Download PDF | (Routledge Revivals) Jeffrey Richards - The Popes and the Papacy in the Early Middle Ages, 476-752-Routledge (1979).
437 Pages
The Popes and the Papacy in the Early Middle Ages, 476-752
There has been a tendency to the view the history of the early medieval papacy predominantly in ideological terms, which has resulted in the over-exaggeration of the idea of the papal monarchy. In this study, first published in 1979, Jeffrey Richards questions this orthodox view, arguing that whilst the papacy's power and responsibility grew during the period under discussion, it did so by a series of historical accidents rather than a coherent radical design. The title redresses the imbalance implicit in the monarchical interpretation, and emphasizes other important political, administrative and social aspects of papal history. As such it will be of particular value to students interested in the history of the Church; in particular, the development of the early medieval papacy, and the shifting policies and characteristics of the popes themselves.
Introduction
There has been a tendency in recent years to view the history of the early medieval papacy in predominantly, if not exclusively, ideological terms. This has resulted in a one-sided view of papal history in which certain periods, indeed whole centuries, have been downgraded because they are not eras of 'significant ideological advance'. One such period is that beginning with the re-establishment of imperial rule in Italy in 554 and ending with the fall of the exarchate of Ravenna in 751. It has been described, indeed dismissed, as 'the Byzantine captivity' of the papacy, implying its unwilling subjection to the Eastern Empire and the stifling of its mission and character. It is the purpose of this study to try to correct that imbalance and emphasize other positive aspects of papal history, political, administrative and social, which just as much as theory were to change the shape and direction of papal development.
The papacy, of course, had an ideology, but it was an ideology that had been arrived at by the opening date of this study, was not departed from during the period covered and in particular not in the direction of papal monarchy. It is anachronistic and without foundation to view this period in terms of the progressive and systematic elaboration of an idea of papal monarchy or of the superseding of the emperor by the pope at the head of the Christian hierarchy. To take this view is to reformulate early medieval history in terms of the late medieval papal masterplan, which undoubtedly did exist, and to give papal history an illusion of inevitability that the facts themselves belie. What eleventh-century canonists mayor may not have made of the writings of Pope Gelasius I is utterly irrelevant to any realistic appreciation of how the papacy changed in the sixth and seventh centuries.
The papacy's power and responsibility unquestionably grew during this period, but by a series of historical accidents rather than by a coherent radical design, by its response to the immediate rather than concentration on the theoretical, by being the right institution in the right place at the right time. It is hoped that by giving prominence to social, economic and political factors it will be possible to view early-medieval papal history in terms other than those of a rigid, foreordained theoretical structure in which the people involved were simply pawns in a gigantic, centuries-long, hierocratic chess game, in which the papal queen moved gradually and inexorably to checkmate the imperial king, a view which in the light of the facts is not only fanciful but wayward.
The period under review is that from 476 to 752, that fascinating, darkling, interstitial period, marked at one end by the fall of the Western Roman Empire and at the other by the rise of the Frankish Empire. Beneath the protective umbrella provided by these two very different imperial entities, the prestige, power and influence of the papacy grew and prospered. But in the intervening centuries there was no such towering presence in the West on whom papal Rome could safely rely. The papacy was thrown back on its own resources and came to rely more and more on the character and qualities of the individual popes. This study will therefore lay much more stress on the individual figures of the popes and their shifts of policy and principle than it has been customary to do in recent years. For the popes were not merely the depersonalized executors of some grand monarchical strategy, they were flesh-and-blood figures, subject to temper and caprice, bodily infirmity and human error.
The system of election ensured that all sorts of men would jostle for power - saints and sinners, knaves and nonentities, statesmen and scoundrels. Once in office, they would be subject to changes of policy and direction, shifts in the balance of Mediterranean world power, changes in the nature of society, which made for a situation of considerably more variety and fluidity than is allowed for in that monolithic view which looks at papal history as the working out of a monarchical blueprint. The social context is one of increasing separatism in Italy. The province, peripheral to mainstream developments in the Eastern Roman Empire, was frequently left to cope with its problems alone. These problems were very real and far-reaching ones, involving as they did the onset both of barbarian invaders and the plague. The financial burdens imposed on the province, the oppressive presence of a largely Greek administration, the often feeble response of the imperial government to the threats to Italy's survival and the involvement of the East in a succession of heresies, all combined in the space of two centuries to induce the growth of a specifically Italian interest, at odds on many fundamental matters with the imperial government in Constantinople.
