:
" Ostendit enim potestatem Ccsaris
aliis potestatibus mundanis prse.
" Ostendit enim potestatem Ccsaris
aliis potestatibus mundanis prse.
Thomas Carlyle
(4) Roma-
norum imperatori et semper Augusto,
qui orbem terrarum juris et justitise
freno constringit. . . . Duec varietates
exordiorum quibus pauper uti valet
coram imperatore. (1) Ad ilium per
quem Reges regnant, justitia con-
servatur in terris, et cui a Domino
collata est po testas gladii tem-
poralis. "
* M. O. H. , Const. , vol. ii. 197:
"Gloriosus in majestate sua dominan-
tium dominus qui regna constituit et
firmavit imperium. . . . Ad hoe nos
supra reges et regna preposuit, et in
imperiali solio sublimavit. "
* Id. id. , vol. ii. 224 : " Exurgat
igitur invicta Oermania, exurgite
populi Germanorum. Nostrum nobis
defendatis imperium, per quod invidiam
omnium nationum, dignitatum omnium
et mundi monarchiam obtinetis. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ]
143
THE THEORY OF THE EMPIRE.
discusses with great care the relation of the imperial to the
papal authority (to this we shall return later), and while
he asserts the immense superiority of the spiritual as com-
pared with the temporal power, he also asserts that the
emperor is the lord of the world and that all nations are under
him. 1 That this is not a mere chance phrase would appear
from the fact that in another wort, the ' Commentary ' on
the Decretals, in dealing with another passage, he again
expresses the same judgment. 2
This would be of considerable significance if we could
take it as representing the general opinion of the Canonists
and ecclesiastical writers, but this is not the case. Innocent
HI. in the Decretal letter ' Per Venerabilem ' not only says
that the King of France recognised no superior in temporal
matters, but founds upon this the conclusion that, if the
king desired it, he could refer a question about himself to
the judgment of the Pope. 3 Pope Innocent IV. , in his ' Appar-
atus ' to the Decretals, says that some men (Canonists pre-
sumably) maintained that kings were not subject to the
emperor but only to the Pope. *
William Durandus, the most important Canonist and
Civilian of the last part of the century, sets out quite definitely
the opinion that there was no appeal from a judgment of the
Court of France, for the French king recognised no superior
1 Hostionsis, ' Summa super titulos
decretalium. ' ' Qui filii sunt legitimi,'
13 : " Ipse (Imperator) est mundi domi-
nus, et omnes nationes sub eo sunt. "
2 Id. , ' In Decretalium libros com-
mentarius,' i. 6, 34, ' De Electione ' :
" (6) TJnus enim est imperator super
omnes reges, vii. q. 1 in apibus (Qratian,
Decretum, C. vii. 1, 41), et omnos
nationes sub eo sunt xi. q. 1. hanc
si quis, ver. volumus (Gratian, Decre-
tum, C. xi. 1, 36, 37). Etiam Judwi
ut C. de Judaeis, Judai (Code i. 9, 8).
Et omnes provincise 63. Diat. Adrianus
(Gratian, Decretum, D. 63, 2). Et
demum omnia temporalia ut viii.
Dist. quo jure (Gratian, Decretum, D.
viii. 1). "
8 ' Decretals,' iv. 17, 13 : " Insuper
cum rex (i. e. , the King of France)
superiorem in temporalibus minime
recognoscit, sine juris alterius lesione,
in eo se jurisdictioni nostra subjicere
potuit. "
4 Innocent IV. , ' Apparatus ad quin-
que libros Decretalium,' ii. 27, 23 :
"Alii tamen dicunt quod reges omnes
in integrum restituunt, quia non sunt
sic imperatoribus subditi, sed papse soli
in dubiis et gravibus artioulis, si ].
qui fil. sint legiti, c. per venerabilem "
(' Decretals,' iv. 17, 13).
Cf. App. iv. 17, 13 : " (Recognoscat)
de facto, nam de iure subest Im-
peratori Romano, nos contra, immo
Papse. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 144
[PABT I.
POLITICAL PRINCIPLES.
in temporal matters ; he is citing the authority of Innocent
III. , but speaks of this legal principle as one which was in
fact observed. 1
It would appear then that, except for Hostiensis, the
opinion of the Canonists of the thirteenth century was clearly
against the theory of a political authority of the emperor
over all other rulers. We have indeed found only one other
ecclesiastical writer of the time of whom it can be said that
he seems to hold that the emperor had this authority. This
is the author of a tract written to support Boniface VIII.
against Philip the Fair of France. He says that all kings
and princes acknowledge that they are subject to the em-
peror in temporal matters, and they must therefore admit
that they are " mediately " subject in these to the Pope,
for the empire is held from him ; and, he adds, if they refuse
to acknowledge that they are subject to the emperor, they
must then admit that they are directly subject to the Pope
in temporal things. 2 We shall return in a later chapter to
this writer's treatment of the temporal authority of the
Pope.
