Last updated 10th July 2024: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 25 March 2011
Medieval historians confronted with the Latin word papa may be tempted to translate it unthinkingly as ‘pope’. Certainly the word has been restricted to the bishop of Rome for much of the history of the Church, and its application to this bishop is of long standing. It occurs in an inscription from pre-Constantinian Rome, in a letter despatched to Rome by the fathers of the Council of Aries in 314, which is addressed ‘dilectissimo papae Silvestro’ and goes on to style Silvester ‘gloribsissime papa’, and in the acts of the first Council of Toledo which met in 400, where language is used which implies that the bishop of Rome, and he alone, was papa. But in the early Church it generally seems to have been felt that the word could be applied to other bishops as well. A striking indication of this is furnished by a letter sent to Cyprian of Carthage by the priests and deacons of the Roman Church itself, which refers to him as papa. Sidonius Apollinaris, who became bishop of Clermont in 469, felt free to address his confrères among the Gallic episcopate by the same title, apparently indiscriminately, and was himself so addressed.
A draft of this paper was read to the Early Médiéval Seminar meeting in the Institute of Historical Research, London, in November 1983, and I am grateful for the suggestions made by those present, in particular Dr Janet Nelson. The themes discussed in it have never received satisfactory treatment; among the literature the most helpful discussions are Labanca, B., Il Papato, Turin 1905, 1–92 (a work more of erudition than analysis)Google Scholar; Labriolle, P. de, ‘Une Esquisse de l'histoire du mot “Papa”‘, Bulletin d'ancienne litérature et d'archéologie chrétiennes, i (1911), 215–20Google Scholar, republished with few alterations as ‘Papa’, Archivium Latinitatis Medii Aevi (Bulletin du Cange), iv (1928), 65–75Google Scholar; Dobschütz, E. von, Das Decretum Gelasianum, Leipzig 1912 (= Texte und Untersuchungcn, xxxviii. Heft iv), 226–32Google Scholar; Batiffol, P., ‘Papa, Sedes Romana, Apostolatus‘, Rioista di archeologia cristiana, ii (1925), 99–116Google Scholar at pp. 99–103; H. Leclercq, ‘Papa’, Dictionnaire d'archéologie chrétienne et de liturgie, xiii. 1097–1111. They are touched on, in a manner not entirely helpful, by Ullmann, Walter, The Growth of Papal Government in the Middle Ages, 3rd edn, London 1970, p. 22 n. 6Google Scholar.
1 Rossi, J. B. de, Inscriptiones Christianae Urbis Romae septimo saeculo antiquiores, i, Rome 1861, cxvGoogle Scholar. The application of Tertullian's phrase ‘bonus pastor et benedictus papa’ (De pudidtia, 13) to a bishop of Rome has been denied by Barnes, T. D., Tertullian, Oxford 1971, 247Google Scholar.
2 Corpus Christianorum Series Latina (hereafter cited as C.C.S.L.), cxlviii.
3 ‘Expectantes pan exemplo quid papa, qui nunc est, quid sanctus Simplicianus Mediolanensis episcopus reliquique ecclesiarum rescribant sacerdotes… constituimus autem, priusquam illis per papam vel per sanctum Simplicianum communio reddatur’ (Concilios visigóticos e hispano-romanos, ed. Vives, J., Barcelona 1963, 32Google Scholar). See the brief discussion in Chadwick, Henry, Priscillian of Avila, Oxford 1976, 184Google Scholar.
4 Cyprian, ep. 30 (Corpus Scriptorum Ecclesiasticorum Latinorum (hereafter cited as C.S.E.L.), iii. 5491.2:5561. 16).
5 Sidonius, epp. 6.1 to 9.10 passim, with 4.2. A similar tendency operates in the correspondence of Ruricius of Limoges (d. c. 507): epp. 2.7, 2.16; with ad Ruricium 4.5.
6 Hilary, ep. 13 (Epistulae Romanorum pontificum, Thiel, A. (ed.), i, Braunsberg 1868, 159–65Google Scholar; the phrase ‘dignus papa, dignus doctor’ occurs at the foot of 163).
7 Felix, ep. 13 (Thiel, op cit. 259–66). Gelasius, Collectio Avellana 103 (C.S.E.L. xxxv. 474–87). Symmachus, Monumenta Germaniae Historica (Auctores Antiquissimi (hereafter cited asM.G.H., Auct. Ant.), xii. 399–415.
8 M.G.H., Auct. Ant. xii. 403 1. 28, 404 1. 18.
9 Another occasion on which the name comes after the title is in the expression ‘iussu domni mei beatissimi papae Gelasi’ (Collectio Avellana, op. cit. 487).
10 M.G.H. Auct. Ant. xii. 426–37. Modern scholarly opinion generally dates this meeting, the ