Sede Vacante 1099

Sede Vacante 1099 (July 29—August 13, 1099) The medieval Lateran Palace, as one approaches from S. Clemente, before the removal of the equestrian statue of Marcus Aurelius in 1538 (Fra Filippo Lippi, detail of fresco of S. Thomas Aquinas in S. Maria sopra Minerva) Last Days of Urban II The Continuator of Berthold of Constanz, monk of Reichenau, summarizes the last months of Pope Urban II (Odo or Eudes of Châtillon). The pope was able to spend Christmas of 1098 in Rome and in peace. The Castel S. Angelo and other fortifications were in his possession, and he was in control of his opponents in the city. In the third week after Easter, 1099, he held a Roman Synod, and once again confirmed the anathemas against his opponent Wibert (Guibert) of Ravenna and his followers ("Clement III", died September 8, 1100) {Baronius-Theiner, sub anno 1099, no. 23, p. 92): Hoc anno millesimo nonagesimo nono, dominus papa Natalem Domini (December 25, 1098) Romae cum magna pace celebravit: nam et castellum Sancti Angeli cum aliis munitionibus in sua potestate detinuit, omnesque aemulos suos in civitate cum Dei adjutorio satis viriliter aut placavit aut vi perdomuit, Synodum quoque suam in tertia hebdomada Romae celebrandam post Pascha, missis litteris usquequaque denuntiavit.... Romae dominus papa generalem Synodum centum quinquaginta episcoporum, abbatum et clericorum innumerabilium tertia hebdomada post Pascha collegit [April 24-30, 1099]: in qua Synodo, confirmatis suorum antecessorum statutis, etiam sententiam anathematis super Guibertum haeresiarcham et omnes ejus complices iteravit. Statuit quoque ibi ne communicare praesumerent iis qui concubinas haberent, nisi prius eas dimitterent. De Hierosolymitano itinere multum rogavit ut irent et fratribus suis laborantibus succerrerent. Canonical reforms, the Schism, and the Crusades were his principal concerns. But he did not live to hear of the success of his monstrous project, the capture of Jersualem by the Crusaders on July 15, 1099. Pandulph of Pisa adds that he was determined in opposing heretical dogma—by which is also meant the schism of Guibert (Wibertus, Antipope Celestine III) and the excommunicate Emperor Henry IV (Muratori RIS III., 352). He died on July 29, 1099 (JL, p. 701; or July 28, according to Ordericus Vitalis, wrongly), at the Church of S. Nicholas in Carcere Tulliano, in the house of Petrus Leonis. He was buried in the Vatican Basilica (according to Pandulphus Pisanus: Muratori, RIS III.1, p. 352 column 2; Petrus Pisanus: Watterich I, 574 and n. 5; Baronius-Theiner 18, sub anno 1099, xxiv, p. 92 and xxxix, pp. 95-96), or in the Lateran Basilica (according to Bernardus Guidonis: Muratori, RIS III.1, p. 354 column 2—wrongly). The Cardinals A firm and accurate list of the cardinals at the time of the decease of Urban II, is the first desideratum. Panvinio's list of Cardinals created by Urban II (Epitome Pontificum Romanorum [Venetiis 1572], pp. 7779) provided a start, but ultimately he did not probe very deeply. He lists thirty cardinals, but cannot name six of them, and likewise cannot provide tituli or deaconries for six. The names of the first four of the Cardinal Bishops are provided by Petrus (Pandulphus) Pisanus (Watterich II, 2). Ciaconius-Olduinus lists forty-one cardinals, an overflow of riches (columns 885-898). Dom Thierri Ruinart (Ouvrages posthumes de D. Jean Mabillon et de D. Thierri Ruinart Volume III [Paris 1724], 333-334 = Migne, Patrologiae 151, column 264) attempted to draw up a list of cardinals created by Urban II (1088-1099, at least thirty-seven in number, praeter ignotos. This is not, in any case, the number of cardinals present at the Election of 1099. Salvador Miranda's list of Cardinals created by Urban II is riddled with errors and impossibilities. When it comes to the Election of 1099, he is content to name only four Cardinal Bishops (Ostia, Albano. Porto, and Palestrina) and two other bishops, Offo of Nepi and Bovo of Labico. In fact, the last two are mentioned by Pandulphus of Pisa only as participants in the Consecration of the new Pope as Bishop, not as electors [Watterich II, p. 2; Muratori, RIS 3. 1, p. 355; Baronius-Theiner 18, sub anno 1100, no. 6, p. 106]. Bruno of Segni is nowhere to be found; "The only absentee was Cardinal Bruno, bishop of Segni". In stating that he is the only absentee, Miranda presumably rejects the episcopates of Crescentius of Sabina and Joannes of Tusculum at the time of the Election of 1099. Ruinart, however, includes Cardinal Crescentius, Bishop of Sabina, and states that there were only five Cardinal Bishops: Odo, Galterius, Milo, Mauricius and Crescentius; he rightly does not include Offo or Bovo. There is also a list of the schismatic cardinals of "Clement III" (Guibert, Wibert, Wiberto, of Ravenna) [Baronius-Theiner 20, sub anno 1198, nos. 10-11, p. 82], who held a synod in Rome in August of 1098. They had, of course, been excommunicaterd. by Urban II. They included two legitimate Cardinal Bishops: Adelbert of Silva Candida [Hüls, pp. 136-137] and John of Ostia [Hüls, p. 103]; as well as Hugo [Candidus] of Praeneste, who had been elevated from Cardinal Priest of S. Clemente [Hüls, pp. 158-160] by "Clement III". The following is a tentative list of the cardinals who might have been eligible to participate in the Election of Paschal II (though the Constitution of Nicholas II was still in effect, which gave the right to nominate exclusively to the Cardinal Bishops): 1. Odo of Châtillon, O. Clun. [Gallus], Cardinal BIshop of the Suburbicarian See of Ostia. (died 1101) nephew of Pope Urban II [Duchesne, Cardinaux françois, 60-61; Cardella I. 1, p. 183; Hüls, pp. 103-105]. He was with Urban II in Salerno on August 6, 1098 [Kehr IP 8, 355 no. 36 and 356 no. 37]. On March 24, 1099 he was in Rome at St. Peter's [JL 5788]. He was the principal consecrator of Paschal II at St. Peter's on August 14, 1099 [Petrus Pisanus "Vita Paschalis II, in Watterich II, p. 2]. He died in 1102; his successor was Leo Marsicanus (1102–May 22, 1115). The "Albericus Ostiensis Episcopus, Apostolicae Sedis Legatus", whose letter (anno Domini MC) is printed in Migne Patrologiae latinae Cursus Completus 155, 1631-1632, is a fraud and a forgery. 2. Galterius, Cardinal Bishop of the Suburbicarian See of Albano (perhaps from 10911100). In 1095, as Bishop of Albano, he had been sent to England as Apostolic Legate of Urban II, arriving before Easter, and carrying the pallium for Anselm of Bec, Archbishop of Canterbury. He became embroiled in some dissention with King William Rufus, who was a supporter of the anti-pope "Clement III" (Wibert). Anselm fled to Italy (November 1097), where he attended a synod of Pope Urban II at Bari in October of 1098, and the Council in Rome (April 24-30, 1099; JL p. 700), the day after which he began his return journey to England [Eadmer, Historiae novorum, Liber secundus, in Migne PL 159, columns 389-391; MGH SS 13, 136-137, 139-143]. Galterius was at the Council of Clermont in November 1195. He was one of the coconsecrators at the coronation of Pope Paschal II on August 14, 1099. Subsequently legate to King Philip of France for Pope Paschal II [In general, see Ciacconius I, 886; Cardella I. 1, p. 184-185; Hüls, pp. 91-92]. His successor was Cardinal Richardus, former Canon of Metz [Laurentius, Historia Virdunensium Episcoporum, in Bouquet-Delisle, Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France 13 (Paris 1869), p. 632], who was Legate in France between 1101 and 1104. On March 28, 1104, a council was held at Troyes with Cardinal Richardus, Bishop of Albano, presiding [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, 1179-1180]. He seems to be back in Rome before December 12, 1104, when he and Paschal II grant permission for a donation to S. Maria Nova [Fedele, Archivio 24 (1901) p. 160 no. xxiii]. Richardus was again Legate in France from 1107 to 1112. He died in 1114 or 1115. Salvador Miranda (following Cardella, Cristofori, Mas Latrie, and the Annuaire Pontifical Catholique 1927) lists a Bishop Oddo of Albano from 1090-ca. 1096. This is quite impossible, in the light of Cardinal Galterus' known career. The evidence for Oddo is a single bull from S. Maria de Cava [Migne, PL 151, columns 347-352, xvi], where Odo of Ostia might be meant (or where the bull might be a forgery). "Odo of Albano" must be deleted entirely from the ranks of cardinals. 3. Milo [Gallus], Cardinal Bishop of the Suburbicarian See of Praeneste (Palestrina) [Duchesne, Cardinaux françois, 65-66; Cardella I. 1, p. 185-186]. A monk of St. Aubin in Angers, he had come to Italy as early as 1092, as part of an embassy to Pope Urban II. He participated as Bishop of Praeneste in the coronation of Paschal II [Pandulphus Pisanus, in Watterich II, 2; Hüls, pp. 111-112]. In 1101 he was present at Venosa and witnessed a land transaction along with Duke Roger of Sicily [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 8, p. 339 no. 3]. On March 21, 1102, he subscribed a privilege in Rome [PflugkHarttung, Acta pontificum Romanorum inedita 3, p. 24 no. 27]. In 1103, and likely earlier, he was papal Legate to all France [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio 20, column 1162; Hugh of Flavigny, MGH SS VIII, p. 495]: Post hoc missus est Legatus in Franciam Milo ex monasterio sancti Albini [Praenestinus] episcopus. He presided at a synod at Marseille in 1103 [Martène-Durand, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum 4 (Paris 1717), 124-125]. On March 28, 1104, a synod was held at Troyes with Cardinal Richard, Bishop of Albano, presiding. Milo was dead, in France, it seems, by 1104 [Hüls, p. 113 n. 22]. Cardinal Milo's legitimate predecessor was Berardus, but there was the schismatic Hugo Candidus as well, who participated in the schismatic Roman Synod of August 7, 1098, and who subscribed a bull for "Clement III" as late as October 18, 1199 [Kehr, Archivio della r. Società Romana di storia patria 23 (1900), 283; Hüls, p. 111]. Milo's successor was Cardinal Kono in 1107/1108. 4. Mauricius, Cardinal Bishop of the Suburbicarian See of Porto (1097-1106). [Cardella I. 1, p. 186-187; Cappelletti Chiese d'Italia I, 507]. His predecessor was Cardinal Ioannes [Migne, Patrologiae 151, no. cxxvii, p. 400 (February 18, 1095)]. Bishop Mauricius dedicated the altar Sancti Marmetis in S. Caecilia on February 24, 1098 [J. Laderchi, S. Caeciliae Virg. et Mart. Acta et Transtyberina Basilica II (1723), pp. 14 and 17]. He was sent as Legate to the Holy Land, departing Genoa on August 1, 1100 [Albertus (or Albericus) Aquensis, in Migne PL 166, 594]. Despite the statement sometimes made that Bishop Mauricius died in 1106, he actually seems to have died by 1102. He had a successor in Cardinal Petrus, who was Rector of Benevento in 1102, and who subscribes a bull on July 29, 1103 [JL 5948]. See B. Zenker, Die Mitglieder des Kardinalcollegiums von 1130 bis 1159 (Würzburg 1964), pp. 25-26 no. 7; and Hüls, p. 122. 5. ? Crescentius [Romanus], Cardinal Bishop of the Suburbicarian See of Sabina (successor of Ubaldo) [Cardella I. 1, p. 187]. He is not listed as present at the consecration of Paschal II on August 14, 1099. But, "Seine Kreation is spätestens 1100 erfolgt" [Hüls, p. 127]. Whether he was Bishop of Sabina on August 13, 1099 cannot be determined on the present evidence. His legitimate predecessor, Bishop Hubaldus, is last heard of in 1094; Cardinal Regizo, who supported the antipope "Clement III" (Wibert) and was the anti-bishop of Sabina is last heard of in 1097. Bishop Crescentius subscribed on March 4, 1102 [Kehr, IP 3, 16, no. 14], and down to 1126. He was succeeded by Conradus, Cardinal Priest of S. Pudenziana tit. Pastoris. 6. Bovo: Cardinal Bishop of the See of Lavicanus (Pandulphus Pisanus, Watterich II, p. 2; Muratori, RIS 3. 1, p. 355). Salvador Miranda, however, chooses to list Bovo, Bishop of Labico, as created 1090 and died 'after April 13, 1111' . Under Bovo's name, Miranda remarks, "He is also listed as Bon, Bobon, Bobo, Bobbone, Bone, Bobonem and Bobone." There were two actual Cardinals Bobone under Urban II, neither of whom is to be confused with Bovo. B. Piazzi, La gerarchia cardinalizia (Roma 1703) p. 259, pointed out that Bovo and Bono are the same person. Bishop Bovo's predecessor was Bishop Minut(- -), who is attested on July 8, 1089, but who is not catalogued by R. Hüls, Kardinäle, Klerus und Kirchen Roms 1049–1130 (Tübingen 1977), among the bishops of Tusculum-Labicum, pp. 138-143 (cf. p. 51 nr. 39). On the See of Labico, see G.Cappelletti, Le chiese d' Italia Volume primo (Venezia 1844), pp. 652-653, and G. Moroni, Dizionario di erudizione storico-ecclesiactica Vol. 5 (Venezia 1840), p. 260-261; Vol. 37 (Venezia 1846), p. 52. There are no Bishops of Labico after Bovo. The entire town was abandoned. Similarly, the great see of Silva Candida was so completely depopulated by the early 12th century that Calixtus II transferred the episcopal seat to Porto [Ughelli-Colet Italia Sacra I, p. 89; Kehr Italia Pontificia II, p. 21 no. 14]. On the basis of the information about the Coronation of Paschal II, Hüls (pp. 140141) makes Bovo the Bishop of Tusculum, whom he inserts between Johannes III (whose latest reference is in 1094) and Johannes IV, who, Hüls claims, was made Bishop of Tusculum by Paschal II, by October 15, 1100. This Bishop Bovo of Tusculum subscribed no documents, and, according to Hüls, left no other traces in the record beyond his participation in the Coronation. He then remarks, "Seine Amtzeit muss kurz gewesen sein...." . Indeed, sehr kurz, since there is another bishop, Minut( - - ), who needs to be squeezed in too, after Johannes III and before Bovo. Joannes (III), Cardinal Bishop of the Suburbicarian See of Tusculum. [Ciacconius I, 886; Cardella I. 1, p. 183]; is not listed as present at the consecration of Paschal II on August 14, 1099. His earliest subscription is in 1073, and his latest on April 5, 1094. He was dead by the time of the papal Election of 1099, and the See was in the hands of Bovo of Lavicanum. Bishop Iohannes (IV) subscribes on October 15, 1100 [JL 5841], but he is claimed as a creation of Paschal II [Hüls, p. 141 no. 6]. It would have been this Bishop Johannes IV Tusculanus who was sent by the Pope to England in 1101, according to Hugh of Flavigny says [MGH SS VIII, p. 494] to collect the Peter's pence, propter censum beati Petri. In 1108, when Paschal II was minded to leave the city of Rome, he appointed the Bishop of Lavico as his Vicar General in spiritualities, and Petrus Leonis and Leo Frangipane as his representatives in secular affairs [Pandulphus Pisanus, in Watterich II, p. 7; Kehr IP II, p. 38]. This would have been Johannes IV, using the older title of Lavicanum rather than Tusculanus. It is said (by Salvador Miranda) that, on April 13, 1111, Bishop Bovo attended the coronation of Emperor Heinrich V by Pope Paschal II at the patriarchal Vatican basilica, Rome, and that he pronounced the eulogy of the emperor. What the "Life of Paschal II" actually says (Muratori, RIS 5, 361. The Annales Romani have almost exactly the same words: Watterich II, 54-55): Illic Dominus Papa cum Episcopis pluribus, cum Cardinalibus Presbyteris et Diaconibus, cum subdiaconibus, et caeteris Scholae Cantorum ministris affuit. Ad cujus vestigia cum Rex corruisset, post pedum oscula ad oris oscula elevatus est. Ter se invicem complexi, ter se invicem osculati sunt. Mox dexteram Pontificis tenens cum magno Populorum gaudio et clamore ad Portam venit Argenteam. Ibi ex libro professionem Imperatoriam fecit, et a Pontifice Imperator designatuis est, et iterum a Pontifice osculatus mox super eum Orationem primam, sicut in Ordine continetur, Lavicanus Episcopus dedit. Post ingressum Basilicae, cura in rortam porphyreticam pervenisset, positis utrinque sedibus consederunt. Pontifex refutationem Investiturae et caetera quae in conventionis charta scripta fuerant requisivit.... It is clear that this was not the coronation ceremony, but the formal announcement of the settlement of the Investiture Controversy. The ceremony immediately preceding it was the formal reception of the Emperor-elect at the top of the steps of the Vatican Basilica, and that the Lavicanus Episcopus merely read the first prayer in the Ordo, not an eulogy for the Emperor. The date was February 12, 1111, and nobody eulogized the Emperor on that day or on the next 61 days, during which the Emperor held the Pope and at least sixteen cardinals prisoner. The BIshop of Lavico on that day, moreover, was Johannes IV, not Bovo. 7. Albertus, OSB, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of Santa Sabina [J.P. Migne, Patrologiae Latinae Cursus Completus Tomus 163 (Paris 1854) column 40 (April 14, 1100)]. He was created a cardinal deacon by Alexander II, and promoted by Urban II [Cardella, 167]. Cardinal Albertus was present at the Council of Placentia on February 18, 1095 [Migne, Patrologiae 151, no. cxxvii, p. 400; JL 5540], and at the Council of Nemausus (July 6-12, 1096) [Mansi, 20, 938]. Appointed Archbishop of Siponto in October 1100 (G. A. Loud, The Latin Church in Norman Italy [2007], 218), Albert, the new Bishop of Siponto, signed a papal bull on October 15, 1100 (Migne, Patrologiae 163, column 47), but only as Archbishop. He had resigned his cardinalate on appointment as archbishop. Paschal II says in a letter confirming certain privileges of the Monastery of Monte Cassino [Migne, Patrologiae 163 (March 31, 1101)], that he was nunc Sipontinus episcopus, hujus autem actionis tempore transacto Romanae Ecclesiae cardinalis presbyter. Albert died on January 12 or 13, 1116 [Hüls, p. 203]. "V(itale) tituli S. Sabinae", who was a successor, if not the successor of Cardinal Albertus, participated in the Concilium Guastallensis (Lombardy) on October 22, 1106; according to Miranda he had been appointed in 1105. Salvador Miranda lists a Cardinal Alberico of S. Sabina, and says that he was created by Urban II in 1088, this Alberico (Miranda says) died ca. 1092; that is not possible, given the actual evidence just presented. Miranda also lists a Cardinal Alberto of S. Sabina, created by Urban II in 1099 (not "created', but promoted), who died "shortly after April 11, 1100" (not so; he moved to the See of Siponto); this Cardinal Alberto's predecessor must have been the Bruno who died "ca. 1099", according to Miranda, in the complete absence of contemporary evidence. Miranda also lists a Cardinal Alberto, created in 1094 and died after 1096, whose title and date of death are unknown (based entirely on two subscriptions). Are Alberico and Alberto the same person? (an easy paleographical or transcriptional error) Is there, in fact, only one Albertus? There was, of course, a Cardinal Albericus, but he was Cardinal Priest of S. Pietro in vincoli [JL 5832 (April 14, 1100] (see below, no. 13). Hüls (p. 204) lists a Cardinal Albericus at S. Sabina, but only in the year 1112; that is pure nonsense too—a simple paleographical misunderstanding. There was also an Albertus, "Cardinali Sancti Pauli", who was present at a meeting at Salerno between Pope Urban and the Archbishop of Salerno on August 6, 1099 [which has been "corrected" to 1098, since the Pope was not at Salerno on the date in 1099], in which the pope states he is unable to give judgment due to lack of information [Pflugk-Harttung, Acta pontificum Romanorum Inedita II, pp. 164-165, no. 198; Kehr IP 8, pp. 355-356 nos. 36-37]. But another document on the same subject [PflugkHarttung, no. 199], also dated August 6, 1099, is the judgment, which the Pope had deferred earlier in the day. Forgery is involved, Pope Urban being already dead on July 29 [see lemma on no. 199]. Cava and Salerno are noted for the practice of documentary forgery. The term "Cardinalis Sancti Pauli" is most suspicious. It is explained away by consideration of the fact that the Cardinal Priest of S. Sabina was one of the cardinals assigned to serve the altar at S. Paolo fuori le mure [Kehr, IP I, p. 4]. However, six other cardinals were similarly assigned, which would lead to confusion; and in any case, this would be a unique signature as "Cardinal of S. Paolo". Cardinal priests are defined, it is true, by their service at an altar in a major Roman basilica, and also by their incardination in a titulus. Note the language used by Pope Alexander when he wrote to all the cardinals whose service was at St. Peter's [Pflugk-Harttung, Acta pontificum Romanorum inedita II, p. 120, no. 156; Kehr, IP I, p. 7, no. 9]: Alexander, servus servorum Dei, VII cardinalibus Sancti Petri atque omnibus aliis.... Capellae igitur, quae iuris proprii titulorum a sanctis patribus ascribuntur, omni ratione suo subiugandae sunt capiti, adeo uit quisque cardinalis haud secus aliquid in eis, quae sunt suo subditae titulo, disponat et iudicet, quam episcopi in suo episcopio facere cognoscuntur. The seven cardinals are reminded that, in accordance with tradition and the canons, they are to make their agreements and hold their courts in their own tituli, not elsewhere (i.e. at St. Peter's). The titulus is their proper seat, not the great Basilica. It should be noted, moreover, that the Church of Salerno was one of several besides the Sancta Romana Ecclesia that used the title of "cardinalis" [e.g. Ughelli VII, 386 (A.D. 1071)]. Indeed, they were still using it on November 26, 1684, in the signatures to the official report of the opening of the tomb of Gregory VII [A. Trama, Storia di Gregorio VII (Roma 1887), p. 721]. The Church of London was using the title cardinal to refer to a benefice without cure of souls in the Cathedral of S. Paul's (in majori ecclesia) as late as 1389, as a papal dispensation indicates [BlissTwemlow, Calendar of Papal Registers IV p. 334 (November 13, 1389)]. The subject of the meeting referred to in the documents of 1098 was complaints of Archbishop Alfanus against the Monastery Sanctae Trinitatis de Cava over the possession of certain churches in Salerno and elsewhere; one such church was Ecclesia Sancti Pauli de Urbe. It would be only too appropriate for the incumbent, Alberto of S. Paolo di Salerno to be present. [Compare the case of Petrus Didacides cardinalis S. Felicis of Compostella (A.D. 1119), Historia Compostela II. 7, in Migne PL 170, 1241; and canonicus noster, Petrus Gundesindides, cardinalis et primiclerus, Historia Compostela II. 8, in Migne PL 170, 1242]. L. A. Muratori, "De Cardinalium institutione," Antiquitates Italicae 12, Dissertatio 61, pp. 569-616; and cf. Ant. It. 15, Dissertatio 74, p. 724 (for a Cardinal Deacon of Ravenna in 1156); p. 701-702 and 704 (for Cardinals at Lucca in 975 and 984). Cf. Hüls, p. 203, who believes that this was really Alberto of S. Sabina in Rome, though there was a Church of S. Paolo at Salerno. But it is better not to try to fix two dubious documents. The right to the use of "cardinal" in the Church of Ravenna is acknowledged by a letter of Pope Urban IV of March 18, 1262 [Potthast 18251], in which he takes tha archidiaconum et canonicos dictos Cardinales Ravennatis ecclesiae under his protection. Erdmann, Papsturkunden in Portugal (1927), p. 167, reports the subscription of "Albertus sanctorum Iohannis et Pauli presb. card." on April 11, 1115. The text is a forgery. 