmutilation.Abelard’s intellectual

interests, save for the briefinterlude at Laon, werehithertodevotedtotheliberalarts,particularlytologic;theynow turned to the seriousstudy of divinity, whichbefitted his new status as amonk. Although he wasvirtually untrained in thissubject, Abelard did nothesitate to turn to its study.

Self-doubt seldom disturbedhismind.Thisstudyhecalled‘theology’, a term which he,perhaps more than any othermaster, caused to becomepopular. During the yearsbetween 1118 and 1121 hewrote Theologia, which hewas to continue to reworkduringmostofhissubsequentlife.Itgothimintotroublein1121.Abelard’s behaviour at

Laon appears to have so

incensed Alberic and Lotulfthat they conspired to havethe charge of heresy broughtagainsthimat a council heldat Soissons in 1121. Theaccusation was that in hisTheologiaAbelardhadtaughtthat there were three gods.Called before the council,Abelard tried to defendhimself, but his explanationswent unheard, and he wasforcedbythecounciltothrowhis book into the fire. He

thought this an even greaterinjurythanhiscastration.

Theearlierbetrayalwassmallincomparison to this. I mournedmuchmorefor theharmdonetomy reputation than the harmdonetomybody,sincethelattercame uponme throughmy ownfault,whereasitwasonlysincereintentions and love of the faiththat brought this open violenceuponme.

He subsequentlyacknowledged two faults ofcharacter– lecheryandpride

– and thatGodhad providedhimaremedyforboth:‘first,for my lechery by deprivingmeofthemeanstopracticeit,and for my pride by theburning of my book.’ (Itshouldbenotedthat,althoughAbelardreluctantlyhurledhisbook into the flames, he hadsaved another copy.) Hereturned, humiliated, if nothumbled, to hismonastery atStDenis.Abelard soon offended his

fellowmonks by questioningthe identity of their patronsaint. Flight soon followed,and an accommodation wasarrivedatthatallowedhimtolive as a hermit. This he didat a secluded place nearTroyes,accompaniedonlybya single cleric. A roughoratorywasbuiltofreedsandthatch. In time, AbelardnameditaftertheHolySpirit:‘the Paraclete’. Studentseventuallycametohimthere,

where, at first, they lived inprimitive huts, but, as theself-subsistence hoped forbecame impractical,economic need requiredAbelardtoestablishaschool.Itwas at about this time thatheput togethera treatise,Sicet non (‘Yes and No’), inwhich he acknowledgedcontradictions in theologicalsources and, by his use ofreason, tried to resolve them.It remains his best-known

scholarlywork.The monks of the

monasteryofStGildas in farwestern Brittany, where itoverlooked the sea, electedAbelard as their abbot,possibly as early as 1125. Ifthemonksmadeabadchoicein choosing Abelard, thenAbelardmadeanevenworsechoice in accepting theelection. It was probably atthistimethathewasordaineda priest. He had little in

common with the Celtic-speakingmonks.Hisattemptstoreformthese‘wild’monks,in his account, led at onepoint to their attempting tokillhimbypoisoningthealtarwine.Real threats or anotherinstance of Abelard’sparanoia?Whetherthethreatswere real or not, AbbotAbelard looked foropportunities to spend moreandmoretimeawayfromhisabbey. By now Heloise was

prioress of Argenteuil, andthe expulsion of the nunsfrom there in 1129 gaveAbelard the opportunity tocome to their rescue and, ineffect, to be absent for verylong periods from St Gildas.HeofferedtheexilednunsofArgenteuil the Paraclete andthen saw to the settlementthere of a number of thesenuns and to the appointmentofHeloiseastheirabbess.Lettongues wag, he said; he

would give comfort to theseunfortunatenuns.Aboutthistime(say,1131)

Abelard is said to havewritten his autobiographicalHistoria calamitatum (‘TheStory of My Calamities’). Acopybyaccidentfell intothehands of Heloise, and thereensued their celebratedcorrespondence. DespiteHeloise’s pleas, Abelardwould give her only spiritualadvice. She complained that

shedeservedmore:You belong to me by theobligations of marriage whichuniteus,andyouareevenundergreaterobligationbecause,asthewholeworldknows, I have everlovedyouwithaboundlesslove.

(Letters,2)

She reminded him that shehad tried to dissuade himfromthemarriagebutthathehadpersistedandprevailed.

With God as my witness, ifAugustus, the emperor of the

world, offered me marriage andthe whole world as a weddinggift tohave forever, itwouldbemore precious and morehonourable to me to be calledyourwhore than thewife of theemperor.

(Letters,2)

How cold his response musthave seemed when, in reply,he merely counselled her topray. She answered that thiswasnot easy, for evenat themostsacredmomentsatMass

‘lewdimagesofourpleasuresseize my hapless soul’.Abelard, in turn, confessedwhat his motives had been:‘My love, which led us bothinto sin, shouldnotbe calledlove but lust; I took mypleasures from you and thatwasall the love Ihad.’Thenhe described the manner oflife which nuns should live.Some may think this but apious response; others mayfindAbelard’s replies among

themost honest deeds of hislife.His theological troubles

were far from over, andopposition to Abelard’stheology was led by theformidable andunfathomableBernardofClairvaux.HewasaCistercianabbot,buthewasmore,muchmore.Duringthe1130s and even the 1140sBernard was the mostpowerful ecclesiastic inwesternEurope.Inamoment

of rare self-mockery, hewrote to his friend PopeEugeniusIII,‘Peoplesaythatit is not you but I who ampope.’Authorofsomeof themost sublime works ofChristian spirituality – hissermonsontheSongofSongperhaps his masterpiece –Bernard was also the masterof scathing invective. Areading of his numerousletters reveals a manseeminglylackinginsubtlety,

tolerance and, it must beadded sadly, elementaryChristian charity. He calledthebishopofWinchester,‘thewhore of Winchester’. Thearchbishop of York he saidwas ‘not created butexecrated’,‘aSimonMagus’,‘anidol’,‘thedevil’,‘athief’,‘a wild beast ravaging theLord’s vineyard’, ‘rottenfromthebottomofhisfeettothe topof his head’. In 1227that archbishop was

recognizedasasaint.Abelardhad the misfortune to comeintoBernard’ssights,andhisfatewastobeworsethanthatofthesetwoEnglishbishops.The differences betweenBernard and Abelard were,indeed, personal, verypersonal, but they were alsomore profound than that.What differentiated Bernardand Abelard were essentiallydifferent views of theChristian life. Bernard

accepted on faith alone themysteries of the Christianreligion.Heacceptedthat theFather isGod and theSon isGod and the Holy Spirit isGod,yetthereisbutoneGod.For him no effort of thehuman intellect wasnecessarytotrytounderstandthis doctrine of the Trinity.SogreatwasGod,hefelt, soutterly transcendent ofanything human, that oneshould merely prostrate

oneself before theunutterable, unknowabledeity. It would be, forBernard, the greatest humanarrogance to use humanreason to try to understandwhat is utterly beyond thereachofhuman reason, sincewholly other. On thecontrary, Peter Abelard, thegreatest logician of his day,saw nothing wrong withusing human reason to studyGod: that is what theology

meant for him.Howcan onebelieve – say ‘Credo’ (‘Ibelieve’) – without trying tounderstandtheobjectofone’scredo? For him, it was notcontrarytofaithtotheologizebut thevery fullnessof faith.These two strongpersonalities and their twodifferent approaches toChristian belief were almostbound to collide, and collidethey did with Abelard beingvanquished and Bernard

displaying the mostunattractive side of hischaracter. Bernard wrote ofAbelard,

Hehasdefiledthechurch;hehasinfectedwith his own blight themindsofsimplepeople.Hetriesto explore with his reason whatthe devout mind grasps at oncewith a vigorous faith. Faithbelieves;itdoesnotdispute.Butthisman,apparentlyholdingGodsuspect,willnotbelieveanythinguntilhehasfirstexamineditwithreason.

(Bernard,Letter338)

And Bernard’s attack thenbecameacutelypersonal:

Outwardly he appears a monk,butwithinhe isaheretichavingnothing of the monk about himsave the habit and the name…He is a monk without a rule, aprelatewithoutresponsibility,anabbot without discipline. Heargues with boys and consortswithwomen.

(Bernard,Letters331,332)

Bernard’s pen seemed toknownorestraint.

The climax to theircontroversycameattheshowtrial of Abelard at Sens in1141.Initsnotorietyitcanbecompared to any of thecelebrated televised trials ofmodern times. The king ofFrance,LouisVII, aswellasalargenumberofthenobilityof France and bishops andabbotsandmanyotherswentto Sens in June 1141 to seewhat they thought would bethe trial of the century.They

hadcometoseeBernardandAbelard in personal combat.Nineteen propositions hadbeen drawn up, attributed toAbelard and alleged to beheretical. They concernedsuchdoctrines as theTrinity,the nature of faith, theRedemptionandthenatureofsin,althoughthislastwasnotparticularly emphasized.Bernard himself undertookthe prosecution and stoodbefore the assembled

churchmen and the audienceof the famous and powerful.He dramatically confrontedAbelard with thesepropositions. Abelard musthave known that in thepreviouseveningBernardhaddinner with the bishops andconvinced them to find thepropositions heretical. Undersuch circumstances whatcould Abelard do? He couldhardly argue that thepropositionwerenotheretical

in the face of the pre-trialdecision by the bishops. Norcouldheadmitthattheywereheretical,forthiswouldbeanadmission that he was aheretic. It was possible forhimtoarguethattheydidnotaccurately represent histeachings, that, in fact, theywere distortions. Instead, hesimply said, ‘I appeal to thepope’ and left immediately,leaving behind a disgruntledBernard and a disappointed

king. The council at Sens in1141 was hardly a triumphfor Bernard and is seen bysome as the moment whenbishops successfully resistedhisdefactopower: theymayhave condemned thepropositions,buttheydidnotcondemn the person PeterAbelard.Onlytwoyearswereleftin

Abelard’s life. Perhaps herecognized his failing healthwhileatSens.Onhisway to

Rome, he stopped at theabbeyofCluny,whereits

Plate9TombofHeloiseandAbelard,cemeteryofPèreLachaise,Paris.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

abbot, Peter the Venerable,one of the most attractivepersons of the era, advisedhim not to proceed to RomeandtookhiminasamonkofCluny. His appeal, in anycase, fell upon deaf ears inRome, and Pope Innocent II,immensely dependent on

Bernard for being restored(see chapter 8), not onlycondemned Abelard but,according to one account,personally presided over theburning of his books in StPeter’s. Abelard moved to apriory of Cluny, Chalon-sur-Saône, where his healthcontinued to fail. A face-to-face reconciliation withBernard occurred at somepoint as also his absolutionfromthepapalcondemnation.

And there at Chalons-sur-Saône,PeterAbelarddiedon21April 1142; hewas about63 years old. Peter theVenerable, in response to therequestofHeloise,personallyconducted Abelard’s body tothe Paraclete, where it wasburiedinthesanctuaryofthechapel. When Heloise diedabout22yearslater,herbodywas placed next to herhusband’s. Their grave wasdisturbed during the French

Revolution, but their bodiesnow repose in Père Lachaisecemetery in Paris, althoughthere is even some slight,lingeringdoubtaboutthat.Romantics might see in

this story the tragedy ofviolence destroying love or,more subtly, the tragedyof ayoung girl who neverrecoveredfromherfirst love,therestofher lifebuta longpostscript to a teenage love.Still others might find the

tragedyelsewhere,inAbelardbeing more remembered forhis relationship with Heloisethan for his being one of thegreatest scholars of thetwelfthcentury.

ThomasBecket(c.1120–70)

The death ofThomasBecket

in Canterbury Cathedral in1170 has recommended himto the ages, the man ofprinciple slain by order of aking, Henry II, intent onextending the power of thestate. His martyrdom createda saint, towhose tomb camecountless pilgrims forcenturiesuntilanotherHenry,removing every symbol ofresistance to the growingpoweroftheTudorstate,hadthat tomb violated, its gold

andpreciousstonescartedoffto the royal treasury and thebonesofStThomasremovedand either burned, his ashesthrown to the winds, orburied in an anonymousgrave, where it still remainsunhonoured. Dramatic stageproductionshaveattemptedtoportrayhim invarious lights.T.S. Eliot in his verse playMurder in theCathedralandJeanAnouilh inBecket (latera 1964 film) found ready

audiencesfortheirownviewsof the martyred archbishop.Neither a dramatist nor ahagiographer nor indeed apropagandist, the historianmustattempttosiftthewheatof truth from the chaff offiction.First, his name. He was

namedThomasforthesimplereason that he was born onthe feast day of St Thomasthe Apostle, 21 December.The year is not certain, but

1120 cannot be far off. HisparentswerebothNormanbybirth (pace Anouilh), amongthemanyNormanswhocameto England from Normandyin the wake of the Normanconquerors. Becket wasprobably his father’snickname. The nameprobably derived as adiminutive from ‘bec’meaning ‘beak’ or ‘nose’. Inan age when surnames werenotfixedandnotlimitedtoa

single name, Thomas wasknown as Becket probablyonly as long as he lived inLondon.Whenheleft,hewascalled Thomas of Londonand, after he becamearchbishop, Thomas ofCanterbury. If he is referredtoherethroughouthis lifebyhis boyhood name, it is onlyby modern historiographicalconvention.Asto‘aBecket’,that appellation is a later,unfortunateconfection.

Thomas’s parents lived atCheapside in the city ofLondon. After his death,Thomas’s sister had ahospital built on the site ofthe family house; it laterbecame the site of theMercers’ Company. Hisfather was a successfulmerchant, who mixed in thesocial circles of the NormaneliteinLondon.Thomasgrewup speaking French with thegreatmenofrankandwealth

whovisitedtheBeckethouseat Cheapside. Although theson of foreign-born parents,Thomaswas aLondoner andspent the first half of his lifeinandaroundLondon.At the age of 10 Thomas

was sent by his father tostudy with the Augustiniancanons at Merton Priory,about15miles fromLondon,amonasteryrecentlyfounded(1114) and enjoying thepatronage of prominent

Normans. He stayed only afewyearsand thenwent toacity school, possibly at StPaul’s Cathedral. TwosourcessaythatThomasthenwent to Paris to continue hisstudies. If so, then ThomasBecketwouldhavestudiedatParis inthecompanyofJohnof Salisbury, who, in hismany writings, makes nomention of Thomas at Paris.In any account, he soonappeared in London, where

his father had sufferedfinancial reverses and hismother, the only woman inhis emotional life, had died.Thomas left his father’shouse, perhaps aged 20 orthereabouts,tolearnpracticaladministration with a richkinsman, who was involvedintheLondonmoneymarket.Three years there andThomas made a move thatwas to lead to an almostmeteoric rise to high offices

in church and state. At theage of about 25 Thomas ofLondon entered into thehousehold of Theobald,archbishopofCanterbury.In Theobald’s household,

he had his real schooling.This household was a cradlefor future bishops, includingfour archbishops and sixbishops.Itwasclearlyaplacefor ecclesiastical high-flyers.When Becket arrived there,John of Salisbury had just

returned from a brilliantsuccessatParisandVacariushad come from studying lawat Bologna. At one point,although the matter is a bitobscure, Thomas seems tohave takena sabbatical leaveto study canon law atBologna. ArchbishopTheobald led a peripateticlife,spendingtimenotonlyathis residences in Canterburyand inLondon (at Lambeth),but also elsewhere in his

province on archiepiscopalbusiness and also abroad atRheims and, perhaps, evenRome. Contemporarydescriptions agree thatThomaswasahandsomemanofimpressiveappearanceandthat he was a personality ofgreat charm.Hismemory forspecific detail impressed allwhoknewhimthroughouthislife. He quickly became afavourite of ArchbishopTheobald. Thomas took at

least minor orders andprobably proceeded as far assubdeacon. After almost 10years in the archbishop’shousehold, in 1154 Becketwas appointed archdeacon ofCanterbury, the office in thedioceseofCanterburysecondonlytothatofarchbishopandan office which was often aspringboard to higherpreferment: his immediatepredecessor had becomearchbishop of York. Now he

took deacon’s order, but hisdirect exercise of hisarchdeaconry was to belimited since he wasappointed within a matter ofweeks to high secular office,the chancellorship of therealm.The newly crownedHenry

II (1154–89)choseBecket tobe his chancellor no doubtupon Theobald’srecommendation. Itwouldbesayingtoomuchandtoolittle

to say that Becket was nowtheking’sprimeminister,toomuch because the modernterm relates to a popularlyelected, democraticgovernment and too littlebecause, as the right hand ofanautocraticking,hewieldedmore power than a modernprimeminister.Thomas, thenabout 35, quickly becamefriend and confidant of thenew,21yearoldking,and itwas this friendship that

elevated the office ofchancellorfromkeeperoftheking’s secretariat and theauthenticating seal to that ofthe king’s closest adviser; inaddition, he became theking’s best friend. Henry byanastutemarriagetoEleanorof Aquitaine extended hisholdings on the Continent toinclude not only Normandyand Anjou but the greatduchy of Aquitaine; he nowheld close to half of France.

He was a very great man intheEuropeofhisday,andthechancellor of such a greatmanwashimselfagreatman.AndThomasBecketlivedtherole: fur-lined capes, silkengarments, tables laden withplateandvesselsofgoldandsilver, hospitality unmatchedin munificence even by theyoung king. When, in 1158,Becket went on an embassyto the French king in Paris,according to a description of

themission,hetookwithhiman enormous retinue. Frenchvillagers wondered inamazement who this couldbe.ThechancellorofEnglandonhisway to see theFrenchking,theyweretold.‘Whatagreat man the king ofEngland must be.’ Becketservedhiskingnotmerelyinhousehold and by elaboratediplomatic matters, but,although still an archdeacon,served King Henry on the

field of battle. In 1159,dressed in the armour of asoldier, he led a successfulcampaign in Aquitaine,commanding an army of 700knights and some thousandsof mercenaries against theking’senemies.An easy relationship

developedwiththeking,whooftenwithoutnotice,droppedin to see his friend,sometimes for a drink or achat. They hunted together,

they hawked together, theyplayed fierce games of chesstogether. On a winter’s daythey were riding throughLondon, when the kingnoticed a poorman huddlingfrom the cold. He andThomas dismounted, and theking, in a playfulmood, toldhis chancellor to give thepoor man his new, miniver-lined cloak. The two friends,laughing all the while,wrestled on a London street,

before Becket obeyedHenry’s order. Onebiographer said, ‘Never inChristian times have therebeentwofriendsmoreatonethan these.’ The closeness oftheir friendship onlyemphasizes the tragedy oftheirgreatfallingout.It was Becket’s great

successaschancellorthatwasto be his undoing. He wasclearly the king’s man, evenin matters touching the

church. When ArchbishopTheobald, to whom Becketowedhiscareer, laydying inlate 1160 and early 1161, hebeggedBeckettocometohisdeathbed, but the busychancellor, in an act seen bymany as gross ingratitude,failed to visit his dyingbenefactor. With Theobald’sdeath (18 April 1161) onlytwo obvious candidates forCanterbury could be seen inthe field, the learned monk-

bishop of Hereford, GilbertFoliot, and the king’schancellor, Thomas Becket.Whatever the canonicalniceties, thekingselectedhisarchbishop,andthekingnowchose his friend and loyalchancellor, a choice which,beforelong,hewastodeeplyregret.Withhischancellorofsix years as the principalbishop of his kingdom, theking,withamplejustification,felt he would have no

challenge from the church tohis exercise of royal power.On consecutive days in June1162 Thomas Becket wasordained priest andconsecratedbishop.Thekingwas startled when, almost atonce, Becket resigned thechancellorship. Trouble wasnotfaroff.A profound change was

quickly noticed in thelifestyle of the newarchbishop. The worldly

chancellor became an asceticpriest. Earlymorning prayer,privatewashingofthefeetofthe poor, the constantirritation of a hair shirt, thescourgingofhisbody,privateprayer, the study of thescripturesandthecompanyoflearned ecclesiastics were allpartofhisnewlife.Histablewas stillmagnificent, and heentertained generously, but,we are told, he himself atesimply, almost indifferently.

Historians will long debatethe nature of thistransformation. Had Becketexperienced a conversion ofsoulandbecomeanewman?Had he, rather, lived out hisroles consistently, aschancellor adopting theworldly display of a greatking’s great man and asarchbishop adopting the wayof life of aman of the spiritwith his eyes on a heavenlygoal? Whatever the

explanation, a dramaticchangeclearlyoccurred.The first major

confrontationwith theking–there were earlier skirmishes– concerned the constitutionsissued by Henry II atClarendon, near Salisbury, inJanuary 1164. The kingdemanded that the bishopsgive solemn assent to thecustoms observed by hisgrandfather, Henry I (1100–35). The bishops were

extremely reluctant to do so,Thomas Becket particularly.Threats and intimidationsfollowed, and, unexpectedlyand to the consternation ofthe other bishops, Becketagreedandso swore,and theothers after him. Henry IIthen ordered the customs tobe written down. As eventswould show, this was ablunder. It would be onething to agree to vague,unwritten customs of a

bygone period and quiteanother to agree to explicit,written-down customs. WhatresultedwastheConstitutionsofClarendonand,eventually,themurderofthearchbishop.Sixteen constitutions,containing ‘some of therecognized customs andrightsof the realm’,were setdown. Six of them wereimmediately cited asunacceptable to thechurchmen. These can be

summarized.Constitution 1: disputesconcerning advowson (i.e.,presentation of clergy tobenefices such as parishes) shallbedecidedintheking’scourt.Constitution3:clergy,accusedofany crime, shall first appear intheking’s court,whichcan thensendthemtothechurchcourtfortrial, and, if found guilty there,sent back to theking’s court forpunishment.Constitution 4: only with thepermission of the king canarchbishops, bishops andbeneficed clergy leave the

kingdom.Constitution7:noneoftheking’stenants-in-chief (the principalmen of the realm) shall beexcommunicated without theking’spermission.Constitution 8: in ecclesiasticalcourtcases thefinalappealshallnot be to the pope without theking’sconsent.Constitution12:whenbishopricsorcertainabbeysfallvacant, thekinghastherighttotheincomes.

In the age of reform, nowover a century old, it isalmostinconceivablethatany

bishopinthereformingmodeof the times would not raiseobjections to these sixconstitutions.PopeAlexanderIII, later, was to condemnthem.Becket now ruedwhathe had done in swearing tothe customs, and, whenrequiredtosealthedocumentcontaining them, refused, tothebitterconsternationofthekingandtothebewildermentofhisfellowbishops.Acrisiswascreated.

We must return to thosemen whom Englishhistoriography calls‘criminous clerks’, i.e., thosemembers of the clergy whocommittedsecularcrimes.Letus look first at church courtsand their jurisdiction. Thesecourtscame intoexistence inEngland shortly after theNorman Conquest (1066). Ingeneral, it can be said thatcases came before thesecourts in either one of two

ways: ratione materiae (byreason of the matter), whenthematterofthecrimehadtodowithsomethingthatwasinsome sense spiritual (crimessuch as stealing a sacredchalice, laying violent handson the person of a priest,burning down a church), orratione personae (by reasonof the person), when theperson accused of a crimewas a spiritual person (suchasacleric,monk,nun).Little

dispute arose over casesbrought to church courtsratione materiae. Thesticking issue concernedcasesrationepersonae.Whatshould happen if a clericcommitsthecrimeofmurder,or if he steals a neighbour’slivestock, or if he rapes ayoung girl of his parish?According to the canonists,although there was somedissent, such a cleric shouldbe tried in the church courts.

If he confesses or is foundguilty in that court, theecclesiastical judge shouldinflict punishment,which forcapitalcrimessuchasmurdercould be degradation (i.e.,loss of clerical status) andexile. In a society where thesecular courts would haveinflicted much more severepunishment, even capitalpunishment, degradation andexile were seen by many asexceedingly lenient. Also, in

thechurchcourtsanallegedlycriminous clerk could purgehimselfbydenyingthecrimeand finding others willing toswear to his truthfulness.Becket’spositionwasthatallcases,ecclesiasticalaswellassecular, which involvedclerics should be tried solelyin the ecclesiastical courts,thatclericswhoareconvictedor who confess in that courtshould be punished in thatcourt and not again

elsewhere, that thedegradationandhandingoverto the secular jurisdiction forthe future constitutedpunishment and that clericsreceiving this punishmentshouldnotbepunishedagainfor the same offence in thesecularcourts.Becketdidnotcreate this point of view; hewas echoing the currentteaching of canon law. Theclash here was between twojurisdictions, not one right

and another wrong, but bothsupported by arguments oflawandcustom.Inhindsight,we could say that there wasroom here for compromise.That none was reached orseriously considered laid thegroundfordisputeand,intheevent, the death of thearchbishop.Dissatisfied with Becket’s

actionsatClarendon,thekingsummoned the archbishop toappear before the council of

thekingandthegreatmenofthe realm to answer chargesabout a matter concerningrightfulpossessionoflandonthe archbishop’s estates. Theroyal council was to meet atthe castle at Northampton inearly October 1164. Othercharges were soon added,including the charge thatBecket had embezzled fromthe king in his days aschancellor, although the kinghad dischargedThomas from

any such debt. It was clearthatBecketwas the target ofthe king’s wrath and thatalmost any issue would do.His brother bishops gaveBecket conflicting advice;several even urged him toresign. In the end,heheededthe advice of his confessor:‘You could easily soothe theking’swrathandkeephimasyour friend, but you havechosen the service of God,Who will not fail you.’ On

the morning of Tuesday, 13October, Becket appealed tothepope,inclearviolationofConstitution 8, leaving himsubjecttoachargeofperjury.He then saidMass inhonourof the proto-martyr StStephen, which opens withthe words, ‘Princes also didsit and speak against me.’Becket feared that threatsmade to his life would thatday be acted upon. AfterMass he took with him a

communion host to be hisdyingviaticum(viatecum,onthewaywiththee).The archbishop upon his

arrivalatNorthamptonCastletook the processional crossfrom his cross-bearer andentered as a priest carryingthe sacerdotal sword of thecross. He and a fewcompanions waited on theground floor, while in a hallabove the king met withbarons and bishops, the king

intent on humiliating thewilful archbishop.The issueshadnowbeenreducedtotwo:Thomas’s refusal to renderaccount of his chancellorshipand Thomas’s allegedlyperjuriousappealtothepope.The king’s justiciar wentdown to Thomas topronounce the judgement onhim, but Becket refused toaccept it, since a laymanhadno right to judge anarchbishop. He then bolted

outofthechamberand,usinga side gate, escaped thecastle. The breach hadoccurred. Becket, dressed inthe habit of a Gilbertinebrother, silently left StAndrew’s Priory, where hehad been staying, and in aheavy rain escaped the townthrough the north gate atmidnight, Lincoln – and notLondon – his destination.Accompanied only by asingle servant and two

Gilbertine brothers, thearchbishop stayed at Lincolnin the humble home of afuller. From there hisjourneys were now almostexclusively by night, findingsafe-houses with theGilbertines. Certain that hehad given the slip to anyking’s men hunting for him,Becket reached the coast atSandwich and sailed into anexile that was to last sixyears.

That the exile was to lastsixyearswas theexpectationof neither king norarchbishop. That it did owesmuchtothecharacterofbothbut also to the situation ofPopeAlexanderIII(1159–81)and the ever precariousrelations between theAngevinkingofEnglandandthekingofFrance.Alexanderhad been challenged by ananti-pope and had to spendmuch of his pontificate in

France (see chapter 8). Healso had to woo the supportof both kings, a ticklish taskatthebestoftimes,butatasknow muddied by an Englisharchbishop living in exile inFrance.Inaddition,HenryII,although king of England,was a vassal of the king ofFrance for his substantialholdingsinFrance.LouisVII(1137–80), who allowedBecketsanctuaryinhisrealm,remained a player in the

events of this saga. Itwas inthese circumstances thatBecketfoundhimselfoncehewas on the Europeanmainland.Henry II made an almost

immediate attempt to haveBecket deposed. He usedbishops as his agents, andtheyappearedbeforethepopeatSens.Herefusedtheking’srequest and then warilyreceived Becket. AlexanderIII condemned the

Constitutions of ClarendonandreleasedBecket fromtheoath which he had made atClarendon. With the pope’shelp Becket was taken intothe Cistercian abbey atPontignyinBurgundy,wherehe remained for two years.Therehelivedanausterelife,asking for and receiving therough, coarse habit from thepope himself. For a fewmonths he followed thesparsediet of themonks, but

hefellillandhadtomoderatethe monastic diet. Heconsidered his stay atPontigny a penance for hisweakness at Clarendon. Itwas from here that Becket,joined by some members ofhis household, carried on thedisputewithHenryII.Yettheking would not permit hisexiledarchbishoptoenjoythetranquil life of his Cistercianretreat; he wrote to thegeneral chapter of the

Cistercians and threatened toconfiscateallCistercianlandsin England if they continuedtoallowBeckettoliveinoneof their monasteries. It wasno idle threat, and theabbotsknew this. The abbot ofCîteaux, himself anEnglishman, went toPontigny to see thearchbishop about the matter.InNovember1166Becket,tothe great relief of theCistercian grandees,

volunteeredtoleavePontignyto save his hostsembarrassment and theirorder great loss. King Louisoffered him residence inwhatever monastery hewished,andBecketchosetheBenedictine abbey of StColumba just beyond thenorth wall of Sens, where,withbriefabsences,hewastoremainforfourmoreyears.Throughout his exile

Becketdidnotexperiencethe

unanimous support of hisbrotherbishops,farfromit.Ahostile party among hisepiscopal colleagues was ledby Gilbert Foliot, rivalcandidate for Canterbury,now, as a consolation prize,bishopofLondon.Foliothadthe continued support of thebishop of Hereford, thearchbishop of York and,depending on the issue, thewaveringsupportofothersofthe bishops. The position of

the archbishop of York wascritical. Roger of PontL’Evêque had been acolleague of Becket in thehousehold of ArchbishopTheobald and, in fact, wasBecket’s immediatepredecessor as archdeacon ofCanterbury. He inherited thetraditional claims of York toprimacy over Canterbury,and, when Becket becamearchbishopofCanterbury,therivalry of earlier days in

Theobald’s familia wasrenewed. The bulk of thebishops found themselves inan uncomfortable position:theywere inEngland, facingan angry king, while theirleader (and king’s enemy)was abroad in France. Theirposition was to support aresolution to the crisis. In1167thepopesentemissariesto meet with Henry II andBecketinanattempttoeffecta resolution. They met with

nosuccess.Bothpartiesgavenegative responses, buteffortscontinued.In January 1169 the two

adversaries had a meeting atMontmirail,wheretheFrenchand English kings weresettling their differences. Itmademuchsensetosettletheissueof thearchbishopat thesametime.AtthefieldbelowMontmirail, in a momentplanned in advance, thearchbishop fell on his knees

beforehisking, thefirst timethey had seen each othersince the fateful meeting atNorthampton over four yearsbefore. Henry then raisedBecket to his feet, and theydiscussed their differences.The archbishop was willingto swear to observe theancient customs of the realmsalvoordine suo (‘savinghisorder’).Thisclausewas seenasanescapeclause,renderingBecket’s agreement

meaningless, for it meant, ineffect,thathewouldagreetothesecustoms insofaras theydidnotcontradictthelibertiesof the church, and this wasthe crux of the matter. Thekingendedtheinterview,anda chance was missed. On 7Februarythekingsmetagain,this time at St Leger, andBecket again met the kingwithnomore success thanatthe previous meeting. Anattempted meeting on 22

February never took place.Many now felt that onlynature would resolve thecontroversy by the death ofone of the parties, king orarchbishoporpope.Itwasthelowesthour.Twomonthslater,onPalm

Sunday, 1169, Becketformally excommunicatedtwo of his fellow bishops,GilbertFoliotofLondonandJocelindeBohunofSalisburyand seven other of his

enemies. As angry as Foliotclearlywas at this action, heobserved the terms of hisexcommunication. The king,alsosensitivetoecclesiasticalpenalties, fearedhiskingdomwould be placed under aninterdict, which prohibitedmost church services andsacraments except thebaptismofinfants,confessionofsins(butoutsidethechurchproper) and the last rites forthe dying.As negotiations in

the summerof 1169 faltered,the king added to theConstitutions of Clarendon aprovision that anyone whobrought a decree of interdictintoEnglandwouldbetreatedas a traitor and punishedaccordingly. Six weeks afterthe decree came into force,Henry and Becket madeanother effort to reach asolution, this time atMontmartre, then outsideParis. When an agreement

seemednear,thekingrefusedto give the archbishop thekissofpeaceashisguaranteeof his sincerity and promiseofBecket’spersonalsecurity.Pope Alexander III, by nowsafelyback in Italy, couldbemore assertive, and inJanuary 1170 explicitlythreatened an interdict if thekingrefusedtosettle.Ifmatterswerenot intense

enough as it was,temperatures rose to white

heat when Henry insisted onhaving his son Henrycrowned at WestminsterAbbey on 14 June 1170 byArchbishop Roger of York.Henry II overstepped long-standing tradition whichreserved coronations to thearchbishop of Canterbury, areservation confirmed asrecently as 1166 byAlexanderIII.Itwasaninsultto Becket owing either tocalculation or to gross

insensitivityonthepartoftheking.Ineithercase,theinsultwas taken. Almost at onceHenry seemed to realize thathehadgonetoofarandwrotetothepapallegatethathewasanxious to make peace withBecket.Andwithinsixweeksof the coronation peace wasmade.Thetermsfollowed,ingeneral, the terms recentlyoffered by Pope Alexander.Henry would allow Becketandhiscompanions to return

in peace and for Becket togainfullpossessionofallhisproperty. The controversialconstitutions were notmentioned; they would bequietlyburiedbytheking.Inaddition, Henry would allowBecket to punish the bishopswho had participated in thecoronation. For his part,Becket agreed to act as anarchbishop should acttowards his king, saving thefreedom of the church. The

twometnearFrétevalnotfarfrom the Loire. Sitting ontheir horses, they greetedeachother,andbeforethedaywas out the deed was done:reconciliation had beeneffected. Ambiguitiesobviously remained,butwithgoodwilltheycouldbelivedwith amicably. Yet the king,claiming an oath takenpreviously, refused to giveBecket the kiss of peace, thesymbol of the special

protection to his life by theking. Nonetheless, it was avictory for the archbishopagainst the most powerfulman in Europe after theemperor. When the two metfor the very last time,probably in early October1170, they had this partingdialogue:

Thomas: I have the feeling, mylord, as we leave, that you willneverseemeagaininthislife.HenryII:Doyouthinkmeaman

whobreakshisfaith?Thomas: May God forbid, mylord.

Theywere not tomeet againin this life. When next theymet,thepenitentkingspentanightofvigilwiththelifelessbodyofhisoldfriend.At the end of November

Thomas Becket was atWissant, his face turnedtowards the Channel andEngland.Hehadpapalletters

re-excommunicating thebishops of London andSalisbury, recently absolved,for their participation in thecoronation.ThearchbishopofYork remained anexcommunicate,neverhavingbeen absolved. Becket sentahead to Dover a messengerbearing the papalexcommunications, whoserved them on the threebishops, who werethemselvesat thecoast ready

todepartforNormandytoseethe king. The messengerescapedwith his life, but thebishops, particularly thearchbishop of York, reactedwith a rage, which stillflamedwhenthebishopsmetthe king some weeks later.Meanwhile,withafavourablewindandaplacidseaThomasBecketsailedforEnglandandarrived at Sandwich on themorningof1December1170,sixyearsandonemonthafter

hehadsailedintoexile.Two welcomes met the

archbishop. First, there wasthe hostile welcome. As sooften happens in majordisputes – it happens in ourown times as in the MiddleEast, in the Balkans andelsewhere – one demonizedone’s enemy, and,consequently there weremany supporters of the king,including those who hadprofited from Becket’s

absence, who truly hated thearchbishop.Soitwasthat,onthe very day of his arrival atSandwich, the three mostsenior royal officials inKentrode with an armed troop toconfront the archbishop. Herefused to meet with themuntil they disarmedthemselves. They angrily –and wrongly – charged thatBecket believed that theyoung king’s coronation wasinvalid. They demanded that

he remove theexcommunications of thebishops. The sheriff of Kenttold him, ‘You have broughtfireandtheswordwithyoutoEngland.’ Yet the popularwelcome was whollydifferent.Becketwasgreetedasareturninghero,evenasapatriot, for his courage instanding up resolutely to anoverbearing, unpopular king.The 12-mile progress fromSandwich to Canterbury

became a victory parade, themedievalequivalenttoaNewYorkticker-tapereception.Ateachvillagepriestandpeoplecheeredhiminafestiveway.Chanting monks met him atthe gate of Canterbury; thebells of all the churchespealed.AndBecket removedhisshoesandwalkedbarefootto his cathedral, where, hisfaceflushedwithexcitement,he prostrated himself on thestonefloor.

AtChristmasatCanterburythe archbishop preached onthethemeofpeaceonearthtomen of goodwill, remindinghis congregation of the onlymartyred archbishop ofCanterbury, St Alphege.Then, after the biddingprayers,Becket reiterated theexcommunications of thethreebishops.Two parties, each

antagonistic to Becket and,indeed, exceedingly angry

with him, arrived in time forChristmas with the king atBures near Bayeux inNormandy.Duringthecourseof Christmas Eve andChristmas Day itself theyspoketothekingoflittleelsebut the treachery of thearchbishop. First, there wereroyal officials who came,spreading the rumour (forwhich there was not a shredof evidence) that Becketintended to dethrone the

young king. The threeexcommunicated bishopswere also there, filling theking’s ears with a torrent ofabuseconcerningArchbishopBecket. The archbishop ofYorkisreportedtohavesaid,‘Youwillneverhavepeaceaslong as Thomas isarchbishop.’ At some point,probably on Christmas Dayitself, the king uttered thewords that sent four knightsonatragicmission.Theyare

variously reported but inessencewere,‘Willnooneofmy men rid me of thiscontemptuous, low-bornpriest?’ Four of his knights,uponhearing this, decided tocarry out what they saw asthe king’s wish: they set outfrom Normandy for theChannel, intentonmurderingthearchbishopatCanterbury.Later it would be said thattheir intentions were only toseize the archbishop, but

account after account statethat they headed forEnglandwith assassination their clearpurpose. Less clear is theking’s knowledge of theirpurpose.Heclaimedlaterthathe did not know what theyplanned to do, and writers,sympathetic to Becket, laterexculpated the king fromordering Becket’s murder,although, it shouldbe added,they were writing whileHenry was still alive and, at

the height of his power, stillanintimidatingpresence.TheknightswereReginald

FitzUrse, who, ironicallyenough, had come to theking’scourtthroughBecket’sinfluence; Hugh deMoreville, who had beenBecket’s vassal; William deTracy,adescendantofHenryI; and Richard le Breton, ayounger knightwith lands inthe west of England. Theytravelled separately, using

different ports and met atSaltwood Castle on theevening of 28 December1170,aMonday,toplottheirtacticsforthemorrow.Early onTuesdaymorning

thefourknightsrodetowardsCanterbury, a journey ofabout 15 miles over theancient Roman road.Meanwhile, at Canterbury,Becket was following hisusual regimen. He attendedMass, said his devotions to

thesaintsattheiraltarsinthecathedral, confessed himselfand took the discipline ofscourging. Themainmeal ofthe day was taken at abouttwo o’clock, and by threeBecket sat in his own largechamber with a number offriends and advisers. It wasthen that the knights enteredthearchbishop’srooms.Whatfollowed has been reportedby five eye-witnesses, whotellauniformlysadtale,each

complementing the other indetail.The knights had entered

the cathedral precincts alone,leavingarmedguardsnearthegate to prevent supportersfrom the town coming to thearchbishop’s aid and also toprevent the archbishop’sescape. The four knights, nodoubtledbyFitzUrse,havingpassed through the gate, hadstoppedbrieflyat amulberrytree to leave their horses and

their weapons. At thearchbishop’s great hall theyfoundthemealconcludedandthe servants eating. Thestewardwenttotheadjoiningchamber to announce theirarrival to Becket. Theyentered without greeting himnor, indeed, did he greetthem.At length,Becketgavethe visitors a long stare andspoke,callingFitzUrsebyhisname. The latter said thattheycame from thekingand

demandedthatBecketlifttheexcommunications. He saidthat Thomas had broken theFréteval peace agreement,which he denied. The knightcontinued that Becket wasalso threatening to undo therecent coronation, which healso denied. Theywere soonshouting at one another,Becket threatening furtherexcommunications andFitzUrse saying that Becketwas speaking at the peril of

his head. ‘Have you come tokill me? You will find mehere, a foot soldier in theLord’s army.’ The knightsordered the archbishop’sservants to guard Becket,while they went to retrievetheir weapons. At themulberry tree theyuncloakedthemselves,revealingcoatsofmail, and then put on theirhauberks, ready to return toBecket.Aloyalservantofthearchbishop had bolted the

door of the archbishop’s hallagainst them. The knightsfound a rear entrance up aflight of stairs, but it wasbeing repaired and only bybattering through a windowwithaxesdidtheygainentry.Meanwhile, Becket wasseated on his bed, beingadvised what to do next. Atthesoundoftheaxes,amovehad to be made, and Becketreluctantlyagreedtoenterthegreat cathedral, where

vespers(evensong)wasbeingsung. Since the knights hadassigned armed men tosurround the buildings,anotherwayhad to be foundforthearchbishop’sparty.Anunusedpassagewaywhichledto the cloister was opened,and Thomas with consciousdignity followed his cross-bearer through the cloisterintohiscathedralbythenorthtransept entrance.Hismonksbolted the door of the

cathedralbehind them,butathiscommand–‘thechurchisnotafortress’–theyunboltedthe door. Themonks tried tohurry him up the stepstowardsthechoir,butbythenthe knights, with FitzUrse inthe lead, with bared swordsand axes in their hands, hadentered the darkeningcathedral. ‘Where is thetraitor Thomas Becket?’Halfway up the stairs, thearchbishopturnedandsaid,‘I

am here, not a traitor to thekingbutapriestofGod.’Hecamedownthestairsandwasstanding now in the transept.One of his attackers hissed,‘Run away; you are as goodas dead.’ But he refused torun.Theknightsattemptedtoput the archbishop onWilliam de Tracy’s back inanefforttoremovehimfromthe church, but Becketresisted, almost throwingFitzUrse to the ground,

calling him scornfully ‘apimp’. Now enraged,FitzUrsewasthefirsttostrikethe archbishop. He struck ablow with his sword atBecket’s head, knocking offhis cap and taking a slice ofhisscalp.‘Iembracedeathinthe name of Jesus and thechurch,’ said the archbishop.Another blow and stillanother blow, both fromWilliam de Tracy, felled thearchbishop to thestonefloor.

There with Becket fullyprostrate Richard le Bretonwithapowerful strokeofhissword cut off the crown ofBecket’s head and broke thesword in two on thepavement. One of theircompanions,inanactofcruelbarbarity, with the tip of hissword scattered thearchbishop’s brains on thefloor. ‘This traitor won’t getup again,’ he boasted. Themurderers then fled the

cathedral, shouting inshameful triumph, ‘King’smen, king’s men.’ And afterravaging their victim’squarters,theyleftCanterbury,while the stilled body of thearchbishop lay where he hadfallen, in his own blood andbrains.Gradually his friends,scattered during the turmoil,returned, and, as theyprepared the body for burial,thunder burst aboveCanterbury. The king’s men

hadcreatedamartyr.

Plate10SaintThomasBecket;Suffrages©AcquiredbyHenryWalters.

The revulsion ofChristendom was asimmediate as the news waspassed. Henry II learned ofthe deed three days later andappears to have sincerelygrieved.Thepopewentintoaweek’s mourning and soonimposed a personal interdicton Henry. The French, who

hadgivenrefugetoBecketinexile, harboured deepsuspicions of the role of theEnglishking.Thearchbishopof Sens, supported by thewhole French hierarchy,imposed an interdict on allHenry’s continental lands.The king quickly made hispeace with the church. AtAvranchesin1172,heagreedto the demands of the pope.He would allow appeals toRome in ecclesiastical cases;

hewouldrestoretotheseeofCanterbury all its properties;he would take the cross andgo to the Holy Land; hewould abrogate the customswhich he had introducedagainst the liberties of thechurch. Later he agreed toexempt clerics from secularcourts. In fact, Henry neverwent on crusade and statedprivatelythathedidnotknowof any customs like thosereferred to. Personally, he

allowed that, althoughhedidnot send the murderingknights to Canterbury, hisintemperate andinflammatory words mighthave provoked his men tocommitthemurderofBecket.Despite what might soundlike self-serving disclaimers,Henry II had capitulated;Beckethadwontheday.On 21 February 1173, just

overtwoyearsafterBecket’sdeath, he was declared a

saint, St Thomas ofCanterbury, martyr, with hisfeast day to be observed on29 December. In July of thefollowing year the kingapproached Canterbury as apenitent pilgrim. Removinghisbootsat thecitygates,hewalked barefoot to thecathedral and to the tomb ofhis once friend. There heprostrated himself, admittedhis unwitting role in themurder, and begged the

monks of Canterbury topunish him. Each of the 80monks administered threestrokes to the back of theking. He remained there atthe tomb throughout thatdayand the ensuing night. Whoknowshowcalculatedthisactofpenancewas?HenryIIwasbeset at this time by arebellion of his queen andsons, his crown not securelyin place. Yet it was ahumiliating act for a very

proud man. The tomb wasfast becoming a shrine, andthe long lineofpilgrimswastoreachintothe1530s,whenHenry VIII destroyed theshrine of a priest who daredtochallengethepowerof thestate.

HildegardofBingen(1098–1179)

Onlyinveryrecenttimeshasthe attention of historiansbeendrawntotheremarkableHildegard of Bingen. Onewonders why the delayedrecognition.Hasshebeenthevictim of a historicalestablishment dominated bymen and largely blind to theaccomplishments of women?Orisshenowlittlemorethana poster-girl for modernfeminists? In a life thatspanned much of the twelfth

century, Hildegard witnessedthe great movements of thetime and was incorrespondencewiththemostpowerfulmenof thecentury.One neglects an examinationofheraccomplishmentsattheriskofgainingonlya limitedand incomplete view oftwelfth-century history. Twomatters should be clearedaway before looking at herlife and its historicalmeaning. She is often called

anabbessandasaint.Strictlyspeaking, she was neither.Hildegard was the head of areligious community, but shewas not called abbess butmistress (magistra) of thenuns in her community.Andfor reasons which are nowobscure attempts to have hercanonized did not succeed,butitshouldquicklybeaddedthat a local cult to ‘StHildegard’ survives in partsof Germany with 17

September as her feast day.Only the pedantic wouldobject to her being called‘abbess’and‘saint’,althoughthe terms require somestretching.Hildegard was born at

Bermersheim not far fromMainz in the GermanRhineland, a daughter of theminornobility.Whenshewasabout eight,Hildegard joinedthe anchoress Jutta, daughterof a local count, at themale

Benedictine monastery of StDisibod (Disibodenberg).They, and other girls whosoonjoinedthem,livedinanenclosure perhaps to thesouthofthemonasticchurch.There, in about 1112,Hildegardprofessedasanunand was taught by Jutta toread the holy books. At thedeath of Jutta in 1136Hildegard became head ofthis community ofBenedictine nuns. Events

were soon to transform herfrom an almost anonymousmistress of an almostunknown community to apersonofEurope-widefame.In the preface to her most

famous work, Scivias,Hildegard described howtheseeventsbegan.

When I was 42 years and 7monthsold,intheyear1141,theheavens opened to me and mybrain was flooded by anexceedingly brilliant light. Itwarmed my whole heart and

being in the same way that sungives warmth. And I instantlyunderstood the meanings of theholy books – the Psalter, theGospels and the other catholicbooks of the Old and NewTestaments. It was not that Iunderstood the grammar andsyntax.

She wrote that she had beenexperiencing visions sinceearly childhood but that shehadnotmadethemknown.

I heard a voice from heavensaying to me, ‘Therefore, tell

othersofthesemiraclesandwritethemdown.’

And,althoughthevoicesaid,‘I am the living light, whoshedslightonhiddenthings’,Hildegard did not heed thecall to write and fell ill. Shetold her secretary, the monkVolmar,abouthervisionsandthe command to write themdown. He encouraged her,and in the courseof thenext10yearsHildegarddescribed,

inLatin,26visions.TheworkwasgiventhenameScivias,ashortening of Scito vias(‘Know the Ways’). TheabbotofStDisibodknewandapproved of herwritings andinformed the archbishop ofMainz, who also approved.Then, in a momentous leap,her work was brought to theattentionofPopeEugeniusIII(1145–53),whoactually readaloud a portion of the yetunfinished Scivias to the

fathersoftheCouncilofTrier(November 1147 to February1148). St Bernard wrote tohis former disciple and nowpopealetterurgingEugeniusto encourage Hildegard tocontinueherwriting.This hedid, and within three yearsher account of her visionswas completed. Hildegardwas fast becoming acelebrity. All was not to besmoothsailing.Hildegard claimed that

Godhadorderedhertomovehernunstoanewplace.Fromapractical point of view thismade admirable sense: hergrowingreputationhadledtoan increase of youngwomencoming to St Disibod with aconsequent overcrowding.Theabbotopposedthismovesincehismonasterysharedinthe fame of their visionarynun and, more practically,since the finances of the twocommunities, particularly the

endowments, had becomesomewhat commingled. Inface of this opposition,Hildegardonceagain took toher bed. The abbotwithdrewhisopposition,perhapsbeingpressured to do so by thearchbishop of Mainz. In anycase, in 1150, accompaniedby 20 or so nuns, Hildegardjourneyed the 20 miles toRupertsberg,where,onahilloverlooking theRhinewhereitisjoinedbytheRiverNahe,

she established her newhouse. It was near Bingen,which name has beenassociated with Hildegardsincethetwelfthcentury.Theabbot of St Disibod’smonastery appointed aprovost to care for thespiritual needs of the nuns,and he chose Volmar.Hildegard remained‘mistress’. She subsequentlyexperienced long periods ofillness,particularlyinthelate

1150s and late 1160s. Aparticularly difficult crisisoccurred soon after arrivingat Rupertsberg, when herfavourite nun, Ricardis ofStade, was appointed abbessof Bassum. She was thedaughter of the marchionessof Stade and, with Volmar,hadassisted in thewritingofthe Scivias. Hildegard’sresponse reveals a veryhuman side of her character.Shewrotetothenun’smother

in an attempt to thwart theappointment: ‘Do not disturbmysoul;donotcausetearsofbitterness to fall from myeyes;donotwoundmyheartso severely.’ Since sheclaimed to know the will ofGod, Hildegard could saywith no obvious self-doubtthatGoddidnotwillRicardisto become abbess. Sheinsistedonthispoint in letterafterletter.Tothearchbishopof Mainz, she wrote, ‘the

clear fountain, truthful andjust[God],says,“Theselegalpretexts for the appointmentof this girl mean nothing inGod’s eyes, for I did notchoose them.”’ When othersin Germany failed to seeGod’s will in Hildegard’swill, she wrote to the pope,butEugenius,understandablynot wanting to get involved,referredthematterofRicardisto localofficials.Hildegard’swill did not prevail.

Hildegard then wrote to thenew abbess what, to many,may appear to be a loveletter:

Mygrief risesup toheaven.Mysorrow destroys my confidenceinmankind. I loved the nobilityofyourbehaviour,yourwisdom,yourpurity,yoursoulandeverypartofyourbeing.Mayallwhohave sorrow like mine grievewithme, allwho, likeme, haveever, in God’s love, so loved aperson in heart and soul only tohave that love snatched awayfromthemasyouwerefromme.

Within a year AbbessRicardis died, and with herdeath closes this chapter inHildegard’s life, a chapterraising questions of humanfeelingsandemotion that thehistorian’s limited abilitiescannotanswer.On another occasion

Hildegard’s conduct as headof Rupertsberg came undercriticism. Another abbesscomplained that Hildegardallowed her nuns on feast

daystoappearinchurchwiththeir hair flowing unbound,wearing longwhite silk veilsthattouchedthefloorand,ontheir heads, golden crowns,whereas they should dresswiththemodestyenjoinedbyStPaul.Farfromdenyingthispractice, Hildegard defendedit as the appropriate way forvirgins to approach the HighPriest.Elsewheresheclaimedthat itwas fromavision thatsheknewthatavirgin’shead

shouldhaveonlyawhiteveilanda crown. In addition, thesame abbess registeredsurprise that Hildegardadmitted only noble womeninto her community,whereasthe Lord chose lowlyfishermenandpoorpeopleashis companions. She repliedthat God created a layeredsociety with a higher and alowerorderandthatthelowerorder should not rise abovethehigherorder.

What farmer wouldindiscriminately put in oneenclosureallhisanimals–cattle,asses, sheep, goats? It isnecessary to be discriminatingabout people, lest people ofdifferent status, herded together,bedisturbedintheprideof theirelevation or in the ignominy oftheirdecline.

Yet, in Hildegard’s defence,itshouldbesaidthatreligiousorders over time, by self-selection of entrants latterly,have tended to produce

communitieswhichare fairlyhomogeneous in terms ofsocial class. Such criticismsscarcelydistractedHildegard;she was busy about otherthings.From about 1150

Hildegard had a public life,which began soon after thepopeheldaloftherSciviasatthe Council of Trier. Over350 letters are extant fromthisperiod.Ascollected,theyare unfortunately not

arranged chronologically butinorderof the importanceofhercorrespondents.Althoughsheprobablydictatedthemtoa secretary or left hersecretarywiththegistofwhatshewanted towrite, shewasas much the author of herletters as St Bernard was ofhis. In fact, shewrote to thegreatabbotofClairvaux,andthis letter takes first place inthecollection.Hildegard toldBernardthatshehadavision

and needed his advice. Inreply,heencouragedher,buthis reply has the ring of astock letter of spiritualencouragement. She wrotePopeEugeniusIIIfourlettersthat survive and at least oneother. Writing in 1151, thepope remarked that ‘yourreputation has becomewidespread’. Likewise, shewrote to Pope Anastasius IV(1153–54) – ‘you allow evilto raise its wicked head’ –

and to his successor theEnglishman Hadrian IV(1154–59) – ‘you aresometimes at oddswith yourbetter self.’ She was equallysevere with the Germanemperor, FrederickBarbarossa,atthetime(1164)when he, for a second time,supported an anti-pope. Shetold him that he was acting‘likealittleboy,likeonethathas lost his mind’. Nun andemperorhadmetundermore

pleasant circumstances in1152, when Frederick hadinvitedHildegardtotheroyalpalace. To King Henry II ofEngland she gave sternwarning that he should notlisten to the devil. And onemay wonder what that othergreat woman of the age,Eleanor of Aquitaine, wifesuccessivelyoftwokingsandmotheroftwokings,madeofHildegard’s remark that shewastoobusyabouttoomany

things: ‘You have not foundrest.’ The translators of herletters tell us that she wrotenot only to the great and theimportant but that she alsowrote to ‘regular, everydaypeople of no historicalconsequence whatsoever(nuns,lapsednuns,distraughtwives, excommunicants, justordinaryfolk)’.Much of Hildegard’s

correspondencetooktheformof spiritual direction, replies

to religious men and womenand to priests and prelateswho asked her advice orperhaps only her prayers. Amonk wrote asking her tointercede with God for hiswickedandperversesinsand‘pleasesendmearesponsebythis messenger’. In truth,mostofherlettersofspiritualdirection were written toheads of houses,who, in thefaceofthechangingmodesofreligious life, felt

uncertainties and some evenconsidered resignation. Anunnamed abbess wrote, ‘Istand in need of your adviceconcerning my office; howandwhenwill thisburdenbelifted from me?’ Hildegardreplied, ‘Do not put asideyour office because you feeloverburdenedandweary.’Toonesevereabbotsheadvised,‘Impose lighter burdens onthosewhoareunabletocarryheavy ones.’ To an abbess,

impatient with her nuns, shecautioned, ‘When you arestirredtoanger,putyoureyeson the font of patience, andthe anger will pass and thestorming waters will abate.’Scores of other such letterssurvive, testimony to herinnate wisdom and to theconfidenceplacedinherbyalargecircleofclients.In another significant

aspect of her prophetic roleHildegard embarked on as

many as four preachingexpeditions, which took hermostly to monasteries butalso, on occasion, to greatGerman cathedrals. AtCologne cathedral shelamented that the clergy bytheir negligence wereresponsible for the successesof the Cathars (see chapter11). At Trier, at Pentecost,1160, using her mostpowerful rhetoric, sheupbraided the bishops and

priests for their laxity.Wherever she went,Hildegard repeated the samemessage: repent and reform.Her message was fullyconsistent with the monasticreforming movement of thetimes.Her speaking out in

monasteries and cathedralsunderlines, as do her letters,her self-described role as aprophet,meaning an inspiredand fearless speaker of the

word ofGod, although somepeople, includingBarbarossa,expected her to reveal futureevents to them, which wasnot the essence of herprophetic role. Like Ezechieland John the Baptist, shespoke the truth of the divinemessage, caring not whomight be offended andbecome wrathful at heruncompromisingforthrightness. She said thatGod spoke through her

mouth. At the famous Triersermon she began by saying,‘I am but a poor little onewith no claim to learning orcourage, but these are thewords I have heard’, and thesermon, God’s words, thenfollowed. The ‘words’ musthavebeenaccompaniedbyanunflinching sense of self-confidence.And so she lived her life,

preaching and writing. Yet,when death came in 1179, it

was preceded by the mosttroubling episode in her longlife. At Rupertsberg,Hildegard had encouragedlocal rich families to burytheir dead in the monasticgrounds, a practice notuncommon for religioushouses, a practice withspiritual benefits for thedeceased from the prayers ofthenunsandmaterialbenefitsfor thenunsfromthegiftsofthe deceased’s family. In

1178 she allowed the burialofa localnoblemanwhohadbeen excommunicated. Thecanons of Mainz cathedral,within days of the burial,orderedhisexhumationunderpain of interdict, because anexcommunicatewasbycanonlaw forbidden burial inconsecrated ground. Sherefused to have his bodyexhumed, claiming that hervisionwouldnotallowit.Byso doing she cast her

community into theconsequences of an interdict,which meant that the nunscouldnotreceivecommunionnor could any liturgicalceremoniesbeheldexcept inthe simplest of forms andnever withmusic or singing.It would be incorrect to seethis as a collectiveexcommunication, sinceexcommunication bydefinition is a casting outfrom the Christian

community, which clearly isnot the effect of interdict.Hildegard, besides citing theirrefutable authority of herown vision, argued that thenobleman had confessed hissinsandreceivedthelastritesbefore his death. Thecathedralcanonsweremovedneither by her claim of adivine imperative to disobeythem nor by her descriptionof the deceased’s allegedreconciliation, and they

refused to budge. Accordingto one account, Hildegardtookmeasures to conceal thegrave. Without any apparentjurisdiction thearchbishopofCologne intervened,producing alleged witnessestothenobleman’sabsolution,and ordered the interdictlifted. The archbishop ofMainz, in Italy attending theThird Lateran Council, wasno doubt displeased by theintrusionofthearchbishopof

Cologne in a matter beyondhis jurisdiction, and he thusconfirmed the interdict andremonstratedwithHildegard:

The church maintained that theman buried at your monasteryhad in his lifetime incurredexcommunication and, althoughsomequestionremainsabouthisabsolution, you acteddangerouslywhenyourefusedtoobey the canons and you wereinsensitive to the scandal thatwouldbecaused.

Nonetheless, the archbishop

ordered his cathedral clergyto withdraw the interdict, ifsuitablewitnesses testified totheman’sreconciliation.Andthe crisis ended. Hildegardwasthen80yearsoldandhadonlysixmoremonthstolive.She died on 17 September1179 at Rupertsberg. HerbodynowrestsatRüdesheim,acrosstheriverfromBingen.If during her lifetime

Hildegardwasbestknownasa visionary prophet, she is

best known to the modernworld as an author. Tomention her writings raisesinstantly the question ofauthenticity of the writingsattributed to her. Within adecadeofherlifeadossierofwritings,whichthecompilersattributed to Hildegard, wasassembled at Rupertsberg.Wecannotbeequallycertainof the authenticity of all theworks in this codex and inother collections. Accepting

that she used secretaries andscribes, there can be little ifany doubt that she was theauthor of theScivias and theconsiderable correspondence.TheLiber divinorum operum(‘Book of Divine Deeds’), adescription of later visions,raises some questions.Examination of the earliestextant manuscript (at Ghent)suggests to different scholarsdistinct alternatives, onebeing her non-authorship,

althoughtheevidenceforthisposition seems notcompelling.With scholarshipdivided about some of theworks attributed to her, onemight put aside for nowbooks of questionableauthenticity. These wouldinclude a book on medicine.Also,over70compositionsofsacredmusicwithwordsandmusicwhichareattributed toher clearly came from hermonasteryatRupertsbergbut

might have come from hersupervision rather thandirectly fromherhand– stilla notable achievement –although her amenuensiswrote, while away, how hemissed ‘the voice of hermelodies and a tongue notheardbefore’.Whentheairisclearedofmist,alldoubtmaywell be dissipated andHildegard’sachievementseeninanevenbrighter light.Yetwere she to have written

nothingbutherlettersandtheScivias, her place would beabsolutelyfirmasaluminousfigureofthetwelfthcentury.Two copies of the Scivias

which weremade during herlifetime at her monasteryhave survived, one, lost in1945, now only in aphotographic copy. Theycontain her visions in threebooks of unequal length.Each section describes avision and then presents

Hildegard’s interpretation.They cover a wide range oftopics concerning theChristian life for religiousandlaityalike.Thenatureofthesevisions

interestedher contemporariesasitindeedinterestsmoderns.The insistent Guibert ofGembloux, a Walloon monkwho later became hersecretary, asked Hildegardabout how she experiencedhervisions:

Is it true that you do notremember at all what you havespoken in a vision once yoursecretarieshavewrittenitdown?Do you dictate them in Latin orin German with someonetranslating the German intoLatin?Haveyoubecomelearnedin the scriptures by study or bydivineinspiration?

When she failed to answer,Guibertwroteagain,

Do the visions come in a dreamwhile you are asleep or do theycome as a trance while you areawake?

Yielding to Guibert’sdemands,Hildegardgavehim(andus)herownexplanationofhervisions:

Since Iwas an infant, I had thisvisionary gift in my soul, and Ihave it to thisveryday.In thesevisionsmyspiritisraisedbyGodup to the heavens and into thewinds,anditmeetsawiderangeofpeople,eventhosefardistant.Since this is the way that I see,mysightisdependentonmovingcloudsandother conditions.No,I do not hear what I hear withbodilyearsnorwith the feelings

of my heart nor with my fivesenses. I see them in my spiritwithmy eyes wide open. NeverdoIexperienceatrancelikestateinmyvisions. I am fully awakeand see visions both day andnight.Still,mybodyexperiencessuchpain that I feel Imightdie.Yet with the help of God I amsustained.

The light that I see is notspecific and limited. It comesmorebrightlythanthesunshinesthroughalightcloud.Neithertheheight,lengthnorbreadthofthatlight can I determine. I havenamed this light ‘theShadowoftheLivingLight’.Sun,moonandstars can be seen reflected in

water; similarly, writings andwordsanddeedsareseenbymereflectedinthislight.

The things that I seeor learnin vision I keep stored away inmymemoryforalongtime.Myexperience of sight and hearingand understanding occur all atonce. Since I am unlearned andhave no other knowledge thanmyvision,thethingsthatIwriteare what I see and hear in myvision with nothing of my ownadded. They are expressed ininelegant Latin, for I hear myvision in that way, since thevisiondoesnotteachmetowriteintheLatinofthephilosophers.Ishouldaddthat thewordswhich

I see and hear in vision do notresemble the words of humanspeech; they are, rather, like afiery flame and a cloud movingthroughemptyspace.ThereisnowaythatIcanperceivetheshapeofthislight,justasIcannotstareintothesun.

AndoccasionallyIseealightwithinthatlight,whichIcall‘theLiving Light’. I can no moreexplain that light than the other.When I do see it,my sufferingsand pains disappear, and I feellike a young girl rather than theoldwomanthatIam.

Tothissheaddedthatshehad

the first light which shedescribed, theShadowof theLiving Light, with heralways:

Itislikelookingintotheheavenswhenthereisbutalightcloudonastarlessnight.Iseeinthislightthe things that I speak of and Ihear the responses that I give tothoseseekingmyadvice.

Thisisasfulladescriptionasany medieval visionary hasgiven of the visionaryexperience.

What is themodern readerto make of this? What mustbe confronted is the questionof the historical nature ofHildegard’s visions as foundin her Scivias. Put squarely,did Hildegard actuallyexperiencevisionsfromGod?Ifonebelieves inaGodwhoat times appears to humanbeings,thenthepossibilityofvisionsposesnoproblem.Yetif one cannot intellectuallyaccept the possibility of

divine visions or if one feelsthat it is not proven thatHildegard actually hadvisions, what then? Thereseem to be two possibilities.One can say that they werepure fabrications of herimagination, created forpersonal reasons; this couldbe true but on the evidenceseems unlikely. Or one cansay that she experiencedsomething which has anatural

Plate11HildegardofBingen’svisionofextinguishedstars.ReproducedbypermissionofBrepols.

explanationbutwhichshefeltwas divine in origin. Thevisionary Hildegard couldhave suffered from migraineepisodes, since what shedescribes fits a classicaldescription of migraineattacks.We oftenmistakenlythinkofsuchattackssolelyinterms of headaches,which is

notstrictlyspeakingthecase.Frequently migraineexperiences affect vision.Most commonly, when thishappens, one sees aconnected series of inversev’s or lightning-like flashesacross the field of vision,whichdonotdisappearwhenoneclosestheeyes.Theyaresometimes called‘scintillating scotomata’ or‘fortification spectra’(because they can resemble

crenellated structures).‘Floaters’ often appear inmigraine incidents and looklike clouds. Hildegard’s‘extinguished stars vision’,which was illustrated in acontemporary manuscript,closely resembles a form ofmigraineexperience.Anaurafrequentlyoccursintheearlystageofamigraineattackandcan include hallucinations,which the subject can beconvinced are entirely

objective. The sicknesseswhichHildegard experiencedfrequently in her life areconsistent with severemigraineattacks, fromwhichone typically recovers,asdidHildegard, with renewedvigour.DrOliverSacks,longa specialist in the subject,concludes, ‘The visions ofHildegard … [were]indisputably migrainous’.That her visions may beexplained in a neuro-

psychologicalwayshouldnotdiminish the importance oftheir content. In such a statewith unusual visualexperiences occurring,Hildegard might quiteunderstandably have thoughtthem experiences from Godand that, consequently, whatshe was thinking whilehaving such experiencescamedirectly fromGod.HerScivias,then,couldbeseenastheoutpouringofHildegard’s

soul as the result of theseexperiences. It provides aview,attimesbrilliant,oftheChristian view of life fromthe fall of Adam and Eve tothe Last Judgement andemphasizes the coming ofJesus and his church and itssacraments as well as otherthemes such as angels,Lucifer and the anti-Christ.Whatever its source, theScivias stands in acommanding place in

medieval religious literatureanditsauthorinthefirstrankof remarkablewomen of anyage.

Furtherreading

The correspondence ofAbelard and Heloise,including the Historiacalamitatum, isavailableina

Penguin paperback, TheLetters of Abelard andHeloise (tr. Betty Radice;Harmondsworth, Mddsx,1974). The best book onAbelard, comprehensive,well-informed, brilliantlyincisive, is Michael T.Clanchy, Abelard: AMedievalLife(Oxford,1997).A book that contains morethanthetitlesuggestsisJohnMarenbon,ThePhilosophyofPeter Abelard (Cambridge,

1997). For Bernard’s letterssee Letters of St Bernard ofClairvaux (tr. Bruno ScottJames; Stroud, Glos., 1998).ConstantJ.Mewsclaimsthatlettersfoundinacollectionatthe municipal library atTroyesbelongtooursubject:The Lost Love Letters ofHeloise and Abelard:Perceptions of Dialogue inTwelfth-Century France(London, 1999), which alsoprovidesatranslationofthese

letters; Dr Mews alsodicusses the Council of Sensin ‘The Council of Sens(1141):Abelard,Bernard,andtheFearofSocialUpheaval’,Speculum 77 (2002) 342–82.A series of essays, mostly(althoughnotentirely)fromafeminist perspective, isBonnie Wheeler, ed.,Listening to Heloise: TheVoice of a Twelfth-CenturyWoman (Basingstoke andLondon,2000).

Three essential books onBecket are David Knowles,Thomas Becket (London,1970),FrankBarlow,ThomasBecket (Berkeley, 1986) andAnne Duggan, ThomasBecket (Oxford, 2005). In awork of exemplaryscholarshipAnneDugganhasproduced an edition (withEnglish translation) of theletters to and from Becket,The Correspondence ofThomas Becket, Archbishop

ofCanterbury, 1162–1170 (2vols;Oxford, 2000). She hasalso written a fascinatingpiece of detective work inreconstructing the text ofHenryII’sreconciliation,‘Nein dubium: The OfficialRecord of Henry II’sReconciliation at Avranches,21 May 1172’, EnglishHistorical Review 115(2000), 643–58, which, withother relevantpapersofhers,is reprinted in Thomas

Becket: Friends, Networks,Texts and Cult (Aldershot,Hants., 2007).An interestingaccount about the remains ofBecket is John Butler, TheQuest for Becket’s Bones:The Mystery of the Relics ofSt Thomas Becket ofCanterbury (NewHaven andLondon,1995).Written forageneral audience by formerCanterbury librarian andOxforddonWilliamUrryandpublished posthumously is

Thomas Becket: His LastDays(Stroud,Glos.1999).An excellent introduction

to Hildegard of Bingen isSabina Flanagan, Hildegardof Bingen, 1098–1179: AVisionary Life (2nd edn;London and New York,1998). Dr Flanagan has alsoprovided a selection ofwritings in Secrets of God:Writings of Hildegard ofBingen (Boston and London,1996). A sine qua non for a

study of her life is AnnaSilvas, tr. and intro., Juttaand Hildegard: TheBiographical Sources(University Park, PA, 1998).Other useful titles includePeterDronke,WomenWritersoftheMiddleAges:ACriticalStudyofTexts fromPerpetua(†203) toMarguerite Porete(†1310) (Cambridge, 1984);Barbara Newman, Sister ofWisdom: St Hildegard’sTheology of the Feminine

(Berkeley and Aldershot,1987) and, under hereditorship,VoiceoftheLivingLight: Hildegard of BingenandherWorld(Berkeley,LosAngeles and London, 1998).The textofhermajorvisionshas been translated intoEnglish by Mother ColumbaHartandJaneBishop:Scivias(Bethlehem, CT, 1990).Extremely valuable is theEnglish translation ofHildegard’s letters, The

Letters of Hildegard ofBingen (3vols; trsJ.L.Bairdand R.K. Ehrmann; Oxford,1994–2004). PenguinClassics has producedHildegardofBingen,SelectedWritings (tr. Mark Atherton;London, 2001). Dr OliverSacks discusses Hildegard’ssymptoms in Migraine (rev.edn;London,1995).

10THEAGEOFINNOCENTIII

The history of the church isnotthehistoryofthepapacy.The Christian church wasmore than its institutional

framework, and, even as aninstitution, the church wasmore than thepapacy.Yet torelegatethepapacytoaside-show would be to distortgrossly the nature of thechurch in the high MiddleAges. If any medieval popedominated the church in theage inwhichhe lived, itwasPope Innocent III (1198–1216). The period at the endofthetwelfthcenturyandthebeginning of the thirteenth

century tested the advancesand reforms of the previouscentury. There were newchallenges and newresponses, but these were inthe context of a reformedpapacy,new religiousorders,an increasingly urbanpopulationand,inthechairofSt Peter, the commandingfigureofInnocentIII.His immediate

predecessors were incontinuing conflict with the

German emperor. AlthoughpeacehadbeenarrangedwithFrederickBarbarossain1177,the next decades sawdisputes, particularly aboutimperial territorial claims incentral Italy, settled in 1189to the benefit of the papacy.The major problem of thepossible union of Sicily andGermany arose and woulddominate the political issuesofthefirstyearsofInnocent’spontificate. Also, Jerusalem,

held since 1099 by LatinChristians,fellin1187totheremarkable Saracen leader,Saladin, and the ChristianWest called for a thirdcrusade, a second crusadehaving failed in 1147 torecapturethecrusaderstateofEdessa. The Third Crusade(1189–92), although led bythe great kings of Europe(Frederick Barbarossa ofGermany, Richard the Lion-Hearted of England and

Philip Augustus of France),failed to recaptureJerusalem,although they secured a 90mile coastal strip from Tyreto Jaffa for the kingdom ofJerusalem. Innocent’simmediate predecessor,Celestine III (1191–98), adefender of Peter Abelard atSens and, indeed, a friend ofThomas Becket, died at theage of 92, having failed onhis deathbed to arrange hisabdication and the

appointment of his favouritecardinal. Instead on the verydayofhisdeaththecardinalselected Cardinal Lothario deSegni, who took the nameInnocent.

ThepoliticalInnocent

Lothario’s father was count

ofSegni,nearRome,andhismother was a member of anevenmorenotablearistocraticfamily, the Scotti of Rome.Lothariohadstudiedtheologyat Paris and was to promotehis former teacher Peter ofCorbeil to the archbishopricof Sens. Later he studied atBologna, presumably law. Acardinal at 29, Lothario deSegni became pope at 37. Inhis sermon given on the daywhen he was consecrated

bishop of Rome – and, thus,pope – Innocent gave anindication of what might lieinstore:

OnlyPeterwasgivenfullnessofpower (plenitudo potestatis).You see, then, who is placed incharge of the household: it isJesus Christ’s vicar, Peter’ssuccessor, the Lord’s anointed,the Pharaoh’s god. I am placedbetween God and man, belowGod but above man; I am lessthan God but more than man; Iamhewhowill judgeallandbejudgedbynone.

Heactedswiftly,accordingtohis biographer. He reducedthesizeofthepapalcuriaandremoved from it greedyyoungnobles.ThePrefect ofRome now took an oath ofobedience to the pope andnot, as hitherto, to theemperor. Oaths to the newpope were given by thepowerfulmenofRome.Oncein control of the city,Innocentundertook to restorethepapallands,lostovertime

to imperial jurisdiction.Withinayearhesucceededinregaining control over the‘Patrimony of St Peter’. Thepope as temporal ruler ofsignificant territory in centralItaly faced at once a majorpoliticalproblem.When thesonofFrederick

Barbarossa, Emperor HenryVI, died unexpectedly at theage of 32 in 1197 as hewaspreparing to sail from Sicilyon crusade, a serious

European crisis was created.Henry was married toConstance, heir to thekingdom of Sicily, whichincluded not only that islandbutalsoaconsiderablepartofsouthern Italy (togethergenerally referred to as theregno). Henry VI left notonly a widow but a youngson, Frederick ofHohenstaufen,whowouldbeheir to Sicily and, dependingon the German election,

possibly successor to thekingdom of Germany. Themainpremiseofpapalforeignpolicy held that theGerman-controlled lands to the northshouldnotbeunitedwiththeregno. If the Germans hadcontrolofboth,thepopesfeltthat the Papal States inbetween would be in realdanger of being squeezed,perhaps to the point ofextinction, with the loss ofpapal independence. The

papal landshad tobeheldatall cost, it was argued, forotherwise the popes and thechurch would not have thefreedom to carry out itsspiritualmission.InSicilyQueenConstance

became regent for her youngson, but she died inNovember 1198, andFrederickwasmadeawardofthe pope. In Germany theelectors were deeply dividedas to what they should do.

They had, in 1196, taken anoath, at the urging of HenryVI, to recognize the youngFrederick as his successor.Few felt constrained to keepthat oath. Two factionselected two different men asking, and western Europetook sides, favouring eitherOtto of Brunswick or Philipof Swabia. The popesupported Otto, and, whenPhilip protested, Innocent, inMarch1202, issued the letter

Venerabilem (its first word).Innocentdisclaimedanyrightin the elections in Germany.Yet, sinceby tradition itwashe who would crown aGerman king as emperor,then he had the right, heargued, to examine that kingandjudgehisfitness.Also,

If there isadividedelection,wecan support one of the parties,suitable delays forrepresentations being made,particularlywhencoronationhasbeenrequestedofus.

Thislooksverymuchlikethepope making what isessentiallyapoliticaldecisionin the temporal – and notspiritual–order.ThedeathofPhilip of Swabia in 1208resolvedtheimmediatecrisis,andOtto IVwas crowned inOctober 1209. Yet, in 1210,Innocent excommunicatedOtto for violating hiscoronation promise not toinvade Sicily. The focusshifted now to Frederick of

Sicily, whom the pope putforward to succeedOtto, andhe was supported in this byPhilip Augustus, king ofFrance. In December 1212theelectors electedFrederickas king. Otto, supported byhis uncle, King John ofEngland, lost any chance ofsuccess when he and Johnwere defeated by PhilipAugustusatthecrucialBattleof Bouvines (27 July 1214).A year later Frederick II, at

age 20,was crowned king atAachen, and his claim to theimperial title was confirmedattheFourthLateranCouncilseveral months later. Hesurrendered claims to papallands in Italy and promisedInnocentthathewouldresignSicily when he was crownedemperor. Innocent III wouldhave been justified inthinking he had won avictory, having gaineduncontestedcontrolofcentral

Italyandhavingthwartedtheunion of empire and regno.He died (1216) with thisconviction. His successorshad to deal with theunravelling of the settlementas the pliant Frederick IIturnedintoanenemy.Muchofthisstorybelongs

tothepoliticalhistoryofItalyrather than to the history ofthe church, yet theinvolvement of the popes inItalian politics by reason of

their temporal possessionswas bound to have aninfluenceonthechurchasaninstitution, since Christianrulers were spiritual sons ofthe pope yet, in many cases,his political enemies. Thissituation was bound tocomplicate and even tocompromise the spiritualnature of the church’smission. The events can bequicklysummarized.Frederick II dominated the

European stage for 35 yearsafter Innocent’s death. Hisenemies portrayed him asamoral, blasphemous,heretical and ruthless. Abouthis personal beliefs there isnoconvincingreasontothinkhimotherthanconventionallyorthodox. His personalmoralswereneitherbetternorworse than many of hiscontemporary rulers. Butruthless and headstrong hewas beyond doubt, and also

oneof themost intelligentofmedieval kings. In 1220 hehad his young son, Henry(VII), elected as Germanking; then Frededrick IIproceededtoRome,wherehewas crowned emperor.Frederick had, in fact,established a union in hisperson of Germany andSicily, the plan of Innocentnow shattered. Frederick’ssonprovedrebellioustowardshisfatherandwasimprisoned

in Sicily. Some of theLombard cities in northernItaly resented Frederick’sexerciseofimperialpowerinthese imperially held places.Twice was Frederickexcommunicated by PopeGregory IX, in 1227 forfailing togooncrusade–hehad embarked but was takenill – and again, in 1239, forfailing to secure peace withthe Lombard cities.Frederick’s role in the

crusades contains a bitterirony. In 1227, althoughexcommunicated and notunderpapalbanner,hesetoutfor the East with a smallarmy. Having married theheiress to the kingdom ofJerusalem, he held claim tothat kingship. Once in theEast, he entered intonegotiations with the sultanof Egypt and gained controlof thekingdomofJerusalem.On 18 March 1229 he

processed into the church ofthe Holy Sepulchre to becrowned, and, with no priestthere, the excommunicatedFrederick II crowned himselfkingofJerusalem.Notadropof blood had been spilt;Jerusalem, lost to Saladin in1187 and its recapture theobject of three crusades (III,IV,V),wasnowinChristianhands.(Weshallhavetovisitthe Fourth Crusade shortly.)Instead of congratulations,

Frederick was vilified onmany sides, some criticsopenly lamenting that it wasnot by blood and the swordthat Jerusalem was regained.In the following yearFrederick made his peacewith the pope, and theexcommunication was lifted.ButPopeInnocentIV(1243–54) actually declaredFrederick deposed in 1245,and, whatever the officialreasons, the real reason was

the emperor’s continuedefforts to control theLombard lands. Frederickdied five years later, thematterstillunresolved.Whenthe pope heard of his death,he said, ‘Let the heavensrejoice and the earth exult’,soundingmorelikeapoliticaladversary than a shepherd ofsouls.ToreturntoInnocentIII,it

was not only with theemperor that he came into

conflict but also with otherprinces of Europe. He wasinvolved with the emergingkingdoms of the Iberianpeninsula (see chapter 13).Also, Hungary, since itsconversion in the years justprior to the millennium, waspivotal to the aims of thepapacy in evangelizing forthe Latin, Western Church,yet, in 1203, Innocent IIIrisked this effort bysupporting Bulgaria and

Bosnia, to the greatannoyanceofHungary.Nowhere outside the

empire was Innocent’sinvolvement in high politicsmoreevidentthaninEngland.There King John (1199–1216)becameembroiled inadispute over the election ofthe archbishop ofCanterburyafter the death of HubertWalterin1205.ThemonksofCanterbury Cathedral Priorysecretlyelectedtheirsubprior

and sent him to Rome.Innocent halted the process,and, back in England, KingJohn intimidated the monksinto electing his candidate,the bishop of Norwich. Butthis election the pope ruledwasuncanonical,andhesoonruled the previous electionalso invalid. A delegation of15 Canterbury monkstravelled to Rome and, nodoubt following the papalwill, elected as archbishop

CardinalStephenLangton,anEnglishman then lecturing intheology at Paris andprobably a former fellowstudentof thepope. Innocentconsecrated Langton asarchbishop of Canterbury in1207 in Italy. King Johnrefused to allow the newarchbishopintoEngland,and,like Becket before him,Langton spent six years inexile in France, mostly atPontigny, the place where

Becket had stayed for twoyears. Innocent threatenedaninterdict on England, and,when the threat failed tomove the king, the pope, in1208, carried through histhreat and placed thekingdom of England underinterdict. Public religiousceremonies ceased, the bareessentials of infant baptismandthelastritesforthedyingand little else surviving thepapal penalty. The interdict

lastedforsixyears,itspreciseeffects diffi-cult to measure.At a crucialmoment in1209negotiations broke down andInnocent excommunicatedKing John. In 1211, facedwith the threat of beingdeposed as king by the popeand with the prospect of animpending invasion by theFrenchking,Johncapitulated.He did more than allowStephen Langton to come toEngland as archbishop of

Canterbury; he handed overthekingdomsofEnglandandIreland to the papacy andtook them back as vassal tothe pope. King John facedanother problem: theopposition of English baronsto his exactions. The kingwas forced to issue MagnaCarta on 15 June 1215, butthe king’s new ally, PopeInnocentIII,annullediton24August(visitorstotheBritishLibrary in London can see

displayed side by side thecharter and the papal bullannullingit):

By violence and fear he [KingJohn] was forced to accept anagreement which is not onlyshameful anddegradingbut alsoillegalandunjust…Thatcharterwedeclaretobenullandvoidforever.

Although the significance ofMagna Carta in thedevelopmentof civil libertieshas long since been

drastically reduced bymodern scholars, thesignificance of the papalannulmentneedsunderlining,for here a pope not onlycriticized but declared nullwhatwasessentiallyaseculardocument. Innocent III wasexercisingafullnessofpower(plentitudo potestatis) thatwould have amazed most ofhis predecessors and havealarmed some. Yet, whenMagnaCartawas reissued in

1216,afterthedeathsofJohnand Innocent, itbore the sealof the papal legate toEngland.

TheFourthCrusade(1202–4)

We have already seen thesuccessful regaining ofJerusalem by Frederick II in

1229, in the context of thatruler’s ongoing controversieswith the papacy. We mustnowbackup20yearstolookat the tragedy of the crusadecalledbyPopeInnocentIIIinAugust 1199, referred to bylater historians as the FourthCrusade.Itwasthefailureofthe Fourth Crusade thatprecipitated theexpeditionofFrederick II 25 years later.Innocent’s crusadewas to beunder papal control and its

object was to recaptureJerusalem, This did nothappen as the pope lostcontrol and as the ChristiancityofConstantinople, ratherthan Muslim Jerusalem, wascaptured by the crusaders.The response to the pope’scallwas slow in coming, thetarget date of departure,March1199,wasnotmet,butthe preaching of Fulk ofNeuilly kept the idea alive.Actual recruitment began in

November 1199, whenknightswhohadgatheredfora tournament at the castle ofThibault, count ofChampagne, cast down theirweapons for the day’s sportand took oaths to go on thecrusade. Soon joining thoseknightswereothers:Baldwinof Flanders, Louis of Blois,GeoffreyofLePerche,SimondeMontfortandothernoblesfrom Flanders and northernFrance, followed soon by

nobles from the RhinelandandnorthernItaly.Sinceonlythe count of Flanders had afleet, the three leadingcrusaders, the counts ofFlanders, Blois andChampagne, in 1200 sentemissaries to negotiate withVenice for their transport,and,indoingthis,thefirstofmanymistakeswasmade.Crossing through Alpine

passesandtheLombardplainthe envoys of the crusaders

arrived at Venice in Lent1201, where they weregreetedcordiallyby thedoge(fromduce,leader),Dandolo,then 94 years old and blind.An agreement, the Treaty ofVenice (1201), was made; itproved disastrous. At therequest of the crusaders theRepublicofVeniceagreedtoprovide ships to transport4,500 knights and theirhorses, 9,000 squires and20,000 foot soldiers – an

armyof33,500men–forthesum of 85,000 marks to bepaid in four instalments byApril 1202, when thecrusaderswouldbeatVenice,readytoshipoutinlateJune.Venicealsoagreedtoprovidean additional 50war galleys,forwhichtheywouldreceivehalf the spoils of theexpedition. The Republicfurther agreed to provisionthe crusading army for oneyear. This agreement meant

that Venice would constructabout 450 vessels andwouldprovide thosevesselswithasmany as 14,000 crewmen. Inearly May 1201 PopeInnocent III confirmed thistreaty, although he seems tohaveaddedasaconditionthatthe crusade not attackChristians. (He was to makesuch a prohibition inNovember 1202.) Indeed, itwas not in the plans of thecrusade leaders to attack

Christians,butitwasalsonotintheirplanstogodirectlytothe Holy Land. By a secretagreementthestrategywastoattackEgypt,totakethegreatMuslim city of Alexandriaand hold it hostage until thesultan restored Jerusalem tothe Christians. It was astrategy which over thepreceding decades had manysupporters including KingRichardIofEngland.Withina few weeks of Innocent’s

approval Thibault ofChampagne,thedrivingforcebehindthecrusade,diedagedabout24.Inneedofaleader,the principal crusadersselectedBoniface,marquisofMontferrat in northern Italy,who met them at Soissons,wherehe took the cross.Thepopewasnotconsulted.ByJune1202theexpected

33,500 had not arrived atVenice. The organizers seemtohavegrosslyoverestimated

the size of their army.Departure dates wererepeatedly made andpostponed, and, when itbecame clear that only about12,000 crusaders had comeand no more could beexpected, the leaders of thecrusadeknewthat theycouldnot pay the doge the agreed85,000marks.TheVenetianshad built the ships, securedthe crews and purchasedprovisions; they were

understandably concernedthat only 50,000marks werebeing paid them. Thecrusaders had not fulfilledtheir part of the treaty. Thecrusade stood in imminentperil of collapsing. It was amoment of extreme crisis.What happened next sealedthe disaster which was theFourthCrusade.Twofactorsnowcameinto

play. In the first place,Boniface of Montferrat, the

leader of the crusade, was aclosefriendandallyofPhilipof Swabia, who at this timewas a contender againstOttoofBrunswickfortheGermanthroneand,ultimately,fortheemperorship (see pp. 172–74). Philip was married toIrene, the daughter of theEastern emperor, IsaacAngelus, who had lost histhrone, shortly after hisdaughter’s marriage, at thehand of his brother Alexius,

whonowasEmperorAlexiusIII imprisoned Isaac andIsaac’s son Alexius andblinded Isaac. The youngAlexiusescapedandtravelledto his sister and brother-in-law in Germany, looking forhelp.

The second ingredientwastheVenetiandesiretocontrolthe Dalmatian coast of theAdriaticSea.ItschiefportofZara was then in Hungarianhands. Venetian interestswould be served if thecrusaderscouldcaptureZara.Twodealswere struck.First,the crusaders were told thatthe Venetians would allowthem to defer payment yetsail in the ships with crewsandprovisions,providedthat,

on the way, theywould takeZara.Apartfromabortingthecrusade, which somecontemporaries thoughtshould have happened, therewas little else the crusaderscould do. An eye-witness toall this, Robert of Clari,commented,

Thebaronsandtheotherleadersof the crusade agreed to thedoge’splan,buttherankandfileof the armyknewnothing aboutit.

TheysailedoutofVeniceon8 November 1202 and downtheAdriatic,where two dayslater theyattackedthecityofZara, which, after 16 days,they took and thoroughlypillaged.ZarawasaChristiancity. Pope Innocent III wasappalledatthisturnofevents;excommunication wasincurredbyallwhotookpart,althoughitwaslaterremovedby Innocent except for theVenetians. What to do now,

once in Zara? The agreedstrategy had been to set sailfor Egypt and takeAlexandria, but Philip ofSwabia and Boniface ofMontferrat approached theVenetians with a temptingproposal. Philip, acting onbehalf of his exiled brother-in-law, the young Alexius,promisedthat,ifthecrusaderswould secure the imperialthrone for Alexius atConstantinople, Alexius

would pay the outstandingdebtowedbythecrusaderstotheRepublicofVenice.Aftermuchdebateandconsiderabledissent, itwas so agreed.AnalreadygreatlyupsetInnocentbecame enraged and forbadethecrusaderstousetheswordagainst fellowChristians,butthecrusade leaders conspiredto keep this prohibition fromtheir soldiers. The papallegate issued a bullexcommunicating the

Venetians, yet, despitedefections by such as SimondeMontfort, itwasagreedatCorfu, where the crusadingarmy had gone from Zara,that the crusaders would sailfor thegreatChristiancityofConstantinople, and InnocentIIIwashelplesstostopthem.It was a crusade out ofcontrol.On 25 May 1203, on the

eve of the Christian feast ofPentecost, thefleet leftCorfu

and, stopping to replenishsupplies en route, sailedthrough the narrow passageof the Dardanelles and,unimpeded, into the Sea ofMarmora, where they camewithin sight ofConstantinople on 23 June.Their planwas to put ashoreon the Asian side of theBosporus and there wait forthe surrender ofConstantinople, which theyoung Alexius had led them

to believe would occur oncetheyhadarrived.Theywaitedandwaited,andhisuncle,theusurper,EmperorAlexiusIII,refused to surrender. Anattack, which the crusadershad not expected to have tomake, was now necessary.Rather than attackConstantinople directly, thestrategists in the crusadingarmydecidedthattheyshouldattackGalataacross fromthecity on the northern shore of

the Golden Horn,Constantinople’s large andsecure harbour, the entranceto which was blocked by amammoth chain.After fiercefighting, Galata was takenand the chain broken by theironprowof aVenetian shipat full speed.The fleet sailedinto the Golden Horn andtook up positions at Galata.The army was ready for itsattackonthecityitself.Aftertwo days of fighting, the

walls were breached and theemperor fled. Constantinoplehad been easily taken. TheblindedIsaacagreedtoreturnas emperor and to accept hisson, the young Alexius, ascoemperor. On 1 August1203 the latter was crownedin Santa Sophia afterpromisingtounitetheEasternChurchwithRome.Withthisdiversionary actionsuccessfully completed, onemightthinkthatthecrusaders

could now go on to Egypt.Thiswasnottohappen.Simply put, the young

Alexius (IV) and his fatherwere unable to raise thepromised money for thecrusaders to pay theirVenetian creditors. PromisesbyAlexiusthathewouldpaykept the crusaders at theircamps across the GoldenHorn into early 1204.Discontent was running highnot just among the crusaders

but also among the Greeks,who were dissatisfied withAlexius IV for his financialexactions and for hisovertures to Rome for unionof the churches. A palacecoup occurred. Isaac died,and the young Alexius wasstrangled and replaced byAlexius III’s son-in-law (yetanother Alexius, the fifthemperor of that name). Thecrusaderssawtheirchanceofbeingpaidfastslippingaway

andwereconvincedthattheironly option was to take thecitybymilitary forceandsetuptheirownmanasemperor.In their councils thecrusaders, no longer reallycrusaders but adventurers,agreed on the division of thespoilsofbattlefortheeasternempire. The new (Latin)emperor would have one-quarter of the city andempire.Theremainderwouldbe divided equally between

the Venetians and the knightcrusaders. A senior crusader,Villehardouin, acknowledgedthatthecrusadewasover:

At the end of March in thefollowing year anyone whowishedtoleavewouldbefreetogo wherever he wished. Thosewho remained, however, wouldbe subject to the jurisdiction oftheemperor.

Thefirstattackonthewalledcity proved unsuccessful, butthenon12April1204,rallied

by preachers, the Latin armysucceeded in breaching thewalls, scattering the ill-trained Greeks, and captureda large section of the city.They then started a fire thatwasted a considerable area,and thewill of the people ofConstantinople to defendthemselves vanished. TheLatins had taken the mostmagnificentcityintheworld,and the leaders allowed theirsoldiers threeday tosack the

city.‘The sack of

Constantinople isunparalleled in history’, SirSteven Runciman sadlycomments.Thecaptureofthecity was followed by aruthless, violent,uncontrolled, barbaricpillaging. Nothing and,indeed,noonewassafefromthesemenastheyrapednuns,slew in an awful, randombrutality, stole jewels and

relics, violated churches andmonasteries, destroyedpriceless art work: an utterlymindlessrampage

Map12Constantinopleinthethirteenthcentury

of collective insanity. Theyeven entered themagnificentSanta Sophia and denuded itofallitsdecorations,goingsofarastosmashthealtarforitsgemsandpreciousmetal andwere entertained in thegreatest church inChristendom by a prostituteseated on the patriarch’sthrone. They entered houses

to wreck them, seizingprecious stones for theirspoils and women for theirpleasure. One Cistercianabbotfeltleftoutanddecidedtojoininbut to limithimselfto stealing only holy relics,whichwerelaterprizedbyhismonks in Alsace. Dandolo,thepowerfuldogeofVenice,whose skilful hand has beenseen by many behind thedestiny of this crusade, stolefour bronze horses from the

Hippodrome,andtheycanbeseentodayabovetheentranceto St Mark’s Basilica, asymbolnowofVenicefortheVenetians, but, for manyothers, a symbol of ineffablehubris and boundless greed.The leaders of the crusadeordered that all booty bebrought to a central place –largeamountswereconcealedbypillagers–fordistributionamong the conquerors. Thedebt to Venice, at the centre

ofthistale,wasfinallypaid.The reaction of Pope

Innocent III to the events inConstantinople might seemambiguous. To the newemperor he wrote withoutreference to the attack onChristian Constantinople, butto others he was explicitlycondemnatory. To Boniface,MarquisofMontferrat,leaderof the crusade, hewrote in averydifferentvein:

You have turned away from thepurityofyour[crusader]vow…because you fought not againstthe Saracens but againstChristians, not to reconquerJerusalem but to occupyConstantinople, preferringearthly to heavenly riches, and,whatisfarmoreserious,becauseyou spared neither religion, norage, nor sex, but perpetratedfornications, adulteries, andincests, not only with marriedwomen and widows, but alsowith matrons and virginsdedicatedtoGod.

Amoredamningjudgementit

is difficult to imagine. Andthere can be no doubt thatInnocent blamed theVenetians for the failure oftheFourthCrusade.All that remained was for

the conquering Latins toselect an emperor. Bonifaceof Montferrat was passedover in favourofBaldwinofFlanders. And, on 16 May1204, a Flemish knight wascrowned emperor, successorto Constantine and Justinian.

And soon a Latin patriarchwasappointed.ButthisLatinempireoftheEastlastedonlyuntil 1261, whenConstantinople wasrecaptured by the ByzantineGreeks. The crusading ideal,preachedbyUrbanIIin1095,was now twisted beyondrecognition, and theEast hasnever forgotten the FourthCrusade, which, instead ofrelieving the Holy Land,succeeded in making

permanent the schismbetweentheChurchesofEastandWest.In2001PopeJohnPaul II apologized to theGreek Orthodox with deepregret for what the FourthCrusadedidatConstantinoplein1204.

TheFourthLateranCouncil(1215)

Therecanbe littledoubt thatthe Fourth Lateran Councilwas the most importantgeneralcouncilof thechurchin the Middle Ages. It wasalso the crowningachievement of thepontificate of Innocent III.Therecame toRometomeetin council not merelyrepresentative bishops fromCatholic lands but manymore. Every bishop wasexpected to attend, excepting

only a few from eachprovince, who were to senddelegates to represent them.Every cathedral chapter wasto send a representative aswas every collegiate church(i.e., a large church with anumber of secular canonssuch as Beverley Minster inYorkshire). The heads of thenew religious orders(Cistercians,Premonstratensians, militaryorders)werealsosummoned.

Innocent even invitedrepresentativesof theEasternpatriarchates toattend. In theevent,outragedbythecaptureof Constantinople in 1204,nonecamefromtheEastsaverepresentatives of the Latinpatriarchate ofConstantinople and of thepatriarch of Alexandria aswell as the primate of theMaronitechurchandproctorsfrom the Latin States. In amovethatmighthavegreatly

disturbed Gregory VII,Innocent III invited secularrulerstosendrepresentatives.Frederick II of Sicily,claimant to the emperorship,sentproctorsasdidthekingsof France and England.Representatives of the kingsof Hungary and Aragonattended as did rulers andproctors from the Italian citystates. Nothing on this scalehad every occurred before:Innocent III, in effect,

convoked an assembly ofLatinChristendom.Quietly, at dawn on 11

November 1215, the popecelebrated the opening Massin the presence only of thecardinals and bishops, about400 or so. They were thenjoinedbyover800abbotsandreligious superiors. Whenfinally the doors of the greatbasilicaofStJohn,thepope’scathedral, were thrown open,a flood of people pressed

theirwayin,massesofclergyand others. One eye-witnessin agitated enthusiasm saidthere were ‘thousands ofthousands, even ten times ahundred thousand’. Thethrong pouring into thebasilica is said to havecrusheda leastonebishop todeath. The same eye-witnesswrote that so great was thedinthathecouldnothearthepope’s address opening thecouncil. He soon secured a

copy. Innocent III declaredthat the aim of the councilwas twofold: to effect therecaptureofJerusalemandtoreform the church. His firstaim,aswehaveseen,provedunsuccessful. Whatcommandsourattentionistheeffort to reinvigorate thespiritualhealthofthechurch.The70canons(ordecrees),

approved by the FourthLateran Council, were notdebated in council but were

presented by the pope.Not aword was changed, not acanon challenged, not anissue debated: the decrees ofthe councilwere theworkofthepopeandhiscuria.Apartfrom the first two decrees,which dealt with dogmaticmatters, the decrees of thecouncil concerned thepractical life of the church.These decrees were to affectthewayChristianslivedtheirChristian lives for centuries

to come. The most enduringandpenetratingactionsoftheFourth Lateran Council hadnothing to do with crusadesordogmaticnicetiesbutwiththe pastoral concerns of thechurch.A summary of the most

significant decrees can onlyserve to suggest the pastoraldimensions of the council’swork. Central to any attemptto elevate the quality of theChristian life as lived by

individual Christians in thehamlets, villages and townsof western Europe was thequality of the clergy chargedwith the careof souls,whichone decree called ‘the art ofarts’. It is ‘better to have afew good priests (paucosbonos) thanmanybadpriests(multos malos)’. Bishopseither personally or throughothers should instructcandidates for the priesthoodas to how they should

perform the sacred rites andsacraments. But more,extendinganenactmentoftheThird Lateran Council(1179), it was decreed thateach cathedral should have amaster of grammar who willinstruct the clergy and poorscholars gratis, and inmetropolitan churches thereshould also be a master oftheology, who will teachpriests and others ‘in thesacred page’ and who will

especially instruct them inthose thingswhich pertain tothe

Map13RepresentativesattheFourthLateranCouncil(1215)

care of souls. Not quite amodern seminary, itself acreature of the sixteenthcentury,yetthearrangementsprovided for the training oftheclergyinsomethingmorethanthemereperformanceofrituals. More than Masspriests,theywereexpectedtobe pastors of souls. Thecouncil defined their

behaviourinexplicitterms:Clerics shall not hold secularoffice nor indulge in commerce,especially unseemly commerce.They shall not attendperformances of mimes, jestersor plays and shall avoid tavernsexcept only out of necessitywhile travelling. Nor shall theyplay with dice; they should noteven be present at such games.They should wear the clericaltonsure and be zealous in theperformance of their divineoffices and in otherresponsibilities. Moreover, theyshallweartheirgarmentsclasped

and neither too short nor toolong. And they shall eschewbright colours such as red andgreen as well as ornamentationontheirglovesandshoes.

(Canon16)

Thecouncilwentontocondemntheconductofsomepriests:

We regret that not onlysome clerics in minororders but also someprelatesofchurchesspendhalf the night eating andtalking, not to mentionother things they aredoing, andget to sleep solate that they are scarcely

wakened by the birdssinging and they mumbletheir way hurriedlythrough morning prayers.There are some clericswho celebrate Mass onlyfour times a year and,what is worse, theydisdain even attendingMass.And,iftheyhappentobepresentatMass,theyflee the silence of thechoir togooutside to talkwith laymen, preferringthings frivolous to thingsdivine. These and similarpracticeswe totally forbidunder penalty ofsuspension.

(Canon17)

The clergy are commanded toabstainfromdrunkennessandthedrinking custom in which eachdrinker matches the otherdrinkers drink for drink untilonlyoneisstanding.Theyaretolive chastely, and offenders arethreatened with suspension.Bishops should institute onlyworthy clerics to benefices, andthe bishops too are threatenedwithsanctions.

Decency requires that theclergy have nothing to do withthe spilling of blood. They areforbidden to be surgeons and

soldiers. Not onlymay they notcondemn anyone to death –‘sentence of blood’ – but theymay not be presentwhere bloodisshedinpunishment.And, inanoteworthyprovisionwhichwasto eliminate a longstandingpractice, clerics were forbiddento be involved in ordeals bywaterand fire.Theguilty,manybelieved, would be rejected bythe water (i.e., float to thesurface),whentheywerethrowninto blessed cold water, and theinnocent would not be affectedwhentheytookablessedhotironin their hands. Since priestshereafter could bless neither thewaternortheiron,thesemethods

ofcriminaljudgementcouldonlyfade away, which they did.Similarly,priestswereforbiddento engage in hunting andfowling. The priestly life, inshort, must be shred ofincongruities and irrelevanciesand imbued with a commitmenttotheserviceofsouls.

More than any otherprovision of the council, nonetouched more people morepersonally than canon 21, oftenreferredtobyitsopeningwords,‘Omnis utriusque sexus’. ‘AllCatholics of either sex’ shallconfess their sins to their localparishpriest at leastonceayearand receive holy communion at

Easter. Failure to do so wouldmean exclusion from theChristian community duringone’slifetimeandfromChristianburial at life’s end. Annualconfession, although urgedbefore this time,nowbecameanabsolute requirement, and thisdecreewastobeoneofthemostinfluential conciliar decrees ofthe Middle Ages in itsconsequences for the devotionallivesofordinarypeople.

Another matter touching thelives of most Christiansconcerned marriage. Weddingceremoniesmustbeperformedatchurch and preceded by thepublicationofbanns;clandestine

(i.e., private) marriages wereabsolutely forbidden. Thecouncil, while forbiddingclandestine marriages, did notdeclare them null and void: thepartiesmaycommitasin,evenagrave sin, by the clandestinemarriage, but they arenonethelessmarried.Itwouldbemany centuries before suchmarriages would be declaredinvalid.Thecomplexquestionofmarryingrelativeswassomewhatsimplified. Henceforward, onecould marry beyond the fourthdegree of kinship, which meantthat what was now prohibitedwasmarriagebetweenamananda woman sharing a common

great-greatgrandparent or acloser ancestor (i.e., a thirdcousin or closer). Consanguinity(kinship) was an impediment tomarriage based on bloodrelationship. Affinity wasanothermatter:itwaseffectedbyrelationship through marriage.WhenJohnmarriedMary,hehada relationship of affinity withMary’s family and shewith his.Thus, ifMaryweretodie,couldJohn marry Mary’s sisterCatherine or, for that matter,Mary’smother,Maud?Thesearequestions concerning the affectof affinity on the validity ofmarriage. Hitherto, affinity wasan impediment to marriage

within the third degree, thusforbidding, in this case, Johnfrom marrying his late wife’smother and sister (first degree)and her nieces (second degree)but also her niece’s daughter(third degree). Hereafter, onlythefirstdegreewasforbidden.Inaruralsocietymadeupofsmallvillages and tiny hamlets withlittlechanceoftravel,thechoiceofapartnerwas,inthenatureofthings, limited even with thesesomewhat relaxed provisions ofthe council. The new provisionregarding affinity wouldprobablyhavehadmorepracticalimpact than those relating toconsanguinity, given the

shortness of life, particularly forwomen, the small circle ofprospectivesecondwivesandtheinvolvement of rural propertiesin these matters. Thearrangementswerestillimperfectbut amajor improvementon thestatusquoante.

Pope Innocent, concernedabout the multiplication ofreligiousorders andproblemsofpapal oversight, forbade throughthe council the founding of newrules; neworderswould have toadopt existing rules. How thisimpactedonthenewlyemergingorders of friars remains to beseen (chapter 11).Also, existingreligious orders should follow

the example of the Cisterciansandholdgeneralchaptersineachprovince at three-year intervalsinordertoensuretheobservanceof the letter and spirit of theirrespectiverules.

Four decrees dealt with theJews. They are the last four ofthe70conciliardecrees,andonewonders if they were anafterthoughtand,ifso,whytheywere added. In the first place,thoseJewishmoney-lenderswhocharge usurious rates of interestneednotbepaiduntiltheymakereparations for their usury.Secondly, in a justly famousdecree, distinctive dress wasrequired of Jews and Muslims

anddeservestobequoted:

In some places, it is notpossible to distinguishJews and Muslims fromChristians.IthappensnowandthenthatthrougherrorChristianmencom-minglewith Jewish and Muslimwomen and, conversely,Jewish and Muslim menwith Christian women. Inorder to avoid suchcommingling in the futureunder the excuse of errorastoreligiousidentity,wedecree that Jews andMuslims of both sexes,when in public in

Christian regions, shouldalways be distinguishedfromotherpeoplebytheirdress, since even Mosesinsisted on this [Lev. 19,19;Deut.22,5,11].

(Canon68)

They were further forbidden toappear in public during certaindays in Holy Week, since, thedecree stated, it has beenreported that some Jews offendmourning Christians by wearingmore ornate clothes than theywear at other times. The tworemainingdecreesabouttheJewscan be summarized. Since, the

council said, it is offensive forJews to have power overChristians, they should beexcluded from public office.And, further, Jews who havevoluntarily converted toChristianity should not continueto observe rituals andobservances of the Jewishreligion.

Some comment is in order.StricturesagainstusurywerenotlimitedtoJewsbutagainstusuryperse,nomatterwhotheusurer.Ecclesiastical penalties wereimposedonChristianusurersandthe return of excess interestordered by church courts. Somemay see in this provision of the

council an extension of thispolicy to non-Christian (i.e.,Jewish) money-lenders. Theexclusion of Jews from publicoffice was first ordered at theCouncil of Toledo in 589 andwas frequently repeated. Jewswho were converted toChristianity and who continuedto live in Jewish communitieswhere social and religiouspractices were almostinextricably intertwined mustfrequently have had to makeaccommodations, which to thecouncil could appear ascompromisesandevenbetrayals.Yet it is the dress provisionswhichlingerinthememorylong

after the others have beenforgottenorhavebecomevague.Jews were required to berecognizable as Jews, asdifferent, ostensibly to avoidsexualminglingwith Christians.Whether darker motives layhidden here it is not possible tosay. Muslim rulers frequentlyrequired non-Muslims to dressdistinctively.Thisrequirementofthe council regarding Jewishdress was not immediatelyadopted,but,inthecourseofthethirteenth century, a cloth badgeof gold or crimsonwas requiredin England, France andGermany, and in some places adistinctivehat (Judenhut)was to

beworn.Althoughlawsofdressoften required other groups towear specific dress – priests,prostitutes,physicians,servants–theprovision regarding the Jewssingledoutagroupalreadyproneto misunderstanding and rawprejudice. Themassacre of over150 Jews at York in 1190 wasbut a recentmemory.Historiansmay dispute the severity andimpact of the legislation aboutJews from the Fourth LateranCouncil, yet, to say the least, itfurtherisolatedalargelyisolatedsub-community and furtherfuelledexistingattitudes.

On 30 November 1215InnocentIIIblessedthefathersof

the council with a relic of thetrue cross; he was to die withineight months. The bishops andothers returned home, copies ofthedecreesintheirbaggage.Lestthey remainmeremementoes ofa Roman holiday, the councilitself had provided that in everyecclesiastical province (e.g.Canterbury, Cologne, Rouen,Milan) an annual synod shouldbe held to ensure observance ofthe conciliar decrees and tofurtherthemovementforreform.What happened? While annualsynods were not necessarilyobserved in all the Christianlands, synods were convokedalmost everywhere to publicize

the pastoral aspects of the workof the council. In the provincesofFrance andGermany– in thelatter the situation wascomplicated by continuing civilunrest – meetings were fairlypromptly held. In Ireland theclergy met at Dublin in 1217.The Scots, deprived of theirarchbishop, did not meet until1225. InEngland the bishops ofthe Canterbury province met atOxford in 1222, and its decreeswerefrequentlycopied:some60manuscripts survive. Yet, evenbefore 1222, the bishop ofSalisbury, Richard Poore, hadissued influential statutes. TheOxford and Salisbury decrees,

reflecting the provisions of theFourth Lateran Council, wereincorporatedintolaterprovincialanddiocesansynodallegislation.Yet equally, if not moreimportantly, nearly all theLateran decrees wereincorporated into the greatestmedieval law book, thecollection of decretals issued byPopeGregoryIXin1234.CalledsimplytheDecretalsortheLiberExtra, this law book waspromulgated as the sole,exclusive collection of generalchurch law: any other generalecclesiastical laws previously inforcewereno longer in force. Itwas the law book studied at the

universities, commented on bygenerations of legal scholars,used in theadministrationof thechurchandappliedinthechurchcourts. The inclusion of theLaterandecreesgavethedecreesofthatcouncilalifebeyondtheirrepetition in local synods. Withsome later modifications, theDecretals remained theprincipaltextofchurchlawthroughouttherest of the Middle Ages andeven, in many places, into thetwentiethcentury.

The emphasis on the care ofsouls cannot bemeasured solelyby legislation, local or general.Manuals and directives of apracticalsortweresoonissuedin

the wake of the council to helpthe parochial clergy to carry outtheirdutiestothesoulsentrustedtotheircare.Sometooktheformof instructions for hearingconfession, now a pressing needinviewof thedecreemandatingannual confession. Others dealtwithpreaching.Stillothersdealtwiththemannerofteachingtheirflocks the essentials of theChristianreligion.Thebishopofthe diocese of Coventry andLichfield, about 1230, appendedto theusualpastoralcanonsofadiocesan synod two treatises forhis clergy. A treatise on thesevendeadlysins,intheformofa sermon to be given to their

parishioners, explained thedangerstothesoulofthesinsofpride,envy,anger,sloth,avarice,lust and gluttony. A treatise onconfession insisted, above all,thatGod forgives no sins unlessthere is true repentance, and italso was meant as an aid inhelping penitents examine theirconsciences. At about the sametime, the bishop of Lincoln, thelearned pastor of souls RobertGrosseteste, composedTemplumdei (Temple of God) for hisparish priests. He made use ofdiagrams and tables, providinganeasilyaccessibleguideforhispriests. For example, withremarkable clarity, Grosseteste

showsthatallvirtueis themeanbetweentwovices:faithbetweenthe vices of scepticism andcredulity,hopebetweenthevicesof presumption and despair,charity between the vices ofindiscrimination and hatred. Helisted the ten impediments tomarriage, the five sins requiringrestitution, the three kinds ofexcommunication and so forth.ThattheTemplumdeisurvivesinover90manuscriptsistestimonyto its wide popularity. In thesouth of France, another learnedbishop, Guillaume Durand, in1291 furnishedhisclergywithasmall book containinginstructionsforadministeringthe

sacraments as well as canons togovern their mission as priests.In this tradition,whichgrewoutof the council’s pastoralemphasis, none is morerepresentative than the explicitinstructions given in 1281 byJohn Pecham, archbishop ofCanterbury:

The ignorance of priestscasts the people headlonginto the pit of error, andthe folly and stupidity ofthe clergy, who areobliged to teach thefaithful in Catholicdoctrine,occasionallyleadthemmoretoerrorthanto

sound teaching. Toremedy such dangers wehereby order that everypriest with the care ofsoulsshallfourtimeseachyear (once each quarter),on one solemn day orseveral, either personallyorbyanother, instruct thepeople using simpleEnglish,asfollows:14articlesoffaith10commandments2 commandments of thegospelsaboutlove7worksofmercy7capital[deadly]sinsandtheiroffspring7principalvirtues

7sacramentsofgrace.Lest any priest excuse

himself, saying that he isignorantofthese,althoughallministersofthechurchare bound to know them,we shall summarize thembriefly.

Pecham, the Paris-trainedtheologian,thendidexactlythat,not in the language of theuniversities but in simple, easy-to-understand language. Thisdecree became separated fromthe other decrees issued in 1281and had a life of its own: itbecame an important teachingguide for priests well into the

sixteenth century. As a schemafor popular instruction in theCatholic faith, it had the greatmerit of clarity,comprehensiveness, practicalityand, above all, susceptibility toeasy memorizing. Subsequentbooks of instruction have littleimproved on Pecham’s outline.Through it and similarinstructional manuals usedelsewhere inwesternEurope theeffects of the Fourth LateranCouncilwerefeltforcenturies.

Theprovisionsofthatcouncilwere the greatest legacy ofInnocent III to the universalchurch, not to the church as aninstitution, but to the church of

the faithful, of men and womenwho looked to religion to giveultimate meaning to their lives.The canons of that council, in apractical way, strove to addressthe needs of these souls, and, inthe centuries that followed, theimpact was felt in almost everyparishinChristendom.

Furtherreading

John C. Moore’s Pope

Innocent III (1160/61–1216):To Root Up and to Plant(Leiden and Boston, 2003)provides an introduction.More analytical is JaneSayers, Innocent III: Leaderof Europe, 1198–1216(London and New York,1994). Also useful is JamesM. Powell, Innocent III:VicarofChristorLordoftheWorld(2ndedn;Washington,DC, 1994). For a primarysource there isThe Deeds of

Pope Innocent III(Washington, 2004) with animportant introductionby thetranslator, James M. Powell.For a specific region seeDamianJ.Smith,InnocentIIIand the Crown of Aragon:TheLimitsofPapalAuthority(Aldershot and Burlington,VT,2004).Thereadershouldalso consult T.C.VanCleve,The Emperor Frederic II ofHohenstaufen: ImmutatorMundi(Oxford,1972).

For theFourthCrusade, inaddition to thegeneralworkson the crusades (see p. 120–121), see Jonathan Phillips,The Fourth Crusade and theSack of Constantinople(London, 2004) and D.E.Queller and T.F. Madden,The Fourth Crusade: TheConquest of Constantinople(2nd edn; Philadelphia,1997),whichmakes a strongifnotentirelypersuasivecasefor the Venetians. Three

contemporary accounts areavailable in English: Robertof Clari, The Conquest ofConstantinople (tr. E.H.McNeal; Toronto, 1996);Villehardouin,‘TheConquestof Constantinople’, inJoinville and Villehardouin,Chronicles of the Crusades(tr. M.R.B. Shaw;Harmondsworth, Mddsx,1963);andGuntherofPairis,The Capture ofConstantinople:TheHystoria

Constantinopolitana (ed. andtr. Alfred J. Andrea;Philadelphia, 1997). Mostcomprehensive is thecompilation made by AlfredJ. Andrea, ContemporarySources for the FourthCrusade (Leiden, 2000). Forthe complex situation in theEast at this time see CharlesM. Brand, ByzantiumConfronts the West, 1180–1204 (Cambridge, MA,1968).

The decrees of the FourthLateranCouncilcanbefoundconvenientlyinH.J.Shroeder(ed. and tr.), DisciplinaryDecrees of the GeneralCouncils: Text, Translation,and Commentary (St Louis,MO, and London, 1937), inEnglish HistoricalDocuments, 1189–1327 (ed.Harry Rothwell; London,1975) and in Norman P.Tanner, ed., Decrees of theEcumenical Councils

(Washington, 1990). Afascinating account of thecouncil can be found inStephanKuttner andAntonioGarcía y García, ‘A NewEyewitness Account of theFourth Lateran Council’,Traditio 20 (1964), 115–78.For the ordeal see RobertBartlett, Trial by Fire andWater:TheMedievalJudicialOrdeal (Oxford, 1986). Onreception of the conciliardecreesseeMarionGibbsand

Jane Lang, Bishops andReform, 1215–1272: WithSpecial Reference to theLateran Council of 1215(Oxford, 1934), and Paul B.Pixton, The GermanEpiscopacy and theImplementation of theDecrees of the FourthLateran Council, 1216–1245(Leiden, 1995). RobertChazan has published twobooks on the Jews in theMiddle Ages: in a textbook

series there is The Jews ofMedieval WesternChristendom, 1000–1500(Cambridge, 2006), and arevisionist book whichstresses the positiveexperienceofmedievalJews,Reassessing Jewish Life inMedieval Europe(Cambridge, 2010). For thepractice of the confession ofsins see Alexander Murray,‘Confession before 1215’,Transactions of the Royal

HistoricalSociety, 6th series,3 (1993), 51–81, and SarahHamilton, The Practice ofPenance, 900–1050(Woodbridge, Suffolk, andRochester, NY, 2001). ForpastoralmanualsseeLeonardE. Boyle, Pastoral Care,Clerical Education andCanon Law, 1200–1400(London, 1981) and JohnShinners and William J.Dohar, eds, Pastors and theCare of Souls in Medieval

England (Notre Dame, IN,1998). A useful example isRobertGrosseteste,TemplumDei (eds. J. Goering andF.A.C. Mantello; Toronto,1984). Decima Douiediscusses Pecham’sconstitution in ArchbishopPecham(Oxford,1952).

11THE

EMERGENCEOFDISSENT

ANDTHERISEOFTHEFRIARS

During the decadessurrounding the pivotalpontificate of Innocent IIItwo distinct but clearlyrelated phenomena shook theearth under the church.Neither doctrinal dissent northe establishment of newreligiousorderswasnew,but,when they appeared at thistime, they came fromquite adifferent source. Both nowemerged from a laitydisturbed by the blatant

affluence of the church andsuspiciousofthemotivesandsincerity of churchmenwearingsilkenvestmentsandusing golden chalices. Itwasa laityyearningforasimplerspiritual life.TheChrist theyknew had been born in amanger and, as an adult, hadno place to lay his head.Whenhesentouthisapostlesand disciples to preach hismessage,hetoldthem,‘Takenothing with you, neither

staff nor pack, neither breadnormoney,notevenasecondcoat’ (Luke9,3).Essentiallythere was a quest for a newmodel for the Christian life.Many felt that it was notnecessary to abandon theworld for the shelter of amonastery to be a goodChristiannorwasitnecessaryto try to live monk-like ornun-like in the world. TheJesustheyworshippedlivedaholy life in the world, but it

was a life of simplicity andpoverty: these became thecentral elements of a newpiety. Their attractionstouched deep the souls ofthousands of Christians, likeWaldès and the hereticalWaldensians and Francis ofAssisi and the orthodoxFranciscans. While otherelementsalsohelpedtoshapetheseandsimilarmovements,at base they all exhibited thedesire for a more personal

formofreligion,oneshornofits accidentals and excessesand centred on the imitationof Christ. Official suspiciongreeted almost everyexpression of this desire, asuspicion leadingoccasionally to acceptancebut frequently to outrightcondemnationandeventothespillingofblood.

Dissent

Heresy was nothing new tothechurch.Whatwasnewinthelatetwelfthandthirteenthcenturieswastheformwhichit took.Heresy,byitsnature,was a departure fromaccepted orthodoxy, and inthehighMiddleAgesitwasadissent espoused not bybishops and scholars but

largely by lowly priests andunlettered laymen and lay-women, their emphasis, atleast at first, not somuch onmatters of doctrine – thatwould follow – but onpractical piety in everydaylife. For this reason it isusually called ‘popular’heresy.When Innocent III

ascended the papal throne in1198, the church was beingseriously challenged by

strong, independentmovements, particularly inFranceandItalybutnotonlythere. Neither Catharism norWaldensianism, the twoprincipal dissidentmovements of the time, wasdoctrinally uniform, yet thegeneral lines can bediscerned. It can be said ofboth these heresies that eachhad two elements, an ethicandadoctrine,andweshouldnot think that the latter was

equal to the former inattracting recruits. These twomovements differed fromeach other and, indeed, weremutually antagonistic. Theyneedbelookedatseparately.The Cathars, it has been

persuasivelyargued,werethemost significant medievalheretics, even if judged onlyby their numbers and theirsuperior organization. Themovementbeganinthe1140sand spread throughout large

partsofwesternEuropeinthesubsequent decades,presenting Innocent III withhis greatest challenge. Yet itsurvivedhisresponse,onlytobedealtitsdeath-blownotbycrusade but by inquisition,although there lingered eventhenafewflickeringsignsoflife in remote areas. Such astriking resemblance appearsbetween the Bogomils, anEasternsectwithitsoriginsinBulgaria,andtheCatharsthat

it seems that the Cathars tosome extent probably owetheir beginnings to aninfiltration of Bogomilteaching into the West,probably in the Rhinelandnear Cologne, by the 1140s.Both movements shared,among many other things, abasicdualism,abeliefintwobasic principles, one goodand spiritual and the otherbad and material, onederiving from God and the

other from Satan. Therepudiationofmaterialthingsmeant the repudiation of theflesh(andsexualrelations)aswell as the repudiation ofCatholicsacraments.At Cologne in the 1140s

there was ineffectiverepression of the movement,and,whenitreappearedintheWest in the 1160s, it wasjoined by an evangelicalelement.Theseweretobethetwo main ingredients of

Catharism, a dualistictheologyandanemphasisona simple, rigoristic way oflife. They were not equallyemphasized in every placewhere the movement tookhold.Themovement’sspreadwas remarkable, even if wecannotplot itscoursestepbystep. Nearly contemporarywith its first appearance atCologne, itwasalsoreportedatChampagneandLiège.Butitwas the 1160swhichwere

critical in its spread.By thenthe Cathars were also in thevicinitiesofBonnandMainz,where they came to theattention of Hildegard ofBingen, who sent an anti-Cathar sermon to Mainz. In1163, another Germanpreaching against thesehereticsdiscussedtheirname:

In German they are called‘Cathars’, in Flemish ‘Piphles’,inFrench‘Texerant’.

It should be added that later,because of their prominencein the vicinity of Albi, theywere frequently called‘Albigensians’. The name‘Cathars’ derives probablynot from the Greek for pureones but from the spuriousallegation of cat-kissing intheir ceremonies. Whateverits derivation, it is the termmost generally in use byhistorians.The Languedoc region of

France was to become theground where Catharismgrew more successfully thananywhereelse,yetthereisnoevidence of Cathars therebefore the 1160s. A regionrather than a precise politicaldivision, theLanguedoc tookits name from the form ofFrench spoken there, langued’oc(orOccitan),where‘yes’was rendered ‘hoc est’ orsimply an unaspirated ‘hoc’insteadof theoï of the north

(langue d’oï). By 1165 theCathars therewere perceivedas such a danger that aconference was held atLombers, nearAlbi, attendedby the archbishop ofNarbonne,fiveotherbishops,six abbots and otherecclesiastical officialstogether with prominentmembers of the nobility. Noeffect emerged from whatwas more a debate than atrial, other than an apparent

tolerance of the Cathars bythe lay leaders. Also, in the1160s they can be seen inLombardy, where a certainMarktheGravedigger, itwassaid, was converted by aFrenchman at Concorezzonear Milan; in turn he soonconvertedothers.BeforelongCatharswereinotherpartsofItaly: in the north atDesenzano on Lake Garda,Vicenza,VeronaandMantuaand in central Italy at

Florence and even furthersouth not far from Rome atOrvieto. By the end of thetwelfth century there werescores of flourishing Catharcommunities in westernEurope, the most successfulin southern France andnorthernItaly.Attempts were made to

repress this heresy. AtCologne in 1144 confessedCatharswereseizedfromtheclergy who tried to protect

them and burned by thepeople. In 1163 further trialswere held at Cologne. Asearly as 1145 St Bernard,abbot of Clairvaux, preachedagainst heretics, quitepossiblyCathars,inthesouthof France at Toulouse, Albiandsurroundingvillageswithapparent success, but asuccess only of the shortterm.Generallyspeaking, theCathars in northern Franceand the Rhineland were

checked, and their influencefaded. To the south thedevelopmentswerestartlinglydifferent. The meeting atLombers in 1165 had nomeasurable success, for,among other reasons, thesecular authorities wereunwilling to intervene.Otherpreachers came into theLanguedoc, but they had noteven the limited success ofBernard. In Toulouse a trialwasheldin1177,andalocal

merchant abjectly recanted,yet fourofhis sonsand theirfamilies later appeared asCathars. Innocent IIIconfrontedaserious,seethingproblem when he becamepopein1198.What was it that

constituted the Catharism towhich Innocent III was torespond in amost aggressivemanner?Inthefirstplace,itsorganization. Catharism wasnotasectwithintheCatholic

church:itwasitselfachurch,one in opposition to theCatholic church. It hadbishops and dioceses. In theLanguedoc in the earlythirteenth century it haddioceses at Agen, Albi,CarcassonneandToulouse.InItalytheterritorialdivisionofthe four dioceses there wasless clear. A separate churchthough itwas,Catharismhadnopope,nooverall leader: itwasareligionofstronglocal

communities.Three levels ofmembership were noted asearlyas1143atCologne,andso that structure continued:theperfects,thebelieversandthe sympathizers. The eliteperfecti formed the core ofthe movement: men andwomen who had passedthrough a rigorousprobationary period, afterwhich they received theconsolamentum(literally,‘theconsoling’), a laying on of

hands, which released theperson from the power ofSatan and now allowed thatpersontospeaktoGodintheLord’s Prayer. To comparetheperfectitoCatholicpriestsor Catholic monks providessome glimpse of their role,but the comparison shouldnot be pressed too far. Theybound themselves to anaustere life of fasting andabstinencefromsexandfromallproductsofcoitionsuchas

meat,milk, cheese and eggs.It was a code of life morerigid than the most rigidCatholicmonasticorders.Theperfecti tended to live insmall communities. Sometravelled, preaching andteaching and encouragingothers. They formed a classapart, not a priesthood, forthere was no Mass, only ablessing of bread whilerecitingtheLord’sPrayer,aneliteclassdeferredtobyother

adherents,whogenuflectedtothem. Their numbers werenever very large, althoughprecise figures elude us.About the lowest order, thesupporters, little can be saidexceptthattheygavematerialsupport to the perfecti andlistened to sermons. Theintermediate order, thebelievers, was composed ofthose who had accepted theteaching but were not yetprepared for the

consequences of theconsolamentum. Somebelievers took that step afterseveral years of intensetraining. For others theconsolamentum was adeathbed ritual, since to dieunconsoledwastodiestill inthepowerofSatan.To summarize their belief

system is hazardous, for itwas not exactly the sameeverywhere. Basic to theirworld-view was the dualistic

dichotomy alreadymentioned, but, even here,there were differences.Extreme and moderatedualists both saw a world ofmaterial, visible, physicalreality, the object of oursenses, particularly sight andtouch, and it was evil. Thehumanbodywas evil, and topropagate the human bodywas evil. The moderatesbelievedthatSatan,thefallenangel, was created by God,

and he in turn createdmaterial things. Moreradically, the extremistsbelievedtherearetwoeternalpowers,oneofgoodandoneof evil, joined forever incombat. All agreed that theworld of the spirit is theworld of the good, whichderives from God, himself awhollyspiritual,non-materialbeing.Thehumansoul is thespiritualpartofeveryhumanbeing, but,while joinedwith

the body, it is under thecontrolofSatan.Theritualofthe consolamentum releasedthe soul from the control ofSatan, liberating it from thepowerofevil.Their ethic followed

logically from their basicworld-view,anditspreacherscould find passages in thegospelstosupporttheirethic.Renounce the world and allits pomps.Liveby the spirit,which can be willing, while

the flesh is weak. Abstainfrom carnality. Fast andabstain from worldlypleasures of all sorts. It wasan appeal not that differentfrom that which sentthousands of youngmen andwomen into monasteries inthe twelfthcentury.Thevitaldifference was that Catholicteaching,evenStBernard’sathis most rhetorical, did nothold that theirworld-denyinglife was the only route to

personal salvation. For theCatharsitwastheonlyroute.CatharpreachersfoundinthelapsesfromvirtueofCatholicpriestsandbishopsarichveinto mine. Who could denysuch evident evils and whocould justify the worldlinessandlackofspiritualityamongthe Catholic clergy? TheCathars held that theirperfecti, having renouncedmaterial pleasures, were theonly trueChristians.Dualism

resolved the perennialproblem of how a goodGodcan permit earthquakes andillnessanddisease simplybypositinganevilGodor,attheleast, anevilSatan, towhommaterial disasters could beattributed. To calculate thenumbers attracted to thischurch is fraught withdifficulties.ThatthereexistedCathars among the peasantryin rural areas is abundantlyclear, but, only if guesswork

weretoreplaceevidence,canactual numbers or evenreasonableestimatesbegivenfor them. For the towns ofLombardyandtheLanguedocsome evidence is available.For example 600 perfectigatheredtogetheratMirepoixin 1206; extrapolating fromthisfigureitispossibletosaythat there may have been asmanyas1,500perfecti in theLanguedoc. At Béziers, in1209,about200Catharswere

identifiedoutofapopulationof about 10,000. In somevillagessuchasCambiastheyformed a majority and, inothers, a minority, even asmallminority.Itwasneveramassmovement but one thatthepope judgedhecouldnotignore.Innocent III, committed to

reform, placed thesuppression of heresy as histop priority. Earlier attemptshad little success. Almost at

once the new pope sent twoCistercians into theLanguedoc to preach and toexcommunicateheretics.Twoothersreplacedthemin1203,then later another Cistercianwasaddedtotheteam.Localbishopswerenotpleasedwiththe intrusion of papal legatesinto their dioceses. Thebishop of Béziers wassuspendedfromofficenotforheresy but for failing tocooperatewith theCistercian

legates. The archbishop ofNarbonne was nearlysuspendedatthistimeforthesame reason, but hissuspension did eventuallycomein1212.Thelaynobleswere even less cooperative,and, as a result, in 1207 thecount of Toulouse wasexcommunicated. Thepreaching mission took onnewimpetusin1206withthearrival of the Spanish bishopDiegoofOsmaandoneofhis

cathedral clergy, Dominic(later St Dominic). Theirplan, approved by Innocent,was that preachers shouldtravel barefoot, eschewingeverysignofluxury,inotherwords, like the Catharpreachers. Also, they shouldnotbereluctanttoengagetheCathars in open, publicdebates. In the followingspring, Innocent ordered 12Cistercian abbots to adoptthis preaching method in the

Languedoc. Eight days ofdebate followed at Servian,where Diego and Dominictriumphed. At Montréal thedebate lasted twoweeks, and150 Cathars returned toCatholicism. By the end ofthe summer of 1207 themonks wanted to return totheir monasteries, and Diegoreturned to Osma, where hesoondied.Eventssoontookadramaticturn.Themissionbypreaching and example was

soonreplacedbyviolence.

Map14PlacesassociatedwiththeCathars(Albigensians)intheLanguedoc

On 14 January 1208 thepapal legate to theLanguedoc, Peter ofCastelnau, was assassinatedby a knight of CountRaymond VI of Toulouse.The parallel of the Becketmurder could not haveescaped many. Peter hadexcommunicated the count

and, in the precedingmonth,had had acrimoniousexchangeswithhim.Thereisno evidence to suggest thecount’s complicity in themurder, but his failure toarrest the assassin and toexpress regret infuriatedInnocent. The result was theAlbigensian Crusade.Innocent III called on KingPhilipAugustus of France tolead a crusading army southto suppress the heresy.

Preoccupied with difficultieswith King John of Englandand Otto IV of Germany,PhilipAugustus refused.Thepopeappointedapapallegateandpromisedthosetakingthecross all the benefits ofcrusaders going to the HolyLand. Once a movement torecovertheholyplacesintheEast from the infidel, thecrusade had recently beenturned against Christians inConstantinople and now was

being used against ChristianhereticsintheWest.Acornerhad been irrevocably turnedinthecrusadingmovement.The Albigensian Crusade

lasted20years andwasonlypartiallysuccessfulingainingits aims. In late June 1209 acrusading army gathered atLyons: a large army ledmostly by the barons ofnorthern France. On 22 JulytheyarrivedatBéziers,whichthey easily took. The people

of Béziers sought safety intheirchurches.ThechurchoftheMagdalene,crowdedwithfrightened inhabitants, wasburned as was the cathedral.The abbot of Cîteauxallegedly said, when askedhow to distinguish Catholicfrom heretic, ‘Kill them all:God will sort it out.’ On toCarcassonne, whichsurrendered. Other fortifiedtownsinthevicinity,suchasNarbonne and Albi, soon

followed suit. By then thecrusadingarmywasbeingledby Simon de Montfort, anoblemanfromthevicinityofParis.When, in the spring of

1210,hisarmytookMinerve,theyburnedalive140perfection a huge pyre.Most of thefortressesinthatregionoftheLanguedoc were under thecontrolofthecrusaders;thereremained the region ofToulouse, which was to

dominate the hostilities forthe rest of the war. CountRaymondVIofToulousehadgiven his support to thecrusaders in 1209, but nowthe crusade turned on him.When he failed to respondpromptly to an order to turnover named heretics, he wasexcommunicated. In July1211 de Montfort positionedhis army outside Toulousebutwas unable to breach thedefences. King Peter II of

Aragon interveneddiplomatically and, in early1213, convinced Innocent IIIto halt the crusade. Thepope’s legates on the groundin southern France subvertedthe peace, and the crusadestarted again. Peter II fell inbattle near Toulouse in latesummer1213.Desultory fighting

continued for the next twoyears with the crusaders incontrolofmuchoftheregion

with the principal exceptionofToulouse.WhentheFourthLateranCouncilconcludedon30 November 1215, itstripped Raymond VI of histitle and made Simon deMontfort count of Toulouse.He took Toulouse in 1216,while Raymond VI wassecuring fresh recruits fromSpain and his son, RaymondVII, was gaining support ineastern Languedoc. In thesummer of 1217, while de

Montfort was campaigningwith little success inProvence, Toulouse roseagainst his garrison, andRaymond VI returned to ahero’s welcome. A siege bythe crusaders was set up butfailed in June1218,whendeMontfort was struck by astone projectile that crushedhis head. At the pleading ofthe new pope, Honorius III(1216–27), Philip Augustussentaroyalarmysouthunder

the command of his sonPrinceLouis.Thecrusadenowwasbuta

pretence; the reality was awarbeingwagedby thekingof France in the Languedocfor the purpose of extendingroyal power into the south.What remains of the storypertains more to Frenchpolitical history than tochurchhistory.Louisfailedinanother siege of Toulouse.Truces were made in 1223

and in 1224. By then LouisVIII was king of France andRaymond VII count ofToulouse. Yet Louis’s largearmyhadlimitedsuccessandwasweakenedbyalongsiegeat Avignon. Tired after 20years, the count of Toulousenegotiated a peace when heand the15yearoldLouis IXmetatthecathedralofNotre-DameinParis.Hekeptmuchofhisancestralterritories,butthey would be ceded to the

royal family at his death.Then the king of FrancewouldhavecontrolovermostofthesouthofFrance.Ithadbeenasuccessfulwar for theFrench, but clearly not acrusade. It failed in its statedpurpose, to eradicate theCathar heresy. The counts ofToulouse and most of theother great men of the southwere not heretics, despiterumours circulating amongthe crusaders that Raymond

VI was a Cathar supporterand that two perfecti werewith him constantly ready togivehimtheconsolamentum,should he show signs ofdying.Thesesouthernleadersfoughtagainstattacksontheirlands. Many heretics wereruthlessly killed, yetCatharism was far fromsubdued. It would takeanother campaign, of adifferent sort, to accomplishthat.

