Barbara McClung Hallman defines an ecclesiastical benefice as ‘a sacred office, with or without the care of souls, to which a permanent income is attached’. The fact that benefices were used by popes as the principal source of rewards ‘encouraged churchmen to view benefices first as income and only secondarily as sacred offices’. How true was this for Cardinal Sauli and, if true, did it necessarily mean that his benefices suffered?

During his fifteen-year ecclesiastical career Sauli held at least thirtyeight benefices, ranging from parish churches to bishoprics and his titular churches. Given this relatively large number in such a short career (and the dearth of documentary material for many of the smaller ones) if any insight is to be gained into how Sauli administered his benefices, and the care he gave to them, then some selection, based on the size and importance of the holding and the survival of sources, is clearly called for. An examination of the administration of two of his commende, the abbeys of San Siro in Genoa and San Simpliciano in Milan; of Gerace and Oppido, one of his two bishoprics; and of his titular church, Santa Sabina, should provide a fairly coherent assessment of Cardinal Sauli as churchman.

A few initial points need to be made. There is no doubt that, despite his family's wealth, the income from his benefices was important to Sauli: on at least five occasions he was involved in disputes, and gave up his rights with great reluctance, on one occasion pressing home his advantage on the election of Leo x almost five years after the settlement of a dispute.