In the middle of the 11th century, the King of Dalmatia is said to have given the Pope a parrot that could speak the words "I am going to the Pope" without much guidance. At any rate, this is how a biography of Pope Leo IX records it: "When the venerable shepherd, tired of dealing with external affairs, retired to his private chamber at some point, or perhaps a depression weighed down his heart, which was burdened by too much excitement, this parrot was often present as a helper against that grief, let his pleasingly short 'Papa Leo' sound and thus kindled inner strength in him." (Vita Leonis, MGH SS rer. Germ. [70], p. 193).
Approaches
The story appears in the context of the remarks that Leo IX's reputation spread to all nations. Accordingly, the King of Dalmatia had sent this marvellous bird as a gift, also in order to obtain an audience.
Does church reform need a parrot? In any case, it is striking that Pope Leo IX did not come from Rome, but from Lorraine. And although the vita is located in the milieu of Pope Leo's origins, in Toul in Lorraine, it mentions Dalmatia, looks eastwards and thus opens up more distant worlds. So it was not only the parrot as a symbol that was new. Tradition-bound action or new beginnings is the title of the papal historical contribution to the Historical Days. The answer to this question can hardly be unambiguous. The struggle for reform can be characterised by many aspects. To this day, reform often involves conflict. If one only looks at the lists of legitimate popes in the Annuario pontificio, it is noticeable that the so-called antipopes (Benedict X, Honorius II and Clement III), who competed for a long time with the holders of office - who were subsequently recognised as legitimate - were also anything but smooth sailing in the papal office during the period in question.
Leo IX was not the first pope to be labelled a reform pope, but he was certainly particularly important in this circle. What did it mean when an institution that had long been focussed on the city of Rome, the urbs, was increasingly led by clerics from other regions? Did this promote reform and bring new ideas to Rome? How new was this, and how can new qualities of reform be recognised? How were these ideas anchored, today we would say: did they pass the sustainability test? Were they born out of necessity? Did they promote a view of regions outside Rome? Numerous studies have been published in recent years on these and other questions, but most of them deal with the 11th and 12th centuries together. This is just a few highlights of the early period of church reform, to be supplemented by further contributions.
Themes and protagonists
The new edition of the Jaffé, an index to the surviving papal historical sources - charters, letters and other notes - documents a basic finding in the fourth volume published in 2020 on the period from 1024 to 1073: from no. 8834 to no. 11338, i.e. from 2504 regnal numbers, 2116 are attributable to the pontificates of Leo IX, Victor II, Stephen IX, Nicholas II and Alexander II. The documentation thus increases by leaps and bounds during this period. But did the beginning mass transmission necessarily mean more reform? Let's take a brief look at the themes and protagonists.
Not all accounts of the age of church reform - which is sometimes abbreviated and characterised with the label "Investiture Controversy" - begin with the events of 1046, the intervention of Henry III in Roman affairs, or with the pontificate of Leo IX in 1049, 1049, but sometimes also with 1054 (break with Byzantium) or 1073 with the central pontificate of Gregory VII. If one wishes to characterise the period up to the beginning of the schism in 1130 from the perspective of papal history, then a changed position of the papacy in the medieval world developed. However, the new position affected not only Germany and the empire, but also the emerging monarchies, the monastic communities that were increasingly united in associations and - particularly during the Crusades - other "states" and groups, especially in the eastern Mediterranean. The question of the extent to which the accompanying transformations in Rome, which can be characterised by buzzwords such as institutionalisation, rationalisation and professionalisation, were prerequisites, consequences or concomitant phenomena on the way to the new position of the papacy requires differentiated explanations, which are only considered here for the beginnings.
The changes in the general conditions were manifold: in the east, the increasing pressure from the Seljuks, in southern Italy the increasingly important Normans and, above all, fundamental reorganisations in the empires of the west and central Europe. The new positioning of Rome and the dispute between regnum and sacerdotium, between secular and ecclesiastical rule, are part of the wider context of these reorganisations, which affected spiritual, social and economic aspects in equal measure. New ways of life in the city increasingly shaped medieval society, the Christianisation of the craft of warfare, the participation of the laity in cultural life, the further development of schools, which later led to the establishment of universities, are just a few of the keywords.