Plate12AlbiCathedral.ReproducedbypermissionofTimBenton.

The elimination ofCatharism was effected bytrials and punishment. Aprocedure for criminal caseswithitshistoryinRomanlawwasemployedbythepopestoeradicate heresy. It was aprocedure thatvestedapapalagent with the power toinvestigate and to punish theheretics.Itsprocedurewasby

way of investigation ratherthan by accusation. It couldbe called simply the‘investigation’, but it isknown to history by asynonym, the ‘inquisition’,and the papal agents as‘inquisitors’. Canonicallegislation against hereticswas already in place; itremainedtoidentifythemanddealwiththem.PopeGregoryIX (1227–41) appointedmembers of the order

founded by the preacherDominic to go into theLanguedoc in 1233 withconsiderable authority. ThreeDominicaninquisitorsarrivedatToulouse.Otherinquisitorswere soon at Albi, Moissacand Cahors; at these placesthe dead were exhumed andburned. The presence of theinquisitors led to nearrebellion at Narbonne and totheir being expelled fromToulouse. The inquisition

was particularly active in theearly 1240s and by thedecade’s end the back ofCatharismwasbroken.How did this inquisition

proceed? When theinquisitors arrived in acommunity such as a parish,they summoned the wholeparish, and a sermon waspreached, exhorting thosepresent to assist in theextermination of heresy. Aperiod of gracewas allowed,

generallyaboutaweekorso,during which individualscould confess, repent, beabsolved and punishedleniently. Questioning ofindividual parishioners thenbegan:

Haveyouseenaheretic?Have you heard sermonspreachedbyheretics?Have you witnessed aconsolamentum?Have you supported hereticsmaterially?

Andsoforth.Thequestionedwould be encouraged toimplicateothers,who,inturn,would be questioned. Whensufficient evidence wasacquired about an individual,the inquisitor provided theaccused with a statement ofthe charges but not with thenames of the accusers. Ifconvicted, the person wouldbe invited to confess andrepent. There is no evidencethat confessions were

extorted by torture at thistime. Punishment dependedon whether the personconfessed or wascontumacious.Ananalysisofthe penalties imposed by theinquisitorBernarddeCauxin1245–46 is instructive. Hequestioned 5,605 – everyadult in two archdeaconriessouth-westofToulouse,allofwhom were transported toToulouse for questioning –and, in the end, pronounced

207 sentences. Only 23 ofthese were imprisonments;therestwerelighterpenances(e.g.pilgrimages).Therewassomeresortatthistimetothesecular arm for execution:oneofevery100condemned,according to one estimate.The inquisition continued oninthesouthforsometimeasdid Catharism, but the latterwas leading an undergroundexistence,andbytheturnintothe fourteenth century only

remnants could be found inremote places, likeMontaillou in the remote hillcountryof thePyrenees,keptalive by the example ofperfecti rather than by theirtheology.Yet Catharismwasnot the only heresyconfrontingthechurchatthistime.TheWaldensianstooktheir

namefromWaldès,awealthymerchant of Lyons.According to oneversion, he

was deeply moved by thestory of St Alexius, whorenounced wealth to live inpoverty and, who, when hereturnedtohisfather’shouse,died unrecognized. Aftertakingstepstoprovideforhiswife and daughter, in 1173Waldès gave up business,wealthand family tobecomeawandering preacher, givinghimselfupentirelytoalifeofpoverty. Relying only onalms, he lived sparingly and

providedfortheneedyduringthe famine of 1176.He soonattracted followers to thissimple life, but his new lifewentbeyondpovertyandactsof charity. Waldès and hisfollowers preached, and theirpreaching brought them intoconflictwith the church.Theproblem was not what theywere preaching – mostlyexhortations to live a betterChristian life – but that theywere preaching at all. These

preachers were laymen and,indeed, laywomen, and thechurch viewed preaching ascoming through bishops assuccessors to the apostlesand,thus,restrictedpreachingto those members of theclergywhowereapprovedbythe bishops. Waldès and hisfollowers, however, felt theyneeded no licence to preach.They heard the words ofChrist, sending out hisdisciples in pairs to prepare

forhiscoming:Go barefoot, carrying neitherpurse nor pack … When youentera town thatwelcomesyou,eatwhat isputbeforeyou.Curethe sick there and say, ‘Thekingdom of God is near’ …Whoeverhearsyouhearsmeandwhoever rejects you rejectsHimwhosentme.

(Luke10,4,8–9,16)

ToWaldèsthiswasamissionfor all Christians, and so heand his followers went out

barefoot, two by two, topreach repentance andconversion of life, living offwhatwas provided for them.They stood in opposition tothe teaching of the churchabout preaching, and thisoppositionledintime,almostinexorably, to heresy. Acompromise, which provedonly temporary, was reachedbetween Waldès and PopeAlexander III at the ThirdLateran Council (1179). The

popeembraced thepoormanof Lyons and approved hislife of poverty but allowedhim and his followers topreachonlyifthelocalpriestsagreed. To the pope Waldèsprofessed the orthodoxChristian faith and renewedhis vow of poverty. Thecompromisewasunworkable,principally because very fewpriests agreed to allow theWaldensians to preach, yetmany of them still preached.

A new archbishop came toLyonsin1183andrefusedtoallowWaldensians to preachthere. Still, their preachingcontinued,andthearchbishopexpelled andexcommunicated them. Theywere not Cathars or in anyway sympathetic to theCathars, against whom theythemselvespreachedandwithwhom they debated, yet, in1184, the Waldensians werecondemned with the Cathars

attheCouncilofVeronawithlittle distinction madebetween them. Theirexpulsion by bishops merelyled to their expansion. InLombardy, like the Cathars,they found a tolerantatmosphereandfertilesoilfortheir appealing message.Some drifted from acondemnation of bad prieststo the position thatsacraments, including theMass, administered by bad

priestswerenosacramentsatall. By the 1190s this washeresy. In parts of ItalyWaldensians, who were notpriests, celebrated Mass.SomeWaldensiansdeniedtheexistenceofpurgatory.Alinehadbeencrossed.Innocent III, in 1208,

reconciled a number ofFrenchWaldensians,agreeingthat theycouldcontinuetheirlives as poor wanderingpreachers, now called ‘the

Catholic Poor’. Two yearslater a Lombard follower ofWaldès was reconciled, andwithhimothers,who formeda Catholic community.Essential to each submissionwasaprofessionoforthodoxfaith,aconcernforwhichhadby now replaced the purelydisciplinaryissueofauthorityto preach. By this time, themovement had experiencedits first of many schisms. In1205 the Poor of Lyons and

thePoorLombardssplitoverseveral issues, includingpersonalities, but particularlyoverthedesireof theItaliansto form a separate churchdistinct from the Catholicchurch, inwhichtheyexistedasasect.Thesetwobranchesof Waldensians remainedseparate and drifted furtherapart as each found itsseparate (if related) place intheecclesiasticallandscapeofthetimes.TheWaldensiansin

France, small in numbers,continued, despite sporadicand largely ineffectivepersecution,intothesixteenthcentury. The movement inItaly faded in Lombardy butremainedstronginthevalleysofPiedmont,whereaseparateWaldensian church continuesto this day. Some evidencesuggeststhattheWaldensianspenetrated deep into theGerman-speaking lands,particularlyintoAustriasouth

of the Danube and possiblyinto Bohemia and Moravia,but we should not presssimilarity of doctrine andpractice, known to usprincipally from theirpersecutors, so far as to seelinks back to Waldès, whennoneiscompellinglyseen.Often classified with the

Cathars and theWaldensiansare the Humiliati (HumbleOnes).Theyalsohadmuchincommonwiththeearlyfriars,

anda correctedviewof theirplace in history would putthem in the company ofFrancis and his followersrather than with Waldès andhis Poor Men or, at least,would see them as a bridgebetween the two. TheHumiliaticamefromallpartsof society, although mostwere probably artisans; theylivedinurbanand,toalesserextent,ruralareasinnorthernItaly, particularly near Milan

and Verona. They foresworeluxuries, wearing coarsewoollen garments anddonating superfluous incometo the poor. In addition, theyshared with ‘heretics’ arefusal to take oaths, and itwasthisthatwasthestickingpoint.Humiliati were amongthose condemned as hereticsin 1184, but whether thosereferred to in the papalcondemnationarethesameasthosewhoappear in thenext

decadeisnotaltogetherclear.In1199, theyapproached thenewly elected Innocent III,who, after several inquiries,sanctioned three orders ofHumiliati: theFirstOrder forclerics who lived incommunity,theSecondOrderfor laymen and laywomenwho could live separately incommunity and the ThirdOrder for laymen and lay-women – even married –living in their own homes.

Theyprospered,and,in1216,anobserverwrote,

Thisreligionhassogrowninthediocese of Milan that they nowhave one hundred and fiftyhouses,menononeside,womenon the other, not counting thosewholiveintheirownhomes.

Atfirst,morealooselylinkednetwork of houses than anorderliketheFranciscans,theHumiliati as a centralizedorder with a master general,general chapter, annual

meetings and annualvisitationsowesthatstructuretothecanonist-popeInnocentIV, who, in 1246, issueddirectives to bring about thateffect. Two factors havecombined to marginalize theHumiliati historically. In thefirst place, numerous as theymay have been, they were afairly localized order withmost of their houses innorthern Italy and notinternational as were the

friars or the Cathars andWaldensians. Second, theorder fell victim to events inthe sixteenth century –including the attemptedmurder of their cardinalprotector by a discontentedmember of the order – andceased to exist, unlike thefour orders of friars. Theorder, consequently, has notreceived until recently thescholarly attention affordedthe friars, with the

unfortunate result that theyhave tended to be seenmoreashereticsthanasareligiousorder.Arising from sources

similartothosethatgaveriseto the Humiliati were theBeguines andBeghards,whoformed communities,respectively, of women andmen, although some, in theearlydays, lived singly.Likethe Humiliati, they werefalsely accused of heresy.

Their name, it is sometimessuggested, derives from‘Albigensian’. It was thecommunitiesofBeguinesthatflourished. Their origins liebeyond our sight, but theycan be seen in the LowCountries at the turn of thethirteenth century. They didnot formanorder: theywerelaywomenwhotooknovowsbut promised,while living incommunity, to remaincelibate; many wore simple

habits. They were notenclosed, and some of themworked in the towns wheretheir beguinages werelocated. They could freelyleave at any time. While incommunity,theysharedalifeofcommunalprayer.In1216,Honorius III gave verbalapproval to them, and, in1233, Gregory IX formallytook the Beguines under hisprotection. There werecommunities at Cologne in

1223, at Leuven in 1232, atMainz in1233andatNamurandPaderbornin1235.Theirreliance on the friars forspiritual direction subjectedthem to criticisms intendedforthefriars.Yettheyclearlyhad their admirers. TheEnglish scholar and bishopRobert Grosseteste warmlyapproved of their life, whichhe found ‘perfect and holy’.In the century after theapproval by Pope Gregory

they flourished, andcommunities arose in manyofthetownsoftheRhinelandand the Low Countries. AtCologne,by1309,therewere164houseswithapopulationestimated at 1,000. At thesame time Strasbourg hadabout 600 Beguines. At theCouncil of Vienne, in 1312,two hostile decrees wereenacted against themovement, and subsequentlyit began to decline. In many

ways, the Beguines presagedthe later development of theDevotio Moderna (seechapter 17). Modern visitorsto suchplaces asBruges andLeuven can see excellentexamples of beguinages,owing much to their revivalintheseventeenthcentury.The movements described

inthissectiondidnotexistinisolation.TheyformedpartofalargersceneinwhichmanyChristians found that their

increasing wealth did notprovide themwithwhat theywanted from life, and, likeothers before and after them,they renounced the materialthings of this world, whichthey had foundwanting, anddedicated themselves to asimplewayof life,becomingpoor not by necessity but bychoice.ThevoluntarypovertyofWaldèsandotherslikehimwas shared, in a strikinglysimilar way, by Francis of

Assisi.

Thefriars

Any discussion of the friarsmustbeginwithStFrancisofAssisi. He was the dominanthistorical figure in the earlyhistory of the friars. Whilethere were other notablefigures like Dominic and

Clare of Assisi, it is Francisof Assisi who, above allothers, commands ourattention. The unreservedadmiration of the ages hasbeen given to the poor friarFrancis.Hewasbornin1181into a comfortable bourgeoisfamily in the hill town ofAssisi, overlooking theSpoletovalleyincentralItaly.Thefactsofhisearly lifearea bit sketchy. Yet this muchcan be said. Francis entered

intothefamilyclothbusiness,perhaps travelling with hisfather to France. Like otheryoung men of his class,Francis took up arms andfoughtforAssisiagainstrivalcommunes.Inanengagementagainst neighbouring Perugiain1202,hebecameaprisonerof the enemy. Ransomed, hereturned to Assisi, where hesuffered fromsomeunnamedillness,perhapsdepression.In1205Francisundertooktogo

on a military expeditionagainst the pope’s politicalenemiesinsouthernItaly,buthe got only as far as nearbySpoleto. There heexperienced a troublingdream,which compelled himto give up his militaryambitions. In the next twoyears Francis left his familyand its riches and became asolitary.He lived for awhilein the ruins of the church ofSan Damiano outside Assisi

and, at times, in caves thatpunctuate the hill country ofUmbria. He even befriendedlepers, in one accountembracing and kissing them.Then,in1208,onthefeastofSt Matthias (24 February),while at Mass, Francis wasdeeplymovedby the readingof thegospel inwhichChristtoldhisapostles:

Proclaim that the kingdom ofGod is at hand, cure the sick,raise the dead, cleanse lepers,

castoutdemons.Youhavefreelyreceived, you must freely give.Donottakegold,silverorcopperforyourpurse.Takenopackforthe journey, no second coat, noshoes, no walking stick, for thelabourerisworthyofhishire.

(Matthew10,7–10)

Francis,thatday,removedhisshoes,donneda roughcloak,girded itwith a knotted ropeandcommittedhimself totheliteralfulfilmentofthegospelmandate.Hehadexperienced

aprofoundconversionof lifeand had found his mission.The similarity to Waldèscould not be more apparent.Like the poormanofLyons,Francisbecamethepoorman(poverello)ofAssisi,reactingto thegospel call to live likeChrist, by abandoningworldlygoods, caring for thepoor and the abandoned andpreachingthegospelmessageofrepentance.ItwasnotonlyWaldès whom Francis

resembled but scores ofothers, including theHumiliati,whorenouncedtheworld for a simple Christianlife, but, unlike Waldès,Francis escaped the taint ofheresy and, unlike theHumiliati, Francis achievedrenownandfoundedanorderthat is still with us. Francishad no intention of foundinganorder–hewantedonly tolive a holy life – but hisvisionwassoattractivethatit

appealed to young men likehimself,comfortable,middle-class, town-dwelling andidealistic laymen. Almostimmediatelysuchyoungmenwanted to join him.To themhe said that they should selltheirworldly goods and giveeverything to thepoor.Somedid. Francis and his smallbandofpoorbrothers(fratresminores,friarsminor)walkedbarefoot, eating what wasgiven them by sympathetic

persons and preaching –always preaching – themessage of penance. In aword, they were itinerantpreachers, like theHumiliati,but with a stricter, moreliteral commitment topoverty.Theyownednothing,and that was the cornerstoneofthemovementandasourceofproblemsinlaterdecades.Inthesummerof1209they

wereeight,andtheywentoutin four pairs, one pair going,

itissaid,tonorthernItalyandthen to Compostela. Othersjoined, and soon there were12. In 1210 Francis walkedbarefoot to Rome, probablywith the other 11, to seekpapalapprovalforhisbandasan order. Several cardinalshad misgivings. When thematter was brought beforeInnocent III, he too felt thatthe non-possession ofproperty and the austerity oftheir life could create

problems. He was right, aseventsweretoprove.ExactlywhatInnocentdidisshroudedinmist.Hegavesomesortofapproval, which may haveamounted to nothing morethan oral encouragement.Francis had brought aprimitive rule with him,whichreceivedsomeformofpapalsanction.

Themost highGod directedmetolivethelifeofthegospel.ThisI had written down in brief and

simple words, and his holinessthepopeconfirmedit.

(StFrancis,Testament)

Later, Pope Honorius III(1216–27) was twice to giveapproval to rules for theorder. And, when, in 1227,their long-time supporter,Cardinal Ugolino, himself anephew of Innocent III,became Pope Gregory IX,their future as an order wasassured.

When Francis and hisbrothers returned toAssisi in1210, theyaccepted theofferoflocalBenedictinestouseadilapidated church. ThisPortiuncula church on thevalley floor below Assisibecame their centre. Amassive basilica was builtaroundthis tinychapel in thesixteenth century. In thewinter of 1210–11 otherrecruits came to thePortiuncula, so that by the

summer of 1211 Francis’sband numbered a score ormore.During their preachingjourneys in that summerothers joined them in theirlifeofpovertyandpreaching.From the sacristy of thePortiuncula,where theywereliving, they moved to rudehuts near the church. It wasthere, at the Portiuncula, onPalm Sunday, 1212, that ayoungnoblewomanofAssisi,named Clare, presented

herself. Other womenfollowed her, and they weregiven the newly restoredchurch of San Damiano as aplacetolive.TheyformedtheSecondOrder,theMinoressesor,morecommonly,thePoorClares. Social and canonicalrestrictionsofthetimedidnotpermitthemtobegorpreach,but they could and did livelives of voluntary poverty.Whatwas once a small bandof men had become two

orders. It was the order ofmen (Order of FriarsMinor)that was to experiencephenomenal growth. Theycame to Assisi, mostlylaymen but some clerics,almost all comfortable andprivileged, but no applicantswere refused. At Whitsun,1217, a chapter of the friarswas held at the Portiuncula,and a blueprint was devised.Soon there were 12provinces, half of them

outsideofItaly.Ataboutthistime Francis, in practice,seemedtoabandontheactualrunning of the new,expandingorder, althoughhewasstill itshead.Twovicarswere appointed to run theorder in 1219, when Francissailed to the East to join theFifthCrusade,nottofightbutto preach to the Muslims.Underaflagoftruce,Franciscrossed enemy lines, gainedaudience of the sultan,

preachedtohimandreturnedwithoutmakinganyconverts.Upon his return to Italy in1220,Francis gladlygaveupany title of authority in theorder, his much neglectedbodynowfeelingthepainsofanillnessthatwouldkillhim.Hewishedtoretiretothelifeofa solitary,his first calling.But, first, he and his closeassociates produced a newrule for the order, the so-called First Rule (1221),

whichprobablyelaboratedonthe skeleton of the rule, nowlost,presentedtoInnocentIIIin 1210. This new rule wasfurther elaborated two yearslater in what became knownas the Second Rule, whenHonorius said that he wasratifying ‘the rule of yourorder approved by ourpredecessor of happymemory, Pope Innocent’. Itcodified Franciscan practiceand ideals.All friars, it said,

are to live ‘in obedience,without property and inchastity’.Aprobationaryyearfor candidates is to beobserved. The daily order ofprayers is set out. Further,Francissays,

The friars should appropriatenothing for themselves… Theyarestrangersandpilgrimsinthisworld, serving God in povertyand humility, and it is thispoverty, my dear brothers, thatmakesyouheirsandkingsofthekingdom of heaven, poor in

material things, but rich invirtues … To this poverty,belovedbrothers,clingwithyourwhole heart, never wishing tohaveanythingelseinthislife.

While the rule may haveresolved some issues, itcontained the seeds fordisputes about the nature ofFranciscan poverty that wereto plague the order for sometime.Meanwhile, the order was

rapidly expanding. Early

missions to France andGermany were ill-plannedand failed, and friars whowent toMoroccowere neverheard of again. These werebut early setbacks. WhenFrancis went to the East in1219, there was already agroupof friarsatAcre in theHolyLand. In the same yearthere was a community nearParis, and in the next fewyears communities werefoundedatLeMans,Bayeux,

Vézelay, Chartres andelsewhere in the north ofFrance. By 1225 there werehousesinmodernBelgiumatNamur, Bruges, Ghent andYpres. Other missions wenttothesouthofFrance,atfirst,in1217,withnosuccess,andthen, in 1219, with long-lasting success. The earliestof these successful southernmissions was at Cahors.Dates are elusive, butcommunitiesweresoontobe

found at Arles, Aix-en-Provence,Montpellier,Nîmesand Perigeux. The firstmission for Germany andHungary, which set out in1219, also proved a failure:none of the friars spokeGerman or Hungarian,presuming on providence toprovide. They were beatenand abused, fortunate toreturntoItalywiththeirlives.In 1221, this time led by arecently professed German

friar, Caesar of Speyer, auniversity graduate, a freshattempt was made. AtAugsburg they were warmlyreceivedandprovidedwithahouse, which became thecentreoftheGermanmission.From Augsburg one groupwith a German friar foundedhouses at Würzburg, Mainz,Worms, Speyer, Strasbourgand Cologne. Another groupoffriarswenttoSalzburganda third to Regensburg. The

Germanprovincewasquicklydivided into four ‘custodies’:Franconia, Bavaria–Swabia,Alsace and Saxony. No oneknows exactly how manyhouses were founded inGermany in the 1220s, buttheremusthavebeendozens.By 1223 there was aFranciscan presence inHungary. Into the Iberianpeninsula, visited earlier byother friars, came newmissions: in 1217, when the

friars were mistaken forCathars and maltreated, andin1219,whentheynumberedmore than 100. Before longtheFranciscanshadhousesatLisbon, Burgos, Coimbra,Compostela, Barcelona,Toledo and Saragossa, tomentiononlysome.In England there was a

similarly rapid expansion,and here the 1220s was alsothe crucial decade. We arefortunate to have an almost

contemporary account inThomas of Eccleston’s TheComing of the Friars intoEngland. Crossing theEnglish Channel, nine friarsarrived at Dover on 10September1224.Theirleaderwas Agnellus of Pisa, adeacon. Three of the ninewere English: Richard ofIngworth,apriest,RichardofDevon, an acolyte, andWilliam ofEsseby, a novice.FromDover they travelled to

nearby Canterbury, stayingthereatthecathedralwiththemonks of Christ Church.Aftertwodaysthepartysplit.Five remained at Canterburyto establish a house. Theother four, including the twoEnglish Richards, moved onto London, where they weregiven hospitality by theDominicans before receivinguseofadilapidatedhouseonCornhill. After Agnelluscame to London, the two

English friars pressed on toOxford. After a fortnight asguests of the Dominicans,who had already been atOxford for three years, theyweregiventheuseofahousefrom a benefactor. TheFranciscans hoped to gainrecruits at theuniversity, andthey were not to bedisappointed.Thus,withinsixweeks of their arrival theyhad friaries at Canterbury,London andOxford, but this

was but the beginning. Verysoon,probablyby1225, theywere at Northampton andCambridge, later atNorwich,Gloucester, Salisbury andYork, all before 1230. By1240therewere28housesinEngland,scatteredthroughoutthe country, but always intowns, from Scarborough inthenorth-easttoExeterinthesouth-west. Eccleston saidthat in 1256 the friarsnumbered 1,242. And, in

1230, Richard of IngworthcrossedtheIrishSeatofoundaprovinceinIreland.In the meantime, other

friars were foundingprovinces in Bohemia,HungaryandPoland.Itwasagrowth of almostincomprehensibleproportions, greater than theextraordinary growth of theCistercians a century earlier,like a prairie fire sweepingthrough Christendom. What

did St Francis make of allthis, as he lay dying at thePortiuncula inOctober1226?We shall never know. Thepoverello ofAssisi, his bodymarked by the stigmata,simply bade those attendinghim to be faithful to theteachingsofChrist.Hissmallband of itinerant preacherswas now a vast organizationwith priests as well aslaymen, with universitygraduates as well as the

unlettered andwith his LadyPovertyunderthreat.Two issues almost

immediately surfaced: theowning of property and theeducation of the friars.Wherever Francis’s poorbrothers went they receivedgenerous gifts from laybenefactors, including thehouses where they were tolive,yettheruledidnotallowindividual friars orcommunitiesof friars toown

anything.Besideshousestheywould soon want churches.To institutionalize the visionof St Francis, of necessity,required compromises withthatvision.Howcouldfriars,whocouldnothandlemoney,contractwithworkerstobuildtheir convents and theirchurches? And how couldfriars, who could ownnothing, hold their property?In 1230 Pope Gregory IX,longasupporteroftheorder,

arranged a compromise. Thefriarscouldappointagents tohandle their financial affairs,and they could remainmendicants, receiving almsfrom benefactors. Hissuccessor, Innocent IV, in1245, effected a furthercompromise. He vestedownershipoftheirbuildings–agreatbasilicanowrising inAssisi and many churcheselsewhere – and furnishingsand books in the Holy See,

which gave the friarspermanentuseofthem.Thesewere compromises whichmay have resolved strictlycanonical issues, but theyfailed to satisfy those friarswhosharedthepurevisionofStFrancis,someofwhom,atthistime,chosetoliveinhutsand caves. They and thoselike them would be heardfrom during the order’sensuinghistory.Another issue had risen

even before St Francis died:the attitude of the ordertowards education. He isquotedbyanearlybiographerassaying,

Some of my friars are beingseduced by a curious quest forlearning; on the day ofretribution they will have anempty hand. It is my wish thattheybemadestrong invirtuesothat, at the inevitable time oftribulation, they will have thecompany of the Lord and theirbooks will be thrown out ofwindows and packed away in

chests.

Although Francis had anelementary knowledge ofLatinand,atsomepoint,eventook deacon’s orders, hissympathieswere clearlywiththe unlettered lay friars. Yetby 1219 his friars weregaining recruits at theUniversity of Paris, wheresoon masters of theologyjoined their ranks, including,in 1236, thegreatestParisian

theologian of the time,Alexander of Hales. AtOxford they soon establisheda school of theology andinvited the eminent scholar,RobertGrosseteste, a secularcleric, to lecture in theologyto them. At Bologna also,before 1236, the friars had aschooloftheology.AtPadua,where a university hadrecently been founded, theirscholar-preacher, St Anthonyof Padua, preached to such

large crowds that peoplequeued early on the dayswhen he preached andshopkeepers closed theirshops. The order waschanging, and after 1239 allmajorofficeswithintheorderhad to be held by priests.And, in 1257, the friarsselected the eminent Parisiantheologian, Bonaventure, astheir minister general. UnderBonaventure the generalchapter, in 1260, restricted

admission to educatedclericsand laymen of distinction.AlthoughitistruetosaythatFrancis himself could notnow have become aFranciscan, it would be aharsh judgement that wouldcondemn the organic growthof any human institution ledby honourable men. BothFrancis and Bonaventure arevenerated as saints, yet eachhad a different view of theFranciscan vocation.

Contemporaries universallypraised the personalsaintliness of Bonaventure,particularly his attachment toasimplelifeofpoverty,evenin the midst of the greatuniversity.Herecognizedthattheorderhadchanged,but,hesaid, so had the churchchanged in accidental wayswhile remaining consistentlytrue to its essential self. Thebasic issue here that willperhapsbedebatedaslongas

historians examine it iswhether the pristine lifeenvisioned by Francis couldsurvive its organization intoanorder.Eventhose,perhapsaminority,whoanswerintheaffirmative mustacknowledge the difficultiesinherentinsuchatransition.The Dominican friars

(Order of Preachers),although similar in manyways to the Franciscans, hada distinctly different origin.

The founder, the CastilianDominicofGuzman(c.1171–1221), we have alreadyencounteredasapreacherbywordandexampleagainsttheCathars. Unlike Francis,Dominic was well educatedin the liberal arts andtheology, and also, unlikeFrancis, he was a cleric inholyorderswhenheappearedon the public scene. In 1206Dominicandhisbishop,whowas to die in the following

year, adopted the simplelifestyle of the Cathars andwalked on foot, without aretinue,fromplacetoplaceintheLanguedoc,preachingandeven debating with theiropponents. Dominic soonestablished a house for somewomen converts, whobecame proto-Dominicannuns. In Dominic eloquenceandlearningwerejoinedwithausterity and unworldliness.Successesweremany,butnot

on a large scale. InnocentIII’s calling of a crusadeagainst the Catharsundoubtedly affectedDominic’s mission. There isno evidence that he wasinvolved in that tragiccampaign, although it is truethat he was friendly withSimon de Montfort and hisfamily. Dominic continuedhis preaching amidst theturbulenceof the crusade.AtToulouseagroupofmen,not

bound by vows but only bypersonal loyalty to Dominic,joinedhispreachingmission.In April 1215 the bishop ofToulouse recognized thisnascent community andauthorized their preaching.Six months later Dominicwas in Rome, where heapproached Innocent III forconfirmation of the neworder. It was just weeksbeforetheopeningsessionofthe Fourth Lateran Council.

Innocent agreed in principletoDominic’srequestbuttoldhim to adopt an already-existing rule. He returned toFrance to confer with hisfollowers. They chose tofollow the Rule of StAugustine, to which theyadded constitutions. PopeHonorius III approved thenew order in 1216. Futherprovisions were made in1220.The

Map15Mendicantfriars

Dominicans did not becomecanons,but friars.Theywerevowed to an evangelicalpoverty,which did not allowthem to live off the rents oflands, as did the monks andcanons,butfromspontaneousgifts and from what theycouldbeg.The friarswere towear a rough, woollen whitehabit, covered by a black

cloak, which gave them thenameBlackFriars.TheOrderof Preachers was nowestablished.Dominic’s vision extended

beyondthestrife-riddenlandsof southern France. On 15August 1217 Dominic sentforth from Toulouse elevenfriars:fourtoSpainandsevento Paris. And very soonothers were sent to Bologna.This was but the beginning.By 1221 the order had

expanded to such an extentthatwhathadbeentwosmallhouses in 1215was by 1221an order divided into fiveprovinces: Spain, Provence,France, Lombardy andTuscany. And the chapter of1221projectednewprovincesin Germany, Hungary,England, Greece,Scandinavia, Poland and theHoly Land. Soon there werethese 12 flourishingprovinces. To Hungary, in

1221, were sent theHungarian Friar Paul, amaster of canon law atBologna, and threecompanions. At the sametime the chapter dispatchedFriar Christian to Germany,whereheestablishedahouseatCologne.FriarSolomonofAarhus went to his nativecountry, where thearchbishop of Copenhagenwarmly welcomed him andwhere, probably in 1223, he

foundedaprioryatLund.Thelargest mission went toEngland. Gilbert de Fresney,an Englishman educated atBologna, and 12 otherslanded at Dover in earlyAugust 1221, theirdestination Oxford. Stoppingbriefly at Canterbury andLondon, they arrived atOxfordon15August1221.Apriory was established, andfriarssoonbecamestudentsatthe university. Elsewhere,

two friars arrived at Cracowin 1222 and soon built thefirst Polish priory there.Three years later effectiveplansweremade to establishother priories from Cracow:at Wroclaw (Breslau) on theOder, at Sandomierz on theVistula, at Gdansk on theBalticSeaand, furtheraway,at Prague in Bohemia. Thegrowthof theorder, ifnotasspectacular as theFranciscans, was still

exceptional, and by 1256there were about 13,000Dominicanfriars.By then the attachment to

universities was an obviouspart of the Dominican plan.There were priories alreadyestablished at Paris in 1217,Bologna in 1218,Palencia in1220 and Montpellier in1221, and others were tofollow. Richard Fishacre, thefirst Dominican Oxfordgraduate,wrotean influential

theological commentary.AlbertusMagnusatPariswasamong those theologiansusingthephilosophicalworksof Aristotle. His student,Thomas Aquinas, taught atParisandNaplesaswellasatDominican houses of studiesand remains the best-knowntheologian of the MiddleAges.AllDominicanpriorieswere to have a residenttheologian, and somehouses,likeCologne,becamecentres

of advanced study for theBlackFriars.Other orders of mendicant

friars also appeared, but theprovisions of the FourthLateran Council forbiddingorderswithnewrulescreateda serious obstacle,which theFranciscans avoided byhaving been approved byInnocent III before thecouncil as did theDominicans by adopting theRule of St Augustine. Both

the Carmelite friars and theAustin friars emerged asorders from associations ofhermits. The Carmelitesderive fromWestern hermitsliving, in imitation of theprophet Elijah, on MountCarmel, near Haifa in theHoly Land. They wereWesterners, possiblycrusaders and pilgrims whostayedontolivesolitarylivesof contemplation. By thebeginning of the thirteenth

century they formed a looseassociation. Sometimebetween 1206 and 1214 theLatin patriarch of Jerusalemgavethema‘formulaoflife’,whichprobablydescribed thelife which they were thenliving.Thesehermitslivedinseparate cells in thewildernessandcametogetheronlyforMassinthemorningin their oratory and for achapter meeting on Sunday.Although Jerusalem fell to

theMuslimsin1187,thestripof coastal land in whichMount Carmel lay remainedin Christian hands. Thecontinued way of life of thehermits was in peril in theshifting political andmilitarysands of thirteenth-centuryPalestine.YetafterthefallofJerusalem the hermits stayedin place and even receivedtheirformulaoflife.Thereisnosuggestionofanexodusofhermits for a half century

after the fall. A guide forWestern pilgrims, writtenabout1231,describedMountCarmel:

Ontheridgeliesapleasantplacewhere live the Latin hermits,who are called Brothers ofMount Carmel. They have anoratory dedicated to Our Lady,andmany springs flow from therocksthere.

Thentheyleft,notallatonce,but in a steady, continuingstream, and returned to the

West. The initial reasoneludes us, perhaps somespecific incident ofunpleasantness with theMuslims, but once started itwas to continue with groupsof hermits from Carmelestablishing communities atvarious places in westernEurope. The contemporaryhistorianVincentofBeauvais(d. 1264) said that thediaspora began in 1238.Another,notwhollyaccepted,

source relates that hermitsfrom Carmel went toValenciennes in northernFrance in 1235. It is safe tosay that in the yearssurrounding the year 1240they migrated to Cyprus,Sicily,EnglandandProvence,sponsored inall theseplaces,it would seem, by returningcrusaders. And for the nextdecades they continued tocome until in 1291whateverremainedoftheirpresenceon

Mount Carmel was burneddown by the sultan’s army.OneWestern visitor in about1350claimedtohaveseentenCarmelitehouses in theHolyLand,butthisseemsunlikely.A change took place once

theywere in theWest. Theycame as hermits who livedsolitary lives ofcontemplative prayer, butthey soon became friarswithan apostolic mission. Thiswas not their initial intent.

Forexample,whentheywentto England in 1242, theyestablished themselves inremote places: Hulne inNorthumberland andAylesfordinKent.Theirnexttwo foundations were inremote parts of Norfolk andKent. This was soon tochange. Subsequentfoundations, almost withoutexception, were in towns:London and Cambridge in1247, then York, Norwich,

BristolandLincoln,allbefore1260.And so itwent on.By1300therewereatleast1,000Carmelites in England, andthey were definitely friars,like theirneighbours in thesetowns, the Franciscans andDominicans.What had happened to the

provisionsoftheirformulaoflifethatrequiredthemtoliveas hermits in thewilderness?Almost at once upon theirarrival in the West, a party

arose among them whichwanted to adopt an activeministry like the friars. Tosettle this matter PopeInnocentIV,in1247,revisedthe formula and issued thenewdocumentasarule.Theycouldnowlivewherevertheywanted (i.e., in towns) andwere to take their meals incommon. They had becomemendicant friars with anurban mission. Not only atCambridge, as seen already,

did the Carmelites establishhouses but also at otheruniversity centres such asParis, Oxford and Bologna.Yet there were to becontinuing tensions, pullingtowards contemplation andtowards active ministry.About1270a formergeneralof the order lamented theabandoning of the life of thedesert for the life of thetowns. And these tensionswere never fully resolved in

ourperiod.The Austin (or

Augustinian) Friars, like theCarmelites, were originallyhermits. As an order theycame into existence by theefforts of mid thirteenth-century popes to givedisparate Italian eremiticalgroups a commonorganization. As early as1223, five hermitages inTuscany adopted a looseassociation; theywere joined

by eight more hermitages in1228. This collection of 13Tuscan groups of hermitsformed the core of a neworder.In1244,PopeInnocentIV through CardinalAnnibaldi arranged theformal union of most of thehermitages of Tuscany withthe Rule of St Augustine astheir rule, to whichconstitutions were added.Attracting other groups ofhermits,theneworderhad61

houses within 10 years.Others were added in 1256,whenanorderofhermitswiththree provinces in northernItaly joined this expandingunionofhermitsasdidothergroups, especially hermitsfromtheMarchofAncona.Inthat year Pope Alexander IVconfirmed the Great Unionand gave the order its name,Order of Hermit Friars of StAugustine.Hermit friars theywere called, but they were

more friars than hermits.They followed the paths oftheotherordersof friars intothe towns and universities ofEurope and within a centuryof their founding had over500houses.Otherordersoffriarscame

into existence in thethirteenth century, adopting,as required by the FourthLateran Council, one of theolder rules, but they neverattractedthelargenumbersof

the four major mendicantorders. The Second CouncilofLyons(1274)forbadethemto accept newmembers, andtheyslowlydiedout.To an extent that should

not be minimized, the friarsemerged from forces similarto those that gave rise toheresy, yet the papacy,perhaps having learned fromthe handling of the CatharsandWaldensians,wasabletoturn their energies to

constructive use within thechurch. Yet they were morethan merely a movementcontained within theinstitution:theordersoffriarswerethelastgreatinnovationofthemedievalchurch.Theywere not cloistered monks,like the Benedictines,Cistercians and Carthusians,nor semi-cloistered, like theAugustinian canons. Theywere not bound to live livesenclosed in a monastic

setting, intent on perfectingtheir own souls. They setthemselves in the midst ofsettled populations, theirdoors open to the spiritualneeds of their neighbours.One cannot arguepersuasively that thiswas allplannedinadvance,thattherewas an analysis of the needsof the church and that thisformoflifewasthusdevised.No study groups; no greatplan.Initsorigins,itwastoa

significant extent a laymovement characterized byan obvious spontaneity.Within the period of severaldecades in the thirteenthcentury the church had takena leap forward,and the friarsbecameafixedelementinthemedievalchurch.

Furtherreading

An excellent general surveyof medieval heresies isMalcolm Lambert, MedievalHeresy: Popular MovementsfromtheGregorianReformtothe Reformation (3rd edn;Oxford, 2002). For theCathars see particularlyMalcolm Lambert, TheCathars (Oxford, 1998) andMalcolm Barber, TheCathars: Dualistic Hereticsin Languedoc in the HighMiddleAges (Harlow, Essex,

and New York, 2000). AlsousefulisMichaelCosten,TheCathars and the AlbigensianCrusade (Manchester andNew York, 1997). For oneaspect of Cathar history seeCarol Lansing, Power andPurity: Cathar Heresy inMedieval Italy (Oxford,1998). For the role of theCistercian preachers againstthe Cathars see BeverlyMayne Kienzle, Cistercians,Heresy and Crusade in

Occitania, 1145–1229:Preaching in the Lord’sVineyard(York,2001).JamesB.Givendiscussestheuseofinquisitorial tribunals againstCathars in Inquisition andMedieval Society: Power,Discipline, andResistance inLanguedoc (Ithaca, NY, andLondon, 1997). For anaccount of the Waldensiansthat takes the story into theearlymodernperiodseeEuanCameron, Waldenses:

RejectionsofHolyChurch inMedievalEurope(OxfordandMalden, MA, 2000). Thesections on southern Europein Gabriel Audisio, TheWaldensian Dissent:Persecution and Survivalc.1170–c.1570 (tr. ClaireDavison; Cambridge, 1999)may be particularly helpful.For heresy in Aragon seeDamian J. Smith, Crusade,HeresyandInquisition in theLands of the Crown of

Aragon (c.1167–1276)(Leiden and Boston, 2010).Much is to be learned fromBernard Hamilton, TheMedieval Inquisition(London, 1981) and fromEdward Peters, Inquisition(New York and London,1988). For an Englishtranslation of pertinent textsseeW.L.WakefieldandA.P.Evans,Heresies of the HighMiddle Ages: SelectedSources Translated and

Annotated(NewYork,1969).An informed analysis can befound in Heinrich Fichtenau,Heretics and Scholars in theHigh Middle Ages, 1000–1200 (tr. D.A. Kaiser;Philadelphia,1998).Two important

contributions to the study ofthe Humiliati are the essaysbyBrendaBoltoninInnocentIII: Studies on PapalAuthority and Pastoral Care(Aldershot,Hants, 1995) and

the impressive monographThe Early Humiliati(Cambridge, 1999) byFrancesAndrews.Also,usingarchival sources is SallyMayall Brasher, Women ofthe Humiliati: A LayReligious Order in MedievalCivic Life (New York andLondon, 2003), whichconcludes to a majority ofwomen, particularly in theThirdOrder.OntheBeguinestheclassicworkisErnestW.

McDonnell, The Beguinesand Beghards in MedievalCulture: With SpecialEmphasis on the BelgianScene (New Brunswick, NJ,1954).AmorerecentworkofmuchvalueisWalterSimons,Cities of Ladies: BeguineCommunities in theMedievalLow Countries, 1200–1565(Philadelphia, 2001). On thestatusofBeguinesandotherslike them in the canon lawsee Elizabeth Makowski, ‘A

Pernicious Sort of Woman’:Quasi-Religious Women andCanon Lawyers in the LaterMiddle Ages (Washington,DC,2005).The starting place for the

friars should be thecomprehensive, eminentlysoundaccountgivenbyC.H.Lawrence inTheFriars:TheImpact of the EarlyMendicant Movement onWesternSociety (LondonandNew York, 1994). There are

many livesofStFrancis, notallworksofhagiography.Thereader will find accessibleand readable Adrian House,Francis of Assisi: ARevolutionary Life (London,2000). Also, John HollandSmith, Francis of Assisi(London, 1972), provides afair account, if somewhatflavoured with Jungianpsychology. Michael RobsongivesaninformedanalysisinSt Francis: The Legend and

the Life (London, 1997). Ashort biography by JacquesLe Goff is now in English:Saint Francis of Assisi (tr.ChristineRhone;LondonandNewYork,2004).Avaluablecollection in Englishtranslation is Francis ofAssisi, Early Documents (4vols; R.J.Armstrong, J.A.W.Hellermann and W.J. Short,eds;NewYork, 1999–2002).For a general history of theFranciscans see John

Moorman, A History of theFranciscan Order: From itsOrigins to the Year 1517(Oxford, 1968), now to beread with Michael Robson,The Franciscans in theMiddle Ages (Woodbridge,Suffolk, 2006). For the earlyperiod see Rosalind Brooke,Early FranciscanGovernment: Elias toBonaventure (Cambridge,1959) and Cajetan Esser,Origins of the Franciscan

Order (Eng. tr.; Chicago,1970).Of the troubleswithinthe Franciscan order thedefinitive study is DuncanNimmo,ReformandDivisionin the Medieval FranciscanOrder:FromSaintFrancistothe Foundation of theCapuchins (Rome, 1987).Rosalind Brooke has alsopublished a fascinating studyofthe‘image’ofStFrancisinliterature,artandarchitecture:The Image of St Francis:

Response toSainthood in theThirteenth Century(Cambridge, 2006). DavidBurr’s brilliant book, TheSpiritual Franciscan: FromProtest to Persecution in theCentury After Saint Francis(University Park, PA, 2001),deserves close attention. TheDominicans are well servedbyWilliamA.HinnebuschinTheHistoryoftheDominicanOrder:OriginandGrowthto1500 (2 vols; New York,

1965).ForDominic’slifeseeVladimir Koudelka,Dominic(trs. C. Fissler and S.Tugwell; London, 1997). M.Michelle Mulchaney haswritten learnedly about theeducation of the Dominicanfriars:‘First theBow isBentin Study … ’: DominicanStudy before 1350 (Toronto,1998).For theCarmelite andAustin Friars there are noreadily accessible generalhistories in English; one,

however,willfindveryusefulAndrew Jotischky’s study ofmedieval Carmelitehistoriography: TheCarmelites and Antiquity:Mendicants and Their Pastsin the Middle Ages (Oxford,2002). Also for theCarmelites there are helpfularticles in the journalCarmelus; in addition,Carmel inBritain:Essaysonthe Medieval EnglishCarmelite Province (ed.

Patrick Fitzgerald-Lombard;2 vols; Rome, 1992) hasrelevant information aboutthe largest Carmeliteprovince. For the AustinFriarsagoodstartingplaceisDavid Gutierrez, TheAugustinians in the MiddleAges, 1256–1356 (tr. ArthurJ. Ennis; Villanova, PA,1984), which treats theirfoundation and first century.For England see FrancisRoth, The English Austin

Friars, 1249–1538 (2 vols;New York, 1961–66).FrancesAndrewhaswrittenavaluable book about thelesserknownordersoffriars:The Other Friars: TheCarmelite, Augustinian, Sackand Pied Friars(Woodbridge,Suffolk,2006).

12TWO

LEGACIESUniversitiesand

cathedrals

The medieval church, in a

sense, is still with us. Muchoftheritual–fromtheriteofbaptism to the rite ofChristian burial – remainsvirtually unchanged exceptfor being vernacularized.Theological creeds, althoughwith different emphases andnuances, are still recited. AnethicbasedontheDecalogueandtheSermonontheMountcontinues to elicit broadacceptance, if not universalobservance. This chapter

focusesontwootherlegacies,which owe their originslargely to the twelfth andthirteenth centuries. One ofthese livesonwherever thereare institutions of higherlearning which have beeninfluenced by the westernEuropean model. Also, in avery physical sense,contemporary places ofChristian worship commonlytake their form and texturefrom churches whose

architectural styles wereformed in those crucialcenturies of the high MiddleAges:whenonesays‘church’today,oneusuallythinksofabuildingmedievalinorigin.

Universities

Modern life owes much toancient Greece, particularly

the use of human reason toask ultimate philosophicalquestions, yet it is not to theGreeks but to the MiddleAgesthatweareindebtedforthe existence of theuniversity. It was a creationof the Middle Ages and hadanalmostinherentconnectionwith the church. A line ofdescent can be drawn fromthe medieval universities atBologna and Paris to almostevery college and university

in the western world. A linecan be seen reaching fromParistoOxfordtoCambridgeto Harvard and another linefromParistoGermanytotheUnited States in thenineteenth century. To besure, as in any vitalinstitution, changes haveoccurred, yet the essence oftheuniversityasaninstitutionhas remained unchanged: themeeting of teachers andstudents around books. The

places to look for its originare medieval Bologna andParis.At Bologna, as at other

cities, there were schoolswhere traditional subjects,suchasgrammarandrhetoric,had long been taught, but atBolognathestudyofrhetoricled to the study of thedrafting of documents,particularly legal documents.The recent recovery of thetextsofJustinian’slawbooks

(seechapter3)meantthatthestudyoflawcouldgobeyondthe mere drafting ofdocuments and concentrateon the study of law itself,jurisprudence. Bologna hadthe great advantage of beingatan importantcrossroads. Ithad the even greateradvantageofhavingtheretheforemost lawyer of the day,Irnerius, who in the yearsfrom c.1095 to c.1125, inaddition to practising law,

almost certainly taughtstudents the ancient laws ofthe Romans. There also wasatBologna–perhapshecameto study with Irnerius – astudent who was to becomethepre-eminentcanonlawyerof the twelfth century,Gratian. There is noconvincing evidence that hewasamonk,and,infact,verylittle is known about his life.Gratian’s work, commonlycalledtheDecretum(Decree),

was actually entitledConcordia discordantiumcanonum (The Concord ofDiscordant Canons). Its firstrecension Professor Winrothhas dated to 1139 and thesecond recension, probablybyafollowerofGrationsomedecade or more later.Gratian’sDecretumdiscussedhypothetical cases and therelevant, often discordant,canons, frequently providinghis solution (his concord) to

the case. It was a supremelysuccessful textbook and wasused in schoolsofcanon lawforalmostacentury.Tothesetwo towering figures atBologna there shouldundoubtedlybeaddedothers,but the surviving sources failus as to their identities.Clearly by the middle of thetwelfthcentury–somewouldsay as early as the 1130s –Bologna had emerged as thecentre for legal studies in

Europe. To be sure, liberalartscontinuedtobestudiedatBologna, and, eventually,theology and medicine wereadded. Contemporaries, intime,wouldgive this typeofinstitution the name studium.In the middle of the twelfthcentury, thefameofBolognaas a centre for the study oflaw soon attracted studentsfrom all over Italy(Cismontane) and also fromother countries north of the

Alps (Transmontane). It wasfrom the self-organization ofstudents at Bologna that theuniversitywastoevolve.Foreign students at

Bologna formed a societyprincipally to protectthemselves fromlocalpolice,who could be harsh, fromlocallandlords,whocouldberapacious, and from localbooksellers,whocouldinflateprices. But they alsoorganized themselves, no

doubt, for social purposes.These foreign students calledtheir organization by theword universitas, whichsimply meant a guild orassociation or society. Itwasawordincommonuseat thetime:forexample,universitasartium was a guild ofartisans. Thus organized intheir universitas, the foreignstudents could go beyondself-protection from thetownsfolk and

companionship. They couldand did threaten to boycotttheir teachers, withhold feesandeventoleaveBolognaenmasse, if theirdemandswerenot met. Soon, Italianstudents formed their ownuniversitas. Before long thetwoguildswereactingasoneand,ineffect,tookcontrolofthe studium. Their threatswerefarfromidle.Anumberof migrations occurred – toVicenza (1204), Arezzo

(1215), Padua (1222) and,most dramatically, Siena(1321) – and on somemigrations themasters joinedthestudentsinprotestagainstthecommuneofBologna.Yetthe students were clearly incontrol.Intheearlieststatutes(c.1317), almost certainlycodifyinglong-timepractices,the student universitasinsisted on getting value formoney:

Nomasterisallowedtobeginhis morning lecture before thebellatStPeter’sfinishedringingforthedailyMass.

The master must begin hislecture immediately underpenaltyoftwentysolidi.

He must not continue hislecture after the ringing of thebellforTerce.

Thestudentsunderpenaltyoften solidi must leave at theringingofthebell.

No master should omit asmuchasasingleparagraphofthelawtext.

No master should absenthimself from Bologna exceptwith the permission of the

students, in which case he willdeposit the sum of one hundredpounds or an article of equalvalue to insure that, alreadyhavingbeenpaidbythestudents,hewould return to complete thecourseoflectures.

Bologna was a studiumwithout an administration.Studentspaid feesdirectly totheir teachers. The teacherseventually did organizethemselves into their ownguild,and,although theyhadcontrol over admitting

studentsasdoctors,theirswasalwaysasubsidiaryrole.Thestudium at Bologna wasclearly runby theuniversitasofstudents.No rosterofearly students

at Bologna exists, but many,probably the majority, musthavebeenecclesiastics.PopeHonorius III, in 1219, ruledthat no doctors should bemade without the consent ofthe archdeacon of Bologna.Whatever its position before

1219,thestudiumatBolognawas henceforth anecclesiastical institution.Andatsomepoint–nooneknowsexactly when – the worduniversitas replaced thewordstudium to describe theinstitution itself. ThisBolognese model of thestudent-controlled universitywas followed generally insouthern Europeanuniversities such asMontpellier, Naples, Padua,

Reggio,VicenzaandVercelli.At Paris a studium also

emerged, but itscircumstances were differentfrom Bologna’s. Severalschools had developed inParis, most notably one atNotre-DameCathedral,wherein the cathedral precinctsmasters taught students,which, indeed,alsohappenedat other French cathedrals.But Paris was blessed by asuperb location at the

crossroadsnotofapeninsula,like Bologna, but of westernEurope north of the Alps.From at least the thirteenthcentury Paris was Europe’sleading city. It was alsoblessed by the quality andpopularity of masters, likeAbelard, who attracted largenumbers of students fromFrance itself and frombeyond.Atsomepoint in thelasthalfofthetwelfthcenturythis centre of study evolved

into what we today call auniversity and whatcontemporaries, as we haveseen at Bologna, called astudium. There was no greatmomentofcreation,simplyaseries of minor changes,which, in sum, changed theschool atwhichAbelardwasmaster in 1118 to a studiumbefore the century’s end.How did this happen? Fromwhatsurvivesitispossibletoreconstruct, at least in broad

terms, what transpired atParis.Itwasthechancellorofthe cathedral who permittedmasterstoteachthere.Hehadauthority over grantingdegrees, as we would say.Actually, he grantedsuccessful students a licentiadocendi(licenceofteaching),a teacher’s certification toteachasubjectasamasterordoctor or professor, whichweresynonymous terms.Theadmissionofastudenttothis

degree (i.e., level) wasattended with a certainamount of ceremony andconcluded with thewelcomingofthenewmasterby those already masters atNotre-Dame with theconsumption of food anddrink at the new master’sexpense. A sense of themasters forming a groupdeveloped, and soon Parishaditsuniversitas,but,unlikeBologna, itwas auniversitas

of masters, and it ruled thestudium.Although inmoderntimes the University of Parisuses the year 1200 as areference point foranniversary celebrations, thestudium pre-dates 1200 by atleastseveraldecades.Earlyinthe thirteenth century themutual obligations ofmembers of the guild werewritten down, and they readlike the obligations of otherguilds: theywere towear the

garments of their profession(academic robes), attend thefunerals of other membersandobserveacommonorderintheirteaching.Thestudentswere subsumed into theuniversitasofmasters,clearlyas junior members, and theuniversitas came to representbothmastersandstudents.What happened in 1200

was that King PhilipAugustusgrantedthestudentsat Paris exemption from

secular jurisdiction becausethey were clerics orconsidered clerics. Like somany major moments in theconstitutional history ofmedieval universities, thisgrant was precipitated by anincidentinatavern.AyoungGerman nobleman, thenarchdeacon of Liège andbishop-electofthatsee,wasastudent at Paris, quite likelyof theology. His servant gotinvolved in a tavern brawl.

ToretaliatestudentsfromtheGerman ‘nation’ attacked thetavern-keeper, leaving himnear death. The provost ofParis, in charge of publicorder, led an armed band ofParisians to the residence ofthe German students. Therethey slew several students,including the bishop-elect.The universitas was in anuproar, and, fearing theywould secede fromParis andtake the studium elsewhere,

the king condemned theactionsofthetownsmen.Theprovostwastobeimprisonedfor life – in the event, hebroke his neck in an escapeattempt – and the others, ifapprehended,were to receivethe same punishment. Moreimportantly, the king issuedwhat is sometimes, butmisleadingly,calledacharter,as if it were a foundationcharter, which it clearly wasnot. In any case, the

University of Paris was notfounded: it evolvedimperceptibly from thecathedral school during thesecond half of the twelfthcentury. The king freed theuniversitas from secularjurisdiction and affirmed theplace of students as clericsunder the jurisdiction of thechurch:

Ourprovostandourjudgesshallnot lay hands on a student forany offense. They shall not

imprisonhim,unless the studenthas committed a crime thatwarrants arrest. In this case, ourjudge shall arrest him withoutviolence, unless he resists, andshall hand him over to theecclesiasticaljudge.

Further, the present provostand future provosts wererequiredtotakeanoathinthepresence of the students toobserve these provisions.Thus,theindependenceofthestudium from local secularauthorities was assured and

its nature as an ecclesiasticalinstitution affirmed. Morewastocome.On the eve of Ash

Wednesday (Mardi Gras) in1229, a group of studentswere celebrating in thesuburbofStMarcel,whereinataverntheyfoundwinethatwas ‘good and sweet’(optimum … et … suave).When thebillwaspresented,they felt that the tavern-keeper was trying to take

advantage of their conditionand had generously paddedthe bill.Wordswere spoken,thenshouted,andblowsweresoon struck. Neighbourscame to the rescue of thetavern-keeper and inflicted abeating on the students. Thelatter were not long inseeking revenge. Very earlythenextmorning,thestudentsreturned and with them alarge number of their fellowstudents, armed with swords

and clubs. Before theneighbourhood was aroused,the students broke into thetavern and committed theoutrage of opening the tapson all the wine casks, thuscausing a river of the ‘goodandsweet’winetocourseoutof the tavern and along thenarrowstreet.Theneighbourswere now aroused, and theyalerted theprovost,whowithabandofsupportersattackedthe frolicking students,

leavingseveralofthemdead.On hearing of this tragedy,the masters instantlysuspended lectures. TheLenten season saw noresolution to the matter, andon Easter Monday themasters announced that theywould leave Paris for sixyears, and the majority ofmastersdidleave,somewentto the universities by thenexisting at Oxford andCambridgeinEngland,others

to places in France likeToulouse, Orléans, Rheimsand Angers. In 1231, PopeGregoryIXintervened,andasettlementwasreachedtothegreat advantage of thestudium.Thepopegavegreatpraise for Paris, which, evenwhen discounted forrhetoricalexcess,providesanindicationof thehighesteeminwhichPariswasheld:

Paris, parent of studies, city of

letters, shines brilliantly and,greatinmastersandstudents,shegivesgreathope.

Gregoryenjoined thekingofFrance to see that theprivileges of the universitaswererespectedandobserved:

We, in viewof the needs of thechurch, hereby will and orderthathereafterourdearestson,theillustrious king of France, shallinsure that the privileges of themasters and students beacknowledged.

The right to suspend lectureswasexplicitlystated:

Ifsatisfactionfordeathorforthemutilationofalimbwithrespecttoanymemberofyouruniversitybe refused, you may suspendlectures. And, if any of you beunjustly imprisoned, you mayimmediatelyceaselectures.

Moreover,thepopeaddressedthe internal tensions withinthe studium. The chancellorof Notre-Dame had to swearthat he would not grant the

licence to unworthycandidates and, in any case,he would take the advice ofexisting masters at Paris.Herecanbeseenamajorstepin the movement of thestudium away from thejurisdiction of the cathedral.A physical move away fromthecathedralalsooccurredasthe studium moved from thestreets around Notre-Dametowards the Petit Pont at theSeine,thenoverthebridgeto

theleftbank,whereitcreatedthe Latin Quarter, thereafterthe site of the University ofParis. It would be a mistakefor us to think of theuniversity as a complex ofbuildings; it was, rather, acommunity of masters andstudents scattered in rentedhouses where lectures weregiven with faculty meetingsbeing held in local churchesandtaverns.Oxford, it was once said,

derivedfromEnglishmasterswho leftParis in 1167 in themidstoftheHenryII–Becketcontroversy(seechapter9).Itis true– thedate isuncertainbutprobablyafter1169–thatHenryIIdidprohibitEnglishstudents from going to Pariswithout royal permission andthreatened beneficed Englishstudents abroad with loss oftheir income if they did notreturntoEngland,butthisdidnot lead to the founding of

Oxford, although theuniversitas that developed atOxford was of the Parisianmodel. The number ofbeneficedEnglish students atParisprobablywasnot large,and, in any case, there is noevidence that those thatreturned went to Oxford,although perhaps some did.There were other schools inEngland, notably Hereford,York, Winchester, Lincolnand Northampton. When the

last mentioned had difficultyin the early 1190s inguaranteeing the safety of itsstudents, the studium then atOxford seems to havebenefited. Although Oxforddid not have a cathedral – itwas inLincolndiocese–nora major collegiate church,nonetheless it stoodadvantageously on the RiverThames at the border ofWessexandMerciaandatanimportant crossroads.

England’s greatest town,London, would not have itsuniversityuntilthenineteenthcenturyandthegreatseatsofthe two archbishops,Canterbury and York, notuntil the second half of thetwentieth century.The originof a studium at Oxford isshrouded inmist. Theremayhave been a school at thechurch of St George-in-the-Castle, which evolved into astudium. Even more

persuasively, a nucleus ofcanon lawyers had gatheredat Oxford in the last half ofthetwelfthcenturytoworkintheecclesiasticalcourtsthere,and, as at Bologna, theyprobably attracted students.Whatever its origins, thestudium was clearly in placebythemid1180s,althoughitwasstilltakingshape.Geraldof Wales (GiraldusCambrensis) described howhe read his recently written

Topographia Hibernica (inabout 1187) to the mastersand students at Oxford,‘where theclergy inEnglandflourished and excelled’. Hereportedhisvisit:

Onthefirstdayhereceivedathislodgings all the scholars of thewhole town.On the secondday,all the doctors of differentfaculties and their more notablestudents. On the third day, therest of the scholars as well asmany knights, townsfolk andburghers.

This sounds suspiciously likenothinglessthanasubstantialscholastic site, in otherwords,astudium.The origin of Cambridge

can be more clearly defined,although questions stillremain. A tragic event or,rather, a series of tragicevents at Oxford was thegenesis. In 1209 an Oxfordstudent had become involvedwith a woman of the town,perhaps a prostitute, and,

when she died suddenly, thestudent said it was anaccident, but the men of thetowndidnotbelievehim.Ledby the mayor and theburgesses, a crowd oftownsmen descended on thestudent’s residence. Theyseizedseveralof thestudentsand appealed to King John,then nearby at Woodstock,who gave permission for thestudents to be executed. Thesuspendium clericorum (the

hanging of the students)proved to be an event ofmajor moment for twouniversities. The masters atOxford immediately closedthe studium, and they andtheir students – one accountsaystherewere3,000,clearlyanexaggeration–migratedtoother places like Reading,Paris and some to the sleepyfenland town of Cambridge.There at Cambridge a newstudium came into being,

clearlyadaughterofOxford,and it was soon to have itsown statutes and mastersteaching the arts, theology,law and medicine. But whyCambridge? The attempts ofthe ablest modern scholarshave not produced evidenceof a school already existingthere either at a religioushouseoratachurch,aschoolto which the Oxford menwould have attachedthemselves in 1209. The

suggestionismadethatsomeof the migrants wereoriginally from Cambridge.OtherssuggestthatthebishopofEly, a townonly15milesfromCambridge,hadOxfordgraduates in his householdand that they invited fleeingmasters to come toCambridge. As attractive asthese suggestions mayappear,firmevidenceissadlylacking about the reason forthemigrationtoCambridge.

While the tragic events of1209 led to the founding ofCambridge, they had theireffectatOxforditself.Exceptfor a few scabs who carriedonteachingthere,theboycottpersisteduntil1214,whentheking, then papallyexcommunicated, made hispeace with Innocent III. Theresolution of the Oxforddispute quickly followed,brokeredby thepapal legate,to the humiliation of the

townsmenandtothegrowingindependence of theuniversitas from the town.Those men of the townresponsiblefortheoutrageonthe students were to walkbarefoot and cloakless,leading the whole town towhere the students wereburied, and from there theywere to take the bodies to acemeteryforproperChristianburial. For the next 10 yearsthelandlordshadtoreduceby

half the rents charged tostudents. In addition, thetownwastoprovideasumofmoney annually for poorstudents. The masters werefree to return, but the scab-masters were not allowed toteachforthenextthreeyears.It was agreed that thereafter,whenever a student wasarrested by the town, hewould be handed over to theuniversitas, which wouldhandle thematter.BothParis

andOxford,asaconsequenceof the apparent overreactionof their towns to studentmisdeeds,gainedasignificantdegree of corporateautonomy.Other universities were to

springup,generallycreaturesofthefourteenthandfifteenthcenturies.Asremarkableasitmay seem, Germany had nouniversities before 1347,when Charles IV, king ofBohemia, established the

University of Prague. Afrancophile,Charlesgave thenew university a constitutionbased on Paris. In 1365, theHabsburg duke of Austria,Rudolph IV, established auniversity at Vienna‘according to the ordinancesandcustomsobservedfirst inAthens, then at Rome, andlater at Paris’. When auniversity was established atHeidelberg in 1386, both thelocal ruler and the pope

insisted that itbe foundedonthe model of the studium ofParis and that it enjoy thesame privileges. By thenthere was a university atCracow in Poland and twoyears later one at Cologneand another at Buda inHungary.Themarchwason.To mention only a few:LeuvenintheLowCountries(1426), Basel in Switzerland(1459), Uppsala in Sweden(1477) and, in Scotland, St

Andrews (1413), Glasgow(1451) andAberdeen (1494).By the end of the fifteenthcentury Europe was dottedwith up to 80 universities.And there were othersexisting only on paper:Dublin(1312),Verona(1339)and Geneva (1365). Whathappened at the medievaluniversities remains to beseen.Like the modern

university, its medieval

ancestor had what we wouldcall an undergraduate levelandapostgraduatelevel.Theliberal artsweremeant to bestudied first and onlyafterwards theology, law ormedicine. Some members ofreligiousorders,inthefaceofstiff opposition, omitted thearts course andwent directlytothepostgraduateschools.Aword first about the artscourse.Thesevenliberalarts,at leastnotionally,comprised

the arts curriculum: thetrivium of grammar, rhetoricandlogicandthequadriviumof arithmetic, geometry,astronomy and music. Inpractice, the triviumtriumphed over thequadrivium, which receivedlessandlessattention.Andinthe trivium it was logic thattriumphed over grammar andrhetoricor,itcanbesaid,thatit was Aristotle whotriumphed in the arts

curriculum. Logic came tomean philosophy, andAristotle was known simplyas The Philosopher. Theavailability of the works ofAristotle, mostly through themedium of Arabictranslations, had a profoundinfluence on the universities.The length of the arts coursevaried from time to time,butan early statute required fiveyears in the study of theprescribed texts, leading to

the students becomingmasters,and then twofurtheryearsasregentmasters,whenthey taught. Some of thesemasters of arts went on tostudy in one of theprofessional faculties,but thetemptation to see masters ofartsmovingenmasseintothehigher schools must beresisted.AtParis, famousforits school of theology, thenumber of students in thatschool was never large,

althoughprecisenumbers arenot easy to come by. Thecurriculumin theologywasalong one, requiring about 12years of study. By papaldecree clerics holdingbenefices could absentthemselves from theirbenefices for part of theirstudy, hiring a curate withsome of their income, theremainder being a type ofbursaryorscholarship.The

Map16Medievaluniversities

theological student firststudiedtheBible,afterwhichhe became a baccalaureusbiblicus (bachelor of theBible). Then he studiedsystematic theology,usingasa textbook the Sentences ofPeterLombard,whichsetouttheologyinfourbooks(aboutthe nature of God; aboutcreation and fall of man;

about the Incarnation,Redemption and the virtues;and, finally, about thesacraments and last things),after which he became abaccalaureus sententiarius(bachelor of the Sentences).Finally,heperformedaseriesof academic exercises,leading to his becoming abaccalaureus formatus (aformed or completebachelor). His course wasthen complete. He had only

some formalities to observeand was then awarded hislicence and became amasterof theology. By that time hewould have been at least 25years of age. This educationprovided for a close readingof at least several books oftheOldandNewTestamentsand for a speculativeapproach to the theologicalquestionsraisedbytheauthoroftheSentences.This textualstudy was grounded in

Aristotelian philosophy. Itwasan intellectually rigorousandsophisticatedapproachtothe mater scientiarum(motherofknowledge).Theword – and variations

ofit–thatiscommonlyusedto describe the medievaluniversity is ‘scholasticism’.Those who taught there arecalled scholastics (orsometimes the variant‘schoolmen’). The danger inusing the word

‘scholasticism’ is that it canbe understood to mean whatwas taught at the medievaluniversities, as if thatteaching formed a monolith.Anyonewhoreads theworksofthescholasticswillquicklyrealize the great variety ofopinions.Debates,sometimesheated, were part of and,indeed,essentialtothenatureof the medieval university.Whenusedtorefertoabodyof knowledge, even a

differentiated body ofknowledge, the word‘scholasticism’ is being usedonly in an extended sense. Itproperly refers not to whatwas taught but how it wastaught, to the form ofteaching, to the pedagogy ofthe medieval university, towhichweshouldnowturn.Two elements comprised

thepedagogyofthemedievaluniversity, the expositiotextuumandthedisputatio.At

the core of the first of thesewas the fact that for eachsubject there was anauthority. For example, inphilosophy the authority wasAristotle; in mathematicsEuclid;inmedicineGalen;inRoman law Justinian; incanon law Gratian and, after1234, the Decretals ofGregory IX; and in theologythe Bible. The authority wasthesourceofknowledge,andlearning became an

explorationofthemeaningofthe authority. The lecturerreadthetextandexplainedit.He did not give an opinionaboutit,andhedidnotdifferwith the authority norcontradict him. He merelyexposed the text of theauthority as clearly aspossible.Itwaslatersaidthatphilosophy became not thestudy of being but the studyof Aristotle. That accusationmightbecredible,wereitnot

for the second element inscholasticism.Thedisputationemergedin

the twelfth century fromproblems remaining after theexposition of the text. Themaster set aside one or twoperiods eachweek to discussunresolvedquestions,suchasthe apparent conflict of twotextsfromthesameauthority.Soon the master would usetheseperiodstosetaquestionfor his students. One student

would propose an answer,another would respond andthe master would determine(or resolve) the question.These sessions becameformalized into the medievaldisputation.The Paris master best

knowntomodernsisThomasAquinas. Two series ofdisputed questions posed byhim are known to be extant.His disputations associatedwith the virtues (book 3 of

the Sentences) took place in1269–72. For example, heasked,‘Dowepossessvirtuesnaturally?’ Arguments proand con were given bystudents, each citingauthorities and usingarguments from reason.Master Thomas respondedthat ‘there is a difference ofopinion’ and determined thatvirtue is in us naturally onlyas an aptitude and not as aperfection.And so itwent, a

give-and-take which wentbeyondtheformallectureandwhich gave a richness to thelearningprocess.In addition, there was the

quodlibet (what-you-will)disputation, which was themost popular academicexercise of the medievaluniversity. A master wouldannounce that at a particulartime, generally before EasterorChristmas,hewouldholdaquodlibetdisputation.Hewas

not required to do so, andmanymasters never did.Thedisputation was open to allstudents and masters and toothersaswell,andthemasterwas prepared to entertainquestions from the floor onany subject (quodlibet).Subjects raised often wentbeyondthetermsofacademicdiscussion and could beconcerned with currentpolitical and ecclesiasticalissuessuchasthesuppression

of the Knights Templar. Tolighten the atmosphere,occasionally frivolousquestions might be asked –‘Whether a drunk can besobered by drinking oil?’,‘Whether redheads can betrusted?’, ‘Whether monkshave to be fatter than otherpeople?’ In time, the verbquodlibetare came into useand is the direct ancestor ofourquibble.Theseoccasionalfrivolities of the quodlibet

aside, the disputationcomplemented the expositionof the text and producedstudents who were aware ofthe accepted opinions andwho also had the ability tospeculate and to be engagedinintellectualexchangeatthehighest level. This wasmedievalscholasticism.Notmanyphysicalremains

of medieval universitiessurvive: the churches of StJulien-le-Pauvre and St

Séverin at Paris, parts ofMerton College at OxfordandPeterhouseatCambridgebut not much else for theperiod before 1300. Whatdoessurviveis theinstitutionitself. For medieval physicalremainswenowturntoactualstoneandmortar.

Cathedrals

Scattered across westernEurope today are churches,almost without number,which were built in theMiddle Ages. One estimatesuggests that in medievaltimes there was one churchfor every 200 people. Onecan visit villages, forexample, in remote parts ofFrance or England and findtiny churches that date fromthe twelfth to the fifteenthcenturies, most of them in

continuous use since theywere built. It was in suchsimple, often unadornedplaces that the people ofEurope worshipped, wherechildrenwerebaptized,wherethe feasts of the liturgicalyear were celebrated, wherevillagerscameonSundaystoMass and on other daysperhapsjusttositinthequietof a holy place and whereobsequies were pronouncedover the dead. Yet

architecturally the crowningglory of themedieval churchmust be the great cathedrals,the seats (cathedrae) ofbishops in their dioceses.From Sweden and Poland intheEasttoSpainandBrittanyandIreland in theWest therestood in great towns thecathedral, the centre ofreligious life for a wholeregion. There were 17cathedrals in England, 4 inWales and 11 in Scotland,

nearly100inFranceandevenmore in Italy. They werelarge buildings, made toaccommodatea town’s entirepopulation. The thirteenth-century cathedral at Amienscould accommodate about2,000 people, which was thepopulation of Amiens. In1944, when Paris wasliberated, General de Gaulleled about 12,000 people intoNotre-Dame Cathedral.Frequentlysitedonprominent

hilltops, such as at Laon andLincoln, the cathedraldominated the landscape. Instone and mortar it was thesupreme achievement of themedievalchurch.To look for origins one

mustgobacktopre-medievaltimes, when in the periodfollowingtheemancipationofthe church by Constantine’sedict (313) the church wasable to construct places ofworship. The historian

Eusebiuswrote:Therewasunspeakablejoyaswesaw that every place, previouslyreduced to dust by tyrannicalwickedness, was now comingback to life and that churcheswere rising from theirfoundations.

(Bk10,ch.2)

Whatthechurchadoptedwasthe style of the Romanbasilica (from βασιλικός,royal), an administrativebuilding, used as a court and

place of public assembly. Inthe beginning some existingbasilicas were actuallyconvertedforuseaschurches.The Christians placed aforecourt (atrium) with acentral fountain in front oftheir basilica. The buildingitself was a rectangle with asemicircularprojection(apse)at one end, where themagistratesatandwherenowtheofficiatingpriestwouldsitbehind an altar; at the other

end, through whichworshippers would enter,therewas usually a vestibule(narthex), but sometimes justa covered portico. Runningthelengthofthebasilicaweretwo(sometimesfour)rowsofcolumns, which created awideareainthecentre(nave,fromnavis,ship)andanaisle(sometimes two) to the sideofthecolumns.Inthecourseoftime,aroomwasaddedtoone side near the apse for

storing materials needed forliturgical ceremonies, and,soon after that, acorresponding room on theopposite side. Thus,unintentionally theseprojections(transepts)createdacruciformbuilding.Also,intime,thebasilicawasbuiltonan east–west axis with theapsidal end facing easttowards Jerusalem. Thesuperstructure was threestoreys high. At the ground

level rising from the floor tothe tops of arches whichbridged the columns was thearcading. The slendercolumns were joined to oneanother by typical Romanround arches, and thearcading supported therelatively light weight of theceiling. Above each row ofcolumns, from west to east,ran an architrave, perhapsfour or five inches wide,which, if one stood at the

west end of the nave, drewone’s eyes eastward towardsthe apse. The architraveseparated the arcading fromthe second storey, thetriforium, an area of wall,perhaps five feet or sowide,whichwasusuallydecorated,frequently with mosaics.Above the triforum was astorey with clear windowscalled the clerestory. Awooden roof enclosed thestructure.

Figure1FloorplanofChristianbasilica

A classic example is thechurch of St Paul-Without-

the-Walls at Rome, built in386, one of the first with aneast–west orientation,althoughwhatweseetodayisnottheoriginalbutanalmostexact replica built after thefire of 1823: a courtyard,narthex,nave,foursetsof20columns, providing four sideaisles, a decorated triforium,a fenestrated clerestory and,at the east end, an apsetopped by a semi-dome. InRavenna the church of S.

ApollinareNuovo,completedby Emperor Justinian in thesixth century, with the moreusualtwosetsofcolumnsandtwo side aisles, has at thetriforium level amosaic of aprocession moving towardsthe apse. Although theBasilican style continued tobe used in Italy – SanClemente in Rome was builtintheeleventhcentury–twonew forms of churcharchitecture, uniquely

medieval, developed. TheBasilican style bequeathed tothe Romanesque and Gothictwo essential elements: thefloorplanand theelevations.Thesecontinuedtobeusedinchurcharchitecturetomoderntimes.The designers of the

Romanesque church facedtwo problems. In the firstplace, wooden roofs wereeasily combustible. Thesolution – not totally

successful – was stoneceilings, called vaults.Secondly, sincemany priestswantedtosayMassdailyandsince at this time each altarcould be used for only oneMassaday–likethepriest,ithad to be fasting – a churchwithasimplealtarwouldnotmeet the devotional needs ofthe times in monastic andcathedral churches, wherethereweremanypriests.Theanswerclearlywasadditional

altars.Theresolutionoftheseproblemshelped toshape thechurch of the Romanesqueperiod (c.1000–c.1150). Thefloorplan,stillbasilican,wasadapted to create new spacesforaltarsattheeastend.Thiswas fairly easilyaccomplished by the use ofeither a staggered or aradiating plan.The staggeredplan,usedmostlyinmonasticchurches, extended the areaof the nave beyond the

transept and added sidechapelsoffthatextendedarea(thisareaeastof thecrossingnow called the choir), wherealtarswereplaced.Theywerealso placed in the transeptsand at the east end of eachaisle. Their orientation waseastward.The

Plate13StPaul’s-Without-the-Walls,Rome.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

radiating plan was to have amore dominant influence. Inthis plan the side aisleswereextended to form a walkway(ambulatory)aroundtheapse,and off the ambulatoryradiatedchapelsthatextendedas semicircular structuresbeyond the east wall. Thechurch of St Sernin at

Toulouse, begun c.1080, hasfive chapels radiating off theeast end and two off each ofitstransepts.ThechurchofStMartininTours,beguninthelate 990s, had a similarsystemofradiatingchapelsatthe east end. The churchknown as Cluny III (c.1120)had 15 radiating chapels. Atthe west end of theRomanesque church theatrium of the basilica wasnow lost, at least in northern

Europe. Creating a stoneceiling (vault) over the naveposed serious engineeringproblems of support. Thesheer weight of the vaultrequired the abandoning ofthe slender columns of theChristian basilica, since theywould simply have crumbledundertheweightof thestonevault. They were replacedwith massive pillars, placedfairly close together andjoined by the traditional

round arches.Also, the outerwalls were vastly thicker.Sincethewallssuppliedmostof the support for the vault,little spacecouldbeaffordedfor windows, which nowtendedtobesmallinsizeandfewinnumber.

Figure2Cross-sectionofChristianbasilica

How was the stone vaultshaped? The easiest, leastcomplicatedwaytocoverthespacewithstonewastouseavault resembling a section ofa barrel, a semi-cylinder,whichranfromoneendtotheother.Thebarrelvaultatfirstran unbroken, but in timearched bands of stone,crossing the nave from pillar

topillar,helpedtogivemoresupport and, importantly,helped to create the bay,which was to feature in allsubsequent churcharchitecture. The bay wasformedbyfourpillars,twooneither side of the nave, andthe arches connecting them.The space created by thearches AB and CD and thetransversearchesACandBDand their supporting pillarsformed the bay ABCD (see

Figure4).The barrel vault was soon

modified.Thevaultovereachbay could be formedseparately, which resulted inthegroinvault.Itwasformedby the intersection of twobarrel vaults above the bay.(Another way to look at thisdevelopment is to considerthe bay created where thebarrel vault of the nave metthe barrel vault of thetransepts and to say simply

that the vaulting of this baywasreplicatedineverybayinthe nave.) No additionalarcheswererequired, just thesame arches as for the barrelvault, but now the groinallowed the use of muchlighter stone, supported bymortar and the curvature ofthe stones, since the weightfellnotevenlyalongthewall,asinthebarrel,butatthefourpoints of the pillars. Theshape of the groin vaulting

couldnowallowformoreandlargerwindows.By1100 thegroin vault was covering thenaves of many largechurches,suchasthenavesofthe church of the Madeleineat Vézelay in Burgundy andthe cathedral at Speyer.Within a few decades thereemergedfromthegroinvaulta new vaulting that was togivebirthtotheGothic.

Figure3InternalelevationofChristianbasilica

Figure4Formationofthebay

The rib vault made use ofthe bay division and coveredthespaceofthebaybyusingthree sets of arches: (i) two

wall (or lateral) arches, ABand CD, (ii) two trans-versearches, AC and BD, in usesince theadventof thebarrelvault, and, what was new,(iii) two diagonal vaults,ADand BC (see Figure 7). Bycreating a skeleton of thesesix arches the stone masoncould then fill in the spaces(the web) with light stonescut to fit, supported byscaffolding till the mortardriedandthen,asinthegroin

vault, by the weight of thebondedstonesintheresultingcurvature.Wheretheribvaultwas first used continues tointerest architecturalhistorians. Whether inLombardy, Normandy orNormanEngland – and thereis really no reason to thinkthis development could nothave occurred independentlyin different places about thesametime–alookatDurhamCathedral should be

instructive.Sitedatthetopofa promontory at the endof aloop of the River Wear, itdominates the area in such away that Sir Walter Scott,with typical exaggeration,calledit‘halfchurchofGod,half castle ‘gainst the Scots’.Save for some thirteenth-century improvements at thefareastend,itremainstothisday little altered from thetime when Benedictinemonks built their cathedral-

monastery as a shrine to StCuthbert. A very early,perhaps the earliest, exampleof high rib vaulting can beseen in the choir, whichwasbegunin1093andrib-vaultedby 1104, and rib vaultingcovered the nave by 1133.Whatever the truth of theclaimofDurhamthatitschoiris the earliest use of ribvaulting, it can be said thatthe cathedral as awholewasprobablytheearlieststructure

completely covered by ribvaulting. Gothic was not faraway.

Plate14Naveelevation,ruinsofJumiègesAbbey.ReproducedbypermissionofJamesAustin.

Several observationsshould be made before welook at Gothic. In the firstplace, itneedstobesaidthatRomanesque churcharchitecture should be seennot merely as a prelude toGothic: it can stand on itsown.Themassivesizeof thepillars and limitations of

fenestrationproducedwhat isseen today as a fairly darkinterior. In the medievalperiod the interior wouldhave been colourfullydecoratedor,attheleast,

Figure5FloorplanofStSernin,Toulouse

whitewashed. Often thoughtof as French, theRomanesque, in fact, wastruly an international style.PartsofRoskildeCathedralinDenmark(by1088)andLundCathedral in Sweden (by1146)areintheRomanesquestyle. On Orkney, thearchipelago of islands northof Scotland, at its principal

town, Kirkwall (‘churchbay’), one finds aRomanesque cathedraldedicated to the Norse earl-saint, Magnus, a remarkablestructureofredsandstone.AtSantiago de Compostela aRomanesquecathedralwithanavemorethan300feetlongwas consecrated in 1211; aBaroquefaçadewasaddedtothe west front in theeighteenth century. ThecathedralatPisahasclassical

Romanesque elevation but iscoveredbyawoodenceiling.And so it went throughoutwestern Europe, thewidespread use of theRomanesque style but oftenwithlocalvariations.

Figure6Vaults:barrel,groin,rib

Figure7Formationoftheribvault

TheGothicstylewasmanythingswhichtheRomanesquewas not. It gives theimpression of openness andlight.Itcameintousefirstinthe mid twelfth century andby the second quarter of the

thirteenth century hadreplaced Romanesque fornew church constructionalmost everywhere andremained the style forchurchesofeverysizefortherest of theMiddleAges and,in many places, to moderntimes. To say that Gothic ischaracterized by the pointedarch and the height of itselevation is merely todescribe two of its mostobviouselements,butGothic

architecture is a harmoniousensemble of many things.Henry Adams famouslycompared the rough, heavymasculinity of theRomanesque to the graceful,delicate femininity of theGothic.Anotherobserverhascalled it ‘perhaps the mostcreative achievement in thehistory of Westernarchitecture’. A historyprofessor at Viennaproclaimed that ‘the Gothic

churchisavisionofparadise,theheavenlyJerusalem’.Andothers similarly. Yet stillothers have taken a differentview.Forexample,Vasari(d.1574) said it was ‘amalediction of pinnacles’.Hereweareonthegroundofsubjective taste, which thehistorian should feel quakingunderhisfeetandmoveon.

Plate15DurhamCathedral.ReproducedbypermissionofDurhamCathedral.

The floor plans of mostGothiccathedralsrevealthreemodifications from earlierstyles.Thechoir,theareaeastof the crossing of nave andtransepts,isgreatlyextended.At Notre-Dame in Paris thechoirisalmosthalfthelengthof the cathedral. This meantinpracticethat thelaitywere

further and further removedfrom the altar; in somechurches this separation wasfurther emphasized by thebuilding of a stone screen atthe entrance to the choir.Radiatingchapelscontinuetodefine the east end, as theydid inRomanesquechurches.Still,thefloorplanevenwiththese modifications remainsthe basilican floor plan,which had been in use sincethe fourth century. The same

three elevations, first used inthe Christian basilica,continued to be used in theGothic.In examining the Gothic

elevations, there can be noquestion about thesignificanceoftheribvaultinits development.Without therib vault there would not beGothic as we know it. Theribs provided the frameworkfor the fairly light stone andallowed the bays to be

rectangularandthenavetobemuchtaller.Thethreesetsofarches in the early ribvaultingwereroundarches.Iftheycovereda square,whichin the early stages they did,then the wall arches and thetransverse arches were ofequal size, whereas thediagonalarch,thehypotenuseof a right triangle, wasobviously longer. Thediagonal arches could reachto a point higher than the

crowns of the other arches,thus producing a conicaleffect. To raise the level oftheseotherarchestothelevelof the diagonals wasaccomplished by makingthese wall and transversearches pointed in shape. Thepointed arch was knownbefore the Gothic but now itwasmade an integral part ofthe new style. It was formednot by two straight linesmeeting at an angle but by

two portions of a circlemeeting at an angle. Thisformofthepointedorbrokenarchprovidedamoreverticalthrust for the weight of thevault than did theRomanesque. In time, eventhe diagonal arches mightoccasionally, although rarely,become pointed. The resultconsequent upon the use ofrib vaulting and pointedarcheswasgreaterverticality.Virtually all thatwas needed

to support these increasinglytaller structures wasbuttressingattheouterwallatthe exterior pointscorresponding to the interiorpillars. Walls between thebuttresses were scarcelyneeded for support and,hence,couldbeopeneduptoallow light to flood the sideaisle.Thehigherthebuildingmeant the higher theclerestory and the morewindow space in the

clerestorytobringlighttothenave. Of course, higherclerestories required higherbuttressing at the point ofstress,andthisneedgaveriseto the flying buttress. Theexternal buttress was raisedfrom the level of the sideaislerooftoaboutthelevelofthe nave roof and from it,extendedshaftsofmasonrytothe clerestory wall. Neithertheribvault,thepointedarchnor the flying buttress was

designed for ornamental oraesthetic purposes. In theirbeginnings, theywereclearlyfunctional or constructional:theribvaulttoallowtheeasyassembly of the stone web,the pointed arch to allowmore verticality and theflying buttress to hold theclerestory wall fromcollapsing outward under theweight of the stone vault.Decoration came later:sculpturedprogrammesinthe

portals and elsewhere,gargoyles spitting outrainwater from their spouts,stained-glass windows andpinnacles,oftenby thescore,although the latter were alsofunctional. The differentperiods of Gothic were butvariations on the same basictheme.Gothic emerged in the

middleof the twelfthcenturyin the region of Francearound Paris, the Île-de-

France. The earliest knownexampleofGothicwasattheabbey church of St Denis,thenjustoutsideParis.AbbotSuger, a close adviser to theFrench king, undertook thegradual replacement of theCarolingian church, a shrineto the national saint, a placelong associated with themonarchy. Construction ofthewestfaçadebeganin1137and what was producedbecame the standard design

for the façades of greatGothic churches: three greatportals, which were highlydecorated and separated bycolumns and colonnettes,themselves usually withsculpted figures, and, abovethe central portal, a wheel(rose) window, the wholearrangement framed bytowersateachend.Yetitwasat the east end, the choir,which was consecrated in1144, thatwere first realized

those features which areconsidered the essentialcharacteristicsofGothic.Thecolumns supporting the ribvaultsoftheambulatorywereslender and the windows intheshallow,radiatingchapelsproduced a richness of light.The impression was one ofspace and lightness. Time –and the French Revolution –destroyed much of Suger’sachievement, particularly inthe upper elevations, but the

groundfloor remainswith itsforest of thin columns in itsdouble ambulatory. OthersfollowedSuger’sexample.Cathedralsinthenewstyle

were soon begun at otherplaces in the Île-de-France.AtSensacathedralwasbeingbuilt at about the same timeas St Denis and may havebeenunderconstructionwhenAbelard had his famousconfrontationwithStBernardin 1141. In its construction

additional buttressing wasrequired for the highclerestory walls of the nave,and here, at Sens, was bornthe flying buttress.ConstructionbeganatNoyon(c.1150), Senlis (c.1153), atParis (c.1163) and at Laon(c.1160). Notre-Dame ofParis had a completed choirin1182andacompletednavebefore 1200. The oftenphotographed flyingbuttresses that support the

wallsofthechoirwereaddedsomewhat later. EugèneViollet-le-Duc, thenineteenth-century architect,saved the cathedral frompossibleruinand,inrestoringit, effected changes from theoriginal.Thecathedralsinthenew style were developing amoredelicateappearanceandwere reaching higher andhigher. Notre-Dame of Parisreached about 115 feet. AtRheims the cathedral rose to

125 feet, at Amiens to 140feet and at Beauvais to 158feet before the roof of thechoircollapsed.In England, fire destroyed

much of the east end of theRomanesque CanterburyCathedral in 1174. An eye-witness, Gervase ofCanterbury, described howthe fire started in nearbycottages, and, unnoticed,sparks landed on thecathedral roof, fell between

the leaden plates and ignitedthewoodenraftersbeneath:

Thethreecottages,wherethefirehad begun, were destroyed and,the general excitement havingended,thetownspeoplestartedtogototheirhomes.Littledidtheyknow that the interior of thecathedral was being consumedby fire. But beams and supportswere burning, and the flamesreached the roof,where the leadbegantomelt.Withtheroofnowopened, ragingwindsfanned theflames. The townspeople,turning, saw their cathedralengulfed in flames and shouted,

‘Look, look.Thecathedral is onfire’.

Reluctantly the monks ofChristChurch,advisedbythemaster mason William ofSens, agreed to rebuild thechoir. After four years, thesamechroniclerrelates,

While William was usingmachinerytoturnthegreatvault,the beams beneath his feetsuddenly broke and he fell fiftyfeet to the ground, timber andstonesfallingwithhim.

Plate16Ambulatory,churchofStDenis,Paris.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

In 1184, the east end, whichcontained the shrine of therecently martyred ThomasBecket was completed by anEnglish master mason, whoreplaced the injuredFrenchman. Both mastermasonsusedtheGothicstyle,andtheCanterburychroniclercompared the new (Gothic)

withtheold(Romanesque):The pillars of both the old andthe new are similar in style butdifferent in height: the newlongerbynearlytwelvefeet.Theold capitals were plain, whereasthe new are sculpturedexquisitely. The old ambulatoryof the choir had 22 pillars; nowthere are 28. The old arches, asall else, were plain and cutroughly with an axe; the newwith a chisel. There were nomarble columns in the old, butnow they are numerous beyondnumbering. The old ambulatoryaroundthechoirhadplainvaults;

thenewhas ribbed arches and akeystone…Thenewbuildingishigherthantheold.

Plate17Nave,LaonCathedral.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

The nave seen by Chaucer’spilgrims and by modernvisitors was built in thefourteenth century, and thecentraltower,BellHarry,wasconstructed only in the verylatefifteenthcentury.

Plate18Flyingbuttresses,LeMansCathedral.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

Meanwhile, in Francenature and man werecombining to produce whatsome art historians considerthecrownofmedievalartisticgenius, Chartres Cathedral.Whentheearliestchurchwasbuilt at Chartres no oneknows, yet the church builtthere in 743 replaced an

earlier church. In 858 firebadly damaged the newchurch, and it was replacedby a structure that remainedtill1020,whenit,inturn,fellto fire. In the ninth century,according to a later legend,theFrankishkingCharlestheBald gave toChartres a relicwhich was to make Chartrestheprincipalpilgrimageplaceof France: the tunic said tohave been worn by theVirgin, when she gave birth

totheChristchild.Thefireof1020enabledanewcathedralto be constructed in theRomanesque style; it wasconsecrated in 1037. About1145 two towers, joined bythree entrances (the RoyalPortal),werebuiltwestoftheRomanesque church, and thearea between this structureand the Romanesque churchwas covered, thus effectingan extension of the oldchurch.Thenewportalsgave

gifted sculptors theopportunity to produce someofthemostadmiredcutstoneanywhere. The colonnettesbecame elongated figures ofOld Testament men andwomen. The tympanumsabove the doors depict threestages in Christian history.Overtheright(south)dooristheVirgin enthroned, her lapserving as a throne for herson, the lintels belowdepicting events in the

Nativity cycle. Over the left(north) door is Christ endinghis earthly life by ascendinginto heaven and beneath arelintels with angels givingtheirmessage to theapostles.And in the tympanum abovethe central door is Christ inheavenlymajesty,surroundedby the figures of the fourevangelists, and in the lintelbelowarethetwelveapostles,flanked at the ends by twofigures, probably Elijah and

Enoch.Disaster struck at Chartres

once again. On the night of9–10 July 1194 theRomanesque cathedral wasdestroyedbyfire, leaving thenew west façade and itswindows remarkablyundamaged. A new Gothicchurch was built behind thewest façade.Above the levelof the lancet windows thewallof thefaçadewasraisedconsiderably higher to

provide space for a wheel(rose)window.Theworkwasessentially completed by1220. The large amount ofwallspace in thenewGothicchurchinvitedlargewindowsand stained glass, for whichChartreshasbecomefamous.The red and the blue glass –one writer calls the latter‘supernatural blue’ – createda fusion of these colours inthe spaces of the nave, choirand aisles. Gifts of windows

came from beyond the localcommunity, for theconstruction of the newpilgrimagechurch–thetunic,inthecrypt,survivedthefire– became a nationalundertaking. Windows weregiven by the aristocratichouses of the Île-de-France;the much admired windowsof the north transept weredonated by Queen Blanche,mother of the king-saintLouisIX,andthewindowsof

thesouthtranseptbythedukeof Brittany.Yetmany of thewindows were dedicated tolocal members of themerchant and artisan guilds,who donated them. A vividaccount tells how thetownsmen, including noblesand burgesses, hauled cartsladenwithstonesupthesteepprecipicetothesitewherethetowerswere being built. Thetemptation to reduce thissymbolicgesturetohysterical

pentecostalism would notseemtodo justice to the truereligious emotion which, atleast inpart, accounts for theastonishing fact that between1180and1270,80cathedralsand500abbeychurcheswerebuiltinFrancealone.The Gothic-building

movementspreadthroughthewesternworldfromDublininthe west, where two Gothiccathedrals were built, toGdansk and Cracow in the

eastandfromTrondheimandUppsala in Scandinavia toSeville and Milan in thesouthern peninsulas,everywhere with a localstamp, yet everywhereessentiallyGothic.And,whenEuropeans came to the NewWorld and built churches,they tended to do so in theGothicmode,adaptedtolocalmaterials and climate. It hadbecome close to being auniversalstyle.

Appendix:Medievalcathedrals:

aselectlist

Thislistpresentstheauthor’ssuggestion of somerepresentative cathedralswhich were built in themedieval period and whichwouldrewardfurtherstudy.

France

Amiens. Gothic. Builtbetween c.1220 andc.1280. Considered bymanytheultimateGothic.

Beauvais. Gothic. Choirbegun in 1225; its roofcollapsed in 1284. Choirrebuilt.Transeptsaddedintheearlysixteenthcentury.

Bourges.Gothic.Builtlargelyin two campaigns (1195–

1214;1225–55).Elegantlytall interior columns andrich stained glass. Façadeconsideredamasterpiece.

Chartres. Gothic. Westfaçade of mid-twelfthcentury. Most ofremainder1194–1220(seepp.233–34).

Laon. Perhaps best exampleof early Gothic; begun inthe 1160s. Uncluttered,simple, with gracefulproportions.

Paris, Notre-Dame. Gothic.Mostly1163–c.1196.Westtowersby1250.

Rheims. Gothic. Thirteenthcentury. Bombarded intwo wars, its walls andfoundation remained.Successfully restored.‘Likedelicatelace’.

England

Canterbury.Gothic.Choirby1184. Nave fourteenthcentury(seepp.230–33).

Durham. Norman (i.e.,Romanesque). Begun in1093. Vaulted by c.1130.Dr Johnson admired its‘rocky solidarity andindeterminateduration’.

Ely. Norman (i.e.,Romanesque) navecompletedin1106.Gothicchoir by 1251, but rebuiltin the fourteenth century

after collapse of centraltower,whichwasreplacedby octagonal lanterntower.

Lincoln. Gothic (someNorman features in westfaçade). Thirteenthcentury. Two sets oftransepts.

Salisbury. Gothic. Built inone campaign, 1220–66.Homogeneity of style: asnapshot of early EnglishGothic. Several paintings

of the exterior byConstable.

Germany

Cologne. Gothic. Built oversix centuries (thethirteenth to thenineteenth) and restoredafter the Second WorldWar. Largest Gothiccathedral in northern

Europe.Magdeburg. Gothic.

Thirteenth century. EarlyexampleofGermanuseofFrenchGothic.

Mainz. Romanesque.Consecratedin1009.Usedby the French as anabattoirandstablein1792andbythealliesasatargetin theSecondWorldWar.Restored.

Speyer. Romanesque.Mostlyeleventh century; nave

extended and Baroquedecorationaddedc.1700.

Worms. The Kaiserdom.Romanesque. Begunc.1000, not completed tillthe thirteenth century.Domeatthecrossing.

Italy

Florence. Italian Gothic.Begun in 1296.

Brunelleschi’s dome notcompleted till 1461.Façadenineteenthcentury.

Lucca. Typical Italianmixture of styles.Fourteenth century.Impressive façade.Marbleinterior.

Milan. Gothic. Begun in1386; essentiallycompleted by 1416, yetremained a work inprogress for some time.Aforest of nineteenth-

centurypinnacles.Pisa. Italian Romanesque.

Begun in 1063. Woodenceiling.Whitemarble.

Siena. Italian Gothic. Begunin 1316, but work washalted at the Black Death(1348)andneverrestarted.Achoirandtransepts.

Spain

Burgos.Gothic.1221–30,butdome not completed till1568. Towers, pinnaclesandstatues.

Compostela. Romanesque.Begun in 1075 andconsecrated in 1211.Eighteenth-centuryBaroquefaçadeadded.

Seville. Gothic. Fifteenthcentury. Largest Gothicchurchanywhere.

Toledo. Gothic. Begun in1227onthesiteofMuslim

mosque.

Furtherreading

For the universities anintroductory book based onlectures given in 1923 canstill be read with profit:Charles Homer Haskins, TheRise of Universities (NewYork, 1923, and frequently

reprinted). The classic is thesecond edition of HastingsRashdall,TheUniversities ofEurope in the Middle Ages(F.M. Powicke and A.B.Emden, eds; 3 vols; Oxford,1936), which requires closeattentionby the reader to theeditors’ notes. More recentworks include HeleneWieruszowski, The MedievalUniversity (Princeton, 1966);A.B. Cobban, The MedievalUniversities: Their

Development andOrganization (London,1975); R.W. Southern,ScholasticHumanismandtheUnificationofEurope(2vols;Oxford, 1995–2001), whoprefers a later date for thestudium at Bologna than theonegivenhere.Formedievalphilosophy the standardworks are Etienne Gilson, AHistory of ChristianPhilosophy in the MiddleAges (New York, 1954) and

ArmandA.Maurer,MedievalPhilosophy (2nd edn;Toronto, 1982). For canonlaw an invaluableintroduction to the subject isJamesA.Brundage,MedievalCanon Law (London, 1995).An introduction to the studyofRomanLawisPeterStein,Roman Law in EuropeanHistory (Cambridge, 1999),and a comprehensivesummaryisO.F.Robinsonetal., European Legal History

(2ndedn;London,1994).FortheologyseeJaroslavPelikan,The Growth of MedievalTheology (vol. 3 of TheChristian Tradition: AHistoryoftheDevelopmentofDoctrine; Chicago andLondon, 1978). Readers willfind helpful William J.Courtenay,TeachingCareersat the University of Paris intheThirteenthandFourteenthCenturies (Notre Dame, IN,1988).Oxford iswell served

byvols1–2ofTheHistoryoftheUniversityofOxford(gen.ed.T.H.Aston;Oxford,1984,1993) as is Cambridge byDamianLeader,AHistoryoftheUniversity ofCambridge,vol.1,TheUniversityto1546(Cambridge, 1988). Thedisputation of ThomasAquinas on virtues can befound in his DisputedQuestionsonVirtue(tr.RalphMcInerny; South Bend, IN,1998). In addition, relevant

articles appear in the journalHistory of Universies. For arich collection of papers onquodlibet disputations seeChristopher Schabel, ed.,TheologicalQuodlibetaintheMiddle Ages (2 vols; LeidenandBoston,2006–7).Good introductions to

Romanesque and Gothic canbe found in Spiro Kostof, AHistory of Architecture:SettingsandRituals(2ndedn;New York, 1995) and in

Robert G. Calkins,MedievalArchitecture in WesternEurope:FromA.D.300–1500(Oxford and New York,1998). A valuable survey isRoger Stalley, EarlyMedieval Architecture(Oxford, 1999). PaulCrossley’s revision of PaulFrankl, Gothic Architecture(New Haven, 2000), can beconsultedwithmuchprofit.Ageneralbookwhichdescribesthe construction issues

(Chapters 3 and 4) andprovides photographs of 28cathedrals is William W.Clark’s,MedievalCathedrals(Westport, CT, 2006). Also,the reader will findinstructive the verygenerously illustrated bookby Anne Prache, CathedralsofEurope(Ithaca,NY,1999).Furtheronthecathedralistheenthusiastic introduction byRobertA.Scott,whichhas aslight slant towards English

cathedrals: The GothicEnterprise: A Guide toUnderstanding the MedievalCathedral (Berkeley, LosAngeles, London, 2003). ForAbbotSugerseeLindyGrant,Abbot Suger of St-Denis:Church and State in EarlyTwelfth-Century France(London, 1998). Gervase ofCanterbury’schronicleawaitsan English translation. Avaluable book is Jean Bony,French Gothic Architecture

of the 12th and 13thCenturies (Berkeley, 1983).For an explanation of theengineering problemsinvolved in constructingmedievalchurchesseeRobertMark,Experiments inGothicStructure (Cambridge, MA,1982), which usescomputerized models. OnstructuralissuesthereisLynnT. Courtenay, ed., TheEngineering of MedievalCathedrals (Aldershot,

Hants., 1997). Readersinterested in sculpture willfind that Paul Williamson,GothicSculpture, 1140–1300(NewHaven,1995),providesahelpfulsummary.

13DEVELOPMENTS

ANDFULFILMENTSThelaterthirteenth

century

By the second half of thethirteenth century changesaffectingboththeinstitutionalandinnerlivesofthechurch,some of them long ingestating, were in full life.The emergence of strongnational monarchies hadserious implications for theway in which the church asan institution functioned. Ifthiscanbeseenmostvividlyin the high drama ofhenchmen of a French king

physically assaulting theperson of a pope, thephenomenon was played outless dramatically elsewhere.Among the Christiankingdoms of Europe mustnow be factored themonarchies of the Iberianpeninsula, for in the secondhalf of the thirteenth centurythe long process of theChristianrecoveryofMuslimlandswas complete, save forGranada, and the Christians

of Castile, Aragon andPortugalhadtakentheirplacein the world of medievalChristianity.

Popesandkings

Let this story begin with thedeath of a French king in1270 and endwith the deathofapope in1303.Thedeath

ofLouisIXin1270endedthereignofoneofEurope’smostremarkablekings.Knownforhisundoubtedpersonalpiety,Louisspentconsiderabletimedailyinprayerand,inprivate,heworethecoarsegarmentofthe friars.He constructed theSainte-Chapelle in Paris tohouse the crown of thorns,whichwasbelieved tobe theverycrownplacedonChrist’shead at his trial. Followingthe conventions of the time,

LouisledaChristianarmyoncrusade to the East, butwithout success. He broughtpeacebetweenFranceandherenemies – Flanders in 1256,Aragon in 1258 andEnglandin 1259 – under terms thatwereequitableandproductiveof a peaceful realm for hissubjects. Taken ill as hewasonhiswayonceagain to theEast, Louis, as he lay dying,advisedhisson:

My dear son, the first thing Iwant to teach you is to moveyour heart to love God, forwithoutGodnoonecanbesaved… Love all that is good andsalutary;despiseevileverywhere…Dealwithallyoursubjectsinjustice and equity, takingparticularcareforthepoor…

Be sure to insure that yoursubjects can live peacefully andhonestly…Loveandrespectallthose who serve the church …Finally, dear son, have Massesandprayerssaidformysoulandformethroughoutyourkingdom.

(Joinville)

There diedwithStLouis thesinglemosteffectiveforceforstability in Europe. InEngland, Henry III wasrecovering from a civil warwith his barons. GermanywasinaperiodknownastheGreat Interregnum, whichsaw competing rivals for theking-ship and which saw noemperor crowned. And thepapacy was experiencing itslongestvacancyinhistory.When Pope Clement IV

diedin1268,themomentwasnot conducive to a quickelection, and it was to be along moment lasting almostthreeyears.Sixteencardinalsmet at Viterbo, where thepopehaddied,andtheywerehopelessly divided, not overspiritual aspects of theleadership of the church butover the political question ofsupporting the ambitions ofthe younger brother of LouisIX, Charles of Anjou, the

papallyinstalled–butpapallyregretted – king of Sicily.Exasperatedbythelongdelayand the incompetence of thecardinals and urged on byStBonaventure, head of theFranciscan order, the peopleofViterboonahotsummer’sdaystrippedtherooffromtheplace where the cardinalswere meeting, locked thedoors tobar their escape andthreatened to cut off theirfood supply. Thematter was

quickly settled. Yet the manelected, then not even apriest, was at Acre in theHolyLand,anditwasnottillsix months later that hebecame pope, Gregory X(1272–76).Hisexperiencesinthe East convinced him toseek a reunion with theOrthodox church. In 1261,Constantinople, in Latinhands since the FourthCrusade went awry in 1204,wasretakenbytheGreeks.A

reunion with the churches ofthe East would meet thepolitical needs of the Greekemperor, now sitting inConstantinople, and such areunionwaspatched togetherat the Second Council ofLyons (1274). It was not tolast.Infact,ittookholdonlypartially among the Greekclergyandwasdeadby1283.The schism of 1054 was nothealed, nor would anotherattempt in the fifteenth

centuryeffectahealing.The papacy of the last

quarter of the thirteenthcentury suffered fromproblems of its ownmaking.In wrenching control ofsouthernItalyandSicilyfromthe German kings(Hohenstauffen) and placingtheir man, Charles of Anjou,on the throne of Sicily, thepopeshad created amonster.Charles,youngbrotherofthesainted French king, quickly

becameuncontrollableby thepopes, and his ambitionsthreatened papalindependence. Charlescontrolled a significantnumber of cardinals, whocouldbe reliedon to supporthis candidate during anelection. Thrown into thismix was the old story ofcompetingRomanaristocraticfamilies–theGaetani,Orsiniand Colonna – vying forcontrol over the papacy. It

was anunholymix, resultingin a number of deadlockedelections and long vacancies.The provision by Gregory Xat the Council of Lyons tolock the electing cardinals inconclaveandstarvethemintoactionworkedforonlyashorttimeandwasabandoned.But,even while it was in force,badluckproducedthreeshortpontificates: Innocent V (21January to 22 June 1276),Hadrian V (elected 11 July

but died 18 August 1276,before even being ordainedpriest or consecrated bishopof Rome) and John XXI (8September 1276 to 20 May1277). There followed a six-month vacancy. Two otherlong vacancies occurredwithin thenext15years:oneof 11 months (1287–88) andanotherof27months (1292–94).This last vacancy led to

oneofthemostbizarreevents

in the long history of thepapacy. Locked in bitter,seemingly irresolvabledisagreement for over twoyears, the cardinals made atotally unprecedented move.The dean of the college ofcardinals read to his fellowcardinals a letter which hehad received from a hermit-monk, living in a mountainretreat in southern Italy.Thishermit, Peter Murrone,speaking with the

unassailable authority of thetruly holy, upbraided thecardinals for not providingthe church with a pope andsaid that the wrath of Godwould fall on them if theyfailed to elect a pope soon.Not even worldly cardinalscould insulate themselvesfrom the prophecy of thisother-worldly, non-political,holy man. The deanimmediately said that hewould vote for Murrone

himself, and others of thecardinals quickly followed.Theimpossiblehappened:thecardinals elected one whomthey called papa angelicus(theangelpope),CelestineV.On 29 August 1294 he rodeto his consecration seated onadonkey.Notonlywasheavery old man – about 85 –but,moreimportantly,hewasgullible and naive. Hebecame the unknowingpuppet ofCharles II, king of

Naples,whosefather,Charlesof Anjou, had by now lostSicily to theSpanish.AlmostimmediatelyCelestinenamed12 new cardinals, allproposed by Charles.Consecrated bishop in thesouth, Celestine made noattempt to go to Rome. Infact, he made no seriousefforttomanagetheaffairsofthe church, and theadministration of the churchquickly fell into disarray.

Keeping with his custom ofspending the season ofAdvent, the four weeksbeforeChristmas,inprayerfulsolitude, in November 1294he announced that he wouldleave thepowersof thepopein the hands of threecardinals, while he went onhis Advent retreat. Whenobjections wereunderstandably made,Celestine asked for advice.Acting on that advice, on 13

December 1294, the hermit-monk-pope appeared beforethe cardinals, removed hismitre and ring and resignedtheofficeofpope.Onemightthink that this good manwould then have beenallowedtogotohismountainhermitagetospendtherestofhis days in peacefulcontemplation, but such wasnotthecase,asweshallsoonsee.OnChristmasEve1294,on

the third ballot the cardinalselected Benedict Gaetani,who took the nameBonifaceVIII. His was to be amomentous, even tumultuouspontificate (1294–1303).Muchcouldrightlyhavebeenexpected of him. He was alearned, even scholarly man,proficient,asfewotherofhisgenerationwere,inthelawofthe church. He was anexperienced curialist, whoknew where all the bodies

wereburied.Hewasaskilleddiplomat, who spent nearlythreeyearsinEngland(1265–68)atamostcrucialtimeandwho, in 1264 and again in1290, undertook delicatemissions to theFrench court.Yet his is often judged anunsuccessfulpontificate,evena disastrous one. He wasburdened by the manner ofhis becoming pope, since itwas he who had advised hispredecessor that he could

resignandwho,further,drewup the actual document ofresignation. It should bequicklyaddedthatthereisnoevidence that he used anyinfluence on Celestine V tomake him resign, but hisproximity to the processwasto make him liable tosuspicion and even tounfounded charges. Also,after his election, Boniface,fearing that the ex-pope,Celestine, might become the

centreofanoppositionparty,ordered that the aged hermitbe arrested and kept underhousearrestatCastelFumonenear Ferentino, where theformer pope died in 1296.Further, Boniface’stemperament – at thisdistance we catch onlyglimpses, makinggeneralizations difficult, ifnot impossible – may havebetrayed him. Others,generally his enemies,

describe him as haughty,arrogant and given tomomentsofirrationalrage.Inaddition, the new popesuffered from whatcontemporaries called ‘thestone’,quiteprobablykidneystones, which meant that hewas frequently inconsiderable pain. In furthermitigation of what was tofollow it should be said thatthe dire condition of thepapacy owed much to the

house of Anjou and itspolicies in Sicily andsouthern Italy. Topping hisagenda, as he first sat on thechairofPeter,wasthetaskofensuring that the papacywould be independent of thecontrolofsecularprinces.Almost irresistible is the

temptation to recount thepontificate of Boniface VIIIsolely in terms of hisencounters with the Frenchking, Philip IV the Fair (le

bel), but it is a temptation tobe strongly resisted. There isnocontestingthesheerdramaof the dispute of pope andking, butBonifacehadmuchmore to deal with than thearrogant, handsome king ofFrance. Boniface gatheredtogether the important papaland conciliar decreespublished since 1234, whenhis predecessor Gregory IXhad promulgated his officialcollection of laws in five

books, and added these as a‘sixth book’ (Liber Sextus).Allother laws introduced forthe universal church since1234 were now null. Thetotality of canon law was tobe found in these two greatcollections. Had Bonifacedone nothing else, he wouldhaveasignificantplaceinthehistory of law. But he didmuch else in his nine-yearreign.Twoyearsafterissuingthe

LiberSextus,Boniface calledfor a Holy Year (or JubileeYear) to mark the newcentury. The papal bulldecreeingitwasissuedon22February 1300, but the HolyYearwas considered to havebegun on Christmas Day1299 and was to run untilChristmas Eve 1300.Hereafter, in each hundredthyear, the pope wrote, therewould be a similar jubilee.Theformofthejubileewasa

pilgrimage to thebasilicasofSS. Peter and Paul in Rome.Tothosewhoconfessedtheirsins would be given a fullremissionof thepenanceduefor their sins, the journey toRome and the visit to thebasilicas being consideredsigns of interior contrition.During the Holy YearpilgrimscametoRomebythethousands, among themrepresentativesfromEngland,including the bishop of

Winchester, from Poland,fromHungaryandfromeveryChristian country of centraland western Europe. Theycame down the Italianpeninsula, passing throughcities whose residentswatched in stunnedamazement. At Modena aneye-witness saw people fromoverseas, some walking andsome even carrying agedparents on their backs. AtParma, according to a

contemporary, a number,almost beyond counting,passed through: ‘barons,knights, noble ladies, menand women of every state,class and condition … fromLombardy,France,Burgundyand from every other part ofChristendom’. Dante, whomay well have been amongthe pilgrims to Rome,describesapilgrim,

Whowith joy of spirit travelled

fromCroatiatoseeVeronica’sveiland,who,gazinguponit,Lingerstherewithunsatedsoul.

(Paradiso,31,103–5)

One Italian pilgrim, withunderstandable exaggeration,said that 2,000,000 visitorscame to Rome during thejubilee. Whatever the exactnumber, never before in itslong history had Rome seensomanyvisitors.Thepopeincalling the jubilee apparently

had no ulterior motive – notalways true of Boniface –otherthantosatisfythepiousdesiresofChristianpeople.Infact, far from dressing like aRomanemperorandparadingthrough Rome during thejubilee, as some of hisenemies said, Boniface spentmost of that year outside ofRome (from April toOctober) at his favouritesummerplaceof residenceatAnagni. Whatever the actual

papal involvement, the HolyYear of 1300was amomentunlikeanyother, aclear signof a church come of age, itspeople comfortable, perhapseven triumphant, in thesecurityoftheirbeliefsandofthe settled order of theirsociety.At almost the same time,

Boniface was sendingmissionaries to the East:Dominicanfriars‘tothelandsof the Saracens, pagans and

Greeks, to the lands of theBulgars, Cuman, Ethiopians,Tartars’ and many others, asthe papal letter says, and theFranciscan friars to theEastern Tartars. Suchmissions could scarcelysucceedwithout the adequatepreparation of themissionaries. TheDominicans had alreadyestablished schools to trainfriars for the missions.Ramon Lull, the Majorcan-

born intellectual andChristian mystic, who hadlearned Arabic in order toproclaim Christianity to hisMuslim neighbours, travelledtoRomeseveraltimes,andinthe early days of Boniface’spontificate urged the pope toencourage the study oforiental languages. He wasnot successful at this time,but15yearslaterClementV,at Lull’s urging, createdschools in Hebrew, Arabic

and Chaldaic at the papalcuria(thenatAvignon)andatfour universities (Paris,Oxford, Bologna andSalamanca):

Wearefullyawarethatitmakesno sense to preach the word ofGod to ears that do notunderstand … It is our ardentdesire that the holy churchshould abound with Catholicmen who have a knowledge oflanguagesusedbyinfidels.Thesemen should be able to instructtheminChristianwaysandbringthem through baptism into the

Christianfold.

Twoexperts in eachof theseEastern languages were toteachateachofthesecentres,andprovisionsweremadefortheir salaries. The world ofthe medieval church wasexpanding.The centrepiece of

Boniface’s pontificate, forbetterorworse,isusuallynotthemissionaryactivityof thefriars nor the pilgrims

crowding across the bridgesintoRomeforthejubileenor,indeed, the important lawcollection promulgated in1298. For modernhistoriography, thecentrepiece remains hisdisastrous relations withPhilip the Fair. Almostinevitably comparisons aremade between Boniface andhis predecessor 100 yearsbefore, Innocent III.WhereasInnocent successfully dealt

withtheemperorandkingsofEngland and France, notmaking a false step,measuringhispowerandthatof his opponents, emergingtriumphant, so triumphantthathistory–andthisbook–can speak of the ‘Age ofInnocent III’, Boniface, it issaid, misjudged both thetimes and his opponents,using traditional tactics andweapons, only to failignominiously, in the end to

be stripped even of personaldignity. Another viewsuggests itself in a historicalscene much more complexthancanbesatisfiedbycrudecomparisons. In Philip theFair,Bonifaceencounteredanadversary more formidablethan any of Innocent’sopponents. And Philip waswell served by lieutenantsmoved by overarchingambition. As ThomasCromwellwas toHenryVIII

andCardinalRichelieuwastoLouisXIII, so tooFlotte andNogaret were to Philip theFair: immensely talented,single-minded, ruthless,unbothered by sentiments ofjustice or morality, movedsolely by a lust for power tobe gained through theirmaster. Perhaps no popecouldwinout,arrayedagainstsuchfoes.Anewnationalism,itmightbeargued,playeditsrole in this conflict. To be

sure, the French kings wereextendingtheareasofFranceover which they held directauthority and wars with theEnglish and Flemishproduced some sentiments of‘national’feeling.Theking,itmay be argued, wasexpressing these ‘national’aspirations and the popefailed to reckon this‘nationalism’ into hiscalculations. Yet it is almostto read history backwards to

see in the opening years ofthefourteenthcenturyasenseof nationalism not present inreality until the seventeenthcentury.Philipwantedpower,and his advisers wantedaccess to that power, andnothing and no one wouldstand in their way, not eventhepope.Acasecanbemadethatthepope,ifanything,wastoopliablefortoolonginhisdealing with the Frenchkings.

The story can be brieflytold.Theimmediateissuehadto do with the French kingtaxing the church to helpfinancehiswarwithEngland.The clergy of Francecomplained to the pope thatthe king was taking churchmoney to finance a war notagainsttheinfidelbutagainsta fellow Christian prince forpurely secular purposes. Thepowerful Cistercian orderpressed their strong

disapproval:Thechurch isnotbound tosuchextraordinary demands withouttheauthorityofthepontiff.

Theyweresoonjoinedby‘allthe clergy of France’ incomplainingthatthekingwastreating them far worse thanthe pharaoh had treated theIsraelites.ThepapalresponsetothecomplaintsfromFrancewas the papal bull, knownfrom its opening words,

Clericis laicos (24 February1296). It took account of thefact that both the king ofFrance and the king ofEngland were taxing theclergy on income derivedfrom church properties tofinance their war. The popementioned neither party byname, and his bull wasaddressed generally, but themeaningwasclear.Unnamedlaymen(laicos)haveimposedburdens on the clergy

(clericis)byexactingpartsoftheir revenues, and someclergy, without receivingpermission from the pope(required in suchcircumstancesbyprovisionoftheFourthLateranCouncilof1215), have acquiesced tothese exactions, fearingwhom there is no reason tofear, settling for thepeaceofthe moment, afraid more ofoffending the temporal thaneternalmajesty.

Boniface went on toexcommunicate rulers whoacted in this way as well asclergy who, again, withoutpapalpermission,made suchpayments. Experienceddiplomatashewas,Bonifacegave wiggle room to Philipby using thewords italicizedhere. They could, as indeedthey did, provide the spaceformanoeuvrebyboth sides.There is every reason tobelieve that Boniface was

caught surprised by thereactionofPhiliptothisbull.Ithadnotbeensent toPhilipnor to any other king; Philiplearnedaboutitwhen,almosttwo months after it wasissued, the archbishop ofNarbonne asked the king tobeexcusedfrompayingtaxesandcitedthepapalbull.Inanattempt to show even-handednessBonifacethen,onthe same day, ordered hislegatestoEnglandandFrance

to publish Clericis laicos,thusnotputtingeitherpartyata disadvantage by losingecclesiastical revenues. Acompromise was in theworks. The pope, whileretaining the principle ofclerical immunity, nowallowed that in extremenational emergencies a kingcould proceed to tax theclergy without the delayinvolved in obtaining papalpermission. Also, the pope

chose this time (11 August1297) to canonize Louis IX,grandfatherofPhiliptheFair.Thematter couldhaveendedthere, but Philip sensed awounded Boniface andpressedforthekill.TheFrench now conspired

with the Colonna family,arch-enemiesofthepopeandhis Gaetani family, to bringdownthepope. InMay1297the Colonna had waylaid aconvoy bringing the pope’s

personalmoney fromAnagnitoRomeandmadeoffwithafortune. Infuriated, Bonifacethreatened the two Colonnacardinalstoeffectitsreturnorface the consequences. Theyagreed, and so it happened,but, still furious, Bonifacedemanded even more. TheColonna cardinals, who infact had voted for Bonifaceand who had acknowledgedhim as pope, now claimedthat Celestine could not

resign and that Boniface’selection was invalid. Thecardinals were summarilystripped of their office, andthey then added to theiraccusations against Bonifacethathehadactuallymurderedthe imprisoned PopeCelestine. The French hadfound their allies in Italy.PierreFlotte, chiefadviser toPhilip theFair, came to Italyand mischievously told theColonnas that the French

supported their call for ageneralcounciltoresolvetheissue of Boniface’s election.Flotte had a broader schemein mind than merely stirringtheItalianpot.Heplannedtorestore a Latin king atConstantinople, who, ofcourse,wouldbeFrench,andtosetupFrenchmenaskingsof Lombardy and Arles.Charlemagne revisited andNapoleon anticipated: Francewastobeineffectivecontrol

of western Christendom, theGerman and Englishmonarchs marginalized andthe pope a French puppet,awarded with control overFlorence. In themidst of theHolyYear,PierreFlottewentto Italy again, and, in ameeting with Boniface, toldhim that people were sayingthat he was not really thepope, that he had murderedthe late Celestine, whom hehad imprisoned, and that he

was a heretic. At about thesame time, complaints werecoming to Boniface fromFrenchbishops,tellingstoriesof the king infringing theirauthority. By now Bonifacerecognized that Philip theFairwaswhollyunresponsiveto his efforts to alleviatetensionsbetweenthem.On18July 1300 he wrote to theking:

At length, God’s vicar cannot

remain silent for fear that hemight be accused of being adumb dog, incapable of speech.Foralongtimehehaswaitedinpatience, hoping that a mercifulresolutionmight be reached, butnowhemustspeakout.

Allitwouldtakenowwasanincident to trigger the almostinevitable explosion, and ithappenedayearlater.In thesummerof1301 the

bishop of Pamiers wasarrested by an armed guardand was to be tried on

charges before a seculartribunal. Becket had died indefence of the principle ofclerical immunity from laycourts. Philip and hisadvisers, particularly, itwould seem, Guillaume deNogaret, aimed to confrontthe pope by their clearviolationofcanonlaw.Someof the French bishops,hitherto rather silent,protested at the king’streatment of their fellow

bishop.Stillhopingtoresolvethe issue but not willing tocompromise further,Boniface, perhaps unwisely,wrote a fatherly letter toPhilip, Ausculta fili (‘Listen,son’) very late in 1301. Theletter was burned whenreceived, and a forgery wasquickly produced, whichattributed to the pope claimsconcerning his authority intemporal matters, which hadnot in fact beenmade in the

letter. When a delegation ofFrench bishops appearedbeforethepopeinJune1302,he denounced by name threeFrench royal advisers asresponsible for the forgeryand for publicizing it: PierreFlotte, Robert of Artois andthe count of St Pol. Evilthings will befall them, thepope prophesied. And justoverafortnightlaterallthreewere killed in a battle inFlanders. If the pope needed

any reassurance for hisposition, this was surely it.When less than half of theFrench bishops attended acouncil in Rome in theautumn of 1302 and noresults were achieved,Boniface issued his mostfamousdecree.The bull Unam sanctam

Boniface issued on 18November 1302, and itremains the best-knownpronouncementofamedieval

pope. Its principal emphasisison theunityof thechurch,its opening words being,‘There is one, holy, catholicand apostolic church.’ Thepope is head on earth of thisone church, and anyonewhodeniesthepope’sauthorityisnot part of that one church.For that reason Bonifaceasserted that the two swordsofpower,thespiritualandthetemporal,werebothgivenbyGodfortheserviceoftheone

church.Thespiritualwiththegoal of human salvationtranscends in importance allthings material. From this itfollows that the spiritualpower can and should judgethe temporal when it departsfrom the ways of goodness.The bull’s concludingsentencereads,

We declare, state, define andpronouncethatitisnecessaryforsalvationforallhumanbeingstobesubjecttotheRomanPontiff.

This might sound as if thepopeweredeclaringuniversalpower, but it is a statementconcerning his spiritualauthority and not about therelations of church and state.Although no mention wasmade of the king of Franceor,indeed,anyothertemporalruler, the meaning had to bepatently clear to Philip: thepopewasclaimingthatPhiliphad morally erred by histreatment of the church and

that the pope had the rightand duty to correct him. Inresponse to a papal legatesent to France to threatenPhilipwithdireconsequencesshould he not reverse histreatment of the church, theking claimed that the popemisunderstood him and hisintentions. A clash of willswith dramatic consequenceswasabouttooccur.Itwasnowopenseasonon

the pope and his character.

The first shot was fired at ameeting of king and councilat the Louvre Palace on 12May 1303, when Nogaretaccusedthepopeofnotbeingpope but of being heretical,simoniacal and guilty ofunspeakable sins: he shouldbetriedbyageneralcouncil.In June the king called anassemblyof thegreatmenofthe realm, including 5archbishops, 21 bishops and11 abbots. An indictment of

Boniface was read to theassembly:

heconsultssorcerershe does not believe intransubstantiationhe forces priests to violate thesecretsofconfessionhefailstofasthecommitssexualsinshemurderedPopeCelestineVhehatesFrenchmenand sayshewould rather be a dog thanbe aFrenchman and other charges,twenty-nineinall

The assembly appealed for a

general council that wouldresolvetheBonifaceproblem.French bishop after Frenchbishop subscribed to theappeal for a council; thenotable holdouts were theCistercians. When the popelearned of these events,probably not till August, heprepared a formal, explicitexcommunication of Philipthe Fair to be nailed to thecathedral door at Anagni,wherethepopewasspending

the summer.The date set forthiswas8September.Meanwhile,Nogaretwasat

Siena, preparing for apersonal attack on the pope,whom he planned to abductphysically and bring toFrance for trial. On 7September,witha largebandof Italian mercenaries,possibly 1,000 in number,NogaretwithSciarraColonnaathissideenteredAnagni.Intheearlyevening theyforced

their way into the papalpalace and into the pope’sroom. They found Bonifacesitting on the papal throne,clothed in papal robes andclutchingacrosstohisbreast.SciarraColonnawasprobablyintent on murder, and someaccounts say that he actuallystruck the pope. ‘Take myhead and pierce my breast’,Boniface said calmly.Nogaret intervened, for amartyredBonifacewasnotin

hisplans.Thetenoroffeelingamong the townspeople ofAnagniquicklyturnedagainstthe attackers, for, whateverminor grievances they mayhaveheldagainstthepope,hewas one of them, a son ofAnagni. Nogaret now had tofleeforhislife.Bonifacehada harsh critic in Dante, buteven the poet was deeplydisturbedbythisattackonthepope:

The fleur-de-lys I see Anagniinvade,And,inhisvicar,Christ ismadecaptive.IseeHimmockedasecondtime;The vinegar and the gall againrenewed,And Him slain again betweenlivingthieves.The new Pilate [Philip] I alsosee,Socruelthatheisnotevensatedbythis.

(Purgatorio,20,86–92)

Broken and weary of life,BonifacereturnedtoRometo

die, and on 12October 1303there ended the troubledpontificate of this pope ofcontradictions.History should perhaps be

less severe than was Dante,who at least ten timesinveighedagainstBonifaceinDivineComedy.Notbynamebut by clear reference Dantecalled him, ‘the prince of anew breed of Pharisees’(Inferno, 27, 85). The poetreserved a place for him

among the simoniacs in theeighth circle of hell (Inferno,19, 53). To be sure, he andBoniface were politicaladversaries in theimpassioned world ofcontemporary Italian politics,and Dante, the greatest ofmedieval poets, cannot beseen as a sober detachedobserver of popes, who bynow had become activeplayers in contentiouspolitics, which inevitably

distracted them from theirspiritualmission.Letthefinalword be from Dante, whomeetsStPeterinparadiseandputs in themouthof the firstpopethewords,

WondernotifIchangecolourFor,asIspeak,youshallseeAllchangewithme.He who on earth usurps myplace,Yes,myplace,myveryplace,Which liesvacant in theeyesoftheSonofGod,Has made my tomb a commonsewerofbloodandpollution

Intowhichthemalignantfall.(Paradiso,27,139–41)

A harsh judgement, but oneaimedatunworthypopeswhohave polluted Peter’s grave.Should history includeBoniface among them?Almostcertainlynot.

Reconquista

By the time of the death ofFerdinandIII,kingofCastile,in1252Christiankingsruledalmost all of Iberia. Seville,thegreatMuslimcityand,forthe Christians, a great prize,hadfallenin1248,and,intheimmediate aftermath,resistance crumbled.Ferdinand’s son, Alfonso X(d. 1284), consolidated thevictories by annexing twosmall Muslim states and bybeginning a Christian

settlement of some of theseregions. From the latethirteenth century all thatremained of Muslim rule intheIberianpeninsulawas theemirate of Granada, whichwould remain Muslim until1492. The reconquest ofSpainwasallbutcomplete.The use of the phrase

‘Reconquest of Spain’ todescribethesuccessfultakingofMuslimlandsbyChristiankings has long been in

dispute. Ithasbeenadisputenot wholly divorced frommodern events in Spain,particularly the central eventin modern Spanish history,the Civil War (1936–39).Thosepoliticalconsiderationsputaside,theobjectiontotheuse of Reconquista is that itdistorts the history of theperiod711to1492.Tomakethe Christian reconquest thecentral and defining issue,many believe, neglects other,

more or, at least, equallysignificant issues of a social,economic, political and evenecclesiasticalnature.Itcannotbe argued here that thereconquestwasthegoalofallChristian rulers at all times,for it was not, or thatalliances were not struckbetween Christian andMuslimrulers,fortheywere,very often against otherChristians, or that Christianrulerswerealwaysmotivated

by high principle, for veryfrequently crass self-advantage lay behind theirland-taking. Motivation wasseldom pure and probablyneverwhollyaltruistic.The sense of ‘reconquest’

depends both oncontemporary articulationsofthis ideal and post factum,modern historical constructs,although the latter perhapshavehadgreaterinfluenceonhistorical writing. What can

be said is that the expansionof Christian holdings overthislongperiodledintimetothe control of the entireIberianpeninsulabyChristianrulers. The goal ofreconquering was enunciatedshortly after the Arabconquest,when, according toa later chronicle, in 722 aChristianprince, in a cave inthe Cantabrian Mountains,toldhiswarriors,

WetrustthatbythemercyoftheLordfromthishillwillcometherecovery of Spain and therestoration of the [Visi-]Gothicarmy … We trust in God torestore church, people andkingdom.

Writing about 883, anotherchroniclersaid,‘Ourgloriouslord,princeAlfonso,willruleoverallSpain.’Therecanbelittle doubt that thereconquest existed as a goalfrom fairly soon after theMuslimconquestupuntil the

time that the reconquest wascompletelyaccomplished,yetitwasoftenlittlemorethanavague and unarticulateddesideratum and for longperiods not a matter of veryhighpriority.Whenlastseen(chapter3),

Spain was being conqueredby a Muslim army that leftbut a small remnant of thepeninsula unconquered. Thatremnanthadnoexactbordersbutextendedacrossthetopof

Spainfromtheeasternslopesof the Pyrenees to theAtlanticOceanonthewest.Itis mountainous terrain,dominated by the Pyreneesand the CantabrianMountains. It was scarcelyworth the effort for theMuslims to try to ferret outthe resistance in these areas.Thus, from 719, when theMuslimconquest canbe saidtohavebeencompleted,thereweretwosetsofChristiansin

thepeninsula, those living inthe mountainous north andthose living under Muslimrule in the rest of thepeninsula, the area called al-Andalus.Theconditionofthelatter Christians should belookedatfirst.Aselsewhere,theMuslims

treated their non-Muslimsubjects(ChristiansandJews)with a tolerance greater thanthe tolerance shown at thattime in most Christian

countries to religiousminorities. Christians couldcontinue to practise theirreligion, and no attempt atforcible conversion to Islamwas made. There were someminor restrictions regardingthe public display ofChristianity: not allowedwere public Masses andpublic processions aswell astheringingofchurchbells.Inaddition, Christians paidsignificantlyhighertaxesthan

theMuslims,asdidtheJews.TheChristians,however,withtheir churches still standingand their bishops still inplace, continued much asbefore the conquest. Yet thepowerfulArabicculturehadapenetrating influence. Largenumbers, while remainingChristians, adopted Arabicways, including the Arabiclanguage. From the eleventhcentury they were calledsimply Mozarabs (i.e., like-

the-Arabs), although thattermmaynothavebeenusedeverywhere: cultural Arabsand religious Christians. Theso-calledMozarabic riteusedbyChristiansinSpaintilltheeleventh century is amisnomer, for itwas used inSpain before the Arabconquest, and, after thatconquest, it was used inChristian Spain in the northaswell as in al-Andalus and,in fact,was aLatin-language

rite. The Christian scripturesweretranslatedandannotatedin Arabic, for, indeed, thatlanguage had become thevernacular language of aconsiderable number ofChristians in al-Andalus. AChristian writer, at Cordovain the middle of the ninthcentury, lamented thisdevelopment:

Many fellowChristians read thepoems and stories of the Arabsand study the works of Islamic

theologiansandphilosophers,nottobe able to refute them,but tolearncorrectandelegantArabic.ThereisscarcelyoneChristianinthousands who can compose anacceptable Latin letter to afriend, but the number iscountless of thosewho speak inArabic and there are evenmanywhocancomposeinArabicmoreartfully than the Arabsthemselves.

