Pelagius and the Fifth Crusade [Reprint 2016 ed.] 9781512801491

Table of contents :
PREFACE
CONTENTS
I. Rome to Constantinople
II. Crusade of 1217
III. Crusade in Egypt: the Conquest of Damietta
IV. Failure of the Crusade
V. Acre to Monte Cassino
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Citation preview

Pelagius and the Fifth Crusade by JOSEPH P. DONOVAN SEATTLE UNIVERSITY

Philadelphia UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS London: Geoffrey Cumberlege Oxford University Press

1950

Copyright 1950 UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS Manufactured

in the United States of

America

Imprimi

potest Harold O. Small, S.J. Praepos. Prov.

Nihil

Oregoniensis

obstat Ioannes McCorkle, S.S. Censor

Librorum

Imprimatur Thomas A. Connolly Episcopus

25" Martii 1950

Coadiutor

Seattlensis

To my Mother

PREFACE THE life of Pelagius does not offer any solution for our current world problems. It is not even "escape literature." It is the story of another failure seven centuries ago. Academically it may be of value by making available in English the complicated details of a phase of thirteenth-century life. The author, however, is grateful for the opportunity to publish the work. He is enabled thereby to acknowledge a debt of gratitude to the collaborators. The late Professor John L. LaMonte did more than suggest the subject, direct the research, and aid in organizing the material; through many pleasant hours he shared his rich knowledge of the Crusades and the Holy Land. He did not always agree with the author about Pelagius; in fact, in matters of opinion, he encouraged controversy rather than conformity. He loved an argument. By their criticisms, Professors Lynn M. Case and William C. McDermott, of the University of Pennsylvania, helped to make the story intelligible. The kindness of the personnel and the facilities granted the author in the Henry C. Lea Library of the University of Pennsylvania and the Library of Congress made study almost a pleasure.

CONTENTS PREFACE I. II.

Rome to Constantinople

vu 1

Crusade of 1217

25

III.

Crusade in Egypt: the Conquest of Damietta

38

IV.

Failure of the Crusade

69

V.

Acre to Monte Cassino

98

BIBLIOGRAPHY

117

I

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE IN THE year 1213, . . . a certain Pelagius went to Constantinople bearing papal prerogatives; attired in red shoes and varicolored clothes (even the saddle and bridle of his horse were covered with red cloth), he was a man of inhuman manners, proud and full of insolence, and wrought much cruelty upon the inhabitants, compelling them to be subject to the yoke of Rome, incarcerating monks, binding priests, closing churches and insisting that all confess the primacy of the pope with solemn commemoration in their ceremonies, or pay the penalty of death.1 Thus some forty years later did George Acropolita, the Greek historian, describe the entrance into Constantinople of the Papal Legate. Five years later, in 1218, an army of crusaders was camped on the bank of the Nile below Damietta, preparing to advance against the Moslems, when, according to the Syro-French contemporary Ernoul, "there arrived two cardinals, the Cardinal Robert, an Englishman; and Cardinal Pelagius, a Portuguese; the former died, and the latter lived, which was a great misfortune." 2 In 1229 a papal army was fighting in southern Italy against the half-Christian, half-Moslem soldiers of Frederick II who had invaded the Papal States. In the midst of conquests, the Pope wrote to his representative, Pelagius, warning him that it was unbecoming for a Christian army to resort to torture and mutilation of prisoners.8 1 George Acropolita, Annales, cap. 17, p. 32. This source hereafter referred to as Acropolita. 2 Chronique d'Emoul, p. 417. This source hereafter referred to as Ernoul. 3 Epistolae Saeculi XIII, ed. Carl Rodenberg, I, 305. This source hereafter referred to as Rodenberg.

1

2

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

Who was this peculiar enfant terrible, a thirteenth-century foreshadowing of a combined Cromwell and Robespierre, yet a contemporary of St. Francis and St. Dominic? It is the same Pelagius to whom Pope Innocent referred as one "especially loved among our brothers." 4 It is the Pelagius whom the gentle, peave-loving Pope Honorius, even after the affair in Constantinople and the disaster which followed the Cardinal's arrival in Egypt, called a "star in the firmament of the Church." 5 Europe in the thirteenth century not only presented scenes of violent contrasts—saints and sinners, mighty lords and impoverished serfs, troubadours and flagellants, orthodox scholastics and heterodox Albigensians; but also produced men who seem to have been a contradiction in themselves. In the magnificent cathedrals of that century were numerous pieces of sculpture, statues of grace and beauty, and carvings of hideous devils or strange grotesques, each teaching a definite lesson. There were, however, in the stained-glass windows, images whose expressions seemed at times to change in the lengthening rays of the setting sun. Just as the noonday or evening worshipers each received a different impression from the image in glass, so it is evident that the popes and historians did not see the same Pelagius. We must therefore study him in the varying lights and shadows of racial, political, and religious aspirations or prejudices preserved in the contemporary pictures of one whose life was passed amidst the intense passions enkindled by the controversy between Rome and Constantinople, Christian and Moslem, Church and State. It is not likely that we will find the image of a saint—much less a grotesque. Nothing is known about the early life of Pelagius, nor is his nationality certain. The greater number of authorities have believed that he was a Spaniard.6 Even our knowledge of his early life as a prelate begins with the tenuous probability of a letter p. Perhaps Pope Innocent III was referring to Pelagius when he * Epistolae Innocenta III, Lib. XVI, ep. 105. To the hierarchy of the Empire of Constantinople. This source hereafter referred to as Inn. Ep. ε Odoricus Raynaldus, Annales Ecclesiastici, anno 1225, No. 2. This source hereafter referred to as Raynaldus. β Those referring to Pelagius as a Portuguese are, Emoul, 417; Espana Sagrada, XXXV ( 1786), 286-89; Chevalier, Répertoire des Sources Historiques au Moyen Age, Bio-bibliographie, "Pelage."

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

3

spoke of a "Magister P. Subdeaconus et Capellanus noster" in March of 1205.7 The first definite information is that he was a religious of the Order of St. Benedict.8 About the year 1206, Pelagius was raised to the dignity of the cardinalate as Cardinal Deacon with the title of St. Lucia in Septa Solis,9 a title which was later suppressed.10 The deacons of the regional churches of Rome had from the early centuries been employed to administer alms and assist in liturgie ceremonies. After the eleventh century, the authority of the cardinal bishops and cardinal priests was increased. In a similar manner, the deacons who had already occupied positions of importance came to be designated as cardinal deacons. Thenceforth the cardinal deacons shared not only the dignity of the cardinalate, but also a more intimate association in the papal administration of the whole church. They were entrusted with many of the expanding functions of government in finance, justice, and discussion of policy. That Pelagius should have risen to such a position of distinction in the Roman Church is sufficiently explained through his ability alone because, as Innocent III later told the Emperor Henry of Constantinople, the Cardinal was "a man of letters, prudent and honorable."11 Pope Honorius III had reason to recommend him as a man of experience 12 since he had been a member of the papal 7 Augustus Potthast, Re gesta Pontìficum Romanorum, 1198-1304, No. 2453. This source hereafter referred to as P.R.P. 8 Conrad Eubel, Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi, I, 4; Cattula, Historia Abbatiae Casinensis Accessories, pt. II, 851; S. Pauli, Codice Diplomatico del Sacro Militare Ordine Gerosolimitano oggi Di Malta, I, 521, No. 107. 9 Eubel (op. cit.) bases the date upon the witnessing of a papal document by Pelagius as Cardinal Deacon on May 4, 1206. Cf. P.R.P. No. 2767. Chevalier ( op. cit. ) followed this dating, but Ciacconius ( Vitae et Res Gestae Pontificum et S.R.E. Cardinalium, II, 27) states that Pelagius was created a Cardinal on Pope Innocent's Fifth Promotion which was not until December, 1206. Ciacconius is not always accurate and even Potthast may err, for he records Pelagius as subscribing to a papal document on March 31, 1219 (No. 6029) and on May 31, 1219 (No. 6078) when the Cardinal was certainly concentrating on the crusade at Damietta. Ferdinand Ughelli adds to the confusion by declaring that Pelagius was named Cardinal Deacon and "later Cardinal Priest of St. Lucia in 1206," Italia Sacra (Rome, 1644), I, 296-97. 1 0 P. B. Gams, Series Episcoporum Ecclesiae Catholicae, p. 50. The title was suppressed in 1587. 1 1 Inn. Ep. Lib. XVI, ep. 104. 12 Honorii IH Romani Pontificis opera omnia, ed. C. A. Horoy, II, 1. This source hereafter referred to as Horoy. Vetera Monumenta Histórica Hungariam

4

PELAGIO S AND T H E F I F T H CRUSADE

curia under Innocent III which, in the truest sense, was the focal point of Christendom. In this curia of a pope, employing the "prerogative of universal dominion," 13 to which kings and peoples from England to Armenia appealed and from which went forth legislation disposing kingdoms, Cardinal Pelagius performed the exacting duties of auditor and judge. 14 As a judge of the Rota, Pelagius would also perform the functions of chaplain and subdeacon to the pope in religious ceremonies. W e have only one questionable reference to Pelagius as an auditor by Innocent, 15 but there are numerous documents from Honorius I I I in which he confirms and praises the decisions made by Pelagius in previous years, sometimes referring to the Cardinal as auditor, sometimes as judge. 18 For the most part, the settlements made by Pelagius involved ecclesiastical persons and concerned disputed elections or jurisdiction over monasteries contested by bishops. At one time he was judge in a litigation between a count and a commune in Tuscany; at another time he determined the location for a bishopric. 17 There are many examples in the documents of Pope Honorius showing that other prelates had been unable to solve disputes entrusted to them. There is only one charge of failure against Pelagius: he failed to settle a dispute between a bishop and the Hospitalers in Hungary. 18 Apparently Innocent III did not underestimate the ability of the Benedictine monk from Spain. In 1210 or 1211, Innocent I I I bestowed on Pelagius the higher honor of Cardinal Priest with the title of St. Caecilia, 19 and in Sacrarti illustrantia, ed. Augustus Theiner, I, No. 12, 7. Raynaldus, anno 1217, No. 2Θ. 1 3 "Praerogativa domimi generalis," Mansi, XXII, 1042. 1 4 For the history of the office of auditor, cf. E . Cerchiali, Capelloni Papae et Apostólicae Seats Auditores Causarum Sacri Palatii Apostolici, I, 39—40. 1 5 P.H.P. No. 2453. 16 Regesta Honorii Papae III, ed. Pietro Pressutti, Nos. 4391, 4958, 4969, 4981, 5011, 5017, 5068, 5261, 5402, 5475, 5514, 5535, 5614, 5646, 5818, 5871, 5961, 6010, 6045, 6227. This source hereafter referred to as Pressutti. P.R.P. Nos. 6450, 7266. 1 7 Pressutti, 5871, 5068. 18 Ibid., 5646. 1 9 The latest date upon which Pelagius is given as a witness to a papal document under the title of Cardinal Deacon is April 10, 1210 (P.R.P. No. 3 9 7 4 ) , and on May 3 1 , 1 2 1 1 , he first witnessed as Cardinal Priest ( P.R.P. No. 4 2 5 7 ) .

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

5

1213 made him Cardinal Bishop of the ancient see of Albano. Albano, only ten miles east of Rome, was honored in the early Church for its cemetery containing the remains of many persons who were martyred in the Roman persecutions and early became an episcopal see.21 At least by the eighth century it was the established custom for the bishops in the vicinity of Rome, especially from Ostia, Porto, Santa Rufina, Sabina, Tusculum, Praeneste, and Albano, to alternate in pontificating on weekdays in the Lateran and to participate in synods presided over by the pope. These bishops became known as cardinal bishops, and likewise became increasingly more important in the government of the Church. Their authority was further increased by the decree of the Roman' Synod in 1059 which emphasized the position of the cardinal \ bishops in papal elections.22 Pelagius, then, as Cardinal Bishop of Albano would have been prominent in the thrice-weekly Vatican consistories held by Innocent 23 and most probably was one of the Pope's intimate advisers. It is not surprising that Pope Innocent should turn to Pelagius when circumstances in distant lands demanded the presence of one familiar with papal policies. Pelagius had already proved by his work as auditor and judge in the papal court that he possessed not only the necessary acumen to formulate decisions alone but also the tact required to placate the intense feelings of dissident factions. The Cardinal Bishop of Albano was to be named a papal legate a latere, bearing the greatest ecclesiastical powers next to the pope. He was, moreover, to be given the most difficult assign20

Chevalier ( he. cit. ) and Eubel ( loc. cit. ) believe that the advancement came in 1210. 2 0 Eubel (loc. cit.). Gams (he. cit.) gives 1211, as does Ughelli, I, 297. Chevalier dates it as 1212. Although his predecessor in the see died in 1211 ( cf. Heinrich Zimmermann, Die päpstliche Legation in der ersten Hälfte des 13 fahrhunderts, p. 42, note 5 ) , Pelagius did not sign a papal document as Cardinal Bishop until August 3,1213 (P.R.P. No. 4785). 2 1 Paul F. Kehr, Italia Pontificia, II, 30. Dictionnaire tfArchéologie Chrétienne et de Liturgie, ed. Fernand Cabrol, "Catacome d'Albano." 2 2 Hefele-Leclerq, Hist. Con. IV, 1139-65. H. Grauert, "Das Dekret Nikolaus II von 1059," Historisches Jahrbuch d. Gorres-Geseüschaft, I (1880), 502-602. Carl Mirbt, Quellen zur Geschichte des Papsttums (Tubingen, 1901), p. 97. 23 Gesta Innocenta III, ed. Baluze, 1683, published P. Migne, Patrologia Latina, CCXIV, cap. 41.

β

PELAGIUS AND THE F I F T H CRUSADE

ment in Christendom—legate to the Latin Empire of Constantinople. The Latin Empire of Constantinople was the fantastic result of Pope Innocent's desire for a crusade which, although originally intended to attack the Moslems in Egypt,24 was diverted in 1203 to help restore a dethroned Greek emperor in Constantinople. In the following year, the Venetian merchants and French crusaders conquered the imperial city.25 According to the partition agreement,28 the temporal and spiritual rulership was to be divided between the Venetians and the barons. Baldwin, Count of Flanders, was elected in 1204 to govern the newly-created Latin Empire; in the patriarchal chair the Venetians placed one of their own, Thomas Morosini, to succeed the Greek, John Camaterus, who fled to the court of Kalojan, King of Bulgaria. One might think that a French baron on the throne of the Basileus and an Italian in place of the schismatic patriarch, with crusaders to protect them, should have surpassed the most sanguine of papal hopes. Yet Innocent III received the news with mixed emotions. He had, however, no other choice than to recognize the fait accompli.21 Apparently Innocent's first ambition for a crusade to regain the Holy Land through an attack on Egypt had been frustrated—or rather, perhaps fortunately, delayed. The possession of Constantinople by the Latins would enable 2 4 Geoffroi de Villehardouin, La Conquête de Constantinople, ed. Natilis de Wailly (Paris, 1872), cap. 30, p. 18: "si fu la chose devisée à conseil que on iroit en Babiloine, por ce que par Babiloine poroient mielz les Turs destruire que par altre terre. ' 2 5 Geoffroi de Villehardouin tells the entire story of the "Crusade." Robert de Clari ( The Conquest of Constantinople, translated by Edgar H. McNeal [New York, 1936] ) gives details of the siege of Constantinople. For a good outline of the crusade cf. A. A. Vasiliev, History of the Byzantine Empire, II, 109 sq. On the problem of the diversion of the crusade, to the studies referred to by Vasiliev should be added Henri Grégoire, "The Question of the Diversion of the Fourth Crusade," Byzantion, XV ( 1 9 4 0 - ^ 1 ) , 158-66, in which the "premeditation theory" is maintained against the "théorie du hasard" upheld by Edmond Farai, "Geoffroy de Villehardouin, La Question de Sa Sincéreté," Revue Historique, CLXXVII ( 1 9 3 6 ) , 530-82. 2 6 Partition agreement, cf. G. Tafel and G. Thomas, Urkunden zur älteren Handéis-und Staatsgeschichte der Republik Venedig, I, 146. Cf. Du Cange, Histoire de l'Empire de Constantinople sous les Empereurs Français jusqu'à la Conquête des Turcs, I, 32. 2 7 Inn. Ep., Lib. VII, ep. 153.

ROME TO CONSTAïmNOPLE

7

28

the pope to resolve religious differences. Then, with a wellordered Catholic state established on the Bosphorus as a base of operations, the crusaders would be in a better position to invade Palestine directly. Indeed when the Emperor Baldwin pointed out the strategic value of their conquest in relation to the Holy Land (perhaps by way of apology), Innocent responded by granting crusade indulgences to those who indirectly labored for the good of the crusade by aiding the Latin Empire. 29 It is scarcely credible that Innocent could have cherished any hopes for a sudden solution to the Greek problem after this invasion. He knew how bitterly the Byzantines resented encroachments from the West and how jealously they guarded their religious independence. In all probability he did not think that the Greeks who fled into exile would form an effective opposition, much less imagine that a revived Empire would be established in Anatolia between Constantinople and Jerusalem. The unforeseen happened when Theodore Lascaris, husband of Anne, a daughter of the former Greek Emperor Alexius III, unified the exiled princes and set up a Greek state in Asia Minor. Realizing that an essential element in the unification of the Greeks would be the satisfaction of their religious demands, Lascaris appealed to the Greek Patriarch Camaterus to establish his see at Nicaea. But the Patriarch preferred to remain under the protection of King Kajolan in Bulgaria.30 Camaterus, however, died in 1206, leaving Lascaris free to have his own choice, Michael Autoreanus, consecrated patriarch in 1208. Autoreanus then reciprocated by crowning the Greek leader as emperor of the new state with his capital in the ancient city of conciliar fame, Nicaea. 31 The first barricade was thus thrown across the road to Jerusalem. 28 Inn. Ep. Lib. VIII, ep. 55, May 15, 1205. Innocent promised that he would send a legate, "ut autem in devotionem ac fidei puntate juxta institutìones sacrosanctae Romane ecclesiae . . . praedicta ecclesia plenius informetur." Even as early as November, 1205 Innocent had made clear his intention of bringing the Greeks to obedience. Cf. Inn. Ep. Lib. VII, ep. 153. 2 » Inn. Ep. Lib. VIII, ep. 69, May 25, 1205. 30 Vasiliev, op. cit., II, 188. 31 A. Heisenberg, "Neue Quellen zur Geschichte des Lateinschen Kaisertums und der Kirchenunion. Patriarchenwahl und Kaiserkronung in Nikaia 1208," Sitzungsberichte der philosophisch-philologischen und der historischen Klasse der Bayerischen Akadamie der Wissenschaft zu München (1923), II Abhandlung, 5-12.

8

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

A second was formed in the Latin Empire itself from the entanglements of religious differences. An obvious consequence of the conquest was that Latin clergy should be introduced not only for the spiritual care of the Catholics from the West but also to bring about the reunion desired by Pope Innocent. Whether Emperor Baldwin shared Innocent's optimism about converting the Greeks or whether he was motivated by political expediency is not clear. But he did encourage the increase of Western clergy in his empire, requesting Innocent to send not only secular but also regular clergy from among the Cluniacs, Cistercians, and Canons Regular. At the same time he asked for missals, breviaries, and other religious books so that there should be no dissonance between the Eastern and the Western Church in divine services.32 As early as March, 1206, the Latin clergy were influential enough to obtain a definition of rights and privileges,33 which granted the Church one-fifteenth of all conquered lands and goods outside the city of Constantinople, guaranteed tithes from all laymen except the Venetians, and, as was the custom in the West, assured the immunity of Church persons and property from all civil jurisdiction. The reaction of the Greek clergy was almost uniformly one of hostility, and many, especially of the higher clergy, fled into exile. If the mere presence of Westerners antagonized the Greeks, one may imagine how they received the effort to subordinate all to the hierarchy and jurisdiction of Rome. Innocent, it is true, insisted that the work of conversion proceed with moderation and prudence.34 In places where there were only Greek inhabitants, they were to be allowed Greek bishops; but if the population were mixed, then the Latin prelate should be preferred. If, however, some Greeks remained contumacious, they were to be warned three times, then suspended from the exercise of their office and excommunicated; only when all else had failed should the pope's legate remove the Greek bishops from their sees.35 Despite the tolerance of Pope Innocent, a very small number of the Greek bishops acknowledged obedience to Rome, and the sincerity of s2 Inn. Ep. Lib. VIII, ep. 70, May 25, 1205. 8 3 Inn. Ep. Lib. IX, ep. 142. Cf. afeo Cesta Innocenta, cap. CI. 8 4 Luchaire, Innocent III, La Question d'Orient, p. 26. 8 8 Inn. Ep. Lib. IX, ep. 140.

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

9

some of these may be suspect. In the regulation of religious rites which in the course of centuries, through local customs and tradition, came to differ widely from the Roman liturgy, Innocent was less definite. He was inclined toward toleration, advising the patriarch to encourage the Greeks to adopt the Roman rite. But if they were unwilling, the Latins should allow the Greek rite until the Holy See had given the question more mature consideration.37 That Innocent's policy for reconciliation failed is due in large part to the Latin clergy and laymen who deceived or dispossessed the Greeks.38 Even these injustices might have been eradicated if the highest authorities could have demanded respect and enforced discipline—if the money-changers from the Rialto had not set up their tables in St. Sophia. As we have seen, according to the bargain made with the French barons, the Italians elected Thomas Morosini as Patriarch of Constantinople. Although Innocent hated the bargain and registered a protest, he accepted the Patriarch. The French, on the other hand, welcomed the contract but refused to accept Morosini 39 because he had made special promises to appoint only Venetians to ecclesiastical positions in Constantinople. It was 1209 before this misunderstanding was clarified through a papal commission.40 Then two years later Morosini died, having been able to accomplish very little toward reunion and bequeathing less hope to the future. After the obsequies, the disgraceful wrangling between the Venetians and the French over the patriarchal throne revived. The Chapter of St. Sophia, composed of Venetians, then chose one of their own, a deacon Philip, as patriarch, while the superiors of other communities named three candidates, the Bishop of Cremona, Cardinal Peter of St. Marsella, and Robert Courçon of 36

3 6 Conclusion derived from the very detailed study by Robert Lee Wolff, "The Organization of the Latin Patriarchate of Constantinople, 1204-1261," Traditio, VI ( 1948), 33-60. 3 7 Inn. Ep. Lib. IX, ep. 140, "ut eos tamdiu in suo ritu sustineas, si per te revocari non possint, donee super hoc apostolica sedes maturiori Consilio aliud duxerit statuendam." 3 8 Inn. Ep. Lib. XII, ep. 24. Innocent condemned the action of priests who abandoned their benefices after forcing tithes from their Greek subjects. Lib. XIII, ep. 101 and 103, the Pope condemned lay seizure of church property. 39 Gesta Innocenta, cap., xcviii, sq. « Inn. Ep., Lib. XII, ep. 105.

PELAGIUS AND T H E F I F T H CRUSADE

10

Paris. When the nominations were submitted to Rome, Innocent rejected all because of the divided election and ordered a new one. 41 It was only a repetition of the same narrow-minded partisanship, with the predominant French faction nominating the Archbishop of Heraclea and the Venetians proposing a certain Louis, a curate of St. Paul's in Venice. 4 2 T h e situation was serious and demanded extraordinary means to restore order. Since ecclesiastical censures did not restrain those who were destroying churches and committing other excesses, Innocent, in May, 1212, called upon Baldwin's successor, the Emperor Henry, as a Catholic prince to use the secular arm. 43 In August the Pope informed his notary Maximus of the details of the patriarchal election and instructed him to settle the case as he judged best, unless in the meantime a papal legate could b e sent. 44 Perhaps in his desire to temper justice with mercy Innocent gave Maximus the power to absolve persons from the excommunication incurred by their violence. But some cases were so excessive that the Pope reserved the absolution to himself. 45 For some reason Maximus was unable to obtain passage from the Venetians, 46 despite the fact that about the same time Peter Ziano, the Doge, appealed to Innocent from Constantinople for a solution to the problem of the patriarchal election. Innocent had replied to the Doge that he had not made a decision, but he would at least delegate someone to settle the dispute if his representative was delayed too long. 47 Finally on August 30, 1213, the Pope, in letters to the Emperor Henry and the clergy of Constantinople, announced that he was sending one highly esteemed at the curia, Pelagius the Bishop of Albano. T h e Cardinal was one who certainly would follow the "royal road," neither declining to the right 41 42

Ibid., Lib. XIV, ep. 97. Ibid., Lib. XV, ep. 156.

43 Ibid., Lib. XV, ep. 74, May 23, 1212, [quos excommunicationem contemnentes], "debes, tamquam princeps catholicus, a pertinaci proposito temporalis terrore gladii revocare . . . hujusmodi homines . . . corrigas et compescas tamquam salutis propriae contemptores, ipsos ad mandatimi Ecclesiae minis et terroribus, monitione non proficiente, reducens." 4 4 Inn. Ep., Lib. XV, ep. 156. 45 Ibid., Lib. XV, ep. 153, "nisi excesses eorum fuerint adeo difficiles et enormes ut merito sunt ad sedem apostolicam distinandi." 4 8 Inn. Ep., Lib. XVI, ep. 112. 47 Ibid., Lib. XVI, ep. 90, August 2, 1213.

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

11

nor to the left, and would bear plenary powers as personal legate of the Pope "to tear down and destroy, build up and plant." Therefore whatever sentences he should declare against the rebellious should be ratified and inviolably observed.48 A few weeks later, on September 18, 1213, Pelagius was given his commission and was told to follow the instructions given to Maximus concerning the election of the Patriarch.49 When Pope Innocent told the clergy of Constantinople that Pelagius was coming with plenary power a latere nostro, he was saying of him, as he said earlier in relation to another legate, that he "held the first place after us in the Roman Church." 50 When the pope chose a personal representative from among the cardinal bishops, the legate was designated as "a laterethat is, from the side of the pope—a member of a corporate body.51 Indeed the disciplinary power of a legate a latere surpassed that of any other person in the hierarchy of the Medieval Church except that of the pope. As Innocent III explained to the Emperor Henry, the obligations of the pope had greatly increased, and "the more one's power is extended, so much the greater must be his solicitude." Consequently he must use co-laborers to accomplish the tasks otherwise impossible for him alone.52 The practice of the popes in using legates had originated in the early centuries of the Church, possibly, as Hincmar of Rheims thought, when Constantine moved his capital from Rome to Byzantium.53 The use was certainly made necessary during the 48 Ibid., Lib. XVI, ep. 104, to the Emperor Henry, and ep. 105 to the clergy of Constantinople, "sententias quas rite protulerit in rebelles ratas haberi praecipimus et inviolabiliter observari." Walter Norden ( Das Papsttum und Buzanz, p. 214, note 2 ) gives the date of this letter correctly as III Kal. Sept., but translates it as September 29. 4 9 Inn. Ep. Lib. XVI, ep. 112. Inconectly dated September 19 by TafelThomas, II, 173, No. 239. 50 Bullarium Romanum, III, 178-81. Letter to the princes of Germany, March 1, 1201. 5 1 "Ipsos praeterea cardinales, pro honoris ac dignitatis eminentia, partem sui corporis Summi Pontificis appellant. Ex quo sine ulla dubitatíone ostenditur post caput Ecclesiae, quod est Papa, contigua sui corporis membra, qui sunt fratres ejus cardinales prae ceteris Ecclesiae membris ac partibus honorari debere." Pope Eugene IV to Henry, Archbishop of Canterbury, 1438, Bullarium Romanum, V, 36. 8 2 Inn. Ep. Lib. XVI, ep. 104. 5 3 D. Bouix, Tractatus de Curia Romana, p. 586.

12

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

ecumenical councils held in the East. During the ninth and tenth centuries, some of the legates were left in places of their visitation in the West as permanent bishops, or sometimes the resident bishop was given the power of a legate. These resident legate bishops became known as legati nati (legates born) or as primates 54 and were associated from time to time with the episcopal sees of Aries, Lyons, Narbonne, Toledo, Treves, Mayence, Bremen, Salzburg, Prague, Canterbury, York, and Pisa.55 In the course of the tenth century, many of these permanent legates succumbed to the moral ills of their environment when the disorders of civil society had disrupted ecclesiastical discipline. After the army of the Holy Roman Emperor Henry III had provided an antidote against the plague of Roman factions in the eleventh century, and the papacy had reacted to the spiritual tonic of the Cluniac reform, a renewed solicitude for the state of the Church was shown by the popes through an increased use of legates,56 known as legati missi, similar to the later nuncios.57 It was not until the twelfth century that the term legate a latere came into common use, although there are indeed references to the title in earlier centuries.58 The amount of power delegated to the legates had varied according to the necessities and intentions of the popes. Just as the administration of the papal government had become more organized in the early thirteenth century, so, too, the powers of the legate a latere were to be codified in Canon Law.59 In general one Thomassin, Vetus et Nova Ecclesia Disciplina, I, cap. CVII sq. Baart, op. cit. Most of these resident legateships had ended by the thirteenth century, cf. Zimmermann, op. cit., p. 260. The Patriarch of Jerusalem, however, became a permanent legate in 1232, cf. Gestes des Chiprois, R.H.C. Documents arméniens, II, No. 204, 721. 5 6 Thomassin, op. cit., cap. CXIX, No. 1. βτ Paul Hinschius, Das Kirchenrecht der Katholiken und Protestanten, I, 507-8. 58 Ibid., p. 505, note 4. Although Hinschius refers to the use as early as the Council of Sardica in 343, and considers the term in general use by the end of the tenth century ( cf. pp. 506-7 ), this seems to be a century too early. 0 9 Gregory IX, Decretalium, De Legatis, Lib. I, XXX, cap. Ill, from Innocent III. Andreas Barbatia ( Tractatuum Universi Juris, Tractatus de Cardinalibus legatis a latere, XIII, pt. II, Lib. I, No. 5 ) gives an outline of the legate's privileges. Although all of these privileges were not explicit in the time of Innocent III, as Zimmermann points out (pp. 247 sq.), still they were prob64

55

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

13

may say that the legate a latere had disciplinary and administrative powers within the territory of his jurisdiction equal to the pope. Certain limitations were imposed by those things reserved especially to the Holy See, such as the power to transfer bishops, divide or unite bishoprics, depose or accept the resignation of bishops, or alienate church property. Of course, a pope might delegate even some of these powers, as Innocent III did to Cardinal Benedict, Legate in Constantinople in 1207, who had authority to replace recalcitrant Greek bishops by Latin bishops.60 There was yet ample scope left to the legate's power, because he could remove a penalty of excommunication incurred by anyone for laying violent hands on clerics;81 confer, reserve or unite benefices; confirm elections of archbishops, bishops, and abbots. Moreover, even the death of the pope did not entail an abrogation of the legate's powers, nor did his own statutes cease to have force after the termination of his legation. Since the papal legates were personal representatives of the popes, the manner in which they were received by the faithful was considered a measure of devotion to the pope himself. Pope Gregory VII had once said that the honor and reverence paid to his legate was in reality given to himself, to St. Peter, and even to Christ, for "whosoever receiveth you, receiveth Me." 82 The same Pope so jealously guarded the reputation of his legates that once when a case was appealed to the papal court against a sentence of a legate, Gregory deferred judgment, advised the legate, and then allowed him to revise the sentence as though it were his own decision."3 In view of the esteem in which the popes held their legates, it is not surprising that the people were frequently effusive in their demonstrations of honor and respect to the representative of the pope. When the Legate Otto went to England in 1237, the more important among the clergy went down to the shore to meet him ably granted frequently enough to afford a precedent for the Code of Canon Law. β» Inn. Ep. Lib. IX, ep. 140. 6 1 This power dated from Pope Clement III, 1187-91. Zimmermann, p. 249. «2 Registrum Gregorii VII, ed. Erich Caspar, MGH. Epistolae, II, 52830, Lib. VIII, ep. 10, October 5,1080. es Ibid., Π, 25-26, July 1, 1073.

14

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

and some went out in boats to escort him. The King himself went down to the sea and greeted the Legate, as the chronicler says, "with head bowed to his knees." 64 With all these vicarious honors the office of legate offered temptations to vanity and pride. It was especially vulnerable to a more serious temptation to greed, since the office was accompanied by certain emoluments. The most important source of income or reward was that of procuration.65 This was similar to the feudal right of purveyance whereby the subjects were obliged to feed and entertain their lords who were on visitation of their estates. When some of the legates abused the right, it evoked caustic criticism from such men as St. Bernard and Ivo of Chartres 66 and even provoked the promulgation of the fourth Canon in the Third Council of the Lateran in 1179.e7 In order to impress upon the people the exalted position of this office, and thus add force to decisions or punishments, the legate was expected to wear the insignia of apostolic dignity except in a city where the pope was also present.68 The red hat and purple garments were prescribed,69 and even the details for his solemn entry into the territory of his legation. He entered on a palfrey with bridle and spurs covered with gold.70 It is impossible to say how much of this formality was obligatory in the early years of the thirteenth century. If we may believe Acropolita, who described the arrival of Pelagius in Constantinople, the legate was already wearing the regalia later prescribed.71 That it was not yet 8 1 Matthew of Paris, Chronica Majora, III, 395-96. As might be expected, the cantankerous monk Matthew did not approve. When he wrote, he was not thinking of the honor due to the pope, but of the taxes demanded by the legate. 6 5 Zimmermann, p. 280 sq. β β Hinschius, p. 511, note 1. 8 7 Mansi, XXII, col. 219-20. Because the retinue of a prelate would devour the people's provisions in a short time (longi temporis victum brevis hora consumât), it was decreed that cardinals on visitation should have no more than 25 horses. 6 8 Barbatia, op. cit., I, 5, No. 18. 8 9 Hinschius (p. 516, note 7, and pp. 357-58) points out that the use of the red hat and robes was not introduced until the middle of the thirteenth century by Innocent IV. Cf. Mansi, XXIII, 675. Baumgarten, "Die Übersendung des rothen Hütes," Hist. Jahrbuch, XXVI (1905), 99-100. 7 0 The palfrey attained a position of distinction in the Middle Ages. For its interesting evolution from a mere post horse, cf. Du Cange, Glossarium mediae et tnfimae latinitatis, "Paraveredi." (Paris, 1845), V. 7 1 Cf. above, p. 1.

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

15

a very common practice, we may judge from discussions which Pelagius later held with the Greeks when the Metropolitan of Ephesus asked by what right he wore the red.72 The puerility of Acropolita, writing many years later, in mentioning the color of his dress is surpassed only by those who infer that the red is a proof of the legate's haughtiness. The exact time when Pelagius arrived in Constantinople is not known. Tradition apparently passed down to George Acropolita only the minute color details of the awe-inspiring entrance. Since Pelagius is not recorded as a witness to papal documents for three years after August 3, 1213 73 and had received his brief from the Pope on September 18, it was probably sometime in October when he reached Constantinople. The accomplishment of Innocent's desires meant a twofold task for Pelagius; to restore ecclesiastical order in the Latin Empire, then to bring about a reconciliation of Roman and Orthodox Catholicism which might lead to an understanding between the rival emperors. The problem of the contested patriarchal election was the immediate occasion for the Legate's mission, yet it was not of prime importance. Pelagius himself had ample power to correct discipline. Moreover, it was not reasonable to begin negotiations with the Greek Empire until the internal affairs of Constantinople were regulated.74 The first year that Pelagius passed in the East was devoted to the manifold abuses and disorders in Constantinople and the neighboring principalities under the rule of French barons. That he accomplished much in this disagreeable work is confirmed by papal documents. They refer to his regulating matters of ceremonial rites for the Church of Constantinople,75 drawing up constitutions for monasteries and chapters, and disposing of, or Cf. below, p. 36. ™ P.R.P. No. 4785 and No. 5065 (February 5, 1216). 7 1 In this chronology we follow Heisenberg, "Neue Quellen . . . Der Bericht des Nicholaos Mesantes über die politischen und kirchlichen Ereignisse des Jahres 1214," Sitzungsberichte, 1923, III Abhandlung, 62, rather than that of Norden, pp. 216-17, or of Ernst Gerland, Geschichte des Lateinischen Kaiserreiches von Konstantinopel. Geschichte der Kaiser Baldwin I und Heinrich 1204-1$I6. Heisenberg argues that the mission of the Greek monks to Lascaris in protest against the cruelty of Pelagius was in October, and it is not conceivable that Pelagius would resort to extreme measures immediately after his arrival, therefore the October mentioned would be in 1214, not 1213. « P.R.P. No. 6584. Raynaldus, anno 1221, No. 28. 72

1β

PELAGIUS AND T H E F I F T H CRUSADE

allocating, church property. On one occasion he found it necessary to remove Greek monks from a monastery.76 On another, he was instructed by the Pope to restore Greeks who had been expelled from a monastery by the Cistercians.77 Unfortunately Pelagius has not been remembered by historians for any of these salutary acts. His whole character, the success of his mission, and his ability to do anything else have been criticized on the basis of one perhaps overzealous response to duty. Most writers of history condemn him for abusing his power. 78 For the details of the episode which has locked Pelagius in the critic's pillory, we depend upon two thirteenth-century Greek writers, George Acropolita and Nicholas Mesarites. The former was born four years after Pelagius went to Constantinople, was trained at the court of the Greek emperor in Nicaea and, toward the end of his life ( he died in 1282 ), wrote his Annales of Byzantine history for the period from 1204 to 1261. 70 The second source, that of Nicholas Mesarites, Orthodox Metropolitan of Ephesus, is a digest of negotiations between himself and Pelagius. 80 After describing the stately arrival of Pelagius and the extreme measures used, even a threat of the death penalty in order to obtain conformity, Acropolita goes on to tell how the more important Greeks living near by went to the Emperor Henry and begged him to intervene for them who were of a different race and already 7 6 Pressutti, Nos. 4085, 4536, 4540, 4563, 4564, 4105, 4431, 5108, 5126, 3914. 7 7 Inn. E p. Lib. XVI, ep. 162. 7 8 "A peine le légat fut il arrive a Constantinople, qu'abusant du pouvoir qui lui avait ete donne par le pape," Du Cange, Histoire de VEmpire, I, 134. Luchaire ( Innocent III, La Question d'Orient, p. 259 ) also believed that he "surpassed his instructions." Despite the work that Pelagius had done in the curia and during the first year in the East, Norden (p. 2 1 3 ) says, "ging dem Pelagius jegliche diplomatische Fähigkeit ab." 7 9 Alice Gardner, The Lascarids of Nicaea, pp. 282 sq. Vasiliev (II, 2 4 7 ) speaks of Acropolita as a contemporary of the events described in his history, which is not entirely accurate since he was not born until 1217. Cf. Heisenberg, "Studien zu Georges Acropolita," Sitzungsberichte der Philos-philolhistor. Klasse der Bayerischen Akad. der Wissenschaft zu München ( 1 8 9 9 ) , II, 4 6 3 - 5 5 8 . 8 0 The Greek text has been edited by Heisenberg, Sitzungsberichte ( 1923), III, 6 - 5 4 . The text followed by Norden, of which he gives some excerpts, e.g., pp. 2 1 5 sq., differs only slightly and not essentially from that of Heisenberg. Cf. A. Vasiliev, "Mesarites as a Source," Speculum, X I I I ( 1 9 3 8 ) , 1 8 0 - 8 2 .

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

17

paid allegiance to a pontiff of their own. It was true, they said, that their bodies were subject to his imperial power, but they remained masters of their own souls. Although it might be necessary to bear arms in Henry's defense, yet by no means could they be forced to surrender their rites and ceremonies. The Emperor, continues Acropolita, fearing the loss of the Greeks' support and despite the protests of Pelagius, reopened the churches, liberated the imprisoned monks, and unshackled the clergy.81 In the account of the conference between Pelagius and Nicholas Mesarites, the latter recorded a cross-examination in which he asked the Cardinal why he had dealt harshly with the monks and priests. The Legate did not deny the charge, nor make any apology. In fact he declared that he would have done more had it not been for a delegation sent to him by Theodore Lascaris. Pelagius evidently wanted to retain the goodwill of Lascaris in Nicaea as much as the Emperor Henry wanted the support of the Greeks in Constantinople. Evidently if it had not been for this more far-reaching policy, the monks would have suffered severer punishment.82 Undoubtedly the use of physical violence was contrary to Pope Innocent's earlier program of reconciliation through moderation, but it is not clear that it was contrary to his intentions after 1211. He had told the Emperor Henry to use the secular arm when necessary to enforce conformity 83 and had used words in his instructions to Maximus which admitted of broad interpretation 84 —instructions which were passed on to Pelagius. Except for the threat of death which may have been an Acropolitan embellishment ( Mesarites does not mention it ), the procedure of the Legate was in conformity with the attitude of an age which was witnessing the Albigensian wars and in 1213 recorded the decree of King Frederick against heretics.83 Acropolita, cap. 17, p. 32. Norden, pp. 221-22 with the Greek text. Heisenberg, Sitzungsberichte, 1923, III Abhandlung, 22, cap. 21. 8 » Inn. Ep. Lib. XV, ep. 74. Innocent to Henry, May 23, 1212. P.R.P. No. 4482. 8 4 "Unde sententias quas rationabiliter tulerit in rebelles usque ad satisfactionem condignem praecipimus inviolabiliter observan." Innocent to the clergy of Constantinople concerning Maximus, Inn. Ep. Lib. XV, ep. 154. ss MGH. Leges, Sect. IV, Vol. II, 224, and 195-97, No. 158, which refers to the death penalty imposed in 1232. 81

82

18

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

In objecting to the action of Pelagius, Mesarites asked why the Greeks were cruelly treated when so much tolerance was shown by the Roman Church to Jews and heretics, to Armenians, Nestorians, and Jacobites. 86 An answer was difficult because the status of the Greeks in Constantinople was ambiguous. Pelagius was evidently acting on the belief that their acquiescence to the rule of the Latins implied acceptance of the Roman Church's jurisdiction. It had been the practice in the East from the early years of the crusades for the Greeks to recognize the jurisdiction of the Latin clergy in those places ruled by the Franks. 87 Pelagius must not have been ignorant of the ecclesiastical situation in Palestine. It was upon this practice in the Kingdom of Jerusalem that similar problems between the Greeks and Latins were solved some years later in Cyprus with the approval of Pelagius. 88 When, therefore, the Greek clergy in Constantinople refused obedience to the superiors approved by Rome and even to the Pope's Legate, Pelagius considered their action equivalent to rebellion. The nature of the Legate's legislation in regard to rites is not known from the sources. Yet since a refusal to tolerate extremes was manifested as the policy of the Roman Church in the Fourth Lateran Council held in 1215, we have no reason to doubt that he did attack certain practices. The Council declared that although the Roman Church wanted to favor the Greeks by permitting them to retain their customs and rites in so far as the interests of God would allow, nevertheless in things that were dangerous to souls and derogatory to ecclesiastical honor she neither wished nor ought to defer to them. 89 Norden, p. 221; Heisenberg, III Abhandlung, 57. E. Rey, Les Colonies Franques de Syrie ( Paris, 1883 ), pp. 89-91. Gaston Dodu, Histoire des Institutions Monarchiques dans le Royaume Latin de Jerusalem (Paris, 1894), pp. 328 sq. On p. 329 he states, "Le clergé indigène ne fut point inquiété. Il dut simplement reconnaître la suprématie de l'Église romaine. A cette condition il lui fut permis de vivre fraternellement à coté d'elle." 8 8 Louis de Mas Latrie, Histoire de We de Chypre, III, 620. The Greeks, "obedientes erunt omnibus in spiritualibus archiepiscopo et episcopis Latinis, ac ecclesiis suis, secundum quod in regno Jerosonmitano Greci sacerdotes et levite bene obediunt vel obediverunt Latinis episcopis, ab eo tempore quo Latini tam clerici quam laici ibi dominium habuerunt." No. 2 of the Treaty of September 14, 1222. 8 9 "In his tarnen illis deferre nec volumus nec debemus quae periculum générant animarum, et ecclesiasticae derogant honestati." Mansi, XXII, 989. 88

87

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

19

That Pelagius was more intent upon establishing the authority of Rome than in making any certain liturgy obligatory is indicated in his conversation with the Metropolitan Mesarites concerning the persecution of the Greek monks. As we have seen, Pelagius confessed that he was deterred only by the delegation from Theodore Lascaris. He then added that not only would he leave the monks in peace but would let the Greeks retain their places undisturbed if Lascaris would become a true son of Rome.80 Quite possibly the entire story has not been told by our two primary sources. Robert Saulger, in his Histoire nouvelle des anciens Ducs de l'Archipel, relates some curious details.91 According to him, when Pelagius arrived, the schismatics rather than be subject to the Latin rite stirred up a sedition of twenty thousand people in Constantinople. Order was restored only after the Emperor Henry had assured the mob that the Legate came only for the affairs of the Latins. Saulger suggested that the Empress who obstinately followed the Greek rite was implicated. He believed, however, that religion was only a pretext. What made the Greeks most apprehensive was the presence of an imperial Latin army only three leagues from the city. Whether the opposition to reunion with Rome on the part of the Greeks in Constantinople was inspired by fidelity to their traditional religious rites, or was directed by the nobles to embarrass the Latin Government and prepare the way for an overthrow, the fact remains that the first phase of the Legate's mission to establish ecclesiastical order in the Latin Empire was, in part, a failure. It must have seemed a hopeless undertaking to attempt a reunion between Rome and the Empire of Nicaea after the discouraging results in the Latin Empire. Even the precedents in this assignment afforded no more promise of success. In the immediate years after the conquest of Constantinople, before the Greek EmNorden, p. 222 (Greek text given). . The details are taken from a lengthy excerpt from the original work printed in Marco Sañudo, by John K. Fotneringham and L. F. R. Williams. (Oxford, 1 9 1 5 ) , Appendix I, 113-22. The excerpt is from the 2d edition by Saulger in 1699, Bk. I, 1-32. E . Hopf in his article "Griechische Geschichte," Encyklopadie der Wissenschaft und Künste ( L X X X V [1867], 2 0 2 ) says that Saulger's work is an unreliable mixture of fact and fable. Yet Saulger's long residence in Constantinople may have given him access to sources not otherwise obtainable. Cf. Carlos Sommervogel, Bibliothèque de la Çompagniç (fe Jésus ( Paris, 1 8 9 6 ) , Pt. I, Bibliographie, VoL VII, 6 5 6 - 5 8 , 90

91

20

PELAGIUS AND T H E F I F T H CRUSADE

pire of Nicaea was organized, Pope Innocent had sent a legate, Cardinal Benedict, to negotiate with the Greeks in exile. He had accomplished nothing. 92 Two years later, Innocent wrote to Lascaris promising to send another legate and exhorting him to live in harmony with the Latin Emperor. The tenor of the letter was not such as to placate the Greek ruler. Although Innocent apparently recognized the conquest in Asia Minor by telling Lascaris to be content with the boundary of water which God had set between him and the Emperor Henry, and not to try to pass over it, yet the Pope definitely put Lascaris in a position subordinate to Henry toward whom "he should humble himself and pay due honor." 93 The Emperor Henry, seeing that Lascaris was little inclined to humble himself, decided to do it by force of arms and conquer the Empire of Nicaea. For a time it seemed that fortune was smiling on Henry through the swarthy Seljuks who attacked Lascaris in the rear, but the latter soon regained his position with the help of Western mercenaries. When Lascaris then began to encourage rebellion among the Greeks in Constantinople, Henry again invaded Asia Minor. 94 Such was the milieu of distrust, hatred, and fear of reprisal in which Cardinal Pelagius was supposed to labor for religious reconciliation. Pelagius dispatched messengers to the Emperor Lascaris asking that a delegation be sent to Constantinople to discuss their mutual problems. Lascaris seems to have been sincere about wanting to cooperate. 95 He hoped that his own patriarch, Theodore Eirenikos, elected in September, 1214 90 to succeed Michael Au9 2 Norden, pp. 182 sq. Heisenberg, "Die Unionsverhandlungen von 30. August 1206," Sitzungsberichte 1923, II Abhandlung. »s Inn. Ep. Lib. XI, ep. 47, March 17, 1208. It seems that Gardner ( 8 0 ) and Vasiliev ( II, 233 ) have placed too much stress on the fact that Innocent did not address Lascaris as "Emperor," but only as a "nobleman"; perhaps Innocent did not know of the coronation. 94 Graeci omnes murmurare incipientes contra nos, ei promittebant auxilium, si venerit Constantinopolim pugnaturus." Henry to his friends in the West. RHF. XVIII, 532. In this letter (pp. 5 3 0 - 3 3 ) Henry gave the full story of his conquests up to January of 1212. 9 5 Gerland, p. 238. Gardner, p. 114. 9 6 Heisenberg, Sitzungsberichte ( 1 9 3 3 ) , III Abhandlung, p. 55. Michael Autoreanus died on August 26, 1214, and Theodore Eirenikos succeeded in September. Heisenberg's research disproves the dates followed by Norden, p. 260, note, and Gerland, p. 328, note 3.

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

21

toreanus, would favor reconciliation, but the Emperor was soon disillusioned. Eirenikos addressed an encyclical letter to his subjects and to the Greeks in Constantinople which could hardly be interpreted as conciliatory.97 The Greek Emperor then had no other choice of a patriarch than Nicholas Mesarites, Metropolitan of Ephesus, who because of his familiarity with the earlier negotiations of the Legate Benedict would have known the attitude of the papal party. In October of 1214, before the Ephesian Bishop left for Constantinople, some Greek monks arrived at Nicaea with harrowing tales of the cruelty inflicted by Pelagius.98 Ignoring their warning, the legation proceeded to Constantinople in November where Mesarites was courteously received by the Latin clergy.99 He was presented with a richly-caparisoned horse to bear him in pomp through the capital, but the humble churchman spurned ostentation and called for a mule. On the following day the Metropolitan was taken to St. Sophia where in glory upon a throne, surrounded by clergy, sat Pelagius. Mesarites was highly indignant that the Legate did not rise at his entrance, nor even offer a hand in welcome. After all, thought the Ephesian, this man was not a metropolitan, nor an archbishop, but only a bishop of an obscure see in Albano. Furthermore, what right did he have to wear red buskins, the insignia of imperial power? Pelagius explained that he wore them in his official position as the personal representative of the Pope, and that the popes had been granted the right to the imperial colors by Constantine. Mesarites countered with a keen thrust. He extended his foot and showed that he too wore the imperial red, but following the example of his Master Christ who shunned display, he wore the red on the inside. 9 7 Gerland, p. 238. Heisenberg, III Abhandlung, p. 80, and note for p. 47. For the text of the encyclical, cf. A. Papadopoulos-Kerameus, "OeoSupos ElmriKÓs" Byzantinische Zeitschrift, Χ (1901), 182-92; text, p. 187. "Norden, p. 217. For the date cf. Heisenberg, III Abhandlung, p. 62. These may be the monks mentioned by Acropolita (cap. 17, p. 3 2 ) , who said that before the imprisoned clergy were liberated by Henry, many monks went to the Emperor Theodore. This would place the persecution and the delegation to Nicaea in approximately the same month of October. 8 9 All the details of the conferences are taken from Norden's digest from the original, pp. 216 sq. and from Heisenberg, III Abhandlung, pp. 55 sq., Luchaire (Innocent III, La Question d'Orient, pp. 270 sq.) quotes amply without references.

22

PELAGIUS AND T H E F I F T H CRUSADE

Mesarites, secure in his red-lined buskins, resumed the offensive, a frontal attack. Did personal ambition prompt those acts of violence against the monks and priests? "Do you believe, O exalted Cardinal," asked the Ephesian, "that you will subject all under heaven to the spiritual power of Rome?" What, he demanded, could be gained by subjecting those poor, ignorant monks living, as they were, dead to the world? Pelagius probably felt that the ecclesiastical world would be safer if the Greek monks were confined in prison rather than allowed to enjoy their peculiar monastic freedom. If the Cardinal retorted to the Metropolitan's raillery, Mesarites did not record it. The fruitless conferences lasted a week. At the end of November the Nicaean party left Constantinople for Asia Minor, accompanied by representatives of the Legate, among whom was a certain Spaniard, Pontius of Ilerda, a professor of Roman Law at the University of Bologna.100 Instead of going to Nicaea, they joined the Emperor Lascaris at Heraclea in Pontus where he had gone to attack David Comnenus. David had established his rule in Heraclea when his brother Alexius set up the Greek Empire of Trebizond.101 At the renewed conferences which Lascaris attended, they discussed dogmatic differences, especially concerning the procession of the Holy Spirit (the Filioque), and the primacy of the pope. Again nothing satisfactory was accomplished, and the Cardinal's representatives rejoined him in Constantinople in December.102 Sometime during the interval of 1213-15, the Greeks wrote a curious letter to the Pope protesting against the Latins' position in regard to the primacy and the Filioque, yet manifesting a submissive attitude toward the Emperor Henry's rule. They 1 0 0 Heisenberg (p. 5 7 ) gives the identification with the qualification, "wenn ich nicht irre." 1 0 1 A. Vasiliev, "The Foundation of the Empire of Trebizond," Speculum, XI ( 1 9 3 6 ) , 3—37. Alexius and David fled from Constantinople probably in 1185 to Georgia. Alexius took Trebizond in April, 1204, and Davia undertook to extend control westward to Heraclea in Pontus during 1205. For an exhaustive critical bibliography with many references to the controversy concerning the flight of the brothers from Constantinople, cf. A. Vasiliev, "The Empire of Trebizond in History and Literature," Byzantion, XV ( 1 9 4 0 - 4 1 ) , 316-77. 1 0 2 Heisenberg, III Abhandlung, 58.

ROME TO CONSTANTINOPLE

23

made two specific requests, first that a general council be held, and second that they be allowed to have their own patriarch.103 It is difficult to imagine how an ecumenical council could have produced any solution, since there is no indication that the Greeks were prepared to promise obedience to the popes as the sole successors of St. Peter. The greatest concession they would make was to admit the non-committal commemoration, "Long live lord Innocent Pope of ancient Rome." 104 A general council was already being planned in the West and a bull of convocation had been sent to Constantinople.105 Perhaps Innocent considered the Greeks included in the summons as subjects of the Church in Constantinople, but he gave them no personal summons and they did not attend. In the meantime, as we have seen, the Greeks in Nicaea elected a new patriarch, and everything remained in the same status as before the arrival of Pelagius. In view of the deep-rooted animosity of the East for the West which the Fourth Crusade greatly justified, the slanderous opinions mutually expressed,106 the strength of traditional religious bonds, and the political ambitions involved, neither Pelagius nor anyone else could have united the Latins and Greeks in 1215.107 It may seem odd that Pelagius had apparently done nothing about the problem of the patriarchal elections for which he was sent to Constantinople. Actually as long as he was present with full legatine powers there was no need of a patriarch. It was probably at his suggestion that the two candidates, the Archbishop of Heraclea and the Curate Louis of Venice, went to Rome 1 0 3 Cotelerius, Ecclesiae Graecae Monumenta, III, 516 sq. Luchaire, La Question d'Orient (251) thinks that Norden and Gerland did not give this letter enough importance. Gardner (p. I l l , note 1) speculates that the letter may have been written during the vacancy of the patriarchal see of Nicaea, which would have been from late August until September, 1214. 1 0 4 Norden, p. 215, note 1. Text. Cotelerius, III, 519. i° 5 Inn. Ep. Lib. XVI, ep. 28. P.R.P. No. 4706. 1 0 6 The Latins thought the Greeks were by nature malicious and perfidious (Inn. Ep. Lib. VIII, ep. 131, Emperor Henry to Innocent). The Greeks summed up their feelings by calling the Latins "dogs." Cf. Lauer, "Une lettre inedite d'henri 1er d'Angre Empereur de Constantinople aux Prélats Italiens," Melanges offerts α M. Gustave Schlumberger (Paris, 1924), p. 201. 107 Gerland ( 236 ) says that union was bound to fail, "aas war der Eifer der in beiden Lagern vorhandenen intransigenten Partei." Cf. Vasiliev, II, 142 sq.

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

24

and presented their case to the prelates assembled in the Council of the Lateran in November, 1215. By the counsel of the cardinals the two were set aside and a certain Gervasius was named Patriarch of Constantinople.108 Pelagius may have remained in the East until the new Patriarch arrived, but he was back in Italy by February 5, 1216.108 108

1084. 109

Godefridus quoted in Acta Sanctorum, I, 149, No. 892. Mansi, XXII, P.R.P. No. 5065. Pelagius is given as a witness to a papal document.

II

CRUSADE OF 1217 THE years which Pelagius passed in the East were momentous in the history of Western Europe. To the Cardinal who had been familiar with the political complications of the European states through his position in the curia, it must have given cause for great concern when traders and pilgrims related the happenings of those years: news from England of its vassalage to the papacy, civil war and the baronial triumph of 1214-15; news from the Continent of the battle of Bouvines with all that it portended —the emergence of France as the dominant Power, the ruin of the Guelf party, and the reshaping of papal political policy.1 If Pelagius was apprehensive for the political future of Europe, he could find some reassuring hope for society in the promise of a reformed and invigorated Church, whose vitality and strength were manifested by the numerous prelates and representatives of kingdoms assembled for the Council of the Lateran. The reform of abuses and definition of dogmas promulgated by the Council might have proved ineffective had they not been accompanied by an internal rejuvenation. This new life came from the moral and intellectual dynamism of the Franciscans and Dominicans whose spiritual worth was already apparent to the curia, naturally cautious of innovation in that age of Joachim and the Albigensians. 1 The Papacy had been persistently Guelf since the time of Frederick I, when he crushed Henry the Lion. At the death of the Emperor Henry VI and the ensuing civil wars in Germany, Innocent tried to safeguard the welfare of the Church independently of Guelf or Ghibelline support. After the death of Philip of Swabia, Innocent favored Otto of Brunswick for the imperial throne, until he began to ignore ecclesiastical rights. Innocent was then forced to put forward his ward, Frederick, the son of Constance of Sicily and Henry VI, who naturally inherited the Ghibelline sympathies. The battle of Bouvines eliminated Otto and left Frederick with the Ghibellines the strongest claimants of rule in Germany.

25

26

PELAGIUS AND T H E F I F T H CRUSADE

When in the late winter of 1216 Cardinal Pelagius returned to Italy, the ports were unusually active preparing ships and supplies for another crusade. It was almost unbelievable. Pelagius knew that Innocent had sent preachers throughout northern Europe in 1214-15 to create interest in a crusade, and had made a crusade the keynote of the recent Lateran Council, but could the Cardinal be blamed for being skeptical? For sixteen years Pope Innocent had been imploring the peoples of Europe to take the cross. Thus far his only consolation was the quasi-crusade against the Moslems in Spain; beyond this he received only grief from that merchants' adventure of 1202-04, and pain from that mass movement of child delinquency in 1212. 2 As Pelagius passed through the towns he sensed that the situation had changed, that something of the old enthusiasm stirred the people. Normally it would not be wise to estimate the fervor of the northern knights by the commercial activity of the Italians, but impressive rumors were coming south from the Rhineland. There were stories about thousands taking the cross inspired by marvelous apparitions. It was told in the village of Bedum near Cologne, where the crusade was being preached, three forms appeared in the skies, two of white and between them one in color in the shape of a cross with a figure as of the Christ upon it. Again in a small village of Frisia many people saw a cross of blue beside the sun. In the village of Dokkum, the scene of St. Boniface's martyrdom, on his feast day, June 5, thousands saw a great white cross which moved slowly toward the south. 3 Before long many would be leaving these villages with the symbol 2 Paul Alphandery, "Les Croisades d'Enfants," Revue de l'histoire des religions, L X X I I I ( 1 9 1 6 ) , 2 5 9 - 8 2 . Joseph Hansberg, "The Children's Crusade," Catholic Historical Review, XXIV ( 1 9 3 8 ) , 3 0 - 3 8 . Dana Munro, "The Children's Crusade," American Historical Review, X I X ( 1 9 1 4 ) , 5 1 6 - 2 4 . R. Röhricht, "Der Kinderkreuzzug 1212," Historische Zeüschrift, XXXVI ( 1 8 7 6 ) , München, 1-8. Eduard Winldemann ( Geschichte Kaiser Friedrichs des Zweiten und seiner Reiche, I, 2 2 1 - 2 2 ) rejects part of the legend by questioning the identity of Guillelmus Porcus and Hugo Ferreus. 3 Oliveras, Historia Damiatina, ch. 9, pp. 1 7 4 - 5 . Letter to Count of Namur, June, 1214, pp. 2 8 5 - 8 6 ; letter to Robert Courçon, June, 1214, pp. 2 8 7 - 8 8 . This source hereafter referred to as Oliver. The Historia Damiatina has been well translated by John J. Gavigan, The Capture of Damietta ( "Translations and Reprints." 3rd. ser, Vol. g: Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1 9 4 9 ) .

CRUSADE OF 1217

27

of the cross upon their shoulders to strike again at the crescent of the Moslems. If this new crusade was to be a success, it would be in great part a tribute to the indefatigable zeal of Pope Innocent himself. Yet it could not be said that Innocent wanted a crusade for its own sake, that is, to the glory of the papacy; he was hopeful of attaining his objective—the Holy Land—preferably by peaceful means. To this end he tried to persuade the Sultan al'Adil (Saphadin) how impractical and increasingly difficult it would be for the Moslems to retain Palestine. How much better it would be for him to return Jerusalem, and make an exchange of prisoners, so that the condition of the Christians in the East would not be worse than that of the Moslems living in the West. Anyway, Innocent continued, God had only permitted al'Adil's brother to take the city in punishment of the Christians who had offended him.4 Innocent did not say, as he did in a letter to the faithful of Europe, that he was persuaded that al'Adil incarnated the beast of the Apocalypse, and that the 666-year sway allotted to the beast was almost complete.6 The Sultan was not intimidated or impressed. Although it was said that he wanted peace, preparations were hastened for war.® Crusade preachers were appointed for all of Europe from Hungary to Ireland and from Sweden to Sardinia.7 The Urban of the Fifth Crusade was Innocent, and his Clermont was the Lateran Council, for from that assembly came the ultimate impulse and definite plans. The crusaders must be prepared to depart by June 1, 1217; if by sea, from Brindisi or Messina, and Innocent would be present to give them his blessing; if by land, a legate a latere would be provided for their help and guidance. War in the thirteenth century was beginning to be expensive, hence money appropriations had to be generous. The Pope promised thirty thousand pounds from the papal treasury, together * Inn. Ep. Lib. XVI, ep. 37; Raynaldus, anno 1213, No. 3. This hope of the Pope is expressed as late as 1216 in a curious mission sent to the Sultan. Cf. R. Röhricht, Geschichte des Königreichs Jerusalem, p. 718, note β. 5 Inn. Ep. Lib. XVI, ep. 28; P.R.P. No. 4706, April 19, 1213. 8 Raynaldus, anno 1214, No. 7. 7 Röhricht, "Zur innern Geschichte des Kreuzzuges," Studien zur Geschichte des Fünften Kreuzzuges, p. 5.

28

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

with three thousand marks silver and a ship for the crusaders from the environs of Rome. Moreover, he and the cardinals would give a tenth of their revenues, while the clergy in general must pay a twentieth for three years.8 Innocent, however, was not to live to realize the great ambition of his life. On May 20, 1216, he left for Perugia to settle a dispute between the Pisans, Genoese, and Lombards, lest their feuds retard the crusade.9 While there he was stricken with fever. Pope Innocent died at Perugia on July 16, 1216.10 Great as Innocent's crusading activity had been, it was ably seconded by that of his successor, Honorius III. 11 Europe was not left in doubt about the new Pope's policy. On July 25, a week after his election, he wrote to John de Brienne, King of Jerusalem, to the Military Orders and prelates of Christendom expressing his intention to prosecute the crusade.12 During the succeeding months, the resolution was emphasized by appeals to princes and knights to take the cross,13 by exhortations to the clergy to remit the assessed tax. 14 Although encouragement was given to the crusade by the King 8 Mansi, XXII, 1057-1068. Letter of Innocent, December 14, 1215, P.R.P. No. 5012. Raynaldus, anno 1215, No. 13. A second letter concerning preparations, January 8, 1216, Patrologia Latina, CCXVII, Supplement CCXVII, 255-58; P.R.P. No. 5048-5050a. Concerning the tax, cf. Adolf Gottlob, Die päpstlichen Kreuzzugs-steuem des 13 Jahrhunderts, pp. 24 sq. and p. 177. 8 Raynaldus, anno 1216, No. 9. 1 0 Honorius announced the death of Innocent. Pressutti, No. 2-7. Cf. F. Hinter, Histoire du Pape Innocent III, 399-400. 1 1 "Die Zahl seiner darauf zielenden Verordnungen ist grösser als die seiner Vorgänger und Nachfolger, so dass man wohl sagen kann, dass die Kreuzzugsthätigkeit des Papstthums in ihm ihren Höhepunkt erreicht hat." Röhricht, Zur innern Geschichte. Studien, p. 5. 1 2 Letter to King John of Jerusalem and all prelates of Christendom. Pressutti, Nos. 2-7; Horoy, Lib. I, Nos. 1-2. ( The letter to King John is incorrectly dated July 15); P.R.P. No. 5317. 1 3 Honorius to Odo III, Duke of Burgundy, numerous bishops and princes. Pressutti, No. 14; Horoy, Lib. I, No. xi; RHF. XIX, 610. Honorius to the laymen and clerics of France and Germany, December 5, 1216. Pressutti, No. 151; Horoy, Lib. I, No. 184; P.R.P. No. 5381. 1 1 Letter to Cluny, November 12, 1216. Pressutti, Nos. 101-2; Horoy, Lib. I, Nos. 57-58. Letter of November 21, 1216. Pressutti, No. I l l ; Horoy, Lib. I, No. 65. Honorius stipulated that two clerics and two of the Military Orders were to collect the tax together.

CRUSADE OF 1217

29

of Norway, and Frederick II had made promises when he was crowned King in 1215, the only monarch of Europe to partake actively was King Andrew II of Hungary. Andrew had inherited the unfulfilled crusade vow of his father Bela III, and would have taken the cross earlier had his kingdom not been disrupted in civil war.16 King Andrew had an added motive for going to the East, even in anticipation of the time set by the Lateran Council. Henry, the Latin Emperor of Constantinople, died in June, 1216, and the Latins looking about for a ruler had intimated a choice between King Andrew and Pierre de Courtenay.17 Pope Honorius told Andrew that under the circumstances he could anticipate the departure date of June and leave at Easter time. The Pope allowed the use of crusaders to help him, but insisted that this diversion should not delay aid for the Holy Land. 18 While Andrew would be away, Honorius promised to place his kingdom under the protection of the Church.19 When, however, Pierre de Courtenay was chosen, he received the approval and royal crown from the Pope. Andrew then lost much of his enthusiasm, with the result that it was well into the summer before his forces began to unite. They did not assemble in the designated Italian 15

1E Honorius congratulated him for his cooperation in helping the crusaders. Pressutti, No. 399; Raynaldus, anno 1217, No. 24. 1 6 Johannes Thwrocz, Chronica Hungarorum, cap. LXXIII, p. 149. Innocent on September 14, 1198, exhorted Andrew to fulfill the vow (Inn. Ep. Lab. I, ep. 10), but later in February of 1213, he gave Andrew a delay for three years (Inn. Ep. Lib. XV, ep. 224). Cf. Röhricht, "Der Kreuzzug des Königs Andreas II von Ungarn 1217," Forschungen zur Deutschen Geschichte, XVI (1876), 139-56, cf. 142. This source hereafter referred to as Forschungen. 1 7 Andrew, after his first wife died, had married a daughter of Yolande and Pierre de Courtenay. Yolande was also the sister of the Emperors Baldwin I and Henry. Röhricht (.Studien, p. 23) is incorrect in saying that the Emperor Henry died in 1214. Röhricht states that Andrew was elected, but refused the position, but it is not definite in the letter of Honorius to Andrew; Honorius said that the Greeks were sending messengers announcing that they were going to elect "you (Andrew) or your father-in-law." Theiner, Vet. Mon. Hist., I, 4-5, No. 5; Horoy, Lib. I, No. 181. Muralt (Essai de Chronographie Byzantine, p. 317, No. 7 ) states, "Pierre de Courtenay est nommé à sa place ( Henry ) au lieu de son gendre André de Hongrie." Cf. P.R.P. No. 5440. 1 8 Theiner, Vet. Mon. Hist., I, 5, No. 6. Horoy, Lib. I, No. 181. Pressutti, No. 291. « Theiner, I, 5, No. 6. Horoy, Lib. I, No. 215. Pressutti, No. 330.

30

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

ports, but at Spalato, the present city of Split on the Dalmatian coast of Yugoslavia.20 The stories of crusading zeal from the Rhineland had no doubt given Pope Honorius the hope that the Frisians' powerful fleet together with King Andrew's men would make a formidable crusading host. The hope was premature. The Frisians, did not reach Portugal until July, and then became divided; one part remained at Lisbon, the other sailed around Spain to Gaeta in Italy, reaching there only in October, too late to continue to the East that year. 21 Pope Honorius was in a dilemma; whether to delay the crusade again and thus leave thousands of fighting men idle in the southern ports—potential bloodshed in the Middle Ages—or whether to send the limited numbers on to the East to attack wherever possible. He chose the latter alternative. On July 24, 1217, Honorious advised the crusaders at Messina, Brindisi, and all the Italian cities to proceed to Cyprus where King Andrew and Duke Leopold of Austria would meet with King John de Brienne, or his representatives, and the envoys of the Military Orders on the feast of the Nativity of the Blessed Virgin, September 8. There they would hold a council of war to decide "on what part of the Saracen lands to invade." 22 2 0 Thomas, Historia Spahtensium, ed. Röhricht, Testimonia Minora de Quinto Bello Sacro chronicis orientalibus excerpsit, p. 229. This source hereafter referred to as Test. Min. It is said that there were 10,000 cavalry and innumerable foot-soldiers. Cf. Röhricht, Forschungen, XVI, 142. 2 1 Oliver, ch. 8, pp. 172-73. De Itinere Frisonum, ed. Röhricht, Quinti Belli Sacri Scriptores Minores, pp. 59-70 ( SS. Min. ) ; Gesta Crucigerorum Hhenanorum (SS. Min.), pp. 29-56. Raynaldus, anno 1217, No. 32-34. For a full discussion of the adventures in Portugal, cf. Friedrich Kurth, "Der Anteil niederdeutscher Kreuzfahrer an den Kämpfen der Portugiesen gegen die Mauren," Mittheilungen des Instituts für Oesterreichische Geschichtsforschung (MIÖG), VIII (Supplement 1911), 131-252, esp. "Eroberung von Alcacer do Sol 1217," pp. 216-44. 2 2 Honorius to King John on July 24, advising a council at Cyprus with King Andrew and Duke Leopold, "per te vel solemnes nuntios." Theiner, Vet. Mon. Hist., I, 8, No. 13 (incorrectly dated IX Kal. July); Horoy, Lib. II, No. 3; Pressutti, No. 673; P.fl.P. No. 5585. On the same day he wrote to the Archbishop of Genoa and bishops in other Italian ports and told them to determine with others at Cyprus, "ex qua parte debeant terram Sarracenorum intrare." Theiner, I, 7, No. 12; Horoy, Lib. II, No. 1; Pressutti, No. 672; P.R.P. No. 5586.

CRUSADE OF 1217

31

Honorius had already appointed papal legates for the crusaders in northern Italy, at Messina and Brindisi to care for the spiritual wants and settle any problems needing papal authority.23 For the crusade itself, and for the council at Cyprus, he chose Cardinal Pelagius whom the Pope knew through years of close association in the curia to be a man "of prudence, virtue and experience," in whom he could place the highest confidence.24 It was probably as a reward to Pelagius for accepting this new burden that the Pope on the same day granted him jurisdiction over the temporalities of Albano formerly reserved to the Holy See.25 That the activities of the Cardinal Legate were not to be confined to the problems of the crusaders alone was clear from the instructions given by Honorius that he should use full authority in behalf of Raymond Rupin, Prince of Antioch, whom the Pope had recently taken under the protection of the papacy.29 By a strange coincidence, before this news could have reached Antioch, the clergy there sent a petition to Honorius asking that Pelagius be named head of their church.27 Since Pelagius was too valuable to the papacy in the capacity of legate and was himself averse to settling down in Antioch, the Pope responded with diplomatic finesse that the Cardinal already held a July 8, 1217. Pressutti, No. 654; Horoy, Lib. I, No. 355; P.R.P. No. 5575. Letter of Honorius to Archbishop of Genoa and others of July 24, referred to above, note 22. It may be of some significance that Honorius did not mention Pelagius in his letter to King John. In speaking of the relationship of the popes and the curia to the crusade, Zimmermann (p. 251) remarks, "Diese gewaltige Aufgabe verlangte ferner, dass der Abgesandte des Papstes ein Mann von höchstem Ansehen und unbedingter Auctorität war." 2 5 July 24, 1217. Pressutti, No. 674, Horoy, Lib. H, No. 2; Ughelli, Italia Sacra, I, 257. 2 6 July 25, 1217. Pressutti, No. 675, 676; Horoy, Lib. II, No. 4. Cf. below, p. 99, for Raymond Rupin and the problem of Antioch. 2 7 The Patriarch Pierre II, abbot of Locedia ( not a former bishop of Ivrée as Grousset states, cf. Rene Grousset, Histoire des Croisades et du Royaume Franc de Jerusalem, III, 258), died in 1217. E. Rey, "Les Dignitaires de la Principauté d'Antioche," Revue de TOrient latin, VIII (1902), 116-57, cf. pp. 139-40. Mas Latrie ("Les Patriarches Latins d'Antioche," R.O.L. II, 192-205) confused Pierre II with Peter de Capua; the latter, a doctor of theology of the University of Paris, was chosen by Pope Honorius to succeed, but never became patriarch. Cf. Claude Cahen, La Syrie du Nord a L'Epoque des Croisades, pp. 660-61. Ranier, a Tuscan, became Patriarch of Antioch in 1219, cf. Rey, op. cit. 23

