By: S. McQuillan

CHAPTER III

The Long-twelfth Century

"Moderation in all things" was the motto of Serlo, the early twelfth century abbot of Glastonbury. The more populated and structurally dense European society, which emerged from late post-Antiquity's demographic revolution's reorganisations, required a new behavioural restraint. This restraint allowed lords to consolidate their regional bans, and it allowed the gradual development of a pan-regional economy of trade and 'information'. Moreover, the discrediting of the 'gesta-episteme' led to attempts to understand society in more 'rationalised'-which is to say, less in primo magico-mystical-terms. The result of these changes was a 'new-civility' (called by clerics 'modestia', by nobles and burghers 'mâze'); wherein political struggles were conducted with greater regard towards, not damaging the new regional/pan-regional economy. In effect, this meant, political struggles increasingly involved bribing one's opponents into temporary acquiescence, and so raising cash and credit became the motivating factor for most elite activity-and providing it, the main activity of everyone else. Lords, including the popes, also retained considerable standing forces to conduct feuds, sieges and raids (mostly so X would bribe Y to go away), but pitched-battles were rare during the long-twelfth century, and often the gambles of desperation.

This new-civility also created greater 'emotional sophistication'. Which is to say, a self-conscious cultivation of restraint and delicacy; and, the period saw a new diversity of religious rules, and a moderation of the notion of a 'potesse', which is usually called 'chivalry'. The, ultimate, intellectual expressions of this new-civility and its rationalism were, 'law' and 'scholastic theology'. Justinian's codes were rediscovered in central Italy during the 1050s, and through prolonged study, gradually influenced society. 'Scholastic theology' was an attempt to understand the ecclesia, and Christian Revelation, through (Graeco-Roman) metaphysics, and it too gradually altered contemporaries' consciousnesses. Still, the perfection of these textual-discourses, and their expression in the plastic-arts, took time; and, for most of the early 1100s, they existed inchoative, alongside another set of 'quasi-formal' conceptual-languages. These were: 'body-metaphors' (attempts to describe social organisations, and relations, by comparing their functioning to the human body), and 'rights-discourse' (where figures claimed certain 'abstract' 'rights', and contesting parties then made compromise delimited 'pacts'). The improved climate, the struggle for control of the newly created regional/pan-regional economy, and the attempts to prefect the discourses of law and scholasticism lasted throughout the 1100s and early 1200s; and, can appropriately be called, the one 'long-twelfth century'.

For the popes, the long-twelfth century had two consequences. On the explicit political level, the popes found Rome, and their immediate entourage, subject to the struggle for power amongst the newly created regions of Europe. These conflicts lasted into the 1260s, when Capetian Ile-de-France proved itself predominant everywhere. Secondly, the more litigious post-1100 society generated appeals to Rome, and the papal-body enlarged, and itself gradually became organised around the rediscovered Roman law. This enlargement was deliberately accentuated, in order to finance the defence the popes' political position in central Italy; the only thing where, there was no long-twelfth century moderation, was in raising cash. Moreover, during the mid-1100s, a rationalised clerical philosophy developed-'lego-pastoral care' [lpc]-, which sought to manipulate legal structures, in order to 'improve' individuals' interior-lives. This 'lpc-mentality' became something of a panacea to northern European intellectuals, but was often greeted with ambiguity south of the Alps.

(i) 'between the hammer and the anvil'.
John of Salisbury, a scribe of archbishop Theobold of Canterbury and himself later bishop of Chartres, met pope Hadrian IV (1154-9), whilst Hadrian was reflecting upon Rome's troubled political situation. In the north and in Lombardy, Hadrian faced the revived 'German' Reich under the king-emperor Frederick I; and, in the south, Hadrian faced the new Norman kingdom of Sicily, whose possessions reached into Africa and Greece. Turning to John, Hadrian sighed, it was like being, "between the hammer and the anvil". The eleventh century demographic revolution created a new Europe, which was divided into regional blocks, approximately 60-100 miles square-which is the distance a horse can travel in a day. Many of these blocks were, ostensibly, parts of larger groups. The ban-lands of Otto I continued to be thought of, as the one Reich; the descendants of Robert Guiscard created a kingdom out of southern Italy; the regions of France had a titular over-lord in the rulers of Paris; the kings of Castile claimed to be 'emperors' over Iberia; the Norman kings of England, the 'king of kings' within the British Isles; the rulers of Constantinople, continued to claim to be the oeconomus ecclesiae, and were occasionally able to act, as over-kings to the various Slavs, and the new Latin princes of Palestine, which had been established after Jerusalem's capture. During the long-twelfth century then, the Roman ecclesia existed within a very polycentric world, where no one region predominated. Yet, as Hadrian IV remarked, this was in itself no guarantee of tranquillity.

In general, the long-twelfth century saw a deepening of these various regional lordships, as figures increased fortification, commercialisation, urbanisation and taxation; something, which proved increasingly technocratic, and required the creation of a new class of administrators. It also led to more litigation, as figures sought to advance or preserve their positions through 'rights-discourse'. The popes participated in these changes, and attempted to consolidate their ban in central Italy. Moreover, the various regions fought one another for hegemony, and especially influence over the papal court, which was the only genuine pan-regional entity within Europe. Hadrian may have been correct in considering his main dangers Frederick's Reich and Norman Sicily, but these were only parts of wider inter-regional rivalries, which stretched from the Atlantic to the Bosphorus. To the European regions, there was added the various Christian peoples of the Near East-such as the Armenians and Marionites; and, eventually also 'prester John', a Latins' folklore term for the peoples of the Steppe, who were allegedly ruled by an unknown Christian priest-king. During the 1240s, 'prester John' assumed a tangible aspect, with the arrival of the Mongols. How these rivalries ultimately resolved themselves is a fascinating story, and it is sufficient for present purposes to note, how the struggles affected the popes and Roman society.

A further complication to these rivalries was, many of the more peripheral regions became 'papal-vassals'. Which is to say, their rulers dedicated their lands to St.Peter, and the pope regranted them to the ruler, and his heirs. Such dedications of res to St.Peter were a feature of early post-Antique central Italy; and, by the eighth century, the Carolingians and monastic communities were also dedicating goods to St.Peter. There was an extension of such practices during the later 1000s, and it continued throughout the long-twelfth century. Those lands, which were ultimately dedicated to St.Peter, or claimed by the popes as having been dedicated, included: Aragon, Portugal, Sardinia, Corsica, southern Italy, England, Ireland, Hungary and Poland. Rulers' intentions in dedicating lands to St.Peter were often to escape the 'rights-claims' of local rivals. For instance, the prevalence of papal-vassals in Iberia was because of Castile's 'emperor', and the 'caliphate'-or universal commonwealth-of the local Muslims. In exchange for papal recognition of their goods, the vassals were obliged to pay annual tribute to the popes.

