The Two Latin Cultures and the Foundation of Renaissance Humanism in Medieval Italy 0521764742, 9780521764742

This book traces the intellectual life of the Kingdom of Italy, the area in which humanism began in the mid-thirteenth c

1,179 115 3MB

English Pages 604 [613] Year 2012

Report DMCA / Copyright

DOWNLOAD FILE

Polecaj historie

The Two Latin Cultures and the Foundation of Renaissance Humanism in Medieval Italy
 0521764742, 9780521764742

Citation preview

The Two Latin Cultures and the Foundation of Renaissance Humanism in Medieval Italy

This book ofers the irst comprehensive account of the birth of a lay intelligensia, the irst in Europe, in the medieval kingdom of Italy. The analysis deals extensively with cultural exchanges between the kingdom and transalpine Europe, primarily Francia and Germany. Ronald G. Witt’s research traces the rise of laymen to intellectual dominance in northern and north-central Italy by the mid-thirteenth century and the evolution of a new conception of secular life which, through Latin humanism, ultimately had a transformative efect on the moral, political, and religious values of western Europe. Ronald G. Witt is currently William B. Hamilton Professor Emeritus of History at Duke University. His most recent book, “In the Footsteps of the Ancients”: The Origins of Italian Humanism, 1250–1420 (2000), received the Helen and Howard R. Marraro Prize of the American Historical Society (2001), the American Philosophical Society’s Jacques Barzun Prize in Cultural History (2001), and the Renaissance Society of America’s Gordon Book Prize (2001). He is also the author of Humanism and Reform (2001); Hercules at the Crossroads: The Life, Works and Thought of Coluccio Salutati (1331–1406) (1983); and Coluccio Salutati and His Public Letters (1976), as well as numerous articles.

The Two L atin C ultures and the Foundation of R enaissance H umanism in M edieval I taly RONALD G. WITT Duke University

cam b ri dg e unive r sity p re ss Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paulo, Delhi, Mexico City Cambridge University Press 32 Avenue of the Americas, New York, ny 10013-2473, usa www.cambridge.org Information on this title: www.cambridge.org/9780521764742 © Ronald G. Witt 2012 This publication is in copyright. Subject to statutory exception and to the provisions of relevant collective licensing agreements, no reproduction of any part may take place without the written permission of Cambridge University Press. First published 2012 Printed in the United States of America A catalog record for this publication is available from the British Library. Library of Congress Cataloging in Publication Data Witt, Ronald G. The two Latin cultures and the foundation of Renaissance humanism in medieval Italy / Ronald G. Witt. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references and index. isbn 978-0-521-76474-2 1. Italy – Intellectual life – 1268–1559. 2. Latin literature, Medieval and modern – Italy – History and criticism. 3. Humanism – Italy – History – To 1500. 4. Renaissance – Italy. I. Title. dg443.w57 2011 945′.04–dc22 2010030604 isbn 978-0-521-76474-2 Hardback Cambridge University Press has no responsibility for the persistence or accuracy of urls for external or third-party Internet Web sites referred to in this publication and does not guarantee that any content on such Web sites is, or will remain, accurate or appropriate.

To Mary Ann for forty-six years of lively dialogue, understanding, and love

Acknowledgments

When I initiated my research into the origins of Italian humanism in 1977, I could not have imagined that the work would occupy the larger part of my scholarly career. Because the irst humanists were laymen, mostly notaries, I decided that I would have to start my study centuries before the second half of the thirteenth century, when humanism began, in order to explain the precocious origin of the lay intellectual in Italy. My work would trace the historical antecedents of humanism from the Carolingian conquest. In the course of an intellectually stimulating semester spent at the Newberry Library in Chicago in the irst half of 1991, I came to a crucial decision. Because the development of the Latin culture of Italy in the period before 1250 had never been given a conceptual framework, I concluded that I would not be able to complete this part of my project for many years. Consequently, I put aside my chapters on the earlier period and devoted my energies to completing the second half of the study, which was concerned with the immediate origins of humanism. For this period, roughly 1250 to 1420, I had the advantage of having preceding interpretations to work with. That study, “In the Footsteps of the Ancients”: The Origins of Italian Humanism from Lovato to Bruni, appeared in 2000. This book should be considered its “prequel.” I have many scholars to thank for their help over more than three decades. The comments of Giles Constable, Edward Peters, and David Lines on drafts of the irst chapters proved invaluable at an early stage in establishing my major lines of inquiry, as did the generous comments of Marcia Colish and Maureen Miller on later versions of the partly inished manuscript. My thinking has proited much from my monthly lunches with John Headley over the last decade. He read the inal version of the manuscript and ofered numerous suggestions for improving the cogency of some of my arguments. As my readers will note, the writings of Brian Stock, Charles Radding, and Antonio Caralli provided me with fundamental conceptual tools for understanding the singular course of Italian intellectual life. I am deeply indebted as well to George Dameron, Brett Whalen, and Susan Keefe for commenting on individual chapters, and to Brian Copenhaver, Michèle Mulchahey, William North, Marjorie Curry Woods, and LilaYawn for advice at crucial points in the development of my argument. I was fortunate to have two anonymous readers for Cambridge ix

Acknowledgments

University Press who read the manuscript with great care, all of whose suggestions I eagerly accepted. Barbara Folsom, my manuscript editor for Cambridge University Press, demonstrated throughout our work together not only her ine editorial skills but also her patience and good nature in dealing with a lengthy manuscript text with equally lengthy footnotes. I also want to express my deepest thanks to Helen Wheeler, my production editor at Cambridge Univerity Press, who gently guided me through all the stages of the process of publication. Over the decades I have frequently availed myself of the Latin expertise of Francis Newton and, more recently, of that of Clare Woods. Anna Celenza came to my rescue with her knowledge of Dutch. As in the case of the volume published in 2000, Andrew Sparling played a major role in the production of the inal version. A gifted historian, he not only edited the irst eight chapters of the book, but he raised provocative challenges to my analysis at almost every key point, often leading me not only to rewrite the presentation of my position but to rethink it. He is also responsible for the index with its extensive articulation of my arguments under the appropriate subjects. Unfortunately, urgent academic obligations made it impossible for him to complete work on the remaining chapters. Nevertheless, to a signiicant degree, whatever merit this book has is owed to him. Selected portions of pages 52–54, 95–100, and 110–11 from my “In the Footsteps of the Ancients”: The Origins of Humanism from Lovato to Bruni (Leiden and Boston: Brill, 2000) have been republished here with the kind permission of Koninklijke Brill NV. Over the last thirty-three years I have received generous inancial support from a number of foundations. A Guggenheim Fellowship in 1978–79 and a summer grant from the Council of Learned Societies facilitated the initial research in France and Italy. In 1983, I received a grant from the National Endowment for the Humanities for a semester of research at the National Humanities Center in the Research Triangle; a second, for a semester at the Newberry Library in 1991; and a third (with a generous salary supplement from Duke), for a year’s residence at the American Academy in Rome. A Fulbright-for-Research-in-Two-Countries made possible a year in Rome and Paris in 1985–86. A visiting professorship at Harvard’s Villa I Tatti in 2005 helped me to inish a rough draft of the manuscript, and an Andrew W. Mellon Emeritus Fellowship in 2006 and 2007 made it possible for me to spend an extended time in Paris and Rome to put the manuscript into inal form. I used a short residency at the American Academy in the fall of 2009 for a inal rechecking of notes.

x

Abbreviations

BAV BHL BISI

BML BMV BNP BRF BSM CAPar CDL CDPad, 1

CDPad, 2

CReg, 1

CReg, 2

DBI

Biblioteca Apostolica vaticana,Vatican City Bibliotheca hagiographica latina antiquae et mediae aetatis, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1898–1901) Bullettino dell’Istituto storico italiano (1886–1921) Bullettino dell’Istituto storico italiano et Archivio muratoriano (1923–33) Bullettino dell’Istituto storico per il Medio Evo e Archivio muratoriano (1935–94) Bullettino dell’Istituto storico italiano per il Medio Evo (1995–) Biblioteca Medicea Laurenziana, Florence Biblioteca Marciana,Venice Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris Biblioteca Riccardiana, Florence Bayerische Staatsbibliothek, Munich Le carte degli archivi parmensi dei sec. x–xii, ed. Giovanni Drei, 3 vols. (Parma, 1924–50) Codex diplomaticus Langobardiae, Historiae Patriae Monumenta, no. 13 (Turin, 1873) Codice diplomatico padovano del secolo sesto a tutto l’undecimo secolo, ed. Andrea Gloria, Monumenti storici, Deputazione veneta di storia patria, ser. 1, Documenti, no. 2 (Venice, 1877) Codice diplomatico padovano dall’anno 1101 alla pace di Costanza, ed. Andrea Gloria, Monumenti storici, Deputazione veneta di storia patria, ser. 1, Documenti, no. 4 (Venice, 1879) Le carte degli archivi reggiani ino al 1050, ed. Pietro Torelli, Biblioteca della reale Deputazione di storia patria dell’Emilia e della Romagna, sez. Modena (Reggio-Emilia, 1921) Le carte degli archivi reggiani (1051–60), ed. Piero Torelli and Francesco S. Gatta, Biblioteca della reale deputazione di storia patria dell’Emilia e della Romagna, sez. Modena, no. 2 Reggio (Emilia, 1938) Dizionario biograico degli Italiani

xi

Abbreviations

DSArezzo FSI IMU MGH PL RCPisa RIS RMan RMod, 1 RMod, 2 RRav 1

RRav 2

SCV, 1 SCV, 2 SG

SM SSCISAM

Documenti per la storia della città di Arezzo nel medio evo, ed. Ubaldo Pasqui, Documenti di storia italiana, no. 11 (Florence, 1899) Fonti per la storia d’Italia Italia medioevale e umanistica Monumenta Germaniae historica Patrologia Latina Regesto della chiesa di Pisa, ed. Natale Caturegli, Regesta chartarum Italicae, no. 24 (Rome, 1938) Rerum Italicarum scriptores Registro mantovano, ed. Pietro Torelli, Regesta chartarum Italiae, no. 12 (Rome, 1914) Regesto della chiesa cattedrale di Modena, ed. Emilio P. Vicini, Regesta chartarum Italicae, no. 16 (Rome, 1931) Regesto della chiesa cattedrale di Modena, ed. Emilio P. Vicini, Regesta chartarum Italicae, no. 21 (1936) Regesto della chiesa di Ravenna. Le carte dell’Archivio estense, ed.Vincenzo Federici and Giulio Buzzi, Regesta chartarum Italiae, no. 7 (Rome, 1911) Regesto della chiesa di Ravenna. Le carte dell’Archivio estense, ed.Vincenzo Federici and Giulio Buzzi, Regesta chartarum Italiae, no. 15 (Rome, 1931) Storia della cultura veneta, ed. Gianfranco Folena and Girolamo Arnaldi, vol. 1 (Vicenza, 1976) Storia della cultura veneta, ed. Gianfranco Folena and Girolamo Arnaldi, vol. 2 (Vicenza, 1976) Studi gregoriani per la storia di Gregorio VII e della riforma gregoriana (1947–61) Studi gregoriani per la storia della “Libertas ecclesiae” (1970–84) Studi gregoriani (1985–) Studi medievali Settimane di Studio del Centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo

xii

Introduction

hat was I talian Exceptionalism and how did it come about? This book intends to investigate the cultural uniqueness of Italy that gave birth to the lay intellectual in medieval western Europe. I intend to explain why and how it was that, whereas clerics elsewhere largely monopolized intellectual life roughly up to 1500, in Italy by the thirteenth century the majority of intellectuals were laymen. An answer to this question will help us to understand better why humanism, an intellectual movement that contributed signiicantly to the development of the modern European mentality, began in Italy, and why it was primarily laymen who sustained it. The sources for answering this question, however, lie deep in Italy’s ancient and medieval past, and therefore analysis must begin long before the thirteenth century. This book focuses primarily on the history of Italian education in the medieval centuries, but it is also intended as a general history of Italy’s medieval Latin culture. At the same time, the story cannot be separated from the social, political, and religious environment in which educational developments took place and with which schools and teachers interacted. Although often detailed matter is involved, the ultimate questions we are seeking to answer remain in the forefront of the analysis. Geographically, this book concerns the northern half of the peninsula, because the early assumption of intellectual leadership by laymen that I describe was limited to that area – essentially the Kingdom of Italy (the regnum), whose borders were largely set by the Carolingian conquest. Created in the aftermath of the Lombard defeat in the late eighth century, the regnum initially included most of northern Italy and a large portion of central Italy down into Umbria. The papacy, however, was recognized as exercising joint authority over the Exarchate of Ravenna, which extended from Bologna to Ravenna, and the Marches with its ive cities, Rimini, Pesaro, Fano, Senigallia, and Ancona. From the late ninth century, although the papacy’s claims were generally recognized, for all practical purposes government in both the Exarchate and the Marches was in the hands of the secular ruler. Just below the Marches and southeast of Rome, the region of the Abruzzo formed the regnum’s southernmost part. Although in the twelfth century the papacy expanded its power to Umbria and into the Marches, on the whole

W

1

Introduction

the territorial arrangement remained relatively unchanged until the second half of the thirteenth century.1 The Carolingian conquest of Italy in 773 constitutes a good starting point for discussing Italian exceptionalism. Not only does documentation become relatively abundant beginning with the years around 800, but also reforms made by the Carolingians in their new territory contributed to a reorganization of ecclesiastical, political, and legal institutions that was to have profound consequences in centuries to come. The present study ends with the middle decades of the thirteenth century at the beginning of the humanist movement, whose development I have discussed elsewhere.2 Historians have long recognized that what is known about the northern half of the Italian peninsula does not conform to the general models that have traditionally been used to describe European society in the Middle Ages. From the eleventh century the northern half of Italy was highly urbanized; a signiicant portion of the nobility lived in towns; social mobility was relatively high; and although the predominant part of the population continued to work in agriculture, an increasing number of people lived from commerce and industry. Over the following two centuries, with the development of urban communes, republican government became the principal political form; and at least after 1100 laymen igured prominently in intellectual life. To explain Italian exceptionalism, historians have generally looked to Italy’s historical background and its geographical position. While Italy had undergone the same period of invasions as the rest of Europe, the roots of ancient city culture were deeper there than north of the Alps. Being situated between the eastern and western Mediterranean, the peninsula was ideally situated to play the role of intermediary between East and West. The basis of the European economic revival lay principally in agriculture, especially in increased production of cereals, but the Italians were also able to proit by exploiting their position as middlemen in trade with the more economically developed East. In succeeding centuries they never lost the initiative, and they dominated the international trade of western Europe up into the sixteenth century. Historians of Europe, especially since World War II, have documented the ascent of Italy to economic superiority over its European neighbors and have in the process provided convincing explanations of why that dominance emerged. Careful work has traced the mutations of political order in the various Italian city-states as power moved from the bishop to lay control, from one lay faction to another, and in many instances, inally to a signorial regime.3 Nothing akin to the detailed research on economics and politics in the period, however, exists for the development of Italian culture. In particular, although it has long been assumed that Italian laymen 1

2

3

Vito Fumagalli, Il regno italico (Turin, 1978), 44, deines the territories of the regnum in 800. On the Exarchate, see Carlo G. Mor, L’età feodale, 2 vols. (Milan, 1952), 2:107–8 and 219. See as well Wilhelm Kölmel, “Die kaiserliche Herrschaft im Gebiet von Ravenna (Exarchat und Pentapolis) vor dem Investiturstreit (10/11. Jahrhundert),” Historisches Jahrbuch 88 (1968): 257–99. Ronald G. Witt, “In the Footsteps of the Ancients”: The Origins of Humanism from Lovato to Bruni (Leiden and New York, 2000). The monumental study of medieval Italian and economic life by Philip Jones, The Italian City State (Oxford, 1997), contains a rich bibliography of the political and economic studies.

2

Introduction

attained intellectual ascendancy in some areas of learning hundreds of years before their counterparts in northern Europe, no general study of the phenomenon has yet been undertaken. The reason for the neglect resides in the easy assumption that the precocious emergence of Latin-literate laymen was simply a corollary of the Italian inheritance from ancient Rome: namely, the existence of an urbanized, republican society and the enriching efect of regional and international commerce. Since from about 1100 the leading intellectual discipline in Italy was the study of Roman law, a subject monopolized there by laymen, it seems obvious that laymen would play the prominent role in society that they did. In Francia in the same period, however, Roman law was taught not by laymen but by clerics. Therefore, even if the dominance of laymen in Italian intellectual culture could be traced to their hold over the study of Roman law, we would still be left with the puzzle of why in Italy laymen, not clerics, occupied that position. I irst became interested in Italy’s medieval Latin culture in the course of my eforts to establish the origins of humanism in the thirteenth century. Because humanism began and largely remained a lay intellectual movement in Italy, I became aware of the need for a broader understanding of the general development of intellectual culture in medieval Italy and of the changing roles of laymen and clerics within it. From the outset I realized that a study covering such a wide range of topics as those included under the term “medieval Latin culture” could not entirely depend on my own primary research. I was aware of the danger that in an efort to construct a consistent historical narrative my discussion of these trends would contain little material unknown to specialists and that, given the breadth of Latin culture and the length of the period treated, I would often have to sacriice depth to coverage. Nonetheless, I determined to undertake the project, partly enticed, perhaps, by Jacob Burckhardt’s assertion that the Italian had become “the irst-born among the sons of modern Europe.”4 While the present study does not resolve the question of what Burckhardt meant by such a phrase, still less in what sense he may have been right, the inquiry should contribute to the development of a more precise historical understanding of how certain aspects of intellectual culture developed in medieval Italy that ultimately came to make themselves felt generally in intellectual culture all over the globe. Essential to my analysis of Italian Latin culture is the fact that Italy, in contrast to the rest of Europe, had essentially two cultures, which from the tenth century became increasingly well deined: on the one hand, the traditional book culture, dominated by grammar and including the corpus of Latin literature of the ancient educational curriculum together with the liturgical and patristic heritage of the late ancient Christian Church; and, on the other, a legal culture, which developed in two stages. First came the culture of the document, which the Carolingian conquerors found already active in the regnum; and second, a new book culture, centered on the Justinian corpus and spawned by the documentary culture, which emerged in the course of the eleventh century. The development of ars dictaminis (the art of 4

The Civilization of the Renaissance in Italy, trans. Samuel G. C. Middlemore (New York, 1954), 100.

3

Introduction

letter writing) and the discipline of canon law in the twelfth century, both of which were immediate outgrowths of the Investiture Struggle, served to reinforce the legal culture and to augment the grip the legal mentality had on Italian intellectual life. No other medieval European society could be meaningfully discussed from the standpoint of this twofold distinction, initially between the traditional book culture and that of the document, and subsequently, between the former and the new culture of the legal book. Tracing the evolution of the relationship between these two cultures over a period of four hundred and ifty years constitutes the fundamental task of explaining Italian exceptionalism. Of the two cultures, the irst was located principally in the cathedral, where – as in other parts of western Europe – clerical masters, supported by beneices, nurtured their students with instruction in liturgical practice, religious texts, and late ancient pedagogical treatises such as the grammars of Donatus and Priscian. In schools ofering an advanced level of training, students were introduced to pagan poets and prose writers. Some of the students were expected to become masters themselves, and the best or best-connected among them could anticipate high ecclesiastical preferment. The school was dependent on the cathedral library, which in turn depended on the scriptorium, where teachers and advanced students used their calligraphic and decorative skills in copying and illuminating manuscripts. Intimately tied to the school and the scriptorium was the chancery, which maintained written contact with the ecclesiastical and secular world outside and guarded the cathedral’s hoard of documents. The school, scriptorium, and chancery were not usually housed in three distinct oices; especially in smaller dioceses, we might better think of three functions performed by the same group of clerics. The important point is that Latin-literate clerics created whatever intellectual or literary life the cathedral generated. The leaders of the second Latin culture of medieval Italy, at least until the middle of the eleventh century, were the notaries. Nowhere else in medieval Europe did society so depend on written records at all levels. Nowhere else in medieval Europe from the ninth to the thirteenth century did a comparable group of practically literate men who earned their living by writing legal documents both for private individuals and for ecclesiastical and secular powers exist.5 Eminently practical, conscious of the fallibility of memory and the tricks of fortune and of men, the notaries envisoned the written word as the best human means of controlling the future. Enshrined in notarial documents, the written word had a relatively wide difusion in medieval Italian society, nourishing a popular consciousness of the power of the law, placing a premium on practical literacy, and encouraging a litigious mentality largely foreign to populations north of the Alps. Initially, clerics as well as laymen were the bearers of documentary culture, but already by 1000 laymen had generally taken over the profession, and in the course of the eleventh century, with the strengthening of the reform movement and the efort to disentangle the clergy from the laity, laymen were moving toward a near-monopoly. Study for the notariate generally required no particular institutional support. In 5

The phrase “practical literacy” is borrowed from Michael T. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record: England 1066–1307, 2nd ed. (Oxford and Cambridge, Mass., 1993), 328.

4

Introduction

the early centuries of our period, training consisted simply of apprenticing with a practicing notary. Even in the thirteenth century, when there is clear evidence that notarial schools existed in Bologna, the vast majority of notaries continued to learn the profession through apprenticeship. The claim regarding the virtual elimination of clerics from the notariate entails a distinction between clerics and laymen, one of the most diicult problems involved in the following narrative. According to ecclesiastical law, those who sought higher orders in the Church (that is, the rank of subdeacon or above) could not marry or, if they were already married, had to separate themselves from their wives. In practice, however, until the great reform movement of the late eleventh century, members of the higher clergy often retained their wives and families. In any case, lower clergy were never required to remain celibate. Throughout the Middle Ages clerics below the level of subdeacon, often married and with children, difered from laymen in only ive respects: they bore the title clerici, were tonsured, wore clerical garb, were prohibited from engaging in work that degraded the clerical status, could not bear arms or engage in tournaments, and – a signiicant privilege – they enjoyed the privilegium fori, the right to be tried only in ecclesiastical courts. At least from the middle of the twelfth century, a sixth attribute of clerical status was added, the privilegium immunitatis or exemption from secular taxation.6 The exemption from secular courts and communal taxation would ultimately prove to be the major factors in marginalizing the clergy as a group from urban politics after 1100, when communal governments came increasingly to dominate the political life of Italian cities. Many men in lower orders never had the intention of advancing to the subdeaconate or beyond. Many sought clerical status, rather, because it guaranteed exemption from secular authority and because it ofered possibilities for earning at least a partial income from ecclesiastical service of some kind.To complicate the distinction between clerics and laymen further, it was not unusual for a layman, even late in life, for religious or economic motives or after the death of a spouse, to enter the clergy and even rise in the hierarchy of orders. Because the lines between laymen and the multitude of clergy in lower orders were often blurred, I have relied in constructing the earlier part of my narrative – up into the eleventh century – on a distinction drawn between the culture of the book, controlled by a clerical elite generally linked with a cathedral, and the culture of the document, the practical, legal Latin culture of the notariate, in which both laymen and lower clergy participated, although the latter, generally designated as notarii clerici, disappeared as time went on. It should be said, however, that even the culture of the clerical elite had a practical orientation. In the irst place, throughout the Middle Ages, in most schools of the Church, education had as its major concern the practical purpose of performing 6

Marino Berengo, L’Europa delle città: Il volto della società urbana europea tra Medioevo ed Età moderna (Turin, 1999), 660, points out that in Italian cities taxation of income from ecclesiastical real estate was common but income from the economic activity of the cleric was not. For a general discussion of the mingling of clerics with laymen in the workplace, see Erich Genzmer, “Kleriker als Berufsjuristen im späten Mittelalter,” Études d’histoire du droit canonique dédiées à Gabriel Le Bras, 2 vols. (Paris, 1965), 2:1207–36.

5

Introduction

the liturgical rites in accordance with decorum. Furthermore, at least to the end of the eleventh century, the Carolingian and Ottonian program of training higher administrators of the empire in the best grammatical tradition remained a central concern of ecclesiastical education. High ecclesiastical oicials in royal and imperial government might have had only a tangential connection with the actual production of oicial documents; nonetheless, their grammatical education undeniably made them capable of directing a writing oice. Finally, some upper clergy wrote in notarial rather than library scripts, no doubt relecting their early training. Such men may well have risen in the hierarchy from the clerical notariate without undergoing thorough training in the traditional grammatical curriculum.7 I would insist, however, that by the late tenth century, generally speaking, the culture of the book and the culture of the document did not signiicantly overlap, either in their focus or their membership, and that the distinction between the two cultures furnishes a useful way of tracing the intellectual developments in the regnum at least from the ninth to the eleventh century. By the second half of the eleventh, it is no longer possible to view documentary culture alone as a counterweight to cathedral culture. By that time the second book culture was emerging, this one fostered by the documentary culture of the notary but founded directly on the study of the books of Roman law. Legal education, like notarial education, did not require an elaborate library. Teaching was mainly done privately by practicing lawyers, whose interpretations would often be written down and circulated as teaching material along with copies of legal texts or portions of them.When, by the mid-twelfth century, canon law became an organized discipline alongside that of civil law, its teachers, primarily clerics, began to follow the example of teachers of civil law by giving private instruction. It is important to stress that the existence of two cultures did not lead, as one might expect, to conlicts between clerics and laymen. In the ninth and tenth centuries both orders were members of the documentary culture, and beginning in the eleventh century both laymen and clerics participated in the legal book culture, through civil and canon law respectively. Nor does the apparent increase of laymen active in the traditional book culture from the early twelfth century, or their commanding position in both the documentary-legal culture and major aspects of the traditional book culture by the thirteenth century, seem to have encountered clerical resistance. Indeed, instead of competing with each other, educated laymen and clerics put their diferent literacies to work for their mutual beneit. Latin literacy itself formed a bond that overrode the late eleventh-century eforts of radical papal reformers to exalt the clergy.8 7

8

On the calligraphy of the upper clergy, see Armando Petrucci, “Scriptoribus in urbibus”: Alfabetismo e cultura scritta nell’Italia medievale (Bologna, 1992), 119–20 and 216–21. In northern Europe, with several exceptions, advanced education remained a clerical domain down to the late ifteenth century whereas, as we shall see, the lay notary made his appearance in northern Europe only in the course of the twelfth century. From its introduction in the irst half of the twelfth century, the clergy exercised a monopoly over the study of civil law up into the thirteenth century. The tendency to generalize about education in the medieval centuries on the basis of the northern experience has been prevasive. See, for example, the summary judgment of James A. Brundage, The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession: Canonists, Civilians, and Courts (Chicago, 2008), 63: “Virtually every school that we know much about in the West between the sixth century and the thirteenth

6

Introduction

The analysis that follows the traditional book culture and the legal culture in its second phase, when it became centered on the books of Roman law, will at points be treated as intimately linked to two diferent disciplines – the former to grammar and the latter to rhetoric. Throughout antiquity grammar was taught through poetry; rhetoric, through prose, especially oration. The grammarian devoted himself to philology and mythology; allegory was, for him, both a way of seeking truth and of encoding it in his own writings; he wrote for an elite; his work required tranquility, and the private life was congenial to his enterprises. In contrast, the rhetorician realized himself more fully in the public arena, where through his eloquence he could gain fame and exert inluence. By teaching his students to write and speak efectively, he prepared them for participation in politics and the law courts. As we shall see, from the Carolingian period onward the cathedral school, the major educational institution of the diocese, provided an education that was essentially grammatical in nature, an education that focused on learning to read Latin as a preparation for liturgical performance. Some cathedral schools went beyond the elementary level, teaching students to use ancient poetry as models and, to the extent that history and letter writing were taught, ancient prose as well. In a subordinate position to grammar, the study of rhetoric entered the program at this point with its teachings on colores rhetorici, construction of arguments, word choice, and word arrangement.The cathedral school might also provide some training in theology and canon law. By contrast, from the eleventh century the revival of Roman law was largely a lay initiative, and its teaching was done by laymen in private schools. Teachers of Roman law probably accepted students with basic grammar skills and taught them what more they needed of grammar through the study of legal texts. Rhetoric was central to legal training. Until the second half of the twelfth century, lawyers, whose business it was to create verisimilitude in their argumentation, relied not on Aristotelian logic (dialectic) but primarily on tools of rhetoric, including enthymemes, examples, and maxims.To equip lawyers with these tools, rhetoric, too, was taught in law schools. Closely connected to the development of legal studies and the increasing attention devoted to the construction of more legally sophisticated notarial formulae, ars dictaminis became a new medieval rhetoric, highly formulaic in character, ofering a simpliied set of rules for written and oral expression. The teacher had no need of the resources of an ecclesiastical library: a short manual suiced. Severed from classical precedents, the teaching texts for ars dictaminis were designed to be written and understood easily by those with even minimal literacy. Because the Italian vernaculars of most regions in northern and central Italy still remained close to Latin, even illiterate listeners would still probably have been able to understand something of a document’s contents if it was read aloud. The clerics and laymen participating in the emergence of the new rhetoric needed only introductory Latin grammar to do so. Ars dictaminis, consequently, ofered an alternative, more democratic means of communication to that provided by the traditional book culture. aimed primarily, if not always exclusively, at training future priests, clerics, monks, or nuns. It was no accident that the Latin vocabulary of the early Middle Ages treated the words ‘cleric’ and ‘literate’ as synonyms.”

7

Introduction

Like Roman lawyers, canon lawyers were responsible for providing students with the technical Latin needed to understand their texts, and rhetoric played a role in training. Nonetheless, the systematic study of canon law that began in the midtwelfth century relied less on rhetoric and more on dialectic. The example of canon lawyers may subsequently have inluenced scholars of Roman law later in the century to place more dependence on Aristotelian logic in their arguments. Because no solid evidence exists for the teaching of an independent course on logic until around 1200, presumably before that date students learned most of what they knew of the subject in their courses in Roman or canon law. Perennial questions are involved in my analysis of the changing relationship between the two Latin cultures. What were the origins of the university? How to explain the relatively low productivity of medieval Italians in writing Latin literary prose and poetry? Why did literature in Italian dialects appear only in the thirteenth century? The irst question concerns the degree of continuity between the cathedral schools of the twelfth century and the development of Italian universities that appeared in the thirteenth, an issue that in the nineteenth century was held hostage to the intense contemporary debate over public versus church schools.9 Although proiting from accumulated research, recent scholars remain divided over the extent to which the new institutions of advanced study were outgrowths of private schools taught by laymen and clerics, and to which they were linked to earlier cathedral schools. Basically, modern scholars hold three diferent views. That championed by Giuseppe Manacorda (1912–13), Ugo Gualazzini (1943), and Giovanni Santini (1979) envisages the Italian studia as expansions of the twelfth-century cathedral schools.10 By contrast, another group of scholars, including Emilio Nasalli Rocca (1947) and Giorgio Cencetti (1966), maintain that the university was a new creation, of lay origin.11 Giorgio Montecchi (1984) represents the third position in that, while 9

10

11

Scholarship on the topic began with the Latin essay of Wilhelm Giesebrecht, De litterarum studiis apud Italos primis medii aevi saeculis (Berlin, 1845), who irst stressed the importance of laymen in medieval Italian intellectual life. By identifying a rivalry between medieval clerical and lay schools, Antoine-Frédéric Ozanam, La civilisation au cinquième siècle: Introduction à une histoire de la civilisation aux temps barbares (Paris, 1862), 410, fed the contemporary debate over the role of the new Italian state in education. Giuseppe Manacorda, Storia della scuola in Italia: Il medio evo (Milan and Palermo, 1912–13), 1:1, 69–87; Ugo Gualazzini, Ricerche sulle scuole preuniversitarie del Medio Evo: Contributo di indagini sul sorgere delle università (Milan, 1943), passim; Giovanni Santini, Università e società nel XII secolo: Pillio da Medicina e lo Studio di Modena.Tradizione e innovazione nella scuola dei glossatori. Chartularium Studii Mutinensis (regesta) (specimen 1069–1200) (Modena, 1979), 140. Emilio Nasalli Rocca, “Scuole vescovili e origini universitarie nella regione emiliana,” Archivio giuridico F. Seraini 84 (1947): 54–65, held that the origin of the studia was intimately connected with the teaching of civil law, so that cathedral schools could not have been the source of the new institutions. Taking a diferent approach, Giorgio Cencetti, “Studium fuit Bononie: Note sulla storia di Bologna nel primo mezzo secolo della sua esistenza,” SM, 3rd ser., 7 (1966): 815, considered the studia to have grown out of private societates of students and teachers (primarily laymen) outside of ecclesiastical control. Although Arrigo Solmi, “La genesi dell’Università italiana,” in Contributi alla storia del diritto comune (Rome, 1937), 253–68, argued for studia of lay origin, he believed that an unbroken continuity had existed between the lay public schools of the late Roman Empire and the universities of the Middle Ages.

8

Introduction

agreeing with Rocca and Cencetti as to the lay origin of studia at Parma, Bologna, Modena, and Reggio, he credits the bishop in the last city with having played a signiicant role in the school’s foundation. He remains noncommittal for Piacenza and Ravenna.12 By emphasizing the negative efect of the Investiture Struggle on the Italian cathedral school, Gina Fasoli (1974) and Girolamo Arnaldi (1984) allow us to formulate the problem of the origin of the studia in a new way, that is, to ask to what degree was the vitality of the cathedral schools so diminished in the twelfth century that they could not have furnished the institutional basis for the studia of the thirteenth?13 The second question regards the character and quantity of Latin literary production in the regnum. Already in 1885, Adolfo Gaspary emphasized that medieval Italy generally had produced almost no Latin literature, a point that Francesco Novati and Angelo Monteverdi later made with even greater insistence, arguing that Italian production of literary works in the eleventh and twelfth century had been small by comparison with that of transalpine Europe, and that in Italy, as they put it, “nothing reveals to us the mark of a true classical culture.”14 Unfortunately, their observation on the dearth of literary creativity in twelfth- and early thirteenth-century Italy as a whole has been almost completely ignored in subsequent discussions. Rather than searching for an explanation for Italy’s low literary productivity and lack of classical inspiration in the twelfth century, twentieth-century scholars soon became caught up in a discussion that obfuscated the issue and impeded the investigation. This new discussion began with the publication of Louis Paetow’s The Arts Course at Medieval Universities with Special Reference to Grammar and Rhetoric (Champaign/Urbana, 1910) in which the author claimed that by 1200 interest in ancient pagan literature had been replaced by scholasticism, with its passion for the study of philosophy, theology, and natural sciences based on the Aristotelian corpus. In a rebuttal published in 1929, Edward K. Rand responded by lavishly demonstrating that pagan literature remained important in thirteenth-century education. The evidence for both positions was overwhelmingly transalpine in character, but in 1961, Helene Wieruszowski joined the discussion by arguing that classics in Italy remained vital in the thirteenth century. In formulating her argument, she simply assumed that intensive study of ancient literature and history had been as common in twelfth-century Italy as it was in northern Europe.15 In his Il secolo senza Roma (1933), Giuseppe Tofanin, the irst Italian scholar to contribute to the exchange, argued for the existence of an intimate contact between 12

13

14

15

Giorgio Montecchi, “Le antiche sedi universitarie,” in Le sedi della cultura nell’Emilia Romagna: Età communale, ed. Girolamo Arnaldi et al. (Milan, 1984), 117–29. Gina Fasoli, “Ancora un’ipotesi sull’inizio dell’insegnamento di Pepone e Irnerio,” Atti e memorie della Deputazione di storia patria per le provincie di Romagna, n.s. 21 (1971): 30; and Girolamo Arnaldi, “Alle origini dello Studio di Bologna,” Le sedi della cultura nell’Emilia Romagna, 104. Adolfo Gaspary, Geschichte der italienischen Literatur, 2 vols. (Berlin, 1885–88), 1:42 and 46–47; and Francesco Novati and Angelo Monteverdi, Le origini continuate e compiute da Angelo Monteverdi (Milan, 1926), 646. Kenneth E. Rand, “The Classics in the Thirteenth Century,” Speculum 4 (1929): 249–69; Helene Wieruszowski, “Rhetoric and the Classics in Italian Education of the Thirteenth Century,” Studi graziani 11 (1967): 169–208 (republished in her Politics and Culture in Medieval Spain and Italy, Storia e letteratura, no. 121 (Rome, 1971), 589–627.

9

Introduction

Christianity and the classical tradition up to the thirteenth century, when it was interrupted by anti-Christian and – in line with Paetow, whom he seems not to have read – anticlassical tendencies in scholasticism.16 Tofanin’s thesis of “the century without Rome” encountered serious opposition from a number of critics ranging from Eugenio Massa (1956) to Francesco Bruni (1987), both of whom, like Wieruszowski, endeavored to assert the importance of ancient literature in thirteenth-century Italy.17 Vitally important for Francesco Bruni were the studies of Giuseppe Billanovich and his students, who proved the intensive interest in ancient literature of the Paduan circle of scholars surrounding Lovato de’ Lovati (1240–1309). Billanovich’s journal, Italia medioevale e umanistica, irst published in 1958, contains dozens of articles devoted to the study of ancient Roman literature and history in the thirteenth century, particularly at Padua. The most recent analysis of the comparative interest in classical literature, Robert Black’s Humanism and Education in Medieval and Renaissance Italy (2001), essentially returns to Paetow in arguing that, as in Francia, a vigorous interest in studying ancient literature and history in the twelfth century was followed in the thirteenth by a signiicant decline in its importance in the irst half of the century. Revival of these studies only occurred in the course of the second half of the thirteenth century with the group around Lovato. Black bases his conclusion on a comparative study of schoolbooks from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries that survive in the manuscript libraries of Florence. In his view, the early humanists, beginning in the second half of the thirteenth century, were endeavoring to reestablish the study of the ancient authors that had lapsed in the irst half of the century.18 I will argue that by insisting on the continuous study of the ancient Latin works between the twelfth and thirteenth centuries in Italy or, as does Black, on the decline of classical interests in the thirteenth after a century of intense study of pagan authors, these scholars have not confronted the conclusions of Gaspary, Novati, and Monteverdi, who pointed out that literary production was slight in the twelfth century and that it showed little sign of classical inluence. Conining myself to the regnum, it will be my task to explain the relative paucity of literary writings in Italy up into the thirteenth century and its signiicance for the cultural life of the kingdom. While my analysis will endorse the judgment of older scholars that, compared with transalpine Europe, relatively few literary works were produced in medieval Italy, the judgment is inevitably beset by two major problems regarding manuscript preservation. The irst has to do particularly with the regnum: relative to northern Europe and southern Italy, more of the manuscripts produced were lost over time because the conditions of documentary storage in the regnum were poorer. The vast bulk of manuscripts that survived in medieval Europe did so because they belonged 16

17

18

Giuseppe Tofanin, Il secolo senza Roma in Storia dell’Umanesimo dal XIII al XVI secolo, vol. 1 (Bologna, 1933). Eugenio Massa, Ruggiero Bacone: Etica e politica nella storia dell’“Opus maius” (Rome, 1955), 81–130; Francesco Bruni, “Metamorfosi dei classici nel Duecento,” Medioevo romanzo 12 (1987): 103–28. Robert Black, Humanism and Education in Medieval and Renaissance Italy: Tradition and Innovation in Latin Schools from the Twelfth to the Fifteenth Century (Cambridge and New York, 2001), 192.

10

Introduction

to ecclesiastical institutions – that is, monastic and cathedral libraries. Most manuscripts were warehoused in monasteries, where they were preserved in relative security. Cathedral libraries, in contrast, were more vulnerable, subject to easier access and theft, to ires in the crowded spaces within city walls, and to urban riots. In the regnum, the cathedral was particularly integrated into the life of the town – for centuries in urban areas the bishop was also lay lord of the area – and manuscripts often fell victim to the depredations of urban warfare. With few exceptions (Bobbio, Nonantola, Pomposa, and Monte Amiata) monasteries from the late eighth century played a much less important role in the intellectual life of the regnum than they did in transalpine Europe or in southern Italy. By comparison with northern Europe, most monasteries in the regnum were small and did not maintain either a scriptorium or a library. Consequently, fewer manuscripts were copied, and those that were depended for their survival on cathedral libraries, where they were more vulnerable to loss or destruction. The fate of ars dictaminis manuals dramatically illustrates how the problem of warehousing manuscripts afected their survival. Although we know from the revolution in prose style in the regnum beginning in the middle decades of the twelfth century that these manuals were ubiquitous, most of the surviving examples are of transalpine provenance, many from northern monasteries. Consequently, I will argue that, although manuscript production in the regnum was comparatively lower than across the Alps, the disparity was likely not as great as the statistics for survival would indicate. The second problem concerns the preservation of manuscripts in western Europe in general. The existence of a large monastic library does not necessarily signify a continuous scholarly tradition. Indeed, manuscripts frequently must have survived because they were not used and, consequently, were well preserved.19 Rarely handled, less worn, they were less apt to come apart, lose their folios or have them recycled for other purposes. Also, a richly decorated manuscript had a better chance of being preserved, not so much because it was studied but because of its artistic and economic value. To an extent, therefore, contrary to what we would intuitively expect, an inverse relationship may well have existed between the number of surviving copies of a manuscript and its use. Although patently unacceptable as a general principle, the explanation certainly has merit as the reason for the disappearance of many elementary school texts and other manuals, works often quickly copied on inferior materials and of little market value. A third general issue relating to medieval Latin culture concerns the late appearance of vernacular literature in Italy in comparison with countries of transalpine Europe. Although the question of this delay no longer seems to be of great 19

Guglielmo Cavallo, “Libri scritti, libri letti, libri dimenticati,” Il secolo di ferro: Mito e realtà del secolo X. 19–25 aprile 1990, SSCISAM, 38 (Spoleto, 1991), 769, writes: “Se le biblioteche degli imperatori erano di puro apparato quelle monastiche o ecclesiastiche erano di pura conservazione, non spazi di lettura.” He refers to the latter two types as “biblioteche dell’oblio.” He also reminds us (768 and 771) that manuscripts of the period were often copied not for reading but for other reasons, e.g., as “a good work” or “un qualche saggio di scrittura.” Even the scholia and comments which accompany texts in the manuscript may have been there simply because they were found in the model (772).

11

Introduction

interest to scholars, it was a matter of intense discussion in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and the matter has remained largely unsettled.20 Was the late advent of vernacular literature in Italy a result of the continuing vitality of the Latin language?21 Did Latin enjoy such prestige that the vernacular, regarded as a domestic language, would not have been thought worthy of use in writing?22 Or did Latin and vernacular literatures inspire one another, so that the low interest in Latin composition in Italy was concomitent with the delayed use of the vernacular for literary purposes?23 Discussion of all three issues is relevant to our understanding of Italian exceptionalism. In closing this introduction, and in anticipation of possible misunderstandings, I wish to clarify four points. First, while initially drawn to the topic by my narrow focus on the revival of interest in classical history and literature by lay scholars from the second half of the thirteenth century, my use of the word “classical” throughout this work, unless otherwise speciied, refers to the entire pagan Latin inheritance, including ancient works of philosophy, science, and logic. Unfortunately, in the case of many of the Latin writings that I will examine, I am unable to airm whether the ancient sources cited by an author were actually known to him in their integrity or whether he was drawing on lorilegia. Second, I must warn readers that, despite the range of kinds of writing I treat in my analysis, they will ind missing or barely mentioned a number that have been taken as traditional medieval genres. From the eleventh century until Lovato in the mid-thirteenth, for example, Latin lyric poetry is represented by one or possibly two poems. Of the two authors who wrote satire in the four-hundred-and-ifty-year period, both were from the tenth century. Biblical exegesis, chronicles, and histories are similarly in short supply. I will occasionally mention liturgical works, but little can be said of one of the most promising genres for literary expression in transalpine Europe, the sequence.24 Scholars of medieval northern Europe confronting the Latin 20

21 22

23 24

Maria Luisa Meneghetti, “La nascita delle letterature romanze,” in Storia della letteratura italiana. Vol. 1. Dalle origini a Dante, ed. Enrico Malato (Rome, 1995), 226. This is the position of Adolfo Bartoli, I primi due secoli della letteratura italiana (Milan, 1880), 29. The position of Gaspary, Die Geschichte der italienischen Literatur, 50; and Alessandro d’Ancona and Orazio Bacci, Manuale della letteratura italiana compilato da A. d’Ancona e O. Bacci, vol. 1 (Florence, 1902), 22 and 25. Novati and Monteverdi, Le origini, 646–47. Although the earliest surviving manuscript in Europe containing sequences (Bib. cap., Verona, XC [85]) was written in northern Italy, probably at Monza, late in the ninth century, none of the ive sequences initially copied into this manuscript, nor a sixth added in the tenth century, are of Italian origin: Wolfram von den Steinen, “Die Anfänge der Sequenzendichtung,” Zeitschrift für schweizerische Kirchengeschichte 40 (1946): 253–56.The list of Italian manuscripts containing sequences written up to 1200 is found in Lance Brunner, “Catalogo delle sequenze in manoscritti di origine italiana anteriori al 1200,” Rivista italiana di musicologia 20 (1985): 204–6. I am puzzled by his dating of Bib. Capitolare Verona XC (85) as “10 metà” (206) on the basis of von den Steinen, “Die Anfänge,” 253–56, and Hans Spanke, “Rhythmen- und Sequenzenstudien,” SM, n.s. 4 (1931): 299, both of whom date the work as of the late ninth century. As to the literary quality of the Italian sequence, I accept the judgment of Brunner, “The Sequences of Verona, Biblioteca Capitolare CVII and the Italian Sequence Tradition” (Ph.D. diss., University of North Carolina, 1977), who studied all known Italian manuscripts of sequentiaria down to 1200. After negatively describing the poetic

12

Introduction

culture of the regnum for the irst time cannot but be surprised by the narrowness of its literary and intellectual life. Third, it may seem diicult to justify limiting the history of Italian exceptionalism to the regnum and neglecting papal and southern Italy. My reason for their exclusion is that cultural developments in the lower half of the peninsula were so unlike those in the north that they were in efect those of other societies. A preliminary attempt to give parallel treatment to the three regions convinced me that any in-depth study would require two or even three separate monographs. As the forthcoming analysis will show, moreover, over the period covered by this work, inluences coming from transalpine Europe on the learning, institutional structure, and literary and scholarly writings in the regnum were far more important than those coming from the Patrimony and southern Italy. A fourth remark has to be made regarding geographical designations throughout the book.To avoid the use of ahistorical country names such as France, Belgium, the Netherlands, and Germany for the territories designated as “transalpine Europe” or “northern Europe,” I have decided to use the term “Francia” to describe those lands held by the king of Francia and his feudatories as well as Provence.“German empire” or “German lands” refer to those territories included in the medieval German duchies. In the matter of adjectives, “German” is associated with “German Empire” and “French” with “Francia,” with the exception that in the case of the adjective, when appropriate, “French” will be distinguished from “Anglo-Norman” and “Provençal.” I have already speciied that, unless otherwise indicated, “Italy” and “Italian” refer to the regnum. Historians have learned over the last century that no historical account enjoys permanence. Old lions remain vulnerable to attacks by younger scholars upbraiding them for their ignorance of discoveries made over decades as a result of the very questions that the work of those same older scholars raised. Convinced as I am that the primary causes of progress in historical research lie in posing original questions, it is my hope to introduce with this book a new historical problem. My own responses to the issues it broaches are based on four decades of reading, conversation, and thought. All the same, I regard my conclusions as tentative, and more as challenges to other historians to disprove or expand upon, rather than as inal answers to the questions that I raise.

value of individual texts, e.g., 87, 94, 97, and 110, produced in the regnum, he comments on those composed in the two principal northern Italian centers of production, Bobbio and Bologna. In his opinion, those of the irst “generally lack poetic distinction” (175) while Bolognese sequences “relect neither a strongly uniied tradition nor one of great poetic merit.”

13

Part I

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Chapter 1

The Carolingian Conquest

hen C harlemagne conquered the kingdom of Desiderio, he found there a lourishing intellectual life centered in the royal court and a widespread documentary culture. As he would also do in the north, he set about instituting religious and educational reforms in Italy that favored the institutionalization of learning and generally improved the level of clerical education. At the same time, recognizing the value of the Lombard notaries to the business of governing, he made no apparent efort to clericalize the central government in his new conquest as he had done in the Frankish heartland. Rather, he multiplied the tasks of the notariate and established a degree of uniformity in their functioning. However, the northward emigration of the kingdom’s leading intellectuals to the Carolingian court, who were attracted by Charlemagne’s patronage, resulted in a sharp decline in literary production in the new regnum Italiae. Whereas in Gaul Charlemagne gave favored status to monasteries in his efort to create a renaissance of religious studies and scholarship, in Italy neither he nor his successors showed any interest in sponsoring centers of advanced learning to compensate for the brain drain. And while by the eleventh century transalpine cathedrals would take up the earlier monastic tradition of scholarship, in the absence of such a tradition in the regnum, throughout most of the medieval period the Italian clergy remained undistinguished representatives of the culture of the book.

W

THE LOMBARD INTELLECTUALS

The Frankish conquest of the Lombard kingdom had taken less than a year. Having crossed the Mount Cenis pass in the summer of 773, by April 774 the Franks had overcome the last serious opposition to Frankish rule and now held Desiderio, the Lombard king (757–74), securely in their power. Unlike Pepin III, Charlemagne’s father, who had intervened in Italian afairs only sporadically, Charlemagne was committed to annexing the Lombard kingdom to his crown. For all practical purposes the new territory comprised northern and central Italy into Umbria and also included those lands east of Rome to the Adriatic that had formerly constituted the Lombard duchy of Spoleto. From 781, Charlemagne ruled the territory through his son, also named Pepin, and Charlemagne’s direct descendants continued to govern the regnum until the death of Charles the Fat in 888. 17

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

At least in the irst part of the century of Carolingian rule, the Lombards had a major intellectual impact on the Franks. One of the greatest beneits of the conquest for Charlemagne was his encounter with the Lombard book culture then in full lower at the court of Desiderio. An extraordinary group of ecclesiastics, learned in the classics and gifted as poets, resided there – a group unparalleled elsewhere in Europe. Perhaps the challenge of reconciling their schooling in the ancient Roman writers with their Lombard heritage stimulated the creative energies of this last generation of authors of the Lombard kingdom. By 773, four scholars, Paolo Diacono, Pietro of Pisa, Fardolfo, and Paolino of Aquileia, stood out as the court intellectuals. At least from the 760s, Pietro of Pisa was teaching in the Lombard capital. Fardolfo, a poet and close friend of Desiderio, was in all likelihood from a noble family of Pavia.1 Paolo Diacono (720/30–ca. 800) had come from Cividale as a young man to complete his studies in Pavia. He had spent some years (763–ca. 769) in southern Italy at the court of the Lombard duke of Benevento, Arichis I, before returning to Pavia to serve as a counselor at the court of Desiderio. Paolino (d. 802), also, like Paolo, from Cividale, was a grammaticus in the circle around Desiderio at the time of the Frankish conquest.2 It is tempting to see Desiderio’s relationship with scholars and poets along with their presence at Charlemagne’s court in the 770s and 780s as providing a large measure of inspiration for the broad educational reform program that Charlemagne outlined in the Admonitio generalis, published in 789, and the De litteris colendis, probably written about the same time.3 Spearheaded by Charlemagne, the reform program focused on the creation of local schools and on instructing local priests and their bishops in the proper performance of Christian rituals and their meaning.4 Whether 1

2

3

4

Little is known about Pietro’s life before leaving Italy. Einhard, Charlemagne’s irst biographer, mentions his teaching Charlemagne grammar: Vita Caroli magni, ed. Philip Jafé (Berlin, 1876), 47. Alcuin, Charlemagne’s major Anglo-Saxon intellectual recruit, may have heard Pietro debate a Jew in Pavia in 767; Max Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, 3 vols. (Munich, 1911–31), 1:452–53. Manitius is still valuable for the biographies of Paolino, Pietro, and Paolo and his discussion of their works: ibid., 1:368–70, 452–56, and 257–72, respectively. On Fardolfo, see Paolo Chiesa, “Fardolfo,” DBI, vol. 44 (Rome, 1994), 281–84. On Paolo Diacono, see Carlo G. Mor, “La cultura aquileiense nei secoli VI–VIII,” SCV, 1 (Vicenza, 1976), 232, with bibliography; on Paolino of Aquileia, 233–37, esp. 233. Although his essay tends to exaggerate the extent of the development, on Pavian culture in this period, see Beniamino Pagnin, “Scuola e cultura a Pavia nell’alto medio evo,” Atti del 4º Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo: 1967, Centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo (Spoleto, 1969), 85–91. For a more balanced treatment, see Donald A. Bullough, “Urban Change in Early Medieval Italy: The Example of Pavia,” Papers of the British School at Rome 24 (1966): 82–130. Luitpold Wallach, Alcuin and Charlemagne (Ithaca, N.Y., 1959), 198–226, dated the De litteris colendis as written between 794 and 800 (226). Donald Bullough, however, believes the work to have been composed before Alcuin’s departure for England early in 790: “Aula renovata: The Court before the Aachen Palace,” in his Carolingian Renewal: Sources and Heritage (Manchester and New York, 1991), 158, n. 58. According to the Admonitio (Capitularia regum Francorum, vol. l, ed. Alfred Boretius; vol. 2, ed. Alfred Boretius and Victor Krause, MGH, Legum sectio, no. 2 (Hannover, 1883–97), 1:60 [chap. 72]): “Et non solum servilis conditionis infantes, sed etiam ingenuorum ilios adgregent sibique socient. Et ut scolae legentium puerorum iant.” On the obligations of bishops to ensure the proper administration of the sacraments and instruction of the faithful in the Admonitio and subsequent Carolingian

18

The Carolingian Conquest

clerics were trained in these schools or in schools run by the cathedral remains a matter of debate.5 Both the above-cited documents reveal the stylistic inluence of Alcuin, who only took up permanent residence at the court late in 786 at the earliest. Nevertheless, the Lombards, on the ground a decade or more before Alcuin’s arrival, likely played an earlier role in shaping Charlemagne’s educational program for his vast territories.6 The lives of the four Lombard intellectuals had been dramatically changed by the invasion, which swept away the old order, but all four prospered from their connection with the Frankish court. Because he chose to join the Lombard king and his wife in their place of exile in Gaul, Fardolfo crossed the Alps in 774. Another Lombard intellectual, however, had preceded him. Pietro, a learned Pavian, had already joined Charlemagne’s retinue before the conquest and in 781 returned to his native city as bishop.7 For more than a decade Fardolfo appears to have enjoyed royal support as a poet before being richly rewarded in 792 for uncovering a plot hatched within Charlemagne’s entourage to kill the king.8 In recompense for his information Fardolfo was made abbot of the royal abbey of Saint-Denis, just north of Paris, where he lived out the rest of his life. The survival of only four short poems by him, three of them commemorating his building projects at Saint-Denis, makes it diicult to judge Fardolfo’s personality and the nature of his poetic composition.9 The work and character of a second Pietro, Pietro of Pisa, are similarly hard to characterize. Based on the records we have, Pietro’s role as Charlemagne’s teacher of grammar extended to his composing poetry in the king’s name, and much of what we believe are Pietro’s writings are poems nominally ascribed to Charlemagne.10 Only two other poems survive: one, the preface to the grammar

5 6

7

8 9

10

legislation, see Rosamund McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789–895 (London, 1977), 1–17. By 800, the reliance of Charlemagne on bishops to reinforce his legislation becomes clear in the episcopal capitularies. Carine van Rhijn, Shepherds of the Lord: Priests and Episcopal Statutes in the Carolingian Period (Turnhout, 2007), discusses these statutes, their purpose, and contents. Cf. McKitterick, The Frankish Church, 45–79. Van Rhijn, Shepherds of the Lord, 176–77. Although scholarly tradition has Alcuin as the dominant intellectual igure at the Carolingian court from 781/2, there is no solid evidence for his presence there before 786; Donald A. Bullough, Alcuin: Achievement and Reputation (Leiden and Boston, 2004), 304. For Alcuin’s contribution to both documents, see Bullough, Alcuin, 379–84. Paolo Diacono, an important source for our knowledge of Charlemagne’s court before 786/7, never mentions Alcuin. Cf. Bullough, “Alcuin and the Kingdom of Heaven,” in his Carolingian Renewal, 175. Donald A. Bullough,“I vescovi di Pavia nei secoli ottavo e nono,” in Atti del 4º Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo, 1967 (Spoleto, 1969), 323–26. See also his “Aula renovata,” 131, where he suggests another possible Lombard at the court, Wilchar, previously bishop of Nomentana (Rome). Chiesa, “Fardolfo,” 781–82, has the details. The three epigraphs are found in MGH, Poetae latini aevi carolini, ed. Ernst Dümmler, vol. 1 (Berlin, 1881), 353–54. Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen literatur des Mittelalters, 2:811 (under the note “S.553”) provides the reference for the fourth. See Karl Nef, Die Gedichte des Paulus Diaconus: Kritische und erklärende Ausgabe, Quellen und Untersuchungen zur lateinischen Philologie des Mittelalters, vol. 3, pt. 4 (Munich, 1908), 60–62, 84–87 (both sent in Charlemagne’s name), and 99–100.

19

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

manual that Pietro composed for the king soon after joining the court, perhaps in 782; and the other a later work praising Charlemagne’s triumphs.11 Pietro appears to have returned to Italy toward the end of the 780s and died there around 790. Two letters of Charlemagne’s to Pietro in retirement evince the king’s deep afection for his former tutor.12 Far more is known of Paolino than of these three men. Paolino arrived at Charlemagne’s court sometime after the Lombard revolt of 776, from which his family, loyal to the king, proited handsomely through royal gifts of land coniscated from rebel nobles.13 In 787, after about a decade at the court, Paolino returned to Italy to take up the strategically important post of Patriarch of Aquileia. There his principal intellectual occupation was to rebut the Adoptionist position taken by two theologians, Felix of Urgel and Elipando of Toledo. Inluenced by discussions with Muslim theologians, Felix and Elipando defended the belief that Jesus, as man, was the adoptive son of God.14 Paolino’s two surviving theological works, both directed against Adoptionism, demonstrate his intimate knowledge of Latin patristic literature. So does his Liber exhortationis on Christian kingship, dedicated to his close friend Eric, duke of Friuli.15 A stern reformer in a frontier post of the empire on the border with Avar territory, Paolino held the respect of both Charlemagne and Alcuin.16 Paolino, whose work exhibits mastery of accentual verse (only incidentally coinciding with metric quantities), was perhaps the inest religious poet of the Carolingian 11

12

13

14

15

16

Ibid., 157–58 and 159–62. Pietro subsequently enlarged the grammar book, Oratio dicitur elocutio, ca. 790; Bullough, “Aula renovata,” 134–35. See also Bullough, Alcuin, 344. Nef, Gedichte, 166–67 and 168–69. For a commentary on Daniel attributed to Pietro, see Donald A. Bullough, “Reminiscence and Reality: Text, Translation and Testimony of an Alcuin Letter,” Journal of Medieval Latin 5 (1995): 174–201. For the dates when Paolino, Pietro, and Paolo arrived in Francia, see Bullough, “Aula renovata,” 131; for Alcuin, 136. For the history of Spanish Adoptionism, see John C. Cavadini, The Lost Christianity of the West: Adoptionism in Spain and Gaul, 785–820 (Philadelphia, 1993). Aimé Solignac, “Paolin d’Aquilée (saint), Dictionnaire de la spiritualité ascétique et mystique: Doctrine et histoire, 12.1 (1984), cols. 585–87, provides a listing of Paolino’s writings. Paolino’s Contra Felicem libri tres is edited by Dag Norberg, Paulini Aquileiensis Opera omnia, pt. 1, Corpus Christianorum, Continuatio mediaevalis, 95 (Turnhout, 1990). Paolino’s Libellus episcoporum Italiae contra Elipandum is found in PL 99, cols. 151–66, and Concilia aevi karolini, ed. Albert Werminghof, MGH, Legum, no. 3, pt. 2 in 2 vols. (Hannover and Leipzig, 1906–8), 1:30–42. On Paolino’s theological writings, see André Wilmart, “L’ordre des parties dans le traité de Paulin d’Aquilée contra Felix d’Urgel,” Journal of Theological Studies 39 (1938): 22–37. For Paolino’s Liber exhortationis, see PL 99, cols. 197–282. The comments of Giuseppe Fornasari are valuable: “Teologia e politica in Paolino d’Aquileia,” Atti del Convegno internazionale di studio su Paolino d’Aquileia nel XII centenario dell’episcopato, ed. Giuseppe Fornasari (Udine, 1988), 119–34. Paolino’s complete poetry is found in a critical edition by Dag Norberg, L’oeuvre poétique de Paulin d’Aquilée. Edition critique avec introduction et commentaire (Stockholm, 1979). Paolino’s small collection of letters shows him to have been stern with his bishops and to have urged the emperor to demand a high standard of conduct from his clergy; Epistolae karolini aevi, ed. Ernst Dümmler, MGH, Epistolae (in quarto), no. 4, vol. 2 (Berlin, 1895), 516–27. In 796, Alcuin was unoficially seeking Paolino’s advice, apparently on Charlemagne’s behalf, on how to conduct negotiations with the Avar ambassadors (ibid., 143). Although his letters to Paolino embellish the topos of friendship in many ways, Alcuin seems to have felt genuine afection for the archbishop: ibid., 70–71, 103–4, 128–31, 139–40, 143–44, and 220–22.

20

The Carolingian Conquest

Renaissance.17 Drawing heavily on biblical passages and the Latin Church Fathers, his poetry lends to the lines a new voice wherein deep religious emotion exerts heightened efect through rhythmic patterning, much of which is original with him. A strophe from one of his hymns, De caritate, which was to enjoy a long history in church liturgy, illustrates Paolino’s talent for reconiguring biblical and early Christian literature into compelling verbal music: Haéc per cóccum príscae légis fígurátur, Qúi colóre rúbro tíngui bís iubétur, Qúia cáritás precéptis ín duóbus Cónstat, qúibus déus ámatur, átque hómo Úbi cáritás est véra déus íbi ést.18 This is igured through the ruddy berry of the ancient law, Which is ordered to be dyed twice in red coloring, Because charity consists in two precepts By which God and man are loved. Where true charity is, there is God.

The content is inspired by a passage in Saint Gregory’s Liber pastoralis, but the verse form is probably original to Paolino.19 The fortunes of Paolo Diacono’s family were the reverse of those of Paolino. Implicated in the Lombard rebellion of 776, his family lost its lands, and his brother was taken as a prisoner to Gaul. By that time, however, Paolo appears to have become a monk at the abbey of Montecassino.20 He took advantage of Charlemagne’s visit to Rome in 781 to go directly to him to plead for the release of his brother, and was invited to return north with the emperor.21 Written before April 783, his digniied poem in elegiac couplets, “Verba tui famuli, rex summe, adtende serenus” (O highest king, hear in serenity the words of your servant), asked the emperor to liberate his 17

18

19

20

21

This is the appraisal of Peter Godman, Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance (Norman, Okla., 1985), 28. Whereas ancient poetry was primarily based on various patterns of long and short syllables, accentual poetry relied on word accent. Word accent usually fell on a long syllable, but not always. For a summary of the historiography on the conception of the Carolingian Renaissance, see Anita Guerreau-Jalabert, “La ‘Renaissance carolingienne’: modèles culturels, usages linguistiques et structures sociales,” Bibliothèque de l’École des Chartres 139 (1981): 5–35. The poem is published by Norberg, L’oeuvre poétique de Paulin d’Aquilée, 138–40. It was earlier published without the identiication of Paolino in Poetarum latinorum medii aevi, ed. Karl Strecker, MGH, no. 4, pt. 2.2 (Berlin, 1923), 526–29. The passage cited is the seventh of twelve strophes. Four trochaic lines, each with groups of eight and four syllables, are followed by a refrain written in pseudo-sentenarius catalectic. The strophe is inspired by Gregory the Great’s Regula pastoralis, II.3: “Auro autem, hyacintho ac purpurae bis tinctus coccus adiungitur, ut ante interni iudicis oculos omnia virtutum bona ex caritate decorentur.... Quae scilicet caritas quia Deum simul ac proximum diligit, quasi ex duplici tinctura fulgescit”; cited from Norberg, La poésie latine rhythmique, 89. On the later inluence of this hymn, see André Wilmart, “L’hymne de la charité pour le JeudiSaint,” in Auteurs spirituels et textes dévots du moyen âge (Paris, 1932), 26–36. Walter Gofart, The Narrators of Barbarian History (A.D. 550–800): Jordanes, Gregory of Tours, Bede, and Paul the Deacon (Notre Dame, Ind., 2005), 334–37. Ibid., 341.

21

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

brother, imprisoned seven years earlier.22 During the approximately ive years he spent with the court, Paolo probably taught grammar while composing a large collection of homilies for the liturgy, all dedicated to Charlemagne; a short history of the bishops of Metz; epitaphs for various deceased members of the royal family; and, although the time is uncertain, perhaps his life of Gregory the Great.23 At home in royal courts, Paolo knew how to play the role of the courtier by joining in the fashionable game of creating and solving Latin riddles.24 Such riddles form part of his corpus of poetry, which includes a wide range of genres ranging from the didactic poetry of “Adsunt quattuor in prima iunctione species” (There are four forms in the irst conjugation), a set of mnemonic verses encoding rules of grammar, to his lyrical praise of Lake Como, “Ordiar unde tuas laudes, o maxime Lari?” (Where shall I begin your praises, o vast Como?). His gift for satire is best illustrated by his clever response to a letter composed for Charlemagne by Pietro of Pisa that exaggerated Paolo’s talents and urged him to remain with the court.25 Despite his success at Charlemagne’s court, Paolo had not forgotten the spiritual comfort he had come to know at Montecassino. In one of the most beautiful letters of the Carolingian Renaissance written to his abbot from the court, Paolo, expressed his longing for his brother monks and fondly recalled in his imagination the daily routine of their common worship: “In comparison with your cloister, the palace is a prison to me; in contrast with the great peace in which you live, I endure a tempest here.”26 Although he left the court to return to Montecassino probably in 785, throughout the rest of his life Paolo maintained a close relationship with Charlemagne. At one point in later years, he dispatched to the king a copy of the Benedictine Rule accompanied by a letter. Decades earlier, probably before the Carolingian conquest, Paolo had composed for Adelperga, daughter of Desiderio and wife of Arichis of Benevento, a revision of Eutropius’s Historiae romanae brevarium (An Abridgement of Roman History, ca. 370). The revision supplemented Eutropius’s pagan history with contemporaneous events 22 23

24 25

26

Nef, Gedichte, 53–55; and Gofart, Narrators, 341. For a listing of Paolo’s works, see Jacques Hourlier, “Paul diacre,” Dictionnaire de spiritualité ascétique et mystique: Doctrine et histoire, vol. 12.1 (Paris, 1984), cols. 60–62. According to Gofart (Narrators, 376), the Deeds of the Bishops of Metz is a igural representation of Charlemagne’s recent decision to settle his empire on his two legitimate sons and to have no more children. For the exchange of riddles between Charlemagne and Paolo, see Nef, Gedichte, 83–105. Ibid., 75–79 and 4–6. On Paolo’s poetry, see also Godman, Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance, 9–10; and Paola Mastandrea, “Classicismo e cristianesimo nella poesia di Paolo Diacono (con esempi di analisi intertestuale assistita dal computer),” in Paolo Diacono: Uno scrittore fra tradizione longobarda e rinnovamento carolingio. Convegno internazionale di studi. Cividale del Friuli, Udine, 6–9 maggio, ed. Paolo Chiesa (Udine, 2000), 293–311. In his answer to Charlemagne’s praise of his talents, Paolo responds (Nef , Gedichte, 64–68) to the favorable comparison of himself with Homer, Horace, Virgil, and others, irst by identifying the tone of the compliment as ironic and then by declaring that he has no interest in imitating the ancient pagans, whom he compares to dogs. While denying he knows much Greek, he provides a translation of a Greek anecdote. Epistolae karolini aevi, 2:506–08; and the later edition by Nef, Gedichte, 71–73. Paolo’s letters express his feelings and purposes with a directness often lacking in other Carolingian writers.

22

The Carolingian Conquest

from Christian history, bringing the whole down to the reign of Justinian. Paolo’s version went on to become one of the most popular manuals of Roman history in the Middle Ages. After his return to Italy, the literary focus of Paolo’s last years was his monumental History of the Lombards, the work in which he established the historical existence of his people, just as Jordanes had done for the Goths, Gregory of Tours for the Franks, and Bede for the Anglo-Saxons.27 From the outset Paolo made it clear that the Lombards possessed an autonomous culture, which had originated in Scandinavia. Partly because he hesitated to recognize the early commitment of the Lombards to the Arian faith, he had no way of tracing their gradual acceptance of Catholicism. At the same time, he showed no reluctance in depicting the bloody struggle for political power among the Lombard nobility and reporting the defeats as well as the victories of Lombard armies in their battles with enemies. In the inal, sixth book, however, Paulo revealed the ultimate goal of his narrative: to prove that the Carolingian succession to the Lombard throne was a natural one based on close ties between the two ruling families. He accomplished his purpose, irst, by condemning the Merovingians as degenerate (VI, 27) while providing a positive assessment of Pepin III and his son Charles (VI, 37); second, by demonstrating the intimate relationship established between the Carolingians and the Lombards under Liudprando (712–44) in 738, when Liudprando cut the hair of the youthful Pepin III at the request of Charles Martel, thereby becoming the adoptive father of the boy (VI, 53); and, inally, noting the alliance of Liudprando with Charles in 737 against the Saracens (VI, 54).28 By ending his narrative with the reign of Liudprando, furthermore, Paolo was able to leave his readers with the impression that the friendship between the Franks and Lombards had been an enduring one. He thereby helped to create a historical background for the current rule of Pepin, Charlemagne’s son, as king of the Lombard peoples.29 Paolo’s history enjoyed enormous success, and it survives in more than a hundred manuscripts.30 27

28

29

30

The work is published as Pauli Historia Langobardorum, ed. Ludwig Bethman and Georg Waitz, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum (Hannover, 1878; repr. 1978). Ernesto Sestan, “La storiograia dell’Italia longobarda: Paolo Diacono,” in La storiograia altomedievale, 10–16 aprile 1969, SSCISAM, no. 17 (Spoleto, 1970), 357–86, provides a historiographical discussion of Paolo’s historical writings. Rosamond McKitterick, “Paolo Diacono e i Franci: Il contesto storico e culturale,” Paolo diacono: Uno scrittore fra tradizione longobarda e rinnovamento carolingio. Convegno internazionale di studi, ed. Paolo Chiesa (Udine, 2000), 23–28, suggests the work was probably requested by Pepin, viceroy of Italy, and given the location of the earliest manuscripts, that it was composed in northern Italy by Paolo. For a detailed analysis of the work, see Gofart, Narrators, 378–431. While not persuaded that McKitterick is right about the place of writing and the sponsorship of Pepin’s court, I am convinced that she is right to interpret the work as a justiication for Carolingian rule in the Lombard kingdom: McKitterick, “Paolo Diacono,” 16–23. McKitterick does not accept the traditional explanation that Paolo died before carrying his narrative beyond Liudprando. Rather she maintains that Paolo purposely stopped his narrative at that point to avoid having to deal with subsequent kings, who fell afoul both of the papacy and the Carolingians; ibid., 20. Georg Waitz, “Über die handschriftliche Überlieferung und die Sprache der Historia Langobardorum des Paulus,” Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde, 1 (1875): 533–66, as cited from McKitterick, “Paolo Diacono,” 24, n. 43. I have not seen the article.

23

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy THE LOMBARD TRADITION OF LITERACY BEFORE CHARLEMAGNE

The coterie of scholars and poets at the Pavian court marked the high point of a two-hundred-year period during which the Lombard monarchy came to recognize the importance of literacy. Although by the early decades of the sixth century aristocratic Roman families were fewer in the Italian peninsula than before, their members continued to play their traditional dominant role in literary culture. As a rule, ecclesiastics were better educated than laymen, but no cleric could surpass in learning such laymen as Boethius (480–ca. 525) or Cassiodorus (ca. 490–ca. 583). Because of family prestige and knowledge of Roman law, aristocrats had served as high functionaries in the Ostrogothic government, while socially inferior laymen, notaries, excerptores, and tabelliones participated in the legal culture by writing legal documents for government oices, churches, and private individuals.31 The sixth century was a period of political and social upheaval throughout the Italian peninsula. For three decades before the Lombard conquest in 568, Justinian fought a prolonged war against the Ostrogoths, in which many of the Roman noble houses were destroyed. Then came the Lombards who, compared with most of the tribes that had earlier invaded the Roman Empire, had had little previous contact with Roman culture. The noble class came to consist overwhelmingly of Lombards, and leadership in the secular government became separate from leadership in the Church, which remained largely Roman. Not even the monarch’s conversion to Catholic Christianity early in the seventh century healed the ethnic division between the Roman ecclesiastical hierarchy and the Lombard secular hierarchy. Kings did not convoke ecclesiastical synods; bishops did not participate in royal assemblies; and bishops only rarely performed in an oicial capacity for the secular government.32 The rupture at the political and social levels was matched by a cultural division. Already under the Ostrogoths, the hostility of pious Christians toward the pagan literary heritage, always a signiicant element in late-ancient and medieval culture, had been intensifying.33 The advent of the Lombards and the extinction of the old aristocratic Roman families now allowed the pietistic current to low freely, at least in ecclesiastical circles.34 Religious writings – that is, liturgical, hagiographical, and patristic literature to the exclusion of pagan authors – came to be the core reading 31

32

33 34

Michael Richter, The Formation of the Medieval West: Studies in the Oral Culture of the Barbarians (New York, 1994), 21–25; and Nicholas Everett, Literacy in Lombard Italy, c. 568–774 (Cambridge, 2003), 23–33. For excerptores, see below, n. 173.The title, tabellio, was used in late-ancient Rome to designate professional writers who occupied stations in public places and wrote for hire. They were strictly controlled by a magister census: Harry Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre für Deutschland und Italien, 3rd ed. (Berlin, 1958), 583. The title would become equivalent in Lombard Italy to notarius. Ottorino Bertolini, “I vescovi del ‘regnum Langobardorum’ al tempo dei Carolingi,” in Vescovi e diocesi in Italia nel medioevo (sec. IX–XIII): Atti del II Convegno di storia della Chiesa in Italia (Roma, 4–9 sett. 1961), Italia Sacra, no. 5 (Padua, 1964), 11. The Carolingians, by contrast, depended heavily on the cooperation of high ecclesiastics in their rule. Everett, Literacy in Lombard Italy, 38–39. Paolo Delogu, “Il regno lombardo,” in Paolo Delogu, André Guillou, and Gherardo Ortalli, Longobardi e Bizantini, Storia d’Italia, vol. 1 (Torino, 1991), 30, describes the extinction of the old nobility.

24

The Carolingian Conquest

for the dwindling number of literate clerics, and religion deined the parameters for whatever the clerics would compose.35 Unlike the Ostrogoths before them, the invading Lombards, almost all of whom were unable to read Latin, had little to do with book culture in either its secular or its religious form. The late sixth century, consequently, marked the end of what had been a unitary culture of the lay-clerical elite. From the beginning, however, the Lombard government needed notaries and scribes to write letters and document their acts.36 They also became especially enamored of epigraphy and wanted to put writing on their coins in imitation of their Roman and Ostrogothic predecessors.37 If to a lesser degree than earlier in the sixth century, the general population of Roman subjects continued to use documents composed by lay and clerical notaries and scribes in order to certify their own legal relationships. The sources are too scattered to provide even a general estimate of the extent to which Lombard society resorted to writing in the early decades of Lombard rule, but the creation in 643 of a written corpus of law, essentially an amalgam of Lombard and Roman customary law, indicates the extent to which Lombard rulers had become dependent on writing by this time.38 By setting down the law in a formal code, Lombard rulers acknowledged the necessity of conducting the business of government through written documents, thereby inviting notaries to associate with them in government and encouraging the nobility to recognize the need for documentary memory of their own activities. By the time of the Carolingian invasion one hundred and thirty years later, the documentary culture centering on the notary was lourishing, but largely independently of the book culture, which was monopolized by a small number of ecclesiastics. Charlemagne testiied to his admiration of Lombard book culture by carrying of its major representatives. The invading Franks also found a documentary culture more active than their own. Documentary literacy seems also to have been more evenly spread over Lombard Italy than in transalpine Europe, and laymen played a more active role in drawing up documents.39 As we shall see, the Carolingians’ 35

36

37

38 39

Of the 135 extant manuscripts for sixth-century Italy, one-tenth are works of classical literature: Armando Petrucci, “Scrittura e libro nell’Italia altomedievale,” SM, 3rd ser., 10 (1969): 157–213, and 14 (1973): 961–1002. The igure is found on 173. I had already portrayed my conception of the two cultures of Italy in my “Medieval Italian Culture and the Origins of Humanism as a Stylistic Ideal,” in Renaissance Humanism: Foundations, Forms and Legacy, ed. Albert Rabil, 3 vols. (Philadelphia, 1988), 1:37, when Charles Radding brought to my attention Petrucci’s article, which utilizes the same distinction but in a more fully developed form. Everett, Literacy in Lombard Italy, 163–276, discusses in detail what is known of the uses of writing in government, charters, and inscriptions. Petrucci writes (“Scrittura e libro,” 14:1001): “Non ci sembra azzardato a questo punto afermare che nell’Italia longobarda del secolo settimo la cultura di un monetiere e quella di uno scrittore di documenti si sviluppavano secondo esperienze e paradigmi del tutto diversi fra loro e soprattutto totalmente indipendenti dalle esperienze e dai paradigmi propri al monaco scriba di Bobbio o dall’amanuense della cattedrale di Verona.” The separation in culture mirrored the exclusion of prelates from public power. They did not participate in royal assemblies or generally act in any public capacity. Petrucci, “Scrittura e libri,” 14:1000. Few chancery documents survive from the chanceries of Charlemagne’s grandfather or father: Janet Nelson, “Literacy in Carolingian Government,” in Uses of Literacy in Early Medieval Europe, ed.

25

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

promotion of Italian documentary culture led to its enhancement by means of greater regulation as to who could draw up legal documents and a clearer conception regarding notarial functions. THE CAROLINGIAN RENAISSANCE

Beyond their desire to foster Christian belief and conduct among their subjects, to educate clerics in the proper execution of their religious duties, and to create an elite body of highly trained administrators, Charlemagne and his descendants aimed at advancing the understanding of Christian doctrine. Although religious concerns dominated Carolingian education, Charlemagne and his immediate successors sought to infuse new life into the late-ancient school curriculum as a means of providing a solid basis for the study of Christian literature.40 Manuscripts of pagan and Christian texts were fundamental to this enterprise, and doubtless the greatest creative achievement of Carolingian scholarship lay in its selection of sources and in its manner of editing them. These scholarly labors served at one and the same time to advance the Christian religion and to enhance the dignity of the monarchy.41 The principal creativity of the Carolingians expressed itself in the way they selected and edited their sources, for the texts they produced would prove fundamental to most modern editions of ancient and late-ancient Latin authors. Over more than a century, scholars, inspired by their reading and by contemporary events, produced as well an enormous number of their own works in prose and poetry. The literary, scholarly, and artistic achievements of the Carolingian book culture

40

41

Rosamond McKitterick (Cambridge, 1994), 261. Nevertheless, McKitterick has convincingly demonstrated that a large number of documents of a notarial character exist for eighth-century Gaul and has identiied numbers of notaries working there; McKitterick, The Carolingians and the Written Word (Cambridge, 1989). Unfortunately, no focused study of the difusion of documentary literacy by region exists, nor is there for Gaul anything comparable to Italy’s systematic collection for the Lombard period: Codice diplomatico longobardo, ed. Luigi Schiaparelli and Carlrichard Bruhl, 3 vols. in 4 (Rome, 1927–84). For documents of Gaul before 800, see Chartae latinae antiquiores, ed. Hartmut Atsma and Jean Vezin, vols. 13–14 and 17–19 (Zurich, 1981–87). On the limited operations of Charlemagne’s chancery early in his reign, see Bullough, “Aula renovata,” 127. Bullough discusses the changes that took place after 773 and the role of Italians in the changes: 127–30. C. Steven Jaeger, The Envy of Angels: Cathedral Schools and Social Ideals in Medieval Europe, 950–1200 (Philadelphia, 1994), 27–35. Peter Godman, Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance, 4–5, suggests that, aside from the practical aim, Charlemagne’s interest in surrounding himself with learned men arose from his desire to emulate great rulers of the past. Giles Brown, “Introduction: The Carolingian Renaissance,” in Carolingian Culture: Emulation and Innovation, ed. Rosamond McKitterick (Cambridge, 1994), 28–30, argues more pointedly that the annexation of the kingdom caused Charlemagne to identify more closely with late Roman traditions. Charlemagne’s ideas for Aachen parallel the concept of the palace complex at Pavia, where Desiderio was surrounded by learned men. Brown extends his argument about Carolingian imitation to book production as well. Theoretically, the ancient pagan authors were at hand to act as stylistic models and to provide reinforcement for Christian positions, but studying the pagans for enjoyment remained suspect. Jaeger, The Envy of Angels, deines the Carolingian educational program for the clerical elite, which he characterizes as “the submersion of classical models in Christian ones,” 34.

26

The Carolingian Conquest

have led scholars to characterize the intellectual revival of the ninth century as the Carolingian Renaissance. While by the late eighth century the growing size of libraries at monasteries such as Lorsch, Corbie, and the nunnery of Chelles suggests a revival of interest in learning even before the extension of royal favor, the nerve center of the early renaissance was Charlemagne’s court with its palace school.42 Beginning with Charlemagne, it became common practice for Carolingian monarchs to reward scholars and poets, especially those trained in the palace school, with high ecclesiastical appointments throughout the heartland of the empire.43 Crucial to enriching Carolingian book culture were Irish scholars, who from the last decade of the eighth century found welcome at the court.44 They had been preceded on the Continent from the seventh century by other Irishmen, who had founded a series of monasteries from near the North Sea down to Bobbio in northern Italy.45 This second wave of Irish, primarily learned men, brought with them a tradition of biblical exegesis and grammar study superior to that on the Continent.46 In turn, their knowledge of pagan authors was enriched through contact with Alcuin and continental scholars already at the court.47 The major scholarly achievements of the irst half of the ninth century, however, were not at the palace school but were largely products of royal monasteries. When in the second quarter of the century, Drogo (d. 855), Charlemagne’s illegitimate son and bishop of Metz since 823, made the school of his cathedral a center of learning, the surge of intellectual activity expanded among the secular clergy. In the third quarter of the century, the cathedral schools of Laon, Auxerre, and Rheims attained scholarly prominence. The irst, however, clearly thrived because of its close link with the court of Charles the Bald and the colony of Irish monks who lived in the 42

43 44

45

46

47

Bullough, “Aula renovata, 140. John Contreni, “The Carolingian Renaissance,” Carolingian Learning, Masters and Manuscripts (Great Yarmouth, 1992), 65, writes: “The court provided example and leadership, Charles’s palace served as both a magnet and as a point of dissemination for the learned men of his time.” Bullough, “Aula renovata,” 135, provides examples of the appointments. Pépin III had already hosted the monk Fergil at his court before sending him to Salzburg as abbot in 745. But the Irish arrived in numbers beginning late in the century: Pierre Riché, “Les Irlandais et les princes carolingiens aux VIIIe et IXe siècle,” Die Iren und Europa im früheren Mittelalter, ed. Heinz Löwe, 2 vols. (Stuttgart, 1982), 736–38. Alcuin remained the intellectual leader of the court, but except for Fardolfo at Saint-Denis the Italians had disappeared. Friedrich Prinz, “Die Rolle der Iren beim Aufbau der merowingischen Klosterkultur,” Die Iren, 202–18, sketches the inluence of seventh-century Irish missionaries, beginning with Columban, on the Merovingian monarchy and the upper aristocracy that led to the creation of an “iro-fränkische Klosterkultur” in the area between the Loire and Rhine. South of the Loire, monasticism remained loyal to traditional Gallic forms. Bernard Bischof , “Il monachesimo irlandese e il continente,” Il monachesimo nell’alto medioevo e la formazione della civiltà occidentale, 8–14 aprile 1957 (Spoleto, 1957), 125–29. He analyzes the Irish method of exegesis in “Wendepunkte in der Geschichte der lateinischen Exegese im Frühmittelalter,” Sacris erudiri 6 (1954): 189–281. Irish scholars encountered a stronger tradition of interest in pagan literature on the Continent than in their homeland; Fidel Rädel, “Die Kenntnis der antiken lateinischen Literatur bei den Iren in der Heimat und auf dem Kontinent,” Die Iren, 488–89. See as well Michael Herren,“Classical and Secular Learning among the Irish before the Carolingian Renaissance,” Florilegium 3 (1981): 118–57.

27

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

city. In the case of Auxerre, however, the primary center of intellectual life was the monastery of Saint Germain, not the cathedral school.48 After the death of Charles in 877, despite the political instability of the kingdom and the increasing severity of attacks by the Northmen, the intellectual capital accrued over the previous decades continued to produce results, albeit diminishing ones, in the form of literary and scholarly work. Nevertheless, by the early tenth century, with the exception of a few intellectual centers, the treasure was largely spent.49 Fundamental to the ultimate Christian goal of education both in monasteries and among the secular clergy was the knowledge of “grammar,” a discipline conceived much more broadly than is its shrivelled modern descendant, grammar as syntax. Alcuin, the Anglo-Saxon scholar who soon after his arrival at court around 786 became the leading educator there, expressed the contemporary view of the scope of grammar when he wrote: “Grammar is the science of letters and the guardian of right speech and writing.” The art embraced not merely letters, syllables, words, and parts of speech, but also elements like igures of speech, prosody, poetry, fables, and history.50 In describing grammar thus, Alcuin did not deny dignity to other disciplines, such as rhetoric: he gave his deinition of grammar in the section devoted to grammar in a treatise in which each of the seven liberal arts was allotted its separate part. Nonetheless, the fundamental character of grammar for all writing and speech, and the breadth of its province, made it for Alcuin the foundation for all learning. Therefore, it can be said that the Carolingian Renaissance endorsed the late-ancient primacy of grammar over the other liberal arts. While it might seem obvious that in a culture with a low degree of literacy most educational eforts would focus on grammar, improving basic literacy did not constitute the Carolingians’ only motive, nor did it entirely explain Alcuin’s enthusiasm for grammar or that of others in his age. The Carolingians assumed that grammar, by means of its methodologies – that is, analogy, allegory, and etymology – provided 48

49

50

John J. Contreni, The Cathedral School of Laon from 850 to 930: Its Manuscripts and Its Masters (Munich, 1978), 78–80 and 165. For the intellectual prominence after 850, see Édouard Jeauneau, “Les écoles de Laon et d’Auxerre au IXe siècle,” in La scuola nell’occidente latino dell’alto medioevo, 15–21 aprile 1971, 509–510, SSCISAM, no. 19 (Spoleto, 1972). Jason K. Glenn, “Master and Community in Tenthcentury Reims,” in Teaching and Learning in Northern Europe, 1000–1200, ed. Sally N.Vaughan and Jay Rubenstein (Turnhout, 2006), 51–68, argues for a revival of vitality of the school in the second half of the tenth century. On Rheims, see as well Michael E. Moore, “Prologue: Teaching and Learning History in the School of Reims,” Teaching and Learning in Northern Europe, 1000–1200, ed. Sally N. Vaughan and Jay Rubinstein (Turnhout, 2006), 19–49. Contreni, Cathedral School of Laon, 152–64, for example, traces the cathedral school of Laon down to the death of bishop Aldhelm. Grammatica, PL 101, cols. 857d–58a: “Grammatica est litteralis scientia, et est custos recte loquendi et scribendi.” To the question: “In quot species dividitur grammatica?” Alcuin replied: “In vocem, in litteras, in syllabas, partes, dictiones, orationes, deinitiones, pedes, accentus, posituras, notas, orthographiae ... analogiae, etymologiae, glossas, diferentias, barbarismum, soloecismum, vitia, metaplasmum, schemata, tropos, prosam, metra, fabulas, historias.” Decades later Rabanus Maurus deined grammar as “scientia interpretandi poetas atque historicos et recta scribendi loquendique ratio”: De institutione clericorum, 18; PL 107, col. 395. Isidore includes history under grammar because “Haec disciplina ad Grammaticam pertinet, quia quidquid dignum memoria est litteris mandatur”: Etymol., I, 41.

28

The Carolingian Conquest

the tools for discovering all truth available to human reason.51 That assumption was nourished by the more basic assumption that knowledge of the origins of words and the structure of language revealed the structure of being. The grammatical orientation to learning and thought was not invented in the eighth or ninth century but instead already constituted the dominant tendency in education by late antiquity. What distinguished the Carolingian period was a concerted efort to incorporate the grammarians’ orientation into an omnibus educational program and to difuse that program widely.52 An examination of compilations of school and literary texts from ninth-century Italy provides a relatively detailed picture of the nature of Carolingian schooling and the degree to which the great literature of antiquity played a role in education. For example, a manuscript compiled at Montecassino in the late eighth or early ninth century (BNP, Lat. 7530), perhaps under the direction of Paulo Diacono, typiies the kind of educational program Alcuin had in mind for the secondary level of schooling.53 A miscellany relating to the liberal arts, it was organized in three divisions: a few selections dealing with dialectic, geometry, and speciic aspects of arithmetic; a longer section on rhetoric; and an extensive treatment of grammar that covered more than three-quarters of the entire manuscript. Based primarily on the manuals of late Latin antiquity, the manuscript’s collection of texts was designed to give a young student the basic rules for composition in prose and poetry, guidance in constructing simple arguments, and a smattering of mathematics, along with some notion of the relationship of the liberal arts to one another. The rhetorical section, comprising texts 40–48, is interesting for the light it sheds on the background for what would become ars dictaminis, the medieval art of letter writing. Two short passages relate to writing letters, one dealing with the litterae formatae, the coded letters of early medieval ecclesiastical chanceries (48), and the other concerned with shaping letters to it the character of the addressee (44). Two of the seven other divisions of the section (45 and 47) deal with progymnasmata, ancient pedagogical exercises designed to develop a student’s ability to speak.54 The 51

52

53

54

I owe many of my views on grammar to Marcia L. Colish, The Mirror of Language, 2nd ed. (Lincoln, Neb., and London, 1983). See her book for this paragraph, 63–74. Grammarians constructed declensions, conjugations, and rules of syntax by use of analogy; they were trained to search for truth under the veil of words in poetry; and because it was believed that an intimate connection existed between an object and its name, their understanding of the name’s etymology was held to reveal the nature of the object itself. The copying eforts of the Carolingians generally were responsible for saving a large part of the ancient corpus of Latin literature. Bernard Bischof, “Die Bibliothek im Dienste der Schule,” in La scuola nell’occidente latino dell’alto medioevo, 394, SSCISAM, no. 19 (Spoleto, 1972), estimates that threequarters of ancient Latin texts survive only because they were copied in Carolingian manuscripts. Louis Holtz, “Le Parisinus Latinus 7530, synthèse cassinienne des arts libéraux,” SM, 3rd ser. 16 (1975): 97–152. The irst was a partial text of Emporius on ethopoeia and the second, Priscian’s Praeexercitamina. On the subject of progymnasmata, see Stanley F. Bonner, Education in Ancient Rome (Berkeley, 1977), 250–76. See also George L. Justas, “The Function and Evolution of Byzantine Rhetoric,” Viator 1 (1970), 55–73. The latter citation was taken from an unpublished paper by Carol D. Lanham, “Latin Epistolography before the Ars dictaminis.”

29

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

progymnasmata were often taught in twelve steps, arranged in order of increasing dificulty, beginning with fable and maxim and ending with more diicult exercises, such as ethopoeia. In ethopoeia, the student was expected to assume for himself a persona in a particular situation and adapt his words to the persona’s age, rank, fortune, and situation, while also taking the same kinds of considerations into account for the speech’s audience. Already in the second century A.D. both rhetoricians and grammarians shared such oratorical exercises.55 The exercise of ethopoeia could be performed just as well by writing a letter as by composing a speech. Surviving examples of model letters from the late empire illustrate how a writer, following the classical conception of a letter as a form of conversation, could adapt his discourse to the persona he had assumed, to that ascribed to his addressee, and to other circumstances surrounding a particular occasion for communication. By the Carolingian period, given the reduced opportunities for Latin speech making, it can be assumed that the use of progymnasmata had become largely connected with letter writing. Notker (ca. 840–912), a monk of Saint Gall and the author of a life of Charlemagne, reports that when Charlemagne returned from the Saxon Wars, he summoned students (presumably from the palace school) before him to read their carmina and epistulae.56 The latter exercises were probably progymnasmata designed to present letters orally, like speeches, with the intention of instilling in the student a sense of appropriateness and decorum. The monastic teacher at Montecassino probably used the texts contained in the BNP Lat. 7530 for the same purpose. It must be stressed, however, that the space devoted to rhetoric in the manuscript was dwarfed by that given to grammar. That the collection of texts comprising BNP, Lat. 7530 was designed for secondary education becomes clear when it is compared with another collection, still a school text but containing more advanced work. Burgerbibliothek Bern 363, a compilation made in northern Italy, probably in Milan, in the second third of the ninth century by an Irish master, contains the kind of material that a teacher would need to complete the education of students in composition and literary culture. Although almost three-quarters of the manuscript is devoted to the commentary on Virgil by Servius, a late fourth-century grammarian, the work in its remaining pages includes poetry by Horace with a late-ancient commentary and selections of poems by Ovid and Priscian, as well as by a few Carolingian poets. The codex also contains the Pseudo-Augustinian manual De dialectica and Fortunatianus’s Ars rethorica, respectively representing dialectic and rhetoric, the other two members of the trivium.57 Works on dialectic and rhetoric presumably honed the more advanced students’ thinking processes and improved their style in writing poetry and prose. Codiied by the mid-ninth century, a curriculum heavily weighted toward grammar would continue to deine the character of Italian education up to the end of 55

56

57

Quintilian, Institutio oratoria 2.1; Institutio oratoria of Quintilian, trans. Harry E. Butler, 4 vols. (London, 1920–1922), 1:204–10, and especially 208. Cf. Lanham, “Latin Epistolography.” Notker, Monachus Sangallensis de Carolo Magno, I, 3–4, ed. Philipp Jafé, Bibliotheca rerum germanicarum, vol. 4 (Berlin, 1867), 633. Claudia Villa, “A Brescia e a Milano,” in Claudia Villa and Gian Carlo Alessio, “Tra commedia e Comedia,” IMU 24 (1981): 1–17.

30

The Carolingian Conquest

the eleventh century. In what had formerly been the Lombard kingdom, just as elsewhere in the Carolingian empire, although the study of grammar relied heavily on ancient manuals of the arts, and pagan literary texts exercised some inluence, the ultimate objective was to use this knowledge to further the understanding of biblical and patristic sources.58 THE SCHOOLS AND LITURGICAL PERFORMANCE

Carolingian promotion of an elite Christian culture was paralleled at a lower level by a concern to purify liturgical performance in the churches of the empire. Liturgical rites properly performed both served the spiritual needs of the people and, by pleasing God, made Him well disposed toward the Carolingians’ rule. It is diicult to overemphasize the importance of liturgy in shaping Carolingian education and its institutional structure. The life of European cathedrals and Benedictine monasteries had from their inception revolved around liturgical performance, and instruction in learning chants and singing had formed the major part of their educational programs. From the middle of the eighth century, however, the Carolingians demonstrated a particular concern for the proper execution of church rituals, primarily in the Mass.59 By that time, the liturgy of the Frankish church had become a rich mixture of Gallican and Roman practices, with dosages of each varying from one diocese to another.60 A shortage of liturgical books containing versions of these rituals, moreover, increased the confusion, because many churches, lacking a library, depended for their liturgy on local memory communicated orally from one generation to the next.61 The Carolingians were not happy with this state of afairs. The movement for liturgical reform was intimately connected with a musical reform spearheaded by Chrodegang of Metz, bishop of Metz (742–66), who, while in Rome in 753 waiting to accompany Stephen II to Gaul, had come to admire 58

59

60

61

Donald A. Bullough, “Le scuole cattedrali e la cultura dell’Italia settentrionale prima dei comuni,” Vescovi e diocesi in Italia, 121, 129–130. Giampaolo Ropa summarizes the hagiographic production of Emilia in “Letteratura e agiograia: I centri di studio e gli scriptoria,” in Le sedi della cultura nell’Emilia Romagna: Alto medioevo, ed. Ovidio Capitani et al. (Milan, 1983), 76–85. Bullough, “Le scuole cattedrali,” 118–21. On the rich development of music under the Carolingians, see Susan Rankin, “Carolingian Music,” in Carolingian Culture: Emulation and Innovation, ed. Rosamond McKitterick (Cambridge, 1994), 274–316. Fernand Cabrol, “Liturgie,” Dictionnaire de théologie catholique, 15 vols. (Paris 1950), 9, cols. 804–16, briely deines these rituals. In his index Klaus Gamber, Codices liturgici latini antiquiores (Freiberg, 1963), ix and x, includes under “Roman” liturgies pre-Gregorian [Gelasian], Gregorian, mixed Gelasian, and mixed Gregorian. Also see the discussion of Yitzhak Hen, The Royal Patronage of Liturgy in Frankish Gaul to the Death of Charles the Bald (877) (London, 2001), 57–81. The confusion of liturgies is discussed by Cyrille Vogel, “Saint Chrodegang et les débuts de la romanisation du culte en pays franc,” in Saint Chrodegang: Communications présentées au colloque tenu à Metz à l’occasion du douzième centenaire de sa mort (Metz, 1967), 91–109. Vogel writes of the need of books for the performance of the liturgy (94): “Or, il ne fallait pas seulement un livre pour accomplir les fonctions liturgiques, mais bien une bibliothèque entière. Pour la messe seule, un Sacramentaire, un Ordo correspondant, un Antiphonaire gradualis, un Epistolier et un Evangélaire étaient indispensables.” Even in contemporary Rome, liturgical books were in short supply in the mid-eighth century.

31

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

the Roman chant.62 During the pope’s two years’ residence in Gaul (753–55), the Frankish court became acquainted with the Roman chant as it was performed for Stephen by singers in his entourage. Meanwhile, after Chrodegang returned from Rome to his own diocese, he resolved, probably in 754 or 755, to introduce the Roman chant there as part of a general program of religious and institutional reform.63 Musical reform seems to have been from the outset the principal factor shaping his plans for change. To judge from his Regula canonicorum, the chief duty of the clerks of the cathedral, whom Chrodegang referred to as canones (canons), was to hear the reading of scripture and to sing the eight daily services of the oices and the chants related to the Mass.64 The archdeacon and the primicerius were speciically enjoined to be “instructed, themselves, in the Gospel teachings and in the Holy Fathers’ canonical teachings, so that they might be able to instruct the clergy in divine law and in the modest law of this present teaching [huius parva institucionis].”65 Given the rigorous schedule for performing the oices and readings, canons would have had little time for other duties. 62

63

64

65

Chrodegang’s treatise on reform (751–55) is published in Regula canonicorum aus dem leidener Codex vossianus latinus mit Umschrift der tironischen Noten, ed. Wilhelm Schmitz (Hannover, 1889); and more recently in Jerome Bertram, The Chrodegang Rules: The Rules for the Common Life of the Secular Clergy from the Eight and Ninth Centuries. Critical Texts with Translations and Commentary (Padstow, Cornwall, 2004), 26–51. I will use the newer edition. On Chrodegang’s life, see Heinrich Reumont, “Der hl. Chrodegang, Bischof von Metz,” in Festschrift Georg von Hertling zum siebzigsten Geburtstag am 31 Aug. 1913, Görres-Gesellschaft zur Plege der Wissenschaft in katholischen Deutschland (Munich, 1913), 202–15; Eugen Ewig, “Saint Chrodegang et la réforme de l’église franque,” in Saint Chrodegang: Communications, 25–53. Chrodegang’s eforts at Metz seem to have had the full support of Pepin the Short. In Paolo Diacono’s Liber de episcopis mettensibus, ed. Georg Pertz, MGH, Scriptores, vol. 2 (Hannover, 1829), 268, Paolo writes of Pepin’s inancial support of Chrodegang’s additions to the cathedral: “Hic (Chrodegang) fabricari iussit una cum adiutorio Pippini regis rebam sancti Stephani prothomartyris et altare ipsius atque cancellos, presbiterium arcusque per girum.” Cf. Carol Heitz, “Le groupe cathédral de Metz au temps de saint-Chrodegang,” in Saint Chrodegang, 126. Regula canonicorum, chap. 6, 33. Martin A. Claussen, The Reform of the Frankish Church: Chrodegang of Metz and the ‘Regula canonicorum’ in the Eighth Century (Cambridge, 2004), 59–113, discusses the composition of the Regula in detail. For the relationship of Chrodegang’s general reform to the introduction of the Roman liturgy, see Hans von Schubert, Geschichte der christlichen Kirche im Frühmittelalter (Hildesheim, 1962), 635–36. Chrodegang’s focus on reforming the clergy most closely connected with the cathedral reveals the general tendency in the period for the other members of the urban clergy to become separated from the daily activities of the cathedral (576). Chrodegang, however, tries to correct this by requiring attendance by the urban and suburban clergy twice a month at services in the cathedral; Regula canonicorum, cap. 33: 49. Charles de Clercq, La législation religieuse franque de Clovis à Charlemagne: Étude sur les actes de conciles et les capitulaires, les statuts diocésains et les règles monastiques (507–814) (Anvers, 1936), 146–55, provides an overview of Chrodegang’s rule. De Clercq’s second volume, La législation religieuse franque: Étude sur les actes de conciles et les capitulaires, les statuts diocésains et les règles monastiques: De Louis le Pieux à la in du IXe siècle (814–900) (Anvers, 1958), studies religious legislation of the later Carolingians. Henceforth I refer to the two volumes as Législation religieuse franque, vols. 1 and 2. Regula canonicorum, chap. 25, 7–8: 42. They are to be “docti evangelica et sanctorum Patrum instituta canonum ut possint docere clerum in lege divina et huius parva institucionis.” Cf. Gaston Hocquard, “La règle de Saint Chrodegang: L’état de quelques questions, in Saint Chrodegang, 55–89. I have discussed the complexity of deining primicerius below.