8. Benedictus, Cardinal Priest in the titulus Pastoris (S. Pudenziana). Created by Gregory VII (1073-1085), as the inscription recording his restoration of his titulus states [Forcella, Inscrizioni delle chiese di Roma XI, p. 137 no. 262]: tempore Gregorii septeni praesulis almi presbiter eximius praeclaris virr Benedictus moris aecclesiam renovavit funditus istam..... He was perhaps the Cardinal Benedictus who was Legate in France with Cardinal Johannes of S. Anastasia in 1100. [Hüls, p. 200]. They held a synod at Valence on September 30, 1100, and were present at Hugh of Lyons' synod at Poitiers on November 18, 1100 [Hefele, Conciliengeschichte V (2nd edition, ed A. Knöpfler), p. 261]. Cardinal Benedictus subscribed at the Lateran on November 30, 1101 [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 8, p. 284, no. 13; Pflugk-Harttung, Acta pontificum Romanorum inedita 2, p. 171 no. 208; JL 5879]. When Pope Paschal II repudiated the decisions of the two cardinals in the matter of the deposition of the Bishop of Autun and the excommunication of the Canons of Autun, Cardinal Johannes retired to Pavia, and Cardinal Benedictus kept to his titulus and no longer attended consistory. Hugh of Flavigny says [MGH SS VIII, p. 495]: at vero cardinales in sua sententia permanentes, quod factum erat publice reprehendebant, quod non esset canonicum, sed ab aequitate Petri alienum; et ob id a familiaritate et consilio papae se subtraxerunt, ita ut Iohannes, Roma relicta, Papiae etiam nunc remoretur, regulariter degens cum fratribus in aecclesia, de qua ad palatium raptus erat. Benedictus vero in titulo suo remoratur, a curiae consilio se removens, et quod dampnavit improbans. 9. ? Augustinus, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of Quatuor Coronatorum, signed a bull on April 11, 1100 [Pflugk-Harttung I, no. 77; JL 5827], and another on April 14 [JL 5831]. His predecessor was apparently "Hermanno presbytero ex titulo Quattuor Coronatorum" who subscribed a bull on September 15, 1092 [Migne, Patrologiae 151, column 348]. Hermannus is listed by Salvador Miranda as "1061 (I) ... Emanno (title of Ss. Quattro Coronati?). + After July 1088." Cardinal Hermannus (Armanus), Cardinal Priest of SS. IV Coronatorum, was apparently created by Gregory VII, however, and therefore after 1073, not by Alexander II in or around 1061 [Ganzer, p. 40 and n. 2]. By October, 1087, Hermannus was Bishop of Brescia, but was expelled by the schismatic Wibertine bishop, Cuono. Hermannus served as legatus for Pope Urban II in his granting the pallium to Anselm, Archbishop of Milan [Pandulphus Pisanus, in Muratori RIS III. 1, p. 352; Bogislav, Die pallium, 131-132: July 1088; Jaffe-Loewenfeld, no. 5359 and cf. 5355], around the same time as Bernardus of Toledo came to Rome to receive the pallium (October 15, 1088: Migne, Patrologiae 151, columns 288-291). Cardinal Hermann was still legatus a latere in the north of Italy in September, 1097 (Landulphus, Hist. Mediolan. MGH SS 20, p. 21). But on April 5, 1098, a synod was held at Milan in which Cardinal Gregory Papiensis was present as legate (Cappelletti, Le chiese d' Italia 11 (1856), p. 163); that may or may not be significant as to the date of death of Cardinal Hermann (between IX.1097 and IV.1098 ?) [Ganzer, p. 43, considers the date of his decease to be unknown]. The titulus might have been vacant at the time of the Election of 1099. The titular church, in fact, was in ruins, having been devastated by Robert Guiscard in 1085; it was not rebuilt and reconsecrated until January 20, 1116 [Kehr, IP I, p. 40-41, *4; Nachrichten (1898), p. 379 no. 5; or in 1112: Petrus Pisanus, "Vita Paschalis II Papae", in Watterich II, p. 17 (probably a misreading of the regnal year]. Cardinal Augustinus, who may have been a creation of Urban II or of Paschal II, was apparently named a legate in 1103 and is last heard of in Hungary. The titulus is apparently vacant, then, for the next thirty years and more. 10. Oderisius, abbot of Monte Cassino (1087-December 2, 1105), Cardinal Priest [Migne, Patrologiae Tomus 151, columns 489-493, 516 (March 21 and 29, 1097; December 8, 1098)] He subscribes for Paschal II on November 10, 1100 [JL 5843]. He had apparently been created Cardinal Deacon by Victor III, since Urban II's letter of March 13, 1088, the day after his election, to Abbot Hugh of Cluny [Migne, PL 151, no. 2, column 285], states that the Abbot of Monte Cassino, a cardinal deacon, had been spokesman for the rest of the Cardinal Deacons: Abbas vero Casinensis cardinalis deaconus caeterorum diaconum [se legatum diceret]. According to the Chronicon Casinense [IV. 25, in Migne PL 173, 851] he died on December 2, 1105 (iv. Non. Dec.); other sources give December 5 (Non. Dec.). 11. Rainerius da Bieda di Galeata [Tuscus, some 24 miles from Rome], son of Crescentius and Alfatia. Ekkhard [Watterich I, 619] calls him nobilis Romanus. He was made Cardinal Priest of S. Clemente by Gregory VII, according to Pandulphus Pisanus (Muratori RIS 5, 354; Baronius-Theiner 18 sub anno 1100, no. 3, p. 105). He had become a monk as a puer, and it is said that he was at Cluny for some time, or perhaps a Cluniac foundation (though there is no real proof of the claim). It is true that Abbot Hugh of Cluny was the first person (so far as the record shows) to whom Paschal wrote to announce his election, but Cluny was on the list of those who received the Electoral Manifesto at the beginning of every reign; no conclusions as to Rainerius' connection with Cluny, therefore, can be supported. Ordericus Vitalis [Historia Ecclesiastica Book II. 18: Tome I, p. 459; Book X. 1: Tome 4, p. 3 ed. Le Prévost] says Rainerius was monachus vallis Brutiorum. According to the Chronicon Casinense [IV. 18, in Migne PL 173, 846; Franz, p. 4], he was made Abbot of S. Lorenzo and Stephano in 1076. At the election of Urban II in 1088, he was the spokesman for the Cardinal Priests. He is probably the Rainerius who signed a bull with Urban II at Salerno in September of 1098 (Migne, Patrologiae 151, column 509). Urban II sent him as Apostolic Legate to Spain in 1089 [JL 5417, 5418], to replace Cardinal Richardus, who had been excommunicated by Victor III. Urban's instructions to him are to be found in Ep. XXIX [Migne PL 151, 313]. He was present at the Council of Leon in 1091 [Collectio Maxima Conciliorum Omnium Hispaniae et Novi Orbis editio altera (ed. Jos. Catalano) V (Romae 1755), pp. 10-11; other letters to Cardinal Raynerius at pp. 13, 15, 16; Franz, p. 12]. There was a Nunerio de titulo Sancti Clementis present at the Council of Clermont under Urban II on April 24, 1099; the name should be considered to be a corrupted form of Rainerio [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, column 878 (April 24, 1099); JL, p. 657]. Salvador Miranda states that Cardinal Rainerius exchanged S. Clemente for another (unknown) titulus in 1078; the sources give no indication of that, and Ekkehard (Watterich I, 619) stands against the notion: Sed antequam ex hac vita migraret [Urbanus II], spiritu instructus divino, Rainerum cardinalem de sancto Clemente, sanctae conversationis et boni testimonii abbatem, nobilem Romanum, designavit in regimen Apostolicum eligendum. Salvador Miranda also provides another Cardinal Rainerius of S. Clemente, who was created by Urban II in 1097, and who died "ca. 1101." Not possible. Rainerius of S. Clemente was made Cardinal Priest of S. Clemente by Gregory VII, and he had been a Cardinal Priest at the Election of 1088, according to the evidence—and Rainerius of S. Clemente (Paschal II) was elected pope in 1099, at which time he vacated the titulus, but he did not die until 1118. Now Salvador Miranda also lists a Cardinal Anastasius of San Clemente, created by Urban II in 1095. This is impossible, for Rainerius was Cardinal of San Clemente at the time of his election as Paschal II in August, 1099. The subscriptiones indicate that Cardinal Anastasius was Cardinal Priest of San Clemente on March 11, 1103 [Migne (editor), Patrologiae Latinae Tomus 163 (Paris 1854) column 86], and was present in that capacity at the Concilium Guastallensis on October 22, 1106 [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, column 43]; Anastasius of San Clemente was also present at the Lateran Synod of 1111 [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 21, column 43], and he signed a bull on February 15, 1113 [Mansi, column 88], another on November 17, 1115 (Julius von Pflugk-Harttung (editor), Acta pontificum Romanorum inedita II, no. 257, p. 214), and another on March 24, 1116 (Mansi, 150-151). He participated in the election of Gelasius II on January 24, 1118; he signed a bull with Calixtus II on April 6, 1123 (Bullarium Romanum II, pp. 335-336), another on June 4, 1124 [Robert, Bulliare du Pape Calixte II, no. 500, p. 329]; he signs another with Honorius II on March 7, 1125 [Migne, Patrologiae 166, 1224-1225]. His successor, Cardinal Hubertus, signs a bull on July 21, 1126 (Migne, Patrologiae 166, columns 1264-1265). Miranda is wrong as to the beginning of Cardinal Anastasius' service. Miranda also lists a Cardinal Raniero of San Clemente, who was appointed to the post by Urban II in 1097 and who died "† ca. 1101"; this is an absurdity. Also, according to Miranda, Gregory VII appointed Gianroberto Capizucchi to the titulus of San Clemente in 1088 (Gianroberto died in 1128, according to Miranda)—another impossibility. 12. Richardus, Cardinal Priest and Abbot of the Monastery of S. Victor in Marseille. Cardinal from 1078. Legate several times for Gregory VII in Spain. He participated in the events following the death of Gregory VII. Excommunicated by Victor III along with Hughes (de Die), Archbishop of Lyon and Papal Legate, but restored by Urban II. On February 18, 1095, he subscribes as Richardus Presbyter Cardinalis sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae et Massiliensis Abbas [Migne, Patrologiae 151, no. cxxvii, p. 400]. He was present at Clermont in November of 1095. He was Papal Vicar at the Spanish Concilium Fusselense in 1087 [M. De Villanuño, Summa Conciliorum Hispaniae 2 (Madrid 1785), pp. 396-398]. He presided as Papal Legate at the Concilium Gerundense [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio 20, columns 1133-1134 (February 6, 1101)]. He became Archbishop of Narbonne in 1106. He died on February 13, 1121. [Hüls, p. 117 no. 20; Ganzer, no. 6, pp. 32-36] 13. Benedictus, Cardinal Priest of S. Susanna. He was present at the dedication of the Monastery of the SS. Trinitatis at Cava on September 5, 1092 [Historia Consecrationis Sacri Monasterii Sanctissimae Trinitatis Cavensis solemniter factae a beatae memoriae Urbano Papa Secundo anno Domini MXCII, die quinta Septembris [Muratori, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores VI, 237-240]]. But the bull of September 15, 1092 which contains his subscription is a forgery [Bullarium Romanum II (Turin 1865), no. xv, pp. 142-147; Kehr, Italia Pontificia 8, pp. 319-321 no. †11]. He is mentioned in another document of June, 1098 (JL 5705). Contrary to the evidence, Miranda lists a Rangerius (Rangier, OSB) of Santa Susanna, created in 1091 [See Kehr, Italia Pontificia 10, p. 22], who died "after March 23, 1112". Rangerius was supposedly a cardinal, created by Urban II; he was made Archbishop of Reggio Calabria ca. 1190 [Ughelli 9, 324-325]; he was present at the Council of Clermont in 1095 [Recueil des historiens des Gaules 14, p. 99; JL 5587]; he is usually said to have been present at the Council of Guastalla in 1106, but so also was a cardinal of S. Susanna with the initial letter A. [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio 20 (Venetiis 1776), column 1212]. According to R. Hüls [Kardinäle, Klerus und Kirchen Roms: 1049-1130. (Tübingen: 1977), p. 207-209, no. 2], however, Rangerius died shortly after July 20, 1096—making it completely unlikely that he attended the Election of 1099 or that he was present at the Council of Guastalla. 