If we look at the formative popes of this period, several characters stand out that are now more recognisable as individuals, of which Gregory VII (1073-1085) is the most prominent. If he is to be seen as a kind of pivotal point of this epoch, which is sometimes named after him, then the so-called German popes and representatives of various reform movements can be named before him; after Gregory VII, some popes were particularly committed to the new religious movements. Of the group of popes elevated before Gregory VII, Leo IX (1049-1054), who came from the reformist milieu in Lorraine, Nicholas II (1059-1061), who was based in Burgundy and had to assert himself against Benedict X, and Alexander II (1061-1073), who had been educated at the Milan Cathedral School and then became Bishop of Lucca, are particularly noteworthy.
After the pontificate of Damasus II (1047-1048), which lasted only a few days and which, as Bishop of Brixen, had already been elevated by Henry III in December 1047, but had to fight for his rule in Rome with the help of the ruler, Leo IX (1048/49-1054) appeared as an important reform pope with a very independent profile. Even after his appointment by Henry III in November/December 1048, he declared that he would only take office if he was unanimously elected by the Romans, which took place in February 1049. Royal backing was not enough for him. His choice of name points to a programme, as Leo I (440-461) had already formulated ideas of primacy with great emphasis.
The former Bishop of Toul, who was influenced by the Lorraine reform, attempted to reduce the risk of isolation that his two predecessors had experienced in Rome by importing supporters. These people formed the basis for a reorganised Curia and the emerging College of Cardinals. Leo was friends with Humbert of Moyenmoutier, who became Cardinal Bishop of Silva Candida in 1050. In addition to Humbert, Frederick, the son of the Duke of Lorraine and archdeacon of Liège, and Hugh Candidus from the Vosges monastery of Remiremont, who later acted as papal legate and cardinal priest, became further papal helpers. This import of people made it easier for Leo IX to create new structures in Rome. In imitation of the Roman-German rulers, he documented his claims by travelling extensively. After Leo's death in 1054, Emperor Henry III intervened once again in Rome and designated his chancellor, Bishop Gebhard of Eichstätt, who was elevated to Pope Victor II in Rome on 13 April 1055. Although his pontificate, which lasted until 23 June 1057, was characterised by a continued course of reform, his term of office was too short overall to make a major impact. Victor's two successors, who came from the Tuscian family, became more important for the development of Rome; during King Henry IV's minority, there was a certain estrangement between the Roman reform circles and the royal court.
Stephen IX, who was elevated again for the first time without consulting the royal court and was pope for only around six months, pursued similar goals to Leo IX, under whom he had already assumed duties as librarian and chancellor of the Roman Church. He had taken part in the momentous legation to Byzantium in 1054. Under him, the hermit movement in Rome grew stronger, partly because an important representative, the aforementioned Petrus Damiani, was now elevated to Cardinal Bishop of Ostia (1057).
Benedict (X), who received his doctorate in Rome after the tumultuous death of Stephen, soon had an opponent favoured by reform circles in Siena, the Florentine bishop Gerhard from Burgundy, who managed to have Benedict deposed in Sutri in January 1059. He then moved to Rome, where he was consecrated on 24 January 1059 and took the - perhaps programmatic - name Nicholas II. His elevation indicates the dynamics of the papal office, as he was elevated by five cardinal bishops against the Roman forces outside Rome. Hildebrand, who later became Gregory VII, had also encouraged this, as evidenced by the saying that Hildebrand fed his Nicholas like a donkey in a stable. The Roman Synod (1059) was groundbreaking, not only to legitimise his own position, but also to keep future elections free from accusations of secular involvement and Simonist machinations. A schism after the death of Nicholas II highlighted new constellations.
The Romans sent a delegation to King Henry IV. While a reform group led by Hildebrand (later Gregory VII) elevated the reformer Anselm of Lucca as Alexander II, the German royal court, Empress Agnes and Lombard bishops favoured Cadalus of Parma, who was elected pope as Honorius (II). Similar to Nicholas II, Alexander was finally able to enter Rome in 1063 with the help of Duke Gottfried of Lorraine; the papal schism ended in 1064 with his deposition and finally with the death of Honorius in 1072.