Yet, even without pressure,manyChristians converted toIslam. We may never knowhow many, but reliable

estimates suggest that by theeleventhcenturyamajorityora near majority converted.Their conversions werefrequently suspect and, forsome time, their descendants(muwalladun) were not fullyaccepted by their Arabmasters.Theruleofal-Andaluswas

originally from theUmayyadcaliphinfar-awayDamascus.Whenthatdynastyfellin750and was succeeded by the

Abbasids, who moved theircapital to Baghdad, a princeof the Umayyad familyescaped to Spain and sethimself up as emir overSpain, thus creating anindependent Umayyaddynasty with its seat atCordova.Thereonthesiteofthe Christian cathedral wasbuilt the Great Mosque, oneof the marvels of worldarchitecture.Theemirateand,later, the caliphate of

Cordova flourished forcenturies. The Muslimsettlers were Arabs, the eliteleaders of the conquest, whotook the prized lands in thesouth, and the Berbers (i.e.,Moors), the bulk of thesoldieryoftheconquest,whogot poorer lands in thenorthern plateau. Inevitablyfriction between these twoMuslimgroupsled toat leasta partial abandonment of thenorthernlandsbytheBerbers,

thus leaving something of avacuum for Christianexpansion southward fromthe mountains. Someevidence suggests that themovement south, now andlater,servedtorelieveseriousdemographic stresses in theChristian-heldregions,wherethere was a growingimbalance betweenpopulation and basicresourcesforsubsistence.The Christian remnant in

thefarnorth,withinacenturyor so, appears in severalbroadgroupings.Inthenorth-east, growing up aroundBarcelona in the region soonto be called Catalonia, wasthe Christian county ofBarcelona.To itswest in thesouthern slopes of thePyrenees was Aragon.Catalonia and Aragon wereboth to expand to the south,and, in 1137, each havingdoubled its territory, the two

federated, forming what hasbecome known to history asthe Crown of Aragon,although Aragon was thejuniorpartner.Traversing thePyreneesattheirwesternmostpart was the Basqueprincipality of Navarre, itsprincipal settlement atPamplona. To the west ofNavarreandsouthoftheBayof Biscay was Castile. Andfurther to the west acrossnorthern Iberia south of the

Bay of Biscay theredeveloped the Christianregion of Asturias withOviedo as its central townandwithashrinetoStJames(Santiago)soontobebuiltatCompostela. It was fromthese regions that the‘reconquest’startedandgrewnotsteadilybutinspurts.By911thekingofAsturias

hadconqueredalargepartofthe lands to his south, muchof it underpopulated. Within

50 years the town of Leonhad become the centre ofAsturian rule and theassociated frontierprincipalities of Portugal andCastilehadappeared.Neitherexact dates nor exactterritorial borders should beexpected,butbyabout1040aline drawn across thepeninsula roughly from justbelowOporto on thewest tojust below Barcelona on theeast, along the Duoro and

EbroRivers,

Plate19GreatMosque,Cordova.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

wouldgiveabroadindicationof where Christian andMuslim areas met, althoughSalamanca and SaragossawerestillinMuslimhands.Acrucialmomentcame in

1031, when the caliphate ofCordovafell.Fortheprevious25 years the caliphate wasdisputed, as various Muslim

factions fought one another,some supported by Berbersand others by Christians.WhentheArabaristocracyofCordovafinallyabolishedthecaliphate, al-Andalus wasalready fractured into manyconflicting parts. Whatemerged from these troubleswasacollectionofascoreorso of small Muslim states(taifas), ruled by local kings.The Muslim rule in thepeninsula was in deep crisis,

a crisis of its own making,from which it would neverrecover. The ‘reconquest’wasnowintheascendant.Atthistime,aChristianknightisreported to have said to aMuslimruler,

In the beginning the Christianshad al-Andalus, until you Arabsdrove them into the poor regionof Galicia. Circumstances havenow changed. Since it is nowpossible for us to recover theselands by force, we will weakenyou, and, when you no longer

have money and soldiers, weshalleasilyconquerthecountry.

Whether boast or prophecy,thepredictedoutcomewastooccurbutnot‘easily’.The Franks had long had

an interest inSpanishaffairs,particularly in the northeast,where the Carolingians hadestablished counties (e.g.Barcelona), but, in the lasthalf of the eleventh century,the reformed and reforming

papacy signalled its interest.Alexander II (1061–73)encouraged Christianwarriorstojointhefray,and,in 1064, French armies, ledby nobles, joined with theforces of Catalonia andAragon to besiege Barbasto.Although promised safeconduct if they surrendered,the Muslim inhabitants wereslaughtered as they madetheir way out of the citygates, and in the slaughter it

was the French ‘crusaders’whodistinguishedthemselvesbyunspeakablebarbarities,atleast according to Spanishsources. In that same year,1064, Christian armies tookCoimbra,andKingFerdinandIofLeon–Castileappointedacount for Portugal. Furtheradvances were soon to takeplace in the western part ofthe peninsulas as Portugalwas taking shape.Alexander’s successor,

Gregory VII (1073–85),encouraged military supportfor the campaigns in Spain,although, when that supportcame,itwasexercisedalmostexclusively in eastern SpainbetweenthePyreneesandtheEbroRiver.Nooneknewitinthe 1080s, but the future laywithLeon–Castile,thecentralkingdom, definitively unitedin 1230 as the kingdom ofCastile, which would pushfurther and further south,

expandingonbroadflanks.Inamomentofsomedrama,thetalented king of Leon–Castile, Alfonso VI (1065–1109), won the surrender ofToledo and entered the cityon25May1085.Forthefirsttime since 712, a Christianking entered what had beenthe seat of Christian kingsbefore the Muslim conquest,although, for strategicreasons, Alfonso did notmove his capital there.

Alfonso promised toleranceto the Muslim inhabitants ofToledo and had to berestrained from executingthose of his followers who,acting against his wishes,seized theGreatMosqueandconverted it into a cathedral.Alfonso’s victory gave himcontrol over the heartland ofthe peninsula. The taking ofToledoputtheChristiankingwithin striking distance ofValencia and Cordova and

must rank high among theprincipal events of medievalSpanishhistory.WhatAlfonsoVImayhave

forgotten–andwhatstudentsof medieval Spain shouldnever forget – is the Africanconnection.TheBerbers,whohad helped to conquer andsettle Spain, were NorthAfricans. Across narrowstraitsfromMuslimSpainlaya kindred people, sharing acommoncultureandreligion.

After the fall of Toledo thepetty kings of the taifaspanicked. A contemporaryMuslimwritercommented,

It is from the edges that a robeunravels,butIseetherobeofthepeninsula unravelling from thecentre.

In this unravelling theMuslim leaders looked toNorth Africa, to Berbercousins, to save them fromtheChristianthreat.Enterthe

Almoravids.Halfacenturyorso earlier, in North Africa, azealous Muslim preached afundamentalist interpretationof the Koran. He drewfollowers from among theBerber tribes of the Sahara.Theybelievedinastrict,evenfanatical, interpretation ofMuslimlaws,fightingagainstfellow Muslims whodisagreed with them. At thetimeofthefallofToledotheycontrolled Morocco and

westernAlgeria.In1085theystood poised to cross thestraits. It was to theseAlmoravids that the Muslimrulers turned. They soonregretted their decision. By1094 the Almoravidscontrolledal-Andalusandhadrestored unified Muslim ruleat the expense of the localMuslim rulers. At thismoment, the man known tohistoryasElCid(The Lord),Rodrigo Diaz de Vivar,

captured Valencia from theMuslims and held off anAlmoravidattempttotakethecity. TheElCid, hero of thePoemofElCid,theCastilianepic, came to symbolize theReconquista, although therealElCidwasamercenary,fightingattimesforChristianandatothertimesforMuslimrulers. It is this historical ElCid who comes nearer therepresentative norm.Valencia, however, was to

falltotheAlmoravidsin1102and remained in Muslimhands for over 100 years.Within 25 years of theseevents atValencia associatedwith El Cid, the Almoravidpower began to wane aspeoplesinal-Andalusbecamerestive and new taifas beganto appear. Christian kingstook advantage of thissituation. The Aragonesewere able, in 1118, to takeSaragossa, situated at a

strategic point on the Ebro.This positioned them for theeventual taking of the regionofValencia.From across the same

straits another group ofBerbers, the Almohads,having already destroyed theAlmoravid empire in NorthAfrica, stood ready to do thesame in Spain. They arrivedin the spring of 1146 andsoon controlled parts ofsouthern Spain and the

Algarvetothewest.Withinayear they had seized Seville,Cordova and much of al-Andalus. In this unsettledatmosphere Christian kingsonceagaintookadvantageofthesituation.In1147AlfonsoHenriques, count of Portugalbutnowstylinghimself‘kingof Portugal’, seized Lisbon,aided by over 10,000crusaders,whohad landed atOporto on their way to theHolyLand.Inthesameyear,

Castilians gained Almeria,their window to theMediterranean, yet it was ashort-termgain, for itwas tofall to the Almohads. Thesenew Berbers were exertingthemselves forcefully and by1172 controlled most of al-Andalus. Yet, like theAlmoravidsbeforethem,theysoonsettledinasbutanotheraspect of the peninsularlandscape.The recently established

military orders of knight-monks (see p. 119)were nothappy with this fairlypeaceful status quo. Thearchbishop of Toledo andother bishops also found thesituation unsatisfactory. In1209PopeInnocentIIIurgedthe archbishop to convincethe king ofCastile to reopenthecampaign.Theresultwasa crusade. Innocent grantedcrusading indulgences, urgedChristians, particularly the

French, toassist and, further,admonished the Christiankings of the peninsula not toattack one another. AtPentecost, 1212, a crusadingarmy gathered at Toledo.Theymarched south, French,Aragonese and Castilians.After an early victory theFrench withdrew, allegedlybecauseoftheheat,andtheirplace was taken byNavarrese.AttheplaincalledLasNavasdeTolosaabloody

battle ensued, at which thecrusading army triumphed.The Almohad threat hadeffectively been ended. Thethree Christian kings ofCastile, Leon and PortugalmetatCoimbrainNovemberand agreed to put aside theirdifferences and to jointogetherinapushagainsttheMuslims.Between 1212 and 1252

the momentum from LasNavas de Tolosa led to the

capture of town after town,region after region, until allthatwasleftofIslamicSpainwas the emirate of Granada.For all intents and purposes,the ‘reconquest’ wascomplete: the peninsula,Granada excepted, was ruledby the Christian kings ofCastile (lastingly united withLeon in 1230), Aragon (andCatalonia) and Portugal.Population displacementoccurred as Christians began

to settle in the cities of thesouth. Conversions ofMuslims to Christianityfollowed, but they wereapparently no more forcedthanthepreviousconversionsof Christians to Islam in thewake of the eighth centuryconquest. The story of thegradual conversion of thebulk of theMuslims has leftlittlebywayofrecord.An exclusive emphasis on

Reconquista does not give

nearly a full picture ofecclesiastical history in thepeninsula. The Christianterritories experienced thechangesaffectingtheWesternChurchgenerally.Theimpactof Cluny (see pp. 99–101)wasearlyfelt,althoughthisissometimes exaggerated.Bernard of Sediros, a FrenchCluniac and friend of thereforming Pope Urban II(1088–99), was imposed ontheabbeyofSahagúnin1080

and became archbishop ofToledo shortly after itscapture. During his longtenure(1086–1124)hehelpedto insert reforming Frenchbishops into sees such asValencia, Salamanca,Segovia and Zamora. Thewinds of reform brought thefirstpapallegatein1067,andmany others were to follow.Thenewordersofthetwelfthcentury came to ChristianSpain, among them the

Cistercians,AugustiniansandPremonstratensians. In 1140Alfonso VII of Castilegranted lands for the firstCistercian monastery, atFitero. Fairly quicklythereafter the White Monkswere opening houses inrecently conquered lands: in1150 at Poblet and SantaCreus in Catalonia and in1153atAlcobaçainPortugal.Inthefollowingcenturiesthefriars came very early and

prospered. The DominicanswerefoundedbytheCastilianDominic.ASpanishprovincewasestablishedby1221,andby the end of the centurythere were more than fortypriories in Spain. In 1214 StFrancis was in Spain, and in1217 the Franciscan generalchapter created a Spanishprovinceandsent friars thereto open a mission. Theyflourished, and centurieslater, itwasFranciscan friars

who went to New Spain toopen missions, manysurvivingtothisday.Spanishbishops attended all thegeneral councils of theperiod: 26 at the FourthLateran Council (1215). Thepopular devotions were thesameaselsewhereinwesternEurope, but with a Spanishflavour. During the reign ofAlfonso X of Castile (1252–84) the immensely popularCantigás de Santa Maria

(Canticles of Holy Mary)were composed, over 400popular songs in thevernacular, extolling the roleof Mary in saving souls ‘atthehourofourdeath’.

Map17Reconquistatoc.1140

Map18Reconquistaduringthetwelfthandthirteenthcenturies

Spanish universities wereamong theearliest, followingBologna,ParisandOxford.In1209, the cathedral school ofPalencia inCastiledevelopedintoauniversity,and,whenitbecame moribund, itsprivilegeswenttoValladolid.Others followed: Salamancain Leon (c.1227), Lisbon inPortugal (1290), which

moved to Coimbra in 1355,Lorida in the County ofBarcelona(1300)andHuescain Aragon (1354). Thefifteenth century saw thefounding of six otheruniversities. The questionsaskedby theologiansatParisand elsewhere were alsoraised and disputed at thesecentres of learning in thepeninsula. Iberiahadbecomepart of the intellectual worldoftheEuropeofthetime.

As important as thecontributions of theuniversities were, it may beargued, of far greaterimportance to the world oflearning was what wastranspiring at Toledo. Itbecame the first and pre-eminent centre for thetranslation of learned worksfromArabic intoLatin.Afterthe Christian capture ofToledo(1085)manyMuslimsstayedonandJewishscholars

fled there from theintolerance of the Almohadsinthesouth.Thesetranslatorswere the principal agents forintroducing Greek learningintotheWest.Theknowledgeof Greek in western Europewasnearlynon-existentinthetwelfthcentury,buttheArabshad long since translated thescientific and philosophicalworksofGreekantiquityintoArabic. Toledo became acentre where learned men

translated the works of theGreek scholars from Arabicinto Latin. There becameknown among Westernscholars for the first timealmost all the works ofAristotle and Plato (exceptsome dialogues) as well asthe works of many otherGreeks, including Galen andHippocrates onmedicine andPtolemy and Euclid onmathematics. The intellectualachievements of Western

philosophers and theologiansin the twelfth century and,particularly, in the thirteenthcentury would have beenunimaginable without suchtranslations. It might not betoo great an exaggeration tosay that without a Toledothere would not have been aParis.The‘reconquest’musttake

its place as one amongseveral strands that made upthepatternofmedievalSpain.

Above all else, what wasaccomplishedduringthislongperiod was the shift of thepeninsula’saxis fromIslamicAfricaandtheMiddleEasttothe Christian world ofwestern Europe. The‘reconquest’ brought SpainbackintoEurope.

Furtherreading

Jacques Le Goff has writtenan extensive study in SaintLouis (tr. Gareth EvanGollrad; Notre Dame, IN,2009). Louis’s canonizationandthesubsequentcultisthesubject of M. CeciliaGaposchkin, The Making ofSaint Louis: Kingship,Sanctity, and Crusade in theLate Middle Ages (Ithaca,NY,2008). Joinville’s lifeofSt Louis can be foundconveniently in Joinville and

Villehardouin, Chronicles ofthe Crusades (tr. M.R.B.Shaw; Harmondsworth,Middlesex, 1963). For thepopes of this period one canusewithprofittheessaybyJ.Watt inTheNewCambridgeMedieval History, vol. 5,c.1198–c.1300 (ed. DavidAbulafia; Cambridge, 1999).For Boniface VIII, still ofvalue is T.S.R. Boase,Boniface VIII (London,1933). For a detailed

narrative of the pontificatesof this period see Horace K.Mann,TheLivesofthePopesin the Middle Ages, 1294–1304, vol. 18, (London,1932). Debra J. Birch’sPilgrimage to Rome in theMiddle Ages: Continuity andChange (Woodbridge,Suffolk, 1998), althoughprincipally concerned with asomewhat earlier period, hasa useful section on the HolyYear pilgrimages of 1300.

H.L.KesslerandJ.Zacharias,Rome 1300: On the Path ofthe Pilgrims (New Haven,2000) presents an art-historyview of Rome in the year1300.Medieval Spanish history

has benefited from a numberof valuable modern works.For a general overview onemay start with Joseph F.O’Callaghan, A History ofMedieval Spain (Ithaca, NY,1975).For the comingof the

Muslims see Roger Collins,TheArabConquest of Spain,710– 797 (Oxford, 1989). Asomewhat impressionisticencomium on al-Andalus isMaria Rosa Menocal’s veryreadable Ornament of theWorld: How Muslims, Jews,and Christians Created aCulture of Tolerance inMedieval Spain (Boston andNew York, 2002). Twodifferent views of ninth-century al-Andalus are Ann

Christys, Christians in al-Andalus (711–1000)(Richmond, Surrey, 2002),and Janina Safrai, ‘Identityand Differentiation in Ninth-Century al-Andalus’,Speculum76(2001),573–98.KathrynA.Millerhaswrittenfrom Arabic sources aboutMudejar scholars mostly inAragon in Guardians ofIslam: Religious Authorityand Muslim Communities ofLate Medieval Spain (New

York,2008).Fortheperioditcovers nothing surpassesJocelyn N. Hillgarth, TheSpanish Kingdoms, 1250–1410 (2 vols; Oxford, 1976–78).The best account of the

Reconquest in English isJoseph F. O’Callaghan,Reconquest and Crusade inMedievalSpain(Philadelphia,2003). Derek W. Lomax’sThe Reconquest of Spain(London, 1978) remains a

good account. Ofconsiderable value are theworks by Peter A. Linehan.HisThe SpanishChurch andthe Papacy in the ThirteenthCentury (Cambridge, 1971)develops the theme of papalinfluence in Spain, and hisHistoryandtheHistoriansofMedieval Spain (Oxford,1993)shouldbeconsultedbyevery serious student of thesubject. Dr Linehan writesabout thecrucial centuryand

a half in Spain, 1157–1300(Oxford, 2008). Bernard F.Reilly haswritten a series oflearned books on medievalSpain; among them is TheContest of Christian andMuslim Spain, 1031–1157(Oxford, 1992). Amongregional studies,ofparticularvalue is Thomas N. Bisson,The Medieval Crown ofAragon (Oxford, 1986).RobinVose’simportantstudyisDominicans, Muslims and

Jews in theMedieval Crownof Aragon (Cambridge,2009). On the Mozarabs seeRichardHitchcock,Mozarabsin Medieval and EarlyModernSpain: IdentitiesandInfluences(Aldershot,Hants.,2008), the essay by M. deEpalza, ‘Mozarabs: AnEmblematic ChristianMinority’,inS.Jayyusi(ed.),The Legacy ofMuslim Spain(Leiden, 1992) and RoseWalker,Views of Transition:

Liturgy and Illumination inMedieval Spain (London,1998).TheprincipalnarrativesourcesofthereconquestcanbefoundinSimonBartonandRichard Fletcher, trs, TheWorld of El Cid: Chroniclesof the Spanish Reconquest(Manchester,2000).

14DEATHANDPURGATORY

The fourteenthcenturymightrightly be thought of as thecentury during which thepopes livedatAvignon.That

storyawaits thenextchapter.Another, more profoundreason commends thefourteenth century to ourattention: no century in theMiddle Ages was morecalamitous in terms of thedestructionofhumanlifethanthefourteenthcentury.Twicethe scourge of massivemortality struck westernEurope, first with adevastating famine and thenwith the catastrophe of the

Black Death. In these tragiccircumstances what comfortreligion could bring to thedying and to those whomourned them came largelyfromabeliefinanafterlifeinwhich there were not only aheaven and a hell but also apurgatory, heaven’santechamber, a place ofcleansing for good but notperfect souls, a place towhich all might hope foradmission. Death hovered

overthiscenturylikenootherintheMiddleAges.

TheBlackDeath

The church was not immuneto thedisasters that beset thesocietyinwhichitlived.Thedeaths of millions ofChristians in the fourteenthcentury had to affect the

Christian church, and indeedit did. The church, it cannotbe too frequently repeated,wasnotmerelyastructure; itwasthat,butitwasprimarilya community of believers.When that communitysuffered from catastrophicevents, as it did in thefourteenth century, then thechurch also suffered fromthosecatastrophicevents.Theactualextentoftheireffectonthe church may be long

debated, but that the churchwasdeeplyshakencanhardlybe denied. It also cannot bedenied that therewasa fairlyfastrecovery,yetonethatleftscars.Often forgotten in the

understandable emphasis putontheplagueof1347–50wasthegreatfaminethatbeganin1315 and, in its severestimpact, continued until 1317and, in some regions, until1322. Severe, cold winters

and very wet summerscombined to reduce the foodcrop drastically, and theconsequence was widespreadfamine. It affected northernEurope: a line from theAlpswestward through Lyons tothe sea near La Rochelleroughly marks the southernextent of the famine. Itreached as far as the BritishIsles (only northern Scotlandescaping) and eastwardthrough the Baltic regions to

southern Scandinavia andeven as far as Poland.Germany, northern Franceand Flanders suffered themost. The wheat yields inFrance are estimated to havedecreased by 50 per cent.Prices soared. In London thecost of wheat at market wasnearly 500 per cent higherthan in pre-famine years. InHollandthepriceoffishrosetoasimilarlevel.Thescarcityof feed for livestock was

compounded by diseases thatravaged cattle, sheep andoxen. On three estates of anEnglish monastery (Ramsey)in 1319–20 the number ofcattle declined from 64 to 6,from47 to 2 and from65 to9. The human mortality isextremely difficult toestimate, since there werevariationsfromplacetoplaceand from year to year. Someestimates run as high as 15percentandeven20percent

in the affected places in thecountryside and in the townsalike, perhaps with asomewhat greater impact inthe towns. In Flanders,according to reliable figures,thetownofYpreslost10percent of its population fromMay to October 1316 alone.In Bruges an average of 92persons died each weekduring the same period. AtTournai compelling evidencesuggests a mortality rate in

1316whichwas250percentabove the usual, which ledonecontemporarytoobserve,‘Thereperishedeveryday somany–menandwomen,richand poor, young and old,from every rank of society –that the very air stank.’Newcemeteries were opened atLeuven in Flanders, atBrussels in Brabant, atHamburg in northernGermany,atErfurt ineasternGermany, at Bratislav in

Slovakia and at many otherplaces.The famine was no

respecter of persons. In 1316alone three abbesses ofReinsburg in Friesland died.In the same year, in what isnow Belgium at least sixheadsofreligioushousesdiedand by 1319 eighteen othershad died. If hunger andfamine-related pestilencestruck the leaders ofmonasteries,whatshouldone

infer about the lowly monksand nuns and the peasantryworking the fields?Stretchedby economic necessities,religioushouseafterreligioushouse sold off lands orwentinto debt. The recordsdescribing this process areabundantlyrichforGermany,wheretheyshowgreathousestaking drastic measures tosurvive. There was, inProfessorJordan’swords,‘analmostuniversalcrisisforthe

northern European church’.As drastic as that crisis was,worse–muchworse–wastocome.In human terms no other

catastrophe in the MiddleAges can come close tomatchingtheplagueof1347–50, known to history as theBlack Death. Nature, notalways benign, visitedwestern Europe with atragedy of monumentalproportions, leaving in its

wake millions upon millionsof humans dead. Economichistorians debate the impactof the Black Death, at timesinaclinical, almostdetachedway, but there can be nodebating that the middle ofthe fourteenth centurywitnessedaphenomenon thatcaused pain, suffering anddeath to human beings, theirnumberssolargeastorendernumbering them almostimpossible and their anguish

so profound as to defydescription. It was nothinglessthanahumandisasterona horrific scale.Professionally, historiansshouldbeneitherreverentnorirreverent,but,whenitcomesto writing about the BlackDeath, their pens should beshroudedinaweatthehumantoll taken by that historicalphenomenon.Some news of disease and

famineincentralAsiafiltered

intoEuropeinthe1330s,butit came from a place where,in the European mind, mythandreality intermingled,and,inanycase,itwasafar-awayplace. The stories were ofdrought and famine,earthquake and flood, andthen of plague. It is nowknown that the plague isendemic to the steppeland ofcentral Asia, where it brokeoutabout1331.Fromthereitbecame pandemic, spreading

east into China, south intoIndia and west towardsEurope. This westward armof the plague reachedsouthern Russia about 1345.It came to Astrakhan at theVolga delta by 1346. Beforelong theplaguespread to theCrimean peninsula.Althoughit may have been broughtwest from other sources inand near the easternMediterranean, the Crimeansource is best described in

contemporary and near-contemporary accounts: itmay have been the principalsourcefortheentranceoftheplague into Europe. At theport of Caffa (nowFeodosiya) in the Crimea,Genoese merchants hadsoughtrefugefromthekhan’sarmy. A siege lasted foralmost three years, since theWesternmerchantswith theirback to theseahadaccess toneeded supplies. A

contemporarydescribedwhathappenedthen:

DiseaseafflictedthearmyoftheTartars and everyday thousandsand thousands died. It was as ifarrowsfromheavenwererainingonthem.Medicinehadnoaffect.The Tartars died as quickly asthe disease appeared on theirbodies:swellingsinthearmpitorgroin and then a dreadful fever.The Tartar army, overwhelmedby this disaster, turned awayfrom their siege and had theputrefying corpses catapultedintothecity,hopingtokillthoseinside. The Christians could not

escape the torrent of bodiesthrown into the city. They triedtodump thebodies into the sea,but there were too many. Thestench of the corpses poisonedthe air and the water, leavingscarcely one in a thousand abletoflee.

There are those who thinkthis a somewhat distortedaccount, yet there can be nodoubtthatWesternersdidfleeCaffa.astheaccounttellsus.Aboat,perhapsseveralboats,sailed from Caffa to Italy in

the autumn of 1347. Theybroughttheplaguewiththem.Disease-ridden Genoesegalleys arrived atMessina inSicilyinearlyOctober,butitis not clear that these werethe ships that had left Caffa.AtleastsomeofthosefleeingCaffalandedatGenoaand,intime,movedontootherports.Wearetold,

When the sailors mingled withthe people in these places, itseemed that they had a cargo of

evil spirits. Every town, everysettlement, every hamlet wasstruck by the contagion, and themenandwomenwholivedtheredied. Those afflicted in turnafflicted their families so thateventhosewhowereburyingthedead themselves died. Deathcamethroughthewindows.

FromItaly theplaguemovednorth until nearly all ofEuropehadbeenvisited, andit was not till very late in1350 that it passed fromScandinavia. A giant scythe

hadcutacrossEurope.What caused this

devastation? The simpleanswer is yersinia pestis (y-pestis),which is anorganismthat is resident in thebloodstream of certainrodentsandinthestomachoffleasthatfeedontherodents.(Attempts to identify anothercause have beenunsuccessful.)Themovementof host rodents and theirresident fleas from remote

parts of central Asia,probablybecauseofchangingecological conditions such asdrought and rodentoverpopulation, brought thedisease into populated areas.Fleas brought it to humans,and theepidemichadstarted.It was the black rat (Rattusrattus), in particular, whichcarried the organism intoEurope. The disease-bearingfleas (probably Xenopsyllacheopis) could live outside

theirrodenthostsperhapsforweeks at a time and couldtravel considerable distances.It was black rats and theirfleasthatarrivedinSicilyandItalyin1347.Contemporariesnoticed two sets ofsymptoms, which describethetwoformsthattheplaguetook. The most commonsymptomwas theappearanceof large swellings, boil-like,the size of almonds, in theareaofthegroinorarmpitor,

less commonly, of the neck.These swellings were calledbuboes, hence bubonicplague. Fever and severeheadaches quickly followed,and, in some cases, internalbleedingledtodiscolourationof the skin. If the buboruptured, there was somechance of recovery. But thebubonic form of the BlackDeathwasfatalinmostcasesandfollowedwithinfivedaysor so after the appearance of

thebuboes.Inthisformoftheplague y-pestis attacked thelymphatic system with itsprincipal nodes at the groin,armpit and neck. The poetBoccaccio describedwhat hehadseenwithhisowneyesatFlorence:

The first signs both in men andwomen were swellings thatappearedeitherinthegroinorinthe armpits. Some became aslargeasanappleandothersmoreor less the size of an egg. Thepeople called them gavoccioli

[i.e., buboes]. They spreadquicklyfromthosepartstootherpartsof thebody.Blackor lividspots began to appear on thearms and thighs and elsewhereon the body, some large andothers small but numerous. Justas the gavoccioli are signs thatdeath was approaching, so alsoarethesespots.

(Decameron,introduction)

Yet the plague, arising fromthe sameorganism,also tookanother form: it affected thelungs, hence, pneumonic

plague. While the bubonicform can be traced quitesimply to flea bites, thepneumonic plague arose in amore complex way. Theinitial infection occurredwhen, in a person sufferingfrom bubonic plague, theorganism attacked the lungand that person coughed orsneezed or expectorated,causing the disease-bearingorganismtobecomeairborne.Whenothersbreatheditin,it

attacked their lungs.Alternatively, and probablyless commonly, a personmightinhalethefaecesleftbya flea on bedding. In eithercase, pneumonic plague wasthe result. The symptomswere shortness of breath,consequent rapid breathingand the coughing of blood.Death was the only releaseand came within three days.The obvious virulence ofpneumonic plague – it was

transmitted not by fleas butfrom person to person – ledcontemporaries to describepeoplewhowent tobedwellatnightandweredeadin themorning. Fear of contagion,in Boccaccio’s telling, haddireconsequences:

Brothers abandoned brothers,uncles abandoned nephews,sisters abandoned brothers, attimes wives abandonedhusbands,and,asdifficultasitisto believe, parents abandonedtheirownchildren, leaving them

uncared for, unvisited, left totheirfatelikestrangers.

NotmerelyatFlorencebutinothertownsandeveninruralareas, the fear of contagion,fedbynoexactknowledgeofwhatwashappening,addedtothedisastrousconditions.The path of the pandemic

can be easily seen. When itstruck a place, it remainedgenerally for several monthsbefore it subsided.Along the

west coast of Italy, Pisa andGenoa were struck late in1347andintheeastBariandVenice.Fromtheseandotherports it went inland, strikingalmosteverywheresothatbythespringof1348allofItalyhad been visited by theplague. The majority of thepopulation of Piacenza werewiped out, as happened alsoat Orvieto, Siena, SanGimignano and scores ofother places. Boccaccio’s

estimate of 100,000 dead atFlorence, while clearly anexaggeration,maynotbe toowide off the mark. Hisdescription of bodies beingpiledupoutsidehouses,tobepicked up like garbage,remainsoneofthemostvividimages of the plague knownto us. At Naples, acontemporary put the deathsat 63,000; at Bologna, achroniclerputthefigureat60per cent. Milan escaped the

same fury, although, eventhere, up to 15 per centmayhave perished. At Pistoia, sosevere was the threat of theplague that the city in May1348 issued ordinances, ‘toprevent the sickness nowthreatening our region fromattacking citizens of Pistoia’,yet,despitetheseprecautions,thecitywasnotspared.Exactfigures are impossible to get,yet Italy experienced adevastationneverseenbefore

orsince.TheAlpsprovednobarrier

to the movement of thedisease. Through Alpinepasses the plague reachedBavaria in June 1348 andAustriainNovember.Viennaexperienced it from the nextspring, where, one estimateconcludes, over 500 peopledied each day. The exactroutesarenotknown,buttheplague was at Frankfurt andMainzinthesummerof1349

and soon thereafter atCologne.Thenbeforetheendof the year it was furthernorthatMünster,BremenandHamburg; at the latter, halfthe population are said tohaveperished.Through southern ports,

particularly Marseilles, aswell as through mountainpasses, in 1348 the plaguereached France. At theseportsaswellasatportsonthewest coast of Iberia, the

plague struck savagely. Soonit was at Narbonne,Carcassone,Toulouse and, atlength, reached the sea atBordeaux. Situated, as it is,on the Rhone, Avignon,residence of the popes nowfor nearly 40 years, wasseverelyaffectedinthespringof 1348. A letter sent fromAvignon at the height of theplaguerecounted,

At least half the population has

died.Within the city walls over7,000housesarevacant,emptiedoftheirresidentsbydeath…Thepopebought landforacemeterynear the church of Our Lady ofMiracles. By 14 March, 11,000victims have been buried there,while many others have beenburiedelsewhereinAvignon.

NorthfromAvignontoLyonsandeventually,byJune1348,the plague reached Paris, itsgates and walls no defenceagainst the disease. Writingten years after the events, a

Carmelitefriar,observed,Somanydiedthatforsometimeover500bodiesweretakeneachday from the Hotel-Dieu to beburied at the cemetery of theHolyInnocents.

Estimatessuggestthatwellinexcess of half the populationof Europe’s most populouscity fellvictim to theplague.QuicklyitspreadtoFlanders,where at Tournai, a localabbotwrotethatatChristmas

time in 1348 an enormousnumber of inhabitants died.Hollandwassimilarlystruck,and soon the sea wallsencircling the British Isleswerebreached.No one knows exactly

where the plague firsttouchedEngland,certainlyonthe south coast, perhaps inDorset or at Southampton orBristol or, most likely, atseveral places at about thesame time, namely, late June

or early July 1348. It mayhave reached London inNovember, but the cityexperienced the worst of thepestilence in the next year.Again, no one knows thedeath toll. The city had apopulation perhaps between40,000 and 50,000, and anestimate of one-thirdmortality is as close to thetrue figure as we may get.East Anglia, with its closecommercialtieswiththeLow

Map19SpreadoftheBlackDeath,1347–50

Countries, was devastated.From chronicle afterchronicle one can see theprogress of the plaguethrough the land.A cleric ofOxfordshire described itsfurtherprogress:

ThejoyoftheScots[atthedeathof so many English] turned togrief. God’s wrath, havingpunishedtheEnglish,nowturned

to the Scots and punished themwithlunacyandleprosy…Inthefollowing year it devastated theWelshasithadtheEnglish.Thenit travelled to Ireland, cuttingdown great numbers of theEnglish settlers, but the nativeIrishwerehardlytouched.

We know that the pestilencecrossed into Ireland in 1349and that it struck nativepeoples and settlers alike. Adescription written by aFranciscanfriar,25ofwhosefellow friars had died, bears

clear testimony to thedevastation, his concludingwordsbeinghisownepitaph:

I, Friar John Clyn of theFranciscans ofKilkenny, relatedin this book the things of notethat have happened in mylifetime, those which I myselfwitnessed or thosewhich I haveheard about from trustworthypeople…Lestthisworkdiewiththeauthor,Iamleavingspaceonthisparchmentfortheworktobecontinued, if anyone shouldsurvive and any child of Adamescape this pestilence andcontinue the workwhich I have

begun.

Another, later hand added,‘At this point the authorapparentlydied.’The story is told that a

merchant ship sailed out ofLondon in May 1349, and,while the ship was at sea,members of the crewexperienced the plaguesymptoms. By the time theship reached her destination,Bergen inNorway, theentire

crew was dead. Those whowent out into the fjord toinspect this ghost shipbecame infected, and so theplague spread to Norway.Whatever truth theremay beto the specifics of this story,the Black Death reachedNorwayataboutthistime.InthefollowingyearthekingofSweden warned his people,‘Norway and Holland arebeingravaged,and thisdeathis fastapproachingour land.’

Ingmar Bergman set hisclassic filmTheSeventhSeal(1958) in Scandinavia at thetimeoftheplague.TheBlackDeath had reachedConstantinople, Greece,CyprusandprobablyeventheDalmatian coast before itarrived in Sicily and Italy.Catalonia was an earlycasualty. From Austria theplague moved to Hungaryand, through routes notaltogether clear to us, to

Lithuania and Poland.Scarcely no part of Europeescaped entirely, althoughsomeregionssuchaspartsofHungary, Flanders and thelower Netherlands seem tohave remained largelyuntouched.The recurrence of the

plague in1361,although lesssevere and less widespread,by ordinary criteria wascatastrophic. Anothervisitation of the plague came

in 1369, others in the 1370sandin1390.Chaucer,writinghis famous tales told bypilgrims to Canterbury about1390,putinthemouthofthePardoner a tale that tookplaceduringaplague:

There came a privy thief mencallDeath,Who in this country all thepeopleslayeth…He has a thousand slain thispestilence.And, master, ’ere you come inhispresence

MethinkeththatitbenecessaryFor to be wary of such anadversary.Be ready to meet him whereveryougo.’Tiswhatmymother taughtme;Isaynomore.

Anotherepisodebrokeout in1405. And the plague thatstruck London in 1665 wasthe final gasp of thispandemic.The death toll from the

BlackDeath is impossible tomeasure with anything

approaching exactitude.Contemporary estimates arenotoriously exaggerated, yetcontrols on populationstatistics are possible, andestimatescanand,indeed,aremade. At one time theestimate ran to ‘somewherebetweenaquarterandathird’of the population of Europe.More recent estimates, basedon more local and regionalstudies, place the death tollbetween40and50percentof

the population of Europe. Ifone accepts a generalpopulation of 100,000,000 inEurope,thentheBlackDeathin little over two years tookbetween 30,000,000 and40,000,000 human lives.AlthoughEuropehasseentheloss of human life on large,tragic scales, neither beforenorsincetheBlackDeathhasitsufferedsuchacatastrophicloss of human life fromnaturalcauses.Oneeconomic

historianhassaidthatEuropeat the time had an excesspopulation and that theplague had a ‘purgative’effect,aproposition,itissafeto say, that would not findmuch favourwith the tensofmillionswhoperished. It hasalsobeensaidthatinadditionto the loss of these lives themost significant historicalaspect of the plague was amassive psychologicalreaction, bordering on

societalhysteriaand that thiswas compounded by the fearof the plague returning, as,indeed, it did. Contemporaryanalysis, at one level, tracedthe plague to the wrath ofGod. Some saw in theheavens the conjunction ofSaturn, Jupiter and Mars inthe house of Aquarius, theomen of disastrouscatastrophe.At another level,the learned doctors at theUniversity of Paris and

elsewhere attributed theplaguetobadhumoursin theair, and, with respect topneumonicplague, theywerenotfaroffthemark.Theonlyremedies were flight andisolation. Massivepsychological trauma makesconsiderable sense, but it isanaprioriconclusion–whatshould have happened didhappen – and, althoughanecdotes about traumaticreactions can be cited, the

evidence tends to show thatthe survivors made fairlyrapid adjustments to theconsequences of thisdevastation.Theeffectoftheplagueon

the church cannot be totallyseparated from the generaleffect on society, sointerconnected were they. Ifone looks merely atdemographics, the picture isclear: a large number ofclergy and religious died

from the plague, probably ina proportion to the generalpopulation. Accounts showparish priests actingheroically in the face ofalmost certain death, as theycaredforthedyingandburiedthedead.AtPiacenzaapriestandthemantowhomhegavethe last rites were buriedtogether on the next day. InFrance, it was said that ‘inmany towns and villagespriests, acting like cowards,

fledandleftthespiritualcareof the sick to the regularclergy, who showedthemselves, on the whole,more courageous’. At Paris,thesamecommentatorwrites,that ‘the holy sisters of theHotel-Dieu,notfearingdeath,nursed the sick humbly andsweetly, without consideringthe consequences’. So scarcethrough death and fear hadpriests become that thebishopofBathandWellstold

hispeople,If the dying cannot find anordained priest, they shouldconfess their sins, according toapostolic teaching, to any layperson, even to a woman if nomanisavailable.

Although the bishop toldthem that, should theyrecover, they should confessthese sins to their parishpriest,itwasanextraordinarystep.ThearchbishopofYorkappointed an Augustinian

canon to a parish usuallyserved by secular priests,stating that ‘we make anexceptionnowbecauseofthelack of secular priests, whohave died from the deadlyplague hanging over us’.German sources show thatone-thirdofthehigherclergy,the ones most able to flee,perished; among the lowerclergy the mortality musthave been significantlyhigher. In Sicily, the

archbishopofCataniadiedinheroic circumstances. Thebishop of Paris died as didthree archbishops ofCanterbury. And the listcould go on. The religious,living in enclosedcommunities, wereparticularly susceptible tocontagious disease andsuffered perhapsdisproportionately.Ahundredand fifty Franciscans atMarseilles died, leaving their

priory empty of life. Oneentire priory of Austin friarsperishedatAvignonasdid66Carmelite friars. In the farwestofEurope,atCoimbrainPortugal, thegreatmonasteryof St Peter was devastated.The abbot of WestminsterAbbey died as did 27 of hismonks. At St Albans theabbot, prior and 46 monksperished. And there was thenun, the only survivor of asmall nunnery, who was

found 10 years laterdisorientated, wanderingthrough the lanes of remoteLincolnshire. Reliableestimatessuggestthathalfthereligious of England died,monks, canons, friars andnuns,withthefriarssufferingasomewhatgreaterloss.Threefurtheraspectsofthe

plague warrant our attention.In the first place, as in somany massive catastrophes,scapegoats were sought and

found. In parts of Spain theChristians blamed theMuslims. Strangers andforeigners were often treatedwith suspicion, not unlikemodern immigrants,with theforeign English suspected atNarbonne and, in Aragon,foreigners and Portuguesepilgrims suspected. Morewidely,helpless lepers,muchreviled as they were, hadheaped on them the addedopprobrium of spreading the

plague.Yet theseaccusationspale in comparison to thosemadeagainsttheJews.Uncoordinated, violent

attacks against Jews eruptedin many places during theplague. Everywhere thecharges were the same. TheJews had poisoned the wellsofChristians.Itwassaidthatthey themselves were takingwater from distant streams,which was taken as a clearsign of their guilt. The

earliest reported attacks onJewsoccurredinthesouthofFrance, where, in the springof 1348, wholesaleexterminations took place atNarbonneandCarcassone.Ata celebrated trial inSeptember a local Jewishdoctor confessed to havingimportedpoisonintosouthernFrance fromSpain,whichhethen had thrown into theprincipal wells. At about thesame time as this trial, the

Jews at Basel were roundedup and put in woodenbuildings, which were thenincinerated. Burning seemedthe usual punishment. InGermany,byearly1349Jewswere burned at Stuttgart,Memmingen, Lindau,Freiburg, Dresden, Wormsand Erfurt, to mention onlysomeoftheplaces.TheJewsofSpeyerweremurderedandtheir corpses placed in winebarrels and dispatched down

the Rhine River. In thesummerof1349thefuryhaderupted at Mainz and atCologne.Some responsible leaders

acted with decency andhumanity.Thepope,ClementVI, threw open the gates ofAvignontoJewsfleeingtheseoutrages. He called onChristians everywhere to actwith toleranceand threatenedwith excommunication thosewhopersecutedtheJews.The

king of Aragon, Pedro IV,disturbed by persecutions atBarcelona, ordered swiftprosecution of theperpetrators there andprotection of Jewseverywhere in his kingdom.ThekingoftheGermansandthe duke of Austria madeefforts, which proved largelyineffectual, to stem theattacks. At Cologne, the cityfathers also took action toprotect the Jews. Neither

popes nor kings nor civicleaderswere able to stop thefury: it ended only with thepassingoftheplague.Secondly, the plague was

marked by a religioushysteria, which formed animportant,ifsmallpartofthepicture of the plague years.The hysteria took its starkestform in the activity of theflagellants. As their nameimplies, they were men whoundertook penance by

flagellation. Flagellantpenance was not new.Individualshadlongseenthescourging of the flesh as ameans of bringing its lustsunder control and of atoningfor sins. Yet, as a groupactivity,itseemstohavefirstappearedinthirteenth-centuryItaly.As related to theBlackDeath, this communalpenitentialscourgingwasfirstseen inGermany. Flagellantswere soon found in most

regions stricken by theplague. They processed fromvillage to village, from townto town, sometimes by thehundreds in a longprocession, two by two, cladinhoodedgarments, ledbyacross-bearer and often bybannersofpenitentialpurple.They walked silently exceptwhen chanting the hauntingwords of the Stabat Mater,the hymn ofMary’s sorrowsatthefootofthecross:

StabatMaterdolorosa

Stoodthemothersorrowful

Juxtacrucemlacrimosa,

Beneaththecrossweeping,

Dumpendebatfilius.

Whilsthersonwasdying.

Facmeplagis

Makemewoundedbyhis

vulnerari. blows.Facmecruceinebriari

Makemebyhiscrossinebriated

Etcruorefilii.

Andbyyourson’sblood.

Theircomingtoavillagewasgreetedbythepealingofbellsfrom the tower of the parishchurch. The parish wouldcome out en masse to seethese penitential people. The

procession wended its waythrough the crowds of thepious and the curious to theparish church. There theystripped themselves of theircloaksandstoodclothedonlywith cloths that hung fromwaist to feet. Taking theirwhips into their hands, theyleft the church one by one,the eldest leading the way.The first prostrated himselfon the ground, his armsoutstretched in the form of a

cross. The second beat theprostrated one, thenprostrated himself and wasbeatenby thenext.Andso itwenton.They then formedacircle in themarketplace andchanted and scourged,chanted and scourged,chanted and scourged, thetempoincreasinglikethebeatof a drum and with it theemotion of the onlookers.Some of the onlookers wereso overwhelmed that they

joined thebandof flagellantson their pilgrimage ofpenance.By mid 1349 flagellants

could be seen on the roadsand lanes of Poland andHungary in the east and ofFlanders and the LowCountries in the west. FromFlandersabout120flagellantsarrived in England, where achroniclerdescribedthem:

They went in procession twice

each day, barefoot, showingthemselves to the people ofLondon,attimesatStPaul’sandat times at other places. Theirbodieswerebaresaveforalinencloththatcoveredthemfromthewaistdown.Eachflagellantworea hood, onwhichwas painted aredcrossonthefrontandontheback, and each one in his righthand had a whip with threethongs.Ineachthongtherewasaknotwithasharppieceofmetal,likeaneedle,whichwaswedgedin theknot in suchaway that itprotruded at each end. As theyprocessed single file, theyscourged themselves on theirnaked bodies, which were soon

red with blood … Thrice theyprostrated themselves andproceeded to take turns beatingeachother.

Their stay in England wasapparently short, and, fewrecruits having been made,they returned whence theyhadcome.At about the same time as

theflagellantswerescourgingthemselves in London, thepope at Avignon condemnedthemovement. InMay1348,

Clement VI had actuallyparticipated in what wereclearly flagellant-likeceremonies at Avignon, buthe turned against themovement – was it thereligious excess? the laycontrol? – and, in October1349, issued a bull ofcondemnation. By then theworst of the plague hadpassed except in far northernEurope, and the movementwaslosingmuchofitsraison

d’être.The third aspect is the

danse macabre (dance ofdeath), often associated withthe Black Death. It firstappeared in verse of thethirteenth century and, later,in both verse and in artisticrepresentations. Its actualperformance in the fifteenthcentury seems little less thana conceit of lordly courts. Inits simplest visual form itshowsthedeadandtheliving

doing a line dance, led byDeath. Among the livingwere bishop and fool,merchant and thief, old manand child and others,signalling the indiscriminatecall of Death. An earlyprintedbook,DanseMacabre(1485), and woodcutspopularized the image in thelate fifteenth and earlysixteenth centuries. It is onlyby inference that we can –and perhaps should –

associate the dance of deathwith the devastating toll ofhumanlifetakenbytheBlackDeath.Thereligioushysteriasoon

passed. Religious houses bycentury’s end recovered toabout 75 per cent of pre-plague numbers. Thepersecution of the Jewsabatedbutdid

Plate20Womenbeingledindancetotheirdeath,fromIcyestladansemacabredesfemmes(Paris,1491);BritishLibraryshelfno.IB39618.ReproducedbypermissionoftheBritishLibrary.

not disappear. By moststandards recoverywas fairlyrapid. The extent and speedof the recovery should notblind us to the shock thatEurope and the churchexperienced in the midfourteenthcentury.

Theemergenceofpurgatory

The stench of death and thesight of the reaper’s scythecutting down millionsindiscriminately focusedattention, as nothing elsecould, on the afterlife.Whendeath comes, is that the end?Do the lights simply go out?The answer was that at this

time there was an almostuniversalbeliefinanafterlife.Inwhich case,what happensat death? With countlessnumbers of every age andcondition dying from famineand plague, the question hada harsh relevance. PrayersandMassesweresaidfor thedead and alms given in theirname,butwhy?By this timethegeographyof theafterlifewas well established in thebelief system of Christians,

and it included purgatory.There was heaven for theperfect, hell for the wickedand, in between, purgatory,where the not-so-perfect andthe not-so-wicked could bepurged of their guilt beforeentering heaven. It was thewaiting room for paradise,and the wait there could beshortened by the prayers andgoodworksoftheliving.It would be nearly

impossible to exaggerate the

significance of purgatory inthe life of the medievalchurch, especially in thewaythat life was lived byindividual Christians. Theantechamberofheavenwherethegoodbutnotperfectsoulssuffer their temporarypunishmenthadafixedplacein the beliefs of virtually allChristians in the WesternChurch and deeply affectedtheir religious practices.Apart from heretics like the

Waldensians and the Catharsand, later, John Wyclif,purgatory was believed in asfirmly as the Eucharist, thedivinityofChrist, theTrinityand other central beliefs ofthe church and played a rolealmost as large as theEucharist and the Virgin inthe daily devotional lives ofpeople.That one could assistone’s deceased father andmother and other loved onesand shorten their stay in

purgatory led to thedevelopmentofarichvarietyof religious devotions andpractices, from which, it issafe to say, no parish inChristendom was exempt.Pope Innocent IV, in a letterof1254,describedthisbelief:

The souls who died havingrepented but not having fulfilledtheir penance or who die withonlyvenialbutnotmortalsinsontheirsoulsarepurgedandcanbehelped by the suffrages of thechurch.

Two decades later PopeClement V, in a documentassociated with the SecondCouncilofLyons(1274),saidvirtually thesame thing.AndBoniface VIII, in calling theHolyYearof1300,allowedaplenary indulgence of thepenancedueforsinsnotonlyto those who confessedcontritely and visited theRoman basilicas but also tothose who duly confessedtheir sins and who died on

their way to Rome, anindulgence remittingpunishment due in purgatoryfor penance incomplete atdeath. During the next twodecades Dante wascomposing his incomparabledescription in Il purgatorio.The doctrine and beliefwerefirmlyestablishedby the latethirteenth century.Yet it hadbeen long believed beforeeitherpopeorpoetdiscussedit.

Thebelief inanafterlife isessential to Christian belief.TheNewTestament recountsChrist’s many promises of alife beyond the grave inwhich thegoodare rewardedand the bad punished. (See,for example, Matthew 25,31ff.)Butbeliefinanafterlifelong preceded the coming ofChrist. Readers of ancienttexts are familiar withincidents of visits to theunderworld. In the Epic of

Gilgamesh,muchof itdatingto sometime in the earlysecond millennium BC, wefind two such visits. Ulyssesin the Odyssey (bk 2)descends into a similarunderworld as does Aeneas(Aeneid, bk 6), who meetsDido, whom he had terriblywronged.Althoughrabbinicalteaching fluctuated, theHebrews had a sheol and agehenna, places for soulsafterdeath.Psalm116sings,

Iwas encompassed in sorrowfuldeath, and I was seized by thepainsofhell.

Christbroughtaclarityabouttheafterlife.Histeachinghadan obvious appeal: theinjusticesofthislifeinwhichthegoodoftensufferand thewicked often prosper will beput aright by an all-just Godinthenextlife.Buteventhisstarkclarityofgoodandevil,heaven and hell, was not

without ambiguity. ‘I willraiseyouuponthelastday,’Christ taught. Then therewouldbeajudgement,aLastJudgement, and theseparationofthegoodandthewicked. What was unclearwas what happened betweenthetimeofdeathandthetimeoftheLastJudgement.Itwasfrom this ambiguity that theideaofpurgatoryarose.Even from early Christian

times prayers were said for

the dead, which would beunnecessaryif thesoulswerealready saved and fruitless ifthesoulswerealreadylost.Acontemporary accountdescribes the vision had byPerpetuaasshewasawaitingmartyrdom in Carthage in202. In a dream she saw herdead brother in a place ofdarknesswith others; hewas‘all burning and tormentedwith thirst, filthy of body,cladinragsandhisfacewith

thesorehehadatdeath’.Hewassevenwhenhedied,andin her dream she saw him,still a boy, unable to reach,evenonhistiptoes,abasinofwater. She prayed night anddayforhim,andthenshehadanother vision. She saw him,his body and clothes clean,the sore on his face healedandthebasinloweredsothathe could drink from it. Herprayers had relieved hissufferings in the afterlife.

This story of Perpetua’svision became a familiarstoryintheMiddleAges,asitwas told and retold bypreachers and others. Itserved to confirm the ideathat the livingcouldhelp thedeadbytheirprayers.TheworksofStAugustine

(d. 430)were secondonly tothe Bible in popularity,particularly among thelearned, in the medievalcenturies. In his immensely

influential City of God (bk21) he develops hiseschatology(i.e.,thestudyofthe ‘last things’, death andwhat follows) and affirms apurgatorial fire whichpunishes some souls in theinterval between death andthe Last Judgement. Theirswereminorsinsormajorsinsforgiven but not fullyexpiatedduringtheirlifetime.Heleftquestionsunasked,buta purgatorial fire between

deathandtheLastJudgementhad by Augustine’s timebecome a firm part of thegeography of the afterlife. StGregory the Great (d. 604)went further and said thatthere are two parts to theunderworld: upper hell, fromwhich souls would emergeand enter heaven, and lowerhell, from which no onewould ever emerge. InGregory’s upper hell we cansee an early description of

what would later be called‘purgatory’.Stories have a way of

shaping belief about theafterlifemore forcefully thanthereflectionsoftheologians.Added to the ever-popularvision of Perpetua was thevision of Dryhthelm,recounted by Bede in hisEcclesiastical History of theEnglishPeople(bk5,ch.12),completedin731:

A certain man, already dead,camebacktolifeandtoldofthemany memorable things whichhehadseen.

Bede goes on to recount thevision of this holy layman.He had died one night andreturned to life in themorning.During thenighthewastakenonajourneytothenextworld.

Myguidewas aman of shiningcountenance, who wore brightrobes.Wewent silently in what

seemedtomethedirectionoftherising sun at the solstice.Aswewalked,wecametoaverybroadand deep valley of infinitelength. It was to our left. Oneside of that valley was ragingwithanexceedinglyterriblefire,and the other side was equallyintolerable,forithadhailfallingfuriously and icy snow swirlingabout and covering everything.Both sides were filled with thesouls of human beings, whichwerethrownfromonesidetotheotherasifbytheviolenceofthestorm. When they could nolonger bear the ferocious heat,the poor wretches hurledthemselves headlong into the

frigidcoldopposite,and,findingno relief there, they hurledthemselves back into the ever-burningflames.

Dryhthelm thought he hadseen hell, but his guide toldhim it was not hell and ledhimonfurther.

I gradually saw that the placebefore us, which we wereentering,grewdarkeranddarkertilltherewasonlydarkness.AllIcouldseewasthebrightgarmentofmyguide.Suddenlybeforeusthere appearedballsof fire, first

rising and then falling, and thenrising and falling again andagain. My guide disappeared,andIwasleftaloneanddesolate,seeing the balls of fire, spittingupsoulslikesparkstossedabovetheflames,onlytofallagainintothedepths.

Dryhthelm then smelledodours of an incomparablestench and heard hideouslaughter fromevil spirits andhorrible lamentations fromhuman souls. He could seetheevilspiritsdraggingsouls

down into a burning pit.Theguidereappearedandledhimawayfromthedreadfulsceneand placed him on top of awall.

FromthereIcouldseebroadandpleasant fields full of fragrantflowers, so sweet that the awfulstench disappeared. And therewas a brilliant light, brightereven than thesunatmid-day. Inthe fieldswere groups of youngpeople in white robes, sittingaroundinjoyfulgroups.

Dryhthelm thought that hemust be in heaven, but theguide told him that this wasnotthekingdomofheaven.

NowIsawinfrontofmealightmore luminous than what I hadseen, and I heard the sweetsoundsofsinging,andIsmelledatranscendentlybeautifulscent.

His guide would not let himenter these fields andexplainedtohimwhathehadseen.

Thevalley thatyousawwith itsburstingflamesandfrightfulcoldis the place in which there aretried and punished the souls ofthosewhodelayedtheconfessionoftheirsinsuntil themomentofdeath. They died before makingrestitution for their sins.Despitethe lateness of their repentanceand confession, they will allenterintothekingdomofheavenat the Last Judgement. Theprayers, almsgiving, fasting andthe celebration of Masses ofthosewhoarestillalivecanhelptofreemanyofthesesoulsevenbeforethedayofjudgement.

Also, that flaming and putridpitwhichyousawisnothingelse

than theverymouthofhell, andthosewhoenterwillneverleave.

Thatfloweryplacewhereyousaw the beautiful and happypeople is the place for the soulswho practised good works butwhoarenotsoperfectastoenterheaven immediately.On thedayofjudgementallofthesewillseeChrist and enter into the joys oftheheavenlykingdom.

Thosewhoareperfectintheirevery word, deed and thought,oncetheydie,shallenterheavenimmediately.Thisisthekingdomwhere you heard the sweetsoundsofmusicandsmelledtheglorious fragrances and saw thesplendouroflight.

This story, often repeated,provides an afterlife of fourplaces: a heaven for theperfect, ahell for thewickedand two intermediary places,one for the good but notperfect and one for the badbutnotwicked.Inthecourseof time, these twointermediary places will beconflated to producepurgatory. What needsunderlining is that Bede, as

many before him and verymanyafterhim,believedthatthelivingcanhelpthosesoulsbyprayers,almsandMasses.Even more enduring and

persuasivewasthetaletoldinthe late twelfth century andrepeated in countlessmanuscripts, not only in theoriginal Latin but in almostevery vernacular language oftheWest. Itwas the story ofSt Patrick’s Purgatory. It isbased on a legend that held

thattheentrancetopurgatorywas through a hole(sometimescalledawelloracave) on an island, nowStationIsland,inLoughDergin Co. Donegal. It waspopularly believed that, if atruly contrite person enteredthat hole and spent a nightand a day there, that personwouldbepurgedofsinsand,barring any future sins, atdeath would enter directlyinto heaven. In the twelfth

century, a story relating tothispopularbelief circulated.It tells of a knightwhowenttoDonegaltodothepenance.After preparing himself heenteredthepitandtherehadavision reminiscent of Bede’sDryhthelm with some addedtouches. Throughout hisjourney into the other worldthe knight was 10 timestormented by evil spirits,whomhedispelledbysayingthe word ‘Jesus’. He saw an

earthly paradise, but it wasnot heaven nor was it hell(the place of the torments)which he had seen. Twoarchbishops in the earthlyparadiseexplainedtohim:

Afterreceivingthefaithwehaveoften sinned because of humanfrailty,andweneededtoperformpenance for our sins. Yet, sincewe did not complete all ourpenance during our lifetime, wedidsoafterourdeathintheplaceoftormentwhichyouhaveseen;some stay there longer thanothers. We came through those

torments to this peaceful place.Thosewhomyousaw,exceptingthose in thepitofhell,will alsobe saved and come here. Eventoday some have arrived here.Those suffering such tormentsknownot how long theywill sosuffer, but Masses, psalms,prayersandalmswhicharedonefor them can moderate theirtorments … Even when theycome here, they do not knowhow long they will be here …Afterthetimesetforushasbeenfulfilled, we will ascend toheavenly paradise. Our numbershere in this earthly paradise areatonceincreasingbythoserisingfromthetormentsanddecreasing

bythosegoingtoheaven.

Other legends placed theentrance to purgatoryelsewhere. For example, onesuch legend placed it in acave on the volcanic MountEtna in Sicily. Such popularstories reaffirmed popularbelief in an in-between placein the afterlife, a temporaryplaceforsoulsneitherperfectnor wicked, who could beassisted by the prayers and

goodworksoftheliving.No more graphic and

eloquent depiction can befound anywhere to comparewithDante’sIlpurgatorio inthe Divine Comedy, whichwas completed in 1319.Famously, over the gate ofhellthepoetreads,‘Abandonall hope, yewho enter here.’The detailed sufferingsdescribedbyDanteineachofthecirclesofhell,asvividasthey are, do not depict the

essentialsufferingofhell:forthe Christian poet hell’sgreatest torment is theabsolute sense ofhopelessness. As Dante, ledbyVirgil,goesfromhellintopurgatory, whose sufferingshewilldescribe,heismovinginto a place, whose essentialfeature, amidst thesesufferings, is the knowledgethat the sufferings will end,that there is hope. Thecontrastisstark.

HowdifferentthisentranceFrom the infernal one; herethroughsongIs one greeted, there withferociouslament.

(12,112–14)

One might compare theindividual punishments inhell and purgatory, but theabsence or the presence ofhope makes the sufferingsessentiallydifferent.Toshowthis,thepoet,asheisledoutofhell,looksupandseesfour

stars: he is outside under thesky. Purgatory is notunderground but is a seven-storeymountain on an islandabove ground. It is a steepmountain, which Dante andVirgilattimescanclimbonlyon all fours, and the ancientpoettellsDantenottoveertothe left or to the right but toclimb ever forward. At eachstoreysoulsarepurgedofoneof the seven deadly sins.First, they are purged of

pride, then, in the secondstorey, of envy, where ‘eachsoulhasitseyelidssewnwithiron threads’ (13, 70). In thethirdstoreytheyare‘undoingknotsofanger’ (16,24).Theslothful purge their sin byrushing about, unwilling towasteevenamoment,andtheavaricious walk stooped,lookingdownon theground,weeping because of theirformer preoccupation withearthly things. In the sixth

storey the gluttons are soemaciated that their faceshave skin drawn taut acrosstheir bones and their eyesockets look like vacuousjewel settings. And lastly hesees fire purifying souls oftheir sins of concupiscence.Andthenheisledtoparadiseby his beloved Beatrice.Dante affirmed in sublimeversepurgatory as aplaceofsuffering and hope, a placewhichleadstoheaven.

Plate21DanteandVirgil,wanderinginDante’spurgatory,meetPopeHadrianV,KingHughCapetandthepoetStasius(fromIlpurgatorio),BritishLibrary,MSYT36,fo.100.ReproducedbypermissionoftheBritishLibrary.

It may long be debatedwhether the scholarlydiscussions about thequestion of purgatory at theschools and, later, at theuniversitieswereindependentofandparallel to thepopular

belief of the faithful or,indeed,spurredintoactionbythat popular belief. In eithercase, theologians seriouslyaddressed the question ofpurgatory. The agenda forthemwas set, as in somanyother matters, by PeterLombard in his Sentences(c.1157), which became thetextbook par excellence fortheologyintheuniversitiesofthe thirteenth century andbeyond. For him there are

sinsofalessseriousnature–he calls them venial sins –which can be purged afterdeath and before the LastJudgement, the lengthof thispurgingvarying from soul tosoul, and there is, as aconsequence, a singlereceptacle for medium-goodandmedium-bad souls in theafterlife. William ofAuvergne, writing in the1230s, argued that purgatorywas necessary, for souls

dying with unexpiated sinscannot enter heavenimmediatelyandthat thereinpurgatory they suffercorporeally from fire.Alexander of Hales, writingat roughly the same time,discussed thequestionof firepurging venial sins and thepenalties due formortal sins.His fellow Franciscan,Bonaventure, commented atlength about the location ofpurgatory, while the learned

Dominican Albertus Magnusanswered questions aboutpurgatory in 12 articles.Thomas Aquinas (d. 1274),undoubtedly the greatesttheologian of the time,accepted the conventionalteaching andwent beyond toaskfurtherquestionssuchas:does the actual guilt forvenialsin,asdistinctfromthepunishment for venial sin,exist in souls in purgatory?(He answered in the

negative.) The theologianswere discussing details ofwhathadbecomebythistimean acceptedbelief, andpapalstatements of the thirteenthcentury, referred to at thebeginning of this section,were merely statements ofwhatwasalreadyafixedpartofChristianbelief.To summarize this belief.

At death there is a particularjudgement, which decideswhat should happen to an

individualsoul.Threeoptionsare available: heaven for theperfect, hell for the wickedand purgatory for the not-so-perfect and not-so-wicked.The length of one’s stay inpurgatory is determined bythe number of unrepentedvenial sins and by theunfulfilled expiation forremitted mortal and venialsins. This time can beshortened by the prayers,Massesandalmsgivingofthe

living.At the endof time, atthe final reckoning, in ageneral Last Judgement, thefinal Doomsday, Godpublicly divides the goodfromthebad,and,as thebadgo back to hell, the good,including those souls whowere still in purgatory, enterinto heaven. The punishmentofhellandthejoysofheavenareeternal,withabsolutelynochanceofchange.The imageof God dividing the good

from the bad at the LastJudgement is foundilluminated in countlessmanuscripts and carved instones over the doors ofscoresofcathedralsandotherchurches. The question ofone’s final fate was difficulttoavoid.Theteachingthattheliving

canhelpthedeadhadamajorimpact on the church. Thiscanbe seen fromat least theseventhcentury,andintimea

day (2 November) forcommemorating all the deadand praying for their soulswasuniversallyobserved.Wecan see the influence ofpurgatory on the religiouslives of men and women inricher detail from thethirteenth century onward.Scarcely a family in Europewas not affected by thisbelief. Relatives would prayfor their deceased familymembers. They would see

that their bodies were buriedwithobsequiesfortheirsoulsand that Masses would beoffered on anniversaries oftheirdeath.Thewealthyoftenwent beyond the usualpractices and foundedchantries, chapels with apriest to sayMasses for theirdead. Some chantries wereestablished as separatechurchesforthesolepurposeof having Masses said for asingle person or a single

family. More commonly,chantriesweresetupasaltarsin side chapels in parishchurches with funds forMasses to be said for adefinite period (e.g. fiveyears) or in perpetuity.During the fourteenth andfifteenth centuries in onesmall English county(Cambridgeshire) 66 suchperpetual chantries werefounded. In 1438 anarchbishop of Canterbury

even founded an Oxfordcollege incommemorationofall the souls in purgatory aswellas,specifically,ofkingsand warriors of the realm.When the English chantriesweredissolvedin1547,therewereover250inLondon,44oftheminStPaul’sCathedralalone,andforthecountryasawholeprobablyalmost3,000:they fell victim in thesixteenth century to a newtheologythathadnoroomfor

purgatory.Moreover, every guild,

merchant and craft, prayedfor its dead members andarranged annual Masses fortheir souls. By their earlieststatutes the guild of mastersat the University of Parisundertook the remembranceofthesoulsof theirdeceasedmembers. In addition,confraternities of lay people,male and female, organizedfor pious purposes, spread

like wildfire all over Europeinthefourteenthandfifteenthcenturies. In Italy, Florencehad nearly 100, while thevillage of Linari in Tuscanywithapopulationofonly500people had threeconfraternities. In France,therewere29atRennes,30atNantes and 30 also atDijon,and at least 25 at Arles. In1389 King Richard II ofEngland ordered a listing ofall suchconfraternities (often

in English called ‘guilds’),and, although returns areadmittedly incomplete, theyreveal 164 suchconfraternitiesinNorfolkand123 in Lincolnshire. Thissource and others show thatthere were 162 in Yorkshirewith14oftheseinthecityofYork. Whatever otherobligations the membersundertook, without exceptionthey undertook to rememberin prayers and Masses the

deceased members inpurgatory. Invariably theywould attend the funerals offellowmembers.AtleastoneMasseachyearwouldbesaidfor all deceased members.Some confraternitiesundertook the trentel (amonth of Masses) for eachdeceased member. Belief inpurgatory was an essentialfeatureofthesesocieties.Thus,wovenintothefabric

of latemedieval religionwas

the conviction that the livingcould help the dead. Thecommemoration of the soulsin purgatory took its placewithdevotiontotheEucharistanddevotiontotheVirginasthe principal displays ofChristian belief from the latethirteenthcenturythroughtherestoftheMiddleAges.One cannot leave this

subject without discussingindulgences.The teachingonindulgences is based on the

twofold consequence of allsins, mortal or venial. In thefirst place, there is the actualguiltincurredbythesinnerincommitting the sin. Guilt isremovedbysincerecontritionandusuallybyconfessiontoapriest.Butsomethingremainsaftertheguiltisremoved:theneed tomake satisfaction forthat sin. This was called thetemporal punishment due tosin, and it could be satisfiedin this life by prayer, pious

works and the like. If it wasnot fully satisfied in this life,then it had to be satisfied inpurgatory.Theologianstaughtthat the church as custodianoftheinfinitemeritsofChristcould use indulgences toreduce the temporalpunishment due to sin. PopeClement VI, in 1343,expressed what was by thattimetheacceptedteachingofthe doctrine of the TreasuryofMerits.Since the temporal

punishment, by definition,was temporal (in time), itcould be given timemeasurements. Hence thepope could declare anindulgence of, say, 100 daysfor performing a designatedgoodwork, such as donatingtowards the building of ahospital or visiting a shrine.When the deed wasperformed, the indulgencewas gained and the temporalpunishment due to sin was

reduced.Exceptionally, thosewho went on crusade couldgain a plenary indulgence,which remitted all thispunishment. What issignificant about the jubileeindulgence granted byBonifaceVIII in1300 is thatit was a plenary indulgence.Still, an indulgence could beearned only for oneself byoneself. In time, however, itcould be earned vicariouslyfor souls in purgatory. This

was a very late medievaldevelopment. In 1476, PopeSixtus IV allowed that theindulgencewhichwasgainedby contributing towards thebuilding of a church inSaintes in France could beapplied tosouls inpurgatory.He insisted, as havetheologians ever since, thatthis application was by wayofsuffrage,whichmeantthatits application depended onGod’s mercy and was not

assured. Two generationslater Martin Luther wouldinveigh against theindulgence preachers whocame to Germany to raisemoneyfor thenewStPeter’sBasilica in Rome and whoallegedly said that as coinsentered the coffers soulswould fly out of purgatory.But that takes us beyond thetime-limitsofthisstudy.