After the death of Henry IV (1106), pope Paschal II attempted to reorganise the papal ban in central Italy. Paschal's local problems included, the surviving partisans of Clement III around Ravenna and Ancona, noble and clerical groups within Rome anxious for a share of papal patronage, and recognition of whatever goods they had seized during the demographic revolution. In 1111, Paschal was kidnapped by the king-emperor Henry V. Unlike his father, Henry V's position was more a ruler of one region (Franconia-Suabia), but who had extensive contacts with the remaining segments of the old Reich. Henry's conflict with Paschal was over the 'right of investiture'. 'Investitura' was the name given in Ottonian Germany to the ritual-act, of the king recognising a candidate elected for a clerical benefice; and, involved the king presenting the elected cleric with a ring and staff. As the said king was the advocate of many churches, he was also a member of their election chapters. Consequently, the 'granting of ring and staff' became de facto what ensured a cleric received a benefice. During the late 1000s, the ritual-act of investiture was reinterpreted as a 'right'; which is to say, it was no longer thought of, as a ban-entitlement of a king or lord, but as an 'abstract claim'. This reinterpretation of ban-entitlements as lego-syllogistic rights was a feature of the late eleventh century, and much caused by the discrediting of the notion of sacral ban by Henry IV.

Various early eleventh century monasteries urged their advocates to renounce 'investiture', in order that, the said congregations might more completely withdraw from political affairs. Pope Nicholas II also urged such renunciations. During his conflict with Henry IV, Gregory VII forbade 'investiture' of main churches. This was so, as Gregory saw such investitures, as preventing the liberalising of clerical benefices. But, it is doubtful, whether Gregory's prohibition was intended, as permanent. His partisans in Germany and northern Italy seem to have assumed, 'investiture' was prohibited only if, the investing advocate was excommunicated; which really meant, was Henry IV. Both king Rudolf and countess Mathilda of Tuscany invested bishops and abbots. Henry V was interested in the 'right of investiture', less in order to ensure clerics favourable to himself were chosen in Germany than, because he required the cash involved in granting ring and staff for his various other activities. After his kidnap, Paschal granted investiture to Henry, and consecrated him emperor. Paschal's actions caused an outcry. Bishops within central Germany wanted Henry to receive investiture, as it minimised the king's opportunity to interfere with their goods; bishops on the periphery of the Reich- especially in Lotharingia, Burgundy, Lombardy and mainland southern Italy-wanted investiture forbidden, as Henry might utilise such a fiat to extract cash from them. At a Lateran council of 1112, Henry's kidnapping and his investiture-privilege were condemned. Paschal was also forced to make an oath of purgation, and swear he had never intended to act against the Faith.

On the death of Mathilda of Tuscany, Henry V returned to Italy, and colluded with those local Romans opposed to Paschal. An anti-pope, Gregory VIII, was established, and pope Gelasius II fled to France (1118). A compromise pact over the right of investiture was finally agreed between Calixtus II and Henry (1122). This pact, granted Henry a modified right of investiture (using the symbol of a sceptre rather than ring and staff), but limited the king's interference in German bishoprics (Henry had to recognise such candidates' possessions before offering his approval). Calixtus sacrificed the interests of peripheral bishops for this agreement; and, shortly afterwards, Henry V raided Paris. Henry's conflict over investitures was part of a wider extension of right-discourse. During the late 1000s, lords-lay and clerical-were increasingly replacing ban-entitlements with delimited rights-claims. For instance, lords resettled their household milites on set portions of land, in exchange for fixed dues. Bosom companions became tax paying vassals. Needless to say, this extension of rights-discourse led to figures attempting to 'optimalise their autonomy', and to endless appeals to the pope. Similar compromise agreements over lay figures' participation in clerical elections were agreed by the pope with the kings of France and England, and with many other regional lords.

During the course of the early 1100s, the various 'rights' claimed by clerics became known, as the 'libertas ecclesiae'. These rights included such matters as: clerics freedom to travel and meet other clerics; the freedom for figures to appeal to Rome, and for papal legates to tour; the restriction of advocates' participation in clerical elections to merely proposing and approving a candidate; and, perhaps most controversially of all, the freedom of clerics-and suits involving clerics (which could include questions of marriage and inheritances)-to be tried only in clerical courts. These various 'rights' were somewhat ad hoc assembled; there was no master-plan, which unscrupulous, or conversely excessively pious, figures stealthily advanced. It was often rulers' conflicts with the popes-especially the kings of Sicily-, which forced the popes to declare specifically, what was and what was not a clerical right. One should also add, long-twelfth century rights-discourse 'libertas ecclesiae' had little to do with the eleventh century's notion of 'ecclesiastical freedom against tyranny'; which had merely meant, stopping, supposedly, depraved men-like Guiscard, or Henry IV, or the Muslims-from physically oppressing Christians. The popes', somewhat ad hoc, position as defender of the 'libertas ecclesiae' was, accentuated by the prolonged struggle between Rome and Roger II of Sicily, for control of lower Italy. During this struggle, the immediate papal entourage became a reasonably large armed group. As a significant political power then, clerics throughout Europe soon forwarded the popes, as a defender of their new-or desired-'libertas ecclesiae'.

Rome's struggle with Roger II's Sicily (1119-56) was for three reasons. Firstly, the popes claimed southern Italy was a res of St.Peter; secondly, the popes feared for the 'libertas ecclesiae', if the area was dominated by one lord; and, thirdly most of Roman society had relatives in the Campagnese plain, and attempted to defend them. Roger II was Robert Guiscard's nephew, and desired the pope invest him, as St.Peter's vassal, with all of southern Italy. At Catanzaro in 1121, Calixtus II confronted Roger, but the pope's entourage was over come by plague. Honorius II raised a papal-army from throughout the south, and promised remission of sins for whoever opposed Roger (1124-30). Roger eventually defeated this army, and Honorius was forced to recognise him, as duke of Apulia. In 1130, there was a disputed election in Rome. This was caused-alongside competition for patronage within the Roman ecclesia-by a minority, who wished to continue opposition to Roger. Anacletus II (1130-7) was the pope of those, who sought compromise, and he granted Roger a regal title. Innocent II (1130-43) was the pope of those, who wished to continue fighting.

Innocent gained support in France, Germany and Liguria-who all feared Roger's predominance in the Mediterranean-, and alongside the Saxon king-emperor Lothar III twice invaded southern Italy (1132-3, 1137). After defeating Anacletus and his partisans in Rome, Innocent was captured by Roger, and also granted a regal-title (1139). Innocent though, continued opposition, and there was eventually an uprising within Rome. This uprising later declared itself the 'Roman senate' (circa 1144). The mediaeval Roman senate was a commune; which is to say, a group, who had sworn an oath to act collectively in political matters. There were communes throughout long-twelfth century Europe, usually located in towns; and, contemporary northern Italy was filled with such. The immediate papal entourage had, an ambiguous relationship with the Roman commune. On one level, all the commune desired was a share of papal revenues, and the popes were, usually, willing to make compromise pacts, to ensure tranquillity; yet, the commune also occasionally boasted it, and not the pope, was the dominus Urbis, and thereby alone entitled to posses goods in Lazio, and confer the imperial-title. In many respects, the senate trotted out the later set of arguments, whenever it wished to scare more cash out of the popes.