21

32

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

high position in the Roman Church and preferred to remain there, even though the see of Antioch was one of great dignity. 2 8 Pelagius was to remain settled in Italy longer than he anticip a t e d because the plans of the Pope h a d nothing in c o m m o n with the confusion across the Adriatic at Spalato. T h e Italians h a d agreed to provide transportation for King Andrew's army, but the time for departure c a m e and went, and yet no ships h a d appeared. Since it was now too late for the rendezvous at Cyprus, D u k e Leopold took advantage of a fair wind and sailed his ship straight through to Acre in early September. H e was followed by A n d r e w in mid-September with as many crusaders as the King could accommodate in only two boats provided by the Spalatane. 2 9 Again the hopes of the Pope were frustrated. N o n e of the crusaders in the Italian cities was able to join King Andrew, not even the L e g a t e Pelagius. 3 0 It is little wonder that when P o p e 2 8 Pressutti, No. 760. Text given by Hassler, Anhang I, p. 103. It seems gratuitous for Hassler to interpret the preference of Pelagius not to accept the honor, as "er hoffte an der römischen Kirche noch hohe Wurden zu erlangen" (p. 20). Perhaps Hassler read that into the words of Honorius that Pelagius preferred to be in the Roman Church "in qua magnum locum noscitur obtinere." 29 Thomas Spalatensis (Test. Min., p. 231). Cf. Röhricht, Forschungen, XVI, 142. Andrew landed at Acre in October. The Annales Claustroneohurgensis (MGH. SS. IX, 622) gives an added detail that Leopold of Austria made the trip in a record time of sixteen days. Mas Latrie (Hist. Chy., I, 193) states incorrectly that a council was held at Cyprus between King Leopold and Ludwig of Bavaria. It is possible also that J. Delà ville Le Roulx (Les Hospitaliers en Terre Sainte et à Chypre, p. 142, note 2 ) concluded too much from the order of the Pope on July 24 by stating that Guerin de Montaigu, Master of the Hospitalers, went to Cyprus. (He refers to the letter as being from Innocent instead of Honorius. ) 3 0 There is some discrepancy in the estimates of the size of the army. Jacques de Vitry said that there was no comparison to the size of the army in arms, horses and fighters. Cf. Jacques de Vitry, Ep. Ill, September, 1218, ed. Röhricht, Zeitschrift für Kirchengeschichte (ZKG), XV (1895), 568. After Honorius heard from the Master of the Templars, he said that the crusaders were not many, but were strong in faith. Pressutti, No. 885; RHF, XIX, 639; Bullarium Romanum, III, 333. In the first expedition against the Moslems in Syria, a Moslem source said there were 15,000 crusaders. Cf. Abu Shama, Livre des Deux Jardins, R.H.C. Or., V, 162, quoting Ibn Djauzi (this source hereafter referred to as Deux Jardins). A western contmuator of William of Tyre's history entitled L'Estoire de Eracles empereur et la conqueste de la Terre ¡TOutremer, R.H.C. Oc. II, 323, gave 2,000 knights, 1,000 horse sergeants, 20,000 infantry, and 30,000 pilgrim crusaders (this source hereafter referred to as Eracles).

CRUSADE OF 1217

33

Honorius heard of the crusaders' arrival at Acre he was deeply concerned for their welfare, realizing as he did that the force was inadequate. That the faithful in Europe might at least help those in the East by their prayers, Honorius convoked the people in the Basilica of Our Saviour and made a procession barefooted to the Church of Sts. Peter and Paul. Other processions were then ordered to be held everywhere on the first Friday of each month.31 At the same time, in a war council held at Acre in October, the Hungarians and Germans accepted a plan previously drawn up by the princes in Palestine. A few would remain to divert the Moslems by attacking them in Syria, while the greater forces of the crusaders would go on to attack Egypt.32 The latter clause was an idle gesture, since all knew that there were no armies on the way immediately, nor sufficient ships to transport the Palestinian army to Egypt. The diversion was to be the crusade itself—a war in Syria against the Sultan al'Adii and his son al'Moazzam. The crusade in Syria was thus removed from papal control and became exclusively a royal-baronial enterprise. Probably King Andrew considered himself the commander-in-chief (at least an Hungarian chronicler thought so). 33 Since the war was to be fought in King John's own kingdom, the latter assumed most of the initiative.34 Lack of a definite leader was not the only problem. In 1217 the crops had been poor in Syria, which meant that the crusaders, not being able to live off the land, could never go far from their base of supplies. Furthermore, because of a 3 1 Letter of November 24, 1217. Pressutti, No. 885; RHF, XIX, 639; Bullarium Romanum, III, 331-33. 32 Guillaume de Chartres told Honorius that before the arrival of King Andrew and Duke Leopold, it was planned by the Patriarch of Jerusalem, King John, the pilgrims and the Military Orders to attack al-Moazzam, lord of Damascus, at Naplus, but after King Andrew arrived all agreed on the double attack. BuHarium Romanum, III, 333 (text); cf. Raynaldus, anno 1217, No. 31; Jac. Vitiy, Ep. III, ZKG, XV, 568; Röhricht, Forschungen, XVI, 143. 3 3 John Thwrocz, Chronica Hungarorum, cap. LXXII. "Ce roi [King Andrew] plein de vaillance et d'audace avait sous ses ordres tous les chefs du littoral," Deux Jardins, 162, quoting Ibn Djauzi. 3 4 Mas Latrie (Hist. Cht/., I, 194), remarks, "Mais l'irrésolution et les resistances des Occidentaux empêchèrent Jean de Brienne de prendre la direction de la guerre." On John's legal status in the Kingdom cf. below, p. 48, note 48.

34

PELAGIUS AND THE FIFTH CRUSADE

lack of horses, they could not m o v e large forces rapidly for surprise attacks. 3 5 W h e n on Friday, November 3, 3 6 the crusaders advanced southeastward along the plains of Esdraelon, on through the Valley of Jezreel toward Bethsan, they met no opposition, because al'Adil, perhaps using the strategy of letting the crusaders exhaust themselves in marching, burned his c a m p before Bethsan. 3 7 T h e crusaders rested on the banks of the J o r d a n on Saturday and Sunday, the eleventh and twelfth. O n the next d a y they proceeded northward along the eastern shores of the Sea of Galilee to Bethsaida, devoutly visiting the places hallowed by their Master and collecting souvenirs from the shrines. T h e y returned to Acre through Capharnaum. 3 8 A second expedition led by King John alone d r e w up to the base of Mt. Thabor, some twenty-five miles southeast of Acre, on Thursday, November 30. 3 9 Instead of waiting for the troops of the Military Orders, King John led the crusaders and pilgrims up the steep ascent on Sunday, D e c e m b e r 3. 4 0 H e h a d personally 35 Guillaume de Chartres to Honorius. Not only were the crops poor, but the food supply expected from the West was inadequate. Horses were so scarce that none was for sale. Bullarium Romanum, III, 333. s e Oliver, ch. 2, pp. 163-64. They left Acre on Friday after the Feast of All Saints, which fell on Wednesday in 1217. 37 Deux Jardins, p. 160. It is possible that the Moslems really feared the crusaders as Oliver (ch. 2, p. 164) believed, because the same Moslem source tells us that the inhabitants of Damascus emigrated upon hearing of the arrival of the Franks. The Chronography of Gregory Abu'l Faraj, I, 369, trans, from the Syriac by Ernest A. Wallis (hereafter referred to as Bar Hebraeus), relates that when the Franks approached, al'Adil "seeing that he had not the strength of the Franks, went and encamped in the neighborhood of Damascus." Ernoul (pp. 411-12), however, makes delay a deliberate strategy of al'Adil. 3 8 Oliver, ch. 2, p. 165; Gesta Crucigerorum, SS. Min., p. 35. Cf. Röhricht, Kreuzzug Andreas, Studien, pp. 27 sq.; Eracles, p. 324. 39 The church formerly constructed by the Christians to commemorate the Transfiguration fell to the Moslems, and had recently been strongly fortified by al-Moazzam. The stronghold was defended by 2,000 men behind 77 bastions. Cf. Röhricht, Geschichte, p. 125, note 2; also his Beiträge zur Geschichte der Kreuzzüge, II, 236. This last source is hereafter referred to as Beiträge. 4 0 It is surprising that Oliver (ch. 2, p. 165) and Jac. Vitry in his Historia Hierosoltmitana (Bongars, Gesta Dei per Francos, II, 1130) have identified the first Sunday of Advent as the day when the Gospel was read, "Go into the town that is over against you," which actually is the Gospel for Palm Sunday. The Gesta Crucigerorum (SS. Min., p. 35) merely states, "Dominica vero adventus Domini prima."

CRUSADE OF 1217

35

cut down the Moslem emir and commandant of the fort and was in a position to take possession of the Mount, when for some unexplained reason he retreated. A second ascent by the Templars and Hospitalers was less successful, and on December 7 the whole venture was abandoned. The inglorious conquerors wandered back to Acre with their captives, including some children whom the Patriarch Raoul and Jacques de Vitry, Bishop of Acre, baptized. 41 Despite the natural expectancy of seasonable storms, some of the crusaders insisted on making a third foray. This time they turned northward toward Sidon, again without King Andrew and even without the moral support of the Patriarch's presence.42 The objective was never reached, for, when only as far as Sarepta, a sudden cold wave and storm struck the coast on Christmas Eve, leaving many Christians dead from exposure.43 Thus the Crusade of 1217, without sufficient supplies, necessary discipline, determined plans, and without a definite leader, ended in failure.44 Early in January of 1218,45 King Andrew and King Hugh of Cyprus left Acre for Tripoli to witness the marriage of Count Bohemond IV of Tripoli and Melisende de Lusignan. Unfortunately the event was saddened by the sudden death on January 10 of the twenty-three-year-old King Hugh.48 King Andrew, satisfied that his inherited vow was fulfilled, departed for home, supplied with innumerable relics, including the head of St. Stephen and even one of the water pitchers from Cana.47 He also 4 1 Oliver, ch. 3, p. 167; Jac. Vitry, Ep. Ill, ZKG, XV, 569. Cf. Röhricht, Geschichte, pp. 725 sq. and Forschungen, XVI, 146 sq. According to Makrizi, Histoire