32

The Carolingian Conquest

Like monks, Chrodegang’s canons slept in a common dormitory and ate their meals together in the refectory, but unlike monks, canons could eat meat, were under no obligation to divest themselves of their possessions, and might leave the cloister during the day if necessary.66 Chrodegang appears to have seen the imposition of a common life on the canons as the means for assuring their participation in the performance of the sacred oices. Under his immediate successors, the canons were given their own collective inancial resources, thereby enhancing the potential for a corporate identity.67 Chrodegang’s musical innovations and the institutional rearrangements he imposed in order to achieve them were ultimately to have a profound efect on liturgical performance throughout the Carolingian empire. According to Charlemagne’s Admonitio generalis of 789, his father, Pepin III, had already introduced the Roman chant into the liturgy of the Mass, and Charlemagne was now implementing his work.68 The Admonitio further commanded the use of several other Roman practices, such as the kiss of peace and the recitation of the names of the dead during Mass.69 The emperor’s Roman prejudices, however, would best be relected in his subsequent acquisition of the Sacramentarium Hadrianum together with a Supplementum, whether or not he intended to impose it uniformly throughout the empire.70 66

67 68

69 70

Heitz, “Le groupe cathédral,” 122–37, discusses the efect of the new liturgy on church architecture in Metz. Hocquard, “La règle de Saint Chrodegang,” 56–57. Capitularia regum Francorum, 1:61 (chap. 80): “Ut cantum Romanum pleniter discant, et ordinabiliter per nocturnale vel graduale oicium peragatur, secundum quod beatae memoriae genitor noster Pippinus rex decretavit ut ieret, quando Gallicanum tulit ob unanimitatem apostolicae sedis et sanctae Dei aeclesiae paciicam concordiam.” We learn from Walahfrid Strabo (De exordiis et incrementis quarundam in observationibus ecclesiasticis rerum. A Translation and Liturgical Commentary, ed. Alice L. Harting-Correa [Leiden and New York, 1996], 168) that the Carolingians’ innovation was successful: “Cantilenae vera perfectionem scientiam, quam iam pene tota Francia diligit, Stephanus papa, cum ad Pippinum, patrem Caroli Magni imperatoris, in Franciam pro iustitia sancti Petri a Langobardis expetenda venisset, per suos clericos petente eodem Pippino invexit, indeque usus eius longe lateque convaluit.” Cf. Rosamund McKitterick, The Frankish Church and the Carolingian Reforms, 789–895 (London, 1977), 122. Nonetheless Hen, The Royal Patronage of Liturgy, 56–57 and 64, while granting that Pepin may have had “a certain role in the promotion of the cantus Romanus in Francia,” maintains that the oicial reform occurred under Charlemagne (64). He also holds that the reform was “rather limited” in efect (88). Ibid., 69–70. The Hadrianum was named after a Mass-book sent from Rome by Hadrian I to Charlemagne around 784. Designed for papal use, the work was ill suited for the Frankish church. According to the summary of McKitterick, The Frankish Church, 131, it contained “only the stational masses for use in the basilicas of Rome” and lacked masses for ordinary Sundays, rites for baptisms, and weddings, funeral, and votive masses. Its calendar also difered from that of the Epistle and Gospel lectionaries then in use. A supplement was required to include those elements lacking in the Hadrianum. The probable compiler of the Supplementum, completed after 800, was Benedict of Aniane; ibid., 132. Cf. Hen, The Royal Patronage, 77. Scholars debate whether or not Charlemagne intended to efect a uniication of liturgical practice throughout the empire. The generally accepted narrative that Charlemagne endeavored to create a uniform liturgy for his people on the basis of Roman models has been analyzed and branded “a drastic simpliication, not to say a travesty” by Hen, Royal Patronage, 153.Vogel, who accepts the standard position, acknowledges (1) that the introduction of new liturgical books, for a time at least,

33

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

For our purposes, the most important part of the Carolingian reforms concerns the link between elementary education and correct performance of religious rites. Chrodegang’s original rule for Metz contained no mention of education for the young, yet the establishment of the Roman chant in the liturgy almost required at least elementary training for the singers.71 Accordingly, the capitulary irst decreed that schools were to be created throughout the kingdom to teach both free and unfree boys to read, but it then focused on boys in schools run by cathedrals, collegiate churches, and monasteries.72 With the execution of liturgical rites and the diiculties associated with performing the Roman chant in mind, the Admonitio stressed the need to educate the boys participating in the oicium. Boys were to study “the Psalms, notes, singing, computation, grammar ... and well-emended religious texts.” Because they should not be allowed to read corrupt texts, if necessary, “men of a mature age ought very carefully to write the Gospels, the Psalterium, and the missal.”73 The document implies that the liturgical education of boys probably began very early in their study of Latin and in most cases continued after they had had all the elementary grammar they were to learn. The passage from grammar to music would have been facilitated by the Carolingian tendency to conceive of music as a form of grammar, with the note as the letter, the interval as the word, and longer groupings of intervals as clauses and periods.74 Subsequently, the decrees of the church council held at Aachen in 816 made a concerted efort to impose on the whole imperial church the institutional structure created by Chrodegang around the systematic performance of the canonical hours. At its conclusion the council declared that all collegial churches (both cathedrals and collegial foundations) must follow a rule of life similar in many respects to that of monks.75 It then proceeded to demand a similar discipline for female religious

71 72

73

74

75

only added to the confusion, because the old books continued to be used in many places; and (2) that all of the new liturgies incorporated Gallican elements to it local needs; Cyrill Vogel, Medieval Liturgy: An Introduction to the Sources, rev. and trans. William G. Storey and Niels Krogh Rasmussen (Washington, D.C., 1986), 63–64. Hen, Royal Patronage, 78–81, maintains that this liturgical diversity was a permanent feature of the Carolingian church. Bullough, Alcuin, 237. Capitularia regum Francorum, 1:60 (chap. 70): “Et non solum servilis conditionis infantes, sed etiam ingenuorum ilios adgregent sibique socient. Et ut scholae legentium puerorum iant.” Ibid., 1:60 (chap. 72): “Et ut scholae legentium puerorum iant. Psalmos, notas, cantus, compotum, grammaticam per singula monasteria vel episcopia et libros catholicos bene emendate; quia saepe, dum bene aliqui Deum rogare cupiunt, sed per inemendatos libros male rogant. Et pueros vestros non sinite eos vel legendo vel scribendo corrumpere; et si opus est evangelium, psalterium et missale scribere, perfectae aetatis homines scribant cum omni dilgentia.” Also in the De litteris colendis, Capitularia regum Francorum, 1:79, Charlemagne exalted learning “sicut aspectu vestro aediicatur visus, ita quoque de sapientia vestra, quam in legendo seu cantando perceperit, instructus omnipotenti Domino gratias agendo gaudens redeat.” Rankin, “Carolingian Music,” 286–90. Bullough, Alcuin, 176 and 236–38, emphasizes the close connection between basic education and music and the scholae cantorum and education in the liberal arts. Paul Hinschius, System des katholischen Kirchenrechts mit besonderer Rücksicht auf Deutschland, 6 vols. (Berlin, 1869–97), 2:51–53, points out how much the reforms of 816 depended on Chrodegang.The council’s provisions establishing the vita canonicorum are found in Concilia aevi karolini, 2.1:397–421. A summary of the council decrees is found in de Clercq, Législation religieuse franque, 2:6–17. De Clercq

34

The Carolingian Conquest

groups living without a rule and collectively referred to as canonicae, probably to relect their devotion to celebrating the canonical hours. Apparently phenomena of the second half of the eighth century, such unregulated groups of women had for some time been a source of concern to the Church, and the council took steps to assimilate them to cloistered nuns.76 First citing patristic texts and then the decrees and canons of various church councils on discipline, the Aachen council outlined the norms of life required of clerics of collegial churches: sleeping in a dormitory, sharing meals in the refectory in silence while listening to the reading of sacred texts, and strictly observing the canonical hours in the choir.77 As in the case of Chrodegang’s rule, canons were allowed to possess private property, and diet depended on the wealth of the particular church. No provision was made for inancial support of the collective life of the canons, but as foundation charters of cathedral chapters suggest, the Metz model, giving the chapter an independent revenue, may often have been imitated.78 The Aachen reforms of 816, concerned with cathedral and other collegial churches, were followed in 817 by others promoting liturgical performance in monasteries.79 But because, as we shall see, after the ninth century monasteries in the regnum, with few exceptions, played little role in intellectual life, it was collegial reforms, especially those afecting cathedral schools, that mattered more in the long run. It was the collegial and especially the cathedral schools, not the monasteries, that were to serve as the major carriers of grammatical culture. In Italy, Lothar, son of Louis the Pious, reinforced the decrees of Aachen regarding the creation of cathedral chapters with his own decree in the Capitulary of Olona (825), as did Eugenius II at the Roman synod of 826.80 Subsequent councils down

76

77

78

79

80

discusses similar decrees in earlier councils establishing the vita canonicorum in the irst years of the ninth century; ibid., 1:203–259. On the decrees afecting sanctimoniales, see Concilia aevi karolini, 2.1:422–56. Although the canonicae were commonly identiied with nuns as sanctimoniales, they were allowed to retain their own property and keep a more generous communal table.The Council of Châlons (813) had already taken up the matter of the sanctimoniales, “quae se canonicas vocant”; Concilia aevi karolini, 284 (53). See Albert Werminghof, “Die Beschlüsse des Aachener Concils im Jahre 816,” Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde 27 (1901): 631. Cf. Hans von Schubert, Geschichte der christlichen Kirche im Frühmittelalter: Ein Handbuch (Tübingen, 1921), 618–19. Concilia aevi karolingi, 2.1:400–408. See the comments of Carlo Egger,“Canonici regolari,” Dizionario degli istituti di perfezione, vol. 2 (Rome, 1975), 49. See the brief summary of the vita canonica by Emile Amann and Auguste Dumas, L’Église au pouvoir des laïques (888–1057), Historie de l’Église depuis les origines jusqu’au nos jours, vol. 7 (Paris, 1940), 250–61. See also Ferminio Poggiaspalla, La vita comune del clero dalle origini alle reforme gregoriane (Rome, 1968), 71–99. On the contradictory attitude of Aachen toward property, see Cosimo D. Fonseca, “Canoniche regolari riformate dell’Italia nord-occidentale,” Monasteri in alta Italia dopo le invasioni saracene e magiare (sec. X–XII). Relazioni e comunicazioni presentate al XXXII Congresso storico subalpino, III Convegno di storia della Chiesa in Italia (Pinerolo 6–9 settembre 1964) (Turin, 1966), 340–41. On the spread of the Aachen reforms to noncathedral churches and sanctuaries in the countryside, see Poggiaspalla, Vita comune del clero, 131–35. The provisions concerning liturgical performance are scattered through the proceedings of the council. See de Clercq, La legislation religieuse, 2.19. Referring to an earlier decree now lost, which apparently ordered the construction of separate lodging for the new cathedral chapters, the capitulary commanded bishops to have the residence for the canons ready by the following October, ive months later: “Volumus ut singuli episcopi

35

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

to the council held at Turin in 876 repeated the call for creating cloisters to foster the common life of church canons.81 The fact that such legislation had to be passed repeatedly suggests that creating cathedral chapters was easier said than done. From their beginning cathedrals had played a pedagogical role in the Christian community, but the diferentiation of functions inherent in the organization of the cathedral chapter likely led to the institutionalization of education. The fact that a major share of cathedral education involved training singers and future liturgists, however, compromised their becoming sites of advanced training in liberal studies or theology. Boys training for the liturgy still had to learn basic grammar, reading, and possibly writing, but detailed descriptions of liturgical education suggest that the study of music could monopolize schooling. At least some of the earliest monastic “customaries” (i.e., constitutions), which only began to appear in the eleventh century, make it clear that boys were expected to spend years learning to read, memorize, and sing chants of the Mass and the Epistle; to understand the elements of music; and to master all aspects of creating Bibles and liturgical manuscripts, from the preparation of the parchment to writing the text and binding the folios. By the eleventh century, hymn glosses in manuscripts, with their comments on lexicon, grammar, syntax, meter, style, doctrine, and variant readings and emendations, indicate that music in some schools was taught at very advanced levels.82 In the earlier stages of education, the goals of both the traditional liberal arts program and the new liturgical studies were similar: both endowed young students with the capacity to read and write Latin. Otherwise, though, the orientation of the programs difered radically. Already in the ninth century, Agobard, bishop of Lyon (d. 840), complained that the concentration on singing was harmful to other more important studies: “A great opportunity for being stupidly and harmfully employed is aforded to those young men and all generally whose duty it is to sing. Among their number there are many who from the beginning of childhood to white-haired old age spend all the days of their life learning and practicing song. They consume all the time they have for useful and spiritual studies – that is, reading and studying divine eloquence – engaged in this kind of thing.”83 Agobard seems to have been

81

82

83

conversationem canonicorum eorumque habitationes Kalendas Octobris futuri anni absque ulla negligentia, sicut disposuimus, habeant praeparatas”: Capitularia regum Francorum, 1:327. The decree of 826 is found in Concilia aevi karolini, 2.2:570 (6): “Necessaria etenim res existit ut iuxta eclesiam claustra constituantur, in quibus clerici disciplinis ecclesiasticis vacent. Itaque omnibus unum sit refectorium ac dormitorium seu ceterae oicinae ad usus clericorum necessariae.” Cf. Poggiaspalla, Vita comune del clero, 132. Acta concilii ticinensis, in Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, ed. Giovanni Mansi, 53 vols. in 57 (Paris, 1901–27), vol. 17, col. 327 (chap. 8). Susan Boynton, “Training for the Liturgy as a Form of Monastic Education,” in Medieval Monastic Education, ed. George Ferzoco and Carolyn Muessig (London and New York, 2000), 14. Boynton’s article discusses the various aspects of the training in detail. See also her “The Liturgical Role of Children in Monastic Customaries from the Central Middle Ages,” Studia liturgica 28 (1998): 194–209. “Et adulescentulis atque omnibus generaliter, quibus cantandi oicium iniunctum est, magna occasio stultae et noxiae occupationis aufertur. Ex quibus quam plurimi ab ineunte pueritia usque ad senectutis canitiem omnes dies vitae suae imparando et conirmando cantu expendunt, et totum tempus utilium et spiritalium studiorum, legendi videlicet de divina eloquia perscrutandi, in

36

The Carolingian Conquest

complaining here that the study of the Bible, and by implication the study of the liberal arts that prepared the way to understanding religious texts, were taking second place in education to music. The imperial chapel and a number of cathedral and monastic schools on both sides of the Alps seem to have reconciled the two programs of study successfully. It may be assumed, however, that most schools ofered a curriculum that began and ended with training young boys in their liturgical duties. The balance between the two kinds of training may have varied over the centuries, but it is important to remember that, even where they were successfully integrated with the liberal arts, liturgical studies consumed a signiicant portion of school time. NINTH-CENTURY SCHOOLS AND SCHOOLMASTERS IN THE REGNUM

Although the Carolingians had a variety of motives for sponsoring an educational program throughout the empire, their attempted reform of the liturgy partially explains why and how cathedral education was strengthened in the ninth century. It can be assumed that every cathedral, whether organized as a chapter or not, had traditionally performed a teaching function at some level. The diocesan clergy had to receive at least minimal training in order to fulill their duties. I claim, however, that the extensive creation of cathedral chapters indicates a response to liturgical reform and thereby a commitment to a relatively formal and continuous program of education. As in the case of the decree commanding the use of the Roman chant, local churches responded in disparate ways to the Council of Aachen’s legislation structuring cathedral life, so intimately linked by the council to the performance of the liturgy. Where the reforms were embraced, however, the members of the cathedral clergy, from living under the same roof with the bishop, probably gradually achieved a semi-independent status resulting from the very needs of their new, more corporate life. Integrated living and working conditions not only required stricter discipline but also encouraged a clearer division of functions; and if, as was eventually true for perhaps all cathedral chapters, beneices from the chapter’s holdings were assigned to oices, the division became even more pronounced.84 To the extent that the chapter was committed to performing the daily oices faithfully, two of its most important functions had to be teaching and copying manuscripts.This meant designating speciic canons as responsible for carrying out these activities. Italian documents from the early ninth century mark the beginning of a movement to restructure the cathedral staf even before the decrees of Aachen. This was the case when at Como in 803 the bishop requested imperial authorization for the foundation of a chapter. Whereas indications exist that bishops in Lodi, Lucca, and Aquileia had established chapters even earlier, the creation of the cathedral chapter

84

istiusmodi occupatione consumunt”; Agobardi lugdunensis opera omnia, ed. L. Van Acker (Turnhout, 1981), 350. As cited in Boynton, “Training for the Liturgy,” 17. The development of a semi-independent status for the chapter was an unintended consequence of the decrees of 816, which were aimed at giving the bishop more control over his clergy.

37

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

at Verona shortly before 820, which Louis the Pious conirmed in the same year, was probably a direct response to Aachen’s legislation.85 The chapter was to live according to a canonical arrangement (iuxta canonicam institutionem) and to enjoy its own income. The canons, however, were not expected to live in the same house.86 From dated charters we know that cathedral chapters were instituted at Arezzo in 840, at Bergamo in 897, and at Volterra in 907, while for other chapters, such as those at Padua, Ravenna, Mantua, Modena, Bologna, and Siena, we can only say that they must have been founded before the irst mention of canons in these cities appears in the documents.87 No charter creating the cathedral chapter at Milan survives, but the new cathedral of Santa Maria constructed during the bishopric of Angilbert 85

86

87

CDL, doc. 77: 147–48 [803], for Como. A reference to a capitulum in Lodi’s cathedral in 759 may mean that the cathedral had a chapter: Alessandro Caretta, “Le canoniche di Lodi,” in La vita comune del clero nei secoli XI e XII: Atti della settimana di studio: Mendola, settembre 1959, 2 vols. (Milan, 1962), 1:150. In the case of Lucca, the irst mention of canonici appears at the end of the ninth century or early in the tenth: Martino Giusti, “Notizie sulle canoniche lucchesi,” ibid., 1:439. See also Martino Giusti, “Le canoniche della città e diocesi di Lucca al tempo della Riforma gregoriana,” SG 3 (1949): 329–30. He maintains, however, that the irst mention of the “chapter” at Lucca dates from 685. Already before 792, Paolino may have established a chapter in the cathedral of Aquileia, if the reference to the “sacra congregatio quae ibidem sub sancto ordine degere videtur” charged with electing the patriarch is interpreted as referring to the clergy of the cathedral: Gianfranco Spiazzi, “Notizie sulle canoniche della diocesi di Aquileia nei secoli XI e XII,” in Vita comune del clero, 2:129. The traditional date of 813 for the Verona chapter is based on documents published in Vittorio Fainelli, Codice diplomatico veronese dalla caduta dell’impero romano alla ine del periodo carolingio, vol. l (Venice, 1940), docs. 101–103, 120–32. Cf. Lanfranco Vecchiato, “Educazione e cultura dal sec. IX al sec. XII in Verona,” Verona dalla caduta dei carolingi al libero comune: Convegno del 24–26 maggio 1985 (Verona, 1987), 194–96, who analyzes the documents of 813 in detail. They now appear to be twelfth-century forgeries manufactured to serve the interests of the chapter: see below, n. 107. Louis the Pious’s conirmation is found in Codice diplomatico veronese, doc. 122, 163–65. See the discussion of this issue by Maureen Miller, The Formation of a Medieval Church: Ecclesiastical Change in Verona, 950–1150 (Ithaca, N.Y., 1993), 42–44. Miller tends to think that the common life was not practiced at Verona until later (44, n. 13). For Arezzo, see Documenti per la storia della città di Arezzo, ed. Ubaldo Pasqui, Documenti di storia italiana, 11 (Florence, 1899), doc. 30: 44–45 [840]. See as well Jean-Pierre Delumeau, Arezzo. Espace et sociétés, 715–1230. Recherches sur Arezzo et son ‘contado’ du VIIIe au début du XIIIe siècle (Rome, 1996), 490–91. For Bergamo, see CDL (Turin, 1873), doc. 328: 618–620 [897]; for Volterra, see Emilio Cristiani, “Le origini della vita canonica nella diocesi di Volterra (sec. XI e XII,” in Vita comune del clero, 2:236. The chapter at Padua predates 874: Antonio Barzon, “Documenti di vita comune in Padova: sec. XI–XII),” in Vita comune del clero, 2:139. In Ravenna (Augusto Vasina, “La vita comune del clero presso la cattedrale ravennate,” in ibid., 2:202), the chapter seems to predate 889–898. At Mantua the irst mention of canons is 971: A. Montecchio, “Cenni storici sulla canonica cattedrale di Mantova nei secoli XI e XII,” ibid., 2:162. At Modena a chapter existed in the cathedral at least by 887: Giuseppe Pistoni, “La canonica della chiesa cattedrale di Modena nei secoli XI e XII,” ibid., 2:181. For Bologna the earliest reference to a cathedral chapter is 903; Gina Fasoli, “Notizie sul capitolo di Bologna nel X–XI secolo,” ibid., 2:193. The cathedral chapter at Pavia probably had a separate identity by 850: Giovanna F. Golia, “Strutture ecclesiastiche e vita religiosa a Pavia nel secolo X,” in San Maiolo e le inluenze cluniacensi nell’Italia del nord. Atti del Convegno internazionale nel millenario di San Maiolo (994–1994), Pavia–Novara, 23–24 settembre 1994, ed. Ettore Cau and Aldo A. Settia (Como, 1998), 37, n. 33. The earliest mention of a chapter for Siena is 945: Luigi Nanni, “La canonica della cattedrale senese nei secoli XI e XII,” in Vita comune del clero, 2:255.

38

The Carolingian Conquest

(824–59) appears to have been intended for a clergy following the canonical life.88 Although little documentation exists, it is probably safe to say that most of the major cities of northern and central Italy had created cathedral chapters by the mid-tenth century. What of cathedral schools? The Edict of Olona, issued by Lothar, viceroy of Italy, in 825, did more than order the creation of cathedral chapters; it also established an organization for higher education in Carolingian Italy. According to the text, Lothar had divided his territory into nine districts and designated a city in each to be a center for education in the liberal arts: these were Turin, Pavia, Ivrea, Cremona, Florence, Fermo, Verona, Vicenza, and Cividale.89 In each area, teachers “have been appointed” (sunt constituti) by royal appointment (nostra dispositione) to teach. In Pavia the teaching would take place “in the school of Dungal”;90 in Ivrea the bishop would be responsible for education, while for the other seven, the document gives only the city’s name. Scholars have usually assumed that, except for Ivrea, Lothar chose the cathedral school in each of the cities that he named to be the local center of study.91 Dungal’s school would probably have been identical with the school of the cathedral chapter at Pavia, while in the seven other cities designated by Lothar as having a school, the teacher would be a canon of an already existing cathedral chapter or someone who 88

89

90

91

Gian Piero Bornetti, “Appendice I: Pensiero e vita a Milano e nel Milanese durante l’età carolingia,” in Storia di Milano, vol. 2 (Milan, 1954), 726. Capitularia Regum Francorum, 1:327 (6): “ab his qui nostra dispositione ad docendos alios per loca denominata sunt constituti maximum detur studium, qualiter sibi commissi scholastici proiciant atque doctrinae insistant, sicut praesens exposcit necessitas. Propter opportunitatem tamen omnium vel apta loca distincte ad hoc exercitium, providimus ut diicultas locorum longe positorum ac paupertas nulli foret excusatio. Id sunt: primum in Papia conveniant ad Dungalum de Mediolano, de Brixia, de Laude, de Bergamo, de Novaria, de Vercellis, de Tertona, de Aquis, de Ianua, de Aste, de Cuma; in Eporegia ipse episcopus hoc per se faciat; in Taurinis conveniant de Vintimilo, de Albingano, de Vadis, de Alba; in Cremona discant de Regia, de Placentia, de Parma, de Mutina; in Florentia de Tuscia repiciant; in Firmo de Spoletinis civitatibus conveniant; in Verona de Mantua, de Triento; in Vincentina de Patavis, de Tarvisio, de Feltris, de Ceneda, de Asylo; reliquae civitates Forum Iulii ad scolum conveniant.” In the same year, Louis the Pious called on transalpine bishops to organize schools for training clerics, as the bishops had promised three years earlier at Attigny: Madge M. Hildebrandt, The External School in Carolingian Society (Leiden and New York, 1992), 66–67. On Dungalo, see Mirella Ferrari,“‘In Papia conveniant ad Dungalum’(Tav. III),” IMU 15 (1972): 1–52. An Irishman trained at Saint Denis, Dungal arrived in Pavia in 810/11, apparently sent by the Frankish court to establish or join a school there. He had intimate knowledge of little-known ancient authors like Lucretius and Macrobius, and his prestige for learning may have helped give currency to the new Carolingian script used in manuscripts that he brought with him from the north (ibid., 36). See as well Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen literatur des Mittelalters, 1:370–74; and Ettore Cau and Maria A. Casagrande Mazzoli,“Cultura e scrittura a Pavia,” in Storia di Pavia, 2: L’alto medioevo (Milan, 1987), 192–98. At the request of Louis the Pious, Dungal composed his Responsa contra perversas Claudii Taurinensis sententias at Pavia in 827; Mirella Ferrari, “Note su Claudio di Torino ‘Episcopus ab ecclesia damnatus,’” IMU 16 (1973): 291–308. Cf. Claudio Leonardi, “Gli Irlandesi in Italia. Dungalo e la controversia iconoclastica,” in Die Iren, 746–57. Dungalo may also have been the author of a sermon, Translatio corporis sancti Syri ticinensis episcopi; Cau and Casagrande Mazzoli, Storia di Pavia, 196. While paragraph 6 of the document establishes the schools, paragraph 7 orders bishops to complete the building of housing for the new chapters.

39

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

would become a canon when a new chapter was created by the decree.92 In Ivrea, where the bishop himself was personally to teach advanced students, presumably no cathedral school existed.93 We are not more enlightened by the document produced by a Roman synod the following year, likely designed to extend Lothar’s edict. Without referring to speciic places, the papal edict required that appropriate instruction in the liberal arts and religion be made available in all bishoprics and parishes. “Let care and diligence be shown that teachers and doctors be appointed who, having knowledge of letters and of the liberal arts and sacred learning, might diligently teach because in these subjects especially the divine commands are manifested and declared.”94 As in the case of the Edict of Olona, there is no way of knowing how many such centers of learning already existed and if new ones were to be created, how many.95 Casting doubt on the success of the imperial and papal efort to encourage education, a Roman synod of 853 envisaged a more modest educational goal: “And if teachers of the liberal arts are rarely found in the parishes, as is usually the case, let teachers of divine scripture and instructors in ecclesiastical duty be in no way absent.”96 Apparently recognizing the impracticality of the decrees of 825 and 826, 92

93

94

95

96

Dungal had likely been in Italy since 810, and he probably died at Bobbio in the 830s. He endowed the monastery library with twenty-nine manuscripts; Mario Esposito, “The Poems of Colmanus ‘Nepos Cracavist’ and Dungalus ‘Praecipuus Scottorum,’” in his Irish Books and Learning in Medieval Europe, ed. Michael Lapidge (Great Yarmouth and Norfolk, 1990), 127–31. Admittedly, we do not know how much weight to place on the perfect tense sunt constituti (have been appointed). The wording of the document is unfortunately so ambiguous that it could be taken to mean that, apart from Dungal’s school at Pavia and Ivrea where the bishop supervised education, no other schools existed, and that, to remedy the situation, the emperor named individuals in speciic locations to teach or sent teachers to each of the other cities. This interpretation would necessarily militate against my position that the emperor intended that teachers in the cities designated were cathedral canons or canons-to-be. To my mind, the association of the creation of cathedral chapters and that of schools by the edict was too close to allow for such an interpretation. For other opinions, see the following: Arrigo Solmi, “Sul capitolare di Lotario dell’anno 825 relativo all’ordinamento scolastico in Italia,” Contributi alla storia dell’Università di Pavia (Pavia, 1925), 3–14, who uses the edict to argue for the existence of superior education in the control of clerics but supervised by state regulation; Giuseppe Manacorda, Storia della scuola in Italia: Il medio evo, vol. 1 in 2 pts. (Milan and Naples, 1912–13), pt. 1, 58–60, who believes that the edict created public schools out of the control of the bishop. Ugo Gualazzini, Ricerche sulle scuole pre-universitarie del medioevo: Contribuito di indagini sul sorgere delle università (Milan, 1943), 9–10, considers the edict as directed to episcopal schools that already existed. Giovanni Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, 53 vols. in 57 (Paris, 1903), vol. 14, c. 1008 (c. 34). The whole chapter reads: “De quibusdam locis ad nos refertur, non magistros, neque curam inveniri pro studio litterarum. Idcirco in universis episcopiis, subjectisque plebibus, et aliis locis in quibus necessitas occurrerit, omnino cura et diligentia habeatur, ut magistri et doctores constituantur; qui studia litterarum, liberaliumque artium ac sancta habentes dogmata, assidue doceant, quia in his maxime divina manifestantur atque declarantur mandata.” Francesco Novati, Le origini, continuate e compiute da Angelo Monteverdi (Milan, 1926), 149, maintains that this is the irst time in the history of the Church that secular studies were oicially airmed to be an intrinsic part of Christian education. Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio, c. 1014 (chap. 34): Et si liberalium artium praeceptores in plebibus, ut assolet, raro inveniuntur; tamen divinae scripturae magistri, et institutores ecclesiastici oicii nullatenus desint.”

40

The Carolingian Conquest

the Church was here willing to accept a minimal education limited to learning to read the scriptures and conducting the liturgy. All the same, evidence suggests that some schools exceeded such limited expectations, and there were doubtless more schools than the few that we can document. Study of the list of witnesses appended to church documents seems at irst glance to be the most obvious way of establishing the existence of a schoolmaster in a cathedral. Unfortunately, the nomenclature of chapter functionaries is often ambiguous. In Francia in the ninth and tenth centuries the teaching canon was variously called the scholasticus, didascalus, caput scolaris, or capischolus. The presence of a schoolmaster in the French cathedral, however, was sometimes concealed under the title cancellarius.The oicial charged with the writing oice would also be responsible for the instruction of young clerics. Indeed, major cathedral schools like those of Paris, Chartres, and Orléans had as their heads cancellarii, not scholastici.97 By contrast, in Italy the title cancellarius seems to have been speciically associated with the writing oice.98 It is easy to discern the teaching function of oicials designated as scholasticus, magiscola, or magister cantorum, although the last term may indicate only duties involved with teaching music. In German-speaking lands as well as in Italy the title primicerius was sometimes associated with a cleric who taught school.99 In Fiesole in 1018, a certain Theuzo was grammaticus Fesulanae ecclesiae primicerius, and in Pisa in 1015, a certain Benedetto appears in a document as cantor atque primicerius.100 Such combined titles, however, suggest that, at least in Italy, primicerius referred to the teacher’s rank within the chapter hierarchy and not to his duties in the schoolroom.101 At the same time, the titles scholasticus, magiscola, grammaticus, or cantor are relatively rare in documents, and the existence of a school in the cathedral has to be established in other ways. The following pages will discuss what is known about teachers and schools in the regnum in the ninth century. The best-documented cathedral school in the ninth-century regnum Italiae is that of Verona. Cultural activity at Verona owed much to three monks from the Abbey of Reichenau who served successively as bishops of the city: Eginon (782–802), Ratholdus (802–844), and Notingus (844–58). All three were learned men, and either 97

98

99

100

101

Amann and Dumas, L’Église au pouvoir, 254. While he did not usually teach, the archdeacon often undertook supervision of the school along with his other duties; Philippe Delhaye, “L’organisation scolaire au XIIe siècle,” Traditio 5 (1947): 247. For the use of the term to apply to secular oicials charged with writing documents on both sides of the Alps, see Chap. 2, under “The Other Culture.” Paul Hinschius, System des katholischen Kirchenrechts, 2.97, cites examples from the eighth to the tenth centuries of the primicerius being designated as responsible for teaching. For the connection of the primicerius with the cantor and the scholasticus, see ibid., 2:98–103. Ferdinando Ughelli, Italia sacra sive de episcopis Italiae et insularum adjacentium, rebusque ab praeclare gestis ..., vol. 3 (Venice, 1718), 220; and Die Urkunden Heinrichs II. und Arduins, ed. Harry Bresslau and Hermann Bloch, MGH, Dipl. reg, et imp. Ger., no. 3 (Hannover, 1900–1903), 356.The two instances are cited in Albert Dresdner, Kultur- und Sittengeschichte der italienischen Geistlichkeit im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert (Breslau, 1890), 246, n. 12, and 248, n. 2. Bullough, “Le scuole cattedrali,” 117, warns that the term grammaticus can mean merely learned or educated, but that is not likely to be its signiicance in a list of cathedral oicials with their titles. For the combined title primicerius et notarius, see Chapter 2, under “The Other Culture.”

41

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

they or northerners whom they brought with them introduced into the cathedral’s scriptorium the new Carolingian script.102 Under the direction of these bishops Verona supplanted Lombard Pavia as the intellectual center of the kingdom. Although the capital remained Pavia, Charlemagne’s son Pepin (777–810), viceroy of the regnum, preferred to reside at Verona. His connection with the city may have inspired an anonymous Veronese author to write a highly rhythmic poem celebrating his victory over the Avars in 796.103 Between 796 and 808 a second poet composed the Versus de Verona, which lauded the city’s beauty, recalled its ancient pagan greatness, and recounted its Christianization through the work of the city’s earliest bishops. Verona’s many holy relics were described as forming a protective ring around the city.104 Very like an earlier encomium of Milan (ca. 739), the Veronese poem had stanzas of three verses, with often uneven ifteen-syllable trochaic lines. The sometimes unusual lexicon and deviations from ancient grammatical usage are best ascribed to the author’s dependence on local Veronese dialect.105 A third contemporary Latin poem, Rhythmus de vita sancti Zenonis, designed to be sung, depicted in dialogue form the struggle of Saint Zeno, the earliest bishop of the city, with the devil. Because the poem seems to have been intended for liturgical purposes, the poet, wanting at the same time to give literary distinction to his work, employed a level of diction midway between the Latin of the schools and the local vernacular. Closely connected with that poem was the Sermo de vita Sancti Zenonis, a Latin prose composition written by a certain Coronato, venerabilis notarius. More detailed in its narration of the saint’s life than was the Rhythmus, the Sermo may either have inspired or borrowed from the poetic text.106 Following the departure of the coterie of intellectuals at Desiderio’s court, the Lombard scholar remaining in the regnum best known to us was Paciico (776–844), archdeacon of the cathedral of Verona, who probably also served as supervisor of the scriptorium and as scholasticus of the cathedral school.107 Recent research leads us to be 102

103 104

105 106

107

Mirella Ferrari, “Libri liturgici e difusione della scrittura carolina nell’Italia settentrionale,” Culto cristiano e politica imperiale carolingia, 9–12 ottobre 1977, Convegni del Centro di studi sulla spiritualità medievale, no. 18 (Todi, 1979), 269–72, identiies manuscripts from the scriptorium late in the eighth century written in a variety of Carolingian scripts. The liturgical manuscripts of Paciico are the earliest in Italy written in Carolingian (272). See also comments on Verona’s scriptorium by Bernhard Bischof, Manuscripts and Libraries in the Age of Charlemagne, ed. and trans. Michael Gorman (Cambridge, 1994), 45. Godman, Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance, 31–32 and 187–191. Editions of both works are found in Versus de Verona: Versum de mediolano civitate, ed. Giovanni B. Pighi (Bologna, 1960). For a discussion of both encomia as examples of urban patriotism, see JeanCharles Picard, “Conscience urbaine et culte des saints: De Milan sous Liutprand à Verone sous Pépin I d’Italie,” in Hagiographie, cultures et sociétés, IVe–XIIe siècles (Paris, 1981), 455–69. Both works follow the general pattern of laudes urbium laid down in BNP, Lat. 7530, fol. 224v: Claudia Villa, “Cultura classica e tradizioni longobarde: Tra latino e volgari,” in Paolo Diacono: Uno scrittore fra tradizione longobarda e rinnovamento carolingio, 583–84. Godman, Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance, 29–31. Rino Avesani, “La cultura veronese dal sec. ix al sec. xii,” SCV 1:242–44, discusses both texts and provides a detailed bibliography. Avesana attributes the long Christmas hymn Audite omnes versum verum magnum to the author of the Rhythmicus (244). Of the documents written by Paciico, only two are originals; see Augusto Campana, “Veronensia,” in Miscellanea Giovanni Mercati, Studi e testi, vols. 121–26 (Rome, 1946), 122:64. Cristina La Rocca,

42

The Carolingian Conquest

cautious about the legends surrounding his scholarly prowess. For one thing, he certainly did not copy 218 manuscripts in his lifetime, as his putative epitaph claims.108 Of his works the following survive: a short prose letter, a series of glosses on the Old and New Testaments; a manual for determining the calendar, Opus exceptum ex libro compoti, which, drawing extensively on Bede’s De temporibus ratione, included twenty-one mnemonic rhymed strophes of varying length rehearsing the lessons of the manual; and three shorter poems, one of which, Argumentum horologii nocturni, celebrates the author’s invention of an instrument for telling time after dark.109 Paciico’s letter to the Frankish monk Hildemar of Corbie in Milan, requesting Hildemar’s opinion on the issue of the predestination of Adam, relects a lively theological discussion that took place in Verona in the last years of Paciico’s life.110 About 840, Gottschalk, a German, having abandoned his monastery at Orbais near Soissons, settled in Verona. In the following ive or six years (ca. 840–46) there he openly expounded the doctrine that God predestined souls both to heaven and to hell at their creation, a doctrine that had been condemned at the Council of Orange in 529. Although Gottschalk was inally expelled from the city, his theological position seems to have enjoyed signiicant support in Verona, leading Paciico to solicit the opinion of Hildemar, who had been a monk at Corbie, where Gottschalk had spent time before going to Orbais.111

108

109

110

111

Paciico di Verona: Il passato carolingio nella costruzione della memoria urbana. Nuovi studi (Roma, 1995), 204–208, publishes both. Five other documents that are published by Fainelli are later forgeries: Codice diplomatico veronese, doc. 102: 132 [813]; doc. 104 :137 [813]; doc. 115: 150 [814]; doc. 174: 246 [844]; and doc. 176: 253 [844]. La Rocca traces the forgeries to the twelfth century and explains the motive for making them in “A Man for All Seasons: Paciico of Verona and the Creation of a Local Carolingian Past,” in The Uses of the Past in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Yitzhak Hen and Matthew Innes (Cambridge, 2000), 250–57. For the legends surrounding the life and works of Paciico, see LaRocca, “A Man for All Seasons,” 250–79. Claudio Leonardi, “Von Paciicus zu Rather: Zur Veroneser Kulturgeschichte im 9. und 10. Jahrhundert,” Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 41 (1985): 398–99, concludes on the basis of Paciico’s editing of BAV, Vat. Lat. 4979, that he had mediocre philological talents. On manuscripts he copied, see Campana, “Veronensia,” 58–61, and Bischof, Manuscripts and Libraries, 45, n. 128. Gerard G. Meersseman, E. Adda, and Jean Deshusses, L’orazionale dell’archdiacono Paciico e il Carpsum del cantore Stefano: Studi e testi sulla liturgia del duomo di Verona dal IX all’XI secolo, Spicilegium friburgense, 21 (Fribourg, 1974), discuss in detail liturgical works that he copied for use in Verona. Gerard G. Meersseman and E. Adda, Manuale di computo con ritmo mnemotecnico dell’arcidiacono Paciico di Verona (+844), Italia sacra, vol. 6 (Padua, 1966), publish the Excerptum (82–137) and the poetry 169–72). The instrument was a wheel, sectioned of by nails, according to which the observer could follow the movement of the polar star. Scholars have sometimes considered Paciico the author of the Veronae rythmica descriptio, written in Verona between 796 and 806, but the poem’s irregular rhymes and borrowings from local speech are incompatible with the poetry that he is known to have composed. Augusto Campana,“Il carteggio di Vitale e Paciico di Verona col monaco Ildemaro sulla sorte eterna di Adamo,” Atti del Congresso internazionale di diritto romano e di storia del diritto: Verona 27–28–29 IX 1948, 4 vols. (Milan, 1953), 1:272–73, publishes Paciico’s short note asking for an answer. Hildemar’s response is edited by Ernst Dümmler in Epistolae karolini aevi, vol. 3, MGH, Epistolae (in quarto), no. 5 (Berlin, 1899), 355–57. La Rocca, Paciico di Verona, 181–83, believes Paciico to be in exile over a dispute with his bishop, and she sees his letter as an efort to establish contact with the powerful Hildemar and through his mediation to return to the good graces of Notingus, the bishop of Verona. The letter would also be a demonstration of Paciico’s concern for orthodoxy. Carlo Mor, “La cultura veneto-aquiliense nei secoli IX–XII,” in Storia di cultura veneta, 1:294. Gottschalk’s works are published as Oeuvres théologiques et grammaticales de Godescalc d’Orbais, ed.

43

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Vitale, a disciple of Paciico, who characterized himself at various times as presbyter and scholasticus, probably was his master’s replacement in the cathedral school.112 It was Vitale’s query about predestination in a letter to Paciico that led the latter to write Hildemar. No other of Vitale’s writings survives. However, his presence as scholasticus in the Veronese cathedral testiies to a degree of continuity in the existence of the chapter’s school. Besides the school within the cathedral’s precincts,Verona had other schools that likely ofered a relatively high level of grammatical training. In his ive years of teaching in Verona, Gottschalk almost certainly held his classes outside the cathedral, as did an anonymous monk, exiled from Bobbio and teaching in Verona circa 900, who in his Lamentum refugae cuiusdam (Lament of a certain refugee) begged his readers for sympathy. The activity of the scriptorium of San Zeno near the Veronese cathedral in the irst half of the ninth century suggests the existence of a school there.113 Presumably, at least, schools run by the two learned exiles ofered an education beyond the elementary level. Although Ravenna fell within the Byzantine sphere of inluence down to the mid-eighth century, it made no show of Greek learning. Recent scholarship has deinitively discredited the claim of Odolfredo, a thirteenth-century civil lawyer in Bologna, that Ravenna hosted a school of Roman law that preceded that of Bologna.114 The one signiicant scholarly achievement of Ravenna in the ninth century was the Liber pontiicalis, a history of the archbishops of Ravenna by Agnello (or Andrea) (805–after 854), a member of the cathedral clergy.115 The author cleverly constructed his historical narrative on the basis of bulls, letters, and inscriptions. The colloquial character of the Latin, however, together with the lack of reference to any ancient pagan writers other than Virgil, suggests that while Agnello was intelligent, his schooling had been relatively limited.116

112

113 114 115

116

Cyrille Lambot, Spicilegium Sacrum Lovaniense (Louvain, 1945). See also Klaus Vielhaber, Gottschalk der Sachse, Bonner historische Forschungen, no. 5 (Bonn, 1956), and Dennis E. Nineham,“Gottschalk of Orbais: Reactionary or Precursor of the Reformation?” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 40 (1989): 10–18. The letter sent to Paciico is found in Campana, “Il carteggio di Vitale,” 272–73. In the letter,Vitale inquires regarding the eternal lot of Adam. Vitale elsewhere signed as presbiter: doc. 174: 247 [844]; doc. 176: 253 [844]; and doc. 227: 342 [862]. In the letter to Paciico, however,Vitale referred to himself as discipulus and as scholasticus. We may conclude that Vitale was a successor to Paciico. Avesani, “La cultura veronese,” 257–258. Mario Pierpaoli, Storia di Ravenna dalle origini all’anno Mille, 2nd ed. (Ravenna, 1990), 302–303. The most recent edition of the Liber pontiicalis is The History of the Archbishops of Ravenna: Agnelli Ravennatis Liber pontiicalis ecclesiae Ravennatis, ed. Deborah M. Deliyannis, Corpus Christianorum: Continuatio mediaevalis, no. 199 (Turnhout, 2006). An earlier edition is found in MGH, Scriptores rerum langobardarum et italicarum, ed. Oswald Holder-Egger (Hannover, 1878), 275–391. Alessandro Testi Rasponi, RIS, vol. 2.3 (Bologna, 1924), prepared a partial edition. Agnello’s manner of speaking about his early life suggests that he was educated in the cathedral (c.25: 289): “ceteris meis condiscipulis et fratribus, qui nutriti in gremio Sanctae Ursianae Ecclesiae fuimus . . . .” For details of Agnello’s life and his work, see Agnellus of Ravenna: The Book of Pontifs of the Church of Ravenna, trans. Deborah M. Deliyannis (Washington, D.C., 2004), 6–13. See as well Gina Fasoli, “Rileggendo il Liber pontiicalis di Agnello ravennate,” La storiograia alto medioevale, 10–16 aprile 1969, SSCISAM, no. 17 (Spoleto, 1970), 457–95. Fasoli makes an impressive case for a cathedral school at Ravenna. Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, 1:713. For a general discussion of the book’s contents, see Ugo Balzani, Le cronache italiane nel Medio Evo (Milan, 1901), 93–98.

44

The Carolingian Conquest

The authors of the two short pieces of poetry that accompanied the Liber in the manuscripts, however, were apparently more educated. One piece is an account of Agnello’s sources, method, and the circumstances surrounding the composition of the work; the other is a dialogue between Agnello and clerics of Ravenna requesting him to write the Liber. The author of the irst refers to himself as minimus scholasticorum (the least of schoolmasters) and was probably the head of the cathedral school, while the author of the second may have been another teacher.117 The poetry of both authors bespeaks solid training in composing Latin verse.118 Unfortunately, we lack hard evidence of cathedral schools in other cities of the regnum in the ninth century.The concentration of Irish monks and learned Franks in Milan, especially under archbishop Angilbert (824–59), however, suggests that a cathedral school existed. The Irish presence in the city is demonstrated largely through the manuscripts that they produced in local scriptoria. I have already mentioned the manuscript Burgerbibliothek Bern 363, an anthology of prose and poetic works, mostly by ancient authors. It was probably compiled in Milan in the second half of the ninth century, possibly by an Irish scholar using the library of San Ambrogio.119 Although Milan and Saint Gall have competing claims to a series of manuscripts containing biblical texts in Greek with Latin translations, at least some of these manuscripts were written by Irish monks working in Milan.120 Hildemar of Corbie, the most important immigrant Frankish scholar in the irst half of the century, also lived for many years in Milanese territory.121 117 118

119

120 121

Liber pontiicalis, 275. The irst poem is found 275–77, and the second 277–78. Bertini, Letteratura latina medievale in Italia, 57–58, briely discusses a short poem consisting of twelve elegant elegiac distiches entitled Versus Romae, attributed to Ravenna and belonging to the last quarter of the ninth century.The philo-Byzantine poet compares Frankish Rome unfavorably with lourishing Constantinople. Simona Gavinelli, “Per un’enciclopedia carolingia (codice bernese 363),” IMU 26 (1983): 1–25, makes a good case for the Milanese origin of the work with its important collection of ancient literary works. She identiies Milan as the “fulcro culturale” of northern Italy (25). She also identiies BNP, Lat. 7900A, containing works of Terence, Juvenal, Lucan, Martianus Capella, and Horace, with commentary, as written in Milan later in the century (13–14). See as well her “Irlandesi, libri biblici greco-latini e il monastero di S. Ambrogio in età carolingia,” in Il monastero di S. Ambrogio nel medioevo: Convegno di studi nel XII centenario: 784–1984 (Milan, 1988); as well as her, “La trasmissione dei testi nell’Italia nord-occidentale. 1. Centri di trasmissione: Monza, Pavia, Milano, Bobbio,” Cultura antica nell’occidente latino dal vii all’xi secolo, SSCISAM, 22 (Spoleto, 1975), 308–12; and Giuseppe Billanovich, “La trasmissione dei testi nell’Italia nord-occidentale: 2. Milano, Nonantola, Brescia,” Cultura antica nell’occidente latino. SSCISAM (Spoleto, 1975), 342–46. John J. Contreni, “The Irish in the Western Carolingian Empire (According to James F. Kenney and Bern, Bürgerbibliothek 363),” in Die Iren, 2:758–98, discusses the multitude of references to Irish scholars found in the margins of the Bern manuscript.Taken together, they suggest an extraordinary degree of Irish scholarly activity related to ancient literature in the eighth and ninth century. See the discussion of Gavinelli, “Per un’enciclopedia carolingia,” 352–60. On Hildemar, see below, in this section. The Historia datiana, consisting of a laudes urbis joined to a detailed analysis of the lives of Milan’s six earliest bishops, has sometimes been dated to the late eighth or the ninth century. See bibliography for this position in Paolo Tomea, Tradizione apostolica e coscienza cittadina a Milano nel medioevo: La leggenda di san Barnaba (Milan, 1993), 358–59, n. 33.Tomea (440), however, dates the work between the late tenth and the beginning of the next century. For that reason I will consider the Historia in Chapter 3.

45

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

The revival of studies in Tuscany in the second quarter of the ninth century, attributed to Donatus, an Irishman who was irst a teacher and then bishop in Fiesole, points to the existence of a cathedral school in that city.122 In the time of Bishop Aganone (837–67), probably a Frank, Bergamo appears to have enjoyed a revival of intellectual activity as well. At least Aganone’s elegant letter to his fellow bishop Ramperto of Brescia testiies to his own literary talent.123 Another literary work surviving from Aganone’s Bergamo, a continuation of Paolo Diacono’s Historia Langobardorum down to 875, is attributed to a certain Andrea presbyter. Lively and largely accurate in its portrayal of events contemporary with the author, the work, written in a corrupt Latin, relies heavily in its early sections on oral traditions.124 As for learning in Pavia, capital of the regnum, nothing is known of Dungal’s school, but it seems likely that the eminent Irish scholar would have had high expectations of his students. The continued existence of a body of lay judges and notaries, the judices et notarii sacri palatiii, highly trained in Lombard law, moreover, suggests that at least some training in grammar was available to laymen. Although the Edict of Olona of 825 ordered students from Asti to study at Pavia, an examination of calligraphic subscriptions to documents from Asti by a signiicant number of clerics and laymen indicates that a cathedral school may have been active there in the mid-ninth century.125 Noticeably absent from the list of cities with active cathedral schools operating in the ninth century is Lucca, where it would appear that one had existed in the eighth century. A “schola apud cathedralem” was referred to in 768, and we have names of magistri going back to the middle of the century – Gaudenzio presbiter, magister in 746; Deusdede, presbiter and magister s(c)ole in 748 and in 764 maiuscola; and G(aus)prando, diaconus, magister in 762. The last magister was mentioned in 809, when Tamperto (or Lamberto) appears in the documents magistru [sic] scole cantorum.That a miscellaneous manuscript produced in the scriptorium of the cathedral around 800 was written in a variety of script, however, suggests that this early 122

123

124

125

Robert Davidsohn, Geschichte von Florenz, 4 vols. (Berlin, 1896–1927), 1:82–4. Wilhelm Wattenbach and Wilhelm Levinson, Die Karolinger vom Vertrag von Verdun bis zum Herrschaftsantritt der Herrscher aus dem sächsischen Hause. Italien und das Papsttum, ed. Heinz Löwe, Deutschlands Geschichtsquellen im Mittelalter: Vorzeit und Karolinger, 6 vols. (Weimar, 1952–1990), 4:422–23, provides a bibliography on his poetry. The letter is published by Mario Lupi, Codex diplomaticus civitatis et ecclesiae Bergomatis, 2 vols. (Bergamo, 1784–99), col. 694. Cf. Giovanni Cremaschi, Mosè del Brolo et la cultura a Bergamo nei secoli XI–XII (Bergamo, 1945), 14–15. See also his “Aganone,” DBI, vol. 1 (Rome, 1960), 358–60.Viscardi comments on Aganone’s sophisticated use of cursus; Antonio Viscardi, Le origini, 3rd ed. (Milan, 1957), 374–75. See also Simona Gavinelli, “Per un’enciclopedia carolingia,” 16–18. Andreae bergomatis historia, ed. Georg Waitz, MGH, Scriptores rerum langobardicarum et italicarum saec. VI–IX (Hannover, 1878), 221–30. See the comments of Ferruccio Bertini, Letteratura latina medievale in Italia (Busto Arsizio, 1988), 53. Gian G. Fissore, “Cultura graica e scuola in Asti nei secoli IX e X,” BISI 85 (1974–75): 48, attributes this quality of calligraphy to education in a local cathedral school. The existence of four codices copied at Ivrea in the second and third quarters of the ninth century point to an active scriptorium in the cathedral and make the existence of a cathedral school likely: Mirella Ferrari, “Libri e testi prima del mille,” Storia della chiesa di Ivrea dalle origini al XV secolo, ed. Giorgio Cracco (Rome, 1998), 521–22.

46

The Carolingian Conquest

scola was probably not a formal school but merely a group of singers led by a magister cantorum.126 Monasteries in the regnum, unlike monasteries in parts of the Carolingian empire north of the Alps and in Italy to the south, generally played a minor role in ninthcentury scholarly and literary life. In contrast with the many great monasteries of the Carolingian heartland, the vast number were small and lacked a scriptorium and a library. Of the great monasteries, moreover, two stand out, Nonantola and Bobbio. Both continued to add to their sizable libraries in the ninth century. About twenty manuscripts composed in the script of Nonantola have been identiied for the years between 800 and 830 alone. Later in the century, however, the monastery declined, and in 899, the Hungarians pillaged and burned the buildings.127 In contrast, Bobbio, founded by Irish monks near Piacenza in 612, seems to have maintained an active intellectual life throughout the Carolingian period and into the second half of the tenth century.128 A number of Latin poems produced by the monks of Bobbio in the late ninth and early tenth centuries, such as the “Lament of a Certain Refugee,” point to a monastic school providing advanced training in grammar.129 It is diicult to trace manuscripts copied at Bobbio in the ninth century, but between 871 and 880, a monk traveled from the monastery to Rome to make a copy of the acts of the Eighth Ecumenical Council (869–70), indicating that at that time the library was still growing.130 126

127

128

129

130

A document of 767 speciies the existence of a scola: “casam ipsius presbiteri que est prope porticalem eiusdem basilice, ubi est schola”: Enrico Coturri, “Fonti per uno studio della cultura di Lucca dell’VIII all’XI secolo,” in Atti del 5º Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo. Lucca 3–7 ottobre, 1971 (Spoleto, 1973), 695, n. 1. Coturri cites these magistri (695). According to Bullough, “Le scuole cattedrali,” 122, there is no mention of magistri after 809. For Tamperto’s limited education, see Armando Petrucci, “Scrittura e libro nella Tuscia altomedioevale, in Atti del 5º Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo, 640–41. Bullough, Alcuin, 237, dismisses the existence of a school on the grounds of the diversity of scripts. Bischof, Manuscripts and Libraries, 49.The development of a common calligraphy among the scribes at Nonantola in the early decades of the ninth century suggests to Giampaolo Ropa, “Letteratura e agiograia: I centri di studio e gli scriptoria,” Le sedi della cultura nell’Emilia Romagna: Alto medioevo (Milan, 1983), 76, that many books were being copied. Cf. Mirella Morelli and Marco Palma, “Indagine su alcuni aspetti materiali della produzione libraria a Nonantola nel secolo IX,” Scrittura e civiltà 6 (1982): 23–98. On the library generally, see Giuseppe Gullotta, Gli antichi cataloghi e i codici della abbazia di Nonantola, Studi e testi, 182 (Vatican City, 1955). The monastery had a large library by 800; Ferrari, “La trasmissione dei testi,” 313–20. Cf. Bischof, Manuscripts and Libraries, 93; and Pius Engelbert, “Zur Frühgeschichte des Bobbieser Skriptoriums,” Revue bénédictine 78 (1968): 220–60. Godman, Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance, 32–33, analyzes a planctus written at Bobbio on the death of Charlemagne in 814. Mirella Ferrari, “Libri e maestri tra Verona e Bobbio,” SCV 1: 277–78. She believes that the monk was writing in the late ninth or very early tenth century. The “discreta qualità artistica” of the Lamentum refugae cuiusdam gives evidence of continued training in ancient literature (277). In the same manuscript appears a second short poem also demonstrating classical inspiration. The poem can be dated because it was written in honor of Adelardo, bishop of Verona (875–915; 278). Cf. Ropa, “Letteratura e agiograia” (80). Works of the tenth century produced at Bobbio include a hagiographical work on the miracles of Saint Columban, Miracula sancti Columbani, dated to the last quarter of the tenth century; Ropa, “Letteratura e agiograia,” 78–80. Bishof, Manuscripts and Libraries, 48, was unable to ind identiiable calligraphic examples at the monastery for the early decades of the ninth century. The Rome expedition is cited by Ferrari,

47

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Under the guidance of Hildemar of Corbie two other monasteries of the regnum likely had important schools, if only for a brief time. In 841, the Frankish archbishop of Milan, Angilbert, sent Hildemar to organize a new monastery, San Faustino, at Brescia for the bishop of the city. He was accompanied by Leutgard, a fellow monk of Corbie, who had come with him to Italy around 836. Leutgard became abbot of the new monastery and Hildemar scholasticus.131 Recalled about 845 by Angilbert, they took up similar duties at the monastery of San Pietro al Monte di Civate, in Milanese territory. During his years in Italy, Hildemar composed a commentary on the Rule of Saint Benedict and another on Luke. He demonstrated his interest in pagan literature by producing an edition of Terence accompanied by a continuous commentary based on a preexistent gloss of the work, now BSM, Clm 14200.132 The BNP, Lat 7900A, written a few decades later and containing works by Terence, Juvenal, Lucan, Martianus Capella, and Horace, together with a metric commentary by PseudoAcro, also shows signs of Hildemar’s involvement.133 Hildemar’s response to Paciico of Verona’s letter on predestination has already been mentioned. Surviving as well is Hildemar’s little grammatical treatise, De ratione recte legendi ex auctoritate grammaticorum veterum, dedicated to Orso, bishop of Benevento.134 We have no evidence that the schools directed by Hildemar at San Faustino or at Monte di Civate thrived later without his presence. Few references to monastic schools in the regnum survive, nor do we have many of the sort of intellectual

131 132

133 134

“Libri e maestri tra Verona e Bobbio,” SCV 1: 276. A third monastery deserves to be mentioned. Founded before 745, the southern Tuscan monastery of Monte Amiata appears to have maintained a lively scriptorium in the ninth century: Michael Gorman, “Manuscript Books at Monte Amiata in the Eleventh Century,” Scriptorium 56 (2003): 239–43 and 270.There are, however, no extant literary or scholarly works surviving from that time authored by the monks. On a poem composed in the second half of the tenth century, see Chap. 2, n. 40. Augusto Campana, “Il carteggio di Vitale,” 268–70, outlines what is known of the life of Hildemar. On Hildemar’s commentary on the Benedictine rule, see Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, 1:89; and Viscardi, Le origini, 96. The commentary is published as Expositio regulae ab Hildemaro tradita et nunc primum typis mandata:Vita et regula SS. P. Benedicti una cum expositione regulae, ed. Rupert Mittermüller (Regensburg and New York, 1880). For the commentary on Luke and other possible writings, see P. Wolfgang Hafner, Der Basiliuscommentar zur “Regula S. Benedicti”: Ein Beitrag zur Autorenfrage karolingischer Regelkommentare, Beiträge zur Geschichte des alten Mönchtums und des Benediktinerordens, 23 (Munich, 1959), 146–50. For Hildemar as a igure in the compilation of key manuscripts, see Giuseppe Billanovich, “Terenzio, Ildemaro, Petrarca (Tav. I–VII),” IMU 17 (1974): 1–60; Claudia Villa, “‘Denique Terenti dultia legemus acta ...’: Una ‘lectura Terenti’ a S. Faustino di Brescia nel secolo IX,” IMU 22 (1979: 1–44, and her “A Brescia e a Milano,” 1–17. Hildemar’s edition of Terence, with the commentary, survives today in a copy made, presumably at Brescia, around 1000 (CLM, 14420): Claudia Villa, “‘Denique Terenti dultia legimus acta,’” 42–43. In the last pages of the manuscript Hildemar added material dealing with Terence’s life and works. Villa (ibid., 5 and 42) attributes to him the poem “Tempore iam brumae cum sol se vertit ad axem,” a twelve-line lyric written to a departed fellow monk with whom he had been reading Juvenal and Terence. Villa, “Denique Terenti dultia legimus acta,” 35–41. The letter to Orso is published by Dümmler in MGH, Epistolae karolini aevi, 3:320–22. Another Irishman, John Scotus, abbot of St. Stephen at Vercelli, seems to have been active in the edition of the Collectio canonum dedicated to Anselmo II of Milan: Wattenbach and Levinson, Die Karolinger vom Vertrag von Verdun, 4:402.

48

The Carolingian Conquest

artifacts that such schools would have produced. This leads to the conclusion that the contribution of monasteries in ninth-century Italy to scholarly and literary life was relatively modest. They were to become even less important in this respect in the following century. As for elementary education in northern and central Italy, teaching seems generally to have been a haphazard afair, available in a scattering of urban and rural scolae sacerdotum, monastic establishments, and private schools run by laymen and nuns. At least this is how Rather, the mid-tenth century bishop of Verona, described the possibilities available to prospective students by his time. In his Synodica of 933 he wrote: “In no way will they [the clerics] be promoted by us unless for a time they are engaged to some degree in the study of letters, either in our city [civitas] or in some monastery or with some wise man.”135 We know a little more about the array of educational possibilities thanks to Rather’s older contemporary, Atto, bishop of Vercelli, who ordered that in his diocese nuns could not teach men and that when clerics were present, laymen were not to teach without the clerics’ permission.136 Not every appearance of the word schola in the documents indicates the existence of a school. In fact, probably the most common usage of that term was to designate the whole body of clerics in a particular church or monastery, in Richard Southern’s words, “at its work of worship in the choir.”137 The schola embraced both the young clerics being educated for participation in the liturgy and the older clerics who principally enacted the sacred rituals. At the same time the term schola could be used in a narrower sense, designating primarily a venue for teaching.138 Audone, bishop of Verona, may have had that usage in mind when in 862 he created a schola sacerdotum at San Lorenzo at Sezano, in Veronese territory. Adalberto, its priest, was 135

136

137

138

PL 136, col. 564: “De ordinandis pro certo scitote, quod a nobis nullo modo promovebuntur, nisi aut in civitate nostra, aut in aliquo monasterio, vel apud quemlibet sapientem, ad tempus conversati fuerint et litteris aliquantulum eruditi, ut idonei videantur ecclesiasticae dignitati.” About the same time, Atto of Vercelli suggests the existence of rural schools in his diocese when he writes (Attonis sanctae vercellarum ecclesiae episcopi opera, ed. Buronto del Signore, 2 vols. [Vercelli, 1768], 2:282, chap. 61) that clergy in the countryside should not ask for remuneration for teaching “the little ones of the faithful” but accept only what a family could give. Cf. Suzanne Wemple, Atto of Vercelli: Church, State, and Christian Society in Tenth-Century Italy (Rome, 1979), 38 and 211. Pagnin, “Scuola e cultura a Pavia,” 93–96, identiies three kinds of schools in ninth-century Pavia: an episcopal school with a schola sacerdotum at the cathedral with other grammar schools in churches; a literary and philosophical school at the monastery of S. Pietro in Ciel d’Oro (Dungal’s school) for advanced students; and a theoretical-practical school of law at the Palace.There is no solid evidence, however, that Dungal’s school was at the Ciel d’Oro, that the school existed beyond Dungal’s lifetime, or that any other educational institution existed in Pavia. Attonis ... opera, 2:286 [chap. 81]: “Laicus praesentibus clericis, nisi ipsis probantibus, docere non audeat. Et mulier quamvis docta et sancta, viros in conventu docere non praesumat.” The quotation is taken from Richard W. Southern,“The Schools of Paris and the School of Chartres,” in Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, ed. Robert L. Benson and Giles Constable with Carol D. Lanham (Cambridge, Mass., 1982), 115. Giuseppe Forchielli, “Collegialità dei clerici nel veronese dall’VIII secolo all’età comunale,” Archivio veneto, 5 ser., 3 (1928): 22–23, points out that the term schola in this period can mean either a school or simply a collegial body of clerics. The context in which the term is used, consequently, should be carefully analyzed. For bibliography regarding the ambiguity of the term, see Miller, Formation of a Medieval Church, 43, nn. 6–7.

49

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

charged with “the service and the lighting in this holy place, and he is to hold school and feed the clerics.”139 Presumably in the ninth as in the tenth century diocesan schooling was available, at least at the elementary level, for boys not intended for the Church as well as for boys and a few girls training for the religious life. Some of the students, consequently, might have gone on to become lay teachers like those referred to in the tenth century by Rather and Atto. Others would have used their education to enter the notariate. As for monastic schools, we have no way of assessing the extent of enforcement of Louis the Pious’s edict of 817 forbidding access to them to everyone but oblates, that is, boys given to the monastery by their parents with the intention that they would eventually become monks. The phrasing of Hildemar’s commentary on the Benedictine Rule reinforces the impression that schooling in the monastery was available only to monks and primarily to oblates. That was the case at least at Civate, where the commentary was probably written. Hildemar never mentioned a school as such, but he commanded children to read as a group under supervision, while literate adult monks were reading by themselves. Hildemar also told children to work diligently on their wax tablets, presumably to practice their writing strokes.140 He mentioned nothing about higher education, but his commentary on Terence suggests that the monastery did ofer advanced opportunities to a select few. The injunction by Bishop Leodoin of Modena in 971 that Abbot Teudrico order his monks to teach the boys of the diocese, however, suggests that at least by that time the restriction limiting education in the monastery to oblates was not being strictly enforced.141 Generally speaking, it is fair to conclude that education in the regnum in the ninth century was likely much as it would be in the tenth in that not all teachers were clerics, monks, or nuns, and some boys, not destined for the religious life, had access to at least an elementary education. LITERACY AND LITERARY AND SCHOLARLY CREATIVITY IN THE NINTH CENTURY

Whereas collegial, parish, and private schools in the ninth century were probably sending a relatively small number of young men dedicated to the ecclesiastical life into advanced education, usually at a cathedral school, these same schools also produced other less-privileged clerics and laymen who would never read Virgil or Ovid or a Church Father, even if, in the case of the clerics, they unknowingly mouthed fragments of their writings in the liturgy. For such less-privileged men, the liberal arts were largely irrelevant: the average cleric needed to make his way through the 139

140

141

Codice diplomatico veronese, doc. 217: 322:“ut ipse cotidie curam de oitio et illuminaria in ipso sancto loco habeat et scholam habeat et clericos nutriant [sic!].” Mayke de Jong, “Growing up in a Carolingian Monastery: Magister Hildemar and His Oblates,” Journal of Medieval History 9 (1983): 114–15. For the emperor’s edict, see Manacorda, Storia della scuola, 1:48. Giuseppe Bedoni, “Ricerche sulle antiche scuole modenesi (del sec IX al sec. XV),” Deputazione storia patria per le antiche provincie modenesi; Atti e memorie, 8 ser., 10 (1958): 46, cites the abbot’s order.The brothers are to be required “docere ilios Ecclesiae nostrae subiectos.”

50

The Carolingian Conquest

Mass, and together with laymen he relied on literacy to defend and advance his own interests, or those of his church, in a documentary culture.142 The ambivalent status of the lower clergy vis-à-vis laymen has already been described in the Introduction. By ecclesiastical law, the major privilege that all clerics enjoyed was exemption from secular jurisdiction, provided that they wore the tonsure and dressed as clerics, while the prohibition against marriage depended on one’s rank in the ecclesiastical hierarchy. In theory, lower clergy (doorkeepers, lectors, exorcists, and acolytes) were permitted to marry and have children like laymen, but if a cleric rose into higher orders, he was supposed to separate from his wife and practice continence.143 In reality, however, the extent to which the formal distinction between upper and lower clergy based on celibacy was actually observed difered widely depending on local customs. It is safe to say that in 800 marriage and concubinage were relatively common among upper clergy as well as lower.144 On the whole, clerics in the ninth century difered from laymen in being better educated. If the ability to sign one’s own name constitutes proof of documentary 142

143

144

M. T. Clanchy, From Memory to Written Record: England 1086–1307, 2nd ed. (London, 1993), 358, describes this level of literacy as “practical literacy.” For a rapid overview of the issue of clerical celibacy down to Trent, see Alfons M. Stickler, “L’évolution de la discipline du célibat dans l’Église en Occident de la in de l’âge patristique au Concile de Trente,” Sacerdoce et célibat. Études historiques et théologiques, ed. Joseph Coppens (Gembloux-Louvain, 1971), 373–442. An excellent discussion of the term “nicolaitism” in connection with the married clergy and the history of the Church’s policy against clerical marriage is Giuseppe Fornasari, Celibato sacerdotale e “autocoscienza” ecclesiale: Per la storia della “nicolaitica haeresis” nell’Occidente medievale, Pubblicazioni dell’Università degli Studi di Trieste, Facoltà di Magistero, ser. 3a, n. 7 (Udine, 1981). Gabriella Rossetti, “Il matrimonio del clero nella società altomedievale,” Il matrimonio nella società altomedievale, 22–28 1976, SSCISAM, no. 24 (Spoleto, 1977), 472–554, contains a bibliography (474–75). See also her “Origine sociale e formazione dei vescovi del ‘regnum Italiae’ nei secoli XI e XII,” Le istituzioni della “Societas Christiana” dei secoli XI e XII: Diocesi, pievi e parrochie. Problemi e ricerche (1–7 settembre 1974), Atti della VI settimana di studio (Milan, 1977), 57–88. The decrees of councils vary as to whether the subdiaconate is to be comprised in the ranks of higher clergy. In 746/47, Pope Zacharias set out a general position on the issue of clerical celibacy in answer to a question of Pepin’s, citing Canons II and III of the Council of Carthage (401): “Placuit episcopos et presbyteros seu diaconos etiam ab uxoribus abstinere ... ceteros autem clericos ad id non cogi, sed secundum uniuscuiusque ecclesiae consuetudinem observari debere”: PL 89, col. 934. Rossetti, “Il matrimonio del clero,” 512, maintains that subdeacons in Gaul would have been included under this injunction. Citing Isidore’s De ecclesiasticis oiciis, 2.10, the Council of Aachen (816) also includes them: “De quibus [subdeacons] quidem placuit patribus, ut, quia sacra mysteria contrectant, casti et continentes sint ab uxoribus et ab omni carnali immunditia liberi ...”: Concilia aevi karolingi, 2.1:320. Stickler, “Le célibat en Occident,” 380–83, cites the penitentials of the eighth and ninth centuries, which underlined that clerics in the major orders were forbidden to marry and that clerics who were already married before ordination must be continent thereafter. A study of Lombard documents in the Codex diplomaticus Langobardiae for the period 724–773 reveals that of twenty-one clerical marriages identiied in the documents, nine are of priests and twelve are of “clerics,” presumably all in lower orders: Rossetti, “Il matrimonio del clero,” 533–34. Of the priestly marriages, two priests (presbyterii) cohabited with their wives (presbyteriae); six had sons who were also clerics; one had a priest as a son who also was the father of a cleric. Two clerics each had a layman for a son and one had four sons (two clerics, one of whom was a priest, and two laymen), one had two sons (a cleric and a layman) while the other seven each had a clerical son. The documents also show three concubinal relationships. Carolingian documents from the same collection show ifteen concubinal relationships for 774–885, in addition to sixty-six marriages.

51

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

literacy, such literacy in the eighth and ninth centuries was not uncommon among both groups. In the centuries before the time when the notarial signature on a document lent it ides publica – that is, gave it the character of a legal document – the signatures or crosses of the participants in a legal act were vital to upholding its validity in the courts. An inspection of lists of those who signed their own names and who merely made a cross on charters for the whole Lombard kingdom between 720 and 774 provides some idea of basic literacy in the eighth century. Of a total of 988 clerics and laymen witnessing the various documents, 14 percent of the laymen and 65 percent of the clergy wrote their names.The proportion of laymen, however, rises signiicantly when documents drawn up in the city are compared with those written in the countryside. In Lucca, for example, 43 percent of all witnesses, that is, 62 percent of all clerics and 25 percent of all laymen, wrote out their own names. In small towns in the countryside, 66 percent of clerics and 11 percent of laymen could do so.145 The average quality of lay writing was decidedly inferior to that of the clergy, but the signatures of some among the clergy suggest that their literacy did not extend much beyond signing their names.146 Although we lack comparative statistics for the ninth century, the level of literacy among clerics and laymen probably increased somewhat. At least the reorganization of cathedral administration – a reorganization that encouraged institutionalizing cathedral education – promoted an increase in Latin literacy among ecclesiastics and laymen. As conceived by the architects of the Carolingian educational reforms, the cathedral required a literate clergy, adept at music, learned in liturgy, and skillful in handwriting, in order for the institution to fulill its role in the life of the diocese. Churches on both sides of the Alps in the ninth and subsequent centuries served as the sites of a steady, largely anonymous production of liturgical calendars and hagiographical material, astronomical charts, and the like that indicate training in the trivium and quadrivium.147 145

146

147

For Lucca, see Armando Petrucci, “Libro, scrittura e scuola,” Scuola nell’occidente latino, 323–35. Petrucci (325) notes that literacy seems to have had no connection with oice or function in the eighth century. See also Chartae latinae antiquiores, ed. Albert Brucker and Robert Marichal, 38 (Zurich, 1990), v–vi. Carolo Carletti, “Iscrizioni murali,” Il sanctuario di S. Michele sul Gargano dal vi al ix secolo. Contributo alla storia della Longobardia meridionale, Atti del convegno tenuto a Monte Sant’Angelo il 9–10 dicembre 1978, ed. Carolo Carletti and Giorgio Otranto (Edipuglia and Bari, 1980), 30, conirms Petrucci’s observation that function and literacy for laymen did not appear to have been directly related in the eighth century. Among numerous discussions of qualitative diferences in the calligraphy of laymen and clerics, see, for example, Armando Petrucci’s “Scriptoribus in urbibus”: Alfabetismo e cultura scritta nell’Italia altomedievale (Bologna, 1992), 60–63.The traditional example of the separation between writing and reading is Charlemagne himself. He could read but not write. In comparing Italy with France and Germany, Guglielmo Cavallo, “Libri scritti, libri letti, libri dimenticati,” Il secolo di ferro: Mito e realtà del secolo X. 19–25 aprile 1990, SSCISAM, no. 38 (Spoleto, 1991), 771, maintains that north of the Alps the bond of the Carolingian school with the grammatical tradition had deeper roots than in Italy. To his mind Italians were less inluenced by school tradition and more independent in their thinking and writing (785–86): “L’Italia viene a proporsi, dunque, come ambito geograico di una vita intellettuale più vivace che nei territori d’oltralpe, dove certo si scrivono, ma forse non leggono, più libri, e dove i canoni di scuole monastiche e vescovii, pur talora raforzati e rielaborati, si rivelano funzionali soltanto ad una modesta istruzione di base.” While Cavallo seems justiied in questioning the direct tie between vigorous intellectual life

52

The Carolingian Conquest

Evidence of an increase, however, is scarce. A study made of ninth- and tenthcentury Asti (812–964) indicates a high rate of signing ability among laymen.148 In contrast to the situation in the previous century, many laymen with oices in the tenth century could in fact write their signatures, and a few demonstrated calligraphic ability equal to that of the best among clerics, a fact that attests to a degree of formal education. Nevertheless, the strongest argument for improved literacy rests, not on anecdotal evidence, but rather on the assumption that Carolingian educational reforms had a measure of success. It is equally diicult to establish the extent to which the clergy of the ninth century received advanced education. A possible way of answering this question is to determine the degree to which pagan and patristic literature was read on the basis of new copies of manuscripts of the works. To be meaningful the interpretation of any given number must be looked at in comparison with the number copied in the same period elsewhere in Europe. No statistics of this nature exist for the Church Fathers, but, if only suggestive, the following are available for comparing the number of manuscripts of Latin pagan authors copied in the ninth and tenth centuries for the areas designated as “France” (modern France except for Alsace), “Germany” (modern Germany, Austria, and Switzerland), and “Italy” (the Italian peninsula).149 Unfortunately, as with “France” and “Germany,” the term “Italy” designates the modern geographical area, and we cannot know what percentage of the manuscripts were copied in the regnum.150 Year 800–850 850–900 900–950 950–1200

148

149

150

France

Germany

Italy

56 65 21 20

12 19 33 33

8 9 9 8

and the copying of manuscripts, I ind it diicult to accept his position that the vivacity of Italian intellectual life stemmed from the weakness of the Carolingian school tradition there. Two of his four major examples of “Italian” independent thinkers, Rather and Gerbert, were trained not in Italy but the north. Fissore,“Cultura graica e scuola in Asti,” 21, shows by a study of signatures written between 812 and 964 in the Asti region that most laymen with oices in that region could sign their own names. It should be acknowledged that because the studies are based on notarial documents, the lowest classes of the society would rarely be represented among the signers. The statistics are based on Birger Munk Olsen, L’Étude des auteurs classiques latins aux IXe et XIIe siècles, 3 vols. in 4 (Paris, 1982–89), vols. 1 and 2, and are to be Considered only of comparative value. Because of the complexity of political allegiances in the Low countries, manuscripts designated by Munk Olsen as from “Belgium” or “the Low Countries” have been omitted. For a brief description of the limitations of Munk Olsen’s numbers, see my “In the Footsteps of the Ancients”: The Origins of Humanism from Lovato to Bruni (Leiden and New York, 2000), 31, n. 1. Robert Black’s “The Origins of Humanism,” Interpretations of Renaissance Humanism, ed. Angelo Mazzocco (Leiden and Boston, 2006), 39–71, shows speciic limitations of his dating and assignment of location of origin. Of the thirty-four Italian manuscripts written over the two hundred years, four were written in Beneventan, a script largely conined to southern Italy. Relatively few manuscripts in Beneventan have survived because of the diiculty later generations would have had in reading them.

53

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

We cannot, however, conclude on the basis of these numbers that the copying of new manuscripts of the classics was less frequent in the regnum than in transalpine Europe, nor that the circulation of the work of ancient writers was less in Italy. First of all, given the paucity of monastic collections in the area belonging to the regnum, the loss of manuscripts generally was particularly acute. Second, the comparatively low igures for production in the peninsula as a whole can be partly explained by the ubiquity of manuscripts of pagan authors copied before 800 still in circulation. Even in the late tenth century, European collectors still considered Italy a treasure-house of manuscripts.151 An alternate way of determining the numbers of clergy with advanced education is to look at literary and scholarly creativity. Were we to judge solely on that basis we would argue that higher education deteriorated over the century. The last of the Pavian circle of poets, Paolino, who had returned permanently to Italy in 787, died in 817. Paciico (d. 844) was the principal heir of the previous generation of Veronese poets, but after his death only a handful of poems survive from anywhere in the regnum for the rest of the century. Among those poems, only one stands out for its poetic quality. Composed late in the ninth century when the Hungarians were beginning their incursions into northern Italy, the “Song of the Watchmen of Modena” was perhaps designed to be used in the chapel of Santa Maria and San Giovanni, located near Modena’s city walls, as part of the liturgical service performed before the night guard went on duty.152 Contrasting the Greek capture of Troy, “dormiente Troia,” by stealth with the Romans’ good fortune in having had the sacred geese of the Capitoline to alert them, the poem superbly captures the anxious vigilance of the sentries on the city walls, peering into the night, aware that the safety of the whole city depends on them. Spaced out along the walls in the darkness, they occasionally cry out to express companionship and to keep one another awake: Resultet echo: comes, eia! vigila! Per muros “eia!”, dicat echo: “vigila!” May the echo resound: “Comrade, hail, keep watch!” Throughout the walls. “Hail!” Let it echo: “Keep watch!”

No lyric poem written in the regnum before the thirteenth century could match this poem in expressive power. The survival of the works of Italian authors was naturally afected by the same problems of storage as were copies of ancient manuscripts, but the paucity of 151

152

In 988, writing to a monk of Bobbio, Gerbert, Die Briefsammlung Gerberts von Reims, ed. Fritz Weigle, MGH, Die Briefe der deutschen Kaiserzeit, no. 2 (Weimar, 1966), 157–58, wrote: “Nosti quanto studio librorum exemplaria undique conquiram. Nosti, quot scriptores in urbibus ac in agris Italiae passim habeantur. Age ergo et, te solo concio, ex tuis sumptibus fac, ut michi scribantur M. Manlius de astrologia,Victorius de rethorica, Demonstenis optalmicus.” I should add that transalpine monasteries not only stored manuscripts but also copied them in the ninth and tenth centuries: Pierre Riché, Écoles et enseignement dans l’Occident chrétien de la in du Ve siècle au milieu du X1e siècle (Paris, 1979), 113. The poem in Latin, with an English translation, is found in Godman, Poetry of the Carolingian Renaissance, 324–27. For an interpretation of the text, see Aurelio Roncaglia, “Il canto delle scolte modenesi,” Cultura neolatina 8 (1948): 5–46 and 205–22.

54

The Carolingian Conquest

intellectual products when compared with the large output of new works by writers in northern Francia and southern Germany is too great to be explained away by this fact. Does this mean that the extent of advanced learning diminished over the ninth century? I think not, because there is no necessary connection between learning and intellectual productivity.The distinctive character of Italian literary and scholarly life was that, in contrast with the traditional book culture in northern Europe, the connection would not be made until the thirteenth century. In my view, while over the century scholars in the regnum continued and likely even increased their study of pagan and earlier Christian authors, in contrast with their counterparts in the Carolingian heartland, they generally lacked interest in adding their own writings to the inheritance.The explanation of this diference lies in an analysis of the factors that created the Carolingian Renaissance of the ninth century and their absence or relative lack of importance in the regnum. Having absorbed the imperial ideal of fostering culture, the Frankish emperors actively encouraged the production of religious and literary works in their native lands.153 Fundamental to the Carolingian model of book culture were (1) the link between learning and scholarly and literary production and (2) the role of secular and ecclesiastical authority in sponsoring intellectual activity. Originating in Carolingian patronage of the monasteries, the expectation that learning was inseparable from creative work passed on to a few of the cathedral schools by the second half of the century. Reemphasized by the Ottonians, who followed the Carolingian lead in many ways, these two traditions became persistent elements in northern European Latin culture. Neither of these two traditions had much play in the regnum. Under the patronage of the last Lombard kings, a series of poets had begun to construct a native literary culture by adapting the ancient pagan and Christian heritage to the needs of their own time and place, but this efort was truncated by the Carolingian conquest and the exportation of the poets themselves to transalpine Europe. Of the Carolingians, except for Louis II (850–75), none resided for long on Italian soil.154 Moreover, from the reign of Charles the Fat (d. 888) down to the advent of Otto I in 962, the Italian throne was contested by German and French Carolingians as well as by local princes. Lack of a stable government and the absence of an imperial vision on the part of the claimants to power discouraged literary patronage. As a result, the scholarly and literary tradition created by patronage north of the Alps was foreign to the regnum. Bobbio was the lone exception in a monastic world that lacked interest in intellectual creativity. Without princely encouragement, however, creative use of their large collection of manuscripts by the monks of Bobbio appears to have been modest.155 As in northern Europe, cathedrals were busy places, largely concerned with providing practical education for the local clergy 153 154

155

Robert Folz, L’idée d’Empire en Occident du Ve au XIVe siècle (Paris, 1953), 12–35. Although in efect king only of Italy, Louis II spent his reign attempting to assert his grandfather’s authority north of the Alps and in southern Italy. Far fewer Irish scholars followed the Franks into Italy than remained in the Frankish heartland. We have only two names, Dungal at Pavia and Donatus at Fiesole; Michael Lapidge and Richard Sharpe, A Bibliography of Celtic-Latin Literature, 400–1200 (Dublin, 1985), 173 and 182–83.The group of Irish monks working at Milan in the middle of the ninth century remains anonymous. By the ninth century Italians also likely far outnumbered the Irish at Bobbio.

55

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

and administering the diocese. In Francia, of the three cathedral schools producing signiicant scholarly and literary work, Metz, Laon, and Rheims, the irst two were supported by Carolingian patronage.156 The lourishing of cathedral culture in tenth-century Germany would largely be tied to Ottonian policies. By default of monastic intellectual interests in Carolingian Italy, cathedrals on the whole provided whatever intellectual life there was. Most, however, remained absorbed in their practical activities without evincing much interest in the genres of writing that were usually associated with medieval learning – that is, theology and biblical exegesis; chronicle literature; and poetry, religious and otherwise. The cathedral had necessarily to be concerned with liturgical performance and, because its prosperity required it, with archiving notarial documents relating to its holdings, but its intellectual interests were limited. The precocious economic and demographic development of northern Italy vis-à-vis the rest of Europe, together with the growing political power of bishops from the tenth century onward, would intensify the secular concerns impinging on the cathedral school’s educational curriculum. While the ancient Latin authors, like the Latin Church Fathers, remained staples of advanced education in the best schools, they failed to create new generations of authors. The separation between learning and creativity that characterized intellectual life in the regnum in the ninth century was to become an enduring trait of the culture of the book down into the thirteenth century. ITALIAN INTELLECTUAL LIFE BEYOND THE REGNUM

A brief description of the cultural life in the ninth and early tenth centuries in the southern half of the Italian peninsula serves to highlight the distinctive character of learning in the regnum. Despite the repeated eforts of a succession of Frankish rulers to annex the old duchy of Benevento, south of Rome, the Italian kingdom’s southern borders became ixed north and east of Rome, thus sealing the separation of two cultural zones that had been growing apart during the previous two and a half centuries. The Lombards, who brought with them a political order resting on the free warrior– peasant and a conception of difused power, had found an entrenched hierarchical bureaucracy in the areas of the peninsula they had invaded. Lombard rule, therefore, necessitated a degree of compromise with tenacious indigenous institutions. In the part of the old Lombard territories that the Carolingians subsequently acquired, the Carolingians tended to reinforce the Lombard strain of political and social attitudes. Especially the introduction of Frankish institutions of vassalage and beneice moved Carolingian Italy further away from late-Roman and Byzantine notions of a bureaucratic, hierarchical society, notions that still prevailed to varying degrees in the papal territories around Rome and in much of the rest of the peninsula south of the city. The growing diference between the northern and southern societies afected scholarly life as well. While in the north Paolo Diacono and Paolino of Aquileia could boast a knowledge of Greek, there is no indication that they had imitators in the rest of the ninth century. Knowledge of Greek, however, continued in southern cities like Benevento, Salerno, and Naples throughout the whole period. Rome, especially, played a central role in Greek studies until the late ninth century. 156

I omit Auxerre because the main center there appears to have been a monastery.

56

The Carolingian Conquest

A revival of scholarly and literary interests in Rome seems to have occurred at the same time as in the Lombard kingdom – namely, in the mid-eighth century. Pope Zacharias (741–52) deserves credit for translating Gregory the Great’s Dialogi into Greek, and Paul I (757–67) had a suicient staf of Greek amanuenses to present Pepin the Short with a library of Greek writings, both pagan and Christian. Roman inscriptions from the following century provide evidence for the continued vitality of Latin classical studies in the city. The schola cantorum of the Lateran, which in the eighth century had neglected its tradition of coupling the teaching of music to the teaching of the liberal arts, began to revive under Pope Sergius II (844–47). In the last years of his life, Giovanni Immonide (825–80) wrote a version of the curious Coena Cypriani, in which he displayed an amazing grasp of ancient literature.157 The intellectual life of southern Italy was concentrated within the triangle of Montecassino, Naples, and Benevento, and for most of the ninth century was dominated by the monastery of Montecassino and its dependencies. The retirement of Paolo Diacono to Montecassino late in the eighth century brought back to the abbey one of the architects of the Carolingian Renaissance. Paolo’s second residence at Montecassino initiated a tradition of scholarship and production of manuscripts that continued, with several interruptions, into the twelfth century.158 It was here that Paolo composed his Historia Langobardorum, a history of the Lombard people from the beginning down to the death of Liudprando in 744.159 Paolo also provided the abbey school with two important didactic texts, his grammar manual, Ars Donati quam Paulus Diaconus exposuit and his epitome of Pompeius Festus’s De verborum signiicatione.160 Paolo’s disciple, Ilderico, would add a second manual for teaching grammar at a more advanced level. Partly because of its enormous size, Ilderico’s treatise, borrowing from Priscian and Donatus as well as from other sources, does not seem to have enjoyed wide circulation.161

157

158

159

160

161

Girolamo Arnaldi, “Giovanni Immonide e la cultura in Roma al tempo di Giovanni VIII,” BISI 68 (1965): 41–42. On the early history of the schola cantorum in Rome, see especially Joseph Dyer, “The Schola Cantorum and its Roman Milieu in the Early Middle Ages,” in De Musica et Cantu: Studien zur Geschichte der Kirchenmusik und der Oper. Helmut Hucke zum 60. Geburtstag, ed. Peter Cahn and Ann-Katrin Heimer (Hildesheim, 1993), 19–40. Herbert Bloch, “Montecassino’s Teachers and Library in the High Middle Ages,” Le scuole nell’Occidente latino dell’alto medioevo, SSCISAM, no. 19 (Spoleto, 1972), 567, begins his account of Montecassino’s intellectual achievements with Paolo’s coming. In discussing the rich tradition of manuscripts in the Beneventan–Cassino area, Guglielmo Cavallo, “La trasmissione dei testi nell’area Beneventano-Cassinese,” Cultura antica, 411–14, stresses its independent character. Paolo’s history was continued by Erchemperto, another monk of Montecassino who, living in Capua after the destruction of the abbey, brought the narrative down to 889; Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, 1:790. The texts are found in Ars Donati quam Paulus Diaconus exposuit, ed. Ambrosio M. Amelli (Monte Cassino, 1899) and in Sexti Pompei Festi, De verborum signiicatu cum Pauli epitome, ed. Wallace M. Lindsay (Leipzig, 1913). On Festus and Paolo’s annotations to Isidore of Seville, see Settimio Lanciotti, “Fra Festo e Paolo,” Paolo Diacono, 237–50. A summary of Ilderico’s grammar is published by Anselmo Lentini as “Ars Hilderici del codice Cassinese 299,” Benedictina 7 (1953): 191–217. Cf. Robert Black, Humanism and Education in Medieval and Renaissance Italy: Tradition and Innovation in Latin Schools from the Twelfth to the Fifteenth Century (Cambridge, 2001), 66–67. Cf. Nicola Cilento, “La storiograia nell’Italia meridionale,” in Storiograia alto medievale, 531–38, discusses historical writing connected with Montecassino in this period.

57

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

By the mid-ninth century a Montecassino–Beneventan scholarly axis developed, marked by its own calligraphic form, the Beneventan script. Who was responsible for originating the form is a matter of debate, but the appearance of the script at roughly the same time at Montecassino and Benevento points to close cultural links.162 Of the scholars active in Benevento about this time only Orso, bishop of the city, is known. He is credited with composing the Abbreviatio artis grammaticae around 833.163 Whereas Ilderico’s treatise dealt with phonetics and parts of speech, Orso added a section on igures. Essentially composing a summary of Priscian, he abridged Priscian’s analysis in some parts but, drawing on other grammarians, ampliied it elsewhere. The bishop was a correspondent of Hildemar of Corbie, who, as I have said, wrote his De ratione bene legendi at the bishop’s request.164 The last surviving work from Montecassino for the ninth century is a sermon written in 883, the year the Saracens sacked the abbey.The sermon by Abbot Bertario on Saint Scholastica, demonstrates that up until the attack grammatical studies were still vigorous at the abbey.165 Although Montecassino lay in ruins for almost a hundred years thereafter, its exiled monks continued to promote scholarship. Many of them, together with the abbey’s manuscripts, found their way to Naples, perhaps spurring that city’s rapid ascent to the cultural leadership of southern Italy by 900.166 For about seventy years, from roughly the last quarter of the ninth century, Naples lourished as a center of the translation of much of the Synaxarion, the Greek church’s equivalent to the Roman martyrology.167 The period also witnessed the production of at least twenty-ive (and probably more) Latin translations of saints’ lives, including lives never before translated and improved versions of older translations.168 By 162

163

164

165 166 167

168

Elias A. Lowe, The Beneventan Script, rev. and ed.Virginia Brown, Sussidi Eruditi 33, 2 vols. (Rome, 1980), is the standard work. Also see Hans Belting, Studien zur beneventanischen Malerei (Weisbaden, 1968), 4, on the origins of the script. For a possible northern Italian origin, see Bischof, Manuscripts and Libraries, 48 and 52. Camillo Morelli, “I trattati di grammatica e retorica del cod. Casanatense 1086,” Rendiconti della r. Accademia dei Lincei: Classe di scienze morali, storiche e ilologiche, ser. 5, 19 (1910): 288. Villa, “‘Denique Terenti dultia legimus acta....,’” 35 and 41; Cavallo, “La trasmissione dei testi,” 367–71. For the grammatical tract ascribed to Orso, see Morelli, “I trattati di grammatica e retorica del cod. casanatense,” 287–320. Cf. Black, Humanism and Education, 66–67. On Benevetan grammarians, see also Virginia Brown, “‘Where have all the grammers gone?’ The Survival of Grammatical Texts in Beneventan Script.” In Manuscripts and Tradition of Grammatical Texts from Antiquity to the Renaissance: Proceedings of a Conference Held at Erice, 16–23 October 1997, as the 11th Course of the International School for the Study of Written Records, ed. Mario de Nonno, Paolo de Paolis, and Louis Holtz (Cassino, 2000), 389–414. Bloch, “Montecassino’s Teachers and Library,” 572–73. Cavallo, “La trasmissione dei testi,” 371–83. Nicola Cilento,“La cultura e gli inizi dello studio,” in Storia di Napoli, vol. 2.2 (Naples, 1979), 551–74; and Paolo Chiesa, “Le traduzioni dal greco: L’evoluzione della scuola napoletana nel X secolo,” Lateinische Kultur im X. Jahrhundert: Akten des 1. Internationalen Mittellateinerkongresses, Heidelberg, 12.–15. IX. 1988, Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 24/25 (1991): 67–86. Further testimonies to the vitality of intellectual life in the Naples area are the late ninth- and early tenth-century additions to the Liber pontiicalis, the history of the bishops of Naples, and a series of treatises inspired by the notorius postmortem deposition of Pope Formosus (891–96). In contrast with the biographies composed in the irst half of the ninth century, which describe the bishops’ lives using stereotypical categories, those written subsequently are more personal and relect an intent to place the lives within their historical contexts: Cilento, “La storiograia nell’Italia

58

The Carolingian Conquest

the irst half of the tenth century, scholars were moving beyond traditional translations ad verbum, that is, translating the Greek text into Latin word for word, and providing translations ad sensum, or translations that sought to capture the sense of the Greek passage in Latin. But from about 950 interest in the translations declined, and a revived Montecassino soon began to reassert its inluence. This brief sketch of literary scholarly life in the Italian peninsula outside the regnum was designed to lay out the cultural geography of the peninsula so as to emphasize how papal patronage and a very diferent monastic culture afected the intellectual life in the rest of the peninsula. Henceforth the papacy and the southern part of the peninsula will concern us only in the few instances where developments there had bearing on the Latin culture of the north. The same criteria will be used for transalpine Europe, primarily the areas comprising modern Germany, France, and Belgium. THE DOCUMENTARY CULTURE

Any study of Italian educational and intellectual life in the early Middle Ages that concentrates on book culture to the neglect of documentary culture must fail to account for the dynamics of Italy’s intellectual development over the following centuries. By 800, people who bought, sold, or rented property, or who willed by testament, maintained a treasury of documents that fortiied their decisions with a wall of formulas. At least the local elite, who had the obligation to participate in legal trials where written depositions along with contracts were introduced as evidence, expected that one day they might need written proofs, for either ofensive or defensive purposes. Unlike the elites, the majority of country people and many town-dwellers probably had little to do with documents directly, but they may still have been able to understand the function and even the contents of written acts. It appears that large areas of the kingdom still spoke a form of Latin that retained a close tie with that of late antiquity.169 In these areas illiterate laymen, hearing a document read aloud, would have been able to grasp at least its gist. Knowledge of a spoken dialect of Latin would also have facilitated Latin literacy, once the alphabet and the pronunciation of syllables had been learned. The classic exponent of documentary culture in the eighth and ninth centuries was the notary. At least by the second half of the eighth century in Lombard Italy, he appears to have been a writer of documents, both public and private, who perhaps

169

meridionale,” 2:539–47. As for the treatises relating to Formosus, the irst surviving defense of his legitimacy was written by a Neapolitan, Eugenio Vulgario (before 908). He soon followed his De causa Formosiana with a second treatise personally attacking the current pope, Sergius III (904–11). The irst treatise is published by Ernst Dümmler, Auxilius und Vulgarius (Leipzig, 1866), 117–39. Subsequently, beginning in 908, Auxilius, a Frank and monk of Montecassino living in Naples, published a number of tracts on the same subject; Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, 1:437–38. Manitius also discusses the contribution of a third supporter of Formosus writing about 928 (ibid., 1:439–40). For the life and writings of Vulgario, see ibid., 1:433–34. Michel Banniard, Viva voce: Communication écrite et communication orale du IVe au XIe siècle en Occident latin (Paris, 1992), 531, ofers convincing evidence that “le maintien des traits latins perd ainsi très rapidement sa raison d’être, et la dernière phase peut commencer vers le milieu du VIIIe siècle [for Spain and Gaul] (vers le milieu du siècle suivant en Italie).”

59

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

had the authorization of a secular power.170 It is diicult, however, to determine to what degree the notary monopolized the writing of documents. Indeed, the twenty-three diferent ways writers have of identifying themselves in an eighthcentury collection of documents (scriptor, scriba, clericus, clericus et notarius, presbiter, acolitus, vir devotus, amicus, monachus, nepos, etc.) could mean that the function of writing documents was accessible to anyone who could write.171 Certainly ecclesiastics wrote a signiicant number of documents, although perhaps not in all areas of the kingdom.172 Words such as scriptor or scriba may well conceal a lay notary concerned to emphasize the document as a writing event, but we have no way of substantiating that possibility.173 170

171 172

173

Giorgio Costamagna, “L’Alto medioevo,” in Mario Amelotti and Giorgio Costamagna, Alle origini del notariato italiano, Studi storici sul notariato italiano, no. 2 (Rome, 1975), 176–77, argues for a royal authorization of notaries and doubts the existence of a signiicant number of private ones. In Costamagna’s opinion, private individuals could rogate charters but not call themselves notarii. On the basis of his close study of Lombard documents, Luigi Schiaparelli, “Note diplomatiche sulle carte longobarde. I: I notai nell’età longobarda,” Archivio storico italiano, ser. 5, 17 (1932): 24–25, agrees, when he writes of Lombard notarii: “Nulla sapiamo di sicuro sulla loro nomina, ma sembra che dipendessero dalle superiori autorità distrettuali, dai duchi e dai gastaldi....” Giorgio Cencetti,“Il notaio medievale italiano,” Atti della società ligure di storia patria 78 (1964): xiii, however, describes them as “semplici scribi forniti di una certa esperienza delle formule documentarie, privi di ogni autorità.” This view is shared by Giovanna Nicolaj, ”Il documento privato italiano nell’alto medioevo, “Libri e documenti d’Italia dai Longobardi alla rinascita delle città: Atti del Convegno nazionale dell’Associazione italiana dei paleograi e diplomatisti. Cividale, 5–7 ottobre 1994, ed. Cesare Scalon (Udine, 1996), 183. While scanty documentation makes certitude impossible, I am more convinced by the presentations of Schiaparelli and Costamagna. Costamagna, “L’alto medioevo,” 158. Costamagna notes (ibid., 160) the absence of clerics writing documents in Piedmont, Lunigiana, and Lazio, but he attributes it to a paucity of documents from those areas. Alberto Liva, Notariato e documento notarile a Milano dall’alto medioevo alla ine del Settecento, Studi storici sul notariato italiano, no. 4 (Rome, 1979), 7–8, suggests that by alluding to himself with a descriptive term such as scriptor the notary was highlighting the act of writing; cf. Schiaparelli,“Note diplomatiche,” 32–33. Liva cites the case of a notary using the title scriptor and notarius interchangeably in the irst half of the ninth century (Notariato e documento, 10). Costamagna, “L’alto medioevo,” 191, cites another for the eighth century. In any case, according to Liva, the use of the term scriptor in Milanese documents disappeared by the mid-ninth century. See as well Everett, Literacy in Lombard Italy, c. 568–774, 202, who suggests that in an earlier period, because documents customarily were written by diverse groups of people, the generic term scriba was used: “the purpose of scriba may have been to encourage the use of charters in the juridical system and not conine such activities to certain groups or individuals in a tightly deined hierarchy.” Summarizing his position on the status of writers of documents in the eighth century, Costamagna concludes (Notariato e documento, 159): “. . . nonostante l’impossibilità di precisare con assoluta certezza la qualiica di alcuni personaggi e ove si escludano in certi limiti gli ‘exceptores,’ peraltro in numero molto limitato ad appartenti ad una categoria ben precisata di persone, si può ragionevolmente afermare che tutti i rogatari possono essere ricompresi o tra gli ecclesiastici o tra i ‘notarii.’” The term exceptores originally referred to stenographers and beginning in the third century came to replace the term notarius: Mario Amelotti, “L’età romana,” Alle origini del notariato italiano, ed. Mario Amelotti and Giorgio Costamagna, Studi storici sul notariato italiano, no. 2 (Rome, 1975), 20. Amelotti writes: “Nel tardo impero la parola diventa difusa in ogni tipo di fonti – letterarie e giuridiche, papirologiche ed epigraiche – ma ormai disegna sempre un pubblico impiegato di rango modesto, con funzioni in primo luogo di verbalizzazzione.” Costamagna (159) still inds a few references to exceptores in the eighth century, but the term disappears by the ninth.

60

The Carolingian Conquest

Charlemagne seems to have decided to impose on his new Italian possessions a notarial arrangement found in parts of Gaul: he endeavored to establish notarial oicials whose primary function was to keep the records of the count’s court, commonly referred to as the placitum in Italy and as the mallus north of the Alps.174 In 781, at Mantua, Charlemagne required that every count in the kingdom have his own notary.175 While it is unclear in the 781 document how the procedure was carried out, he speciied in a capitulary of 803 that the choice of the notaries, along with that of the local scabini and advocati, should belong to the imperial missi.176 Presumably, this choice would be made from among the notaries already practicing within a county. Traditionally the Lombard notary exercised diverse functions; for the newly created comital notary, the charge of maintaining the records of the local placitum probably proved to be part-time and just added to his other documentary work.177 Local judges or scabini appear also to have been notaries.178 While the public status of the notary in Lombard Italy is debatable, there can be no question that the notary in Carolingian Italy had oicial standing.179 In 832, Lothar at Pavia enacted legislation that further professionalized the Carolingian notariate. Among the variety of prescriptions regarding payment and high moral conduct existed one deining the county as the area in which an individual notary was allowed to practice freely. Notaries who intended to notarize acts outside their own county did so only with the permission of the count of the county in which they intended to work.180 This piece of legislation would help to explain the frequent appearance after this time of notaries designated as notarius luccensis or notarius de Parma. 174

175

176

177 178

179 180

Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 1:591–92 and 618–19. Cf. Schiaparelli, “Note diplomatiche,” 31–32. Capitularia Regum Francorum, 1:190 (c. 3): “Comes vero ... et omnia notarium suum scribere faciat.” Cf. Giorgio Costamagna, “L’alto medioevo,” 181–82; and Liva, Notariato e documento, 12–13. Capitularia, 1:115 (c. 3): “Ut missi nostri scabinos, advocatos, notarios per singula loca elegant et eorum nomina, quando reversi fuerint, secum scripta deferant.” Cf. Costamagna, “L’alto medievo,” 181, and Liva, Notariato e documento, 12–13. The missi were men sent out regularly by the central government to supervise local government. Created by the Carolingian government in the decades around 800, scabini were appointed to act as councilors of the count, primarily in judicial cases. The role of the avocatus was to represent a patron, usually ecclesiastical, in court: François Bougard, La justice dans le royaume d’Italie de la in du viiie au début du xie siècle (Rome, 1995), 177–203, 140–41, and 264–69. On the term scabini, see also Julius Ficker, Forschungen zur Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte Italiens, 4 vols. (Innsbruck, 1868–74; rpt. Aalen, 1961), 3:199–221. Armando Petrucci, Notarii: Documenti per la storia del notariato italiano (Milan, 1958), 12. Bresslau, Die Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 1:621–22. For the scabinus as notarius, see also Ficker, Forschungen, 3:220. Bougard, La justice dans le royaume d’Italie, 66. Capitularia regum francorum, 1:62 (chap. 13): “Notarii autem hoc iurare debent, quod nullum scriptum falsum faciat, nec in occulto scriptum aliquis nee de uno comitatu in alio nisi per licentiam illius comitis, in cuius comitatum stare debet.” The same chapter, at points, substitutes the term cancellarius for notarius: for example,“Ut nullus cancellarius pro ullo iudicato aut scripto aliquid amplius accepere audeat nisi dimidiam libram argenti de maioribus scriptis.”The title cancellarius, which for the Franks of the early ninth century commonly referred to the clerk of the Frankish mallus, was also a title given to the head of royal and ecclesiastical writing oices. On the notaries of the mallus, see Alain de Boüard, Manuel de diplomatique française et pontiicale.Vol. 2: L’acte privé (Paris, 1948), 128f. On the transalpine source for the term cancellarius, see also Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 1:378. Throughout the ninth century the

61

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

In 805, two years after requiring counts to have a notary, Charlemagne imposed the same requirement on bishops and abbots.181 Apparently these notarii clerici – also designated as notaries with the title of a church attached, for example, notarius s. Petronii – appointed by the bishop or abbot, would be responsible for writing documents by and for the prelate.182 While it is unclear from these documents whether the notarius clericus was so restricted in the jurisdiction that he enjoyed, special concessions to ecclesiastical bodies in the ninth and tenth centuries suggest that such a restriction did exist.183 Although it is diicult to know what institutional organization the Lombard notariate had on the eve of the conquest, Carolingian legislation seems to have given a tighter, more formal structure to the profession. In the course of the second half of the ninth century, the title scriba or scriptor became rare in documents that historically would be considered of a notarial character.184 The number of writers signing as clericus or subdiaconus also diminished; and the term presbiter almost disappeared altogether, apparently in response to the Carolingians’ absolute prohibition on priests performing notarial functions in the regnum.185

181 182

183

184

185

term appears, although rarely, as equivalent to notarius; see Codice diplomatico veronese, doc. 373 (873): 371. According to this document the king bestowed on the bishop of Verona the right to name “notarios vel cancellarios ad scribendum cartarum instrumenta.” In 891, King Guido had assumed the same equivalency when, in guaranteeing the bishop of Modena certain privileges, he wrote: “Concedimus etiam eidem sanctae Motinensi aecclesiae, sicut ei ab antiquis antecessoribus nostris regibus loca, in quibus civitas predicta constructa fuerat, per irmatitis suae auctoritatem concessa sunt, ita nostrae auctoritatis precepto irma et stabilia maneant, cum cancellariis quos perpetua et iugi consuetudine temporibus antecessorum episcoporum predicta aeclesia de clericis sui ordinis ad scribendos sue potestatis libellos et idecarios habuit”: I diplomi di Guido e di Lamberto, ed. Luigi Schiaparelli, Fonte per la storia d’Italia, vol. 36 (Rome, 1906), 30. Cf. Bougard, La justice dans le royaume d’Italie, 69, n. 11. In the tenth century, royal and imperial cancellarii were without exception high ecclesiastics charged with supervising the chancery, but they did not usually write out the documents themselves. Where a diocesan cancellarius wrote a document, I assume that such an oicial was usually head of the writing oice of the chapter and a notary. See Chapter 2, under “The Other Culture.” Capitularia, 1:121 (chap. 4 and note e). Schiaparelli, “Note diplomatiche,” 11–12, considers this group to be not necessarily clerical, but my tendency is to regard them as such unless otherwise speciied. Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 620–21, cites a royal privilege granting the bishop’s notaries in Parma the right to practice throughout the diocese for lay and clerical employers. Another permits the notaries of the abbey of San Giulia of Brescia, certainly clerics, the right to perform the abbey’s business anywhere in Italy. Also note the examples in Max Handloike, Die lombardischen Städte unter der Herrschaft der Bishöfe und die Entstehung der Communen (Berlin, 1883), 65, n. 3. Schiaparelli,“Note diplomatiche,” 31, suggests that Carolingian legislation had a practical efect:“Esse essenzialmente regolano e perfezionano in Italia, in una parola riformano, quanto già si aveva, sia pure in modo indeterminato, nell’età longobarda.” And again (33): “Ciò che ora appare confuso, indeterminato, libero, andrà prendendo sotto i Carolingi chiarezza, ordine, regolarità, e avrà riconoscimento dalle leggi ... le disposizioni relative ad esso [the notary] nelle leggi carolingie avranno concorso ad accrescere ides al documento scritto dal notaio, in particular modo dal notaio comitale.” Capitularia, 1:179 (c. 13): “Ut nullus presbyter cartas scribat nec conductor sui senioris existat.” See Costamagna, “L’alto medioevo,” 190 and 193. In his survey of the Codex diplomaticus Langobardiae between 800 and 1000, he inds only twelve documents rogated by ecclesiastics of any sort, and these were between 810 and 888. Nonetheless, Enzo Petrucci, “An clerici artem notariae possint exercere,” in Studi storici in onore di Ottorino Bertolini, 2 vols. (Pisa, 1972), 2:562–63, emphasizes the reference to suus senior and maintains that the provision refers only to priests in private churches in the countryside

62

The Carolingian Conquest

The explanation for the continued appearance, albeit rare, of a presbyter, subdiaconus, or diaconus writing documents that were notarial in character lies in large part in the peculiar position held by the bishop, an ecclesiastic who had a measure of secular power.To what extent could the bishop, like the emperor or king, publish charters or diplomas, and to what extent had he to make his will known through notarial documents requiring witnesses and a notary’s signature? Distinctions between diplomas or charters and notarial documents were sometimes diicult to draw.186 Lay notaries often wrote out privileges and concessions granted by a bishop to clerics of his diocese, and the documents often included lists of witnesses with their signa manuum, despite the fact that such documents would not seem to have required notarization.187 At other times, documents dealing with the same kind of matters assumed the form of charters granted by a bishop, written by a cleric, and needing no other validation than that of the authority in whose name it was issued. Throughout the Middle Ages, of course, clerics continued to write nonnotarial documents such as epistolae, breves, and the like, documents in which the scribe signed as diaconus or subdiaconus, or remained anonymous. Notarius clericus and notarius with the name of a church, such as notarius s. Petronii bononiensis, continued to be used as titles for ecclesiastical notaries into the next century, but by 900 the former title emerged as the prime indicator of a clerical notary. Besides notarizing documents for ecclesiastical authorities, some clerics also acted as comital notaries, but in the examples we have, when doing so the notary indicated his clerical status, for example, clericus et notarius.188 My overall impression, however, is that by 900 there were fewer clerics writing notarial documents than ifty years earlier. There are exceptions to the tendency, primarily in dioceses in the archiepiscopal province of Ravenna, which was independent of Carolingian Italy until the midtenth century. In that area, as in Rome, where ecclesiastical tradition was particularly strong, evidence of clerics performing notarial functions in the archiepiscopal and diocesan chanceries exists into the twelfth century. We know little about how notaries were trained. Despite eforts to prove the existence of schools for their instruction, there is no solid evidence either for the ninth century or for several centuries to follow. Apprenticeship to a working notary seems to have been the common way to learn the trade. In 880, for example, Rimegauso,

186

187

188

and is designed to forbid their writing documents for local lords, who might force them to falsify documents. I interpret the passage as containing two separate commands to priests, one generic for all priests and the other only for those having a patron. Giovanna Nicolaj, “Per una storia della documentazione vescovile aretina dei secoli XI–XIII. Appunti paleograici e diplomatici,” Annali della scuola speciale per archivisti e bibliotecari dell’Università di Roma 17–18 (1977–78): 67–68, with the examples following. The frequent confusion between charters and notarial documents points to a relatively unclear distinction between public and private. See general conclusion of Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 1:622. It is possible that clerical notaries occasionally neglected to add their clerical status. However, I know of only two instances before 1250 in which a cleric signs both as notarius clericus and simply as notarius. The irst concerns a certain Giovanni, who in 881 signed as clericus notarius and in 882 as notarius: Girolamo Tiraboschi, Memorie storiche modenesi, 5 vols. (Modena, 1793–95), vol. 1, Codice diplomatico, 53: doc. 51 (881), and 57: doc. 53 (882); and the second concerns Cantarino, Pisane urbis cancellarius, in the twelfth century (see Chapter 2, under “The Other Culture”).

63

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

who took dictation from the notary Adalberto, to whom he referred as magister meus, was probably learning his trade on the job.189 Connected with the unsubstantiated conviction that there were notarial schools is the belief that by the ninth century certain standard collections of documents, which could be employed for instructional as well as practical purposes, circulated widely in the form of manuals. Studies of the formulas used over a wide area, however, suggest that they had local origins and probably derived from copies of notarial documents that were easily accessible. Frequent documentary contact between notaries from various regions, especially with notaries from Pavia, however, may help to explain the occurrence of certain similarities.190 The rapid spread of the legal action known as ostensio cartae, with its attendant formulas, is a case in point. First appearing in Piacenza around 880, within thirty years it became the dominant form of case in public courts (placita) in the regnum.191 If a school of the notariate existed anywhere in ninth-century Italy, it would have been at Pavia. Since the days of the Lombard kings, notaries connected with the royal palace performed duties requiring greater literary and technical skills than ordinary notaries possessed.192 From the 790s, the palace notaries were distinguished irst as notarii domni regis or notarii regales or imperiales, and by the mid-ninth century, 189

190

191

192

The example comes from Uberto Benassi, Codice diplomatico parmense (Parma, 1910), 43–45. Eforts to prove the existence of formal legal and notarial training at Modena in the ninth century have been unconvincing; Bedoni, “Ricerche sulle antiche scuole modenesi, 44–58; and Giuseppe Russo, “L’insegnamento del diritto a Modena nel sec. IX,” in Deputazione storia patria per le antiche provincie modenesi, Atti e memorie, ser. 10, 12 (1977), 23–52. Guiscardo Moschetti, Primordi esegetici sulla legislazione longobarda del sec. IX a Verona (Spoleto, 1954), 55–107, is likewise unsuccessful in his endeavor to prove formal teaching of law at Verona in the same century. However, Alberto Liva (Notariato e documento, 31) is probably right in believing that there was formal notarial training in Pavia in the ninth century. Francesco Calasso, Il medioevo del diritto (Milan, 1954), 279–83, summarizes evidence for law schools at Rome and Ravenna in the early Middle Ages. Pier S. Leicht, “Formulari notarili nell’Italia settentrionale,” Mélanges Fitting, 2 vols. (Montpellier, 1908), 2:49–59, generally rejects the existence of notarial formularies circulating in Carolingian Italy but notes evidence for one, possibly of Pavian origin, in an area covering Asti, Verona, and Bergamo. Schiaparelli, “Note diplomatiche,” 15, argues that notaries usually relied on imitating documents available to them but does not exclude the existence of formularies of a local or regional nature. Liva, Notariato e documenti, 33, explains that the uniformities observed in documents are largely the result of “scambi di notizie e di esperienze fra rogatori,” based on private collections of models and the models found in ecclesiastical archives, as well as the inluence of a common master. Cf. Costamagna, “L’alto medievo,” 215–17. Chris Wickham, “Land Disputes and Their Social Framework in Lombard–Carolingian Italy, 700–900,” The Settlement of Disputes in Early Medieval Europe, ed. Wendy Davies and Paul Fouracre (Cambridge and London, 1986), 117–18. Jane Carpenter, “Glossary,” The Settlement of Disputes, 273, deines the ostensio cartae procedure as “the practice of showing one’s charter in public in the court; by extension, the formalized procedure by which such a demonstration won a court case for the charter owner without contest.” The formal language of placita become standardized in Pavia itself about 810; Bougard, La justice dans le royaume d’Italie, 134. The conclusions of Guido Mengozzi, Ricerche sull’attività della scuola di Pavia nell’alto medio evo (Parma, 1924), on the notariate of Pavia must be regarded with caution. On eighth- and ninthcentury notaries, see Pagnin, “Scuola e cultura,” 80–81 and 89–90; Liva, Notariato e documento, 30–33; Charles Radding, The Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence: Pavia and Bologna, 850–1150 (New Haven, Conn., 1988), 44–54; and Giovanna Nicolaj, Cultura e prassi di notai preirneriani: Alle origini del rinascimento giuridico (Milan, 1991), 15–20.

64

The Carolingian Conquest

as notarii sacri palatii.193 By the 840s and 850s, a second special group emerged with the title judices sacri palatii or judices domni regis. In contrast with notaries in the counties, these notaries wrote documents all over the kingdom, and as judges they sat alongside local judges at royal assemblies wherever they were held. Men bearing these titles seem to have possessed specialized legal training. The fact that many of the judices sacri palatii sometimes referred to themselves as notarii sacri palatii or notarii domni regis suggests that they had been drawn from the ranks of the royal notaries and that their legal expertise initially derived from notarial experience.194 The frequent appearance of these specially designated notaries and judges in the records of the imperial or royal government in the last half of the ninth century points to the existence of a bureaucracy at the Pavian court composed of technical experts on Lombard law. The frequent interchange of titles probably depended on diferent functions they performed in varying situations. In other words, judices domni regis or judices sacri palatii were trained notarii who, when identiied as judices, served a consultative or decision-making function rather than a notarial one. Members of this body of royal judges and notaries were presumably all laymen.195 When in the tenth century the notariate of other cities began to use the same titles (notarii sacri palatii and judices sacri palatii), however, I am less certain that there were 193 194

195

The earliest reference to a notarius sacri palatii is in 713; Everett, Literacy in Lombard Italy, 201. See Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 1:622–23, for the early occurrences of royal notaries. Giovanna Nicolaj, Cultura e prassi, 27–29, maintains that we are looking at two kinds of royal notaries, the notarius sacri palatii, directly linked to the royal court at Pavia along with the judices sacri palatii; and the others – notarius imperialis, notarius regalis, and notarius domni regis – all of local origin but claiming some sort of royal patent for their oice. She sees the two groups as distinct sorts of technicians, “distinguibili per biograie e itinerari, tipologie formulari e anche tipologie graiche” (27). The problem with making such a distinction is that in the ninth century judges and notaries seem to have used sacri palatii, domni regis, and domni imperialis interchangeably. See the list of royal judges based on Cesare Manaresi, I placiti del ‘regnum Italiae,’ FSI, vols. 92 and 96–97 (Rome, 1955–60), given by Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 189–244, for the ninth to eleventh centuries. Mengozzi, Ricerche, 19, gives the irst instance of a judex et notarius sacri palatii as 844, but without reference. He may have been referring to the placitum of 844 found in Manaresi, I placiti, 92:157 and 159, where two judices, Paolo and Stabile, subscribe to the document as notarii, the former as notarius domni imperatoris, but, contrary to Mengozzi, the title judex et notarius does not appear. Nicolaj, Cultura e prassi, 19, traces the history of the term judex at Pavia in the irst half of the century. The irst mention of judex sacri palatii is found 857; Radding, Origins, 189 under (3). Ten years earlier the same judge referred to himself as iudex domni imperialis. The case of Lucca indicates that the tendency to make notaries act as judges was not unique to Pavia: Hansmartin Schwarzmaier, Lucca und das Reich bis zum Ende des 11. Jahrhunderts.Studien zur Sozialstruktur einer Herzogstadt in der Toscana (Tübingen, 1972), 274–76; and Hagen Keller, “La Marca di Tuscia ino all’anno Mille,” Atti del 5º Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo, Lucca 3–7 ottobre 1971 (Spoleto, 1973), 125–127. Cf. Nicolaj, Cultura e prassi, 19–20, n. 39. Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 1.625: “Fanden wir unter den Grafschaftsnotaren auch Geistliche, so kann ich Kleriker in der Stellung als Königsnotare für das 10. bis 12. Jahrhundert nicht nachweisen.” It is important to distinguish between this notarial staf resident at Pavia and the royal chancery, headed by a high ecclesiastic, which followed the king and was intimately linked with the royal chapel.To all appearances the chancery of the Lombard kings had been stafed only by laymen (ibid., 358 and 387–99). The Carolingians replaced laymen with clerics, and after the demise of the Carolingian dynasty succeeding Italian kings kept the tradition (374). The primary function of the royal chancery was to emit royal charters and other decrees in the king’s name.

65

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

not clerics among them. The local notariate designated by titles such as notarius lucensis or simply notarius would then largely disappear, along with titles associated with an ecclesiastical notariate. As we shall see, the lay tradition connected with the titles notarii sacri palatii and judices sacri palatii, coupled with the concern of the early tenth-century kings to create a large royal notariate as a means of keeping control of the country, would have militated against admitting ecclesiastics (who, in theory at least, would not be justiciable in the royal courts). Nonetheless, it is possible that some of the notarii clerici in the tenth century obtained royal appointments.196 That the judices et notarii sacri palatii were as a group attaining greater cohesiveness and importance over time is shown by a study that focuses on the calligraphic elements in surviving collections of placita, that is, the records of public judicial assemblies held in the name of the king and often in his presence.197 A detailed study of the handwriting of the legal technicians present at placita in the ninth and tenth centuries has shown that by the late ninth century a peculiar script had become widely difused among the notarii et judices sacri palatii, which the authors of the study call cancelleresca palatina.198 Over the next century, that calligraphic form distinguished the writing of the legal technicians of the court from the hand used by other literate laymen and ecclesiastics present, including other notaries.199 The legal structures in which the notaries and judges of the regnum worked depended largely on the legal identity of individuals, whether Roman or Lombard. Lombard law prevailed mainly in the northern part of the regnum where Lombard settlement had been heaviest, and Roman law in the south.The former had received its irst codiication in 643 in the Edictum Rotari and had been added to by the later Lombard kings Grimbaldo (688), Liudprando (712), Ratchis (745), and Aistulph (749). Carolingian rulers supplemented Lombard law with their own legislation.200 196

197

198 199

200

I have seen only two clear examples of clerics as royal or imperial notaries. In Verona, beginning in 947 and ending in 957, a Veronese cleric, Liudprando, signed himself as cl(ericu)s not(arius) domni regi in a series of documents: Codice diplomatico veronese, 359: doc. 236; and 410: doc. 259. The second example comes from 1356, when a certain cleric, Lanfranco, signed a document ego presbiter Lanfranchus de comitatu mediolanensi imperiali auctoritate notarius: Carte dell’Archivio di Stato di Pisa, ed. Mariella D’Alessandro Nannipieri, 2 vols. Thesaurus ecclesiarum Italiae, Toscana,VII, 9 (Rome, 1978), 1:21. At the same time, it would be fatuous to believe that throughout the centuries civil authorities consistently excluded clerics from the notariate. As late as the thirteenth century, among the 2,000 members listed as matriculants to the Bolognese guild of notaries over the century, one was a cleric; see Chapter 9, under “Laymen and the Traditional Book Culture.” Armando Perucci and Carlo Romeo, “Scrivere ‘in judicio’: Modi, soggetti e funzioni di scrittura nei placiti del ‘Regnum Italiae’(sec. ix–xi),” Scrittura e civiltà 13 (1989): 5–48; published as “Scrivere ‘in iudicio’ nel ‘Regnum Italiae,’” in Scriptores in urbibus, 195–236. In ibid., 222–23, Petrucci and Romeo describe the form of writing. Ibid., 224–25. Pavian judges from the second half of the ninth century also used tachigraphic note taking. On the practice of tachigraphic note taking, see Luigi Schiaparelli, “Tachigraia sillabica nelle carte italiane,” BISI 31 (1910): 27–71, and 33 (1913), 1–39. This notation, Petrucci writes (225), “conferma il processo di formazione di una vera e propria aristocrazia della scrittura e della cultura scritta documentaria.” The development of Lombard law is discussed by Nicholas Everett in his Literacy in Lombard Italy, 163–96. For a discussion of the extent to which Lombard law was territorial, see ibid., and his article “How Territorial Was Lombard Law?” in Die Langobarden: Herrschaft und Identität, ed.Walter Pohl and Peter Erhart (Vienna, 2005), 345–60.

66

The Carolingian Conquest

In areas where Roman law formed the basis of the legal system, ninth-century documentary culture invited access to the Roman legal texts, and a number of epitomes were created, such as the Epitome Juliani, which was a compendium of the Novellae, the fourth part of the Justinian corpus of Roman law. Eight complete manuscripts of the Novellae dating from the late seventh century to the ninth survive in western European libraries, but knowledge of the other three parts of the Justinian corpus, the Institutes, Code, and Digest, remained fragmentary. The irst complete manuscripts of these historically more important parts date only from the late eleventh and early twelfth century.201 Excerpts from the Justinian corpus, mainly from the Novellae but also short passages from the Institutes and Code, were also available in a series of collections compiled for ecclesiastical use: the Lex Romana canonice compta; the Collectio Anselmo dedicata, dedicated to the Frankish archbishop of Milan, Anselm II (882–96); and the so-called Bobbio excerpts.202 The irst appears to have been the source for the Roman legal material of the others and relects direct knowledge of manuscripts of the Code, the Institutes, and the Novellae.203 A fourth ecclesiastical collection, in Beneventan script, from the ninth century, the Ordo meliluus in expositione legum Romanarum, contains 201

202

203

Charles M. Radding and Antonio Ciaralli, “The Corpus iuris civilis in the Middle Ages: A Case Study in Historiography and Medieval History,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, romanistiche Abteilung 117 (2000): 306–8. The Epitome Juliani forms the subject of Wolfgang Kaiser’s Die Epitome Iuliani. Beiträge zum römischen Recht im frühen Mittelalter und zum byzantinischen Rechtsunterricht (Frankfurt-am-Main, 2004). For uses of Roman law in Lombard Italy, see Guido Astuti, “Inlussi romanistici nelle fonti del diritto longobardo,” Tradizione romanistica e civiltà giuridica europea: Raccolta di scritti, ed. Giovanni Diurni, 3 vols. (Naples, 1984), 1:138–39. The corpus of Roman law, composed in Justinian’s reign (527–65), consists of four books: the Code, the collection of constitutions or statutes decreed by Roman emperors down to the early years of Justinian’s reign; the Digest, a compilation of fragments drawn from ancient Roman legal treatises and opinions of jurists; the Institutes, essentially a manual for teaching Roman law; and the Novellae, containing imperial constitutions decreed by Justinian after the second revision of the Code in 534, together with a small number of those by subsequent emperors. Radding and Ciaralli, “The Corpus iuris civilis,” 306–7, relate the four books of the corpus to these collections of canons. See also their The ‘Corpus Iuris Civilis’ in the Middle Ages: Manuscripts and Transmission from the Sixth Century to the Juristic Revival (Leiden and Boston, 2007), 55–62. Carlo Mor,“Le droit romain dans les collections canoniques des Xe et XIe siècles,” Revue historique de droit français et étranger,” ser. 4, 6 (1927), 512–24, was the earliest to note the use of Roman law in the irst two collections. He published his Lex romana canonice compta:Testo di leggi romano-canoniche del sec. IX pubblicato sul ms. Parigino Bibl. Nat. 12448 con introduzione e due tavole delle fonti, Studi nelle scienze giuridiche e sociali pubblicati dall’Istituto di esecitazioni presso la facoltà di giurisprudenza, Pubblicazioni della reale Università di Pavia, Facoltà di giurisprudenza, no. 13 (Pavia, 1927). The Collectio Anselmo dedicata is published by Jean Martial Besse, Histoire des textes du droit de l’Église au moyen-âge. Collectio Anselmo dedicata: Étude et texte (Paris, 1960 [1957]).The Excerpta bobbiensia is found in Mor,“Bobbio, Pavia e gli Excerpta bobbiensia,” Contributi alla storia dell’Università di Pavia (Pavia, 1925), 42–113). On the dating of the ecclesiastical collections, see Mor, “Diritto romano e dritto canonico,” Cultura antica nell’occidente latino, 713–22. On canon law generally in this early period, consult Harald Zimmermann, “Römische und kanonische Rechtskenntnis und Rechtsschulung im früheren Mittelalter,” Scuola nell’occidente latino, 766–94. The so-called Glossa Pistoiese (Bibl. cap. Pistoia, 106), formerly dated as mid-tenth century (see, e.g., Francesco Calasso, Il medioevo del diritto, 289), has often been used as an indication of the extent of knowledge of Roman law before the eleventh century. Radding and Ciaralli have shown that the Glossa dates from after 1050; “The Corpus iuris civilis,” 286–89. Radding and Ciarelli, “The Corpus iuris civilis,” 292 and 307.

67

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

fragments, dealing largely with marriage, from the Institutes and Code.204 A few other collections survive from the ninth and the tenth centuries, but they ofer even more fragmentary versions of the Justinian corpus. Granted the overwhelmingly agricultural nature of the society and the low level of institutional development, the legal system of the late-ancient world, designed for a more complex society, would in any case have been of limited value. The current scholarly tendency is to deemphasize the diferences between the documentary culture of the Italian kingdom and that of the transalpine parts of the Carolingian empire in the ninth century.205 Especially in recent decades, scholars have demonstrated that in parts of the north, human interchanges were recorded in written form in ways similar to those used in Italy. The older position that judicial procedures in the south were more sophisticated than in the north at least requires qualiication.206 That the Carolingians actually reinforced the organization of the Lombard notariate in various ways, based on their experience in their own homeland, is almost certainly true. Rather, the key diference in the ninth century between the documentary cultures on opposite sides of the Alps and the basis for the documentary culture’s greater resilience in Italy resided in the existence of a growing notariate, increasingly lay in status and gaining cohesiveness in the course of the ninth and early tenth centuries. The evidence used to prove the extent of written documentation surviving for transalpine parts of the empire reveals the continuing presence throughout the ninth century of large numbers of clerics serving as scribes for documents of a notarial character.207 In Italy, by contrast, the number of clerics involved in writing documents seems to have declined signiicantly in the same period. Furthermore, the 204 205

206

207

Carlo Mor, “Diritto romano,” 2:717–18. The principal general work representing the newer scholarship remains McKitterick’s The Carolingians and the Written Word.The essays relating to northern Europe in The Settlement of Disputes provide signiicant proof of the importance of documents in certain regions. Also see the essays in The Uses of Literacy in Early Mediaeval Europe, ed. Rosamond McKitterick (Cambridge, 1990). De Boüard, Manuel de diplomatique française, 128–49, contrasts the attitude toward the validity of documents in eighth- and ninth-century Italy with that in contemporary France. Cf. Carlo C. Mor, “Dritto romano,” 2:713. François L. Ganshof, “La preuve dans le droit franc,” in La Preuve, vol. 2, Moyen âge et temps modernes, Recueils de la Société Jean Bodin, no. 17 (Brussels, 1965), 90, writes, “l’usage de la preuve écrite est aux temps merovingiens et carolingiens exceptionnel.” McKitterick, Carolingians and the Written Word, 26, squarely challenges that statement as regards the Carolingians, and in fact devotes her book to refuting it. Robert-Henri Bautier, “L’authentiication des actes privés dans la France médiévale: Notariat public et juridiction gracieuse,” in Notariado público y documento privado: De los orígenes al siglo XIV. Actas del VII Congreso internacional de Diplomática, Valencia, 1986 (Valencia, 1989), 709, indicates that under the Carolingians the institution of the notariate “semble ... avoir été générale en Gaule, mais, dans l’ensemble, elle s’est efacée à des dates variables, dès le cours du IXe siècle, à la in de ce siècle, ou au mieux, au Xe.” As for episcopal chanceries, after the Carolingian period “dans le plupart des diocèses, la fonction semble disparaître.” McKitterick, Carolingians and the Written Word, 104–34, provides an extensive discussion of the identities of the scribes writing documents. A student of the Italian notariate is struck by the sizable number of the scribes whom McKitterick identiies as monks and clerics. Under the Carolingians, the writers of documents for counts belonged, as Bresslau remarks, “vorwiegend dem geistlichen Stande angehörten”: Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 1:374.

68

The Carolingian Conquest

confusing array of terms transalpine scribes used to designate themselves, persistent throughout the ninth century, contrasts with the growing standardization of titles used by the Italian notariate. The sharp decline in documentary culture north of the Alps after 900 may be largely attributable to the unrelenting waves of invaders from the far north and the proliferation of political powers, especially following the death of Charles the Fat. Although the periodic invasion of Italy by the Hungarians appears to have had less destructive consequences, the authority of the central government was constantly threatened by claims to local control. In Italy, however, unlike in Gaul, there existed a large corps of lay notaries, who, modeling themselves on the royal notaries of Pavia, were to become, in the course of the tenth century, increasingly homogeneous, claiming similar privileges, functioning in similar ways, and utilizing similar formulas. Whereas the fragile organization of the public writing function in the north could not resist the forces of decentralization, the Italian lay notariate endowed the regnum with an underlying legal structure that even the Ottonians, coming from that part of the former Carolingian empire with the weakest documentary culture, could not discourage.208 One of the most obvious characteristics of the heritage left to western Europe by the Carolingians was the tendency to clericalize royal and imperial government.209 Although eventually bishops in Italy were to enjoy more secular power than their counterparts north of the Alps, at lower levels of government the process of clericalization encountered resistance. The lay notaries and judges in Pavia, legal professionals whose lives were devoted to government service, contrasted with the largely clerical administrators of the Carolingian court in Francia, men often from the imperial chapel and aspiring to high positions in the Frankish church. In the northern world where documentary culture shrank after 900, the Carolingian clerical administrator served as the model functionary for governments at all levels. “Literate” became largely synonymous with “ecclesiastic” and would remain so down to the end of the ifteenth century. In Italy, lay control over the largest portion of documentary culture meant that the creation of a new book culture founded on the Justinian corpus in the eleventh century would be the work of lay intellectuals. CONCLUSION

The invasion of Italy by the Carolingians caused an irreparable tear in the geographical fabric of the peninsula, detaching the northern portion of the country and drawing it into a new orbit whose center lay beyond the Alps. Conscious of the political and spiritual need to raise the educational level of their people as well as to glorify their throne, Charlemagne and his immediate successors introduced a series of educational reforms. A particular focus of concern was liturgical performance, 208

209

Wickham,“Lombard-Carolingian Italy 700–900,” 115, refers to the resistance in Italy to the Ottonian efort to introduce the duel as a means of impugning the authenticity of a charter. This is the conclusion of Walter Ullmann, The Carolingian Renaissance and the Idea of Kingship (London, 1969), 169. Cf. Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre, 1:373–74.

69

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

designed to raise the spiritual conscience of their people and to win divine favor for the empire. To ensure the observance of liturgical rites they introduced communal life into cathedrals and reinforced it in monasteries. The enhancement of performance required the regular functioning of schools where boys could be taught to take their place in singing the canonical hours. Encouraged throughout the empire, these schools likely exercised a positive inluence on elementary education and contributed, along with increased political stability, to a modest rise in literacy. The link established between a large number of transalpine monasteries and Carolingian patronage serves to explain the lourishing of scholarship and literary writing in the ninth century that has been called the Carolingian Renaissance. By the second half of the century a few cathedrals, particularly favored by royal support or by a relationship with a nearby monastery, joined the intellectual movement. In contrast, lacking Carolingian patronage, the monasteries of the southern kingdom, taken as a whole, never established an intellectual tradition, and we must look to the cathedrals, primarily concerned with administering the dioceses, for most of whatever scholarship and literature the century produced. In the regnum up into the thirteenth century, a “culture of the book,” dominated by clerics, would be a conservative tradition of learning. Doubtless there were numbers of clerical scholars who studied scripture, ancient pagan authors, and the Church Fathers, but few contributed to this literature with works of their own creation. A fundamental component of Italian exceptionalism was this conservative conception underlying the traditional culture of the book. Another was the importance of the culture of the document. In his newly conquered territories Charlemagne encountered documentation of human activity more common than elsewhere in his empire, as well as an amorphous body of men – lay and clerical, including those claiming to be notaries – who wrote it. He also inherited from the Lombards a royal corps of lay judges and notaries in the capital. By 900, thanks to the legislative decrees of the Carolingians, the notariate was institutionalized: notaries alone were supposed to write common legal documents, and their practice was governed by certain rules. The exclusion of priests from the notariate made it increasingly lay. Whereas in northern Europe what had been regional notariates collapsed when the Carolingian empire ended, in the regnum the notariate thrived as a major source of law and order in an unstable kingdom. Led by laymen, over time the regnum’s culture of the document would become a creative Latin culture.

70

Chapter 2

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

he union of the REGNUM with the Kingdom of Germany under Otto I in 962 began a new and enduring epoch in the political history of northern Italy. From that date the sovereign of the regnum became for all practical purposes nonresident. Aside from the emperors’ sporadic descents to suppress egregious threats to imperial sovereignty or to seek coronation at Rome and collect the tribute owed them by their Italian subjects, the population of the regnum was largely left to govern itself. Consequently, the political structure of medieval Italy developed largely free of the inluence of a sovereign authority. At least from the second half of the tenth century the most dynamic centers of power in the political landscape of the regnum were the cities. Stimulated by new economic growth, urban centers in the more populated zones began to emerge as independent political powers, with their bishops as the political leaders. Fragmented as many of them were by cities intent on local control, large Italian territorial lordships were to prove inherently unstable. The medieval history of the regnum from about 1000 is the history of cities, not principalities. In the course of the eleventh century, the emperor’s Italian subjects would come to seek a remedy for the dispersion of governmental power by reviving the study of the Justinian corpus of law. In the tenth century, what legal stability the society had known was largely provided by notaries and judges working with local law, either of Lombard or Roman origin. By then, however, Roman law had basically become customary. As we shall see in this chapter, by the second quarter of the tenth century, the Italian monarchy, in an efort to form a local power base from which to ight centrifugal political tendencies, set out to coopt this corps of lawmen at the local level by transforming them into privileged royal oicials. The Ottonians were to continue the same policy. The existence of the Italian notariate, increasingly composed of laymen who possessed practical literacy, was a crucial diference between society in the regnum and society in the rest of Europe. Although lay literacy may have been at a comparatively low level in the regnum in the tenth century, the notariate constituted a continuous cultural institution dating back to the late-ancient world, which resisted the clericalization of intellectual life typical of transalpine Europe from the eighth century

T

71

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

onward. Anyone seeking to explain the precocious emergence of lay intellectuals in the regnum by the twelfth century must start with the notariate. Discussion of the evolution of the grammatical curriculum in the tenth century must precede, however, any examination of the Italian notariate and the character of the document culture generally. Promoted largely by the difusion of cathedral chapters with their schools, the curriculum dominated Italian education up into the late eleventh century. In the irst hundred years after the conquest, central and northern Italian beneiciaries of the educational program had been minor contributors to Carolingian intellectual life, but in the tenth century they became more prominent. As in northern Europe, the regnum in the ninth and the irst half of the tenth century had been assailed by outside invaders – in the regnum’s case, the Hungarians – but the lack of an interconnected network of rivers, with the notable exception of the Po and its tributaries, had prevented deep penetration and reduced the efects of assaults by raiding parties. In contrast, by 900, within the cultural heartland of the Carolingian Renaissance (the area between the Loire and the Rhine), the society was torn apart by internal political feuding and lacerated by Scandinavian invaders who, proiting from easy access to the interior along the river system, wreaked havoc in wide areas of the country and ultimately occupied a large area of the Atlantic coastal region. Since its educational institutions enjoyed greater continuity during the disruptions of the late ninth and the irst half of the tenth century, the educational institutions of the regnum gained relative superiority over those in Francia. As a result, in the middle decades of the tenth century, as the Ottonians undertook to construct their kingdom out of the northern regions of what had been part of the Carolingian empire, they followed the Carolingian precedent of almost two hundred years earlier, calling upon Italian scholars to come to German lands to play a major role in raising the intellectual and cultural level of the new imperial people. Unlike the Carolingian approach to education, that developed by the Ottonians emphasizing litterae et mores had a distinctly secular bias in that it focused on training young clerics for high positions in the imperial bureaucracy and church. A consideration of the intellectual biographies of four Italians, one prior to and three after 962, will serve to characterize the reorientation of clerical ethos following the absorption of the regnum into the Ottonian empire. THE OTTONIAN SUCCESSION

The conquest of the Italian kingdom by Otto I and its incorporation into a new empire centered in German-speaking lands played a major role in determining the character of Italian politics and also of cultural and intellectual life throughout the Middle Ages. Without any notable immigration of Germans southward on which to depend, and lacking resources to make their authority continuously present on both sides of the Alps, the emperors ruled the regnum essentially in absentia.The papal coronation in Rome of Otto I, king of Germany, as emperor in February 962, therefore, marked the beginning of a new epoch in the history of the Kingdom of Italy.1 1

Vito Fumagalli, Il Regno italico (Turin, 1978), 171–201, provides an excellent short summary of these years, as does Chris Wickham, Early Medieval Italy: Central Power and Local Society, 400–1000

72

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

The kingdom that Otto claimed by right of conquest had been politically unstable. From the deposition of Charles the Fat (887) the kings of Italy had been forced to rely on one group of nobles or another to sustain their power. Rarely was the throne uncontested for long.The irst twenty years of the reign of Ugo of Provence, from 926 until 945, constituted the longest continuous period of relative peace. In 945, however, Ugo and his son Lotario, whom he had associated with himself as king, were forced by a powerful noble, Berengario of Ivrea, to yield up real power to him.With both Ugo and Lotario dead by 950, Berengario took the crown at Pavia as Berengario II. In 951, however, on the pretext of avenging Berengario’s mistreatment of Lotario’s widow, Adelaide, Otto I invaded Italy, forced Berengario to lee, and, marrying Adelaide, had himself proclaimed rex. On Otto’s departure, Berengario was gradually able to reconquer most of his old kingdom, but his return to power ended abruptly in light when Otto returned to Italy in 961. By the beginning of Ugo’s reign, practical political authority at the level of the counties lay in the hands of secular and ecclesiastical lords, who exerted power through their control of vassals and tenants. Even in Ugo’s most peaceful years, rebellions and plots of nobles posed constant threats to the king’s authority. To meet the challenges to their power, Italian monarchs, beginning with Berengario I (888–924), attempted to strengthen their position by awarding grants of immunity that authorized castle building and the right to exercise public police powers within an area covered by a grant (districtus). The immunity not only served to demonstrate the beneicence expected of a monarch but also to enhance royal power by establishing a direct link between the monarch and the holder of the immunity to the exclusion of intermediate royal oicials, who were often unfaithful.2 The creation of a royal notariate throughout the kingdom by King Ugo after 926 designed to counteract the undermining of central power represented a second strategy to be discussed later. Nonetheless, confronted with repeated incursions by the Magyars, the monarchy proved incapable of protecting the country. The unsupervised erection of castles across the Italian landscape made government diicult. By 950 security at the local level increasingly depended on the defense of city walls and on landlords or communities possessing a castle.3 Otto’s monumental defeat of the Hungarians in 955 at Lechfeld in what is now Austria, however, freed his future kingdom from periodic barbarian raids and restored a measure of order to Italian society.

2

3

(Ann Arbor, Mich., 1989), 168–93. See also Giovanni Tabacco, The Struggle for Power in Medieval Italy: Structures of Political Rule, trans. Rosalind B. Jensen (New York, 1989), 144–81. Tabacco, The Struggle for Power, 126–32 and 155. Barbara Rosenwein, Negotiating Space: Power, Restraint, and Privileges of Immunity in Early Medieval Europe (Ithaca, N.Y., 1999) has substantially expanded our understanding of the policy of granting immunities. For her discussion of Berengario’s policy, see 140–55. François Menant, Campagnes lombardes du Moyen Âge: L’économie et la société rurales dans la région de Bergame, de Crémone et de Brescia du Xe au XIIIe siècle (Rome, 1993), 37–100 and 399–411, traces the relationship of castle building, reconiguration of agricultural exploitation and population, and the development of the rural seigneury. See also Giovanni Tabacco, “Regno, impero e aristocrazie nell’Italia postcarolingia,” Il secolo di ferro: Mito e realtà del secolo X. 19–25 aprile 1990, SSCISAM, 38 (Spoleto, 1991), 253; and Gabriela Rossetti, “Formazione e caratteri delle signorie di castello e dei poteri territoriali dei vescovi sulle città nella Langobardia del secolo X,” Aevum 49 (1950): 247–70.

73

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Having conquered the crown largely with his own army, Otto escaped identiication with a faction of the Italian aristocracy, and hence his rule had an opportunity to transcend local rivalries. The emperor ruled with a light hand. Unlike the earlier Carolingian rulers, Otto I and his son, Otto II, allowed Italians to hold the majority of episcopal oices, and there was no massive inlux of foreigners to replace the old ruling class. The great Carolingian families had disappeared by the mid-tenth century, and new leaders had risen from the second-rank nobility, many of them of Lombard origin.4 As a result of Ottonian policy, the nobles under Otto were far less dependent on the king than they had been under the Carolingians and tended to govern their territories with relative independence, except when the emperor himself was in the country. Unlike the Carolingian domination, German suzerainty, although it remained unchallenged for centuries, did not strike deep roots in Italy, nor during their long absences could emperors do more than provide or deny the mantle of legitimacy to what local rulers did on their own.5 Already by 962, the generous grants of immunity from royal authority and other privileges awarded by Otto’s royal predecessors had signiicantly reduced the power of the king’s local oicials, the counts, in the cities. No one group beneited more from this aspect of royal muniicence than did the bishops. Kings since the late ninth century had tended to favor bishops as a matter of policy in order to undercut the great lay nobles. Endowed with signiicant secular authority within the areas of their immunity and reinforced by their extensive spiritual power, bishops proved dangerous rivals to counts, especially in governing the cities. Indeed, by the mid-tenth century counts frequently were seen leaving the city to the bishops and making the countryside their base of power.6 Otto showed no inclination to resist this trend.7 It 4

5 6

7

Stefano Gasparri, “The Aristocracy,” in Italy in the Early Middle Ages, ed. Cristina La Rocca (Oxford, 2002), 79–82. Karl Bosl, Gesellschaftsgeschichte Italiens im Mittelalter (Stuttgart, 1982), 126–29. Besides accounts found in the works cited in n. 2, see Hagen Keller, “Der Gerichtsort in oberitalienischen und toskanischen Städten: Untersuchungen zur Stellung der Stadt im Herrschaftssystem des Regnum italicum vom 9. bis 11. Jahrhundert,” Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 49 (1969): 38–39. Keller suggests that from the time of the late Carolingians royal policy tended to favor the bishop against the local duke or count. Gerhard Dilcher writes that the bishop’s formal claims to power over his city arose out of the grant of immunity, combined in some cases with his powers as imperial missus: “Bischof und Stadtverfassung in Oberitalien,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte: germanische Abteilung 81 (1964): 230–35. See also Eugenio D. Theseider, “Vescovi e città nell’Italia precomunale,” in Vescovi e diocesi in Italia nel medioevo (sec. ix–xiii), Atti del II Convegno di storia della Chiesa in Italia: Roma, 5–9 sett. 1961, Italia sacra, Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica, no. 5 (Padua, 1964), 76–78. Cf. also Philip Jones, The Italian City State: From Commune to Signoria (Oxford, 1997), 65. Rossetti, “Formazione e caratteri delle signorie di castello,” 303–4, however, tends to see the emerging superiority of the bishop to the count in many regions as largely owing to the fact that in the turbulent political circumstances the bishop had more reliable resources to draw on. Ovidio Capitani, Storia dell’Italia medievale, 410–1216 (Rome and Bari, 1986), maintains that even before the establishment of the Ottonians the bishops had more or less displaced the counts as secular authority in the towns: “nel mezzo della sec. X si assiste ad una pressoché assoluta cessazione di attività giudiziaria dei conti” (168).The existence of a powerful margrave in tenth-century Tuscany, however, prevented most of the Tuscan bishops from acquiring comital status: George Dameron, Episcopal Power and Florentine Society, 1000–1320 (Cambridge, Mass., 1991), 24. Theseider, “Vescovi e città,” 93–95; Tabacco, “Regno, impero e aristocrazie,” 264.

74

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

could be said, indeed, that Otto legitimized the heterogeneous power structure left to him by previous rulers and kept it in place by promising swift revenge for major breaches of the arrangement.8 Otto I’s son, Otto II (955–83), followed his father’s approach toward Italy, but events early in the reign of Otto III (980–1002) caused a signiicant change in imperial government of the kingdom. Jolted by urban revolts against German rule in Verona and Cremona in 996 and in Ravenna in 998, Otto III, who realized that to control the cities and their territory he had to control the bishops, reversed traditional Ottonian policies by appointing more German bishops to vacant episcopal sees and by assigning members of his own entourage to hear most royal placita.9 In a snub to the Italians, in 999 Otto III united the Italian chancery with the German chancery under a German chancellor.10 The increased German presence, at least in the bishoprics, became a part of royal policy toward Italy under Otto’s successors. THE OTTONIAN PROGRAM OF EDUCATION

Otto I may have taken Charlemagne for his model in embarking on his ambitious educational program in the years immediately following his irst trip to Italy in 951.11 Like Charlemagne, Otto admired Italian scholars, and on his return to German lands in 951 he invited one to accompany him back to assist in educational reform. On a later trip in 964–65, Otto returned to his homeland with a second Italian. In contrast with Charlemagne’s program, Otto’s was less oriented toward religion and more narrowly aimed at creating a corps of public servants on whom the emperor could rely. Because monks would not be suitable civil servants, Otto focused on improving cathedral education, either by reforming schools that already existed or by creating new ones.12 The overall efect of his educational policies was to promote the tendency initiated under the Carolingians of making both administrative oice in government and the culture of the book itself into clerical monopolies. 8

9 10

11

12

Theseider, “Vescovi e città,” 95–96.Tabacco, “Regno, impero e aristocrazie,” 265, writes: “L’intera età degli Ottoni si conigura in Italia con maggior evidenza che altrove, come deinitiva trasformazione del regno in una struttura disordinatamente policentrica, eterogenea nei suoi elementi costitutivi, che furono egemonizzati dagli interventi imperiali con profonda discontinuità nello spazio e nel tempo.” Cf. Dilcher, “Bischof und Stadtverfassung in Oberitalien,” 244. Keller, “Gerichtsort,” 68–69. Tabacco, Struggle for Power, 199. Prepared to assert his lawmaking powers in the kingdom in a significant way, Otto III resolved to remedy the confusion between freeman and serf brought about by loss of judicial memory and economic development. He did so by declaring in a capitulary of 998 that no serf belonging to the church could ever be liberated and that serfs claiming to be free of a lay master had to prove their freedom by judicial duel. The most important work on the contrast between the Ottonian and the Carolingian educational programs is Stephen Jaeger, The Envy of Angels: Cathedral Schools and Social Ideals in Medieval Europe: 950–1300 (Philadelphia, 1994), 21–52. On the policy of the Ottonians toward education, see especially Josef Fleckenstein, “Königshof und Bischofsschule unter Otto dem Grossen,” Archiv für Kulturgeschichte 38 (1956): 38–62. The association of the beginning of the imperial reform with the irst Italian expedition of Otto is found on 52. Jaeger, Envy of Angels, 43, maintains that whereas under the Carolingians monastic education differed in no appreciable way from cathedral education, this was not the case under the Ottonians.

75

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Modern scholars tend to attribute much of the responsibility for the content and execution of the Ottonian educational program to Otto’s younger brother, Brun, who was irst archchaplain of Cologne and imperial chancellor (ca. 939–53) and then archbishop of Cologne (953–65).13 A natural teacher, Brun transformed the chancery and chapel into a veritable school for educating young clergy serving in the palace, and later, as archbishop of Cologne, he continued to watch closely over the local cathedral school. He doubtless inluenced his brother’s efort to appoint bishops who would energize their cathedral schools or create a cathedral school where none existed.14 Brun himself represented the ideal of the royal priest that German cathedral education aimed to produce: a high churchman who could move easily between ecclesiastical duties and royal service.15 This entailed providing a young cleric with education in litterae et mores so as to prepare him for diplomatic and administrative roles both in the Church and in secular government. While the Carolingians had also held the training of imperial functionaries as one of the goals of education in the liberal arts, they envisioned learning more broadly, as a way of advancing the spiritual welfare of their subjects. Because of the preponderantly secular motives behind their educational policies, the Ottonians heightened the focus on ancient literature and placed special emphasis on the orators and historians.16 A teacher’s role as interpreter of the texts and as author, however, was secondary to the role that he played as a charismatic igure, embodying in his voice and gestures an indwelling greatness of soul leavened with humility.17 The rewards of imperial patronage were bestowed on the basis of personal moral virtue and talent, not deep religiosity. In the combination of litterae et mores, litterae may have taken second place to mores, but the beneicial efects of the study of ancient moralists and historians on the formation of character remained an article of faith. Already before his Italian journey in 951, Otto had been aware of the superiority of grammar studies in Italy. His brother Brun had had an Italian as a grammar teacher, but his encounter with the impressive young Pavian exile, Liudprando (ca. 920–72), who had recently taken refuge with Otto after quarrelling with Berengario II at Pavia, was probably the immediate spur to Otto’s interest in inviting Italian scholars to teach in his German lands.18 Liudprando himself would eventually become one of those royal bishops on whose shoulders the administration of Ottonian power rested. 13 14

15 16 17 18

On the role of Brun, see ibid., 36–43. Cathedral schools reformed or created by bishops closely related to the Ottonian court were the following: Cologne, Magdeburg, Hildesheim, Paderborn, Bremen, Würzburg, Worms, Augsburg, Regensburg, Trier, and Mainz (Aschafenburg). The bishops of Strasbourg, Speyer, and Halberstadt appear to have drawn their intellectual direction rather from Saint Gall; Fleckenstein, “Königshof,” 49–58. Ibid., 45–47. Jaeger, Envy of Angels, 48. Jaeger refers to it as “the cult of personality” (ibid., 80). The teacher was Isreale. See n. 22. The earliest secure date for Liudprando’s presence at the imperial court is 956, when he met the Spanish bishop, Recemundus of Elvira, envoy of the Umayyad prince of Cordova to Otto. Liudprando later dedicated his Antapodosis to Recemundus. It is known that Liudprando embarked for Constantinople as Berengario’s ambassador to the eastern emperor in August 949. He returned to Pavia, probably sometime in 950, angry with Berengario, who had

76

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

Liudprando was probably responsible for introducing Otto to Stefano of Novara (ca. 985), whom he could have known from their schooldays in Pavia or later when Stefano was teaching in Novara. Liudprando certainly would have encouraged the invitation that Otto and Poppo, bishop of Würzburg, extended to Stefano to come to the German kingdom to teach in Würzburg’s new cathedral school. Arriving at the school in 952, Stefano was to teach both there and at Bamberg until, in 970, he returned to Italy and ended his career in Novara.19 Despite a report of a malicious attack on his learning by a couple of disgruntled students, the Italian master must have left the north on generally friendly terms, because he gave many of his manuscripts to the Würzburg cathedral library.20 On returning from a subsequent journey to Italy in 964, Otto, now emperor, brought back with him a second teacher, Gunzo, about whom we know only what he wrote of himself in his Epistola ad Augienses, composed in the months immediately after he had passed over the mountains into the German kingdom.21 Because he claimed that he was his own master and implied that he could have refused the emperor’s invitation had he chosen to, Gunzo was probably not a monk. Allusions in the letter to his independent economic status, and mention of the more than a hundred books that he was bringing with him, make monastic status even less likely. We know neither where nor how long he taught in the schools north of the Alps.

19

20

21

left it to him to ofer rich gifts to the emperor from his own funds. After the irst abortive German descent into Italy by Otto I’s son, Liudolf, in 950, the second by Otto himself in 951 was successful in driving Berengario back to his native province of Ivrea. I conjecture that Liudprando deserted Berengario at some point in 950 or 951. At any rate, I doubt that Liudprando would have followed Berengario in his retreat to the northeast. The basic account of Stefano’s life is found in Luigi Benedetto,“Stephanus grammaticus da Novara (sec. X),” SM 3 (1908–11): 499–508. The second of Stefano’s epitaphs published by Benedetto (500–501) has him teaching at Novara and Pavia before his summons to Würzburg. See also Ettore Cau, “Scrittura e cultura a Novara (secoli viii–x),” Ricerche medievali 6–9 (1971–74): 67–71. On Stefano at Pavia, see Ettore Cau and Maria A. Casagrande Mazzoli, “Cultura e scrittura a Pavia (secoli V–X), Storia di Pavia. II: L’Alto medioevo (Milan, 1987), 202. For the date of Stefano’s departure for Germany, see Benedetto, “Stephanus grammaticus da Novara” 502–3; and Josef Fleckenstein, “Königshof und Bischofsschule,” 52, n. 57. At one point in his teaching at Würzburg, while lecturing on Martianus Capella, Stefano apparently scandalized several of his students by failing to explain adequately the metric scheme of the work. One of his student critics, Wolfgang, a personality akin to Abelard, gave his own lecture on the subject and satisied the students; Benedetto, “Stephanus grammaticus da Novara,” 505. On the vogue for Martianus, see Claudio Leonardi, “Nuove voci poetiche tra secolo IX e XI,” SM, 3rd ser., 2 (1961): 139–68. On the Italian codices in the Würzburg library, see the index of Bernard Bischof and Josef Hofmann, Libri sancti Kiliani: Die Würzburger Schreibschule und die Dombibliothek im VIII. und IX. Jahrhundert (Würzburg, 1952), 196. For the identiication of Vienna Nat. Bibl., lat. 1616 as belonging to Stefano’s gift, see Ettore Cau, “Osservazioni sul cod. lat. 1616 (sec. VIII ex.) della Biblioteca nazionale in Vienna,” Palaeographica, diplomatica et archivistica: Studi in onore di Giulio Battelli, 2 vols. (Rome, 1979), 1:92–94. Benedetto, “‘Stephanus grammaticus da Novara,’” 507, surmises that he died sometime after 985. Epistola ad Augienses, in Gunzo Epistola ad Augienses und Anselm von Besate Rhetorimachia, ed. Karl Manitius, in MGH, Quellen zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters, vol. 2 (Weimar, 1958), 3–8. Already an old man (23, line 5), Gunzo makes it clear that he had been summoned by the emperor (21, lines 6–9). No proof exists for the identiication of Gunzo of Novara, author of a letter to Atto (PL 134, cols. 111–12), with our Gunzo (Gunzo, 4).

77

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

The emperor’s interest in attracting Italian scholars to Germany provides evidence of transalpine Europe’s high opinion of Italian attainments in grammatical studies in the second half of the tenth century, but there are more anecdotal indications of Italian ascendancy from other quarters. Late in the century, a grammarian from Francia, Gautbert, who had found Italy to be the “friend of grammar,” composed a work entitled Epitoma Prisciani, in an efort to simplify Priscian for students in Francia who, he wrote, compared with Italians, had little or no interest in the ancient grammarian.22 The Burgundian Ralph Glaber refers to a scholar of Ravenna around 1000 (inem millesimi anni), “a certain man called Vilgardo, constantly, not just occasionally, studying grammar, as is the custom of Italians who neglect the other arts for this one.”23 So strong was Vilgardo’s passion for the ancient poets, according to Glaber, that he fell into heresy. The German imperial family’s choice of an Italian, Almerico, abbot of the Ciel d’Oro in Pavia, as tutor of the young royal prince, the future Henry III (1017–56), suggests a continuing high opinion of Italian scholarship in the eleventh century.24 An anecdote recounted by Adémar of Chabannes also reinforces the impression that Italy enjoyed a reputation for superiority in grammar. When Benedetto of San Michele della Chiusa visited Limoges in 1028, Adémar was furious at Benedetto’s use of his learning to convince the local population that the city’s patron, Saint Martial, had not been an apostle, whereas Adémar maintained that he had.25 According to Adémar, Benedetto claimed that “in Francia there is wisdom but not much” and that “Lombardy ... is the fount of eloquence.” Benedetto was also said to have boasted that when he inished his studies he would be the wisest man in the world. It is possible that Benedetto went this far but more likely that Adémar was exaggerating to undercut a claim to Italian precedence that he suspected was true.26 The reference to books in the account of the lives of both Stefano and Gunzo suggests the pivotal role that Italy played in furnishing books to transalpine Europe. 22

23

24 25

26

The phrase is found in a letter of dedication prefacing his Epitoma Prisciani, which Gautbert sent to two friends in Paris: “quod amica grammatice Italia me diu diuque insudantem docuerat”; cited in Max Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, 3 vols. (Munich, 1911–31), 2:674. In his short history of grammar beginning with the seventh-century Greek grammarians Theodore and Hadrian, who worked principally in England, down to his own day Gaubert, probably of French origin, praised Ambrogio, an Italian grammarian whose student, Isreale, became one of Brun’s teachers: L. Müller, “Zur Geschichte der lateinischen Grammatik im Mittelalter,” Rheinisches Museum für Philologie 22 (1867): 634–37. Ralph Glaber, Historiarum libri quinque, 2.12.23, in idem, Historiarum libri quinque:The Five Books of the Histories, ed. and trans. John France; and Glaber, Vita domni Willelmi abbatis:The Life of St.William, ed. Neithard Bulst, trans. John France and Paul Reynolds (Oxford, 1989), 92: “Quidam igitur Vilardus dictus, studio artis grammaticae magis assiduus quam frequens, sicut Italicis mos semper fuit artes negligere caeteras, illam sectari.” Manitius, Geschichte, 2:7. On Benedetto, see Marina Rossi, “Benedetto,” DBI, vol. 8 (Rome, 1966), 305–7.This Benedetto was the nephew of another Benedetto, who was an abbot of San Michele della Chiusa. Epistole de apostolatu s. Martialis, PL 141, cols. 107–8. Benedetto arrived in Limoges on the eve of the irst celebration of Martial as an apostle, for which Adémar had composed the liturgy. Richard Landes, Relics, Apocalypse, and the Deceits of History (Cambridge, Mass., 1995), ofers a fascinating account of the events surrounding Saint Martial’s status as an apostle.

78

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

That the low of books from Italy to the north continued after the time of those men has been demonstrated by recent discussions surrounding the contents of Otto III’s library: of twenty-eight volumes so far identiied, eighteen were of Italian provenance.27 In 988, a letter from Rheims, written by a northern Spanish polymath, Gerbert of Aurillac, to an Italian friend asking him to send him a copy of a rare Latin author, likewise points to a south–north low of manuscripts.28 ITALIAN SCHOOLS

Although Italian cathedral schools may have been the leading centers for grammatical studies in western Europe in the tenth century, it is diicult to locate many of them or to identify the teachers. The term scholasticus never occurs in tenth-century documents; magiscola is found occasionally in lists of cathedral canons. The term grammaticus also appears in the documents, but it might merely indicate literacy. Nonetheless, more schools can be identiied for the tenth century than for the ninth. Pietro, sapiens grammaticus, listed in 933/36 among the canons of the Arezzo cathedral – many of whom may have been literate – and appearing again with the same title in 961 and 963, was almost certainly a teacher.What of Suaverico, primicerius and sapiens grammaticus (961 and 963)? In the list of canons of 963, Stratario calls himself maiorscole.29 Teaching duties in Arezzo, however, could be assigned to a man whose title had no apparent tie with teaching: in 1009 the bishop of the city, Elempert (986–1010), designated the cathedral’s archdeacon as schoolmaster “so that he compel the brothers in his charge by healthful instruction to follow pious teaching.”30 27

28

29

30

Mirella Ferrari, “Manoscritti e testi fra Lombardia e Germania nel secolo X,” Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 24/25 (1989/1990): 107. This would in part help to explain an apparent anomaly in the statistics of manuscripts copied in German territory in the tenth century. In the table given in Chapter 1, the production of new manuscripts jumped from nineteen in 850–900 to thirty-three in 900–950 and was again thirty-three for 950–1000, despite the fact that the so-called Ottonian Renaissance only began after 950. Although the Ottonians may only have been reinforcing an intellectual trend already under way, the statistics indicating little change between the two halves of the century are deceptive: irst, the manuscripts copied after 950 were being added to a store already available in the area; second, once the Ottonians governed the Italian kingdom, the need for new manuscripts was partly met by importing them from there. Die Briefsammlung Gerberts von Reims, ed. Fritz Weigle, in MGH, Die Briefe der deutschen Kaiserzeit, vol. 2 (Weimar, 1966), 155–56: “Nosti, quot scriptores in urbibus ac in agris Italie passim habeantur.” He then asks his correspondent to ind and have copied the volumes that he lists. Donald A. Bullough, “Le scuole cattedrali e la cultura nell’Italia settentrionale prima dei Comuni,” Vescovi e diocesi in Italia nel medioevale (sec. IX–XIII), Italia sacra: Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica, vol. 5 (Padua, 1964), 134. For another teacher, Sigezo scole cantor (996 and 998), see Giovanna Nicolaj, “Per una storia della documentazione vescovile aretina: Appunti paleograici e diplomatici,” Annali della scuola speciale per archivisti e bibliotecari dell’Università di Roma 17–18 (1977–78): 127. See also Documenti per la storia della città di Arezzo nel medio evo, ed. Ubaldo Pasqui, Documenti di storia italiana, 11 (Florence, 1899), 1:85, 95, and 98. Helene Wieruszowski, “Arezzo as a Center of Learning and Letters in the Thirteenth Century,” Traditio 9 (1953): 348, n. 4, cites a charter of 1009 in which Elempert relates that he appointed the archdeacon as “magistrum, ut fratres quibus preest ad pium magisterium salubri discipulatu coartet.”

79

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

In an awkward and lawed Latin poem dedicated to Novara’s Bishop Rudolfo (944–55), a certain Domenico deined himself as grammatici [sic], an epithet perhaps merely intended to assert a claim to literacy. In contrast, Domenico’s better-educated contemporary, Gunzo, Novariensis ecclesie levitarum extimus, who may have been a teacher in the cathedral school, sent a letter to Atto of Vercelli citing an extensive passage from canon law on the degrees of consanguinity restricting marriage.31 At least before instructing in Germany and after his return in 970, Stefano was teaching in Novara, where he had received his own early education before going to Pavia to complete his studies.32 Guglielmo of Volpiano (962–1031), a monastic reformer, began his training in the schools of Vercelli, irst at the monastery of Saint Michael in Lucedio and then at the cathedral school, but he too inished his education at Pavia in the seventh decade of the century, as Liudprando and Stefano had done earlier.33 Dungal’s school in the cathedral of Pavia may have continued, but the three might also have studied at Pavia’s famous monastery of the Ciel d’Oro. Like Arezzo, Novara,Vercelli, and Pavia,Verona had a functioning cathedral school for at least part of the century.34 Rather of Liège (ca. 887–974), as Verona’s bishop (931–34, 946–48, and 961–62), endeavored to create other schools in the city during the three periods of his rule.35 Although it is admittedly slender evidence, Rather’s 31

32 33

34

35

Simona Gavinelli, “Lo studio della grammatica a Novara tra l’VIII e il XV secolo,” Aevum 65 (1991): 262–63. Gunzo’s letter is found in PL 134, cols.111–12. His letter displays a knowledge of canon law on the issue of the legitimacy of sons marrying the godchildren of their fathers. Donald A. Bullough, “Le scuole cattedrali,” 131–32, considers the second Gunzo to have been Milanese and to be identical with Gunzo, the presbyter who wrote an act of donation in 963. Cf. Bullough, review of Epistola ad Auguienses und Anselm von Besate Rhetorimachia, in English Historical Review 75 (1960): 488. Gavinelli, “Lo studio della grammatica a Novara,” 264. Ralph Glaber, Vita domni Willelmi abbatis, 260: “Nam olim in Vercellensi urbe primitus, postmodum apud Ticinum sub tuta custodia regulas artis grammatice pleniter didicerat. Constitutur etenim divini oicii assiduus custos ac scolae capitalis illius loci.”To judge from the last sentence, Gugliemo held some sort of teaching position in the cathedral school. He received his elementary training from the abbot and a tutor at the monastery of Saint Michael in Lucedio, outside Vercelli (258). Cf. Neithard Bulst, Unterschungen zu Klosterreformen Wilhelms von Dijon (962–1031), Pariser Historische Studien, no. 11 (Bonn, 1973), 24; and Albert Dresdner, Kultur- und Sittengeschichte der italienischen Geistlichkeit im 10 und 11 Jahrhundert (Breslau, 1890), 238. Eracle of Liège taught as magister scolarum at Verona sometime before 959, when he became bishop of Liège; Rainerius, Vita Eraclii, ed. Wilhelm Arndt, I.2, in MGH, Scriptores, no. 20 (Hannover, 1868), 562. Maureen C. Miller, The Formation of a Medieval Church: Ecclesiastical Change in Verona, 950–1150 (Ithaca, N.Y., and London, 1993), 48. The best brief account of Rather remains Max Manitius, Geschichte, 2:344–52. See as well Giuseppe Pavani, Un vescovo belga in Italia nel secolo decimo: Studio storico-critico su Raterio di Verona (Turin, 1920); Giuseppe Monticelli, Raterio, vescovo di Verona (890–974) (Milan, 1938); Vittorio Cavallari, Raterio e Verona, Biblioteca di studi storici veronesi, no. 6 (Verona, 1967); and Raterio da Verona: 12–15 Ottobre 1969, Convegni del Centro di Studi sulla spiritualità medievale, no. 10 (Todi, 1973). Rather’s intellectual pride, austere piety, and intolerance for opposition contributed to his failure as an administrator. Expelled from Verona for the second time in 948, he went north to the imperial court, probably sometime before 950, when he joined the abortive German expedition into Italy led that year by Otto’s son Liudolf. In 951, Rather followed Otto into Italy, but failed at the time to retrieve his bishopric. Having lost Verona, Rather received compensation when Brun named him

80

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

statement in a letter that he had been pressed by “certain men” in Milan early in his stay in Italy to answer questions about the pagan poets may be a reference to scholars in the local cathedral school of Milan.36 In any case, Rather’s fellow bishop, Atto of Vercelli, seems to have studied in Milan at the turn of the tenth century, probably at the cathedral.37 That there was a cathedral school in Bergamo is established by a donation of land made by the bishop in 973 to two members of the chapter, a magister grammatie and a magister cantorum.38 The bishop himself, Ambrogio, probably a product of the Milanese cathedral school, knew Greek and was praised by Atto of Vercelli as a learned man.39 Vilgardo almost certainly was a teacher of grammar in the schools of Ravenna. Even more diicult than establishing where schools existed is determining what they taught. We have manuscripts for the ninth century containing a range of texts that can be interpreted as constituting a school’s curriculum, but we have no such manuscripts for the tenth.We may assume that if Stefano was teaching a diicult text like Martianus at Würzburg, he used the same text when teaching at Novara. Three poems written in Verona, one early in the century and two later, indicate by their sophisticated techniques and classical reminiscences that their authors had received advanced training in grammatical studies, probably in that city.40 The long narrative poem Gesta Berengarii imperatoris, composed in Latin hexameters between 915 and 924, that is, late in the lifetime of Berengario I (ca. 850– 924), recounts Berengario’s struggle for domination of Italy after the abdication of Charles the Fat in 887. Although probably designed to win royal favor, the author’s frequent glosses to the poem and those of an apparent contemporary suggest that the learned work was being taught in early tenth-century classrooms. Not only does the author relect the inluence of Virgil, Juvenal, Statius, and the Latin Iliad as well as of Christian poets, but he also displays a smattering of Greek learning.41

36

37

38 39

40

41

to Liège in 953, but he was expelled from there a year later as the result of a plot by neighboring bishops. Restored to his see at Verona by Otto in 962, Rather again encountered strong opposition from the local clergy and lost the bishopric a third time, eight years before his death. Rather of Verona’s letter is found in Die Briefe des Bischofs Rather von Verona, ed. Fritz Weigle, in MGH, Die Briefe der deutschen Kaiserzeit, no. 1 (Weimar, 1949), 29–31. See the English translation in The Complete Works of Rather of Verona, ed. and trans. Peter L. D. Reid (Binghamton, N.Y., 1991), 216–17. Suzanne F. Wemple, Atto of Vercelli: Church, State, and Christian Society in Tenth Century Italy, Temi e testi, no. 27 (Rome, 1979), 9, suggests that Atto probably came from the area north of Milan and had close ties with the Milanese church because he deeds his personal property to that church in his will, written in 948. CDL, n. 749 (973): 1303–5. For Ambrogio’s life, see Margherita G. Bertolini, “Ambrogio,” DBI, vol. 2 (Rome, 1960), 703. Atto’s references are found in PL 134, cols. 112 and 113–15. Besides these three poems and those of Leo of Vercelli, I know of only one other poem of any length. Written presumably at Bobbio, the pedestrian verses represent a dialogue between the author-monk Saint Columban and Pietro, who was abbot of the monastery, in the second half of the tenth century: MGH, Die lateinischen Dichter des deutschen Mittelalters, Die Ottonenzeit, ed. Karl Strecker and Norbert Fickermann, MGH, Poetarum latinorum medii aevi, no. 5, pts. 1–2 (Munich, 1978), 561–63. The text is found in Poetae latinae aevi carolini, ed. Paul von Winterfeld, MGH, Poetarum latinorum medii aevi, no. 4 (Berlin, 1899), 354–401. For bibliography, see Rino Avesani, “La cultura veronese

81

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Two short lyrics also associated with Verona, one religious, the other secular, date from later in the tenth century. The two share the same metric and rhythmic structure and were probably written about the same time.42 The irst, “O admirabile Veneris idolum,” is a love lyric perhaps by an older man, almost certainly a cleric, abandoned by a boy (puerulus) who has departed, heedless of his sorrowing lover (qui lacrimabiles non curat gemitus [who cares nothing for my pitiful cries]).43 The poet implores the creator (Archos) to protect the boy, this “marvelous image of Venus (admirabile Veneris idolum), whose nature has nothing imperfect.” The poet begs the three Fates to keep the boy from harm and prays that Neptune and Tethys, gods of the waters, will accompany his beloved as he sails on the Adige. Then follows an expression of bewildered grief: Quo fugis, amabo, cum te dilexerim? Miser quid faciam, cum te non viderim? Where do you lee, I pray, after I have loved you so much? Miserable, what will I do, since I will see you no more?

A conviction that he is to be replaced by another lover seasons the man’s grief with jealousy. The poem is composed of three rhymed strophes of six, seven, and six lines respectively, each line of which contains twelve syllables, with caesura after the sixth. The rhyme in each strophe falls on the same two-syllable line endings or has assonance in the inal two syllables.44 The mythological references, the antiquarian amabo in the line cited above, and the extended reference to the myth of Deucalion and

42

43

44

dal secolo IX al secolo XII,” SCV, 1:259–61. The author of the commentary addresses his students directly: “Nec temptabo meis ultra fastidia dictis,/ o juvenes, inferre ...”; Gesta Berengarii, 401. Cf. Manitius, Geschichte, 1:633. The author relies so much on Virgil that Berengario becomes Aeneas and Guido di Spoleto, Turno. The battle descriptions are based on ancient Roman ones; Francesco Novati and Angelo Monteverdi, Le origini continuate e compiute da Angelo Monteverdi (Milan, 1926), 234–36. See Marco Giovini, “‘O admirabile Veneris ydolum’: Un carme d’amore paidico del X secolo e il mito di Deucalione,” SM 40 (1999): 261–62, with accompanying notes, for borrowings. The fundamental edition of both poems is found in Ludwig Traube, “‘O Roma nobilis,’ Philologische Untersuchungen aus dem Mittelalter,” Abhandlungen des philosophisch-philologische Klasse der königlichen bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, 19.2 (1891): 200–301. The poems are found on pp. 301 (“O Roma nobilis”) and 307 (“O admirabile Veneris ydolum”). For the latter poem, see also Die Cambridger Lieder (Carmina cantabrigiensia), ed. Karl Strecker, in MGH, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum in usum scholarum separatim editi, no. 40 (Berlin, 1926), 104–7, with its important notes; and the notes in The Cambridge Songs (Carmina cantabrigiensia), ed. Jan Ziolkowski (New York and London, 1994), 306–9. I am unconvinced by Vollmann’s suggestion that the poem may have been composed by a woman: Benedikt K. Vollman, “‘O admirabile Veneris idolum’ (Carmina Cantabrigiensia 48) – ein Mädchenlied?” Festschrift für Paul Klopsch, ed. Udo Kindermann, Wolfgang Maaz, and Fritz Wagner (Göppingen, 1988), 532–42. Sven Limbeck, “Welches Geschlecht hat das Ich? Zu ‘O admirabile Veneris idolum,’” Mentis amore ligati. Lateinische Freundschaftsdichtung und Dichterfreundschaft in Mittelalter und Neuzeit. Festgabe für Reinhard Düchting zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Boris Körkel,Tina Licht, and Jolanta Wiendlocha (Heidelberg, 2001), 253–74, argues convincingly against the possibility. The rhyme scheme, consequently, is the following: strophe 1: aaaaa; strophe 2: aaaaabb; strophe 3: aabaab.

82

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

Pyrrha (Meta. 1, vv. 253–415) highlight the poem’s learned character, and close analysis of the language also reveals throughout a sophisticated welding of fragments borrowed from a wide range of ancient and early-medieval texts.45 Perhaps because he is less self-consciously learned, the poet of the second lyric poem, “O Roma nobilis,” achieves greater lyrical expression. A poem of pilgrimage, the work is designed in its irst six lines of rhymed verse to celebrate Christian Rome cunctarum urbium excellentissima (the most exalted of cities), the destination of Christians seeking forgiveness at the tombs of the apostles. Roseo martyrum sanguine rubea, Albis et virginum liliis candida Reddened with the purple blood of martyrs, Shining with the white lilies of virgins.

The last twelve lines consist of prayers to Peter and Paul, the principal martyrs of the city. The poet prays to Peter, prepotens caelorum claviger (powerful doorkeeper of heaven) for mercy, and to Paul, economus in domo regia divina (administrator in the divine royal palace), to communicate the gift of divine grace to penitents. This vibrant lyric, propelled by its rhythm and rhyme, may have been set to music from the outset, but it reached the summit of its popularity in 1950, when it was made the oicial hymn of that jubilee year. Admittedly, three anonymous poems written in the course of a century in one city cannot serve as the basis for a general assessment of the level of Latin cultural life in the regnum in the tenth century. Nor are the careers and writings of the only four tenth-century scholars whose biographies we can reconstruct in some detail representative of the society. At best, the lives and thought of these men, together with the three poems, can only be taken as examples of the lives and thought of elite ecclesiastics and of the the high book culture over which they held sway. ATTO OF VERCELLI: PIONEER OF CHURCH REFORM

Appointed by Berengario I to the see of Vercelli in 924, Atto (ca. 885–961) was an avid reformer in his diocese. A pious man, Atto would not have envied Vilgardo his knowledge of ancient letters.46 He distrusted the inluence of pagan writers and 45

46

“Dura materies ex matris ossibus,/ creavit homines iactis lapidibus,/ ex quibus unus est iste puerulus ...”: 107. On amabo, see Strecker’s note, 107. On the language of the poem, see Giovini, “‘O admirabile Veneris ydolum,’” 65–78. On love poetry generally in this century, see Guy de Valous, “La poésie amoureuse en langue latine,” Classica et medievalia 13 (1952): 285–345. The one known classical text in the library in the eleventh century was Justin’s Epitome: Guglielmo Cavallo, “Libri scritti, libri dimenticati,” Il secolo di ferro: Mito e realtá del secolo X. 19–25 aprile 1990, SSCISAM, 38 (Spoleto, 1991), 774. The library of Vercelli still contains a lexicon, Liber glossarum, given by Atto, which was used by him or by him and his glossator in their work:Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 188, n. 6. For other information regarding the scriptorium of Vercelli during Atto’s time, see Philip Levine, “Historical Evidence for Calligraphic Activity in Vercelli from St. Eusebius to Atto,” Speculum 30 (1955): 579. Also on the library, see Gina Fasoli, Dalla ‘civitas’ al ‘commune’ (Bologna, 1961), 79. Atto himself gave three religious manuscripts to the cathedral library, but they were not necessarily produced at Vercelli (Levine, “Historical Evidence,” 578).

83

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

criticized rhetoricans, dialecticians, and “philosophers of this world” for indulging in supericialities while missing the substance of biblical truth taught by “simple men, uneducated ishermen.”47 He did not speciically mention grammarians, but he likely assumed that they would be included in his condemnation of pagan literature. His intolerant attitude toward antiquity would have been out of step with the Ottonian educational program introduced after his death. Despite his insistence on substance over form, Atto was an early representative of the new “manneristic” style, a form of intellectual snobbism that remained popular down to the time of Anselmo of Besate in the mid-eleventh century. Prose in the manneristic style was characterized by recondite vocabulary, elaborate constructions, and exaggerated use of colores rhetorici. It involved intentionally confused patterns of word sequences, unusual metaphors, and unfamiliar expressions designed to obscure the meaning of the work. It proved diicult to read and sometimes bordered on incoherence.48 The introductory letter to Atto’s Polipticum is typical of the work as a whole: Reverendo in me Fulano valde praesuli: Fulanus cupiens me sic beatum instar felicissimi opilionis Silvestri summi exitum. Mortuus aliquibus, sed mihi nec emortuus, vivus immo mihi vividus es; mortuus, sed vivus immo. Hujus labyrinthi iter currentes, aut qua insistendo vitari voraginem edoce, aut quo salubres sublati adtingere possint delitias. Quae sentio in hoc cernes. Sed sic ego quae et tu comparantur cantabries ut pollini. En quae ego, tu quae feliciter redde.49 47 48

49

Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 162–63. The style favored scinderatio, a stylistic technique developed by the so-called Virgilius Maro in the seventh century; Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 28–29. In her pioneering article, “Classicism and Style in Latin Literature,” in Robert I. Benson and Giles Constable with Carol D. Lanham, Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century (Cambridge, Mass., 1982), 550, Janet Martin uses the term “manneristic” to describe much medieval poetry: “Medieval mannerism, which exaggerates qualities found already in the stylistic theory and practice of classical Latin, is manifested particularly in elaboration and exaggeration of the traditional ornatus (embellishment) recommended by ancient theory. Thus hyperbaton, the separation of words belonging together grammatically, is a normal feature of literary Latin; but its exaggerated use becomes manneristic.” I shall use the term “manneristic” to refer to both poetry and prose that make exaggerated use of colores rhetorici. PL 134, cols. 859–61. The glosses that accompany the work identify Fulanus as Atto: “scilicet ego.” In the salutation Fulanus could be either the sender or addressee, but the opening line of the letter seems to refer to the addressee as “Fulanus.” The series “mortuus,” “emortuus,” “vivus,” and “vividus,” “mortuus, and “vivus,” seem to have as their subject Silvester, not the addressee. The “ego quae et tu” with “comparantur” and in the next sentence “quae ego, tu quae” add to the obscurity. “Fulanus” may designate the location of the correspondent. The only geographical areas whose names would lend themselves to this word would be Luxembourg (“Fula,” “Fulina,”) and Fulham, in England (“Fulanea”): Orbis latinus. Lexikon lateinischer geographischer Namen, ed. Johann G. H. Graesse, Fredrich Benedict, Helmut Plechl, rev. ed. Helmut Plechl, 3 vols. (Braunschweig, 1971), 2:113. The editions and translations of these and Atto’s other writings are discussed by Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 185–94. There are two versions of the Polipticum, and a single tenth-century manuscript (BAV, Vat. Lat. 4322) contains them both: PL 134, cols. 881–900 and 859–80. The irst version is composed in tortured gnomic prose, and the second, a less-complicated version of the irst with scholia and marginal and interlinear glosses, appears to have been expressly composed to make the

84

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance To the Fulane prelate, whom I exceedingly revere: I, the Fulanus, [in] wishing that I [might enjoy] a happy end on the model of that most felicitous shepherd, the very great Silvester. You [Silvester] are dead to some, but to me not dead, nay alive as living to me; dead, but nay rather alive.50 Teach those running the way of this maze [of life] either by pursuing what path [they may be able] to avoid the Pit, or to what goal being uplifted they may attain the joys of salvation.You will perceive my thoughts about this. But so [also] I your thoughts. As [rough] bran [my thought] is set beside ine wheat lour [i.e., your thought], so behold! This is mine; now you in felicity respond with yours.

The tortuous Latin syntax was intentionally designed to obscure the meaning. For example, in order to make sense, while keeping the hyperbaton, the Latin of the last line should have read something like this: “en quae ego credo, redde feliciter quae tu credis.” By contrast, the Latin sermons that Atto gave to the clergy in his diocese were straightforward if lifeless, suggesting that he consciously adjusted his words to his audience.51 Atto’s intellectual pursuits ran not to secular literature but to biblical commentary, hagiography, ecclesiology, and political thought. Ecclesiology and political thought constitute the subject of his two major works, Polipticum and De pressuris ecclesiasticis, both of which are extensive discussions of clerical reform. They are concerned as well with good kingly rule and the relationship between spiritual and temporal power. Both demonstrate Atto’s knowledge of canon law and, to a lesser extent, of patristic writings, especially Augustine’s. Atto took many of his ideas from the work of Claudius of Turin, who, like Atto, preferred Augustine to the other Church Fathers.52 By Atto’s generation the multivoiced discussions of general church reform of the previous century had become muted, even though Cluny was initiating an efort to reform monasticism. Atto was not unique in his time, however, in theorizing about

50 51

52

content of the work more intelligible. Accordingly, in its second form, the Polipticum presents itself not only as a work of political thought but as an advanced school text. Concerned with deining words, particularly by providing etymologies, with emphasizing igures of speech and thought, and with giving details of history and mythology, the scholia and glosses, if not by Atto himself, are probably contemporary with his work and highlight its grammatical aspects: Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 28–30. Carla Frova, “Il ‘Polittico’ attributo ad Attone vescovo di Vercelli (924–960): Tra storia e grammatica,” BISI 90 (1982–83): 31–47, discusses the variety of purposes that the second version and its glosses might have served in the classroom. This is perhaps a play on 1. Tim. 5:6: “Nam quae in deliciis est, vivens mortua est.” His sermons are found in PL 134, cols. 833–60. By contrast, if Rather’s surviving sermons were actually delivered as we have them, their gnomic prose must have made them incomprehensible to all but the most initiated among his listeners. See Erich Auerbach, Literary Language and Its Public in Late Latin Antiquity and in the Middle Ages, trans. Ralph Manheim (New York and London, 1965), 136. Rather’s style has also been studied in detail by Bengt Lofstedt, “Bemerkungen zur Sprache des Ratherius von Verona,” IMU 16 (1973): 309–15; and Peter L. D. Reid, Tenth-Century Latinity: Rather of Verona (Malibu, Calif., 1981). For her discussion of the importance of Claudius of Turin’s ideas to Atto, see index to Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, under Claudius’s name.

85

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

the Church and its relationship to the temporal power. Rather of Verona, trained at Liège, was not Italian. He was almost forty in 929, when he came to Italy as bishop of Verona during the later years of Atto’s life.53 It is not known whether the two men knew each other or were aware of their mutual concern, but a comparison of their ideas will serve to contextualize Atto’s thought. Most of Atto’s and Rather’s ideas on church reform were not original. Both reformers inveighed against priests who lived with their wives or concubines, and they forbade administering the sacraments to such priests. Neither reformer, however, considered whether the sacraments would be valid if a priest in such a state of sin performed them himself. Both men imposed a high standard of conduct on their clergy in other respects, forbidding them from frequenting taverns, hunting, or bearing arms, and commanding them diligently to perform the duties of their oices. Atto and Rather focused especially on the bishop, who held the unique position of representing Christ on earth, as the moral model for the whole community. In line with late Carolingian ecclesiastical tradition, both Rather and Atto asserted that, although kings and bishops owed their power to God, the power of bishops was inherently superior. Rather was particularly extravagant in describing the status of bishops, praising them as “gods, lords, Christs, heavens, angels, patriarchs.”54 In deining a separation between the spiritual and temporal spheres, however, Atto, perhaps following Claudius (827), disagreed with the prevalent conception of spiritual-temporal relationship when he contrasted the ecclesiastical corpus headed by the bishop with the secular corpus composed of the king and the hierarchy of nobles.55 In his earlier years Atto had served in the royal government, albeit briely, 53

54

55

Rather’s writings are found in Opera Ratherii veronensis opera: Praeloquiorum libri vi, Phrenesis, Dialogus confessionalis, Exhortatio et preces, Pauca de vita sancti Donatiani, Fragmenta nuper reperta glossae, ed. Peter L. D. Reid, François Dolbeau, Bernard Bischof , and Claudio Leonardi, Corpus Christianorum: Continuatio mediaevalis, vol. 46a (Turnhout, 1984). Perhaps the most learned man in Europe in his time, with knowledge of a large number of ancient Latin authors (he even seems to have read Catullus), Latin Church Fathers, and books on canon law, Rather was likely responsible between 962 and 968 for the production of BMF, 6, 19, containing decades I, III, and IV of Livy’s Ab urbe condita with a unique tradition for decade I: Giuseppe Billanovich, “Dal Livio di Raterio al Livio del Petrarca,” IMU 2 (1959): 103–33; and his La tradizione del testo di Livio e le origini dell’umanesimo, 2 vols. (Padua, 1981), 1:241–66. On his reading Catullus, see Julia Gaisser, Catullus and His Renaissance Readers (Oxford, 1993), 17. Liudprando, who likely had met Rather at court, praised him for his piety and knowledge of the seven liberal arts: Reid, Tenth-Century Latinity, 7–8. Opera Ratherii, Praeloq. 3:12; 86. The long sentence begins: “Dii sunt, Domini sunt, Christi sunt, celi sunt, angeli sunt, patriarchae sunt, prophetae sunt, apostoli sunt, evangelistae sunt, martyres sunt, uncti sunt, reges sunt, principes sunt, iudices sunt, non tantum hominum, sed et angelorum, arietes gregis Domini sunt, pastores ovium....” Atto more succinctly likens the bishop’s power over his church to that of Christ; Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 123. Karl F. Morrison, The Two Kingdoms: Ecclesiology in Carolingian Political Thought (Princeton, N.J., 1964), 41–42, characterizes the predominant Carolingian view. Cf. Walter Ullmann, The Carolingian Renaissance and the Idea of Kingship:The Birkbeck Lectures 1968–9 (London, 1969), 118–19. The current view was that the oice of emperor became clericalized with the emperor’s anointment with holy oil. At the same time, it was held that, in opposition to that of bishops, unction in his case was not indelible but depended on his actions as monarch: Ullmann, Carolingian Renaissance, 111–34, especially 125 and 130–33.

86

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

and perhaps the idea of a strict separation of power was a product of that experience.56 While Rather did not draw the distinction so sharply, like Atto he maintained that the bishop was not subject to the prince’s judgment. Both held that the king could not summon the bishop to court to justify his actions or interfere in any way with the internal life of the church, to say nothing of stealing church lands or ecclesiastical revenue. As guardian of the church, the king had the duty to protect it, but only at the bidding of the bishop. Rather allowed, however, that in cases where the king considered a bishop to have committed criminal deeds, he might submit a complaint to an assembly of bishops and, if he were unsatisied with their decision, could take the matter to the Holy See; but ecclesiastics alone could decide guilt or innocence.57 Supposedly, according to both bishops, even if the king wished to punish a bishop involved in royal administration, the best he could do was to deprive him of his secular oice. Neither Atto nor Rather seemed concerned with the symbolism of investiture, but Atto resurrected a broad deinition of simony that associated it with princely appointment to ecclesiastical oice. While the contemporary view of simony as a heresy involved the sale or purchase of ordinations and church oices by clerics, Atto deined it more generally as accepting clerical oice out of improper obedience or in return for money or favor and included in the abuse appointments to clerical oice made not only by clergy but also by laymen. Atto also speciically applied the term “simony” to the king’s bestowal of bishoprics for money or for other services.58 Furthermore, he considered princely intervention in the selection of bishops a major cause of church corruption. Oddly, Rather, who held such a high opinion of the episcopal oice and of its independence from the lay ruler, appears to have been ambivalent about the current practice of royal appointment of bishops.59 He himself had not been canonically elected to any of the four episcopacies he had held, and like him, Atto may well have been raised to the episcopal oice by royal initiative. Nevertheless, Atto was insistent 56

57 58

59

Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 123–24. For about two years’ time, beginning sometime in 948/950, Atto became involved in royal politics and briely acted as conciliarius of Lotario, Ugo’s son and joint king with him (ibid., 16–17). Incidentally, in the period before Liudprando left for the east in August 949, Atto must have met the younger scholar, who was also in royal service. Opera Ratherii, Praeloq. 4:4, 107; The Complete Works, 122–23. Whereas the Carolingians had understood simony to be the sale of ordinations by bishops, Atto extended the deinition to include the sale of bishoprics by princes: Augustin Fliche, La Réforme grégorienne, 3 vols., in Spicilegium sacrum lovaniense: Etudes et documents, nos. 6, 9, 18 (Louvain, 1924–26), 1:66–67. Cf. Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 129. On the source of Atto’s deinition, see UtaRenate Blumenthal, The Investiture Controversy: Church and Monarchy from the Ninth to the Twelfth Century (Philadelphia, 1988), 75. Atto did not extend his attack on simoniacal practices to laymen generally, nor did he attack the institution of the proprietary church (that is, a church belonging to laymen, who controlled the appointment of the priest and the church’s revenues): Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 135–37. Fliche understandably has trouble inding a passage in Rather criticizing the practice of royal appointments of bishops. He writes: “il n’a indiqué qu’en passant que ce mauvais recrutement était la conséquence de l’investiture laïque, de la nomination des évèques par le roi que tantôt il condamne et que tantôt il considère comme tout à fait normale” (91). The passage in the Praeloquia to which Fliche refers (4.2) acknowledges that bishops can be chosen or appointed by kings but cannot be ordained by them. That cannot be taken as a criticism of royal appointment of bishops.

87

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

that canonical procedures be followed in choosing a bishop. A bishop, Atto wrote, must be elected by the clergy and people of the diocese, examined by the archbishop together with the sufragans of the province, and approved by the archbishop and sufragans.Then word of the election had to be sent to the prince, who could either approve the choice or veto it. By stipulating that bishops examine and approve the candidate before the prince intervened, Atto explicitly attacked a practice common to the Ottonians of bringing in the ecclesiastical hierarchy only to perform the rituals consecrating the individual chosen by the emperor.60 Perhaps inspired by his own experience in royal government, Atto’s reform interests extended beyond those of Rather to secular politics. In his Polipticum, Atto painted with a wide brush the destructive conlicts between the three major secular groups of the time: the kings, the great lords, and the knights.61 As he described the political inighting, the kings – and here he seems to have meant Ugo (926–47), Lotario (945–50), and Berengario II (950–61) – were dedicated to the strategy of weakening the great lords by undermining their control over the knights who served them. The great lords themselves used similar methods in their struggle with one another. As we shall see, Atto could also have mentioned the king’s efort to undercut the nobility by creating a local royal notariate. Because of their greed, lust for power, and unchristian conduct, all three political groups were guilty of contributing to the anarchy that plagued Italy. Essentially conservative, Atto believed that the refusal of political forces to recognize the privileges and duties attached to each group posed the fundamental challenge to peace. The eforts by the king to create a new social order by favoring the knights, however, appeared to him to constitute the biggest threat of all to political stability.62 Despite the obvious intensity with which Atto and Rather propounded their analyses of the sources of corruption in contemporary society and set forth the goals they wanted to achieve through reform, neither seems to have had any idea how to gain their ends except by moral exhortation. Although both occasionally recognized papal preeminence in the Church, neither envisaged any signiicant role for the pope in a reform program.63 Futhermore, despite repeated references to his power to bind and loose, neither invoked a bishop’s power of excommunication as a response to lay interference. For Atto’s part, this failure to assert that the Church had judicial powers may have been a consequence of his insistence that its role in a Christian society was to seek peaceful reconciliation, by unifying believers through love for one another and love for God.64 In the event, the inluence of both writers on later papal reformers was insigniicant. Atto’s works, surviving in only two manuscripts, were never mentioned by 60

61 62 63

64

Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 133–34. Fliche, La Réforme grégorienne, 1:18–22, succinctly describes the practice of royal designation under the Carolingians and Ottonians. Ugo’s efort to extend the royal notariate was doubtless an aspect of this strategy. Wemple, Atto of Vercelli, 92–93. Although Atto considered the papacy to have ultimate control over the interpretation of doctrine as well as ultimate judicial power, he nowhere invokes papal intervention in any of his reform measures (ibid., 127). Similarly, Rather acknowledged the pope as the ultimate judge of appeals but wrote nothing about a right of intervention in the conlicts of bishops with their king. Ullmann, Carolingian Renaissance, 43–110.

88

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

later reformers. Rather’s ideas seem to have had no efect either on reform in the eleventh century.65 The absence in Italy of episcopal reformers like Atto and Rather seventy or eighty years after their deaths illustrates how successfully the Ottonians integrated the ecclesiastical hierarchy into the imperial government. When, in the second half of the eleventh century, a scattering of bishops emerged as reformers, the ideas of the two earlier bishops would have seemed old-fashioned, in that they had omitted any focused discussion of the means by which the reform of the Church could be accomplished. LIUDPRANDO OF CREMONA, IMPERIAL BISHOP

Liudprando of Cremona (ca. 920–72) represented the very kind of bishop that Atto had in mind when he criticized the participation of bishops in the afairs of secular government. Although he may have belonged to a rich, nonnoble merchant family of Pavia, he it the description of the ideal of the imperial bishop: a courtier whose literary learning was complemented by pulcritudo morum (beauty of bearing and manners).66 When he was a boy his lovely singing voice caught the attention of King Ugo, who made him a member of his chapel in 931.67 Like other boys of similar talent, his ability to sing helped him procure a career in the Church. At some point between 945 and 949, his family bought him the oice of secretary to Berengario, the real power behind the throne at the time, and then convinced Berengario to send the young man on a mission to Constantinople (September 949 to April 950) so that he might learn Greek. On Liudprando’s return from the mission to Constantinople (April 950), he quarrelled with Berengario, now king as Berengario II, and led Pavia. After a decade of service to Otto I both in the imperial chapel and as ambassador to Constantinople, with Otto’s annexation of the Kingdom of Italy in 962, Liudprando was rewarded with the bishopric of Cremona.68 In his youth, either in the royal chapel or at the cathedral school of Pavia, Liudprando received a splendid education in the Latin classics. His knowledge of Greek he owed to three periods of residence in Greek-speaking territories.69 A vain 65 66

67

68 69

Complete Works, 14–15. Girolamo Arnaldi, “Liutprando e la storiograia contemporanea nell’Italia centro-settentrionale,” in La storiograia altomedievale, 10–16 aprile 1969, SSCISAM, 17 (Spoleto, 1979), 517–18, believes that Liudprando descended from a merchant family. Against this position, see Karl Leyser, “Ends and Means in Liudprand of Cremona,” in Byzantium and the West, c. 850–c. 1200. Proceedings of the XVIII Spring Symposium of Byzantine Studies, Oxford 30th March–1st April 1984, ed. J. D. Howard-Johnson (Amsterdam, 1988), 119–20. Leyser considers Liudprando to be of noble descent. Liudprando writes of his boyhood: “regis Hugonis gratiam michi vocis dulcedine adquirebam. Is ... euphoniam adeo diligebat, in qua coaequalium puerorum nemo vincere poterat”: Antapodosis, 4.1, in Liudprandi cremonensis opera omnia, ed. Paolo Chiesa, Corpus Christianorum: Continuatio mediaevalis, 156 (Turnhout, 1998), 97. Manitius, Geschichte, 2:166–75, gives the basic biographical information. His irst mission to Constantinople lasted from September 949 to March or April 950; the second, abortive mission, halted at Paxos, in late 959 or early 960; and the third mission ran from June 968 to January 969: Johannes Koder, “Liutprand von Cremona und die griechische Sprache,” in Johannes Koder and Thomas Weber, Liutprand von Cremona in Konstantinopel: Untersuchungen zum griechischen Sprachschatz und zu realienkundlichen Aussagen in seinen Werken (Vienna, 1980), 17 and 61. Koder’s study of Liudprando’s use of Greek in his works leads Koder to conclude that Liudprando spoke

89

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

yet gifted writer, Liudprando shared with his contemporaries a taste for the mannerist style, but in his case the product was surprisingly lively. He exhibited a penchant for irony and satire in historical works, mixing prose with occasional poetry and seasoning a complicated Latin with frequent words and phrases from Greek.70 Virgil irst, then Terence and Juvenal were his favorite Roman poets, and Cicero was his favorite prose writer. Whether he cited Pliny, Lucretius, and Martial from the texts or from lorilegia cannot be known.71 While he lacked the intimate acquaintance with patristic literature that Atto had demonstrated, he showed a good command of the Bible.72 Oddly, perhaps because of his secular occupations, he left it to his successor to reorganize the cathedral library, on which he appears to have left no mark.73 An imperial bishop and courtly counselor par excellence, Liudprando ofered to young men proof of the political and economic value of scholarship and poetry. Interest in historical writing was traditionally weak in Italy north of Rome, and just as Andrea of Bergamo’s additions to Paulo Diacono’s Historia Langobardorum and Agnello’s Historia pontiicalis may have been the only historical works produced north of Rome in the ninth century, so Liudprando’s histories may have been unique in the tenth. The absence of monastic chronicles, a lourishing enterprise north of the Alps in both centuries, is particularly puzzling.74 Agnello’s and Liudprando’s works were

70

71

72

73

74

Greek with relative luency as a result of his travels to the east and that he had some acquaintance with Greek writing, especially biblical Greek texts. Frederick A. Wright, The Works of Liudprand of Cremona (New York, 1930), 17–24, provides a brief analysis of Liudprando’s prose style. Wright also publishes translations of his three historical works, Antapodosis, Liber de rebus gestis Ottonis, and Relatio de legatione Constantinopolitana. I will use Wright’s translations. Bernhard Bischof, “Eine Osterpredigt Liudprands von Cremona (um 960),” Anecdota novissima: Texte des vierten bis sechzehnten Jahrhunderts, Quellen und Untersuchungen zur lateinischen Philologie des Mittelalters, no. 7 (Stuttgart, 1984), 22, points to grammatical errors in Liudprando’s prose. Nikolaus Staubach, “Historia oder Satira? Zur literarischen Stellung der Antapodosis Liudprands von Cremona,” Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 24–25 (1989/90): 484, suggests that Liudprando met Rather, a master satirist, in Germany and that he may be the reader referred to in Rather’s Praeloquia as “nostri perintimus licet A.L.D,” which Staubach believes may stand for “nostri perintimus amicus Liudprandus diaconus.” Staubach also hypothesizes that contact with Rather might have fed the satirical vein in Liudprando’s thinking. For references to ancient pagan authors, see the Index auctorum of Liudprandi Cremonensis opera omnia, 225–34. For his references to the scripture, see 221–24. Bullough, “Le scuole cattedrali,” 132–33, situates Liudprando within the Carolingian literary tradition and emphasizes his inluence on subsequent Ottonian writers of history. Of his knowledge of ancient literature, Bullough writes: “Liutprando stesso ... conosceva un numero maggiore di scrittori classici degli altri studiosi del X secolo, e fra essi alcuni poco conosciuti anche più tardi.” For an analysis of the poetry found in his histories, see Enza Colonna, Le poesie di Liutprando di Cremona: Commento tra testo e contesto (Bari, 1996). On his successor’s inventory of the library, see Ugo Gualazzini, Ricerche sulle scuole pre-universitarie del medioevo: Contributo di indagini sul sorgere delle università (Milan, 1943), 42–48. Arnaldi, “Liutprando e la storiograia contemporanea,” 498, suggests that monastic chronicles evolved in an efort to keep track of monastic property. The implication is that as transactions were recorded in cartularies, the scribes added other details related to the life of the monastery. Because in Italy land transactions were recorded in notarial documents, Arnaldi maintains that there was no equivalent temptation to note down such other details. It should be said, however, that southern Italy also relied heavily on notarial documents, although there the historiographical tradition

90

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

exceptional anyway, in that Agnello’s was the product of a culture still signiicantly inluenced by Byzantium, and Liudprando’s was inspired by the request of an Iberian bishop at Otto’s court and he began writing history in Germany, not Italy.75 The earliest and longest of Liudprando’s histories, Antapodosis, was composed at the request of Recemundus, bishop of Elvira in the Iberian peninsula, whom Liudprando met at Otto’s court in 956. He began it in 958 at Frankfurt and completed it about 962 in Italy. The work recounts in often lurid detail the history of the period roughly from the death of Charles the Bald in 877 to Liudprando’s irst expedition to Constantinople in 949. A second short history, Gesta Ottonis, deals with only one major event in the reign of Otto I, his deposing of John XII at Rome in 963. Liudprando’s most lively composition, Relatio de Constantinopolitana legatione, describes his last embassy to Constantinople in 968/69 and reveals a Western antipathy toward Greek culture and society. Although claiming to be an account of “the doings of the emperors and kings of all Europe,” the six books of the Antapodosis contain little material not pertaining to the German or Eastern empires. The author characterizes the work in its opening pages as an exposition of the operation of divine justice in the world, but in the third book he makes the objective more speciic. There he belatedly explains the meaning of the title Antapodosis as “Tit-for-Tat” and speciies that “The aim and object of this work is to reveal, declare and stigmatize the doings of this Berengarius, who now is not king but rather despot of Italy, and of his wife Willa, who because of her boundless tyranny is rightly called a second Jezebel, and because of her insatiate greed for plunder, a Lamia vampire.”76 But Liudprando is quick to assure his readers that “my book will also be repayment for the beneits conferred upon me by men of sanctity and repute.”77 From this point on we are led to expect that Liudprando himself, not God, will render justice to his friends and foes alike by publishing their deeds. Besides settling old scores with Berengario, the author clearly aimed to create a legend of the Ottonians’ smooth ascent to the German throne and attribute the current stability of the kingdom to their rule. To justify Otto’s right to the Italian crown, Liudprando not only reviled and debased the person and policies of Otto’s enemy, Berengario II, but also denigrated all other possible claimants, including the Byzantine emperor.78 Throughout the narrative Liudprando exercised a selective misogyny, treating the female members of the Ottonian family with reverence while describing Berengario’s rule as contaminated by the incessant interference of lustful and willful women.79

75 76 77 78

79

in these centuries, if less rich than north of the Alps, was nevertheless ample; Nicola Cilento, “La storiograia nell’Italia meridionale,” La storiograia altomedioevale, 10–16 aprile 1969, SSCISAM, 17 (Spoleto, 1970), 521–56. Antapodosis, 1.1: 5. Ibid., 3.1: 68; Wright, Works of Liudprand, 109. Antapodosis 3.1:68; Wright, Works of Liudprand, 109. The observations in this paragraph are based on Philippe Buc, The Dangers of Ritual: Between Early Medieval Texts and Social Scientiic Theory (Princeton, N.J., and Oxford, 2001), 15–24. Ibid., 20.

91

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

All of Liudprando’s historical writings are marked by a penchant for realistic detail that at points leads to the grotesque when used to describe enemies.80 His talent for caricature is perhaps best illustrated by the demeaning description in his Relatio of the Byzantine emperor, Nicephorus, whom he describes as having “a big belly, a lean posterior, very long in the hip considering his short stature, small legs, fair sized heels and feet; dressed in a robe made of ine linen, but old, foul smelling, and discoloured by age....”81 The hostile relations between the Germans and Constantinople at the time of his writing the Relatio allowed Liudprando to hurl scathing criticisms at the Byzantines, fueled by his anger at the repeated and intentional slights that he had personally sufered at the imperial court during his failed embassy to Constantinople in 968/69. Until recently, scholars have considered Liudprando an “ecclesiastic in name only,” but the discovery of a sermon that he delivered at an Easter service in Germany between 958 and 961 requires us to qualify the assessment.82 Structured as a dialogue between Liudprando and a Jew, and then between Liudprando and the congregation, the sermon confronts basic questions regarding the tenets of the Christian faith such as the following. Why did God send Christ, combining in his being two natures, to save mankind? Why did God seek the reconciliation of men and not of fallen angels? Why is the Trinity not three gods rather than one? How did the death of Christ frustrate the devil’s plan to dominate the world? Then, presuming to have answered the questions by relying on biblical citations and some of the central writings of Saint Augustine, he turns to his audience and instructs them about how they are to attain the salvation freely ofered by Christ’s death. The performance must have been impressive: irst the defender of the faith dramatically pursuing the Jew’s skepticism with theological arguments bolstered by scriptural references; then the spiritual father with his homiletic appeal to his listeners’ concern for their souls. There is no reason to doubt that Liudprando believed everything he said in the sermon. In a larger sense, we have no grounds to question either his commitment to belief in the omnipotence of God’s Providence in human history or his self-interested faith that Otto’s triumph over Berengario II and his other enemies had been divinely willed. Perhaps the fairest comment to make is that Liudprando was vitally concerned with worldly afairs, and that his faith seems not to have inconvenienced his personal ambitions but rather legitimized them. 80

81

82

On this aspect of Liudprando’s style, see Robert Levine, “Liudprand of Cremona: History and Debasement in the Tenth Century,” Mittellateinisches Jahrbuch 26 (1992): 70–84. See also Staubach, “Historia oder Satira,” who emphasizes the didactic intention of Liudprando’s use of satire in the Antapodosis, 461–87. Relatio de legatione constantinopolitana, in Liudprandi cremonensis opera omnia, 188; Wright, Works of Liudprand, 136–37. The phrase is from Auerbach, Literary Language, 153, and is cited by Karl Leyser, “Liudprand of Cremona: Preacher and Homilist,” in The Bible in the Medieval World: Essays in Memory of Beryl Smalley, ed. Katherine Walsh and Diana Wood (Oxford, 1985), 43–60. Leyser cites conlicting interpretations of Liudprando’s character by other scholars (54–56) and gives a summary of the arguments of the sermon (47–53). The sermon, Homelia paschalis, is published in Liudprandi cremonensis opera omnia, 153–65. It exhibits both Liudprando’s preaching style and his biblical expertise; see Bischof , “Einer Osterpredigt Liudprands,” 24–34, who publishes Liudprando’s homily. Bischof dates the work on p. 23.

92

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance GUNZO, VINDICATOR OF ITALIAN SCHOLARSHIP

Personal advancement in the ecclesiastical hierarchy may have been in Gunzo’s mind when, perhaps leaving the cathedral school of Milan, he crossed the Alps in the train of Otto I in the winter of 964/65 to assume a teaching position in Germany.83 Gunzo was perhaps in his ifties; it is unlikely that an older man would voluntarily have undertaken such a rigorous journey in winter.84 The journey was the occasion for him to write his Epistola ad Augienses, in which he endeavored to dazzle his readers with the full extent of his knowledge – thereby revealing to future generations its character and limitations. The Epistola relates that, arriving at Saint Gall stif with cold one night on his way through the Alps, and inding his spirits revived by the warmth and refreshment of the refectory, Gunzo began to chat carelessly with his assembled hosts. Little did he realize that in that hall “to misplace a period was a capital sin.” A slight error, the substitution of an accusative for an ablative in the course of a relaxed conversation, was enough to bring down upon his head the ridicule of the whole monastic community. Burning with anger at his humiliation, Gunzo resumed his journey through the snows the following morning, but months later in the Epistola, written to the brothers of the monastery of Reichenau, where he had stayed after leaving Saint Gall, he tried to heal his wounded pride by telling his tale to a sympathetic audience. Gunzo did not hesitate to identify the attempt to humiliate him as an insult to Italian learning in general. There can be no mistaking his condescension toward German education at this early point in the Ottonian intellectual revival: that attitude deepened his sense of shame at having been mocked publicly by Germans for a grammatical error. Had he not been writing to other monks in the same area, he might have even more strongly asserted his attitude of Italian intellectual superiority in his defense. 83

84

Karl Manitius, ed., Epistola ad Augienses, 5, n. 1, considers him to have been a monk on the basis of his play on words in accusing a monk of Saint Gall both of having maliciously attacked his reputation and of having killed the last abbot of the monastery: “Haud igitur miremini, si fratrem verberat qui patrem necat,” 31. The statement, however, may mean only that if the monk feared not to attack a superior, he would not fear to attack an equal. I ind it diicult to reconcile with a monastic status Gunzo’s boast that the emperor had personally asked him to come to Germany because he was subject to no one and had considerable inancial means: “Sed enim quia non alicui ita subiciebar neque tam humilis fortune habebar, ut cogi possem, versis ad me precum indiciis promissionem ceu pignus veniendi accepit” (21). Moreover, with the exception of the Ciel d’Oro at Pavia, northern- and central-Italian monasteries in the late tenth century do not seem to have have been sites of the kind of learning Gunzo demonstrated. In his preface to Gunzo’s Epistola ad Augienses, 4–5:23, Manitius considers Gunzo to be an old man on the basis of a passage in Gunzo’s text: “Adfuit tamen quem supra pusionem dixi, culpans tam grave facinus mutationis unius casus, asserens me senem scolaribus dignum lagellis....” Gunzo is explaining that a pusio had extemporaneously composed a Latin poem mocking a grammatical mistake that he, senex, had just made. My sense is that the passage involves a degree of exaggeration in order to heighten the contrast between the two men. Just as it is unlikely that “a little boy” would have composed the Latin poem on the spur of the moment, so it is unlikely that Gunzo was “an old man.” It should be said that Gunzo claimed that the boy and his master, the older monk, had plotted to embarrass Gunzo in advance, but Gunzo does not explain how they could have known what Gunzo’s error would be.

93

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

The long letter, articulated according to the rules of classical oratory, was probably intended to be read aloud in the refectory before the assembled brothers. In it Gunzo endeavored both to justify his grammatical usage by citing legions of classical examples and to render his accusers contemptible. After a simple salutation, he presents his exordium, designed to make his listeners “well-disposed, attentive, and receptive.” To that end he elects from Cicero’s recommended approaches the one entitled “ab loco adversariorum,” that is, aimed at denigrating his adversaries (pp. 19–20). Gunzo accuses the monks of Saint Gall of deep-seated malignity and a willful desire to humilitate him: a young monk drew him out, while the youth’s lover and the mastermind of the plot hovered unobtrusively in the background. Gunzo then narrates the series of events (p. 21), and, after what appears intended as a one-sentence partitio, he irst defends himself against having made a grammatical error (conirmatio, 25–30) and then tries to undermine his enemies’ arguments using personal attacks (refutatio, 30–37).85 After a long digression (digressio, 37–53) – doubtless too extensive to conform to Cicero’s recommendation – he identiies its relevance to the case (53–55) and draws his conclusion (conclusio, 55–57). Gunzo apparently felt that to vindicate his learning he needed to deliver a formal judicial oration. The author claims to have brought with him to Germany almost a hundred books, but he only supplies the names of the ive that matter to him most: Martianus Capella’s De nuptiis philologiae et Mercurii, Plato’s Timaeus (doubtless in Chalcidius’s translation), Aristotle’s De interpretatione, and both Aristotle’s and Cicero’s Topica.86 If Gunzo was carrying Aristotle’s Topica in the Boethian translation, then he was bringing a rare work indeed to Germany.87 The text of the De interpretatione was probably the one found in Boethius’s commentary.88 Gunzo’s remarks suggest that he also knew the Categories, with Boethius’s commentary.89 He also understood the distinctive positions of Plato and Aristotle on the issue of universals and sided squarely with Plato.90 Gunzo’s ability to manipulate Priscian for his arguments apparently came from years of teaching his Institutiones in the classroom.91 Although Gunzo made no use of Aristotelian methodology in his arguments, he was nonetheless precocious in appreciating that logicians and grammarians sometimes understood language in diferent ways.92 As he writes: “This woman [grammar] turns out to be one thing 85

86 87

88 89 90 91 92

The short partitio reads: “Perpendite, queso, tandem, quid prudens vir ille de quo sermo est in reprehensione unius casus profecerit aut quid magni de se ostenderit.” Epistola ad Augienes, 37. According to Lorenzo Minio-Paluello, “Nuovi impulsi allo studio della logica: La seconda fase della riscoperta di Aristotele e di Boezio,” La scuola nell’occidente latino dell’alto medioevo, SSCISAM, 19 (1972), 749, the Topica only reappeared in the early twelfth century. Were it in Boethius’s commentary on the work, the manuscript would perhaps be unique, because no copy of the commentary has ever been identiied: Jonathan Barnes, “Boethius and the Study of Logic,” in Boethius: His Life, Thought and Inluence, ed. Margaret Gibson (Oxford, 1981), 75, 87, n. 8. See Epistola ad Augienses, notes on 28, 29, 37, 39, and 41. See ibid., notes on 40, 41, and 50. Ibid., 10, n. 2. Manitius provides a list of references to Priscian in Gunzo’s text in Epistola ad Augienses, 185. In her classic article, Marcia L.Colish, “Eleventh-Century Grammar in the Thought of St. Anselm,” in Arts libéraux et philosophie au Moyen Âge: Actes du quatrième Congrès international de philosophie

94

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

for the grammarians, another for Aristotle. For to him she suggests that nouns are not able to be put in oblique cases; to them she says that nouns are able to be in oblique cases.”93 Gunzo probably had his Priscian at hand when writing the Epistola, because some of his quotations from ancient poets are precisely those used by the sixthcentury grammarian to illustrate grammatical rules.94 Still, the citations from major ancient poets, such as Virgil, Juvenal, Horace, Persius, and Ovid, go beyond those found in Priscian and demonstrate an extensive personal acquaintance with the works of the poets themselves.95 Gunzo also manifests a good knowledge of the Bible; but of the Latin Church Fathers he cites only Augustine, Jerome, and Gregory the Great. As for rhetoric, he may have known portions of Quintilian and the still rare Pseudo-Ciceronian Ad Herennium, but Cicero’s De inventione provided the basic structure for his work. Like his knowledge of Priscian’s manual of grammar, Gunzo’s knowledge of Cicero’s rhetorical text, the De inventione, suggests that that book, too, had a part in his teaching program. The former had been the standard manual for the advanced study of grammar since late antiquity, while the Ciceronian manual became the basic manual for rhetoric only in the course of the ninth and tenth centuries.96 The most striking feature of Gunzo’s elaborate display of knowledge is that the author articulates his learning in the form of an oration. As we shall see in the next chapter, the eleventh-century Italian text most closely approximating

93

94 95

96

médiévale, Université de Monréal, Montréal, Canada, 27 août–2 septembre 1967 (Montreal and Paris,1969), 788, contrasts the position of late-ancient grammarians on the signiication of the noun and that of Aristotle as interpreted by Boethius. For grammarians, a noun could deine a thing both substantially and accidentally. According to Boethius’s interpretation of Aristotle, if a noun signiied with respect to an accident, it could not properly do so for a substance. Colish illustrates the diference in The Mirror of Language: A Study in the Medieval Theory of Language (New Haven, Conn., and London, 1968; rev. ed. Lincoln, Neb., and London, 1983), 109–10, using Anselmo’s efort to determine whether the word “grammarian” signiied a substance or a quality. Anselmo concluded that “grammarian” signiied a man, but it did so as a quality or accident, that is, not as a vox signiicativa per se but vox signiicativa per aliud. Colish considers awareness of this problem to be a contribution of the eleventh century. Although less sophisticated philosophically, Gunzo in this passage may be basing his formulation of the diferent understandings of the noun by the grammarian and the philosopher on the same texts of Boethius. “Hec femina aliter grammaticis, aliter Aristoeli cedit. Huic suadet per obliquos casus non posse nomina dici, illis etiam in obliquis posse nomina nuncupari”; Epistola ad Augienses, 39. See, for example, ibid., 1:25, nn. 6 and 8; 26, nn. 1, 2, 5; and 30, n.3. This observation is based on Manitius’s register of citations in the Epistola, ibid., 184–86. Gunzo considered himself something of a poet. For a discussion of the interweaving of prose and poetry in his text, consult Bernard Pabst, Prosimetrum:Tradition und Wandel einer Literaturform zwischen Spätantike und Spätmittelalter, 2 vols. (Cologne and Wiemar, 1994), 367–75. Margaret Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec (Oxford, 1978), argues that interest in the Ciceronian manuals began in the 1030s and 1040s. John O. Ward, Ciceronian Rhetoric in Treatise, Scholion and Commentary, Typologie des sources du Moyen Âge occidental, fasc. 58, A–V, A–I (Turnhout, 1995), 105, however, considers the eleventh and twelfth centuries as the “high watermark” of interest. He notes that Alcuin relied heavily on De inventione in writing his own description of rhetoric (Ward, Ciceronian Rhetoric, 81). He maintains (Ciceronian Rhetoric, 90) that the ninth and tenth centuries saw “the beginnings of a shift from the compilation of new compends/manuals/abridgements on rhetoric to a more thorough use of the older classical texts.”

95

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Gunzo’s “letter” in its erudition assumes a similar structure. What this penchant for rhetoric suggests is that by the mid-tenth century public life in the form of assemblies and courtrooms, ecclesiastical and secular, was already orienting artistic creativity, privileging oral eloquence, and providing the dominant situation-image for literary expression. The litigious character of Italian society of which Pietro Damiani complained a century later may already have been present in the tenth century. The highly rhetorical nature of medieval Italian culture would in part account for the relative poverty in northern and central Italy of poetic expression and of certain literary prose genres common north of the Alps, such as the fable and history. LEO OF VERCELLI, SPOKESMAN FOR EMPIRE

As I suggested earlier, the presence of the youthful Liudprando, a learned courtier and diplomat of the Italian kingdom, may have served as a model for the conception of the imperial bishop as it was being constructed at Otto’s court in the 950s. Liudprando was almost certainly a model for later Italian bishops such as Leo (ca. 965–1026), who was one of Atto’s successors at Vercelli.97 Like Liudprando gifted with considerable literary and diplomatic talent, Leo of Vercelli irst appeared in the imperial court of the young Otto III in 996. Between the spring of 998 and May 1, 999, Leo received the bishopric of Vercelli, and probably from October 999 on he also occupied the position of logotheta in the imperial chancery. The title logotheta had previously been used by the imperial chancellor Heribert of Cologne in conjunction with his title cancellarius, so its use by Leo indicates that Leo was serving as acting chancellor during Heribert’s extensive periods of residence in Cologne, where he had become archbishop in 999.98 Otto III had 97

98

The fullest account of Leo’s life and works is found in Hermann Bloch, “Beiträge zur Geschichte des Bishofs Leo von Vercelli und seiner Zeit,” Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde 22 (1897): 13–136. For further bibliography, see Manitius, Geschichte, 2:515–16. The debate concerning Leo’s nationality has remained inconclusive: Metrum leonis: Poesia e potere all’inizio del secolo XI, ed. Roberto Gamberini, Edizione nazionale dei testi mediolatini, no. 6 (Impruneta, 2002), viii, n. 7. Gamberini maintains that the greater share of scholars consider Leo to have been an Italian “valutando la solida cultura classica e l’amore per la civiltà di Roma antica che traspaiono nelle sue opere.” Mathilde Uhlitz, “Die italienische Kirchenpolitik der Ottonen,” Mitteilungen des Österreichischen Instituts für Geschichtsforschung 48 (1934): 279–81, argues for a German origin for Leo. Josef Fleckenstein, Die Hofkapelle im Rahmen des ottonisch-salischen Reichskirche, vol. 2 of idem, Die Hofkapelle der deutschen Könige, MGH, Schriften, no. 16 (Stuttgart, 1966), 91, n. 213, convincingly refutes some of Uhlitz’s arguments, but the possibility of a German origin remains. On Leo’s appointment as bishop, see Bloch, “Beiträge,” 79; on Leo’s appointment as logotheta, 85. Leo’s irst use of the title in a surviving document came only in April 1001 (83). Bloch, however, maintains that Leo had held the title for some time by then. In Otto’s letter in the summer of 999 appointing Heribert archbishop, the new archbishop was designated as archilogotheta, and in October 999 he was addressed as logotheta principalis et cancellarius. For all practical purposes, Bloch maintains that from mid-1000 Leo was Otto’s chancellor (88–89). The term logotheta referred in the Byzantine chancery to a high chancery oicial and was associated with the title summus consilarius. Bloch, “Beiträge,” 85, writes: “Um mich indessen hier mit aller Vorsicht auszudrücken, fasse ich das aus den Quellen und dem Vergleich mit dem byzantinischen Grosslogotheten gewonnene Ergebnis

96

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

reversed traditional imperial policy, which had favored Italians for Italian bishoprics and locally supervised royal placiti.Therefore Leo’s spectacular success in the imperial hierarchy may suggest that he had family ties with Germany.99 On the death of Otto III in January 1002, Leo retired to his bishopric of Vercelli, whence he led the battle in support of the new German emperor, Henry II (1002–24), against Arduino, the native Italian marquis of Ivrea, who laid claim to the Italian kingdom. Over the next thirteen years, until Arduino’s death in 1015, Leo vigorously championed Henry’s cause against Arduino, who appealed to anti-German sentiments.100 When on Henry II’s death in 1024, the Italian crown again became a matter of dispute, Leo joined with Ariberto d’Intimiano, archbishop of Milan, in endorsing the claim of Henry II’s successor, Conrad II (1024–39), the irst of the Franconian or Salian dynasty, to be king of Italy. Committed to secular politics for most his life, Leo appears to have written little. Apart from four letters, only four poems survive: a short elegy composed in 998/99 for Pietro, the murdered bishop of Vercelli (d. 997), one of Leo’s recent predecessors in the see; Versus de Gregorio papa et Ottone augusto, written in 998, a paean to the joint rule of the world by Otto and Gregory V (d. 999); Versus de Ottone et Heinrico, a lament on the early death of Otto III coupled with a celebration of the accession of Henry II to the throne in 1002; and Metrum leonis, an animal fable probably composed before 1002, whose message remains a subject of debate.101 An intimate councilor of Otto, Leo encouraged the emperor’s belief that a renovatio imperii was under way. As he wrote in Versus de Gregorio papa et Ottone augusto: O Christ, understand our prayers; look on your Rome, Piously renew the Romans; stir up the powers of Rome; Let Rome rise to empire under Otto the Third.102

99

100

101

102

dahin zusammen, dass für die Stellung des Logotheten zwei Momente von Bedeutung zu sein scheinen: vor allem sein hervorragender Einluss auf die politischen Angelegenheiten des Reiches, dann aber auch eine enge Verbindung mit der Kanzlei.” Otto III united the Italian chancery to the German one in 999, under Heribert, who remained chancellor until 1002. The chanceries were not divided again until 1009; Harry Bresslau, Handbuch der Urkundenlehre für Deutschland und Italien, 3rd ed., 3 vols. (Berlin, 1958), 1:470. Gian Luigi Barni, “Dal governo del vescovo a quello dei cittadini,” in Dagli albori del comune all’incoronazione di Federigo Barbarossa (1002–1152): Storia di Milano, vol. 3 (Milan, 1954), 3. Benzone of Alba assigns Leo the central role in the defeat of Arduin: “Poliphemum qui prostravit, inde venerabilis”: MGH, Scriptores, no. 11, 639, v. 4; cited from Manitius, Geschichte, 2:515. The four letters are published by Bloch, “Beiträge,” 16–23. The poems are published by Karl Strecker and Norbert Fickermann, Die Ottonenzeit, 476–89. For the dating of these poems, see the notes to 477–78 and 482–83. Jan Ziolkowski, Talking Animals: Medieval Latin Beast Poetry, 750–1150 (Philadelphia, 1993), 116–28, analyzes the Metrum leonis in detail. For the Metrum leonis, see the new edition of Roberto Gamberini, Metrum leonis, 2–16. The longest, most intricate beast poem before the eleventh century, the Metrum leonis played a signiicant role in the development of the genre: Ziolkowski, Talking Animals, 128. On the importance of classical authors in this work, especially Horace, see the notes to Bloch, “Beiträge,” 127–33. “Christe, preces intellege, Romam tuam respice,/ Romanos pie renova, vires Rome excita./ Surgat Roma imperio sub Ottone tertio”: Versus de Gregorio, strophe 1, in Strecker and Fickermann, Die Ottonenzeit, 477.

97

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

He believed fervently in the divine ordination of the German emperor. Had not Henry II succeeded Otto III as emperor, all would have been ruined, but “There is no council great or small against God.” In scarcely three months all moaning ceased: “He [God] appointed Henry to the monarchy without bloodshed.”103 In the economy of worldly leadership the emperor ruled over both the spiritual and the temporal, and the papacy acted under his aegis: Rejoice, O Pope; rejoice, Caesar; rejoice, O Church! Let there be great joy in Rome; let the palace celebrate! Under the power of Caesar the papacy puriies the world.104

The oical documents that Leo composed for both Otto III and Henry II embodied his convictions. In 1001, in a document recording a gift made by Otto to Pope Sylvester II (Gerbert of Aurillac), Leo blurred the lines between secular and ecclesiastical power by referring to Otto as servus apostolorum. In this document he unambiguously endorsed the imperial claim to control the Church. He did so by denouncing the Donation of Constantine and that “of a certain Karl” as falsiications, describing papal elections carried out without imperial intervention as mistaken and focusing on Otto’s recent choice of Gerbert as pope as an example of the proper method of selection.105 In imperial documents that he wrote, Leo associated the Ottonian rulers with the rulers of ancient Rome, a gesture of great propaganda value. In a charter composed by Leo in the name of Otto, granting privileges to Leo’s own bishopric of Vercelli, Leo connected the beneits of favoring the Church with those of a renovatio imperii: “so that with the Church of God free and secure our empire will prosper, the forces of our army will triumph, the power of the Roman people and state will be restored, so that we merit living honorably as a guest in this life, lying more honorably from the prison of this life, and reigning most honorably with the Lord.”106 103

104

105

106

“Contra deum consilium nec magnum nec minimum/ In tribus pene mensibus omnis cessit gemitus./ Heinricum sine sanguine prefecit monarchiae”: Versus de Ottone, strophe 8, in Strecker and Fickermann, Die Ottonenzeit, 482. Composing the poem soon after the advent of Henry, Leo could not know how many years it would take to establish the emperor’s claim to the Italian crown. “Aude papa, gaude caesar, gaudeat ecclesia,/ Sit magnum Romae gaudium, iubilet palatium./ Sub caesaris potentia purgat papa secula”: Versus de Gregorio, strophe 10, in Strecker and Fickermann, Die Ottononzeit, 480. Die Urkunden Otto des III (Ottonis III: Diplomata), ed. Theodor Sickel, MGH, Die Urkunden der deutschen Könige und Kaiser (Diplomatum regum et imperatorum Germaniae), no. 2, pt. 1 (Hannover, 1888), 818–20. Morrison, Two Kingdoms, 58–59 and 134, provides Carolingian precedent for this title. Walter Ullmann, The Growth of Papal Government in the Middle Ages: A Study in the Ideological Relation of Clerical to Lay Power, 3rd ed. (Northampton, Mass., 1970), 229–38, discusses the imperial theory justifying the Ottonian control of the Church. Francis Oakley, Kingship: The Politics of Enchantment (Malden, Mass., 2006), 100–107, describes the emergence of a Christocentric view of kingship in the tenth century, emphasizing the ruler as representative of Christ as king and superior to the priest, who is representative of Christ in this capacity. The quotation is found in Ottonis III: Diplomata, 752–53: “ut libere et secure permanente dei ecclesia prosperetur nostrum imperium, triumphet corona nostre militie, propagetur potentia populi Romani et restituatur res publica, ut in huius mundi hospitio honeste vivere, de huius vite carcere

98

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

Just as Leo created the title servus apostolorum to suggest a more eminent relationship with the Church than the more general epithet enjoyed by the pope as servus servorum dei, so he is credited with having invented the fateful title Romanorum rex, which was applied to the medieval German ruler from the time of Henry II. The title suggested an intimate connection with ancient greatness that might lessen the separation between the northern and southern parts of the emperor’s realm.107 Even in the period 1002–15, when it was far from certain that Henry II would prevail, Leo showed unhesitating loyalty to him. His allegiance, however, was hardly selless. He exhibited no hesitation in advertising that his support came at a price. As he wrote to Henry II in the conclusion of his poem praising the Bavarian prince’s election, Never let Henry rejoice nor let him thrive happily If he does not make Leo the bishop very rich; If he does not by decrees place Leo’s enemies under his feet.108

The devout among Leo’s contemporaries were outspoken in their criticism of a bishop so constantly embroiled in secular politics. Of Leo’s involvement in quelling the revolt of Rimini against Henry II, Brun of Querfurt wrote, “He acquired great wealth in the county ighting for loyalty to the king and on his own account.”109 Leo’s aggressive venality may also have been the reason for Guglielmo of Volpiano’s denunciation of his conduct. That pious reforming abbot, who had grown up in the Vercelli area and who, after years spent reforming monasteries in Gaul, extended his activities to northern Italy by founding the abbey of Fruttuaria in Ivrea (ca. 1003), declared Leo unit to be a bishop: “This cruel man Leo,” he wrote, “is therefore totally without God.”110 Liudprando, Gunzo, and Leo all appear from their writings to have been more secular than religious in their interests. For them the ancient pagan authors not only served as the basis of their early education but retained importance for them

107

108

109

110

honestius avolare et cum domino honestissime mereamur regnare.”The passage was cited by Bloch, “Beiträge,” 91, n. 1. Wolfgang C. Schneider, “Heinrich II. als ‘Romanorum rex,’” Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 67 (1987): 436–43. “Numquam Heinricus gaudeat, numquam felix valeat/ Si Leonem episcopum non faciat ditissimum./ Si non submittat legibus hostes eius pedibus”; Versus de Ottone, strophe 14; Strecker and Fickermann, Die Ottonen Zeit, 483. These are the words of Bruno of Querfurt in his Vita quinque fratrum Poloniae, col. 10, ed. Reinhard Kade, in MGH, Scriptores, no. 15, pt. 2 (Hannover, 1888), 725. Ralph Glaber, Vita domni Willelmi abbatis, 284. In citing William’s statement, Glaber adds his own opinion: “Simili invidia quoque Leo Vercellensis episcopus ad actus universos istius patris extiterat infestus. De quo etiam talia narrare erat solitus: ‘Hic ergo crudelissimus totus est Leo sine Deo, quia si fuisset deus cum eo, quae illius sunt, amaret pro illo.’” See references to other critics, Bloch, “Beiträge,” 106. On the relationship between William and Leo, see also Neithard Bulst, Untersuchungen zu den Klosterreformen Wilhelms von Dijon (962–1031) (Bonn, 1973), 118–19. On Fruttuaria and its inluence on monastic reform, see Gregorio Penco, “Il movimento di Fruttuaria e la riforma gregoriana,” Il monachesimo e la riforma ecclesiastica (1049–1122): Atti della quarta Settimana internazionale di studio Mendola, 23–29 Agosto 1968 (Milan, 1971), 385–90.

99

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

in later life.111 None of the three manifested the uneasiness that Atto of Vercelli had felt toward pagan literature a generation or two earlier, nor would they have joined Atto in arguing that learning in maturity should be limited to the Christian classics. The extension of Ottonian power across the Alps provided an institutional structure in which Italians trained in litterae et mores could expect preferment in the highest ecclesiastical oices for a century and a half. By the late tenth century, bishops in southwestern Francia, in league with lay princes, were incorporating church reform into a general peace movement, which within decades would be taken up by bishops in northern parts of the country; but the ecclesiastical leadership of the regnum, dominated by men of the stamp of Leo of Vercelli, had little interest in it.112 In 963, near the end of his long life, Rather bitterly identiied the trend of the times as one in which the sons of the nobility sought out the episcopal oice, not for the desire of serving the Lord, but “from ambition for the episcopate” (ambitum ... episcopandi).113 He and Atto apparently had no immediate successors among the prelates of the Italian Church. THE OTHER CULTURE

While the examples of Liudprando, Gunzo, and Leo demonstrate a new intensity of interest in book culture based on classical literature, documentary culture was also thriving. An examination of the published collections of charters (that is, contracts involving sales, exchanges, rentals, donations, conirmations of rights, petitions, etc.) for Lombard cities and seven other major centers of northern and central Italy (Pisa, Modena, Padua, Mantua, Parma, Arezzo, and Reggio) for the two halves of the tenth century, 901–50 and 951–1000, shows that almost twice the number of documents survive from the second half of the century as from the irst. The diference cannot be explained by accidents of preservation, because the survival of documents increases in the second half of the century in all eight areas. When the evidence of seven areas – the monumental Codex diplomaticus Langobardiae ends at 999 and is not included in the statistics after 1000 – is compared for 901–50 (146), 951–1000 (194), and 1001–50 (557), the signs of increase are even more striking. The ratio between the latest and the earliest is almost four to one.114 111

112 113

114

Liudprando’s and Gunzo’s wide reading of ancient literature and history is evident from their writings. Leo’s is demonstrated by our growing knowledge of the library that he collected and housed at Vercelli; Metrum leonis, xiii–xix. On monastic reforms, see Chapter 3. Die Briefe Rathers von Verona, 96: “Sed cum scriptum sit, quia ‘nihil in terra sine causa it’, causam ipsam, non diiteor, videre videor plerumque ita posse contingere. Pone quemlibet nobilium scolis tradi, quod utique hodie magis ieri ambitu videtur episcopandi quam cupiditia Domino militandi....” The statistics in the following table are based on the documents preserved in the following eight collections: CAPar (Parma); CDL (Lombardy); CDPad, 1 and 2 (Padua); CReg, 1 and 2 (Reggio); DSArezzo (Arezzo); RMan (Mantua); RMod, 1 and 2 (Modena); and RCPisa (Pisa). Despite the frequency with which I refer to Verona in my text, its collection could not be used for comparison because the published volume stops in 961; Codice diplomatico veronese del periodo dei re d’Italia, ed. Vittorio Fainelli (Venice, 1963).

100

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

No claim for precision can be made for statistics drawn from a limited number of geographical areas, but enough collections are involved to suggest that the trend was widespread. These statistics suggest that the economic recovery of Europe that began late in the eighth century, initially hampered in the course of the ninth century by invasions of Northmen and Magyars and the conquest of Sicily by the Arabs, had at least in Italy resumed by the middle decades of the tenth century. For the regnum the gradual diminution of the Magyar menace and then the reopening of the trade routes through the Danube basin with the conversion of much of that area to Christianity around 1000 were of enormous economic signiicance.115 Along with a gradual increase in the number of documents by the end of the tenth century came their greater uniformity, indicating a difusion of common documentary practices. The arenghe or introductory sentences became less extravagant and limited to fewer types. Dire threats of earthly and divine punishments for contravening the terms of the document were replaced by rational enumerations of penal sanctions in this world. Unstable in form as late as the last decade of the ninth century, the records of the placiti became stereotyped in the tenth century. The confused mass of scabini, clerics, counts, judges, and notaries signing as participants in the deliberations were now generally replaced by groups of royal judges and royal notaries, who successfully laid claim to dominating documentary production in wider spheres of activity.116 The rise of royal judges and notaries relected the political designs of the monarchy. During the tenth century, a large number of local lay notaries, distinguished at the century’s beginning by the title of the city where they were authorized to 901–950 Padua Parma Lombardy* Arezzo Modena Mantua Pisa† Reggio‡ Totals

951–1000

docs. 26–40: 15 docs. 41–79: docs. 1–56: 56 docs. 57–83: docs. 388–594: 207 docs. 595–995 docs. 54–66: 13 docs. 67–89: docs. 34–50: 17 docs. 51–73: docs. 15–22: 8 docs. 23–41: docs. 33–45: 13 docs. 46; 49–76: docs. 33–56: 24 docs. 58–91: 353

1001–1050 39 27 401 23 23 19 29 34 595

docs. 80–158: docs. 1–89: ------------docs. 90–175: docs. 74–206: docs. 42–70: docs. 77–125: doc. 94–185:

79 89 86 133 29 49 92 557

*

I have not included one document in an appendix, which is not dated. The collection for Lombardy ends in 999. † I have not included docs. 47 or 48, which are dated 930–54. ‡ I have not included doc. 57, which is dated 945–55, nor documents 92 and 93, which are dated only as tenth century.

115

116

When the total of documents for the seven areas are added together – the collection for Lombardy ends in 999 – the igures for the three periods are as given in the text. Michael McCormick, Origins of the European Economy: Communications and Commerce, A.D. 300–900 (Cambridge, 2001), 795–97, deals briely with this and other causes of the temporary slowdown in Europe’s economic development from the second half of the ninth century. Charles Radding, The Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence: Pavia and Bologna, 850–1150 (New Haven, Conn., 1988), 55–67.

101

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

practice or simply by the designation notarius, became notarii sacri palatii, notarii imperialis, notarii domni imperialis, notarius domni regis, or notarius domnorum regum.117 Those notarial titles appear to have been interchangeable; but by the last half of the tenth century the titles notarius sacri palatii or notarius domni imperialis predominated.118 In the ninth century, a royal judge was usually designated by the term judex domni imperialis; by the late tenth, he might also be called a judex sacri palatii and the title notarius et judex sacri palatii was not uncommon. The increasing number of documents by judices sacri palatii in the tenth century is generally viewed as indicating that notarii sacri palatii were being promoted to judices, and that in notarizing documents they commonly used the superior title.119 Trained in Lombard law and asserting in their titles a connection with the king or emperor, the judges and notaries at Pavia served the monarchy as a special group of administrators associated with the royal chancery and the courts. Their numbers unmistakably increased in the early decades of the tenth century, but, while occasionally appearing in placita in various cities of the regnum, up to the 930s the royal notaries and judges of Pavia seem to be have been mainly active in Pavia itself and nearby Milan. Beginning about 930, however, two changes occurred. First, royal notaries associated with Pavia appear in documents involving private individuals in areas as far away from Pavia as Cremona and Bergamo. Second, royal notaries and judges with no evident link with Pavia emerge in the documents. In 934 in Pisa, for example, a local notary, who had simply used the title notarius in 927, was claiming to be a notarius et judex dominorum reghum [sic]. In a local matter later in the same year, Iohannes notarius et iudex domnorum regum notarized a document, and two local judices domnorum regum, Teuperto and Silverado, witnessed it. From that time onward these titles seem to have become the common property of Pisan notaries and judges.120 In Lucca judices domni regis appeared in 930, in Florence in 934, in Pistoia in 940, and in Siena in 946.121 Increasingly, local legal elites active in regional royal placiti shared the same titles with notaries and judges who had been dispatched from Pavia for that purpose. 117

118 119

120

121

Bresslau, Handbuch, 1:625, concludes that in the course of the eleventh century the ordinary notarius disappeared throughout the Italian kingdom except in the Romagna, which, as we shall see, developed more slowly but in the same direction. Julius Ficker, Forschungen zur Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte Italiens, 4 vols. (Innsbruck, 1868–74), 2:70, was the irst to note this tenth-century dispersion of the titles. See Chapter 1, under “The Documentary Culture.” Giorgio Costamagna, “Alto medioevo,” in Mario Amelotti and Giorgio Costamagna, Alle origini del notariato italiano, Studi storici sul notariato italiano, vol. 2 (Rome, 1975), 197–200. Cecilia Piacitelli, who has studied the Milanese notariate from the eighth to the twelfth century, maintains that in the twelfth century the titles notarius domni imperatoris and notarius sacri palatii were used interchangeably, as were equivalent titles for judges: “Notariato a Milano nel xii secolo: Qualiiche e nomina,” Atti dell’11º congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo: Milano, 26–30 ottobre 1987 (Spoleto, 1989), 972–74. RCPisa, 21, doc. 37: 21, and doc. 38: 22 for Urso; and doc. 39: 22, for others. Urso is cited by Radding, Origins, 204, doc. 148, while Teuperto might be the judge who appears in Lucca in 941, ibid., doc. 146. Keller, “Gerichtsort,” 25–27.

102

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

In a few cases, we may be looking at former royal notaries from Pavia, who, moving to other cities, kept their titles. But the relatively rapid difusion of royal notaries and judges is better explained as connected with eforts of King Ugo (926–50) to undermine the power of the great nobility by binding the urban upper classes, composed of scabini and notarial families, more closely to the Crown.This was part of the royal strategy for usurping power from the upper nobility that Atto lamented in his Polipticum. The Ottonians embraced the same policy when they took over the reins of government in the second half of the century.122 By transforming the leading residents, the scabini and notaries of the towns of the realm, into royal judges and royal notaries, tenth-century monarchs intended to draw on the political and economic resources of the town for the beneit of their government. Although that goal may not have been fully realized, Ugo’s eforts to create a royal notariate, part of a broader policy to weaken the territorial nobility, appealed to the interests of both the bishops and the urban nobility, who preferred a distant king to the local count.123 The multiplication of royal judges and notaries throughout the kingdom did not of itself create a challenge to the preeminent position of the Pavian judicial elite, but an increasing tendency to make temporary assignments of members of this elite to other regions of the country where they worked alongside local notaries had a disruptive efect on the solidarity of the royal judicial and notarial corps in Pavia by the late tenth century. By 1000, the disappearance of the calligraphic uniformity that had characterized Pavian documents since the late ninth century marked a loss of cohesiveness among legal oicials at the royal court.124 The Liber legis Langobardorum, also referred to by nineteenth-century scholars as the Liber papiensis, a compilation including all the Lombard codes together with the subsequent legislation of Carolingian rulers, represents one of the earliest responses to the new situation. Composed between 1028 and 1039, the oldest surviving manuscript of the work omits Carolingian legislation not relevant to Italy, eliminates the prefaces to the laws, and reorganizes the material so as to facilitate comparison with Lombard law. Close reading of the manuscripts of Carolingian legislation would at points have been required to establish which laws were pertinent to the regnum.125 No manuscript of the Liber contains exactly the same laws. Marginal notations in some indicate that these manuscripts were being collated with others. Hitherto contained in separate codices, the Liber’s gathering of the two sets of laws into one

122

123

124

125

Ibid., 66–67. See also Keller, “La marca di Tuscia ino all’anno mille,” Atti del 5º Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medioevo. Lucca. 3–7 ottobre 1971 (Spoleto, 1971), 133–36. Keller, “Gerichtsort,” 40–42, describes the rise of a new, aggressive nobility located in the major towns of the kingdom. Armando Petrucci, “Scriptoribus in urbibus”:Alfabetismo e cultura scritta nell’Italia altomedievale (Bologna, 1992), 233–36. Radding, Origins, 79–80, cites as an example the ninth chapter of Charlemagne’s capitulary of 803, which referred to earlier legislation by Pepin III (714–68) that had never been applied to Italy. The Liber legis Langobardorum papienses dictus is edited by Alfred Boretius, in Leges Langobardorum, MGH, Legum, no. 4 (Hannover, 1868), 289–585.

103

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

manuscript was likely meant to be a practical manual for the use of palace judges, who had to leave the convenience of Pavia and its archives.126 The earliest version of the Liber is followed in the manuscript by a collection of comments on legal issues known as the Quaestiones ac monita (Questions and counsels) dealing with legal issues in Lombard, Frankish, and Roman law. The Justinian corpus, while cited only twice explicitly, is referred to tacitly at many points. If, as seems probable, the comments belong to a time when the manuscript was created, we may conclude that, at least by the third decade of the eleventh century, legal minds in Pavia were turning to Roman law to help them better understand Lombard law.127 The changes taking place in the lay notariate were peculiar to Italy. North of the Alps, the Carolingian efort to encourage the use of written documentation had collapsed with the empire in the late ninth century, and written records had become largely the preserve of clerics, who kept them when they were of interest to the particular church or monastery.Writing documents for laymen became a haphazard afair, and even in princely households, where clerical scribes were available, the amount of written documentation dropped drastically in comparison with the previous century. Notaries only reappeared north of the Alps from the mid-twelfth century.128 In the Italian kingdom, the presence of an organized lay notariate had a decisive efect on cathedral chanceries. Clerics of the cathedrals in France and Germany enjoyed a monopoly on writing documents for their institutions. In Italy a greater degree of osmosis existed between religious and civil societies in this regard. In many areas of the Italian kingdom in the tenth and eleventh centuries lay notaries (notarii sacri palatii) were invited into clerical space and assumed much of the work usually associated north of the Alps with an ecclesiastical chancery.This lay presence altered the relationship between chancery, school, and scriptorium, the triad of oices traditionally at the center of intellectual life in the cathedral chapter, disrupting the integrity of the chapter’s corporate life. In Italy clerics are rarely mentioned in connection with a cathedral’s writing oices. The designation cancellarius or the title notarius linked to that of primicerius indicates the 126

127

128

The Corpus iuris civilis in the Middle Ages: Manuscripts and Transmission from the Sixth Century to the Juristic Revival, ed. Charles Radding and Antonio Ciaralli (Leiden and Boston, 2007), 78. Radding, Origins, suggests that “there may also have been some demand for such a text from the judges based elsewhere than Pavia whose literacy and competence was certainly greater than that of earlier, local judges.” The author’s important thesis is that the new complex of judicial oicials led to a more scholarly approach to law. The Quaestiones ac monita is found in the Librum legis Langobardorum papienses dictus, ed. Alfred Boretius, in Leges Langobardorum, ed. Friedrick Bluhme, MGH, Legum, 4 (Hannover, 1868), 590–95. See as well, Radding, Origins, 78–86. The notariate reappeared in southern France at the beginning of the twelfth century and by the last decade of the century had become common. However, notaries lacked the ides publica: Robert-Henri Bautier, “L’authentiication des actes privés dans la France médiévale: Notariat public et juridiction gracieuse,” in Notariado público y documento privado: De los orígenes al siglo XIV. Actas del VII Congreso internacional de diplomática,Valencia, 1986, 2 vols. (Valencia, 1989), 714–15. They appear farther north only in the thirteenth century. They are found in Flanders only in the last years of the thirteenth: P. D. Schmidt, “Actes notariés en Flandre,” Tijdschrift voor Rechtsgeschiedenis 61 (1993): 34.

104

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

ecclesiastical head of the writing oice, but such terms are hard to ind in the ecclesiastical documents of the Italian kingdom from the ninth to the twelfth century.129 The evidence suggests that most bishoprics had no institutionalized writing oice. A cancellarius appears in only ive of eleven major collections of documents from the ninth to the mid-thirteenth century. The diocese and the dates are as follows: 1. Verona: 813–47, cancellarius.130 2. Pisa: 942, cancellarius; and 1147, Pisane urbis cancellarius et curie clericus.131 3. Padua: 964, subdiaconus atque cancellarius; 978 and 1026, presbiter atque cancellarius.132 4. Arezzo: 1009, diaconus, cancellarius et canonicus; 1013–37, cancellarius and cancellarius et primicerius.133 129

130

131

132

133

Carolingian capitularies of 822/23 and 832 regulating notaries refer to them as cancellarii; Capitularia regum francorum, ed. Alfred Boretius, in MGH, Legum, 2, pt. 1 (Hannover, 1883), 319, and ibid., Alfred Boretius and Victor Krause, in MGH, Legum, 2, pt. 2 (Hannover, 1897), 62.The title, however, seems largely to have fallen out of use in the regnum. I have ignored the forged documents dated 813, purportedly signed by Stadiberto cancellarius; Codice diplomatico veronese dalla caduta dell’impero romano alla ine del periodo carolingio, ed. Vittorio Fainelli, Monumenti storici, n.s., 1 (Venice, 1940), 120–38. The irst document above suspicion signed by Stadiberto as cancellarius was from 814: doc. 115: 147 [814]. For subsequent cancellarii, see Taudemario, doc. 172: 244 [844]; Walperto, doc. 176: 254 [844]; Taudemario, doc. 181: 272 [846]; and Ragiberto, doc. 184: 280 [847]. In 942, Pisa had Domenico as cancellarius; RCPisa, doc. 43: 25. An exception to the near-omnipresence of laymen writing episcopal documents is found in three charters of the 1140s.These are dated 1140, 1144, and 1147 (docs. 376, 394, and 407: 253, 264, and 274) and were written by Cantarino Pisane urbis cancellarius. Only in the third document did Cantarino add et Pisanae curie clericus, indicating that he was also a cleric. Ottavio Banti, “Per la storia della cancelleria del Comune di Pisa nei secoli XII e XIII,” BISI 73 (1961): 146, n. l, wrestles with the problem of a cleric as chancellor of Pisa’s commune. He stresses the powerful inluence exercised over the commune by the archbishop at the time and concludes that Cantarino was not a notary but depended for his authority on the archbishop’s power. He does not, consequently, constitute an exception to my statement that generally clerical notaries indicated their clerical status in their title. Banti concludes: “da ciò si potrebbe anche dedurre che la sua veste uiciale di cancelliere non era occasionale e che, anzi, proprio da tale carica egli derivava l’autorità ordinariamente derivanti, in quest’epoca, dall’uicio di notaio.” Cf. his later assessment: “Cantarinus, Pisanae urbis cancellarius (ca. 1140–1147) fu lo strumento della preminenza politica di un vescovo in regime consolare?” Bollettino storico pisano 40–41 (1971–72): 23–29. Cantarino’s two immediate successors as notaries of the commune were laymen; RCPisa, doc. 481: 336 [1164] and RMan, doc. 343: 232 [1169]. In 964 Adalberto refers to himself as subdiaconus atque cancellarius sancte pataviensis ecclesie (CDPad., 1, doc. 47: 71), and in 978 Ingelberto calls himself presbiter atque cancellarius sancte Patavine ecclesie; doc. 63:90. In 1014 Eldino writes a document signing himself presbiter et notarius (doc. 98:133), but in 1026 he reappears as presbiter atque cancellarius; doc. 111:148. Eight years later he igures in a document as a witness, but this time he is given the title archipresbiter; doc. 129:166. The same year Pretertino sacri palatii notarius notarizes for the bishop; and with Pretertino begins the lay domination of the Paduan chancery: doc. 130:167. Curiously, in 1064; doc. 187:217, the bishop writes the record of his own donation. The second document in the collection of the Arezzo cathedral emanating from the bishop’s curia, dated 979, is the work of Baterico notarius sacri palatii, and three of the next four are by Ugo, notarius sacri palatii, who seems to be a regular notary for the curia; DSArezzo, doc. 77: 109; doc. 92: 128; doc. 95: 133; and doc. 96: 134 [1008–9]. Contemporary with Ugo is Giovanni diaconus cancellarius et canonicus, who is probably Ugo’s superior: doc. 94: 131 [1009]. Beginning in 1013 and for a period

105

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

5. Milan: 1168–70, cimilarcha et cancellarius; 1184, diaconus et cancellarius, 1194 cancellarius.134 Just as the title primicerius was conjoined at times with grammaticus and cantor, so the title primicerius was sometimes associated with notarius. The dioceses and dates where individuals performing chancery functions bear the title primicerius are as follows: 1. Milan: 963, subdiaconus et primicerius notariorum; 1123, primicerius notariorum; 1130s, primicerius notariorum; 1153, primicerius notariorum.135 2. Ravenna: 891–983, primicerius notariorum.136 3. Bologna: 987 and 1012, notarius et primicerius; 1045, diaconus primicerius notarius; and 1110–30, clericus, primicerius et notarius.137

134

135

136

137

of twenty-four years a Gerardo appears who uses alternatively the title cancellarius or primicerius, but always the former when notarizing a document. One document refers to Geraldo as primicerius et cancellarius; doc. 156: 227 [1037]. His other acts are found in doc. 125: 178 [1026]; doc. 127: 182 [1027]; doc. 153: 221 [1033]; and doc. 156: 227 [1037]). Just as Ugo was probably Giovanni’s assistant, so Guido, who wrote a series of episcopal acts between March 1028 and April 1031, was probably assistant to Gerardo. Between 1028 and 1029, Guido notarized six acts: doc. 129: 187; doc. 130: 188; doc. 131: 190; doc. 132: 191; doc. 135: 194; doc. 136: 196. Guido’s place was taken by another lay notary, Andrea, in December 1029: doc. 139: 200. Andrea rogated continuously for the bishop until April 1031 (doc. 148: 211), when he began to share the work with other lay notaries. Antichi diplomi degli archievescovi di Milano e note di diplomatica episcopale, ed. Giacomo C. Bascapè, Fontes ambrosiani, 18 (Florence, 1937), refers to Alghisio mediolanensis ecclesie cimiliarcha et cancellarius in 1168 (74) and 1170 (77), and to Rolando, diaconus et cancellarius in 1184 (77). In 1170 Alghisio (Algixus) writes out the document, but in 1168 he acts as a witness. In 1194 (79 and 81) Rolando writes out two charters of the archbishop.The cimiliarca was the vicar of the archbishop, administrator of the treasury of the Milanese church (ibid., 32). According to two documents dated 963, a subdiaconus et primicerius notariorum, Lanfranco, headed an oice consisting of at least two other ecclesiastics. He may or may not have been a notary himself. Both documents were signed by Gotefredo and Landolfo, who designated themselves as clericus et notarius, while Gunzo presbiter wrote the texts (CDL, doc. 673: 1168, and CAPar. I, doc. 65: 201–2). In 997, among the witnesses to an archepiscopal document, the same Landolfo, clericus et notarius, reappears, but the document is written by Aldo notarius, either an acolyte or a layman (CDL, doc. 926: 1629). For 1123, see Gian Luigi Barni, “Milano verso l’egemonia,” Storia di Milano, vol. 3 (Milan, 1954), 335–36. Cf. Bascapè, Antichi diplomi, 69. The Ordo et ceremoniae ecclesiae ambrosianae mediolanensis, written in the 1130s, assigns a regular role in church ritual to the primicerius notariorum: Beroldus sive ecclesiae ambrosianae mediolanensis kalendarium et ordines saec. XII, ed. Marco Magistretti (Milan, 1894), 18, 20, 22, and passim. For 1153, see Bascapè, Antichi diplomi, 69, in which Alderico is listed as primricerius notariorum. A primicerius notariorum is mentioned in one of the earliest extant documents of the archbishopric of Ravenna in 891, but the oice had probably been in existence for some time; Giulio Buzzi, “La curia arcivescovile e la curia cittadina di Ravenna dall’859 al 1118,” BISI 35 (1915): 26. The title reappears again with Onesto I (971–83); ibid., 27. In the twelfth century the head of the writing oice bore the title magister notariorum: 1107, tabellio Ravennae et praepositus atque et magister notariorum s. Ravennensis ecclesiae; and 1127, tabellio Ravennae et magister notariorum s. Ravennensis ecclesiae; RRav, no. 15, doc. 4, p. 9; doc. 11, p. 14; and doc. 12, p. 14. Giorgio Cencetti’s study of early Bolognese documents, “Le carte bolognesi del secolo decimo,” Notariato medievale bolognese, Vol. I: Scritti di Giorgio Cencetti, Studi storici sul notariato italiano, no. 3 (Rome, 1977), 99, n. 13, cites a document dated 959, notarized by notarius Petrus diaconus of the Bolognese church, and another, ibid., 111, n. 51, dated 997, by notarius Leo, who signs himself as notarius et primicerius of the Bolognese church. Leo signs another document in the same way in 1012;

106

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

As I have already noted, the title primicerius indicates a position of leadership in the cathedral hierarchy and not a particular function.138 Consequently, when a witness with the simple title primicerius appears in a document, there are no grounds to consider him a notarius.139 Despite the fragmentary character of the data, we have enough evidence to conclude that, apart from the two archbishoprics and a few dioceses, the common practice of bishops and cathedral chapters was to employ local lay notaries when notarial work was to be done. The general absence of autonomous ecclesiastical writing oices is but one indication of the weak organization of diocesan government in Italy when compared with that in transalpine Europe.140 As lay notaries took on a wider range of activities, the numbers of notarii clerici, apparently as a consequence, gradually declined. As we saw in the last chapter, the early Carolingians required every bishop in the Italian kingdom to have his own notary for writing documents. Because that injunction was complemented by concessions to bishops allowing them to choose members of their own clergy for the purpose, it seems probable that most notarii clerici (the usual term for an ecclesiastical

138

139

140

Le carte bolognesi del secolo XI: Note topograico-storiche sui documenti bolognesi del secolo XI, ed. Giovanni Feo and Mario Fanti, 3 vols., Fonti per la storia dell’Italia medievale. Regesta chartarum, no. 53 (Rome, 2001–5). Geraldo presents himself as diaconus primicerius notarius in 1045 (ibid., 1:115). In 1054 he signs only as notarius et primicerius (ibid., 1:165). In the twelfth century a certain Giovanni notarizing documents in 1110 and 1130 signs as clericus, primicerius et notarius sancte bononiensis ecclesie: Giorgio Cencetti, “Note di diplomatica vescovile bolognese nei secoli XI–XIII,” in Scritti di paleograia e diplomatica in onore di Vincenzo Federici (Florence, 1944), 162–64, and 218. See also another signature in 1128: Chartularium Studii bononensis: Documenti per la storia dell’Università di Bologna dalle origini, vol. 3 (Bologna, 1916), 75. He is the last cleric to notarize in the episcopal chancery. Cencetti sees Giovanni primicerius as the successor to Giovanni notarius s. bononiensis ecclesie, who irst appears in 1089, died in the irst years of the twelfth century, and whom he identiies with Giovanni di Pietro tabellio, who is active as tabellio between 1079 and 1101: “Note di diplomatica vescovile,” 217. Cencetti, however, returns to this subject in his “La ‘rogatio’ nelle carte bolognesi: Contributo allo studio del documento notarile italiano nei secoli x-xii,” Notariato medievale bolognese: Scritti di Giorgio Cencetti, vol. l (Rome, 1977), 239, n. 34. In this article he maintains that all three Giovannis are one and that the notary uses various titles depending on the nature of the document in question. In Cencetti’s view, Giovanni, a layman in 1089, became a cleric after the birth of his son, Ugo, who succceded his father as notary of the bishop and refers to himself as ilius Johannis tabellio (Chartularium, 91 (1137). The irst notarius sacri palatii appears in Bologna in 1067; Le carte bolognesi del secolo XI, 320, doc. 156.The irst notarius sacri palatii worked in the episcopal chancery of Bologna in 1118; Cencetti, “Note di diplomatica vescovile,” 183, n. 33. The title primicerius notariorum indicates that the individual holding the title was the head of the notaries. We may assume that in the two other appearances of a primicerius writing documents, the absence of a joint title with notarius means that the writer is writing simply as a scribe. Modena: 996, diaconus et primicerius; RMod., 1, doc. 68: 1:100, and Reggio, 946 and 945/52, presbiter et primicerius; CReg. 1, doc. 55: 142 [946] and doc. 57: 146 [945/952]. This is a major theme of Robert Brentano’s classic comparative study of the medieval English and Italian churches, Two Churches: England and Italy in the Thirteenth Century (Princeton, N.J., 1969). As he writes of the thirteenth-century Italian church (348): “In Italy the Church was broken into parts: the relatively inefectual episcopal establishment; violent popular and “Franciscan” enthusiasts; propertied colleges and monasteries.”

107

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

notary after 900) were created by episcopal authorization.141 The larger number of clerical notaries were likely in lower orders, but subdeacons and deacons were not uncommon in this group. By 1050 the notarii clerici almost vanish from the documents in Lombardy (not Milan), Tuscany, the Veneto, and the Romagna (not Ravenna and Bologna). Notarii clerici do not even appear in the extensive collections of Mantua,142 Parma,143 or Pisa144 in the tenth or eleventh centuries. The diocese of Modena had a number of clerical notaries active before 933 but none thereafter. If Gherardo (1013–33), the last cancellarius identiied for the cathedral of Arezzo, was a notarius clericus, he was also likely the last of the kind in the diocese.145 In Reggio, a clerical notary wrote a document in 923, but afterward no notarius clericus appears down to 1060, when the document collection stops.146 Padua had a number of chancellors and 141

142

143

144

145

146

This appears to have been Charlemagne’s intention in 805; Bresslau, Handbuch, 1:619. We may assume that the practice continued over the next two centuries. The Mantuan collection has two examples of clerics writing non-notarial documents: a privilege written in Cremona for the bishop per manum Frugerii archipresbit. et cappellani (RMan, doc. 129: 1:96 [1104]; and one signed by Vitalo, d. ep. Mantuani capellanus, doc. 180: 1:130 [1119]. There are in the tenth century a large number of documents without scribal signature, some of which were surely the work of clerics. But with the exception of the bishop’s inal testament (CAPar, doc. 9: 56 [913], lay notaries are employed by the bishop for writing the earliest episcopal documents: CAPar, doc. 72–74: 222–29 [982–87], and doc. 81: 247 [995]. In 942 Pisa had Domenico as cancellarius: RCPisa, doc. 43: 25. All surviving Pisan documents in the eleventh and twelfth centuries were written by laymen with few exceptions. Apart from the three documents written by Cantarino, cancellerius pisane civitatis, cited in note 131, there are only two found in the Regesto della chiesa di Pisa: a privilege written in 1116 by Obderic of Vienne “eo tempore cum supra dicto ep. commoranti,” probably a French cleric (doc. 269: 169), and a charter by Uberto diaconus in 1125 (doc. 298: 194). All the documents contained in the irst three volumes of the Carte dell’Archivio capitolare di Pisa, 4 vols., Thesaurus ecclesiarum Italiae, sec. 7: Toscana, nos. 1–4 (Rome, 1969–71) are written by laymen: vol. 1 (930–1050), ed. Emma Falaschi (1971); vol. 2 (1051–75), ed. Emma Falaschi (1973); and vol. 3 (1076–1100), ed. M. Tirelli Carli (1977). Vol. 4 contains a document from 1114 written by a certain Carlo presbiter, but he does not sign as a notary; vol. 4 (1101–20), ed. Carli (1969), doc. 72, p. 162. See also Carte dell’Archivio di Stato di Pisa, ed. Mariella D’Alessandro Nannipieri, Thesaurus ecclesiarum Italiae, vol. 7: Toscana, no. 9 (780–1070) (Rome, 1978), which contains no clerical writers. Beginning in 1057 (Carte dell’Archivio di stato, doc. 59: 154–55), notaries by papal authority (notarius apostolice sedis) appear, and their number increases sharply in the twelfth century. Gherardo (1013–37) is the last cleric in the documents designated as cancellarius. On him, see Nicolaj, “Per una storia della documentazione vescovile aretina,” 135–38. For the next century and a half all documents are by lay notaries, with two exceptions: Arnulfo diaconus et canonicus, DSArezzo doc. 193: 276 (1064); and Uberto [archi]diaconus, doc. 352: 478 (1147). The collection of episcopal documents for Modena, beginning in the eighth century, ofers a picture of intense activity by clerical notaries up to 933, when Petronio clericus seo et notarius rogates a document; RMod., 1, doc. 46: 1:70. Girolamo Tiraboschi, Memorie storiche modenesi col codice diplomatico, 2 vols. (Modena, 1793), shows the continued activity of clerics in writing nonnotarial documents, but there is no indication of a cancellarius or of clerical notaries after 933. After 1050 clerical participation of any sort drops noticeably. While the irst surviving episcopal documents (881–926) of the church of Reggio were written by clerical notaries (CReg, 1, doc. 17: 1:47 to doc. 47: 1:121), from 926 on to the last published document in 1060 no other appears.

108

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

clerical notaries at work down to 1034, but after that date lay notaries monopolized notarial functions in the chancery.147 The last mention of a notarius clericus in Verona is 982.148 The admission of secular notaries to the writing oice of the archbishopric of Milan is diicult to date. We lack a published collection of cathedral documents from 999, when the notaries were all clerics, until 1144.When in 1145, we again have documentation, there is no trace of a clerical notary in the archbishop’s chancery, with the possible exception of the cancellarius himself, a high ecclesiastical oicial who occasionally wrote archepiscopal charters that did not require notarization.149 Probably lay notaries began to enter the employ of the chancery in the course of the eleventh century. By the time documentation resumes in the second half of the twelfth, they monopolized the oice. Landolfo senior (d. ca. 1100) tells us that he and others among the clerical staf of the cathedral were notaries, although judging from his remarks, to be a notary in the Milanese church meant to occupy a rank in the hierarchy of oices in the Milanese cathedral more commonly held elsewhere by an acolitus or acolyte.We also learn from a document of 1179, a century later, that notarii had oicial functions in the performance of church rituals.150 But did they have notarial functions apart from liturgical duties in the Milanese cathedral?151 Landolfo does not help us here. As for clerical notaries in the city, its suburbs, and churches aside from the cathedral, six notarized documents by clerics survive from the ninth century, but notaries identiied as ecclesiastics are nowhere to be found in any of the collections for the 147 148

149

150 151

See above, n. 132. I am deeply indebted to Maureen Miller, who has searched through Veronese charters from 962 to 1158 on my behalf.The last document she has found written by a notarius clericus is dated December 12, 982. Rogating a gift of land to San Lorenzo in Sezano, the notary signs: Ego Liudprandus clericus notarius domnis regis; Archivio di Stato, Verona, Santa Maria in Organo, perg. no. 15 (originale). The fact that Liutprando, earlier notarizing as clericus notarius, now signs as a royal notary suggests that he had successfully sought from the king an alternative to the bishop’s designation as a source for his notarial authority.There are no successive examples of this combination of titles at Verona, nor have I seen any others in our sources for these centuries. Lay notaries who notarize or copy episcopal documents given in Bascapè, Antichi diplomi, are the following: Otto, judex 1145 (67); Scoto, judex et missus domini secundi Chunradi regis, 1156 (70); Mainerio ilius quondam Ardrici de Faniano, notarius domini Henrici Imperatoris, 1161 (71); Jacopo di Magniago, notarius, 1161 (71), 1168 (74), and 1194 (81); Gartio, judex, 1169 (75); Martino Maderno, notarius archiepiscopatus, 1169 (77); and Filippo di Nuxigia, notarius sacri palatii, 1198 (82). It is important to note that Scoto must also have been a notary, but he chose to emphasize his higher status as a royal judex and missus in his signature. I would assume that the other notaries signing simply as notarius, judex, or notarius archiepiscopatus were not royal notaries. Mediolanensis historiae Libri quatuor, ed. Alessandro Cutolo, RIS, vol. 4 (Bologna, 1942), 76 (26). Lodovico Muratori, Antiquitates italicae medii aevi, vol. 4 (Milan, 1741), 857, cites a Milanese document of 1179 that assigns the notarii their tasks and payment in celebration of the inding of the True Cross: “Notarius, qui portabit crucem suum [of the archbishop] denarios quatuor.... Notarii duo, quos volo interesse ipsi festivitati, scilicet unum pro causa legendi, et alterum causa canendi, habeant denarios quatuor pro unoquoque.” Landolfo Senior, Mediolanensis historiae libri quatuor, 13 (25–26), identiies the notarius with the acolitus: “Qui in tempore notarios [Ambrosius] ordinavit, qui acoliti usque hodie vocentur, quibus magistrum praeposuit.”

109

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

tenth, eleventh, or twelfth centuries.152 Although he wrote letters for the city government, Landolfo junior (d. 1137), a Milanese ecclesiastic dispossessed of his church, made no claim to be a notary.153 Clerical notaries persisted longer in the Romagna than elsewhere in the regnum. Only two lay notaries, for example, appear to have been employed in the archbishop’s chancery in Ravenna between 850 and 1118.154 The quasi-clerical monopoly of notarial positions in the chancery broke down in the irst part of the twelfth century, however, and before the end of the century lay notaries alone were performing notarial functions there.155 As far as the city itself was concerned, from 751 to at least 1200 the notaries or tabelliones of Ravenna were overwhelmingly lay in status.156 A similar pattern can be seen in the episcopal curia at Bologna, which, along with Ravenna itself, retained special ties with the Roman papacy long after the Frankish conquest.The earliest surviving document in the episcopal archive, a leasing agreement of 959, was written by Pietro, diaconus et notarius sancte Bononiensis Ecclesie.157 The bishopric maintained a clerical chancellor down to the 1130s, when the oice seems to have disappeared. Thereafter lay notaries monopolized notarial 152

153

154

155

156

157

For these six documents, see Alberto Liva, Notariato e documento notarile a Milano: Dall’Alto medioevo alla ine del Settecento, Studi storici sul notariato italiano, 4 (Rome, 1979), 15. The documents of the Milanese commune for the eleventh century in the series Gli atti privati milanesi e comaschi del sec. XI, vol. 1 (1000–1025), ed. Giovanni Vittani and Cesare Maneresi (Milan, 1933); vols. 2–4 (1026–1100), ed. Cesare Manaresi and Caterina Santoro (Milan, 1960–69) are all notarized by laymen. See also Keller, “Gerichtsort,” 31, n. 117; and Cecilia Piacitelli, “Notariato a Milano nel xii secolo,” 971, who has analyzed all Milanese documents from the eighth to the twelfth centuries. The only Milanese notarii clerici that I have identiied for the eleventh century are Landolfo senior and Landolfo Cotta; Mediolanensis historiae, viii and 86.The former seems to have been born around 1025, while the latter was murdered in 1057. On Landolfo senior, see my Chapter 3. Buzzi, “La curia arcivescovile,” 24. The laymen are public notaries: Giovanni II (919–31), 63; and Giovanni III (942–68), 64. These observations are based on a survey of RRav, nos. 7 and 15. The diiculty in establishing who is and who is not a clerical notary requires interpreting a title. For example, in 1107 a certain Ugo notarizes as tabellio Ravennae et praepositus atque magister notariorum s. Ravennensis ecclesiae, and in 1127, as tabellio Ravennae et primicerius atque magister Notariorum sancte Ravennensis ecclesie (RRav, 15: doc. 4: 9; doc. 11: 14; and doc. 12: 14). In 1122 and in 1129 up to 1148 another Ugo is active, this time notarizing as tabellio et notarius sancte Ravennensis ecclesie; doc. 6: 11; doc. 13: 15; and doc. 27: 23. I interpret the two diferent signatures as identifying two diferent people, the irst Ugo is a cleric, the second a layman. The title of the second Ugo, however, contrasts with that of other lay notaries, for example, Niger tabellio plebis S. Marie in Portu, a section of the city (1184, doc. 79: 51); Pertecone plebis S. Marie in Portu tabellio (1191, doc. 111: 71); Giovanni, sancte Ravennensis ecclesie et plebis Portus tabellio (1212, doc. 156: 109); and Speme, sacri palacii notarius (1214, doc. 173: 122). The second Ugo was likely a lay notary working in the episcopal curia as was Giovanni, but Giovanni was also claiming by his title to a more general practice in the town. Cf. Bresslau, Handbuch, 1:628. The tradition of clerical notaries persisted longest in Venice. Imbued with Byzantine inluence, the city continued to use clerical notaries for a signiicant portion of notarial work done for both laymen and clergy up into the ifteenth century. On Venetian clerical notaries in the ifteenth century, see Giorgio Cracco, “Relinquere laicis que laicorum sunt: Un intervento di Eugenio IV contro i preti-notai di Venezia,” Bollettino dell’Istituto di Storia della Società e della Stato veneziano 2 (1961): 179–89. Mark Steinhof, “Origins and Development of the Notariate at Ravenna: Sixth through Thirteenth Centuries” (Ph.D. diss., New York University, 1977), 120. Cencetti, “Note di diplomatica vescovile,” 217.

110

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

work for the bishop. Outside the curia in the city, all surviving documents are the work of lay notaries.158 Why was there a trend toward fewer clerical notaries in the Italian kingdom beginning in the early ninth century?159 First, clerical notaries were casualties of the rivalry between local bishops and great nobles anxious to heighten their power. Such a rivalry existed in the amorphous duchy of Lucca, which in the second quarter of the ninth century included a large portion of Tuscany. As late as the irst years of the ninth century clerics there were heavily involved in political and judicial afairs as lociservatores, scabini, and notarii. Under the duchy’s Duke Bonifazio I and his son Bonifazio II, however, the bishop’s powers were sharply curtailed, and gradually all ecclesiastics were excluded from political power. After 857 no clerics appear in the documentation with titles of lociservator, scabinus, or notarius.160 The absence of clerical notaries in some other areas of the Italian kingdom outside Tuscany by the second half of the ninth century suggests that other territorial princes saw the political advantage of emulating Lucca’s policy by reducing the role of ecclesiastics in temporal government.161 While the political strategy of secular lords helps to explain why in so many areas from the ninth century onward few or no clerical notaries are found, there is a second explanation as well. This one relates to royal policy and the increase of the bishops’ secular power from the late ninth century due to the political confusion following on the collapse of Carolingian authority, and the continuing Hungarian depredations. In his battle against powerful nobles, who were anxious to augment their own power in such a situation, the king could more securely rely on the bishops, whose appointment was largely under his control. Furthermore, as spiritual leaders of their cities, bishops enjoyed a prestige denied to secular lords, particularly in such troubled times. Even where bishops did not replace local counts in the course of the 158

159

160

161

Outside of the Bolognese episcopal curia, only two documents written by clerics are found among the 475 pieces in the Carte bolognesi and neither are notarial in character: ibid., 228 (1062) and 267 (1065). I would add that notarius predominated in Bologna up to the middle of the eleventh century, but as the century went on tabellio became the usual title; Ettore Falconi, Lineamenti di diplomatica notarile e tabellionale (Parma, n.d.), 124: “Nei tempi più antichi lo scrittore si professa notarius e così fra tutto il X secolo in città, ino a oltre la metà del successivo nel territorio, poi prevale tabellio.” Andreas Meyer, Felix et inclitus notarius: Studien zum italienischen Notariat vom 7. Bis zum 13. Jahrhundert, Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom, vol. 92 (Tübingen, 2000), 78, likewise observes the increasing laicization of the notariate between the eighth and the tenth centuries. Keller, “La Marca di Tuscia,” 122–24. Keller sees these princes as extending their policy to Pisa as well (124). Boniface I is cited in documents of 812 and 813; his son, Boniface II, irst appeared as ruler in 823 (122). He was driven out of Tuscany in 833. Although the term lociservatores (also locopositi) is sometimes used to designate underoicials of the count, in Lucca and Pisa it was a term of Lombard origin, equivalent to the Frankish term scabini, or judges; Julius Ficker, Forschungen zur Reichs- und Rechtsgeschichte Italiens, 3:217. On the scabini, see my Chapter 1, under “The Documentary Culture.” Keller, “La Marca di Tuscia,” 124, concludes that: “i conti di Lucca anticiparono nei propri centri di potere uno svolgimento tipico per lo sviluppo del notariato italiano: in essi, per la prima volta, gli ecclesiastici venero totalmente esclusi dall’attività notarile, e in tal modo fu reso possibile lo svilippo di una tradizione scrittoria e giuridica riservata interamente ai laici.”

111

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

tenth century, as a rule they participated more actively in local political afairs than they had in the ninth.162 When King Ugo (926–50) attempted to curb the power of the great nobles by transforming the local notariate into a royal one, the policy beneited not only the local elite from which most of the new royal notariate came but also the bishop.163 As bishops gained political ascendency in the cities in the tenth century and sought to extend their secular authority beyond the city walls into the countryside, a common episcopal policy by the late tenth century, a local royal notariate ofered a number of advantages. The bishops favored a royal notary over an ordinary lay notary or a clerical notary because, irst of all, royal notaries, drawn from the local elite, brought with them the prestige of their families. Second, in contrast with local or comital notaries and clerical notaries, who were limited to working within their county, royal notaries traditionally had no jurisdictional limitations.164 The irst generations of the expanded body of notarii sacri palatii and judices sacri palatii would have claimed a similar privilege. Because of their ability to work beyond county boundaries, the new royal notariate would have proven more efective agents of expanding episcopal power. The appearance in the second half of the tenth century of licenses given by local counts to royal notaries who wished to notarize in counties other than their own can be explained in at least two ways: the licenses may have represented arbitrary iningements on royal power or may have been related to the kind of work royal notaries were doing beyond their localities. Whereas the limited Pavian group of specialists had initially functioned only as royal agents in their work outside the capital, after about 930, as has been said, they appear to have been notarizing for private individuals as well. The expanded group of royal notaries likely claimed the same privilege. Counts may have begun to require a license for royal notaries because they 162

163 164

The weak secular power of the bishop in Bologna vis-à-vis the count, as I have remarked, might help to explain the relatively late appearance of lay notaries as writers of episcopal documents in Bologna. On the power structure in Bologna in this period, see Augusto Vicinelli, “L’inizio del dominio pontiicio in Bologna (774–876) ed il passaggio dell’Esarcato dal governo papale a quello dei re d’Italia (876–1073),” Atti e memorie della deputazione di storia patria per le provincie di Romagna, 4th ser., 10 (1919–20): 139–76 and 220–45; and 11 (1920–21): 39–76 and 217–58. On the political power of bishops in tenth-century Francia, see Michel Parisse, “Princes laïques et/ou moines. Les evèques du X siècle,” Il secolo di ferro: Mito e realtà del secolo X. 19–25 aprile 1990, SSCISAM, 38 (Spoleto, 1991), 490 and 502. Keller, “La Marca di Tuscia,” 134–35. For the limitations on the jurisdiction of comital and clerical notaries, see Chapter 1, under “The Documentary Culture.” For the wide-ranging activity of royal notaries and judges (also notaries), see Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 189–244. Renato Piattoli, Le carte del monastero di S. Maria di Montepiano (1000–1200), Regesta chartarum Italiae, 30 (Rome, 1942), lv, maintains that, at least after the tenth century, notaries who were neither imperial or palatine could also work outside their own areas freely. However, he uses, a very narrow sample, and I tend to think that in general the distinction between a local notary and an imperial one persisted at least into the thirteenth century. Liva points out (60–61) that in Milan in the eleventh and twelfth centuries notaries without further speciication of their titles worked only in the city, while Milanese notarii sacri palatii also notarized in the territory.

112

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

were working privately in their counties.165 In any case, the instances of licensing dropped decisively in the eleventh century. When speaking of a drastic diminution of notarii clerici over time, however, we must repeat the caveat made in Chapter 1: there is no way of determining to what extent clerics, who formerly would have been notarii clerici, entered the ranks of royal notaries in the tenth century.166 Despite ecclesiastical prohibitions against priests as notaries and the special juridical status of clerics, both of which made them less likely candidates for royal or imperial appointment, we cannot discount the interest of clerical notaries in seeking the more attractive status of royal notary, and we must consider a crossover, unnoticeable in the surviving documentation, as a partial cause for the diminution in the number of notarii clerici. In my view, however, it is justiied to maintain that by 1050 lay notaries controlled the documentary culture in most dioceses of the regnum. In sum, in contrast with transalpine Europe, the Italian clergy in 1000 had no monopoly on the writing function. To the contrary, by 1000 the clergy were being increasingly excluded from what was perhaps the most important role of the writer in society. Most clerical communities were inviting lay notaries to perform tasks that in transalpine Europe would have been done by clerics. In the decades after 1000, conident of their growing control over written instruments, laymen began to develop a new intellectual culture revolving, not around pagan literary texts or Christian writings, but around legal texts, primarily the Justinian corpus. The great intellectual revival of Francia would begin in the late tenth century in the cathedral chapters of cities such as Paris, Rheims, Chartres, and Angers. Within those insulated communities, the elite – that is, cancellarii, scholastici, and their associates – found a ready-made audience for their literary and scholarly writings among their colleagues and those belonging to a similar sodality in other cathedral communities. In Italy, the early and easy access of laymen to most episcopal and cathedral writing oices prevented the self-suiciency of chancery, scriptorium, and school so central to the intellectual dynamic of the cathedral in northern Europe, and the cohesion of the intellectual clerical elite was weakened by the permanent presence of lay notaries in its midst. Current studies suggest that there would be a rebirth of the clerical notariate in Italy, but not until the second half of the thirteenth and the irst half of the fourteen 165

166

Handloike, Die lombardischen Städte, 66–68, provides evidence showing that in the second half of the tenth century notarii domni regis and notarii sacri palatii frequently acknowledged rogating documents out of this area with comptal permission. The only notary he cites for the irst half of the century (930) requiring the permission of the local count (pro data licencia) was actually working ex jussione of the count. He suggests (68) that this permission was perhaps necessary when the notarii were not working in the king’s court or in the service of a royal missus. Giovanna Nicolaj, Cultura e prassi di notai preirneriani: Alle origini del Rinascimento giuridico (Milan, 1991), suggests that perhaps the Carolingian license had a certain revival “proprio nella seconda metà del X secolo” (24, n. 53). Cf. Liva, Notariato e documento notarile, 13. By the eleventh century the number of authorizations had dropped sharply. Bresslau, Handbuch, 1:624. The only case I have encountered is that of Liudprando clericus notarius domnis regis in Verona in 982 (see above, n. 148).

113

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

century.167 It occurred in connection with the early steps that bishops took toward bureaucratizing episcopal government in an efort to assert greater control over the ecclesiastical establishment of the diocese. In Arezzo this took the form of an extension of notarization to almost all episcopal documents, an evident concern for organizing and conserving records, and an episcopal claim of the right to create notaries when it suited the bishop’s needs.168 Just as the heavy temporal responsibilities of the bishop had earlier invited dependence on a corps of local lay notaries, so his loss of signiicant temporal power in the course of the thirteenth century encouraged him to circle the wagons by clericalizing his bureaucracy.169 But let us return to the tenth century. In Francia, where the Viking invasions had destroyed towns and monasteries along the Atlantic coast and along rivers deep in the interior, and where internal political rivalries had paralyzed reconstruction, scholarly and literary production declined. In Italy, however, despite similar political conlicts and external invasions – albeit less destructive because they were more sporadic and geographically less extensive – the Carolingian institutional structure of education, oriented around grammatical studies, enjoyed relative continuity. In the tenth century as in the ninth, all the leaders of the book culture were ecclesiastics; but whereas in the ninth century foreigners, principally Franks and Irish, had done much of the scholarly work and teaching, in the tenth, with exceptions such 167

168

169

Giorgio Chittolini, “Episcopalis curiae notarius”: Cenni sui notai di curie vescovili nell’Italia centrosettentrionale alla ine del medioevo,” in Società, Istituzioni, Spiritualità: Studi in onore di Cinzio Violante, 2 vols. (Spoleto, 1994), 221–32, was among the irst scholars to draw attention to the large number of notarii episcopalis curiae in late medieval Italy. More recent articles have emphasized the clerical status of the notaries illing this oice. Antonio Olivieri, “Per la storia dei notai chierici: Il caso del Piemonte,” in Studi in onore di Giorgio Costamagna, ed. Dino Puncuh (Genoa, 2003), 701–38, focuses on Torino, Vercelli, and Asti, while in the same volume Gian Giacomo Fissore, “Jacobus Sarrachus notarius et scopolanus Astensis ecclesiae: I chierici notai nella documentazione capitolare e vescovile ad Asti fra XIII e XIV secolo,” 356–414, deals in detail with clerical notaries in Asti. For Verona, see Maria Clara Rossi, “I notai di curia e la nascità di una ‘burocrazia’ vescovile: Il caso veronese,” Società e storia 59 (2002): 1–33. For other studies, see the bibliography given by Antonio Olivieri, “I registri vescovili nel Piemonte medievale,” in I registri vescovili dell’Italia settentrionale (secoli XII–XV): Atti del Convegno di Studi (Monselice, 24–25 novembre 2000, ed. Attilio B. Langeli and Antonio Rigon, Italia sacra, vol. 73 (Rome, 2003), 3, n. 6; and James A. Brundage, The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession: Canonists, Civilians, and Courts (Chicago, 2008), 202. In her pages on episcopal documentary practices in Arezzo, Giovanna Nicolaj Petronio, “Per una storia della documentazione vescovile aretina,” 167–71, observes that by the second half of the thirteenth century notaries were giving public form to all episcopal documents. She writes (168) that “i notai con la loro cultura pratico-giuridica rientrano in forza nella costituzione di una nuova diplomatica vescovile.” See also Paul Fournier, Les Oicialités au moyen âge: Étude sur l’organisation, la compétence et la procédure des tribunaux ecclésiastiques ordinaires en France de 1180 à 1328 (Paris, 1880), 53–54; and Giulio Battelli, “L’esame di idoneità dei notai pubblici apostolica auctoritate nel Duecento,” Forschungen zur Reichs-, Papst-und Landesgeschichte: Peter Herde zum 65. Geburtstag von Freunden, Schülern und Kollegen dargebracht, ed. Karl Borchardt and Enno Bünz, 2 vols. (Stuttgart, 1988), 1:255–63. Fissore, “Jacobus Sarrachus,” 413, concludes: “il problema posto dai chierici notai non è certo il loro possibile collocarsi in opposizione ai notai laici; nella scelta di incrementare, nei ranghi dei propri oiciales, una presenza notarile corredata dallo status ecclesiastico sembra, semmai, intravedersi la voluntà di deinire più nettamente una propria burocrazia nell’ambito di un ceto notarile che è anche, inevitabilmente e totalmente, identiicato nella burocrazia del comune.”

114

Italy and the Ottonian Renaissance

as Rather, native Italians illed both roles. Of the four Italian scholars whom I have discussed in some detail, all probably received their educations in cathedral schools. Again, as in the case of the Carolingian Renaissance, Italian scholars initially helped to inspire intellectual life in the northern half of a new empire after 950. By 1000, documentary culture was increasingly becoming the province of widely dispersed lay notaries empowered to practice their profession by royal or imperial authorization. Local notaries and clerical notaries lacked that credential, putting them at a disadvantage: they appear in the documents in decreasing numbers. While all imperial notaries now shared prerogatives that had once been the property of an elite notariate in the royal government at Pavia, Pavian notaries were located at the seat of royal power, a position which made them not only wealthy and powerful but also gave them a unique perspective on legal relationships throughout the kingdom. It would be no coincidence, then, if in Pavia an early revival of interest in the study of Roman law should emerge.

115

Chapter 3

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture and the Birth of a New Book Culture (1000–1075)

he eleventh century marked the beginning of the irst major hermeneutical enterprise in Medieval Europe and perhaps the most ambitious: the recovery and interpretation of the sixth-century Corpus iuris civilis. The undertaking, initiated by legal professionals in various parts of Italy and southern Francia, would be taken up with systematic intent in the twelfth century by Bolognese jurists, who brought it to completion. The greatest advances in the pre-Bolognese period were those of the circle of notarii et judices sacri palatii at Pavia. Inspired by the inadequacy of Lombard law to meet the needs of a society in rapid political and economic development, the study of Roman law texts in Pavia had a narrow utilitarian goal at the outset. Nonetheless, the legal activity of Pavian jurists constitutes perhaps the best evidence we have of an intensiication of intellectual life in the regnum in the eleventh century. The success of the Pavians’ enterprise depended in part on their legal expertise but also in part on their training in grammar. Such training presupposes an education in the schools of the Church: only in the next century can we speak with conidence of lay grammar schools. Although we can ofer no evidence of laymen studying in these church schools, we do know that in the seventy-ive years between 1000 and the beginning of the struggle between pope and emperor in 1075, Italian cathedral and monastic schools lourished. The bishops of the regnum, many of them German appointees, embraced the German emperors’ program of litterae et mores, a course of study designed to produce clerics dedicated to imperial service, the most talented of whom would attain high positions in the church hierarchy. The biography of Anselmo of Besate in this chapter illustrates the mentality that such training produced. Nevertheless, in the midst of this, the regnum’s golden age of cathedral and monastic learning, even as educational institutions thrived, literary and nonlegal scholarly works, apart from saints’ lives, were few.The scarcity was an efect of a continuing lack of patronage and of the force of a conservative tradition of learning essentially dedicated to preserving knowledge but not necessarily to expanding it. In the early eleventh century, dialectic laid claim to its own place in the reinvigorated school curriculum. I have chosen to illustrate the fortunes of the newly revived study of dialectic in Italy by showing its efects on the career of Lanfranco and his debate with Berengar of Tours over transubstantiation. There is suicient

T

116

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

evidence to suggest that up to the middle of the eleventh century the study of dialectic was as developed in Italy as in Francia, but that thereafter this member of the trivium languished.The following analysis endeavors to explain why.While dialectic, theology, and natural science formed a potent intellectual mixture in transalpine Europe from the twelfth century, after the mid-eleventh century into the thirteenth, dialectic in the regnum functioned largely as an auxiliary of rhetoric. Italians tended to distrust dialectic – largely, I will suggest, because narrow pietistic tendencies in the native Italian reform movement viewed it as posing a threat to revelation. Pietro Damiani, the most outspoken proponent of that viewpoint, was also the sharpest critic of the study of pagan authors, which he saw as contributing to the worldliness of the church. This chapter will present him as the most eloquent representative of one of two new monastic movements, the Vallombrosan and Camaldolensian, both founded on vows of absolute poverty. Because their lives contrasted so sharply with those of the clerics around them, the two new orders attracted a large popular following. Unlike the Camaldolensians, which Pietro led, the Vallombrosans actively supported popular movements to drive out corrupt clerics, thereby contributing to the civil struggles leading up to and continuing during the papal–imperial battle that began in 1075. In order to set the early development of a new area of Italian intellectual life against the background of the conservative tendencies dominating the traditional book culture, the discussion of the new legal book culture appears in the inal section of this chapter. An outgrowth of the earlier documentary culture that laymen nearly monopolized by 1000, legal book culture made gains because it attracted people indoctrinated in the importance of using legal documents in daily life. Its attraction lay in the promise it ofered of bringing order to civil society, especially in the absence of other legal authorities in the form of central government or territorial principalities. The study of Roman law, together with, from the twelfth century, the study of canon law, would constitute the regnum’s major contribution to the intellectual life of medieval Europe. ITALY UNDER THE SALIANS

By the late tenth century, the demographic increase and expanding role of commerce that had slowed from the late ninth, resumed and intensiied in the eleventh.1 Fundamental to explaining the momentum of the Italian economy in 1000 is the fact that, unlike their northern counterparts, many upper-class landowners in Italy had never abandoned city life.2 Their urban experience made commercial investment and participation in trade congenial to them. Unlike Pirenne’s humble northern merchants, for whom amassing capital was a slow process, the amphibious citydwelling Italian upper classes were able to draw revenues from allodial possessions

1

2

Philip Jones, The Italian City-State: From Commune to Signoria (Oxford, 1997), 92–103, succinctly sketches the major aspects of demographic and economic revival. See ibid., 46–92, for the contrasts in the relationship between town and country in transalpine Europe and northern and central Italy between late antiquity and the eleventh century.

117

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

or beneices in the countryside, allowing them to accrue capital more quickly and generating more overall economic investment.3 Land prices began rising dramatically in Lombardy, the most economically advanced region of the kingdom, from the second half of the tenth century, and the trend spread throughout the regnum by the early eleventh century.4 The land market proved particularly active in areas surrounding cities, where demand for food encouraged landowners who dwelt in both the city and the country to rationalize production by consolidating their holdings through purchase and exchange. While in the eleventh century the pursuit of land was common among prosperous members of Italian society in general, many bishops and monasteries also had a religious motive for acquiring land.5 By repurchasing from laymen the rights over lands that laymen had purloined, reformed monasteries and cathedral chapters promoted their own autarchy, a goal that to them amounted to separating themselves from worldly entanglements. At the same time, however, the same policy of acquisition was followed by less devout individual ecclesiastics and less spiritually oriented ecclesiastical institutions eager to increase their wealth. Unlike their immediate predecessors, the Italian kings Ugo and Berengario, the German emperors Otto I and Otto II spent little time in Italy. Apart from occasional appearances in the southern kingdom, at which times they exerted their power directly, they relied largely on Italians governing themselves. Invited to ill the power 3

4

5

Pirenne’s model for the medieval northern merchant was Saint Godrick of Finchal, who became rich from humble beginnings. For Pirenne, the merchant class had to be derived from groups of men outside the established order – the outcasts, the runaways, those hostile to the old system – who had both the mental elasticity and mobility to enter commerce. Perhaps the best summary of Pirenne’s thesis of town origins and growth is to be found in Henri Pirenne, Gustave Cohen, and Henri Focillon, La civilization occidentale au moyen âge du XIe au milieu du XVe siècle (Paris, 1933), 7–145. For modiications of Pirenne’s thesis, see my “The Landlord and the Economic Revival of the Middle Ages in Northern Europe, 1000–1250,” American Historical Review 76 (1971): 978–85. Cinzio Violante, La società milanese nell’età precomunale (Rome and Bari, 1974), 123–59, sees a rise in land prices in Lombardy after 960–70 that continues into the next century. For general observations on land prices in the period, see David Herlihy, “The Agrarian Revolution in Southern France and Italy, 801–1000,” Speculum 33 (1958): 21–41. The increasing awareness of the economic importance of land in a time of demographic rise was further relected in the marked increase in the percentage of leases in northern and central Italy after 1100 that speciied rents paid in kind rather than in money. This shift represented in many cases a sizable hiking of the rent: David Herlihy, “Rural Seigneury in Italy, 751–1200,” Agricultural History 33 (1959): 68. Already in the second quarter of the tenth century, the episcopal reformer Atto, bishop of Vercelli, had called upon churches and monasteries to recuperate their alienated properties, in this way linking church reform to reclamation of rights over church property; Cinzio Violante, “I vescovi e l’economia monetaria,” Vescovi e diocesi in Italia nel medioevo (sec. IX–XIII): Atti del II convegno di storia della Chiesa in Italia, Roma, 5–9 sett. 1961, Italia sacra: Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica, vol. 5 (Padua, 1964), 199. By the late tenth century Cluny was establishing its own dependencies in the regnum at the same time as its program of reconstituting monastic holdings was being widely emulated in the Italian monastical world: Herbert E. J. Cowdrey, The Cluniacs and the Gregorian Reform (Oxford, 1970) 248–52. Although his study is valuable from other points of view, Ernst Werner, Die gesellschaftlichen Grundlagen der Klosterreform im 11. Jahrhundert (Berlin, 1953), exaggerates the economic motive behind the Cluniac reforms. Violante, Società milanese nell’età precomunale, 169–73, provides a brief analysis of the restoration of the patrimony of the Milanese church by Ariberto, archbishop of Milan (1018–45).

118

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

vacuum, large landowners, lay and ecclesiastical, who had already allied themselves with the monarchy against the great territorial princes, set out to transform their power into lordships, by means of which they not only exercised a landlord’s authority over those living on their own lands but also enjoyed governmental power over the whole population of an area.6 As we saw in the last chapter, Otto III attempted to reverse this dispersal of political authority by appointing more Germans to Italian bishoprics and by using high German functionaries to hear most royal placiti. Beginning with Henry II (1004–24), the last of the Ottonians, a new conception of imperial government emerged in Germany, which aimed at concentrating power in the king’s hands so that, rather than allowing his siblings to rule over their own duchies under the emperor’s aegis, all those who exercised governmental power in the kingdom did so as oicers of the Crown and not on the basis of heredity or custom. As oicials they could be dismissed or transferred at the monarch’s will. Henry’s successor, Conrad II (1024–39), the irst of the Salian emperors, adopted Henry’s new conception of imperial kingship and attempted to extend it to Italy.7 In the course of Conrad’s second Italian voyage in 1036–38, in an endeavor to make the bishops, like secular lords, into oicials of the empire, Conrad II arrested and deposed the bishops of Vercelli, Piacenza, and Cremona, who had disagreed with his policies, and besieged Milan in an efort, ultimately unsuccessful, to capture the city’s archbishop.8 In contrast to his father, who had been criticized by reformers for simony, Conrad’s successor, the pious Henry III (1039–56), campaigned against it as well as against clerical marriage. Henry, however, was no less dedicated than his father to establishing the preeminence of the German monarchy in both secular and spiritual matters. In Henry’s case, that included reforming the Church under his leadership. During his one trip to Italy in 1046–47, which he had undertaken for the sake of his coronation in Rome, he found himself confronted with three claimants to the 6

7

8

Cinzio Violante, “La signoria rurale nel secolo X: Preposte tipologiche,” in Il secolo di ferro: Mito e realtà del secolo X, 19–25 aprile 1990, SSCISAM, 38 (Spoleto, 1991), 329–85; Mario Nobili, “Le trasformazioni nell’ordinamento agrario e nei rapporti economico-sociali nelle campagne dell’Italia centrosettentrionale nel secolo XI,” in Il secolo XI: Una svolta?” ed. Cinzio Violante and Johann Fried, Annali dell’Istituto storico italo-germanico, no. 35 (Bologna, 1993), 173–88; Giovanni Tabacco, The Stuggle for Power in Medieval Italy: Structures of Political Rule, trans. Rosalind B. Jensen (Cambridge, 1989), 159 and 193–94; and Jones, The Italian City-State, 108–9. For an acute analysis of the mentality relected in the privatization of what the Carolingians had thought of as royal power, see Giovanni Tabacco, “La storia politica e sociale,” Storia d’Italia: 2.1 Dalla caduta dell’Impero romano al secolo XVIII (Turin, 1974), 119–22. Stefan Weinfurter, The Salian Century: Main Currents in an Age of Transition, trans. Barbara M. Bowlus (Philadelphia, 1999), 54. The work was originally published as Herrschaft und Reich der Salier: Grundlinien einer Umbruchzeit (Sigmaringen, 1992). According to the chronicler Wipo, at Conrad II’s coronation the archbishop of Mainz praised him as vicarius Christi: Gesta Chuonradi imperatoris, ed. Harry Bresslau, in Die Werke Wipos, MGH, Scriptores, no. 61, 3rd ed. (Hanover and Leipzig, 1915), 23; cited in Walter Ullmann, The Growth of Papal Government in the Middle Ages: A Study in the Ideological Relation of Clerical to Lay Power, 3rd ed. (Northampton, Mass., 1970), 249, n. 1. Ullmann, ibid., 249–50, describes Conrad’s “ruthless exploitation” of the Church. See as well, Weinfurter, The Salian Century, 45–47. Weinfurter, The Salian Century, 54. Cf. Augustin Fliche, La réforme grégorienne, 3 vols. (Paris, 1924–26), 1:8, n. 3.

119

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

papacy. Henry’s response to their competing demands for recognition was to deny the oice to all three and instead establish a new line of reforming German popes (1046–58), all of whom retained their German sees throughout their reigns.9 The deposition of Pope John XII by Emperor Otto I furnished a precedent for Henry’s action, but the extent of his interventions in papal politics was novel. Henry III likely envisaged papal centralization of ecclesiastical reforms in Rome as an extension of imperial authority. Nevertheless, between them Conrad II and Henry III spent less than four years in Italy out of a combined thirty-two years of rule, so they could not possibly have done much to direct the energies and ambitions of their southern subjects. The two emperors’ sojourns in the kingdom served as lightning rods for a diversity of political activity, but once the emperors retreated beyond the Alps, Italians largely ignored their existence again and concentrated on working out their own solutions for governing a populous and economically buoyant society. The long minority of Henry IV (1056–73) following the early death of his father added to Italians’ sense of autonomy and provided a radical group of religious reformers with an opportunity to create a new Church in which kings and princes, together with all regional churches, would recognize the papacy’s guiding role in ecclesiastical afairs. THE FLOURISHING OF THE SCHOOLS

While they shaped educational policy by a system of future rewards in imperial service, the emperors likely had little to do with the vitality that the schools of the regnum displayed after 1000, the same vitality characteristic of educational institutions throughout western Europe in the period. In the universal history that he wrote in the 1030s, Ralph Glaber (985–ca. 1046) testiied to the rapidly increasing wealth of western European society by remarking on the intense competition in churchbuilding in Francia and Italy that began in the irst years of the eleventh century: Just before the third year after the millennium, throughout the world, but especially in Italy and Gaul, men began to reconstruct churches, although for the most part the existing ones were properly built and not in the least unworthy. But it seemed as though each Christian community was aiming to surpass all others in the splendor of construction. It was as if the whole world were shaking itself free, shrugging of the burden of the past, and cladding itself everywhere in a white mantle of churches.10

The timing of the building program cannot really be dated with the exactitude that Glaber claimed, but his amazement relected the genuine novelty of a phenomenon that only a surge of new wealth in the cities of Francia and Italy could have underwritten. 9

10

Although a German pope and chancellor of the curia under Leo IX, Stephen IX (Frederick of Lorraine) was generally hostile to Henry III. Ralph Glaber, Historiarum libri quinque, 2.12.23, in idem, Historiarum libri quinque: The Five Books of the Histories, ed. and trans. John France; Glaber, Vita domni Willelmi abbatis:The Life of St.William, ed. Neithard Bulst, trans. John France and Paul Reynolds (Oxford, 1989), 3.14: 114 and 116. For Glaber’s life, see Franz Brunhölzl, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur, 2 vols. (Munich, 1975), 1:227–34.

120

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

The ending of invasions by Northmen and Hungarians and the revival of international trade coincided with the beginning of a new phase in the history of Western European education. Learned and not-so-learned masters in previous centuries had frequently sought their fortunes abroad, where presumably a greater market for their talents existed than at home. In the eighth and ninth centuries, Irish scholars had been particularly given to itinerant careers, while Stefano of Novara, Gunzo, and Gerbert represented the wandering scholars of the tenth century. In the eleventh century, however, while teachers continued to migrate, now a large number of students traveled too, seeking teachers of renown. A practice of displacement, in which students moved from master to master, was to become characteristic of the pursuit of advanced education in medieval western Europe, but in the early years it seems to have been more common among Italians. A highly educated student might cover a wide territory before completing his education. If the otherwise exaggerated and self-interested account of Adémar of Chabannes is to be believed, for instance, the abbot of one Italian monastery had paid out 2,000 solidi so that his nephew might study “in many places in Lombardy and Francia for the sake of grammar.”11 Together with eight companions, the young man had spent nine years as a wandering student. An interest in learning also motivated Pietro Damiani and Anselmo of Besate to travel widely during their early lives. While intent on glorifying the Milanese cathedral school by emphasizing the distinctive characteristics of its students during what he considered its golden age earlier in the century, Landolfo senior (d. ca. 1100) incidentally revealed that Milanese students in his youth commonly spent time studying abroad: These [students] had been so brought up over a long period of time with clerical dress, with a look, a manner of conduct, and a gait of such long and ancient usage that if you should ind any member of the Ambrosian choir dedicated to the study of letters in Burgundy, the Teutonic lands, or Francia, knowing something of the customs of this church you would instantly be able to assert that he was a member of this church even though you saw nothing else.12

The educational itineraries of Pietro Damiani and Anselmo of Besate provide a list of cathedral schools, many of which receive mention in the documents for the irst time. Born in Ravenna in 1006/7, Damiani was the older of the two men. Having had a diicult childhood, he started school late (iam grandiusculum) in Ravenna. The regular succession of scholastici there from the beginning of the eleventh century might have relected the enduring inluence on cathedral education exerted by Gerbert of Aurillac, who had been archbishop just before the turn of the previous 11

12

Adémar of Chabannes, Epistole de apostolatu s. Martialis, PL 141, col. 107. Adémar supposedly gets this information from Benedetto of Chiusa himself. Landolfo Senior, Mediolanensis historiae libri quatuor, ed. Alessandro Cutolo, RIS, vol. 4, pt. 2 (Bologna, 1942), 76: “In tantum enim in clericali habitu longa saeculi vetustate ac usitatione, multis transactis temporibus, vultu, habitu, incessu erant nutriti, ut si aliquem chori Ambrosiani totius in Burgundia aut in Teutonica aut in Francia literarum studia deditum invenires, etiamsi non ultra vidisses, de huius ecclesiae usibus aliquantulum notus sine mora huius esse ecclesiae airmares.”

121

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

century.13 A certain Mainfreno of Ravenna, whom years later Damiani referred to as presbyter and magister meus, may have been one of Damiani’s early teachers there.14 The description of elementary education that Damiani provided in one of his letters probably relected his own early schooling in Ravenna: “In elementary school (litterarius ludo) where boys learn the elements of separate words, some are called abecedarians, some syllabizers, certain ones are called students of words (nominarii), and still others are called calculators.”15 His description suggests a slow and unimaginative way of teaching students the basic elements of reading and mathematics. Unfortunately Damiani wrote nothing about his subsequent encounters with teachers in grammar or rhetoric. While still adolescens, that is, probably in his mid-teens, the young man went to Faenza for litterarum studia.16 Again, as in the case at Ravenna, we cannot be certain who his teachers were. We know that Pietro scholasticus Rainerii was teaching there in 1021 and 1023.17 A Faentine document of 1045 concerning a gift made by the bishop to the chapter includes among those present Aldebrando di Rainerio grammatico, apparently a layman, and is signed by Ildebrando scholasticus and Rustico scholasticus.18 Given the chronology for Damiani’s studies, it is probable that the young man worked with Pietro rather than with the latter two scholastici. As for Rainerio, probably like his son Aldebrando a layman, the title grammaticus might have meant only that he was literate.19 Continuing his study of the liberal arts, Damiani may have moved next to Parma, where he was in residence at least in 1030 and may have remained until 1034.20 13

14 15

16

17

18

19

20

Cf. Alfred Dresdner, Kultur- und Sittengeschichte der italienische Geistlichkeit im 10. und 11. Jahrhundert (Breslau, 1890), 251, lists Johannes magister (1002); Petrus scholasticus (1023); Arardus scholasticus (1036); and Johannes scholarum magister (1063). For references see Fridolin Dressler, Petrus Damiani: Leben und Werk, Studia Anselmiana (Rome, 1954), 9. Die Briefe des Petrus Damiani, ed. Kurt Reindel, in MGH, Die Briefen der deutschen Kaiserzeit, 4 vols. (Munich, 1983–93), 3:321: “In litterario quippe ludo, ubi pueri articulatae vocis elementa suscipiunt, alii quidem abecedarii, alii sillabarii, quidam vero nominarii, nonnulli iam etiam calculatores appellantur.” One can see here the repetitious process of learning words by starting from the smallest part to the whole word. Ibid., 2:30: “Adolescentem me in Faventina urbe propter litterarum studia constitutum audire contigit quod enarro”; cited from Francesco Lanzoni, Storia ecclesiastica e agiograia faentina dal XI al XV secolo, ed. Giovanni Lucchesi, Studi e testi, no. 252 (Vatican City, 1969), 13. Cf. Piero Zama, Le istituzioni scholastiche faentine nel medio evo (Milan, 1920), 31–42. For Pietro, see Bruno Paradisi, Storia del diritto italiano: Le fonti del diritto nell’epoca bolognese: I. I civilisti ino a Rogerio, vol. 4, pt. 1 (Naples, 1967), 172. See Lanzoni, Storia ecclesiastica e agiograia faentina, 14, for the document of 1045. A copy of the document is found in Giulio Tonduzzi, Historia di Faenza (Faenza, 1675), 153–55. To judge from the subscriptions of Ildebrando and Rustico (155), Faenza had at least two scholastici at the same time. The title grammaticus given to Rainerio probably signiies that he was literate, not that he was a teacher. According to the account of Adémar of Chabannes (ca. 989–1034), the braggart Benedetto, the nephew of the abbot of Chiusa, claimed that his monastery had nine scholastici: Epistole de apostolatu s. Martialis, col. 107. This is the suggestion of Giovanni Lucchesi, “Per una vita di San Pier Damiani: Componenti cronologiche e topograiche,” in San Pier Damiano nel IX centenario della morte (1072–1972), 3 vols. (Cesena, 1972), 1:19. Ibid., 19, for the date of 1030. For that of his departure from Parma, see Dressler, Petrus Damiani, 9.

122

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Despite a rich collection of documents for the tenth century, there is no evidence of an active cathedral school at Parma before the turn of the eleventh century. From then on, however, judging from the extant witness lists of the cathedral chapter, the school seems to have lourished, with a regular succession of scholastici appearing in the witness lists of the cathedral’s charters for the next four decades. Sigesfredo is named presbiter et magister scholarum in 1002, while in 1005 Homodeo holds the same title. The two may overlap in teaching, because two months after the reference to Homodeo, Sigesfredo appears again as magister scholarum. At some point between 1005 and 1015, Teudolfo exercises the oice, while in a document dating from between 1032 and 1034/35 Homodeo acts again as magister scholarum. In 1039 Giselberto, son of Homodeo, holds the same position.21 At Parma, the logician Drogo, philosophus, los et Italie, decus, may already have been a canon and teacher in the cathedral when Damiani arrived.22 Damiani, however, mentions none of his masters at Parma, reserving his observations instead for two young men, probably fellow students, whose diferent styles of life he compares: Zeuzolino, a young cleric totally given over to the pleasures of the lesh, and

21

22

CAPar, doc. 2: 2:4 (1002); doc. 5: 2:12 (1005); doc. 6: 2:15 (1005). Homodeo seems to have ceased teaching with the reappearance of Sigisfredo in June 1005 because he appears in the witness list of the document (doc. 6: 2:15 [1005]) simply as presbyter. In a subsequent document dated between 1005 and 1015 Sigisfredo now signs as archdiaconus (doc. 7: 2:19), and Teudulfo is listed as magister scholarum. Homodeo reappears in 1032 as magister scholarum: doc. 50: 2:107 (1032) and again in 1034–35: doc. 55: 2:122 (1034–35). Giselberto qui et Homodei, a presbiter et magister scholarum, appears as a witness in doc. 19: 2:46 (1015–27) and again in 1039: doc. 68: 2:152 (1039). For the rest of the century the following scholastici are recorded: Rolando, doc. 128: 2:285 (1073); Alberto, doc. 137: 2:301 (1081); and Ingo, doc. 139: 2:306 (1081). These words in praise of Drogo were written by his former student Anselmo of Besate in his Rhetorimachia, in Gunzo: Epistola ad Augienses und Anselm von Besate: Rhetorimachia, ed. Karl Manitius, MGH, Die deutschen Geschichtsquellen des Mittelalters, 500–1500, Quellen zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters, no. 2 (Weimar, 1958), 99. Hereafter references to Manitius’s edition of the Rhetorimachia will be identiied by that title. In his Fecunda ratis, ed. Ernst Voigt (Halle, 1889), 173, completed about 1023, Egbert of Liège refers critically to a certain Drogo as a leading teacher of logic. While it is possible that Egbert is referring to Drogo grammaticus (ca. 1000–ca. 1080), who taught grammar at Notre Dame in the eleventh century, this Drogo would have had to reach prominence very early in that he was corresponding with Berengar in 1068, forty-ive years later: Allan J. MacDonald, Berengar and the Reform of Sacramental Doctrine (London, 1930), 153. See as well Constant J. Mews, “Logica in the Service of Philosophy: William of Champeaux and His Inluence,” in Schrift, Schreiber, Schenker: Studien zur Abtei Sankt Victor in Paris und den Viktorinern, ed. Reiner Brendt (Berlin, 2005), 80, n. 10, who distinguishes between Drogo, the archdeacon of Paris, and Drogo grammaticus. Consequently, the reference of Egbert of Liège in 1023 is probably is probably to the Italian Drogo, whose birth date would then probably fall in the 980s at the latest. A document of April 18, 1039, lists Drogo presbiter as subscribing to a document at Parma: Ugo Gualazzini, Ricerche sulle scuole preuniversitarie del medioevo: Contributo di indagini sul sorgere delle università (Milan, 1943), 223. A second document of 1056, cited by Giovanni Mariotti, Memorie e documenti per la storia della Università di Parma nel medioevo, vol. 1 (Parma, 1888), 97, notes a certain Drogo as subscriber but without any title. It is highly unlikely that this last Drogo was identical with the logician. Gualazzini cites this second document but dates it 1057.

123

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Ugo, another cleric of the city, who, endowed with outstanding intellectual gifts, would become a chaplain of Conrad I.23 Upon inishing his training at Parma about 1034, Damiani, still a layman, probably returned to Ravenna, where he would have embarked upon a legal career along with teaching rhetoric, a common practice among lawyers of the time. But he must not have continued in that way of life for long, because in his late twenties, probably in 1035, he was seized by an intense religious devotion and abandoned the world to join the hermitage of the Holy Cross at Fonte Avellana, which had been founded a few decades earlier and was dedicated to an austere eremitic existence.24 Yet a man of such titanic energy and talent could not bury himself for long, and there would be few periods in the remainder of Damiani’s life when he would enjoy the otium that he had sought by taking vows. Damiani’s younger contemporary, Anselmo of Besate, seems to have been devoid of Damiani’s reforming zeal. Anselmo’s career models, instead, were Liudprando of Cremona, Leo of Vercelli, and perhaps more recently, the aforementioned Ugo of Parma. Anselmo’s pursuit of learning was driven by his hope for high preferment within the imperial church. As he explained in a letter to his former teacher, Drogo, philosophiae otium was preparation for seculare negotium.25 In any case, even had he been highly spiritual, coming to maturity in a period when an ardent reformer like Damiani looked to the emperor to purify the Church of corruption, Anselmo might not have felt that his ambition for imperial service necessarily entailed a spiritual compromise. Born of high Lombard nobility between Milan and Pavia about 1020, Anselmo felt deep reverence for the Milanese church, which he referred to as mater mea.26 A brief discussion of the Milanese church, its clergy, and education in its cathedral school will serve as a background for understanding Anselmo’s attitudes toward education and the Christian faith. 23

24

25

26

Damiani, Briefe, 2:320–21; and Briefe, 3:323–24. Cf. Irenio Afò and Angelo Pezzana, Memorie degli scrittori e letterati parmigiani, 4 vols. (Parma, 1789–1833), 1:30–31. Cf. Gualazzini, Ricerche sulle scuole preuniversitarie, 240. Lucchesi, “Per una Vita,” 1:20, supposes that because Pietro irst conided his desire to join a monastery to a friend in Ravenna, he was teaching in his native city. If Dressler, Petrus Damiani, 9, is correct in believing Damiani stayed in Parma as late as 1034, then he likely taught in Parma before returning to Ravenna. A passing reference to a certain Ivo as his master raises the issue of whether Damiani ever studied in Francia. In recounting an anecdote about a French scholar, Walter, who is known from other sources to have been a student of Fulbert of Chartres, Damiani begins: “Gualterus plane, magistri mei, scilicet Ivonis, socius fuit” (Walter to be sure was a student of my master, that is, Ivo); Briefe, 3:322. The fact that Ivo was a French name and Damiani’s master, Francesco Novati, “Un dotto borgognone del sec. XI e l’educazione letteraria di S.P. Damiani,” Mélanges Chabaneau zur Vollendurg, seines 75. Lebensjahres 4. März 1906, dargebracht von seinen Schülern, Freunden und Verehren (Erlayen, 1907), 998–1001, suggests that Damiani may have studied with Ivo in Francia. Since the saint never mentioned studying abroad, Novati admits that the greater probability is that Ivo taught Damiani somewhere in Italy. Rhetorimachia, 118. Cf. the biographical article by Herbert E. J. Cowdrey,“Anselm of Besate and Some Other Italian Scholars of the Eleventh Century,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 23 (1972): 115–24.The observation of the link between study and career is taken from Cowdrey, 181. Manitius, Rhetorimachia, 62, suggests this approximate date of his birth.The reference to the Milanese church is found Rhetorimachia, 116.

124

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

In their competition with Ravenna for second place in the Roman church, Milanese archbishops consciously promoted the idea, both at home and abroad, that the Milanese church was preeminent in northern Italy. The fabricated claims made by the Historia datiana, written at some time between the last decades of the tenth century and 1018, were designed to serve the same purpose.27 The loosely formed work begins with an introductory laudes urbis of Milan, followed by a retelling of the legend claiming an apostolic foundation for the Milanese church, speciically laid by Saint Barnabas, one of Christ’s twelve disciples, and concludes with the vitae of Milan’s six earliest bishops.28 Consistently employing ornatus diicilis, the author especially demonstrates his literary talent in the preface, where he skillfully adapts Sulpicius Severus’s Vita sancti Martini, Jerome’s De viris illustribus, Venantius Fortunatus’s Vita sancti Hilarii, and Ennodius’s Vita Epifani as stylistic models.29 With a unique liturgy (the Ambrosian liturgy) and a large school, perhaps the largest in Italy, the cathedral of Santa Maria Hyemalis, which was dedicated to the Virgin, was the citadel of the archdiocese. Even if we acknowledge that Landolfo senior’s account was colored by nostalgia for a time before decades of civil war over religious reform destroyed a way of life, the school he described, as it existed in his (and consequently in Anselmo’s) youth must have been an elaborate institution.30 In the atrium that stood before the cathedral, Landolfo wrote, were two schools where cantus magistri gave daily lessons to children. He continued: “In the inner atrium, which was on the side of the door looking toward the north, were two schools of philosophers skilled in the diferent arts, where doctrines of philosophy were diligently taught to clerics of the city and to foreigners.”31 Teachers both within the cathedral and in the lower, external schools were maintained at the expense of the archbishop who, to encourage good teaching, occasionally attended lessons himself. Daily supervision of the school fell to the archdeacon, Giberto, who would pass attentively from the inner to the outer schools with a whip of leather thongs, symbol and instrument of his oice, in his hand, counseling the masters and praising or 27

28

29 30

31

Paolo Tomea, Tradizione apostolica e coscienza cittadina a Milano nel medioevo: La legenda di s. Barnaba (Milan, 1993), 432–40, discusses this motivation. The editors of the Historia datiana (Anonymi mediolanensis libellus: De situ civitatis Mediolani, de adventu Barnabe apostoli et de vitis priorum pontiicum mediolanensium, ed. Alessandro Colombo and Giuseppe Colombo, RIS, no. 1, pt. 2 (Bologna, 1942), consider the work to have been written roughly in 789 (xc), when Milan was supposedly ighting to keep the Ambrosian ritual in the face of Carolingian eforts to impose the Roman rites. For the scholarship relating to the text, see not only Colombo (iii–xc) but also Antonio Viscardi, “La cultura milanese nei secoli vii–xii,” Dagli albori del Comune all’incoronazione di Federico Barbarossa (1002–1152), Storia di Milano, vol. 3 (Milan, 1954), 734–39. I have been convinced of the later dating, however, by the detailed arguments of Paolo Tomea, “Le suggestioni dell’antico: Qualche rilessione sull’epistola proemiale del De situ civitatis Mediolani e sulle sue fonti,” Aevum 63 (1989): 173; and his Tradizione apostolica, 392–431, which presents a summary of his arguments. Tomea’s discussion of the motivation for the work is found on 432–40. Tomea, “Suggestioni dell’antico,” 178–79. Landolf made a testament in 1073, leaving his property to a brother and a nephew: Gli atti privati milanesi e comaschi del sec. XI. ed. Cesare Manaresi and Caterina Santoro, doc. 536 (1073), 3:353–55 (Milan, 1965). He died sometime after 1085, the date of the last entries in his work. Landolfo Senior’s extensive description of education in the cathedral school is found Mediolanensis historiae, 75–77.

125

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

punishing students.32 Giberto probably did not apply his disciplinary methods, however, to the more mature students attending the highest level of classes, which were held in the presbyterium. Lessons there were devoted to the study of divine legis ac idei catholicae mandata” (mandates of divine law and the Catholic faith), that is, probably the study of theology and canon law.The honor of teaching such sacred material was given to the primicerius, who held the highest position next to the archbishop in the Ambrosian church and supervised the clergy of the whole city.33 In Landolfo’s account of the elaborate organization of the Milanese church, the schools of the cathedral played a key role in maintaining the dignity of an enormous establishment stafed by diverse ranks of clerics supported by various orders of lay men and women. Each group demonstrated through its attire and ornaments its function within the whole.The sanctity of the Milanese church was manifest as well in the proper ordering of the hierarchy, leading up to the archbishop himself. The fact that, according to Landolfo, Milanese students studying abroad were immediately recognizable by their dress, look, comportment, and gait relected the highly formal structure of Milanese ecclesiastical life. The values implicit in Landolfo’s description indicate the weight he placed on mores in the Ottonian and Salian balance of litterae et mores, an emphasis with which the eleventh-century Milanese church doubtlessly agreed. At the same time, Landolfo did not neglect to boast of the learning of the cathedral clergy. He singled out Arderico diaconus for his Latin eloquence and Gilberto archidiaconus, Andrea sacerdos, and Ambrogio Bii diaconus for their Latin and Greek learning.34 He praised archdeacon Giberto “as deeply knowledgeable in song and in Ambrosian learning, as well as gifted with skill in divine letters.”35 Landolfo’s high opinion of Andrea, Ambrosio Bii, and Giberto may have been colored by the antipathy that they, like him, expressed toward supporters of radical ecclesiastical reform in the city. Landolfo implied that the two leading radical reformers, Landolfo Cotta (d. 1061/64) and Arialdo (1010–67), were able speakers, and speciically characterized Anselmo da Baggio (d. 1073), later Pope Alexander II, as “an efective preacher” (potens in sermone), but he condemned all three for using their oratorical gifts for bad ends.36 Although perhaps out of humility Landolf did not include himself among the learned, Damiani, who knew Landolf personally, referred to him as “distinguished by the brilliance of his literary knowledge.”37 32 33 34 35 36

37

Ibid., 75. Ibid., 77. Ibid., 107, for Arderico, Guiberto, Andrea, and Bii . Also for Bii , 86. Ibid., 75. Ibid., 86–87, for his remarks on Cotta and Arialdo. Landolfo writes of Landolfo Cotta’s death: “Qui moriens, linguam quasi bovinam orribilem, qua multum ofenderat, quae coopertorium non habebat, cui tormenta aperte parabantur, emisit” (120). See as well Giorgio Giulini, Memorie spettanti alla storia, al governo e alla descrizione della città e campagna di Milano ne’ secoli bassi, 12 vols. (Milan, 1760–71), 4:14–75. On Arialdo, see Cosimo D. Fonseca, “Arialdo, santo,” DBI, no. 4 (Rome, 1962), 135. Arialdo was the only one of those mentioned in this paragraph who was not of Milanese origin and educated in the city’s schools. Landolfo refers to him only as artis liberae magister; Mediolanensis historiae, 86. In his life of Arialdo, Andrea Strumi, Vita sancti Arialdi, ed. Friedrich Baethgen, MGH, Scriptores, no. 30.2 (Leipzig, 1929), civ, remarks that he studied abroad. On Anselmo, see Mediolanensis historiae, 85. For Landolfo’s style, see Max Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen literatur des Mittelalters, 3 vols. (Munich, 1911–31), 2:210–11; and Cutolo’s comments in the preface to Mediolanensis historiae libri

126

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

The many Milanese manuscripts surviving from the irst half of the eleventh century underwrite Landolfo’s claim that intellectual life in the city was intense. At least from the time of Arnolfo II (998–1018), a large number of surviving liturgical works, sacramentaries, homilies, passionaries, and volumes of the works of Saint Ambrose and those of other Latin Church Fathers bear witness to the industry as well as to the technical and artistic skill of the scriptoria located not only in the cathedral but also in local churches.38 Particularly abundant are manuscripts of the Bible.The sequence of biblical books followed the sequence of the Ambrosian oice rather than that of the Vulgata and were written in a peculiar Milanese script, whose use the singularity of the rituals perhaps encouraged.39 Beginning in the 1050s, several decades of conlict between the ecclesiastical hierarchy and the forces of radical religious reform inspired the writing of the earliest municipal histories of Milan. In the irst of them, the Gesta archiepiscoporum mediolanensium, Arnolfo, a member of the Milanese patriciate, a judge, and, although likely trained at the cathedral, a layman, traced Italian political history from the reign of Ugo in 926. Most of the narrative, however, focused on the civil conlict surrounding reform of the Milanese church from the 1050s to 1077, at which point he left of writing.40 A temperate observer, Arnolfo defended neither nicolaitism nor simony, but at the same time he deplored the eforts of the lower classes to blame the upper clergy for sins shared by all. He also claimed that Rome’s support for the radicals was part of a campaign to subjugate the Milanese church. He wrote humbly of himself that “entrance into the labyrinth of Aristotle is diicult for me and access to Tully’s palace very wearisome. I confess that I have never ascended the four-wheeled chariot of the quadrivium.” Despite his disclaimer, Arnolfo’s use of cursus both within and at the end of periods, his tendency to compose in leonine prose, and, together with biblical reminiscences, his citations and echoes of Sallust,Virgil, Lucan, and Horace reveal his apology to be more a rhetorical topos than a genuine assessment of his abilities.41

38

39 40

41

quatuor, xiv–xvi. For Damiani’s remark, see Briefe, 2:311–12. Damiani urged Landolfo to carry out a promise that he had made to God to become a monk. Mirella Ferrari, “Produzione libraria e biblioteche a Milano nei secoli XI e XII,” Atti dell’110 Congresso internazionale di studi sull’alto medievo, Milano, 26–30 ottobre 1987, vol. 2 (Spoleto, 1989), 689– 702. The early decades of the twelfth century saw the codiication of the Ambrosian rite; Enrico Cattaneo, “Storia e particolarità del rito ambrosiano,” Dagli albori del Comune all’incoronazione di Federico Barbarossa (1002–1152), Storia di Milano, vol. 3 (Milan, 1954), 800. Ferrari, “Produzione libraria,” 696–98. For his biography, see Cinzio Violante, “Arnolfo,” DBI, no. 4 (1962), 281–82. There are two modern editions of the work: Arnolfo, Liber gestorum recentium, ed. Claudia Zey, MGH, Scriptores rerum germanicarum in usum scholarum separatim editi, no. 67 (Hannover, 1994); and Liber gestorum recentium, ed. and trans. (into Italian) Irene Scaravelli, in Fonti per la storia dell’Italia medievale: Storici italiani dal cinquecento al millecento ad uso delle scuole, no. 1 (Bologna, 1996). Zey, ed., Liber gestorum recentium, 116–17: “Hec animo revolvens non michimetipse conido, quem exilis ingenii adeo paupertas angustat, ut diicilis michi videatur Aristotelici laberinthi ingressus, laboriosus valde Tuliani palacii accessus. Fateor me numquam conscendisse curules quadruvii rotas.” On his style, see Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen literatur des Mittelalters, 2:508; and Zey, Liber gestorum recentium, 35–39.

127

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

The second work inspired by the local battle over religious reform was Landolfo’s Mediolanensis historia. Following a narration of earlier Milanese history and an elegaic description of the Milanese church of his youth, in Books 3 and 4 Landolfo, bringing the story down to 1085, presented his version of the struggle between the ecclesiastical establishment and the radical reformers, who enjoyed widespread support among the lower classes. With its lapses into poetry, its creation of speeches for historical igures, and its sometimes lorid prose, Landolfo’s composition had greater literary pretensions than Arnolfo’s Gesta; at the same time, Landolfo’s prejudices, most of which he shared with Arnolfo, were more in evidence. Anselmo of Besate, who was a little younger than Landolfo, was raised in the local church like Landolfo and probably educated in the same cathedral.There he absorbed the ideal of litterae et mores from his irst lessons and likely developed his ambition to seek an imperial appointment.42 Anselmo designed his Rhetorimachia, which he dedicated to the Emperor Henry III, primarily to demonstrate his own learning, but he made sure that it also made mention of his personal beauty, an important requirement for success as a courtier. He did this at the beginning of the second book, where he depicted his dead uncle, seeing him in the Elysian ields, seeking to know if Anselmo was indeed his wife’s nephew: “What is your family? Where is your home, O outstanding youth? You seem to be the nephew of my late wife. Indeed the bearing of your body (dignitas corporis) marks you as being of a great lineage.Your humble look, your angelic appearance, the very stamp of modesty, indeed in a form of true beauty a creature of God, an upright body, a noble chest, which God himself has formed, your gait – these are the mark of a great house and lofty lineage.”43 By unabashedly praising his own appearance, Anselmo hoped to communicate to the emperor that he had the looks to fulill a high function in the imperial entourage. Anselmo probably left Milan in his teens to study logic with Drogo in Parma. To judge from the Rhetorimachia, his cousin Rotilando already lived there.44 Anselmo also met two other students, Azzo and Giesone, who would later become canons of the cathedral of Parma if they had not already been so.45 Anselmo may also have had as a fellow student the future monk Lambert, who came to Italy in the train of 42

43

44 45

Besides the cathedral school, a document of 1053 reveals the existence of another in Sant’Ambrogio; Gli atti privati milanesi e comaschi, doc. 366: 3:41–45. It names those among the monks and canons of Sant’Ambrogio who were to receive a gift of money on the Feast of the Exaltation of the Holy Cross and lists both a primicerius notariorum and a magister scholarum among the recipients. As a secular cleric, it is unlikely that Anselmo would have studied at Sant’Ambrogio. Other Milanese documents provide evidence of ecclesiastical schools in towns and villages near Milan in these decades. Amizone of S.Vittore is listed as presbiter et scholarum magister in Varese; doc. 421: 3:150 (1060). In 1096 the schoolmaster there was Uberto subdiaconus et magister scolum [sic]; ibid., doc. 841: 4:533 (1096). At Modica in 1062 Ariprandus presbiter de ordine ec(c)lesie Sancti Johannis was magister scole; ibid., doc. 430: 3:165 (1062). Rhetorimachia, 139: “Qui genus, unde domo, iuvenis aegregie? Mulieri quondam mee nepos videris existere. Magni quidem generis te notat dignitas corporis. Facies humilis, aspectus angelicus, vultus ipse pudoris, forma quidem speciei vere plasma dei. Statura corporis, nobilitas pectoris, quam deus ipse plasmavit, gressus euntis sunt nota alte domus et magni generis.” In the work Anselmo informs Rolando that he has been watching his house; ibid., 165–66. Of Geisone, Anselmo writes: “Geiso nec inirmat quod vera probatio irmat”; and of Azzo: “Et favor Azonis donat dignissima laude”; Rhetorimachia, 95–96. For scholars’ eforts to identify the

128

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Beatrice of Lorraine in 1036 and studied with Drogo.46 Anselmo’s future master at Reggio, Sichelmo, had earlier also been Drogo’s student. In the dedication of the Rhetorimachia to the emperor, Anselmo writes that on leaving Parma but before going to Reggio he had studied with master Adelprando, “ipse facundissimus” (the most eloquent). Although Anselmo mentions neither the place nor the focus of his studies, possibly the master in question was Aldelprando of Faenza.47 The attraction of Reggio for Anselmo was the presence of Sichelmo, “the most skilled in the liberal arts” (liberalium artium peritissimus), in the city’s cathedral school. According to Anselmo, Sichelmo was not only a master of rhetoric but also possessed superior knowledge of Roman law: “just as our Tullius prizes him before all men in his rhetorical works, so Justinian prizes him before all others in his imperial edicts and legal judgments.”48 Anselmo’s formal education may have ended at Reggio. He speaks of having taught rhetoric himself thereafter and of having written a manual for that purpose, De materia artis, but we do not know where or when.49 Already by 1045 Anselmo appears to have put his splendid training to use in German lands by working in the chancery of the bishop of Bamberg. Anselmo’s second residence in Parma, between May 1046 and early 1048, the period when he composed the Rhetorimachia, was interrupted for at least three months in the spring of 1047 while he

46

47 48

49

two men, see ibid., 65, n. 1. Manitius did not know Gualazzini, Ricerche sulle scuole preuniversitarie, 241, who may have solved the problem. Gualazzini found among the documents of the cathedral of Parma the subscription of a certain Azo as presbiter in 1039 (CAPar, doc. 68: 2:155) and 1057 (doc. 101: 2:226–27), not 1046, as Gualazzini writes. There are also a number of others for a certain Geisone, archpriest of the cathedral between 1064 and 1081; CAPar, doc. 112: 2:249 (1064); doc. 128: 2:285 (1073); doc. 237: 2:301 (1081); and doc. 139: 2:306 (1081). Because their appearance in the introductory poem is separated from Anselmo’s listing of his teachers Drogo, Sichelmo, and Aldelprando (99), it is unlikely that they were his masters. The last date for Geisone (1081) makes it almost certain that he was not a teacher in the 1040s. I take them to be Anselmo’s fellow students at Parma. I see no reason to agree with Donald Bullough that this Geisone is the same as Ge(i)zo notarius sacri palatii; review of Manitius’s Epistola ad Augienses und Anselm von Besate Rhetorimachia in The English Historical Review 75 (1960): 489. Mariotti, Memorie e documenti per la storia della Università di Parma nel medioevo, 34, cites the Cantatorium S. Huberti andaginensis, the chronicle of the monastery of Saint Hubert in the diocese of Liège: “Hic [Lambert] jam iuvenis a marchissa Beatrice Langobardiam ductus et apud Drogonem Parmensem aliquamdiu philosophatus….” Rhetorimachia, 99. Damiani could have studied with him as well. Ibid.: “Quem ut pre omnibus in suis rethoricis noster habet Tullius, sic Iustinianus pre omnibus in imperialibus suis edictis et legalibus iudiciis.” If Anselmo arrived in the early 1040s, Sichelmo scholasticus would have had as his fellow teacher Domenico presbiter, who is listed as magister scholarum. For Sichelmo as teacher in the cathedral of Reggio in 1040, see Ugo Gualazzini, La scuola giuridica reggiana nel medio evo con appendice di documenti e testi (Milan, 1952), 20–21. Manitius, Rhetorimachia, 65, identiies Sichelmo as provost of the cathedral of Reggio in 1061 and archdeacon at least between 1068 and 1073. For Domenico, see CReg. 1, doc. 150: 369 (1038); doc. 160: 390 (1042); and doc. 183: 436 (1031–49). Subsequently, at least between 1059 and 1063, Giovanni held this position. For Giovanni, CReg. 2, doc. 36: 74 (1059), and Gualazzini, La scuola giuridica reggiana, 19, for 1063. It should be noted that Girolamo Tiraboschi, “Codice diplomatico,” Memorie storiche modenesi col codice diplomatico, 5 vols. (Modena, 1793–95), gives a Domenico as magister scholarum in 1006, but it is likely another individual; doc. 151: 1:172 (1006). The Domenico mentioned in doc. 132: 1:331 (978–1030) could be one or the other. In Rhetorimachia, 103, he writes that he had composed the De materia artis “precipiendo.” Also see 144.

129

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

worked in the emperor’s itinerant Italian chancery. In the spring of 1048 he joined the imperial court again and worked in the chancery until 1050, when his hand disappears from the records. His dreams of becoming a prelate were never realized, and he seems to have inished his career as a chancery oicial of the bishop of Hildesheim.50 Besides the cathedral schools associated with the itineraries of Damiani and Anselmo – namely, those in Faenza, Parma, Milan, Ravenna, and Reggio – students in the eleventh century who were eager for schooling had other choices. At Modena the cathedral had a succession of scholastici throughout the irst half of the century: Gualcherio, diaconus magister scholarum in 1016; Pietro, presbiter maior scholarum in 1025; and Pietro, presbiter et magister scholarum in 1046.51 Immediately after 1100, Aimone, magischola, not only composed poetry but presumably authored the Relatio translationis corporis Sancti Geminiani.52 This elegantly written work furnished a contemporary account of the construction of the new cathedral of the city and of the transferral of Saint Giminiano’s body to its new lodgings there. The cathedral school of Arezzo enjoyed the vigorous support of its imperial bishops in the irst third of the eleventh century. In 1009, Bishop Elempert (986/7–1010) lauded his own eforts in rebuilding the city walls and in cultivating the arts on behalf of his people. He pointed speciically to his having named the archdeacon as magister for his canons in the chapter. Six years later, Elempert’s successor, Adelbert (1015–25), in choosing a priest as a magiscola to serve under the archdeacon, refers to the “discipline of the liberal arts and of canon law” (disciplina liberalium artium et canonice regule) fostered by Elempert and others.53 The names of two other magiscolae in the eleventh century survive for Arezzo: Sigizone diaconus, who was listed as scolae cantor in 996 and maior scholae in 1026, 1027, and 1044; and Guido Bonici clericus, who was both maior scolae and cantor in 1078.54 Guido is also mentioned in the same capacity together with Ragniero clericus et maior scholae in 1080.55 50

51

52

53

54

55

Manitius provides these details; Rhetorimachia 67–68. Cf. Cowdrey, “Some North-Italian Scholars,” 116–17. Tiraboschi,“Codice diplomatico,” doc. 158: 2:8 (1016); doc. 170: 20 (1025) and RMod., doc. 201: 1:207 (1046). Relatio translationis corporis sancti Geminiani, ed. Giulio Bertoni, RIS, no. 6, pt. 1 (Città di Castello, 1907), xix–xx. Bertoni (xx) includes a list of masters of the cathedral school from 1150 through the thirteenth century. Helene Wieruszowski, “Arezzo as a Center of Learning and Letters in the Thirteenth Century,” Traditio 9 (1953): 348. See also Studio e scuola in Arezzo durante il medioevo e il rinascimento: I documenti d’archivio ino al 1530, ed. Robert Black (Arezzo, 1996), 100–101; his Education and Society in Florentine Tuscany: Teachers, Pupils and Schools, ca. 1250–1500 (Leiden and Boston, 2007), 176; and the extensive treatment by Giovanna Nicolaj Petronio, “Per una storia della documentazione vescovile aretina dei secoli XI–XIII. Appunti paleograici e diplomatici,” in Annali della scuola speciale per archivisti e bibliotecari dell’Università di Roma 17–18 (1977–78): 124–29; together with her excellent analysis of the relationship of the Aretine notariate of the period with the bishop that follows. Angelo Moretti, “L’antico studio aretino: Contributo alla storia delle origini delle università nel medio evo,” Atti e memorie della reale Accademia Petrarca di lettere, arti e scienze, n.s. 15 (1933): 305; and Jean-Pierre Delumeau, Arezzo: Espace et sociétés, 715–1230: Recherches sur Arezzo et son contado du VIII au début du XIII siècle, 2 vols., Collection de l’École di Rome, no. 219 (Rome, 1996), 2:753, n. 424. For Guido and Raginerio in 1080, see Robert Black, Education and Society in Florentine Tuscany. Teachers, Pupils and Schools, c. 1250–1500 (Leiden and Boston, 2007), 176. Black, Education and Society, 176.

130

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

The successor of Adelberto, Theodald (1022/23–33), is known for two achievements: the building of a new cathedral, designed by the architect Adalberto Maginardo; and his support of the musician Guido of Arezzo who, driven out of Pomposa, settled in Arezzo.56 Theodald’s successor, Immo (1037/38–48), who was a product of the learned cathedral of Worms, seems to have supported a high level of intellectual culture during his episcopate.57 The ability of Wido of Ferrara to employ Sallustian language in his attack on Gregory VII in 1081 probably derived from his training in the schools of Arezzo during Immo’s tenure.58 Arezzo, under Bishop Theodald, provided the brilliant young theoretician Guido with the support that he found lacking in his monastery at Pomposa. Some of his revolutionary musical treatises were composed in Arezzo between 1026 and 1032. In his earliest surviving work, Micrologus, composed in verse, the musical staf makes its irst appearance in western Europe. Using Guido’s method, musicians would be able henceforth to ascertain musical pitch without having to hear the music sung or played irst. Guido’s subsequent Prologus in antiphonarium and Epistola ad Michaelem developed and reined the principles of the earlier work, while his Regulae rhythmicae, composed in verse, was a primer for teaching choirboys the fundamentals of the new musical system.59 Whether the Pavian cathedral hosted a school in the eleventh century remains as much a mystery as it does for the tenth, when Liudprando, Stefano of Novara, and Guglielmo of Volpiano attended some sort of school in the city. Pavia’s schools likely provided Lanfranco with his early education, but his biographers fail to identify an institution. In any case, as we shall see, the developments made in legal scholarship beginning early in the eleventh century strongly suggest that advanced education was available in the city in one form or another. The elite jurists of the city would have needed a good foundation in grammar before undertaking their philological work on the texts of Roman and Lombard law. A document of 1082 provides solid evidence for a school in the monastery of the Ciel d’Oro by attesting to the presence of a magister scholarum.60 A school likely 56

57

58 59

60

Hucbald, Guido, and John on Music: Three Medieval Treatises, ed. Claude V. Palisca and trans. Warren Babb (New Haven, Conn., 1978), 50–51. Cf. Wieruszowski, “Arezzo as a Center of Learning,” 348. Ibid., 350. The exchange of letters known as the Wörmser Briefsammlung displays the learning of scholars at Worms including that of Immo; Manitius, Geschichte, 2:302–4. See Chapter 4, under “The Propaganda War and the New Style.” On Guido’s music, see Pellegrino Ernellit, “La riforma musicale di Guido monaco pomposiano,” Analecta pomposiana: Atti del primo convegno internazionale di studi storici pomposiani (Ferrara, 1965) 129–41; and Giuseppe Vecchi, “I centri della cultura musicale,” in Le sedi della cultura nell’Emilia Romagna: Alto medioevo, ed. Ovidio Capitani et al. (Milan, 1983), 200 and 205. Antonio Samaritani, “Contributi alla biograia di Guido a Pomposa e ad Arezzo,” in Guido d’Arezzo, monaco pomposiano, Atti dei convegni di studio, Codigoro, Ferrara, Abbazia di Pomposa, 3 ottobre 1997; Arezzo, Biblioteca Città di Arezzo, 29–30 maggio, 1998, ed. Angelo Rusconi (Florence, 2001), 124–25, argues that Guido died in 1081. In later life, Samaritani maintains, Guido was also a preacher and teacher of theology (113). See the excellent summary of Guido’s life and works in Cesarino Ruini, “Guido d’Arezzo,” in DBI, no. 56 (Rome, 2003), 381–88. On the school, see Aldo A. Settia, “Pavia, capitale del Regnum nel secolo XI,” in Lanfranco di Pavia e l’Europa del secolo XI nel IX centenario della morte (1089–1989): Atti del Convegno internazionale di studi: Pavia, Almo Collegio Borromeo, 21–24 settembre 1989 (Rome, 1993), 57–59. Cf. Dresdner, Kulturund Sittengeschichte, 243. For a magister scholarum in the Ciel d’Oro, see Giovanni Lami, Sanctae ecclesiae

131

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

existed at the monastery earlier in the century: Aimerico, “greatly learned in letters” (litteris optime eruditus), a monk in the monastery who had served as tutor to Conrad’s heir, Henry III, upon his return to Pavia from the German court probably assumed teaching duties there for a few years before being appointed abbot of Farfa by his tutee, now emperor. The names of isolated scholastici or grammatici testify to the existence of cathedral schools at Como in 1015, Imola in the mid-eleventh century, Fiesole in 1019, Siena in 1056 and 1081, and Piacenza in 1055.61 Papias (d. after 1063), the learned lexicographer and grammarian probably of northern Italian origin, may well have received his education in the last city.62 The cantus magistri in Pisa in 1015, together with his counterpart in Florence, whom Damiani mentioned in 1052, may have ofered no more than elementary courses in grammar.63 At least early in the century, Novara seems to have remained active, and Damiani’s praise of Turin implies that there was some advanced form of schooling for the clergy there at the time of his visit,

61

62

63

lorentinae monumenta, 3 vols. (Florence 1758), 2:1404. For schools in the Pavese area in the period, see Settia, “Pavia,” 41, n. 30. Como: a scholasticus is cited in Dresdner, Kultur- und Sittengeschichte, 236; Fiesole: Theuzo grammaticus Fesulanae ecclesie primicerius, cited in Robert Davidsohn, Geschichte von Florenze, 4 vols. (Berlin, 1896), 1:807; Siena: Rolando clericus et prior scole (1056) and prior scolae (1081), cited in Paolo Nardi, Insegnamento superiore a Siena nei secoli XI–XIV: Tentativi e realizzazioni dalle origini alla fondazione dello studio generale (Milan, 1996), 23; and Piacenza: maestro delle scuole (1056), cited in Pietro Campi, Historia universale: Così delle cose ecclesiastiche, comé secolari di Piacenza, et altre città d’Italia, 3 vols. (Piacenza, 1759), 1:337. Dresdner also refers (250) to a certain Pietro di Aquaviva grammaticus in Forlì. His evidence for this is found in Francesco A. Zaccaria, Series episcoporum forocorneliensium a Ferdinando Ughellio contexta, 2 vols. (Imola, 1820), 1:188, which shows Pietro among laymen. Although Pietro could be a lay teacher of grammar, given the date (1047), grammaticus might mean only that he is literate. His famous lexicon, Elementarium doctrinae rudimentum, was probably completed by 1063: Violetta de Angelis, “Papias, Elementarium, tradizione manoscritta ed edizione del testo: Alcuni problemi,” in Bandhu: Scritti in onore di Carlo Della Casa in occasione del suo settantesimo compleano, ed. Renato Arena et al., 2 vols. (Turin, 1997), 705. The irst portion of Papias’s work has been published by de Angelis as Littera A, Papiae elementarium,Testi e documenti per lo studio dell’antichità, no. 58.1 (Milan, 1977). The references to Papias’s work below are taken from the Paris 1495 edition. For his grammatical tract, Ars grammatica, see Chapter 5. De Angelis (v–vi) questions Papias’s Lombard origin. In “Papias, Elementarium, tradizione manoscritta,” she suggests that Papias wrote at Monte Cassino (714–15). Robert Black, however, in his Humanism and Education in Medieval and Renaissance Italy: Tradition and Innovation in Latin Schools from the Twelfth to the Fifteenth Century (Cambridge, 2001), 49, n. 88, emphasizes Papias’s detailed knowledge of the region around Piacenza; and Charles Radding argues, in “The Geography of Learning in Early Eleventh-Century Europe: Lanfranc of Bec and Berengar of Tours,” BISI 98 (1992): 155, n. 3, that the detailed descriptions of the sources of Lombard law in the work mark him as a Lombard. Papias’s education belonged to the irst decades of the century: Lloyd W. Daly and Bernadine A. Daly, “Some Techniques in Medieval Latin Lexicography,” Speculum 39 (1964): 229–31. The work opens with a preface dedicated to “Fili uterque carissime,” whom he is unable to educate directly because of the distance between them. While these “sons” might have been spiritual ones, they could also have been sons of his lesh whom he left behind when he entered a monastery. On Pisa, see Chapter 2. For Florence, see Damiani, Briefe, 1:439. Damiani mentions a conversation with Rozo, “qui dicitur magister cantorum, Florentinae Ecclesiae presbiter, vir apprime litterarum studiis eruditus....”

132

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

probably in 1064.64 The absence of any evidence for teaching at Lucca could mean the decline of its earlier active schools.65 As for Bologna, the magniicent liturgical collection produced by the scriptorium of the cathedral of San Pietro in 1029/30, Bibl. Angelica Rome, 123A, indicates that the cathedral in the third and fourth decades of the eleventh century ofered more than elementary training. The elaborately illustrated work, which includes a liturgical-astronomical calendar, as well as a gradual, antiphonal, and tropar with sequences adapted to the liturgical needs of the Bolognese cathedral, presupposes a clergy of some intellectual reinement.66 The same may be said for the almost contemporary breviary-passionary Bibl. universitaria Bologna, 1576, attributed to the nearby monastery of San Stefano.67 Nevertheless, nothing about education is mentioned in the episcopal reform programs of 1045 or 1054 designed to reorganize the church and its revenues.68 Only in the reorganization of 1065 do episcopal documents make any reference to learning, when Bishop Lamberto explicity states that he had reformed the cathedral chapter

64

65

66

67

68

In a letter written between 1048 and1055 (Briefe, 3:260), Damiani airms that the clergy of Turin “litterarum studiis sint decenter instructi. Qui dum ad me conluerent, tanquam chorum angelicus et velut conspicuus Ecclesiae videbatur enitere senatus.” While no masters can be identiied for Novara, Ettore Cau, “Scrittura e cultura a Novara (secoli VIII–X),” Ricerche medievali 6–9 (1971–74): 71, sees a “rinnovata attività dello scrittorio tra la ine del X e l’inizio dell’X secolo, con tutta una serie di codici a noi pervenuti.” He attributes this development to the inluence of Stefano of Novara. But did that activity continue? Dresdner, Kultur- und Sittengeschichte, 248, cites Siena as having a school, but his source, Giovanni A. Pecci, Storia del vescovado della città di Siena (Lucca, 1748), does not bear him out. Dresdner’s three citations from Pecci, 104 (for 999), 119 (for 1056), and 132 (for 1081), concern not magistri scolarum but priores scolae, who are probably chapter oicials set over the other canons. Roger Wilmans, ed., Vita Anselmi episcopi Lucensis auctore Bardone presbytero, MGH, Scriptores, 12:35: “Hic [Ubaldus de Colurnio] cum in nostra civitate artis grammaticae vacabat studio....” Gina Fasoli, “Notizie sul capitolo di Bologna nel X–XI,” La vita comune del clero nei secoli XI e XII, 2 vols. (Milan, 1962), 2:194, refers, however, to “il materiale di vario genere conluito in un codice liturgico, recentemente identiicato per bolognese e connesso alla canonica della cattedrale; nel suo complesso, il codice sembra attestare l’esistenza di una scuola capitolare....” For the date and origin of the manuscript, see Luciano Gherardi,“Il codice angelica 123, monumento della chiesa bolognese nel sec. XI,” Quadrivium 3 (1959): 19. Generally on the manuscript, see Codex angelicus 123: Studi sul graduale-tropario bolognese del secolo XI e sui manoscritti collegati, ed. Maria T. Rosa-Barezzani and Giampaolo Ropa (Cremona, 1996). The Angelica, 123, and Bibl. univ. Bologna, 1576, taken together, must be seen as “una vetrina di testimonianze, guidanti al sorgere dello Studio universitario”: Giampaolo Ropa, “Le scuole ecclesiastiche,” in Le sedi della cultura nell’Emilia Romagna: L’età comunale, ed. Girolamo Arnaldi et al. (Milan, 1984), 90. These manuscripts are connected with a religious revival stimulated in part by the translation of the bones of the martyred Vitalis and Agricola to new quarters in the monastic complex of San Stefano in 1019 and the contemporary construction of the new Romanesque cathedral which became functional by the late 1020s; Gherardi, “Il codice angelica 123,” 56–62. These two documents are published by Alfred Hessel, “Zur kritik der älteren Privilegien des Bologneser Domkapitel,” Neues Archiv der Gesellschaft für ältere deutsche Geschichtskunde 31 (1905): 568–73.The thirteenth-century life of Saint Bruno and Saint Guido, bishop of Arqui, presented Bologna improbably as the leading Italian center of learning in the early eleventh century; Giorgio Cencetti, “Sulle origini dello studio di Bologna,” Rivista storica italiana 63 (1940): 249.

133

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

not only for prayer but also “because we have decreed that our canons be intent on studies.”69 To accomplish that efectively, the number of canons composing the chapter would have had to exceed the seven who were listed eleven years earlier in 1054.70 In the following century, however, as the city of Bologna emerged as the leading educational center on the peninsula, the cathedral had a pioneering role in the development of ars dictaminis.71 Liturgical texts can rarely be as neatly dated as at Bologna; as a result, indications of intellectual activity elsewhere can often only be dated approximately. Nevertheless, the extent and quality of liturgical literature produced in eleventh-century Ravenna suggests that, at least in grammar and music, educational standards in the city were relatively high.72 By the same token, the mediocre literary character of the saints’ lives contained in two passionaries composed in Rimini, perhaps at the monastery of San Gaudenzio, in the early twelfth century, points to a comparatively lower level of education in that city and the surrounding area.73 To my knowledge no solid evidence of schools in the Veneto exists.74 It is likely, however, that Geraldo, a native of the area who became the irst bishop of Csanád in Hungary (1030–44), received his early training in the Veneto before going to study in Francia. Geraldo’s Deliberatio supra hymnum trium puerorum, a commentary on Daniel 3:57–65, depended on Isidore’s Etymologiae as well as on Latin translations of Dionysius the Pseudo-Areopagite, Maximus the Confessor, and Chalcidius’s translation of Plato’s Timeaus.75 This last text Geraldo encountered while living in Francia 69

70

71 72

73

74

75

“quia nostros canonicos in studiis intentos esse decrevimus …”; cited in Fasoli, “Notizie sul capitolo di Bologna,” 2:197. In what appears to be an exhaustive list, in 1054 the number of canons was down to seven; Hessel, “Zur kritik,” 572. See Chapter 5. Giampaolo Ropa, “La cultura dal VII al XII secolo,” Storia della Emilia Romagna, ed. Aldo Berselli, 3 vols. (Bologna, 1976–80), 1:572–73, identiies two liturgical texts containing sequences for Sant’ Apollinare and San Vitale of Ravenna, that is, Padua, Bibl. capitolare, A. 47, and Modena, Bibl. capitolare, O. I.7. On saints’ lives, see Ropa, 573–74. See as well Giovanni Lucchesi,“Stato attuale degli studi sui santi dell’antica provincia ravennate,” Atti dei convegni di Cesena e Ravenna (1966–67), 2 vols. (Cesena, 1969), 1:51–80. Paolo Tomea, “L’agiograia dell’Italia settentrionale,” Hagiographies: Histoire internationale de la littérature hagiographique latine et vernaculaire en Occident des origines à 1550, ed. Guy Philippart, 4 vols. (Turnhout, 1994–), 3:137, however, lists only one saint’s life written in Ravenna in the eleventh century. Adriano Gattuci, Codici agiograici riminesi: Studi, testi e documenti (Spoleto, 1973), discusses two passionaries, one written in the last three decades of the eleventh (44) and the second early in the twelfth century (117). Also see Ropa, “La cultura dal VII al XII secolo,” 574. Rino Avesani, “La cultura veronese dal sec. IX al sec. XII,” SCV, 1:268. He cites a Giovanni grammaticus and grammaticus et iudex in Veronese documents in 1073, 1079, and 1082, but the word grammaticus in context might mean only “learned” and might function adjectivally with judex. Gerardi moresenae aecclesiae seu csanadiensis episcopi Deliberatio supra Hymnum trium puerorum, ed. Gabriel Silagi (Turnhout, 1978); on Gerardo’s education, see ix. Because of its lack of emphasis on the value of the monastic life, Jean Leclercq, “Saint Gérard de Csanád et le monachisme,” Studia monastica 13 (1971): 13–30, maintains that Gerard was not a monk. A detailed analysis of the commentary is found in Gabriel Silagi, Untersuchungen zur ‘Deliberatio supra hymnum trium puerorum’ des Gerhard von Csanád, in Münchener Beiträge zur Mediävistik und Renaissance-Forschung, no. 1 (Munich, 1967). Joseph A. Endres, “Studien zur Geschichte der Frühscholastik,” Philosophisches Jahrbuch 26 (1913): 349–59, interprets Gerardo as having been hostile to pagan learning, as was

134

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

(quondam apud Galliam constitutus).76 Gerardo’s references to Cicero, Quintilian, and other ancient authors may have come from secondary sources, but even so the composition, although largely an imaginative use of citations, required more than an introductory background in grammar.77 Once in Hungary, Geraldo found it impossible to complete his luxuriantly allegorical commentary because “the lack of amanuenses and of paper do not allow it.”78 A love poem, written incongruously along with hymns and liturgical poetry in the empty spaces of a psalter in the cathedral library of Ivrea, points to a surprisingly active grammatical culture in that outlying diocese in the western reaches of the kingdom. The work, probably composed in the 1070s, appears to have been a literary exercise by one of the canons. Given by modern scholars the title “Ivrean versus” (Versus eporedienses) or Distici d’Ivrea, the poem has the distinction of being the last surviving love lyric securely attributable to the Italian kingdom before the introduction of Provençal poetry more than a century later.79 Composed of one hundred and ifty – at points belabored – leonine distichs of quantitative verse, the Versus describes the eforts of the poet to seduce a young girl by the banks of the Po on a beautiful day in April. After a brief exchange between the two (lines 11–36), the poet enumerates at length the gifts he will exchange for her favors (lines 37–254), praises her beauty (lines 255–84), and concludes by promising her eternal fame for having been commemorated in his poem (lines 285–300). A sample of the verse form follows: Siste, puella, gradum Et per aquas alias Siste, puella, precor Si loqueris soli,

per amenum postulo Padum tam cito ne salias. per terram, queso, per equor, nil patiere doli.80

The echoes of Virgil, Ovid, and Juvenal, along with mythological and historical references, indicate a relatively high level of training in grammar, probably in the local

76

77

78

79

80

his contemporary Pietro Damiani. Silagi, Untersuchungen, 44–47, sees him, rather, as close to the Augustine of the De doctrina christiana. Deliberatio supra Hymnum, 41: “In Platone, quippe disputationes, quondam apud Galliam constitutus, quasdam de deo Hebreorum conidenter fateor me legisse et celestibus animis.” Ibid., 5, 12, 33, 38, 40 (Aulius for Tullius?), 41, 83, and 96. Silagi, Untersuchungen, 63–78, discusses his stylistic pretensions. Deliberatio supra Hymnum, 177: “Multa dici possunt, sed penuria scriptorum atque membranarum non patitur.” The poem is published by Ernst Dümmler, Anselm der Peripatetiker nebst andern Beiträgen zur Literaturgeschichte Italiens im eilften Jahrhundert (Halle, 1872), 94–102. On the poem, see Umberto Ronco, Cultura medioevale e poesia latina d’Italia nei secoli xi e xii, 2 vols. (Rome, 1899), esp. 1:163–64 and 2:72–73; and Francesco Novati, Le origini, continuate e compiute da Angelo Monteverdi (Milan, 1926),109–12. Frederic J. E. Raby, A History of Secular Latin Poetry in the Middle Ages, 2nd ed., 2 vols. (Oxford, 1957), 1:301–5, suggests that three lyrics from the tenth and eleventh centuries, including a love poem, “Iam dulcis amica venito,” are probably Italian, but he ofers no evidence except his conviction that urban Italy was more secular than the rest of Europe and that educated laymen and clerics alike “were given to the making of verses” (305). Versus eporedienses, in Ernst Dümmler, Anselm der Peripatetiker, 94, lines 11–14: “O girl, stay your step in the fair Po, I pray / and bound not through other waters so quickly. / Stay, girl. I pray by the earth, I ask by the sea, / if you would speak to one alone, fear no duplicity.”

135

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

cathedral school.81 This poem as well as the religious and other secular verse found in the empty spaces of the Ivrean manuscript may well relect the intellectual stimulus provided by Ogerius, the learned German bishop of Ivrea (1075–94), who earlier had been Henry IV’s chancellor for Italy. Ogerius himself is credited with writing a poem on the martyrs of the Legion of Thebes, now lost.82 Not only cathedral schools but also a number of monasteries in the kingdom testify to lourishing scholarly interests. In fact, never before had the monasteries of the Italian kingdom demonstrated anything approaching the degree of intellectual life that they did in this period. I have already mentioned that San Pietro in Ciel d’Oro maintained a school in the eleventh century.83 Monte Amiata in southern Tuscany had a busy scriptorium that produced a large number of manuscripts, primarily of post-patristic authors.84 Both the Benedetto of San Michele della Chiusa who was ridiculed by Adémar of Chabannes (see Chapter 2) and his uncle, an abbot of the same monastery, were passionate collectors of books. The younger man boasted that he had two rooms full of them. Three hagiographical works that were written at the monastery in the eleventh century survive. One, a vita of Benedetto’s uncle the abbot, is appended to the anonymous Chronica monasterii sancti Michaelis Clusini (1058–61), the chronicle of the abbey that describes its foundation and early years.85 The second is a life of a later Abbot Benedetto, written (ca. 1100), by Guglielmo of Chiusa. It describes the monastery’s manuscripts of writings of the Latin Church Fathers as “treasures richer than the wealth of Croesus or the opulent riches of the Arabs.”86 The lively use of dialogue, the metric poetry in its opening and closing paragraphs, and the often vivid narrative language of the Vita all show that San Michele was a monastery where learning was appreciated. The third hagiography need not concern us here.87 81

82

83

84

85

86

87

Carla Maria Monti, “La cultura classica nei codici della Capitolare,” Storia della chiesa di Ivrea dalle origini al XV secolo, ed. Giorgio Cracco (Rome, 1998), 578–80, discusses the sources of the Versus. On Ogerius’s fame for learning, see Dümmler, Anselm der Peripatetiker, 90; for his poem, now lost, see 91. Dümmler publishes the religious poetry (102–6). For this latter poetry, see Simona Gavinelli, “Alle origini della Biblioteca capitolare,” Storia della chiesa di Ivrea, ed. Giorgio Cracco (Rome, 1998), 540–47. Novati, Origini, 612, maintains that after 1100 hymnology ceased to evolve in Italy. Tomea attributes the vita of Saint Maïeul to the Ciel d’Oro early in the eleventh century; Tomea, “Agiograia,” 106–7, n. 7. Michael M. Gorman, “Manuscript Books at Monte Amiata in the Eleventh Century,” Scriptorium 56 (2003): 225–93, describes the collection of manuscripts that he has so far identiied. He particularly notes that the monastic scribes showed a marked preference for copying post-patristic writings (269–70). Except for a letter of Abbot Winizo (d. 1035) and a list of six books, however, no writings survive, but he suggests that an unstudied work of exegesis of the Gospel of John (Biblioteca Capitolore Perugia, 41) may have originated in this scriptorium (273). Chronica monasterii sancti Michaelis Clusini, in MGH, Scriptores, no. 30, pt. 2, ed. G. Schwartz and E. Abegg (Leipzig, 1929), 968–70. Addressing Geraldo, the librarian who has requested the vita of the later abbot Benedetto, Guglielmo refers to chests (armaria) illed with books, “potioribus videlicet thesauris Croesi opibus seu gazis opulentis Arabum, quibus augendis incubas, et sedulo custodis quasi cellas aromatum”: Vita v[enerabilis] Benedicti abbatis clusiensis, PL 150, col. 1462.The vita as a whole may be found in PL 150, cols. 1459–88. The vita was written between 1058 and 1061. It was published by Giuseppe Sergi as Vita di san Giovanni confessore: Edizione, in his “La produzione storiograica di S. Michele della Chiusa,” BISI 81 (1969): 160–72.

136

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Although it is likely that, given Adémar’s description of the words and actions of the nephew of the abbot of Chiusa, both Benedetto and his uncle were Italian, the monastery itself, created by a French nobleman, traditionally drew its monks largely from Spain and Aquitaine.88 Guglielmo of Chiusa, like the Abbot Benedetto whose life he composed, was probably French. The foreign origin of many of the monks might help to explain the existence of the abbey’s chronicle, a genre rare in the regnum. Devoted to narrating, irst, the foundation of a church at Chiusa early in the tenth century and, then, the building of the monastery in the 980s, the Chronica, like Gugliemo’s later Vita Benedicti, displays training in the liberal arts with citations from the Aeneid, possible allusions to Tibullus (an elegiac poet), and a generic reference to “tulliana facundia” (Ciceronian eloquence).89 A solid grammatical education was also probably available at Pomposa, where late in the century the monks feared that the passion for books of their abbot, Geremia (1079–ca. 1100), would bankrupt the abbey.90 Geremia himself had been educated “in the fundamentals of grammar as well as dialectic” at Pomposa in a time when, if we are to believe the words of Pietro Damiani, who lived there from 1040 to 1042, the library was already well stocked.91 A few decades earlier, Guido of Arezzo (d. ca. 1050), had been a monk at Pomposa. Although he was forced to leave there because of the hostility of fellow monks, who perhaps found his musical innovations threatening, the monastery had no doubt been largely responsible for the knowledge of Latin and especially of prosody that he manifested in his later writings. Two hagiographical works were composed at the monastery in the second half of the century. Both were dedicated to the life of Guido degli Strambiati, who had been abbot of the monastery from 1008 to 1046. Like Chiusa, the monastery of Santi Pietro e Andrea di Novalesa was located to the west of Turin, on the border between Francia and Italy and likely subject to French inluence. It too must have possessed a sizable collection of manuscripts in the eleventh century, but we know little about the collection’s contents, save what can be gleaned from the sources cited in the chronicle that was written there. That work, together with the chronicle written at Chiusa, are the only two monastic chronicles I have found that were produced in the regnum up to the thirteenth century. The author of the lengthy chronicle from Santi Pietro e Andrea, the Cronaca di Novalesa, recounts the vicissitudes of the abbey, which lay in a mountain valley on a 88 89 90

91

Sergi, “La produzione storiograica di S. Michele della Chiusa.” BISI 82 (1970): 200–201. Chronica, 961–64. Dresdner, Kultur- und Sittengeschichte, 230–31 and 248. On the library of Pomposa, see Amedeo Benati, “Presenza culturale di Pomposa nel medioevo,” Atti del primo convegno internazionale di studi storici pomposiani, ed. Antonio Samaritani (Ferrara, 1964), 91–98; Giuseppe Billanovich, Pomposia monasterium modo in Italia primum: La biblioteca di Pomposa, Medioevo e umanesimo, vol. 86 (Padua, 1994); and Antonio Manfredi, “Amissis rastris, ego unus mansi sub astris: ricerche su libri, biblioteca e catalogazione libraria,” in Guido d’Arezzo, monaco pomposiano, 55–79. The reference to Girolamo’s education is taken from the introduction to the preface of Enrico, clericus, to his inventory of Pomposa’s library in 1194: Giovanni Mercati, “Il catalogo della biblioteca di Pomposa,” in Opere minori: Vol. 1 (1891–1897), in Studi e testi, no. 76 (Vatican City, 1937), 372. For Damiani’s stay at Pomposa, see Benati, “Presenza culturale di Pomposa,” 91–92.Tomea, “Agiograia,” 131, ascribes two vitae of Guido of Pomposa to the monastery in this period.

137

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

major route between Francia and Italy, from its legendary foundation in the time of Nero down to his own.92 The sources that the author used relect what the library must have contained. They are primarily patristic, hagiographic, and historical.93 In addition, chansons de geste from the Carolingian cycle, the Lombard legends surrounding Algiso, son of Desiderio, and a German epic, Walterius, contribute signiicantly to his account, which blends fact with iction.94 The most actively intellectual of all the monasteries in the kingdom in the eleventh century, however, may have been Nonantola. It had a large library, although it seems not to have contained any works of pagan literature.95 Monks of the monastery produced at least three and possibly four hagiographic works in the eleventh and early twelfth centuries, one of which was in verse.96 The Vita Adriani papae, consisting of 101 lines in leonine rhyme, is one of the few Italian vitae of the century written in poetry and relects the monastery’s exceptional interest in composing verse.97 Although the other surviving poems are short, the fragmentary remains of inscriptions in metric and of liturgical verse in both rhyme and metric point to an active group of monastic poets. In 1111, Placido, the prior of the monastery, also contributed an extensive prose treatise to the current debate over Investiture.98 The interest that the monasteries here mentioned showed in hagiography was common to all the monasteries of the regnum in the eleventh century. Sixty-nine to 92

93

94 95

96

97

98

The most recent edition is Cronaca di Novalesa, ed. Gian Carlo Alessio (Turin, 1982). The remnants of the library down to the end of the eleventh century are described on lv–lx. Ibid., lx. The one classical reference, a verse of Terence’s Andria, very likely was borrowed from a secondary work. Ibid., xvii. On Nonantola, see Giuseppe Salvioli, L’istruzione in Italia prima del mille (Florence, 1912), 85, for indications of a school there. On the library, see José Ruysschaert, Les manuscrits de l’abbaye de Nonantola (Vatican City, 1956). Antonio Viscardi, “La cultura nonantolana nei secoli XI–XII,” in Atti e memorie della Deputazione di storia patria per le antiche provincie modenesi, 8th ser., 5 (1953): 339–54, discusses the large library of religious and scholastic books, many of which appear to have come into the library in the early eleventh century under abbot Rodolfo I. On the basis of the collection he argues that the monastery hosted a school of advanced studies (348–52). Neither the library catalogues of 1002–35 nor that of 1166 mentions pagan literary works: Jörg Busch, Die Liber de honore ecclesiae des Placidus von Nonantola: Eine kanonistische Problemerörterung aus dem Jahre 1111, Quellen und Forschungen zum Rechte im Mittelalter, no. 5 (Sigmaringen, 1990), 24. Viscardi,“Cultura nonantolana,” 351, discusses three hagiographical works, Vita Anselmi, the Translatio et miracula sanctorum Senesii et Theopontii, and the Vita Adriani, as well as a fourth work, De fundatione monasterii nonantulani. Tomea, “Agiograia,” 159–60, dates the Vita Anselmi (BHL 3738) to before 974, the Translatio to 1035–53, and the Vita Adriani to late in the eleventh century. Ropa, “Scuole ecclesiastiche,” 67, mentions an early saint’s life of San Fortunato, bishop of Fano (ca. 620), probably composed early in the twelfth century by Abbot Giovanni III (d. 1128). For the Vita Adriani, see Augusto Gaudenzi, “La Vita Adriani Papae,” in “Il monastero di Nonantola, il ducato di Persiceto e la Chiesa di Bologna,” BISI 36 (1916): 280–312. Giuseppe Vecchi has published the poem together with all the other poems known to have been written at Nonantola in the two centuries in “Metri e ritmi Nonantolani: Una scuola poetica monastica medioevale (sec. XI–XII),” Atti e memorie della Deputazione di storia patria per le antiche provincie modenesi, 8th ser., 6 (1954): 220–57. The Vita Adriani is found on 240–42. Angelo Mercati, “Placito priore di Nonantola (prima metà del secolo XII),” Atti e memorie della Deputazione di storia patria per le antiche provincie modenesi, 8th ser., 5 (1953): 127–41; and my Chapter 4.

138

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

seventy-one hagiographic works whose origins we can determine survive for the period 950 to 1130, from the archepiscopal provinces of Milan, Aquileia-Grado, and Ravenna, as well as from the dioceses of Pavia and Rimini. Of these, thirty-eight to forty were of episcopal origin, one was written at the behest of a layman, and between thirty and thirty-two were written in monasteries.99 While most of the almost six-score compositions were brief, anonymous, and without literary merit, a few monastic works – for example, the Vita Benedicti already noted and the vitae composed by Damiani and Andrea di Strumi, to be discussed later – ofered readers compelling accounts because the authors had acquired narrative techniques that allowed them to use their subjects’ lives as windows through which to grasp contemporary issues of church reform. In sum, more is known about Italian schools of the irst three-quarters of the eleventh century than about the schools of earlier periods. We owe our knowledge in part to a greater number of surviving documents and in part to Damiani’s and Anselmo of Besate’s accounts of their educational itineraries. The dramatic increase in source material itself betokens a major expansion of educational opportunities and an intensiication of intellectual life in the schools in comparison to the previous centuries.While masters appear to have been less mobile after 1000, a signiicant regional and international network of educational institutions was emerging, whose sites were linked by a growing number of students wandering in pursuit of knowledge. LANFRANCO OF PAVIA (CA. 1010–89) AND THE RENAISSANCE OF DIALECTIC

The divergent fates of the study of dialectic during the eleventh century in Francia and in the regnum reveal the role played by cultural and religious attitudes in fostering the distinctive character of Italian intellectual life in the Middle Ages.Whereas in transalpine Europe by 1100 dialectic was poised to become the methodological basis for the pursuit of theology and the natural sciences, in Italy dialectic was reduced to a tool for legal reasoning. The purpose of the following three sections of this chapter is to characterize and explain the crucial diference in the approach to logic by comparing the intellectual biographies of three Italians of the period. To judge from his early biographers, Lanfranco of Pavia deserves credit for reviving the study of liberal arts in Francia, and especially of the discipline of dialectic. Writing in 1073–75, a younger contemporary of Lanfranco’s, Guitmund of La-Croix–Saint-Leofroy (later the bishop of Aversa) remarked that, in the early years of the century, “the liberal arts had decayed in Gaul” and maintained that they were only revived by Lanfranco’s arrival.100 Looking back from the mid-twelfth century, 99

100

Tomea, “Agiograia,” 109–10, 111, 127, and 139. This is out of a total of 104 works for the period, a total that appears similar in quantity to hagiographical material produced in northern Europe between the years 950 and 1130. Guitmund, De corporis et sanguinis Christi veritate in Eucharistia, in PL 149, col. 1428, makes these statements in characterizing Berengar of Tours’s knowledge of the liberal arts as supericial. As he had heard from those who knew him, Guitmund writes, Berengar “elatus ingenii levitate, ipsius magistri sensum non adeo curabat, condiscipulorum pro nihilo reputabat, libros insuper artium

139

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

another biographer referred to Lanfranco as having restored the art of dialectic, “which in that time had greatly decayed.”101 Recognized not only for his intellectual abilities but also for his diplomatic and administrative skills, Lanfranco would eventually become archbishop of Canterbury. Lanfranco descended from one of Pavia’s legal families – his father had probably been a iudex sacri palatii.102 Whereas we have no clear picture of the state of liberal studies in Pavia in the early eleventh century, we are better informed about legal studies thanks to the Expositio ad librum papiensem. That work, composed between 1070 and 1090/1100, took the form of a glossa a catena with the incipits of Lombard laws serving as lemmata, each followed by the legal interpretations of earlier Pavian jurists – that is, judices sacri palatii.103 The references to those jurists, including

101

102

103

contemnebat. Sed cum per se attingere philosophiae altioris secreta non posset, neque enim homo ita acutus erat (sed et tunc temporis liberales artes intra Gallias obsolevarant), novis saltem verborum interpretationibus quibus etiam nunc nimium gaudet, singularis scientiae laudem sibi arrogare, et cuiusdam excellentiae gloriam venari, qualitercunque poterat, afectabat.” He continues a few lines later: “Sed postquam a D. Lanfranco in dialectica de re satis parva turpiter est confusus, cumque per ipsum D. Lanfrancum virum atque doctissimum liberales artes Deus recalescere, atque optime reviviscere fecisset, desertum se iste a discipulis dolens, ad eructanda impudenter divinarum scripturarum sacramenta ... sese convertit.” As Lanfranco’s disciple, however, his remarks are not unprejudiced. For an Italian translation of Migne’s text, see Guitmund of Aversa, La “Veritas” dell’Eucarestia: De corporis et sanguinis Christi veritate, trans. Luciano Orabona (Naples, 1995). A biographer writing about 1140 refers to his teaching dialectic: “quae eo tempore quam maxime elapsa fuerat, et per hoc notus non solum Romanis sed et Graecis, nam pro certo nobis protestati sunt, qui ante nos fuerunt, quod ipsa ars, scilicet diale[c]tica, per eum recuperata sit et renovata....”; “Miracula S. Nicolai,” Catalogus codicum hagiographicorum latinorum antiquiorum saeculo XVI … in Bib. Nat. Par., vol. 2 (Brussels and Paris, 1890), 409. Two traditions regarding Lanfranco’s early life existed at Bec; both are represented in the Vita Lanfranci composed there: Margaret Gibson, ed., “Appendice: Vita Lanfranci. Introduzione, edizione del testo e note,” in Lanfranco di Pavia e l’Europa del secolo XI nel IX: Centenario della morte (1089–1989): Atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Pavia, Almo Collegio Borromeo, 21–24 settembre 1989), ed. Guido D’Onofrio, Italia Sacra: Studi e documenti di storia ecclesiastica, no. 51 (Rome, 1993), 668–715. The earlier part of the biography depicts Lanfranco as studying liberal arts elsewhere and then returning to Pavia, but between that time and his departure no mention is made of any participation in public life (668). In making the later addition to the life, the same author, or another, writes apologetically: “Libet nunc quasi ab alio exordio seriem nostre narracionis digerere et quedam omissa inserere, et sic cetera de eodem Lanfranco (prout poterimus) prosequi” (681). In this later part Lanfranco is said to have been educated from childhood in the liberal arts and then actively engaged in legal activity until his departure from the city, but this version says nothing about him studying abroad. The second tradition, referring to Lanfranco’s legal career, was perhaps inluenced by Orderic Vitalis (ca. 1115–37): Historia ecclesiastica, ed. Marjorie Chibnall, 6 vols. (Oxford, 1969–80), 2:248–49. Margaret Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec (Oxford, 1978), 8, points out that Orderic elsewhere drew extensively on William of Poitier’s Gesta Guillelmi ducis, ed. Raymonde Foreville (Paris, 1952). Herbert E. J. Cowdrey, “The Enigma of Archbishop Lanfranc,” Haskins Society Journal 6 (1994): 129–33, suggests that Orderic might have derived his information from later missing chapters of the book written in 1073–74. See also note 112 below. Charles Radding and Antonio Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis in the Middle Ages: Manuscripts and Transmission from the Sixth Century to the Juristic Revival (Leiden and Boston, 2007), 97.The commentator could not have written the Expositio without extensive training in Lombard law. He refers to one of the jurists he mentions, Guglielmo, by the respectful term dominus, a title used at least in the next century for teachers. This may mean that Gugliemo had been his teacher; Giovanni Diurni, “L’Expositio ad Librum papiensem e la scienze preirneriana,” Rivista di storia del diritto italiano

140

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

statements that they themselves had made, provide us with the names of two generations of legal professionals extending back into the early eleventh century: Boniglio (active 1014–55), Bagelard, who seems to have belonged to the same generation; and, in the second generation, Guglielmo, Boniglio’s son; Ugo (1040–70); Walcausius (1055–79); Sigefredo; and inally Lanfranco. The Expositio, which was composed while Lanfranco was still alive or within a decade of his death, refers at points to Boniglio’s discipuli, suggesting that Boniglio also taught law.104 Boniglio’s teaching and that of his fellow jurists would have had no connection with a school of liberal arts at the cathedral or at the Ciel d’Oro but would instead have taken place in a rented space or in the teacher’s home. Pietro Damiani’s letter against the jurists of Ravenna in 1046 indicates that local lawyers (judices) there also engaged in private teaching.105 The double function becomes clear in Damiani’s appeal “that you who are responsible for imposing discipline in the classroom (gimnasio) amidst crowds of students (clientium turbas) should not fear to submit to the discipline of the Church, and just as you are wise in cases argued in the courts, let it suice for you to hear, like students, the words of Christ in the sanctuary.”106 In Ravenna, where laymen dominated the urban notariate, these judices, who themselves likely came from the notariate, would have shared the same civil status.107 Nothing can be said of the nature of legal teaching at Ravenna, but to judge from the Expositio, Pavian jurists over the course of the irst three-quarters of the eleventh century developed a systematic approach to legal sources and interpretation that

104 105

106

107

49 (1976): 199; and Charles Radding, The Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, Pavia and Bologna 850– 1150 (New Haven, Conn., 1988), 97. Diurni’s work is also published separately (Rome, 1976). The Expositio is published as a running commentary in Liber legis Langobardorum papienses dictus, ed. Alfred Boretius, in Leges Langobardorum, ed. Friedrick Bluhme, MGH, Legum, no. 4 (Hannover, 1868), 289–585. For the date, see Diurni, “Expositio ad Librum papiensum,” 53, and Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 126–28. Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 95. Briefe, 1:186, lines 5–7: Vos denuo, iudices, alloquor, vos de lege vestra convenio, vos inquam legis periti, qui iura scrutamini....” At various other times he refers directly to his audience as “judices” (189, lines 16 and 24; 190, line 17). He repeatedly identiies them professionally as a group: “Vobis siquidem vestra relinquimus, nec alieni nobis oitii peritiam arrogamus” (192, lines 7–8); “vester namque Justinianus” (190, line 23). At one point, he calls on them (190, lines 17–19): “Audite, igitur, judices, utriusque doctoris verba diligenter attendite, atque illud tumultuantium murmur, quo in foro vel tribunalibus assueti estis, hic in aecclesia ieri prohibite.” Die Briefe, 1:193: “ut qui inter clientium turbas tenetis in gimnasio ferulam, non vereamini subire in aecclesia disciplinam, et qui tamquam docti peroratis in tribunalibus causas, suitiat vobis sicut docendis in oratorio Christi audire sententias.” Damiani’s contemporary biographer and friend used the term clientes in the sense of students when he wrote of Damiani himself (PL 144, col. 117): “Mox alios erudire, clientium turba ad doctrinae ipsius famam undique conluente, studiossime coepit.” Although it is possible to read the text as directed toward two diferent groups, teachers and lawyers, from Damiani’s remarks here it is clear that the lawyers were teaching. Consequently, I cannot agree with Ian S. Robinson, Authority and Resistance in the Investiture Contest: The Polemical Literature of the Late Eleventh Century (Manchester and New York, 1978), 80, who argues that the teachers to whom Pietro refers in the letter are clerics in the cathedral school. He bases his judgment on Pietro’s statement that “tenetis in gymnasio ferulam.” Damiani seems to me to be addressing practicing lawyers and judges who are also teaching. See my Chapter 2.

141

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

made their discipuli not apprentices but students.108 Indeed, to an extent this professionalization was fueled by the competition of masters to obtain students.109 Throughout the Expositio the commentator refers to the judges of Boniglio’s generation as antiqui and contrasts those of the next generation as moderni. By using these terms he appears to contrast earlier jurists who followed the literal interpretation of the law with later ones who sought to investigate the intention of the lawgiver in establishing the law. Nevertheless, despite the narrowness of his legal opinions, Boniglio shows by his opinions that his generation of judges systematically compared laws in an efort to reconcile their meaning and to determine when one abrogated another.110 His statements on questiones and contestationes indicate that he had a sense of the historical nature of Lombard law and a willingness to alter a reading of the text if it ran contrary to common sense.111 At points in his arguments, he felt the need to draw on concepts from Roman law to elucidate a term or clause, and at others he sought to reinforce a Lombard law by showing its agreement with a related one from Roman jurisprudence. Despite Boniglio’s eminent position in the legal community, the new generation of lawyers, among them Lanfranco, did not hesitate to challenge the old man’s authority. Raised in the house of a judge, Lanfranco appears to have assumed the place of his deceased father in the courts of Pavia upon reaching maturity.112 Earlier 108

109

110

111

112

Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus juris civilis in the Middle Ages, 74–78, question the scholarly character of legal studies at Ravenna at this early date. This is Radding’s conclusion, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 97–98. Speaking to the issue of lawyers as teachers, Diurni, “Expositio ad Librum papiensem,” 168, writes: “Naturalmente non è suficiente l’esistenza di dispute tra giuristi per potersi parlare di un centro di cultura giuridica, ma il valore delle opere giuridiche prodotte in quell’ambiente, i contrasti di opinione su problemi giuridici, la sistemazione delle fonti legislative, l’apposizione di glosse, non solo grammaticali ai testi di legge, l’esistenza di una problematica giuridica, non solo pratica, ma anche teorica, l’uso più consapevole degli strumenti della logica formale e non la ripetizione pedissequa di regulae mandate a memoria, l’elaborazione di concetti nuovi e l’introduzione di una sistematica nella interpretazione della legge, sono gli aspetti che possono farci concludere sul valore da assegnare alla cultura giuridica pavese e sull’esistenza di un centro di cultura giuridica ove l’attività del giurista non era diretta esclusivamente a risolvere problemi di prassi giudiziaria, anche se non esistono prove sicure di un vero e proprio insegnamento.” On the contrast between antiqui and moderni, see Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec, 6; and Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 101–2. Guiscardo Moschetti, “Boniglio,” DBI, no. 12 (Rome, 1970), 17–19, summarizes his life. As an example of his appreciation that a law code was not a unitary whole, Moschetti (18) cites Boniglio’s view that King Rotari altered an earlier law contained in his edict excluding women from succession to property because “pietate commotus” (moved by pity). The reference is to the Expositio, in Roth. 153 (not 152 as Moschetti has it); Liber legis, 321. His substitution of et for aut in the texts of a capitulary of Louis the Pious was accepted by the author of the Expositio as a better reading (Liber legis, 398; Moschetti, 18). On this latter point see Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 104–5. In a comment on the laws of King Guido the commentator refers to the legist Lanfranco as archiepiscopus; Liber legis Langobardorum, 566. I take it as serious proof that a legal scholar writing between 1070 and 1100 made this statement. See as well Nino Tamassia’s study “Lanfranco arcivescovo di Canterbury e la scuola pavese,” Mélanges Fitting, 2 vols. (Montpellier, 1908), 2:189–201, which identiies the jurist with the archbishop on the basis of the archbishop’s use of Lombard law in his commentary on the letters of Saint Paul in a period when it would have been diicult for him to have had access to Lombard legal texts.

142

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

he may have left Pavia to study elsewhere, but we do not know what kind of learning he sought abroad or the dates of his absence. In any case, the Expositio records a debate between Boniglio and Lanfranco, who was then probably about twenty-ive. The circumstances for the discussion are not clear, but each discussant, matching his skill with his opponent’s, was eager for a victory.113 The exchange between Lanfranco and Boniglio was direct, but Guglielmo, a third jurist probably not involved in the interchange, subsequently rendered his own judgment on the issue. The text of the debate reads: Lanfranc archiepiscopus posed the following question to Boniiglio iudex: “If the bearer wished to validate a charter that had been challenged, and the notary and all witnesses are dead, how ought it to be done?” Boniglio answered him: “By custom the bearer of the charter should validate it with twelve compurgators and with two other charters.” ... Lanfranc: “Then this custom is against the law, for it is of this custom that the prologue of Otto’s law says, ‘A detestable and dishonest custom has grown up in Italy.’” Against this [Boniglio] withdrew with an embarrassed smile and his head bowed. But William, of no little ingenuity, settled the matter in this fashion: “Otto said, ‘A dishonest and detestable custom has grown up’ not in respect to the aforesaid custom but respecting this, that certain greedy men were drawing up false charters of alienation and defending the charters by perjury, thus acquiring the goods of others. Thus Otto gave the challenger of the charter the choice of battle or letting the bearer swear.”114

The text reveals the polemical character of legal discussions in early eleventh-century Pavia by which study of the law advanced. Lanfranco had challenged Boniglio

113 114

The identiication of the future archbishop with the Pavian lawyer, however, has repeatedly been challenged. The fullest exposition of the case against it is found in Richard W. Southern, “Lanfranc of Bec and Berengar of Tours,” in Studies in Medieval History Presented to Frederick Maurice Powicke, ed. Richard W. Hunt, William A. Pantin, and Richard W. Southern (Oxford, 1948), 28–30, who points out that the story of Lanfranco’s legal career was not mentioned in one version of Milo Crispin’s biography written shortly after 1136. As for the reference in the Expositio, Southern writes: “If we are to believe that the Lanfranco of the ‘Liber papiensis’ was our Lanfranco we must believe that the memory of the amazing young man was kept alive in Pavia for thirty or forty years by someone who followed his career from afar; in which case the casualness of the single reference to his identity would be hard to explain” (30, n. 4, from previous page). My response to the latter argument is, irst, that the commentator of the Expositio, who knew the work of the leading legists of the previous two generations, was a serious scholar. Second, as the scion of an important family, Lanfranco would have had close relatives still living in Pavia and his successes would have been followed closely in the city. A nephew studied with Anselmo at Bec, and Lanfranco, as archbishop of Canterbury, was in contact with both: letters 18 and 19 (1073), in The Letters of Lanfranc Archbishop of Canterbury, ed. Helen Clover and Margaret Gibson (Oxford, 1979), 96–100. Finally, Lanfranco made three or four trips to Rome, the last in 1071; Cowdrey, “Enigma,” 133. Likely on one or more of these trips to and from Italy he stopped to visit his native city. For the commentator to claim erroneously that the archbishop of Canterbury had once been a practicing lawyer in Pavia would have made him ridiculous to the contemporary legal community there. Charles Radding, “Geography of Learning,” 170, makes this point. I have used the translation of the passage from the Expositio in Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 87.

143

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

to resolve a legal issue, and when Boniglio responded by ofering a customary procedure for its resolution, Lanfranco identiied it as contrary to imperial law. Subsequently, Guglielmo accused Lanfranco of taking the imperial law out of its historical context and misunderstanding its provisions. Boniglio’s apparent defeat in a public arena, however, may have been enough to end his teaching career. In the two subsequent occasions the Expositio mentions in which Lanfranco debated with other judges, it was no longer with Boniglio but with discipuli Bonigli.115 As in the case of Boniglio, we may assume that Lanfranco had taken on students, some of whom may have been among those “of great renown,” who are reported to have followed him over the Alps and into Francia.116 We do not know when Lanfranco composed his commentaries on both Ciceronian manuals of rhetoric, but as a teacher of law in Pavia he would have known the manuals well because of their concentration on legal reasoning and judicial oratory.117 Papias, Lanfranco’s contemporary, articulated the connection when he deined rhetorica in his Elementarium as “ratio dicendi et iurisperitorum” (the foundation of speaking and of men skilled in the law).118 By way of studying the rules for constructing speeches, students learned the kind of argumentation used by lawyers, who sought probable rather than absolute truth, argued by inference rather than by demonstration, and therefore relied more on the enthymeme than on the syllogism. Nonetheless, syllogistic reasoning was needed at times, and Cicero’s manuals provided suicent instruction to serve the needs of courtroom oratory. The Ciceronian texts taught students not simply to reason but speciically to reason about the law and then to articulate their arguments in a formal way, either orally or in writing. As a teacher of law and rhetoric in Pavia, 115

116

117

118

Moschetti, “Boniglio,” 17. See references in Liber legis Langobardorum; Grim. 8 (402–3); and in Luitp., Prol., 3 (404); Wido, 6 (566–67). Vita Lanfranci, ed. Margaret Gibson, Lanfranco di Pavia, 668: “Deinceps patria egressus et Alpes transgressus in Gallias venit.... Et pertransiens Franciam, quamplures magni nominis scolares secum habens, in Normanniam pervenit; et in Abrincatensi c[i]vitate demoratus per aliquod tempus docuit.” He is credited also with two works on dialectic, De dialectica and Dicti Lanfranci, and possibly with a commentary on Priscian. The commentary on Ad Herennium is referred to by Richard W. Hunt, “Studies on Priscian in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries. I. Petrus Helias and His Predecessors,” in idem, The History of Grammar in the Middle Ages: Collected Papers, ed. Geofrey L. Bursill-Hall (Amsterdam, 1980), 14, who also mentions the Dicti Lanfranci (14, n. 3). For the commentary on De inventione, Ad Herennium, and Lanfranco’s Dialectica, see Gibson, Lanfrance of Bec, 49; for the possible commentary on Priscian, see 47. Hunt, “Studies on Priscian,” 14–16. On rhetoric and law, see Giovanni Cassandro, Lezioni di diritto comune, 2 vols. (Naples, 1984), 1:37–42. Legal scholars are generally in agreement that contemporary movements in theology, philosophy, and logic in western Europe had little or no connection with the development of legal studies by the early Bolognese jurists: Bruno Paradisi, “Osservazioni sull’uso del metodo dialettico nei glossatori del sec. XII,” Studi sul medioevo giuridico, Studi storici, Istituto storico italiano per il medio evo, fasc. 163–73 (Rome, 1987), 696. Paradisi himself, however, demonstrates that Aristotelian dialectic had an increasing importance for the glossators in the second half of the twelfth century (ibid., 703–4). See as well Gerhard Otte, Dialektik und Jurisprudenz: Untersuchungen zur Methode der Glossatoren (Frankfurt am Main, 1971), 22–23, who maintains that before Placentino legal scholars made wide use of the logica antiqua but were less prone to identify their dependence on Aristotelian and Boethian sources.

144

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Lanfranco wrote glosses for the beneit of his students that emphasized the dialectical and rhetorical aspects of the legal texts.119 Anselmo of Besate may have learned a similar methodology of glossing in Sichelmo’s classroom; in any case, the series of glosses that Anselmo wrote to accompany his Rhetorimachia brought out the argumentation and explained the desired efect of particular words or phrases. Later, in Francia, Lanfranco would apply the exegetical techniques that he had developed to analyze legal texts to produce biblical commentaries that were exceptionally systematic and clear. When he crossed the Alps in his late twenties, probably late in the 1030s, Lanfranco passed from a milieu of legal professionals into a scholarly world less passionate about legal studies and where Latin learning was a clerical monopoly.120 We do not know the state of the study of dialectic in Francia when he arrived. Modern scholarship tends to see Francia as the home of the developments in logic that led to scholasticism’s achievements in theology and the natural sciences, but it is not at all clear that in the earliest stages Francia was more advanced than Italy. As we have seen, Lanfranco’s early biographers opted for Italy. Richer, a disciple of Gerbert of Aurillac, in his Historiae, which he inished around 996, claimed that his master had been teaching a series of logical texts at Rheims a generation earlier that included all but one of the works generally comprising what later became known as the logica vetus. While there may be reason to doubt Richer’s accuracy, at least we can be sure that by the time of his writing in the last decade of the century the concept of teaching an integrated series of logic texts existed in Francia.121 Gerbert’s curriculum of dialectic, however, seems subsequently to have been dropped. Nor is there any indication of instruction in logic at Fleury after the death in 1004 of Abbo, a contemporary of Gerbert who was especially interested in the works of Boethius.122 Fulbert of Chartres (ca. 970–1028), if he indeed ever studied with Gerbert, may have carried on Gerbert’s legacy in an attenuated form, irst as scholasticus at Chartres until 1006 and then as bishop there until his death in 1028, but nothing for certain 119

120

121

122

Charles M. Radding, “Vatican Latin 1406, Mommsen’s Ms. S, and the Reception of the Digest in the Middle Ages,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, romanistiche Abteilung, 123 (1993): 335. Gibson, Lanfrance of Bec, 15, believes that Lanfranco left Italy around 1030, at about age twenty. This would mean that he lived in Francia for twelve years before entering the monastery at Bec in 1042. After that his career is relatively well documented. But, as she writes, “It is the 1030s that are so obscure.” As Charles Radding argues (“Geography of Learning,” 170), to attain the status that he held among the jurists of Pavia, Lanfranco would have had to have been older than nineteen or twenty, and he maintains that he would not have left Pavia before the mid-1030s. In his Historiarum libri IIII, ed. Hartmut Hofmann, MGH, Scriptores, no. 38 (Hannover, 2000), 193–94, Richer outlines the texts Gerbert used in teaching logic. Except for the omission of Boethius’s uninished Introductio ad syllogismos categoricos, they included the whole logica vetus. For the dating of Richer’s work, see ibid., 2. Radding, “Geography of Learning,” doubts that Gerbert’s curriculum contained all the works that Richer attributes to it (164–65). For the school of Rheims in the eleventh century, see J. R. Williams, “The Cathedral School of Rheims in the Eleventh Century,” Speculum 29 (1954): 661–77. On Abbo’s work, see Pierre Riché, Abbon de Fleury: Un moine savant et combatif (vers 950–1004) (Turnhout, 2004), 98–101. His Libellus de propositionibus et syllogismis hypotheticis, ed. and trans. Franz Schupp (Leiden, 1997) ofers original interpretations of Boethius’s own treatise on the subject: Riché, Abbon de Fleury, 100.

145

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

is known of the curriculum that Fulbert designed for the school. We cannot simply assume that Fulbert duplicated at Chartres Gerbert’s elaborate curriculum of logic at Rheims, a claim that rests primarily on what might have been a contemporary manuscript in the library at Chartres, Chartres, 100, which contains a good share of the same texts of the logica vetus used by Gerbert.123 A short poem attributed to Fulbert distinguishing rhetoric from dialectic probably served as a mnemonic device for students in the earlier stages of their training, but ifty years earlier Gunzo had already drawn a similar distinction. As for writings on rhetoric, Fulbert could have used Victorinus’s commentary on the De inventione and a lorilegium of rhetorical material in the cathedral library, but the two Ciceronian manuals themselves appear not to have been there.124 The central argument of Fulbert’s most substantial surviving work, Contra Judeos, does not enhance his reputation as a dialectician. Comparing a kingdom to a house having the king as its roof, the people as its walls, and the land as its foundation, he argued that there could be no Jewish kingdom.This supposedly followed because (1) a Jewish king must be anointed by a Jewish priesthood; (2) there was no true Jewish priesthood; and (3) therefore there was no Jewish king. If, then, he concluded, there was no king, there was no kingdom.125 Although formally valid, the quality of the syllogism, which is based on arbitrary major and minor premises, makes it diicult to imagine that Fulbert’s knowledge of dialectic went beyond the elementary.126 Nor does the use of logic by Fulbert’s most brilliant student, Berengar of Tours, display great sophistication. Born circa 1005, Berengar probably began his teaching career in the liberal arts at Tours circa 1035, around the same time that Lanfranco emigrated from Italy. The primary reason for positing that Berengar’s knowledge of dialectic might have been superior is that Lanfranco is said to have studied with him for a time. An early account of Lanfranco’s life, Miracula S. Nicholai (1140), which describes Lanfranco as irst teaching in Burgundy before establishing a school at Avranches in Normandy, suggests that the period was short. It reported: “Hearing the fame of a certain Berengar, archdeacon of the church of Tours, who surpassed many and nearly all in the knowledge of letters in these regions, he [Lanfranco] 123

124 125

126

Both Frederick Behrends, The Letters and Poems of Fulbert of Chartres, ed. and trans. Frederick Behrends (Oxford, 1976), xxxi–xxxii, and Jules Clerval, Les écoles de Chartres au moyen-âge (du Ve au XVIe siècle) (Paris, 1895), 117, assume its presence there in the early decades of the century. See, however, Radding, “Geography of Learning,” 161–65. Even had the manuscript been at Chartres in Fulbert’s day, the “jumble” of Boethian texts with older dialectical works such as the De decem categoriis and Alcuin’s dialectic suggests that, had the texts been taught as one corpus, instruction in dialectic would have been inferior to that at Rheims under Gerbert: Suzanne J. Nelis, “What Lanfranc Taught, What Anselm Learned,” Haskins Society Journal 2 (1990): 79. Radding, “Geography of Learning,” 115. See Behrend’s summary of the argument, The Letters of Fulbert of Chartres, xxvii. For doubts about Boethius as the source of the house analogy, see Radding, “Geography of Learning,” 169. Marcia L. Colish, “Eleventh-Century Grammar in the Thought of St. Anselm,” Arts libéraux et philosophie au Moyen Âge: Actes du quatrième congrès international de philosophie médiévale: Université de Montréal, Montréal Canada, 27 août–2 septembre 1967 (Montréal and Paris, 1969), 789, coins the term “Aristotelianized grammar” to characterize the logic of this century, including that of Anselmo. See also her The Mirror of Language: A Study in the Medieval Theory of Knowledge, 2nd ed. (New Haven, Conn., and London, 1983), 63–78.

146

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

came to him [Berengar], completely concealing his identity, and submitted himself to him as a disciple. But when he discerned that he was gaining nothing there and knowing him not to be of sound doctrine, as it afterward appeared in fact, he departed from him.”127 We may assume that Guitmund’s description in his De corporis et sanguinis Christi veritate of Berengar’s afected Latin pronunciation and pretense at deep meditation came directly from Lanfranco, who had seen Berengar perform.128 Although Lanfranco studied with Berengar for a time, we do not know the subject of Berengar’s lessons, nor when and for how long Lanfranco remained with him. But Lanfranco’s efort to remain incognito suggests that even early in his residence in Francia the Italian master was well known. Berengar perhaps knew Lanfranco’s identity before 1048, the approximate time of the former’s discovery of the treatise of Ratramnus, the ninth-century monk of Corbie whom Berengar erroneously interpreted as maintaining the presence of Christ in the Eucharist in spirit only. At least Guitmund has it that Berengar’s theological interests only began after losing a scholarly debate with Lanfranco over an insigniicant issue (de re satis parva).129 His defeat by Lanfranco, according to Guitmund, caused Berengar’s students to desert him and resulted in his turning to the study of theology in an efort to recoup his reputation. Those events would have preceded Berengar’s irst surviving letter to Lanfranco, written in 1049, four years after Lanfranco had become prior of Bec, in which Berengar tried to convince Lanfranco to embrace his position that the presence of Christ in the Eucharist was only spiritual. How learned was Berengar in dialectic? His major surviving work, Rescriptum contra Lanfrannum, composed sometime between 1065 and 1070 and written to defend himself against Lanfranco’s attacks in Liber de corpore et sanguine domini (1063), proclaimed the superiority of reason over authority. To Lanfranco’s cautions about the dangers of using dialectic in theology, Berengar replied: “Now as to the fact that you do not hesitate to write (I say) that, when an opportunity for carrying forward the argument occurs and necessity brings the sacred authorities before the public view, I leave them aside. It will be made clear by divine favor that you are writing out of malice, not out of truth; although no one not blinded by madness would deny that, just because the matter (in this case) is evident, it is incomparably superior to use reason in the perception of truth.”130 Although Berengar introduced a welter of arguments, his basis for denying the corporeal presence of Christ in the bread and wine following consecration came down to Aristotelian concepts of substance and qualities: “For truth holds that – as I have argued above at suicient 127

128 129

130

“Miracula sancti Nicholai,” 409. The Vita Lanfranci only mentions his teaching at Avranches; “Vita Lanfranci,” in Lanfranco di Pavia, 668. Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec, 20, cites Migne, PL 149, col. 1428. On the date of the discovery of the treatise, see John de Montclos, “Lanfranc et Bérenger: Les origines de la doctrine de transubstantiation,” Lanfranco di Pavia, 298. Berengar thought the work to have been written by John Scotus. Rescriptum contra Lanfrannum is edited by Robert B. C. Huygens, Corpus christianorum, Continuatio medievalis, Textus varii saeculorum x–xiii, vol. 84 (Turnhout, 1988), 85: “Quod relinquere me, inquio ego, sacras auctoritates non dubitas scribere, manifestum iet divinitate propicia illud de calumpnia scribere te, non de veritate, ubi deducenti sacras auctoritates in medium necessitate inde agendi locus occurrerit, quamquam ratione agere in perceptione veritatis incomparabiliter superius esse, quia in evidenti res est, sine vercordiae cecitate nullus negaverit.”

147

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

length – everything made up of matter and form is one thing in that it is, and another thing in that it is something; and it cannot be something if it happens itself not to be; that is, what is not according to substance is in no way able to be according to accident.”131 In other words, the continued presence of the qualities of the bread and wine after consecration proved that their substances were also present, and therefore that Christ was not there in body. Nevertheless, although Berengar played dialectically on the Aristotelian concepts and insisted on the identiication of dialectic with human reason, as Henry Chadwick concludes, “a reading of the Rescriptum as a whole does not suggest that Berengar was dominated by either logic or grammar but by his patristic readings.”132 Moreover, Berengar repeatedly justiied his stress on the independent power of reason itself by references to Augustine, not Aristotle.133 Like others engaged in the Eucharist controversy, Berengar demonstrated a new interest in questions regarding the role of authority by raising broad doctrinal problems and by defending his opinion against those of his opponents, but it is diicult to see his argumentation as having been signiicantly afected by training in dialectic.134 Lanfranco himself frustrates an efort to compare his contribution to dialectic with that of Berengar, in that he consciously endeavored to avoid using dialectic in dealing with religious matters and tried to conceal the logical underpinnings of his thought where logic seemed inappropriate. In defending his belief in the corporeal presence of Christ in the Eucharist against Berengar, Lanfranco wrote: “I do not wish to propose dialectical questions nor respond to dialectical questions or to their solutions. Even if the subject of the dispute is such that it can be more clearly explained by dialectic, so far as possible I conceal this art by equipollency of propositions, lest I seem to conide more in art than I do in truth and the authority of the holy fathers.”135 That is, rather than impose an artiicial construction on a passage, Lanfranco preferred to develop its meaning from within the text itself, by restating the meaning of the passage in what he claimed was its exact equivalent. Nevertheless, actual examples of “equipollency” are rare in Lanfranco’s work, and in at least one instance, his malicious rewording of a statement of Berengar’s was self-serving. This 131

132

133

134 135

Rescriptum, 158: “Veritas enim hoc habet, unde superius satis egi, omne compactum ex materia et forma aliud esse in eo quod est, aliud in eo quod aliquid est, nec posse aliquid esse si contigerit ipsum non esse, id est quod secundum subiectum non sit minime posse secundum accidens esse.” See ibid., 66: “Verbi gratia, si enuncias: Socrates est, ipsum esse irmasti, si enuncias: Socrates iustus est, aliquid eum esse constituisti, nec potest iustus esse si contingat Socrates non esse.” Henry Chadwick, “Symbol and Reality: Berengar and the Appeal to the Fathers,” Auctoritas und Ratio: Studien zu Berengar von Tours, Peter Ganz, R. B. C. Huygens, and Friedrich Niewöhner, Wolfenbütteler Mittelalter-Studien, 2 vols. (Weisbaden, 1990), 2:35; cited from Charles M. Radding and Francis Newton, Theology, Rhetoric and Politics in the Eucharistic Controversy, 1078–1079 (New York, 2003), 9. See as well André Cantin, “La position prise par Lanfranc sur le traitement des mystères de la foi par les raisons dialectiques,” in Lanfranco di Pavia, 372. Most of the small number of references that he does make to works of the liberal arts are taken from Lanfranco’s Liber de corpore et sanguine Domini (1063), which Berengar was trying to refute: Radding and Newton, Theology, Rhetoric and Politics, 8. Ibid., 9–10. Lanfranco, De sanguine et corpore domini, PL 150, col. 417.

148

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

form of reasoning would, however, become basic to the theological arguments of Lanfranco’s disciple, Anselmo.136 Lanfranco displayed his dialectical ability more efectively in his dialectical glosses on the Epistles of Saint Paul, which he wrote early in his teaching career at Bec in 1045.137 The critical talents that he had earlier honed by explicating legal passages at Pavia he now employed for explicating often obscure scriptural ones.138 For example, he clariied Paul’s statement in Rom. 2:1, “Therefore thou art inexcusable, O man, whosoever thou art that judgest; for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things” by the following gloss:“This is an invective against rulers. Paul says: ‘Since all who commit and agree to (wickedness) shall perish, so also shall those who judge others, if they are enmeshed in the same sin.’” The gloss was equivalent to a syllogism: All who sin shall perish. The rulers are enmeshed in sin; Therefore they too shall perish.139

There is no evidence, however, in this or in the few other syllogistic arguments in the commentary (Lanfranco’s earliest work), that the author had any direct knowledge of Aristotelian logic. It seems more likely that his later reputation for skill in dialectic derived from his superlative understanding of Ciceronian argumentation, with its dialectical ingredient. In Lanfranco’s day the state of training in dialectic in Francia appears to have been so mediocre as to allow him to carry the day with Cicero.140 136

137

138

139

140

Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec, 87–88. On the history of the term “equipollency,” see 88. Richard Southern, Saint Anselm and His Biographer: A Study of Monastic Life and Thought, 1059–c. 1130 (Cambridge, 1963), 22, uses a passage from Saint Anselmo’s De veritate to give an example of equipollency. Ann R. Collins argues convincingly, in “The Manuscripts and Text of Lanfranc of Bec’s Commentary on St. Paul” (Ph.D. diss., University of Pennsylvania, 2002), 16–17, that the work was written about three years after Lanfranco’s arrival at Bec. In writing his commentary on the Psalms, Lanfranco was preceded in the eleventh century by Bruno of Würzburg (d. 1045) who, limiting himself to short glosses, used Cassiodorus’s rhetorical approach to commentation designed to explain the rhetorical structure of the text. Similarly, Herman of Reichnau (d. 1054) glossed the Pauline epistles and, like Lanfranco, wrote short glosses incorporating both patristic and subsequent comments; Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec, 52–54. Of Lanfranco’s two commentaries, the irst on the Psalms survives only in fragments. Margaret Gibson, “Lanfranc’s Commentary on the Pauline Epistles,” Journal of Theological Studies 22 (1971): 102: “At irst sight Lanfranc has brought to Pauline commentary a quite new concern for the forms of argument, for logical consistency, and rhetorical efect.” According to Richard Southern, “Lanfranc of Bec,” 37, Lanfranco “explained the argument, disentangled its branches, and put into proper logical form what the Apostle had left to be inferred from a few rapid sentences. ‘The order of argument is as follows …’ ‘This is a proof of the preceding verse....This is an argument a simili … a causa … a contraria....’ ‘Here, by disproving one alternative, the Apostle proves, as his manner is, the other’: these are phrases which often recur in Lanfranc’s commentary.” This example is cited from Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec, 56–57. For another, see Collins,“The Manuscripts and Text of Lanfranc of Bec’s Commentary,” 127–30. She considers Cicero’s Topica as the central rhetorical text used in this commentary (130). Collins, “Manuscripts and Text,” 133–36.

149

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

We can be certain that Lanfranco imparted the same methodology of explication de texte to his students at Bec. From the time of his entry into the monastery, in the diocese of Rouen, in 1042 until he left to become abbot of Saint Étienne at Caen in 1063, Lanfranco served for long periods as scholasticus of the monastic school and attracted young men as students from both sides of the Alps.141 His most famous student, Anselmo of Aosta (and later of Canterbury), arrived at Bec in 1060, only three years preceding Lanfranco’s departure for Caen. Given Lanfranco’s reluctance to resort to dialectical arguments in theological questions, the master’s inluence on Anselmo’s revolutionary proof for the existence of God in the Monologion, published in 1079, may well have gone no further than to stress the rewards to be gained by subjecting scripture to logical analysis.142 In fact, Lanfranco had no compelling need to attack Berengar, because the latter’s doctrine of the spiritual presence of Christ in the Eucharist had already been condemned by papal synods in 1050 and 1059, as it would be again in 1079. A series of regional church councils also rejected the doctrine at various times during the third quarter of the eleventh century.143 Although those synods rejected Berengar’s theological position on the presence of the body and blood, they did not discuss the more general issue of what limitations should be placed on the use of reason in theology. Alberico of Montecassino wrote a tract in response to Berengar’s works in preparation for the papal council of 1079, but he did not confront the problem either.144 Fourteen years earlier, however, in 1065, Pietro Damiani had already enunciated his conviction that dialectic had no place in theology. His vituperative opposition to granting a place to dialectic arose out of another contemporary discussion, one that appears to have been peculiarly Italian. The discussion, perhaps connected with the teachings of Drogo at Parma, who likely had some knowledge of AristotelianBoethian logic, focused on the legitimate use of hypothetical propositions. ANSELMO OF BESATE AND THE MANIPULATION OF THE ARTES

While Lanfranco was revolutionizing biblical commentary in Francia by submitting the biblical text to logical analysis using tools that he had derived from Cicero, his 141

142

143 144

All evidence that Anselmo da Baggio, the future Alexander II, had been a student of Lanfranco is late and unreliable. Similarly, there is no proof that the kinsman of Pope Alexander II sent to study with Lanfranco at Bec was Anselmo of Lucca: Herbert E. J. Cowdrey, “Lanfranc, the Papacy, and Canterbury,” in Lanfranco di Pavia, 448. However, a 1073 letter of Lanfranco to Alexander suggests that many Italians came to study with him: Gibson, The Letters of Lanfranc Archbishop of Canterbury, 33. Also see the letter of Pope Nicholas II (1059–61), cited by Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec, 39, who wants to send students to Bec to study dialectic and rhetoric. The only work of logic speciically mentioned by Lanfranco was the old-fashioned De decem categoriis, which comes out of a diferent tradition of logic from that of the logica vetus. Therefore, Margaret Gibson, Lanfranc of Bec, 49, concludes: “If Lanfranc is still prepared to accept the De decem categoriis, it is almost impossible to see him as a pioneer in the study of the logica vetus.” It also should be said that Anselmo difered from his master by favoring arguments supported by reason alone: Nelis, “What Lanfranc Taught,” 81–82. Radding and Newton, Theology, Rhetoric and Politics, discuss these councils (17 and 26). The speech is edited with translation, ibid., 126–69.

150

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

older Italian contemporary Drogo enjoyed an international reputation at Parma, apparently due to his study of both Ciceronian rhetoric and Aristotelian-Boethian logic. Drogo’s reputation was broad enough by 1023 to capture the attention of Egbert of Liège, scholasticus at the cathedral of Liège, who cruelly satirized him in his Fecunda ratis. Egbert’s Drogo did not understand the meaning of Hebrew words like “Sabaoth” and “Hosannah,” nor could he recite the Dominus vobiscum. Perhaps the pious schoolmaster intended his satire as an attack on the secular orientation of Drogo’s instruction. Another motive might have been envy. According to Egbert, Drogo’s students proclaimed, “We judge no other to be wiser than he.”145 Because nothing remains of Drogo’s writings, we know of his teaching only through that of one of his students, Anselmo of Besate, whose use of logic suggests a knowledge not only of the relevant Ciceronian texts but also of elementary Aristotelian and Boethian writings. Anselmo of Besate, who studied with Drogo in the late 1030s or early 1040s, acknowledged his gratitude to his old master both for his teaching and for Drogo’s letter recommending the Rhetorimachia by dedicating to him the irst edition of the work. Numbering himself among the secta drogonica, Anselmo appealed to Drogo to take the composition under his protection and use his authority to defend it from attack.146 Anselmo composed the Rhetorimachia between 1046 and 1048 in Parma and probably wrote the dedication in the spring of 1048. But his three months’ service in the imperial chancery of Italy, accompanying the emperor from March to May 1047 as Henry III moved around northern and central Italy on his Romfahrt, had whetted Anselmo’s hope of gaining a permanent place in the imperial bureaucracy.147 Having followed the emperor back to Germany in 1048, he must have decided that the Rhetorimachia’s eloquent testimony to his wide knowledge of the arts could certify him as qualiied for a chancery position, and late in 1049 he rededicated the book to Henry. The Rhetorimachia takes the form of a long letter in which the author attempts to convict his cousin Rotilando of a wide range of preposterous charges. Anselmo’s stated purpose is to demonstrate the principles of rhetoric taught by ancient writers and by his own earlier treatise on rhetoric, De materia artis, now lost. “Since I had for a long time heard their old complaint [sc. that of critics of rhetoric] that they were constrained by a lack of examples for following the principles of the art, I wanted both to create examples and not fail to write them down, so that the mind might learn by inventing, teach by writing, and conserve what was written.”148 In his brief dedicatory letter to Drogo, Anselmo frankly admitted that none of the charges were true and that he had “revealed him [Rotilando] as guilty by verisimilitude rather than truly because the rhetorical faculty proves not truth but rather verisimilitude.”149 145 146 147 148

149

Fecunda ratis, ed. Ernst Voigt (Halle, 1889), 173. Rhetorimachia, 181. Manitius, Rhetorimachia, 68–74, provides a brief sketch of Anselmo’s career. Rhetorimachia, 102: “Cumque eorum iam inveteratam querelam audieram, quod secundum artis precepta exemplorum angerentur inopia, fuit mihi velle et exempla invenire et stilo mandare non omittere, ut et disceret animum inveniendo et scriptura docere vellet et scripta retineret.” Ibid., 103.

151

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Initially Anselmo promised to demonstrate in his book all three forms of oratory (judicial, deliberative, and epideictic), but in the event he illustrated only judicial oratory. In the irst of the three books, following the letter of dedication to Drogo, Anselmo analyzed a letter by Rotilando in order to show that its author lacked the skill, intellect, and moral character to be an orator. The irst half of the second book was devoted to recounting Anselmo’s dream of meeting Roberto, Rotilando’s father, in heaven and hearing the father lament that his son practiced magic. The dream concluded with Anselmo himself becoming the object of a struggle between the souls in heaven, who insisted on keeping him there, and the trivium, represented by three maidens, who demanded his presence on Earth for their beneit. Anselmo’s rebuttal of putative accusations leveled against him by his cousin made up the rest of the second book. In the third Anselmo intensiied the attack by accusing his cousin of theft, murder, and being enslaved by the devil. Having lost his free will by choice, Rotilando now sinned of necessity: “You, who have lost the judgement of reason, whose free will has been destroyed, from whom now there is nothing to be hoped, will be a beast among beasts.”150 Anselmo concluded his treatment of judicial oratory at the end of the third book by promising at last to exemplify the other two styles of oratory, the epideictic and deliberative styles, in a fourth.151 Having written up to this point by the spring of 1048, however, Anselmo left for the imperial court and apparently never inished the project. Aiming to convince his audience of his mastery of Latin, Anselmo composed his Rhetorimachia in the best mannerist style, at times mixing prose and poetry (prosimetron).152 The prologue, written in hexameters, generally in leonine form, is metrically correct, but the rhymed verses within the body of the prose text sometimes fail to follow metrical rules and accepted rhyme schemes. Examples of rhymed prose are frequent, such as the following: dominium non negasti; cui te miser servum donasti. Illum enim ofendere timuisti; confessus es, cum non negasti. Plasma Christi dehonestasti, legem subvertisti, humanum genus minuisti, cum tam preclarum opus domini tam turpi dominio infecisti et ex superna illa gloria ad inimam miseriam descendisti.153 150

151 152 153

Ibid., 176: “Erisque bestia inter bestias, qui racionis iudicium perdideras, cui arbitrii interiit libertas, de quo quis sperare iam nequeat.” Ibid., 109. This analysis is based on Manitius’s introduction, ibid., 85–86. Rhetorimachia, 169–70. The translation reads as follows: “You have not renounced the lord to whom you, miserable one, gave yourself as a slave. For you fear to ofend him; you confess, since you do not deny; you have dishonored the blood of Christ, subverted the law, diminished the human race, since you have corrupted such an excellent work of the lord with such a foul dominion, and you have descended from that heavenly glory to the depths of misery.” See Karl Polheim, Die

152

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

The sentences, crowded with rhetorical igures and tropes, compel the reader to work hard to understand their meaning. The author presumably intended this exercise in high style to serve, irst, as a classroom model for illustrating the rules of rhetoric; and second, as a testimony to his qualiications to hold a prominent position in the imperial chapel or chancery. Anselmo’s work ofers the best evidence we have of the level and kind of instruction to be found in Drogo’s classroom. A number of works in the logica vetus seem to have been known to the author, namely, Boethius’s commentaries on the Isagoge, the Categories, and De interpretatione; Boethius’s commentary on Cicero’s Topica; and Boethius’s own De topicis diferentiis. The fact that Anselmo cited Cicero’s Topica makes it likely that he knew the work directly, but we cannot be sure from his references that he had the complete texts of Porphyry or Aristotle on which Boethius had commented.154 Anselmo had clearly been trained in constructing the post-Aristotelian hypothetical syllogism. It was available in Martianus Capella and Cassiodorus, but it is more likely that he learned it from Boethius, probably from his commentary on De interpretatione.155 When Anselmo’s cousin Rotilando accused him of using magic to cause abortions, Anselmo responded with a series of hypothetical syllogisms: Those [children] who you have said were about to be were either about to be or not about to be. If not about to be, since they are not nor will have been, what you have proposed to be is impossible to be. For if it is true that it will not be, it is then assuredly false that it will be; if this is false, it is necessary that it not happen. But if it is necessary [that it not happen], then it is impossible that it happen, such that now, because it will necessarily not come to be, it is certainly impossible that it does not exist because of some act of magic, since, if for some reason it did not exist, it would be necessary beforehand for something to exist, or to have existed, or be about to exist.156

Although the construction, relying on the interrelationship of the terms of the propositions that comprise it, reached a logically valid conclusion, it is diicult to see how the argument disproved Rotilando’s charge. Here as elsewhere, Anselmo was launting his learning, but what is historically signiicant is the kind of argument that he chose to launt. Anselmo’s use of the

154

155 156

lateinische Reimprosa (Berlin, 1963), 421, as well as Bernard Pabst, Prosimetrum: Tradition und Wandel einer Literaturform zwischen Spätantike und Spätmittelalter (Cologne and Weimar, 1994), 379–87. See index under “Boethius,” in Rhetorimachia, 196–97. Lorenzo Minio-Paluello,“The Genuine Text of Boethius’ Translation of Aristotle’s Categories,” Mediaeval and Renaissance Studies 1 (1941–43): 155–59, points out that often manuscripts of the Boethian commentaries include only those parts of the Aristotelian text being commented on. Rhetorimachia, 154, n. 5, and 155, n. 2. Ibid., 154–55: “Quos enim futuros dixisti, futuri erant vel non futuri. Si non futuri, cum nec sint, nec fuerint: quod esse sit inpossible esse proposuisti. Si enim verum est non futurum, falsum est quidem esse futurum; hoc si falsum, non evenire est necessarium. Quod si necesse, evenire quippe est inpossible, ut iam, quod necessario non veniet ad esse, sit quidem inpossible aliquo maleicio deesse, cum, si aliquo deesset, esse vel fuisse futurumve aliquid prius necesse foret.” I wish to thank Francis Newton and Clare Woods of Duke University for advice on translating this passage.

153

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

hypothetical syllogism suggests that his teacher, Drogo, had moved beyond the study of Aristotelian logic, which was designed to structure the givens of experience, toward a less formal logic, that found in Boethius’s own logical works. Although it does not appear to have been used in the debate about the Eucharist that was going on north of the Alps, the hypothetical syllogism had entered theological discussions in Italy by the 1060s, becoming a speciic object of attack for the ascetic Pietro Damiani, who determined to save Christian belief from the insidious efects of dialectical argumentation. An intellectual playfulness, often expressed in gratuitious syllogistic arguments, is evident throughout the Rhetorimachia. When in Anselmo’s dream the Muses beg him to remain with them because he is unequalled in dialectical skill, they syllogize as follows: “There will be no one like you after you unless it shall be you. Yet it is impossible that anyone should become you. Therefore it is necessary that it not happen: because if it is impossible to be, it is necessary that it not be. It is, however, impossible; therefore it is not to be.”157 Irritated that despite praise of his work in Gaul, Burgundy, Saxony, and “barbarous” Francia, the city of Mainz had withheld its judgment, Anselmo entered into an elaborate series of syllogisms to prove that, according to logic, by embracing the middle course (medium) of not choosing, Mainz was both praising and blaming at the same time, an impossible stance.158 We must not discount the delight that Anselmo’s readers may have taken in working through his verbal games at a time when such arguments were novel. The Rhetorimachia permits us to assess a learned northern Italian’s knowledge in the mid-eleventh century not just of dialectic but also of grammar and rhetoric. We must be cautious about taking the author’s claims to knowledge at face value, because he is out to claim as much learning as possible. In any case, amidst a panoply of texts cited or echoed in the work, most would have been considered commonplace north of the Alps. Some passages of the book are reminiscent of rare authors, but the citations are often not speciic enough to assign them to a deinite source. Where the choice lies between a rare text like Statius’s Silvae and Horace’s Carmina or better-known works, it is wiser to assume that the latter served as the inspiration.159 At the same time, we cannot be sure that some references were not drawn from lorilegia. Or, if Anselmo did have direct knowledge of some of the rare texts that he cited, such as Quintilian’s Institutiones, he may have known them only in fragmentary condition. To judge from the index of citations that Manitius, the editor of Rhetorimachia, provides, a conservative estimate would give Anselmo acquaintance among the ancients at least with Lucan, Virgil, Horace, Ovid, Juvenal, Avian, and Maximianus. 157

158

159

“Post te quidem nullus erit ut tu, nisi qui fuerit tu, tu autem aliquem inpossible est ieri. Ut tu igitur necesse est non ieri, quia, si inpossibile est esse, necesse est non esse: est autem impossibile, necesse igitur non esse”; ibid., 148. Ibid., 181–83. See Joseph A. Endres, Forschungen zur Geschichte der frühmittelalterlichen Philosophie, Beiträge zur Geschichte der Philosophie des Mittelalters, 17 (Munich, 1915), Hefte 2–3, 36–37, for discussion of this passage. Lucan’s De bello civili is the more likely source for the phrase sedes Elysiae than is the Silvae; Rhetorimachia, 138. Similarly, as source for the phrase vertice ipsa pulsare sidera, the choice lies among the Carmina, the Ex Ponte, the Aeneid, and the Argonautae (ibid., 147).

154

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Possibly Anselmo knew Prudentius as well. Of historians he seems to have read only Sallust and Sulpicius Severus.160 Judging from his direct citations from grammatical works, he had studied Priscian and Servius’s De inalibus, works that, like the literary texts, he had probably read while still in Milan.161 The collection of rhetorical material, Quintilian and possibly Cicero’s De oratore aside, was no more impressive than was that for grammar.The works included Cicero’s De inventione, the Pseudo-Ciceronian Ad Herennium, the Philippics, Victorinus’s In rhetorica Ciceronis with Grillius’s commentary.162 The Ciceronian manuals provided a foundation for the work as a whole, while the author’s knowledge of literature and Aristotelian-Boethian logic played more decorative roles. While Anselmo might have had at least some training in rhetoric under Drogo, he credits Sichelmo as his principal teacher in that subject. The Rhetorimachia was probably only an elaborate example of similar orations that Sichelmo had trained him to write in the classroom. Anselmo himself had likely become a teacher of rhetoric in turn and used the manuals that he cited with his own students. Not only did he write a manual of rhetoric entitled De materia artis, now lost, but the glosses focusing on rhetorical techniques that accompanied the Rhetorimachia suggest that he saw the speech as a teaching model.163 Although Anselmo also claimed that Sichelmo considered Justinian “before all in his imperial edicts and legal judgments” (pre omnibus in imperialibus suis edictis et legalibus iudiciis), Anselmo’s two leeting references to the Corpus iuris civilis in the body of the Rhetorimachia furnish no basis for thinking that the study of law in Sichelmo’s classroom went much beyond composing judicial orations as part of training in rhetoric.164 Like Gunzo about ninety years earlier, Anselmo exhibited a predominately oratorical conception of literary expression.While it is true that the ancient manuals that both men studied highlighted the judicial oration, at least by Anselmo’s time the choice of genre also relected the litigious character of contemporary Italian life. While in Gunzo’s generation the large regional assemblies known as placita were occasions for exercising oratorical skills, a frenzy of pleading, as we shall see, overwhelmed the law courts in Anselmo’s. PIETRO DAMIANI AND POETIC ASCETICISM

Although they were worlds apart in most ways, the ascetic Damiani and the ambitious oice-seeker Anselmo shared a taste for highly worked prose. Pietro’s stylistic taste, however, contrasted starkly with his ascetic beliefs, generating multiple contradictions. While on the one hand he deiantly labelled his style “rudis simplicitas,” 160

161 162 163

164

See Index under these writers’ names, ibid., 197–99. Maximianus, whom he uses for one of his direct quotations, was certainly a rare author. Ibid., 81. See Index, under these writer’s names, ibid., 197–99. Ibid., 103. The editor of the work has included Anselmo’s glosses after the text on the appropriate pages. Ibid., 99. For citations from Justinian, see 163 and 167; both were citations from the Epitome Juliani a series of extracts from the Corpus circulating separately at least as early as the eighth century: Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis, 49.

155

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

“sermo pauperculus,” or “rusticitas,” on the other he apologized to his correspondents for his “stilus incultus” or “non luculentum sive politum ... languidi sermonis articulum,” for which he gave various excuses – the press of business, the waiting messenger, or an illness.165 Naturally Pietro’s attention to prose style varied with the purpose for which he was writing, but generally when the matter and genre invited it, he pulled out all rhetorical stops. Like Anselmo, Pietro showed a preference for prose rhyme, in his case usually expressed in couplets and parallel constructions. A typical prose passage from his sermon celebrating the festival of Saint Severus, a former bishop of Ravenna and confessor, illustrates his enthusiasm for these techniques. In the passage, Pietro used lines initiated by alternating demonstrative pronouns, illa and ista or in illa and in ista, and arranged in rhythmic patterns determined by the last syllable of the verbs.Throughout the sermon, as in this passage from it, the aesthetic efect of his words was enhanced by strict observance of the three main cursus: velox (v), tardus (t), and planus (p). Illa nos festivitas Redemptori nostro referre gratias doceat (t); Ista vero ad amorem nos patriae coelestis accendat (p). In illa discamus quanta Deus pro homine pertulit (t); in ista perpendamus, homo per Deum ad quantum celsitudinis culmen ascendit (p). In illa quippe festivitate unigenitus Dei Filius in templo est humiliter presentatus (v); in ista beatissimus ejus famulus ad coeli palatium est cum gloria sublimatus (v). In illa Redemptorem nostrum parentes ejus in Hierusalem, ut sisterent (v) eum Domino, detulerunt (v); in ista beatissimi confessoris animam, ut eam divinae majestatis vultui praesentarent (v), ad coelestem Hierusalem sancti angeli portaverunt (v). In illa solemnitate Mediator Dei et hominum, abjecto jam carnis praeputio, parvulus est oblatus in templum (p); in ista confessor egregius deposito terreni corporis pondere liber ascendit in coelum (p). In illa is qui legi nihil debebat legis tributa persolvit (p); in ista morti obnoxius jura mortis evasit (p).166

The abrupt substitution of the male pronoun for the female in the next two lines, Ille de matre nascendo dignatus est esse mortalis (p); iste carne moriendo ieri meruit immortalis (v),

tended to bring the passage to a conclusion with the focus on the dual nature of Christ. 165

166

André Cantin, Les sciences seculières et la foi: Les deux voies de la science au jugement de S. Pierre Damiani (Spoleto, 1975), 335–45, esp. Cantin’s notes, 336–37. PL 144, col. 524, as well as Polheim, Lateinische Reimprosa, 421. See also the example given by Owen J. Blum, St. Peter Damian: His Teaching on the Spiritual Life (Washington, D.C., 1947), 56–58; and Dressler, Petrus Damiani, 191–92.

156

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Indeed, Pietro actually surpassed Anselmo in his penchant for using rare Latin words and expressions and introducing Latinized forms of Greek vocabulary, even creating new forms of words for efect.167 He relied heavily on anecdotes and historical examples to anchor his ideas, as well as on images and comparisons drawn from the natural world, on the grounds that all nature relected the harmony of the divine design.168 Biblical quotations and citations from the Latin Church Fathers frequently lent authority to his arguments, and occasionally they were supplemented by quotations from ancient authors, either with or without attribution.169 Despite the elaborate mechanics of expression, however, Pietro’s prose had a clarity that Anselmo’s lacked. Furthermore, the earnestness of Pietro’s convictions and the passion with which he expressed them infused his rhetoric with an authenticity that a modern reader inds compelling. Backed by his enormous reputation for spirituality, his words must have had even more efect on his contemporaries. Pietro was also a proliic composer of both metric and accentual poetry. Of his surviving poems, 103 are in hexameter or elegaic distiches, while 51 are accentual verses or hymns.170 The poems in the irst group, consisting of epigrams or dedications, are from one to twenty-four lines long. He was at his best in a number of the compositions in the second group. Perhaps the inest example of his craft is his poem, composed in trochaic trimeter, entitled De die mortis, on death and the terror of judgment. The poem began with a powerful description of the senses fading in the body: Gravi me terrore pulsas, vitae dies ultima; Maeret cor, soluuntur renes, laesa tremunt viscera, Tui speciem dum sibi mens depingit anxia. Quis enim pavendum illud explicet spectaculum Cum dimenso vitae cursu carnis aegrae nexibus Animis luctatur solvi propinquans ad exitum? Perit sensus lingua riget revoluuntur oculi, Pectus palpitat, anhelat raucum guttur hominis, Stupent membra, pallent ora, decor abit corporis.

As devils and angels struggle for possession of his soul, the dying man’s anguish suddenly increases as he grasps the full extent of a lifetime of sinning. Despairing, he calls out to Christ for help in overcoming the devil and in inding redemption. The images and emotions captured here in verse could well have been those of Pietro himself as he meditated on death in his hermit’s cell. 167 168

169 170

Dressler, Petrus Damiami, 189–90. Ronald E. Osborn, “The Preaching of Saint Peter Damiani: The Oratory of an Eleventh-Century Rhetorician” (Ph.D. diss., University of Oregon, 1955), 227–36, gives instances of his use of grammatical igures like similitudo, imago, collatio, and exemplum for preaching. Cf. Cantin, Sciences seculières, 430–32. For historical examples, see Dressler, Petrus Damiani, 192. Dressler, Petrus Damiami, 185–89 and 204–9. The poetry has been edited by Margareta Lokrantz, Opera poetica di S. Pier Damiani,Acta Universitatis Stockholmiensis: Studia Latina Stockholmiensia, no. 12 (Stockholm and Göteborg, 1964). Lokrantz excludes from Pietro’s authorship nine poems whose provenance is dubious (137–58). For comments on the poetry, see Frederic J. E. Raby, A History of Christian-Latin Poetry from the Beginnings to the Close of the Middle Ages, 2nd ed. (Oxford, 1953), 250–56; and Blum, St. Peter Damiani, 49–55.

157

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Because Pietro’s command of complex rhetorical tools and grasp of literary traditions were the products of strenuous training in the Trivium, it is diicult to reconcile his debt to education with his often bitter denunciation of liberal studies and their teachers.171 All eforts to learn the liberal arts he regarded as not studia but rather stultitiae.172 “My grammar is Christ!” he proclaimed.173 Elsewhere he wrote, “Let them all, steeped in the ilth of earthly wisdom, turn back to their shadows; blinded by the sulphureus splendor of cloudy doctrine, they mean nothing to me.”174 He branded philosophers as akin to heretics.175 Even as prior of the hermitage of Fonte Avellana, after 1043 he showed no interest in establishing a school there. It must be granted that in the matter of education Pietro sometimes made a distinction among monks, priests, and prelates as to how much was required.176 While he considered an educated monk proud and of doubtful reliability in his vows, he recognized that secular clerics, especially bishops, needed Latin education. His expectations for priests were modest: they had to be able to read and understand scripture and have some skill at writing. But in the case of bishops, a complete education in the liberal arts was required. There would have been no contradiction had Pietro consistently limited his condemnations of the liberal arts by making it clear that they applied only to monks, but most of the condemnations were general in character, without any qualiications. They reveal an unresolved conlict in the ascetic hermit convinced of the wretched human state, who could nevertheless never liberate himself from his early passion for the liberal arts. In his tirades against worldly learning, Damiani reserved his greatest hostility for dialectic. His writings contained frequent references to the dialecticians’ “ambiguities and nonsense,”“the obliquity of frivolous questions,” and “the bitterness of inner gall” in their words.177 In 1065 he criticized as “peasants and silly men” those who disputed questions relating to scripture. Such men endeavored to shut their opponents in by skillful use of syllogism and “by wrapping the Author of Wisdom in hunting nets through the use of captious arguments.”178 Pietro’s own acquaintance with the logica vetus went beyond Cicero’s De topica, but apparently not far. Besides Topica he seems to have read Boethius’s commentary on the work and one or both of his commentaries on Aristotle’s De interpretatione.179 Many of Pietro’s references to dialectic are derived from Cicero’s writings, and his tendency to refer to dialectic as ars disserendi (art of discussion) reveals the 171 172

173 174

175 176 177 178

179

Dressler, Petrus Damiani, 176, for the following three notes. PL 145, Opusculum, 45, col. 695. Damiani recounts in a letter to a young hermit how the latter “ante ad heremum provolasti, sequens vestigia piscatorum, quam liberalium artium non dicam studiis sed stulticiis insudares.” Ibid., 1:203: “Mea igitur grammatica Christus est.” Ibid., 1:252: “Cedant in suas tenebras omnes terrene sapientie fecibus delibuti, nil mihi conferant sulphureo caliginose doctrine splendore cecati.” Ibid., 2:290–91. Cited from Dressler, Petrus Damiani, 178–79. Ibid., 179. Cantin, Les sciences seculières, 445, n. 197, gives these and other examples. Briefe, 3:395: “Sicque timendum est, ne syllogismorum suorum versuta te argumentacione concludant, et auctorem sapiencie cassibus captiosae cavillacionis involvant.” He identiies his opponents as “rustici et insipientes quique” (3:393). Cantin, Les sciences seculières, 378–79.

158

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Ciceronian orientation of his logic.180 Overall, dialectical arguments in Pietro’s writing took second place to rhetorical arguments: enthymeme and a fortiori reasoning. The rhetorical arguments often relied on proofs by analogy, an orientation that derived from the grammatical tradition of the Italian schools. The closest that Pietro came to identifying any of the dialecticians whom he maligned occurred in a letter to Desiderio, abbot of Montecassino, written in 1065, in which he recalled a discussion he had had the previous year with the abbot over dinner at the abbey as to whether God had the power to make a woman who had lost her virginity a virgin again. Seizing an opportunity for exercising their dialectical talents, some young monks who were present raised a more inclusive question: “Can God make what has happened not to have happened?” The young monks then proceeded to discuss the issue in hypothetical terms. Shocked by their impudent speculation about divine omnipotence, the pious Pietro rebuked them, warning that such a question regarding the divine majesty could not legitimately be asked: “Rather it is shown to pertain to the skill of the dialectical art; and not to the power or matter of things but to the manner and order of arguing and the logical connection of words. What is considered by worldly boys (saeculares pueri) in the schools has no place among the holy things (sacramenta) of the Church.”181 The particular form of argument that the young monks had used, the hypothetical syllogism, had been a playful academic exercise in the hands of Anselmo of Besate in the 1040s, but by the 1060s it had become an innovative method for discussing theological questions and – to Pietro’s mind – a threat to orthodoxy. A comparison of the relative progress of the study of dialectic in Francia and the regnum suggests that, although Gerbert and Abbo had initiated the revival of the study of logic in western Europe, the discipline was not yet anchored solidly in the northern school curriculum by Lanfranco’s and Berengar’s generation. Nothing is 180

181

Where we would expect Damiani to write ordo disputandi, he writes ordo disserendi. Cf. Cantin, Sciences seculières, 78–79. Pietro Damiani, however, frequently disinguishes between rhetoricians and dialecticians, for example, in Briefe, 1:217–18, 1:356–57, and 2:565–66. Papias, Damiani’s contemporary, is clearly inluenced by Cicero when in his Elementarium, art. “syllogismus” (Venice, 1496), he deines syllogism as “autem non solum rhetores, sed maxime dialectici utuntur.” On the historic link between law and rhetoric, consult my Chapter 5. Damiani gives the impression at one point that the interest in dialectic in his day was a matter of fashion. In the preface of a letter, he complains that saeculares will look over his letter for its stylistic quality: “utrum rhetoricae facultatis color eluceat, an et sententias argumenta dialecticae subtilitatis involvant. Quaeritur, etiam utrum categorici an potius hypothetici, quae proposita sunt, per allegationes inevitabiles astruant syllogismi”; Briefe, 1:217–18. Briefe, 3:350–55. He writes (355): “Haec igitur questio quoniam non ad discutiendam maiestatis divinae potentiam, sed potius ad artis dialecticae probatur pertinere peritiam, et non ad virtutem vel materiam rerum, sed ad modum et ordinem disserendi consequentiamque verborum non habet locum in aecclesiae sacramentis, quae a secularibus pueris ventilatur in scholis.” Presumably the debate arose from discussing the implications of Cicero’s phrase “si peperit, concubuit; si peperit, cum viro concubuit” (Cic., De inv., 1, 29, 44). Cf. Cantin, Sciences seculières, 168–69 and 375–97. In what was his most extreme assessment of the nature of the divine will, he maintained in 1067 that God’s will was not subject to the law of contradiction; De divina omnipotentia, in De divina omnipotentia e altri opusculi, ed. Paolo Brezzi, trans. Bruno Nardi (Florence, 1943), 118–20. Cf. Friedrich Überweg and Bernhard Geyer, Die patristische und scholastische Philosophie: Grundriss der Geschichte der Philosophie, vol. 2 (Berlin, 1928), 189–90.

159

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

known of Drogo of Parma’s antecedents or of the speciic nature of his instruction, but no transalpine contemporary apparently enjoyed an equal reputation. Whereas Berengar’s association with dialectic did not deter its study north of the Alps, however, in Italy by the third quarter of the century the discipline had become suspect. A deeply conservative Pietro branded it a danger to the faith. Two decades later Bonizone of Sutri would lodge the same criticism against all the liberal arts.182 More signiicantly, within the Italian milieu in a period of intensifying discussions of church reform, when even the suspicion of false belief could undercut the standing of those claiming to represent orthodoxy, the prospects of dialectic became increasingly bleak. Certainly in the regnum, where the struggle over church authority was to prove more disruptive than anywhere else in Europe, the contenders could not but be wary of the destabilizing efects of a methodology of reasoning that could sometimes produce unorthodox conclusions. CHURCH REFORM

The spirituality of Pietro Damiani, the most outspoken Italian reformer of his generation, was an outgrowth of a monastic reform movement that sought to purify the Church by urging the embracing of poverty. In Italy, of the forces pushing for universal reform of the Church in the irst half of the eleventh century the Camaldolensians and the Vallombrosans were the most important. By Damiani’s youth the reforms of Benedictine monasticism, inaugurated at Cluny early in the tenth century, had spread to some of the major monasteries of the Italian kingdom.183 Although several

182

183

A considerable portion of the logica vetus might have been taught at Montecassino in Damiani’s day. Francis Newton, “Tibullus in Two Grammatical Florilegia of the Middle Ages,” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 93 (1962): 275, identiies BMV, Zanetti Lat. 497 as a textbook written at Montecassino in this period. The manuscript includes (fols. 106v–140): Porphyry’s Isagoge, Boethius’s translation of the Categories and De interpretatione (incomplete), the Categoriae X of Pseudo-Augustine, Boethius’s In perihermeneias ed. sec. (incomplete) and De divisione diinitionum. See as well the description in George Lacombe, Corpus philosophorum medii aevi: Aristotelis latinus, codices descripsit Georgius Lacombe: pars posterior (Cambridge, 1955), 1123–24. Radding and Newton, Theology, Rhetoric and Politics, 109–13, argue that the another collection of classical dialectical texts found in the splendid BAV, Ottobonianus lat. 1406, was associated with the Synod of 1078. Bonizone condemned pagan learning even for priests: “Ad ministerium enim sacerdotum pertinet sacros libros utriusque testamenti legere et canones sanctorum patrum non ignorare, non poetarum fabulis insudare nec dialectice dare operam garrulitati”; Liber de vita christiana, ed. Ferdinand Perels (Berlin, 1930), 38. Giles Constable, “Cluny in the Monastic World of the Tenth Century,” Il secolo di ferro: Mito e realtà del secolo X, 19–25 aprile 1990, SSCISAM, no. 38 (Spoleto, 1991), 391–437, outlines the major characteristics of Cluniac monasticism in its irst century: (a) The monastery was subject to no earthly power – the role of the popes was to serve as tutores ac defensores (405–106). (b) Monks were to elect their own abbot (407). (c) The abbot was a member of the community and usually acted in consultation and often with the consent of the brothers (410). (d) The main task of monks was to devote themselves to intercessionary prayers on behalf of individuals, the Church, and Christian society in general (421). Cinzio Violante, “Per una riconsiderazione della presenza cluniacense in Lombardia,” in Cluny in Lombardia: Appendice ed indici degli atti del convegno storico celebrativo del IX centenario della fondazione del priorato cluniacense di Pontida, 22–23 aprile 1977, Italia Benedettina, vol.1.2 (Cesena, 1981), 535, points

160

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Cluniac foundations in the area around Rome dated to the time of the second abbot of Cluny, Odo (927–42/48), it was the fourth abbot, Maïeul (954–94), who aggressively pursued reform in northern Italy. At Pavia, Cluniac reforms were efected at Ciel d’Oro; and Maïeul founded two monasteries, Santa Maria in 967 (called San Maiolo after 999) and San Salvatore in 971. At Parma, San Giovanni was reformed and, at Ravenna, Sant’Apollinario in Classe.184 Cluniac spirituality also afected the Italian monastic foundations associated with Guglielmo of Volpiano (d. 1031). A native of Vercelli, Guglielmo, a close collaborator of Maïeul, began his career as a Cluniac reformer in Francia in the region of Dijon.185 Having established reforms there, he directed his attention to Italy, where in 1003 he founded Fruttuaria in Ivrea, on the Cluniac model. From Fruttuaria Guglielmo’s inluence spread into Lombardy and Emilia, and in 1007 Sant’Apollinario Nuovo at Ravenna accepted his reform program.186 In contrast with the Cluniacs, the leaders of both the Camaldolensians and Vallombrosans, Romualdo and Giovanni Gualberti respectively, placed a new emphasis on the ideal of poverty as the key to monastic reform, an ideal that was to have an enduring inluence on European monasticism and spirituality in general.187 Initially joining the newly reformed monastic community of Sant’Apollinare in Classe in Ravenna, Romualdo (d. ca. 1027) quickly grew dissatisied with what he considered the lax life of the cenobitic community and, willing to take the spiritual risks associated with solitude, sought to create an ascetic life for himself and for others of the sort only possible to achieve in remote places.188

184

185

186

187

188

out that Cluny’s dependence on the institution of private churches and exemption from episcopal control, together with its resistence to emphasizing the role of the sacramental priesthood, qualiied its support of the papal program of reform in the second half of the eleventh century. Cluny’s major supporters in Lombardy were nobles who sided with the emperor (634–41). Philibert Schmitz, Geschichte des Benediktinerordens: Ausbreitung und Verfassungsgeschichte des Ordens von seiner Gründung bis zum 12. Jahrhundert, vol. 1 (Zurich, 1947), 166–67. For Cluny’s connections with Polirone, see Hansmartin Schwarzmaier, “The Monastery of St. Benedict, Polirone, and Its Cluniac Associations,” in Cluniac Monasticism in the Central Middle Ages, ed. Noreen Hunt (Hamden, Conn., 1971), 124–38. Violante, “Per una riconsiderazione della presenza cluniacense,” 536–59. On Saint Maïeul, see Cesare Manaresi, “La fondazione del monastero di S. Maiolo di Pavia,” Spiritualità cluniacense, 12–15 ottobre, 1958, Convegni del Centro di studi sulla spiritualità medievale, no. 2 (Todi, 1960), 274–85. Although Maïeul’s link with San Pietro in Ciel d’Oro has been questioned, Giancarlo Andenna, “Le fondazioni monastiche del nord Italia riformate da Maiolo,” San Maiolo e le inluenze cluniacensi nell’Italia del Nord: Atti del Convegno internazionale nel Millenario di San Maiolo (994–1994), Pavia–Novara, 23–24 settembre 1994, ed. Ettore Cau and Aldo S. Settia (Como, 1998), 214–15, argues cogently for his contribution to the reform of the monastery. Gregorio Penco, “S. Guglielmo di Volpiano e la sua attività riformatrice in Francia,” Studia monastica: Commentarium ad rem monasticam investigandam 11 (1969): 1–17. See above, p. 99. See Schmitz, Geschichte des Benediktinerordens, 1:168, for the link of Sant’ Apollinario Nuovo and Fruttuaria. For the founder of Fruttuaria, Guglielmo of Volpiano, and his work in the regnum, see Gregorio Penco, “Il movimento di Fruttuaria e la riforma gregoriana,” in Il monachesimo e la riforma ecclesiastica (1049–1122): Atti della quarta Settimana internazionale di studio Mendola, 23–29 agosto 1968 (Milan, 1971), 385–95. On Guglielmo, also see my Chapter 2. Henrietta Leyser, Hermits and the New Monasticism: A Study of Religious Communities in Western Europe 1000–1150 (New York, 1984), 39. Damiani’s irst surviving work was the biography of the saint, Vita beati Romualdi, written in 1042. The work is edited by Giovanni Tabacco in FSI, no. 94 (Rome, 1957).

161

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

Romualdo’s most important foundation, at Camaldoli in the wooded hills of the Casentino, gave its rule to what in the early years was a loosely connected group of hermitages created in the high valleys of the Apennines and the swampy delta of the Po River.189 Among those hermitages was Fonte Avellana, established in Umbria at the foot of one of the highest peaks of the Apennines by a disciple of Romualdo. Fonte Avellana, Pietro Damiani’s hermitage, generally followed the practices ordained by Romualdo: hermits lived in pairs in isolated cells, exercised strict self-discipline, followed a minimal diet, and devoted themselves to penitence and prayers.The construction of buildings was also kept to a minimum. Beyond elementary training, formal education had little place in the regime: Romualdo himself learned to read late in life and even then knew Latin only imperfectly.190 Giovanni Gualberti (d. 1073), the founder of the Vallombrosan order, irst committed himself to an eremetic life at Camaldoli. Around 1030 he created his own hermitage at Vallombrosa dedicated, like Camaldoli, to the greatest poverty and to the renunciation of all worldly pleasures. Unlike Romualdo, however, Giovanni joined eremitic living from the outset within a cenobitic institution.191 While Camaldolensian hermitages, too, came to add a complementary monastic arrangement, that order’s focus of religious life remained primarily eremitic. The contrast between the stark living conditions of the eremitic orders and those of the upper secular clergy must have impressed the urban masses, who could not fail to notice the disparity between the hierarchy’s way of life and that of the apostles depicted in the Bible, the text upon which the hierarchy’s claim to authority ultimately rested. Both Romualdo and Giovanni Gualberti railed against the two great vices of contemporary clerics – clerical marriage and simony – but Giovanni in particular did not hesitate to stir up the masses in support of his goal of extinguishing those practices. Romualdo wrote nothing, and Giovanni very little if anything on his own, so that most of what we know of the lives of the two, both of whom later became saints, comes from their vitae.192 Pietro Damiani’s extensive Vita Romualdi of 1042, written soon after 189

190

191

192

Wilhelm Kurze, “Campus Malduli: Die Frühgeschichte Camaldolis,” Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven 44 (1964): 1–34. His “Zu Geschichte Camaldolis im Zeitalter der Reform, in Monachesimo e la riforma ecclesiastica, 399–415, discusses the origin of the monastery and the movement. Damiani writes (Vita beati Romualdi, 93) that in later life he interpreted the “psalterium et nonnulla prophetarum cantica luculenter exposuit et licet corrupta grammaticę regula, sanum tamen sensum ubique servavit.” Black, Education and Society in Florentine Tuscany, 179, suggests that Giovanni may have taught school at Vallombrosa, based on a statement made by Strumi, his biographer: “Contigit enim me in infantia pueritiaque sancti viri Johannis abbatis Vallisymbrosae disciplina diligenter erudiri.” The reference to Vallis ymbrosae disciplina I take rather to be a reference to the way of life at the monastery, not education in school. Brunetto Quilici, “Giovanni Gualberto e la sua riforma monastica,” Archivio storico italiano 99 (1941): 1:113–32, 2:27–62; and 100 (1942): 45–99, provides the basic outline of Gualberti’s life and the nature of his reform. See also Soia Boaesch Gajano, “Storia e tradizione vallombrosane,” BISI 27 (1964): 99–215; and Antonella degli’Innocenti, “Giovanni Gualberto, DBI, no. 56 (Rome, 2001), 341–47. For early biographies of the saint, see the following note. In the earliest vita of Giovanni Gualberti, that of Andrea of Strumi Vita sancti Iohannis Gualberti, ed. Friedrich Baethgen, MGH, Scriptores, no. 30.2 [Leipzig, 1929], 1076–1104, composed ca. 1092, the author characterizes Giovanni as “inscius litterarum et quasi idiota” (1087).

162

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Damiani joined the hermitage, emphasized the extreme asceticism of the future saint and his passionate campaign against clerical marriage and simony, causes that Pietro himself championed throughout his own life.193 In his Vita sancti Iohannis Gualberti (ca. 1095) Andrea da Strumi also emphasized Giovanni’s asceticism, but Andrea, being a former member of the Milanese Pataria, the revolutionary popular reform movement in the city, not only lauded the future saint’s passionate condemnation of clerical marriage and simony throughout the work but also linked Giovanni’s campaign to his own open support for the violent popular reform movement that had sprung up in Milan in the 1050s.194 Only a few years later, Andrea’s vita would serve as the basis for two others on Giovanni, both of which generally endorsed Andrea’s views.195 The vast majority of the vitae from the period served a parochial purpose: glorifying a saint or prospective saint was a means of satisfying particular local interests, especially the beneits of visiting the saint’s shrine. By contrast, the biographies of Romualdo and Giovanni, as well as Andrea da Strumi’s biography of Arialdo, saint of the Pataria, were extensive and ambitious accounts written as much to promote a way of life as to celebrate the saint himself. For that reason the works did not assert the saintliness of the three men on the basis of the miracles they performed but instead established it by describing their normal conduct.196 Damiani belonged to the second generation of severe monastic reformers. From the early years of his conversion his vision of reform extended beyond the monastic life toward a general reform of the Church as a whole. In opposition to the Vallombrosans, he believed that these reforms were the task of the established authorities and that appeals to popular support should be eschewed.197 Already before Henry III’s descent into Italy in 1046, Damiani had proclaimed the emperor a new David because he had deposed Widger, the German archbishop of Ravenna, whom Pietro considered unsuited to his oice.198 Henry III’s subsequent deposition 193

194

195

196

197

198

The work is composed in stilus humilis and lacks rhetorical embellishment; Vita beati Romualdi, 56–57. Driven by the desire to include all that he knows of the saint, however, Damiani had diiculty in producing a uniied composition. Vita sancti Johannis Gualberti, 1100. About twenty years earlier, soon after coming to Camaldoli from Milan, where he himself had participated in the patarine movement, Andrea composed (ca. 1075) his vita of Saint Arialdo (Vita sancti Arialdi, ed. Friedrich Baethgen, MGH, Scriptores, no. 30, pt. 2 [Leipzig, 1929], 1047–75), one of the leading members of the Milanese pataria. Vita Iohannis Gualberti auctore discipulo eius, ibid., 1104–10; and Atto da Vallombrosa, Vita sancti Iohannis Gualberti, PL 146, cols. 671–706. Both were written in the early years of the twelfth century; Degli’ Innocenti, “Giovanni Gualberto,” 345. Atto’s vita has little originality. See the discussion of Soia Boesch, “Giovanni Gualberto e la vita comune del clero nelle biograie di Andrea da Strumi e di Atto da Vallombrosa,” La vita comune del clero nei secoli xi e xii, Atti della Settimana di studio: Mendola, settembre 1959, 2 vols. (Milan, 1962), 2:228–44. While capable of vividly describing the character and actions of both Arialdi and Giovanni, Andrea’s control of Latin grammar was decidedly mediocre. See Baethgen’s remarks on the Vita sancti Arialdi, 1048, and on the Vita Iohannes Gualberti, 1077–78. In the case of the vita of Arialdi, Baethgen praises the “vivam dilucidamque imaginem Arialdi Patarenorumque.” Of the author of the anonymous life of Gualberti, he writes: “multo autem pluris aestimanda est narrandi eius ars elegans atque viva, qua plerosque eiusdem temporis auctores antecellit.” Briefe, 3:539–42. Cf. Giovanni Miccoli, “La storia religiosa,” Storia d’Italia: Dalla caduta dell’impero al secolo XVIII, vol. 2.1 (Milan, 1978), 495. Damiani writes (Epist., 1:200–201): “ ‘Laetentur ergo celi, exultet terra’ (Psal. xvc) quia in rege suo vere Christus regnare cognoscitur, et sub ipso jam seculi ine aureum David saeculum renovatur.”

163

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

of three rival claimants to the Roman papacy late in the same year and his establishment of a line of reforming popes raised Pietro’s expectations for a general reformation of the Church.199 Henry III’s irst two popes lived only briely after their appointment, but the emperor’s third pope, Leo IX (1048–56), seriously initiated church reform. Bishop of Toul in what is now northeastern France, Leo brought with him an entourage composed of like-minded reformers: Humbert and Hugh the White, monks respectively at Moyenmoutier and Remiremont near Toul; Archdeacon Frederick of Liège; and Archbishop Halinard of Lyon.200 Although Pietro and the men in this group shared many of the same positions on reform, his willingness to qualify his statements sometimes raised the ire of the extreme members of Leo’s circle. In 1049 Pietro sent to Leo IX his Liber gomorrhianus, which contained a lurid appraisal of the sexual sins of the clergy, primarily homosexual practices.201 Attacking certain canons that inlicted only moderate punishment for homosexual acts as apocryphal, Pietro declared the canons invalid because they were not sanctioned either by genuine canon law or by papal authority: “All authentic canons are either created in venerable synodal councils or promulgated by the holy pontiical fathers of the Apostolic See; nor is it permitted to anyone at all to edit the canons, but this privilege rests only with him who is seen to preside over the See of Blessed Peter.”202 Dividing “unnatural acts” into four types, individual masturbation, mutual masturbation, femoral fornication, and complete acts against nature, he appeals to the papacy to decide which of these vices merit expulsion from ecclesiastical oices, and which merit lesser punishment.203 Although certain passages of the Liber gomorrhianus might suggest that sacraments performed by priests guilty of these vices were invalid, Pietro’s Liber gratissimus, composed in 1052 with additions in 1061, made it clear that he distinguished between the oice and the person of the priest, arguing that the sacraments functioned ex opere operato.204 For instance, he asserted, a cleric consecrated by a simoniac did not need a second consecration. Six years later, Humbert, in his Libri tres adversus simoniacos, 199 200

201 202

203

204

He selected Bruno of Toul in 1048 after the short-lived papacies of Clement II and Damasus II. Uta-Renate Blumenthal, The Investiture Controversy, Church and Monarchy from the Ninth to the Twelfth Century (Philadelphia, 1980), 70. The position of Augustin Fliche is developed in detail in his La réforme grégorienne, 3 vols. (Louvain and Paris, 1924–26). He generally treats Damiani as a prereformer. Briefe, 1:285–330. Ibid., 304: “Constat nimirum, quod omnes authentici canones aut in venerandis synodalibus conciliis sunt inventi, aut a sanctis patribus sedis apostolicae pontiicibus promulgati, nec cuiquam soli homini licet canones edere, sed illi tantummodo hoc competit privilegium, qui in beati Petri cathedra cernitur praesidere.” While his attack on homosexuality relates to celibacy, his major attacks on clerical marriage appear relatively late, beginning in 1059; Blum, St. Peter Damian, 175–76. Ibid., 287: “ Ut autem res vobis tota per ordinem pateat, ex huius nequitiae scelere quatuor diversitates iunt. Alii siquidem semetipsos polluunt, alii sibi invicem inter se manibus virilia contrectantes inquinantur, alii inter femora, alii fornicantur in terga.” The work concludes (ibid., 329) with an appeal to the pope to decide “cui earum [of the four types] obnoxius debeat ab ecclesiastico ordine inretractabiliter abici, cui vero praelato discretionis intuitu possit hoc oicium misericorditer indulgeri.” The work is found in Briefe, 1:388–509. For the distinction, see 415–18.

164

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

would denounce Pietro (without naming him) for aiding the cause of the simoniacs with that opinion. Humbert would insist that because consecration by a simoniac was no consecration, the ceremony would have to be repeated.205 As Pietro’s praise of Emperor Henry III’s intervention in papal governance suggests, he had no intention of excluding the emperor from reform eforts. Instead, in a traditional way, he envisaged the spiritual and secular rulers of the world as acting to govern it in consort. As Pietro wrote to Henry IV in 1065: “Both dignities – that is, both the regal and the priestly – just as they are connected mutually to one another by the truth of the sacrament principally in Christ, are also linked to the Christian people by a certain mutual agreement with one another. Each one is mutually in need of the utility of the other: while the priesthood is protected by the guardianship of the king, the kingdom is supported by the sanctity of the priestly oice.”206 Although in Pietro’s Disceptatio synodalis of 1062, written as a defense of Alexander II against the antipope Cadalo, Pietro introduced the Donation of Constantine in airming the Roman pope’s “dominion over all the churches of the world,” he drew from it no implications regarding papal dominion over secular af airs.207 From the pontiicate of Leo IX onward, the traditional stress on cooperation between secular and spiritual powers in church reform had vied with a more radical view that belittled the status of kings; subjected them to the instruction and direction of the Church, primarily that of the papacy; and largely ignored the doctrine of the two swords.208 Although initially Pope Gregory VII (1073–85) showed restraint in his relationship with the German emperor, the radical character of his concept of papal power emerged by 1077/78. Before he became pope, while he was still Cardinal Ildebrando, Damiani – alluding to his small stature – described him as “a small tiger springing against oncoming arrows” and elsewhere as a “wolf.”209 He was a man of absolute convictions and zealous in pursuing them. It is diicult to know to what extent the strained relationship between Gregory VII and Pietro in the last years of Pietro’s life – he died in 1072 – came from a widening gap in their diverse perceptions of what church reform entailed and of the role of the emperor in the endeavor. 205

206

207

208

209

Libelli de lite imperatorum et pontiicum saeculis XI et XII, ed. Friedrick Thaner, MGH, 3 vols. (Hannover, 1891–97), 1:100–253. See Dressler, Petrus Damiani, 107. Epist., 3:389: “Utraque praeterea dignitas, et regalis scilicet et sacerdotalis, sicut principaliter in Christo sibimet invicem singulari sacramenti veritate connectitur, sic in christiano populo mutuo quodam sibi foedere copulatur. Utraque videlicet alternae invicem utilitatis est indiga, dum et sacerdocium regni tuitione protegitur, et regnum sacerdotalis oicii sanctitate fulcitur.” Disceptatio synodalis in Briefe, 2:532–79. The reference is on 546. Cited from Ian S. Robinson, Authority and Resistance, 27. In his analysis, Gerd Tellenbach, Church, State and Society at the Time of the Investiture Contest, trans. Ralph F. Bennett (Oxford, 1940), 147–61, outlines Gregory’s position briely. Indeed, Henry IV would defend his cause on the basis of the doctrine of the two swords (ibid., 158–59). Cf. Robinson, Authority and Resistance, 89–95. L’opera poetica di S. Pier Damiani, 68 (poem 78): “Parva tigris missas aequat properando sagittas....” Poem 18 (55) reads: “Qui rabiem tigridum domat, ora cruenta leonum / Te nunc usque lupum mihi mitem vertat in agnum.”

165

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy MANIA FOR LAW

Scattered throughout Pietro Damiani’s writings are legal terms, judicial similes drawn from civil law, and frequent citations from canon law.210 He wrote his Disceptatio synodalis, which was composed in June or July of 1062 and which I just mentioned, as if it were a transcript of a legal trial. Consisting of a series of alternating speeches by a defensor Romanae ecclesiae justifying the election of Pope Alexander II without imperial consent and by a regius advocatus denying the election’s validity, Pietro conceived of the work, according to his own account, as a praeludium for the actual imperial synod that had been summoned to meet a few months later to decide on the legitimacy of that very papal election.211 Pietro’s letter of 1046 to the bishop of Cesena and archbishop of Ravenna, which I have already mentioned, describing Pietro’s debate with a group of sapientes civitatis in a church in Ravenna over the deinition of what constituted the prohibited seven degrees of consanguinity, shows him to have been well informed on the legal aspects of the problem.212 During the meeting these “wise men,” certainly lawyers, had formulated a response to a request made by Florence to reconcile canon law’s prohibition of marriage, which went to the seventh degree, with the prohibition under Roman law, which stopped at the fourth. Employing the Roman method of adding together the number of degrees separating two related individuals from their common ancestor, the lawyers had declared that the canonical seventh-degree prohibition would be satisied when four degrees on one side and three on the other separated a man and a woman.213 The response enraged Pietro, who informed these judices or legis periti that the canons required a distance of seven generations of separation on each side to satisfy the prohibition and declared this law of God to be above that of Justinian. Pietro tried to clarify the law on consanguinity by looking at the way another closely related law, that of inheritance, deined successors when a person died intestate.214 Like the moderni of Pavia, Pietro sought to resolve apparent contradictions 210

211

212

213

214

Apart from the classic article by Nino Tamassia, “Le opere di Pier Damiano. Note per la storia giuridica del sec. XI,” Atti dell’Istituto veneto 62 (1902–3), 981–1008, see on civil law Pietro Palazzini, “Note di diritto romano in S. Pier Damiani,” Studia et documenta historiae et juris, 13–14 (1947–48), 235–68, and by the same author, Il diritto, strumento di riforma ecclesiastica in S. Pier Damiani (Rome, 1956). For references to canon law, see John J. Ryan, Saint Peter Damiani and His Canonical Sources (Toronto, 1956). Cf. Cantin, Les sciences seculières, 505–33. Briefe, 2:532–79. Justifying his mode of presentation, he writes in the opening paragraph: “Et quoniam in proximo, ut speramus, iet hinc Osborgense concilium, hic iam eiusdem concilii constituamus velut in quadam tabellae pictura preludium” (541). Also consult Osborn, The Preaching of Saint Peter Damiani, 132–33. Briefe, 1:179–99. For that which follows, see Cantin, Les sciences seculières, 515–25.The date of the letter describing the incident is taken from Giovanni Lucchesi, Per una vita di san Pier Damiani: Componenti cronologiche e topograiche, 2 pts. (Forlì, 1972), 2:157. Briefe, 1:180. The interpretation involved a passage in the Institutes (tit. 10; De nuptis, para. 3): “Sed nec neptem fratris vel sororis ducere quis potest, quamvis quarto gradu sit.” On the calculation of degrees of consanguinity, see Ernest Champeaux, “Jus sanguinis: Trois façons de calculer la parenté au moyen âge,” Revue historique de droit français et étranger, ser. 4, 12 (1933): 244–50. Briefe, 1:185: “Secundum hoc igitur sententiae synodalis edictum, cui competit ius haereditatis, competit etiam propinquitas generis. Neque enim, ut dicitur, in haereditatem succederent, nisi ad cognationis propaginem pertinerent.”

166

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

in the laws by urging examination of the intentions of their authors and by considering the laws in context: “Let them read the whole [passage] ... so that they may understand what is said at one glance.”215 Pietro’s study of law and its handmaid discipline, rhetoric, does not appear to have been atypical of young Italian laymen in the irst half of the eleventh century. Their appreciation of law and rhetoric is relected in the signiicant growth in the number of surviving legal documents. Increasing interest in law was doubtless connected to the rising tempo of economic life, especially the consolidation of holdings on the part of both lay and spiritual landholders, who were eager to rationalize agricultural exploitation. A growing demand for legal advice made it advantageous for individual families and religious institutions to have a close relative or associate who was wise in the ways of the law. As archbishop of Ravenna, Pietro complained to Alexander II that he could neither contemplate nor write because of the continual disputes about property and other matters involving the archdiocese that demanded his attention. He tried to shut himself away in his cell, but “the sea of enguling legal matters” would not let him rest: “I am struck by a storm of injuries inlicted, by the violation of properties, or I am disturbed by the loss of income.”216 He blamed his fellow churchmen for engaging in litigation rather than performing their religious duties and studying, not sacred writings, but legal decrees: “The tribunals of judges and the royal courts no longer suice for the multitude of priests.While they vomit forth crowds of clerics and monks, they complain of the courts’ brief schedules (suae brevitatis). Cloisters are empty. The Bible is shut, and through the mouths of the clerical order run the civil laws.”217 The Italian lay upper classes were also deeply involved in judicial disputes. Wipo, a chaplain of Henry III, commented that “All Italians do this as soon as they leave their cradle, and all the young are sent to sweat in the schools.” Wipo’s words make clear that the ultimate goal of such education was to have knowledge of the law. Appealing to Henry to institute educational reforms using the Italians as models, Wipo added that the German nobility should be encouraged to study law as the Italian nobility did, so it could defend itself in court. “The Germans alone,” he laments, “ind it seems worthless and foul that they [the Germans] teach anyone except someone who is received into the clergy.”218 215

216

217

218

Ibid., 1:195–96: “Veruntamen quia alii doctores sextam, alii septimam generationem observandam esse decernunt, haec in talibus est tendenda discretio: ut si a iliis incipit, in sexta generatione supputatio desinat; si vero a nepotibus, usque ad septimam tendat. Sic nimirum plurimorum sententia reperietur una, quae in litterarum videbatur inaequalitate diversa.”The Latin for the quotation in the text reads: “Totum, queso, legant, ut sub uno intuitu totum, quod dicitur, comprehendant …”; Briefe, 1:483. Cf. Ryan, St. Peter Damiani, 145. Ryan (141–48) provides a general discussion of Damiani’s approach to the interpretation of canon law. Briefe, 3:47: “Illatis iniuriarum procellis illidor, violenta praediorum vel quorumque proventuum diminutione perturbor.” Ibid., 3:51: “nec sacrarum meditantur eloquia scripturarum, sed scita legum et forense litigium. Multitudini sacerdotum non suiciunt tribunalia iudicum et aulae regiae, dum clericorum ac monachorum evomunt turbas, brevitatis suae conqueruntur angustias. Claustra vacant, evangelium clauditur, et per ora aecclesiastici ordinis forensia iura decurrunt.” Tetralogus, in Die Werke Wipos, 81: “Tunc fac edictum per terram Teutonicorum/ Quilibet ut dives sibi natos instruat omnes/ Litterulis legemque suam persuadeat illis,/ Ut, cum principibus placitandi

167

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

As the market for legal instruction spiraled upward in the eleventh century, the number of teachers increased accordingly. As I understand the evidence, students learned some Latin grammar and then went on to a legal education that included instruction in rhetoric and further instruction in the grammar relevant to the legal texts. There may have been some teaching of Roman law in cathedral schools, but Anselmo of Besate’s few references to Roman law suggest that whatever legal training he received in Sichelmo’s classroom was related to the composition of judicial orations. As at Ravenna and Pavia, most legal instruction was commonly given by lay lawyers who, as private teachers, instructed their students in rhetoric, especially in the art of arguing cases. The renaissance of legal thought beginning in the eleventh century was the work of men like these who, confronted with practical questions surrounding the application of law, came over time to envisage Roman law as an overarching structure within which to understand all human law. The appearance of new professional titles in the documents from all over northern and central Italy by mid-century points to the increasing complexity of the legal society there. Two terms appear most frequently: legis doctor and causidicus. While the term legis doctor was apparently used simply to indicate someone learned in the law, the term causidicus referred to professional functions.219 The role of the causidicus in court seems to have been either to provide learned counsel to the judges or to defend one of the parties in a dispute. Whereas Pietro Damiani referred to law teachers in Ravenna interchangeably as judices, legisperiti, and causidici, at least in Bologna, documents identify the earliest teachers only as causidici.220 Until about 1000 legal learning appears primarily to have meant being able to choose the right law in a given situation. Likely the most advanced legal men in Italy, the judices et notarii sacri palatii of Pavia, had occupied themselves up to around 1000 principally with interpreting Lombard law. As we have seen, the Pavian legal corps in the course of the tenth century increasingly went on judicial rounds where its members sat on tribunals together with local royal notaries and judges. Unable to consult the legal archives of the royal palace when working outside of Pavia, Pavian

219

220

venerit usus,/ Quisque suis libris exemplum proferat illis./ Moribus his dudum vivebat Roma decenter,/ His studiis tantos potuit vincire tyrannos;/ Hoc servant Itali post prima crepundia cuncti,/ Et sudare scholis mandatur tota iuventus:/ Solis Teutonicis vacuum vel turpe videtur,/ Ut doceant aliquem, nisi clericus accipiatur.” See the early appearance of these titles in Giovanni Santini, “‘Legis doctores’ e ‘sapientes civitatis’ di età preirneriana. Ricerche preliminari (con speciale riferimento al territorio della Romagna nel sec. XI,” Archivio giuridico, ser. 6, 38 (1965), 114–71; and Carlo G. Mor, “Legis doctor,” in Atti del convegno internazionale di studi accursiani (Bologna, 21–26 ott., 1963), ed. Guido Rossi, 3 vols. (Milan, 1968), 1:193–201. In the case of the period up to 1100, Mor’s opinion that the title legis doctor referred to teachers of law is not supported by the evidence. According to Johannes Fried, Die Entstehung des Juristenstandes im 12. Jahrhundert: Zur sozialen Stellung und politischen Bedeutung gelehrter Juristen in Bologna und Modena (Cologne and Vienna, 1974), 18, only later did that become their title: “Wir sehen in diesen ‘legis doctores’ keine Rechtslehrer sondern gute Rechtskenner, vielleicht auch Rechtsgelehrte, die ihre Kenntnis auf alle möglichen Ausbildungsweisen erworben hatten: durch Schulung in der Praxis, bei einem fortgeschrittenen und älteren ‘iudex’ oder ‘causidicus,’ an einer Schule durch die Rhetorik vermittelt und schliesslich vielleicht auch im Selbststudium.” For Damiani see above, n. 106. Cf. Fried, Entstehung, 38–39; and Girolamo Arnaldi, “Alle origine dello Studio bolognese,” in Le sedi della cultura nell’Emilia Romagna: L’età comunale, ed. Girolamo Arnaldi et al. (Milan, 1984), 108.

168

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

notaries and judges, as I have noted previously, created the Liber legis Longobardorum, also known as the Liber papiensis, an organized anthology of Lombard law and Carolingian capitularies.221 Such a collection could also have served as a textbook for legal instruction. At the same time the growth of a broad royal notariate from the middle of the tenth century constituted a challenge to Pavia’s monopoly on legal wisdom. Emerging from the comfortable atmosphere of consensus generated by a concentrated elite, the lawmen of Pavia were now called upon to justify their legal opinions. When rioting Pavians destroyed the royal palace after the death of Henry II in 1024, and Henry’s successor failed to treat Pavia as the capital of the Italian realm, these events only increased pressure on the members of the legal corps of the city to retain their preeminent position in the kingdom. They could no longer speak as the representatives of royal authority. The Pavian lawmen were therefore forced to deepen their understanding of the law out of the need to defend their expertise.222 The economic revival brought a new kind of destabilization – not this time wrought by invading barbarians but instead by litigating Italians, who fought one another in the courts over the possession of increasingly valuable land and the jurisdictional control over it. Legal systems that had been developed for a less highly evolved society no longer met the needs of the age. It was the combination of the new ethos of competition with an emerging awareness that the old legal framework no longer suiced that encouraged the Pavian legal establishment to turn to Roman law to provide guidance where Lombard law was mute, and to seek authorization for novel legal interpretations. The result of the lawyers’ efort to maintain their prestige is apparent in the fact that most of the early citations from the Justinian corpus are in Pavian sources or sources associated with Pavia. Already by mid-century, Guglielmo had articulated the principle that Roman law was lex omnium generalis and used it to decide issues where Lombard law was unclear or silent.223 The earliest surviving manuscript of the complete Institutes (Bamberg Staatsbibliothek, Jur. 1) comes from Rome in the irst quarter of the eleventh century, but the accompanying glosses are apparently ancient ones, copied by the scribes 221

222 223

See Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 81–82. Ennio Cortese, Il diritto nella storia medievale, 2 vols. (Rome, 1995), 2:17, citing Radding, assigns a date to the Liber papiensis in the second quarter of the eleventh century. Also see my Chapter 2. Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 75–78. Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis, 83–84. The torrent of negative criticism that followed the publication of Charles Radding’s Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence in 1988 might explain why, although he includes Radding’s book in his bibliography, James A. Brundage erased the role of eleventh-century Pavia in his account of the revival of Roman law in his The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession: Canonists, Civilians, and Courts (Chicago, 2008). He begins with Bologna (75) and refers to Pavian jurists, along with those of other Italian cities (89) in the early twelfth century, as increasingly citing the Institutes and the Code, and asserts that when they began to cite the Digest “they were no longer studying Roman legal texts simply as sources for rhetorical lourishes, but were commencing to engage in serious legal analysis.” We must not overlook, however, Stephan Kuttner’s assessment of eleventh-century Pavia’s role in his “The Revival of Jurisprudence,” 303. He refers to Pavia as the “only true precursor of Bologna, the only center at which serious scholarly relection on legal texts can be found.” Among the texts of Roman law cited by the Pavian jurists he includes a small number from the Digest.

169

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

along with the text from the base manuscript.224 There is no way of knowing if the earliest citations of the Justinian corpus by Pavian lawyers were gleaned from a similar complete manuscript or only from isolated fragments of the text. In any case, as I said in Chapter 2, the earliest citations from the Institutes since the ninth-century Lex romana canonice compta appear in the Lombard Quaestiones ac monita, probably from the second quarter of the eleventh century. Subsequently citations appear in the glosses called the Walcausina, written by Walcausio, a Lombard lawyer who wrote the commentary on the Liber papiensis in the third quarter of the century, and in the Expositio dated between 1070 and 1090.225 Similarly, the Novellae was cited in all three of these eleventh-century works and the Codex in the latter two.226 Henry III, who stopped at Pavia in 1047 and was accompanied on part of his journey by Boniglio, the lawyer whom I mentioned earlier as the young Lanfranco’s opponent, also cited the Codex in a law of that year in responding to a problem posed to him by “several legal experts” (nonnullis legisperitis).227 As for the fourth division of the Justinian corpus, the Expositio cites the Digest at a number of points, but the irst dated reference to the work was made by Pepo in the Romagna in the Marturi plea in 1076.228 Although Pavian specialists in Lombard law were guided in their study of legal texts by practical considerations, both the Expositio and the Walcausina manifest a philological interest in the texts of Lombard law. The author of the Walcausina (ca. 1050), boasts in fact of having emended a key text of the Liber legis Langobardorum.229 224

225

226

227

228

229

Charles Radding and Antonio Ciaralli, “The Corpus Iuris Civilis in the Middle Ages: A Case Study in Historiography and Medieval History.” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, romanistische Abteilung, 117 (2000): 307. Walcausio or Gualcausio wrote documents at Pavia between 1055 and 1079: Radding, Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 95. The glosses of Walcausio are included with the commentary of the Expositio on the Liber papiensis in Boretius’s edition of the last work. For the most complete analysis of the Expositio consult Giovanni Diurni, “L’Expositio ad liber papiensem, cited above. Cf. For its precise citations of the Institutes, see Antonio Padoa Schioppa, “La cultura giuridica,” Storia di Pavia, II. L’alto Medioevo (Milan, 1987), 231, n. 98. Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis, trace the early manuscript history of the Institutes, 111–31. For those of the Code and the Digest, see 133–68 and 169–210 respectively. Radding and Ciaralli, “The Corpus Iuris Civilis in the Middle Ages: A Case,” 306–7.There may, however, be allusions to it in the Quaestiones ac monita (307). Cf. Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis, 118–20. The text is found in Constitutiones et acta publica imperatorum et regum inde ab a. DCCCCXI ad a. MCXCVII (911–1197), ed. Ludwig Weiland, MGH, Legum, no. 4, pt. 1 (Hannover, 1893), 96; cited in Radding and Ciaralli, “The Corpus Iuris Civilis in the Middle Ages,” 307 and 309; see, for additional references to citations, 307–108, n. 77. Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis,” 181–82. The plea is found in Cesare Manaresi, I Placiti del “regnum Italiae,” FSI, nos. 92, 96–97 (Rome, 1955–60), doc. 437: 3:333–35. The following discussion regarding the reconstruction of the Justinian corpus in the eleventh century is largely taken from Radding and Ciarelli, The Corpus iuris civilis. The apparatus of Boretius’s edition of the Liber papiensis indicates that the two manuscripts of the Walcausina that he used for his edition (manuscripts 7 and 8) ofer numerous variants, most probably emendations, for the text of the Liber. For the Walcausina’s speciic reference to the emendation of the Liber, see Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis, 190–91. For the Expositio’s emendations, see ibid., 191–92. On the sensitivity of the author of the Expositio to the need of a philological approach to the Liber, see Diurni, L’Expositio, 110–11: “egli è consapevole di avere davanti a sé un

170

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Both commentaries relect the same combination of concerns in their use of Roman law, that is, the practical motive of using Roman law to develop a more sophisticated approach to Lombard law along with a scholarly interest in having a correct text. While the philological skills that Pavian jurists developed in editing Lombard law equipped them for editing Justinian’s corpus, a study of the surviving eleventhcentury manuscripts of the corpus, especially of the Code and Digest, suggests that contemporary jurists in other areas of the regnum and possibly beyond had similar philological interests and that reconstruction of complete manuscripts of both works by the last decades of the eleventh century was the result of a group of jurists geographically dispersed.230 The origin of the earliest surviving manuscript of the Epitome Codicis, Archivio Capitolare Pistoia, C 106 (P), a lorilegium of numerous constitutions of the Code written circa 1050, remains elusive. Originally written by eight scribes, the Epitome contains in the empty spaces of its folios hundreds of constitutions added by at least twenty-three later eleventh-century hands. A slightly later edition of the same work, BNP, Lat. 4516 (L), was mainly the product of one of the scribes of P, but a third edition, Universitäts- und Landesbibliothek Darmstadt, 2000 (D), shares a common ancestor with P and possibly was written in southern France.231 Fragments of two remaining versions of the Epitome, Württembergische Landesbibliothek Stuttgart, Jur. fol. 62 (second half eleventh c.) and Biblioteca Oliveriana Pesaro, 26 (ca. 1100), were likely products of the areas of Pavia and Lazio respectively.232 A study of P reveals how the manuscript grew.Although the scribes of the original text and subsequent annotators were clearly interested in including useful laws, the scribes of the original carefully corrected the text against another manuscript, adding constitutions in places where they had been omitted, while the later scribes manifested a similar scholarly concern to place the constitutions in their proper place in relationship to those already in the text. Occasionally annotators included corrections of the language of the text apparently based on conjecture or collation with another text.233 The three earliest full manuscripts of the Epitome with their annotations include almost all the contents of the Code, and when eforts to furnish complete copies of the Code began to appear in the last decade or so of the eleventh century, they seem to have been outgrowths of the Epitome.234 Legal scholars by then had apparently seen the practical value of having the ancient text in full. As with the Epitome, the

230

231

232 233 234

testo normativo, complesso di norme vigenti, che andavano comprese e spiegate per la loro corretta applicazione; da qui la necessità di un esegesi unita teleologicalmente al testo da cui è tratta la materia, esegesi che ancor meglio poteva efettuarsi con l’uso dei principi della logica formale, dei metodi della dialettica e della retorica.” Cf. Schioppa, “La cultura giuridica,” 229–33. Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis, 157. For the probable date of the Epitome, see 142; for that of the supplemental constitutions, 146. For a discussion of these manuscripts, see ibid., 143–51. If written in southern Francia early in the twelfth century, as the authors suggest, ibid., 150, Darmstadt’s 2000, would predate works on Roman law generally recognized as produced there. See Chapter 8, under “Roman and Canon Law in Francia.” Ibid., 152–53. Ibid., 146–47, discusses the exegetical work involved in developing the Epitome. Ibid., 157.

171

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

graphic diversity of the complete versions indicates that they were compiled in different areas, in this instance northern and central Italy.235 The state of the Digest in the eleventh century difered from that of the Code in that whereas only an incomplete manuscript of an ancient text of the Code apparently survived by the eleventh century, a complete sixth-century copy of the Digest (F), the Codex Pisanus (BLM, s.n.), existed in Pisa. The manuscript, however, does not appear to have been systematically collated until the twelfth century. Possibly already by the second half of the eleventh century the archetype of later medieval versions of the text, known as S, was in circulation. Although based on F, S contained readings from a second authentic source.236 The fact that the two surviving eleventh-century versions of the Vetus, that part of the Digest that ran to the second title of Book 24 of the enormous work, share some errors and difer in others suggests that the medieval text of the Digest may have evolved, in the same way as the Code, from a shorter base text supplemented over decades by additions.237 These two versions of the Vetus, BNP, Lat. 4450 (P) and BAV, Vat. Lat. 1406 (V), both presumably based on S, omit at points the same passages and at others omit diferent passages of the text that appear in F.238 However V and P were produced, it is important for our purposes that both were the product of scholarly interventions by their editors. Attributing to S differences with F as relected in P and V (together with two later manuscripts L and U), Hermann Kantorowicz regards the creator of S as a philologist as well as a jurist.239 Charles Radding and Antonio Ciaralli have grouped the textual emendations listed by Kantorowicz under PV into categories of changes.240 The diferences with F include changes in word order, illing out elliptical phrases and substituting synonyms as well as changing the cases of prepositional objects from accusative to ablative. Occasionally glosses are erroneously incorporated into the text. More important, because jurists are involved, obvious errors in stating the law are corrected. This is done partly by resort to conjecture and partly by comparison of the text with parallel passages in the Institutes. Finally whole phrases are introduced to make legal and logical sense of passages that are defective in F. By 1100, consequently, philological study of the Justinian corpus that was to be taken up and greatly advanced by jurists of Bologna had already been under way for more than half a century. In terms of the size of the corpus and the state of the 235 236

237

238 239

240

Ibid., 163. This was the opinion of Theodor Mommsen expressed in his Praefatio to his edition of the Digest: Justiniani Augusti Digestorum seu Pandectorum codex Florentinus olim Pisanus phototypice expressus (Rome, 1902–10), lxviii–lxx. Cf. Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis, 174, 176–77. Of the two eleventh-century manuscripts of the medieval Digest based on S, the Vatican manuscript likely belongs to the third quarter of the eleventh century, while the Paris manuscript appears to have been written somewhat later in the century; Radding and Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis, 197–98. For these manuscripts, see also 170. Ibid., 205–7. Über die Entstehung der Digestenvulgata (Weimar, 1910), 40. L and U were used by Mommsen to designate two twelfth-century manuscripts that he also used for his edition; Padua, Bib. Univ., 941 (U), and Leipzig, Universitätsbibliothek, 873 (L). Kantorowicz (37–50) discusses the emendations found in P and V. Radding and Ciarelli, The Corpus juris civilis, 185–87, summarize the diferences.

172

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

manuscripts, no other philological enterprise undertaken in the Middle Ages would be comparable to that of jurist/philologists primarily from the regnum.241 In a society plagued by the absence of central government and driven by a rapidly expanding economy that intensiied the contact between individuals and regions, the pursuit of a legal structure to regulate human behavior in new circumstances became an imperative in the areas of both Lombard and Roman law. That by the late eleventh century scholarship in Lombard law lapsed for a time – to be revived by the midtwelfth – suggests that jurists henceforth felt that their mission was best fulilled by focusing on the study of Roman law. As a result, the future lay not with Pavia but Bologna. On the basis of surviving documentation, it seems that Bologna, compared with Pavia, Ravenna, or even Parma, had been an intellectual backwater until the second half of the eleventh century. As we have seen, there is no persuasive evidence that a school existed in the cathedral, although it must be assumed that there was some form of educational program there for training diocesan clergy. In the twelfth century, private schools lourished in Bologna, but as for the cathedral, we know only that in the second decade of the century, one of its canons, Ugo, was teaching ars dictaminis. As we shall see, the short-lived burst of interest in theology in the city in the middle decades of the twelfth century probably had little to do with a school in the cathedral. In any case, after 1060 conceptual innovations in Bolognese notarial documents followed one another so quickly that it is diicult to believe that the ground for the later schools of law was not related in some way to these developments.242 Generally, throughout central and northern Italy in the eleventh century, the grammar of the notarial texts moved closer to a classical standard, and after mid-century, formulas not only were noticeably more precise but indicated “a decisive return to the terminology of the pure Roman sources.”243 Advances in the notarial art at Bologna, moreover, far outpaced those elsewhere. Beginning around 1060, Domenico, a Bolognese notary, introduced a historic change in the subscription to documents, transforming them from being charters to being instruments. By omitting the signature or manuirmatio of the witnesses and substituting the new formula “hec instrumenta irmavi” (I have conirmed these documents) or “hiis instrumentis robur accomodavi” (I have given force to these documents) for the old “complevi et absolvi” (I have completed and released ...), Domenico made the validity of the document rest not on the signatures of those witnessing the acts but upon his own attestation that the contents represented the will of the agreeing parties. By 1070, Bolognese notaries also appear to have been the irst to 241 242

243

Ibid., 188–90. As earlier in Pavia, the initial development of legal studies in Bologna appears to have grown out of a close link between lawyers and notaries: Giorgio Cencetti, “Studium fuit Bononie: Note sulle origini dello studio di Bologna nel primo mezzo secolo della sua esistenza,” SM, 3rd ser., 7 (1966): 799. Arnaldi, “Alle origini dello Studio,” 99–102, elaborates on Cencetti’s emphasis on the Bolognese notariate’s link with legal studies. Pier S. Leicht, “Inluenze di scuola in documenti toscani dei secoli XI–XII,” Bullettino senese di storia patria 16 (1909): 174. Alberto Liva, Notariato e documento notarile a Milano: Dall’alto medioevo alla ine del Settecento (Rome, 1979), 42–51, points to greater sophistication in the formulas of eleventhcentury Milanese documents.

173

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

separate clearly the juridical act itself from the document that proved it had been accomplished. Heretofore the traditio clause that was included in the document had referred both to the passage of the property between the old and new owner and to the piece of parchment itself. Hereafter the traditio unambiguously referred to the property, while the document itself assumed a probative value.244 The new clarity achieved in the judicial action by the introduction of these concepts was paralleled by a change in calligraphy from a rugged, archaic form of cursive to an elegant and eminently readable form of minuscule.245 The twelfth century would see other advances. Supposedly the founder of Bolognese legal studies was a certain Pepo. How closely connected he was to the historic reforms in notarial practice remains unknown, but he was apparently an important igure in the legal world of Tuscany and the Romagna between 1070 and 11o0. He was likely the teacher of some of the many jurists who were frequently summoned to the placita of Matilda of Tuscany in the next generation. Perhaps he was the mentor of Irnerio himself, with whom Bologna emerged as the leading center of Roman law studies in Italy. CONCLUSION

In the irst three-quarters of the eleventh century, Italian cathedral schools, which were recognized by native and foreign students alike for the high quality of grammatical learning they ofered, experienced a golden age. The strength of Italian magistri did not stem, however, from their publications, but rather from their teaching. It is tempting to attribute the lack of interest that these men had in setting thoughts and imaginings down in writing to Italy’s allegiance to the Ottonian and 244

245

Cencetti, “Studium fuit Bononie,” 793–94. Liva, Notariato e documento, 59–60, sees this change as having taken place in Milan in the last decade of the century. Because of this legal sophistication, Arnaldi, “Alle origini,” 104–6, argues that the Bolognese Studio had its beginnings as a school of ars notaria.Although attracted to this idea, Cencetti,“Studium,” 800, considers the possibility that the “school” might have really been closer to an apprentice system, consisting “di alcuni notai più istruiti, esperti ed autorevoli, che ammaestravano i loro discepoli uno per uno, in veste d’insegnanti privati o di semplici trasmettitori dell’arte loro ai propri continuatori....” There is no solid evidence of a school for notaries before the thirteenth century even at Bologna. I agree with Cencetti that notaries in these centuries learned by apprenticeship. However, in the case of these more sophisticated legal documents, I suspect that rhetoricians/lawyers studied notarial documents with their students and that they were in fact responsible for the new notarial forms. A certain Angelo notarius and causidicus, active in Bologna between 1102 and 1147, together with another notary, Bonando, was responsible for introducing Carolingian script into Bolognese documents: Gianfranco Orlandelli, “Ricerche sulla origine della Littera bononiensis: Scritture documentarie bolognesi del sec. XII,” Bollettino dell’Archivio paleograico italiano, n.s. 2.3 (1956–57), 179–241. Cf. Gianfranco Orlandelli, “Considerazioni paleograiche sulle più antiche carte del monastero di S. Stefano,” Atti della Accademia dell’Istituto delle Scienze di Bologna, cl. Scienze morali, rend. 72 (1985): 83–97. Andreas Meyer, Felix et inclitus notarius: Studien zum italienischen Notariat vom 7. bis zum 13. Jahrhundert, Bibliothek des Deutschen Historischen Instituts in Rom, no. 92 (Tübingen, 2000), 177–78, however, argues for Tuscan leadership in innovation in the late eleventh century, including the introduction of Carolingian script. Given the evidence, I favor Bologna.

174

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

Salian educational ideal of litterae et mores, which envisaged education as directed at creating men of high moral character rather than learned scholars or literary artists. A similar commitment, however, did not prevent contemporary Germans from composing in abundance in a wide range of genres: history, hymnology, exegesis, and religious and secular poetry.246 Only in hagiographical writings, perhaps, was Italian output roughly comparable to that of other areas of western Europe.247 The explanations that I gave in Chapter 1 for Italy’s lack of literary creativity two centuries earlier remain persuasive for the eleventh century.248 Because of the depth of understanding that Italian teachers possessed of the ancient language and its artifacts, schools of the regnum attracted students of grammar and rhetoric from abroad. That understanding, however, did not necessarily translate into the production of scholarly and literary works. Instead, the reverence that scholars held for the traditional book culture tended to check their creative powers, rendering them guardians of a scholarly tradition that passed down from one generation of teachers to the next. The reluctance of intellectuals might have been overcome had eleventh-century Italy had a great prince who aspired to associate his name with scholarly and literary achievement, but it did not. In the Salian as in the Ottonian period, the German half of the empire was favored by the presence of emperors who acted as generous patrons of letters, but their largesse rarely crossed the Alps. In northern Francia, the Capetian monarchs, with the exception of Robert the Pious (972–1031), exhibited little interest in emulating their Carolingian predecessors’ patronage of learning, but territorial princes and powerful ecclesiastics showed signs of assuming that role already in the eleventh century, and a scattering of bishops and abbots sponsored the writing of historical works.249 246

247

248

249

This observation is based on the list of important authors discussed by Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, vol. 2, for the period 950–1075. Generally on the writing of saints’ lives, hymns, and secular and didactic poetry, see Manitius, 2:491–94. He discusses thirty-one individual poets who wrote in this period (2:495–637). Of these poets only Leo of Vercelli (511–17) wrote in the regnum, and there is some possibility that he was at least educated in German lands. The regnum’s production seems to have been similar to that of southern Francia: Pierre Bonnassie, Pierre-André Sigal, and Dominique Iogna-Prat, “La Gallia du Sud, 930–1130,” Hagiographies: Histoire internationale de la littérature hagiographique latine et vernaculaire en Occident des origines à 1550, ed. Guy Philippart, 4 vols. (Turnhout, 1994–), 1: 288–344 (see especially 333–38), but less than that of northern Francia: Ineke van’t Spijker, “Gallia du Nord et de l’Ouest: Les provinces ecclésiastiques de Tour, Rouen, Reims (950–1130),” in ibid., 2:239–90. No diocese in Italy, however, could compare with the production of the diocese of Orléans, which from the 980s to the 1130s produced more than thirty works related to the cult of the saints; Thomas Head, “The Diocese of Orléans,” in ibid., 352. We await the publication of Friedrich Lotter’s chapter in the Hagiographies series for statistics on production in Germany between 950 and 1130. By the eleventh century the argument that the comparative diference of surviving literary and scholarly production in the regnum and transalpine Europe was partly owing to storage loses some of its cogency. Whereas in earlier centuries monasteries, good places for storage, played little role in the intellectual life of the regnum, they were at its center north of the Alps. In the eleventh century, irst of all, intellectual interest in Italian monasteries reach an all-time high. Second, in the course of the eleventh century urban areas in Francia and Germany played an increasing role in intellectual life and, consequently, a greater number of manuscripts were put in jeopardy. On the Capetians, see Reto R. Bezzola, Les origines et la formation de la littérature courtoise en occident (500–1200), 3 vols. in 5 pts. (Paris, 1958–63), 1:307–14. The dukes of Normandy and their

175

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

As in German lands so in Francia, however, the strength of the inherited tradition of active learning, the expectation that learning would generate new learning, helps to explain much literary and scholarly production.Weakened by a century of relative political chaos, intellectual life revived in northern Francia in the decades after 1000 as regional governments succeeded gradually in imposing order. Thereafter, even without any evident princely sponsorship, the monasteries and churches of these territories attained a level of literary and scholarly activity rivaling that in imperial Germany. As we shall see in Chapter 8, the intensity and quality of that activity by the last decades of the eleventh century merit considering these years as marking the beginning of what has become known as the Renaissance of the Twelfth Century.250 By the second half of the eleventh century the disparity in scholarly and literary production of the regnum with that of northern Europe was afected by other negative factors besides lack of patronage and the absence of an active tradition of learning. These new factors not only would discourage scholarly and literary work but would bring into question the entire program of grammatical studies that was central to the traditional culture of the book. Already by mid-century, the secular orientation of education that emphasized pagan literature, which informed the outlook of the ecclesiastical elite in bishoprics and monasteries, became an object of attack as one aspect of what reformers considered rampant secular tendencies in the Italian church. Camaldolensian and Vallombrosian monasticism, the two pioneering eremitic movements in eleventh-century western Europe, arose as direct responses to the perceived corruption of Christian ideals.251 Although the founders of both

250

251

descendants were particularly noted for their patronage. A long prosimetron history of the dukes was composed ca. 1000 by Dudo of Saint Quentin at the request of Richard I and Richard II: Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen literatur des Mittelalters, 2:257. A series of Norman historians was patronized by William the Conqueror: ibid., 263, and Bezzola, Les origines, 2.2:400. Ingelran of Rheims addressed a poem to the countess Adèle of Blois (ca. 1060–1137), daughter of the Conqueror, celebrating her father’s exploits: Wilhelm Wattenbach, “Lateinische Gedichte aus Frankreich im elften Jahrhundert,” Sitzungberichte der Preussischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Philos.-Histor. Klasse (1891), 105. Wattenbach publishes the poem. Adèle was a major source of patronage: Geofrey of Rheims, Baudry of Bourgeuil, and Hildebert of Lavardin looked on her as a patroness; Bezzola, Origines, 2.2:369–81. Hugh of Fleury’s Historia ecclesiastica et liber modernorum Francorum regum was dedicated to her as well: see the work edited by Georg Waitz, MGH, Scriptores, no. 9 (Hannover, 1851), 337–64. Cf. Bezzola, Origines, 2.2:378. Another princess, Matilda of England (d. 1118), wife of Henry I, appears to have been a generous patroness of French continental poets (2.2:423–24). Ecclesiastical patronage was responsible for a number of works. Abbo of Fleury (d. 1004) commissioned Aimoin to write his Historia Francorum (PL 139, cols. 627–798), and Abbo’s successor, Gauzlin, requested at least two other works from Aimoin: Bezzola, Les origines, 2.1:32. The abbot of SaintSymphorien at Metz, Constantine, inspired one of the monks, Alpert, to write a history of the bishops of Metz (ibid., 2.1:33–34). At Tholey, his abbot commanded Thierry to write the life of Conrad of Trier (ibid., 36), and at Cluny, the abbot commissioned Syrus for a life of Saint Maïeul (ibid., 38). Ralph Glaber’s universal history was requested by Odilo, abbot of Cluny (d. 1049) (ibid., 39). Apart from Matilda, I know of no other patron of letters among the lay nobility of the regnum and, although there are possibly examples, I am not aware of any similar patronage on the part of ecclesiastics in the regnum. The phrase formed the title of Charles Homer Haskins’s celebrated book, The Renaissance of the Twelfth Century (Cambridge, Mass., 1927). For the inluence of these Italian movements on transalpine monastic reformers in the late eleventh century, see Giles Constable, The Reformation of the Twelfth Century (Cambridge, 1996), 111.

176

The Golden Age of Traditional Book Culture

movements never identiied clerical education as encouraging the worldly character of the contemporary church, the ideal that the two men, who were illiterate or almost so, embraced was intrinsically anti-intellectual, and it fell to Pietro Damiani to make the negative connection between education and radical reform. Anti-intellectualism had been a recurring tendency throughout the history of Christianity, but, ired by his zeal for reform, Damiani crystallized the suspicion of learning intrinsic to the two pietistic movements into an assault on the current program of education. In that he was original. Cluniac monasticism, newly imported from Francia and dedicated to extracting monastic institutions from the tentacles of the secular by imposing an ecclesiastical chain of command, did not speak to Italy’s intellectual orientation. Notwithstanding the fact that only a few voices after Damiani survive that explicitly denounce the paganizing curriculum of the educational establishment, it seems fair to suppose that the strong pietistic sentiments aroused by the popular ascetic movements that he represented, over time, dampened enthusiasm in the regnum for the study of the classics and for writing literary works they might have inspired. In their attack on the secularism of the contemporary Italian church, however, Damiani and his allies did not advocate completely abandoning the temporal for the spiritual.252 Everywhere in contemporary western Europe, clerics were for all practical purposes governors of urban areas. The situation in Italy was even more extreme, however, in that bishops were in fact autonomous secular and religious rulers, subject only to imperial interventions, which were few. Bishops and their clergy worked closely with the lay elite in governing the local population and managing ecclesiastical lands. Nowhere else in western Europe were clergy and laymen – notaries, judges, knights, and lay administrators – so intermingled in secular and ecclesiastical af airs. The Italian economy, the earliest in Europe to revive, evolved rapidly, becoming stronger and more complex. It gave Italians a heightened awareness of the advantages to be gained by buying or exchanging land, by improving it, and by using legal procedures to advance or defend one’s economic interests. Living in the fastest developing economy in western Europe, even the ascetic Damiani, while archbishop of Ravenna, felt constantly harrassed by the practical demands associated with his oice, especially lawsuits, which were largely connected with matters of property. Nevertheless, although complementing, in a sense, the secular orientation of the program of litterae et mores, the intensifying drive toward more enlightened administrative practices served to draw laymen and clerics alike away from grammatical studies toward education that could prove more useful in their daily work. There is little doubt that the emergence of the legal book culture, the new alternative to traditional book culture, was largely inspired by the increasing complexity of jurisdictional quarrels and the sophistication of the regnum’s economy. 252

The agreement of Pascal II in 1111 to abandon the temporal possessions that the Church had received from the emperors was abhorrent to most of the clergy, including serious reformers; Stanley Chodorow, “Paschal II, Henry V, and the Origins of the Crisis of 1111,” Popes, Teachers, and Canon Law in the Middle Ages, ed. James Ross Sweeney and Stanley Chodorow (Ithaca and London, 1989), 5–6.

177

The Two Latin Cultures of Medieval Italy

It is to be expected that some masters in cathedral schools would ofer courses in legal studies, but the one reference that we have to a cleric teaching law, that of Anselmo of Besate to the legal teaching of Sichelmo, his magister at Reggio, tells us little about the character or extent of the instruction. In any case, at this early stage in the development of legal studies, we would expect work on the cutting edge to have come from those who could compare theory with practice. These scholars would have been practicing lawyers who, while arguing cases in the courts, also ran private schools. By the second half of the eleventh century, such practitioner-teachers appear to have enjoyed a near monopoly on legal education. Consequently, not only the intensiication of anti-intellectual prejudice associated with church reform but also the rise of legal studies hurt the cathedral school’s grammar curriculum. The potential notary had to have enough knowledge of Latin to work with the formulas in his documents. Potential lawyers needed more knowledge of grammar than that, but the specialized language of the Justinian corpus could better be taught in law school itself. Jurists who became legal scholars must have had more preparation in grammar than the average lawyer, but they developed the paleographic and editing skills necessary to reconstruct the ancient legal texts themselves in the course of their working lives. Had the cathedral school had another string to its bow in the form of the study of dialectic, the institution could possibly have reclaimed its central role in higher education, but this possibility was largely precluded by a widely held suspicion that dialectic would inevitably be used in theology to the detriment of the faith. Although the study of logic appears to have made solid progress in Italy in the irst half of the century, perhaps even ahead of Francia, by the second half, the danger that logic would question revealed truth led Damiani to denounce the use of dialectic in theology altogether. He may have been the irst to sound the alarm, but the Roman papacy must quickly have realized the risk of freedom of thought that dialectic encouraged, at a time when the papacy needed to present itself to the world as impeccably orthodox. Dialectic in Italy, including the Italian kingdom, survived in the twelfth century, but only as an anemic appendage to rhetoric and law.

178

Part II

The Birth of a New Order

Chapter 4

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

rom the first quarter of the twelfth century we can discern for the irst time in the regnum the emergence of an intellectual tendency that would dominate its mental universe and condition its approach to learning in general for several centuries. I call this the legal–rhetorical mentality in that the major currents of intellectual energy were expended primarily in legal studies and in the development of a spare, practical Latin rhetoric akin to notarial prose. While no one cause explains the genesis of this mentality, without question the Investiture Struggle (1075–1122) as it developed in the regnum played a major role in providing the focus for a Latin book culture hitherto disparate in character and feeble in creative activity. In the following four chapters I will argue that, paradoxically, it was an antisecular religious movement championed by the papacy that inspired a secular legal–rhetorical culture to which laymen and most clergymen subscribed and in which lay intellectuals gained predominance. The fundamental purpose of this chapter is to show that, although the issue of investiture troubled the peace of all of western Europe, it revolutionized the society of the regnum to an extent unmatched elsewhere. Crucial to understanding why this was the case is that nowhere else in western Europe did the struggle over church reform in the nearly ive decades between 1075 and 1122 stir the consciousness of the masses to the extent that it did in the regnum. In part this was because, in pursuit of victory for radical reforms, Pope Gregory VII (1073–85), who had already as a cardinal demonstrated his sympathy with popular protest, made it a policy to convey the reform message to the urban masses, thereby putting a religious face on all manner of popular protests. Through decades of prior diplomatic service he intimately knew the Italian clergy and supported like-minded bishops eager to carry the papal campaign to the people. Although Gregory’s successors modiied the policy, the change could not prevent the development of a sense of agency in town-dwelling laymen and laywomen that was to distinguish Italy’s urban population for centuries to come. Whereas in transalpine Europe and southern Italy the papacy pursued reform primarily through negotiations with princes, in the highly urbanized regnum appeal for popular support for the reform program was a practical strategy. Bishops there were particularly vulnerable. In southern Italy and transalpine Europe the sharper

F

181

The Birth of a New Order

division of spiritual and temporal authority and, especially north of the Alps, the dominant rural character of the society made organized popular opposition to the status quo diicult. In the cities of the regnum, where bishops often encompassed both spheres of power in their oice, popular support for reform was easily galvanized and rarely did alternative authorities exist to keep order. The extent to which this new sense of popular agency found concrete expression will be outlined in the next three chapters. The irst two divisions of this chapter narrate the outbreak of the conlict between papacy and emperor and then describe the widespread social and political turmoil characterizing the battle for reform as it was waged in the regnum. In almost every urban center of the kingdom, over multiple decades, the ecclesiastical establishment was convulsed by internal dissent and occasional mob violence. Although popular participation was doubtless inspired by an array of nonreligious interests, religious partisanship was usually the ostensible motive. In such a climate of civil unrest, popular opinion often played the decisive role in which of the two factions would retain control of the diocese. The third section discusses the war of propaganda that ran parallel to political events with a view to revealing the hostility of papal reformers, already evident in Pietro Damiani, toward the imperial educational program of litterae et mores embraced by the cathedral schools of the kingdom. Anti-intellectual in the sense that they eschewed the citation of ancient authors and use of literary devices (in this they went beyond Damiani), papal publicists from at least 1080s tended to formulate the issues involved in legal terms.The spare, legalist-lavored prose of the reform treatises was the forerunner of what would become the dominant prose style of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, while the focus on canon law anticipated the almost exclusive intellectual concern of the twelfth-century clerical elite. The subject of the fourth section is the relationship between the Investiture Struggle and the development of the commune. While the growth of economic activity and demographic increase marked by urban development were necessarily factors in the rise of the communal movement in the regnum and in the urbanized area of northern Europe restricted to the borderlands between Francia and the empire, almost all of the early communes in the regnum were in one way or other linked to the imperial-papal conlict. Leaders on both sides of the struggle endeavored to gain the support of the urban populations by granting charters guaranteeing substantial privileges to lay oicials, in some cases amounting to the creation of a commune. In a number of instances the commune represented lay initiatives to restore civic peace after decades of religious strife. In others the joint cooperation of bishops and laymen created institutions that would later develop into a commune. Whatever the genesis of the commune, whatever the material interests in play, the political forces involved in its creation were almost without exception deined in the documents in terms of the loyalty of their participants to one party or the other in the struggle for reform. Nourished by the political destabilization of the regnum’s society, the communal movement meant that from the early twelfth century a second, largely autonomous center of urban power existed, lay in character and ofering rewards in terms of power, prestige, and potentially wealth. Republican in form but admittedly controlled by 182

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

an elite, the commune sought the loyalty of the urban masses by embellishing their exercise of authority with religious symbolism and by insisting on the identity of the communal government with the city – an identiication that aroused in the members of the new institution the patriotic sentiments traditionally felt by laymen and clerics alike for their homeland. Intellectually, with the introduction of communal institutions a new space opened up for secular lay thought, at least one propitious for creative thinking about law, ethics, and politics. The next section of the chapter ofers an analysis of the progress of the reform movement between 1075 and 1122 in other areas of western Europe. I will show that, outside Germany, the Investiture Struggle did not inspire the participation of the populace because it was settled largely through negotiations between the papacy and the existent temporal and ecclesiastical hierarchy. While in German areas of Europe the papal–imperial dispute occasioned a series of bitter civil wars into the twelfth century and massive sufering among the populace, nonetheless we have little evidence to show that the masses were anything other than victims of warfare. As for the beginning of the communal movement, although the relatively urbanized border areas between Francia and the empire were responding to economic and demographic stimulation similar to that of the Italian cities, the political context in which they developed, the fact that the nobility were usually not included within the citizenry, and the small size of the cities limited the autonomy of the communes and rendered their existence uncertain. Hedged in by a resiliant episcopacy and the growing power of territorial princes, these communes never enjoyed the degree of autonomy attained by their Italian counterparts. The chapter concludes with an assessment of the fate of the cathedral schools in western Europe in the aftermath of the conlict and a brief comment on the success of the papal reform efort in the regnum. GREGORY VII AND THE OPENING PHASE OF THE INVESTITURE CONTROVERSY

After word of the ban against the king became known to the people, our whole Roman world trembled.1

As Bonizone’s testimony to the general consternation that followed on the news that Gregory VII had excommunicated Emperor Henry IV at the Lenten synod in 1076 shows, contemporaries had some appreciation of the momentous character of what would become the most historically signiicant event in western Europe in the eleventh century. In one stroke Gregory had initiated a war between spiritual and temporal power that would last oicially until 1122 but whose efects on the course of western history and culture would extend down to the present day. 1

Bonizone of Sutri, Liber ad amicum, ed. Ernst Dümmler, in MGH, Libelli de lite imperatorum et pontiicum saeculis XI et XII conscripti, 3 vols. (Hannover, 1891–97), 1:609: “postquam de banno regis ad aures personuit vulgi, universus noster romanus orbis contremuit.” See also Benzone, Liber ad Henricum IV, ed. Georg Pertz, in MGH, Scriptores, no. 11 (Hannover, 1854), 642: “Infernus totum vomuit, quod habet et quod potuit. Turbavit terram, maria atque sanctuaria.”

183

The Birth of a New Order

The two important writers on church reform in Italy in the tenth century, Rather and Atto, had spoken out against the church’s relation to the temporal power of their day, but of the two only Atto, and even then only in general terms, had identiied princely intervention in spiritual afairs as a major source of the problem and had called for canonical elections of bishops. Neither of the two men had immediate followers. Instead, when the issue of church reform was raised again in the eleventh century, most ecclesiastics looked to the Christian emperor for leadership. The aggressive policy of church reform that Henry III pursued in the second quarter of the eleventh century testiies to the positive efect that royal intervention could have in spiritual matters, especially in the reformation of the papacy. Even reformers like Pietro Damiani easily envisaged a future reform of church life as a joint efort of the emperor and the pope.2 Consequently, while there was nothing new in the condemnation of nicolaitism and simony, the position held by radical papalists at the curia, that any investiture of a cleric by a layman constituted simony, was revolutionary. The novel thesis challenged the entire structure of the church hierarchy. The long minority of Henry IV and the unsettled political situation in the empire, moreover, encouraged radical reformers to push as far as possible for a powerful papal monarchy “liberated” from lay interference. The opening salvo in the campaign of the radicals was Cardinal Humbert’s Libri tres adversus simoniacos (Book I, 1054–56; Books II and III, 1058), in which he (a) deined simony as a heresy; (b) argued that because it was a heresy, sacraments performed by simonical priests were invalid; and (c) demanded that bishops be elected according to canon law, in accordance with procedures that allowed the king or emperor no role in the actual election.3 A series of papal decrees on simony from 1059 to 1078 showed the inluence of Humbert’s work: in condemning clerical marriage and simony, and forbidding the faithful from receiving sacraments from clerics guilty of those crimes, the decrees stopped just short of embracing Humbert’s position that sacraments performed by such clerics were invalid. The issue, however, that led to the inal rupture between the young monarch and the new pope in 1076, after less than three years of an uneasy relationship between them, was not whether Henry IV had the right to invest bishops; investiture became an explicit issue only in 1078.4 The immediate cause of the break stemmed instead from Henry’s appointment of two bishops in the Roman province at Fermo and Spoleto without consulting with Gregory and continued personal contact with ive of his counselors who had been excommunicated by 2 3

4

Augustin Fliche, La réforme grègorienne, 3 vols. (Louvain and Paris, 1924–37), 1:228–29. The work is published in Libelli de lite, ed. Fredrick Thaner, 1:100–253. The work has more recently been edited by Elaine G. Robinson, “Humberti cardinalis Libri Tres adversus simoniacos” (Ph.D. diss., Princeton Univerity, 1972).The studies of Fliche on the struggle over investiture remain fundamental: La réforme grégorienne, together with his La réforme grégorienne et la reconquête chrétienne (1057–1125), vol. 8 of Histoire de l’Église depuis les origines jusqu’à nos jours (Paris, 1946), with a rich bibliography, 7–11. For more recent analysis see Michel Anton, “Die folgenschweren Ideen des Kardinals Humbert und ihr Einluss auf Gregory VII,” SG 1 (1947): 65–92; and Uta-Renate Blumenthal, Die Investiturstreit (Stuttgart and Berlin, 1982), 74–76. Rudolf Schiefer, Die Entstehung des päpstlichen Investiturverbots für den deutschen König, Schriften der Monumenta Germaniae historica, no. 28 (Stuttgart, 1983), 132–52 and 204–5.

184

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

Alexander II (1061–73). The fact that the emperor had relied on one of the excommunicated counselors, Count Eberhart, to invest Tedaldo as the archbishop of Milan in 1075 was particularly emphasized in Gregory’s harshly worded letter to Henry IV on December 8, 1075, demanding that the ive counselors be dismissed. The preemptory character of Gregory’s order so angered Henry, however, that he went out of his way to take part in the decision of a large portion of the German episcopate, meeting at Worms in January 1076 to renounce obedience to the pope.5 The bearers of Gregory’s December letter may have already threatened Henry orally with possible excommunication, but in any case the fact that the German bishops at Worms renounced their obedience to Gregory made the pope’s excommunication of them and the emperor at the Lenten synod of 1076 almost inevitable. In sponsoring the break, Henry may have misjudged the strength of Gregory’s position in Rome, but he clearly underestimated the character of his papal opponent. Probably Tuscan by origin, Gregory had been trained from boyhood in Rome at the monastery of Santa Maria on the Aventine and in the papal school at the Lateran. Whether he ever became a monk remains a matter of debate.6 As a student at the Lateran, he likely would have had Lorenzo of Amali , one of the leading scholars of western Europe, as a teacher. Lorenzo was well schooled in pagan literature and had perhaps studied with Gerbert. As a monk at Montecassino, he had helped initiate the revival of the monastery, whose days of glory would be under Desiderio (Victor III, d. 1087).7 Despite Gregory’s education under Lorenzo, his letters as pope, the major weapon of papal propaganda, were almost devoid of classical references; but whether that betokened a reluctance to cite pagan authority or simply relected 5

6

7

The German episcopacy, angered by Gregory VII’s claims to interfere in the functioning of their dioceses, wholeheartedly supported Henry IV in his opposition to the pope. Here I am echoing Blumenthal, Der Investiturstreit, 130–31. See also Herbert E. J. Cowdrey, Gregory VII 1073–1085 (Oxford, 1998), 130 and 134, who summarizes the problems confronting pope and emperor at the outset: “the heart of the problem was whether or not Henry would part with his German counsellors who were guilty of simoniacal deals and who stood behind his episcopal appointments in Germany as in Italy, and whether the German bishops were still so far alienated from Gregory by his interventions in Germany ... that they would rally to the king if he rejected Gregory’s demand that he dismiss his counsellors and do penance” (134). For brief outlines of his early life, see Fliche, La réforme grégorienne et la reconquête chrétienne, 57; and Henri X. Arquillière, Saint Grégoire VII. Essai sur sa conception du pouvoir pontiical (Paris, 1934), 21–22. Their view that Gregory was initially a monk has been the dominant position; see Cowdrey, Pope Gregory VII, 28. Recently Blumenthal has argued that the weight of evidence points to Gregory having been a canon and not a monk: Gregory VII: Papst zwischen Canossa und Kirchenreform (Darmstadt, 2001), 31–43. See Megan McLaughlin’s review of this position in Speculum 78 (2003): 140–41. Walther Holtzmann, “Laurentius von Amali: Ein Lehrer Hildebrands,” SG 1 (1947): 207–10; republished in his Beiträge zur Reichs- und Papstgeschichte des hohen Mittelalters: Ausgewählte Aufsätze von Walther Holtzmann (Bonn, 1957), 9–33. Because of Lorenzo’s role in educating Gregory, the imperial cardinal Beno in 1098 labelled him princeps maleiciorum: Benonis aliorumque cardinalium schismaticorum contra Gregorium VII et Urbanum II scripta, ed. Karl Franke, in Libelli de lite, 2:376. For Lorenzo’s learning, see Francis L. Newton, “Tibullus in Two Grammatical Florilegia of the Middle Ages,” Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association 93 (1962): 253–86, esp. 259. On Lorenzo’s Lexicon prosodiacum, see Henry M. Willard, “Codex Casinensis 580 T. Lexicon Prosodiacum saec. XI,” Casinensia 1 (1929): 297–304.

185

The Birth of a New Order

papal chancery tradition it is impossible to say. The feature in Gregory’s prose that shows clear beneit from Lorenzo of Amali ’s instruction is his generous use of rhetorical techniques, which enabled him to articulate eloquently the thoughts and emotions of a powerful personality.8 The overwhelming predominance of biblical resonances in Gregory’s style suggests that he had been in intimate contact with scripture from boyhood and that it had shaped his thinking and expression. Perhaps in relection of his schooling and then of the active life that he had led since early adulthood, Gregory had only the most supericial knowledge of the Church Fathers, with the exception of Gregory the Great, his namesake and model, whom he knew well.9 Gregory VII wrote his letters in a period just before ars dictaminis formalized papal correspondence, and their like would not be seen again until the correspondence of Innocent III, when a personality of heroic proportions would break through the massive restraint imposed by formulas to ind its voice. Innocent’s letters, though, would depend for their efect on manipulating more than a century of epistolary theory, lending them an elegance and sophistication that contrast with the directness and immediacy of Gregory’s. In a spare eloquence redolent of the Vulgate and especially of the Psalms, whose music and words he had internalized, Gregory expressed his espousal of reform, his reproach of unrepentant sinners, his weariness and frustration at many defeats and disappointments, and his underlying sense of responsibility before God. Sent throughout Christiandom, Gregory’s letters, with their appeal for the reform of Christian society, may have been a major force in converting many to the cause.10 At the same time that Gregory sent out letters to whip up support among bishops and other members of the clerical elite, he also committed himself fully to an alliance with new, popular-religious forces. The reform of clerical abuses that the eremitical orders, puriied by poverty, had denounced, and that reform popes had championed after 1049, was a cause that ofered discontented town-dwellers a compelling way to channel their various complaints against local clergy. Nicholas II and Alexander II had generally shown support for popular movements that opposed a simoniacal clergy, but Gregory went further by counting on their help to carry out his program. As cardinal, he alone, at the synod held at Rome in 1067, spoke in 8

9

10

Hubert E. J. Cowdrey, The Register of Pope Gregory VII, 1073–1085: An English Translation (Oxford, 2002), 456, lists nine references to classical authors; the authors are Cicero, Horace, Lucan, and Virgil. Friedrich Bock, “Annotationes zum Register Gregors VII,” SG 1 (1947): 281–89, discusses the degree to which Gregory was responsible for writing or dictating the letters himself.Two in the collection are in Gregory’s hand and four bear the indication dictatus papae, but the responsibility for the others is impossible to assign. Although admitting the diiculty of deciding which letters were actually composed by Gregory himself, Cowdrey concludes that “the force of Gregory’s personality is stamped upon even the more routine letters that were dispatched in his name”: The Register of Pope Gregory VII, xvi. Arquilière, Saint Grégoire VII, 272–76, notes that in his papal letters Gregory cites Gregory the Great ifty-eight times, Augustine once, Ambrose three times, and Chrysostom twice. Ian S. Robinson, “The Dissemination of the Letters of Pope Gregory VII during the Investiture Contest,” Journal of Ecclesiastical History 34 (1983): 175–93, discusses the extent of their difusion. Cf. his “Bernold von Konstanz und der gregorianische Reformkreis um Bischof Gebhard III,” Freiburger Diözesan Archiv 109 (1989): 176. I am indebted to William L. North for this last reference.

186

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

support of the monks of Vallombrosa, who had stirred up the Florentine people by preaching against Pietro Mezzabarba, their bishop, and accusing him of buying his oice. The moderate Pietro Damiani, in contrast, joined in the general condemnation of the monks’ efort to depose Mezzabarba by instigating lay pressure, speaking out against them as “locusts who devour the greenness of the Holy Church.”11 As pope, Gregory’s reliance on popular participation in pursuit of church reform would heighten the religious and political consciousness of broad groups of the urban population of the kingdom. At the same time, he would have to share responsibility for the consequences of violent popular action in the streets.12 RELIGIOUS REFORM AND POPULAR VIOLENCE

Henry II and Conrad II had made it a policy to place men from the imperial chapel in key episcopal positions in the Italian kingdom.The archbishop of Aquileia was consistently German, while candidates from beyond the Alps were favored for Ravenna and a few Tuscan and Lombard bishoprics as well. Whereas about a fourth of Henry III’s appointments were Germans, a somewhat smaller proportion of Henry IV’s were: unrest in the Italian cities forced the son to pay more attention to local sentiments than his father had done.13 Nonetheless, like his father, Henry IV needed to be sure that he could count at least on the bishops whose territories guarded the approaches to Germany. While Italian bishops usually owed the emperor loyalty for 11

12

13

The debate is described in Andrea Strumi’s Vita sancti Iohannis Gualberti, ed. Friedrich Baethgen, MGH, Scriptores, no. 30, pt. 2 (Leipzig, 1929), 1095; and Attone’s Vita sancti Iohannis Gualberti, PL, 146, col. 692. See also Robert Davidsohn, Forschungen zur älteren Geschichte von Florenz, 4 vols. (Berlin, 1896–1908), 1:47–49. Berthold of Reichenau writes in his Annales under 1067 that the Camaldulensians “scriptis quibusdam publice protestati sunt”; ed. Georg Pertz, MGH, Scriptores, no. 5 (Hannover, 1849), 273. The fact that Cardinal Humbert consecrated the monastery church at Vallombrosa in 1058 points to a direct inluence of Humbert’s position on Giovanni Gualberti; Giovanni Spinelli and Giustino Rossi, Alle origini di Vallombrosa: Giovanni Gualberto nella società dell’XI secolo (Milan, 1984), 27.Yoram Milo, “Dissonance between Papal and Local Reform Interests in Pre-Gregorian Tuscany,” SM 20 (1979): 70–86, explains the political reasons that made it diicult for the papacy to support the position of the Vallombrosans. Ildebrando must have been aware of those considerations but still chose to side with the monks. Mezzabarba was driven out the following year (1068), discredited by a Vallombrosan monk who successfully passed an ordeal of ire. For Damiani’s hostility to Vallombrosan activism, see above, Chapter 3, “Church Reform.” Hagen Keller “Pataria und Stadtverfassung, Stadtgemeinde und Reform: Mailand im ‘Investiturstreit,’” in Investiturstreit und Reichsverfassung, ed. Josef Fleckenstein,Vortäge und Forschungen, vol. 17 (Sigmaringen, 1973), 328: “Denn nicht nur in Mailand, sondern in allen italienischen Städten sind die politischen und religiösen Auseinandersetzungen des 11. Jahrhunderts gekennzeichnet durch eine Aktivierung der städtischen Bevölkerung und oft auch der benachbarten Landbevölkerung, und zwar eine Aktivierung aller Schichten, wie sie das abendländische Mittelalter bis dahin noch nicht erlebt hatte.” Gerhard Schwartz, Die Besetzung der Bistümer Reichsitaliens unter den sächsischen und salischen Kaisern mit den Listen der Bishöfe (951–1122) (Leipzig, 1913), 5–6; for the eleventh-century appointments in Aquileia, 31–36. In Ravenna ive of the seven archbishops between 1001 and 1072 were German: Ovidio Capitani, “Politica e cultura a Ravenna tra papato e impero dall’XI al XII secolo,” Storia di Ravenna: Dal mille alla ine della signoria polentana, ed.AugustoVasina (Ravenna, 1993), 169.Archbishop Giberto (1073–1100), after 1080 Clement III, was Italian. The irst papal reformer to become archbishop was Gualtiero (1118–44): Capitani, “Politica e Cultura,” 191.

187

The Birth of a New Order

his granting of their position, German bishops in Italy did so even more, because they were utterly his creatures. Whether of German or Italian origin, however, the bishops of the regnum at the outset of the Investiture Struggle were almost without exception loyal to the emperor and hostile to Gregory VII, and a large number endorsed the creation of Henry’s antipope in 1080. By 1122, however, the imperial episcopate had been largely swept away and reform bishops had taken their places. Such a total transformation could not have been accomplished without enormous active support for the program of reforms on the part of the urban population. The irst popular riots in the name of radical reform occurred in Milan, a city where the emperors had never challenged the powerful sense of local identity by attempting to impose a non-Milanese bishop. The uprising against the concubinage of the clergy of the Pataria there in the spring of 1057 marked the entry of the lower classes into the struggle for church reform.14 Arialdo, the leading preacher of the radicals, possibly inspired by contact with Cardinal Humbert during two trips to Rome in the latter half of that year, combined an attack on clerical marriage with a denunciation of simony.15 Within months of the outbreak of violence in Milan, local patarie formed and revolted against the ecclesiastical establishment in Brescia and Piacenza as well. In 1059 the murder of the bishop of Brescia by the local clergy, who were angered by his publication of papal decrees enforcing celibacy, led to widespread refusal throughout Lombardy to accept the sacraments at the hands of married priests or priests living with concubines.16 Ecclesiastical authorities appear to have responded successfully to such challenges in most of Lombardy, but civil unrest continued to rock Milan, the largest city in the regnum, over the next half-century. In the 1060s, if not earlier, the radical party 14

15 16

Cinzio Violante, La pataria milanese e la riforma ecclesiastica: I. Le premessi (1045–1057) (Rome, 1955), 148–49. Attacking what it considered a corrupt clergy, the Pataria claimed that sacraments performed by a bad priest were invalid. Their opponents generally defended the episcopal hierarchy and urged respect for the priest regardless of his personal moral status. Violante considers the Pataria as having been mostly composed of artisans, merchants, and popolo minuto (192). He believes, however, that people of other groups such as minters were also among their number: “I laici nel movimento patarino,” in I laici nella societas christiana dei secoli XI e XII: Atti della terza settimana internazionale di studio, Mendola, 21–27 agosto 1965 (Milan, 1968), 597–687. John Howe, “The Nobility’s Reform of the Medieval Church,” American Historical Review 93 (1988): 317–39, rightly stresses the importance of reform eforts of nobles from the tenth century. Paolo Golinelli, La pataria: Lotte religiose e sociali nella Milano dell’XI secolo (Novara, 1984), 14–15. Cf. Cinzio Violante, “La chiesa bresciana nel medioevo,” Storia di Brescia, 5 vols. (Brescia, 1963–64), 1:1035. In the case of Piacenza, the bishop, Dionigi (1048–82), ultimately reentered the city with the approval of the papacy: Pierre Racine, “La nascita del comune,” Storia di Piacenza: Dal vescovo alla signoria, ed. Piero Castignoli et al., 6 vols. (Piacenza, 1984–2003), 2:65. See as well, on the revolt in Piacenza, Giuseppe Fornasari, “La riforma gregoriana nel Regnum Italiae,” Studi gregoriani 13 (1989): 297–305. All that is known about the pataria movement in Cremona is a reference in Bonizone’s account of the reaction to the death of the bishop of Brescia in 1059; Liber ad amicum, 1:594: “Quod factum [the attempted assassination of Adelman of Liège] non mediocre patariae dedit incrementum: nam non solum Brixiae, sed et Cremonae et Placentinae et per omnes alias provincias multi se a concubinatorum abstinebant communione.” On the situation in Brescia, see Arsenio Frugoni, Arnaldo da Brescia nelle fonti del secolo XII (Turin, 1989), 4–5. Cf. Violante, “La chiesa bresciana,” 1:1034–35.

188

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

turned to Vallombrosa for support, and for a time Giovanni Gualberti was supplying Milan with priests trained at Vallombrosa to perform the sacraments for those unwilling to take them at the hands of simoniacs.17 The death of the movement’s leaders led to the dissolution of the Pataria by 1075, but violence related to religious politics had by then became endemic in the city. Three archbishops in succession, Guido of Velate (1045–68), Gotofredo (1068–74), and Tedaldo (1074–85), who has been mentioned earlier, spent a part of their reigns under papal excommunication; only Anselmo da Rho (1086–93), a bishop with imperialist sympathies but who was ultimately accepted by the papacy, succeeded temporarily in quieting the bitter dissensions.18 The expulsion and exile for simony, however, of Grosolano, a propapal archbishop, in 1103, shows that the reform program itself could breed factions.19 The divisions created by the struggle over church reform in Milan were common to most of the other cities of the regnum as well. In Lucca, Anselmo, bishop since 1073, was forced to lee in 1080 and a pro-imperial bishop, Pietro, took his place.20 In 1091, Gottefredo, who was probably appointed bishop in Lucca by Urban II, was residing in the Valdinievole, unable to occupy his diocese. Rangerio (d. ca. 1112), a Gregorian bishop elected in 1096, was only able to enter Lucca in 1097.21 Gregory’s deposition of the imperial Gandolfo and consecration of Eriberto in 1082 led to a schism in Reggio lasting until 1098.22 Similarly, at Modena, after the 17

18

19

20

21

22

Strumi, Vita Sancti Johannis Gualberti, 1100. Historians disagree as to whether the intervention of Giovanni Gualberti in Milan occurred before or after the popular revolution against the Florentine bishop Mezzabarba and his deposition in 1068: Antonella degli Innocenti, “Giovanni Gualberto,” DBI, vol. 56 (Rome, 2001): 344. The narrative here is based on Gian Luigi Barni, “Dal governo del vescovo a quello dei cittadini,” and “Milano verso l’egemonia,” Storia di Milano, vol. 3 (Milan, 1954), 114–236 and 238–57. Guido was excommunicated in 1066 by Alexander II. Forced to lee Milan briely in 1067, he resigned his see in 1068. Gotofredo was excommunicated in 1073 and deposed by Henry IV in an efort to placate the Milanese. His choice of Tedaldo, who was never recognized by the papacy, was no more fortunate.The appointment of Anselmo da Rho in 1086 ended two years of vacancy.The election of his successor, Arnolfo, in 1093 was initially condemned by Rome as irregular but ultimately allowed. On Arnolfo’s death in 1097, Anselmo of Bovasio was elected with papal approval. On his death in 1101, Grosolano was chosen to replace him. See as well the article by Herbert E. J. Cowdrey, “The Papacy, the Patarenes and the Church of Milan,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 18 (1968): 25–48; reprinted in his Popes, Monks and Crusaders (London, 1984). Grosolano was driven from the city in 1103 and deposed in 1112: Barni, “Dal governo del vescovo,” 270 and 303. Giordano of Clivio was elected in that year to replace him, but Grosolano (d. 1117) disputed the archbishopric with him for some years (316). The religious confusion in Milan in this period is highlighted by the fortunes of Grosolano, who may have come from Camaldoli and who ultimately retired there: Piero Zerbi, “Monasteri e riforma a Milano dalla ine del secolo X agli inizi del XII,” Aevum 24 (1950): 55, n. 6. On Lucca, see Martino Giusti, “Le canoniche della città e diocesi di Lucca al tempo della Riforma gregoriana,” SG 3 (1948): 333–34; and especially Hansmartin Schwarzmaier, Lucca und das Reich bis zum Ende des 11. Jahrhunderts. Studien zur Sozialstruktur einer Herzogstadt in der Toscana (Tübingen, 1972), 402–7. Rafaele Savigni, “L’episcopato lucchese di Rangerio (1096–ca. 1112) tra riforma ‘gregoriana’ e nuova coscienza cittadina,” Ricerche storiche 27 (1997): 9–10. Francesca Bocchi, “Le città emiliane nel Medioevo,” in Storia della Emilia Romagna, ed. Aldo Berselli, 3 vols. (Bologna, 1976–80), 1:423. See as well Pericle di Pietro, “Aspetti socio-economici e culturali

189

The Birth of a New Order

excommunication of another bishop Eriberto in 1081, rival bishops divided the see until 1095, with the papal one residing at Savignano and the imperial one within the city.23 On the death of Eriberto, the propapal candidate, Bernardo, was chosen bishop; he held the see until his death about 1097; but the Modenese objected to the pope’s choice of Bernardo’s like-minded successor and refused him entry into Modena for several years. In Parma, beginning with the election in 1062 of the imperialist bishop Cadalo (Honorius II) as pope and rival of Alexander II, proimperial sentiment remained strong until the 1090s, when a signiicant radical-religious faction emerged. Subsequently, after years of bitter struggle between two rival claimants, Parma accepted the reform candidate as bishop in 1106.24 In Bologna the struggle between rival bishops lasted from 1078 to 1104.25 In the diocese of Padua, in 1095, upon the death of the imperial bishop Milo, a strong advocate of the vita communis of the clergy, Henry IV appointed Pietro Cizarella, who was subsequently deposed by the Council of Guastalla in 1106 and replaced by a papalist, Sinibaldo. Pietro, however, refused to submit, and he and Sinibaldo fought over the see for years.26 In 1091, when Henry IV captured Mantua, Ubaldo, the bishop supported by Matilda, led, and the emperor replaced him with a German, Chuno, in 1092. Matilda retook the city and drove him out, but for years afterward, until his death in 1112, Chuno continued to claim the bishopric. The see of Brescia was dominated by a line of imperial bishops down to 1087, when the reform party succeeded in canonically electing Arimanno, a reform bishop. Forced into exile by an imperial challenger, Oberto Baldrico, a German, he only fully recovered the see in 1098.27 Because of his willingness to compromise with the imperialists, however, he was deposed in 1116 by the papacy and was replaced by a hard-line papalist.28 In Piacenza, although Bishop Dionigi managed to return to the city in 1057 within a short time after his expulsion by the local pataria, he was oicially deposed by Gregory VII in 1074.29 Nevertheless, Dionigi appears to have continued to exercise power in the city until his death in 1082, when the propapal Maurizio took his place. But antipapal sentiment still ran high in the city, and when Bonizone assumed the bishopric in 1089, he was almost immediately expelled and an imperial bishop, Winsico, who had been appointed by Henry IV, replaced him. The advent of Winsico was followed in 1090 by a bloody battle between propapal populares and

23

24

25

26

27 28 29

della vita modenese in età matildica,” Studi matildici: Atti e memorie del III convegno di studi matildici. Reggio E., 7–8–9 ottobre 1977 (Modena, 1978), 162. Luigi Simeoni, “I vescovi Eriberto e Dodone e le origini del comune di Modena,” Atti e memorie: Deputazione storia patria per le antiche provincie modenesi, ser. 8, 2 (1949): 77–87. Cf. Bocchi, “Le città emiliane,” 1:425. Reinhold Schumann, Authority and the Commune, Parma 833–1133 (Parma, 1973), 97, 147–50 and 159–63. On the makeup of the reform party in Parma, see 316–25. Gina Fasoli, “Ancora un’ipotesi sull’inizio dell’insegnamento di Pepone e Irnerio,” Atti e memorie della deputazione di storia patria per le provincie di Romagna, n.s., 21 (1971): 32–34. See as well Paolo Prodi and Lorenzo Paolini, Storia della chiesa di Bologna, 2 vols. (Bologna 1997), 1:73–77, 86, and 96. Schwartz, Die Besetzung der Bistümer, 58–59. As late as September 1110, Pietro was present “in domo solariata predicti episcopi” (59). Frugoni, Arnaldo da Bresica, 3–4. Cf.Violante, “La chiesa bresciana,” 1039–42. Violante, “La chiesa bresciana,” 1046–47. Racine, “La nascita del comune,” 65–66; and Bocchi, “Le città emiliane,” 416–18.

190

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

imperialist milites.30 At some time prior to 1095, Aldo, a papal reformer, replaced Winsico in turn.The sharp division between a series of Genoese bishops loyal to the emperor and a cathedral chapter dominated by reformers led to more than twenty years of bloody warfare in town and country that ended in 1099 with the consecration of a propapal bishop.31 The alternation of imperial bishops with bishops of the radical reform party, often involving rivalry between two claimants, either both residing within the diocese or with one plotting against the other from outside, necessarily resulted in major shifts of fortune for many city-dwellers. Many of an exiled bishop’s conspicuous supporters among the clergy and laity had to accompany him into exile, while those of his people remaining behind plotted their bishop’s return. A lack of documentation for other cities and the fragmentary material surviving even in the cases of most of the cities that I have already mentioned make an overall assessment of the divisions diicult. As is suggested by the chronology of disruptions of civic peace, a decisive reduction in violence occurred with the ascension of Henry V in 1106.The sharp divisions between the two parties were softened by the eforts of Henry V to compromise with the papacy and Matilda of Tuscany. Political relationships became more nuanced. Reformers throughout the regnum witnessed the success of their eforts to control the bishoprics, but the reform party itself split over the compromises.32 At the same time, the growing autonomy of lay political organizations fed by decades of disputed authority in the cities meant that bishops had to reckon with a new competitor for power over the diocese. THE PROPAGANDA WAR AND THE NEW STYLE

The Investiture Struggle sparked the irst international propaganda war in European history. Until nearly the end of the thirteenth century, there would be nothing comparable to this battle of words, which was particularly intense in the regnum between the 1080s and the 1110s but continued, principally in northern Europe, for decades afterward. Although not all have survived, ifty-ive papal tracts and fortyeight imperial ones (a few of which are in verse) still exist for the period from 1075 to 1122.33 Most are gathered in the three volumes of the Libelli de lite, published in the late nineteenth century. Both sides defended their positions with many arguments, largely based on historical precedent and ingenious interpretations of biblical and patristic sources. 30

31

32 33

On this conlict, see Pierre Racine, “Città e contado in Emilia e Lombardia nel secolo XI,” Evoluzione delle città italiane nell’XI secolo, ed. Renato Bordone and JÖrg Jarnut, Annali dell’Istituto storico italo-germanico 25 (Bologna, 1988): 131–33; Bocchi, “Le città emiliane,” 418; and Emilio Nasalli Rocca, “Osservazioni su Bonizone come canonista,” SG 2 (1947): 151–62. Valeria Polonio, “Da provincia a signora del mare. Secoli VI–XIII,” in Storia di Genova: Mediterraneo, Europa, Atlantico, ed. Dino Puncuh (Genoa, 2003), 131. Violante, “La chiesa bresciana,” 1046–47. Carl Mirbt, Die Publizistik im Zeitalter Gregors VII (Leipzig, 1894), 93–94. See the observations of Ian S. Robinson, Authority and Resistance in the Investiture Contest: The Polemical Literature of the Late Eleventh Century (Manchester and New York, 1978), 8–11.

191

The Birth of a New Order

Although the polemicists were biased and their study of sacred authorities was shaped by their immediate needs, as the controversy matured discussion tended to center on sources relevant to investiture issues. In the end the core texts supporting the papal position on investiture would be those used as authoritative in constructing canon law on the subject. Because the polemical works written in northern Italy and the Patrimony were interdependent, a characterization of the literature cannot be conined to the regnum alone.34 In this larger area we shall consider the major Italian treatises from the pontiicate of Gregory VII down to the death of Pascal II (1118).This literature is important because it evinces the development of a broader dimension of interest in law in the regnum, which up to the time had been focused principally on the documentary culture. Canon law had been a traditional subject of study in cathedral schools, but heretofore canonical and theological material had been so intermingled that canon law could not be regarded as a discipline in its own right. The bitter debates concerning the relationship of spiritual and temporal powers tended to encourage emphasis on legal not theological issues and to efect a separation of canon law from theology. We shall consider Italian treatises of the Investiture Struggle in two periods: seven that survive from 1085 to Pascal’s election in 1099, and ive written between 1099 and 1112. In all of those written before 1099 the policies of Gregory VII constituted the focus of discussion. Of the ive written in the regnum, three were imperialist – Pietro Crasso’s Defensio Heinrici IV (1082–84), Benzone of Alba’s Liber ad Henricum (1064/65–1085), and Wido of Ferrara’s De scismate Hildebrandi (1086) – and two papalist – Bonizone’s Liber ad amicum (1085/86) and Anselmo of Lucca’s Liber contra Wibertum (1085/86).35 Two treatises were written by Roman cardinals, presumably in Rome or in the neighborhood. The irst, Cardinal Deusdedit’s propapal Libellus contra invasores et simoniacos et reliquos schismaticos, has been dated to a decade after the group of ive above (1097).36 The second consisted of a series of writings by a number of Roman prelates known as Benonis aliorumque cardinalium scripta and was compiled in 1098.37 Of the ive treatises belonging to the second phase, that is, the controversies swirling about the policies of Pascal II, four were propapal: Bruno of Segni’s Libellus de 34

35

36

37

For example, the De honore ecclesiae of Placido of Nonantola, near Modena, was written with full knowledge of the Orthodoxa defensio imperialis of Gregorio of Catino of Farfa, composed in Roman territory; Mirbt, Die Publizistik, 76. The ive works are published in the following: Petri Crassi Defensio Henrici IV. Regis, ed. Lothar von Heinemann, MGH, Libelli de lite imperatorum et pontiicum saeculo XI et XII, ed Friedrick Thaner, 3 vols. (Hannover, 1891–97), 1:432–53; Benzonis episcopi Albensis ad Heinricum IV, ed. Karl August Pertz, MGH, Scriptores, no. 11 (Hannover, 1854), 591–681; Wido episcopus Ferrariensis De scismate Hildebrandi, ed. Roger Wilmans, Libelli de lite, 1:529–67; Bonizonis episcopi Sutrini Liber ad amicum, ed. Philipp Jafé and Ernst Dümmler, ibid., 1:568–620; and Anselmi Lucensis episcopi Liber contra Wibertum, ed. Ernst Bernheim, ibid., 1:517–28. Deusdedit presbyteri cardinalis libellus contra invasores et symoniacos et reliquos schismaticos, ed. Ernst Sackur, MGH, Libelli de lite, 2:292–365. Benonis aliorumque cardinalium schismaticorum contra Gregorium VII et Urbanum II scripta, ed. Kuno Francke, ibid., 2:366–422. For minor writings concerning investiture, see the list in Mirbt, Die Publizistik, 84–85.

192

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

symoniacis (before 1109), Rangerio’s De anulo et baculo (1110), Placido of Nonantola’s De honore ecclesiae (1111), and the anonymous Disputatio vel defensio Paschalis papae (1112).38 Gregorio Catinensis’s Orthodoxa defensio imperialis (1111), composed at Farfa, near Rome, is the only surviving imperialist work for the period.39 My analysis will briely trace the increasingly legalistic treatment of issues surrounding investiture in the Italian treatises, which went along with a decreasing tendency to draw on the tradition of litterae et mores in presenting or defending arguments. The treatises of radical reformers were the irst to ferret out legal principles systematically from heterogeneous religious sources. Imperialist treatises subsequently followed the same path, but failed to match the papalists in their organized presentation of a legal position. The contributions of the imperial polemicists in the irst phase of propaganda testify to their continuing debt to the traditional grammatical education of litterae et mores.40 That is especially true of Benzone of Alba, whose Liber ad Henricum, which was obviously designed to win the emperor’s favor, is reminiscent of Anselmo’s Rhetorimachia. A grand farrago of short prose pieces alternating with poetry, Benzone’s work, composed over roughly twenty years from 1064/65 to 1086, consisted of seven books.41 Benzone enjoyed playing with diferent rhythmical patterns in his poems. He had a wide knowledge of ancient writers: he cited Cicero, Sallust, Gellius, Boethius, Horace, and Virgil, as well as Persius and the Disticha Catonis.42 He compared the emperor Henry IV to Scipio (597) and in his dedicatory poem to the Liber ad Henricum dropped the names of Demosthenes, Lucan, Statius, Pindar, Homer, Quintilian, and Terence (599). Church reform only became the focus of the treatise in books 6 and 7, where Benzone attacked irst the patarie and then Gregory VII. Benzone’s acquaintance with Christian literature seems to have been limited to scripture, short phrases or passages of which he cited or echoed in his account. He felt no need to justify his attacks on the radical papal reforms by speciically invoking authoritative statements drawn from the Church Fathers or papal or conciliar declarations of the faith.43 38

39

40

41

42

43

Brunonis episcopi Signini libellus de symoniacis, ed. Ernst Sackur, in Libelli de lite, 2:543–62; Placidi monachi Nonantulani Liber de honore ecclesiae, ed. Lothar von Heinemann and Ernst Sackur, in ibid., 2:566–639; Rangerii episcopi Lucensis Liber de anulo et baculo, ed. Ernst Sackur, in ibid., 2:505–33; and the anonymous Disputatio vel defensio papae Paschalis, ed. Ernst Sackur, in ibid., 2:658–66. Gregorii Catinensis monachi Farfensis orthodoxa defensio imperialis, ed. Lothar von Heinemann, in ibid., 2:534–42. Again for minor writings on both sides, see Mirbt, Die Publizistik, 84–85. Inluenced by Lucan and Augustine, Cardinal Humbert had already drawn a sharp distinction between ancient pagan Rome, the prostitute, and the Rome of Christ, the virgin: Percy Schramm, Kaiser, Rom und Renovatio, 2 vols. (Leipzig, 1929), 2:29–33. The basic study of Benzone’s treatise remains Hugo Lehmgrübner, Benzo von Alba. Ein Verfechter der kaiserlichen Staatsidee unter Henrich IV. Sein Leben und der sogennannte ‘Panegyrikus,’ Historische Untersuchungen, no. 6 (Berlin, 1887). Lehmgrübner (3–4) argues convincingly that Benzone was a southern Italian by origin. On Benzone, see as well Fliche, La Réforme grégorienne, 3:215–49; Schramm, Kaiser, Rom und Renovatio, 1:258–74; and Giovanni Miccoli, “Benzone d’Alba,” DBI, vol. 8 (1966), 726–28. Horace is his favored poet (600, 615, 628–29, 672–73). He also cites Sallust (608); Gellius (611); Virgil (615 and 670); and Cicero (627). Fliche, La Réforme grégorienne, 3:232, makes this observation.

193

The Birth of a New Order

Pietro Crasso’s Defensio Heinrici IV, in contrast, drew on more heterogeneous sources for his argument.44 He made wide use of the Church Fathers as well as papal and conciliar declarations in his exposition of the imperial position. Of the Fathers, Pietro primarily quoted passages from Jerome, Augustine, Ambrose, and Gregory the Great; he also quoted papal and imperial letters and constitutions, as well as Orosius (439), Josephus (445), and Cassiodorus (449). Among classical authors he cited Sallust, Ovid, Terence, and possibly Martianus Capella.45 Pietro argued that the emperor should call a council to depose the pope.46 The sections written in 1084 and addressed to the Saxons, whom Crasso claimed Gregory VII had led by deception to revolt against their lawful monarch, referred to the Institutes and the Code of Justinian to prove that Emperor Henry IV legitimately possessed the monarchy through inheritance and that Gregory’s attack on imperial perogratives was criminal.47 Because he cited the Justinian corpus of Roman law, Pietro has traditionally been associated with Ravenna, principally owing to an unsubstantiated belief that the corpus passed from Ravenna to Bologna at the end of the eleventh century.48 Given what is now known about the difusion and use of the texts of Roman law in the period, it is more probable that Pietro came either from Emilia or Lombardy.49 Whatever his origin, though, he must have had a ine cathedral school education. 44

45 46

47

48

49

Although Pietro traditionally has been associated with Ravenna, the place-names that he cites in the work, with the exception of Rome, that is, Milan, Cremona, and Nonantola, suggest that he may have been Lombard: Robinson, Authority and Resistance, 77. Ibid., 87, n. 103. The citation from Terence’s Phormio is from IV.3.623, not IV.3.18. Chapters 1–4 embody the defense of Henry as promised by the title and urge him to call a council to judge Gregory VII, while chapters 5 and 7 constitute a detailed indictment of the pope, likely used for the council held in Rome in March 1084, summoned by Henry. The council’s purpose was to strip Gregory of his position and even his clerical status. In Chapters 6 and 8 Crasso appeals to the Saxons in revolt to throw down their arms and rely on the clemency of Henry, their hereditary lord. This appeal relates to the open warfare that had broken out between the emperor and the Saxons beginning late in 1083: see Augustin Fliche, La Réforme grégorienne, 3:103–7. For a detailed discussion of the work and the historical circumstances of its composition, see Karl Jordan, “Der Kaisergedanke in Ravenna zur Zeit Henrichs IV: Ein Beitrag zur Vorgeschichte der stauischen Reichsidea,” Deutsches Archiv für Geschichte des Mittelalters 2 (1938): 85–128. Defensio, 1:443–46 and 1:452–53. Crasso claimed that Henry, who had inherited the crown from his father, could not be denied dominium in the empire: ibid., 1:444–45. For references, see Fliche, Le Réforme grégorienne, 3:115–19 and 3:133. Crasso argued as well that both canon law and Roman law airmed this: Defensio, 446–53. On his precedence in introducing Roman law to the debate, see Percy Schramm, Kaiser, Rom und Renovatio, 288. A statement by Odolfredo, a thirteenth-century Roman lawyer at Bologna, to that efect is quoted in Nino Tamassia, “Odolfredo. Studio storico-giuridico,” Atti e memorie della r. deputazione storia patria per le provincie di Romagna, ser. 3, 12 (1894): 41. This article was republished as Odolfredo: Studio storico-giuridico (Bologna, 1894). Odolfredo’s statement reads: “Nam primo cepit studium in civitate ista in artibus, et cum studium esset destructum Rome, libri legales fuerunt deportati ad civitatem Ravenne, et de Ravenna ad civitatem istum [Bologna].” See the discussion by Charles Radding and Antonio Ciaralli, The “Corpus Iuris civilis” in the Middle Ages: Manuscripts and Transmission from the Sixth Century to the Juristic Revival (Leiden and Boston, 2007), 73–78. Robinson, Authority and Resistance, 75–83, expresses hesitations on other grounds. I ind unconvincing the suggestion that Pepo the jurist might be identical with Pietro Crasso; Carlo Dolcini, “Velut aurora surgente”: Pepo, il vescovo Pietro e l’origine dello Studium bolognese, Istituto Storico italiano per il medio evo, Studi storici, 180 (Rome, 1987). While Crasso’s citations from Roman law demonstrate

194

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

Although the text borrows little from pagan authors, it belongs to the curial tradition. Pietro begins the work with a poem consisting of nineteen strophes in iambic tetrameter proclaiming Henry the victor over Gregory. Twenty-four verses at the conclusion of the work solicit the emperor’s favor. Consequently, like Benzone’s, Pietro’s treatise gives the impression of being something of a court performance.50 The third imperialist,Wido of Ferrara, who wrote De scismate Hildebrandi, was the most politically moderate of the three and perhaps the most gifted writer on either side of the controversy. The treatise, written about 1086, was likely a response to a nearly contemporary work by Anselmo of Lucca that attacked the legitimacy of Clement III, the antipope. In the irst of the two books, Wido summarized in eight points the charges against Gregory VII’s legitimacy as pope, refuting each in turn by using the defenses ofered by Gregory’s supporters. In the second book, Wido returned to the eight points, showing that, despite the defenses that he himself had earlier provided, Gregory was nonetheless guilty on every count. The theoretical importance of Wido’s treatise lay in the clear distinction it made between the spiritual and temporal aspects of the bishop’s oice. Wido held that all secular powers of bishops were a gift from the emperor, while all spiritual powers came from the Church as represented by the pope.51 The ultimate resolution of the issue of investiture was in fact to be reached largely on the basis of this distinction. The way in which Wido used evidence to support his arguments on both sides demonstrates that he had an intimate acquaintance with biblical and patristic sources. Unlike the other two imperial authors, he included no poetry. Nevertheless, the opening lines of the irst book echo Ovid (Met. 2.3), and in the course of his exposition Wido also cited Virgil (537) and Cicero (550).52 In his ability to set forth a series

50

51

52

his knowledge of the Novellae in the Epitome Juliani, Institutes, and Code, he does not know the Digest; Pier S. Leicht, “Ravenna e Bologna,” Atti del Congresso internazionale di diritto romano: Bologna e Roma, XVII–XXVII aprile, MCMXXXIII, 4 vols. (Pavia, 1934–35), 1:288. Also see comments on his knowledge of the law by Karl Jordan, “Der Kaisergedanke in Ravenna zur Zeit Heinrichs IV,” 103–5. Referring to Crasso’s attribution of a passage from the Code (9, 40.10) to the Digest, Bruno Paradisi, “Il pensiero politico dei giuristi medievali,” Studi sul medioevo giuridico, Istituto storico italiano per il medio evo, Studi storici 163–73 in 2 vols. (Rome, 1987), 1:272, considers Pietro Crasso to be separated from the northern Italian jurists by an abyss (un abisso). On the poetry, see Max Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen literatur des Mittelalters, 3 vols. (Munich, 1911–1931), 3:28. Robinson, Authority and Resistance, 70–71 and 80, rightly considers the style of Benzone and Pietro Crasso as linking them to the panegyrical style of the imperial chancery, but in a broader context the writings of both are products of a traditional elitest conception of audience. Pietro’s literary ambitions are evident from the opening prose lines: “Haec aetas inter multa humanae vitae adversa protulit quoddam genus hominum, quod in tantum a moribus atque ab integritate vitae prioris aetatis discrepat, ut pene ipsi incognitum habeatur naturae, de qua aestimatur, ut aut ipsa in productione aberasset, aut ipsum genus hominum a prioris aetatis stirpe originem penitus non duxisset. Nam a ide et iustitia et veritate caeterisque virtutibus, quae sunt instrumenta salutis animarum, tantum abhorret, ut eas aut omnino non cognoscat aut cognitas in odio habeat”; Defensio, 1:434. Ibid., 1:564–66. His conclusion, however, remains unclear, because at diferent times he seems to suggest that the emperor name the bishop and at others grants the emperor only the right to invest the bishop with secular powers connected with the oice: Fliche, Le Réforme grégoriene, 3:294. Konrad Panzer, Wido von Ferrara: De scismate Hildebrandi. Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des Investiturstreites (Leipzig, 1880), 23–38, for a discussion of Wido’s style. A brief biography and discussion of the work is also found in Francesca Roversi Monaco, “Guido,” DBI, vol. 61 (Rome, 2003), 366–69. Wido’s

195

The Birth of a New Order

of credible arguments for his opponents before tearing them down,Wido relected a rare degree of intellectual lexibility for the age, a trait that could appear a weakness to his ruthless and often fanatical enemies. One such enemy was a papal reformer, Bonizone of Sutri (1045–before 1095). Probably born in Cremona, he came from a modest background and in an earlier generation might never have had an opportunity for preferment in the imperial church. Initially appointed bishop of Sutri by Gregory VII in 1075 or 1076, he was subsequently elevated to the see of Piacenza in 1086. He lost the diocese in 1089, after sufering horrible mutilations at the hands of his enemies.53 Bonizone’s Liber ad amicum (ca. 1085/86) constituted a justiication for armed militancy against the enemies of right doctrine. Formally the treatise was written in order to answer two questions asked by a friend: (1) If God is a god of justice, why does He permit the Church to lie prostrate and allow evil men to exult? (2) If we judge from the examples of the Church Fathers, is it right for Christians to take up arms to defend the faith? In responding to both questions, Bonizone summarized in nine books the history of the Church from the time of Adam down to his own day. The last four books dealt with events of the eleventh century in a manner that was egregiously tendentious. In creating his version of the Church’s history, Bonizone relied mainly on two historical sources, Cassiodorus’s Historia ecclesiastica tripartita and the Liber pontiicalis, but he supplemented them with abundant documentation from other ecclesiastical sources. While Bonizone’s knowledge of the Latin Fathers appears to have been limited, he knew Gregory the Great’s Liber pastoralis and the letters of Jerome and Isidore thoroughly, as well as the Bible.54 Alone of the papal polemicists, Bonizone referred in the course of his account to pagan authors, twice to Virgil and once each to Horace and Lucan.55 Bonizone’s book would prove important because his

53

54

55

descriptive power is at its height in his characterization of Gregory VII, a portion of which reads as follows: “Preferebat sitim caeteraque incommoda corporis, cum ad nutum cuncta suppeterent. Fugiant alii praesentiam hominum, devitent consortia mulierum, declinent frequentiam urbium, solitudines adeant, invia et praerupta requirant, abdant sese specubus montium et cavernis petrarum, alantur herbis, potentur fontibus, feris cohabitent; hic suscepti regiminis necessitate compulsus, quod maioris est meriti, inter seculares et ilios tenebrarum singularis meriti praerogativa dignissimus habebatur. Cumque omnes occcuparentur negotiis seculi et mundi desideriis et questibus inhiarent, animi virtute cuncta transcendens, vitam istam peregrinationem, non patriam existimabat. Iam vero quam cunctis afabilis, tractabilis fuerit et communis, quis explicare suiciat?”; De scismate Hildebrandi, 1:534–35. Manitius speaks of his use of the Sallustian historical ininitive as distinctive of Wido’s style: Manitius, Geschichte der lateinischen Literatur des Mittelalters, 3:33. However, Bonizone, a less skillful writer than Wido, also frequently used the same verbal form. According to Rangerio’s Vita metrica Anselmi lucensis episcopi, Gerhard Schwartz and Bernard Schmeidler, MGH, Scriptores, no. 30, pt. 2 (Leipzig, 1934), 1299, vv. 6887–90, his torturers cut out his tongue, put out his eyes, split his nose in two, and removed his ears: “Et iam multa ferens Sutriorum pulsus ab urbe, / Proque ide longo squalidus exilio/ Sed necdum lingua mutilus necdum sine luce/ Et necdum gemina nare vel aure carens.” Cf. Giovanni Miccoli, “Bonizone,” DBI, vol. 12 (Rome, 1970), 248. Miccoli, “Bonizone,” 252, considers him “relativamente limitato della cultura e degli interessi culturali.” Walter Berschin, Bonizo von Sutri. Leben und Werk (Berlin and New York, 1972), 5, calls his intellectual orientation “kirchlich-pastoral.” In Liber ad amicum Bonizone echoes Virgil twice (603 and 615) and Lucan (582) and Horace (614) both once. He was very hostile to the study of dialectic, but thought that law could be helpful to a bishop: Berschin, Bonizo von Sutri, 5, n. 10.

196

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

construction of events surrounding the development of the Church would provide a historical context congenial to the interpretation that radical reformers were giving to the texts they were striving to make part of the canon. While the second papal polemicist, Anselmo of Baggio (1035–86), did not completely resist literary ambition, he revealed no weakness for ancient letters. From a powerful house of Milanese capitani, Anselmo, the nephew of Pope Alexander II (d. 1073), was educated in Milan. That he studied with Lanfranco at Bec is unsubstantiated. Anselmo’s irst prose biographer, Pseudo-Bardo, writes that he “was skilled in the grammatical and dialectical art.” Gregory VII admired Anselmo’s knowledge of divine letters, and also his discretion.56 Appointed bishop of Lucca in 1073 by one of the last acts of his uncle, he was driven from the city in 1080 because of his reforming zeal. He devoted the rest of his life to working closely with the Countess Matilda in promoting Gregory VII’s reform eforts in the northern half of the Italian peninsula. Anselmo’s greatest scholarly achievement was a Collectio canonum, a collection of canon laws in thirteen books, which he wrote in exile. The irst two books focused on the biblical, patristic, conciliar, and papal sources that endorsed the principle that the papacy was supreme in the spiritual realm. In its turn Anselmo’s Collectio canonum was to become one of the major sources for the Decretum.57 Anselmo’s only surviving contribution to the debate over investiture was clearly the work of a scholar deeply involved in exploring the law of the Church. Pietro Crasso, Wido, and Bonizone had been generous in their citation of biblical and patristic texts, but in Anselmo’s work such source material takes up at least a half of the text. Written to demand that Giberto, the antipope Clement III (1080–1100), step down, Anselmo’s Liber contra Wibertum (1085/86) advanced its arguments by alternating passages of Anselmo’s own prose with extensive citations from authorities supporting his position. His citations, often lengthy, were taken from the Bible and the Church Fathers, including Augustine, Cyprian, Innocent I, and Ambrose, as well from the pseudo-Isidorian decretals, which he had already included in his Collectio.58 Writing a decade later, Cardinal Deusdedit, also a canonist, gave no sign of having literary ambitions. His Collectio canonum focused, more systematically than that 56

57

58

Pseudo-Bardo’s remark is found in Vita Anselmi episcopi Lucensis, ed. Roger Wilmans, MGH, Scriptores, no. 12 (Hannover, 1856), 13: “in arte grammatica et dialectica extitit peritus.” For Gregory’s appraisal, see Das Register Gregors VII, ed. Erich Caspar, Epistolae selectae in usum scholarum ex Monumentis Germaniae historicis, 3rd ed., 2 vols. (Berlin, 1967), 1:18; I, 11: “tantam divinarum litterarum scientiam et rationem discretionis.” Both of these sources are cited from Cinzio Violante, “Anselmo da Baggio, santo,” DBI, vol. 3 (Rome, 1961), 399. Kathleen G. Cushing, Papacy and Law in the Gregorian Revolution: The Canonistic Work of Anselm of Lucca (Oxford, 1998). Maureen Miller’s review in the American Historical Review (2000): 599–600, however, points to some important laws in the work. It should be noted that Gérard Fransen, “Anselme de Lucques, canoniste?” in Sant’Anselmo vescovo di Lucca nel quadro delle trasformazioni sociali della riforma ecclesiastica, ed. Cinzio Violante, Studi storici, no. 13 (Rome, 1992), 143–56, argues that either Anselmo did not author the book or he wrote only the irst seven books. Jürgen Ziesc, Historische Beweisführung in Streitschriften des Investiturstreits, Münchener Beiträge zur Mediävistik und Renaissance-Forschung, 5 (Munich, 1972), 34–43, provides a detailed outline of Anselmo’s argument.

197

The Birth of a New Order

of Anselmo, on issues directly connected with the reform struggle – that is, the liberty of the Church; the prerogatives of the clergy, particularly of the pope; and the inalienable ownership of church possessions. In writing his attack on royal investiture and simony in his Libellus contra invasores et simoniacos et reliquos schismaticos, published in 1097, Deusdedit drew heavily on his own collection, as Anselmo had done on his.59 Given the stern character of Deusdedit’s prose, it is surprising to learn that as a young man in Francia – he was probably from the Limousin – he had been a poet well acquainted with Horace, Prudentius, Boethius, and Servius, among others.60 After a few opening lines, the author summarized the theses that he intended to treat: (1) that the king could not appoint bishops to churches; (2) that simoniacs were heretics; (3) that a priest ought to be honored by laymen, not defamed and judged; and (4) that secular powers could neither introduce into the church nor expel clerics and that they had no control over church property.61 To prove his arguments, Deusdedit devoted proportionately even more space to citing religious sources than Anselmo of Lucca had done. The Benonis aliorumque cardinalium scripta, connected with the synod that a group of cardinals, supporters of the antipope Clement III, held in Rome in 1098, consisted of a series of letters. The irst two letters were authored by Cardinal Beno and were entitled Gesta ecclesiae romanae contra Hildebrandum, 1 and 2.62 The irst one, probably composed in 1085/6, around the time of Gregory VII’s death, condemned Gregory as ruthless in his lust for power and cruel, a poisoner, a heretic, and a necromancer. The second, written sometime after 1088, repeated the charges in greater detail. Both letters were refurbished for the collection, which contains eight other letters and a short addendum by other writers. The addendum and the eight letters were probably written in the months around the time of the synod in 1098 and were designed to prove that Urban II, Clement III’s rival, was guilty of heresy. The signiicance of this collection of imperialist letters for present purposes lies in the fact that all omit any reference to ancient authors and make infrequent use of rhetorical igures. While Beno’s earlier and later letters exhibit little reliance on sacred authorities in making their arguments, that is not the case with the other imperialist writers in the collection whose work can be securely dated as composed in 1098. Like the papalists, the imperialists by then had come to believe that their case could only be won by inding the right sacred texts to sustain their position. 59

60

61 62

For a general biography of Deusdedit, see Harald Zimmermann, “Deusdedit,” DBI, vol. 39 (Rome, 1991), 504–6. A shorter version of this work seems to have been prepared for the Council of Clermont in 1095: Zimmermann, “Deusdedit,” 505. His collection of religious poems, Libellus theoposeos, was written when he was between thirty and thirty-ive: “Iam senis lustris, si bene rem teneo, / humanis utor rebus inutiliter” (lines 1–2):Walther Holtzmann, “Kardinal Deusdedit als Dichter,” Historisches Jahrbuch 57 (1937): 220. Deusdedit appears to have come from Aquitaine (230). Libellos contra invasores et symoniacos, 2:300. The letters are found at 2:369–80. Beno was probably from Lorraine; Zelina Zafarana, “Benone,” DBI, vol. 8 (Rome, 1966), 564. Mirbt, Die Publizistik, 60–66, describes the contents. Carl Erdmann, “Gesta romanae ecclesiae contra Hildebrandum,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, kanontische Abteilung 26 (1937): 433–36, dates the work as written about 1098.

198

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

Their own prose was heavily interlarded with citations from a vast variety of sources that were generally regarded as canonical. In the second phase of the investiture polemic, which began with the conlict between Pascal II (1099–1118) and Henry IV’s son, Henry V (1004/6–1125), the Italian authors on both sides take the same legalistic approach to establishing their position. A survey of four of the ive treatises surviving from this period, Bruno of Segni’s Libellus de symoniacis, Gregorio of Catino’s Orthodoxa defensio imperialis, the anonymous Disputatio vel defensio Paschalis papae, and Placido’s De honore ecclesiae, shows that they are alike in this respect, save that the biblical exegete, Bruno of Segni, limits his evidence entirely to citations from scripture. Gregorio of Catino, an imperialist, testiied to the kind of research that went into writing the treatises: “For the sake of this [inding authorities] we, by divine gift the senior monks of a by-nomeans unlearned monastery, together collected the opinions of many Catholics, and we made it a point to respond through their words to those eloquent men calumniating and blaspheming us indiscriminately in the name of the Lord.”63 His treatise Orthodoxa defensio imperialis relects his own efort to match papalist writers’ citation by citation from Christian sources. The outstanding methodological achievement of the polemical literature was Placido of Nonantola’s Liber de honore ecclesiae. Written in 1111, the work was designed to integrate into an organized whole the mass of accumulated biblical passages, patristic sources, and papal and conciliar pronouncements that favored the radical reformers’ position.The book was dedicated to honoring and defending the Church as well as to proving the primacy of the see of Peter, the salviic role of the Church in the divine plan, and the right of the church to possess property. The author broke down his discussion into one hundred and seventy logically sequential chapters, for example: 31. That the bishops ought to have ecclesiastical property in their power. 32. That the church ought to have earthly property. 33. That ecclesiastical property ought not to be controlled by laymen. 34. About the same matter.64 Many of the rubrics began with a statement based “on reason” that the author then followed with authoritative texts to support the claim. There was always one citation or more from sacred sources to support each proposition. With its emphasis on clarity of exposition, the Liber stylistically resembled a legal treatise. The mentality displayed in Placido’s work, in dividing his major issues concerning investiture into their respective subsets of issues and the conception of these subsets as rubrics under which relevant canons could be placed, marked the mature formulation of the radical reformers’ thoughts on investiture. Judging from surviving material, while the same issues continued to interest transalpine thinkers for 63

64

“Huius rei gratia nos calogeri divino munere haud ignari cenobii plurimorum sententias catholicorum pariter collegimus et quibusdam magniloquis nos calumpniantibus atque indiscrete blasphemantibus in nomine Domini per eos rationabiliter respondere curavimus”: Orthodoxa defensio imperialis, 2:535. Liber de honore ecclesiae, 2:570: “XXXI. Quod episcopi aecclesiasticas res in potestate sua habere debeant. XXXII Quia aecclesia etiam terrenas res habere debeat. XXXIII. Quod res aecclesiasticae ad laicos disponendae non respiciant. XXXIIII De eadem re.”

199

The Birth of a New Order

many decades, Placido’s was the last major treatise by an Italian on either side of the question. The explanation for the lack of further treatises in Italy probably lies in the fact that in the propapal atmosphere that prevailed in the peninsula after 1122, the source material used in the partisan treatises became absorbed into more general treatises on canon law – notably into Gratian’s Decretum. While the treatises that I have just discussed suggest that by the turn of the twelfth century both parties were fortifying their position with a battery of ecclesiastical authorities, it is important to mention also a fourth propapal contribution, the poem on investiture De anulo et baculo, composed in 1110 by Rangerio (d. 1112).65 Given its genre, the work seems to belong to an earlier stage of the struggle in Italy. Like Deusdedit, Rangerio was probably born in Francia. Educated at Rheims and later a monk at Cluny, he likely came to Italy in the train of Urban II, former prior of the abbey, when the pope returned to Italy in 1096, after a voyage in Francia where the latter issued the call for a crusade.66 Consecrated bishop of Lucca by 1096, he could not occupy his see until 1097, when the imperial bishop, Gottefredo, was driven from the diocese. In the intervening period he likely resided at the court of Matilda of Tuscany, to whom he dedicated the poem. The work, in hexameters, consisted of a forty-line preface followed by 580 couplets. Rangerio’s initial subject was the ring and staf , the symbols of a bishop’s oice. He began by characterizing the ring as representing a marriage and the staf as the sign of the shepherd and then went on to play on the imagery, arguing that a king, who does not receive either, cannot therefore present them to another. A long section ensued deining the hierarchy of oices in the Church (vv. 109–564) and contending that the hierarchy held no place for a layman. After a second elaborate discussion (vv. 565–859) of the sacred character of (among other things) clerical vestments, the altar, and holy oil, Rangerio returned to focus again on the ring and staf (v. 860). He challenged his opponents to prove that kings had ever had the power to invest bishops with those objects and concluded by denying that a king could create a bishop, on the grounds that the oice of king ranked far below that of any kind of cleric. The poem is notable in that it contains an early reference to the Donation of Constantine as a source of papal power, a claim that would play a vital role in the subsequent history of spiritual–temporal relations (vv. 1071–1120). Unlike the imperialist poetry of Benzo and Pietro Crasso, Rangerio’s verses ofer no classical citations or reminiscences. In contrast with the other writings of radical reform, Rangerio showed no compulsion to justify his arguments by reference to sources, although he occasionally incorporated biblical verses or phrasing. Although such poetic treatment of the problem of investiture would recur in the ongoing debate north of the Alps, nevertheless there, as in Italy, the dominant tendency 65

66

A poem with the same title was composed in the same period by Gualfredo, the pro-papal bishop of Siena. Another of his works, De utroque apostolico, dealt with the investiture issue; Nicolangelo D’Acunto, “Gualfredo,” DBI, vol. 60 (Rome, 2003), 170. Neither writing survives. Pietro Guidi, “Della patria di Rangerio autore della Vita metrica di S. Anselmo vescovo di Lucca,” SG 1 (1947): 278.

200

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

would continue to be a legalistic approach. Northern Europeans, as we shall see in the next chapter, had much to teach Italian canonists about method, but the general intellectual impact of the new discipline of canon law in northern Europe was diminished by the fact that it had to compete for attention in the curriculum of the cathedral school with grammatical, dialectical, and theological studies, which were in full development. The efort to make canon law into a discipline followed a somewhat diferent path in the regnum, where the cathedral schools were emerging from the Investiture Struggle weakened by religious divisions and where their program of grammatical studies was identiied with the old imperial church by victorious radical reformers. At the same time, private schools of Roman law were lourishing, and these ofered an alternative institutional model for teaching canon law. The result was that, while some cathedrals began ofering courses in the new discipline of canon law, instruction also became available in specialized private schools, especially in Bologna, which became the most important center for the study in Italy. This new discipline, added to those of Roman law and of ars dictaminis, a new formulaic rhetoric thriving by the 1120s, further nourished a legal–rhetorical mentality that would dominate the Italian kingdom down into the fourteenth century. THE COMMUNAL MOVEMENT

The earliest Italian communes had their origin in this half-century of conlict, but the notorious lack of chronicles in Italy makes it diicult to ascertain exactly how these new institutions emerged. Surviving documentation, however, makes it clear that over the decades issues of religious reform had, paradoxically, deeply politicized the urban populations where communes arose. Almost everywhere participants involved in the communal movement locally are designated as being loyal to one party or the other. Consequently, the origins of the communal movement in the regnum cannot be understood apart from the Investiture Struggle.67 67

Philip Jones, The Italian City-State: From Commune to Signoria (Cambridge, 1997), 136: “In the Regnum most evidently the enlargement of urban privileges ... and the progress of urban liberty were governed if not determined by the sharpening conlict between emperor, pope, and house of Canossa and the related party alignments, imperialist, papalist, or both by turns, of the towns.” Pierre Racine, Plaisance du Xe à la in du XIIIe siècle, 3 vols. (Lille, 1979), 1:206, sees the religious movement of patarines as contributing to the sensitivity of the cities of Italy to political questions and to creating a municipal consciousness. See also Gina Fasoli, “Gouvernants et gouvernés dans les communes italiennes du xie au xiie siècles,” Recueils de la Société Jean Bodin pour l’histoire comparative des institutions 25 (1965): 47–86, esp. 67. Fasoli writes (62–63): “La querelle des investitures a favorisé et accéléré un mouvement intimement connexe avec le développement économique et démographique de la ville: à la prospérité économique, due non seulement aux contingences favorables mais aussi à l’initiative individuelle qui en a su tirer proit, s’accompagnent inévitablement l’assurance de soi, en tant qu’individus et en tant que groupe, et l’esprit d’indépendance; et l’on désire encore un système politique, administratif, judiciaire plus souple et répondant mieux aux nécessités d’une activité en phase d’expansion.” Cf. 60, where she links the development of the Italian cities to the struggle over investiture by deining the latter as “un tournant décisif dans l’histoire des villes et des institutions urbaines.”

201

The Birth of a New Order

The following Italian cities formed a commune in the period from 1075 to 1122:68 Cities

Years

Biandrate Pisa Asti Cremona Milan Arezzo Pistoia Bergamo Como Florence Bologna Lucca Brescia

1093 1094 1095 1097 1097 or 1117 1098 1105 1108 1109 1115 1116 1119–1120 1120

Most of the dates are the years when consuls, as the leading oicials of communal governments were usually called, irst appear in the documents, but the foundation may have occurred some years earlier.69 In no case was a commune the direct outgrowth of the pataria. In their concern for social justice and in the formulation of their goals in Christian language, however, the patarie contributed positively to the development of communal ideals. Analogous in this sense to the eforts led by bishops in northern Europe to establish the Peace of God, the patarie introduced into the regnum the juramentum commune (the oath to keep the peace and punish those who did not) that served later as the model for the oath taken by men joining the commune.70 That the commune sometimes represented a stage in the peacemaking process helps to explain why some bishops took the lead in establishing it.71 68

69

70

71

My list of dates for the founding of communes difers from that given by Daniel Waley, The Italian City-Republics, 2nd ed.(London and New York, 1978), 27, for the following cities (his dates are included in parentheses): Pisa (1081–85); Genoa (1099); Cremona (1112–16); Lucca (1115); Bergamo (1117); and Bologna (1123). On the commune of Genoa, which he dates as 1099, see below note 73. For the tentative character of these dates, see Wickham, Courts and Conlict in Twelfth-Century Tuscany (Oxford, 2003), 16–19. Hagen Keller,“Die Entstehung der italianischen Stadtkommunen als Problem der Sozialgeschichte,” Frühmittelaltliche Studien 10 (1976): 206–11, questions, however, the signiicance of the appearance of the consuls as an indication of the existence of a commune. Cf. his “Gli inizi del comune in Lombardia: Limiti della documentazione e methodi di ricerca,” in Evoluzione della città italiana nell’ XI secolo, ed. Renato Bordone and Jörg Jarnut (Bologna, 1988), 48–53. Hagen Keller, “Entstehung der italienischen Stadtkommunen,” 195–97. See as well Dilcher, Die Entstehung der lombardischen Stadtkommune: eine rechtsgeschichtliche Untersuchung, 107–8; and Philip Jones, The Italian City-State, 147–48. In the 1040s eforts to establish the Peace of God failed, probably due to interurban hostility: Pierre Racine, “Évêque et cité dans le royaume d’Italie: Aux origines des communes italiennes,” Cahiers de civilisation médiévale, Xe–XIIe siècles 27 (1984): 137. Maureen Miller, The Bishop’s Palace: Architecture and Authority in Medieval Italy (Ithaca, N.Y., and London, 2000), 143–46, argues persuasively against the tendency of Italian scholarship to present

202

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

Although the irst mention in a document of a consulatus in Milan came only in 1097 and the irst use of the term consules even later, in a document of 1117, some kind of governing assembly of citizens may have existed by the middle of the eleventh century.72 Weakened by the Pataria, a succession of archbishops likely found it necessary to make concessions to the urban community in exchange for support. It seems reasonable to suppose, consequently, that the creation of the commune marked the inal stage in the negotiations between the ruler and the body politic of the city. Although a consul appears briely in Genoa in 1098 in the midst of an efort to attain stability in the midst of a civil war ostensibly over religion, the commune was not solidly established until 1122.73 The appearance of consuls in Bergamo in 1108 followed by two years the creation of a power vacuum in the city caused by the second excommunication and exile of Bergamo’s imperial bishop.74 Driven out of Cremona by the local pataria in 1067, the explusion of the imperial bishop, Arnolfo da Velate, introduced an extended vacancy in the bishopric. As in Bergamo, in the absence of the bishop, the lay community created the communal government whose consuls irst appeared in documents in 1097.75 Several of the early communes resulted from the desire of papal and imperial leaders to strengthen their ties with important urban populations. The appearance of the commune in Florence by 1115 relected Matilda’s efort to retain the support of the city.76 Henry IV generously endowed Pisa and Lucca in 1081 with some form of self-government in an efort to lure them away from Matilda. In charters to the two cities Henry reassigned to the cives a signiicant portion of his powers as sovereign.77 Henry IV promised the Pisans, for example, that he would not hear appeals over local justice, nor would he name a new marquess to replace Matilda (who was under the ban of the empire) without the approval of twelve men elected by a city

72 73

74

75

76

77

the commune as arising in opposition to the bishop or as largely the result of lay eforts. Jones, The Italian City-State, 141:“communes seem in general to have resulted from compromise, a ‘reallocation’ or ‘resettlement’ of power, largely paciic, within a single social order.” Barni, “Dal governo del vescovo,” 241 and 320; and 242. Valeria Polonio, “Da provincia a signora del mare: Secoli VI–XIII,” Storia di Genova: Mediterraneo, Europa, Atlantico, ed. Dino Puncuh (Genoa, 2003), 131–32 and 136. Jörg Jarnut, “Gli inizi del comune in Italia: Il caso di Bergamo,” Archivio storico bergamasco 5 (1983): 205. Although the irst mention of a consul occurred in a document dated between 1112 and 1116, François Menant, “Cremona in età precomunale. Il secolo xi,” Storia di Cremona: Dall’alto medioevo all’età comunale, ed. Jörg Jarnut et al., vol. 1 (Cremona, 2004), 135–36, efectively argues that the commune dated from at least 1097. On the imperial–papal conlict in Cremona that left the city without a bishop, see ibid., 126–29. Matilda created the commune of Florence to secure its support: Dameron, Episcopal Power and Florentine Society, 1000–1320 (Cambridge, Mass., and London, 1991), 65–67. Charters for these two cities and those given by the emperor to Modena in 1085–86 and to Mantua in 1091, are discussed in detail by Tilman Struve, “Heinrich IV. und die ideles cives der städtischen Kommunen Oberitaliens,” Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 53 (1997): 497–553. See as well Gina Fasoli, Città e sovrani fra il x e xii secolo (Bologna, 1963), 67–70. Although no mention is made of consuls in any of the four charters given by Henry IV, the terms of the documents imply that some kind of urban government already existed or would be created to fulill them.

203

The Birth of a New Order

assembly. Subsequently, at least by 1090, the local bishop, an imperial ally, is recorded as working with a popular assembly, perhaps the same one alluded to earlier in Henry IV’s charter. By 1094 we have the irst mention of consuls, not as leaders of an association of merchants – that sort of consul had already been mentioned in a charter dated between 1080 and 1085 – but clearly as city oicials.78 As for Lucca, the expulsion of its reform bishop in 1080, together with the imperial charter of 1081 granting the cives judicial jurisdiction within a six-mile radius of its walls, rendered the city independent of Matilda of Tuscany.79 Between 1081 and 1096 the city and the diocese was hotly contested by imperial and reform candidates. In the latter year Lucca again accepted Matilda’s suzerainty, and Rangerio, a reform bishop, was irmly established in the city in 1097.80 Although a consulate does not appear in the documents until 1119, the recognition of the commune was likely the last step in a development in progress for two generations.81 The creation of the commune of Asti followed a diferent course. In 1091 Marchioness Adelaide, who had recently allied herself with the papacy, and Dodone, the imperial bishop of Asti, quarrelled over Adelaide’s efort to exert more control in the towns of her domain.82 In his opposition to her policy, Dodone had the support of the noble leaders of Asti, many of whom were sympathetic to the papal party but who also felt threatened by the countess’s designs. Adelaide’s troops burned Asti in a raid, but she died soon after. Henry IV, eager to support a loyal follower, then granted Dodone the powers of a count, and Dodone, apparently recognizing that claimants to Adelaide’s lands continued to pose a threat to his authority, created the commune in or before 1094. The fact that in Bologna political power in the eleventh century was shared between the bishop and a count meant that even after 1094, when a rival no longer challenged the reform bishop for control of the diocese, the largely Gregorian populace still remained in conlict with the count, a staunch imperialist.83 Although 78

79 80 81

82

83

Herbert E. J. Cowdrey, “The Mahdia Campaign of 1087,” English Historical Review 92 (1977): 1–22, esp. 12–15, traces the rise of the commune, but he seems to suggest that Henry’s efort to lay hold of the city so frightened the largely Guelf population that they pressured the imperialist bishop to create the commune. I do not see, however, that this negates the inluence of Henry IV’s initiative. Sturve, “Heinrich IV. und die ideles,” 501. Schwarzmaier, Lucca und das Reich, 408–9. Chris Wickham, “Economia e società rurale nel territorio lucchese,” Sant’Anselmo vescovo di Lucca (1077–1086) nel quadro delle trasformazioni sociali e della riforma ecclesiastica, ed. Cinzio Violante, Nuovi studi storici, no. 13 (Rome, 1992), 400–401, stresses the poverty and political weakness of Pietro, the schismatic bishop appointed by Henry VI in 1081 to replace Anselmo. Schwarzmaier, Lucca und das Reich, 331–34, argues that, in the absence of Matilda’s authority, the local group of judges whose families had fused with members of the episcopal vassalage created judicial institutions that laid the basis for the commune in this period. Although Wickham, Courts and Conlict, 22, sees consular patterns developing in the city from 1080s, he dates the existence of a commune with the appearance of the irst consuls in 1119/20. Renato Bordone, Città e territorio nell’alto medioevo: La società astigiana dal dominio dei Franchi all’afermazione comunale (Turin, 1980), 351. In 1096 a letter of Urban II to the clergy and people of Bologna thanking them for their support indicates how important to his cause the pope considered the support of the city’s population: Alfred Hessel, Geschichte der Stadt Bologna von 1116 bis 1280 (Berlin, 1910), 35–36. Hessel (38)

204

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

details are lacking as to the maturation of a lay organization before Henry V granted what appears to have been communal status in 1116, the continuing tension between the populace and the count likely nurtured self-government. In the case of Arezzo, where the cathedral chapter along with a signiicant body of elites, the people, and Constantino (1062–96), the bishop, shared allegiance to the papacy, the emperor’s appointment of Constantino’s successor, a man loyal to him, probably in 1097, resulted in the creation of a commune the following year, perhaps the price the new bishop paid for obedience.84 Although Brescia, Pistoia, and Como had experienced violence from their own pataria, communes in all three cities emerged in periods when reform bishops held their sees uncontested.85 Perhaps in the case of Brescia, whose consuls appear in 1120, the commune may have taken shape in response to the period of thirteen years of conlict between imperial and papal bishops (1097–1112).86 The speciic motives behind the rise of the communes in Pistoia and Como, however, are even more obscure.87 The exceptional character of the double commune founded at Biandrate in 1193 suggests that its origins were not comparable with those that we have discussed.88 Even if incomplete, the history of the rise of the earliest Italian communes appears indissolubly linked to the progress of the Investiture Struggle in that the crisis of authority signiicantly politicized the urban masses. The eforts of the leadership of both parties to woo popular support only strengthened the sense of agency that the

84

85

86

87

88

emphasizes the letter as evidence of the “Machtfaktor” of the burghers in the religious conlict in Bologna and concludes: “Ihre politische Entwicklung wird also damals schon auf eine Stufe gelangt sein, von der der Schritt zur Selbständigkeit nicht mehr allzu gross war.” The commune was established, however, only in 1116: Antonio I. Pini, “ Bologna nel suo secolo d’oro,” Rolandino e “l’ars notaria” da Bologna all’Europa: Atti del convegno internazionale di studi storici sulla igura e l’opera di Rolandino organizzato dal Consiglio Notarile di Bologna sotto l’egida del Consiglio Nazionale del Notariato, Bologna – città europea della cultura, 9–10 ottobre 2000, ed. Giorgio Tamba (Milan, 2005), 4–5. Jean Delumeau, “Sur les origines de la commune d’Arezzo,” in Les origines des libertés urbaines: Actes du XVIe congrès des historiens médiévistes de l’enseignement supérieur (Rouen 7–8 juin 1985) (Rouen, 1990), 328–29. Pierre Racine, “Communes, libertés, franchises urbaines: Le problème des origines: L’exemple italien,” Les origines des libertés urbaines, 41; and Storia d’Italia: Il medioevo, ed. Girolamo Arnaldi et al., vol. 1 (Milan, 1958), 202–6. Alfredo Bosisio, “Il comune,” in Dalle origini alla caduta della signoria viscontea (1426), Storia di Brescia, 5 vols. (Brescia, 1963–64), 1:579–80. Despite the consistent reform attitude of Pistoia’s recent bishops, its cathedral chapter, and lay population, the autonomy of nearby Lucca may have inspired the desire for communal government in 1105: Natale Rauty, Storia di Pistoia, Vol. 1: Dall’alto medioevo all’età precomunale, 406–1105 (Florence, 1988), 318. On Como, see Dilcher, Die Entstehung 133, who cites the mention of consuls in a document of 1109. Of the two communes created at Biandrate, one was popular and the other composed of a small number of local elite: Romolo Caggese, Classi e comuni rurali nel medio evo italiano. Saggio di storia economica e giuridica, 2 vols. (Florence, 1907), 1:181–82; and Jones, The Italian City-State, 142. I have been unable to determine whether religious conlict played any role in the origins of the two institutions.

205

The Birth of a New Order

urban population felt. Although it is likely that in most Italian cities some form of popular participation in episcopal government predated 1075 at least by decades, nevertheless the internal and external threats to urban peace thereafter encouraged laymen to assume increased responsibility for city government.89 The point at which that responsibility became institutionalized as a commune depended on historical circumstances in each place. The commune not only assumed much of the secular power of the bishop but, by bringing into the ruling circle individuals and groups with alternate claims to power in the city and its suburbs, it largely succeeded in unifying secular authority in the area. Although bishops had generally controlled the city, their authority had encountered resistance from those holding remnants of public power of imperial, marquisate, or comital origin.90 By absorbing these claimants into the regime, although never entirely, the commune was able to achieve a “uniied system of government” that the bishops had never enjoyed.91 Once established, communes expanded and intensiied the powers previously exercised by the bishop. The ongoing economic and demographic growth of the twelfth century abetted the process by generating a need for more extensive regulation of interpersonal and institutional contacts at the local and regional levels. Almost inevitably, communes also aspired to expand their authority to the whole diocese where the bishop and often the urban elite possessed lands.92 The de facto autonomy granted the communes by the Peace of Constance in 1183 further encouraged them to create city-states. As in earlier popular urban assemblies, leadership in the new communal institutions fell to the possessing classes: the capitani, milites, and cives.93 Because of their urban experience and involvement in commerce as town-dwellers, members of the Italian nobility tended to work well with new families that had risen from below. Moreover, despite the elite character of communal regimes, the leadership, drawing 89 90

91 92

93

Pierre Racine, “Évêque et cité dans le royaume d’Italie, 133–34. Nicola Ottokar, “Il problema della formazione comunale,” Questioni di storia medioevale, ed. Ettore Rota (Como, 1946), 362–64; and Cinzio Violante, “L’Età della riforma della chiesa in Italia,” Storia d’Italia, ed. Nino Valeri, 5 vols. (Turin, 1963), 1:6–98. The phrase is Ottokar’s; “Il problema della formazione comunale,” 363. Ottokar, ibid., nicely contrasts the Italian comune with that of northern Europe by distinguishing the former as civitas and the latter as urbs; that is, whereas the northern commune was more or less limited to the city walls, the Italians traditionally conceived of the urbs along with its suburbia. The amphibious character of the urban nobility with signiicant possessions in the country, however, was not true everywhere. For example, in Tuscany, Florence contrasted with its neighbors Pistoia, Volterra, and Arezzo. Elio Conti, La formazione della struttura agraria moderna nel contado iorentino, vol. 1: Le campagne nell’età comunale, Studi storici, nos. 51–55 (Rome, 1965), 180, shows that the urban nobility of Florence, with the exception of the Visdominici, had few possessions in the countryside in 1100. See also Dameron, Episcopal Power, 68–92. Heller, “Die Entstehung der italienischen Stadtkommunen,” 206. Renato Bordone, “Les ‘élites’ cittadine nell’Italia comunale (XI–XII secolo),” Mélanges de l’École française de Rome. Moyen âge – Temps modernes 100 (Rome, 1988): 47–53, discusses the problems connected with establishing membership in the urban elite over time. For the debate surrounding the role of the rural aristocracy versus that of the urban elite in the founding of the commune, see Renato Bordone, “Tema cittadino e ‘ritorno alla terra’ nella storiograia comunale recente,” Quaderni storici 52 (1983): 255–87; and Elisa Occhipinti, Italia dei comuni: Secoli XI–XIII (Rome, 2000), 22–24.

206

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

on Christian formulations of brotherly love, mutual service, and peace and justice for all, held a wide appeal for the lower classes of urban society. In time, loyalty to the commune became diicult to distinguished from loyalty to the city itself. Manipulation of symbols also played an important role in cementing patriotic with religious sentiments. Communal councils held their meetings in consecrated spaces – that is, the cathedral, baptistery, or another large church. Bishops often presided, lending their authority to communal rituals. Communal carroccii (municipal wagons), which served as rallying points for communal militia in battle, were decorated with religious as well as secular symbols and were placed for safekeeping in the local cathedrals or the baptisteries, where they acted as centers of religious cults.94 The insertion of the commune into the established network of authorities of the regnum raised numerous legal issues involving the relationship of the new institution to episcopal government, to satellite lordships, and to the empire as a whole. As the commune extended its authority over the surrounding countryside and intensiied its control over the activities of its citizens and subjects, legal questions also arose. As a result, lawyers and notaries were increasingly called upon to deine a welter of novel legal relationships and to capture these in the language of statutes and notarial documents. Combined with the growing complexity of economic relationships in the twelfth century, the demands imposed by communal institutions gave an impetus to legal studies, especially the study of Roman law, the most sophisticated of the secular laws dominant in the regnum. At the same time, the growing importance of the secular government likely rendered ecclesiastical recruitment, at least from the upper classes, correspondingly more diicult. Because the privilegium fori (see Introduction) was as a rule incompatible with membership in the commune, ambitious young men from the elite may have thought twice before renouncing their lay status, which would have entailed sufering exclusion from the political life of the commune. The higher standards of conduct expected of the clergy after 1122 created an additional disincentive for those without a deep spiritual vocation. THE INVESTITURE CONFLICT BEYOND THE REGNUM

The Investiture Struggle played a key role in unleashing the creative intellectual initiative of laymen and clerics in the regnum and signiicantly determined the direction that intellectual initiative would take. In areas to the south and in transalpine Europe, apart from the empire, its efect on intellectual culture was minimal, while in Germany the consequences of decades of civil war over the issue proved disastrous for scholarly and literary life. A brief description of the history of the conlict outside of the regnum should serve to make clear Italian exceptionalism as of 1122. From the outset of the Investiture Struggle Gregory VII’s principal strategy was to negotiate directly with reguli and lesser territorial lords, with whose support 94

Augustin Thompson, O.P., Cities of God: The Religion of the Italian Commues, 1125–1325 (University Park, Penn., 2005), 125–28. On the symbolism of the carrocio, see the bibliographical summary of Edward Coleman, “The Italian Communes: Recent Work and Current Trends, The Journal of Medieval History 25 (1999): 393.

207

The Birth of a New Order

papal legates convoked provincial ecclesiastical councils designed to impose reforms on the clergy.95 In taking such a top-down approach, Gregory VII and Urban II exhibited an extraordinary degree of tolerance. In their dealings with the rulers of England, Francia, and southern Italy, they evinced a willingness to overlook the violation of some of the most fundamental principles of reform in the hope – ultimately vindicated – that in the long run the reform doctrines would prevail, at least at the theoretical level. Almost permanently at war with the German emperor from 1075, the popes could not risk increasing the number of their enemies in other parts of Europe. Unlike the situation in the regnum, elsewhere in Europe popular pressure to all appearances played only a small role in the settlement of the investiture issue, and what popular agitation did occur was largely conined to the urbanized border regions between northern Francia and the empire. Even in those areas, however, unrest was sporadic and could not have had much efect on the establishment of church reforms. In part the lack of popular participation in reform stemmed from the fact that, whereas in the regnum bishops generally were both religious and secular leaders, in England and Francia, even if a bishop was under attack for moral corruption, it was the secular ruler who enforced order. In England there was no conlict over investiture until 1100, when the new king, Henry I (1100–35), recalled Anselmo, archbishop of Canterbury, from his two-year self-imposed exile in Rome.96 Gregory VII had recognized William the Conqueror’s right to appoint bishops in England and Normandy, provided he prohibit simony and clerical marriage in his territories. Even in the corrupt reign of William Rufus (1087–1100), when simony was rampant, Urban had allowed the appointments to continue. Until his death in 1089, Lanfranco, as archbishop of Canterbury, had also reluctantly tolerated the abuse, and although his successor, Anselmo of Aosta, had been critical of the king’s infringement on ecclesiastical freedoms, it was not until Anselmo’s return from exile that an English archbishop actively opposed the king’s claim to invest bishops with the ring and staf.97 Only in 1105, when the new pope, Pascal II (1100–18), published the excommunication of the members of the English king’s council and the bishops whom he had invested, did the king seek to compromise with the papacy.98 At the Diet of London in 1107, Henry renounced investiture 95

96

97 98

Although symbols, rituals, and myths evolved that endowed other rulers with a sacral aura, no king could claim the commingled secular and spiritual authority that the emperor inherited from Constantine and Charlemagne. For the imperial claim to control the papacy, see Chapter 2. On the difusion of symbols of sacral kingship, see Francis Oakley, Kingship: The Politics of Enchantment (Malden, 2006), 87–107, especially 97 and 99. Christopher Harper-Bill, “The Anglo-Norman Church,” in A Companion to the Anglo-Norman World, ed. Christopher Harper-Bill and Elisabeth van Houts (Sufolk, 2003), 175, dates the beginning of the controversy in England from Anselm’s return from his two-year exile in Rome (1198–99). Cf. Friedrich Kempf, “Die gregorianische Reform (1046–1122),” in Friedrick Kempf et al., Die mittelalterliche Kirche:Vom kirchlichen Frühmittelalter zur gregorianischen Reform: Handbuch der Kirchengeschichte, vol. 3, pt. 1 (Freiburg and Basel, 1966), 432–33 and 450–51; and Herbert E. J. Cowdrey, “The Gregorian Reform in the Anglo-Norman Lands and in Scandinavia,” La riforma gregoriana e l’Europa: Congresso internazionale, Salerno, 20–25 maggio, 1985. Relazioni, ed. Alfons M. Stickler, 321–52, SG, no. 13 (Rome, 1989). After 1103, Henry was duke of Normandy as well. Kempf, “Die gregorianische Reform,” 451.

208

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

of bishops with the ring and staf of oice but retained the right to receive the homage of bishops and abbots-elect for the temporalities of the bishopric or abbey. Throughout the struggle between the king and the Roman Church the vast body of the English and Norman clergy remained obedient to their monarch; nor did anything like a pataria movement arise.99 Nowhere else in transalpine Europe were circumstances more propitious for the introduction of papal reforms than in Francia.100 In achieving its reform objectives there, the papacy found the ground already prepared by the Peace of God, a peace movement that, although it had lost much of its fervor by 1075, had stirred entire populations to collective action in the name of repressing violence and that from the late tenth century had been associated with monastic reforms paralleling those initiated earlier by Cluny. Beginning in southern Francia, the Peace, led by bishops in cooperation with the local nobility, had aroused massive support in an efort to defend church property, protect dependent cultivators from pillaging predators, and free peasants from being placed by force under the authority of a landlord.101 The pursuit of peace became associated in the popular mind with the expectation that the clergy, as the guardians of peace, had to stand outside the normal social framework. Hence implicit in support for the movement was a campaign against simony, clerical marriage, and the use of weapons by clerics.102 There were two main stages of the Peace: the irst (989–after 1000) was concentrated in Aquitaine, while the second (1019–38) extended from the ecclesiastical province of Bourges and the duchy of Burgundy in the east to parts of the provinces of Sens and Rheims in the north.103 Although occasional ecclesiastical councils devoted to establishing the Peace are recorded during the rest of the century, after the 1030s secular princes assumed the leadership of the peace efort and the focus was altered to emphasize the prohibition of warfare on certain days of the week and 99

100 101

102

103

Following the lead of Ivo of Chartres, the Diet separated investiture with staf and ring given by the archbishop from investiture with the temporalities of the bishopric bestowed by the monarch; Fliche, La réforme grégorienne et la reconquête chrétienne, 350–51. Pascal II regarded the arrangement with Henry I, almost duplicated in the pope’s agreement with Philippe I in Francia, as only a temporary solution: Stanley Chodorow, “Paschal II, Henry V, and the Origins of the Crisis of 1111,” Popes, Teachers, and Canon Law in the Middle Ages, ed. James Ross Sweeney and Stanley Chodorow (Ithaca, N.Y., and London, 1989), 14. Kempf, “Die gregorianische Reform,” 434. There is a large literature on this movement. A full survey of the various regional church councils proclaiming the Peace and the Truce of God is given in Hartmut Hofman, Gottesfriede und Treuga Dei, Schriften der Monumenta Germaniae Historica, no. 20 (Stuttgart, 1964). A map indicating cities associated with the early Peace of God is found in the introduction to The Peace of God: Social Violence and Religious Response in France around the Year 1000, ed. Thomas Head and Richard Landes (Ithaca, N.Y., and London, 1992), 5. On the Peace of God as a response to the birth of a new society, see Robert I. Moore and his summary of his position in “Postscript: The Peace of God and the Social Revolution,” in ibid., 308–26. Robert I. Moore, “Family, Community, and Cult on the Eve of the Gregorian Reform,” Transactions of the Royal Historical Society, 5th ser., 30 (1980), 65. See as well Amy G. Remensnyder, “Pollution, Purity, and Peace,” in Head and Landes, The Peace of God, 280–307. Hans-Werner Goetz,“Protection of the Church, Defense of the Law, and Reform: On the Purposes and Character of the Peace of God, 989–1038,” in Head and Landes, The Peace of God, 261–64.

209

The Birth of a New Order

during stated times of the year.104 Although still involving religious symbolism, this Truce, as it was called, unlike the Peace of God, had little interest in reform of clerical corruption, and its provisions were imposed without depending on grassroots enthusiasm.105 Nonetheless, the results of the Peace proved long-lasting. Not only had the movement created a widespread sensitivity to the spiritual exigences of the clerical life, but, backed by an aroused popular opinion, it in many cases efectively led to an implementation of the reforms entailed by the guiding ideal. Almost inevitably the Peace also created among the populace a new sense of agency that served to encourage more lay participation in religious life and promote conidence in the power of collective action. Albeit only indirectly, that conidence likely inspired the communal movement that began in Le Mans in 1070. Although lay investiture had not been identiied as simony in the Peace of God, the Peace’s inluence helps to explain the relative ease with which the papacy, in the decades after 1075, negotiated with the secular princes and church councils in the southern areas of Francia over issues of church reform.106 The princes, for their part, seem to have been willing to cooperate with the papal legates by suppressing lay investiture and clerical marriage in their territories. During the pontiicate of Gregory VII a number of princes went so far as to become vassals of Saint Peter. Negotiations with the Capetian ruler were not so easy. In the case of the French monarchy, Gregory VII and his two immediate successors demonstrated extraordinary restraint in their contacts with King Philippe I (1060–1108) – this despite the king’s dealing fast and loose with ecclesiastical property and his simoniacal practice of placing his own men in the large number of bishoprics that the Capetian family controlled. Gregory allowed his aggressive papal legate, Hugh of Die, to pursue simoniacal bishops, but only to a point.107 Urban II exercised even greater restraint when disciplining French bishops than had Gregory VII.108 As for the king, although 104

105

106

107

108

Herbert E. J. Cowdrey, “The Peace and Truce of God in the Eleventh Century,” Past and Present 46 (1970): 42–67; and his “From the Peace of God to the First Crusade,” in La primera cruzada, novecientos años después: El concilio de Clermont y los origínes del movimiento cruzado, ed. Luis GarcíaGuijarro Ramos (Madrid, 1997), 52–54. Marcus Bull, Knightly Piety and the Lay Response to the First Crusade: The Limousin and Gascony, 970–1130 (Oxford, 1993), 21–56, describes in detail the rise and decline of the peace movement in Aquitaine. On the Truce of God, see Cowdry, “The Peace and Truce of God,” 44 and 59–62; and Landes and Head, “Introduction,” Peace of God, 7–9. The earliest of these was the truce established in the county of Roussillon in 1027 (7). On lack of popular participation in the peace movements in the second half of the century, see Thomas H. Bisson, “The Organized Peace in Southern France and Catalonia,” American Historical Review 82 (1977): 293; and Robert I. Moore, “Postscript,” 325. Kempf, “Die gregorianische Reform,” 435. See as well, Louis De Lagger, “Aperçu de la réforme grégorienne dans l’Albigeoise,” SG, no. 2 (1947): 211–34. At the Lenten synod of 1078, Gregory annulled the suspension of the archbishops of Rheims, Sens, Bourges, and Tours that had been imposed the previous year by the legate: Alfons Becker, Studien zum Investiturproblem in Frankreich: Papsttum, Königtum und Episkopat im Zeitalter der gregorianischen Kirchenreform (1049–1119) (Saarbrucken, 1955), 67. For Urban’s policy toward the French church, see ibid., 80–85. The character of Philippe’s personal life, however, led Urban II with great reluctance to excommunicate the king in 1095 after repeated appeals to renounce his bigamous marriage to Bertrade the previous year. Consequently, he was only too ready to reconcile with the monarch in 1096 when the king promised that he would

210

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

he had been instrumental in the bishops’ obtaining oice, he rarely attempted to frustrate papal eforts to depose them.109 Pascal II inally reached a settlement with the French king over the issue of investiture in 1107. In an arrangement very similar to the one that Pascal and Henry I of England negotiated the same year, Philippe granted canonical elections and renounced the right to invest bishops with ring and staf , while the papacy recognized the king’s right to bestow the temporalities of the bishopric. In contrast with the settlement at London, however, the bishop was not to render homage to the king, which would have entailed becoming the king’s vassal and incurring the attendant obligations.110 Unlike the introduction of papal reforms in the regnum, where an imperial episcopacy had to be expelled by popular force, in Francia, where reforming bishops had prepared the ground by their eforts to spiritualize clerical oice, the papal program was introduced largely through negotiation with the secular and ecclesiastical leadership. Even if reportedly immoral clergymen may occasionally have been the objects of popular anger after 1075, diocesan leaders, supported by the local secular power, prevented the kind of breakdown in public order that occurred south of the Alps. In contrast with the regnum, in most areas of Francia negotiations concerning the establishment of the papal program of reforms were carried on over the heads of the general populace. Winning popular support was everywhere key to the ultimate success of the reform movement, but we must be careful not to exaggerate the extent to which popular agitation had a direct part in imposing church reform. The argument that grassroots supports played an important role in establishing papal reforms in Northern Europe essentially depends on only three cases of violence ocurring over a period of a half-century. Of these three incidents of mass pressure for reform, two were not in Francia but over the border with the Empire. The third was in Normandy. Early in his pontiicate Gregory VII may have had a hand in stirring up anticlerical feeling by granting licenses to wandering preachers in the border area between Francia and the Empire in order to arouse popular opposition to nicolaitism and simony. Although we know of only one such licensed preacher, Wederic of Ghent, who worked in the dioceses of Tournai, Cambrai, and Liège, there may have been others.111 Among them may have been Ramihrdus of Douai (d.1076), who like

109 110

111

separate from Bertrade, who was already the wife of one of his vassals. Nonetheless, in 1097, when it became obvious that Philippe would not keep his promise, Urban put Philippe under personal interdict and excommunicated him again: Fliche, La réforme grégorienne et la reconquête chrétienne, 311–12; and Becker, Studien zum Investiturproblem in Frankreich, 88–93. Philippe was only restored to communion with the church under Pascal II. Becker, Studien, 63. Ibid., 121–23. Becker (169) summarizes the degree of conlict between pope and king in France thus: “Einen im Bereich des Grundsätzlichen ausgetragenen, zeitlich genau begrenzbaren und zusammenhängenden, mit allen, den Gegnern zur Vernügung stehenden Mitteln ausgefochtenen Investiturstreit zwischen Papst und König hat es in Frankreich nicht gegeben....” Gilles Gérard Meersseman, “Eremitismo e predicazione itinerante del secoli XI e XII,” in Ordo Fraternitatis: Confraternite e pietà dei laici nel medioevo, with Gian Piero Pacini, 3 vols. (Rome, 1977), 1:246–64. On Wederich, see especially 255–56. See as well Henrietta Leyser, Hermits and the New

211

The Birth of a New Order

Wederic was active in the diocese of Cambrai and whose iery death would lead to a local civil war.112 In 1074/75 Sigebert, a monk of Gembloux, in the region of Namur, gave the earliest report of mass violence in the name of reform. Sigebert testiied to ierce attacks on the clergy being made by the local population in the name of reform: Now then, if you seek the fruit, the Lord’s lock is miserably dispersed, with the shepherds inciting the wolves against it. Having gained the opportunity, which it has always sought, to satisfy its madness, popular error abuses the obedience imposed on it by calumniating the clergy. These men, subject to public mockery, produce, wherever they appear, people crying out insults, pointing their ingers, and striking them with blows. Some clergy, having lost their possessions because of unjust proscriptions, unable to endure the presence of these people, among whom there once were honest and illustrious men, lee despoiled and poor. Others, their bodies mutilated, display before all the people a sentence – according to the clear witness of their so prudent correctors – too lenient for their crime.113

Sigebert’s account does not name those responsible for stirring up the people, however, nor does it provide the basis for determining the long-term efect that popular violence had on the ecclesiastical establishment in the region. The second event concerns the iery death of Ramihrdus of Douai, who in 1076 had been preaching against simony in Cambrai, a diocese located in the empire but in the ecclesiastical province of Rheims. Seized and interrogated by Gerard II, the new bishop of the city, Ramihrdus was placed in a hut by the bishop’s servants and, with or without the prelate’s complicity, was burned to death. Infuriated, Gregory VII granted the bishop a pardon for his servants’ actions only on the condition that Gerard enforce the papal reform decrees in the city.114 Tension between the burghers of the city and their bishop had long existed, but we cannot discount the opposition of the local clergy to the new reforms.115

112

113

114

115

Monasticism:A Study of Religious Communities in Western Europe, 1000–1150 (NewYork, 1984), 75. Gregory VII may also have inspired preaching missions of the monks of Hirsau in Swabia and Franconia. Robert I. Moore provides the sources on Ramihrdus of Cambrai in his The Birth of Popular Heresy (New York, 1976), 24–26. Sigeberti monachi Gemblacensis apologia, ed. Ernst Sackur, MGH, Libelli de lite, ed. Friedric Thaner, 3 vols. (Hannover, 1891–97), 2:438: “Nunc autem si fructum requiris, grex dominicus pastoribus lupos in eum incitantibus miserabiliter dispergitur. Plebeius error quam semper quaesivit opportunitate adepta usque ad furoris sui satietatem iniuncta sibi, ut ait, in clericorum contumelias obedientia crudeliter abutitur. Hi publicis illusionibus adducti, quocunque prodeunt, clamores insultantium, digitos ostendentium, colaphos pulsantium proferunt. Alii iniustis proscriptionibus rebus sic amissis praesentiam eorum, inter quos modo honesti et clari erant, ferre non valentes, egeni et pauperes profugiunt. Alii membris multilati non satis discretam pro lapsu suo sententiam ad evidens tam prudentium correctorum testimonium per omnium ora circumferunt. Alii post longos cruciatus superbe necati sanguinis sui vindictam de iusti et omnipotentis defensoris manu incessanter expetunt.” Cf. ibid., 452. Alfred Cauchie, La querelle des investitures dans les diocèses de Liège et de Cambrai (Louvain, 1890–91), 2. Cf. Henri Platelle, “Les luttes communales et l’organisation municipale (1075–1313), in Histoire de Cambrai, ed. Louis Trenard (Lille, 1982), 46. For opposition to the reform, see Cauchie, Querelle des investitures, 15–16; Platelle, “Les luttes communales,” 45–46; and Reinecke, Geschichte der Stadt Cambrai bis zur Erteilung der Lex Godefridi (1227)

212

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

Signiicantly, the bishop’s predecessors had refused to participate in the earlier wave of peace movements, and consequently the ecclesiastical establishment remained immune to the ecclesiastical reforms that the peace movements presumably brought with them. The departure of Gerard, who left Cambrai to attend the emperor’s court, proved the catalyst for the popular revolt.116 The commune that the burghers created, however, was to be short-lived. Calling on the count of Hainaut’s assistance, Gerard returned to Cambrai and with the help of the count’s army destroyed the new government in a massacre. Although we are told that after his death Ramihrdus left a following in the area (“in some towns there are many members of his sect to this day”), the bourgeois revolt that created the commune was allied with the enemies of reform.117 The circumstances surrounding the creation of the second commune in 1101/2 will be postponed until the discussion below of the Investiture Conlict in German lands. We must wait twenty-ive years for further evidence of a tie between popular protest and reform, this time in Normandy. In the 1090s, Marbod (1035–1128), bishop of Rennes, wrote a sharp letter to Robert of Arbrissel (d. 1115), a canon of his cathedral, who had been preaching in the diocese.118 By purportedly arousing the local population to avoid contact with clergy contaminated by concubinage or simony, the bishop warned that Robert was thereby empowering “common and ignorant people” to judge the diocesan clergy: “We see impoverished priests, deserted as if unworthy by their congregations. To them their lock should make oferings, to their prayers commend themselves, from them accept the charge of penance, pay them tithes and irst-fruits. And all of these pastors lament that they are condemned by your unjust reproach.”119 We may assume that Robert, who had been authorized by Urban II essentially to preach the crusade, exercised a similar inluence in other dioceses by means of his preaching tours around northern Francia. To judge from Marbod’s letter, however, unlike in Namur a quarter-century earlier, listeners in Normandy apparently conined their reform activity to passive disobedience to their parish clergy.

116

117

118

119

(Marburg, 1896), 106–8. In a letter to the clergy of the archdiocese at Rheims, written late in 1077 or early 1078, the clerics of Cambrai begged for support against the papal prohibition of clerical marriage. The clerics wrote that “Quorum adstipulationi episcopus noster consentiens, nos intolerabiliter aggressus ad impondendum praedictum onus cervici nostrae, multus ac vehemens nuper incubuit: quia et clericos conjugatos chorum intrare et ministrare, et eorum ilios ad sacros ordines provehi, inhibuit”: Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France, 24 vols. (Paris, 1738–1904), 14:780. The letter was sent to other cathedral chapters in the area as well. See the response of Noyon in ibid., 780–81. Albert Vermeesch, Essai sur les origines et la signiication de la commune dans le nord de la France (XIe et XIIe siècles) (Heule, 1966), 97. For a detailed analysis of events surrounding the creation and destruction of the commune, see Henri Platelle, “Le movement communal de Cambrai de 1077 et ses destineés ultérieurs,” Les chartes et le mouvement communal: Colloque régional, octobre 1980 organisé en commémoration du neuvième centenaire de la commune de Saint-Quentin (Saint-Quentin, 1980), 131–48. The citation is from Moore, The Birth of Popular Heresy, 25. The letter of Gregory VII to the bishop of Paris asking him to investigate the murder (24), however, does not bear out Moore’s claim that the pope was inviting “the laity to judge their priests and the lower clergy their superiors” (27). For Robert of Arbrissel, see Bruce L. Venarde, Robert of Arbrissel:A Medieval Religious Life (Washington, D.C., 2003). Ibid., 98.

213

The Birth of a New Order

Unlike in the regnum, then, in Francia lower-class participation in the struggle for reform, down to the inal settlement with Philip I, appears to have been sporadic and uncoordinated even in the limited areas where it occurred. Nor do we have evidence that in the years immediately following the settlement on French territory in 1107 that the masses became involved in implementing reform.120 The most severe threat to the ecclesiastical establishment in the latter period came, not from Robert of Arbrissel, who continued to preach until his death in 1117, but from two iery preachers, Tanchelm of Antwerp (d. 1115) and Henry of Lausanne (l . 1116–45).121 Both (Tanchelm in Flanders and Henry irst in Le Mans in 1116 and afterwards for thirty years throughout northern and southern Francia) drew great crowds to their sermons and appear to have incited their audiences to perform vicious acts against clerics whom the preachers denounced as corrupt. As in the period before 1107, however, the popular enthusiasm aroused by such preaching appears to have exercised little efect on the progress of church reform. Although frequent deposition of bishops and an occasional double election surely produced confusion among the local clergy, it is diicult to establish any direct link between such events and popular agitation. Similarly, in contrast with the regnum, investiture and issues surrounding it seem to have had no direct inluence on the communal movement in northern Francia (Cambrai was in the empire). As in the regnum, economic expansion in northern Europe in the eleventh century created new wealth, encouraged urban growth, and facilitated social mobility, but unlike the communal movement in the regnum, there is no evidence that the conlict over the imposition of papal reforms had anything to do with the creation of the six French communes established before 1122: Le Mans (1070), Saint-Quentin (ca. 1081), Beauvais (1099), Noyon (1108–9), Laon (ca. 1109–12), and Amiens (ca. 1113/17).122 All but the commune of Saint-Quentin, which was recognized by the count of Hainaut, were established with the consent of the local bishop.123 The bloody uprising in the diocese of Laon in 1112 was directly 120

121

122

123

The establishment commonly branded the preachers as rabble-rousers and as preaching heretical beliefs. Generally speaking, they and their sects had little historical importance: Malcolm Lambert, Medieval Heresy: Popular Movements from the Gregorian Reform to the Reformation (Oxford, 1992), 9–32. Moore, Birth of Heresy, 28–32 and 33–60, publishes the sources for both.The sources given by Moore do not bear out his claim (The First European Revolution, c. 970–1215 [Oxford and Malden, Mass., 2000], 16–17) that Henry “presided for some weeks over a communal regime” in Le Mans (16). See as well Charles Dereine, “Les prédictateurs ‘apostoloques’ dans les diocèses de Thérouanne, Tournai, et Cambrai–Arras durant les années 1075–1125,” Analecta praemonstratensia 59 (1983): 171–89. The origin of the six communes is discussed in Vermeesch, Essai sur les origines, 81–88, 98–116. Oddly,Vermeesch (121) implies that the commune of Saint-Quentin was authorized by the bishop rather than by the count of Hainaut; see his discussion of the commune, 98–103. Ibid., 121–22. Generally regarded suspiciously by overlords as a form of conjugatio, communes were nonetheless authorized by them when it suited their own interests: André Chédeville, Jacques LeGof, and Jacques Rossiaud, Histoire de la France urbaine, Vol. 2: La ville médiévale des Carolingiens à la Renaissance (Paris, 1980), 174–75. Because Cambrai and Valenciennes, also discussed by Vermeesch (88–98 and 116–120), were in this period within the empire, their communes will be discussed below.

214

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

caused by the decision of the bishop, Baudry, to quash the commune, which both he and Louis VI had agreed to support the previous year.124 Scholars generally agree that local peacekeeping institutions associated with the Peace of God provided a model for communal organizations, but the extent to which a point of contact existed between the two remains debatable.125 The purpose of the rules governing these new political bodies, like those made by proponents of the Peace of God, was to guarantee peace and security for the bourgeois (nobles were often not in the commune) within the town’s precincts, and both appealed to concepts of amicitia and Christian brotherhood as guides to conduct. I have dwelt at length on the course of the papal campaign for reform in Francia primarily because of the overwhelming efect that that region would have on the cultural life of the regnum in the course of the twelfth century. The churches of the regnum emerged from the struggle over investiture having been cleansed by ire, while those of Francia, having already experienced widespread eforts at clerical reform, adapted more easily and without greatly sufering the efect of violent interventions by the lay population at large. Consequently, in the aftermath of the Investiture Struggle the French ecclesiastical establishment and cathedral learning enjoyed an institutional continuity unknown by its counterpart in the regnum. In southern Italy the papacy followed an approach similar to that in Francia. In the south, as in Francia, popes had mostly to exert their power indirectly. They did so by working for reform with the agreement of their vassals.126 In Sicily in 1098, for 124

125

126

After accepting money to obtain his consent, the bishop subsequently decided to destroy the arrangement: Autobiographie (De vita sua), ed. and French trans. Edmond-René Labande (Paris, 1981), 328–32. See as well Vermeesch, Essai sur les origines, 108–13; and Alain Saint-Denis, “Pouvoirs et libertés à Laon dans les premières années du XIIe siècle,” Pouvoirs et libertés au temps des premiers Capétiens, ed. Elizabeth Magnou-Nortier (Amiens, 1992), 267–305. Saint-Denis (278) refers to a tension between the bishop and a reforming group of cathedral canons led by Master Anselm, but the issue of ecclesiastical reform seems not to have igured in the struggle over the commune. In the case of the commune at Amiens, founded with the approval of the king and bishop in 1113, the bishop voluntarily left the town for eight months because of disagreements with the communal leadership but returned in 1115. Pierre Desportes, “Les origines de la commune d’Amiens,” 254–60, discusses the cooperation of the commune and bishop in attacking the count. Also see Alfred Vermeesch, Essai sur les origines, 113–16. In the case of the origins of the commune at Noyon, Abel Lefranc, Histoire de la ville de Noyon et de ses institutions jusqu’à la in du XIIIe siècle (Paris, 1887), 31–35, alludes to urban riots leading to its creation in 1108/1109, but Vermeesch, Essai sur les origines, 106, inds no evidence of popular violence preceding the establishment of the commune. In fact, the bishop claimed credit for its establishment (107). Vermeesch holds that the institution of the commune, designed to establish peace in the town, was a descendant of the widespread peace organizations championed by French bishops earlier in the century, but in the case of the commune the initiators were usually local lay residents (Essai sur les origines, 177–83). Dolores Kennelly, “Medieval Towns and the Peace of God,” Medievalia et humanistica 15 (1963): 52, stresses the contrasts in the circumstances for communal foundations. From 1059 the Norman rulers in their oath of fealty to the papacy, swore to surrender all churches in their lands to his authority: Graham A. Loud,“Churches and Churchmen in an Age of Conquest,” Studies in Church History 20 (1993): 46. Norman princes, however, continued to dispose of church property freely: Graham A. Loud, Church and Society in the Norman Principality of Capua, 1058–1197 (Oxford, 1985), 62. See as well Fliche, La réforme grégorienne et la reconquête chrétienne, 235–36 and 322–23, and 419; and Ovidio Capitani, L’Italia medievale nei secoli di trapasso: La riforma della chiesa

215

The Birth of a New Order

instance, Pope Urban granted King Roger I powers over the local churches equivalent to those enjoyed by papal legates elsewhere.127 By contrast, in dealing with the secular and ecclesiastical hierarchy within its own territories in central Italy, along the Adriatic in the maritime provinces, and at Benevento, popes acted directly to impose their program. On the whole, then, church reform in Italian lands outside the borders of the regnum appears to have proceeded in relative peace.128 THE CASE OF GERMANY

As in the regnum, so in Germany the Investiture Struggle had dire efects on the imperial church, the imperial oice, and public order, but in Germany the destruction of the old order had wholly negative consequences for intellectual life. The excommunication of Henry IV encouraged a new rebellion in Saxony, and the following year a civil war erupted between Henry and Rudolph of Swabia, who was supported by the papal faction. Even after Henry’s victory over Rudolph and the latter’s death in 1080, Henry’s reign remained troubled by the endless plots of princes seeking to augment their territorial power by weakening the central government. When, championed by rebels, Henry IV’s younger son, also named Henry, revolted against his father late in 1104, Rome embraced the younger man as its champion, thereby contributing to a bitter civil war that ended only with Henry IV’s death in 1106. The number of German bishops opposing Henry IV varied depending on his changing political fortunes and his willingness at any given time to compromise with reformers. During his reign, from 1076 to 1106, there were schisms in twentythree bishoprics – about half of the bishoprics in Germany – some lasting years.129 Although over the eight years following Henry IV’s initial deposition by Gregory VII episcopal support for the monarch dwindled signiicantly, in 1084 a sudden change in Henry’s policy in favor of those sympathetic to papal reforms quickly succeeded in winning back the support of many of them. That year saw Henry’s elevation of three reformers, Wezelos of Mainz, Erpo of Münster, and Heinrich of Paderborn, to their respective sees. In the following year Henry illed two other episcopal vacancies, that of Worms and Würzburg, by choosing clerics associated with reform.130 Hitherto alienated bishops, impressed by these appointments, began to return to the royal camp.

127

128 129

130

(1012–1122) (Bologna, 1984), 76–78. For a general summary of papal–Norman relationships in the period of the reform, consult Graham A. Loud, The Latin Church in Norman Italy (Cambridge, 2007), 135–47. Graham A. Loud, “Royal Control of the Church in the Twelfth-Century Kingdom of Sicily,” Studies in Church History 18 (1982): 147–48. Kempf, “Die gregorianische Reform,” 435–36. Cf. Loud, “Royal Control,” 159. Herbert Zielinski, Die Reichsepiskopat in spätottonischer und salischer Zeit (1002–1125), pt. 1 (Stuttgart, 1984), 182. Zielinski provides a map locating the schisms (298). See as well the relevant geographical tables (299–301). This paragraph and that following summarize the narrative of events by Josef Fleckenstein, “Hofkapelle und Reichsepiskopat unter Heinrich IV,” in Investiturstreit und Reichsverfassung, ed. Josef Fleckenstein (Sigmaringen, 1973), 135–36.

216

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

Conident of the strength of his standing among bishops, however, Henry now unwisely used the synod of churchmen at Mainz, in 1085, to lash out against his remaining opponents by deposing ifteen archbishops and bishops and appointing his own supporters in their place.The resulting schisms plunged the German church again into confusion and created fresh divisions among the bishops who had come to constitute his support. Among the newly deposed bishops was Herman of Metz, perhaps the most vocal supporter of the Gregorian reforms in Germany. In exile since 1078, Herman had returned briely to his see in 1084 only to formally lose his oice in 1085. Four years later, in 1089, however, he reconciled with Henry and returned to Metz and died the following year.131 Herman’s recall was the result of another new policy introduced by the lexible monarch beginning in 1088 to deal with the schisms in Saxon dioceses, where Henry reconciled with his enemies by simply abandoning the cause of his own appointees. Taking the same approach in dealing with other bishops among those whom he had deposed at Mainz and henceforth generally allowing canonical elections of bishops to stand, he endeavored to regain the loyalty of the episcopate in the face of eforts by a growing group of lay princes to depose him.132 Henry V’s rebellion against his father may in part have been motivated by a fear that, had his father been beaten by the aristocracy with papal support, he might have been denied the succession.133 As it was, his rebellion received endorsement not only from aristocrats and clergy concerned with church reform but also from Pope Paschal II. In the irst years following his father’s death in 1106, the young king embarked on a policy of coopting the reform movement in the kingdom. By opposing simony, appointing reformers to vacant bishoprics and archbishops, and encouraging reforms of monasteries and cathedral chapters, he sought to rehabilitate the idea of sacral kingship.134 Having minimized objections to lay investiture by these means in his northern kingdom, Henry V had still to deal with Pascal II. In February 1111, Henry V’s acceptance of Pascal II’s ofer to reconcile him to the Church in exchange for recovery of the regalia bestowed on the churches by the emperors since the time of Charlemagne infuriated the German episcopacy, who were aghast at the potential loss of property to their bishoprics. When two months later Henry held Pascal II prisoner, whom he had seized ostensibly for the pope’s safety following the chaos caused by the announcement of the agreement

131

132 133

134

According to Alfred Haverkampf, Medieval Germany 1056–1273, trans. Helga Braun and Richard Mortimer (Oxford, 1988), 120, ifteen archbishops and bishops were deposed at Mainz and replaced by Henry’s supporters. Expelled in 1078, Hermann had returned to his see for a brief period in 1084, but was deposed by the Council at Mainz in 1085. On Hermann’s life and thought, see Siegfried Salloch, Hermann von Metz: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des deutschen Episkopats im Investiturstreit (Frankfurt am Main, 1931). Fleckenstein, “Hofkapelle und Reichsepiskopat,” 36–37. Haverkampf, Medieval Germany, 125. Henry IV had his older son, Conrad, elected king in 1087, but in 1098 had the younger son, Henry, elected in his stead. Stefan Weinfurter, “Reformidee und Königtum im spätsalischen Reich. Überlegungen zu einer Neubewertung Kaiser Heinrichs V,” in Reformidee und Reformpolitik im spätsalisch-frühstauischen Reich. Vorträge der Tagung der Gesellschaft für mittelrheinische Kirchengeschichte vom 11. bis 13. September 1991 in Trier, ed. Stefan Weinfurter with Hubertus Seibert (Mainz, 1992), 22–38.

217

The Birth of a New Order

in Saint Peter’s, reformers among the German bishops identiied the emperor as their enemy.135 In the following years, bishops, whether from religious or political reasons, increasingly gravitated to the party of princes eager to depose the king.136 By 1121, Henry’s political position had become so precarious that in order to retain his crown he had no choice but to compromise with the papacy. The inal solution, worked out at Worms in 1122, followed closely the compromise adopted by the papacy in 1107 with the Anglo-Norman and the French kings. Distinguishing between the temporal and spiritual aspects of the bishopric, the pope recognized Henry V’s right to bestow the regalia of the diocese, but only on condition that it follow the election of the candidate. In Germany the king was to bestow the regalia immediately after the candidate had been elected in his presence, whereas in Burgundy and Italy newly elected bishops had six months in which to accomplish the ceremony.137 In assessing the fate of the papal reform movement in Germany, it must be remembered that Henry III had created the reform papacy out of an eagerness to eradicate nicolaitism, that is, impose celibacy on the clergy. The extent to which his goals were successfully transformed into policy by the time of his death is diicult to establish. His successor, Henry IV, appears to have lacked his father’s pious concerns, but even Henry III would have rejected the papal demand that the emperor abandon his claim to govern the imperial church. Traditionally, control of the personnel and the resources of the Church was the greatest source of the emperor’s strength. The German ecclesiastical hierarchy stood irmly behind the emperor at Worms in 1076 in deposing Gregory VII, who by his demands on Henry IV not only was introducing a dangerous innovation but also was threatening the liberty of the German church. Over subsequent decades, however, the papal position gradually won converts throughout the episcopacy, ultimately forcing Henry IV and his son into diicult positions. Their often contradictory shifts of policy created havoc with institutional continuity in many dioceses. While there appears to have been growing support for the papal reforms among the clergy over the almost half-century of the struggle, there are few signs of active interest among the population at large. As earlier in Francia, German bishops from the 1080s, at least in areas near the French border, sought relief from the disorder spawned in part by struggles for the imperial crown and local rebellions against royal authority by creating local institutions of peace.138 Although bishops initiated peace movements in German territory, secular princes soon took over the movements’ leadership.139 In contrast with Francia, from the outset the general population 135 136

137 138

139

Ibid., 38–39. By the second half of the second decade he encountered serious resistance to his interference in episcopal elections. Between 1116 and 1120 ten out of seventeen new bishops were elected canonically: Zielinski, Die Reichsepiskopat, 183. Cf. Weinfurter, “Reformidee und Königtum,” 39–45. Kempf, “Die gregorianische Reform,” 459; and Haverkampf, Medieval Germany, 134–35. Theodor Körner, Iuramentum und frühe Friedensbewegung (10–12 Jahrhundert) (Berlin, 1977), 6–81, discusses the ten occasions on which peace organizations were established in Germany and compares them with those created in France. The dates of the German organizations run from 1082 to circa 1104. Ibid., 123.

218

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

played no role in the creation of peace institutions, and the rules established for the peace did not extend to reform of the clergy.140 Consequently, the German population lacked experience with the cooperative enterprises that the Peace of God had undertaken in Francia, and consequently also with the spirit of religious reform that the movement had incorporated. Popular participation in the religious struggle generally remained peripheral, and where it did occur the masses tended to favor the imperial cause.141 In the case of the burghers’ expulsion of the bishop of Worms in 1073, of the archbishop of Mainz in 1077, and of the archbishop of Cologne in 1106, the townspeople, seeking to limit episcopal control of the city, expressed their support for the secular ruler against their local prelate.142 Similarly, there is little evidence that when the burghers of Speyer expelled their tyrannical bishop in 1111 issues linked to investiture played a signiicant role.143 Nevertheless, there are indications that laymens’ attitudes toward the papal reform program may have changed with time. Among the supporters of Henry V’s revolt against his father were members of the upper nobility who believed, with the papacy, that the young prince was committed to the papal cause.144 In 1092, the burghers of Constance staunchly resisted Henry IV’s efort to replace the Gregorian bishop of the city with a candidate of his choosing. The circumstances surrounding the creation of the second commune at Cambrai and those of the irst and second communes at Metz, however, ofer the clearest evidence that some change of public opinion occurred. Owing in part to slower urban development, and perhaps missing the sense of community developed over time by involvement in diocesan peace movements, few communes were established in Germany in the years before 1122, and the ones that 140

141

142

143 144

In the case of the bishop’s synod at Liège, representatives of the burghers may have been included (ibid., 12–13). Otherwise the general population was excluded from assemblies decreeing the peace. In those localities where an oath was required, however, all residents appear to have been forced to take it. Körner also insists on the secular character of the movement in Germany (ibid., 131). On the whole, the German urban dwellers’ loyalty to the king was stronger than their concern for church reform: Heinrich Büttner,“Basel bis Mainz während des Investiturstreites,” Investiturstreit und Reichsverfassung, ed. Josef Fleckenstein (Sigmaringen, 1973), 360–61. Hans Planitz, Die deutsche Stadt im Mittelalter (Graz, 1954), 103 and 105–6. Fritz Rörig, The Medieval Town, trans. D. J. A. Matthews (London, 1967), 23, attributes the revolt of the burghers of Worms in 1073 to the political opposition of its bishop, along with that of other Rhineland bishops, to Henry IV. The burghers drove out the bishop and welcomed the ruler into the city. In 1077 in Mainz, the burghers expelled Rudolph of Swabia, Henry’s bitter enemy, along with the archbishop: Planitz, Die deutsche Stadt, 106. On Worms and Mainz, see as well Büttner, “Basel bis Mainz,” 355–56 and 357. For Cologne, see Ursula Leward, “Köln im Invesituturstreit,” Investiturstreit und Reichsverfassung, ed. Josef Fleckenstein (Sigmaringen, 1973), who attributes the revolt of 1074 in Cologne to political motives (382–84 and 390), and considers that later as well the people of Cologne “fanden die Forderungen der Reformpartei weitgehend taube Ohren.” She extends the observation to the whole region north of the Rhine (391). Although the motives of the local population of Constance are unknown, their resistance to the king’s eforts to replace their reform bishop with one of his followers in 1092 constitutes an exception to the generalization that urban populations were consistently loyal to the monarch: Helmut Mauere, “Konstanzer Bürgerschaft im Investiturstreit,” in Investiturstreit und Reichsverfassung, 367. Planitz, Die deutsche Stadt, 106. Weinfurter, “Reformidee und Königtum,” 8–23.

219

The Birth of a New Order

were – Valenciennes (1114), Cambrai (1077 and 1092), and Metz (ca. 1117) – were founded near the French border. The burghers, clergy, and nobles of Valenciennes established their commune peacefully, by common consent, and with the authorization of the count of Hainaut. By contrast, communes in the episcopal towns of Cambrai and Metz were the result of intense conlict, in which issues relating to the Investiture Struggle were involved. In both cities the creation of the commune appears ostensibly to have been linked to the campaigns for religious reform. In the case of the commune established at Cambrai in 1077, I have already argued that its establishment was in part fueled not by popular support for reform but by opposition to the reforms established by the bishop at the command of Gregory VII. By contrast, the events surrounding the creation of the second commune in 1101/1102 and its aftermath suggest that a sizable portion of the population of the city was involved on both sides of the issue. The second commune had its origin in 1092, when two rival bishops were elected by a clergy divided over religious reform. For most of the next decade the imperial bishop held the city. Then, in 1101/1102, threatened with an attack by the papal champion, the count of Flanders, and despairing of help from the emperor, the imperial bishop agreed to the creation of a second commune in exchange for the burghers’ support. In 1103, however, he was expelled and a reform bishop invited to take his place. Four years later, in 1107, the reform bishop was driven out in turn when the emperor captured Cambrai, and in punishment for its disobedience the town lost its commune a second time.145 The successive alternation of imperial with reform bishops in Cambrai cannot be explained by political or economic motives or external pressures alone, any more than it can in the cities of the regnum. Likely by the early twelfth century a shift of power within the cathedral chapter relected a similar shift within the town at large. Although the reasons behind the support of Cambrai’s burghers for one faction or the other may have been diverse, a signiicant number of burghers were apparently converted to religious reform over the years – enough to become a competitive force contending against those who adhered to the imperial cause.146 The beginnings of the communal movement at Metz can be traced to the expulsion of its Gregorian bishop, Herman of Metz, by Henry IV in 1078.147 Although Herman was not deposed at the time, in 1085 Henry IV replaced him with a pious bishop who, after being consecrated, resigned almost immediately. Henry’s second 145 146

147

Platelle, “Les luttes communales,” 47–49; and Reinecke, Geschichte der Stadt Cambrai, 112–18. Alfred Cauchie, Querelle des investitures, 1:14, treats the burghers’ participation in the alternation of bishops as inspired purely by political motives, as do Reinecke, Geschichte der Stadt Cambrai, 100–118; Vermeesch, Essai sur les origines, 94–96; and Planitz, Die deutsche Stadt, 103–4. As in Cambrai, there were bitter quarrels among the clergy over reform in Liège in 1117, but, unlike in Cambrai, the clergy do not appear to have garnered support from the lay population; see Cauchie, Querelle des investitures, pt. 2. Unlike in similar alternations of imperial and reform bishops in Italian dioceses, the cathedral school in Cambrai, like that in Laon, continued to function without apparent interruption; Emile Lesne, Les écoles de la in du VIIIe à la in du XIIe en France, in his La propriété ecclésiastique en France, vol. 5 (Lille, 1940), 321–24. The following two paragraphs are based on Michel Parisse, “Metz dans l’église impériale,” Historie de Metz, ed. François-Yves Le Moigne (Toulouse, 1986), 118–21. See as well René Bour, Histoire de Metz (Metz, 1979), 65–66; and Westphal (major), Geschichte der Stadt Metz, 3 vols. (Metz, 1875), 1:88–91.

220

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

choice fell on a nephew of Pope Leo IX, Bruno of Calw. When the people of the city expelled Bruno and his retinue several years later, they may have done so not only because they were angry at the new bishop for having plundered church property but also because they supported the papal reforms.That conjecture is supported, at least with regard to the clergy, by the fact that on the death of Hermann, who had returned to Metz in 1089 only to die in 1090, a reformer, Poppon, was chosen by a majority of the cathedral chapter as his successor. By 1097, however, when Henry IV invested a rival bishop, Adalbéron IV, with the see, the balance of power in the cathedral chapter had changed and perhaps the popular mood as well: the reform bishop was driven out and the emperor’s bishop welcomed. Until his deposition at Rheims in 1115, Adalbéron remained the bishop of Metz, presumably supported by the burghers of the town. The bishop may at this time have gained their support by helping to create the commune. In any case it had been established by 1117, when Pascal II tried to impose a pious monk as bishop. Forbidden entry to the city, the new appointee was only able to occupy his see in 1122, upon the signing of the Concordat.148 Consequently, in Metz, as in Cambrai, shifts in the fortunes of the movement for religious reform were dependent to some degree on popular opinion. In his light from the city in 1078, Herman likely left behind a faction of sympathetic clergy and laymen, which revived upon his return and which the following year successfully elected a like-minded successor. By 1097 the weight of public opinion, however, had changed, and the populace was to side consistently with the emperor’s position down to the end of the Investiture Struggle. In both cities the changing fortunes of the two parties in the ight for possession of the bishopric likely encouraged the burghers to bargain for a commune. Nonetheless, during the almost a half-century of warfare in which institutional continuity at all levels was repeatedly interrupted, the mass of the German population seems to remained largely passive. The emperor, having witnessed his control over church oices diminish both theoretically and in material terms, was scrambling to ind other supports for imperial authority; the territorial princes were growing in power; and the hierarchical church had to be reconstituted; but apparently in only two German towns, Metz and Cambrai, did popular elements assert their claim to play a role in the construction of their country’s future. INVESTITURE AND CATHEDRAL SCHOOLS

The disruption of the regnum’s cathedral schools prepared the way for a new kind of education and a new institutional basis for its propagation. Under tremendous pressures stemming from the religious struggle between imperialists and papal radicals, commonly with popular support, cathedral chapters in the regnum had often been fractured by struggles over reform. In a number of chapters, collective life seems almost to have ceased.149 In a climate of violence, maintaining institutional continuity 148 149

Parisse, “Metz dans l’église impériale,” 119, asserts that a commune existed in the town by 1117. Between 1086 and 1140 the canons of the cathedral at Mantua seem not to have existed as a collective entity; Alberto Montecchio, “Cenni storici sulla canonica cattedrale di Mantova nei secoli

221

The Birth of a New Order

in the schools must have been diicult if not impossible.150 The continuity of cathedral education in Pisa, as relected in the scholarly and poetic activity of the canons in the early decades of the twelfth century, may well be explained by the apparent ease with which the city’s commune arose.151 Even in Pisa, however, the cathedral’s period of productivity was over by 1140. This was because new attitudes toward education generated during the years of religious conlict were in play. The suspicion of pagan letters so prominent in the more pietistic generation following 1122 dampened interest in the traditional book culture, while private teachers, conscious of the advantage of teaching new practical disciplines in an enlarging market of clerics and laymen for education, created specialized private schools to rival the cathedral with its less lexible curriculum. These private schools constituted the primary generators of the legalistic-rhetorical mentality that was to prevade intellectual life in the regnum for centuries. The fortunes of cathedral education in Francia were very diferent. Although the outcome of the Investiture Struggle had repercussions at the local level, the struggle over investiture, as we have seen, was overwhelmingly a matter of negotiations between the papacy and princes. Unlike the situation in the regnum, where the clerical establishment, including the institutions responsible for ecclesiastical schooling, was deeply afected, French education enjoyed continuity throughout the ifty-year period. For instance, despite the devastating civil war that raged in and around Laon in 1112, the study of theology and biblical exegesis appears to have prospered in the local cathedral afterwards as before.152 Landolfo junior reported that in 1109 he, together with the noble Olrico, viscount of Milan, and Anselmo of Pusterla, the future archbishop of Milan, went to Laon to study with master Anselm (ca. 1050–d. 1117) and his brother, Ralph.153 Despite the massive revolt of 1112, however, Laon

150

151 152

153

XI e XII,” La vita comune del clero nei secoli XI e XII: Atti della settimana di studio, Mendola, settembre 1959, Miscellanea del Centro di Studi Medievali, no. 3, 2 vols. (Milan, 1962), 2:179. A similar situation prevailed from the 1080s at least into the 1120s in Lucca: Martino Giusti, “Le canoniche della città e diocesi di Lucca,” 2:333–35. There is no sign of communal life in the cathedral at Arezzo in the decades immediately after 1103: Giovanni Tabacco, “Canoniche aretine,” La vita comune del clero, 1:249. On Arezzo’s cathedral chapter, see as well Giovanna Nicolaj Petronio, “Per una storia della documentazione vescovile aretina dei secoli XI–XIII: Appunti paleograici e diplomatici,” Annali della Scuola speciale per archivisti e bibliotecari dell’Università di Roma, 17–18 (1977–78): 147–48. Gina Fasoli, “Ancora un’ipotesi sull’inizio dell’insegnamento di Pepone e Irnerio,” 30, writes: “Che le scuole vescovili sfuggissero completamente alla crisi che travagliava le strutture ecclesiastiche e trasformava le strutture polito-amministrative cittadine, pare del tutto inverosimile.... Il distacco di maestri e scolari dalle scuole vescovili, la formazione di nuove scuole specializzate e del tutto autonome devono essere avvenuti un po’ dappertutto, proprio in relazione con la crisi religiosa locale. E impensabile che chi contestava l’autorità spirituale di un vescovo e ne riintava l’ autorità temporale, riconoscesse a lui ed al suo clero il monopolio dell’insegnamento superiore....” For Pisa, see below, Chapter 7, “The Civic Panegyrists.” Lesne, Les écoles, 299–310, traces the history of the school from roughly 800 to 1200. John Contreni, The Cathedral School of Laon from 850 to 930: Its Manuscripts and Its Masters (Munich, 1978), concentrates on the earlier stages of the school’s development. Landuli junioris sive de Sancto Paulo Historia mediolanensis anno MXCV usque ad annum MCXXXVII, ed. Carlo Castiglioni, RIS, no. 5.3 (Bologna, 1934), 30–31. On Anselm of Laon, see Lesne, Les écoles, 303–6; on Raoul, his brother, 308–9. Besides his biblical scholarship and theological writings, Anselm also wrote commentaries on Lucan, Virgil, and Statius; see Günter Glauche, Schullektüre im Mittelalter: Entstehung und Wandlungen des Lektürekanons bis 1200 nach den Quellen dargestellt,

222

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

continued to attract students in 1113–14. Abelard probably came to Laon in these years to learn theology with Anselm and stayed briely to teach the subject in competition with the master.154 The cathedral school of Rheims, moreover, where the clergy had been divided over reform questions late in the eleventh century, but where the division seems not to have extended beyond ecclesiastical circles, also appears to have thrived in the early decades of the twelfth century.155 Whereas in the irst half of the twelfth century the cathedral schools of northern and central Italy led a shadowy existence, a dozen cathedral schools were thriving in Francia.156 While, as we shall see, the destruction of much of the old ecclesiastical order in the regnum lent a creative impetus to intellectual life, this was not the case in the German half of the empire. Most scholars acknowledge that in the course of the twelfth century the number of German cathedral schools declined and that those that survived deteriorated in quality. The main cause is usually said to have been the loss of patronage from Henry IV and Henry V, who were embroiled in Italian adventures and a series of civil wars.157 It is certainly true that institutions so closely tied to the monarchy could not help but sufer when imperial resources were directed elsewhere. At the same time, as in the regnum, decades of civil war, the instability of the German episcopate, and dissension among the clergy likely disrupted cathedral education over a period of decades in major centers. In any case, young Germans eager for education after 1100 now sought it primarily in Francia and the regnum. POST-INVESTITURE RELIGIOSITY

The conlict over church reform was to have profound efects on all phases of life in the regnum. Oicially invited by papal authorities to participate actively in reform eforts, the populace in numerous urban centers developed a lively interest in religious issues and a new sense of responsibility for their own spiritual life. Subsequent papal policy designed to reestablish clerical authority and eliminate lay interference in ecclesiastical government encouraged the channelling of popular religious fervor into a deep pietism and active participation in civic religious rituals supportive of rather than hostile to the clerical establishment. The most striking aspect of the twelfth-century religious landscape would be the fervent activity of a multitude of penitents and conversi who had pledged to live ascetically, devoting themselves to Christian service, while continuing to live in their own homes in urban parishes.158 An expanded conception of sainthood led to the

154

155 156 157

158

Münchener Beiträge zur Mediävistik und Renaissance-Forschung, no. 5 (Munich, 1970), 103–4. On his ethical thought, see Marcia Colish, “Another Look at the School of Laon,” Archives d’histoire doctrinale et litteraire du moyen âge 53 (1986): 7–22. Lesne, Les écoles, gives ca. 1113. By 1115 Abelard had been called back to Paris to become canon of the cathedral. Ibid., 276–98. Ibid., 271–76, 310–21. Zielinski, Die Reichsepiskopat, 124–25. Zielinski sees the German students after 1100 going to study in French and Italian cathedral schools, although among the examples cited none went to Italy. Giovanni Miccoli, “La storia religiosa,” Storia d’Italia. Dalla caduta dell’impero al secolo XVIII (Turin, 1973), 533–41, characterizes the efort of the Church from the later years of the Investiture Struggle

223

The Birth of a New Order

creation for the irst time of lay saints. Of the nine local lay saints so far identiied for the twelfth century, all but one were members of urban society who established their credentials for holiness by serving the poor with great humility.159 The papal triumph in Italy may have had an even greater efect on the clergy than on laymen. The campaign against clerical marriage encouraged a puriication of the clergy while at the same time inviting a new level of hypocrisy. Especially in the pious atmosphere of Italian towns and cities, clerics would have been closely monitored. In the prevailing atmosphere, the number of religiously minded young men wanting to join the clergy probably increased. At the same time, the expanding sphere of lay-centered communal power would have discouraged the recruitment of young men who had no intention of rising into the higher clergy but simply wished to enjoy the beneits aforded by tonsure. Especially individuals lacking strong convictions would have had to weigh the importance of tonsure’s beneits against the cost of, at least ostensibly, losing their sexuality and being excluded from participation in the political life of the commune.160 The papal reforms particularly afected the multitude of canons in collegial churches, including cathedral chapters. One of the major reforms of Aachen in 816 had been to impose the common life on clerics in collegial churches. Although still charged with performing sacraments for the lay public, the life of the canons themselves was henceforth to resemble that of monks. Over the centuries the rule deined by Aachen, originally designed primarily to facilitate liturgical performance, had generally lapsed, and papal reformers were resolved to reimpose the common life on collegiate churches with the added proviso, cherished by the sterner reformers, that private property be forbidden. Some collegiate bodies ignored the pressure to adopt a rule, and among the various communities of clerics that did subscribe to the general ideal of leading a common life a great deal of variety prevailed in interpreting what such a life entailed.161

159

160

161

to exclude popular lay interference in local churches as exalting the authority of the church hierarchy and depriving the lay population of any ecclesial role. Because of compromises and accords with the Church, however, public lay institutions continued to exercise certain rights in such matters. Jean Leclercq, “Comment vivaient les frères convers,” I laici nella ‘Societas christiana’ dei secoli XI e XII. Atti della terza settimana internazionale di studio, Mendola, 21–27 agosto 1965 (Milan, 1968), 152–82, deines the term conversus as it relates to monasticism. However the term also applies to single and married people who embraced asceticism and usually lived under the spiritual direction of a cleric: Thompson, Cities of God, 69–70. André Vauchez, “Une nouveauté du XIIe siècle: Les saints laïcs de l’Italie communale,” L’Europa dei secoli XI e XII fra novità e tradizione: Sviluppi di una cultura. Atti della decima settimana internazionale di studio, Mendola, 25–29 agosto 1986 (Milan, 1989), 69. Of the lay saints, one was from the lower urban nobility, four were artisans, and the other three came from the upper or middle level of the people (65–66). See also Paolo Golinelli, “Italia settentrionale (1130–1220),” in Hagiographies: Histoire internationale de la littérature hagiographique latine et vernaculaire en Occident des origines à 1550, ed. Guy Philippart, vol. 1 (Turnhout, 1994), 127 and 145–47. This was not, however, Saint Bernard’s view, in that he believed that the number of clerics was increasing; De conversione ad clericos sermo seu liber, cap. 20: PL 182, cc. 853d–854d. Cinzio Violante and Cosimo D. Fonsega, “Introduzione allo studio della vita canonicale del medioevo: Questionario,” La vita comune del clero, 498–99, describe the variety of ways of living the common life in this period. (1) It could be lived in determined liturgical periods or throughout the whole year. (2) The whole community could practice it or just those whose turn it was to oiciate

224

The Investiture Struggle and the Emergence of the Communes

Nonetheless, by 1125, a large number of Italian cathedral chapters and other collegiate churches, carried along by reform fervor, had placed themselves under some form of rule. Churches interpreting the common life more strictly rivaled the more observant monasteries in their requirements of manual labor and ascetic practice.The pietism of the laity was consequently reinforced by that of the clergy. Despite the intensiication of religious life in the regnum after 1122, the new spirit did not result in an outpouring of religious scholarship from the clergy. Uninterested in biblical exegesis, indiferent to exploring theology by means of dialectic or to liturgical studies that were being enriched north of the Alps by musical invention, intellectuals among the clergy focused largely on developing canon law.162 The growing organization of papal powers after 1122 and the efort to implement the claim of the papacy to be the supreme justiciar of Christendom were transforming Rome into an institutional model emphasizing administration and organization. Within the context of this model, success in rising in the hierarchy increasingly came to depend on one’s legal knowledge and administrative abilities. Consequently, the Italian church emerged after the Investiture Struggle as deined by two tendencies that were not always reconcilable – on the one hand, toward deep piety and, on the other, toward administrative and legal professionalism. In its own way, then, the Church contributed to the construction of the new legal–rhetorical mentality with its secular orientation.