Furtherreading

Destined to become a classicis William C. Jordan, TheGreat Famine: NorthernEurope in the EarlyFourteenth Century(Princeton, 1996). A startingpointfortheplagueshouldbePhilip Ziegler, The BlackDeath(London,1969).Muchcan be learned from John

Kelly, The Great Mortality:An Intimate History of theBlack Death, the MostDevastating Plague of AllTime (New York, 2005). Inaddition to containingtranslations ofmany relevantsources, Rosemary Horrox’sTheBlackDeath(Manchesterand New York, 1994)provides balanced, well-informed introductions to thehistorical questions thatconcern students of the

subject. She alsoprovides anexcellentbibliography.Everystudent of the subject shouldread the introduction byBoccaccio to hisDecameronfor the best-knowncontemporary, eye-witnessaccount and, as a bonus, thetalestoldbythosefleeingtheplague. Various regionalstudies provide a wealth ofmaterial. For England oneshould consult Colin Platt,KingDeath:TheBlackDeath

and its Aftermath in LateMedieval England (Toronto,1996). On attitudes towardsdeath in the later MiddleAges nothing surpassesPhilippe Ariès, The Hour ofOurDeath(tr.HelenWeaver;Oxford,1981).The principal work on

purgatoryisJacquesLeGoff,The Birth of Purgatory (tr.Arthur Goldhammer;Chicago,1981),whichshouldbe read together with the

cautionaryremarksofAronJ.Gurevich in ‘Popular andScholarly MedievalTraditions: Notes in theMargin of JacquesLeGoff’sBook’, Journal of MedievalHistory9 (1983),71–90,andofGrahamRobertEdwardsin‘Purgatory: “Birth” orEvolution?’, Journal ofEcclesiastical History 36(1985), 634–46. Two studiesthat treat the emergence ofbelief inanafterlifeareAlan

E. Bernstein, The Formationof Hell: Death andRetribution in the Ancientand Early Christian Worlds(Ithaca, NY, 1993), and JanN. Bremmer, The Rise andFall of the Afterlife (LondonandNewYork,2002).EileenGardiner, Visions of HeavenandHell beforeDante (NewYork, 1989), provides themost accessible collection ofthe texts of visions. TakamiMatsuda, Death and

Purgatory in Middle EnglishDidactic Poetry (Cambridge,1997) contains a usefulsummary. For reflections onSt Patrick’s Purgatory by amodern poet see SeamusHeaney, Station Island(London and Boston, 1984).SeealsoEileenGardiner,ThePilgrim’sWaytoSt.Patrick’sPurgatory(NewYork,2010).There are numeroustranslationsofDante’sDivineComedy. Many prefer the

versions of John Ciardi, thepoet, or Dorothy L. Sayers,medievalscholarandmysterywriter, although thetranslation and commentaryby Charles S. Singleton,TheDivine Comedy (3 vols;Princeton, 1970–75) may bepreferredbyscholars.Amostmodern access to afterlifematters is Eileen Gardiner’swebsite "http://www.hell-on-line.orgThe literature on

confraternities continues togrow. For Italy one canconsult John Henderson,Piety and Charity in LateMedieval Florence (Oxford,1994) andNicholasTerpstra,LayConfraternitiesandCivicReligion in RenaissanceBologna (Cambridge, 1995).TheclassicworkforEnglandisH.F.Westlake,The ParishGilds of Medieval England(London,1919).Amongmorerecent studies one will find

useful Barbara Hanawalt,‘Keepers of the Lights: LateMedieval Parish Gilds’,Journal of Medieval andRenaissance Studies 14(1984), 21–37; Caroline M.Barron, ‘The ParishFraternities of MedievalLondon’, inC.M.BarronandC. Harper-Bill, eds, TheChurch in Pre-ReformationSociety:Essays inHonourofF.R.H. Du Boulay(Woodbridge,Suffolk,1985),

pp. 13–37; and, particularlyfor the fifteenth century,Eamon Duffy, The StrippingoftheAltars(NewHavenandLondon,1992).A much neglected subject

has been the subject of twobooks which appeared in thesame year: R.N. Swanson,IndulgencesinLateMedievalEngland: Passports toParadise? (Cambridge,2007), and Robert W.Shaffern, The Penitents’

Treasury: Indulgences inLatinChristendom (Scranton,PA,2007).

15EXILEIN

AVIGNONANDAFTERMATH

For almost seven decades ofthe fourteenth century the

papacy resided not at Romeonthebanksof theTiberbutat Avignon on the banks oftheRhone,northof theAlps,in what has been called(wrongly) the BabylonianCaptivity. Far from Rome atAvignon, the bishops ofRome became the mostflagrant absentee churchmeninmedievalhistory,yetitwasan absence which theyplausibly–tothemselvesandto many others – felt they

couldjustify.Thequestionoftheir subservience to thewishes of the king of Francealso needs to be explored.The return of the papacy toRome prompted the worstschism in the history of theWestern Church, which wastolasttill1415.

ThePopesand

Avignon

From1309to1376thepopeslived at Avignon on the eastbank of the Rhone River inwhat is now France. Sevenpopes lived there until thelast, Gregory XI, at greatpersonal risk, returned thepapacytoRome,fomentingaschismwith a pope at Romeand a pope at Avignon. The

story of that schism will betold in the next chapter. ButnowAvignon.Attheoutsetseveralpoints

need be made. In the firstplace,thepopesdidnotleaveRome with the intention ofestablishing themselvespermanently or even quasi-permanently at Avignon or,indeed, anywhere else. Afterthe tragic circumstances ofthe attack on Boniface VIIIby henchmen of the French

king, Philip IV (the Fair), in1303, thepapacywasinneardisarray. In the turmoilfollowing Boniface’s deaththe cardinals quickly electedBenedict XI, who ruled lessthan eight months. A longinterregnum of nearly a yearfollowed. The pro-Frenchcardinalscleverlysecuredtheelectionofanon-cardinal,thearchbishop of Bordeaux,Bertrand de Got, a Gascon,who took the name Clement

V(1305–14).Inretrospect, itcanbeseenasamistake.Henever got to Rome nor didany of his successors fordecades. Clement planned tobe crowned pope at Vienne,but, bowing to Philip theFair’s wishes, he wascrowned at Lyons in theking’s presence. For severalyears he wandered aboutsouthern France, a fewmonths here and a fewmonthsthere.In1309hewas

at Avignon, another stop inhis wandering, and residedthereattheDominicanfriary.Cancer struck the pope, andhe remained at Avignon,where the friars nursed him,although he occasionally leftthecityformonthsata time.Clement did not move thepapacy to Avignon: he tookwithhimmerelythosepapersneeded to carry on the dailyaffairs of the church as aprovisional arrangement at

this temporary residence.Whyhissuccessors remainedtherewillbevisitedshortly.Second, theabsenceof the

popefromRomewasnothingnew. Many of Clement V’simmediate predecessors livedfor long periods outside ofRome. For example, UrbanIV (1261–64) was never inRome;neitherwereJohnXXI(1276–77),Martin IV(1281–85) nor the haplessCelestineV (1294). And others spent

but short periods there.InnocentIV(1243–54)wasatRome a very short time aswereAlexanderIV(1254–61)andGregoryX (1271–76). Ithas been calculated that fortheperiodfrom1100to1304thepopesspent60percentoftheir time away from Rome.The residence at Avignonshouldbeseeninthiscontext.That having been said, whatmarks Avignon out is theprolonged residence of the

popes in one place and in aplaceoutsideItaly.Thethirdmatterthatneeds

stressing is that the sevenpopes who resided atAvignonwerestillbishopsofRome.Thepopebydefinitionis bishop of Rome: the popeis pope because he is bishopofRome.Wheneachofthesesevenpopeswasinstalled,hewas installed as bishop ofRome. The actual see ofRome was provided with a

vicar general, who acted inthe pope’s name. While atAvignon, the pope was notbishop of Avignon. Thepopes at Avignon weresimply absentee bishops ofRome.Something must be said

about Avignon itself. It wasnot within the kingdom ofFrance:itwassituatedontheeastern bank of the Rhonewith France on the oppositeside,thetwobanksjoinedby

a bridge known toschoolchildren. The city wassituated in the Comtat-Venaisson,whichhadbeeninpapal control for 100 yearsbeforeClementmoved there,although the city itselfbelonged to the counts ofProvence. For most of thepapal years there, Avignonwas a peaceful place.Excellent water routes madecommunication with Italyfairly easy, and it was more

accessible than Rome to allpartsofnorthernEurope.Theconvenience is undoubted,butAvignonwasnotRome.Why did the popes remain

there for nearly 70 years?EachpopeavowedhisdesiretoreturntoRome,but,exceptfor the last two, failed to actdecisively on that intention.Italy was in near anarchy,theyarguedpersuasively.Thepolitical factions that hadlong plagued the peninsula

haderuptedintoopen,almostcontinuous violence. ThePapal States, over which thepopesruledastemporallords,had as their purpose theinsulation of the popes fromcivil disruption, but they nolongergavethatinsurance,asthese lands were persistentlyinturmoil.WhathappenedtoBonifaceVIII atAnagni (seepp. 245–46) cast a longshadow over the fourteenthcentury, and the not

unreasonable fear of theviolence of Anagni beingrepeated on another popegave reason for pope afterpope to hesitate to return toItaly.ClementV lived at theDominican priory atAvignon.Hissuccessor,JohnXXII, lived there for awhilebut moved to the bishop’spalace,hishomewhenhehadbeenbishopofAvignon.Thatthe popes were to remain atAvignon for some time

became clear when John’ssuccessor, the reformingBenedict XII (1334–42)constructed a mighty palace.Itwasthispapalpalace,soontobeenlarged,thatthepopesmade their residence: afortress-like structure, itswalls 13 feet thick. Just asimportantly,Benedictbroughtthe papal archives from ItalytoAvignon.AndClementVI,his successor, bought thetown of Avignon from the

countess of Provence. Thepapal court was clearly atAvignon for the indefinitefuture. In addition, duringmuchoftheirstayatAvignonEngland and France were atwar, and pope after popeattempted to reconcile thetwo warring nations so thatthey could combine theireffortsinyetanothercrusade.This preoccupation, it wassaid, servedasanother factorin delaying their return to

Rome.What can be said of the

popes, all Frenchmen, wholivedthere?Oftenreviledandvilified, the Avignon popeshave been condemned bycontemporaries and by laterhistorians. The poet Petrarchin his Book without a Namerefers frequently to Avignonas the modern Babylon, ‘thecesspool of crime andscandal, a living hell’,whichledsubsequentwriters tocall

the papal period there the‘Babylonian Captivity’, thechurch, like the ancientHebrews, taken captive in asybaritic, immoralplace.Thesame poet describes thelabyrinthofAvignon:

The one hope of salvation isgold. Gold satisfies a wrathfulking and defeats the fearfulmonster. Gold is the thread thatguides. Gold reveals forbiddenpassages,ridsthewayofbarriersandstones.Gold it is thatbribesthe harsh gatekeeper and opens

the gates of heaven. In the end,Christissoldforgold.

In another place, Petrarchreaches an exceedinglyrighteous toneandattacksonabroadfront:

Here virtue does not give oneprotection. Justice has vanished.Freedom has perished. Fairnesshas been eliminated.What rulesis lust. What runs unabated isgreed.Whatboilsoverisenvy…The wondrous temple built byJesusChrist, once the invinciblefortress against enemies of holy

religion, has now in our timesbecome a den of heartlessthieves.

TherewasmorethanahintoftheItalianpatriotspeakinginPetrarch, yet his judgementstuck.FerdinandGregorovius(1821–91), historian of thecity of Rome, declared thatthe Avignon popes wereenslaved to the king ofFrance. The great Germanhistorian Ludwig von Pastor

(1854–1928) in hismemorable history of thepopes accused the Avignonpopes of being responsiblefor a decline in religiousfervour by their turning thepapacy from a universalinstitution to one that wasFrench. And so it went, theaccepted opinion that theperiod of the popes atAvignon was one of thedarkest in the history of thechurch.Thanksprincipally to

the researches of the FrenchSchool at Rome anotherpicture, more complex andmore reflective of thehistoricalreality,isemerging.Wecannowgetabetterviewof the popes themselves, anditistothemthatwenowturn.Some historians dispute

whether Clement V (1305–14) should be called anAvignonpope.Although it istrue that hewent toAvignonin 1309, was taken ill there

andresidedat theDominicanpriory, it was not even thenhis fixed residence. Thesummer months, forincreasingly longer periods,were spent in thecoolerhillsoutside Avignon. In 1313 hespent not only the summerbutthewinteratacastlenearCarpentras, where the curiajoined him.With life ebbingfromhisbodyinthespringof1314, Clement decided toreturn to his native Gascony

andleftCarpentrasbuthardlycrossed the Rhone before hedied. ‘Avignon pope’ or not,whatcanbesaidofhim?Withinweeks of his being

elected, long before the ideaof moving to Avignon, eventemporarily, surfaced,Clement named 10 newcardinals,oneEnglishandtherest French, four nephewsamong them. More cardinalswere created in 1310 and1312, leaving the college

clearly in the hands of theFrench. Not only did heaccedetothewishesofPhilipthe Fair in moving the placeof his installation to Lyonsfrom Vienne, he acceded inmuch more. Philip, notwilling to let his feud withBonifaceVIIIbeburiedwiththat pontiff’s bones,demanded that Boniface betried posthumously forheresy.Clementgave in, andthe trial began in February

1309. That it lapsed in 1311had nothing to do withClement’s intervention, onlywith the intervention ofpolitical exigencies for theFrench king. Beyond that, in1311, Clement absolvedGuillaumedeNogaret,PhiliptheFair’shenchmanwhohadled the attack onBoniface atAnagni, and, at the sametime, praised Philip for hishandling of the problem ofBoniface,statingthattheking

and his men ‘were notmotivatedbyanypriormalicebut only by a praiseworthyand honest devotion forjustice…andwedeclarethatthey were not and are notguilty of the maliciouschargesmadeagainstthem’.Moreover, at the Council

of Vienne (1311–12) PopeClement yielded again to theinterests of the French king,whowished to legitimize hisseizureof thepropertyof the

Knights Templar. Thismilitary religious order hadcomeintoexistencetoprotectthecrusaderstatesintheEast.The Templars had grownwealthy, and their propertiesin France created anirresistible temptation toPhilip’s voracious appetite.He seized them in 1307,alleging irregularities.Specifically the Templarswere charged with spittingandurinatingon thecrucifix,

rejecting Christ, whom theycalled a false prophet,indulging in homosexualbehaviour and worshippingidols. Under torture manymembers of the orderconfessed.While the councilwas sitting, King Philip,accompanied by an armedforce, was at Vienne. AnEnglisheye-witnessnoted,

Virtually all the prelates held infavour of the Order of theTemplars, except those prelates

from France, who, fearing theirking,darednottoactotherwise.

Without discussion, on 3April 1312, ClementV,withPhilip at his right hand andPhilip’s son at his left,suppressed the KnightsTemplars. It was a decisionforcedonthecouncilwithoutdebate, or even discussion,about the merits of thecharges: a weak pope,suffering from what appears

to have been colon cancer,was unable or unwilling tooppose a bullying king. TwoyearslaterClementwasdead,and a two-year interregnumfollowed.The cardinals were

required by canon law tomeetatCarpentras,thesiteofthepapalcuriaat the timeofthe pope’s death. They weredivided but not, as might bepresumed,intoaFrenchandanon-French party. In fact,

there were three parties. Thelargest comprised the 10cardinalsfromGasconyinthesouth-western region ofFrance, who were distinctlymoreGasconthanFrenchandnot known for excessivedeferencetotheFrenchking:many were loyal to theirduke, who, in fact, was theking of England. Also therewas an Italian faction ofseven cardinals, who, whileunited in resenting the

presence of the papal courtoutside of Italy, werethemselves split into threesubgroups. A third party ofsixcardinalscameprincipallyfrom parts of France outsideGascony.Theneedforatwo-thirds vote and theunwillingnessofthepartiestocompromise in the earlystages led to a hardening ofattitudes. Armed mobsattacked the Italians atCarpentras,evenburningand

looting the houses where theItaliancardinalslived.Amobbesieged the conclave,shouting, ‘Death to theItalians’. Fearing for theirlives,withsome justification,the Italian cardinals escapedthroughanarrowpassagewaybehind the place of theconclaveandfledCarpentras.The Gascons also left,returning to Avignon tocontinue the electionwithoutthe Italians. Were it not for

the flight of the cardinalsfrom Carpentras, there isevery reason to think thatCarpentras rather thanAvignonwouldhavebeentheplace of residence of thepopesfordecadestocome.Inresponse, the Italiansthreatened to proceed to anelection on their own if theGascons were to proceedwithout them. The deadlocklasted two years, until June1316, when the local count

locked the cardinals in theDominican priory at Lyons.The matter was soonresolved, when one group ofItalians allied with theGascons and elected JacquesDuèse, the former bishop ofAvignon,who took thenameJohnXXII.Hewas, at about70 years old undoubtedlyseen as a caretaker. In theevent,he reignedaspope for18years.PopeJohnXXII(1316–34)

made Avignon the normalresidence of the popes and,formany,remainsthecreatorof the attributes connectedwith the Avignon papacy.Two characteristics,universally acknowledged,marked his pontificate:centralization of the churchapparatus and a fiscal policythat greatly enriched thepapal court. The two wereinterrelated. PopeClementVhadallbutemptied thepapal

treasury by generous, evenexorbitant, bequests tomembers of his family. Thenew pope recognized theneedtorestorepapalfinancesto the level adequate for theefficient conduct of papalbusiness. John XXII, as didother popes after him,increased the number ofappointments (or ‘provisions’as they were called) tobenefices reserved to theHoly See, not only to

bishoprics but also to lesserecclesiastical offices. Thedeath of benefice-holders atthepapalcuriagavethepopethe right, so he claimed, toappoint a successorindependently of the wishesof local collators. It is nowrecognized that the papalappointeestendedtobebetterqualified, frequentlyuniversity graduates withadvanced knowledge oftheology,thanthoseprovided

locally. All prelates (bishopsand abbots) appointed by thepope were required to pay‘common services’, a feeequal to about one-third ofthe annual income to bederivedfromthebishopricorabbey. In addition, clericalappointeesatlowerlevelshadto pay ‘annates’, roughlyequal to the first-year’sincome. As the number ofpapal provisions to beneficesgrew in the fourteenth

century, the income fromthesetaxescametoconstituteasubstantialpartofthepapalincome. John XXII had agenius for administration.Although papal bureacracyhad long existed, hereorganized with a newefficiency the apostoliccamera (or chamber) to dealwith finances, the papalchancerytomanagethelargevolume of correspondence, ajudicial system to consider

petitions, appeals, complaintsand the other kinds oflitigation coming toAvignonand, also, the apostolicpenitentiary, whichconsidered matters ofecclesiastical penalties suchas excommunication. Andeachof these institutionshaditssubdivisions.Avignonwasbursting at the seams, andnew suburbs were builtoutside the old ramparts.Avignon had become second

only to Paris in size in‘Greater’France.PopeJohnXXIIisaccused

of extravagance with papalrevenues. Incidents are notwanting to support thisview.For example, on 22November 1324, he gave abanquet for his great-niece’swedding, quite probably amass meal for the town, atwhichwasconsumed

over4,000loavesofbread

9oxenover55sheep8pigs4boarsalargevolumeoffish200capons690chickens580partridges270rabbits40plover37ducks50pigeons4cranes2pheasants2peacocks292smallbirds3hundredweightofcheese

Such excess disturbed thefriars, particularly theSpiritual Franciscans, whoheld to a rigorous, extremepovertyoflife.The dispute about the

nature of poverty for theFranciscans escalated underJohnXXIIwhen theministergeneral of the Franciscansespoused the view thatneither Christ nor any of hisapostles had possessions. In1328, the same general was

summoned to Avignon,where he was detained inhouse arrest.He fled the citybut was deposed by friarsloyal to the pope, and theobservant friars,probably thevast majority, followed thepope. This long festeringcontroversyoverthenatureofpoverty, dating from the lastyearsofthelifeofStFrancis,wouldcontinuetotroubletheorder and the church forcenturiestocome.

It should be noted, infairness, that John ensuredthat a significant portion ofpapal revenue be spent inalms to the poor. Heestablished the Pignotte toadminister almsgiving. Itsaccounts survive and showthatmealswere cooked eachdayforthepoor.Inthecourseof an average week thePignotte distributed 67,500loaves of bread. In addition,clothingandmedicationwere

supplied to those in need. Itshouldfurtherbenotedthatinhis personal life John XXIIlived in simple frugality,almost to the point ofausterity. Also, in his lastyears he began activemovesto return the papal court toItaly, not to Rome, stillconsidered unsafe, but toBologna, where he felt hemight be able to live insecurity. In December 1334the caretaker pope, who had

beenelectedasacompromisecandidate in 1316, died agedabout90.The cardinal electors

quicklyelectedasuccessor,aCistercian monk from thesouthofFrance,whotookthename Benedict XII (1334–42).Hewastobeareformingpope. Although he had notlivedinamonasteryforsometime, having served as abishop and, later, as a curialcardinal, he set about togive

new life to the religiousorders. One of his first actswas to assist the return ofapostate religious, thosemenandwomenwhohadfled thereligious life, to return totheir houses, where, heinsisted, they should bereceived in a spirit ofkindness. His own order heendeavoured to reform byinsisting on regularvisitations. But it was theBenedictines who received

his full attention. In 1336 heissueda long,comprehensivebull, which institutedprovincestoanorderhithertobasedonindependenthouses,reducedtheliturgicalservicesand ordered the teaching ofgrammar,rhetoricandlogic–the university subjects – tomonks in their monasteries.And in 1339 he issued newconstitutions for theAugustinian canons in 39articles.TheDominicanorder

resented his attempts torestrain their begging and tocurb their communal lives ofluxury. Also, he foundAvignon crowded withsecular clergy, who werethere seeking personaladvantage. Benedict orderedthem to return to theirbenefices.In thecuria itselfBenedict

reacted so severely to thecorrupt conditions that somecurialists fled Avignon to

avoid punishment. Bribery,threats,intimidations,inflatedfees and other behaviour,against rich and poor alike,had been a way of life. Hequickly punished thoseresponsible and establishedfirm rules. Unlike his twopredecessors, Benedict XIIabhorrednepotism.Nofamilymembers were madecardinals,and,whenhisniecemarriedatAvignon,thepopeforbade any ostentatious

display. His nephew waswarned not to come toAvignon: ‘our master showsno preference to naturalfeelings’. Benedict XII wasthe most austere of theAvignonpopes.YetBenedictdidnotreturn

thepapacytoRome.Earlyinhispontificate,heconsideredthe Bologna option, as hadhis predecessor.Although heexpendedmoneytorestoreStPeter’sBasilicaandthepapal

palace at the Lateran, heremained at Avignon, citingthe near anarchy in Italy asbarringhisreturn.Hedirectedhis attention towards acrusade, as had predecessorsand successors, and, to thatend, towards effecting apeace between England andFrance. Benedict failed inboth. Early in his reign heordered the construction ofthe fortress-palace for thepopes (Le Palais des Papes)

and the transfer of the papalarchivesfromItalytohisnewpalace. It was this mostattractive of the Avignonpopes who entrenched thepapacy on the banks of theRhone. His policy ofappeasement towards therebellious factions in Italyprovedafailure:hewastakenadvantage of and laughed at.Thepopewho followedhim,thoughnomoresuccessful inItaly,atleasteludedridicule.

Those observerswho viewthe Avignon popes asworldly, self-indulgent andostentatious would see inPope Clement VI (1342–52)the embodiment of thosetraits. Clement’s court,without doubt, was the mostsophisticated,resplendentandcivilized

Plate22PalaisdesPapes,Avignon.ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

court inEurope.Like agreatsecularprince,hedelightedinthe company of artists andscholarsandlavishedgiftsonall petitioners with anunprecedented benevolence:‘my predecessors did notknow how to be pope’. Thesame generosity, lessspectacularly, showed itself

when theBlackDeath struckAvignon in 1348. While,elsewhere,greatmenfledthetowns,Clement remained formuchof theplagueseasonatAvignon, where over 60,000reportedlydied.Moreover,hesecured the services ofdoctorstotendtheillandthedying, purchased a cemeteryforthedecentburialofplaguevictims and welcomed intoAvignon Jews who werefleeing from the fury of

maddenedmobswhoclaimedthat they had poisoned thewells.Early inhis reign (January

1343)adeputationcamefromRome, conferringonhim therank of Roman senator andentreating him to return toRome. They were politelyreceived by this aristocraticFrench pope, but their pleaswent unheeded. Clement, infact, further entrenched thepapal court at Avignon by

enlarging the papal palaceand adorning it with arichness of decoration. Hisefforts tobringpeacetoItalyand, particularly, to regaincontrol of the Papal Statesprovedineffective.It was his successor,

Innocent VI (1352–62), whotook the drastic measuresneeded to pacify the papallands in Italy. With a strokeof near genius he named theSpanish cardinal, Gil

Albornoz, as his legate toItalywithhismissiontopavethewayforthepope’sreturn.Descended from kings ofLeon and Aragon, Albornozaccomplished by war anddiplomacywhatnearlyhalfacentury of vague hopes andhalf measures had failed todo. The mission of thiswarrior-cardinalwasnotfullyaccomplished during thereignofInnocentVIbut,withstarts and stops, was well

under way. Urban V (1362–70) did, in fact, return thepapal curia to Rome, butunsuccessfully. This devout,even ascetic, Benedictinemonkwithineightmonthsofbecoming pope wrote to theRomans that he intended toreturnthepapacy.Againsttheprotests of the Frenchcardinals and the Frenchcourt, Urban V left Avignonon30April 1367.He landedat a port in the Papal States

on 3 June, where CardinalAlbornozgreetedhim.On16October 1367, at last, thepope entered Rome: it wasover 60 years since a popewas there. The emperor,CharlesIV,cametoRometobe crowned. The Byzantineemperor, John V Paleologus,cametoRometoenlistpapalsupport against the Turks.The humanist ColuccioSalutatitoldPetrarch:

If you were now in Rome, youwould see temples which lay inruins now being raised again. Iknow itwouldgiveyou joy andyourpioussoulwouldpraisehimwho has rebuilt the Lateran,restoredStPeter’sandgivennewlifetotheentirecity.

Yet Urban V stayed in Italyfor just less than three years.Threats of attacks, thereaction of Romans to hisappointing only one Italiancardinal among the eightwhom he appointed, the

insinuations and rumours ofvicious conspiracies againsthisperson–allseemtohavecontributed tohisdecision toreturntoAvignon.Andsohesailed for Marseilles on 5September 1370. When hearrived at Avignon, atriumphant welcome greetedhim.Within threemonths hewas dead, but his courage,even if not enduring, meantthat thedaysof thepopesonthe banks of theRhonewere

surelynumbered.Almost immediately the

cardinals elected the nephewof Clement VI, the brilliantGregoryXI(1370–78).Itwashis conviction that, puttingasideallopposition,hehadtoreturn to Rome. Hewrote totheEnglishking:

From the time that we becamepope,ithasbeenourdeeplyhelddesire, as indeed it still is, togoto the Holy City, the city thatgivesusourauthority,where, inits environs, we shall establish

our residence and the residenceofourapostoliccourt.

Yet he was delayed forvarious reasons. Peacenegotiations between Franceand England, in whichGregory expected to play apart,were tobeconductedatBruges. Renewed hostilitiesbrokeoutinItaly,eveninthePapal States. He persisted inhis plans and eventuallyannounced a date for his

departure, but it waspostponed, and then he setanother date,whichwas alsopostponed. The duke ofAnjou spoke for many,almost certainly theoverwhelmingmajorityofthecardinals, curialists andFrench nobility, especiallytheking,whenhesaid,

You are travelling to a countryand to a people, where there islittle love for you. You areturningaway from the sourceof

faith, that is, that kingdomwherein the holy church hasgreater authority and perfectionthananywhereelse in theworld.You may indeed cause greatharmtothechurch,for,wereyouto die there,which your doctorssayisquitelikely,theRomans–those alien and treacherouspeople –will control theSacredCollege and will elect a popewhosuitsthem.

The duke’s words were toproveprophetic.YetGregoryheard another view deliveredwithforcebyStCatherineof

Siena:Donotdelay,fordelayhasbeenharmful.Thedevilisusingallhistrickery to bar your path…Donot resist the will of God anylonger:yourstarvingsheepawaityourreturntoPeter’ssee.

Hervoice,howeverpowerful,wasbutoneamongmanyandcertainly not determinative.Pope Gregory XI knew hisownmindandneededneitherthe encouragement of anItalian partisan nor the

counsel of a Frenchnobleman. To the people ofAvignon, who urged him tostay,heresponded:

Last year I feared I would die,and it is my belief that the solereasonformyillnesswasmynotlivinginItaly.

On 13 September 1376Gregory left Avignon forRome. Nature seemed tosupport the nay-sayers:violent storms at sea forced

his ship to return toMarseilles and, later, to seeksafety in other ports on theway.Itwasnottill17January1377 that the papal shipslanded at Rome. The papacywas back at Rome and, savefor forced departures at thehands of Napoleon, it wasthere to stay. There arereports, however, that, likehis predecessor, Gregory XIwasdismayedby the stateofaffairs in Italy and was

contemplating a return toAvignon. How much truththese reports contain isdifficult to say, but theFrench cardinals whoaccompanied him continuedin their opposition to themove. What the duke ofAnjou feared, in fact,happened: thesicklyGregoryXI died on 27 March 1378andwasburiedatRome.Likethe duke, Gregory himselfhad fearedwhatwouldoccur

afterhisdeath.WhatoccurredwastheGreatSchism.The phrase ‘Babylonian

Captivity’ deserves a muchtoodelayedburial.Thesevenpopes who lived at Avignonfrom Clement V to GregoryXI constituted a remarkablyablelineofpopes,unlikeanysince the late eleventh–earlytwelfth century. Three(Benedict XII, Urban V andGregory XI) were known,even in their own times, for

undoubted piety of life, andone of these (Urban V) wassubsequently beatified. Tonone of them can personalscandals be assigned. EvenJohn XXII, the greatadministrator, lived a simple,sober life, and Clement VI,who lived likeaRenaissanceprince, showed exceptionalcompassionandgenerositytothe victims of the BlackDeath. But what of theirsubservience to the French

king? While it can be saidthat the popes while atAvignon were not in Frenchterritoryandthatmanyofthepopes often showedremarkable independence ofthe French king, it must beaddedthatthedesiretopleasethe French king was oftenpresent. Consistent papalpolicy urged the ending ofhostilities between Franceand England in the HundredYears War, yet the popes

were Frenchmen andgenerally sympathetic toFrench interests. Clement V,by any reckoning, wassubservient to the wishes ofPhiliptheFair,andPopeJohnXXII and King Philip VIwere friends. The popes,particularly John XXII andClement VI, allowed theFrench kings to useecclesiastical revenues intheirwarsagainsttheFlemishandtheEnglish,anallowance

not extended to theadversaries of the French.Thepopesnodoubtthoughtitasmallpricetopayforlivinginastableplaceinprolongedpeace. For the most part thepopes acted independentlyandofteninoppositiontothewishes of the Frenchmonarchy. Nonetheless, theperception to manycontemporaries, particularlytoItalians,wasthatthepopeswere puppets of the French

kings, and, although thereality differed from theperception, that perceptionitself created the context forwhatfollowedafter thedeathofGregoryXIatRome.This long line of able

popes, acting more or lessindependently of the Frenchmonarchy, had oneincontrovertiblecharacteristic: these bishopsof Rome lived continuouslyoutside Italy, hundreds of

miles from Rome. It was astateof affairs that couldnotlast forever. The historianmust ask the question: howjustified were the Avignonpopes in claiming that theanarchic conditions in Italymade it impossible for themto live there in peace? Nearanarchy accurately describesthe situation it Italy at thistime, but why would thatinhibit the popes from livingin the city ofRome?Even if

the popes might have beenable to control the disputeswithinthecityofRomeitself,the problem of the PapalStates might still remain.What good would it be tocontrol Rome but not thePapal States? It was a long-heldprincipleofpapalpolicythat these papal possessionsneeded to be under papalcontrol in order to give thepopes the independencewhich they felt they needed.

(This principle was tocontinueasthebasisforpapalpolicy in Italy until 1870.)The Avignon popes felt thatthey could not be assuredcontrol of thePapalStates, aposition which can behistoricallyjustified,andthat,therefore, they could notreturn to Rome. In a sense,theyhadbecomeprisonersoftheir own perceived need tobe secular rulers of a largepartofItaly.

Twoelectionsandthecomingofschism

The return of Pope GregoryXIfromAvignontoRomeinJanuary 1377 presaged areturn to normalcy afternearly 70 years of the popesliving at Avignon. Normalcywas not to be. A long,peaceful reign whichovercame early settling-in

problemswouldhaveactedtosolidify the papacy in Romeand to win over thosecardinals and curialistslonging for the attractions ofAvignon. But the pope’shealth didnot cooperate, and14 months after his returnGregory XI died. Thechronology of events canbriefly be summarized anddemandsmorethanourusualattention. The pope died on27March 1378. On the next

day his body was buried inthe church of Santa MariaNuova (nowSanta FrancescaRomana). By the canon lawof the time the conclave toelect a successor could notconvene until 10 days afterthepope’sdeath:itmeton7–8 April and elected thearchbishopofBari,who tookthe name Urban VI. He wasenthronedandcrownedon18April, Easter Sunday. Fivemonths later, on 20

September, the cardinals,declaring Urban’s electioninvalid,electedanotherpope,ClementVII.Thechurchwasin the throes of a schism.Nowthedetails.Sixteen cardinals were at

RomewhenGregoryXIdied.Six others had remained atAvignon, and one was awayonapapalmission.Ofthe16who were to elect the newpope, four were Italians, 11were French and one was

Spanish. The political lineswere not as clearly drawn asthis statementofnationalitiesmight imply. Two Frenchparties, antagonistic to oneanother,madeaclear‘Frenchvote’unlikely.TheLimousinregion had produced three ofthe last four popes, and thefive Limousin cardinals inRomewantedstillanother.AGallicpartyof fourcardinalswanted a non-Limousincardinal andwere led by the

ambitiousCardinalRobert ofGeneva, 36 years old andcousin of the French king;theyweresupportedbyPeterdeLuna,aSpaniard.Bothofthese cardinals were to playmajor roles in the schism.With suchdivisions selectinga new pope might not beeasy. Added to thesedifficultieswasthetemperofthe Roman people. Theymade their desires known bytheirofficialsandbymobsin

the streets: they wanted aRoman or, at the least, anItalian.During thedaysbefore the

cardinals met in conclave,canvassing,notunexpectedly,was quite probably takingplace.Atitscentremayhavebeen Cardinal Robert ofGeneva. He was so opposedto the Limousins that heallied with the Italians inorder toavoid theelectionofaLimousin.Aclosefriendof

Cardinal Robert later allegedthat, in the time before theelection,thecardinal,withhishandrestingonthescriptures,said to him, ‘We shall haveno one else as pope but thearchbishop of Bari.’ Thearchbishop, BartomoleoPrignano, was not a Roman,but,atleast,hewasanItalian,anativeofNaples.Moreover,Prignano, as an absenteebishop, had served as adiplomatat thepapalcuriaat

Avignonfor14years.Hehadtravelled to Rome withGregory XI, who made himhis vice-chancellor for Italy.Hewasaninsiderandnotanunknown quantity, not atokenItaliansnatchedfromaremote, southern diocese.Although not a cardinalhimself, hewasknown to allthe cardinal-electors whogathered in conclave on theeveningof7April1378.As they processed into the

Vatican palace, the cardinalsheard a crowd shoutingrepeatedly, ‘Romano lovolemo’ (‘we want aRoman’). Once shut in, theycould still hear the clamourfrom outside. The cardinal-electors proceeded with theirbusiness on the followingmorning. The Limousincardinals lacked sufficientvotes for their candidate; thecardinalofLimogesroseandsaidtotheothers,

Iproposetheelectionofamantowhom the people cannotseriously object and who wouldshowhimselffavourabletous…I elect the archbishop ofBari tobe pontiff of the holy andcatholic church, and this I dowillinglyandfreely.

Theothersfollowedsuit,firstthe French and finally theItalians, including CardinalOrsini, a Roman ambitiousfor the papal office, whosimply said, ‘I elect theperson elected by the

majority’,whowasPrignano.The cardinals had donewhattheyhadcometogether todoand what had been agreeduponinadvance:theyelectedthe archbishop of Bari aspope.Onefurthermatterstillhad

to be dealt with. SincePrignano was not a cardinal,he was not present at theelectiontogivethenecessaryconsent to his election. Hehad to be sent for and his

assent received before theelection was complete andbefore the announcementcould be made. Still verymindful of the noisy Romanmob,thecardinalssummoneda number of prelates,Prignano among them, toappear. Before they arrived,therumourspreadamongtheRomans that a non-Romanhad been elected. At thepalacethesummonedprelateswere kept waiting, while the

cardinals repaired to thechapel and there, again,unanimously electedPrignano as pope. Theelectors delayed informingPrignano and announcing hiselectiontotheRomanpeople.The crowdgrew increasinglyagitated and soon burst intothe palace. In the conclavechambercardinals,fearingfortheir lives, put papalvestments on an aged, feebleRoman cardinal and set him

onthepapal throne,andthentheydisappeared.Themanonthepapalthroneprotested,

I am not the pope, and I do notwanttobeananti-pope.Abetterthan me has been elected, thearchbishopofBari.

Someofthefleeingcardinalssought safety in the CastelSant’Angelo, others went tofortified places outside thecity and still others simplywent to their residences

unbothered. The pope-elect,not yet having consented tothe election, hid in aninnermost room in the papalpalace.The morning of 9 April

sawRome a quiet place, andRoman officials, nowinformedoftheelection,werepleased and went to payhonour to the new pope. Hesaid that they should notaddresshimaspopebutonlyas archbishop of Bari. That

afternoon the cardinals,realizing there was no threatto them, drifted back to theVatican palace. They askedPrignano to accept hiselection.Hedidand took thename Urban VI. Clad aspope,hewaspresentedtotheRoman people: ‘habemuspapam’(‘wehaveapope’).Astrangeelectionitsurelywas,but it was its validity thatwould eventually bequestioned,eventothisday.

The cardinals, far fromraising any objection to theelection, treated Urban aspope. Within a day ofUrban’s accepting theelection three Frenchcardinalsaskedforfavoursinthe pope’s gift: a cardinal’shatforthenephewofthelatepope, his intercession for therelease of a prisoner andpreferential treatment forfriends. In view of laterevents,whatCardinalRobert

of Geneva wrote to theGerman emperor bearsrehearsinghere:

The ten days after the death ofthe late pope required by canonlaw having passed, the othercardinals and Iwere enclosed inconclave. The name of thearchbishop of Bari (as he thenwas)wassuggested…TheothercardinalsandIunanimouslygaveourvotestohim.

On Palm Sunday, 11 April,just days after the election,

thecardinalstooktheirpalmsfrom Urban VI, dressed inpapal vestments and seatedon the papal throne, and onHoly Thursday, four dayslater, they gathered with thepopewhilehe issuedapapalbull. Enthronement occurredon the following Sunday(Easter), and all cardinalswerepresentandtookpart intheceremony.Laterthatsameday one of the Frenchcardinalssaidtoafriend,

In allmy life I have not knownsuchjoyasthejoyIhavetoday:we have completed this taskpeacefully. I did have doubtswhether the Romans would besatisfied.

Thenextdayall16cardinalssent a letter to their brothercardinals still at Avignon,notifying them of theelection. What happened tochangetheirminds?Almost immediately after

his enthronement Urban VI

began to alienate themembers of his curia. OnEaster Monday hecondemned churchmen whoderived their income frombenefices from which theywere perpetually absent. Afortnightlaterhepreachedonthesamesubject,beratingthecardinals who were presentfor living luxurious lives: thecardinal of Amiens, he said,should live simply and notbeg money from foreign

ambassadors, and CardinalOrsini is a sotus (a sot).Urban was soon to stripAmiensofhiscardinal’srank.The pope came close tophysically assaulting thecardinal of Limoges. Thecardinals asked the pope toreturnthepapacytoAvignon,but, not unexpectedly, herefused. Summer wasapproaching, and, on thepretextofescapingtheheatofRome, the cardinals one by

one went to Anagni in thehillssouth-eastofRome,firstthe French, then three of thefour Italians. (The other laydying at Rome.) Sixteencardinals had elected Urbanin April, and in Augustthirteen of them were atAnagni, troubled by Urban’sbehaviour.Oftheotherthree,oneby thenhaddiedand theother two had returned toAvignon.Thepoperefusedtojoin them atAnagni, fearing,

with some justification, thathe would become theirprisoner.There,atAnagni,on9August 1378, the cardinalsissued their Declaratio: theelection of Urban was nullandvoidandthepapalthronewas consequently vacant.Theirargument,quitesimply,wasthattheyactedoutoffearof the Roman mob and thatsuch fear invalidated theiraction. The 13 cardinalsproceededtoanewconclave,

whichmetatFondiundertheprotection of the local count.Theyenteredtheconclaveon19 September, observed allthe appropriate canonicalprocedures and, on thefollowingday,announcedtheunanimous election ofCardinal Robert of Geneva,who took the name ClementVII. There were now twopopes or, rather, twoclaimantstothepapacy.We must pause and ask

aboutthecanonicalprobityofthe cardinals’ actions. Howjustified were they in whattheydid?Convenientlyforusthey laid out their reasons inthedocumentDeclaratioof9August1378:

The ultramontane cardinalsagreed to the election of anItalianfornootherreasonthantoescape the danger of death, astheythenaverred…SomeoftheItaliancardinalsstatedthat,werethey to be elected, they woulddecline because of the evident

coercion.Allthecardinals,eagertoescape theperils facing them,quickly nominated thearchbishop of Bari without anyfurther discussion, and theyimmediately elected him to bepope. He was known to them,and they trusted in hisconsiderable experience in theaffairs andcustomsof the curia.Later experience proved themwrong. In addition, somecardinals said that they electedhim as true pope, but this wasdone solely out of fear for theirlives.

Several cardinals, it was

argued, had demurred in oneway or another and somespoke of retiring to a safeplaceforanewelection.Thisbrief went on to describe anattempt at a second election,which was broken up byarmed men who surroundedthe cardinals. Whileacknowledging that all thecardinalstookpartinUrban’senthronement andsubsequently treated him aspope, both in consistory and

in liturgical ceremonies, theyclaimed that theydidsoonlyinRome,wheretheystillfeltin danger. The Declaratiostated,

They believed that, if theyweretocastdoubtontheelection,theywouldhavebeenmurdered.

This, then, was theirargument: since actionsperformed out of excessivefear are null and void, theelectionofUrbanVIwasnot

atrueelectionandUrbanwasnotatruepope.Neither the presence of a

hugecrowdatthetimeoftheelection should be surprising–afterall,therehadnotbeena papal election in Romesince the thirteenthcentury–nor that it had an exuberant,carnival flavour nor that theRomans wanted a Romanpope. That some of theRoman people becameboisterous and even unruly

andafew,at least,positivelythreatening seems clearenough. The question mustbe: how influenced were thecardinals by theRomanmoband was that influencesufficient to invalidate theiractions? On the face of it,while admitting the presenceof the vociferous Romans,one still wonders why thecardinals proceeded as theydid, if they were under suchconstraint. If they merely

wanted to placate theRomans, why not elect aRoman such as the agedCardinal Tebaldeschi, whomsomelaterclothedaspopeina woeful pantomime? Whydidtheyratifytheelectionbyelecting Bari again after aninterval of several hours?Why did they ask favours ofhim, assist at hisenthronement and generallytreat him as pope for threemonths, if they felt the

electioninvalid?Iftherewereserious doubts, we wouldexpectthatatleastoneortwoof the cardinals would havehadthepersonalintegrityandmoral courage to disown theelection, but none did, notuntil months later. Althoughwecanneverbeentirelysure,it is diffi-cult to escape theconclusion that what turnedthe cardinals against UrbanVI was his bizarre, hostile,irrational behaviour after his

enthronement on EasterSunday, 1378. Severalcardinals admitted as much.One of the French electorsremarked,‘Ifhehadbehavedprudently, he could haveremained pope.’ And theSpanish cardinal, Peter deLuna (later pope in theAvignon line), in a momentofcandour,allowed,

If his behaviour had beendifferent, we would have stayedwith him. His violence turned

everythingupsidedown.(Ullman,p.174)

Either Urban VI after hisenthronement revealed a partof his character hithertounknown to his electors, allofwhomknewhim,or,quiteprobably, he experienced amental breakdown. Hisrantings against bishops andcardinals exceeded mereintemperance and seemed toknownorestraint, leading, in

one instance, to his nearlystriking one of the Frenchcardinals. Later, in 1384,when Urban learned that sixof his new cardinalswere sodisturbed by his rages thatthey were seeking a remedy,he imprisoned them,andfivewere never heard of again,presumably murdered; thesixth, the Englishman Adamof Easton, was saved by theintervention of King RichardII. On another occasion,

while the aged cardinal ofNapleswasbeingtorturedbybeing repeatedly lifted to aceiling and dropped to thefloor, Urban walked outsidein the garden, reciting hisoffice as he listened to thecardinal’sscreams.Separated as we are by

over 700 years from theseevents,we are in no positiontorenderaclinicaljudgementabout the sanity of the pope,but the evidence that we do

have must give us pause towonder. Whether hiddenpersonal characteristicsbecame apparent or amentalbreakdown had occurred, thecardinals by the summer of1378recognizedthattheyhadmade a grievous error inelectingUrban. This posed aproblem of monumentalproportions for them. Theeasiest solutionwould be forthem to convince Urban toresign. But Urban would

never resign, and thecardinals knew this fullwell.Thatbeingthesituation,whatcouldthecardinalsdo?Attheheart of the problem thusfacing them was a defect incontemporary canon law:there were no provisions forremoving a pope, even onewho had lost his sanity. Yetthecardinalsknewthatitwasa long-standing principle ofthat law that actionsperformed by force and fear

(vi et metu) had no legalstanding and were invalid.Their solution was to claimthat the election itself wasradically compromised andvitiated by reason of fear;then they could proceed to afresh election. In doing thisthe cardinals created an evengreater problem by plungingthe church into a schism,which was to last almost 40years. The argument can bemadethat,inarealsense,the

Great Schism occurredbecauseof the inadequacyofcanon law to provide aremedy for an incapacitatedpope.(Itmaybenotedthatinthe United States it was notuntil 1967 that constitutionalprovisions were made fordealing with a presidentunabletodischargethedutiesofhisoffice.)ThenewlyelectedClement

VII almost immediatelycreated new cardinals and

was anxious to return thepapacytoAvignon,yethedidnot arrive at the Palais desPapes until 20 June 1379. Intheeightmonthsbetweenhiselection at Fondi and hisarrival at Avignon, ClementVII was busy in Italy. Herecruitedmercenary forces tohelpestablishhimselfinItaly.HetriedtolaysiegetoRome,buthismenweredrivenfromCastel Sant’Angelo, andClementandhiscourtfledto

Naples, where they werewelcomed by the queen ofNaples but not by Urban’sfellow Neapolitans. On 20June1379Clementsetsailonthe queen’s ships forMarseilles, whence he saileduptheRhonetoAvignon.KingCharlesVofFrance,

cousinofthenewelectee,didnot rush to his support.Before the election ofClementVIIthecardinalshadsenttwoenvoysfromAnagni

to elicit the king’s support.Charles summoned a numberof the higher clergy to theroyalpalace inParis to listento the envoys: sixarchbishops, 30 bishops,several abbots as well asdoctors of law and theologyfromtheuniversitiesofParis,Orléans and Angers. On 13September1378theyreportedto the king that the matterneededmore clarity before ajudgementcouldbemadeand

that the king would beadvised to take a posture ofneutrality. At their meeting,opposition to Clement wasexpressed by some of theclergy from Normandy andfrom Provence. Charles Vthen called a smallerassembly of prelates anduniversity doctors, somesuggest, hand-chosen tosupport Clement. On 16November they listened toClement’s envoys and

advised Charles to supportClement. This he did. Thekinghadalsoapproached theUniversity of Paris for itsopinion, which was slow incoming. Disagreement wasapparent among the masters,some, instead of supportingoneorotheroftheclaimants,suggesting a general councilbe convened, but in May1379 a majority of theuniversity declared forClement VII. The call for a

general council would beheard again. The support ofthekingofFrancewascrucialto Clement’s claim oflegitimacy. Itmaynotbe toomuch tosay thatwithout thisearlysupportofCharlesVtheschismmighthavebeenbutaminor footnote in the historyof the church. It becamemuchmore.Support for the rival

claimants now took on ageographical and a decidedly

political dimension. Lookingfor wider support, Urban,abandoned by his curia aswell as his cardinals, inSeptember 1378 created 24new cardinals, 4 of whomwerenon-Italian.Hebeganinearnest to look for politicalsupport. Italy, then and forcenturies after, was apatchwork quilt of politicalentities. The kingdom ofNaples went briefly intoUrban’s camp but then went

over to Clement, where itremained till Urban’s death(1389), when it reverted tothe Roman claimant.Throughout the rest of theschism,whiletherewassomevacillation of loyalties, mostof Italy remainedobedient toRome. Also in what becameknown as the RomanObediencewasEngland,longa foeofFrance.Thepositionin Ireland was moreambiguous, but Clement

certainlyhadsomesupportinthe province of Tuam in thewest and Urban had supportelsewhere in what, at best,was a fluid situation.Wenceslaus IV, the Germankingandemperor-elect,optedfor Rome, and most ofGermany followed his lead.Scotland, traditional ally ofFrance, chose the AvignonObedienceasalsodidSavoy,Burgundy and Portugal,although Portugal, under

pressure from England,switched to the RomanObedience.Theother Iberiankingdoms maintained theirneutrality at first, but theyeventually went over toAvignon: Castile in 1380,Aragon in 1387 andNavarrein 1390. Scandinavia, Polandand Hungary came intoUrban’scamp.Somedioceseswere represented by twobishops (e.g. Breslau,Constance,Mainz,Basel),but

toomuchshouldnotbemadeof this: the major divisionswere national. Politicalconsiderations alone – notcanon law, not theology, notpiety – dictated thesedecisions. Europe was nowdivided between the nationssupportingUrbanVI and thenations supporting ClementVII. In an expression of thetime, the world was at sixesandsevens.

Furtherreading

The two essential Englishlanguage works on Avignonare G. Mollat, The Popes atAvignon(tr.JanetLove;NewYork, 1963) and YvesRenouard, The AvignonPapacy,1305–1403(tr.DenisBethell;Hamden,CT, 1970).A judicious summary byPatrickN.R.Zutschiisfound

in vol. 6 of The NewCambridgeMedieval History(ed. Michael Jones;Cambridge,2000).Theviewsof Petrarch can be foundconveniently in Norman P.Zacour’s translation ofPetrarch’s Book without aName (Toronto, 1973). Thetrials of the Templars haveelicited much historicalcommentary. A book ofsingular good sense isMalcolm Barber’s now

classic The Trial of theTemplars (2nd edn.;Cambridge, 2006). He hasalso written the introductionto a series of studies on thesubject: J. Burgtorf, P.F.Crawford, H.J. Nicholson,eds,TheDebate on the Trialof theTemplars (1307–1314)(Farnham, Surrey, andBurlington, VT, 2010).Geoffrey Barraclough, PapalProvisions: Aspects ofChurch History

Constitutional, Legal andAdministrative in the LaterMiddle Ages (Oxford, 1935)is the standard work on thatsubject.The narrative of the

electionsof1378isrelatedinJohn Holland Smith, TheGreat Schism, 1378: TheDisintegration of the Papacy(London, 1970). Althoughsometimes criticized forbeing pro-Urban, WalterUllmann, The Origins of the

Great Schism: A Study inFourteenth-CenturyEcclesiastical History(London,1948)isagemofabook. Joëlle Rollo-Kosterpresents a new view of thepapal election at Rome in1378 inRaiding Saint Peter:EmptySees,Violence,andtheInitiation of the GreatWestern Schism (1378)(LeidenandBoston,2008).

16THEGREATSCHISM

There was one pope; thenanother claimed to be pope;then, still another.A rupture,aschism,rentwesternEurope

as never before. Largelyalong national lines, Europewas divided into two andeventually three allegiances.Confusion, suspicion,distrust, bitterness, evenhatred consumed much ofChristian Europe. Indeed,therehavebeenothertimesinthelonghistoryofthepapacywhen there were rivalclaimants, but none can becompared to the schism(known to history as the

Great Schism) that began in1378 and lasted for almostfour decades. And it cast along, lingering shadow overthe subsequent history of thechurch.

TheroadtoPisa

Two men, each claiming tobepopeandbishopofRome,

each claiming canonicalelection, establishedthemselves togetherwith fullpapal apparatus atRome andAvignon.Bothheld thesameconstitutional position: theybelieved in the primacy ofRome over the church. Theydiffered only about whowasthe true successor of Peter,the bishop of Rome and, onearth,theheadoftheChurch.Each quicklyexcommunicated the other

and began to act as pope.Neither Urban nor Clement,onthehumanlevel,hadmuchtocommendhimasleaderoftheChristianchurch.Urban’slapses into apparentlydemented behaviour led todecisions and actions hardlyconsistent with the ideals ofthe religion of which heclaimed to be leader.Clement, on the other hand,wasthebutcherofCesena.Ayear and a half before the

cardinals elected him pope,the then Robert of Geneva,acting as a militarycommander, ordered theslaughter of all theinhabitants of Cesena, nearRimini, sparing none, notwomen, children, the aged,theinfirm.Asmanyas3,000perished, and the streets andlanes ofCesenawere said tohavebeen awashwithblood.Neither Urban nor Clementwas an ideal person to be

pope,butoneofthemwasthetrue pope and the other ananti-pope.The identityof thetruepopewas thecentralbutnot the only question of theschism. How to resolve theschism was the alliedquestion, and it soonbecamethe paramount question.Christians of unquestionedrectitude, belonging to bothcamps, endeavoured to findanswers, and their quest wasto last for decades. A Paris

theologian lamented, ‘Notevenahardenedheartcanbeunmovedat the sightofholymother the church in suchagony.’In the years immediately

followingthedoubleelection,two German theologians atthe University of Parissuggested a radical solutionto the problem. Theyproposed the calling of ageneralcounciltoresolvethecrisis. Henry of Langenstein,

who was soon (1383) tobecome, in a real sense, thenewfounderoftheUniversityof Vienna, wrote that thegeneral good of the churchmust be the final norm andthat the church, as thecommunity of believers, tosecure thecommongoodcanreverse what cardinals haddone. His colleague at Paris,Conrad of Gelnhausen, soonto leave for Heidelberg,where he was to become the

firstchancellor,alsobelievedthat the ultimate authority inthe church reposes in thechurch itself, the communityof all Christians, which issuperioreventothepope.Tothose who might argue thatonlyapopecancallageneralcouncil he replied that,against the wishes of aheretical or notoriouslycriminal pope, the Christianpeople can call a council.Also, if after the death of a

pope and before the electionof his successor all thecardinalsdied,onlyageneralcouncil could resolve thesituation, even though therewas no pope to convene it.Thus,forConrad,thereisnotanessentialneedforacounciltobesummonedbythepope.True, he continued, there arepositive,man-made laws thatrequire thatageneralcouncilbe summoned by the pope,but,likeallhumanlaws,there

arecircumstanceswhicheventhewisestoflegislatorscouldnot have foreseen and inwhich they would not havewanted the law to apply. Hewas restating theAristotelianprinciple of epikeia andapplying it to the schism:althoughcanonlawrequiresapope to call a council, themakers of that law could nothave foreseen the currentsituation and, consequently,that law does not bind. His

conclusion quite simply wasthatageneralcouncilcanandshould resolve the crisis oftheschism.In 1381 these opinions of

Henry and Conrad found noready acceptance; theiracceptancewouldcomelater.In the meantime, the rivalclaimants were preoccupiedwith garnering support fortheirrivalclaimsandfortheirrivalbureaucracies.Thedeathof Urban VI on 15 October

1389mighthaveprovidedtheopportunity to reconcile thetwo obediences. Avignonurged the French king topersuade the cardinals atRome to elect Clement VIIand,thus,endtheschism,butit was an opportunityspurned. Eighteen days afterUrban’s death, withoutwaiting for negotiations, theRoman cardinals electedBoniface IX. Almostimmediately he

excommunicated ClementVII, who, in turn,excommunicated him. Therewastobenoquickoreasyfixtotheschism.The new French king,

CharlesVI,was amenable tocapturing Rome by militaryforce and imposing ClementVII on the papal throne atRome. Complications arose,and the campaign failed tomaterialize, but the use offorce was never far from

Clement’smind.Itledhimtosupportvariouscampaigns inItaly with some but littlesuccess and to drain theFrench church by demandingtaxes at an unheard of rate,which led to an increasingalienation of much of theFrench clergy.Mental illnessbegan to plague Charles VIfrom 1392, and the realpowerinFrancemovedtothedukes of Berry andBurgundy. They put a high

premium on ending theschism, political calculationsplaying a large role in theirdesigns.TheUniversityofParis, in

1384,polleditsmembersandgraduates about ways inwhich to resolve the schism.Three ways emerged: viaconcilii generalis (way of ageneral council), viacompromissi (way ofcompromise) and viacessionis (way of

resignation). The universityrecommended the last ofthese: the mutual resignationof both claimants withoutjudgement about thelegitimacy of their claims.Theviacessionisbecame thepolicyadoptedby theFrenchauthorities. It was to haveseveral manifestations,including forced resignationand even deposition. In itsless radical form it was thewayofchoice.

This way seemed quitewithin reach when a fewmonths later, in September1394, Clement VII died. Ifthe Avignon cardinals wouldnot elect a successor and ifBoniface IX at Rome couldbe convinced to resign, aresolution was clearly withinsight. To this end the royalcouncil dispatched a letter tothe cardinals at Avignon notto proceed to an election.Without acknowledging the

lettertheywentintoconclaveand elected the SpaniardPeterdeLuna,whomwefirstmetatthetroubledelectionatRome in 1378, and hebecame Benedict XIII. Lunahadtakenapre-electionoath,as did the other cardinals,that, if elected, he wouldstrive to resolve the schism,even if it required hisresignation.Heevenrepeatedthe same oath after hiselectionbutmadeitclearthat

hewould innowayconsiderresignation unless hislegitimacywasaffirmed.Theroyal dukes responded bycalling an assembly of thehigher clergy of France tomeet at Paris in February1395 to give their advice.Over100clergyandscholarsattended. The key figure atthe assembly was Simon deCramaud,thetitularpatriarchof Alexandria, formerly aprofessor of canon law at

Parisandnowaroyalofficial.He presided and skilfullypresented the via cessionis,which carried by a vote ofmore than four to one. Anembassy led by the dukes ofBerry and Burgundy, joinedbytheking’sbrotherthedukeof Orléans, proceeded toAvignon. Their pleas fell onthe deaf ears of BenedictXIII, but his cardinals werenot so deaf. All but one, afellowSpaniard,agreedtothe

via cessionis, and supportbegan to come fromelsewhere. In England,Richard II accepted thissolution as part of a largersettlement with France thatincluded a truce and hismarriagetotheFrenchking’sdaughter. Castile, England’snew ally, followed theEnglish lead and supportedtheviacessionis.RichardII’sbrother-in-law, KingWenceslaus of Bohemia,

soon took the same position.In 1397, representatives ofFrance, England and Castilevisitedbothclaimants,urgingtheirmutualresignations.Another French assembly

metatParisinMayandJune1398 and argued for forcedcession or subtraction(withdrawal of allegiance).Twomonths later the Frenchgovernment withdrew itssupport for Benedict XIII.The cardinals who had been

loyal toBenedict crossed theRhone fromAvignon, takingwith them thepapal seal.Allseemed lost forBenedict,buttheendoftheschismwasnotto be so easily attained. Hehadhiddensupport.ThedukeofOrléans openly sidedwithBenedict as did theuniversities of Toulouse,AngersandOrléans.Thekingof Castile restored hisallegiance in 1402. Aragonremained steadfast behind

Benedict, as it was tocontinuetobethroughouttheupsanddownsoftheschism,almost to his final, almostfarcical end. Meanwhile, atAvignon, where he hadendured a long siege andhumiliating house arrest,Benedict escaped to friendlyProvence. Opposition toBenedict in France began tocrumble. The cardinalsreturned, the royalwithdrawal of allegiancewas

rescinded (1403) and thepeople ofAvignon submittedtoBenedict.Flushed with the sense of

victory, Benedict sent anembassy to Rome to maketwoproposalstoBonifaceIX:first, that the two claimantsmeet and, second, that bothagree not to create any newcardinals. Prospects for asettlement looked promising,but, by the time the embassyreached Rome, Boniface IX

wasinextremisanddiedon1October 1404. The cardinals,before proceeding to anelection, tried to convinceBenedict’sembassy that theirpopeoughtnowtoresign,butthey failed. The new pope,InnocentVII,livedjustoverayear. At his death anotherchance was given to resolvethe schism, but it too failed.The 13 cardinals of theRoman Obedience met atRome, and, before entering

theconclave,eachsworethat,if elected, hewould resign ifthe other claimant would dothe same and if the cardinalsof both claimantswould jointo elect a new pope and,further, that he would notname any new cardinals. On13 November 1406 theyelected the 80 year oldGregory XII for the solepurposeofhavinghimresign.Almostimmediatelyhewroteto Benedict XIII, saying that

he would resign if theAvignoncardinalswouldjoinhis cardinals to hold anelection. Early in thefollowing January, Benedictagreed to a meeting withGregory to arrange a mutualabdication, providing – withBenedict there was always aproviso – there first be adiscussion of rightfullegitimacy. They planned tomeet on 29 September 1407at Savona, a coastal town

west of Genoa. But thecarousel was to continue togoroundandround.Simon of Cramaud served

as the go-between and, inshuttle diplomacy, movedbetweenthetwopapalcourts.On the appointed day, thefeast of St Michael theArchangel, Benedict was atSavona, but Gregory wasalmost 200 miles away atSiena. Benedict suggestedanother meeting place and

sailed toPortovenere, east ofGenoa, and Gregory movedtoLuccainthisstrangechessgame. In January 1408 theywere but 40 miles apart.Other meeting places werediscussed and rejected.Gregorywaslosinginterestinan agreement, not under theheady influence of papalincense but under thepressureofhisgreedyfamilyand others looking forpersonal advantage. On 4

May he announced that hewould never resign and heforbadehiscardinalstoleaveLucca. He also announcedthathewouldcreatefournewcardinals.On11MaymostofGregory’s cardinalsabandoned him, appealingfromGregory to Christ, to ageneral council and to afuture pope.A fortnight laterFrance once again withdrewits support from BenedictXIII and declared its

neutrality; England followedsuitlaterinthatyear.Atlast,events were moving quickly.Mostof thecardinalsofbothcampsmet atLeghorn on 29June1408andtookanoathtoreunite the church bysecuring the voluntaryresignations of bothclaimants:

If theywill not resignor if theyactcontumaciously,wewillfindanother remedy through ageneral council. Then we will

give the church one, true,undoubted shepherd by acanonical election by both ourcolleges meeting as a singlebody.

They then summoned ageneral council to meet atPisa on 25March 1409. Thesolution, prematurelyproposedbyLangenstein andGelnhausen in the early1380s,wasnowchosenasthevehicleforreunion.Itwouldbeeasytodismiss

the Council of Pisa, ashistorians often do, becauseofsubsequentevents,yetthatwould grossly underestimatewhat the council achieved.Not since the Fourth LateranCouncil (1215) had such animpressive assembly beenseen in Europe. Twenty-fourcardinals from the twoobediences attended as didfour patriarchs, 84archbishops and bishops andthe proxies of a 102 others,

128 abbots and proxies for200 others, the generalsuperiorsofthefourordersoffriars (Dominican,Franciscan, Carmelite andAustin). Cathedral chaptersfrom most of Europe sentrepresentatives as did 13universities. Some 300theologians and canonistswere also present.Ambassadors representedalmostall the secularprincesof Europe. They came from

England, France, Bohemia,Poland, Portugal, Sicily andCyprus. The great dukes ofBurgundy, Brabant, Holland,Lorraine and Austria sentenvoys as did the prince-bishops of Liège, Cologneand Mainz. Otherrepresentatives came fromBrandenburg, Thuringia andSavoy. Apart from Scotlandand Scandinavia the notableabsentees wererepresentatives from Naples

and Spain, which was stillloyal to its native BenedictXIII. It was an impressivearrayofprelates,scholarsandlay envoys who met at thecathedral at Pisa on the firstday of the new year (25March). In a real sense,Europecame togetheratPisain 1409 in a concertedattempt to bring unity to thechurch.The events atPisa in1409 were not incidental,peripheral to general

Europeanaffairs.Itisnottoomuch to say that in themonths from late March tillearly August the focus ofEuropewasfixedonPisa.Onematterandonematter

aloneconcernedthefathersofthe Council of Pisa, thereunitingof thechurchunderasinglepope.AttheopeningsessionGuydeMalesset,whowas the only survivingcardinal of Pope Gregory XI(except for Peter de Luna,

nowBenedictXIII) andwhohad participated in bothelections in 1378, presided.Five times the councilsummoned the rival popes;they responded by callingtheirowncouncils,which, inthe event, were piddling,ineffective meetings. ThemainactionwasatPisa.On 4 May the council

answered objections to itslegality and declared that bycanonical right it represents

thecommunityofthefaithfulwith the right to passjudgement on the papalclaimants. And judgementsoon came. On 5 June 1409thecouncildeclared,

Thissacredsynod,actingfortheuniversal church, acts as a courtin the present case against Peterde Luna and Angelo Corrario,onceknownasBenedictXIIIandGregoryXII,decrees…thattheywere and are schismatics,nourishers of schism andnotorious heretics and that theyhavedeviatedfromthefaithand

have committed the notoriouscrimes of perjury by violatingtheir oaths… For these reasonsand others they have provedthemselvestobeunworthyofallhonour and dignity, includingthose due to the papal office…Thissynoddeprives,deposesandexcommunicates Peter andAngelo and forbids them to actas supreme pontiff. This synoddeclarestheRomanseevacant.