14. ? Albericus, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of Eudoxiae, S. Petri ad vincula [CiacconiusOlduinus, column 888 no xvi; Jaffe, p. 702: (October 15, 1100)]. He subscribes as Albericus Dei gratia humilis presbyter tituli apostolorum ad Vincula on April 4, 1100 [Migne PL 163, 39; JL 5831]. Hüls' suggestion [Kardinäle, Klerus und Kirchen Roms: 1049-1130, p. 94, no. 2] that he was the same person as Bishop Albericus of Sutri (1105) is a reductionist argument and lacks proof. His predecessor, the famous Deusdedit, author of the Collectio Canonum, published his "Libellus contra invasores et symoniacos et reliquos scismaticos" in 1097 {MGH SS 6 Libelli 2, pp. 292-294; Eggs, Purpura Docta I, 50-51]; he died on March 2 of 1098, 1099 or 1100. Which of the two was in office, if either, in August of 1099, cannot be positively stated on present evidence. Albericus' apparent successor, Cardinal Benedictus, first appears in the evidence by way of a subscription of May 11, 1112 [Kehr IP I, p. 159, no.2; Nachrichten (1900) p. 155, no. 11], though Hüls would have him succeed to the titulus at the latest in 1102, according to his own Anciennitätprinzip (pp. 84-87). A decade in the titulus without positive evidence is a long time. 15. ? Benedictus, Cardinal Priest in the titulus Equitii [SS. Silvestri e Martini in montibus in tit. Equitii]. His earliest subscription is on March 15, 1101 [JL 5870] (died ca. 1102) [Hüls, p.192 no. 3]. Since his predecessor in the titulus, Cardinal Beno, was a follower of Clement III (Wibert of Ravenna) in the schism, and was present at the schismatic Synod in S. Maria Rotonda on August 7, 1098 [MGH SS Libelli de Lite 2, 369 and 405], there may have been no legitimate incumbent at the time of the Election of 1099. His successor, Cardinal Divizo, appears in the evidence on July 3, 1103 [JL 5948]. 16. Joannes [Burgundy], Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Anastasiae. [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio 20 , column 878 (April 24, 1099); Hüls, p. 146]. He was in Salerno with Pope Urban in August of 1098 [[JL 5709]. Cardinal Johannes of S. Anastasia was legate in France with Cardinal Benedictus of S. Pudenziana in 1100. [Hüls, p. 200]. They held a synod at Valence on September 30, 1100, and were present at Hugh of Lyons' synod at Poitiers on November 18, 1100 [Hefele, Conciliengeschichte V (2nd edition, ed A. Knöpfler), p. 261]. When Pope Paschal II repudiated the decisions of the two cardinals in the matter of the deposition of the Bishop of Autun and the excommunication of the Canons of Autun, Cardinal Johannes retired to Pavia, and Cardinal Benedictus kept to his titulus and no longer attended consistory. Hugh of Flavigny says [MGH SS VIII, p. 495]: at vero cardinales in sua sententia permanentes, quod factum erat publice reprehendebant, quod non esset canonicum, sed ab aequitate Petri alienum; et ob id a familiaritate et consilio papae se subtraxerunt, ita ut Iohannes, Roma relicta, Papiae etiam nunc remoretur, regulariter degens cum fratribus in aecclesia, de qua ad palatium raptus erat. Benedictus vero in titulo suo remoratur, a curiae consilio se removens, et quod dampnavit improbans. Cardinal Johannes again subscribed on March 20, 1105 [JL JL 6012]. [Hüls, p. 146, suggests he died in 1108].He was succeeded at S. Anastasia by the Cardinal Deacon Boso in 1113 [Hüls, p. 147]. 17. Robertus (Rodebertus) Pasiensis, (or Pariensis or Papiensis or Parisiensis), Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Eusebio [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 21, column 43 (October 22, 1106), and Mansi 21, p. 51 [Lateran Synod of March 18-23, 1112, MGH Leges 4 Constitutiones 1, p. 572 and 573]. Both Duchesne, Cardinaux françois, 67-68, and Roy doubt that he was Parisian or even French; Cardella, 192-193]. He was in Salerno with Pope Paschal II on August 25, 1100 [Kehr , Nachrichten ... Göttingen (1900), pp. 310311]. At the Lateran Synod of March 28, 1112, he was one of the leaders for the revocation of the privilegium (or pravilegium, as Gerard of Angoulême called it) which Paschal had granted to the Emperor Henry V. He was in schism against Paschal II, a state which continued during the Election of 1118 and the Election of 1119. His titulus was reassigned in 1116 to Cardinal Johannes, who held it from 1115 to 1123. 18. Bernardus Ubertinus, O. Camald., Florentinus, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Chrysogoni, Abbot of Vallombrosa in 1097 [Migne, Patrologiae Latinae Cursus Completus Tomus 163 column 40 (April 14, 1100); Cardella, 193-195; Ganzer, pp. 5155; Hüls, 172-174] The inscription in Parma commemorating the transfer of his remains to a new tomb in 1543 indicates that he had been made a cardinal by Urban II. [Ciacconius-Olduin, 890-894]. In 1099 he was Apostolic Legate in Lombardy for Paschal II, where he presided over the signing of an agreement at Brescia [Kehr Nachrichten ((1905) p. 324]. He subscribed at the Lateran on April 14, 1100 [JL 5832]. He was Apostolicae Sedis Legatus in Tuscany in 1101 [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 3, p. 260 no. 5 (Grosetto, April 7, 1101)], and in that capacity he was offered all of the property of Countess Matilda of Tuscany for the Roman Church, according to an inscription in St. Peter's Basilica [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 5, p. 391 no. 24 (Canossa, November 17, 1102)]. He was also Apostolic Legate and Vicar of Paschal II in Lombardy and adjacent territories from 1101-1105 [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 7. 1, pp. 331333, nos. 11-16]. He was at Modena in September of 1104 [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 3, p. 124 no. 4; Schneider, Quellen und Forschungen aus italianischen Archiven u. Bibliotheken 11 (1908), 256-258 (Pistoia)]. According to a document of Guastalla (October 26, 1106), he was Bernardus S. R. E. card. presb. atque Paschalis II vicarius [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 5, p. 394 no.5]. He became Bishop of Parma in 1106 [Ganzer, pp. 51-55], and died in December of 1133. He was succeeded at S. Crisogono by Cardinal Berardus, Cardinal Deacon of S. Angelo in Pescheria, who was made Bishop of the Marsi in 1110 [Ganzer, pp. 67-69]. 19. Teuzo (Teuto, Theoderic, Dietrich), Germanus, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of SS. Joannis et Pauli. His earliest known subscription is in March of 1095 [JL 5540]. He subscribed on April 24, 1099 [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, column 878; and on November 10, 1100 [Migne, Patrologiae Tomus 163, column 49] [Ciacconius-Olduin, 894, but cf. 898; Cardella, 195-196, 203; Eggs, Purpura Docta Supplementum novum p. 42, who states that he died in 1118 under Pope Gelasius; Klewitz, Reformpapsttum und Kardinalkolleg, p. 122, no. 5, and Hüls, Kardinäle, Klerus und Kirchen Roms: 10491130, p. 218, no. 23, state correctly that he died on December 21 or 22, 1115] His predecessor was Bonus senior. His successor was Theobaldus, who is listed as participating in the Election of 1118 by Pandulphus of Pisa, nephew of Cardinal Hugh of XII Apostolorum [Muratori, RIS III.1, 381; 389; Baronius-Theiner 18, p. 286]. 20. ? Johannes [not Gregorius], abbot of Subiaco, Cardinal Deacon of S. Luciae ad septem Solia [Ciacconius-Olduin, 895; Cardella, 197; Hüls, p. 237 no. 2] or S. Maria in Via Lata [Aubery] The Abbot of Subiaco was present at the Council of Guastalla on October 22, 1106 [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, 43], though only the title Abbas Sublacensis is given. P. Fidele, "Le fonte e la letteratura della storia sublacense," in I monasteri di Subiaco (Roma: Ministero della Publica Instruzione: 1904), 211-212, indicates (based on the Chronicon) that the abbot of Subiaco in 1099 was actually Giovanni VII, whose term of office began in June of 1068 and lasted for fifty-two years. He was in his 41st year as abbot when the monastery was visited by Paschal II in August of 1109 [cf. JL, p. 738]. He is mentioned as the first of the Cardinal Deacons at the Lateran Synod of March 18-23, 1112: Iohannes abbas Sublacensis [MGH Leges 4 Constitutiones 1, p. 572 and 573]. He died on May 2, 1120. The Chronicon Sublacense gives him the Deaconry of S. Maria in Domnica: Is [Gregorius VII] diligens plurimum supradictum Johannem abbatem fecit eum levitam sacri palatii cui diaconiam dedit ecclesiam sancte Marie in domnica et honorifice dum advixit in omnibus tractavit eum. In 1084 he entered into the schism of "Clement III" against Gregory VII, and persisted in it long enough to have succeeded Cardinal Theodinus (who is last heard of in 1089) as Archdeacon in the schism. But, as has been noted, the Abbot of Subiaco was at the Council of Guastalla, and he subscribed the final Acts of the Lateran council of March, 1112. He must have been reconciled to the Roman See at some point, perhaps as a result of the policies of Urban II (who was elected on March 12, 1088) [See also Ganzer, 29-31]. Perhaps, though, it was the death of Urban II, or the death of Guibert of Ravenna (Wibert, "Clement III") that made reconciliation possible—in which cases he certainly would not have participated in the Election of 1099. 21. Paganus, Cardinal Deacon of S. Maria Nova. He subscribed a donation made by Countess Mathilda of Tuscany on November 12, 1099 at Brescello in Aemilia [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 5, p. 431 no.1]. On August 30, 1100, he subscribed a bull in favor of the Monastery of S. Maria de Cava with the signature Ego Paganus diaconus cardinalis sanctae Romanae ecclesiae de diaconia sancte Marie Nove [PflugkHarttung, Acta pontificum Romanorum inedita II, no. 206 p. 171; JL 5837]. He also subscribed documents later in 1100 [Migne, Patrologiae 163 column 49 (November 10, 1100); JL 5843; and JL 5844 (November 14, 1100)]. Ciacconius-Olduin (column 896) and Cardella (I. 1, p. 190) note his successor, a Theobaldus, Cardinal Deacon of S. Maria Novae, who is mentioned in a document of S. Maria Nova on January 10, 1110 [Archivio 24 (1901) 164]. There was Theobaldus who was present at the Concilium Guastallensis (Lombardy), October 22, 1106 [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, p. 43]. Theobaldus' latest subscription appears to be on May 25, 1122. 22. Gregorius, Cardinal Deacon of S. Angelo in Pescheria [Ciacconius-Olduin, 897; Cardella, 199-200], but NOT yet Gregorius Papareschi, who was preceded by a Cardinal Berardus in 1107 [PL 163, column 207 (February 24, 1107); JL 6125; Migne, PL 163, 224; JL 6161 (July 25, 1107); and JL 6165 (September 1, 1007)]. Is this Cardinal Deacon of S. Angelo actually Gregory of Pavia (Gregorius Ticinensis)? Cardella made Gregory of Pavia a cardinal priest from the time of Urban II. Gregory of Pavia was certainly a cardinal. Gregorius Papiensis was present at a papal hearing at Tours on March 14, 1096 [Migne PL 151, column 449], but his church is not named. A year earlier, on March 10, 1095, a cardinal Gregorius diaconus Ticinensis (Pavia is on the R. Ticino) took part in the dedication of the Church of the Monastery of Majoris Monasterii at Tours; he was certainly Gregorius Papiensis, and at the time it appears he was a Cardinal Deacon, not Cardinal Priest of S. Prisca. He was Apostolic legate at a synod in Milan on April 7, 1098 [Cappelletti, Le chiese d' Italia 11 (1856), p. 163; Kehr, IP 6. 1, p. 75 no. 4]. Cardella says he was at the Council of Guastella in 1106, but the subscriptions from that Council reveal that the Cardinal of S. Prisca was R(omanus), who was at S. Prisca by November 30, 1101, not Gregorius. If Gregory of Pavia is the Cardinal Deacon of S. Angelo, then he served until 1106 or early 1107 [P. Pressutti (editor), Regesta Honorii Papae III I (Roma 1888), p. lxviii (December 27, 1106)]. 