Perhaps the most suggestive treatment of the subject is
that of Andrew of Isernia in his ' Commentary on the Con-
stitutions of the Kingdom of Naples. ' The king, he says,
who is monarch in his own kingdom makes laws even contrary
to the positive law; but what, he asks, are these " univer-
sitates " which have jurisdiction, since the emperor is lord
of all the world t He replies that they are kings who are
1 William Durandus, ' Speculum,'
ii. partic iii. : ' Do Appellationibus' ' a
quibus appellari possit,' p. 481 : " Item
a sententia lata in curia Francise non
appellatur, cum rex ipse in tempo-
ralibus non recognoscat, ut extra, qui
filii sunt leg. c. per venerabilem
(' Decretals,' iv. 17, 13) et sic ibi de
facto servatur. "
3 Anonymous fragment (ed. R. Scholz)
in ' Die Publizistik,' p. 475 : " Item
universi reges ct principes fatentur se
imperatori Romano subesse quantum
ad tomporalia . . . et tunc non poterant
negare quin etiam subsunt Pape in
temporalibus mediate, cum imperium
teneatur ab eo, et ipse confirmat ejus
electionem et coronam imperii concedit,
etiam ipse imperator jurat sibi fideli-
tatem. . . . Si enim noluerint confitcri
uo subesse imperatori, necessarie habent
confiteri se subesse pontifici Romano
in temporalibus. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ]
145
THE THEORY OF THE EMPIRE.
free and exempt from the authority of the empire, as, for
example, the King of Sicily, who holds from the Eoman
Church ; and he seems to mean that this exemption was due
either to long prescription, or to the grant of the emperor.
Having thus explained the origin of this position, he sets
out dogmatically the principle that every king, who is thus
free from the empire, occupies the same position in his
kingdom that the emperor does in his empire ; the king is
monarch in his kingdom. The king who is free from the
empire has his own " flscus," as the King of England, the
King of Italy, and the King of Lombardy. 1
It would seem that Andrew of Isernia, who was presumably
a Civilian by training, was already attempting to find a
solution of the problem how the actual independence of various
European States could be reconciled with the standpoint of
the Eoman law. The most important point, however, of
his statement is that there were independent kingdoms which
were not under the empire.
With Andrew of Isernia we may compare the terms of the
great eulogy of the ' Empire,' written by Jordan of Osna-
briick in the latter part of the thirteenth century. He had
the highest reverence for the Eoman Empire, which was
now held by the German nation, and solemnly warns the
Eomans and the Pope, as well as the German princes, of the
great dangers which would be brought upon the world if the
empire were to be destroyed, and he says that the authority of
Csesar was above all other earthly authorities, and contained
1 Andreas de Isernia, ' Peregrina,'
fol. 3, v. : " Cum constitutiones regni
faciat quilibet rex monarcha in regno
suo; etiam contra legem positivam.
. . . Sed qua sunt universitates habentes
jurisdictionem, cum imperator sit dom-
inus totius mundi ? . . . Idem liberi
reges et exempti ab imperio, ut rex
Sicilise, quam habet a Romana ecclesia,
sunt monarchic in regnis suis . . . .
cum sine bujusmodi prescriptione vel
principis Romanorum concessione reges
VOL. V.
alii non haberent aliqua regalia in
rerris et regnis suis, nec monete fa-
oiende. . . . fol. 7, v. equiparetur rex
in regno suo imperatori in imperio suo.
. . . Item dicimus de omni rege libero
ab imperio sicut est regnum Sicilisn.
. . . Rex regni sui monarcha est. . . .
Item diximus re gem ab imperio liberum
habere nscum sicut imperator . . . .
Rex Anglise fiscum habet. . . . Reges
Longobardie dicunt se habere . . . hoe
idem dicit Rex Sicilian"
K
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 146
[PABT I.
POLITICAL PRINCIPLES.
them all. 1 In a later chapter of the same work, however,
he gives, in a passage already cited, a curious account of the
creation of the French kingdom by Charlemagne. He says
that this kingdom, in contrast with the empire, was to be
hereditary, and that the king was not to recognise any superior
in temporal things. 2
The French writers of the thirteenth century repudiate
emphatically the conception that the emperor had any
authority in France. The author of the very interesting
tract, in the form of a discussion between a knight and an
ecclesiastic, written in the course of the conflict between
Boniface VIII. and Philip the Fair of France, says dog-
matically that no one can make laws for those over whom
he has no " dominion,'' and that therefore the French cannot
make laws for the empire, nor the emperor for the King of
France. 3 And in another place he develops more fully still
the principle that the true dignity and authority of the
King of France is the same as that of the emperor, and con-
tends that when the Empire of Charles the Great was divided,
the kingdom of France retained the same powers as that
part which had the name of the Empire. *
1 Jordan of Osnabruck, ' Tractatus
de Prerogativa Romani Imperii,' i.
:
" Ostendit enim potestatem Ccsaris
aliis potestatibus mundanis prse. eminere
et ipsas sub eo contineri. "
1 Id. id. , v. : " Porro, quia ipse
Karolus Rex Franoorum extitit et
illud regnum ad eum fuerat ex sue-
cessione devolutum, impium fuisset
et indecens, quod ipse suos heredes
dignitate regia penitus denudassct.
Statuit igitur . . . ut Franoigene eum
quadam regni Francorum portione
re gem habere nt de regali semine jure
hereditario successurum, qui in tem-
poralibus superiorem non recognos-
ceret, cui videlicet tamquam imperatori
posteritas ad homagium vel aliquod
cbsequium teneretur. "
3 ' Disputatio inter clericum et mili-
tem,' p. 75 : " Null us enim potest de
iis statuere, super quse constat ipsum
dominium non habere. Sic nee Fran-
corum rex potest statuere super im-
perium, nec imperator super regem
Francise. "
* Id. , p. 80 : " Cler. : Imperatores
sanxerunt ista non reges, et ideo per
bonos imperatores, o miles, nunc exit
legum gubernacula moderari.
" Mil. : Hoe responsum est blas-
phemiss. Et quoniam, ut videtur, aut
originem ignoratis regni aut quod
videtur verius, illius altitudini invi-
detis, si Caroli Magni registrum in-
spiciatis et histories probabilissimas
revolvatis: invenietis quod regnum
Fruncise dignissima conditione imperii
portio est, pari divisione ab eo discreta,
et equali dignitate et auctoritate quin-
gentis annis circiter insignita; quiequid
? ? ergo privilegii et dignitatis retinet
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ]
147
THE THEORY OF THE EMPIRE.