There it was: the depositionofbothclaimants for reasonsof heresy and scandalouscrimes. In doing this the

council was not instituting arevolutionary constitutionalprinciple; it was adhering tocurrentcanonical teachingonthetwobasicissues:first,thata pope could be deposed fornotorious crimes and heresy,a doctrine enunciated in itsclearest form by the canonistHuguccio (1188), and,second, that the ultimateauthority in the church restswith the whole church as acorporate body, a doctrine

classically articulated byHostiensis (1270). Pisa wasadhering to principles with alongtradition.The Holy See was now

considered vacant, and anelection was quickly held.The council authorized thecardinals of both obediencesto elect the new pope. Inordertoguaranteeacceptanceof their choice the councildecreed that the new popehad to receive not a two-

thirds vote of the combinedbodybuta two-thirdsvoteofeachgroupofcardinals.After11 days, they announced theunanimous choice of theCrete-born Franciscan friar,Peter Philargi, the cardinalarchbishopofMilan.Hetookthe name Alexander V. Itmust be underlined that hewas not elected by thecardinals as cardinals but bythe cardinals as electorsdelegated by the council; the

authority for election derivedfromthecouncilitself.Theschismwasover,orso

it could confidently bebelieved. A new pope ofunblemished reputation hadbeen elected. He had thesupport of most of westernEurope. Two octogenarianrivals could not be expectedto long endure, and, in anycase, their support waseroding. Gregory, nowabandoned by his native

Venice,hadonlyNaples,andBenedict had little supportbeyond Spain. The greatprinces, churchmen anduniversities recognizedAlexanderVas theonepopeofthenowunitedchurch.Heretrospectively authenticatedthe acts of the council thatpreceded his election. Thecouncil in its last session (7August 1409) called foranother council in threeyears’ time to address issues

of internal reform. Thefathers left Pisa withunderstandable optimism andwith theclearsense that theyhad ended the schism.Unforeseen events were toproveotherwise.

TheroadtoConstance

Nearly 70 when elected,Alexander V wouldpresumably outlive his tworivals.Suchwasnot tobe.Adelegation from Rome cametohimatBologna to arrangehis triumphal entry into theircity, but, before he could doso, Alexander V suddenlydied. One might speculatewhat might have happenedhad Alexander not died in1410, had he solidified hiswidespread support, had he

been able to take advantageof the shrinking influence ofhisrivalsandhadheturnedtothe internal reform of thechurch. Hewould have beenhailed as a saviour of thechurch and not listed by theVatican as an anti-pope. Hisdeath was bad luck, but thechoice of a successor wouldhave remedied that bad luck.The choice, in fact, wasdisastrous, or so saystraditionalhistoricalwisdom.

Baldassare Cossa, aNeapolitan (as were most ofthe ‘Roman popes’ of thistime), has had his nameblackened by his enemies.Disengaging truth from libelis not easy in thesecircumstances. As a youngman,hehadcertainlyactedinthe naval wars of the time,butdidheactpiratically?Hefailed to display thecustomarypietiesofaprelateandmayevenhavefathereda

child, but did he seduce 200women at Bologna, as isfrequently said? WhenAlexanderVsuddenlydiedatBologna,hadCossapoisonedhim?And,when the electionwas held, did he use lavishgifts as bribes to secure hiselection?Theremaybesometruth to some of theseallegations, but to say morethan that is to go beyondsurvivingevidence.John XXIII entered Rome

in April 1411, thebeleaguered Gregory XIIcowering at Gaeta under theprotection of the king ofNaples. In thefollowingyearNaples abandoned Gregory,who then took refuge atRiminiwiththelocallord,hislast supporter. Gregory wasquickly becoming anirrelevance. Meanwhile,John’shandwasstrengthenedeven more when, out of thecontest for the German

kingship,there

Table1PapalclaimantsofthethreeobediencesattheGreatSchismRome Avignon Pisa

UrbanVI(1378–89)

ClementVII(1378–94)

BonifaceIX(1389–

BenedictXIII(1394–

1404) 1423)InnocentVII(1404–06)

AlexanderV(1409–10)

GregoryXII(1406–15)

JohnXXIII(1410–15)

emerged Sigismund, whoabandoned any allegiance heonce held for Gregory and

pledged his considerablesupport for the successor ofthepopeelectedatPisa.JohnXXIII felt confident enoughto appoint 18 new cardinals,including among them threedistinguished scholars: Pierred’Ailly, Guillaume Filastreand Francisco Zabarella.John’s strength had nowreached itshighestpoint,andno onewould have predictedin 1412 that three years laterhewouldbeforcedtoresign.

Map20TheGreatSchism:betweenPisaandConstance

The unravelling of John’sinfluence began when thearmy of the kingdom ofNaples, once again changingitspoliticalposition,marchedinto Rome in March 1413,thus forcing the pope to fleeforhissafetytoFlorenceandthen to Sutri. Fearing theworst, he appealed toSigismund for assistance.

Cardinal Zabarella, thegreatest canonist of the age,led the delegation toSigismund, who at the timewas near Como in northernItaly. What they discussedprincipallywas thecallingofanother council.TheCouncilof Pisa had required thecallingofareformingcouncilin three years’ time. JohnXXIII had tried to summonsuchacouncilatRomeinlate1412, but the unsettled state

of affairs in central Italyprevented anything but asmallattendance:itwasbutabrief meeting with only onesession.Johnhadpromisedtocall another, fuller council,and, after negotiations ofJohn’s legation withSigismund lasting more thantwo weeks, the where andwhen of this council wereagreed upon. On 30 October1413, Sigismund announcedthatacouncilwouldmeeton

1 November 1414 atConstance. John then metSigismundatLodiforfurtherdiscussion, and on 9December he formally calledthe council. Although it isfrequently said that theemperor-elect forced areluctant pope to call thecouncil, the evidencesuggests rather that itwas inthe choice of place thatSigismundprevailedover thepope.Constance(Konstanzin

southern Germany near theSwissborder)wassituatedinlands that he controlled and,intheturbulentsituationthenexistingincentralItaly,wasamore appropriate place thanRome, which John favoured.ItmustfurtherbeemphasizedthattheCouncilofConstancewasnotsummonedtoresolvetheschism.Itwassummonedto complete the work leftunfinished at Pisa: theinternalreformofthechurch.

Thatthecounciltookanotherturnwasnotforeseenin1413whenitwascalledbytheonepope with the overwhelmingsupport of Christians. JohnXXIII made a solemnentrance into Constance on28 October and formallyopened the council on 5November1414.The Council of Constance

sat continuously for overthree and a half years, hadforty-five full sessions,

countless committee andother meetings and, in theend, profoundly influencedthe very constitution of thechurch. Its composition,varying from time to time,was even broader in scopethan the Council of Pisa: nopart of Christendom wasunrepresented. Bishops camefrom remote parts of theBritishIslesandScandinavia,from Silesia andTransylvania; even the

Iberian peninsula, in time,sent representatives;observers came from theEastern churches, fromGreece and Constantinople.The greatest representativeassemblyoftheMiddleAgesit has been called, and thatclaimmightwellbejustified.The great array that

gatheredatConstance, calledto complete the work of theCouncilofPisa,tookamajorturn from this original

purpose,andtheagentofthatchangewasPierred’Ailly.Hehad a brilliant career as atheologian at the Universityof Paris and became theuniversitychancellorin1389.During the years of theschism d’Ailly was thetowering figure amongEuropean intellectualsdiscussing ways of resolvingthe crisis. Not particularlyinvolved at Pisa, d’Aillycame to Constance as a

cardinal recently created byJohnXXIII and as bishop ofCambrai; he virtually tookcontrol of the council. TheItalian bishops in amemorandumof7December1414 wished to limit thecouncil to two actions – toconfirm the Council of Pisaand to take a stronger actionagainst the two claimants,Benedict XIII and GregoryXII, particularly the latter –after which the council

shoulddissolve.D’Ailly roseto the challenge and calledthosewishing to dissolve thecouncil ‘promoters of schismandopentoserioussuspicionofheresy’.Neitherhenorhisassociates questioned thatJohn XXIII was the solelawful pope and that theothers were mere pretenders,but d’Ailly put the unity ofthe church together withreformastheessentialagendaof the council. D’Ailly’s

partysoonurgedJohnXXIII,the good shepherd, to laydownhislifeforhisflockbyabdicating: the peace of thechurch required it.Discussions would follow,but the abdication of JohnXXIII was firmly on thetable. Next d’Ailly turned tothe organization of thecouncil.On 7 February 1415thecouncilagreedtoorganizeitself into four nations:English (including Scots and

Irish), French, German(including Poland, Bohemia,Hungary and Denmark) andItalian. In July 1415 thecardinals formed a ‘nation’as, later, did the Spanish.Within each nation votingincludednotonlybishopsandabbotsbutalsotheproxiesofabsent bishops and abbots aswell as representatives ofcathedral chapters anduniversitiesandtheenvoysofsecular rulers. In each nation

thevotewouldbebyheadbutin the general sessions itwouldbebynation.The fearthat the Italian bishops bysheer numbers wouldoverwhelm the others if thegeneral session were to havevotingbyheadandthebeliefthat the pope had secretlymade 50 additional Italianprelates contributed to theadoption of this method ofvoting. The attack on JohnXXIII could now begin in

earnest.During the month of

February John XXIII’senemies circulated ananonymous broadside whichcharged him with great andnumerous crimes. It foundready acceptance particularlyamong the Germans and theEnglish. The unimaginablewas becoming inevitable asthe anti-John campaignneared its goal, hisabdication. In the face of

quickly eroding support, notleast from Sigismund, Johngave the first indication thathe might resign on 16February. Five days later heissued a similarmemorandum. In each ofthese the pope agreed toabdicateontheconditionthatthe other claimants renounceanyclaimtothepapaloffice.Further discussions tookplace, and an acceptableformula – not of resignation

but of the promise ofresignation – was agreed to.On 2 March 1415 aftercelebrating Mass before theassembledcouncil,Johnkneltbefore the high altar ofConstance cathedral, whilehisstatementwasread:

I, Pope John XXIII, in order tobring tranquillity to all ofChrist’speople,doherebyoffer,promise,pledge,swearandavowtoGod, thechurchand thisholycouncil willingly and freely togive peace to the church bymy

genuine abdication and to carryout this promise as this councildecides, if and when Peter deLunaandAngeloCorario,knownas Benedict XIII and GregoryXII in their obediences, dolikewise renounce either inperson or by legal proxies theirclaimstothepapaloffice.

This agreed statement wasclear enough: John wouldresign when the other tworesigned.Threeofthenations– German, French andEnglish – asked for his

immediate resignation. Thiswas predictably unacceptableto John XXIII, who, fearingforhislife,fledConstance.Inthewords of a contemporarychronicler,

On 20 March 1415 at oneo’clock in the afternoon PopeJohn departed the city ofConstance in secret. On a smallhorse he rode out of the city,wearingagreycapewithagreyhood, wrapped about him todisguisehisidentity.

The fleeing pope went to aplace nearby where he wasunder the protection of theduke of Austria and fromwherehewrotetoSigismundand the cardinals of hiscontinuing intention ofresigning.Althoughtherewasa danger that the councilwould sputter out now thatthe pope had left, it did not,and John quickly becameyesterday’sman but not firstwithout some unpleasant

formalities. An armed forceof 300 brought him back onwhat appear to be highlyinflated charges.Without hisanswering them the councilon29May1415proceededto‘remove,depriveanddepose’him. The judgement of onescholaroftheperiodisthat

he was neither better nor worsethan his contemporaries … HewassacrificedtothedesireoftheChristian nations for unity, allthesinsoftheageheapedonhimsothathecouldbedeposedwith

asemblanceoflegality.

Perhaps this favourablejudgement holds much morethan a grain of truth. Johnneverappealedhisdepositionand, in fact, ratified thecouncil’sactionbyresigning.In 1419 he paid homage tothenewpope,whomadehimacardinal.The council, after having

deposedthepope,thevalidityof whose election it never

questioned,wasinanunusualsituation.Howcouldtherebea council without a pope? Acouncil took its authorityfrom the pope, but nowwithoutapope–negotiationswiththeotherclaimantswereongoing–bywhatrightcouldthe council exist?There nowcame into theopenwhathadbeenintermittentlywhisperedheretofore, the doctrine ofconciliarism: the supremeauthority in the church was

not the pope but the churchitself,representedinageneralcouncil.While John XXIII was on

the run, the council assertedits sovereignty. Almostimmediately after his flight,even before trying him, thecouncil announced itsultimate authority in theoften-cited decree Haecsancta (from its openingwords):

This holy synod of Constance,legitimately assembled in theHoly Spirit, forms a generalcouncilrepresentingtheCatholicchurch militant. It derives itspower immediately from Christ,and everyone of whateverpositionorrank,eventhepapacyitself, is bound to obey it in allthings pertaining to the faith, tothehealingof the schismand tothegeneral reformof thechurchofGodinheadandmembers.

It went on to say that anyperson, even the pope, whorefuses to obey a general

councilwillbedulypunished.These were unprecedentedclaims. No council, howeverturbulent or rebellious, hadasserted its supremacy overthe pope. This conciliarismhadgonebeyondtheteachingof earlier theologians andcanonists that gave a generalcouncil extraordinary powersover a heretical or criminouspope:Haec sancta attributedto a general council essentialpower over the pope, even a

saintly, fully orthodox pope.In time some conciliaristswould moderate this radicalview.Zabarella, forexample,stressed that the deposingpower of a council appliedonly to popes notoriouslyguiltyofseriousoffences,butHaec sancta made no suchdistinction. In matterspertainingtofaith,endingtheschism and reforming thechurchinhead(i.e.,thepope)and members the council,

representing the church, tookitsauthorityfromChrist.Onemightask,whatothermatterscould there be? Faith has todowith theology,andreformhas to do with humanbehaviour, and schismwas amatter of the moment. Thiswas an all-embracing decree.Echoes of it will thunderthrough thenextdecadesandwillbeheardcenturieslateratcouncils at the Vatican in1870and1963.

The councilwaswithout apope, since, after thedeposition and resignation ofJohnXXIII,whoserighttobepope was consistentlyacknowledgedbythecouncil,there were still twopretenders, never recognizedby thecouncil aspopes.Yet,according to Haec sancta, apope was not necessary, andthecouncilcontinuedwithitsbusiness. Before the councilproceededtodisposingofthe

twopretendersandelectinganew pope, a pressing matterhad to be dealt with. Itconcernedheresy.

WyclifandHus

This heresy came fromBohemiabuthad someof itsroots in England. JohnWyclif, an Oxford don of

middlingtheologicalabilities,held controversial views,which were condemned at acouncil at Blackfriars inLondon in 1382. Two yearslater he died without havingbeen personallyexcommunicated, protectedby powerful members of theroyal family, particularly bythemotheroftheyoungKingRichard II. Although he washimself an absentee pluralist,holding several benefices

simultaneouslywhileresidingat Oxford, Wyclif inveighedagainst the abuses of thechurch.Churchmenwhowerenot righteous could have noauthority in the church ofChrist. In addition, he heldviewsontheEucharistoutofstep with the receivedorthodoxyof the times.Afterthe consecration of the breadand wine, he believed, thesubstance of bread and wineand notmerely the accidents

(i.e., the appearances) ofbread and wine remained.Also,heheld thatChristwasnot physically present in theconsecrated species. Hefurther denied the existenceof purgatory. All of theseventures into heterodoxymighthaveremainedapurelyEnglish affair, of peripheralinterest in the wider life ofthe medieval church, even ifripples continued in Englandfora fewdecades. Itwas the

marriage of Richard II toAnne of Bohemia, sister ofKing Wenceslaus, in 1382,that transported Wyclif’steachingstothetinder-boxofBohemiaandgavehisnameaEuropean-wide recognition.Although the details are notfully known, the works ofWyclifwere brought back toBohemia, perhaps by clericalmembers of Queen Anne’shousehold after her death in1394. In Bohemia not

England, at Prague notOxford, Wyclif received awarmwelcome.Many of thesurviving manuscript copiesof his works exist only inCzechlibraries.Even before the reception

of Wyclif, Bohemia wasexperiencing considerableunrest,andthenewteachingsbecame part of a largermix.The indigenous Slavicpeople, the Czechs, weredominated by the Germans,

who formed less than 10 percent of the population. Thecentres of resentment werethe University of Prague,German-controlled since itsfounding, and the church, inwhose higher ranks theGermans prevailed. OneCzech critic described thesituation,

The Germans completelycontrolled the university. TheCzechswerehelpless…AndtheGermans also controlled the

kingdom, having the secularoffices, while the Czechs hadnothing.

Thiswas theworld inwhichtheCzech JohnHus cameofage. He joined the voices ofprotest at the BethlehemChapel in 1402, while still atheology student. Hiseloquence and obvioussincerity won him a largeaudience, and he soonbecametheforemostvoiceof

Czech nationalism and thepre-eminent preacher ofreform in the church,inveighing against the vicesof the clergy, his preachingbecoming less and lessrestrained.At the same time,he discovered the works ofJohn Wyclif and eventranslated one of them intoCzech.OfparticularappealtoHus

was Wyclif’s ecclesiology:since only righteous

churchmen have genuineauthority,obedienceneednotbegiventotheunrighteousofanydignity.ButitwasHus’sviolentattacksagainstsimonyandclericalgreedthatled thearchbishop of Prague torestrict his preaching, but tono effect, since Hus did notfeel obliged to obey. WhenWyclifite propositions werecondemned at Prague in1407, Hus refused to join inthecondemnation.Twoyears

later,stirredonbyHus’sfierysermon, a mob sacked thearchbishop’s palace. Thearchbishop burned Hus’sworks and excommunicatedhim. Civil unrest continued,and by 1412 Prague was innearrevolt.Thetouchstoneoforthodoxywaswillingness tocondemn Wyclifitepropositions. After a longsilence, Hus, in July 1412,defended five of thesepropositions, arguing that an

orthodox interpretation ofthem was possible. Theexecution of three followersofHus for inciting riots laterin 1412 gave the movementits martyrs, and KingWenceslaussetouttodestroyCzech nationalism and theheretical teachings by nowinextricablyboundupwithit.Hus was solemnlyexcommunicated. The matterwas moving quickly towardsthebreakingpoint.Thebrief,

poorly attended council heldby John XXIII at Rome inFebruary 1413 condemnedthe writings of Wyclif,principally because of thegrowing crisis in Bohemia,but this council hardlymattered.TheshowdownwastocomeatConstance.Events were to prove it

unwise, but JohnHus, at theurging of Sigismund andreassured by the king’spromiseofasafe-conductand

with the removal of hisexcommunication, went toConstance. Perhaps hethoughthewouldbeinvolvedin a university-likedisputationwiththefathersofthecouncilandthathewouldconvince them of therightness of his views. JohnXXIII before his flightseemed eager toaccommodate Hus, evenmeetingwithhimpersonally,but Hus insisted that the

papacy was a man-madeinstitutionandthatthechurchwasnotbuiltonPeterbutonChrist. Pope John had himplaced under house arrest,but, after John’s demise, thecouncil, urged on by Pierred’Ailly and JeanGerson, thechancellor of the Universityof Paris, turned to the Husaffair.Ironical,as itseemstous,thesetwoconciliaristsanda decidedly conciliaristcouncil found the antipapal

views of Hus too radical fortheirtaste.Atrialwasheldon5July1415inthepresenceofSigismund with d’Aillyleading the prosecution.Thirty allegedly heretical orerroneous propositionssupposedlydrawnfromHus’swork De ecclesia (On theChurch) were presented tohim. Hus denied havingtaught themand,whengiventhe opportunity to abjurethem, replied that he could

not abjure what he nevertaught. The followingmorning after Mass in thecathedral Hus wascondemned and handed overtotheseculararm,apaperhatbearing thewordheresiarcha(heretic) placed on his head.The secular authorities actedwithin hours, and John Huswasdevouredbyflames.Rioting followed in

Prague, and the Hussites (asthey were soon called)

became a force in Bohemia,often associated with Czechnational aspirations, althoughmanyCzechnationalistswerenotHussitesandtheHussitescame to include Germans.Hushavingbeendisposedof,the Council of Constancecouldreturntothebusinessoftheotherpapalclaimantsandtotheelectionofanewpope.

BacktoConstance

Disposing of the tworemaining claimants, JohnXXIII having resigned,proved relativelystraightforward.GregoryXII,now nearing 90 and anxiousto prepare his soul for death,proved easier to deal withthan the increasinglyintransigent Benedict XIII.

On 4 July 1415, five weeksafterJohnXXIII’sdeposition,Gregory’s representatives didtwo things in his name: theyformally convoked theassembly at Constance as ageneral council, sinceGregory did not recognizethat assembly as a council,and to that general councilsubmitted Gregory’sresignation.BenedictXIII, atPerpignan in the easternPyrenees, proved the last

obstacle. Sigismund’spersonal meetings withBenedict and even thepressuresbroughtbySpanishkings had no effect. Whenthese kings and the Scottishlegates abandoned Benedicton 13 December 1415, heceased tobea factor in thesematters. All that remainedwere the formality of hisdeposition from theofficeheclaimed (16 July 1417), butby that time the council was

planning the election of apope who would beuniversallyrecognized.

Plate23BurningofJohnHusforheresy,fromUlrichvonReichenthal,[ChronicleoftheCouncilofConstance](Augsberg,1483);BritishLibraryshelfno.IB5958.ReproducedbypermissionoftheBritishLibrary.

A significant part of thecouncil wanted to delay theelection of a pope until thecounciltookseriousmeasuresto reform the church. Thestalemate, acrimonious attimes, was broken whenHenry Beaufort, bishop of

Winchester (later cardinal)and nephew of the Englishking, Henry V, arrived atConstance in early Octoberwith a compromise plan:promulgate the reformsalready agreed to, elect apopeanddeferother reformstoa futurecouncil.Andso itwas agreed. On 9 October1417, the council by its ownauthority, promulgated fivereforming decrees. Theyconcerned the transfer of

bishops by the pope, thepapalcollectionof taxesand,most significantly, the needfor future councils. ThedecreeFrequens,oftenpairedwith Haec sancta byhistorians, provided thevehicleforfuturereforms:

Afrequentcelebrationofgeneralcouncils is a special means forcultivating the field of the Lordand for destroying briers, thornsand thistles, i.e., heresies, errorsand schism … Thus, by aperpetual edict we sanction,

decree, establish and ordain thatgeneral councils shall beheld inthe following manner. The nextcouncil shall follow the close ofthisoneat theendoffiveyears.Thesecondshallfollowthecloseofthatattheendofsevenyears.Thereaftercouncilsshallbeheldeverytenyears.

There remained only theelectionofapope.Who would elect the new

pope? The only uncontestedcardinalwastheonlycardinalstill living who had been

appointed by Gregory XI(i.e., before 1378), and hewas hiding in a Spanishfortress, still protesting thathe was pope. (To those whobelieved the election ofUrbanVI invalid and that ofClement VII valid BenedictXIII,assuccessortoClementVII, was true pope, but thatlogic won him little support,andhediedasadfigureon23May 1423.) The electoralbody would be made up of

the cardinals of the threeobediences (23 in number)plus six delegates from eachofthenations.Thesuccessfulcandidate would receive atwo-thirds majority of thecardinals and a two-thirdsmajority of eachnation.Thisbody met on 8 November1417 and on 11 November,thefeastofStMartin,electedOdo Colonna, who took hisnamefromtheday’ssaintandbecame Martin V. Some

furtherattemptsweremadeatreform,but the fathersof thecouncil were eager to gohomeandtopostponeallthatcould conceivably bepostponed. Pope Martinentered into some temporaryagreements, usually calledconcordats,aboutreformwithindividual countries.Significantly thesewerewiththesecular rulersandnot thebishops,whoseauthoritywasto some extent thus

undermined. Although thecouncildidnotdissolveuntil22 April 1418, the councilhadessentiallyendedwiththeelectionofMartinVfiveanda half months earlier. Theschismwastrulyover.To describe the effect of

theschismandtheCouncilofConstance as ‘the end of themedievalpapacy’exaggeratesand even distorts whatactually happened. True tosay, the papacy in 1418 was

markedly different from thepapacy in 1378. Theinstitution itself could hardlyhave been unaffected bycompeting claimants to thepapal office and byChristendom being dividedinto separate, hostileallegiances. While nationswenttheirownways,noneofthem questioned the papacyitself, even the French (theso-called Gallicans). Whatthey questioned was the

identityofthepope,althoughthe French and Englishwanted less papalintervention in the practicalaffairsoftheirlocalchurches.The challenge to the papacyitself came from the counciland its claim to superiorityover thepope.Thisclaim,aswe shall soon see, persistedwell into the fifteenthcentury. Yet it was notconciliarism that fomentedthe great changes of the

sixteenth century. AfterConstance the papacy’sprincipal challenge was theneed for reform within thechurch and for revitalizingthe spiritual life of theChristianpeople.

Furtherreading

The survey by Howard

Kaminskydistilsalifetimeofdistinguished scholarship onthe schism: ‘The GreatSchism’,TheNewCambridgeMedieval History, vol. 6,c.1300–c.1415 (ed. MichaelJones;Cambridge,2000),pp.674–96, with a remarkablythorough bibliography (pp.1031–41),althoughthearticlepulls up short, apparentlybecause of constraints ofperiodization, andconsequently has little to say

about Pisa and virtuallynothing about Constance.Both of these councils aretreated summarilybyAntonyBlack in ‘Popes andCouncils’,vol.7of the samehistory, c.1415–c.1500 (ed.Christopher Allmand;Cambridge,1998),pp.65–69.A reader looking for a fairlydetailed narrative can readJohn Holland Smith, TheGreat Schism 1378: TheDisintegration of the Papacy

(London,1970).A classic of its kind is

Brian Tierney’s immenselyinfluentialFoundationsoftheConciliar Theory(Cambridge, 1955; rev. edn.,Leiden,1998).Thedefinitivestudy of Pierre d’Ailly’spolitical thought remainsFrancisOakley,ThePoliticalThought of Pierre d’Ailly:The Voluntarist Tradition(New Haven and London,1964). For a more general

study of d’Ailly’secclesiology see Louis B.Pascoe,Church and Reform:Bishops, Theologians, andCanon Lawyers in theThought of Pierre d’Ailly(1351–1420) (Leiden andBoston, 2005). Brian PatrickMcGuire has written athoughtful biography ofGerson:JeanGersonand theLast Medieval Reformation(University Park, PA, 2005).E.F. Jacob, Essays in the

Conciliar Epoch (2nd edn;Manchester, 1953) containsseminalwork on the subject.The reader will find theworksofRobertN.Swansonhelpful, especially hismonograph Universities,Academics and the GreatSchism (Cambridge, 1978)and his many articles,including ‘The Way ofAction:Pierred’AillyandtheMilitarySolutiontotheGreatSchism’, The Church and

War (Studies in ChurchHistory, vol. 20, 1983; ed.W.J.Sheils),pp.191–200.Several contemporary

descriptionsoftheCouncilofConstance can be found inThe Council of Constance:TheUnificationoftheChurch(tr.LouiseRopesLoomis;edsJ.H. Mundy and K.M.Woody; New York andLondon,1961).

17THE

FIFTEENTHCENTURY

Two views can be taken ofthe fifteenth century, each

with merit as historicalapproaches.Inthefirstplace,it canbe lookedatonlywithone eye, while the other eyeis on the future, to thesixteenth century and to thereligious changes thatdramatically altered thecourse of history. Theemphasis isonroots,origins,even causes, related to theProtestant Reformation, andno historian of thatphenomenon can avoid

seeking itshistorical sources.But, for the medievalhistorian,thisapproachposestherealdangerof turningthelast century of the MiddleAges into a mere prelude towhatwas tocomeandofnotseeingitinitsownright.Thissecond view examines thisperiod not entirely unawareof the great changes aroundthe corner but with theemphasisclearlyonthehere-and-now of fifteenth-century

Europe. It is this secondapproach which is adoptedhere: the fifteenth centurydeserves to be studied foritself, not in an entirelyblinkered way, but withemphasis unmistakably onwhat happened then ratherthan onwhatwas to happen.What happened thenwas notdecay and decline, as hasoftenbeensaid.Itwas,rather,a period of unusual richness,a richness in which the

churchsharedandtowhichitcontributed. Recovery fromthe catastrophic Black Deathwas fairly rapid. The self-inflictedwoundsoftheGreatSchism and the consequentConciliar Movement leftscars, yet the church as thecommunity of Christianbelievers emerged as healthythen as the church of thetwelfth and thirteenthcenturies,perhapsevenwithamore widely shared sense of

the essentially spiritualaspectsofreligion.

Popesandcouncils

From the attack on BonifaceVIII(1303)throughthelong,70 year exile in Avignonfollowed by the devastatingschismandthehumiliationofthe councils at Pisa (1409)

andConstance(1414–18),thepapacy was scarred, deeplytroubled,evenreeling.Yet50years later the papacy hadrecovered its constitutionalposition as the supremeauthority over the church.Popes would reign whowould be among the mostsplendid in an age ofsplendourandnearsplendour.When Martin V left

Constance in 1417, he hadmuch to concern him,

particularly the nature of thebodythathadelectedhimandits claims and mandates. Apope elected by an assemblyclaiming to be his superiorcould scarcely feelcomfortable, particularlysince that assembly hadordered the frequent meetingof like bodies in theproximate future.YetMartinV, of that many-pope familythe Colonna, had the self-confidence and the subtle

diplomatic skill to yield insome things in order not tolose all. And so, in keepingwith the requirement ofConstance for a councilwithin five years (anotherwithin seven from then andothers at ten-year intervals),Martin V summoned acouncil to meet at Pavia in1423. Few representativesarrived in Pavia for thescheduled opening on 23April. When plague fell on

Pavia in June, the councilmovedtoSiena,whereitwasofficially opened only inNovember. Little wasaccomplished because ofpapal reluctance and alsobecauseofpoorattendance–only25‘mitres’(bishopsandabbots) at the postponedopening – which wasunderstandable, since theprelates who had attendedConstance had been awayfromtheirseesforover three

years. Practical-mindedbishops could see that asystem of frequent councilscould amount to an almostcontinuous parliament,requiring bishops to neglecttheir own pastoralobligations. Some who didattend, like the abbot ofPaisley, who had come fromScotland, complained whenthe council disintegrated inearly1424.Before theywenthome, the fathers agreed (in

accordance with Constance)thatanothercouncilwouldbeheld in seven years’ time(1431) at Basel, now inmodern Switzerland, then anindependent city within theempire.Baselproved thedefinitive

turningpoint in theConciliarMovement, being both itspinnacle and its nadir. Theconciliarists reigned, perhapseven supreme, for a while,butby thecouncil’send they

hadbecomewhattheywouldremain, academics debatingamong themselves, far fromthe real world of power andinfluence. Many were theagents causing the demise ofconciliarism, perhaps chiefamongthemtheGreeks.Before the council met,

Martin V had died (20February 1431) and 11 dayslater the cardinals electedEugenius IV, about whosecompetence as pope

historians continue to differ.Athis firstpublicconsistory,the floorgavewayunder theweightofthecrowd,killingabishop: an ill omen for atroubled pontificate. On thedayofthescheduledopeningat Basel only the abbé ofVézelay was present. Othersbegantostragglein:byAprila bishop had come and anabbot as well asrepresentatives of theUniversity of Paris. Small

attendancewas to trouble thecouncil throughout itssitting.The pope’s officials formallyopenedthecouncilon23July1431, and in late Septemberthe papal legate, CardinalCesarini, arrived to takepersonal control. He camestraightfromamajormilitarydefeat in a ‘crusade’ againsttheHussites.Hefoundamerehandful of mitres at Basel.While Cesariniwas obsessedwith resolving the Hussite

problem, Eugenius IV wasnegotiating with the Greeksinaneffort toconvince themto attend an ecumenicalcouncilwiththeLatinchurchto discuss reunion of thechurches. More will be saidabout the Greek factor, but,for now, the Greeks, inpreliminary negotiations,preferred to meet in Italyrather than north of theAlpsat some place like Basel. Inanycase,Eugeniusheld little

sympathy for what washappeningatBaseland,on18December1431,issuedabulldissolving the council andcalled for a new council atBologna. He underestimatedthe determination of thefathersatBaselaswellasthesingle-mindedness of hislegate, who was determinedto use the council to resolvetheHussitecrisisbypeacefulnegotiation. The councilcontinued, refusing to obey

the papal order, andreaffirmedHaecsanctaoftheCouncil of Constance,declaring the superiority ofcouncil over pope: Eugeniuslacked the authority todissolve a council unless thecouncil approved. It tookanotheryearandahalf(till1August1433)beforethepopewithdrew his bull ofdissolution but not to thecouncil’s satisfaction. Hemade further concessions

and, on 15 December 1433,abjectlysubmitted:

We decree and declare that thesaid council from its verybeginningwasandisalegitimatecouncil and that it shouldcontinue… as if no dissolutionwas made. We declare thatdissolutioninvalidandnull.

Pope Eugenius IV hadsurrendered. The victoriouscounciltriumphantlyrepeatedthe decreeHaec sancta. Thecouncil and, with it,

constitutional conciliarismwere now in charge, but itwasnottolast.Meanwhile, the council

fathers–bishopsalways inaminority–proceededwiththeHussite issue. The fate ofJohn Hus and Jerome ofPrague, who, safe-conductsnotwithstanding,wereburnedto death at the Council ofConstance, made the Hus-sites very wary of acceptingthe invitation to go to Basel.

Skilful negotiations byCardinal Cesarini won theirconfidence, and, havingreceived iron-clad assurancesof their safe-conduct, 300Hussites arrived at Basel inJanuary1433toputtheircasetothecouncil.Theyremainedthere for three months andreturned, unmolested, toPraguewith no agreement inhand. But the waywas openfor further discussions, thecouncil – andnot thepope–

taking the lead. InNovember1433 both sides acceptedarticles of agreement (theCompacta of Prague). Thearticlesaddressedtheissueofcommunion under two kinds(i.e.,underthespeciesofbothbread and wine), which theHussites had insisted upon:they could administercommunion in this way butcould not require it, andpriests must explain thatJesus is present in the

Eucharist–body,blood,souland divinity – under eachspecies. Free preaching withsome controls was allowed,and priests could ownproperty under somecircumstances. Furtherrefinementsweremadetothisagreement, and the councilratifiediton15January1437.It brought an end to theHussiteWarsandrelievedthechurch of the formidablepressures from the Hussites,

although unpacifieddissidents remained andwould be heard from again.This was the council’sgreatestachievement.With the pope effectively

sidelined, the councilattempted to do two thingssimultaneously: administerthechurchandeffectreforms.Thecouncilsoughttoreplacethe papal curia and manage,almost micro-manage, thepracticalaffairsofthechurch.

This consumed more timethan was anticipated andsiphoned off much of theenergy which could havebeen directed towardsmeaningful reform. Thecouncil did pass reformingdecrees,butthesehadlargelyto do with the pope and hiscuria.Theirswasareformnotof ‘head and members’ butonly of ‘head’: the largerneeds of the church weremostly ignored. An

opportunity was missed.Although the pope hadcapitulated and although thecouncil succeeded with theHussites,theheightshadbeenreached and a steady declineof itsfortuneswastoendtheeffective life of the Councilof Basel. If the council rosewith theHussites, it fellwiththeGreeks.Pope Eugenius may have

been seen to capitulate in1433, but his was a tactical

retreat, a holding action, adelay to await a morefavourable day. It came.WhilethefathersatBaselfellinto bickering over smallerandsmallermatters, thepopecontinuedhispursuitofunionwith the Greek churches.Understandably, the Greekswanted any ecumenicalcouncil to be held in aconvenientplace.Forawhile,Constantinople was seriouslyconsidered, then Italy. In the

meantime, the council sentemissaries to treat with theGreeks. Many at Baselwantedtheassemblynorthofthe Alps at Savoy, Avignonor even Basel itself. Thecounciltookacrucialvoteon7May1437,and inababbleofvoicesthemajorityreaditsdecree, summoning thecounciltoAvignon,whiletheminority read its decree,summoning thecouncil toanItaliancitytobenamed.Each

side then sang theTeDeum,as if victorious. It should besaidthatthesystemofvotingextended voting privileges toacademics and members ofthe lower clergy and that themajority of the mitres wereamong the minority at BaselCathedral who favoured amove to Italy. Eugeniussummoned a council tomeetat Ferrara in January 1438.Many, including thebest andthe brightest, left Basel. The

rump at Basel soon declaredEugeniusdeposedandelectedthe lay duke of Savoy, FelixV. His name could scarcelyhave been less appropriate.With Basel becoming littlemore than a debating forumfor university doctors, ledbythe Parisians, Felix, a trulydevout man, withdrew in1442. Seven years later hewasreconciledwiththepope,who treated him generouslyby making him a cardinal.

The Baselites had becomeirrelevant, and there perishedwith them any effectiveconciliarism. It had itsgreatest support atConstanceas theonlyperceivedwayofending the scandalousschism. The radicalconciliarists, those firmlycommitted to government ofthe church by council,became increasingly fewer innumbers. Practicalchurchmen with pastoral

responsibilities could notjustify by ideology the longabsences from their diocesesrequiredbyfrequentcouncils.Their support for the counciland conciliarism faded.Debate continued, but, as apracticalmatter,theConciliarMovement was no longer amovement.The reunion of the Greek

and Latin churches, longdesired at least in theory,came to fruition at the

Council of Florence(transferring from Ferraraearly in 1439). That thereunion failed to hold mightlead us to underestimate itsachievement. What is oftensaid is that the Greeks, withtheTurksa force inAnatoliaand even in parts of theBalkansandwiththeirposinga threat to Constantinople,turned to the West forassistanceandwerewillingtopaythepriceofreunion.Such

would be an inexactstatement of the facts. Thatthere were politicalconsiderations and that theyplayed an important part inthe quest for reunion cannotbe doubted, but theconsiderations also involvedthe shared needs of East andWest. Not only wasConstantinopleinperilbutsotoo theBalkans andmuchofcentralEurope.Earlycontactswere made while the popes

were at Avignon. TheOrthodoxmonkBarlaamhelddiscussionswithBenedictXIIin 1339, a century beforeFlorence,and,presciently,theGreekmonkarguedthatonlyan ecumenical council couldachieve reunion. Embassiesfrom the East came toAvignon in the 1350s and1360s, and at this latter visitpreparationswerebegunforacouncil. It came to naught,and in the early years of the

fifteenthcenturytheinitiativecame not from the East butfrom the West. Pope MartinV was on the verge ofsending a representative tosuchanecumenicalcounciltobe held at Constantinoplewhenhe realized thathewasexpected to pay for thecouncil, a burden his emptycoffers could not support.Martin and later Eugeniusconducted negotiations withthe emperor directly or

indirectly through theOrthodox church leaders. Inthe dynamics of the timeEugeniusandBaselcompetedactively to meet with theGreeks tosuchanextent thatit was not known for surewhose invitation the Greekswouldaccept,evenafter theylanded inVenice inFebruary1438.That they accepted thepapal invitation and went toFerraraenormouslyenhancedpapalprestigeatagreat,even

lethal, cost to the rumpcouncil.A Greek delegation, 700

strong, was led by EmperorJohn VIII Paleologus. Thepatriarch of Constantinopleattended as didrepresentatives of the otherpatriarchs (Antioch,Alexandria and Jerusalem),whose cities were underMuslim control. After afascinating debate over theseating arrangements,Greeks

and Latins processed intoFerrara Cathedral andrecognized themselves asforming an ecumenicalcouncil. The tensions thatappeared almost at onceconcerned not doctrinaldifferences per se butprocedure and order ofdiscussion. The Greeks,proddedbytheemperor,whowanted prompt militarysupportfromtheWest,wouldhave preferred a quick

bandaging up of old woundsin an ambiguity that wouldsatisfy both sides. Eugeniusdemanded more. Four issuesof difference were finallydiscussed as representativesof each side presented theirviews, the Westerntheologians in an elegantLatinity that captivated theirhearers. The centuries-olddispute over the ‘procession’of the persons of the Trinityconsumed over three weeks

in March 1439. In a muchearlier time the West hadaddedthewordfilioquetothetraditional creed, insistingthattheHolySpiritproceededfromtheFather‘andtheSon’(filioque),whereasintheEastthe Holy Spirit was said toproceed from the Fatherthrough the Son. In the finaldecree,bothsidesagreedthattheir formulas expressed thebeliefsoftheirsaintsandthattheir saints, since they are

saints, must be teaching thesame doctrine. Thus, whentheEasternsaintssaythattheHolySpiritproceedsfromtheFather through the Son andwhen theWestern saints saythat theHoly Spirit proceedsfrom theFather and theSon,they must mean the samething. On the subject ofpurgatory the Easterntheologians in discussing aplace where the souls of thegoodbut not perfect go after

deathdidnot speakwithonevoice, but they seemed toholdthatsuchanintermediatestate was not a state of fireand that the final dispositionofsoulswasfixedonlyattheLast Judgementat theendoftheworld.TheyyieldedtotheLatin view of the geographyoftheafterlife:afterdeaththegood and the wicked areimmediately sent to heavenandhellandthegoodbutnotperfect remain in another

place to purge themselves ofthe remaining stains of sin,wheretheycanbeassistedbythe prayers and suffrages ofthe faithful on earth. TheissueoftheEucharistcentredon the essential words ofconsecration, and thedominicalwords(‘Thisismybody … this is my blood’)were accepted, leaving roomfor customary liturgicalusages of East and West aswell as for the use of

leavened or unleavenedbread. A fourth issueremained,and thatconcernedtheauthorityof thebishopofRome.While the theological

matters just described weredealt with only after muchdebate, it could be reliablyexpected that the question ofultimate authority in thereunited church would haveprovokedthegreatestfriction.Such was not the case. An

agreement happened quitequickly after formulas wentfrom one camp to the other.Theagreedstatementreads,

Wedefine that the apostolic seeand the Roman Pontiff holdprimacy in thewholeworld andthat the same Roman Pontiff isthe successor of blessed Peter,princeof theapostles,and is thetrue vicar of Christ, head of thewhole church and father andteacherofallChristians.

The patience of Eugenius,

little shown at the beginningof his pontificate but shownat Florence repeatedly as heyielded to the Greeks inminorpointafterminorpoint,wontheday.ThesixthofJuly1439was

proclaimedacivicholiday inFlorence.Theduomoandthelarge square in front of itwerefilledwithpeopleasthegreat men of East and Westprocessed into the cathedral.The Byzantine emperor,

resplendent as only anEasternemperorcouldbe,satin a prominent place. Thepopeenteredinamagnificentprocession, Mass was said,and thebullofunion read. Itbegins with the words fromPsalm 95 (96), Laetenturcoeli et exsultet terra (‘Letthe heavens rejoice and theearth exult’). The reunion ofthe churches, long desiredand often despaired of, wasachieved.

Other churches followedthe Greeks. The Armenianpatriarch sent tworepresentatives to Florence;theygreetedEugeniusas‘thevicar of Christ in the see ofthe apostles … our head …our shepherd … thefoundationofthechurch’.On22 November 1439 adocument of union with theArmenians was promulgated,at the news of which KingHenryVIofEnglandordered

prayers of thanksgivingthroughout his kingdom.TheCoptic church sentrepresentatives from Egypt,who, on 4 February 1442,agreed toabullofunion.Tothe Copts of EthiopiaEugenius sent a letteraddressed to Prester John,believed to be the Christianking. (A hundred years laterthekingofEthiopiawrote tothe then pope, saying that hehad a letter and a book from

Eugenius, quite likely theletter andcopyof thebullofunion.) Efforts were madewith some success with theNestorians, the Syrians andthe orthodox churches inCyprus. It all might haveworked, but circumstances –not merely the fall ofConstantinople in 1453 –conspiredagainstit.Two deaths provided

obstacles. King Albert,successor as German king to

Sigismund,diedunexpectedlyin October 1439, and therefollowed a dynastic struggle,which precluded a swiftresponse to the pope’s pleafor military aid for the East.The Greeks, returning fromFlorence, did not reachConstantinople until 1February 1440, whenEmperor John VIII learnedthat his wife had died. Heentered into profound andprolonged grief. The slow

return – six months afterLaetentur coeli – and theemperor’s inactivity gaveanti-union forces inConstantinople anunopposedfield. If the emperor hadimmediatelyandwiththefullforce of his authoritypromulgated the decree ofunion, the nay-sayers mightwellhavehadlittlesuccessinencouraging opposition. TheWestern forces, when finallygathered, did not reach

Constantinople untilSeptember 1444 andexperienced a devastatingdefeat atVarna on theBlackSea in modern Bulgaria.Never again would aChristian army of thenecessary strength be raisedto stem the Turkish forces.Much of the Balkans werealready in their hands.Adrianople (Edirne), 100kilometres west ofConstantinople, had been

Turkish since 1362. Underthese circumstances onemaywonder what the assembledthronginSantaSophiafelton12 December 1452 when, atlast, the union was solemnlyproclaimed. Within fourmonths the walls of the citywere ringed with Turkishforces. The two-month siegeended when the defendingforce of Italians and Greeks,outnumbered 20 to 1, finallygave way to the Turks. And

the city of Constantine,foundedasasecondRomein330, was no longer aChristian city, its greatbasilica about to become amosque, and no longer anoutpost protecting Europefrom incursions from theEast. With the fall ofConstantinoplein1453endedthe quest to reunite the twopartsof theChristianchurch.Andsoitstands.While the churches sought

reunion at Ferrara andFlorence, the nation stateswere confronted with thedecision to supportEugenius’s council atFlorence or to continuesupporting Basel. KingCharlesVII called his clergytogether at Bourges in 1438to determine French policy.What issued was thePragmatic Sanction, which,while applying some of thereforms of Basel tailored to

French needs and beingcourteous to the pope,maintained neutralitybetween pope and council.Meanwhile, the German dietthatmetatMainzinMarchofthe same year also bided itstime by a neutral policy.Polandstoppedsendingfundsto both pope and council.Englandcontinueditsstaunchsupport of Eugenius. AsBasel deteriorated, it becameincreasingly difficult for

supporters to accord it anyserious regard. Baselessentially dissolved. Only ashell was left when Felix Vbecame reconciled. Amongthe able churchmen toabandon Basel was thehumanist Aeneas SilviusPiccolomini. In November1442heputhis talents to theservice of Eugenius andFlorence. This remarkableman, laterhimself tobecomepope (Pius II), went to

Germany, where hepersuaded Frederick, newlyking, to forgo neutrality infavour of Eugenius. By themid 1440s France, while notformally rescinding thePragmaticSanction (notuntil1516), had come to termswithEugenius.Thepopediedon 23 February 1447, hisopponents either reconciledor marginalized and hiscouncil successfullycompleted. Piccolomini

concluded his funeral orationbysayingofEugenius,

Therewasnogreaterfaultinhimthanthathewaswithoutmeasureand he tried to do not what hecoulddobutwhathewanted.

The pope’s biographer,Joseph Gill, suggests that itwould be a more accuratejudgement if ‘what hewanted’ were to read ‘whathe ought to do’ or ‘what hebelievedheoughttodo’.The

new pope, Nicholas V,quickly solidified the papalposition, even receiving thehomage of the French king.InamomentofcomictheatretheremnantoftheremnantofBasel (now at Lausanne)‘elected’Nicholas.Thecrisiswas over, but somemay seein these circumstances ofnational churches actingindependentlyfororagainstapope or, indeed, a council aprecedent forwhat became a

principle in the next centuryat the Peace of Augsburg(1555): cuius regio, eiusreligio (‘in the prince’scountry, the prince’sreligion’). Whether theAugsburg formula derivedfromeventsof the1430sand1440s, no one can sayapodictically, for othersources suggest themselvesand intervening eventscreated a wider dynamic.Nonetheless, the parallels, at

least, show the power of thestate in matters of religion.But more was happening tothe papacy than its relationswithcouncilandprinces.Humanist popes ascended

the throneofPeter.EugeniusIVwould not fit that profile,yet he was exposed to thenew ways while he was atFlorence and brought backFra Angelico to Rome withhim. It was his successor,Nicholas V (1447–55), who

can be called the firstRenaissance pope. Atheologian by training atBologna, he became tutor toan aristocratic family atFlorence,and,forhim,itwasaperfectmarriageoftimeandplace. He soon becameintoxicatedwith theworldofart and learning, which sawthe beauty of nature as notinimical to religion butseamlessly joined with it tofulfil the human spirit. He

admired the works ofantiquityinlettersandstonesand, as a young priest,became a bibliophile,according to one story,actuallyraisingmoneyforhisobsession by bell-ringing.Once pope, Nicholas setabouttobegintherestorationof the Eternal City, longneglected by the absence ofpopes and, later, by theirconcern with other matters.With peace having been

achievedinItalybetweentherival states, Rome was ripefor renewal. Nicholasrestored and enlarged theVatican Palace, hereafter theprincipal residence of thepopes, employing the geniusof Fra Angelico in thedecorations.The pope turnedhis attention to the repair ofchurches,bridges,castlesandwalls. Plans to repair andextend the 1,000 year old StPeter’s Basilica were drawn

up, although, in time, a newbasilica was to be decidedupon. Not all wasaccomplished in his day, butit isnot toomuch tosay thatNicholasVpresidedover thecreation of RenaissanceRome. His greatestachievement, however, maybe seen in what he did forlearning. As a result of theunionof the churches,Greekscholars came to the Westand found a generous patron

in the humanist pope as didWestern scholars. Nicholaspresided over translations ofthe canon of ancient Greekwriters: the historiansHerodotus, Thucydides andXenophon, the works ofAristotle (known previouslychiefly by translations fromArabic), Strabo and manyothers. The translation ofHomer into hexameter Latinverse was incomplete atNicholas’s death. Translators

under his patronage renderedinto Latin not only Greeksecular works but alsoprovided fresh translationsofthe writings of the greatChristian theologians of theEast such as Basil, GregoryNazianzen,GregoryofNyssaand John Chrysostom.Nicholas’s youthfulenthusiasmforbooksbecamefulfilled: he actively pursuedthe collection of manuscriptsof ancient Latin and Greek

works by sending scholarseven to remote parts ofEurope in search of books.Gutenberg’s presswas yet toprint its first book, and allbooks were manuscriptbooks. Nicholas acquiredover 1,000manuscript books(807 in Latin and 353 inGreek), which were to formthe basis for the VaticanLibrary. His Spanishsuccessor,CalixtusIII(1455–58), was said (by his

enemies) to have gestured athis predecessor’smanuscripts, calling them awaste of the church’streasury.Pius II (1458–64)wehave

already met as the brilliantAeneas Silvius Piccolomini.Oneof thebrightest lightsofhis age, he not only read theworksofancientauthors,buthe himself wrote histories,romances, poems, addressesand even an erotic comedy.

His Commentaria have beentranslated asTheMemoirs ofa Renaissance Pope. Skilledin diplomacy, he supportedBasel and then defected toEugenius and servedeffectively on diplomaticmissions. He had refused totakepriest’sorders,for,inhiswords, ‘I fear continence’(timeo continentiam). Hesired several illegitimatechildren. Piccolominitravelled widely, reaching

even Norway and Scotland,wherehesufferedfrostbiteofhis feet. In 1445 seriousillness led to a personalconversion, and he wasordainedthenextyear.Whenelected pope, AeneasPiccolomini took the name‘Pius’ because Virgilroutinely referred to his heroas‘piusAeneas’.Hisyearsaspope saw him concernedabout mounting a campaignin the East, and, unlike his

predecessorNicholasV,Piusdidnotbecome thepatronofscholarsandartists,although,as pope, he producednumerous works, includinghis already-mentionedautobiography.A crucial moment may

have been reached in theattitudeofthechurchtowardssecular learning. TheMiddleAges witnessed an ongoingcontroversy about the placeof secular learning in the life

of aChristian.WhatneeddoChristians have of suchlearning, since they have allthat is needed in sacredscripture and holy books, itwas frequently argued. Buthumanists at the court ofCharlemagne in the ninthcentury and at Paris in thetwelfth century foundaesthetic pleasure andintellectual satisfaction inpurely secular learning. Andin themiddleof the fifteenth

century two humanists, to befollowed by others, becamesupreme pontiffs of theChristianchurch.Onecannotspeak for historical persons,but one can imagineAugustine, Cassiodorus,Alcuin, Abelard, Dante andothers like them takingsatisfactionandevenpleasureat this turnofevents.Yetforforces that touched the soulsofmenandwomenonemustlook beyond the courts of

Roman pontiffs, who hadbecome successful Italianprinces.

Christianpiety

The defining form ofChristian spirituality from atleastthelateeleventhcenturywas the monastic life.Christians wishing to strive

forspiritualperfection,wouldbetoldtoleavetheworldandenter a religious community.The terminology isinstructive: they becamereligious, a term which,without further modification,meant those who tookreligious vows of poverty,chastity and obedience andwho lived in a communitywith others like them.Theirswasthetruelifeof thespirit.A layperson who desired to

live a life of Christianperfection yet was unable orunwilling to take vows andbecome cloistered could tryto live like a religious in theworld, in a less than perfectway,distractedbyfamilyandother practical concerns ofeveryday life, at best, asecond-rate, inferior spirituallife. The establishing of thelife of a religious as thenormativeformofspiritualitydefined themedieval idealof

Christian perfection.Attempts at a peculiarly layspirituality at the end of thetwelfth and beginning of thethirteenth century led eitherto charges of heresy, aswiththe Cathars and others, or tothe absorption of theseaspirations intonewreligiousorders,aswiththefriars.Thefifteenth century offered tothe laityanalternativemodelofspirituality,onenotsecondbesttomonasticpiety,butits

equal. To seek perfection itwas no longer necessary toleave the world and takevows. The new spiritualteaching held that perfectioncanbesoughtintheworldbylaymen and laywomen goingabouttheirquotidianpursuits.There were writers andpreachers who taught thisnew way, and individualscommitted themselves tofollowingthenewwaysinglyor in informal groups. In

parish churches they foundreligious meaning in therituals of the calendar and inthe ceremonies marking therhythms of life from birth todeath and beyond. LorenzoValla, writing about 1441,spoke for many when heobjected to the use of theword‘religious’toapplyonlytothosewhotookvows,sinceit implies that those peoplehave a higher form of theChristian life than other

Christians, which, hebelieved,theyclearlydidnot.This resistance to thetraditional religious culture,while not everywheresuccessful or, indeed,accepted, addedadimension,hitherto mute, to thediscourse about religiousexperience.Valla was not the first to

resent the self-assertedmonopolyof religious to thatname. In the late fourteenth

century Gerard Groote (d.1384)ofDeventerinHollandand his disciples argued notonly against the traditionalusage but, particularly,against the underlyingassumption that religious aremorereligious.Grootestandsas the founder of a newmovement, the DevotioModerna (New Devotion),which swept across much ofnorthern Europe in thefifteenth century. Gerard

Groote will never benumbered among the greattheologians of his time, yet,far from being a scarcelylettered person, he had spenttenyearsat theUniversityofParis. In minor orders, hereturned from Paris toDeventer, where, supportedby benefices which requirednocareofsouls,heturnedhisattentiontoworldlyaffairs.In1374 he experienced aconversionofsoulandturned

over his house and worldlypossessions to a group ofwomen,who,intime,becameknown as the Sisters of theCommonLife,i.e.,unmarriedlaywomen living incommon.Groote went to a Carthusianmonastery near Arnhem,where he remained for threeyears.When he left, he tookdeacon’s orders so that hecould preach. Groote soonbecame an effective andpopular preacher against the

evils of the day. Hispreaching made many of thehigher clergy uncomfortable,and, at one point, the bishopof Utrecht forbade preachingby all deacons in order tosilencehim.Grootebecameamagnet for laymen andlaywomen and members ofthe secular clergy whodesired a more spiritual life.The women living in hishouse took no vows andcarriedontheirlivesaspious

women living, withoutobligation, in a voluntarycommunity. Groote died ofthe plague in 1384 and soongroupsoflaymenandsecularpriests who were committedtohis idealsbegantoappear,first at Deventer, then soonnearby at Zwolle andKampen. Another branch offollowers of Grooteestablished religiouscommunities based on therule of the Augustinian

canons with theWindesheimcongregation at its centre.From one of these houses ofcanons emerged the mostinfluential spiritual writer ofthefifteenthcentury,ThomasàKempis, aboutwhommoresoon.The Brethren of the

Common Life weredeterminedly not religious,since they took no vows andwere free to leave wheneverthey wished, nor did they

form an order, since theFourth Lateran Council(1215) prohibited thefounding of new orders. TheBrethren were a mixture oflaymenandclerics,and therefrequently lived in theirhouses schoolboys, likeErasmus in 1484–87. Onlyoccasionally did the brothersactuallyteachtheboys–theytended to go to local schools–providing, instead, spiritualdirectionandsomecommunal

spiritual exercises. Thebrothers themselves spentconsiderableeffortincopyingmanuscripts of devotionalworks. An early textdescribestheDeventerhouse:

Our house was established andsupportedbymeagrefundsfromrents and the sale of goods sothat, following the example ofthe early church, devout priestsandclericsandpoor laymencanlive in this house in commonfrom the manual labour ofcopying books and from theincomefromsomeproperty.Our

purposeistoworshipdevoutlyatchurch, to obey the bishops, towear only simple clothing, tokeep the canons and decrees ofthe holy ones, to practicespiritualexercisesandtolivenotonly lives beyond reproach butlives of perfection so that wemay serve God and perhapspersuadeotherstodolikewise.

Other communities of theBrethrenoftheCommonLifesprang up elsewhere. In theNetherlands there werehouses at Delft (1403),

Albergen (1406), Hatten(1407), Groningen (c.1433),Gouda (1445) and Utrecht(1474), to mention the moreprominent ones. They alsospread into Flanders, wherecommunitieswereestablishedat Ghent, Antwerp, Brusselsand Leuven. InGermany theBrethren had houses atMünster (1400), Cologne(1417) and at many otherplaces.Althoughtheysharedsome

common aims with theHussites and their lessimportant English cousins,theLollards, the followersofthe ‘new devotion’ weredecidedly within the church.Three components can besaid to form the DevotioModerna: the Brethren, theSisters and the CanonsRegular. The devotion wasclearly urban, bourgeois andliterate. The classicalexpositionofitsspiritualityis

in Thomas à Kempis’s TheImitation of Christ, fourdifferent booklets broughttogether in 1418 as a singlebookunder theLatin titleDeimitatione Christi. Amanuscript of 1441 in theauthor’s hand is now at theRoyal Library in Brussels.Although he was a canon ofMount St Agnes(Agnietenberg, near Zwolle),his book was intended notjust for canons but also for

pious souls living in theworld,anditwaswiththem–laity and secular clergy alike– that it found its enormousaudience.Itisanaccessiblebook,not

based on theologicalarguments but on almostaphoristic phrases, which, ifnotdisdainingtheology,showitslimitations:

Whatgoodisitifyouarguewithprofound learning about theTrinity, yet, lacking humility,

you displease the Trinity? It isnotlearneddiscoursebutalifeofvirtue that brings you close toGod. I would rather feelcontrition than know how todefineit.

One can almost hear suchphrases, easily memorized,being repeated by readershungry for easily understoodrulesoflife.Again,

How foolish to seek riches thatonlyperishand to trust in them.How foolish to be ambitious forearthly honours and strive for

worldly advancement. Howfoolish to indulge theurgingsofthefleshandenjoythatforwhichyou will one day be punished.How foolish towant a long lifeand not care how it is lived.Foolish,too,tothinkonlyofthepresent instead of preparing forthelifetocome.

A few more examples fromthefirstbook,itsmostwidelyadmired part, can underlinefurther its attraction toordinary Christians desiringtoliveamoreperfectlife:

Take no credit for yourself foryour accomplishments. Think ofothers with kindness andadmiration … Do not think ofyourself as better than others,however obviously wicked theymayseem,foryouknownothowlongyouwillpersevere.

Lest it be thought that theImitation and by extensionthe Devotio Moderna weretotallyanti-intellectual,whichJohn Van Engen warnsagainst, Thomas à Kempisreassuresthescholar:

Thereisnoreasontoarguewithlearning,foritisallgoodinitselfand inGod’sorderingof things.But what must be put first andforemost is a good conscienceandaholylife.

Few scholars would arguewiththatpriorityofgoodnessover learning, but, whenThomas tellshis readerswhytheyshouldreadtheBible,hetilts away from the scholarlyapproach:

We read Holy Scripture not for

its literary qualities but for itstruth and its relevance to ourlives…Youwillreaditwiththegreatestprofit,ifyouapproachitinhumility,simplicityandfaith.

For him the highest motivefor all human actions is loveforGod:

Frequentlywhenwethinkwearemotivated by love, we aremistaken, for we act for someother reason such as naturalinclination, self-will, desire forregard or, even, our own gain.True love is not about self-

seeking but is directed solely tothegloryofGod.

Andheremindshisreaderstorememberthatdeathexcludesnoone–mementomori–andone should keep in mindone’sdeath:

Whenyouwake in themorning,think that this may be your lastday, and, when you retire atnight, do not promise yourselfanothermorning.

ForàKempistheChristianis

but a pilgrim on earth, lifebeing livedhere as apreludetoa fuller lifehereafter.Thisperspective imbues all hiswritings.Its simplicity and

directness led to the greatpopularity of the Imitationamong laityandclergyalike.Translations were quicklymade into Dutch (1420) andGerman (1434) and, in thecourseoftime,intomorethan50 languages, including

Hawaiian, Eskimo andSwahili.Weshallneverknowhowmanymanuscript copieswere made, but about 900survive in whole or in part.Thousands of copies wereprinted in the first fewdecades of printing. Withoutdoubt, no other book of thefifteenthcenturyhashadsucha profound influence on thespirituality of ordinarypeople.In Italian cities of this

period religiousconfraternities, each of themwith scores and evenhundreds ofmembers, had itas their principal purpose torelieve human suffering. AtFlorence in 1419, when theconfraternities there werereordered, the dellaMisericordia committed itsmembers to visiting the sickand burying the dead, whilethe Bigallo looked afterfoundlings and orphans. The

confraternity of Santa MariadellaPietàhadamembershipwhich strove to avoidfrivolouspursuits,whichmetfor prayer fortnightly, whichconfessed once a month andwhich received communiontwiceayear,yet,forallthesepious practices, theirprincipal work was thedistribution of food to theindigent. TheOspedale degliInnocenti was founded in1419,itsbuildingstartedthen

byFilippoBrunelleschi, laterthe architect of the greatdome crowning Florence’sduomo; this foundlinghospital established a modelof its kind. Virtually allFlorentinesabovethepovertylevelbelongedtooneormoreofthecity’scharitablebodies.In 1427, it has beenestimated, annualcontributions for alms andother charitable purposes inFlorence alone was about

108,000 florins, which wasabout one-sixth of the totalincomeofallcitizens.Similar works of charity

were being done elsewhere.InPistoia,atownoflessthan5,000, there was a hospitalwith 70 beds (with 25permanent patients) and astaff of twophysicians, eightnurses as well as otherpersonnel. There were alsoother, smaller hospitals, but,inall,therewasacapacityof

over 200 beds at Pistoia, abed-to-populationratiowhichmodern cities can only wishfor. In addition to the sick,these hospitals cared forfoundlings, orphans, theinsane,thehomeless,thepoorandlife’sunfortunates,allforfree.Theseworksofcharityand

others like them werepossible because of theincreased donation to theseconfraternities. In Florence

such civic charity increasedalmosttwofoldbetween1427and 1498. A merchant ofPrado, who was encouragedto donate his wealth to amonastery, chose instead topresent it to a hospital.Although Tuscany mighthave led the way, similarpious foundations appearedelsewhere in Italy (e.g. atVenice, Milan, Bergamo,Brescia). Some had adecidedly penitential flavour,

but always the purpose wascharitytolife’slessfortunate.Civic charity was clearlyemerging,toosoontocallita‘social gospel’, but it was adistinct form of Christianpiety, seeking religiousexpression by relievinghumansuffering.

Plate24Foundlings,façadeofOspedaledegliInnocenti,Florence.GlazedterracottafiguresbyAndreadellaRobbia(1463–66).ReproducedbypermissionoftheCourtauldInstituteofArt.