After failed attempts at fighting the senate, pope Eugenius III agreed a compromise pact (1145-53). Eugenius also attempted to consolidate, through further rights-discourse pacts and bribery, the papal ban in Lazio and Sabina. This was also intended to protect the city from Roger's new kingdom, which is usually called the regno. Eugenius negotiated with the new king-emperor Conrad III, of Suabia, for an invasion of southern Italy; although this was delayed, as Conrad and king Louis VII of France decided to go east, to aid Latin Palestine. Conrad's successor, Frederick I of Staufen, agreed to fulfil such obligations. In 1155, Frederick was crowned emperor, but refused-or rather was unable through lack of cash-to reduce the senate, or the regno. Roger himself had died a year previously, and the popes were anxious to deprive his heir, William I, of mainland possessions. The Byzantine emperor, Manuel I, had recently invaded Ancona. Manuel offered a papal-Byzantine invasion of Sicily, and pope Hadrian IV accepted. Hadrian was captured by William I, and forced to agree to a pact; wherein William received all of his father's possessions, and the 'libertas ecclesiae' in the regno, and especially Sicily, was profoundly curtailed.

The emperor Frederick I, or Barbarossa meaning red-beard's, problems with the popes were legion. Unlike his three immediate predecessors, Frederick formed pacts amongst the regions of Germany. This ensured Frederick internal peace, but it also forced him to find cash, in order to fulfil the terms of his pacts. Frederick's chancellor, Rainald of Dassel, was also skilled in Roman law and rights-discourse, and rethought the king-emperor's position; mostly so, as to be in a better position to extort monies from people. According to Rainald, the king-emperor was the oeconomus ecclesiae, and thereby exercised ecclesiastical authority, and consequently the pope had no 'idoneus-sanction' over him. Which is to say, after the king-emperor had been elected by the German great, the pope was obliged to crown him immediately; and, the king-emperor could not subsequently be removed for violating 'christian morality'. Frederick and Rainald took these, somewhat faux, arguments to extraordinary lengths. Including, Frederick dressing in episcopal insignia, as he was the ecclesia's 'episcopus in exterioribus'. Rainald's arguments had little permanent affect upon contemporaries thinking; but, they popularised the notion, the king-emperor was, not merely 'advocate of the Roman ecclesia' but, 'advocate of the ecclesia itself'. This notion was, somewhat, folklore, and was created in Germany and Italy during the late 1000s, as a response to the Tuscans' and southern Normans' defence of the popes, and Castile and the Anglo-Normans 'imperial-claims'. Frederick's initial relations with the popes were reasonably amicable, until 1157-62. Then, Frederick occupied Burgundy and Lombardy, over both of which he was titular king, and attempted to extort cash from people, in exchange for recognising their 'rights'. Frederick's self-proclaimed aim was to invade the regno, which the king-emperors had always claimed, as part of Otto I's greater Reich.

Hadrian IV was humiliated by Frederick, over the Diet of Besançon (1157). Where, Frederick expelled papal legates from Burgundy because of their insinuation, the king-emperor was a papal-vassal. Hadrian was forced to write to the emperor, admitting, the Reich was not a papal-vassal kingdom. In Lombardy, Frederick and his local partisans besieged Milan, and to provide supplies, they encroached upon the papal-ban in central Italy. Following Hadrian's death, there was another disputed election in Rome (Sept.1159). One party, the majority, wished to oppose Frederick, and align with Milan and Sicily; another party, wished to co-operate with the emperor to invade Sicily. After some prevarications, Frederick supported this minority party under pope Victor IV; and, the larger group rallied itself around pope Alexander III. Frederick's 'captains' forced Alexander to flee to France. 'Captains' were small groups of mercenaries-united into a society by oaths-, whom rulers utilised to terrorise others. Frederick made extensive use of captains, and the contemporary surplus population ensured, there were always plenty of such groups for hire.

In France, Alexander slowly consolidated support in Lombardy, Sicily, Anglo-Normandy and Paris. Alexander's cause was greatly enhanced by the French clergy, who were increasingly educated in the scholastic schools of Ile-de-France; Alexander also experienced a problematic relationship with Thomas ŕ Becket, the archbishop of Canterbury. Becket attempted to advance the 'libertas ecclesiae' against king Henry II, and Alexander prevaricated over the issue, as the pope required Henry's support and cash. The pope also excommunicated Frederick, and released his men from fealty; but, this had none of the consequences of Henry IV's excommunications, as Frederick's position relied upon more than, just maintaining friendships with his great men. Frederick was also renowned, as charming and chivalric. Initially, Frederick attempted to detach Louis VII from supporting Alexander. Failing in this, Frederick ignored the schism, and concentrated upon reducing Milan and invading Sicily. In 1165, Alexander returned to central Italy, and utilised Sicilian gold to bribe Rome. On news of William I's death, Frederick and his allies began their invasion. Unfortunately, after capturing Rome, Frederick's army was destroyed by plague (1167). The communes of Lombardy then, formed an extended 'societas', or league, against Frederick; and, promised to fight alongside the pope to end the schism, and free Italy from 'tyranny'. A 'tyrant', in the long-twelfth century, meant someone, who was attempting to oppress others' rights. Frederick was defeated by the Lombard league at the battle of Legano, and was forced to agree to compromise pacts. The schism was ended by the 'peace of Venice' (1177), and Frederick's relations with the Lombards settled by the 'peace of Constance' (1183). Barbarossa received hefty cash payments for both agreements.

Frederick's last escapade with the popes was over his own heirs. After 1167's disaster, many German princes lost their sons, and gifted Frederick their lands. Consequently, Frederick's family, the Staufen, acquired a super-regional block of territory in central-southern Germany. These acquisitions ended the Saxons' hitherto truce with the Staufen; and, the Saxons' ducal family, the Welfs, mongered revolt. Frederick was initially successful in forestalling this revolt, but appreciated, he required papal consent to his own heirs, in order to stop the Welfs or popes-or anyone else-raising an anti-king. At Verona in 1184, Frederick attempted to force pope Lucius III, into crowning his son, Henry VI, as co-emperor. Barbarossa also married Henry to William II of Sicily's aunt, Constance. Jerusalem was recaptured by the Muslim in 1187, and Frederick volunteered to lead a new eastern expedition, and subsequently died in Cilicia. The fall of Jerusalem also led to a wider spirit of repentance, and pope Clement III made a pact with the senate, to restore peace in Rome, and agreed to consecrate Henry VI.

This spirit of repentance soon evaporated. William II died without an heir, and the local barons elected a new king, Tancred; but, Constance claimed the regno, and Henry prepared an invasion. In conformity with earlier agreements, pope Celestine III crowned Henry emperor (1191). Constance and Henry's invasion of Sicily failed, and Constance was actually captured during the retreat. Celestine then recognised Tancred, as king of Sicily, and Tancred agreed to the 'libertas ecclesiae' throughout the south. However, the duke of Austria kidnapped king Richard of England, on Richard's return from Palestine. With the monies from Richard's ransom, Henry launched another invasion of Sicily. In 1194, Henry captured Palermo. With the prospect of a renewed Welf revolt in Germany, Henry then returned to forcing the pope to recognise his own heir, the infant Frederick II, as both king-emperor and king of papal Sicily. Henry's captains sacked much of Lazio, but Celestine refused to consent.