John of Paris, writing on the same conflict, admits that
there should be one spiritual head of the world, and that
Peter and his successors held that place, not by the authority
of some council, but by the institution of Christ Himself ;
but, he continues, this is not true in temporal matters, for
there is no Divine law that the lay people should be subject
in temporal things to one monarch. 1 It is true that in one
place he uses a phrase which is a little ambiguous. The
king, he says, is supreme in his kingdom, and the emperor,
if he were monarch, would be lord of the world. 2 It is not
very easy to say what John means. That he does dogmatically
repudiate any claim to superiority on the part of the emperor
in France is, however, clear from a later passage in which he
discusses the " Donation " of Constantine--we shall return
to this in a later chapter; he argues that, whatever may be
the validity of the donation, it has no reference to France,
for the Franks were never under the domination of the Eoman
Empire. 3
imperii nomen in parte una, hoc regnum
Francis e in alia. Cum enim fraterna
divisions, Francorum regnum a reliqua
parte discessit imperii, quicquid in
parte decedente et penitus ab imperio
existente, imperium ipsum quondam
obtinuit, aut ibidem jure altitudinis
aut poteetatia exercuit, hoc- principi
seu Francorum regi in eadem plenitu-
dine cessit. Et ideo sicut omnia infra
terminos imperii sunt, subjecta esse
noscuntur imperio, sic quse infra ter-
minos regni, regno. Et siout imperator
supra totum imperium suum habet
leges condere, addere eis, aut demere:
sic et Rex Franciso, aut omnino leges
imperatorias repellere, aut quamlibet
placuerit permutare, aut, ill ia a to to
regno suo prescriptis et abiectis, novas
si placuerit promulgare. Alioquin si
aliquid novi, ut saepe accidit, visum
fuerit statuendum, si rex non posset
hoc qui est summus : tunc nullus pote-
nt, quia ultra eum non est superior
ullus. Et ideo, domine clerice, linguam
vestram coercite et agnoscite regem
legibus, consuetudinibus et privileges
vestris, et libertatibus datis, regia
po testa to prse. esse, posse addere, posse
minuere quselibet, equitate et ratione
consultis, aut cum suis proceribus,
sicut visum fuit temperare. "
1 John of Paris: ' Tractatus de
Potestate Regia et Papali,' iii. : " Non
sic autem fideles laici se habent ex
jure divino, quod subsint in tempor-
alibus uni monarchse supremo. "
>> Id. id. , 19: " Non est autem
caput (>>. <<. , the Pope) quantum ad
regimen in temporalibus seu dis-
positione temporalium, sed quilibet
rex est in hoc caput regni sui, et
imperator monarcha si fuerit, est caput
mundi. "
* Id. id. , 22: " Tertio apparet, quod
ex dicta donatione nihil habet papa
super regen Francise, dato etiam quod
voluisset, et generalis de toto imperio
? ? fuisset: quia licet Gallici inveniantur
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 148
[PABT I.
POLITICAL PRINCIPLES.
The position of France is clear, and we can now observe
that the position in Spain was the same. In one place in
the ' Siete Partidas ' Alfonso X. uses the highest language
to describe the dignity of the emperor, and his place as the
vicar of God in the empire to do justice in temporal matters,
as the Pope is God's vicar in spiritual things. 1 A little farther
on, however, he uses practically the same terms to describe
the dignity of the king; he also is the vicar of God in his
kingdom, to maintain justice and truth in temporal things
as the emperor does in the empire. 2 A little farther on
Alfonso even argues that kings have not only the same
powers in the kingdom as the emperor has in the empire,
but larger powers, because they hold their lordship by in-
heritance while the emperor holds his by election ; 8 and in
yet another place he says explicitly that by the grace of God
he has no superior in temporal matters. *
It is plain that while Alfonso X. may think of the emperor
as having the place of highest temporal dignity in the world,
he quite as clearly repudiates the notion that the emperor
has any authority over other kingdoms, and indeed claims
for the king exactly the same authority as that of the emperor.
The conclusion, which appears to us reasonable and well-
1 ' Siete Partidas,' ii. 1, 1 : " Im-
perio es grant dignitat, et noble et
honrada sobre todas las otras que los
homes pueden haber en este mundo
temporalmente . . . et el non es temido
de obedescer a? ninguno, fueras ende
al Papa en las cosas espirituales. . . .
Et otrosi, dixieron los sabios que el
emperador es vicario de Dios en el
imperio para facer justicia en lo tem-
poral, bien asi como lo es el Papa en
los espirituel. "
a Id. , ii. 1, 6 : " Vicarios de Dios
son los reyes cada uno en su regno
puestos sobre las gentes para mantener*
las en justicia et en verdad quanto en
lo temporal, bien asi como el emperador
en su imperio. "
* Id. , ii. 1,8: " Sabida cosa es que
todos aquellos poderes que desuso
deximos que los emperadores han et
deben haber en las gentes de su im-
perio, que esos mismos han los reyes
en las de sus regnos, et mayores ; ca
ellos non tam solamente son sen? ores
de sus tierras mientras viven, mas
aun 6 sus finamientos las pueden
dexar a? sus herederos, porque han
el sen? ori? o por heredat, lo que non
pueden facer los emperadores que lo
ganan per eleccion, asi como desuso
deximos. "
* 'Especulo,' i. 1, 13: "E pues
que estos las fezieron que avien ma-
yores sobre si, mucho mas las podemos
nos fazer que por la merced de Dios
non avemos mayor sobre nos en el
temporal. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ]
149
THE THEOBY OF THE EMPIRE.
founded, is very much the same as that which we expressed
at the end of our third volume--that is, that while the con-
ception of the political unity of the world under the one
authority of the emperor still survived as a theory in some
quarters, it had no real significance in the political theory
of the thirteenth century, or in the actual structure of political
society. We venture to think that it is time that students
of history should recognise this, and should recognise that it
is not really in accord with the characteristics of the political
order of the Middle Ages to think of them as tending towards
an international or universal unity, as far as this was to be
found in the temporal order. What importance there may
have been in the conception of a political unity under the
control of the spiritual power we shall consider in detail
in the second part of this volume. In our next volume we
hope to consider what was the real importance and signi-
ficance of such conceptions as those of Dante and other
writers of the fourteenth century.