Against this background, the three continuing strands of religious, social and political circum stances in papal history all contrived to make the papacy seem, in the absence of any comparable Italian institution, to be a figurehead for those interests. It was never the wish of the papacy that this should be so, but it came to be so nevertheless. First, there was a succession of doctrinal conflicts with Constantinople. But this led to no substantial ideological change. Each time papal Rome, in what can almost be seen as a Pavlovian response, took up exactly the same position, one of affirming the pre-existing ideas and the basic, already defined and agreed tenets of the faith. The consequence of this was a practical one. In an age when the articles of faith were for the man in the street a matter oflife and death, the pope came to be seen as the champion of orthodoxy, the spiritual leader of Italy and ultimately the successful resister of the imperial government, which invariably backed these Eastern bids to tamper with the faith.
It is in this context that we must place the constant assertion of Rome's primacy. It was an affirmation of papal seniority in the ecclesiastical hierarchy as the best guarantee of the maintenance of orthodoxy rather than a first step in a bid to establish monarchical supremacy over all other authorities, lay and ecclesiastical. The arguments to justify the primacy - the Petrine Commission, apostolic foundation, etc. - had been largely developed before the period of this study begins. During it, they were emphasized rather than added to. Second, at a time of considerable social and economic dislocation, due to the effects of plague and war, new emphasis was placed on the traditional role of the papacy both as intercessor with God and as dispenser of help to the hungry, the homeless and the sick. More and more, people turned to Rome as the one stable and settled force, and sure and certain source of spiritual and material help. So, as the volume of work increased and the range of responsibilities widened, the papal administration expanded and diversified until it came to rival that of the provincial government. Third, the role of the pope as intercessor with barbarian invaderson the hallowed model of Pope Leo the Great's famous interview with Attila which turned the Huns back from the gates of Rome - and the papacy's activity in the field of ransoming prisoners broadened to include the actual negotiation of truces and treaties. When the Lombards were converted to Catholicism, this became even more common, because the Lombards would defer to papal arguments far more readily than they would to Exarchal persuasion.
Ultimately, indeed, the exarch of Ravenna was reduced to asking the pope for help in warding off the Lombard threat from his capital. By the seventh century, with the Roman senate gone and the Roman aristocracy dispersed, with the government of the ex arch unpopular, starved of resources and stretched to its limits, the Italian people came to look to the pope for political as well as spiritual leadership. It was, therefore, the combination of these three continuing trends - the successful resistance to a succession of Eastern heresies; the increasing involvement in the social services; the increasing involvement in politics, diplomacy and war - that made the papacy a power in the land. None of these developments took place because of any new-fangled monarchical ideology. All were extensions of the traditional and time-honoured role of the pope, in defending orthodoxy, ransoming prisoners and feeding the poor. The papal administration expanded because the work increased. The popes took on secular functions not at the dictates of theory but out of sheer desperate necessity.
The combined result was a papacy whose power was enhanced beyond its wildest dreams. But this was a cause for concern rather than rejoicing on the part of the papacy. The extent to which the pope came to be idolized by the people and the worry to which this gave rise is reflected in the synodical decree introduced by Gregory the Great in 595. The custom of covering the pope's bodies with dalmatics for their funeral processions had grown up. But these dalmatics were being torn to pieces and carried off by the people, who preserved them as holy relics and held them in greater esteem than the relics of the apostles and martyrs. Gregory therefore had to order that this should stop. But it reflects the position in popular esteem already held by the papacy at the end of the sixth century. Nowhere is the blend of political, religious and social elements more apparent than in the papal elections. In their intensity and passion, they matched, in some cases even surpassed, the turbulence surrounding imperial elections. Many papal elections involved violence, chicanery and corruption on a grand scale. Blood ran in the streets of Rome, gold changed hands in the corridors of power, rival factions pumped out propaganda and ambitious men caballed around the deathbeds of the popes.
The high passions and low intrigues that this involved have a familiar, almost contemporary ring. The fire and spice of those times comes through to us in the surviving documents of the period. This is the raw, red meat of papal history, this and not the desiccated, pre-packed portions often served up in the guise of papal history. This day-to-day reality will be highlighted as a counterbalance to the dominance of monarchical theory in some versions of papal history. In pursuit of the facts and in humble emulation of my revered mentor A. H. M. Jones, I have concentrated my researches on the primary sources, preferring to allow the authentic voices of the period to speak for themselves and their time rather than to synthe size the views of the sometimes tendentious later commentators. Nevertheless, students of the period will recognize the debt lowe, and which I freely acknowledge, to those modern scholars whose pioneering work has made the trip through the minefield of early medieval history that bit less precarious, men such as Dvornik, Duchesne, Hefele, Jones, Frend, Caspar and Llewellyn.
The book falls into five sections. The first section will set the context of the study, along the lines suggested above. The second and third sections present an interpretive narrative of the period. The fourth section analyses the background and qualifications for office of the popes. The fifth section traces the growth of the papal administration and examines the neglected subject of papal personnel management. The whole adds up, I hope, to an examination of papal history from a new perspective.
Link
Press Here
0 التعليقات :
إرسال تعليق