Even this brief sketch makes a number of things clear: in addition to the important impulses among the so-called German popes, including Leo IX, Nicholas II and Alexander II came to the fore as people who had to deal with rivals. The episcopal see of Rome was increasingly coveted and disputed.
Motu proprio - On the scope of papal action in the orbis christianus
But what was new? In 2002, Rudolf Schieffer used the term "motu proprio" to describe the "papal historical turning point", which was appropriate for this time. He meant the following: From 1046 onwards, the papacy increasingly developed from an institution that reacted - to requests, complaints, petitions - into a force that also made decisions on its own initiative, i.e. motu proprio. It was perhaps not so much the awareness of speaking for the entire Church that changed - as Roman bishops had repeatedly made this claim since antiquity - but rather the practical handling of the matter. Here are a few examples.
Travelling
Leo IX travelled more than his predecessors. In imitation of the Roman-German rulers, he made his claims as pope visible by travelling extensively, mainly to southern Italy, France and Germany. He obviously saw himself not only as Bishop of Rome, but also as Pope of all Christians. With the new means of rule, reform ideas and concepts could be better disseminated or implemented, especially when the pope presided over synods outside Rome; for example, in October 1049 in Reims, where Santiago de Compostela's apostolic claims were countered when it was criticised that the title universalis ecclesiae primas et apostolicus was reserved for the pope alone.
The purpose of Leo's journeys was to see what was right in various parts of the orbis christianus, to remedy grievances and spread ideas for reform. However, this was done without a direct request, which was the difference to earlier papal journeys, which tended to take place in conflict situations, such as John VIII's journey to France in 878 or Hadrian III's journey to Germany in 885, when the popes fled Rome, as it were. Travelling remained important in the long term; even Gregory VII practised it, and Urban II also used this form after 1095 because he sought support in France during the schism. The new beginnings of travelling were thus rooted in traditions that were, however, overcome at the same time.
Legacies
This applies in general, even if one considers that the personal presence of the pope in the orbis christianus was limited. Here the popes resorted to the means of legates, papal deputies, who had also been sent earlier, but mainly to Byzantium and the Carolingian Empire or its successor states. Here, too, an intensification and expansion took place. If we think of the kingdoms of Christian Spain in the 11th century, for example, between 1065 and 1073 the aforementioned Hugo Candidus, who had come to Rome with Leo IX, attempted to impose Roman church ideas on the so-called Mozarabic traditions in the long relatively isolated kingdoms of Spain. This intensification of papal influence through legates, but also through delegated judges and documents, was later to intensify further.
Normans
But what role did the popes play in the development of Christian monarchies? The Iberian kingdoms later sought papal protection more frequently in order to stabilise their rule, without it being possible to speak of feudal relationships. However, this happened with regard to the Normans, who had settled in southern Italy. From around 1015/16, Normans from north-west France were in the service of Lombard princes to fight against Byzantines and Saracens; they were eventually even enfeoffed by Salian rulers.
One of their most prominent leaders, Robert Guiscard († 1085), subjugated Calabria from 1046/47. Leo IX opposed him from 1053 because the Normans seemed to be preventing the implementation of his church policy. After going into battle himself with an army, he suffered a severe defeat at Civitate on 18 June, was imprisoned, remained in Beneventan and only returned to Rome at the beginning of April 1054; he died a few days after his return. Hermann von Reichenau gives a thoroughly critical account of the Normans and Leo's involvement in the battles: "After Easter, the Pope held another synod in Rome and then marched against the Normans with his army, as he had planned. The Normans asked for peace and promised to submit and serve him. They asked his permission to keep their previously unjust and violent conquests by his grace. But the pope refused these requests and demanded the return of St Peter's possessions [...]. But the Normans were superior in number. [...] Perhaps such a high-ranking priest, instead of fighting with armed force for ephemeral things, should confine himself to the weapons of the spirit [...]. They besieged the Pope in a castle, and when they had almost stormed the ramparts, he, obeying necessity, lifted the sentence of excommunication that he had previously imposed on them. So they took him prisoner, but brought him to Benevento with full honours and kept him there for a while without allowing him to return [...]."