As far as the mediseval civilisation in the proper sense
is concerned--that is, the civilisation which reached its cul-
mination in the thirteenth century,--we feel ourselves com-
pelled to say that its tendency was not towards unity but
rather towards disintegration, not indeed to such a confused
anarchy as that of the tenth century, but to the development
of the national system of modern Europe. How far this
system is again to be transformed by the creation of some
new organisation of unity the future alone can show.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 152 TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. [PABT II.
promoted to the empire, after his coronation by the Pope,
but he claimed the right and authority to examine the person
elected and to decide whether he was fit for empire. He also
claimed the right to decide in the case of disputed elections. 1
In the case of disputes between rulers, Innocent claimed the
right to arbitrate where a question of sin was involved. 2
In the Vercelli case he laid down the rule that suitors
would not be heard by the Holy See in matters within the
jurisdiction of the secular courts, unless justice were refused
by the civil authorities concerned. Should justice be refused,
recourse might be had to the bishop or to the Pope ; especially
at a time when the empire was vacant and there was no
superior to whom they might appeal for justice. 3 Finally,
it seems that he maintained that it was for the Pope to decide
in cases where it was uncertain whether the matter was
one for ecclesiastical or for secular authorities to deal with. *
The passages cited in the Decretals, from Innocent, do not
include any reference to Constantine's donation, but there
is an important statement on this subject in one of his sermons
to which we shall refer later on. 5
Every reader of Innocent's letters must be struck by his
tremendous assertion of the Pope's exalted position. Gregory
VII. was content to be the vicar of St Peter. 6 For Innocent,
the Pope is the vicar of Christ (or sometimes of God) ; less
1 Vol. ii. p. 217 f.
2 Vol. ii. p. 219 f.
3 Vol. ii. p. 223.
4 Vol. ii. p. 231 f.
s See p. 183 f.
* Thus (we quote from Erich Cas-
par's edition of Gregory VII. Register)
i. 72: " Nos (i. e. , Gregory) licet in-
digni qui vicarii eius (i. e. , of Peter)
dicimur. " iii. 10a : " Et ideo ex tua
gratia, non ex meis operibus credo,
quod tibi placuit et placet, ut populus
christianus tibi (i. e. , Peter) specialiter
commissus mihi obediat specialiter pro
vice tua michi commissa. " Similarly
in iii. 10 he writes : " Considerantes
quam districti iudicii de dispensatione
crediti nobis per beatum Petrum apos-
tolorum princupem. " Sometimes St
Paul is associated with St Peter--e. g. ,
i. 34. Gregory gives absolution " auc-
toritate principum apostolorum Petri
et Pauli fulti quorum vice quam vis
indigni funigmur. " viii. 37 : " Proinde
carrissimi filii, auctoritate sancte ro-
mane ecclesie, vice beatorum aposto-
lorum Petri et Pauli nobis licet indignis
concesse. " In many passages he speaks
of himself as acting by the authority
of Peter--e. g. , i. 49 : " Obsecremus
et auctoritate beati Petri admonemus. "
As in the passage quoted above from
viii. 37, St Paul is occasionally asso-
ciated with St Peter as giving the
authority.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:48 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. I. ]
153
INNOCENT HI.
than God but greater than man; the successor of Peter
and vested with the same powers. Thus in a sermon on the
consecration of the Pope (possibly the sermon preached
by him on the day of his own consecration) he speaks of him-
self as placed above all peoples and kingdoms, endowed with
the fulness of power, less than God but greater than man,
judging all, but judged by God alone. 1 In another sermon
on the anniversary of his consecration he speaks of his marriage
to the Church (of Eome) and of the dowry he has received--
a priceless dowry, the fulness of spiritual and the " latitudo "
of temporal powers. As a sign thereof he has received the
mitre to indicate his spiritual and the crown to indicate his
temporal power. 2 His authority is divine rather than human. 3
He has received of God such fulness of spiritual power that
no increase thereof is possible. * Innocent complained in
1 M. P. L. , vol. 217. Sermones de
diversis. Sermo II. In Consecratione
Pontificis maximi, col 657-8. Mihi
namque dicitur in Propheta : '* Con-
stitui te super gentes et regna, ut
evellas et destruas et diaperdas et dis-
sipes, et sedifices et plantes". . .
ccteri vooati sunt in partem sollici-
tudinis, solus autem Petrus assumptus
est in' plenitudinem potestatis. Jam
ergo videtis quia iste servus, qui
super familiam constituitur, pro-
fecto rioarius Jesu Christi, successor
Petri, Christus domini, Deus Pha-
raonis : inter Deum et hominem medius
constitutue, citra Deum, sed ultra
hominem: minor Deo, sed major
nomine : qui de omnibus judicat, et a
nomine judicatur : Apostoli voce pro-
nuntians, " qui me judicat, Dominus
est"
<< M.