In 1197, Henry suddenly died, leaving a child, as his heir. The Welfs and their supporters in Germany and Anglo-Normandy elected Otto IV of Brunswick, as king-emperor; and, the Staufen chose Henry's brother, Philip of Suabia. Constance kept the child Frederick in Palermo, and acted as his regent. The new young pope Innocent III attempted to resolve the legacy of Henry VI. With his extended family, for Innocent was a son of the counts of Segni, the pope reduced Henry's various captains in central Italy; and, attempted to establish papal-rights claims throughout Tuscany, Romagna, and the Marche. This was the beginnings of a papal attempt to control the Via Flaminia-the main road from the north to south of the peninsula-, in order to protect Rome from wondering captains. After attempting to convene a conventus to decide the disputed German regal election, Innocent finally recognised Otto IV. Philip continued to pressurise Innocent, but Philip was murder in a local feud (1208). Innocent then consecrated Otto emperor, and unsurprisingly Otto then attempted to invade Sicily, in order to find the cash required for ruling Germany. The pope, who was Paris educated, also greatly favoured king Philip II of France against the Angevin John of England. Philip managed to conquer most of John's continental possessions; Innocent covertly, and not so covertly, favoured this, and later attempted to promote the 'libertas ecclesiae' in England. John was initially excommunicated, but later won Innocent's favour by making England a papal-vassal. In 1204, a wayward papal-expedition to recapture Jerusalem sacked Constantinople. This sack was caused by various misadventures but, it reduced the Byzantine empire to a series of small principalities, some Greek, some Latin.

From Alexander III's pontificate to 1215, the notion of lego-pastoral care also came to predominate amongst the papal entourage. Within the various schools of northern Europe, especially around Paris, early twelfth century clerics developed the notion that, the various 'rights' associated with 'libertas ecclesiae' might be capable of 'rational' manipulation, in order to improve individuals' interior spiritual-lives. This mentality owed much to contemporary northern European practices of deepening the structural density of lordship, in order to raise taxes; for it effectively said, external structural manipulation of rights could alter individuals' behaviour. 'Lpc' was something different from imposing monastic rules upon non-monks, because monastic rules emphasised, it was the individual's participation, which brought perfection; 'lpc' considered 'spiritual-efficacy' resided with manipulating rights. The papal entourage, which was frequently composed of Romans and southern Italians, were originally somewhat cautious towards this mentality. Italy itself had few large bishoprics with well defined rights-capable of being 'manipulated'-, and long traditions of idiosyncratic wondering holy-men. Yet, Alexander, who was a Sienese, adopted lpc at his councils of Tours (1162) and Lateran (1179); and, Innocent III solidified it, at his Lateran council of 1215-where over sixty statutes were passed, as to how bishops and abbots, and laity, were to perform it. These statutes were quite different from earlier papal 'canons', because early papal canons-in as much, as they were not just wisdom-stories-simply forbade things [eg. monks were to stay in monasteries, only bishops were to collect episcopal tithes, clerics were to be clean shaven]; but, lpc-councils desired to manipulate [eg. everyone was to receive the sacraments once a year, bishops were to hold annual local synods, monastic congregations were to be reorganised into corporations, 'heretics' and Jews were to wear distinctive clothing].

The final stage in the long-twelfth century struggle for European hegemony occurred with Frederick II, and his sons. Initially, Frederick was a close ally of the popes. To forestall Otto IV's invasion of Sicily, Innocent agreed to sending Frederick to Germany, in order to be declared king-emperor by the pro-Staufen regions. Philip II's cavalry eventually crushed Otto's forces, at Bouvines (1214); and, this ensured Frederick was recognised, as the unique king-emperor. The popes, however, feared Frederick, as king of Sicily and king-emperor. When Frederick prevaricated in his promised expedition to aid Latin Palestine, pope Gregory IX excommunicated him, and invaded Capua (1227-30). Frederick effortlessly overcame this invasion, and renewed the old game of attempting to extract monies from the Lombard communes. The Lombards reformed their league, and sought papal support. After some hesitation, Gregory again excommunicated Frederick; calling him, 'the beast of the Apocalypse' (1239). Frederick's scribe Piero della Vigna having much wound up the pope, by calling upon the Romans to depose Gregory for bad deeds.

In order to stop the Lombards receiving papal cash, Frederick besieged Rome. The emperor even stopped clerics travelling to the city for a general council, which Gregory had called to raise funds (1241). After Gregory's death, a period of stalemate ensued. Eventually, the Genoese merchant's son Innocent IV was elected (1243). Through bribery, and a fair measure of deceit, Innocent escaped to Lyons, and called a general council. Innocent then renewed Frederick's excommunication, and 'contradicted' his 'gubernaculum'; which is to say, declared a free for all upon Frederick's goods (1245). With his council's cash, Innocent raised papal-captains for invasions of Lombardy and the regno. Innocent also bribed German princes into raising an anti-king, Henry the Raspe of Thuringia; and, offered Sicily to king Henry III of England's son, in exchange for cash. Frederick died of dysentery in 1250. Innocent returned to Rome, and invaded Capua and Naples; in this, Innocent was much aided by Frederick's bastard son Manfred. Frederick's legitimate heir Conrad IV died of fever, after himself invading Capua in 1254. Manfred's relations with Innocent though, soured. After a possible attempted assassination, Manfred fled into the hills, and was eventually recognised king, by those parts of the south most loyal to his father.

Manfred used his father's cash and captains to attempt to terrorise the popes, into recognising his kingship. Pope Alexander IV refused to negotiate, and concentrated upon raising further anti-kings in Germany against Conrad IV's son, Conradin. In 1261, the pro-Paris faction within the papal court seized control. The intention of this faction was less to aid Rome than, to end the bitter papal-Sicilian feud, as it was distracting from French attempts to recapture Jerusalem. Urban IV, the former patriarch of Jerusalem Jacques de Pantaléon, appointed fourteen new cardinals-six of them French-, and offered Sicily to Louis IX of France. Louis refused, but his brother Charles of Anjou accepted. After raising enormous loans, Charles brought an army to Rome. At the battle of Benevento (1266), Charles defeated and killed Manfred. Two years later, Charles defeated Conradin's attempt to invade the south. Charles, with the French pope Clement IV's tacit approval, executed the sixteen year old Conradin for treason. Clement died within the month, and the papal seat was left vacant for three years; until, Philip III, the king of France, and Charles arrived in central Italy, to force another election. The struggle for power amongst the regions of post-demographic revolution Europe had ended, and ended with a decisive Capetian French victory.

During the long-twelfth century, the papal view of kings remained, on one level, somewhat standard: all (Christian) lords and kings, especially the king-emperors, were subject to a papal, and perhaps also regional episcopal, 'idoneus-sanction'; if kings oppressed the 'libertas ecclesiae', or retarded lpc, or violated 'christian morality' then, they could be excommunicated, their followers released from fealty-and, possibly anti-kings, or a papally sponsored army raised against them. Innocent III called this view, 'ratio peccanti'; and, the view itself was variously expressed in body-metaphor, rights-discourse, and eventually Roman legal terms. That the long-twelfth century popes and bishops often tolerated 'unChristian' kings was, for two reasons. Firstly, lords now commanded structurally dense regions, and excommunicating them often had little immediate practical consequences; secondly, contemporaries self-consciously cultivated 'moderation'. Thus, Alexander III excommunicated Frederick, but refused to 'contradict' his gubernaculum-or pre-date the excommunication, so as to invalidate the king's previous acts. It was also appreciated, especially in Germany after Henry IV, that, raising anti-kings and papal-armies meant, the remedy to 'unChristian' behaviour was often worse than, the illness.

The real change in papal attitudes towards kings, during the long-twelfth century, was, in perceptions of what 'regna'-or kingdoms-actually were. This, essentially philosophical matter, was a question, which had greatly troubled Gregory VII's generation; Gregory's generation being unaccustomed to 'abstract lego-philosophical' thinking. Gregory, for instance, excommunicated Henry IV, but was uncertain whether this stopped Henry being a king. Various solutions to this problem were proposed: a 'potesse' was a type of sub-mystical favour from God, predicated upon such's combating the worse excesses of fallen man's sinfulness (a reiteration of St.Augustine's view); a 'potesse' was simply a thug, possibly demonically inspired (a view inherited from Antiquity concerning barbarians, and much favoured amongst those, who despaired over Henry IV); a 'potesse' was a providential part of 'Christian society'-the 'Christianitas', as it was called-but, not part of the ecclesia itself (a sort of optimistic body-metaphor version of Augustine); and, a 'potesse' may be a thug or sub-mystical, but could be 'transformed' into part of the ecclesia by papal/episcopal recognition (a view developed from Hugo of St.Victor onwards, and held by Innocent III). With the revival of Roman law, a final view appeared. According to Justinian's codes: the ecclesia was identical to the 'Christianitas', and kings were innately 'officers' of the ecclesia. Latin contemporaries described this by saying, 'kings were the secular arm of the ecclesia'. There was continual disagreement amongst the holders of these various views, as there was-to a lesser extent-disagreement over whether the clergy had an 'idoneus-sanction' over kings, but by the 1240s the explicit Justinian-view tended to prevail in papal circles.

According to the Monte Cassino chronicler Petrus diaconus, the Byzantine envoy, sent to negotiate an alliance with Innocent II and Lothar III against Sicily, remarked of contemporary struggles for power, "As the people, so shall be the priests" (Isaias 24:2). From another perspective, the existence of the long-twelfth century ecclesia, and papal 'idoneus-sanction', ensured, 'ideological hegemony' was not concentrated into the hands of those, with real physical power; and, contemporaries, anxious for the autonomy of their own regions, accepted-and perhaps even encouraged-this.

(ii.) the enlargement(s) of the papal-corpus.
The notions of 'libertas ecclesiae', lego-pastoral care, and the incessant papal wars of the long-twelfth century contributed to the enlargement, and sub-division, of the papal-body. This was a prolonged, and continuous, change; and, the papal-body had something of the quality of the proverbial axe-several new blades, several new handles. Pope Innocent II expressed this continual change through a 'body-metaphor', "For a new sentence is required for a new problem, [just as] the discreet doctor applies a new medicine to new illnesses". In a sense, the papal-corpus was, to contemporaries, a living thing, animated by the 'sanctus spiritus'. As a consequence of this, long-twelfth century contemporaries perceived both the papal-body and the ecclesia itself, as 'divine cubism'. Which is to say, an attempt to represent the mind/life of God so, as all possible things are seen in all possible ways; for this, contemporaries argued, is how God Himself sees/is. A 'Gothic cathedral' was intended, as a building haunted by the protean divine spirit, so as to transform the building's very nature and relationships to time(s); and, a similar aesthetic animated the papal-body. Gregory IX explained this by saying: the martyrs, "gave to the ecclesia, innumerably increased, children of all the nations under heaven"; St.Benedict, "reestablished through the happy society of a cohabitation full of grace"; St.Bernard, "replenish[ed] its weary troops"; and, St.Dominic, "the strength and the favour of divine prediction". It is the very touch-stone of ignorance, and indicative of an imagination under the influence of Hegelian phenomenology, to say: 'the high mediaeval ecclesia became a 'papal monarchy''.

For a consideration of the enlargement of the long-twelfth century papal-body, it is sufficient to begin with the 800s. The ninth century Arab invasions lead to the disintegration of the popes' polis-style administration within Rome; and, resulted in a papal-ban, amongst Roman society's other bans, and the popes as an indeterminate-idealist 'pater romanorum'. Effectively, this meant, the popes and their immediate entourage residing at the Lateran, and the previous 'civic officials' of the Lateran palatine were replaced by (ban-motivated) 'supervisory' figures. Such figures were initially called 'bibliothecarius', later 'vestarius', and-from the tenth century-'cancellarius'. This 'ban-organisation' continued throughout the early eleventh century, until the arrival of Leo IX (1049-54). Leo arrived in central Italy with a large personal entourage, which consisted of scribes, milites, and holy-men counsellors. With his various political activities, Leo's entourage spent considerable periods touring; and, this created something of a distinction between the immediate papal-entourage, and the Lateran/Roman ecclesia. The 'autonomy' of Leo's entourage was consolidated by the demographic revolution, within central Italy. Contemporary population growth ensured, there were many collaborators, anxious to counteract the influence of local bans, through forming a specific relationship with Leo's entourage. It was these specific relationships, between the immediate papal entourage and the families and communes created in Lazio by the improved climate, which formed a gimmal-ring for the papal entourage. The enlarged papal-body of the long-twelfth century was, to no small degree, the collective will of the post-1030 neo-nobles of Lazio.

The changed relationship between the enlarged (immediate) papal entourage and central Italy continued under the Tuscan popes, Nicholas II to Gregory VII. These popes also attempted to relocate the papal entourage within Roman society. This involved, attempting to form specific relationships with some of the city's bans: neo-noble families such as the Pierleoni and Frangipani, and clerical figures-especially abbots, and the cardinal priests of the great basilicas. Lenten councils were also held at the Lateran, to allow neighbouring bishops, and other new collaborators, to meet with the papal entourage. Yet, these councils were not simply the reestablishment of antique Roman metropolitan synods, they involved figures from outside central Italy; and, were, in a sense, intended, as 'general ecclesiastical councils'. Gregory's catastrophic pontificate, and the subsequent rivalry between Urban II and Clement III, caused further changes. Both Urban and Clement bade for support within Rome, and offered future patronage, in exchange for recognition. The most noticeable feature of such bidding was, certain smaller congregations were offered the title 'cardinal'-and access to papal funds; the first references to 'cardinal deacons' occur in the letters of Clement. Urban's forced exile from Rome, also accentuated the separation of the immediate papal entourage from Rome itself. It was during the 1090s, Urban's entourage was first called, by contemporaries, a 'curia'. The word 'curia' originally referred to the antique princeps' immediate legal-body but, eleventh century figures understood the term to mean, the immediate entourage of any ban-lord. Urban also reorganised his immediate entourage: establishing one figure-and a college of scribes-, as a 'chancellor' to supervise documents; and, another figure, with a college, to collect monies. The pope also encouraged litigants to have suits heard by his immediate entourage-basically, in order to raise funds from honoraria. It was concerning Urban's curia, Garcia of Toledo wrote his famous satire, De albino et rufino; wherein, Garcia said, the patrons of Rome were saints 'silver' and 'gold'.