A second step became more important in the long term, as Nicholas II's successor enfeoffed two Norman rulers in 1059: Count Richard of Aversa and Duke Robert Guiscard. With this new papal policy, papal sovereignty over southern Italy was claimed and enforced. As new feudatories, the Normans pledged to support the pope or, in the event of a disputed papal election, the "better cardinals". This also meant that imperial rights in southern Italy were called into question. The new relationship even included obliging Normans to provide military assistance in the event of conflict, if necessary against the emperors. In southern Italy, too, the image of the pope as a warlord and feudal lord may have developed further - especially with the general Leo IX - as Robert Guiscard's brother Roger sent
the Pope carries a St Peter's flag.
Byzantium
The conflict with Byzantium, which led to a rift between the Eastern and Western Churches at the end of Leo IX's pontificate, continued to strengthen Roman positions to a certain extent. The issues were not new; questions of the veneration of images or the filioque in the creed had been discussed repeatedly since at least Carolingian times; the problem of the two emperors and the disputes in southern Italy exacerbated the smouldering conflicts. The struggle over southern Italy contributed to particular tensions under Leo IX, as the popes' Norman policy also clashed with the interests of Byzantium. Attempts to settle the conflict did not lead to the desired success. Originally, the pope even sought an alliance with the East. A legation under the leadership of Humbert of Silva Candida, who had come to Rome with Leo as Humbert of Moyenmoutier, was supposed to reach a political and ecclesiastical agreement in Byzantium, but this led to a conflict with Patriarch Michael Kerularios (1043-1058).
Officially, it was not the competing interests in southern Italy that led to the break, but differences over the use of unleavened bread (azyme), Saturday fasting and the filioque. Nevertheless, there were also political interests behind the theological issues. Whether Humbert laid down the papal bull of excommunication against the patriarch on 16 July 1054 in the Hagia Sophia only as a person or as a representative of the pope is disputed. Humbert then took a stand on the controversial issues in various writings. Although the schism only solidified later, the schism of 1054 perhaps also led to the new reform policy in the West taking on a much stronger shape. The ousting of Greek influence in southern Italy and the new pact with the Normans could emphasise this impressively.
War
Whether the policy towards the Normans and Byzantium also had an impact on the later crusades must also be considered, as the papal attitude towards warfare was already reformulated here. A look at the Iberian Peninsula can further emphasise this. Alexander II's successes in Spain were based, among other things, on the activities of the active legate Hugo Candidus, who campaigned against the Mozarabic liturgy and in favour of Roman-canonical legal concepts. The Pope supported the intensified struggles of the "Reconquista" at this time with a call for the conquest of Barbastro in 1064. Amatus of Montecassino described the impression of contemporaries of this endeavour as follows:
"In order that the Christian duties of faith might be fulfilled and the wicked madness of the Saracens destroyed, the kings, counts and princes united by inspiration of God in one will and one plan. Thus a large body of troops was assembled, a strong army of knights from France, Burgundy and elsewhere, and with them were the valiant Normans. They marched to Spain. And they invoked the help of God, therefore God was present to support those who had asked him [...]."
The involvement of "foreigners" is clearly mentioned, as is the religious motivation. Pope Alexander II, who was reigning at the time, also supported this warlike action by promising a remission of penance, as can be seen from a fragment of a letter. This has often been interpreted as the first evidence of crusade indulgences, which later became more common. Although local interests dominated, the battles were now at least to some extent part of a European context, in which the popes also contributed their position. Or to put it another way: at least some contemporaries now interpreted the battles in this new perspective.
Travel, legates, conflict with Normans and Byzantium, warfare were thus not completely new topics, but - if one trusts tradition - they were obviously now dealt with in a different way, which strengthened the institutionalisation and independence of the papacy.
Functions and procedures - The papal election
This external reorientation with partly old means found its counterpart in internal discussions on the image of priests, the metropolitan structure, priestly and monastic forms of life. Central to a reorganised independent institution were procedures that we could trace in the Curia, the College of Cardinals, the Chancery and other areas. I will confine myself to the elevation of the respective popes, which traditionally, as with bishops, was carried out by the clergy and people of the city of Rome, but at the same time required confirmation by the secular power - in the early Middle Ages by Byzantium, from 817/824 by the Carolingians and Ottonians. In the early days of the reform period, Henry III was still important, but how unchallenged were the respective representatives? As already mentioned, Benedict (X), who received his doctorate in Rome in a tumultuous manner, soon had to give way to his successful opponent, Nicholas II. Not only to legitimise his own position, but also to keep future papal elevations free from accusations of secular involvement and simonistic machinations, the Roman Synod convened by Nicholas II a little later (1059) became groundbreaking. It was no longer the clergy and the people of Rome, including imperial confirmation, who were to determine the papal election, but the cardinals. This was also based on the idea that the Roman bishop could not have a metropolitan over him. The papal election decree, which conceptually went back to Peter Damiani, established this pioneering development, as it stipulated the decisive role of the cardinals in the papal election:
"Therefore, having been instructed by the example of our predecessors and other holy Fathers, we decide by our decree that upon the death of the bishop of this universal Roman Church, the cardinal bishops shall first deliberate with the utmost care, that they shall then call the cardinal clerics to them as soon as possible, and that the rest of the clergy and the people shall only then come to the consensus of the new election; lest the disease of venality creep in on any occasion, we therefore ordain that God-fearing men shall take precedence in the election of the pope now to be elevated, but that the others shall follow [...]. But because the apostolic see is prior to all the churches on earth and therefore cannot have a metropolitan above it, the cardinal bishops undoubtedly function instead of a metropolitan, for it is they who promote the elected bishop to the top position of the apostolic office. However, they should elect someone from within the same Church if a suitable person can be found, or one should accept someone from another Church if no suitable person can be found from the (Roman) Church itself, and in doing so the honour and reverence owed to our beloved son Henry [...] remain unaffected.
But if the depravity of shameful and unjust men should have become so strong that a pure, genuine and gratuitous election cannot take place in the city (Rome), then the cardinal bishops, together with the God-fearing clergy and Catholic laity - even if they should be few in number - shall have the legal authority to elect the bishop of the apostolic see wherever they deem it more appropriate [...]".
The papal election decree of 1059 replaced the election of the Roman bishop by the clergy and people with the right to vote for cardinal bishops, which was later extended to all cardinal ordinaries. Just how decisive this papal election decree was can be seen, among other things, from the fact that it was falsified shortly afterwards. The text of 1059 is controversial because a papal and an imperial version soon circulated, which differ essentially in a so-called royal paragraph. The falsified version may have originated in 1076 among Henry IV's supporters in northern Italy or in 1084 among the cardinals who had fallen away from Gregory. Although the decree had relatively little success as a written document - at least according to the findings of the manuscript tradition - the provisions that had arisen in a specific situation prevailed in the long term. The papal election was thus not only formalised and procedurally regulated, but also clearly set apart from the traditions of a bishop's election and no longer took imperial rights into account.
However, the papal election decree of 1059 did not solve the problem in the long term, because after the end of Gregory VII's pontificate, a phase characterised by competition began after long disputes. In the official Roman list, there are no fewer than 13 so-called "antipopes", from Alexander II, who is regarded as the 150th pope, to Alexander III, who has the number 164. The new procedures did not initially pass the sustainability test. Only after the two great schisms in the 12th century, which lasted from 1130 to 1138 and from 1159 to 1177, was a further decisive step taken with the specification of the two-thirds majority for papal elections in 1179. The learning process leading up to this regulation took a good century - but the success was resounding: there were no more antipopes until 1378. However, some consequences can already be deduced for the early period:
1. rule in the city of Rome was no longer the only decisive factor for the success of a pope, but rather the support of the entire orbis christianus. This also led to centralisation effects.
2 The importance of cardinals grew. To this day, cardinal elevations are relevant for the election of a future pope.
3. the role of the emperor was pushed into the background because the popes were increasingly able to rely on other monarchies or religious communities.