norum imperatori et semper Augusto,
qui orbem terrarum juris et justitise
freno constringit. . . . Duec varietates
exordiorum quibus pauper uti valet
coram imperatore. (1) Ad ilium per
quem Reges regnant, justitia con-
servatur in terris, et cui a Domino
collata est po testas gladii tem-
poralis. "
* M. O. H. , Const. , vol. ii. 197:
"Gloriosus in majestate sua dominan-
tium dominus qui regna constituit et
firmavit imperium. . . . Ad hoe nos
supra reges et regna preposuit, et in
imperiali solio sublimavit. "
* Id. id. , vol. ii. 224 : " Exurgat
igitur invicta Oermania, exurgite
populi Germanorum. Nostrum nobis
defendatis imperium, per quod invidiam
omnium nationum, dignitatum omnium
et mundi monarchiam obtinetis. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ]
143
THE THEORY OF THE EMPIRE.
discusses with great care the relation of the imperial to the
papal authority (to this we shall return later), and while
he asserts the immense superiority of the spiritual as com-
pared with the temporal power, he also asserts that the
emperor is the lord of the world and that all nations are under
him. 1 That this is not a mere chance phrase would appear
from the fact that in another wort, the ' Commentary ' on
the Decretals, in dealing with another passage, he again
expresses the same judgment. 2
This would be of considerable significance if we could
take it as representing the general opinion of the Canonists
and ecclesiastical writers, but this is not the case. Innocent
HI. in the Decretal letter ' Per Venerabilem ' not only says
that the King of France recognised no superior in temporal
matters, but founds upon this the conclusion that, if the
king desired it, he could refer a question about himself to
the judgment of the Pope. 3 Pope Innocent IV. , in his ' Appar-
atus ' to the Decretals, says that some men (Canonists pre-
sumably) maintained that kings were not subject to the
emperor but only to the Pope. *
William Durandus, the most important Canonist and
Civilian of the last part of the century, sets out quite definitely
the opinion that there was no appeal from a judgment of the
Court of France, for the French king recognised no superior
1 Hostionsis, ' Summa super titulos
decretalium. ' ' Qui filii sunt legitimi,'
13 : " Ipse (Imperator) est mundi domi-
nus, et omnes nationes sub eo sunt. "
2 Id. , ' In Decretalium libros com-
mentarius,' i. 6, 34, ' De Electione ' :
" (6) TJnus enim est imperator super
omnes reges, vii. q. 1 in apibus (Qratian,
Decretum, C. vii. 1, 41), et omnos
nationes sub eo sunt xi. q. 1. hanc
si quis, ver. volumus (Gratian, Decre-
tum, C. xi. 1, 36, 37). Etiam Judwi
ut C. de Judaeis, Judai (Code i. 9, 8).
Et omnes provincise 63. Diat. Adrianus
(Gratian, Decretum, D. 63, 2). Et
demum omnia temporalia ut viii.
Dist. quo jure (Gratian, Decretum, D.
viii. 1). "
8 ' Decretals,' iv. 17, 13 : " Insuper
cum rex (i. e. , the King of France)
superiorem in temporalibus minime
recognoscit, sine juris alterius lesione,
in eo se jurisdictioni nostra subjicere
potuit. "
4 Innocent IV. , ' Apparatus ad quin-
que libros Decretalium,' ii. 27, 23 :
"Alii tamen dicunt quod reges omnes
in integrum restituunt, quia non sunt
sic imperatoribus subditi, sed papse soli
in dubiis et gravibus artioulis, si ].
qui fil. sint legiti, c. per venerabilem "
(' Decretals,' iv. 17, 13).
Cf. App. iv. 17, 13 : " (Recognoscat)
de facto, nam de iure subest Im-
peratori Romano, nos contra, immo
Papse. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 144
[PABT I.
POLITICAL PRINCIPLES.
in temporal matters ; he is citing the authority of Innocent
III. , but speaks of this legal principle as one which was in
fact observed. 1
It would appear then that, except for Hostiensis, the
opinion of the Canonists of the thirteenth century was clearly
against the theory of a political authority of the emperor
over all other rulers. We have indeed found only one other
ecclesiastical writer of the time of whom it can be said that
he seems to hold that the emperor had this authority. This
is the author of a tract written to support Boniface VIII.
against Philip the Fair of France. He says that all kings
and princes acknowledge that they are subject to the em-
peror in temporal matters, and they must therefore admit
that they are " mediately " subject in these to the Pope,
for the empire is held from him ; and, he adds, if they refuse
to acknowledge that they are subject to the emperor, they
must then admit that they are directly subject to the Pope
in temporal things. 2 We shall return in a later chapter to
this writer's treatment of the temporal authority of the
Pope.
Perhaps the most suggestive treatment of the subject is
that of Andrew of Isernia in his ' Commentary on the Con-
stitutions of the Kingdom of Naples. ' The king, he says,
who is monarch in his own kingdom makes laws even contrary
to the positive law; but what, he asks, are these " univer-
sitates " which have jurisdiction, since the emperor is lord
of all the world t He replies that they are kings who are
1 William Durandus, ' Speculum,'
ii. partic iii. : ' Do Appellationibus' ' a
quibus appellari possit,' p. 481 : " Item
a sententia lata in curia Francise non
appellatur, cum rex ipse in tempo-
ralibus non recognoscat, ut extra, qui
filii sunt leg. c. per venerabilem
(' Decretals,' iv. 17, 13) et sic ibi de
facto servatur. "
3 Anonymous fragment (ed. R. Scholz)
in ' Die Publizistik,' p. 475 : " Item
universi reges ct principes fatentur se
imperatori Romano subesse quantum
ad tomporalia . . . et tunc non poterant
negare quin etiam subsunt Pape in
temporalibus mediate, cum imperium
teneatur ab eo, et ipse confirmat ejus
electionem et coronam imperii concedit,
etiam ipse imperator jurat sibi fideli-
tatem. . . . Si enim noluerint confitcri
uo subesse imperatori, necessarie habent
confiteri se subesse pontifici Romano
in temporalibus. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ]
145
THE THEORY OF THE EMPIRE.
free and exempt from the authority of the empire, as, for
example, the King of Sicily, who holds from the Eoman
Church ; and he seems to mean that this exemption was due
either to long prescription, or to the grant of the emperor.
