Liudprand of Cremona

We are grateful that some people in the past chose to record what they saw and heard, or were told by others. Surviving histories help to build a picture of what life was like. Unfortunately, many wrote with an agenda. Liudprand of Cremona certainly had opinions he wanted to get across with his writings, along with his histories.

He was born c.920 in Pavia, in northern Italy, and was a page to Hugh of Arles who was styled King of (northern) Italy and married Marozia of Rome. Hugh died in 947, after which Liudprand became confidential secretary and then chancellor to Berengar II, King of Italy from 950 - 961.

Liudprand, by then a deacon, was sent by Berengar to the court of Byzantine Emperor Constantine VII Porphyrogenitus where he learned Greek and became one of the first Western writers to use the font called Greek minuscule. Liudprand's father and stepfather had both visited Constantinople as ambassadors, and Liudprand praised Byzantine hospitality.

Liudprand also brought gifts to the emperor. In his account of Constantinople in his work Antapodosis ("retribution"), he says:

I offered, therefore, nine excellent breastplates, seven excellent shields with gilt bosses, two gilt silver cups, swords, spears, skewers, and four carzimasia slaves, to this emperor the most precious of all these things. For the Greeks call a child-eunuch, with testicles and penis cut off, a carzimasium. The merchants of Verdun do this on account of the immense profit they can make, and they are accustomed to bring them to Spain.

Back in Italy, Liudprand and Berengar had a falling out, so Liudprand joined Holy Roman Emperor Otto I, who became king of Italy after the death of Berengar's son Lothair. In 961 Liudprand went to Italy with Otto. A year later he became Bishop of Cremona.

While with Otto he met Recemund, a Mozarabic Bishop of Elvira and ambassador for Abd al-Rahman III. Recemund persuaded Liudprand that he should write a history of his times. The result was the Antapodosis.

In 963, Liudprand attended the Synod of Rome that deposed Pope John XII. His account of the events around that Synod is the only source we have.

In 968 he went to Constantinople again, this time to arrange a marriage between Otto I's son, Otto, and Anna Porphyrogeneta, daughter of (former) emperor Romanus II. This visit was not as happy as his first, for many reasons, and I'll share those and some of his account tomorrow.

Pope Agapetus II

In 946, Rome was an independent republic ruled by Alberic II of Spoleto (and we'll be taking a closer look at his whole family soon), who prevented the popes from exercising any secular power. This was during a period called the Saeculum obscurum ("the Dark Age"), which was also known by less-polite names.

At the death of Pope Marinus II, Albert nominated Agapetus (born c.901) as Bishop of Rome. Agapetus II had very little authority in anything other than religious matters. The See of Reims was being fought over by two bishops, so he sent a legate, Marinus of Bomarzo, to oversee a synod there. Agapetus showed his support for King Louis IV of France by appointing Louis' favorite to Reims.

Agapetus also intervened in a dispute between an archbishop and a bishop who each wanted to declare himself the metropolitan of Pannonia, a province of the old Roman Empire that includes the modern regions of western Hungary, western Slovakia, eastern Austria, northern Croatia, north-western Serbia, northern Slovenia, and northern Bosnia and Herzegovina. Agapetus pointed out that, because of historical invasions and subsequent divisions, Pannonia was logically split into two regions, and each man could be metropolitan of his own half of old Pannonia.

He argued with dukes of Beneventum and Capua to turn over possession of monasteries to the monks who lived there. He also wanted to revive one of the monasteries outside the Vatican walls and requested for some monks from the Gorze Abbey in the Lorraine to come and live there. Even this needed the support of Alberic, however.

When Agapetus died in 955, he was succeeded by John XII, who began life as Octavian, the son of (drum roll) Alberic II of Spoleto. It sounds like we really ought to look at Alberic and his influence on the papacy.Turns out it was very much a family affair for him. I'll explain next time.

Dunstan's Comeback

Now brought back to England by Edgar the Peaceable after the demise of Eadwig, Dunstan was made Bishop of Worcester and Bishop of London. Just before Eadwig died he had named a new Archbishop of Canterbury, Byrhthelm. Edgar reversed that appointment, claiming incompetence, and conferred the position on Dunstan.

To be confirmed as Archbishop of Canterbury, Dunstan had to go to Rome to receive the pallium from the pope, in this case John XII. His biographer tells us that he was so generous to others during the trip the he ran out of money for himself and his retinue.

Back in England he started making changes. His friend Æthelwold became Bishop of Winchester, and Oswald became Bishop of Worcester. (Oswald, Æthelwold, and Dunstan are referred to as the "Three English Holy Hierarchs" because of their religiou reforms. We'll be getting to Oswald soon.)

Dunstan enforced a spirit of self-sacrifice in the monasteries, and enforced (where he could) celibacy. He forbade selling clergy positions for money, and stopped clergy from appointing relatives to positions under their jurisdiction.

He started a program of building monasteries and cathedrals. The cathedral communities he created were monks instead of secular priests, and in those that existed already with secular priests he insisted they live according to monastic discipline. Priests were encouraged to be educated, and to teach parishioners not only about their religion but also useful knowledge of trades.

For the coronation of King Edgar, Dunstan himself designed the service which became the basis for modern British coronations. Edgar's strong rule and his partnership with Dunstan was considered by contemporary chroniclers as a "Golden Age" for England. The only problem mentioned in chronicles was by William of Malmesbury who wrote that the sailors tasked with patrolling the North Sea shores to guard against Viking invasions were not happy with their post.

Once again, however, Dunstan would clash with the king and lose his standing. Edgar was not the adversary. It was "two kings later" that brought about the end of Dunstan's public career. One more post on Dunstan, and then we will get to the third of the "Holy Hierarchs."

P.S. The illustration is from the anecdote found in the Dunstan link in the first paragraph above, of Dunstan grabbing the devil with red-hot tongs.

"Pope Joan"

Jean de Mailly was a Dominican chronicler working in Metz in northeast France in the middle of the 13th century. He wrote a history of the Diocese of Metz, in which he mentions a female pope reigning for two years about the year 1100. She was a talented woman who dressed as a man and became a notary to the pontifical Curia, then a cardinal, and finally a pope.

One day, while riding her horse, she gave birth to a son, revealing the deception. (Honestly, if she were pope for two years and at the end of that time had a son, then at least one person in her orbit knew that she was actually a woman.) With the deception revealed, she got tied to the tail of the horse, dragged around the city, then stoned to death and buried on the spot with the inscription placed over her Petre pater patrum papissae prodito partum ("Peter, Father of Fathers, betray the childbearing of the woman Pope").

This idea tickled the imagination of others, and so it became repeated and expanded. Along came Martin of Troppau, a Polish Dominican, who also wrote history. His history of the world first appeared during the pontificate of Clement IV (1265-68), but it wasn't until the third edition in 1277 that he added the story of the female pope.

Martin places the event in the 9th century, just after the death of Pope Leo IV (847-55). She was an "Englishman" named John of Mainz. Originally taken to Athens as a young girl in male clothing, she became educated until no one was her intellectual equal. She went to Rome (still disguised as a man), and earned so much respect that she was eventually made pope. During a procession from St. Peter's to the Lateran, she gave birth to a child. She died (and was buried) on the spot. Martin refers to her as Johanna. Martin himself was a papal chaplain at the Vatican, so his accounts were widely read, and the legend spread. In a later version of his history he changed the story, saying that she was deposed, imprisoned, and then lived for many years doing penance. The child grew up to become bishop of Ostia, who had her body interred at Ostia.

Later writers give her the birth name of Agnes; others said she was Gilberta. One version of the story says she was given a vision and offered eternal punishment or temporal disgrace. She chose the latter, and that is why she died on the spot after giving birth.

By the 15th century, scholars were looking at these stories and noting their improbability. Unfortunately, the 20th century enjoys escapism and conspiracy theories, and the legend of "Pope Joan" has been embellished to the point where entire books have been written to recount her "history." There is no gap in the history of popes where Joan was excised (although I wrote here, coincidentally, that one annal thought there was a gap before Leo IV, not after.) A 10th-century pope, John XII (955-64), supposedly had a concubine named Joan who was given much authority at the papal palace during his pontificate, and some have speculated that this gave rise to the idea of a "Pope Joan."