Writing and tradition
If we just look back at the few examples mentioned, it is noticeable that I have only presented a few of the substantive reform ideas, but rather the possibilities for disseminating these ideas. To make an assessment, however, we need to return to the sudden increase in writing, which was initially underpinned by the figures from Jaffé. The new written form did not only affect the papacy itself, for example when documents were now written in the Carolingian minuscule and no longer in the difficult-to-read curial or on more durable parchment instead of the perishable papyrus.
It also concerned storage - the first original register of Gregory VII has been preserved, which not only provides us with the well-known Dictatus Papae, but also impressively documents his numerous contacts in the various European empires. If this register had not survived, we would know much less about Gregory's ideas and political aims. The early crusade indulgence of Alexander II is preserved in a collection of legal texts, the Collectio Britannica. This addresses an important area, as the collection of letters and legal texts made a new system possible. Increasingly, collections of legal texts were now also compiled in Rome, which referred to earlier papal pronouncements, among other things, after collections such as that of Regino of Prüm or Burchard of Worms had previously been influential.
This cannot be developed in detail here, but for example we find disputes documented in these collections, such as the conflict between Rome and Constantinople in the 9th century. The respective texts were already available before - but they were now used in a new way. Arrangement, dissemination and application were the new features of this turning point in law and writing. The reform topics were taken up in numerous pamphlets, which used this legal material to address current issues such as simony, celibacy or, later, questions of investiture. Of the early authors, at least Petrus Damiani and Humbert of Moyenmoutier, later cardinal bishops of Ostia and Silva Candida, should be mentioned. The numerous treatises led to a culture of controversy, which in the long term also led to the academic paths of the 12th century. However, the multiplied and very diverse writing and tradition itself was a form of new approach and reform, because people were more aware than before of the origins and principles of their own self-image.
Summary and outlook
Let's take a brief look back. Tradition was always present in the reform processes, just think of how important the return to the forms of the early church, for example the vita apostolica - if it was known at all - was as a figure of argumentation in many writings. Important representatives of the phase of papal history I have presented came from reform milieus where this was discussed: Leo IX from Lorraine, Nicholas II from Burgundy, Alexander II from central Italy, not to mention Gregory VII, who is still specifically presented here. All were familiar with discussions of reform, but these were almost always bound by tradition. Tradition was omnipresent, it was what you made of it that mattered.
The various aspects of the papal historical turn, which I could only present as examples, were also bound to tradition, but were given a new direction. In addition, several aspects intertwined, such as travelling and legations - also to Byzantium. However, the strongest developments probably took place where reaction was initially required: with the Normans. The fact that this led to a new form of feudal dependency only became a new beginning in the second stage, as did the papal attitude to war. The reformers around the popes, such as Peter Damiani or Humbert of Moyenmoutier, became cardinal bishops, important figures, as the papal election decree shows.
Looking at the period up to 1073, there is no uniform idea of the reform ideas, which in their diversity can best be summarised under the term libertas ecclesiae (freedom of the church) and which had their points of orientation in the return to the early church and apostolic times. While monastic and ecclesiastical reform unfolded in mutual fertilisation over a long period of time, the various reform approaches in Rome came together to a greater extent from the pontificate of Leo IX onwards. The formation of an environment close to the pope, a "court" based on the empire, meant that reform could now be carried out with several heads, even against local aristocratic interests. By the time of Alexander II's pontificate, the reform approaches had increasingly broken free from the ties to the Roman-German rulers and gained their own momentum. Simony and priestly marriage were the most important points of discussion, while the question of investiture was not yet taken up. For this reason alone, the early phase of church reform outlined so far can by no means be labelled the "investiture dispute". Gregory VII certainly set further accents of his own, but he was already able to utilise developments from the early reform phase. However, this judgement is based on a swelling tradition, which itself became a testimony to reform and a new beginning.
And what about the parrot from Dalmatia? It came to Leo's court from an area on the borders of the Byzantine Empire. The orbis christianus of the West extends to this day to where Catholic Croatia borders on Orthodox Serbia. So perhaps parrots also say something about the scope of papal action.