Having thus explained the origin of this position, he sets
out dogmatically the principle that every king, who is thus
free from the empire, occupies the same position in his
kingdom that the emperor does in his empire ; the king is
monarch in his kingdom. The king who is free from the
empire has his own " flscus," as the King of England, the
King of Italy, and the King of Lombardy. 1
It would seem that Andrew of Isernia, who was presumably
a Civilian by training, was already attempting to find a
solution of the problem how the actual independence of various
European States could be reconciled with the standpoint of
the Eoman law. The most important point, however, of
his statement is that there were independent kingdoms which
were not under the empire.
With Andrew of Isernia we may compare the terms of the
great eulogy of the ' Empire,' written by Jordan of Osna-
briick in the latter part of the thirteenth century. He had
the highest reverence for the Eoman Empire, which was
now held by the German nation, and solemnly warns the
Eomans and the Pope, as well as the German princes, of the
great dangers which would be brought upon the world if the
empire were to be destroyed, and he says that the authority of
Csesar was above all other earthly authorities, and contained
1 Andreas de Isernia, ' Peregrina,'
fol. 3, v. : " Cum constitutiones regni
faciat quilibet rex monarcha in regno
suo; etiam contra legem positivam.
. . . Sed qua sunt universitates habentes
jurisdictionem, cum imperator sit dom-
inus totius mundi ? . . . Idem liberi
reges et exempti ab imperio, ut rex
Sicilise, quam habet a Romana ecclesia,
sunt monarchic in regnis suis . . . .
cum sine bujusmodi prescriptione vel
principis Romanorum concessione reges
VOL. V.
alii non haberent aliqua regalia in
rerris et regnis suis, nec monete fa-
oiende. . . . fol. 7, v. equiparetur rex
in regno suo imperatori in imperio suo.
. . . Item dicimus de omni rege libero
ab imperio sicut est regnum Sicilisn.
. . . Rex regni sui monarcha est. . . .
Item diximus re gem ab imperio liberum
habere nscum sicut imperator . . . .
Rex Anglise fiscum habet. . . . Reges
Longobardie dicunt se habere . . . hoe
idem dicit Rex Sicilian"
K
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 146
[PABT I.
POLITICAL PRINCIPLES.
them all. 1 In a later chapter of the same work, however,
he gives, in a passage already cited, a curious account of the
creation of the French kingdom by Charlemagne. He says
that this kingdom, in contrast with the empire, was to be
hereditary, and that the king was not to recognise any superior
in temporal things. 2
The French writers of the thirteenth century repudiate
emphatically the conception that the emperor had any
authority in France. The author of the very interesting
tract, in the form of a discussion between a knight and an
ecclesiastic, written in the course of the conflict between
Boniface VIII. and Philip the Fair of France, says dog-
matically that no one can make laws for those over whom
he has no " dominion,'' and that therefore the French cannot
make laws for the empire, nor the emperor for the King of
France. 3 And in another place he develops more fully still
the principle that the true dignity and authority of the
King of France is the same as that of the emperor, and con-
tends that when the Empire of Charles the Great was divided,
the kingdom of France retained the same powers as that
part which had the name of the Empire. *
1 Jordan of Osnabruck, ' Tractatus
de Prerogativa Romani Imperii,' i.
:
" Ostendit enim potestatem Ccsaris
aliis potestatibus mundanis prse. eminere
et ipsas sub eo contineri. "
1 Id. id. , v. : " Porro, quia ipse
Karolus Rex Franoorum extitit et
illud regnum ad eum fuerat ex sue-
cessione devolutum, impium fuisset
et indecens, quod ipse suos heredes
dignitate regia penitus denudassct.
Statuit igitur . . . ut Franoigene eum
quadam regni Francorum portione
re gem habere nt de regali semine jure
hereditario successurum, qui in tem-
poralibus superiorem non recognos-
ceret, cui videlicet tamquam imperatori
posteritas ad homagium vel aliquod
cbsequium teneretur. "
3 ' Disputatio inter clericum et mili-
tem,' p. 75 : " Null us enim potest de
iis statuere, super quse constat ipsum
dominium non habere. Sic nee Fran-
corum rex potest statuere super im-
perium, nec imperator super regem
Francise. "
* Id. , p. 80 : " Cler. : Imperatores
sanxerunt ista non reges, et ideo per
bonos imperatores, o miles, nunc exit
legum gubernacula moderari.
" Mil. : Hoe responsum est blas-
phemiss. Et quoniam, ut videtur, aut
originem ignoratis regni aut quod
videtur verius, illius altitudini invi-
detis, si Caroli Magni registrum in-
spiciatis et histories probabilissimas
revolvatis: invenietis quod regnum
Fruncise dignissima conditione imperii
portio est, pari divisione ab eo discreta,
et equali dignitate et auctoritate quin-
gentis annis circiter insignita; quiequid
? ? ergo privilegii et dignitatis retinet
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ]
147
THE THEORY OF THE EMPIRE.