162

during a particular period. (3) Canons could (a) sleep and eat together or (b) only eat together. They could (1) sleep in their own houses within a walled space; (2) sleep in one house in individual rooms; or (3) sleep in a common dormitory. Pierre Riché, “Les écoles avant les universités,” Luoghi e metodi di insegnamento nell’Italia medioevale (secoli XII–XIV ), ed. Luciano Gargan and Oronzo Limone (Galatina, 1989), 14–15, uses the new mood of piety to explain the Italian retreat from grammatical studies in the twelfth century. He refers to Eriberto of Reggio (ca. 1101) and Bruno of Segni (ca. 1050–1123) as examples of this change. Riché assumes, however, that the Church encouraged exegetical studies in the twelfth century, which does not seem to have been the case, at least in the Italian church. Both of the Italian exegetes whom Riché cites died in the irst quarter of the twelfth century, and they had no successors that I know of.

225

Part III

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

Chapter 5

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

he results of the Investiture Struggle had enormous consequences for the political life of the regnum in the twelfth century. The emperor’s loss of control over appointments to crucial bishoprics entailed loss of his surest means of asserting imperial power in his southern kingdom. To some extent the power vacuum would be illed by the expansion of papal power relying on the massive buildup of propapal sources justifying Rome’s position on church reform. The disruption of the old political order, however, had also facilitated the rise of a number of new centers of power, the communes. Energized by rapid economic development and demographic growth in the twelfth century, these new institutions became increasingly eager to encoach on the authority of local ecclesiastical and secular lords and to usurp powers traditionally recognized as granted by imperial concession. The irst two sections of this chapter briely outline the rapid expansion of the regnum’s economy in the twelfth century and describe the resistance of the communes to the eforts of Frederick I (1152–90) to reestablish imperial power in Italy beginning in the 1150s after a hiatus of more than three decades. With this background in mind, the main body of the chapter will trace the fortune of the learned disciplines in Italy in the irst eighty years of the twelfth century, primarily the development of the culture of the legal book, namely, the texts of Roman and canon law, and the associated discipline of ars dictaminis. Since knowledge of these disciplines led to inancially advantageous careers, down to the late thirteenth century at least, the legal–rhetorical disciplines dominated the intellectual landscape of the regnum and attracted a broad mixture of laymen and clerics who were willing to pay for an education that potentially had practical value for earning a living.1

T

1

The service of notaries, for instance, proved fundamental to the newly created communes because until the Peace of Constance in 1183 they had an unclear status as public authorities. Communal actions, consequently, could be considered analogous to those of private individuals. For this reason communal governments relied on notaries to legalize their acts. See Pietro Torelli, “Studi e ricerca diplomatica comunale,” Atti e memorie della Accademia vigiliana di Mantova, n.s., 4.1 (1911): 11–12. To reinforce Torelli on the role of notaries in legalizing the acts of communes, see as well Gina Fasoli, “Il notaio nella vita cittadina bolognese (secc. XII–XV),” Notariate medievale bolognese, 2 vols. (Rome, 1977), 2:125–28.

229

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

The traditional book culture did not remain impervious to the expanding interest in literacy and practical knowledge in general. An efort to systematize the teachings of Latin grammar and present them in the form of new textbooks directed at people who did not speak Latin as a native tongue constituted the best indication of such an awareness. At the same time, grammarians likely cut back on the teaching of literature in the knowledge that they would have to adjust to the lower expectations of ars dictaminis, the simpliied rhetoric that dictated Latin prose style into the ifteenth century. It is not too much to say that, as a result, in the twelfth century rhetoric came to rival grammar’s historic domination of the trivium. Of activity in the third member of the trivium, logic, we surprisingly know almost nothing for the period from the 1050s down to the thirteenth century, when references to courses on logic and the names of masters at last begin to appear. In the case of theology, while we might assume that courses were already available in major cathedrals, there is no indication of active scholarship until the 1160s, when theologians at Bologna began producing a modest number of treatises heavily dependent on French theological works, a production that appears to have ceased after about thirty years. The general lack of creativity in traditional ields of book culture contrasts strikingly with rapid advances in the three new disciplines, which were fueled by the demands of a new market for practical education. The dynamics behind the development of Latin culture in Italy in the twelfth century cannot be understood without taking into consideration the commercial revolution that began roughly in the decades around 1100.2 Economic development afected the demand for education by tending to privilege certain kinds of learning over others, by encouraging a wider stratum of the population to seek literacy, and by producing a inancial incentive to become a teacher that had largely been lacking in earlier centuries. We begin, then, by sketching the outlines of the commercial revolution. THE COMMERCIAL REVOLUTION

Northern Italy played a role in the commercial revolution comparable to that of England in the industrial revolution.The economic revival that had resumed in Italy by the second half of the tenth century signiicantly intensiied after 1100. Trade, primarily maritime commerce, constituted the foundation of the revolution. Pisa and Genoa sharply increased their trade with the western Mediterranean islands as well by clearing the seas of Muslim pirates and by attacking their bases in the ports of north Africa.3 In the course of the twelfth century both cities secured trading privileges in southern French coastal cities and in Christian and Muslim Spain. 2 3

For the phrase, see Philip Jones, The Italian City-State: From Commune to Signoria (Oxford, 1997), 189. To the south Amali seriously competed for this trade until the late eleventh century. See Robert S. Lopez, “The Trade of Medieval Europe: The South,” in The Cambridge Economic History of Europe, vol. 2, 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1987), 345–46 and 353–57; Philip Jones, “La storia economica: Dalla caduta del’ Impero romano al secolo XIV,” in Storia d’Italia, vol. 2.2 of Dalla caduta del’Impero romano al secolo XVIII, ed. Ruggiero Romano and Corrado Vivanti (Turin, 1974), 1692–96, and his Italian City-State, 175–76. Marco Tangheroni, Commercio e navigazione nel Medioevo (Bari, 1996), provides an extended account of the expansion of Italian trade from the eleventh to the fourteenth century.

230

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

Beginning at the end of the eleventh century, the Crusades opened up the eastern Mediterranean for northern Italian cities, principally Pisa, Genoa, and Venice, to launch commercial ventures.4 All three gained trading privileges in the major cities of the eastern Mediterranean, most signiicantly at Constantinople and Alexandria. They also established residential quarters endowed with extraterritorial rights for their merchants. Because the eastern Mediterranean ports were the ultimate destination of Arab merchants bringing goods from the Far East, Italian merchants in the cities there quickly established a lively trade in spices between East and West. By the early thirteenth century Italians controlled most of the trade in the eastern half of the Mediterranean basin as well as in the western half.5 Burgeoning maritime commerce stimulated the economic life of cities in the regnum’s interior. From the early twelfth century Lucca became the major producer of silk cloth in western Europe.6 At about the same time Italian cities began to manufacture cotton and fustian cloth (a mixture of cotton and lax), cheap products produced for both a regional and an international market.7 The early twelfth century also marked the beginnings of a signiicant international trade in woolen cloth of low quality. By the end of the century, however, making use of dye stufs and alum from the East, certain regions, primarily Tuscany, the Val Padana, and Liguria, became specialized centers for inishing high-grade cloth imported from northern Europe. Hemp, leather, and weapons also became items for export. From the 1170s, when the trade fairs of Champagne irst appear in the documents, transalpine trade drew an increasing number of merchants from the interior of the regnum, primarily Lombardy, Emilia, and Tuscany.They carried north not only goods originally imported by eastern sea and land trade but also items of local production, and they returned with merchandise, especially northern cloth, much of which they inished before sale. Although they shared transalpine trade with foreigners in the twelfth century, Italians of the regnum were able to gain a large part of the two-way traic in the course of the following century.8 Sharply increased international and local trade coincided with signiicant demographic growth, a high rate of urbanization, and a rise in food prices and in the value of food-producing farmland.9 The large landowner’s direct cultivation of his domain, 4

5

6

7 8 9

Lopez, “Trade of Medieval Europe,” 346–54; Jones, “La storia economica,” 1689–92, and Italian City-State, 173–75. David Abulaia, “Trade and Crusade, 1050–1250,” in Cross-Cultural Convergences in the Crusader Period, ed. Michael Goodrich, Sophia Menache, and Sylvia Schein (New York, 1995), 1–20. On the difusion of Italian merchants to the east and west beginning in the eleventh century, see David Abulaia, “Gli italiani fuori d’Italia,” in Storia economica italiana, ed. Ruggiero Romano, vol. 1 (Turin, 1990), 262–86. It is diicult to know how much competition early Luccan production encountered from Sicily. Anna Muthesius, Byzantine Silk Weaving, AD 400–1200 (Vienna, 1997), 113–18, discusses silk production in Sicily but does not ofer an estimate of its chronology. The irst Latin silk-weaving workshop was established in Sicily by Roger II at Palermo in 1147: Anna Muthesius, “Sicilian Silks,” in Textiles, 5000 Years. An International History and Illustrated Survey, ed. Jennifer Harris (New York, 1993), 165. Jones, “La storia economica,” 1707. Jones, Italian City-State, 177. Athos Bellettini, “La populazione italiana dall’inizio dell’era volgare ai giorni nostri. Valutazioni e tendenze,” Storia d’Italia, vol. 5: I documenti, ed. Ruggero Romano and Corrado Vivanti (Turin,

231

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

which by the early eleventh century had become consolidated and produced a large part of the surplus that sustained urban development, went into decline after 1100 as communal governments expanded their control of the surrounding countryside and invalidated seigneural jurisdictions. In the course of the twelfth century most large landlords tended to rent out their land to local peasants on a contractual basis and lived of the income.10 Communal intervention in the neighboring countryside also encouraged the production of foodstufs through abolishing tolls on the transport of goods in the region, involving the city in the construction of local roads, encouraging peasants to exchange their produce for silver, and increasing the peasants’ need for money by imposing taxes on their communities.11 Agriculture would remain the principal occupation of the regnum throughout the Middle Ages, but the driving engine of its economy proved to be commercial capitalism. By the twelfth century merchants of the regnum’s cities had already demonstrated the ability to mobilize capital from rural and urban sources for investment in trade that would make the area the center of European commerce for centuries.The increasing political control of the urban centers of the regnum over the countryside corresponds to the centrifugal nature of local economies. IMPERIAL CLAIMS AND THE COMMUNES

The possibility of tapping into the immense wealth of the Italian cities was probably an important motive in the decision of the German emperor, Frederick I (1152–90), to descend into Italy two years after his crowning.12 More generally, however, he wanted to reestablish central authority in the southern kingdom. His arrival in the regnum in the fall of 1154 brought to a close three decades of relative freedom from imperial supervision. During those decades powerful magnates and communes had extended their authority over lesser powers, usurping imperial jurisdiction along with lucrative regalian rights, that is, imperial rights and possessions such as the right to coin money, impose taxes, and control mining. Frederick’s efort to subordinate Italian communes to his will would exert a profound inluence on Italian life for the next forty years. From the outset of his rule in 1152, Barbarossa’s governing policy, irst in his German territories and then in Italy, sought to establish the imperial oice as the

10

11 12

1973), 497, estimates that the population of the Italian peninsula rose from 5.2 to 6.5 million from 1000 to 1100 and from 6.5 to 8.5 million from 1100 to 1200. Statistics for the price of grain, perhaps the best indicator of population growth and economic development in agriculture, begin, to my knowledge, only with the thirteenth century; see Bernard H. Slicher van Bath, Agarian History of Western Europe, A.D. 500–1850, trans. Olive Ordish (New York, 1963), 326. Jones, Italian City-State, 166–68. In large areas of Lombardy François Menant, Campagnes lombardes du Moyen Âge: L’économie et la société rurale dans la région de Bergame, de Crémone et de Brescia du Xe au XIIIe siècle (Rome, 1993), 381–82 and 388, sees this process as having been complete by 1200. Ibid., 292–93. On the central importance of iscal claims, see the observations of Karlrichard Brühl, “La politica inanziaria di Federico Barbarossa in Italia,” Popolo e stato in Italia nell’età di Federico Barbarossa: Alessandria e la Lega Lombarda: Relazioni e communicazioni al XXXIII Congresso storico subalpino per la celebrazione dell’VIII centinario della fondazione di Alessandria. Alessandria 6–7–8–9 ottobre 1968 (Turin, 1970), 201–2.

232

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

font of all jurisdiction. Accordingly, only the emperor could delegate jurisdictional authority, and that involved a speciic grant of power entailing feudal investiture.13 In some places the emperor intended to govern directly through his own oicials; in other places, the local communes, counts, or marquesses, bound by vassalic oaths of fealty to the emperor, would act in his stead, on the condition that they respected speciic rights that only he could exercise.14 His insistent demand for restitution of usurped imperial powers and possessions was often coupled with an ofer to grant them in ief at a price. Frederick’s policy was not intentionally directed against the communes per se; it applied to all agencies claiming to exercise political power. In 1158, at Roncaglia, a college of Roman lawyers for the irst time clearly articulated the emperor’s program for the regnum in a set of principles, which an obedient assembly of Lombard cities and magnates then approved.15 The following spring, however, in reaction to what they viewed as a threat to their liberty, the communes of Milan, Piacenza, Crema, and Brescia rose up in open warfare against Frederick, and the pope joined the conlict in the communes’ support.16 The emperor, in turn, found allies among communes traditionally hostile to his enemies and eager to avail themselves of Frederick’s promise to legalize most of their usurpations of imperial regalia. The high-water mark of Frederick’s power came with the defeat of the Milanese and their allies in 1162 and the utter destruction of Milan, the greatest city of the regnum. Over time, however, the exactions of the emperor’s oicials aroused hostility to his authority even in once friendly cities. In 1167 Cremona, Mantua, Bergamo, 13

14 15

16

Renato Bordone, “L’inluenza culturale e istituzionale nel regno d’Italia,” Federico Barbarossa: Handlungsspielräume und Wirkungsweisen des stauischen Kaisers, ed. Alfred Haverkamp (Sigmaringen, 1992), 153–54. Alfred Haverkamp, Herschaftsformen der Frühstaufer in Reichsitalien, 2 vols. (Stuttgart, 1970–71), 449, notes that the vocabulary of feudalism is sometimes missing in the privileges granted to communes by the emperor, but considers the relationship of subordination established between the two powers to have been feudal in nature (517–19). Bordone, “Inluenza culturale,” 168. Against an older view going back to Ficker in the late nineteenth century, Alfred Haverkamp, Herschaftsformen der Frühstaufer, 731–39, convincingly argues that the emperor’s policies applied not merely to communes but to all political authorities in the kingdom. Four famous Bolognese masters together with twenty-four judges from twelve cities formulated the major legislation approved by the assembly at Roncaglia. The legislation declared (1) that all jurisdiction belonged to the prince and that every judge had to take an oath of obedience to him; (2) that he could place his palaces and government buildings where he chose; and (3) that under Roman law the emperor had a right to levy personal as well as real-estate taxes on his subjects; Vittore Colorni, “Le tre leggi perdute di Roncaglia (1158) ritrovate in un manoscritto parigino (Bibl. Nat. Cod. Lat. 4677),” in Scritti in memoria di Antonio Guifré, 4 vols. (Milan, 1967), 1:143. See also Constitutio et acta publica imperatorum et regum, ed. Ludwig Weiland, MGH, Legum, no. 4, pt. 1 (Hannover, 1893), 244–45. Kenneth Pennington, The Prince and the Law, 1200–1600: Sovereignty and Rights in the Western Legal Tradition (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1993), 8–37, discusses the statements that Frederick I himself made at Roncaglia regarding his power and the interpretations of his claims down into the thirteenth century. The formation of the league and its actions against Barbarossa are discussed by Giulio Vismara, “Struttura e istituzioni della prima Lega Lombarda,” Popolo e stato, 291–332. See as well Paolo Lamma, “I comuni italiani e la vita europea, 1127–1204,” in Storia d’Italia, ed. Girolamo Arnaldi et al., 2nd ed., 5 vols. (Turin, 1965), 1:288–90.

233

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

Brescia, and Milan formed the Lombard League, and over a ten-year period the ranks of Frederick’s enemies grew to include most of the communes of the province. The league defeated the imperial army at Legnano in 1176; the parties signed an armistice at Venice in 1177; and a peace treaty, at Constance, in 1183. Although formulated as a limited set of concessions by the emperor to the communes, the Peace of Constance rendered the communes de facto almost completely autonomous. Under the terms of the treaty, the emperor recognized the right of the cities of the league to elect their own rulers and make their own laws. In fact, communal governments willingly recognized the suzerainty of the emperor as deined by Constance because his acceptance of their obedience legitimated their existence as political authorities.17 The communes made concessions of their own. Consuls, the elected leaders of the town government, had to be invested either by the bishop or the representative of the emperor; a series of crimes was excluded from the consuls’ jurisdiction; and consuls could render inal verdicts in other crimes only when sums of less than twenty-ive pounds of gold were involved. Furthermore, cities were required to furnish soldiers and tribute on the occasion of an imperial descent into Italy. Although the Peace of Constance directly concerned only the cities of the Lombard League, within a few years major cities of the Piedmont, Tuscany, and the Romagna assumed equivalent autonomy on their own.18 Territorial lords, especially in the Piedmont, Liguria, and Lombardy, now felt free to act as independent powers vis-à-vis the emperor. Nevertheless, Frederick’s allies, the greatest Italian feudal princes of Lombardy, Monferrato, Biandrate, and Malaspina, emerged from Constance with their power diminished in relation to their neighboring cities.19 Weakened in their position, at Constance they could not speak for themselves, but were represented in the bargaining by Asti, Vercelli, and Piacenza respectively.20 City-dwellers may have become even more loyal to their communes in the aftermath of the epic struggle against Barbarossa, which generated myths that nourished local patriotism for centuries. The lessening of the imperial threat after Constance, however, not only ushered in a period of endemic warfare among the communes but also increased factionalism within the consular elites that dominated communal governments. Divisions in the upper classes in turn encouraged the rise of broader-based groups demanding a right to participate in the communal government. 17

18 19

20

On the terms of the peace, see Carlo G. Mor, “Il trattato di Costanza e la vita comunale italiana,” in Popolo e stato, 363–77; and Alfred Haverkamp, “Der Konstanzer Friede zwischen Kaiser und Lombardenbund (1183),” Kommunale Bündnisse Oberitaliens und Oberdeutschlands im Vergleich, ed. Helmut Mauerer, Vorträge und Forschungen, no. 33 (1987), 11–61. For the general implications of the peace, see Jones, Italian City-State, 338–41. Gina Fasoli, “La politica di Federico Barbarossa dopo Costanza,” in Popolo e stato, 396–97. Anna Maria Nada Patrone and Gabriella Airaldi, Comuni e signorie nell’Italia settentrionale: Il Piemonte e la Liguria, Storia d’Italia, no. 5 (Turin, 1986), 30–32; and especially for medieval Piedmont, Francesco Cognasso, Il Piemonte nell’età sveva (Turin, 1968). Raoul Manselli, “La grande feudalità italiana fra Federico Barbarossa e i comuni,” Popolo e stato, 343–61. Manselli concludes (361): “i veri, i soli vincitori furono i comuni.”

234

The Triumph of the Legal Culture THE EMERGENCE OF THE BOLOGNESE SCHOOLS

Law Schools By 1100, the traditional book culture of litterae et mores, centered in the Italian cathedral schools, a culture that was already threatened by the rapid development of secular legal studies, the growing inluence of reform piety, and the disruption of institutional continuity, had to confront a further challenge: the emergence of private schools narrowly focused on teaching canon law and ars dictaminis. While in principle the two new subjects, which were taking shape as clearly deined academic disciplines, could be accommodated within a cathedral’s educational program, they could also be taught by private teachers beyond the cathedral walls. By the midtwelfth century, Bologna emerged as the unrivalled center of private education in ars dictaminis and canon law as well as Roman law. Why did it happen? Part of the answer lies in Bologna’s natural advantages: centrally located in the kingdom, it had access to a rich countryside where abundant supplies of food were normally available, making the city capable of feeding a substantial student population.21 Although the cathedral must have ofered some level of education, absence of evidence of a cathedral school in the late eleventh century suggests that private teachers were not competing against a lourishing educational institution. Indeed, the growth of private schools in the city may well have beneited the cathedral’s school by drawing students to the city. Bologna’s chief attraction for students, however, lay in the character of the legal education ofered in the city. First, working in a territory where Roman law had become the customary law, Bolognese lawyers enjoyed the advantage over their Pavian counterparts of being able to study only one law; Pavian jurists had been concerned with Roman law as a way of supplementing or conceptualizing Lombard law and not with mastering it for its own merits. Second, by the fourth quarter of the eleventh century, Bologna had already produced a famous jurist. Pepo’s pioneering citation of the Digest indicates that he at least thought a passage from the most diicult book in Justinian’s corpus was applicable to a living issue.22 Pepo’s role in

21

22

Admittedly it is easier for Richard W. Southern, “The Schools of Paris and the School of Chartres,” Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, ed. Robert Benson and Giles Constable with Carol D. Lanham (Cambridge, 1982), 119–20, to explain why Paris, the royal capital and probably the largest city in Western Europe, outdistanced its rivals. I placiti del Regnum Italiae, ed. Cesare Manaresi, in FSI, vols. 92, 96, and 97 (Rome, 1955–60), 3:333–35, n. 437 (for March 1076). He also appeared in three other placita: 3:304–7, n. 426 (June 7, 1072); 3:355–58, n. 448 (February 1078); and 3:367–69, n. 453 (November 1079). Kantorowicz maintained that Pepo completely misunderstood the passage cited from the Digest: Hermann Kantorowicz and Beryl Smalley, “An English Theologian’s View of Roman Law: Pepo, Irnerius, Ralph Niger,” Mediaeval and Renaissance Studies 1 (1941–43): 250. By contrast, Ennio Cortese, “Legisti, canonisti e feudisti: La formazione di un ceto medievale,” in Università e società nei secoli XII–XVI. Pistoia, 20–25 settembre 1979 (Pisa 1982), 200, maintains that it was “straordinariamente adatta al caso.” Charles Radding and Antonio Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis in the Middle Ages: Manuscripts and Transmission from the Sixth Century to the Juristic Revival (Leiden and Boston, 2007), 184, write: “The particular passage quoted was far from prominent – little more than a phrase, and not an especially memorable one – in a long excerpt near the end of a rather technical title.That the passage had been

235

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

various placita in Tuscany points to his possessing some knowledge of Lombard as well as Roman law. His interests may have extended to canon law as well.23 Although Pepo was celebrated as early as 1090 as the “brilliant light of the Bolognese,” we must concur with Odolfredo, who wrote in the mid-thirteenth century that “whatever his learning had been, it remains unknown.”24 Nonetheless, the exalted appraisal of his legal talents, accorded perhaps less than a decade after his death, can be taken to mean that Pepo was at least among the pioneers in legal studies south of Lombardy. A inal explanation for the rise of Bologna as the center of legal studies concerns the city’s reputation as a leader in notarial studies. As was said in Chapter 3, by 1060 Bolognese notaries had made two historic advances in the ars notarie: they had established the principle of notarial ides and conceptualized the distinction between the juridical act and the document that registered it. Perhaps a kind of symbiotic relationship existed between these innovations in the notarial art and an the early development of the study of Roman law at Bologna. In any case, the two disciplines appear closely linked at an early date in Bolognese legal history if indeed Irnerio (d. 1125), the “father of Roman law,” also developed the theory of the “four instruments.” The theory at least dates back to Bologna in the early twelfth century. It maintained that all notarial documents could be organized under one of four rubrics – namely, sales contracts, mortgages, donations, and testaments. The theory aroused the criticism of early thirteenth-century reformers, who felt that it straitjacketed the scope of ars notarie, but a century earlier the conceptualization of these categories had proved fundamental to structuring the ars.25 Irnerio may also have

23

24

25

noted at all, much less remembered, tells us that the Digest was being read with special attention to its description of Roman procedure. Such mastery could not have been achieved quickly.” Ludwig Schmugge, “Eine neue Quelle zu Magister Pepo von Bologna,” Ius comune 6 (1977): 1–9; and Piero Fiorelli, “Clarum bononiensium lumen,” Per Francesco Calasso: Studi degli allievi (Rome, 1978), 415–19. Nino Tamassia, “Odolfredo: Studio storico-giuridico,” Atti e memorie della r. Deputazione di storia patria per le provincie di Romagna, ser. 3, 12 (1895): 41. Writing circa 1090, Gualfredo, bishop of Siena, refers to Pepo as “clarum Bononiensium lumen”; Arrigo Solmi, “Il rinascimento della scienza giuridica e l’origine delle Università nel Medioevo,” Contributi alla storia del diritto comune (Rome, 1937), 237. Ralph Niger circa 1180 emphasized Pepo’s role in the recovery of Roman law:“cum igitur a magistro Peppone velut aurora surgente iuris civilis renasceretur initium, et postmodum propagante magistro Warnerio iuris disciplinam religioso scemate traheretur ad curiam Romanam, et in aliquibus partibus terrarum expanderetur in multa veneratione et munditia, ceperunt leges esse in honore simul et desiderio”: Kantorowicz and Smalley, “An English Theologian’s View of Roman Law,” 250. Cf. Giorgio Cencetti, “Studium fuit Bononie: Note sulla storia di Bologna nel primo mezzo secolo della sua esistenza,” SM, ser. 3, 7 (1966): 794–95. For bibliography on the origins of teaching law in Bologna, see Gina Fasoli, “Ancora un’ipotesi sull’inizio dell’insegnamento di Pepone e Irnerio,” Atti e memorie della Deputaziione di storia patria per le Provincie di Romagna, n.s., 21 (1971): 19–37. Gianfranco Orlandelli, “Documento e formulari bolognesi da Irnerio alla Collectio contractuum di Rolandino,” Notariado público y documento privado: De los orígines del síglo XIV. Actas del VII Congreso internacional de diplomática. Valencia 1986, 2 vols. (Valencia, 1989), 1009–36; and “Irnerio e la teorica dei quattro istrumenti,” Atti della Accademia delle Scienze dell’Istituto di Bologna. Rendiconti 61 (1972–73): 121. Cf. Orlandelli, “La scuola di notariato,” Le sedi della cultura nell’Emilia romana: Età comunale, ed. Girolamo Arnaldi et al. (Milan, 1984), 133–34. The notarial manual Formularium tabellionum di Irnerio, ed. Giovanni B. Palmieri, in Scripta anecdota antiquissimorum glossatorum, Bibliotheca iuridica Medii Aevi, ed. Augusto Gaudenzi, 3 vols. (Bologna, 1888–1901), 1:199–229, formerly attributed to Irnerio, is now generally considered to be a work

236

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

been responsible for reforming an important formula related to mortgage contracts (petitionibus emphyteocariis annuendo) – a formula that the two Bolognese notaries whom I mentioned in Chapter 3, Bonando and Angelo, included for the irst time in a document of 1116 and that was destined for a long life.26 As has been said earlier, aspiring students of the notarial art generally learned their skill by apprenticeship to a notary, but the precocious sophistication of the ars notarie in Bologna suggests that already by 1100 the city might have ofered some formal training in the notariate. Be that as it may, as earlier in Pavia, Pepo and Irnerio would likely have had disciples who learned from them both Roman law and ars notarie. Most students would have been drawn to Bologna by the aspiration of becoming a notary, but some, their curiosity about the Roman law aroused by their masters, might have been inspired to move beyond the legal training needed to draw up notarial documents.27 Recently several scholars have raised doubts about whether law schools existed in Bologna before the middle decades of the twelfth century. While admitting that lawyers such as Irnerio may have had young apprentices who accompanied them into court and helped them prepare for their cases, scholars suggest that lawyers were primarily devoted to activity in the courts and not to providing systematic analyses of legal texts for students.28 Only at mid-century, their argument runs, with a work

26

27

28

of the late twelfth century: Orlandelli, “La scuola di notariato,” 132–34. Enrico Besta, ed., L’opere d’Irnerio: Contributo alla storia del diritto italiano, 2 vols. (Turin, 1896), 1:179–84, accepted Irnerio’s authorship of such a work, but he denied that the edited text of 1888 was that of Irnerio. On Bonando and Angelo, see Orlandelli,“La scuola di notariato,” 133–34.Also see Cencetti,“Studium fuit Bononie,” 800; and Gianfranco Orlandelli, “Documento e formulari bolognesi,” 1015–17. On the basis of two thirteenth-century authors, scholars have sometimes argued that the success of Bologna’s earliest Roman lawyers was due in part to the patronage of Matilda of Tuscany. Odolfredo wrote that Pepo began lecturing on the law “auctoritate sua” (i.e., Matilda’s); Tamassia, “Odolfredo,” 41. Writing a few decades before Odolfredo, Burchardt of Ursperg, who seems to have been well informed about Italy, explained that Irnerio irst began commenting on Roman law “per petitionem Mathilde comitisse.” For Burchard, see Burchardi praepositi Urspergensis Chronicon, ed. Oskar Holder-Egger and Bernard von Simpson, MGH, Scriptores rerum germanicarum in usum scholarum, no. 16 (Hannover, 1916), 15–16. In all probability both Pepo and Irnerio had contact with the countess, but that this extended to patronage is doubtful. Richard W. Southern, Scholastic Humanism and the Uniication of Europe: I. Foundations (Oxford, 1995), 274–82; and Anders Winroth, The Making of Gratian’s Decretum (Cambridge, 2000), 170, as well as his “Origins of Legal Education in Medieval Europe,” http://law.usc.edu/academics/assets/docs/ winroth.pdf (accessed Oct. 1 2009), 8. For an earlier discussion of the issue, see Giovanni Diurni, “L’expositio ad Librum papiensem e la scienza giuridica preirneriana,” Rivista di storia del diritto italiano 49 (1976): 166–68. Winroth bases his judgment largely on the diference between what he argues were two editions of the Decretum. Because of a reference the irst edition (Gratian I) makes to the Second Lateran Council of 1139, he considers it written ca. 1140. He believes a revised version, double the size of the irst, was probably inished after 1150 (Gratian II). The irst certain date is 1155–58, when it was cited by Peter Lombard: Winroth, The Making of Gratian’s Decretum, 142. Gratian I knew very little Roman law. Gratian II added most of the law texts, and his work demonstrates a thorough grasp of its rules and terminology. According to Winroth, Gratian I represents the mediocre level of legal studies in the city around 1140. By contrast, at the time of the writing of Gratian II, law schools were lourishing (144–45 and 173–74). Although Winroth follows John T. Noonan, “Gratian Slept Here: The Changing Identity of the Father of the Systematic Study of Canon Law,” Traditio 35 (1979): 145–72, in debunking the myths

237

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

like Bulgaro’s Stemma, which contains a series of ictitious lawsuits in which students would take sides and the teacher would render and explain his verdict, can it be said that law schools existed in Bologna.29 While no modern historian could argue for a broadly institutionalized form of law training at Bologna early in the twelfth century, nonetheless it is likely that individual lawyers like Irnerio devoted a signiicant part of their time to teaching activities in their own schools. First, it is a fact that as early as the mid-eleventh century contemporaries reported that law was being taught in Italian private schools.30 Second, there is abundant evidence of a high level of philological research being carried out on all three major works of the Justinian corpus by the early twelfth century.31 Scholarship of such a character went beyond whatever practical interests a lawyer would have had for arguing a particular case. Consequently, I see no reason to reject the traditional outline of the development of legal instruction at Bologna according to which such instruction is traced back at least to Irnerio. The four leading Bolognese jurists of the next generation, known as the “Four Doctors” (Bulgaro, Martino, Ugo of Porta Ravegnana, and Jacopo), all may have had him as their master. His public role in the last stages of the Investiture Struggle may also have increased Bologna’s visibility as a center for the study of Roman law. A devoted follower of the imperial faction, his loyalty must have made him a persona non grata to Matilda (d. 1115) until her formal reconcilation with the

29 30

31

surrounding the life and writings of Graziano, he tends to assume that Graziano wrote his Decretum in Bologna. The traditional reason for that assumption depends on Bologna’s reputation for the study of law in the period leading up to Graziano (162). By denying such a reputation to that generation, Winroth has partially removed the justiication for claiming Bologna as the site of the composition of the early edition. Winroth does not have the same problem dating Gratian II because he argues that the law schools began to blossom between 1140 and the 1150s. The only speciic mention of Bologna in the Decretum, however, is found in a letter included in Gratian II, C.2, 1.6, d.p.c. 31, but omitted from Gratian I: Winroth, The Making of Gratian’s Decretum, 142. Winroth argues that, nevertheless, the presence of a letter from the bishop of Reggio in the comparable section of Gratian I, a letter also present in a letter collection attributed to Bologna, points to a connection of Gratian I with that city. The letter is published by Wilhelm Wattenbach, “Iter Austriacum 1853,” Archiv für Kunde österreichischer Geschichtsquellen 14 (1855): 81–82. Although Bologna was the leading center for ars dictaminis, the subject was the object of study in other areas of the kingdom, and Wattenbach ofers no proof that the collection was Bolognese. Consequently, there is no reason to assume that Gratian I tells us anything about the state of the study of law in Bologna in 1140. Moreover, I would agree with Kenneth Pennington (review of Winroth, Speculum 78 [2003]: 295) that, as Winroth thought earlier, Gratian I was written ca. 1120. No texts are cited in the work date after ca. 1119, except the reference to canon 28 of the Second Lateran of 1139, which is “imprecise, the text of the canon is not given, and it might be an interpolation.” At such an early date Gratian I, a canonist, would not have been expected to be abreast of recent developments in Roman law. Winroth, The Making of Gratian’s Decretum, 159–68. See Chapter 3, under “Mania for Law.” See as well the remark of Wipo, Chap. 3, n. 167. A poem written ca. 1130 on the war between Como and Milan, waged between 1118 and 1127, associates Bologna, an ally of Milan, with legal studies: “Docta suas secum duxit Bononia leges” and “Docta Bononia et huc venit cum legibus suis”; De bello Mediolanensium adversus Comenses liber cumanus in RIS, vol. 5 (Milan, 1724), 418, v. 211, and 453, v. 1848. Charles Radding and Antonio Ciaralli, The Corpus iuris civilis in the Middle Ages, is largely devoted to advances made in establishing and analyzing the Justinian corpus in the regnum down to 1100.

238

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

emperor in 1111. Irnerio’s appearances afterwards in comital placita ranging from 1112 to 1125 show him to have been both a causidicus (lawyer) and a iudex (judge), depending on the situation.32 By the last years of his life Irnerio became not only a leading citizen of Bologna, but also between 1116 and 1118, a major igure in the court of Henry V. His eforts to justify Henry’s creation of Gregory VIII as antipope procured Irnerio a papal excommunication in 1119 at the Council of Rheims, from which he was absolved just three years later, with the signing of the Concordat of Worms.33 By the mid-thirteenth century, when Odolfredo commented on the life of Irnerio, it had become part of the legend of the Bolognese school, thus we cannot take what he reports at face value. He writes that he had heard from his teacher that Irnerio had been a teacher in the arts before teaching law; and in another passage he refers to Irnerio as loicus or logician.34 The recent attribution to Irnerio of a large collection of theological sentences, Liber divinarum sententiarum quas Guarnerius [iurisperitissimus] ex dictis Augustini aliorumque doctorum excerpsit, has led to his being characterized as a cleric who subsequently became a jurist.35 While I ind unconvincing the evidence adduced for his authorship of the work – I consider Irnerio as having belonged to what by his time had become a legal tradition of notaries and lawyers dominated by 32

33

34

35

The documents are published by Enrico Spagnesi, Wernerius bononiensis judex: La igura storica d’Irnerio (Florence, 1970), 29–106. Irnerio was probably instrumental in obtaining a pardon from Henry V in 1115 for the revolt of Bologna against Matilda the previous year: Spagnesi, Wernerius, 73–74. A detailed account of the years 1116–25 is given by Spagnesi, 132–43. Odolfredo reports that Irnerio began as a teacher “in artibus”: “Dominus Yrnerius, quia loicus fuit, et magister fuit in civitate ista in artibus...”; Tamassia, “Odolfredus,” 42. Cf. Ernesto Besta, L’opera d’Irnerio, 1:54–55, for discussion of the passage. Giacomo Pace’s argument that Irnerio was of German origins (“Guarnerius Theutonicus: Nuove fonti su Irnerio e i ‘quattro dottori,’” Rivista internazionale di diritto comune 2 [1991]: 123–33), has been convincingly refuted: Enrico Spagnesi, “Irnerio teologo: Una riscoperta necessaria,” SM, ser. 3, 42 (2001): 341–42. Guarnerius Iurisperitissimus, Liber divinarum sententiarum, ed. Giuseppe Mazzanti (Spoleto, 1999). The identiication of Guarnerius as the author with Irnerio the lawyer (“Incipit liber divinarum sententiarum quas Guarnerius Iurisperitissimus ex dictis Augustini aliorumque doctorum excerpsit”), however, is found as the title of the work in only one of the three extant manuscripts: Biblioteca Ambrosiana Milan, Y 43 sup., but not in Bibliothèque municipale Troyes, 1317, or Biblioteca Ambrosiana Milan, 40 sup. The Troyes manuscript gives no author, and 40 sup. omits “Iurisperitissimus.” Nor was “iurisperitissimus” found in the manuscript on which the two Milanese manuscripts were based (Mazzanti, Liber, 12). Moreover, in Y 43 the adjective “iurisperitissimus” is written above the title line by the rubricator. Mazzanti argues that the adjective was not added as an afterthought but, because of the word’s length, was consciously put there so as to allow the rest of the title to it on the line. I consider it a later addition had the rubricator intended from the beginning to include the word in the title, he would have put half of the title on the line occupied by the interjected adjective and given better balance to the page. Mazzanti further contends that the rubricator would not simply have picked the famous jurist as the Guarnerius of the manuscript, because it would have been incongruous to make a jurist author of a theological work were he not indeed the author (ibid., 13–15). Essentially Mazzanti maintains that Irnerio was already a well-known cleric, who subsequently took up Roman law (ibid., 83–84). On the contrary, as my Chapter 7 demonstrates, in the twelfth century there would have been no incongruity in a lay jurist accruing a collection of theological sententiae. Consequently the rubricator would have felt no contraint in making such an identiication. There is no place here for a detailed analysis of Mazzanti’s other arguments for Irnerio’s authorship, none of which I consider cogent, but his work has great merit on other grounds and deserves to be better known.

239

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

laymen – his interest in theology would not be surprising. As Chapter 7 will show, laymen throughout the twelfth century, like Burgundio of Pisa, Mosè del Brolo, and Ugo and Leo Eteriano, also translated and composed theological tracts. Were the Liber Irnerio of Bologna’s work, the likely case would be that he was a lay jurist with theological interests rather than a cleric with a genius for interpreting Roman law. Of all the legal writings attributed to Irnerio’s pen over the last two hundred years, however, only two short accessus, one to the Codex and the other to the Institutes, and a series of glosses have been ascribed to him by modern legal historians.36 Now, his authorship of the glosses has been questioned. The belief had been that those glosses found in early manuscripts designated with the initial (siglum) y were those of Irnerio. Recent critics, while allowing that the glosses concerned were the products of a jurist or jurists writing in the earlier decades of the twelfth century, deny that the sign necessarily denotes Irnerio’s authorship.37 It has also been argued that the use of sigla identifying a particular author’s glosses did not begin until the middle decades of the century.38 Whether Irnerio wrote the glosses or someone else did, however, is inconsequential for our purposes, for if, as scholars seem to have assumed, these are early Bolognese glosses, their contents tell us much about the general character of legal study in the early decades of the Bolognese law schools.39 First, the glosses indicate that their author or authors read widely through the Corpus iuris civilis, covering the Digest and large parts of the Code (with the exception of the Tres libri) and the Institutes.40 The brevity of the interpretations suggests that they may have served only as aide-mémoires for lecturing or preparing to argue a case. At the same time the glosses given to both the titles and individual parts of the Justinian books reveal 36

37

38

39

40

Hermann Kantorowicz with William W. Buckland, Studies in the Glossators of the Roman Law: Newly Discovered Writings of the Twelfth Century (Cambridge, 1938); reprinted with addenda and corrigenda by Peter Weimar (Aalen, 1969), 37–50 and 231–40. Winroth, The Making of Gratian’s Decretum, 164–68. Winroth argues convincingly that the identiication of the siglum y to denote Irnerio’s glosses rests on pure assumption. He points to the fact that by the second half of the century y was the common symbol used before a marginal commentary to distinguish it from an addition to the text in the margin. The same would presumably be true of the sign in earlier comments. Important for my purpose is Winroth’s argument that by the second half of the twelfth century glossators regularly used their initials to indicate glosses they edited (167). Consequently, while later glossators might occasionally write y-glosses without another siglum, we might assume that if glosses are marked only by y, they can usually be assumed to have been composed before the mid-1150s. See the next note. Gero Dolezalek, Repertorium manuscriptorum veterum Codicis Iustiniani, Ius commune, Sonderhefte, no. 24, 2 vols. (Frankfurt am Main, 1985), 1:463–74. Cf. James A. Brundage, The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession: Canonists, Civilians, and Courts (Chicago and London, 2008), 84. In what follows I have taken the judgments of scholars characterizing Irnerio’s approach to the Justinian corpus based on the glosses to describe early twelfth-century Bolognese legal scholars generally. Hermann Kantorowicz, Studies in the Glossators of the Roman Law, 33, describes the glosses as follows: “Nearly all of them are purely technical; they display as well as demand a thorough understanding of the Justinian law, even of some of the more diicult parts of the Digest. Innumerable references, similia amd contraria, are noted in the margin to connect the explained passages with every other part of the sources (except the Tres libri).The style of the glosses is always concise, sometimes laconic, and the reasoning is often very subtle.”

240

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

the character of the methodology and the interests of the writer or writers. Generally, the glosses are not so much concerned with establishing the meaning of the text – for example, with determining the Roman conception of property and property rights – as they are with the character of the legal procedures to which these rights gave rise.41 The approach is that of a master teaching his students to be lawyers, asking the questions: What was the character of a particular legal procedure? What were the parties against whom the action proceeded? What kind of remedy did it provide and how could the action be brought before the court? How, moreover, did its nature compare with that of a related action? These are the questions of a person long experienced in arguing cases in the courts. In working out the meaning of the text, the glosses in numerous instances followed closely the thought and style of the ancient jurists. Although terms from logic, like deinitio, distinctio, and quaestio, are used to describe techniques of analysis, the actual arguments are not dialectical. Even in the more extensive treatment of legal points in summulae, where there would be space for dialectical arguments, the distinctions and deinitions propounded are not original with the author but are borrowed from the Justinian texts. Moreover, terms like natura, quantitas, genus, species, and so on, in the glosses are not imposed upon the writings but are commonplaces in the Justinianic writings themselves.42 Irnerio’s successors, the Four Doctors, took the same approach in their commentaries.43 The fact that the early glosses do not relect the direct inluence of Aristotelian logic casts doubt on Odolfredo’s claim that Irnerio had begun as a loicus, a claim that relects his assumption that Aristotelian logic had been as important for legal study in its earliest years as it had become in his own time. The statement by a student in a model letter of the early twelfth century that he was devoting himself unstintingly to the study of law and dialectic at Pavia (studio legum et dialectica) would seem to substantiate Odolfredo’s assumption.44 By dialectica, however, the student may have meant the art of argumentation generally, an art taught by Cicero as well as by Aristotle. If 41 42

43 44

Radding, The Origins of Medieval Jurisprudence, 166–69. Bruno Paradisi, “Osservazioni sull’uso del metodo dialettico nei glossatori del sec. XII,” Studi sul medioevo giuridico, Studi storici, Istituto storico italiano per il medio evo, fasc. 163–73 in 2 vols. (Rome, 1987), 702. See also his Storia del diritto italiano: Le fonti del diritto nell’epoca bolognese: I civilisti ino a Rogerio, vol. 4.1 (Naples, 1967), 125. This would explain what Gerhard Otte, “Die Rechtswissenschaft,” in Die Renaissance der Wissenschaften im 12. Jahrhundert, ed. Peter Weimar (Zurich, 1981), takes to be Irnerio’s “dialectical” approach to the law. As Otte writes (132–33): “In den wenigen überlieferten Texten des Irnerio inden sich nämlich verhältnismassig viele Stellen, in denen von logischer Terminologie Gebrauch gemacht oder eine Diktion benuzt wird, die in ihrer unerbittlichen Knappheit und Präzision untrügliches Zeugnis intensiver Beschäftigung mit Logic ist.” Otte’s analysis here and in his book Dialektik und Jurisprudenz. Untersuchungen zur Methode der Glossatoren (Frankfurt am Main, 1971) unfortunately deals only with secondary sources in German and appears to be innocent of the ongoing discussion in Italy on the role of dialectic in early Roman law studies. Cf. Harold J. Berman, “The Origin of Western Legal Science,” Harvard Law Review 90 (1977: 894–943. Of course, the terminology cited in the glosses could have been found in Isidore and Papias. Paradisi, “Osservazioni,” 703–4. Botho Odebrecht, “Die Briefmuster des Henricus Francigena,” Archiv für Urkundenforschung 14 (1936): 250. In pleading for money, the student writes: “innotescat me divina misericordia Papie studio legum vel dialectice alacrem et sanum nocte dieque adherere.”

241

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

the student meant Ciceronian logic, then his statement would better coincide with the current scholarly view that not Aristotelian but Ciceronian logic, more congenial to the rhetorical conceptions found in the Justinianic writings themselves, constituted the primary ally of the new medieval jurisprudence.45 Admittedly, in the course of the second half of the twelfth century, increasing doses of the logica vetus appeared in the generation of Bolognese lawyers after the Four Doctors. Rogerio, Giovanni Bassiano, and Pillio were particularly skilled in dialectical argumentation.46 The logica nova, however, only made its appearance in Azzo’s generation at the end of the century, and even then was restricted to the De sophisticis elenchis.47 How did these later twelfth-century lawyers learn logic, whether Aristotelian or Ciceronian? As we shall see, the student’s reference to the study of logic above was one of the few references to the subject in the twelfth century. The paucity of evidence would suggest that independent courses of logic might have been rare and that they were at the elementary level. In any case, teachers of law would have been responsible for teaching their students legal argumentation just as they had to teach students, most of whom had had perhaps only two or three years of Latin grammar, to read the legal texts.48 Legal logic in its Ciceronian form also played a vital role in the hermeneutical practices of Bolognese legal scholars as it did in those of their predecessors at Pavia. The early Bolognese glossators, so-called because glosses served as their typical form of expressing scientiic investigation of the Corpus, employed distinctions, quaestiones, and cross-references and sought to reconcile apparent contradictions in the laws.The Bolognese difered from the Pavians, however, in that they worked on the complete Digest.49 The Pavian Expositio ad librum papiensem, written in the 1070s or 1080s, had 45

46

47

48 49

Albert Lang, “Rhetorische Einlüsse auf die Behandlung des Prozesses in der Kanonistik des 12 Jahrhunderts,” Festschrift Eduard Eichmann zum 70 Geburtstag, dargebracht von seiner Freunden und Schülern in Verbindung mit Wilhelm Laforet, ed. Martin Grabmann and Karl Hofmann (Paderborn, 1940), 69–71. See also Elizabetta Graziosi, “Fra retorica e giurisprudenza,” Studi e memorie per la storia dell’Università di Bologna, n.s., 3 (1983): 3–38; Erich Genzmer, “Die justinianische Kodiikation und die Glossatoren,” Atti del Congresso internazionale di diritto romano: Bologna e Roma, XIIII–XXVII aprile, MCMXXXIII, 4 vols. (Pavia, 1934), 1:363–64; and Paradisi, “Osservazioni,” 703. Bibliography on the debate between scholars over the issue of the inluence of dialectic on the glossators of the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries is discussed in Paradisi, “Osservazioni,” 695–98. Paradisi’s conclusion that dialectic played an important role in legal analysis only after 1150 seems to me convincing in the light of the history of dialectic in northern and central Italy in the preceding 150 years. See as well Gerhard Otte, Dialektik und Jurisprudenz, 22, who notes that before Placentino no ancient thinkers except for Cicero are mentioned in the glosses. Otte, Dialektik und Jurisprudenz, 22. Similarly, Paolo Marangon, Alle origini dell’Aristotelismo padovano, sec. XII–XIII (Padua, 1977), 15–17, inds no evidence in Padua of the use of the logica nova in the twelfth century. His eforts to prove that the logica vetus was taught in the second half of the twelfth century depend on manuscripts containing works of logic that, he argues on the basis of a series of questionable assumptions, were in the Paduan monastic libraries at that period (24–42). See below, n. 132. The Lombard writers tended to concentrate their attention primarily on the Digestum vetus, i.e., books 1 to 24.2. The Collectio britannica, compiled circa. 1090, contains excerpts of the work mainly from this section as does the Liber decretorum of Ivo of Chartres, who collected material for his work during a visit to Rome in 1093–94: Stephan Kuttner, “The Revival of Jurisprudence,” Renaissance and Renewal in the Twelfth Century, ed. Robert L. Benson and Giles Constable with Carol D. Lanham

242

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

drawn on the Digest but primarily on its earlier books, while the Bolognese, in contrast, made glosses on all parts of the ifty books. Indeed, the Digest seems to have occupied a cherished place in their teaching. The most diicult of the four parts comprising the Justinian corpus, the Digest is composed of 9,123 extracts from the writings of ancient Roman jurists organized into ifty books, each of which is subdivided under titles. Each extract consists of a sentence or two and is accompanied by the name of the jurist who wrote it and the name of the work whence the extract was taken. Although the contents of the Digest were sometimes not only repetitious but often mutually contradictory, Bolognese legal scholars operated from the assumption that the work as a whole was utterly consistent. This forced scholars to work hard to reconcile the seemingly irreconcilable. In efect, the obligation that the scholars felt to make the entire Digest agree liberated them from the text and encouraged them to seek a consistency in the law beyond what a scrupulous literal interpretation of the text would have provided.50 While by the time of Irnerio’s four famous successors in the middle decades of the twelfth century Bologna was generally recognized for its leadership in legal studies, it did not enjoy a monopoly in teaching civil law. To judge from the distribution of manuscripts of various parts of the Justinian corpus in the second half of the eleventh century, the new interest in Roman law had not been limited to Pavia and to Pepo in Bologna. At least by 1124/27 training in Roman law was available in Pisa, and from the middle decades of the century courses in Roman law were being given at least at Modena. By the second quarter of the twelfth century, Roman law was being taught as well in the Valence–Die region of southern Francia, and by the third quarter at Montpellier.51 Nonetheless, at least into the early modern period, Bologna would remain the most prestigious law school in Europe, where students of all nationalities came to study. Perhaps the major issue dividing the Bolognese glossators in the generation after Irnerio was the extent to which Roman law ought to be qualiied by the principle of equity.52 The two principal igures in the dispute were Bulgaro (d. 1166) and Martino (ca. 1100–1160s). Bulgaro, taking the Justinianic texts as his focus, insisted on a narrow and scientiic reconstruction of the law and refused to compromise its

50

51

52

(Oxford, 1982), 302–3. See also Ennio Cortese, “Alle origini della scuola a Bologna,” Scritti, ed. Italo Birocchi and Ugo Petronio, 2 vols. (Spoleto, 1999), 1107–10. This is a paraphrase of Francesco Calasso, Medio Evo del diritto (Milan, 1954), 531–32. Although Kuttner, “Revival of Jurisprudence,” 300, may exaggerate in seeing the rediscovery of the Digest as “the beginning of everything,” nonetheless it was surely key to further advancement. Peter Classen, “Italienische Rechtsschulen ausserhalb Bolognas,” in Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Berkeley, California, 28 July–2 August 1980, ed. Stephan Kuttner and Kenneth Pennington, Monumenta iuris canonici, ser. C, sub. 7 (Vatican City, 1985), 205–21, discusses various possibilities for law schools in twelfth-century Italy. He considers the existence of a school of Roman law at Pisa and Modena as established. Also see chap. 8, “Roman and Canon Law in Francia.” By espousing equity the glossators were not appealing to natural law. Rather “equity” had to be based on the Corpus juris civilis; Paradisi, Storia del diritto italiano, vol. 4.1:409. See the whole discussion 399–414. Ennio Cortese, Il diritto nella storia medioevale, 2 vols. (Rome, 1995), 2:76–81, suggests that the debate relected disagreement over whether Roman law ought to be interpreted rigorously in isolation from canon law or whether consideration ought not be given to canon law when canon law addressed the same issues.

243

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

demands according to contemporary circumstances. Martino, however, was committed to the world of utraque lex – that is, he believed that Roman and canon law worked together in establishing justice. Implicit in the two approaches were difering attitudes toward the three other kinds of law currently operative in the Italian peninsula: Lombard law, feudal law, and customary law. Whereas Bulgaro considered Roman law the ius unicum and wanted to keep it uncontaminated by other legal systems, Martino had a more ecumenical approach.53 Apparently Martino deemed other systems of law worthy of study in themselves and felt that knowledge of them would be useful to scholars working on the Justinianic texts.54 Within the context of the Italian peninsula, where Lombard law prevailed over wide areas, Martino’s integrative approach was more relective of the way law was actually being practiced. By the second half of the eleventh century the irst known copy of Liber papiensis appeared.55 A later revision, called the Lombarda, circulated in various editions. The most widely used version probably originated in Pavia at the end of the eleventh century.56 Perhaps certain legists at Bologna taught both Roman and Lombard law, but if so, it has not been proven.57 The earliest known commentaries on the Lombarda in the mid-twelfth century were those by Ariprando and Alberto.58 Although it has been suggested that both commentaries were written 53

54

55 56

57

58

If we can judge by the glosses attributed to Irnerio, early Bolognese jurists showed no interest in Lombard law. In that sense, Bulgaro was the defender of Bolognese tradition. Besta, LOpere d’Irnerio, 110, n. 1, inds one allusion to Lombard law in an anonymous gloss found in a manuscript containing the so-called Irnerian glosses. Bruno Paradisi,“Diritto canonico e tendenze di scuola nei glossatori da Irnerio ad Accursio,” Studi sul medievo giuridico, 579–81, identiies Martino’s position with that of the French legists (580): “Le idee generali, dominanti tutto il sistema e tali da imprimergli un indirizzo coerente, il valore attribuito all’equità, l’attenzione dedicata al diritto canonico e perino la prevalenza che gli veniva talvolta concessa al diritto canonico e perino la prevalenza sul Giustineo, un riconoscimento implicito che, attraverso questi criteri, veniva tributato al valore della consuetudine e l’apertura verso il diritto contemporaneo quale esso era in realtà; tutte queste erano anche le linee del pensiero di Martino.” See also his “Bulgaro (Bolgaro) Giovanni Battista,” DBI, vol. 15 (Rome, 1972), 52. In describing the contrast between Bulgaro and Martino, Cortese, “Alle origini della scuola di Bologna,” 1118–19 and 1136–37, maintains that not only French law schools but Italian law schools outside Bologna generally shared Martino’s views. Cf. Giovanni Santini, Università e società nel XII secolo: Pillio da Medicina e lo Studio di Modena:Tradizione e innovazione nella scuola dei Glossatori Chartularium: Studii Mutinensis (regesta) (specimen 1069–1200) (Modena, 1979), 28–50. See Chap. 3, n. 221. Peter Weimar, “Die legistische Literatur der Glossatorenzeit,” in Handbuch der Quellen und Literatur der neuren europäischen Privatrechtsgeschichte, vol. 1: Mittelalter, 1100–1500: Die gelehrten Rechte und die Gesetzgebung, ed. Helmut Coing (Munich, 1973), 165.Weimar also provides a list of the editions and bibliography. See as well Bruno Paradisi, Storia del diritto italiano: le fonti dal sec. X ino alle soglie dell’età bolognese: Lezioni universitarie (anno 1960–1961) (Naples, 1961), 448–49. The identiication of Ugo, author of a work on Lombard law, De pugna, as Ugo of Porta Ravegnana, one of the “Four Doctors,” has been generally discredited; Hermann Kantorowicz, “‘De pugna’: La letteratura longobardistica sul duello giudiziario,” in Studi di storia e diritto in onore di Enrico Besta per il XL anno del suo insegnamento, 4 vols. (Milan, 1939), 2:1–15. Kantorowicz considers Ugo, the author of the work, to have been Pavian (15). The texts are published by August Anschütz, Die Lombarda-Commentare des Ariprand und Albertus: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte des germanischen Rechts in zwölften Jahrhundert (Heidelberg, 1855). Two texts are involved, the irst by Ariprando and the second by Alberto. The fact that both men are referred to in the text in the third person suggests that we are dealing with reportationes: Luigi Prosdocimi, “Alberto

244

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

in Bologna, this seems unlikely, given that the texts seldom cite Roman law.59 The smaller law schools, such as those at Modena and Piacenza, where both Roman and Lombard law are known to have been taught, would have been more likely sites for the commentaries’ composition. The legal writings of Vacella on the Lombarda, composed during the late twelfth century, probably at Mantua, relect a similar lack of interest in the Justinian corpus.60 The commentaries of Ariprando, Alberto, and Vacella on Lombard law involved only portions of the Lombarda. That of Carlo di Tocco (d. after 1215) covered the whole text of the work and became its glossa ordinaria. A native of Benevento, di Tocco studied Roman law somewhere in northern or central Italy while at the same time pursuing the study of Lombard law, which remained the basic law in former Lombard areas in his native south. In his glosses to the Lombarda, which he completed after his return to Benevento late in life, he consummated the process begun by the Pavians early in the eleventh century of using Roman law and its categories to dominate the heterogeneous material of Lombard origin. Already fallen into desuetude in the north, the study of Lombard law in the south remained vital down to the late fourteenth century, and di Tocco’s work served as its fundamental textbook.61 In his commentary on the Libri feodorum, written circa 1207, Pillio of Medicina used Roman law to render another legal system, feudal law, more coherent.62 The oldest edition of the Libri feodorum, a motley collection of decisions of feudal courts, customs, imperial constitutions on the “feud” (i.e., beneice), and fragmentary pronouncements of jurists on various issues relating to feudal tenure, was composed after 1150 and has been attributed to the Lombard lawyer Oberto of Orto.63 While the irst edition contained material relating to imperial legislation on feuds from Conrad II in 1037 to Lothar III in 1136, a second, called the Libri ardizzoniani, brought the legislation down to the end of the reign of Frederick I. It is the second text on which Pillio commented.64 With Pillio the Libri feodorum came into the mainstream of jurisprudence, and in the course of the thirteenth century the

59

60

61

62 63

64

longobardista,” DBI, vol. 1 (Rome, 1960), 746. Cf. Kantorowicz, “‘De pugna,’” 11. There are a few citations of the Institutes and the Code in both. Alberto mentions the Digest once. The preface to Ariprando’s work and the longer version of the same preface to Alberto, however, contain other references to the Justinian corpus: Kantorowicz,“‘De pugna,’” 11–12. Both versions of the preface appear to have been written by an unidentiied “Albacrucius”; Prosdocimi, “Alberto longobardista,” 746. Kantorowicz (“‘De pugna,’” 13) suggests Piacenza, but Prosdocimi, “Alberto longobardista,” 746, leaves the matter open. Cf. Cortese, Il diritto nella storia medievale, 125–26. Federico Patetta, “Vaccella, giurisconsulto mantovano del secolo XII,” Accademia delle scienze di Torino 32 (1896–97): 1–16, establishes that Vacella was not the same person as Vacarius and that he was from Mantua. For his biography, see Giuliana D’Amelio, “Carlo di Tocco,” DBI, vol. 20 (Rome, 1977), 304–10. Cf. Weimar, “Die legistische Literatur,” 186. Cortesi, Il diritto nella storia medievale, 159–61. Calasso, Il medio evo del diritto, 554, for a description of the material. On the work of Pillio, see Cortesi, Il diritto nella storia medievale, 167–72. For his glosses on the text, see Antonio Rota, “L’apparato di Pillio alle Consuetudines feudorum,” Studi e memorie per la storia dell’Università di Bologna 14 (1938): 1–170. For the editions of the Libri feudorum, see Weimar, “Die legistische Literatur,” 167. Cf. Cortese, Il diritto nella storia medievale, 161–62. Cortese, Il diritto nella storia medievale, 163. It was called after the Veronese legist Jacopo d’Ardizzone because he was believed to have been the irst to work on the new edition.

245

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

text became a part of the Libri legales: in the series it followed immediately after the Novellae, itself in fourth place after the Institutes, Code, and Digest.65 The intensity with which northern and central Italians pursued the study of law in the eleventh and twelfth centuries can only be understood in the light of the political history of the area. The sporadic Italian sojourns of the emperors were not suicient to maintain German authority within the kingdom. The burning of the royal palace at Pavia in 1024 as a protest against imperial exactions, moreover, was symptomatic of the diiculties inherent in the eforts of a foreign ruler to maintain order. The long minority of Henry IV, followed by ifty years of schism, in which the authority of both emperor and pope was persistently challenged, brought into question the legitimacy of all claims to power. The advent of communal governments in the late eleventh and early twelfth centuries further complicated jurisdictional issues concerning the competing claims of local bishops, counts, and others with pretensions to authority. As argued earlier, in this long-term crisis of political authority, the image of the law as objective and constant promised an impersonal, self-propelling order independent of the weaknesses of individuals or contemporary institutions. Roman law especially, enshrined in the Justinian corpus and a product of the greatest world monarchy in history, proved particularly attractive as a potential template for ordering society. The law itself became the authority that Italians of the eleventh and twelfth century so desperately needed: its principal ministers were not kings, counts, or popes but notaries and lawyers. CANON LAW

The eleventh-century reform movement stimulated an interest in older collections of canonical literature and in new sources in an efort to justify or attack what appeared to many to be revolutionary principles. Written between 1008 and 1012, the monumental collection of canon law texts compiled by Burchard of Worms in his Decretum had dominated the study of the canons until the last quarter of the eleventh century, but the sources that he used largely relected the state of canon law in a Church dominated by emperors.66 As already stated, canonists in the circle of Gregory VII, inspired by the papal–imperial conlict, emphasized canons that exalted the authority of the papacy within the Church. They tended to focus more than before on juridical questions and less on ethical or theological ones.67 The 65

66

67

Ibid., 167. In his intensive study of the Tres libri of the Codex, bk. 11, with its tendency to assimilate mortgage to a form of property, Pillio was led to identify the feudal beneicium with dominium utile and thereby to create the classic distinction between dominum directum and dominium utile (169–72). Paul Fournier, Yves de Chartres et le droit canonique, (Paris, 1898), 48–51. For the date of the work, see Paul Fournier and Gabriel Le Bras, Histoire des collections canoniques en occident depuis les Fausses Décrétales jusqu’au Décret de Gratien, 2 vols. (Paris, 1931–32), 1:366. See as well the important observations of Greta Austin, “Authority and the Canons in Burchard’s Decretum and Ivo’s Decretum,” in Readers, Texts and Compilers in the Earlier Middle Ages: Studies in Medieval Canon Law in Honour of Linda Fowler-Magerl, ed. Martin Brett and Kathleen G. Cushing (Farnham, Surrey, and Burlington, Vt., 2009), 35–58. Carlo Guido Mor, “Diritto romano e diritto canonico nell’età pregraziana,” Scritti di storia giuridica altomedievale (Pisa, 1977), 362. These collections, moreover, resort to citations of Roman law only sparingly in contrast with an imperialist author like Pietro Crasso.

246

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

most prominent of these new compilations, such as the Collectio canonum attributed to Anselmo of Lucca (written before ca. 1085), the collection with the same name by Deusdedit (written ca. 1085), and the Liber de vita christiana by Bonizone, composed after Gregory VII’s death, also demonstrated a greater concern than had earlier works to weed out texts of questionable authenticity.68 The writings of two transalpine contemporaries, however, were to exert an important inluence on the development of canon law studies, in that their formulations of the law relected the conciliatory tendency in promoting papal reforms inaugurated by the French pope, Urban II. In contrast with the rigidity of Anselmo and Deusdedit, the northern canonists Bernold of Constance (d. ca. 1100) and Ivo of Chartres (1040–1116) laid down rules for calculating the valences of individual canon laws and deined a large area in which prelates enjoyed a measure of freedom in granting dispensations from them.69 Ivo’s Decretum (ca. 1093) and Panormia, composed sometime before his death in 1116, however, went beyond Bernold’s De excommunicatis vitandis, de reconciliatione lapsorum, et de fontibus juris ecclesiastici (ca. 1091) in that it clearly distinguished a hierarchy of authoritative texts according to whether they were indulgences, counsels, precepts, prohibitions, or dispensations from the law.70 Both men argued, however, that most of what appeared to be contradictory in the canons resulted from a failure on the part of the interpreter either to distinguish between absolute and contingent laws or a failure to sort out which authors outranked the others in authority.71 At least Ivo of Chartres’s discussions of a prelate’s power to dispense with canon law would ind themselves relected in various passages in Graziano’s Concordia discordantium canonum. 68

69

70

71

Gerard Fransen, Les collections canoniques, Typologie des sources du moyen âge occidental, fasc. 10. A-III.1 (Turnhout, 1973), 26; Calasso, Il medio evo del diritto, 322–24, with bibliography. On Urban II’s less rigid approach to canon law and its similarity to that of Bernold and Ivo, see Fournier, “Un tournant de l’histoire, 1060–1140,” Nouvelle revue historique de droit français et étranger 41 (1917): 156–58. Fournier, however, was misled into believing that Urban II himself had written on the lexibility of ecclesiastical discipline: Stephan Kuttner, “Urban II and the Doctrine of Interpretation: A Turning Point?” in Post Scripta: Essays on Medieval Law and the Emergence of the European State in Honor of Gaines Post, ed. Joseph Strayer and Donald Queller, in Studia gratiana 15 (1972): 53–85. Bernold’s work is published; De excommunicandis vitandis, ed. Friedrich Thaner, in MGH, Libelli de lite imperatorum et pontiicum saeculis XI et XII, ed. Friedrich Thaner, 3 vols. (Leipzig, 1925), 2:7–160. Ivo’s Decretum and his Panormia were originally found in PL 161, cols. 47–1022 and 1046–1344 respectively. New editions of both works by Martin Brett and Bruce Brasington are available at http://www.wtamu.edu/%7Ebbrasington/ivo.htm (accessed Feb. 27, 2010). The Panormia has been dated variously from 1095 to 1118; ibid., Panormia, “Method,” 2. Ivo’s authorship of the work, however, has been disputed by Christoph Rolker, “The Earliest Works of Ivo of Chartres: The Case of Ivo’s Eucharist Florilegium and the Canon Law Collections Attributed to Him,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, kanonistiche Abteilung 124 (2007): 109–27. See also his “Ivo of Chartres’s Pastoral Canon Law,” Bulletin of Medieval Canon Law, n.s., 25 (2002–3): 114–45. Joseph de Ghellinck, Le mouvement théologique du XIIe siècle (Brussels, 1948), 488–89, cites the crucial passages from Ivo. Bernold’s statements on methodology are scattered throughout his text; see, for example, De excommunicandis vitandis, 132, 135, 139, and 157. Cf. Fournier, “Un tournant d’histoire,” 157–65; as well as Stephan Kuttner, “The Father of the Science of Canon Law,” The Jurist 1 (1941): 5.

247

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

Commonly referred to as the Decretum, Graziano’s work became the basic textbook for the study of canon law in western Europe, and it was at Bologna that the work irst gained prominence.To an extent the creation of canon law as an independent discipline involved distinguishing itself clearly from the study of theology, with which it had historically been linked. Already under way in the eleventh century, Graziano’s Decretum constituted a milestone in this process of separation. Although additions appear to have been made very early on, by the 1150s the Decretum had taken on its inal form. The irst of three parts contained 101 “distinctions,” or sets of statements (frequently, quotations from canonical sources), each grouped around a particular point. Thirty-six ictional causae (legal situations) together with questions and answers rising from them, comprised the second part. The third part, De consecratione, contained ive distinctions concerning sacraments and liturgy. The history of the Decretum has recently been complicated by the discovery that there were two versions of the work, Gratian I and Gratian II, the irst completed either in the early 1120s or early 1140s and the second in the early 1150s. It has also been argued that portions of Gratian I may go back to the irst years of the twelfth century.72 The inal version, Gratian II, is based on Gratian I, but there are major diferences: (a) The second version contains more than twice the amount of source material as the irst; (b) Gratian I makes a handful of references to Roman law and interprets them clumsily, whereas Gratian II cites almost two hundred passages and handles them in a sophisticated fashion; (c) Given that the author of Gratian II added a great number of interpolations to his version, the earlier version has greater logical consistency and must have been a better school text; (d ) Only Gratian II contains the third part of the Decretum, namely, the Tractatus de consecratione.73 Scholars have not yet established whether the two versions were written by the same author. In any case the author of Gratian I deserves to be regarded as the father of canon law. His cogent use of dialectical reasoning suggests that he was heavily inluenced by work being done in logic in transalpine Europe. Already before Abelard, scholars in Francia had been using Aristotelian dialectic to resolve conlicts arising from disagreements in the sources of Christian theology.74 In his Sic et non 72

73 74

For the two versions, see above, no. 28; for a possibly earlier form of the work, see Carlos Larrainzar, “El borrador del la ‘Concordia’ de Graziano: Sankt Gallen, Stiftsbibliothek MS 673,” Ius ecclesiae: Rivista internazionale di diritto canonico 11 (1999): 593–666. Also see Larrainzar’s earlier conclusion in the same journal: “El Decreto de Graciano del Códice Fd (= Firenze, Biblioteca Nazionale Centrale, Conventi Soppressi A.I.402): in memoriam Rudolf Weigand,” Ius Ecclesiae 10 (1998): 471–75. Kenneth Pennington,“Gratian, Causa 19, and the Birth of Canonical Jurisprudence,” in “Panta rei”: Studi dedicati a Manlio Bellomo, ed. Orazio Condorelli, 4 vols. (Rome, 2004), 4:339–55, concludes that the San Gallo manuscript is an “Ur-Gratian” and that both it and Gratian I belong to the early twelfth century. The diferences are based on Winroth’s analysis (1) 122, (2) 128–30, and (3) 144–45, respectively. Marcia Colish,“From the Sentence Collection to the Sentence Commentary and the Summa: Parisan Scholastic Theology, 1130–1215,” Manuels, programmes de cours et techniques d’enseignement dans les universités médiévales: Actes du Colloque international de Louvain-la-Neuve (9–11 septembre 1993), ed. Jacqueline Hamesse (Louvain-la-Neuve, 1994), 13, maintains that Abelard and his followers were “less adept at applying these rules in practice than were many other scholastic theologians working before and during his lifetime.” Cf. Ermenegildo Bertola, “I precedenti storici del metodo del

248

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

Abelard codiied the process by grouping quotations from the authorities under systematically arranged rubrics designed to cover the whole range of theological problems. By carefully distinguishing the meaning of the texts and sharpening the theological conceptions involved, Abelard envisaged constructing a uniied theological doctrine.75 Gratian I skillfully adopted Abelard’s methodology, originally applied to theology, for his own purposes. Certainly the author of Gratian I found inspiration for structuring his work at least in part by studying the writings of two northern canonists: Alger of Liège (1070–1131) and the aforementioned Ivo of Chartres.76 Each in his way furnished the author of Gratian I with a model for his approach to organizing the texts of canon law. Whereas canonists before Alger had organized their collections under subject categories without comment, Alger asserted a strong authorial presence. He had no intention of creating a general collection of canon laws but addressed an issue of immediate local interest in the diocese of Liège: the eicacy of sacraments administered by unworthy priests.77 Nevertheless, his work, De misericordia et iustitia (early 1090s), provided a new methodology for dealing with texts generally. He organized the work around questions and used canonical sources as the basis for his answers.78 In the process of citing the canons relevant to a particular question, he pointed out apparent contradictions in the texts, resolved conlicts, and provided answers based on his understanding of his sources.79 In one sense Ivo’s undertaking was more ambitious. His monumental collection of texts, also called the Decretum (written in the early 1090s) set out to provide

75

76

77

78

79

‘Sic et non’ di Abelardo,” Rivista di ilosoia neo-scolastica 53 (1961): 255–80; and Mary McLaughlin, “Abelard as Autobiographer: The Motive and Meaning of His ‘Story of Calamities,’” Speculum 42 (1967): 478–80. Ghellinck, Mouvement théologique, 174, writes that “l’efort constructif d’Abélard pour une élaboration rationelle de toute la doctrine révelée et l’entraînement suscité par ses essais ont profondément marqué de leur empreinte toutes les générations, à partir du premier quart du xiie siècle. On assiste alors à un tournant dans l’histoire de la théologie: le désir d’une synthèse complète, rationelle, fait surgir l’ère des ‘Summistes’ et assure leur succès....” Kuttner, “Father of the Science,” 9, stresses the close link between early collections of canon law and those of theology. Although the Investiture Struggle drew canonists to focus more on juridical problems, until Graziano, legal and theological sententiae were commonly mixed together in both varieties of collections. For a listing of the canonical collections deinitely used by Graziano in his own work, see Peter Landau, “Neue Forschungen zu vorgratianischen Kanonssammlungen,” Ius commune 18 (1984): 15. Gabriel LeBras, “Le Liber de misericordia et justitia d’Alger de Liège,” Revue historique de droit français et étranger 45 (1921): 80–118; and his “Alger de Liège et Gratien,” Revue des sciences philosophiques et théologiques 20 (1931): 18–21. This work, generally dated to about 1104, has been convincingly redated to the early 1090s by Nikolaus Häring, “A Study in the Sacramentology of Alger of Liège,” Mediaeval Studies 20 (1958): 41–42. His De misericordia et justitia is found in PL 180, cols. 857–968. It has been reedited by Robert Kretzschmar, Alger von Lüttichs Traktat “De misericordia et iustitia”: Ein kanonistischer Konkordanzversuch aus der Zeit des Investiturstreits, Quellen und Forschungen zum Recht im Mittelalter, no. 2 (Sigmaringen, 1985). On his methodology, see Fournier and Le Bras, Histoire de collections canoniques, 2:343–44; and Kuttner, “Father of the Science,” 7. Alger’s methodology had some parallels with the dicta found in Bonizone’s canonical collection, Liber de vita Christiana (1090–95), but the latter’s interventions in the text were meant to describe the organization of the sources and to ofer “pastoral admonitions”: ‘Kuttner, “Father of the Science,” 6.

249

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

canons for a much broader range of issues related to ecclesiastical discipline and justice. Like his predecessors, however, Ivo merely placed his texts under appropriate rubrics without authorial comment. Ivo’s Panormia, which he based largely on material taken from his Decretum, was more systematically arranged.While lacking Alger’s consistent authorial presence, Ivo did intervene by including brief summaries of the texts, often indicating what principle of law he believed they illustrated.80 Ivo’s Panormia was contemporary with Alger’s De misericordia, and both contributed to the approach that the author of Gratian I took to the texts of canon law, the irst principally by using commentary throughout the work and the second by its scope.81 But the identiication of precedents should not lead us to overlook Graziano’s originality. Although by the early twelfth century it had become a common goal of canon lawyers such as Bernold, Ivo, and Alger to seek resolution of contradictions in the canons by a variety of means, including dialectical argument, no author before the author of Gratian I seems to have conceived of the systematic use of such analysis to reconcile seemingly intractable contradictions in the sources with the goal of creating a unitary complex of juridical norms for the Christian Church. In both conceiving and implementing his project, the author of Gratian I was indebted to theological and philosophical doctrines developing in Francia by 1100. Parallel to his contemporary Abelard in theology, he set out to exploit for canon law “the full dialectical method of raising doctrinal problems for the sake of systematic progress and synthesis.”82 Although previous canonists had already made progress in the direction of separating juridical from theological questions, the author of Gratian I went further in isolating legal issues as the focus for his new methodology, and thereby separating canon law from dogmatic theology.83 Given the revolutionary potential of Gratian I, why do no commentaries on it survive? The poor knowledge of Roman law that its author evinced makes it improbable that Gratian I, even if composed in the 1120s, was written in the Bologna of Irnerio. By contrast, Gratian II, ifteen to thirty years later, almost certainly was produced in Bologna, where it enjoyed great success, as is shown by the rash of commentaries that followed its publication. Whether or not both versions were written by the same author, it was the second version of the work that 80 81 82

83

Fournier and Le Bras, Histoire de collections canoniques, 2:98. Ghellinck, Mouvement théologique, 452. Kuttner, “Father of the Science,” 10–11. On the doctrinal ainity between Graziano and Abelard as well as Hugo of Saint Victor, see Kuttner, “Zur Frage der theologischen Vorlagen Gratians,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, kanonistiche Abteilung 23 (1934): 243–68. Describing Graziano’s methodology, Kuttner, “Father of the Science,” 15–16, writes: “He always raises a problem, proposes an answer which he supports with a series of canons, each of them introduced with a summarizing rubric, then indicates an objection and supports it in the same way, concluding with a solution in which the contrasts are reconciled by a remarkable range of dialectical distinctions.” Cf. his “Discorso commemorativo tenuto nell’Aula Magna dell’Università di Bologna nella mattina del 17 aprile 1952,” Studia gratiana 1 (1953): 24–28. For an example of the close relationship between sacramental theology and canon law, see Nikolaus Häring, “The Interaction between Canon Law and Sacramental Theology in the Twelfth Century,” Proceedings of the Fourth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Toronto 21–25 August 1972, ed. Stephan Kuttner, Monumenta iuris canonica, ser. C, subsidia, no. 5 (Vatican City, 1976), 483–93. Cf. Arthur M. Landgraf, “Diritto canonico e teologia nel secolo XII,” Studia gratiana 1 (1953): 373–413.

250

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

became historically important, and its author was the Graziano known to the earliest Bolognese commentators. Methodologically the Decretum may have had signiicant repercussions on the study of Roman law. Whereas the irst generations of Roman lawyers made their discoveries by depending primarily on tools of rhetoric, “Graziano” relied heavily on advances made in dialectical reasoning, guided by the logica vetus, primarily in the ield of theology. The success of Graziano’s book in turn might have played a role in the increased reliance on dialectical reasoning found in the work of scholars of civil law in the generation after that of the Four Doctors.84 Between the 1150s and the 1180s, Bolognese canon lawyers wrote about one hundred and ifty sets of glosses on Graziano’s work, as well as a series of systematic textbooks and detailed commentaries.85 Already by the 1150s the Decretum had been abridged by an unknown legist in Incipit Quoniam egestas (ca. 1150); Paucapalea had written his Summa (ca. 1150); and perhaps Rolando had published his Stroma ex decretorum corpore carptum (early 1150s).86 Consisting of a scattering of marginal notes indicating parallel or contrary passages, notable facts, and summaries of speciic arguments, the latter two commentaries were superseded within a decade (ca. 1164) by Ruino’s Summa decretorum, which provided a general and detailed commentary on the whole Decretum. Ruino’s work, however, was not composed of glosses but rather consisted of summaries of the contents of individual chapters.87 Highly inluential, the Summa decretorum directly inspired two members of the next generation of canon lawyers: Stephen of Tournai and Giovanni of Faenza.88 84

85

86

87

88

The increased use of dialectical legal reasoning in Roman law seems to have begun with Rogerio’s Quaestiones super Institutis. He was a student of Bulgaro: Paradisi, “Osservazioni sull’uso del metodo dialettico,” 704. Stephan Kuttner, “Bernardus Compostellanus antiquus: A Study in the Glossators of the Canon Law,” Traditio 1 (1943): 279–80. A repertorium of many of these glosses is found in Rudolf Wiegand, Die Glossen zum Dekret Gratians: Studien zu den frühen Glossen und Glossenkomposition, Studia gratiana, vols. 25 and 26 (1991). On Rolando and Paucapalea, see Rudolf Weigand, “Frühe Kanonisten und ihre Karriere in der Kirche,” Zeitschrift der Savigny-Stiftung für Rechtsgeschichte, kanonistiche Abteilung 76 (1990): 136–37. Weigand argues for a series of versions of Rolando’s Summa into the 1160s. On the abbreviation, see Rudoph Wiegand, “Die Dekretabbreviatio ‘Quoniam egestas’ und ihre Glossen,” in “Fides et ius”: Festschrift für Georg May zum 65. Geburtstag, ed. Winfried Aymans, Anna Egler, and Joseph Listl (Regensburg, 1991), 256. John T. Noonan, “The True Paucapalea,” in Proceedings of the Fifth International Congress of Medieval Canon Law, Salamanca, 21–25 September 1976, ed. Stephan Kuttner and Kenneth Pennington, Monumenta juris canonici, ser. C, subsidia, no. 6 (Vatican City, 1980), 157–86, has argued that the Summa über das Decretum Gratiani, ed. Johann F. von Schulte (Giessen, 1890), considered to be the summa of Paucapalea, was derived from it. Rudolf Weigand,“Paucapalea und die frühe Kanonistik,” Archiv für katholisches Kirchenrecht 150 (1981): 137–57, convincingly refutes Noonan’s position that Bib. Naz., Conv. Soppr. G. IV, 1736, not known to Schulte, was Paucapalea’s Summa. Rolando’s Stroma was edited by Friedrich Thaner (Innsbruck, 1874). Stephan Kuttner, Repertorium der Kanonistik (1140–1234): Prodromus corporis glossarum, Studi e testi, no. 71 (1937), 131–32; Gabriel Le Bras, Charles Lefebvre, and Jacqueline Rambaud, L’histoire du droit et des institutions de l’Église en Occident, vol. 7: L’âge classique 1140–1378 (Paris, 1965), 278–79; and Robert Benson, “Ruin,” Dictionnaire de droit canonique, vol. 7 (Paris, 1965), 779–84.Weigand’s “Frühe Kanonisten,” 138–39, dates the work to 1164. Weigand, “Frühe Kanonisten,” 132. Étienne’s work was written in the 1160s and John’s about 1171 (140 and 143).

251

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

By 1160, however, a form of commentary consisting of a mixture of summaries and gloss apparatus characterized most of the production of the Italian school. Of the dozen or more commentaries of that type produced over the next thirty years, the most complete representative of the genre was Uguccio of Pisa’s Summa decretorum, probably composed between 1188 and 1190. Generally considered the greatest of all the decretists, Uguccio built a bridge between the ius antiquum and the ius novum – between the earlier school of canon law that focused on Graziano’s compilation and the later one concerned with welding his Decretum into a unitary structure with papal decretals.89 After an extended introduction on the general nature of canon law, Uguccio submitted the complete text of the Decretum to an exegetical and analytical gloss. As he moved through the work, his interpretation took the form of a continual dialogue with the opinions of canonists, theologians, and Roman lawyers of his own century. He closely analyzed the legal decisions of ecclesiastical authorities, church councils, and so on, as well as the positions of individual writers, and he was always ready to make his own position clear. His reliance on Roman law, his use of papal decretals in his interpretations, and his tendency to treat canon law as independent from theology all signaled a new orientation. His work provided the foundation for John the German’s commentary (before 1217) that became the glossa ordinaria for the Decretum.90 The achievements of Italian canon lawyers, from the author of Gratian II to Uguccio, were considerable. With the Decretum the Church inally had a codiication of its laws, and the rich mantle of interpretation, which Uguccio ultimately systematized, lending its provisions coherence and intelligibilty. At the same time the interpretive tradition tended to expand the concept of the spiritual sphere and emphasize its superiority to secular rule. At least its dominance seemed symbolically guaranteed: Was not the sun superior to the moon, the soul to the body, and the spiritual to the temporal? In the period after the Investiture Struggle, canon lawyers consistently endeavored to expand spiritual jurisdiction and to present the papacy as the highest administrator, legislator, and judge of the Church. ARS DICTAMINIS

From the early decades of the twelfth century Bologna’s fame grew not only as a center for legal studies but also for instruction in ars dictaminis, the art of letter writing, a newly formalized discipline that by mid-century had largely coopted the ield of rhetoric.91 What explains the emergence of the sudden popularity of this new ield of 89

90

91

Alfons M. Stickler,“Uguccio de Pise,” in the Dictionnaire de droit canonique, vol. 7 (Paris, 1965), 1357–62. See also Le Bras, Histoire du droit, 279–81; and Kuttner, Repertorium, 157–160. Cf. Cortese, Il diritto nella storia medievale, 2:226–28. Weigand, “Frühe Kanonisten,” 145, ofers no date of composition. This paragraph is based on Stickler, “Uguccio de Pise,” 1358–60. See as well Le Bras, Histoire du droit, 279–80; and Kuttner, Repertorium, 3. On Johannes Tentonicus, see Brundage, The Medieval Origins of the Legal Profession, 119. The ield of letter writing has produced a series of excellent scholarly summaries and bibliographical tools. See Giles Constable, Letters and Letter-Collections, Typologie des sources du Moyen Âge occidental, fasc. 17, A-11 (Turnhout, 1976); Martin Camargo, Ars dictaminis, ars dictandi, Typologie

252

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

study? Chapter 4 maintained that intense popular interest in religious reform, which was stimulated by written as well as oral argument, awakened a relatively large number of laymen and clerics to the advantages of both reading and writing. Especially in the context of the rapidly widening economic and political horizons of Italian society, the ability to write a letter could prove a ticket to success. Ars dictaminis aimed at simplifying letter writing, a genre of composition that had hitherto been very lexible and had often been used as a medium for attaining literary distinction. The character of the letter style that emerged as the standard model by the middle decades of the twelfth century was in large part determined, irst, by the low level of Latin literacy – the Latin had to be highly formulaic, with minimal opportunity for individual variation liable to error – and second, by the increasingly legalistic mentality of the regnum.92 The new style of letter writing as developed in Bologna was a sister of the notarial document. The kinds of situations requiring notarial documentation, while numerous, were limited, and even a barely Latin-literate notary could keep a collection of documents covering all occasions on hand to serve as models. Manuals of ars notarie would not appear until the irst quarter of the thirteenth century, when notarial schools spread. The subjects for letter writing, however, appeared almost ininite in number. Therefore, any serious efort to regulate the letter in accordance with the twelfthcentury’s passion for organization demanded manuals laying down general rules of composition. From the outset, examples of model letters were often appended to the manuals, and by the second half of the twelfth century collections of model letters without theoretical introductions were circulating independently. Although throughout its long career ars dictaminis claimed to be based on ancient antecedents, it was in fact a medieval creation largely determined by the needs of the contemporary society.93 Nonetheless, the teachers of the ars dictaminis did take

92

93

des sources du Moyen-Âge occidental, fasc. 60, A-V.A.2 (Turnhout, 1991); Franz-Josef Worstbrock, Monika Klaes, and Jutta Lutten, Repertorium der Artes dictandi des Mittelalters.Vol. 1:Von dem Änfangen bis um 1200 (Munich, 1992); hereafter referred to as Repertorium; and John O. Ward, Ciceronian Rhetoric in Treatise, Scholion, and Commentary, Typologie des sources du Moyen Âge occidental, fasc. 58, A–V.A.2 (Turnhout, 1995). Emil Polak surveys the thousands of manuscripts containing medieval manuals of dictamen and letters in Medieval and Renaissance Letter Treatises and Form Letters: A Census of Manuscripts Found in Eastern Europe and the Former U.S.S.R. (Leiden and New York, 1992), as well as the companion volume, Medieval and Renaissance Letter Treatises and Form Letters: A Census of Manuscripts Found in Parts of Western Europe, Japan, and the United States of America (Leiden and New York, 1994). For the interplay between dictamen as both a product of this process and an active force in its development, see Giles Constable, “The Structure of Medieval Society according to the Dictatores of the Twelfth Century,” Law, Church, and Society: Essays in Honor of Stephan Kuttner, ed. Kenneth Pennington and Robert Somerville (Philadelphia, 1977), 253–67. In fact, the ancients had little to say about letter writing because the letter was considered to require the lexibility of conversation.The earliest surviving Greek treatise (3rd. c. A. D.) deines the structure of the letter as “loose and not too long,” while Cicero contrasts letters written as they are in “plebian style” and “everyday words” with the rich variety of styles used in his orations: George M. A. Grube, A Greek Critic: Demetrius on Style (Toronto, 1961), 112. In the case of oicial or public communications, letters that were read aloud on delivery, the rules governing oratory, for which there were many textbooks, were applicable. Julius Victor in the fourth century contrasts litterae negotiales to litterae familiares: Julius Victor, Ars rhetorica, ed. Karl Halm, in Rhetores latini minores (Leipzig, 1863), 447.

253

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

what help they could get from antiquity and sought guidance for letter composition in the ancient handbooks of oratory, primarily in Cicero’s De inventione and the pseudo-Ciceronian Ad Herennium. The ancients had understood that oicial communications, particularly important letters, were often read aloud by the recipient or in the recipient’s presence and thus at the moment of communication took on the appearance of orations. Circumstances of political and social life, however, encouraged the medieval dictatores to impose on what earlier and later ages considered personal letters the same stylistic practices imposed on oicial ones.94 Lacking in large part ancient or modern distinctions between public and private, medieval society had no reason to separate private from public personalities or individuals from oice or status within a particular group. A letter, whatever its purposes, was expected to relect the power relationship between writer and addressee. Conceived along such impersonal lines, the letter became an eicient vehicle for oicial purposes. Diplomacy particularly required an elaborate protocol by which subtle changes in formulas or structure constituted signals of altered attitudes and situations. Dictamen’s tyranny of stylistic prescriptions, however, discouraged the spontaneity and direct expression of thought and feeling that, at other times in history, have given the personal letter its distinctive character. With the difusion of the prescriptions of ars dictaminis the personal letter as such disappeared.95 The irst surviving handbook of the new discipline in the art of letter writing, the Flores rhetorici, was composed by Alberico (d. 1105) in the monastic setting of Montecassino around 1075. We would have expected the new simpliied version of letter writing to have begun in the busy area north of Rome where the economy and the political system were in rapid development. There is suicient evidence, nevertheless, to suggest that the doctrines taught by Alberico were common to other classrooms in the period, and that his was but the irst surviving example of a synthetic treatment of the subject.96

94

95

96

For more bibliography on ancient epistolography, see my “‘Medieval Ars dictaminis’” and the Beginnings of Humanism: A New Construction of the Problem,” Renaissance Quarterly 35 (1982): 7. John O. Ward, “Rhetorical Theory and the Rise and Decline of Dictamen in the Middle Ages and Early Renaissance,” Rhetorica 19 (2001): 177, cogently attributes the lack of manuals in antiquity to the use of formularies and models in the schools and various secretariats of the empire. On oral reading of writings, see Ruth Crosby, “Oral Delivery in the Middle Ages,” Speculum 11 (1936): 88–110; and Constable, Letters and Letter Collections, 53–54. Also see Letters of Peter the Venerable, ed. Giles Constable, 2 vols. (Cambridge, Mass., 1967), 2:27, n. 115. Paul Saenger’s Space between Words:The Origins of Silent Reading (Stanford, Calif., 1997) is devoted to a consideration of the relationship between silent and oral reading. The inluence of Italian-style dictamen becomes obvious in northern Europe only after 1200. The letters of Peter of Blois (d. 1205) are the last survivors of the old epistolography. Joseph de Ghellinck, L’essor de la littérature latine au xii siècle, 2 vols. (Brussels, 1946), 2:67, criticizes the dictatores for misunderstanding the character of the letter as a means of communication: “en transportant dans le genre épistolaire ce que l’Orator de Cicéron reservait au genre oratoire, appelé à captivé l’oreille pour mieux conquérir l’esprit, ils enlevaient à la lettre tout ce qu’elle pouvait avoir de charme personnel, d’abandon conidentiel, de sentiment et de vie.” While valid for letters of a personal nature, as suggested above, the criticism is unfounded as far as oicial letters are concerned. The existence of a tradition of rules for letter writing prior to Alberico’s formulation of the art is the focus of William D. Patt’s study, “Early Ars dictaminis as Response to a Changing Society,”

254

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

Alberico’s manual began by dividing the letter into ive parts, the salutatio, the exordium or proemium, the narratio, the argumentatio, and the conclusio.97 His associations with the model of the ancient oration become clear when he characterizes the task of the exordium as rendering the reader “attentive, kindly disposed and receptive” and illustrates his discussion of the structure of the letter by examples drawn indiscriminately from letters and speeches.98 He then turns to a detailed consideration of colores rhetorici applicable to all kinds of composition, which takes up more than half the book.99 The extensive and often frequent quotations from ancient literature relect the assumption that the student would have had training in pagan texts before studying letter writing. Another work attributed to Alberico, Brevarium de dictamine, also discusses letter writing, but only as part of a longer treatise considering a range of other rhetorical topics.100 Because Alberico wrote the irst surviving manual providing the rules for the composition of letters, some scholars tend to regard him as the founder of ars dictaminis. Others, however – and I include myself among their number – disagree with that judgment. Alberico melds letter writing into a broad treatment of Latin composition.101 In contrast, the prime characteristic of medieval ars dictaminis as it developed in the twelfth century was its separation from the study of rhetoric in general.102 The igure who should more properly be considered the founder of ars dictaminis was Adalberto of Samaria, a layman teaching in Bologna, whose Praecepta dictaminum (written in Bologna between 1112 and 1118) was concerned only with letter writing to the exclusion of all other aspects of rhetoric.103 He knew Alberico’s work

97 98

99

100

101 102

103

Viator 9 (1978): 135–55. Alberico of Montecassino’s manual is published as Flores rhetorici, ed. Mauro Inguanez and Henry M. Willard, Miscellanea cassinese, no. 14 (Montecassino, 1938). See the bibliography for Alberico in Anselmo Lentini, “Alberico,” in DBI, vol. 1 (1960), 646; and Paul Oskar Kristeller, “Philosophy and Rhetoric from Antiquity to the Renaissance: The Middle Ages,” in his Renaissance Thought and Its Sources, ed. Michael Mooney (New York, 1979), 318, n. 22. He did not, however, consider the salutatio a part of the letter proper; Flores, 36–38. Because conirmatio and refutatio appear to be included by Alberico in argumentatio, only partitio from the classical oration is omitted: Inv., I:22–23. In composing his letter in the form of an invective, Gunzo, it will be remembered, followed the six-part oratorial pattern faithfully. In the edition of the work, Alberico devotes pp. 35–41 to letter writing and 41–56 to the colores and other aspects of composition. The most complete edition of the Brevarium de dictamine is that by Peter-Christian Groll, who edited chapters 1–17 (of 22) for part 2 of his doctoral dissertation,“Das ‘Enchiridion de prosis et de rithmis’ des Alberich von Montecassino und die Anonymi ‘ars dictandi,’” Ph.D. diss., University of Freiburg, 1963). His edition, however, was based on only three of the ive manuscripts that have so far been identiied. Janine L. Peterson, “The Transmission and Reception of Alberic of Montecassino,” Scriptorium 57 (2003): 34–35, dates the irst seventeen chapters to 1082 and pp. 18–22 to early in the twelfth century. Alberico is the likely author of at least part of the work. Camargo, Ars dictaminis, ars dictandi, 30–31. Ward, “Rhetorical Theory and the Rise and Decline of Dictamen in the Middle Ages,” 177–90, maintains that in the twelfth century in both Italy and transalpine Europe ars dictaminis was taught separately from classical rhetorical theory. The text is published in Adalbertus samaritanus: Praecepta dictaminum, ed. Franz-Josef Schmale, MGH, Quellen zur Geistesgeschichte des Mittelalters, no. 3 (Weimar, 1961). Schmale believes him to be a layman (8). For dating, see Worstbrock, Repertorium, 1. Doubtless there were other masters in between Alberico and Adalberto whose works have not survived. Enrico Francigena (l. 1120s) refers to his own master as Anselmo: Patt, “Early Ars dictaminis,” 143, and Ugo of Bologna (l . 1120s)

255

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

and criticized it for “repetitiousness” (reciprocaciones) and unspeciied “oddities” (inusitationes). Nevertheless, while Adalberto’s manual relected his awareness of a public primarily concerned with knowledge of the mechanics of letter writing, his observation that preparation for that art required previous training in grammar, rhetoric, and dialectic suggests that he had not yet divorced ars dictaminis from the traditional curriculum.104 From the fact that Adalberto frequently cited ancient authors in the theoretical sections of the manual and in the model letters, together with the fact that he composed the models in elaborate language, we may infer his commitment to the book culture of the previous century.105 His inclusion of papal, imperial, and episcopal letters indicates that he was setting a high standard for his students to imitate. Nonetheless, Adalberto’s emphasis on the importance of letter writing threatened the broad curriculum of study that he inherited. In a passage from one of his own model letters in which he endeavored to promote dictamen, Adalberto was unknowingly prophetic when he wrote, “For what advantage is it to anyone to sweat for a long time in the profession of grammar, if he does not know how, when it shall be necessary, to write at least one letter?”106 If, as the passage suggests, knowledge of letter writing might be the goal of one’s formal education, what need would there be “to sweat for a long time in the profession of grammar”? Adalberto’s successors would decide that there was none. The manuals of two of Adalberto’s contemporaries, Ugo of Bologna’s Rationes dictandi prosaice (ca. 1119–24) and Enrico Francigena’s Aurea gemma (ca. 1119–24), probably written in Pavia, were also narrowly concerned with letter writing.107 Enrico’s model letters resemble those of Adalberto in that they are written in a learned style with classical references, although fewer. By contrast, Ugo’s manual, dedicated to “D., Citizen of Ferrara, most just judex sacri palatii of the emperor,” ofers numerous models of letters for diferent occasions ranging in style from stilus altus to stilus humilis.108 In this way his manual meets the promise that he makes in

104

105

106

107

108

in his Rationes dictandi prosaice, published in Ludwig Rockinger, Briefsteller und Formelbücher des eilften bis vierzehnten Jahrhunderts, Quellen und Erörterungen zur bayerischen und deutschen Geschichte, no. 9 (Munich, 1963), 1:53, defends Alberico against the attacks of Adalberto and a certain Aigulfo, who remains without further identiication. Adalberto, Praecepta, 31: “Primum itaque dictatorem oportet cognoscere grammaticam, rhetoricam, dialeticam, eloquentie studia huic operi necessaria.” In my discussion of ars dictaminis in my “The Arts of Letter-Writing,” in The Cambridge History of Literary Criticism. Vol. II: The Middle Ages, ed. Alastair Minnis and Ian Johnson (Oxford, 2005), 70, I presented Adalberto as both reducing the ield of rhetoric to letter writing and divorcing it from the literary tradition grounded in the classics. I now conclude, however, that while he deserves credit for the irst innovation, the divorce from the Latin classics occurred in the work of Adalberto’s contemporary Ugo and generally in writers of the following generation. Adalberto’s letter is included among the model letters in Ugo’s Rationes dictandi, 84: “Quid enim prodest alicui diu gramaticae professioni insudare, si nescierit cum oportuerit – saltim unam epistolam dictare?” Enrico’s collection of letters is published by Odebrecht, “Briefmuster,” 242–61. The preface to the work was published by Ernst H. Kantorowicz, “Anonymi Aurea gemma,” Medievalia et humanistica 1 (1943): 56–57. Ugo’s salutation reads (53): “Ugo bononiensis ecclesie canonicus et sacerdos humillimus seruus crucis Cristi D Ferariensium civi sacri palacii imperatoris equissimo iudici salutem et peticionis

256

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

the preface that the work will serve the needs not only of beginning students but also of more experienced letter writers. Generally his models for the salutation and exordium are elaborate, and students could have been expected to choose among them for the one appropriate to a particular occasion. If Adalberto was the founder of ars dictaminis, Ugo was the creator of the letter in stilus humilis, which would become the trademark of Bolognese ars dictaminis and the dominant style of letter writing in Italy for the next three hundred years.109 The Summa dictaminum (1144/45) by Master Bernardo, a cleric who was either French or had close ties to Francia, returns letter writing to its place in the broader ield of rhetoric in general.110 Bernardo had already published an earlier letterwriting manual in Bologna, the Rationes dictandi (ca. 1138–43), that would exert an enormous inluence on the ield. Apparently a partial draft of the longer Summa, the Rationes dictandi laid out in detail what was to become the standard ive-part letter of ars dictaminis: salutatio, benevolentie captatio (also called the exordium), narratio, petitio, and conclusio.111 While the Summa constituted an ampliication of the teachings of the Rationes on letter writing, the work in its later sections went beyond dictamen to treat a wide range of genres of literary composition.112 Uncharacteristically for Italian artes dictaminis of the period, the book began with a verse prologue consisting of thirty-six hexameter lines, seventeen of which were borrowed from the epilogue of Marbod of Rennes’s De ornamentis verborum. It then proceeded to discuss at length the ive-part letter with many examples (fols. 1–37) and then gave instructions in writing metric (fols. 37v–58v) and rhythmic poetry (fols. 59–70), and in colores rhetorici (fols. 70–86).113 We might expect that the evident commitment of the author to the traditional book culture would have produced letters as elaborately worded as those of

109 110

111

112

113

efectum.” As for his audience, he writes that, with these rules, “disciplinam rudibus et documenta provectis breviter conmodeque traderem.” For an example of Ugo’s stilus humilis, see my “The Arts of Letter-Writing,” 72. Repertorium, 30. In his examples in the Summa, he mentions such place-names as Paris, Lyon, Arles, Cluny, and Clairvaux, along with Italian place-names. For a description, see Repertorium, 24–27. The irst of the two parts of the Rationes dictandi was published by Rockinger, Briefsteller und Formelbücher, 1:9–28, who mistakenly attributed it to Alberico of Montecassino; Repertorium, 25. Signiicantly, in the course of explaining the rules of the art, the author made only one classical reference and that a commonplace. The author paraphrased Cicero, In Cat. 3.5: “Quis sim, ex eo quem ad te misi cognosces.” See James J. Murphy, Three Medieval Rhetorical Arts (Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1971), 20, who translates from Rockinger’s edition. Murphy, however, attributes the quotation to Sallust. For a description of the Summa dictaminum, which remains unpublished, see Repertorium, 29–31. My folio citations are taken from Biblioteca dell’Accademia dei Filopatridi Savignano dei Rubicone, 45. I am grateful to Dr. Arturo Menghi Sartorio, librarian of the Accademia, for sending me a disk version of the manuscript. The treatise on rhetorical colors is essentially taken from Marbod’s De ornamentis verborum. The manuscript also includes two letter collections, one ascribed to Bernardo (fols. 86–133v) and the other to his disciple Guido (fols. 134–54v). For Guido’s letter collections, see below n. 122. The opening verses and the section on Latin verse in the Summa make it highly probable that he was the author of the treatises on Latin metric and rhyme in the Savignano di Romagna manuscript. Bernardo’s manual enjoyed enormous popularity in northern Europe, where it it well with a thriving traditional book culture: Repertorium, 24.

257

The Dominance of the Legal–Rhetorical Mentality

Adalberto or Enrico. The letters in the collection ascribed to Bernardo dated from their contents to 1142–44, however, are syntactically uncomplicated and highly formulaic. They raise the question of why Bernardo would have thought the Summa’s extensive treatment of rhetorical igures and linguistic detail necessary.114 As for classical references, the letters contain only two. Aphoristic in character, the one taken from Lucan and the other from Sallust, both had probably already become proverbial among dictatores.115 The collection of model letters attached to the Introductiones prosaici dictaminis (1145–52), a work closely related to the Summa dictaminum, perhaps composed by one of Bernardo’s students, exhibits the same tendency to streamline letter writing by composing in stilus humilis.116 The anonymous author imitates earlier manuals by including letters from emperors and popes in his collection, but in this case they are all imaginary creations, written in the same simpliied style as his other models.117 A second contemporary collection, this one of Tuscan origin, dated 1154/55, ofers model letters that can easily be imitated, but they deal largely with local politics and everyday relationships.118 The editor of the collection refers to it as a “forerunner of municipal ars dictandi.”119 The collection was typical of ars dictaminis manuals in the second half of the century in that it consisted merely of model letters with no discussion of theory.120 It has been suggested that after 1150 dictatores no longer needed to discuss the theoretical aspects of dictamen in their manuals because they could teach theory from the older manuals.121 While this may be partly true, the absence of theoretical discussions after 1150 more likely indicates that, given the development of a new streamlined style of letter writing, teachers felt able to teach students dictamen simply by imitating 114

115

116

117

118

119

120

121

Bernardus bononiensis: Multiplices epistole que diversis et variis negotiis utiliter possunt accomodari, ed. Virgilio Pini (Bologna, 1969). I do not understand the ascription “bononiensis.” Bernardo cites (20) Lucan, I:281: “semper nocuit diferre paratis,” and quotes (21) Sallust, Iug. 10.6: “nam concordia parvae res crescunt, discordia maximae dilabuntur.” The latter quotation had already appeared both in Adalberto, 24, and Enrico of Francigena, 253. The Introductiones prosaici dictaminis is described in Repertorium, 37–42, and dated as written between 1145 and 1152 (38). The Repertorium says of its author (24): “Möglicherweise handelt es sich um das Werk eines Schülers des Bernardus.” Charles H. Haskins, “An Italian Master Bernard,” in Essays in History Presented to Reginald Lane Poole, ed. H. W. Carless Davis (Oxford, 1927), 215, notes that no classical author is mentioned in the manual except Cicero. Presumably, the citations from Cicero would have been from the rhetorical manuals. Hermann Kalbfuss, “Eine Bologneser Ars dictandi des XII. Jahrhunderts,” Quellen und Forschungen aus italienischen Archiven und Bibliotheken 16 (1914): 1–35. Helene Wieruszowski, “A Twelfth-Century Ars dictaminis in the Barberini Collection of the Vatican Library,” Traditio 18 (1962): 382–92. She dates the manuscript 1154/55 (384). Ibid., 385. Wieruszowski (385) considers the references to mythology and the scattering of Ovidian references as indicating that the teaching of ars dictaminis was “still based on a thorough study of ancient authors.” Given that these are models, the level of Latin training required of a student to put together his own letter would have been equivalent to Latin II in a modern American high school. Cf. Patt, “Early Ars dictaminis,” 149. I should add that two northern Italian manuals were roughly contemporary with Bernardo’s Summa: Praecepta prosaici dictaminis secundum Tullium, ca. 1140, and Alberto of Asti, Flores dictandi, ca. 1148–53. Both were devoted strictly to letter writing. For a description of the manuals, see Repertorium, 152–53 and 19–20, respectively. Charles H. Haskins, “Early Artes dictandi in Italy,” Studies in Medieval Culture (New York, 1929), 188. Cf. Wieruszowski, “A Twelfth-Century Ars dictaminis,” 385.

258

The Triumph of the Legal Culture

the forms and language of the model letters that they provided in their manuals without speciic recourse to theory. About twenty years lay between the irst and second generation of manuals, but already in the irst generation Ugo, when writing to a layman, showed himself willing to abandon the elitist conception of the letter as a manifestation of the writer’s training in the book culture. Despite the elaborate pretensions of second-generation manuals such as the Summa dictaminum and the Introductiones prosaice dictaminis, dictatores realized that style had to it the capacities of the expanding mass of new learners, both laymen and clerics.That involved fashioning a new form of eloquence using elements of the stilus humilis, a form that could be mastered by students with only a modest level o