With the more stable conditions of Paschal II's pontificate, Paschal continued Urban's curia, and attempted to relocate it within Rome. Paschal reorganised the clerical liturgies of the city (and thereby defined its various regions), attempted to define which churches possessed cardinal titles, and attempted to restore the organisation of the Lateran palatine. In this, Paschal created a new college, the so called sub-deacons of the palatine, who were to act, as chaplains to the pope, and general counsellors. Paschal also attempted to integrate Rome's various nobles into his curia. During the early 1100s, local nobles were entitled to offer counsel upon 'criminal' litigations (ie. suits not uniquely involving clerics); and, could expect papal patronage, as regards receiving castra, and division of papal gifts-each visitor or litigant to the pope, usually presented gifts. The disputed papal elections of 1118, 1124 and 1130 were caused, to some extent, over quarrels about the division of such gifts. Nonetheless, the papal-body during this period was no larger than, any other major archbishopric; say, Mainz, Lyon, Milan, Ravenna. The real long-twelfth century enlargement of the papal-body occurred, during Innocent II's war with Sicily.

Innocent's enlargement consisted of a 'systematic'-which is to say, self-conscious-attempt to encourage gifts to the papal court. This involved, reorganising appeals to the curia. Instead of ad hoc figures travelling to Rome or touring papal legates participating in local councils, any would be litigant was to secure a letter from his local bishop or abbot, then travel to Rome with appropriate surety, and then have his case settled by the pope, or delegated to particular figures, who would act in the pope's name (so called, papal judge-delegates). These procedures were copied from the codex Justiniani. Touring papal legates were now reserved for more explicitly political matters-such as threatening kings over christian morality, or attending to important divorces; although, legate tours initially continued for more distant lands, such as Scotland, Scandinavia and the Slavs. Innocent's immediate successors recognised the Roman commune (thereby agreeing pacts, as regards distributing papal gifts), and attempted to fortify and control Lazio against Roger II. The commune also forced many local clerics, especially cardinals, to reside permanently with the touring curia; and, it was during the 1140s, and only then, cardinals became the predominant counsellors to the popes. Innocent consolidated his various innovations with a spectacular embellishment of papal-rituals. As mentioned, the popes had always performed rituals, as regarded their high-priesthood, and their position as dominus Urbis; but, Innocent enhanced these: by introducing new papal thrones, statues along papal procession routes, and rebuilding the larger basilicas of Rome. Innocent, like Paschal II and Calixtus II, decorated S.Nicola al Laterano with mosaics, depicting papal deeds; S.Nicola was the private chapel, where the pope and his counsellors retired to consider non-criminal litigations.

By 1150, the enlarged papal-body of the long-twelfth century existed, so to speak, 'in outline'. There was: the legal-persona of the pope (his sancta praesentia, from which the pope could distribute idiosyncratic spiritual gifts, such as remission of sins); an immediate entourage, or curia, with-a chancellory and camera colleges, sub-deacons for liturgical and menial tasks, nobles and commune leaders, who acted as counsellors, castellans and captains, and semi-resident cardinals, who enjoyed a predominance, but not an exclusive 'right', in counselling the pope. This curia was, normally, resident at the Lateran palatine, whose judges addressed local Roman matters, not considered by the senate. And, there was an extension of the body, in the provincial appeals organisation, and the more extemporary legate tours. This entire organisation was, however, thought of in terms of body-metaphor: the cardinals were the pope's sides, the nobles the pope's hairy sons, visiting litigants his children. Subsequent change in the papal-body involved 'replacing' parts of this, body-metaphor and rights-discourse, corpus with Roman legal instruments. Yet, even at this stage, some contemporaries, most noticeably Bernard of Clairvaux, were unhappy with the enlarged papal-body. "Peter", wrote Bernard, "is not known ever to have gone in procession adorned in jewels and silks, nor crowned with gold, nor mounted upon a white horse". This was though, not the predominant opinion. Other contemporaries appreciated the curia's usefulness, as a 'closure point' to litigations; others, more cynically, appreciated, the curia had to be enlarged, in order to keep Roger II in Sicily. One should also, not over emphasise the size of the enlarged papal-body. It consisted of around 100 figures (clerical and lay), and dealt with perhaps ten to fifty suits a month. Control of the forest pigs of Albano, and the sheep runs of the Apennines were, as much long-twelfth century papal concerns, as 'foreign-litigations'.

The replacement of parts of the papal-body by Roman legal instruments posited a knowledge of Roman law, which is to say a knowledge of Justinian's codices. There was a memory of Roman law, and more so its 'philosophy of causation', throughout post-Antiquity. Yet, early mediaeval figures, who wrote 'collections of canons'-such as Theodulf of Orléans, Atto of Vercelli, Rather of Verona, Abbo of Fleury, and Burchard of Worms-compiled texts like wisdom-stories, and their activities were akin to composing spiritual-rules. The various shouting matches around Gregory VII and Henry IV increased the number of 'canonical texts' in circulation, although these texts continued to be read, as wisdom-stories. But, the rediscovery of Justinian's codices changed consciousness. In reading these codices, it was appreciated by contemporaries, there 'was'-ie. could be made to be-an aesthetic to 'law'; and, Christian writings could be read, from such an aesthetic. Such an aesthetic was desired by contemporaries because, it allowed the justification of possession without in primo invoking magical-mysticism. The study of Justinian's codices was a painful, and it was only during the early 1130s-and then only by a select few-that, Roman legal aesthetic began to be genuinely understood. Throughout the early twelfth century, the justification of papal dispute settlement remained, 'the irrefragability of the apostolic-ban'; which is to say, after taking suitable counsel, St.Peter illuminated the present pope, and the pope 'banned', or cursed, something.

The introduction of explicit Roman law into the papal-body was a long, and often ambiguous process. Apart from anything else, many contemporaries continued-and actively preferred-thinking in terms of body-metaphors and wisdom-stories; and, such figures were increasingly denoted, by the legally or scholastically educated, as 'the simple'. The first Roman legal instruments to enter the papal-body were lego-syllogisms (ratiocinationes), which were used to settled individual disputes: ie. an issue was compared against an abstract 'norm', derived from Roman law. Celestine II used the lego-syllogism, 'salva auctoritate apostolicae sedis' (1143-4); Eugenius III wrote, ignoring the papal-ban was 'laesa majestas', ie. the Roman legal offence of ignoring the princeps (1145-53). Eugenius' pontificate also saw the first, what are somewhat confusingly called, '(mediaeval) papal decretal letters'. These letters were intended, as 'general guidance' to papal dispute settlement practices, both for judge-delegates and would be litigants. Such letters were, not originally, an emanation of self-consciously understood 'principate decretal privilege'; although, contemporaries, who understood Roman legal aesthetic, frequently 'glossed'-or commented upon-these letters, as such. Indeed, a small industry developed, especially in northern Italy, glossating papal letters. With Alexander III, lego-syllogisms and 'decretal letters' continued. Alexander's pontificate also saw, further enlargement of the papal-body: the chancellory was sub-divided into individual colleges, to produce specific types of letters; the camera was enlarged, invented new types of papal revenues-especially, systematic subsidia (gifts because of political necessity) from local bishops-, and given its own touring representatives. In part, these enlargements were caused by Alexander's struggle against Barbarossa but, Alexander deliberately enlarged, in order to ensure, it would be impossible for any dissident group within Rome to establish a viable alternative papal praesentia. Alexander's enlargements cured the problem of faction fighting within Roman society, creating schisms.

It was once considered, Alexander was a master from Bologna's law schools but, this is now disputed. Less ambiguously, the 1160s, when Alexander was most dependent upon Parisian clerical aid, saw, the introduction of lego-pastoral care into the curia. The supererogatory nature of lpc-because suits occurred, not only for 'violations' but, also for failures to perform enthusiastically-increased papal use of lego-syllogisms. During the later 1100s, the popes repeatedly used, in dispute settlement, the work of, so called, Gratian of Bologna; which was the largest Roman legal-aesthetic 'collection of canons'. Yet, there was a certain hesitation within the curia over adopting Roman legal aesthetic. For instance, the popes refused to consider, the texts approved by their own 'general councils', as 'statute-law'; and, the curia's internal organisation remained orientated around body-metaphors. This was not ignorance of Roman law, as 'glossating' was now a well established discipline. In many respects, the hesitation was because, of curial relations with peripheral peoples: whether they be 'latin barbarians' (such as the Irish or Scandinavians), or eastern Christians (such as the Byzantines and Armenians). There was an appreciation with the late twelfth century popes, these groups possessed 'particular customs'; and, the popes preferred to deal with these groups on an idiosyncratic pact-basis, rather than universal statute-law. Celestine III declared, against the archbishops of York's ambitions, the ecclesia scotorum was a distinct 'daughter of the Roman ecclesia'. Such considerations were much ignored by the Parisian intelligentsia, whose solution was, it would be far better for peripheral groups, if they were made to act like French people.

The curial hesitation, over fully adopting Roman legal aesthetic, was ended by Innocent III (1198-1216). Innocent self-consciously acted through principate decretal privilege, which inter alia posited acceptance of ordinary, super-ordinary and trans-ordinary jurisdiction; Innocent, through recognising the collections of Pietro di Benevento, also explicitly recognised glossators' legal aesthetic. From Innocent onwards, the popes presented glossated collections of their judgements, which were to be studied by schools, judge-delegates and would be litigants. Innocent also attempted to increase the 'legal knowledge' of the curia itself, the curia having hitherto lagged in its knowledge of glossating. Moreover, Innocent's pontificate saw, an attempt to reorganise the curia, and its appeals and legates, by Roman legal instruments. With Innocent, the curia was declared 'ordinarily' separate from the Lateran, and new rituals introduced specific to the curia. It was during this period, the popes first publicly wore the tiara, or the head-dress of the (neo-Mosaic) high-priest. Contemporaries, and Innocent, also used the word 'papacy' ('papatus') to describe the curia; hitherto, the word 'papatus' had referred only to the person, who was pope. The body-metaphor ritual-act of the pope 'taking counsel' ('habito concilio') was replaced by a 'consistorium'; an organisation ordered by statute-law, what-in the strict sense of the word-is meant by an 'institution'.

Innocent also 'institutionalised' the papal chancellory. Its various colleges were reorganised, and a new college established, the 'audientia litterarum contradictarum'. The audientia was intended, as a proto-court to the consistory; where would be litigants would have their documents inspected for appropriate forms, and encouraged to settle without pursuing full litigation. This new emphasis upon 'correct form', also enhanced the influence of those numerous figures, who carried correspondence from foreign clerics to the curia. During the twelfth century, such figures were known as 'nuncii'; and, in the thirteenth, as 'proctors'. Clerics with regular business at the curia, also began retaining proctors; simultaneously, proctors encouraged bankers to reside at Rome, in order to provide their clients with easy surety. During the late 1190s and Innocent's pontificate, there was also an attempt to 'institutionalise' the camera. Which is to say, to collate details of papal revenues, whether from papal-vassals, churches which had become res of St.Peter, or from the curia's sundry rights-discourse pacts. This 'systemisation', which was conducted by cardinal Savelli, was less to pursue papal revenues than, to provide evidence, to bankers, of papal solvency, in order to facilitate loans. The popes required such funds to combat Henry VI, and later to finance their attempt to control the Via Flaminia, against wondering captains.

Innocent, being the Parisian rake, was also an enthusiast for lpc. Such innovations involved, attempting to extent Latin legal practices to the newly conquered Greeks, and enclosing existing schools and religious into lego-corporations. In regard to the various schools, such lego-corporations were reasonably successful; and, one can talk of (statute-institution) 'universities' from the 1200s onwards. Yet, the experience with religious was disastrous, and was to influence curial thinking about lpc until the 1500s. Hitherto, religious had been myriad: some monasteries were under bishops, some monasteries were the private possessions of the pope, some monasteries had extended 'families', some monastic families were recognised by the popes, every monastery had sundry relations with its local patrons. Ignoring these problems, Innocent attempted to reorganise all religious into four (Roman legal defined trans-ordinary) corporations: the 'Benedictines', the 'Augustinians', the 'Carthusians', and the 'Cistercians'. Such reorganisation only resulted in endless quarrels, with figures claiming idiosyncratic 'exemptions'. In addition, the reorganisations created the problem of, what to do about all the wondering holy-men, and forest hermits. The curia's eventual solution to this, self-created, difficulty was to lump such into a new corporation, established around the holy-man Francis of Assisi (d.1226).

The mid-thirteenth century saw, a continuation of this legal-cubism. Gregory IX, and his scribes, compiled an encyclopedic-gloss, the so called Liber extra. Such a work enabled the development of, genuine, 'canonists'; which is to say, figures, who commented upon the topoi used within, the previously constructed, glossating textual-aesthetic. To the Franciscans, there was joined the 'Dominicans', a corporation of preachers, based around the followers of Dominic Guzmán (1217). Other new spiritual-rules were recognised: the Trinitarians (who attempted to ransom captives), the Humiliati, and Pietro of Morrone's hermits. As with most papal recognition of holy-men, these various groups already existed, and the popes only later-modulo suitable legal privileges-confirmed them. This permitting new spiritual movements space to develop-and thereby prove whether they were of God or not-was also, very much, an 'Italian' view of things; and, greatly irritated advocates of lpc. These small groups were frequently associated with the increased urbanisation, and thereby new, 'rationalised', opportunities for acts of practical charity and preaching. Celestine III recognised, as a saint, the merchant, Homobonus of Cremona (1199). Such emphasis upon practical charity was caused: through the increase in urban destitution, created by demographic growth, and the migration of rural dispossessed to urban centres; and, partly, through the new emotional sophistication, which emphasised the human nature of Christ. The two great images of long-twelfth century art were the curcified Jesus, and the Madonna and child.

Alongside, such changes, there was something of an early thirteenth century panic over 'heresy'. Mediaeval heretics were not a continuation of antique 'philosophical heresy' but, rather something particular to the long-twelfth century's regional/pan-regional economy. In 1233, Gregory IX established the 'Inquisition', which was a college of travelling experts, who-when asked by local jurisdictions (such as bishops, religious corporations, or universities)-would aid in considering, 'sins against the Faith'. Hitherto, bishops had considered such matters but, it was seemingly felt greater sophistication was required. Most figures, who appeared before the inquisition, were soon dismissed with short penances; and, the whole thing was, somewhat, a smoke screen for hunting-newly commercially minded-peddlers of contraceptives, and abortionists. These matters were a considerable worry for higher clerics, as the only groups, who utilised such, were clerics themselves, and richer nobles and burghers; everyone else was reliant, for their livings, upon children surviving. There was also some large scale mediaeval heretical groups, such as the Waldensians and Cathars in southern France. Innocent III initiated a papal-army against such, in 1208-13. These larger groups were, in a very 'catholic' way, organised into alternative 'hierarchical churches'. After the French king's annihilation of the Cathars, such groups were little more than curios.

The papal wars against Frederick II and his sons further enlarged the papal-body. From Honorius III onwards, the popes utilised numerous captains; and, this required, raising revenues, in order to provide the surety for loans. Such revenue was, partly, met through established methods: increasing fees for papal-jurisprudence, dues from ban-pacts over Lazio, 'subsidia' collections from papal-vassals and foreign clerics. In 1265, Clement IV introduced a new departure. Clement declared that, any cleric, who died at the curia, could-thereby be said to have-donated his movables and benefices to 'papal provision'. Papal provision meant, the pope could 'prevail' upon an election chapter to chose a candidate. 'Provision' was not, strictly speaking, a legal act but, an act of practical charity towards the pope. Since antiquity, the popes had 'provided' clerics to benefices throughout central Italy; and, encouraged by the Parisian clerical community, Innocent II and Alexander III had provided some clerics to benefices in Spain, France and England. The full implications of Clement IV's extension of provisions were only felt during the fourteenth century, and are discussed more fully later.

There were three main social groups, who contributed to the long-twelfth century curia. The dominant group was scions of the greater nobles of Rome, central Italy and southern Campagna. This group was often associated with Monte Cassino, and in consequence were skilled in Scripture and prose-formalism. The, so called, cursus-a type of accented hexameter developed by Alberic of Cassino-was introduced into papal letters by John of Gaeta (son of the duke of Gaeta, a monk of Cassino, Urban II's chancellor, and later pope Gelasius II). In order to improve their suitability, these central Italians increasingly studied in Paris, or Bologna. Such local noble popes included: Anacletus II (a Pierleoni), Innocent II (a Papareschi), Anastasius IV (a Subarri), Clement III (a Scolari), Celestine III (a Boboni-Orsini), Innocent III (a Conti-Annibaldi), Honorius III (a Savelli), Gregory IX (a Conti-Annibaldi), and Alexander IV (a Conti-Annibaldi). The second group were 'technocrats' from northern Italy and France, and to a lesser extent Anglo-Normandy and Iberia. These figures were of minor noble or burgher family, and schooled. Popes of this groups included: Honorius II (from Bologna), Eugenius III (from Pisa), Hadrian IV (from St.Albans), Alexander III (from Siena), Urban III (from Milan), Celestine IV (from Milan), Innocent IV (from Genoa), Urban IV (French)), Clement IV (French). There were few curial figures of German origins. This was less prejudice than because, German clerical technocrats enjoyed rich domestic benefices. Finally, there was a small tier of holy-men, retained to exercise discernment in theological matters. During the 1100s, such figures tended to be renowned monks of high-noble birth-monks, because of their more perfect religion, were thought of, as possessing heightened powers of spiritual discernment. Such monks were later, partly, replaced by Franciscans and Dominicans.

Much effort has been dedicated to considering the 'cardinals', during the long-twelfth century. This is somewhat misplaced. Cardinals only became the dominant papal counsellors during the mid-1140s; and, even during the 1170s, they were still expected to participate, in the daily liturgies of their basilicas. It was only with Innocent III, a statute-organisation was created for cardinals: the 'collegium cardinalium', under the 'carmerlengus'. Papal elections also remained somewhat ad hoc occurrences; until 1179, when it was declared, a two-thirds (numerical) majority amongst cardinals was required. Gregory IX decreed, papal elections were to occur in private (the, so called, 'conclave'). During the twelfth century, there were around thirty to fifty cardinals; with Innocent III's creation of a statutory consistory, numbers significantly decreased, to around a dozen-two dozen. This was so, as cardinals were now expected to be, effectively, appeal court judges, and skilled in law. Innocent, and his immediate successors, went to considerable lengths to improve 'jurisprudential knowledge' amongst the whole curia. Alongside the new importance of cardinals, there were changes in notions of collective-identity amongst the Roman ecclesia. The mid-twelfth century writer Gerhoh of Reichersberg said, the 'coetus'-or gathering-of the cardinals was the Roman ecclesia; and, there was a certain tendency, amongst Roman contemporaries, to consider the coetus cardinalium as-'effectively'-the papal-body, because the cardinals represented all the great churches of Rome, and therefore all its Christians. Moreover, until the adoption of explicit decretal privilege, there was an indeterminacy, as to whether the pope required the 'gathering of the Roman ecclesia' (ie. the cardinals) to make, certain, decisions. In recognition of this, the popes reserved certain decisions-appointment of papal castellans, canonisation of saints, proclamations of new liturgical texts or feasts, disputes over greater benefices, confirming new canons-for either the 'collective sitting of the Roman ecclesia', or 'general councils'. The notion, the 'Roman ecclesia' could depose a pope for bad deeds, or denying the symbols of faith, was, already aired during Antiquity, and it revived during the later 1000s. In their various struggles, Frederick I and Frederick II also proposed the said but, as yet, it found few enthusiasts within Rome itself.

Charles of Anjou's victory over Conradin marked the end of the long-twelfth century, and its particular enlargement(s)-in both size and aesthetic refinement-of the papal-body. With Capetian France now predominant throughout western Europe, it presented the curia with different challenges, and these were all the more so, because of a declining economy. In one way or another, Paris, which had been the real driving force-both financially and intellectually-behind the enlargement of the papal-body (because the Parisian intelligentsia used the curia to open benefices, for its own lpc scholars) was, to prove itself the post-Gothic curia's best enemy.