23. Joannes Cajetanus, OSB Cassin., Cardinal Deacon of S. Maria in Cosmedin. Cancellarius S.R.E. He had been made Diaconus in Lateranensi Patriarcho when Urban II visited Montecassino [July, 1189 ?: Chronicon Casinense IV. 7, in Migne PL 173, 829]. He was already a Cardinal Deacon on September 5, 1092 [Muratori, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores VI, 237-240:], but the bulls of that time that survive are forgeries [Migne, Patrologiae Latinae Tomus 151 , column 348 (September 15, 1092)]. At the Concilium Guastallensis (Lombardy), October 22, 1106, he signs among the Cardinal Deacons as Joannes Gaetanus abbas S. Andreae [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, p. 43]. He was at the Lateran Synod of 1111 [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 21, column 43]; Ciacconius-Olduin, 897; Cardella, 200-202] 24. Docibilis, S. R. E. diaconus cardinalis, acting as datary for Paschal II, in 1099 (September 17, 1099, according to JP 5808) [Recueil des historiens des Gaules 15, p. 17; Migne PL 163, column 33; JL 5808]. His subscription seems to be too early for him to have been created Cardinal in the Ember Days of the Fall of 1099, which would make him a cardinal of Urban II. He also subscribed as datary on April 9, 1100 [JL 5826]. Hüls, 247 no. 11. Others ( suggested by Ciaconius-Olduin, Cardella, or others ) • Robertus, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. ?Caeciliae? This is a conjecture of Olduinus in Ciacconius, column 888, in place of 'Clementis'— which is impossible. Cardella (p. 189) insists that there were two Roberts of the same family, the Capizucchi, one created Cardinal of S. Clemente in 1097, and the other Cardinal Iohannes Robertus of S. Cecilia under Honorius II, created in 1127. Cardella's information probably derived from an inscription in the Church of S. Maria in Porticu (S. Maria in Campitelli), where the burial chapel of the Capizucchi is located [V. Forcella, Inscrizioni delle chiese di Roma V (1874), p. 380 no. 1042; P. Galletti, Inscriptiones Romanae infimae aetatis I (Romae 1760), p. cclxxxi, no. 176]. The inscription was placed by Cardinal Raymundus Capizucchi, OP, in 1685, who built the new chapel and transferred the remains of his family thither. It represents the ambitions of the Capizucchi family at the end of the 17th century, nearly six centuries after the alleged accomplishments of the early 11th century cardinals. Actually the Cardinal of S. Caecilia in the 1120's was Cardinal Johannes, not Cardinal Robertus, and not Cardinal Ioannes Robertus; and this Johannes of S. Cecilia had been at the Lateran Synod of 1112, and his latest subscription was on May 7, 1128 [JL 7312]; he was succeeded by Goselinus or Jocelinus in 1129. Cardinal Johannes could not, therefore, be the alleged Capizucchi cardinal, Ioannes Robertus. But neither of those Capizucchi, then, has a real existence as a cardinal. No Capizuccho was Cardinal of San Clemente. It is Cardinal Rainerius who is attested as Cardinal of S. Clemente since the reign of Gregory VII; he was elected Pope on August 13, 1099 [Migne PL 163, p. 31 no. 1; Watterich II, p. 17]. The only Robertus known is Robertus of S. Eusebio. • Theodinus, OSB Cassin., said to be related to the Counts of the Marsi. Cardinal Deacon of S. Maria in Porticu, allegedly created in 1062. Promoted by Gregory VII to the post of Archdeacon, and said to have been transferred to the Deaconry of S. Maria in Domnica (Gregory VII, of course, had been Deacon of S. Maria in Domnica and Archdeacon). As Archdeacon, Theodinus witnessed the oath taken by Robert, Bishop of Chartres, in St. Peter's in April of 1076 [Registrum Gregorii VII, III. 17a; Jaffé (ed.) Bibliotheca rerum Germanicarum II (Berlin 1865), pp. 232-233]. In 1084, he joined the schism of Wibertus of Ravenna ("Clement III"). [MGH SS Libelli 2, 369; Cardella I, 1, pp. 164-166; R. Hüls, Kardinäle, Klerus und Kirchen Roms: 1049-1130. (Tübingen: 1977), p. 254, no. 30). He subscribed for "Clement III" on November 4, 1084 [Monumenta ordinis Servorum Sanctae Mariae II (Bruxelles 1898), pp. 191-193]. He did not participate in the papal elections of 1086-1087 or 1099. He died in 1099 or 1100 [Cardella, 165]. • Jonatas (Gionata), Romanus, Cardinal Deacon of SS. Cosmae et Damiani, created by Urban II [Ciacconius-Olduin, 896; Cardella, 198-199]. The Annuaire pontifical catholique 1927 (p. 153 no. 67), states that he was created Cardinal Deacon by Urban II in 1099 and that he died ca. 1106, based on no evidence at all. Ciaconius-Olduin states that he subscribed documents in 1121 and 1123, and there was indeed a Cardinal Jonathas at SS. Cosmae et Damiani between 1121 and 1130, but he was preceded by Cardinal Petrus, who subscribed between March 24, 1116 and May 21, 1120. There are therefore, it seems, two Cardinal Jonatas. The first Cardinal Jonatas, the one in whom we are interested for the Election of August 13, 1099, was still subscribing on December 27, 1106 [Pressutti, Regesta Honorii Papae III I (Roma 1888), p. lxviii:] When he was created Cardinal is the question. This first Jonatas, however, is not registered by Hüls, p. 224. • Rangerius, OSB, Archbishop of Reggio Calabria (Regiensis). He began his ecclesiastical career as a monk at Majoris-Monasterii, at Marmoutiers, just outside Tours. He was made Archbishop of Reggio Calabria ca. 1190 [Ughelli 9, 324-325]. Rangerius was, in the received opinion, a cardinal, created by Urban II in 1091 [See Kehr, Italia Pontificia 10, p. 22], though his titulus is unknown. If he was created a cardinal at all by Urban II, he was not present at the Election of 1088. In August, 1092, he attended a judicial hearing in the presence of Pope Urban II, concerning Duke Roger of Sicily's deposition of a legitimate archdeacon at the Cathedral of S. Maria de Domno and substitution of one of his creatures [Pflugk-Harttung, Acta pontificum Romanorum inedita 2, pp. 149-150 no. 184]; in the text he is Rangerio Regino archiepiscopo, and in the subscription Rangerius Regiensis archiepiscopus; there is no mention of his cardinalate, nor indeed should there be, but, of the four suscribers, he signs as Archbishop after the two Cardinal Bishops who were present, and before Azo the Subdeacon. In the text of the same document are listed the names of Hubaldus BIshop of Sabina, Iohannes Tusculanensis, Bruno Segnensis, and Rangerius Reginus. The text proves nothing, except that Rangerius was Archbishop of Reggio Calabria, and a local metropolitan. On September 5, 1192, Pope Urban II and sixteen cardinals took part in the dedication of the Monastery SS. Trinitatis Cavensis and its basilica, and Rangerius consecrated the collegiate church of S. Maria de Cava in the nearby village [Muratori Rerum Italicarum Scriptores VI, 237-240; JL p. 670; Kehr IP 8, 36, though Kehr's lemma is tendentious]; there is actually no mention of his cardinalate (and the surviving grant of indulgences is spurious). Rangerius' name occurs after that of Bruno of Segni and before Gerardus of Troja and Johannes Rapollanus, i.e. among the bishops and before the Cardinal Priests. No one has ever claimed that Johannes of Rapolla was a Cardinal; he and Bruno, though, were bishops immediately dependent upon the Holy See. The evidence does not support the claim of a cardinalate In the first week of March, 1095, he was present at the Synod of Piacenza [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, 804], though his notice leaves something to be desired; he appears between the BIshop of Imola and the Patriarch of Venice: Rodulfus Reginus archiepiscopus subscripsi. And there is no mention of his cardinalate; he is just a bishop. He travelled to France with Pope Urban (perhaps as a favorite, perhaps as someone who might have influence on the French nobility), and was present at the Council of Clermont in 1095 [Recueil des historiens des Gaules 14, p. 99; JL 5587], when the disputes between the Monastery of Majoris-Monasterii and Archbishop Rodulfus of Tours were examined, assistente pariter domino abbate nostro B(ernardo), de monachis nostris domino Rangerio cardinali, qui fuit Regiensis archiepiscopus [Notitia seu Libellus de tribulationibus , et angustiis, et persecutionibus, Majori-Monsterio injuste illatis ab archiepiscopis et clericis S. Mauricii Turonensis; et de adquisitione et renovatione privilegii et libertatis ejusdem ecclesiae, in: Bouquet, Recueil des historiens des Gaules 14, p. 98]. It is his friends from his old monastery (who are not disinterested in his prestige) who salute him as Cardinal. In a bull of Pope Calixtus II of September 24, 1119 [JL 6743], recalling the visit of Urban II, the pope's suite included Hugone Ludgunensi, Alato Burdegalensi archiepiscopis et tunc temporis Ecclesiae Romanae legatis; Brunone Segniensi et Rangerio Lucano episcopis; et Johanne Cajetano ejusdem Romanae Ecclesiae diacono cardinali ac bibliothecario. Here, too, there is no mention of a cardinalate. On January 10, 1096, Rangerius was present at the consecration of the high altar of the Monastery of Carrofum (Charroux). Huic siquidem operi affuerunt domnus Amatus Burdegalensis archiepiscopus sanctaeque sedis Romanae legatus, Hugo Lugdunensis archiepiscopus similiterque legatus, Daimbertus Pisarum archiepiscopus, Raingerus quoque [Rhegiensis] archiepiscopus, Petrus Pictavorum, Bruno Signiensis episcopus, Johannes cardinalis diaconus [Recueil des historiens des Gaules 14, pp. 102-103]. No cardinalate is mentioned, but then neither is Hughes of Lyons'. But now Rangerius' name appears ahead of Bruno of Segni. Rangerius was present as well on March 10, 1096 at the consecration of the Monastery of Majoris-Monasterii, whose basilica was dedicated to SS. Peter, Paul, and Martin of Tours [Recueil des historiens des Gaules 14, pp. 99-100; MGH SS 26, 461]. The narration of the consecration indicates that Rangerius became a cardinal after the issue and sending of a privilegium from Rome and before he became Archbishop of Reggio Calabria (April 16,1190, JL 5435) This privilege had been requested per manus reverendorum fratrum nostrorum domni Bernardi Remensis, cognomento Pontii, tunc prioris nostri, domnique Rangerii, qui postea presbyter cardinalis S.R.E. ac deinde Regiensis archiepiscopus fuit, et in praefato concilio ut archiepiscopus et cardinalis sedit. It is an author or two from his old monastery (who are not disinterested in his prestige) who salute him as Cardinal. According to R. Hüls [Kardinäle, Klerus und Kirchen Roms: 1049-1130. (Tübingen: 1977), p. 207-209, no. 2], he died shortly after July 20, 1096. If so, he was certainly not present at the Election of 1099. Subsequent notices to him would represent a confusion between his name and that of his successor, Archbishop Rogerius. Rangerius (or his successor, Rogerius) was present at the Council of Guastalla in 1106 [Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio 20 (Venetiis 1776), column 1212]. Paul Kehr [ IP 8, p. 23] believes that Rangerius is to be distinguished from Archbishop Rogerius, his successor, who was present at the Lateran Council of 1112. In the opinion of Klaus Ganzer, Die Entwicklung des auswärtigen Kardinalats im hohen Mittelalter (Tübingen 1963), p. 49, the cardinalate of Archbishop Rangerius is very doubtful. Hüls, p. 207-209, makes Archbishop Rangerius the Cardinal Priest of S. Susanna, on the basis of JL 5658 (signed at the Monastery of S. Egidio, on July 20, 1096). The document, however, is known only through a copy written into the Cartulaire de l'abbaye de Saint-Sernin de Toulouse, published by Canon C. Douais (Paris 1887), not from the original. It cannot be missed that the knowledge of