Central Italywitnessed thespreadoftheLaudesi,groupsof laypeople who gatheredeach evening to pray at theirownchapelororatory.Itwasa brief meeting of prayers,always including the AveMaria and ending with a

confession of faults. On thefirst Sunday of every monththememberswouldgatherfora solemn Mass and thenprocess through the church,leaving their candles at thehigh altar. Such monthlygatherings took place atFlorence, Pisa, Perugia,Bolognaandelsewhere.Theiractivities began to includepublic pageants as well asservices for the dead. Other,similar lay associations also

appearedandhelpedtoshapethe increasingly laydevotionalpietyofthetime.Evidence of devotional

pietycanbefoundnotonlyinNetherlandish towns andItalian cities but also in theparishes of urban and ruralEngland, and not merely inthe graceful new churchesrising amidst the sheep-runsofEastAnglia.Itcanbeseenin the cycle of yearlycelebrations which touched

every parish, even the mostremote, and these werecelebrations not of a piousfewbutcelebrationsofwholecommunities.On2February,whenwinterwasatitsgreyestand gloomiest andChristmasa fading memory, a feast ofthe Virgin became a feast ofcandles: the Purification ofthe Virgin becameCandlemas. It was a day onwhich thewholeparishcameto church. The priest blessed

the candles and then eachparishioner,carryingalightedcandle,joinedinaprocessionwhich went around thechurch.AttheoffertoryoftheMass, when the bread andwine were brought to thealtar, each person brought acandle to the altar. MargeryKemp, the pious woman ofBishop’s (nowKing’s)Lynn,wrote what this ritual meanttoher:

OnthefeastofthePurification–also called Candlemas – whenthis creature [Margery] sawparishioners in church withcandles in theirhands,shecouldthink only ofOurLady offeringherholyson,saviourtousall,toSimeon,thepriest,inthetemple,asifshe[Margery]wereactuallypresent,makingtheofferingwithOur Lady … So moved, shecould scarcely carry up her owncandletothepriest.(BookofMargeryKemp,ch.82)

Not all enjoyed MargeryKemp’s raptures, but all

carried candles home withthem to light in times ofdanger. In some biggertowns, such as Beverley, alocal guild organized a re-enactment in costume of thepresentation of Jesus in thetemplewithmembersplayingthepartsofMary (carryingadoll), Joseph, Simeon andtwoangelswithlargecandles.Similar rituals

accompanied the ceremoniesof Holy Week, which began

with the procession of palmson Palm Sunday and endedwith the empty tomb andAlleluiasonEasterSunday.Itwas the week whenparishioners made theirannual confession inpreparation for Eastercommunion,which,formost,was the only reception ofcommunioneachyear.BeforeMassonPalmSundaypalms–or theEnglishequivalent–were distributed to the

parishioners, who thengathered by a bare crossoutside the church as thegospelstoryofChrist’sentryinto Jerusalemwas read.Thepriest,carryingthesacrament,approached and sang,‘Behold, Sion, your kingcometh’. The procession ofpalms, with the priest andsacrament at its end, circledthe church as flower petalswere scattered before thesacrament. They entered the

church through its main,western door. When all hadentered, three clerics sangMatthew’s Passion, eachtakingapart.AfterMass,thepalms were taken home, ashadthecandlesweeksbefore,as a protection for placeswhere they were displayed.On Holy (or Maundy)Thursday,whenthepriesthadcompleted Mass, the altarswere stripped of their linenand leftbare,as if toprepare

Jesus’s body for death thefollowing day. Good Fridaywas the day of the cross.Threetimesthepriest,beforea veiled cross, sang ‘Eccelignum crucis’ (‘Behold thewoodofthecross’),and,aftereachtime,partoftheveilwasremoved from the cross.Then, barefoot, each personapproached the bare cross,and kneeling, kissed it.(Henry VIII scandalizedmany when he did the same

thing in a chapel inWestminster abbey in 1539.)A host, previouslyconsecrated, was solemnly‘buried’ in a temporarysepulchre,where it remained,with parishioners keepingwatch, till Easter morning.Then the sacrament wasremoved from the sepulchre,and at Easter Mass thecongregation, before theemptytomb,sang‘Resurrexitsicut dixit’ (‘He has risen as

he said’). These were theceremonies held in everyparishchurch, largeorsmall,across the land, and in someplaces there were localembellishments. The morerecentfeastofCorpusChristi(BodyofChrist),observedinlate May or June, enjoyed amore public expression thanthose just described, asCorpus Christi guilds in themajortownsorganizedpublicprocessions of the sacrament

attended with banners, bell-ringing, costumes and evensomeclearlysecularfeatures.AtYorkaremarkableplay

wasperformedonthefeastofCorpus Christi. Often called‘mystery plays’, it was,however, a single play with50‘pageants’–wemightsay‘scenes’ – which recountedthe Fall and Redemption ofthe human race. Each‘pageant’ was mounted on acart by a local guild. A

processionofthesecartswentthrough the streets of York,stopping at 12 ‘stations’ toenact their parts of the story.The play began with the fallofLuciferandthebadangels,followedby creation, the fallofAdamandEve,themurderof Abel, the flood, the nearsacrificeofIsaacbyAbrahamand Moses before thePharaoh, to mention onlysome of the scenes from theOld Testament part of the

cycle.Thencamecartswhichperformed scenes from thelife of Christ, including hisbirth, the flight into Egyptand the slaughter of theInnocents, Christ’s baptismby John the Baptist, his trialbefore Pilate, his betrayal byJudasandhisdenialbyPeter,followed by his crucifixionand resurrection. The finalscene showed the LastJudgement with thewelcoming of the good by

God and the casting ofscreaming souls into theeternal fires of hell. Thedidactic import of this cycleshould not be minimized.York’s Corpus Christi cyclewas an event of majorimportance in the civic anddevotional life of the city.And therewere similar playselsewhere.Emphasis on these great

procession days could makeus overlook simpler

observances which engagedthe participation of a wholeparish. On the RogationDays, observed on threeconsecutive days – Monday,Tuesday and Wednesday –four times a year, theparishioners behind the crossprocessedthroughtheirfieldswhich the priest blessed, inthehopeofdriving away thedevil and all wicked things,like blight and famine. Afterthe singing of the litanies of

the saints, food and drinkwere provided by thewealthier members of theparish. And, on theWednesday, a ritual devil-dragonlosthistail.It was not merely – or,

indeed,mostly–onsuchdaysof communal celebration thatonelooksforexternalsignofinnerpiety.Itisintheday-to-day, week-to-week living oflife. On Sundays virtuallywholevillagesattendedMass.

AlthoughthepriestsaidMassin Latin, often quietly, thelaityhad theirowndevotionsofprayers–Paters andAves–ormeditativereflectionsfordifferent parts of the Mass.Yet at the consecration – thesacring–when theybelievedthat the priest’s wordstransformed the bread andwineintothebodyandbloodofChrist,andattheelevation,when, as a bell rang, theconsecrated elements were

raised for all to see andworship, they raised theirarms and silently said aprayer. The fifteenth-centurypastoral writer, John Mirk,suggestedaprayersuchas,

JesusLord,welcomethoube,InformofbreadasItheesee.Jesus,forthyholynameShield me today from sin andshame.Shriving and housel, Lord, thougrantmeboth,’EreIshallhencego,Andverycontritionofmysin,ThatI,Lord,neverdietherein.

And as thou were of a maidenborn,Suffermenevertobeforlorn,ButwhenIshallhencewend,Grantmetheblisswithoutend.Amen.

Other elevation prayers weresimpler – ‘My Lord and myGod’ – but, whatever thewords, to ‘see Jesus’ at theelevation was considered bythelaitythesublimemoment,theessenceoftheMass.No one knows what

motivated individual peoplein the fifteenth century – or,for that matter, in anycentury. Whether thoseattending Mass were movedby lofty spiritual reasons ormere social pressure or by acombination of motives orwhether motivations variedfrom time to time we shallnever know. That piouswoman Margery Kemprecounts that, as she wasentering church, a handsome

man of her acquaintancemade a sexual proposition toher, which she said sheseriously considered.Whatever the motivatingreason, it seems safe to saythat, for all or virtually all,the sacring and showing ofthe host were considered themoments when they wereclosesttoGod.But how did they learn

their Paters and Aves andelevationprayers?Thesimple

answer is by instruction.Before the godparents tookthe newly baptized infantfrom the font, the priest toldthem‘toseeitbelearnedthePaterNoster,AveMaria andCredo’.Thesethreeprayers–Our Father, HailMary and IBelieve (Apostles’ Creed) –formed the basis forinstruction. The first is theprayer Jesus gave to hislistenersattheSermonontheMount, when he was asked,

‘How should we pray,Lord?’, the second is theessentialprayer to theVirginand the third a summary ofChristianbeliefs.The syllabus of Christian

instructionhadbeensetoutinthe late thirteenth century byJohn Pecham, archbishop ofCanterbury (see p. 187).Priests were directed to usethevernacularandteachtheirpeople the elements ofChristian faith: the fourteen

articles of the creed, the tencommandments, the twocommandments of love ofGod and neighbour and thegroups of seven – the sevenworks of mercy, the sevendeadlysins, thesevenvirtuesand the seven sacraments. Itis safe to presume that thesewere widely known and,easily memorizable as theywere, they could be recitedwith ease by most people.The Lay Folk’s Catechism,

summarizing these teachingsin rhyming English verse,was widely circulated, andone bishop gave copies of itto allhis clergyat anominalprice. Similar bookscirculated among the parishclergy, among them JohnMirk’sInstructionsforParishPriests,alsoinversetoassistthem in carrying out theirpastoral mission. Parishpriests, Mirk wrote, shouldurge their people to say their

private prayers in English,‘for, when you speak inEnglish, you then know andunderstand what you aresaying’. And there was anemphasisonprayerthatwentbeyond the recitation of thePaterandAve.Hundreds of manuscripts

ofprimers(oftencalledbooksof hours)which circulated inthe first three-quarters of thefifteenthcenturystillsurvive.In the decades that followed

the establishing of printingpresses, tens of thousands ofprimerswereproducedforaneager market. They usuallycontained the little office ofthe Virgin, the litany of thesaints, prayers for the dead,psalms of the Passion, acalendaroftheliturgicalyearand private prayers, such asmorningprayers.Theprimerswere prayer books for thelaity, and their popularitythroughout society – and not

just among the upper classes–cannotbeindoubt.The distinct impression

that one gets from the extantevidence is that the fifteenthcentury was a period ofvibrantdevotionallife,whichincludedthelaitytoanextenthithertounknown.Tobesure,thereweresaintsandsinners,and the vast majoritysomewhere in between,penitents and recidivists,moving with the tides of

everyday life. It is only byexternals that one can judgethe religious feeling of anyage,andbyallthesesignsthefifteenth century was not acenturyofdecayanddecline.Farfromit.

Furtherreading

On the general history of

councils of this period anexcellent starting point isHubertJedin,AHistoryoftheCouncilofTrent,vol.1(tr.E.Graf;Edinburgh,1949).Morespecifically, on Basel, onemay consult Antony Black,Council and Commune: TheConciliar Movement and theCouncil of Basle (London,1979) and, on Florence,Joseph Gill, The Council ofFlorence (originallypublished, Cambridge, 1959,

but with corrigenda, NewYork, 1982). In addition, thesame author has written anaccessible biography ofEugenius IV: Pope of Union(London, 1961) and hasanalysed attendance at thecouncils in ‘TheRepresentation of theUniversitas Fidelium in theCouncils of the ConciliarPeriod’, Councils andAssemblies (Studies inChurch History, ed. G.J.

Cumming, vol. 7, 1971), pp.177–95. M. Philippides andW.K. Hanak have written amonumental study of TheSiege and the Fall ofConstantinople in 1453:Historiography, Topographyand Military Studies(Farnham, Surrey, andBurlington, VT, 2011).Francis Oakley tracesconciliarism from thefourteenth century tomoderntimes in The Conciliarist

Tradition: Constitutionalismin the Catholic Church,1300–1870 (Oxford, 2003).The source of much that iswrittenonpopesoftheperiodis the learned andindispensable work byLudwig von Pastor, TheHistoryofthePopesfromtheClose of the Middle Ages(Eng. tr.; 40 vols; London,1891–1953). As a papalautobiography, nonesurpasses Memoirs of a

Renaissance Pope: TheCommentaries of Pius II: AnAbridgment (tr. F.A. Gragg;ed. L.C. Gabel; New York,1959). Of great assistance inthe study of the Hussites isthe English-languagetranslationofrelevanttextsinThomas A. Fudge, tr., TheCrusade Against Heretics inBohemia, 1418–1437:Sources and Documents forthe Hussite Crusades(Aldershot,Hants.,2002).

John Van Engen haswrittenwhatwillbecometheclassic treatment of theDevotioModerna:SistersandBrothersoftheCommonLife:TheDevotioModernaandtheWorld of the Later MiddleAges(Philadelphia,2008).Anolderworkstillofmuchvalueis R.R. Post, The ModernDevotion: Confrontationswith Reformation andHumanism (Studies inMedieval and Reformation

Thought, vol. 3; Leiden,1968). A specific study isWybren Scheepsma,MedievalReligiousWomeninthe Low Countries: The‘Modern Devotion’, theCanonesses of Windesheimand Their Writings(Woodbridge,Suffolk,2004).There are many translationsof The Imitation of Christ;some may prefer that byRonald Knox and MichaelOakley(London,1959).

There is an abundance ofexcellent studies on civiccharity in Italian cities.AmongthoseforFlorencethereader will learn much fromthe seminal essay byMarvinB. Becker, ‘Aspects of LayPiety in Early RenaissanceFlorence’,inC.TrinkausandH.Oberman,eds,ThePursuitofHoliness in LateMedievaland Renaissance Religion(Leiden, 1974), pp. 177–99;John Henderson, Piety and

Charity in Late MedievalFlorence(Oxford,1994);andNicholas Terpstra, LayConfraternities and CivicReligion in RenaissanceFlorence (Cambridge, 1995).Also, a specific locus ofcharity is studied in PhilipGavitt,Charity andChildreninRenaissanceFlorence:TheOspedale degli Innocenti,1410–1536 (Ann Arbor, MI,1990).ForotherpartsofItalyone can consult the classic

work of Brian Pullen, Richand Poor in RenaissanceVenice: The SocialInstitutions of a CatholicState,to1620(Oxford,1971),as well as David Herlihy’sinformative study, MedievalandRenaissancePistoia:TheSocial History of an ItalianTown, 1200–1430 (NewHaven and London, 1967).More specifically, David M.D’Andrea has written CivicChristianity in Renaissance

Italy: The Hospital ofTreviso, 1400–1530(Woodbridge,Suffolk,2007).An example of popular pietyis the subject of Daniel E.Bornstein, The Bianchi of1399: Popular Devotion inLate Medieval Italy (Ithaca,NY,1993).For England one cannot

exaggerate the importance ofEamon Duffy’s study ofreligious practice in thisperiod, The Stripping of the

Altars: Traditional ReligioninEngland,1400–1580 (NewHaven and London, 1992),which has made necessary areappraisal of long-heldviews. Also, one will findstimulating ChristopherHarper-Bill, The Pre-Reformation Church inEngland, 1400–1530 (rev.edn; London, 1996). Avaluable summary is RobertN. Swanson, Religion andDevotion in Europe, c.1215–

c.1515 (Cambridge, 1995).Three specific works can beconsulted: Terence Bailey,The Processions of Sarumand the Western Church(Toronto, 1971);Miri Rubin,Corpus Christi (Cambridge,1991); and David J.F.Crouch,Piety,FraternityandPower: Religious Guilds inLate Medieval Yorkshire,1389–1547 (York, 2000).There is a Penguin Classicversion inmodernEnglishof

The Book of Margery Kemp(tr. BarryWindeatt; London,1983; with revisedbibliography, 1994). For thereligious dramas see RichardBeale and Pamela M. King,eds, York Mystery Plays: ASelection inModern Spelling(Oxford,1995)andDrKing’sThe York Cycle and theWorship of the City(Cambridge, 2006). RichardRex has provided a freshview in The Lollards (New

York,2002).For Germany, in many

ways paralleling Duffy’swork, is the important bookby R.W. Scribner: PopularCulture and PopularMovements in Germany(London,1987).

EPILOGUE1492:theanatomyofa

year

WhentheMiddleAgesendisjust as vexing a question aswhentheybegin,andwhenabook on the church in the

Middle Ages should end isequally vexing. Argumentscan be made to continue thestory to the time of theFifthLateran Council (1512–17)anditsinadequateresponsetoissues of the day. OtherargumentswouldsuggestthatErasmus and Thomas Morecomplete the medieval story.Still others would concludewithLutherandhisgestureofdefiance at the Castle atWittenberg in 1517. Such

dates can be persuasivelyargued, yet, in the finalanalysis, anydateor event isbound tobearbitrary,chosenas much for pedagogical asforotherreasons.Inanycase,historical orthodoxy rightlysees a transitional period,when the old (medieval)wasfadingand thenew (modern)was emerging.By the endofthe fifteenth century thetransition was well underway.

Theyear1492istakenhere–otheryearscouldhavebeenused – as a convenient placeto conclude this account ofthe medieval church. This isnottosuggestthattheMiddleAges ended in 1492 or thatthe church lost its medievalcharacter in that year. Suchwould constitute historicalheresy. The choice of thatyear affords us theopportunity to consider someevents that occurred in 1492

and how they reflect thingspast and portend things tocome.On2January1492,aftera

sporadiccampaignlastingtenyears, King Ferdinand andQueen Isabella received thesurrender of theMuslim cityof Granada. They led 1,000horsemen and 5,000 footsoldiers to the Alhambra,wherethebannersofthekingand queen, each bearing thecross, were hoisted from the

tower.The solemnentry intothe city took place four dayslater, on the day of theEpiphany (Feast of theKings).Althoughthetermsofthe capitulation allowedMuslims to continue thepractice of their religion, thereconquest was complete,Islam was no longer apresence in western Europe,and there was widespreadrejoicing. Henry VII ordereda thanksgiving service at St

Paul’s Cathedral in London.TheUniversityofParissentamessageofpraise,fulsomeintheLatinrhetoricofthetime.And the pope was soon todeclare Ferdinand andIsabella the ‘CatholicMonarchs’. The victory atGranada ushered in or, atleast, buttressed a sense oftriumphalism,longassociatedwithSpanishCatholicism.Three months later (31

March 1492) the triumphant

monarchs ordered theexpulsion of all Jews fromtheir kingdoms. The decree,issuedatGranada,gaveJewswho did not convert toCatholicism three months toleave, taking with themneither gold, silver, horsesnor arms. Many converted,including the chief rabbi;others left in a new exodus,their numbers impossible toknowbutnodoubtinthetensofthousands.Thesincerityof

these conversions wouldincur the suspicion of theinquisition inSpain for sometime to come. The Jews hadbeen expelled before fromother places, for examplefrom Gascony in 1289 andfrom England in 1290, andsoon (1497) from Portugaland, in recent times, fromotherplaces,incircumstancesofutterbarbarity.At Florence, during the

night of 5 April 1492, the

great cupola of the duomowas struck by lightning.Lorenzode’Medici,ashe laymortally ill, took it as anomenthathewouldsoondie.Three days later he sent forthe Dominican preacherSavonarola, who gaveLorenzo his blessing; then IlMagnifico died. WithLorenzo’s restraining handgone, Savonarola’s fieryrhetoric seemed to know nobounds. While delivering a

sermonlaterinthesameyear,heclaimedthathesawahandholding a flaming sword, onwhich appeared the words,‘Terrible and swift upon theearth is the sword of theLord.’ And he claimed tohearavoice,whichsaid,‘Thetime is at hand when I shallunsheathe my sword.’ Fromthen his preaching, withincreasing fervour,denounced the vices of thechurch, the corruption of

societyandthepreoccupationwith luxuries. His was tobecomethedominantvoiceinFlorenceforsixyearsandhethe city’s de facto ruler,providing an austerity toEurope’smostluxuriouscity.Oncarnivalday1497hewasto encourage Florentines tofeed the bonfire in a mainsquare with their vanities,such as obscene books andpictures, playing-cards, dice,gaming pieces, cosmetics,

perfumes, mirrors, dolls, etc.Whether any valuable booksor pictures were devoured inthe rogo della vanità(‘bonfireofthevanities’),weshall never know, but thespectacleclearlyshowsacityhighonenthusiasm,almosttothe point of uncontrolledhysteria. The religiousfervour ended, with noobvious lasting effects. It isreminiscentoftheexcessesofthe flagellants in the darkest

days of the Black Death asthey entered a communityandby chanting, incense andpreachingheatedthereligiousemotionstoafeverpitch.TheSalem witch-trials of 1692may have fed from a similarsource. And some may seeparallels betweenSavonarola’s Florence andCalvin’sGeneva.Meanwhile,atRomeon11

August1492anewpopewaselected, for many the most

infamous in papal history.TheSpaniardRodrigoBorgiatook thenameAlexanderVI.It was an election arrived atby blatant bribery andextravagant promises. As acardinal, Borgia had siredmany children by severalmistresses, and, as pope, hecontinued to indulge hissexual appetites.Throughhisruthless son Cesare and hisdaughter Lucretia he wouldpursue political ambitions in

Italy, even to the extent oftrying to appropriate thepapal states for the Borgiafamily. Two of Lucretia’smarriages he annulled, and athird husband Cesaremurderously dispatched. Atone point, when AlexanderVI was absent from Rome(1501), he remarkably leftLucretiainchargeoftheHolySee.Itmaynothavebeentheworstoftimesforthepapacy,but it surelymusthavecome

close. An institution with itsshareofsaints,italsohashadits share of men who wereapparently wholly secular.The papacy would recoverfromtheexcessesofthepopeelected in 1492, but thespiritual mission of thepapacy continued to be indangerofbeingcompromisedbecause of the pope being asecular ruler, until thePiedmontesearmysettled theissue in 1870, just two

monthsafterPiusIXdeclaredpapalinfallibility.There entered Granada

with Ferdinand and Isabellaon 2 January 1492 a 40 yearoldGenoesesailor.Laterthatyear, on 12 November, thatsailor,ChristopherColumbus,landed in the Indies andimmediately fell to thegroundonhisknees,thankingGodfor reaching land,whichhecalledSanSalvador(HolySaviour). His men were

carrying the banners of theking and queen, on each ofwhich was the Christiancross.Columbuswroteofthepeoplehefoundthere:

To win their friendship, since Iknewtheycouldbeconvertedtoourholyfaithbyloveratherthanby force, I distributed amongthem red caps and glass beads,which they hung around theirnecks, andmany other things ofsimilar value, which pleasedthemmuch…Inoticedthattheycan repeat what is said to themquitequickly. Ibelieve that they

wouldeasilybecomeChristians.

And, so, a tectonic shift inworld history and, perforce,inthehistoryoftheChristianchurchbeganonthatbeachinthe Caribbean islands. Tensand tensofmillionsofwhiteEuropeans and countlessnumbers of black Africanswould come to theAmericasin the greatest migration inhuman history. In severalsenses,itwasanewworld.

LISTOFPOPES,500–

1500

A pope by definition isbishopofRome.The date ofthe beginning of hispontificate is the date on

which he became bishop ofRome. If the electee wasalready a bishop, he becamebishop of Rome (and, thus,pope) at the time that heaccepted election and not atthe time of his subsequentcoronation.If theelecteewasnot a bishop, he becamebishop of Rome (and, thus,pope) at the time of hisconsecration as bishop. It isthis date that is preferredhere. The pontificate ended

with the death or,occasionally, with theresignationofthepope.By convention some

claimants are called anti-popes, where their claimshave not been generallyrecognizedbyhistorians.Yettherewillalwaysberoomfordoubt. These anti-popes arelistedinitalics.

Symmachus,498–514Lawrence,498–99;501–06

Hormisdas,514–23JohnI,523–26FelixIV(sometimesIII),526–30

Dioscorus,530BonifaceII,530–32JohnII,533–35AgapitusI,535–36Silverius,536–37Vigilius,537–55PelagiusI,556–61JohnIII,561–74BenedictI,575–79PelagiusII,579–90GregoryI,590–604Sabinian,604–6BonifaceIII,607BonifaceIV,608–15Deusdedit(also,AdeodatusI),615–18BonifaceV,619–25

HonoriusI,625–38Severinus,640JohnIV,640–42TheodoreI,642–49MartinI,649–54EugeniusI,654–57Vitalian,657–72AdeodatusII,672–76Donus,676–78Agatho,678–81LeoII,682–83BenedictII,684–85JohnV,685–86Conon,686–87

Theodore,687Paschal,687

SergiusI,687–701JohnVI,701–5JohnVII,705–7

Sisinnius,708Constantine,708–15GregoryII,715–31GregoryIII,731–41Zacharias,741–52StephenII(sometimesIII),752–57PaulI,757–67

Constantine,767–68Philip,768

StephenIII(sometimesIV),768–72HadrianI,772–95LeoIII,795–816StephenIV(sometimesV),816–17PaschalI,817–24EugeniusII,824–27Valentine,827GregoryIV,828–44

John,844SergiusII,844–47

LeoIV,847–55BenedictIII,855–58

Anastasius,855NicholasI,858–67HadrianII,867–72JohnVIII,872–82MarinusI,882–84HadrianIII,884–85StephenV(sometimesVI),855–91Formosus,891–96BonifaceVI,896StephenVI(sometimesVII),896–97Romanus,897TheodoreII,897JohnIX,898–900BenedictIV,900–903LeoV,903

Christopher,903–04SergiusIII,904–11

AnastasiusIII,911–13Lando,913–14JohnX,914–28LeoVI,928StephenVII(sometimesVIII),928–31JohnXI,931–35LeoVII,936–39StephenVIII(sometimesIX),939–42MarinusII,942–46AgapitusII,946–55JohnXII,955–64LeoVIII,963–65BenedictV,964JohnXIII,965–72BenedictVI,973–74BenedictVII,974–83JohnXIV,983–84

BonifaceVII,974,984–85JohnXV,985–96

GregoryV,996–99JohnXVI,997–98

SylvesterII,999–1003JohnXVII,1003JohnXVIII,1003–9SergiusIV,1009–12BenedictVIII,1012–24

GregoryVI,1012JohnXIX,1024–32BenedictIX,1032–44;1045,?1047–48

SylvesterIII,1045GregoryVI,1045–46ClementII,1046–47DamasusII,1048LeoIX,1049–54VictorII,1055–57StephenIX(sometimesX),1057–58

BenedictX,1058–59NicholasII,1058–61

AlexanderII,1061–73HonoriusII,1061–64

GregoryVII,1073–85ClementIII,1080,1084–1100

VictorIII,1087UrbanII,1088–99PaschalII,1099–1118

Theodoric,1100–01Albert,1102SylvesterIV,1105–11

GelasiusII,1118–19GregoryVIII,1118–21

CalixtusII,1119–24HonoriusII,1124–30

CelestineII,1124InnocentII,1130–43

AnacletusII,1130–38VictorIV,1138

CelestineII,1143–44

LuciusII,1144–45EugeniusIII,1145–53AnastasiusIV,1153–54HadrianIV,1154–59AlexanderIII,1159–81

VictorIV,1159–64PaschalIII,1164–68CalixtusIII,1168–78InnocentIII,1179–80

LuciusIII,1181–85UrbanIII,1185–87GregoryVIII,1187ClementIII,1187–91CelestineIII,1191–98InnocentIII,1198–1216HonoriusIII,1216–27GregoryIX,1227–41CelestineIV,1241InnocentIV,1243–54

AlexanderIV,1254–61UrbanIV,1261–64ClementIV,1265–68GregoryX,1272–76InnocentV,1276HadrianV,1276(neverconsecrated)JohnXXI,1276–77NicholasIII,1277–80MartinIV,1281–85HonoriusIV,1285–87NicholasIV,1288–92CelestineV,1294BonifaceVIII,1295–1303BenedictXI,1303–4ClementV,1305–14JohnXXII,1316–34

NicholasV,1328–30BenedictXII,1335–42ClementVI,1342–52

InnocentVI,1352–62UrbanV,1362–70GregoryXI,1371–78Rome Avignon Pisa

UrbanVI(1378–89)

ClementVII(1378–94)

BonifaceIX(1389–1404)

BenedictXIII(1394–1423)

InnocentVII(1404–06)

AlexanderV(1409–10)

GregoryXII(1406–15)

JohnXXIII(1410–15)

MartinV,1417–31ClementVIII,1423–29

EugeniusIV,1431–47FelixV,1439–49

NicholasV,1447–55CalixtusIII,1455–58

PiusII,1458–64PaulII,1464–71SixtusIV,1471–84InnocentVIII,1484–92AlexanderVI,1492–1503

INDEX

Abelard, Peter 142–51; abbot of StGildas 148; autobiography of142–43; and Bernard of Clairvaux148–49;atcouncilsheldatSoissons147 andSens 149–50; education of143–44; family background of 143;and Heloise (affair with 145–46;correspondence with 142–43, 148;marriageto146);atLaon145;monkof St Denis 146–47; physical

mutilation of 146; and problem ofuniversals 144; and Roscelin, thelogician 143–46; and scholarlyworks (Theologia 147; Sic et non147)

Abrissel,Robertof133AdamofBremen82Adam,canonofStVictor’s147Admonitiogeneralis71–72Agiltrude, regent of Duchy of Spoleto

91–92Agiluf,Lombardking34Aidan,St25,53–54,58Ailred,abbotofRievaulx130al-Andalus43,248–52AlbericofRheims145,147AlbertusMagnus206,273Albi190–91,194–96Albigensians, crusade against 193–96;

seealsoCatharsAlbornoz,Gil,cardinal284AlcuinofYork26,55.58,74–77Aldhelm56,59AlexanderII,pope104–5,113,250Alexander III, pope 125–26, 154,

156–58,197AlexanderV,pope298–99AlexanderVI,pope80,328AlexanderofHales204,273AlexiusI,Easternemperor113,116AlexiusIII,Easternemperor177–78AlexiusIV,Easternco-emperor178AlexiusV,Easternemperor178Alfonso Henriques, king of Portugal

251Alfonso VI, king of Leon-Castile

250–51AlfonsoVII,kingofCastile252

AlfonsoX,kingofCastile247,252Alfred,kingofWessex18,48,78,84Almohads251,255Almoravids251–52Ambrose,St11AmiensCathedral220,230,235AnacletusII,anti-pope124Anagni: disputed papal election at

(1378)289;attackonBonifaceVIIIat245–46

Angers: bishopric 20; University of215,219,296

Anglo-Saxons:conversionof48–59(inthe south of England 48–52; in thenorth52–55);invasionofBritainby49; transmission of learning to55–59

Anne of Bohemia, queen of England304

AnselmofLaon145AnselmofLucca103Anselm, St, archbishop of Canterbury

107Ansgar,andconversionoftheDanes81Antioch:countyof117;patriarchateof

9, 31, 88; siege of city of, bycrusaders116

Aquinas,Thomas1,138, 206, 219–20,273

Aragon 104, 181, 194, 238, 249–50,253–55

architecture, ecclesiastical 220–36;basilican form of 221–22; Gothic227–34; Romanesque 222–27; ofSantaSophia32–34

Arianism10;conversionofGermans,to17–18

Aristotle: place of, in university

curriculum217;worksof123ArnoldofBrescia125Arnulf,kingofEastFranks91–92Asturias43,249Ataulf,Ostrogothicking17Augustine, St, of Canterbury: mission

of, to England 49–52; andinstructionsfromGregory theGreat51; and relations with the nativeBritishchurch51–52

Augustine,St,ofHippo11,18,269;seealsoRuleofStAugustine

Augustinian canons 80, 127–28, 135,152,265,282

Auscultafili244AustinFriars208,265Avemarisstella137–38Avignon:papalresidenceat277–86;as

BabylonianCaptivity277,279,286;

and Black Death 257–68; andFrench influence 296; papal palaceat283

Baldwin(ofBouillon),countofEdessa116

BaldwinofFlanders176,180Bandinelli, Rolando 125; see also

AlexanderIII,popeBarbasto,slaughterat250Barcelona202,249–50,255Basel 265, 292; University of 217;

Councilof310–15Beaufort,Henry, bishop ofWinchester

306BeauvaisCathedral230,235Becket, St Thomas 151–62; and

Archbishop Theobald 152–53, 157;

charges against, at Northampton155–56; and Constitutions ofClarendon 154; early years of 152;education of 152; as chancellor152–53;inexile156–58;andHenryII 152–62; and his murder inCanterburyCathedral159–62;nameof 151; and return to England158–59; and subsequentcanonizationandcult162

Bede, Venerable: and Anglo-Saxonconversion49–51; andDryhthelm’svision 270; and Isidore of Seville21; and school at Canterbury 56;scholarshipof57–58;and‘Synod’ofWhitby54–55

Beguines199BenedictIX,pope,277BenedictXII,pope278,282–83,286

Benedict XIII, anti-pope 296–98,301–2,305–7

BenedictBiscop56–58BenedictofAniane73Benedict of Nursa, St 19; Rule of 19,

26,73,99,127,131Benedictines19,78,127–28,282Benevento,duchyof34,46,68,108Berbers30,42,248–51BernardofClairvaux,St:asabbot128;

and Cathars 191; and conflict withCluny 131; cures bewitched man136; and devotion of the Virgin137–38; and Hildegard of Bingen163,165;supportsPopeInnocent II124; opposition of, to Abelard148–51;andTemplars119

Bernard of Sediros, archbishop ofToledo252

Bertha,queenofKent49Besançon,dietat125Béziers: bishop of 193;Cathedral 194;

churchofMagdaleneat194Bible:placeof,inuniversitycurriculum

219; translation of, into Gothic 17,intoLatin(Vulgate)11

Birinus,missionarytoWessex52BlackDeath257–68;andAvignon261,

265, 284; in Austria 259; cause of259–60; death toll from 264; inEngland 261, 263; and flagellants266–67;inFrance261; inGermany261;inIreland263;inItaly260–61;and Jews 265–66; and nature ofdisease 259–60; origins of 258–59;and persection of Jews 265–66;recurrences of 263; in Scandinavia263

Bobbio25–26,34Boccaccio260Boethius18Bogomils190Bohemia 116, 198; Cistercians in 128;

conversionof90;friarsin203,206;andHussites304–5

Bohemond (of Taranto), prince ofAntioch114

Bohun, Jocelin de, bishop of Salisbury157

Bologna: and Black Death 261;proposed removal of papacy fromAvignon to 283; University of211–13 (Carmelites at 207;Dominicans at 206; and Easternlanguages 242; European centre oflegalstudies212;originsof211–13;andRomanlawtexts211;statutesof

212–13)Bonaventure,Franciscan204,239,273BonifaceIX,pope95–96BonifaceofMonferrat177–78,180Boniface VIII 240–46; and canon law

241; attacked at Anagni 246;election of 240; and Jubilee Year(1300) 241–42; and Philip the Fair242–46

Boniface, St, missionary to theGermans62–63

booksofhours324Borgia, Rodrigo 328; see also

AlexanderVIBoris,kingoftheBulgars89–90BourgesCathedral235Bouvines,battleof174Britain: abandonment of, byRome17;

Christianityin,duringRomantimes

11, 49; at time of the Augustinemission49,51–52

Brogne, abbey, and monastic reform100

Bruges122,199,202,258Brussels:BrethrenoftheCommonLife

at318;famineat258Bulgaria89–90,175,190BurchardofWorms103Burgos: Cathedral 236; Franciscans at

202Byzantium: mission of the deacon

Gregory (the Great) to 46–47; andits virtual abandonment ofmuch ofItaly 47; see also Constantine,Justinian

CaesariusofArles20

caesaro-papism30Caffa,Crimea259Cahors196,202CalixtusII,pope107CalixtusIII,pope316Cambridge: Templars’ church at 119;

University of (Carmelites at 207;Franciscans at 203; origins of 216;Peterhousein220)

canons: regular (see AugustinianCanons; Premonstratensians;Victorines);secular74

Canossa,GregoryVIIandHenryIVat106

Canterbury: archbishops of 56, 107,186–87, 265, 324; churches at(Cathedral159–61, 175, 230–33; StMartin 49–50); Franciscans at 202;and mission of Augustine 49–52;

and transmissionof learning55–56;seealsoBecket

CantigásdeSantaMaria252capitularies 71; Admonitio generalis

71–72;MonasticCapitulary73Carcassonne191,194cardinals: and papal elections 104,

287–91;originofCarmelites206–7Carthusians131–32Cassiodorus18–19Castile238,247,249–55,292,296Catalonia249–50,252,263Cathars190–96;andtheirbeliefsystem

192; crusade against 193–95; andtheir ethic 192; in Languedoc190–96; inquisitionagainst195–96;in Italy 191; membership structureof 191–92; origins of 190; and

purgatory268cathedrals,architectureof220–36CatherineofSiena,St285CelestineV,pope240,245,278celibacy,clerical102–3Ceolfrid,abbot57–59Cesarini,cardinal310Chalcedon,Councilof(451)10,30ChansondeRoland67,123chantries,English274Charlemagne: at Aix-la-Chappelle 55,

58, 62, 69–75; and coronation asemperor 69–70; and forcedconversionoftheSaxons74–75;andintroduction of theRomanRite 74;and Lombards 69; and personalreligious practices 71; and popes69–70

Charles Martel, mayor of the palace:

defeatsMuslimarmynearTours43;andPopeGregoryIII67–68

CharlesofAnjou,kingofSicily239–40Charles the Bald, king of the West

Franksandemperor87,233CharlesV,kingofFrance291–92CharlesVI,kingofFrance295CharlesVII,kingofFrance314Chartres: Cathedral 138–39, 233–35;

Franciscansat202Chaucer18,138,263–64Chrodegang,bishopofMetz74Cistercians: and conflictwithCluniacs

128–31;foundingof128;growthof128–30; lay brother component of130; and nuns 132–33; and seizureofland130;inSpain252

Cîteaux, abbey of 128, 131, 134, 156,193

Clairvaux128;seealsoBernardofClare,St201Clarendon,Constitutionsof154–57Claudius,emperor5ClementV,pope242,268,277–81,286Clement VI, pope 278, 283–84, 286;

andBlackDeath265;andflagellants267;andindulgences275

ClementVII,anti-pope289–92,296Clericislaicos243Clermont,Councilof(1095)112Clonmacnois,monastery23–24,77Clonmelsh,monastery59–60,62Clovis,Frankishking17;conversionof

20Cluny: abbey and monastic family of

99–101,106,124,127,150–51;andconflict with Cistercians 130–31;monastic church of 223; and

pilgrimages to Holy Land 112; inSpain252;seealsoHugh,abbotof;PetertheVenerable

CodexAmiatinus57Coimbra 250, 252, 265; Franciscans at

202;Univesrsityof255Colman, bishop of Lindisfarne 54–55,

58Cologne: Beguines at 199; and Black

Death261,265–66;Brethren of theCommon Life at 318; Cathars at190–91; Cathedral 165, 235;Dominicans at 206; Franciscans at202;Universityof217

Columba,St24–25,53–54Columbanus,St:andLombards34;his

travels, foundations and monasticrule25–26

Common Life: Brethren of 317–18;

Sistersof317CompactaofPrague311Compostela5,249;Cathedral277,236;

Franciscansat200,202conciliarism303,307,309–12confraternities: in England 274; in

France274;inItaly320consolamentum191–92,195–96Constance, Council of (1414–18)

299–307Constantine, emperor, conversion of

9–11Constantinople:churchofSantaSophia

32–34;Councilof (381)10,30–31;fallof,toTurks314;foundingof31;and Fourth Crusade 178–80;patriarchof(Ignatius88–89;Photius88–90);patriarchateof31

conversion:ofAnglo-Saxons48–55;of

Bohemia 90; of Bulgars 89–90; ofDanes 81; of Franks 20–21; ofGermanstoArianism17,toCatholicChristianity 20, 59–65; of Hungary113; of Iceland 79–80; of Ireland21–24;ofLombards34;ofNorway81–82; of Poland 90; of RomanEmpire 9–11; of Saxons 74–75; ofSweden 82; of Vikings 78–79; ofVisigoths21

Coptic church, reunion of, with Rome314

Corbie,monastery25Cordova:andendofcaliphate249;fall

toChristians,of251;GreatMosqueat249;seatofMuslimrule42,248

CorpusChristi,feastof322–23CorpusIurisCivilis32Cossa, Baldassare 299; see also John

XXIII,popecouncilsseeindividualcouncilsCracdeschevaliers117,119Cracow: cathedral 234; Dominicans at

206;Universityof217Cramaud,Simonde296–97criminousclerks154–55Crusaderstates117–18crusades: first 109–18; against

Albigensians 193–96; fifth 201;fourth 175–80 (capture ofConstantinople 178–80; capture ofZara 177–78); and motives ofcrusaders114–15;Peoples’114;andslaying of Jews 115–16; third 126,171–72

Cuthbert,St58,225Cyril,St,missionarytoSlavs90

d’Ailly,Pierre301–2,305Dandolo,dogeofVenice176,180Daniel,bishopofWinchester63dansemacabre267DanteAlighieri:andBonifaceVIII246;

and Jubilee (of 1300) 241; andpopes 246; and purgatory 272–73;and St Bernard’s prayer to theVirgin137

dead,prayersandMassesfor294–95Denmark: conversion of 81;

Dominicans in 206; RoskildeCathedralin227

Deventer,Holland317–18DevotioModerna317–19Dictatuspapae106DiegoofOsma193

Dionysio-Hadriana72doctrine: conflict about, regarding

divinityofChrist10,Trinity10–11,109, 144, 149–50, 313; see alsoheresy

Dominic,St193,196,204–6,252Dominicans: and inquisition 196;

foundingof204–6; andmissions totheEast242;andPopeBenedictXII282;inSpain252

DonationofConstantine68–69,73DonationofPepin68dramasseeplaysDryhthelm,visionof270–71Dublin: cathedrals at 234; ‘paper’

universityat217Dunes,abbeyof130Durand, Guillaume, bishop of Mende

186

DurhamCathedral224–25,227

early church: in apostolic age 5–6;expansion of 6–8; persecution of8–9; and theological controversies10–11

Easter, date of: as occasion of disputebetween Augustine and nativeBritish church 52, and disputebetween Irish monks and party ofWilfrid 53–54; resolved at ‘Synod’ofWhitby54–55

Eastern Church: and Photian ‘Schism’88–90; reunion with, at SecondCouncilofLyons(1274)239,andatCouncilofFlorence(1439)311–14;andschism(1054)107–9

Eccleston,Thomasof202–3

Echternach:gospelbook62;monastery62

Edessa,countyof116,172Edwin, king of Northumbria,

conversionof52Egbert,abbotofClonmelsh60Egbert,archbishopofYork58Eigenkirchen74Einhard,biographerofCharlemagne71ElCid121,251Eleanor of Aquitaine: and Fontevrault

133;andHildegardofBingen165Ely:bishopof216;Cathedral235England: and Great Schism 292, 297,

302;guildsin274;andInnocentIII175–76; popular piety in 321–23;see also Anglo-Saxons; Henry II,kingof;Vikings

ErictheRed79

Ethelbert,archbishopofYork58Ethelbert, kingofKent, his conversion

49–50Eucharist: and Eastern churches 313;

devotion to 9, 135–36; and WyclifandHus304,311

EugeniusIII,pope149,163,165EugeniusIV,pope310–11,315Eusebius,thehistorian220

famine in early fourteenth century257–58

FaroeIslands25FelixV,anti-pope312,315FerdinandI,kingofLeon-Castile250FerdinandII,kingofAragon327–28FerdinandIII,kingofCastile246Filastre,Guillaume300

filioquecontroversy108–9,312–13Fishacre,Richard,Dominican206Fitero,abbey252flagellants266–67Florence: and Black Death 260;

Cathedral235–36; confraternities in274, 320; Council of (1439–47)312–14;OspedaledegliInnocentiat320–21;andSavonarola328

Flotte,Pierre242,244Foliot, Gilbert, bishop successively of

HerefordandLondon153,156–57Fontevrault,orderofnuns133–35Formosus,bishopofPorto,pope91–93;

and conflict with house of Spoleto91;electionof,aspope91;missionof, to Bulgars 89–90; and hisposthumous trial and subsequentrehabilitation92

Fountains,abbey128,130FraAngelico315FrancisofAssisi,St199–201Franciscans 199–204; approved by

InnocentIII200–201;andeducation203–4; growth of 202–3; origins of199–201; andPoorClares 201; andpoverty203,282;inSpain252

Franks: and alliance with papacy 61,67–71; Carolingian dynasty of 67,71, 83; conversion of 19–20;migrationsof17,19

FrederickBarbarossa,emperor124–26,165: death of 126; and Hadrian IV124;andinvasionofItaly125–26

Frederick II, emperor173–75;imperialcoronation of 174; as king ofJerusalem174

FrederickofLorraine101

Frequens306–7friars 199–208; see also Austin Friars;

Carmelites; Dominicans;Franciscans

Frisians,missionsto60–62Fritigern,Visigothicleader17Fulbert, canon of Notre-Dame, Paris

145–46Fulda,monastery63,101FulkofNeuilly176

Gelnhausen,Conradof295Genoa,BlackDeathat259Genviève,St20GeraldofWales135,216Germans: and conversion to Arianism

17–18; and conversion to CatholicChristianity 59–65; migrations of

14–19; mission of Boniface to62–65

GervaseofCanterbury230–32GilbertinesseeSempringhamGodfrey, duke ofLowerLorraine 101,

114,117Gorze,abbey,andmonasticreform100Goths 14–18; see also Ostrogoths,

VisigothsGranada252,327–28Gratian,canonist211–12;Decretum of

73,212,219Greenland80–81Gregorian Reform, inappropriate name

98;seereform,eleventhcenturyGregoryI theGreat,pope:andattitude

towards classical culture 48; Italyand Rome in time of 46–47; aslegatetotheEasternemperor46–47;

and his life of St Benedict 19; andmissiontotheAnglo-Saxons48–51;physical description of 45–46; andpurgatory269;pontificateof45–48;registerof47;writtenworksby48

GregoryII,pope57,63–64GregoryIII,pope64,67–68GregoryVI,pope96,101GregoryVII,pope104–7:deathof107;

election of 105; and lay investiture105–7; name of, giveninappropriatelytoreformmovement98; relations of, with Henry IV105–7;andSpain113,250

Gregory IX, pope: and the Beguines199; and canon law 186, 219; andCathars 196; and Franciscans 200,203; and Frederick II 174; andUniversityofParis215

GregoryX,pope239GregoryXI,pope285–86GregoryXII,pope296–99,301–2,305GregoryofTours20Groote,Gerard317–18Grosseteste, Robert, bishop of Lincoln

186,199,204guildsseeconfraternitiesGuthrum,conversionof78

hadith36HadrianI,pope69HadrianIV,pope125,165HadrianV,pope239;inpurgatory273Hadrian,abbot56,58Haecsancta303,306,310–11Hamburg,famineat258Harald Bluetooth, king of the Danes,

conversionof81HaraldHardrada,kingofNorway112Hebrides,Vikingattackon77Heidelberg,Universityof217,295hejira36Heloise: and affair with Abelard

145–46; and entry into nunnery atArgenteuil 146; and marriage toAbelard 146; as prioress of theParaclete148

HenryII,emperor101HenryIII,emperor96,101–2HenryIV,emperor104–7HenryI,kingofEngland107,124Henry II, king of England: and

HildegardofBingen165;recognizesAlexander III 124–25; and ThomasBecket163–73

HenryVII,kingofEngland327

heresy189–99;Cathar190–96;Hussite304–5; Waldensian 196–98;Wycliffite304–5

Hesse,Boniface’smissionto63Hild,abbessofWhitby54Hildebrand, in papal curia 102–4; seealsoGregoryVII,pope

Hildebrandine Reform, inappropriatename 98; see reform, eleventhcentury

Hildegard of Bingen 162–70; andCathars 165–66, 190; illnesses of169–70;lettersof165;preachingof165–66; at Rupertsburg (Bingen)163–66; and her Scivias 163–70;visionsof167–69;writingsof167

Hincmar, archbishop of Rheims 73,87–88

holywar112–13,120;seealsojihad

HolyWeekrituals322HonoriusII,pope123Honorius III,pope194,198, 201, 204,

213Hostiensis,canonist298HughdePaynes118HughofStVictor132Hugh,abbotofCluny100,106Huguccio,canonist298Humbert of Moyenmoutier (of Silva

Candida)101–3,108–9Humiliati198Hungary: Cistercians in 128;

conversion of king of 113;Dominicans in 206; and FristCrusade114; Franciscans in 202–3;and Great Schism 292, 301; andPope Innocent III 175; universityestablishedatBudain217

Hus,John,andHussites304–6,311

Iceland: Irishmonks at 25, 79; Vikingsettlement of and their conversion79–80

Ignatius, patriarch of Constantinople88–90

ImitationofChrist318–20indulgences: and crusades 115, 251;

and Jubilee Year of 1300 41, 275;andpurgatory275

Inge,kingofSweden82InnocentII,pope124,151InnocentIII,pope172–87;andCathars

190–94; and England 175–76; andEuropean politics 172–75; familyand educational background of172–73; and Fourth Crusade

176–80;andFourthLateranCouncil180–87; and Franciscans 200; andFrederick II 173–75; supportsBulgariaandBosniatoannoyanceofHungary175

Innocent IV, pope: and Austin Friars208; and Carmelites 207; andFranciscans 203; deposes FrederickII 175; and Humiliati 198; andpurgatory268

InnocentVI,pope284inquisition,againstCathars195–96Iona,monastery24–25,53–54,77Ireland:andconversion21–26;and the

Franciscans 203; and learning 26;missionaries from 24–25;monasticism in 23–26; andpenitentials 24; and Great Schism292,302

Irnerius,lawteacher211–12Isabella,queenofCastile327–28IsidoreofSeville21Islam35–43;andthe jihad39; and the

Koran37–40;originsof35–36;andtheprophet36–37;spreadof40–43

Italy: political geography of 35, 124;and religious confraternities 320;stateof,attimeofGregorytheGreat46–47, at time of Avignon papacy286

IvoofChartres103

Jarrow,monastery57Jerome,St11Jerusalem: Council of (c.AD 50) 5;

captureof,byTurks113;crusaders’capture of 117; fall of, toMuslims

112; kingdom of 118; Latinpatriarchof200

Jews: and theBlackDeath 65–66; andthecrusades115–16;andtheFourthLateran Council 184–85; in theKoran 37; refusal to followMohammedatMedina36; in Spain21,327–28

Jihad39JohnVIII Paleologus,Eastern emperor

312–14John VIII, archbishop of Ravenna

87–88John XII, pope 93–95; and coronation

of Otto I as emperor 93–94;scandalousbehaviourof93

JohnXXII,pope92–95JohnXXIII,pope299–303John,kingofEngland174–75,216

JubileeYear(1300)241–42Jumièges:abbeychurchof225;Viking

attackon78Justinian,emperor29–33;andcaesaro-

papism 30; and church building32–33; and law reform 31–32; andreconquestoftheWest29–30

Kells,Bookof25,57,62Kemp,Margery322,324Kempis,Thomasà317–20KirkwallCathedral227KnightsHospitaller119KnightsTemplar119,220,280Koran 37–40: and afterlife 37;

arrangement of 38; as a code ofliving 38–39; and jihad 39; andmonotheism36–37; official version

of38;andslavery39;andstatusofwomen39

Laetenturcoeli314Lambert,dukeofSpoleto91–92Lanfranc,archbishopofCanterbury104Langenstein,Henryof294–95,297Langton, Stephen, archbishop of

Canterbury175Laon: Cathedral 220, 230, 232, 235;

schoolat123,145–47LasNavasdeTolosa,battleof252Laterancouncils:II(1139)103,124;III

(1179) 126, 181, 197; IV (1215)(attendance at 180–81; decrees of181–85; and the Jews 184–85;pastoral consequences of 186–87;Spanish bishops at 252); V (1512–

17)327Laudesi321law: canon 71–73, 103, 186, 211–12,

219, 241, 289–90; Roman 32,211–12,219

LayFolk’sCatechism324layinvestiture105–7LeMans: bishopric 20;Cathedral 233;

Franciscansat202LePuy,bishopof112,114,117Legnano,battleof126LeoIII,pope69LeoIX,pope98,101–3Leoba,abbess63Leon249Leuven: Beguines at 198–99;Brethren

of theCommonLifeat318;famineat258;Universityof217

LiberSextus241

Linari,Tuscany274Lincoln: Carmelites at 207; Cathedral

220,235Lindisfarne 53–55, 58–59; Aidan’s

monastic foundation at 25; gospelbook57;Vikingraidat77

Lisbon: Franciscans at 202;Universityof255

liturgy,formationoftheRomanRiteof74

LombardLeague126Lombards 34–35; and conversion 34;

and the Franks 67–68; invade Italy30; pose military threat at time ofGregorytheGreat46–47

Lombardy,Waldensiansin197–98London:andBlackDeath261;churches

of (St Paul’s Cathedral 152, 266,274, 327;Templars’ 119); religious

houses (Carmelite 207;Charterhouse 131; Franciscan202–3)

Lorraine, reforming movements in100–101

Lothar,kingofGermany124LotharII,kingofLotharingia86–87LotulfofLombardy145,147LouisthePious,kingoftheFranksand

emperor67,70,73LouisVII,kingofFrance126,150,156Louis IX, king of France 195, 234,

238–39,243Lucca25,235,297Lull,Ramon242Lund:Cathedral227;Domincansat206Lyons:coronationofClementVat279;

SecondCouncilof(1274)208,239,268;andWaldensians196–97

MagdeburgCathedral235MagnaCarta175–76Mainz:archbishopof,andHildegardof

Bingen 163–64, 166; Beguines at199; Boniface as archbishop of 63,65; Cathedral 235; diet at (1438)315;Franciscansat202;persecutionofJewsat,bycrusadersandatBlackDeath261,265

Malmesbury,monastery59manuals,pastoral186–87Manzikert,battleof113marriage,legalrequirementsfor184MartinV,pope307,309–10Mary,Virgin,devotionto136–39,266Matilda,countessofTuscany106Mecca35–36

Medici,Lorenzode328Melrose,abbey128;OldMelrose58Mercia,conversionof59Merovingiandynasty20,60Methodius,St,missionarytoSlavs90Michael Cerularius, patriarch of

Constantinople108–9Milan:archbishopricof105;andBlack

Death 261; and Byzantinereconquest30;Cathedral235;Edictof9;Humiliatiat198

military orders 118–19, 181, 251; seealso Knights Hospitaller; KnightsTemplar;TeutonicKnights

Minerve, capture of, in AlbigensianCrusade194

Mirk,John323–24missions:totheEast242;ofEnglishto

continent 59–65; of Irish to

continent25Mohammed35–40Moissac196monasticism: Benedictine 19, 73, 127;

Cluniac99–100,127;Irish23–26Monophysites30–31MonrealeCathedral137Montaillou196MonteCassino,monastery,19,101Montfort,Simonde176,178,194,204Montpellier,Universityof:Franciscans

at 202; governance of 213; andRomanlawtexts32

MountGracePriory,Yorkshire131MozarabsandMozarabicrite248

Nantes, bishopric 20; confraternities in274;Vikingattackon78

Naples:BlackDeathat261;andGreatSchism292,299

Narbonne194,196,243,261,265Navarre249,292Nibelungenlied123Nicaea: Council of (325) 10, 30, 54;

captureof,bycrusaders116NicholasI,pope86–91;andthedivorce

ofLothar II86–87;and theEasternChurch88–90;andhisrelationswithHincmar, archbishop ofRheims 87,and with John VIII, archbishop ofRavenna87–88

NicholasII,pope104NicholasV,pope315–16Nogaret, Guillaume de 242, 244–46,

280Noirmoutier,andtheVikings78Norbert, St, archbishop of Magdeburg

124,132Norbertinenuns132Normandy, Viking settlement in and

latersignificanceof79NormansinSicily108Northumbria,conversionof25,52–53Norway,conversionof81–82NoyonCathedral230nuns 132–35; Anglo-Saxon 54, 132;

Irish 23–24; and twelfth-centuryfoundations 142–43; see alsoCistercian nuns; Fontevrault;Norbertinenuns;Sempringham

Olaf Haraldson, St, and conversion ofNorway81–82

OlafTryggvason,kingofNorway81ordeals81,181

Orkney: cathedral at Kirkwall in 227;andVikingattack77

Orléans, duke of 296; University of215,291

Ostrogoths: in Italy 17–18; migrationsof14–17

Oswald,kingofNorthumbria25,53Oswy,kingofNorthumbria54OttoI,emperor,coronationof93–94OttoofBrunswick173,177Oxford: provincial council (1222) at

185; University of (and Carmelites207; and Dominicans 206; andEastern languages at 242; andFranciscans 202, 204; MertonCollegein220;originsof215–16)

Palencia,Universityof206,255

Pamiers,bishopof244papacy: and alliance with Franks

67–71; at Avignon 277–86; andclaim to depose secular rulers 106;conflictof,withemperors(FrederickI 124; Frederick II 173–75; HenryIV 104–7); control of, by Romanfamilies 92–96, 124, 255; anddisputed election (1378) 287–92;and election to 103, 126, 239;financesof280;listofpopeselectedto231–32;relationsof,withEasternchurch 88–91, 108–9, 312–14; seealsoindividualpopes

Paraclete,nunnery147–48,150Paris:andBlackDeath264;churchesat

(Notre-Dame Cathedral 229–30,235;StDenis20,68,74,229–31;StJulien-le-Pauvre 220; St Séverin

220;Sainte-Chapelle238);cemeteryof Père Lachaise at 150–1; schoolsat (Notre-Dame 143–46, 213; StVictor 132; St Geneviève 145);University of (and Carmelites 207;and Domincans 206; and disputedpapal election (1378) 291–92; andEastern languages 242; and GreatSchism 294–95; and Franciscans204; origins of 213–14;representatives of, at Council ofBasel310;suspensionof lecturesat214–15);Vikingsiegeof78

PaschalII,pope100,107pastoralcare:andCarolingians72;and

Fourth Lateran Council decrees181–84andtheiraffect185–87;andGregorytheGreat48

Patrick,St22–23

PaultheDeacon34Paulinus, missionary to north of

England52–53Pavia,councilat310peacemovement110PeaceofGod110Pecham, John, archbishop of

Canterbury186–87,324PedroIV,kingofAragon265penitentials24PepinII,mayorofthepalace60Pepin III, mayor of the palace, later

kingoftheFranks67peregrinatioproChristo24–25Périgeux,Franciscansat202Perpetua,St269PeterII,kingofAragon194PeterDamian101–3PeterdeLuna287,290,296,298, 302;

seealsoBenedictXIII,anti-popePeterLombard219,273PeterofCastelnau193PetertheHermit114Peter the Venerable, abbot of Cluny:

and Abelard and Heloise 151; andconflict with Cistercians 131;supportsInnocentII124

Petrarch279,284Philip IV the Fair (le bel), king of

France242–46,277,280,286Philip Augustus, king of France 174,

193–94,213PhilipofSwabia173,177–78Photius, patriarch of Constantinople

88–90Piacenza: and Black Death 260, 264;

councilat(1095)114Piccolomini, Aeneas Silvius 314–16;

seealsoPiusII,popePicts,conversionof25Pierleonifamily124piety, popular 135–39, 317–25; and

confession 183; and Eucharist135–36;andpurgatory268–75; andVirginMary136–39

pilgrims: to Holy Land 112–13; toRomeforHolyYear241–42

Pisa: Cathedral 227, 237; Council of(1409)297–98

Pistoia, Black Death at 261;confraternitiesat320

PiusII,pope316plagueseeBlackDeathplays:mystery323;Quemquaeritis136Poland: Cistercians in 128; conversion

of king of 90; Dominicans in 206;Franciscans in 203; and Great

Schism 292, 297; universityestablishedatCracowin217

PontL’Evêque,Rogerof,archbishopofYork157

Pontigny,abbey156,175PoorClares201Portugal: Cistercians in 128, 252; and

Reconquista 249–50; and schism266

PragmaticSanction(1438)314Prague: Dominicans at 206; and

Hussites 314–15, 311; massacre ofJews at, by crusaders 116;Universityof217

Premonstratensians132,181,252Prignano,Bartolomeo287–88;see also

UrbanVI,popeprimers324Procopius30,32–33

Pseudo-IsidorianDecretals73purgatory 267–75; Dante’s description

of 272–73; and Dryhthelm’s vision269–71; early teaching about 269;and Eastern churches 313; locationof 271–72; papal statements about268; and St Patrick’s Purgatory271–72

Purification,feastof321–22

quadrivium217Quemquaeritis136

Raedwald,kingofEastAngles51Ratisbon, massacre of Jews at, by

crusaders116Ravenna: churches at (Sant’Apollinare

inClasse33;Sant’Apollinarenuova

18, 33, 222; San Vitale 33);exarchateof46–47

Raymond IV, count of Toulouse 114,116

Raymond VI, count of Toulouse193–95

RecaredI,Visigothicking21Reconquista247–55reform: eleventh-century (so-called

Gregorian) 98–107; monastic99–101

Regensburg25,64,123;Franciscansat202

religiousorders:banofneworders184;new orders in twelfth century126–35; see also Augustiniancanons; Austin friars; Benedictines;Carmelites; Carthusians;Cistercians; Cluny; Dominicans;

Fontevrault;Franciscans;Norbertinenuns; Premonstratensians;Sempringham

Rheims:Cathedral 230, 235; Hincmar,archbishopof73,87–88

Rievaulx,abbey128,130RobertofClari177RobertofGeneva287–89,294;seealso

ClementVII,anti-popeRobertthePious,kingofFrance101Robert,dukeofNormandy114Roderick,VisigothickingofSpain42RogationDays323Rollo,VikingleaderinNormandy79Rome: besieged by Byzantine armies

30, 46; churches (San Clemente 8,222;StPaul’s-Without-the-Walls6,11, 222; St Peter’s Basilica 47, 69,87, 91, 94–95, 275, 283–84, 316);

early Christian community at 5–6;patriarchate of 31; andRenaissancepopes 315–16; sack of (410) 16;state of, in time of Gregory theGreat46–47

RoskildeCathedral227RudolphIV,dukeofAustria217RudolphofSwabia106–7Rule of St Augustine 127, 132, 204,

206,208RuleofStBenedictseeBenedict,StRuleoftheMaster19Rupertsberg (Bingen), nunnery at

163–67

Sacramentaries74StDisibod,monastery163StGaul,monastery26

StPatrick’sPurgatory271–72Salamanca: inMuslim hands 250; and

reform252;Universityof242,255Salisbury: Cathedral 138; Franciscans

at 203; John of 152; local synod at186

Salzburg25–26;Franciscansat202Saragossa: fall of, to Muslims 42;

Franciscansat202;inMuslimhands(c.1040) and retaken by Aragonese250–51

Saxons,conversionof,byCharlemagne74–75

schisms:Eastern107–9,311–14;Great294–307(andCouncilofConstance(1414–18) 301–7; and Council ofPisa (1409) 297–99; and disputedelection (1378) 287–92; anduniversities294–95)

schools, twelfth century, atNorthampton, Laon, Paris,Regensburg,Rheims,Tours123

Scotland: and Fourth Lateran Council185; and Great Schism 292, 302;PaisleyAbbeyin309

Sempringham,orderofnuns133–35SenlisCathedral138,230Sens: abbey of St Columba at 156;

councilat(1141)149–50Seville, capture of, by Muslims 42;

Cathedral 236; recapture of, byChristians247,251

ShetlandIslands,Vikingattackon25SienaCathedral236Sigismund,emperor300–302,305,314Sigtuna,Sweden,dioceseof82simony102Sisebut,Visigothicking21

SixtusIV,pope,andindulgences225SkelligMichael24,77Skye,Vikingattackon77Soissons,councilat(1121)147Spain: Cluniacs in 99; Dominicans in

206; Franciscans in 200, 202; andthe Reconquista 247–55; fall ofVisigothic rule in, to Muslims42–43;Visigothic21;seealsoJews

Speyer:andBlackDeath265;Caesarof202; Cathedral 224, 235;Franciscansat202

Spoleto: duchy of 34–35, 46, 68, 108;dukesof47,91

StabatMater266StephenII,pope68StephenIV,pope71Strasbourg,Franciscansat202Suger,abbotofStDenis124,229–30

Sutri,Synodof96,101SuttonHooburialsite51Sweden:conversionof82;cathedralat

Lundin227SylvesterIII,anti-pope95–96

taifas250–51Tauberbischofsheim,nunnery63TeutonicKnights119Theobald, archbishop of Canterbury

152–53,157Theodolinda,Lombardqueen34Theodora,empress30,33Theodore of Tarsus, archbishop of

Canterbury56–58Theodoric,Ostrogothicking17–18theology, university teaching of

217–19;seealsodoctrine

Theutberga,wifeofLotharII86–87Thuringia,Boniface’smissionto63–64Toledo: capture of, by Muslims 42;

Cathedral 236; as centre fortranslations of Arabic works 255;councils of (third and fourth 21,185); Franciscans at 202; recaptureof,byChristians250

Toulouse: bishop of 204; and Cathars191;churchofStSerninat223,226;count of 114, 116, 193–95;Dominicans at 196; University of215,296

Tournai20,258,261Tournaments126Tours:defeatofMuslimarmynear43;

RomanesquechurchofStMartinat223

translations of Arabic and Greek texts

123,217,255,316Trier,Councilof(1147–48)163Trinity, doctrine of 10–11, 109, 144,

150,313trivium217TruceofGod110Turks,Seljuk113,116Tusculum,familyof95–96

Unamsanctam245universals,problemof144universities 211–20: curriculum of

217–19; and Great Schism 295;origins of, at Bologna 211–13, atParis213–14;pedagogyat219–20

Uppsala:pagantempleat82;templeat,replaced by Christian church 82;Universityof217

UrbanII,pope,73,100,107; andFirstCrusade109,112–14;reformer81

UrbanV,pope284,286Urban VI, pope: disputed election of

286–91; political support for 292;subsequent behaviour of 289–90;deathof295

Utrecht60–62,317–18

Valencia251–52Valla,Lorenzo69,317Valladolid,Universityof255Vandals16,18,30Venice: and Fourth Crusade 176–80;

Treatyof(1201)176Verona: council at (1184) 197;

Humiliatiat198Vézelay: church of the Madeleine at

224;Franciscansat202via cessionis; via compromissi; viaconciliigeneralis295

VictorIV,anti-pope125Victorines132Vienna: Irish monks at 25; University

of217,227,295Vienne, Council of (1312): and

Beguines199;andTemplars280Vikings75–82:attacksonNorthumbria

77,Orkney77,Shetland Islands77,Ireland 77–79, Low Countries77–78,Francia78;conversionof(inEngland 78; in Francia 79; inGreenland 80; in Iceland 79–80; inIreland78–79);mapoftravelsof76;reasons for expansion of 75–76;settlement of Greenland 80–81, ofIceland79,ofNormandy79

Villehardouin179VincentofBeauvais207Visigoths: conversion of, to Arian

Christianity 17–18; migrations of14–16;inSpain21,42–43

Waldensians196–98;andAlexanderIIIandInnocentIII197; condemnationof,atCouncilofVerona(1184)197;as different from Cathars 197; inItaly197–98;inFrance197–98;andpossible penetration into centralEurope198;andpreaching197;andpurgatory268

Waldès196–98,200Waldrada,loverofLotharII86–87Wearmouth,monastery49,57–59Wenceslaus IV, king of Bohemia,

emperor292,296,304–5Wenceslaus,St90Wessex,conversionof52Whitby:abbeyat48;‘Synod’of54–55Wido,dukeofSpoleto91Wilfrid,St54–55,60William (the Conqueror), duke of

Normandy, king of England 104,110

WilliamI,kingofSicily125WilliamII,kingofSicily137WilliamofAuvergne273WilliamofChampeaux132,143–44WilliamofSens230William,dukeofAquitaine99Willibald,biographerofBoniface64Willibrord59–62Windesheim318Worms: Cathedral 235; Concordat of

99, 107, 123; Franciscans at 202;slaying of Jews at, by crusaders115–16,atBlackDeath265

Würzburg25,64,202Wyclif,John268,304–5

yersiniapestis259York: archbishops of 58, 156, 159;

Carmelites at 207; Franciscans at203; school at 58; andViking king78;Yorkcycleat323

Zabarella,cardinal300,303Zachary,pope68Zara,captureof,bycrusaders177–78

TableofContents

CoverTitleCopyrightDedicationCONTENTSListofplatesListofmapsListoffiguresPreface

PrefacetothesecondeditionIntroduction1ThePre-MedievalChurch

The apostolicchurchThe spread ofChristianityThe persecutions: ahistoricalproblemConstantine,controversy andconversionFurtherreading

2 The beginning of the

MiddleAgesTheGermansConversion of theFranksCatholicSpainConversion of theIrishFurtherreading

3JustinianandMohammedJustinian’sachievementJustinian and thelawJustinian and

churchbuildingsTheLombardsIslamThe land ofMohammedTheProphetTheKoranConquestsFurtherreading

4Thesceneisset:StGregorytheGreattoStBoniface

GregorytheGreatConversion of theAnglo-Saxons

ThetransmissionoflearningEnglish mission totheContinentFurtherreading

5 Church, Carolingians andVikings

Franco-papalallianceThe CarolingiansandchurchpracticeTheVikingsFurtherreading

6 The church in disarray,

c.850–c.1050Pope Nicholas I(858–67)Formosus(891–96)Pope John XII(955–64)Pope Benedict IX(1032–45; ?1047–48)Furtherreading

7Reform,theEast,crusadeEleventh-centuryreformTheEasternChurch

TheFirstCrusadeFurtherreading

8ThetwelfthcenturyPopes and anti-popesandemperorsNew religiousordersPopular devotionandpracticalpietyFurtherreading

9 Three twelfth-centuryprofiles

Peter Abelard(c.1079–1142)

Thomas Becket(c.1120–70)Hildegard ofBingen (1098–1179)Furtherreading

10TheageofInnocentIIIThe politicalInnocentTheFourthCrusade(1202–4)The Fourth LateranCouncil(1215)Furtherreading

11 The emergence of dissentandtheriseofthefriars

DissentThefriarsFurtherreading

12Two legacies: universitiesandcathedrals

UniversitiesCathedralsAppendix:medievalcathedrals: a selectlistFurtherreading

13 Developments andfulfilments: the laterthirteenthcentury

PopesandkingsReconquistaFurtherreading

14DeathandpurgatoryTheBlackDeathThe emergence ofpurgatoryFurtherreading

15 Exile in Avignon andaftermath

The Popes and

AvignonTwo elections andthe coming ofschismFurtherreading

16TheGreatSchismTheroadtoPisaThe road toConstanceWyclifandHusBacktoConstanceFurtherreading

17ThefifteenthcenturyPopesandcouncils

ChristianpietyFurtherreading

Epilogue: 1492: the anatomyofayear

Listofpopes,500–1500Index