But let's say she did become pope; what was she called? She would not have taken the name "Pope Joan"! A Dominican named Bartolomeo Platina (1421-81) called her Pope John VIII. This is silly, since he should have known that there was a Pope John VIII in the 9th century, and not an inconsequential one, either. Let's talk about him next time.

Pope John XII

After the story of Gregorius by Hartmann von Aue, I became curious if there ever was a pope who was the product of incest. The only pope I could find with any connection to incest was John XII, who was called Octavian at birth and probably should never have become pope.

His father was Alberic II of Spoleto (912 - 954). Alberic styled himself Prince of Rome, and for all intents and purposes, he controlled Rome politically after a quarrel with the actual King of Rome, Hugh, when Alberic incited a mob that drove Hugh out of the city. Alberic married his step-sister Alda, which would (sort of) make their son the product of incest. But their son was Gregory I of Tusculum. Octavian's mother was actually Alberic's concubine. On Alberic's deathbed, he had the nobles and clergy of Rome swear to make Octavian the next pope (Gregory was a count, and didn't need anything else).

This idea was not completely out of the blue. Octavian had entered holy orders and was a cardinal deacon of a basilica in Rome. Pope Agapetus II died in November 955, and the 25-year-old Octavian was elected his successor one month later, taking the name John XII.

A note about the name: for centuries, popes used their own names when elected; they rarely took a new name when they became pope. When Octavian chose to call himself "John" it was only the third time that a pope took a new name. This is called a "regnal name"; that is, the name used when one starts a reign or pontificate. The only other times prior to this when a pope used a different name were John II (born Mercurius, reigned 533-535) and John III (born Catelinus, reigned 561-574). Octavian would use 'Octavian" when issuing directives on secular matters, and "John XII" when issuing papal bulls.

There were plenty of secular issues. In 960 he personally led an attack on some Lombard duchies to reclaim part of the Papal States. He did not achieve that goal, and in fact had to agree to relinquish a claim on certain territories. He was equally ineffective in controlling Rome the way his father had. When King Berengar II of Italy began to attack papal territory, John appealed to Otto I "the Great" of Germany. For his help, John crowned Otto Holy Roman Emperor.

At home, John was considered coarse and immoral; the Lateran Palace was described as a brothel. At a Synod of Rome in 963, charges of corruption were brought against him. The contemporary priest and historian Liudprand of Cremona offers us this (hearsay) account:

Then, rising up, the cardinal priest Peter testified that he himself had seen John XII celebrate Mass without taking communion. John, bishop of Narni, and John, a cardinal deacon, professed that they themselves saw that a deacon had been ordained in a horse stable, but were unsure of the time. Benedict, cardinal deacon, with other co-deacons and priests, said they knew that he had been paid for ordaining bishops, specifically that he had ordained a ten-year-old bishop in the city of Todi ... They testified about his adultery, which they did not see with their own eyes, but nonetheless knew with certainty: he had fornicated with the widow of Rainier, with Stephana his father's concubine, with the widow Anna, and with his own niece, and he made the sacred palace into a whorehouse.

I have italicized the relevant phrase. (I promised an incestuous pope, after all.)

It was his deal with Otto that ultimately caused him trouble. Otto wanted John to abandon his worldly ways. As Otto did what John wanted—subduing Berengar—John feared Otto's hold in Italy and sent for help from the Magyars and the Byzantines. Seeing John turn on him, Otto besieged Rome. John fled Rome, taking papal treasure with him. A council summoned in Rome by Otto deposed John and elected Pope Leo VIII in his place.

After Otto left Rome, John re-entered (Leo fled) and summoned his own synod to declare his deposition invalid. Before he could negotiate with Otto, he died on 14 May 964. The cause of his death is uncertain. All accounts say it involved an adulterous encounter, but some say he died of apoplexy and some say he was caught and killed by the husband.

His very worldly behavior may explain a papal legend that won't go away. A medieval writer claims that among John's concubines was one named Joan who wielded great authority during John's pontificate. It has been suggested that this gave rise to the legend of "Pope Joan," that supposedly there was a pope who was secretly a woman—a claim for which no evidence exists. But I suppose that legend is worth examining next time.