John of Paris, writing on the same conflict, admits that
there should be one spiritual head of the world, and that
Peter and his successors held that place, not by the authority
of some council, but by the institution of Christ Himself ;
but, he continues, this is not true in temporal matters, for
there is no Divine law that the lay people should be subject
in temporal things to one monarch. 1 It is true that in one
place he uses a phrase which is a little ambiguous. The
king, he says, is supreme in his kingdom, and the emperor,
if he were monarch, would be lord of the world. 2 It is not
very easy to say what John means. That he does dogmatically
repudiate any claim to superiority on the part of the emperor
in France is, however, clear from a later passage in which he
discusses the " Donation " of Constantine--we shall return
to this in a later chapter; he argues that, whatever may be
the validity of the donation, it has no reference to France,
for the Franks were never under the domination of the Eoman
Empire. 3
imperii nomen in parte una, hoc regnum
Francis e in alia. Cum enim fraterna
divisions, Francorum regnum a reliqua
parte discessit imperii, quicquid in
parte decedente et penitus ab imperio
existente, imperium ipsum quondam
obtinuit, aut ibidem jure altitudinis
aut poteetatia exercuit, hoc- principi
seu Francorum regi in eadem plenitu-
dine cessit. Et ideo sicut omnia infra
terminos imperii sunt, subjecta esse
noscuntur imperio, sic quse infra ter-
minos regni, regno. Et siout imperator
supra totum imperium suum habet
leges condere, addere eis, aut demere:
sic et Rex Franciso, aut omnino leges
imperatorias repellere, aut quamlibet
placuerit permutare, aut, ill ia a to to
regno suo prescriptis et abiectis, novas
si placuerit promulgare. Alioquin si
aliquid novi, ut saepe accidit, visum
fuerit statuendum, si rex non posset
hoc qui est summus : tunc nullus pote-
nt, quia ultra eum non est superior
ullus. Et ideo, domine clerice, linguam
vestram coercite et agnoscite regem
legibus, consuetudinibus et privileges
vestris, et libertatibus datis, regia
po testa to prse. esse, posse addere, posse
minuere quselibet, equitate et ratione
consultis, aut cum suis proceribus,
sicut visum fuit temperare. "
1 John of Paris: ' Tractatus de
Potestate Regia et Papali,' iii. : " Non
sic autem fideles laici se habent ex
jure divino, quod subsint in tempor-
alibus uni monarchse supremo. "
>> Id. id. , 19: " Non est autem
caput (>>. <<. , the Pope) quantum ad
regimen in temporalibus seu dis-
positione temporalium, sed quilibet
rex est in hoc caput regni sui, et
imperator monarcha si fuerit, est caput
mundi. "
* Id. id. , 22: " Tertio apparet, quod
ex dicta donatione nihil habet papa
super regen Francise, dato etiam quod
voluisset, et generalis de toto imperio
? ? fuisset: quia licet Gallici inveniantur
Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 148
[PABT I.
POLITICAL PRINCIPLES.
The position of France is clear, and we can now observe
that the position in Spain was the same. In one place in
the ' Siete Partidas ' Alfonso X. uses the highest language
to describe the dignity of the emperor, and his place as the
vicar of God in the empire to do justice in temporal matters,
as the Pope is God's vicar in spiritual things. 1 A little farther
on, however, he uses practically the same terms to describe
the dignity of the king; he also is the vicar of God in his
kingdom, to maintain justice and truth in temporal things
as the emperor does in the empire. 2 A little farther on
Alfonso even argues that kings have not only the same
powers in the kingdom as the emperor has in the empire,
but larger powers, because they hold their lordship by in-
heritance while the emperor holds his by election ; 8 and in
yet another place he says explicitly that by the grace of God
he has no superior in temporal matters. *
It is plain that while Alfonso X. may think of the emperor
as having the place of highest temporal dignity in the world,
he quite as clearly repudiates the notion that the emperor
has any authority over other kingdoms, and indeed claims
for the king exactly the same authority as that of the emperor.
The conclusion, which appears to us reasonable and well-
1 ' Siete Partidas,' ii. 1, 1 : " Im-
perio es grant dignitat, et noble et
honrada sobre todas las otras que los
homes pueden haber en este mundo
temporalmente . . . et el non es temido
de obedescer a? ninguno, fueras ende
al Papa en las cosas espirituales. . . .
Et otrosi, dixieron los sabios que el
emperador es vicario de Dios en el
imperio para facer justicia en lo tem-
poral, bien asi como lo es el Papa en
los espirituel. "
a Id. , ii. 1, 6 : " Vicarios de Dios
son los reyes cada uno en su regno
puestos sobre las gentes para mantener*
las en justicia et en verdad quanto en
lo temporal, bien asi como el emperador
en su imperio. "
* Id. , ii. 1,8: " Sabida cosa es que
todos aquellos poderes que desuso
deximos que los emperadores han et
deben haber en las gentes de su im-
perio, que esos mismos han los reyes
en las de sus regnos, et mayores ; ca
ellos non tam solamente son sen? ores
de sus tierras mientras viven, mas
aun 6 sus finamientos las pueden
dexar a? sus herederos, porque han
el sen? ori? o por heredat, lo que non
pueden facer los emperadores que lo
ganan per eleccion, asi como desuso
deximos. "
* 'Especulo,' i. 1, 13: "E pues
que estos las fezieron que avien ma-
yores sobre si, mucho mas las podemos
nos fazer que por la merced de Dios
non avemos mayor sobre nos en el
temporal. "
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. X. ]
149
THE THEOBY OF THE EMPIRE.
founded, is very much the same as that which we expressed
at the end of our third volume--that is, that while the con-
ception of the political unity of the world under the one
authority of the emperor still survived as a theory in some
quarters, it had no real significance in the political theory
of the thirteenth century, or in the actual structure of political
society. We venture to think that it is time that students
of history should recognise this, and should recognise that it
is not really in accord with the characteristics of the political
order of the Middle Ages to think of them as tending towards
an international or universal unity, as far as this was to be
found in the temporal order. What importance there may
have been in the conception of a political unity under the
control of the spiritual power we shall consider in detail
in the second part of this volume. In our next volume we
hope to consider what was the real importance and signi-
ficance of such conceptions as those of Dante and other
writers of the fourteenth century.
As far as the mediseval civilisation in the proper sense
is concerned--that is, the civilisation which reached its cul-
mination in the thirteenth century,--we feel ourselves com-
pelled to say that its tendency was not towards unity but
rather towards disintegration, not indeed to such a confused
anarchy as that of the tenth century, but to the development
of the national system of modern Europe. How far this
system is again to be transformed by the creation of some
new organisation of unity the future alone can show.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:47 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? 152 TEMPORAL AND SPIRITUAL POWERS. [PABT II.
promoted to the empire, after his coronation by the Pope,
but he claimed the right and authority to examine the person
elected and to decide whether he was fit for empire. He also
claimed the right to decide in the case of disputed elections. 1
In the case of disputes between rulers, Innocent claimed the
right to arbitrate where a question of sin was involved. 2
In the Vercelli case he laid down the rule that suitors
would not be heard by the Holy See in matters within the
jurisdiction of the secular courts, unless justice were refused
by the civil authorities concerned. Should justice be refused,
recourse might be had to the bishop or to the Pope ; especially
at a time when the empire was vacant and there was no
superior to whom they might appeal for justice. 3 Finally,
it seems that he maintained that it was for the Pope to decide
in cases where it was uncertain whether the matter was
one for ecclesiastical or for secular authorities to deal with. *
The passages cited in the Decretals, from Innocent, do not
include any reference to Constantine's donation, but there
is an important statement on this subject in one of his sermons
to which we shall refer later on. 5
Every reader of Innocent's letters must be struck by his
tremendous assertion of the Pope's exalted position. Gregory
VII. was content to be the vicar of St Peter. 6 For Innocent,
the Pope is the vicar of Christ (or sometimes of God) ; less
1 Vol. ii. p. 217 f.
2 Vol. ii. p. 219 f.
3 Vol. ii. p. 223.
4 Vol. ii. p. 231 f.
s See p. 183 f.
* Thus (we quote from Erich Cas-
par's edition of Gregory VII. Register)
i. 72: " Nos (i. e. , Gregory) licet in-
digni qui vicarii eius (i. e. , of Peter)
dicimur. " iii. 10a : " Et ideo ex tua
gratia, non ex meis operibus credo,
quod tibi placuit et placet, ut populus
christianus tibi (i. e. , Peter) specialiter
commissus mihi obediat specialiter pro
vice tua michi commissa. " Similarly
in iii. 10 he writes : " Considerantes
quam districti iudicii de dispensatione
crediti nobis per beatum Petrum apos-
tolorum princupem. " Sometimes St
Paul is associated with St Peter--e. g. ,
i. 34. Gregory gives absolution " auc-
toritate principum apostolorum Petri
et Pauli fulti quorum vice quam vis
indigni funigmur. " viii. 37 : " Proinde
carrissimi filii, auctoritate sancte ro-
mane ecclesie, vice beatorum aposto-
lorum Petri et Pauli nobis licet indignis
concesse. " In many passages he speaks
of himself as acting by the authority
of Peter--e. g. , i. 49 : " Obsecremus
et auctoritate beati Petri admonemus. "
As in the passage quoted above from
viii. 37, St Paul is occasionally asso-
ciated with St Peter as giving the
authority.
? ? Generated for (University of Chicago) on 2014-12-19 10:48 GMT / http://hdl. handle. net/2027/uc1. b3318617 Public Domain in the United States, Google-digitized / http://www. hathitrust. org/access_use#pd-us-google
? CHAP. I. ]
153
INNOCENT HI.
than God but greater than man; the successor of Peter
and vested with the same powers. Thus in a sermon on the
consecration of the Pope (possibly the sermon preached
by him on the day of his own consecration) he speaks of him-
self as placed above all peoples and kingdoms, endowed with
the fulness of power, less than God but greater than man,
judging all, but judged by God alone. 1 In another sermon
on the anniversary of his consecration he speaks of his marriage
to the Church (of Eome) and of the dowry he has received--
a priceless dowry, the fulness of spiritual and the " latitudo "
of temporal powers. As a sign thereof he has received the
mitre to indicate his spiritual and the crown to indicate his
temporal power. 2 His authority is divine rather than human. 3
He has received of God such fulness of spiritual power that
no increase thereof is possible. * Innocent complained in
1 M. P. L. , vol. 217. Sermones de
diversis. Sermo II. In Consecratione
Pontificis maximi, col 657-8. Mihi
namque dicitur in Propheta : '* Con-
stitui te super gentes et regna, ut
evellas et destruas et diaperdas et dis-
sipes, et sedifices et plantes". . .
ccteri vooati sunt in partem sollici-
tudinis, solus autem Petrus assumptus
est in' plenitudinem potestatis. Jam
ergo videtis quia iste servus, qui
super familiam constituitur, pro-
fecto rioarius Jesu Christi, successor
Petri, Christus domini, Deus Pha-
raonis : inter Deum et hominem medius
constitutue, citra Deum, sed ultra
hominem: minor Deo, sed major
nomine : qui de omnibus judicat, et a
nomine judicatur : Apostoli voce pro-
nuntians, " qui me judicat, Dominus
est"
<< M.