Rangerius' cardinalate is confined to two Benedictine houses in the city of Toulouse, in one of which Rangerius had begun his religious career. But in any case, Cardinal Benedictus of S. Susanna, who is known from a document of 1092 [Historia Consecrationis Sacri Monasterii Sanctissimae Trinitatis Cavensis solemniter factae a beatae memoriae Urbano Papa Secundo anno Domini MXCII, die quinta Septembris (Muratori, Rerum Italicarum Scriptores VI, 237-240)], is also mentioned in a document of June, 1098 (JL 5705). This excludes the presence of Archbishop Rangerius at the cardinalatial titulus of S. Susanna between 1092 and 1098. And if, as Hüls argues, Rangerius died shortly after July 20, 1096, his tenure seems impossible. Equally impossible would be his presence at the Election of 1099. Hüls (p. 209) has missed some of the facts. Ganzer is on more solid ground. • Bernardus, Cardinal Deacon [known to Cardella (p. 197) only from a single bull of Paschal II, which noted no deaconry; Annuaire pontifical catholique 1927 [(Paris 1928), p. 154 no. 74]. Salvador Miranda, however, claims on the authority of the Annuaire pontifical catholique 1927 [(Paris 1928), p. 148, no. 29] that a Cardinal Berardo was created Cardinal Deacon of S. Adriano in 1075 and opted for S. Angelo in Pescheria "toward 1090", which he held until 1107. This translation is necessary to take account of Cardinal Petrus of S. Adriano, who subscribed on September 15, 1092 [Migne PL 151, columns 348, 352]. However, the Berardus of S. Angelo in Pescheria, which the Annuaire and Miranda, presume to be the same Berardus who had been promoted from S. Adriano "ca. 1090", had a predecessor named Gregorius who subscribed on December 27, 1106 [P. Pressutti , Regesta Honorii Papae III I (Roma 1888), p. lxviii], and therefore Berardus could not have held the Deaconry from ca. 1190 to 1107. Berardus of S. Angelo in Pescheria begins to subscribe on February 24, 1107 [PL 163, p. 206; JL 6125] and also subscribes on September 1, 1107 [JL 6165]. In September, 1109, he became Cardinal Priest of S. Crisogono [Hüls, 222]. He was promoted to the See of the Marsi in the Abruzzi in 1110 [Loud, Latin Church, p. 217]. One would have to create yet another Berardus before Cardinal Gregory of S. Angelo. The musings of the Annuaire and Miranda, therefore, are unlikely. The "promotion" of Berardus obviously conflates two separate persons named Berardus. Is Bernardus the Cardinal Deacon under Paschal II yet a third person? He cannot be either of the two Cardinals Berardus, the earlier one created "ca. 1190" and supersceded at S. Adriano by 1192 by Cardinal Petrus; and the other of whom was not yet Cardinal of S. Angelo until 1107. Was a Cardinal Deacon Bernardus or a Berardus eligible to take part in the Election of August, 1099? [no] Unfortunately Cardella does not provide a reference for his Cardinal Bernardus of unknown diaconate, speaking only of a bull in favor of S. Benedetto di Mantova. All of the materials relevant to the Monastery of S. Benedetto (S. Benedictus super Padum) [Kehr, Italia Pontificia 7. 1, pp. 331-333, nos. 11-16], concern Cardinal Bernardus, the Cardinal Priest of S. Crisogono, who was Apostolic Legate and Vicar of Paschal II in Lombardy and adjacent territories from 1101-1105. Cardella evidently made a mistake in calling Bernardus a Cardinal Deacon. Our conclusion must be, then, that the first Bernardus should be deleted, and the second is not in office until 1107. There was, therefore, no Cardinal Bernardus at the Election of 1099. • Landulfus Rangone [Mutinus], Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Lorenzo in Lucina. (a privilege given at Parma, November 2, 1106: JL 6098) [Ciacconius-Olduin, 894]; he is also mentioned in a bull issued at Souvigny on June 6, 1107 [Migne, PL 163, 221], and another on July 25, 1107 [Migne, PL 163, 224; JL 6161]. He subscribed at Benevento on April 20, 1117 [Kehr, IP 8, 252 no. 23]. He died (according to Falco of Benevento) on August 4, 1119. It is not possible that his predecessor was "Cardinal Bovo"— who survived to at least 1111 (see below, under "Others", on Bovo). Landulphus was a real cardinal, but there is no evidence that he was in his titulus at any time near the Election of August 13, 1099, or for seven years thereafter. • Amicus, OSB, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Crucis in Jerusalem [Ciacconius-Olduin, 889; Cardella, 191]. He subscribed on December 27, 1106 [Pressutti, Regesta Honorii Papae III I (Roma 1888), p. lxviii]. A real cardinal, but there is no evidence at all that places him in the reign of Urban II. • Comes (Cosma), Mediolanensis, Cardinal Deacon of S. Maria in Aquiro [Ciacconius-Olduin, 896;Cardella, 199; Panvinius believed he was a creation of Paschal II]. Salvador Miranda lists his creation under 1088, that is, that Cardinal Comes was a creation of Urban II. His subscriptions, however, begin in 1116 [Hüls, p. 231]. He was present, according to Pandulphus Pisanus, at the Election of Pope Gelasius II in 1118. He did not participate in the Election of Calixtus II at Cluny on February 2, 1119, but he was one of the Cardinals in Rome who consented to the election. Promoted by Honorius II to S. Sabina (1226-1230), he followed Pope Anacletus II (Petrus Petri Leonis) in the schism of 1130-1138, rather than Gregory Papareschi (Innocent II). When Pope Anacletus died in 1138, he was received by Innocent II and named Cardinal Priest of S. Pietro in vincoli {Brixius, p. 32 no. 8, 72-73, and 136], but he was treacherously deposed in the Lateran Council of 1139. It is highly doubtful that he was a cardinal at the time of the Election of August 13, 1099. • Risus, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Lorenzo in Damaso (Consecrated Archbishop of Bari on August 1, 1105 by Paschal II [Cappelletti, Chiese d' Italia 21, p. 13; Cardella, 193; Ughelli Italia Sacra 7 (1721) 614-618]). He was present at Gaeta in March of 1118 with Gelasius II after the flight from Rome [Watterich II, p. 98]. He died in 1118, not in 1117 (as Falco of Benevento has it). [Hüls, pp. 179]. He was succeeded by Cardinal Deusdedit who seems to have begun subscribing by May 24, 1116—an anomaly which Hüls does not address. Though included as a Cardinal of Urban II, the long interval until his earliest subscription does not lend any confidence at all to the assertion of his participation in the Election of 1099. • Bonifacius, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Marci. He was present at the Council of Guastalla on October 22, 1106 [Mansi , Sacrorum Conciliorum nova et amplissima collectio 20 (Venetiis 1776), column 1212], but it is only a vague statement by Ciaconius-Olduin that makes him a creation of Urban II [Ciaconius-Olduin, 889-890; Cardella, 191-192]. Hüls (p. 186) states, without providing positive evidence, "Er hat seine Titelkirche spätestens 1100 erhalten." But that does not make him a Cardinal at the Election of August 13, 1099. • Ciaconius-Olduin also list Paulus Gentili, Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Sixti, as a creature of Urban II, but with no documentary proof at all [Ciacconius-Olduin, 889; Cardella, 191] Subscribed December 27, 1106 [Pressutti, Regesta Honorii Papae III I (Roma 1888), p. lxviii] • Azo [Ciacconius-Olduin, 895; and Cardella, 198. They identify him as being present at the Council of Guastalla (Lombardy), October 22, 1106: JL, p. 726; Mansi, Sacrorum Conciliorum 20, column 43, under the name Aldo]. He was Archpriest of S. Peter's Basilica on May 23, 1103: Archivio della R. Societa Romana di storia patria 25 (1902), 273, but he does not use the title cardinal in the document: Ego quidem presbyter Azzo, rector ecclesiae sancti Petri et de quattuor monasteriorum [sic]. In the subscription he is presbyter Azzo. One may well doubt both the cardinalate and the archpresbyterate. • Offo, Bishop of Nepi (Nepi was a immediate suffragan of the pope in the Roman Province: Eubel I, p. 540). It is claimed that he was Cardinal Priest of S. Pudenziana (Cappelletti, Le chiese d' Italia Vol. 6, p. 213, derived from Ciacconius). This is impossible, since the incumbent at S. Pudenziana was Cardinal Benedictus, who had held the title since the reign of Gregory VII. A bull of Paschal II was subscribed by Offo Bishop of Nepi on May 11, 1112 [Kehr, Nachrichten von der k. Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen . Phil.-hist. Klasse (1900), no. 11, p. 155-157]. There was actually one Cardinal Bishop of Nepi, Alberto, but he was a creation of the Antipope Clement III (Guiberto, Wibertus, of Ravenna) and participated in the schismatic Synod of Rome in 1098. In fact, Offo was just a bishop, who as suffragan of the See of Rome, and perhaps as an exile from his own see, participated in the consecration of Paschal II; though there is no evidence that he participated in the Election. • Bruno of Asti (Astiensis), or Segni (Signiensis) [Ganzer, pp. 57-62]. He was made Bishop at the request of Pope Gregory VII [Vita anonymi, AA SS Julii 4, p. 481]. He first appears (His name is reported as Brunus episcopus Segninus !) on March 4, 1082 at the Lateran Synod of that year, listed last among the bishops [Mansi, Sacrorum conciliorum nova et amplissima editio 20, 578; JL, p. 642; Z. Zafarana, "Sul «conventus» del clero romano nel maggio, 1082," Studi medievali 7 (1966), 399 ff.]. He appears to have engaged in an intense struggle with the Count of Segni, Adolfo, who was a supporter of Henry IV. Bruno was imprisoned. The notion that Bruno of Segni was a cardinal is derived from a letter of Urban II [Stephanus Baluzius (Étienne Baluze), Miscellaneorum Liber Sextus (Paris 1683), pages 527-530], in which the Pope mentions that he was one of the Episcopi et Cardinales who were present at his election. The list, it must be noted, is not a list of the Electors, but of those who gave their approval (the four abbots and many religious had no part in a papal election), "Notum itaque facimus dilectioni vestrae quod apud Terracinam Campaniae civitatem sanctae Romanae Ecclesiae Episcopi et Cardinales, Portuensis videlicet, Sabinensis, Tusculanus, Albanensis, et Signensis cum aliis Episcopis numero XVI. et Abbatibus quatuor aliisque quam plurimis viris religiosis convenientes, cum Portuensis Episcopus omnium Romanorum clericorum catholicae parti faventium se legatum diceret, Abbas vero Cassinensis Cardinalis Diaconus caeterorum Diaconorum, P. quoque Cardinalis tituli Sancti Clementis omnium Cardinalium, Praefectus autem urbis laicorum omnium se ferre assereret legationem...." It has been taken that "Sigonensis" goes with the list of cardinals preceding, making Bruno a Cardinal, but the names that include Bruno are the names of bishops, and there were sixteen more (or twenty-one, in a letter to the Archbishop of Salzburg) of them at the event. Bruno of Segni is just another Bishop, albeit the most prominent one after the suburbicarian Bishops. This would be in accord with the statement of Petrus Diaconus that there were three bishops in Terracina in addition to Odo, Bishop of Ostia, in the process of the election [Migne, Patrologiae 173, column 826]: Dominica itaque die [March 12, 1088], valde mane, omnes iterum in eadem ecclesia congregati, cum inter se pariter nonnulla de re huiuscemodi tractavissent, exurgentes tres cardinales episcopi, qui caput eiusdem concilii erant, Portuensis scilicet, Tusculanensis et Albanensis ambonem ascenderunt factoque silentio uno simul ore pronuntiant, Ottonem episcopum placere sibi in Romanum Pontificem eligendum. In fact, he was a direct suffragan of the Pope in the Roman province. There is no reference to the creation of a "Cardinal" Bruno of Segni, though Salvador Miranda inserts him as the one and only cardinal of Victor III in 1187 (which itself is untrue). This is because Victor III is said to have made Bruno of Segni his Chancellor and the Bibliothecarius S. R. E. In JL 5345 [Ughelli, Italia Sacra I, 1182; Kehr, IP 8, p. 402 no. 2], however, when Bruno signs he provides the date notation: Dat.Capuae p.m.Signien. ep. Rom. vero eccl. bibl., without any reference to a cardinalate or chancellorship. Moreover, he is datary only in 1087 and there are exceedingly few surviving documents which he supervised. By July 1, 1089, Cardinal Giovanni Gaetani, Cardinal Deacon of S. Maria in Cosmedin, was Papal Chancellor. [JL 5401; Hüls, 232]; as Subdeacon, he had been Prosignator of Urban II [JL 5365 (August 23, 1088)]. And it is Cardinal Johannes who is Bibliothecarius under Paschal II [JL 5818 (February 4, 1100)]. The position of Bibliothecarius S. R. E. had been given by Pope Benedict IX in November, 1037, to the Bishops of Silva-Candida perpetuo [Ughelli-Colet Italia sacra I, p. 106C; JL 4110; Kehr IP II, p. 26 no. 4], but only Humbertus and Mainardus (who died after August 8, 1074) held the position, which then passed to others, despite the alleged grant in perpetuo. Otherwise in subscriptiones, Bruno of Segni never signs himself as a Cardinal (of course), though his name appears (quite properly and quite frequently) among the bishops, some of whom might well be Cardinals; it is the same with other archbishops and bishops who likewise were never cardinals. Indeed in a bull of March 14, 1096 [Migne, Patrologiae 151, columns 449-450], Bruno of Segni is listed distinctly separately from "nostris cardinalibus" and as "praesentibus Brunone Signiensi episcopo, et Ingelramno Suessionensis ecclesiae archidiacono...." Furthermore, Bruno's name in subscription lists is never found above those of the seven suburbicarian bishops, and sometimes far below them, even though he quickly became far senior in age and service to any of them; he obviously did not have the seniority of a cardinal. Neither is the title of cardinal mentioned in Bruno's notice in the "Liber de viris illustribus Casinensis coenobii" of Peter the Deacon [Migne, PL 173, 1040-1042]; Leo Marsicanus is mentioned.as a cardinal, and so is Desiderius, Roscemannus, Oderisius and others, either in the "Liber" or the "Chronicon". On June 16, 1106, Bruno, Bishop of Segni, was legatus ecclesiae Romanae (or Romanae Sedis vicarius) at a council at Poitiers [Martène-Durand, Thesaurus novus anecdotorum 4 (Paris 1717), 127-132; Chronicon Malleacense; Suger, Vita Ludovici Crassi 9; Bouquet-Brial, Recueil des historiens des Gaules 14 (Paris 1806), p. 810]. But Bruno renounced his episcopal throne and retired to Montecassino, where, however, he was elected Abbot in November of 1107, a position which he held until September of 1111, when the pleas of his former charges in Segni brought his return to the episcopal throne—an odd occurrence for a bishop simply to leave his see, unless his flock were extremely small or in the hands of schismatics. There is no account of whether he had a successor or a substitute at Segni while he was a monk at Montecassino. Bruno of Segni was present at the Lateran Synod of March 18-23, 1112 [JL p. 745], where his name occurs last among the bishops, well below the five cardinal-bishops whose names head the list: "B. Signiens. et alii fere centum episcopi" [Baronius-Theiner 18, sub anno 1112, no. 9, p. 227]. He appears still to be the Bishop of Segni. He was also present at the Lateran Council of March 6-11, 1116, and spoke on the fourth day [Baronius-Theiner 18, sub anno 1116, no. 3, p. 259; JL 761-762]. Bruno of Segni is not present, however, at the Election of 1118, or at least there is no mention of him; Pandulphus Pisanus, who was a member of the papal court, provides a list of the cardinals who were present [Baronius-Theiner sub anno 1118, no. 4, p. 286; Muratori RIS III.1, 389; Watterich II, 94-95], but his name is not among them. Pandulphus mentions four of the six cardinal bishops as being present [Petrus of Porto, Crescentius of Sabina, Lambertus of Ostia, and Vitalis of Albano]; Cono of Palestrina is not mentioned [he was legate in Germany], nor is Johannes of Tusculum. If Bruno were a cardinal, he would have been the senior bishop and would have presided at the Election of 1118. If he was not "Cardinal Bishop" Bruno of Segni; it is quite understandable that he missed another papal election (even though the electors sent to Montecassino after the death of Pope Paschal for Cardinal Johannes Gaetani and awaited his arrival before beginning deliberations). Bruno died at Segni in 1125, according to Cardinal Baronius, and was buried in the Cathedral [Baronius-Theiner 18, sub anno 1125, no. 14, p. 376]. Pope Honorius III was of a different opinion however. He spent June through August, 1223, in Segni, and there he dedicated an altar on July 16: anno centestimo post obitum B. Brunonis episcopi et confessori Signiae dedicatum fuit altare ipsius Brunonis existens in ecclesia Signina ad honorem ejusdem Sancti, per manus supradicti Summi Pontificis.... [AA SS Julii Tomus IV, p. 476F; and cf. Potthast Regesta, pp. 608612; Hüls, p. 129]. Bruno actually died in 1123. Bishop Bruno is enshrined in the Jesuit Acta Sanctorum in the 4th volume of July (Antwerp 1725), under July 18, at pp. 471-488 [article by J(oannes) B(aptista) S(ollerius), SJ], where it is pointed out (p. 471A) that the Canons of the Cathedral of Siena (of whom Bruno was one) used the title "cardinal". The right to the use of "cardinal" in other churches, specifically, the Church of Ravenna, is acknowledged by a letter of Pope Urban IV of March 18, 1262 [Potthast 18251], in which he takes tha archidiaconum et canonicos dictos Cardinales Ravennatis ecclesiae under his protection. The editor of Eadmer in Patrologia Vol 159, col. 1, n. (b), also rejects Bruno's cardinalate. R. Gregoire, Bruno's most recent biographer, also rejects (p. 33) the cardinalate of Bruno of Segni. One would be well advised to remove this example as proof of Klaus Ganzer's thesis of the existence of "external cardinals". • The French have constructed a marvellous story, which makes Goffridus (Gaufridus) de Credone or Vindocini, (Geoffroy de Vendôme) OSB, a Cardinal Priest in the titulus of S. Prisca [according to Jacques Sirmond (Migne PL 157, 9-10); Frizoni; Duchesne, Cardinaux françois, 6264; ; Abbé Roy, Nouvelle histoire des cardinaux françois (Paris 1785); L. T. Compain, Essai sur Geoffroi de Vendôme (Paris 1891); MGH Libelli de lite 2 (1892) 676-677]. Cardella, 203-204, say he was a cardinal from 1094-1130; cf. Mabillon Annales Ordinis Sancti Benedicti V, pp. 232 ff. p. 312 (Mabillon does not call him cardinal)]. Olduin [Ciacconius-Olduin, 898 ad fin.] says, "Nos Goffridum Cardinalem ultimo loco enumeravimus, quia non omnes Scriptores illum Cardinalem nominant." The story is (according to Geoffroy's own narrative) that, hearing that Pope Urban II was oppressed and forced into hiding by his enemies, Geoffroy hastened to Rome and devoted himself and his earthly goods to the rescue of the pontiff and to installing him in the Lateran. In fact, however, Geoffroy had to go to Rome anyway; he was a newly elected abbot (August 21, 1093), and his abbey of SS. Trinité de Vendôme was an allodium of the Patrimony of S. Peter [U. Robert, Etude sur les actes du Pape Calixte II, clii, no. 319A]. It was the right of the Pope, his direct feudal lord, to invest him in his office. Goffridus was certainly already in Rome on March 14, 1094, when he obtained a privilegium from Urban II for his monastery [JL 5511]. The famous rescue of Urban II seems to have taken place around March 26, 1094 [JL p. 674]. For his services Goffridus was ordained a priest and made Abbot and Cardinal of S. Prisca (according to the story) in 1194 [JL, 5714; Goffridus Epistolae I. viii = Migne PL 157, columns 47-48]. But he was certainly back in France by June, 1194, when he attended a council held by Hughes, Archbishop of Lyon and Papal Legate, at the Abbey of S. Florentius on June 24 for the purpose of dealing with Count Fulques of Anjou. Cardinal Hughes even mentions, in last place among the attendees, "Gaufridus Abbas Vindociensis" [Gallia Christiana IV instrumenta p. 10]. He was present at the Council of Cleremont in 1095 [Ep. II. 29 = PL 157, columns 99-100; see Mabillon, Annales Ordinis Sancti Benedicti V, p. 357, for a list of notables in attendance; Goffridus is listed far down among the abbots, but is not called a cardinal, unlike Cardinal Richard of S. Victor in Marseille, who heads the list of abbots and is called a cardinal]. Geoffroy was also present at the Roman Synod of Paschal II on March 12, 1102; on the day before the Synod he had obtained yet another privilegium for his old abbey of SS. Trinitatis Vindociniensis [JL 5899]. He was present at the consecration of the altar of S. Maria de Ronceio with Pope Calixtus II on September 7, 1119. In 1122, he and Cardinal Petrus Petri Leonis were sent throughout Gaul to invite the appropriate persons to a council which Calixtus intended to hold in 1123. He wrote to Pope Honorius II from his monastery in France that he would have liked to come to Rome and stay there, but his infirmitas corporis negavit effectum [Ep. I. 14; PL 157 column 55]. He died in Anjou on March 26, 1132. His successor was Abbot Fromond, who was never a cardinal either. The events are perhaps somewhat true [but cf. H. Meinert, "Die Fälschungen Gottrfrieds von Vendôme," Archiv für Urkundenforschung 10 (1928) 232-325], but the fact is that Geoffroy was not a cardinal. He never subscribed a papal document. The subscriptions, in fact, show that Cardinal Romanus was Cardinal Priest of S. Prisca from 1101 [JL 5870; M. Lupus, Codex diplomaticus Bergomatis, II (1784), 829] to 1114 [JL 6371 (February 25, 1114)]; Cardinal Romanus attended the Lateran Synod of March 18, 1112 [Cardella I.1, p. 247]. Romanus' successor was Cardinal Gerardus, who was present at the election of Pope Gelasius in 1118 (according to Pandulphus Pisanus). Cardinal Gregory was Gerardus' successor at S. Prisca [JL 6886 (January 3, 1121)], and he was followed by Cardinal Petrus in 1121 [JL 6940 (December 28, 1121)], who held the titulus until 1129. Petrus was followed by Cardinal Henricus (in the Anacletan obedience) in 1130 [Zenker, p 94, no. 62], or by Cardinal Gregorius (Innocentian obedience) [Zenker, p. 95 no. 63], who is attested from 1135-1137. Gregorius was followed by Cardinal Rainerius, between 1139 and 1146 [Zenker, p. 95, no. 64]. None of these Cardinal Priests of S. Prisca was Abbot of S. Trinité de Vendôme. Abbot Geoffroy himself says that he was made a priest and abbot of S. Prisca: eo tempore {1094] presbyter ordinatus, investituram de ecclesia B. Priscae per manum domini Papae recepi, quem praedecessores nostri longe ante possiderant [Ep. I. 14; PL 157 column 55]. He obviously means his Benedictine predecessors who were abbots of S. Prisca [Kehr, IP 1, p. 117] (one of whom, Odericus (Odricus), had been abbot of the Monastery of SS. Trinitatis Vindocinensis ca.1060s-d. 1082), but who was not a cardinal and never subscribed). Now Abbot Odericus, it is claimed, had obtained privileges from the popes in his time as well, one of which is mentioned in a letter of Pope Alexander II of July 1, 1066 [Mabillon, Annales Ordinis Sancti Benedicti IV (Lucca 1739), 692-693 and p. 620; Migne PL 146, column 1313, no. xxxiii, from the archive of the monastery at Vendôme; JL 4594; Métais, Cartulaire de l' Abbaye cardinale de la Trinité de Vendôme I (Paris 1893), clxxx, pp. 310-312]. The letter formalizes an agreement reached between Abbot Odericus and Archdeacon Heldiprandus, who was oeconomus coenobii Sancti Paulo, or (later in the document praedictus Heldiprandus archidiaconus ac Sancti Pauli rector cum monachorum Sancti Pauli generali capitulo consensu. The agreement transferred to the abbots of the monastery at Vendôme the church of S. Prisca on the Aventine, cum omnibus suis pertinentiis in perpetuum largiri ad utendum, fruendum, possidendumque dignitate cardinali..... "All the things pertaining to it", as the document makes clear, included the monastery. And the Abbot, Prior, and monks of S. Paulo fuori are not to bother the abbots of S. Trinité de Vendôme in their possession. Meinert pointed out that most, if not all, of the documents concerning S. Trinité de Vendôme attributed to Alexander II are forgeries [Compare the formula in Métais, Cartulaire de l' Abbaye cardinale de la Trinité de Vendôme II, ccclxvii, p. 116, which is without dignitate cardinali ]. Klaus Ganzer (pp. 26-27) is willing to consider this letter just quoted as authentic, but he points out that the abbots are not made cardinals tout court, but are given privileges and status (dignitas) as though they were cardinals. One must wonder, though, whether the phrase dignitate cardinali is not an interpolation. Indeed, the foundation documents of S. Trinité are exposed as forgeries by Jean de Launois, Ioannis Launoii Constantiensis Inquisitio in chartam fundationis et privilegia Vindocinensis monasterii (Paris 1661); and by Louis Halphen, "Étude critique sur les chartes de fondation et les principaux privilèges de la Trinité de Vendôme," Le Moyen-Age (Paris 1901), 69-112; a defense of sorts is attempted by Canon Métais, Cartulaire de l' Abbaye cardinale de la Trinité de Vendôme V (Paris 1904), pp. ix-xlv, especially xliii-xlv. He is answered, of course, by H. Meinert, "Die Fälschungen Gottrfrieds von Vendôme," Archiv für Urkundenforschung 10 (1928) 232-325. It may be pointed out that the confirmation of privileges by Paschal II, on March 11, 1103 (i.e. 1104) [Métais, Cartulaire II, ccccvii, pp. 162-166], makes no mention of the cardinalate or cardinalatial dignity. The confirmation of privileges granted by Calixtus II on October 8, 1119 [Métais, Cartulaire de l' Abbaye cardinale de la Trinité de Vendôme II, ccccxxxvi, pp. 211-213; JL 6747] says only ecclesiam Beatae-Priscae in monte Aventino sitam, quam cum universis pertinentiis suis praedicti domini nostri Alexandri papae concessione, praedecessores tui longo tempore possedisse noscuntur, tibi tuisque successoribus cum omni dignitate quae ad eandem ecclesiam pertinet confirmamus. There is no mention of the cardinalate or cardinalatial dignity. The claim does not reappear until Honorius III's bull of January 18, 1219, confirming all the previous charters [Métais, Cartulaire de l' Abbaye cardinale de la Trinité de Vendôme IV, dccclxxiv, pp. 31-32, known only from a notarized copy made at Vendôme in 1680]. Konrad Eubel reports that there was no known cardinal at S. Prisca between 1205 and 1305 [Conradus Eubel, Hierarchia Catholica Medii Aevi I (Monasterii 1913), p. 45]. But "cardinal" Odericus does not use the title cardinal or the customary greeting between two cardinals in writing to the Apostolic Legate in France, Cardinal Gerardus, Bishop of Ostia (10731077) in 1073; he is simply Odericus sanctae Trinitatis abbas [Mabillon V, p. 56; cf. Métais I, ccxxxv, pp. 368-369]. In April, 1075, Pope Gregory VII confirmed the grant of S. Prisca to the abbots [Métais, Cartulaire, cclii, pp. 398-402; JL 4992]: Concedimus etiam omnibus hujus loci abbatibus ecclesiam Beatae-Priscae cum dignitate cardinali, Sancti Spiritus judicio decernentes, et ut nulla deinceps ecclesiastica saecularisve persona praedictam Beatae-Priscae ecclesiam, seu ecclesiae dignitatem eis auferre qualibet occasione praesumat. Whether the phrase cum dignitate cardinali is original or interpolated is again the question; the document was written per manus Octaviani scrinarii et notarii Sacri Palatii in mense aprili, indictione XIV—a person otherwise unattested [cf. JL I, p. 594]. The confirmation of the privileges of S. Trinité granted by Urban II and addressed to Abbot Goffridus on March 14, 1093 [Métais II, cccxliv, pp. 74-77], does not mention the dignity of the cardinalate. Odericus' successors, Abbot David (who ruled for two years and two months, until August 6, 1085) and Abbot Berno [Mabillon V, pp. 186 and 232; he ruled until 1093], should have been "cardinals" just as Abbot Odericus and Abbot Geoffroy allegedly were, and yet they appear on no lists of cardinals. The cardinalate of the Abbots of Vendôme is certainly a fiction, and probably the "dignity of a cardinal" too. It is Abbot Geoffroy's admirers, misled by his forgeries, who have concluded that the Abbot of S. Prisca was actually a cardinal. But the monastery of S. Prisca was not the same as the titular Church, and, obviously, the Cardinal of S. Prisca was not necessarily the Abbot of S. Prisca (pace Kehr), as the careers of Cardinals Romanus and Gerardus clearly demonstrate. Geoffroy's alleged career as a cardinal does not square with the lists of subscriptions. Strangely (if he were a cardinal), there is no mention of him during Pope Gelasius' time in France in 1119, and no evidence that he participated in the Election of 1119. He did meet the new Pope Calixtus II, however, on September 7, 1119, when he was present at the dedication of an altar at S. Maria de Ronceio (Ronceray) in Angers [MGH Libelli de lite 2 (1892) 676-677; Recueil des historiens des Gaules XIV, p. 199-200]. Goffridus is listed last among the notables in attendance, far below several cardinals and after two archdeacons and a treasurer: Gaufredo Vindociensi abbate. Apparently the dignitas of a cardinal granted to Oderisius and his successors, if authentic, did not extend very far in practice. Ganzer would be well advised to remove this example as proof of his thesis of the existence of "external cardinals". The term "cardinal", it appears, was appropriate for any ecclesiastical establishment which depended directly on the Papacy. There is even the case of Facino dicto Cardinali, preposito ecclesie sancti Salvatoris de Lavania, Januensis diocesis, whose eminence is accounted for when Pope Benedict mentions in his letter to Facinus vacante siquidem nuper prepositura ecclesie sancti Salvatoris de Lavania, ad Romanam Ecclesiam nullo medio pertinentis, Januensis diocesis... [Registre de Benoit XI, no. 948, p. 567 (June 1, 1304)]. This is the sort of "cardinalate" that the Abbots of S. Trinité enjoyed, not the personal status of a Roman Cardinal Priest or Cardinal Deacon. Cardella [I.1, p. 197], contradicting himself, claims that the Cardinal of S. Prisca was Gregory of Pavia (Papiensis), from the time of Urban II to ca. 1122, which would overlap most of the time given to "Cardinal" Geoffroy de Vendome. Gregory of Pavia was certainly a cardinal. He was Apostolic legate at a synod in Milan on April 7, 1098 [Cappelletti, Le chiese d' Italia 11 (1856), p. 163; Kehr, IP 6. 1, p. 75 no. 4]. Cardella says he was at the Council of Guastella in 1106, but the subscriptions from that Council reveal that the Cardinal of S. Prisca was R(omanus), who was at S. Prisca by November 30, 1101, not Gregorius. Gregorius Papiensis was, however, present at a papal hearing at Tours on March 14, 1096 [Migne PL 151, column 449], but his church is not named. A year earlier, on March 10, 1095, a cardinal Gregorius diaconus Ticinensis (Pavia is on the River Ticino) took part in the dedication of the Church of the Monastery of Majoris Monasterii at Tours [Bouquet, Recueil des historiens des Gaules 14, pp. 99-100; MGH SS 26, 461]; he was certainly Gregorius Papiensis, and at the time it appears he was a Cardinal Deacon, not Cardinal Priest of S. Prisca. • Joannes, Cardinal Deacon of S. Adriano [Ciacconius-Olduin, 897; Cardella, 203]. Ciaconius refers to a diploma of Urban II, issued at Salerno, in behalf of SSma Trinita de Cava [cf. Kehr, IP VIII, 317-324, several of which are forgeries, including nos. †11, and †12— in which a Joannes S.R.E. diac. card. is listed]. Or is this a paleographical confusion of a title of Joannes Gaetanus abbas S. Andreae, Cardinal Deacon of S. Maria in Cosmedin? A Petrus of S. Adriano (Archpriest of S. Agnese), a cardinal of the schism of Archbishop Wibert of Ravenna, signed a bull of the antipope "Clement III" in 1099 [Hüls, p. 219]. • Joannes, Cardinal Deacon of (S. Maria in Domnica ?) [Ciacconius-Olduin, 895, no. xxxi; repeated by Cardella, 198] Election Before his death on July 29, 1099, Pope Urban had designated Cardinal Rainerius da Bieda to be his successor [Ekkehard of Aura, in Watterich I, 619; Holder, Designation, 56]: Sed antequam ex hac vita migraret, spiritu instructus divino, Rainerum cardinalem de sancto Clemente, sanctae conversationis et boni testimonii abbatem, nobilem Romanum, designavit in regimen Apostolicum eligendum; quem etiam revelationibus aliis insuper denotatum, iniversa Romana ecclesia pastorem sibi consecrat, licet invitum, Paschalem appellans eum. After the burial of Urban II, the Cardinals, Bishops, leaders of the city of Rome, the primiscrinarii and the scribae Regionarii met in the Church of S. Clemente, which was Cardinal Rainerius' titulus. Discussions took place on a number of issues, and then they began to discuss Cardinal Rainerius himself. He was greatly distressed when he realized what was happening, and he fled the scene and hid (quod compertum viro bono displicuit, volensque vitare fugit latuitque : Pandulphus Pisanus: Muratori, RIS 3. 1, p. 355 column 2). But the electors were determined, and he was not able to hide himself for very long. He was discovered, brought to the meeting, and lectured by the Patres to conform himself to the Will of God and accept his election: in te solo totius Ecclesiae quievit examinatio. He finally accepted, announced his name change, and was thrice acclaimed: Paschalem Papam Sanctus Petrus elegit. He was then invested with the red cope (pulvinar, chlamys) and the tiara, and, accompanied by the crowd, conducted in procession to the Lateran Basilica. Paschal himself mentions in a letter to Hughes of Cluny that he was elected on the 16th day after Urban's death, August 13, 1099 [Migne PL 163, p. 31 no. 1; Watterich II, p. 17]. Next day, Sunday August 14, he was consecrated bishop and crowned at the Vatican Basilica. Coronation A description of the Coronation of Pope Paschal II is provided by Pandulphus Pisanus (or Peter) [Watterich II, p. 2; Muratori, RIS 3. 1, p. 355; Baronius-Theiner 18, sub anno 1100, no. 6, p. 106]: Die altero [August 14, 1099], mensis †sexti† XIV, die primo [Sunday], consecrandus in pontificem consecraturique pontifices cum frequentia populi plebisque basilicam beati Petri adeunt. Quorum nomina sunt haec: Oddo Ostiensis, Mauricius Portuensis, Gualterius Albanensis, †Bovo† Lavicanus, Milo Praenestinus, Offo Nepesinus. Et inter missarum solempnia loco et termino quo decuit manum sibi imponunt, primus in consecratione Oddo Ostiensis, qui ad hoc utitur pallio, et benedixit et linivit eum chrismate catholice. Igitur a catholicis et orthodoxis episcopis in pontificem consecratus, translato in se pallio, expletisque quae restabant misarum solemnibus, cum plenitudine laudum, cum ingenti applausu populi plebisque, cum alacritate Patrum ac Cleri Domnus Pascalis Papa secundus coronatus in Urbem rediit, convaluitque Ecclesia. The ceremonies were presided over by four Cardinal Bishops: Odo of Ostia, Maurice of Porto, Walter of Albano, and Milo of Palestrina, assisted by the suffragan bishops of Labicano and Nepi. Odo of Châtillon, O. Clun. was the senior Cardinal Bishop, and took the lead in the ceremonies. It was his right as Bishop of Ostia to consecrate the Pope as bishop. No doubt some Cardinal Deacon read the Epistle in Greek and another the Gospel in Latin.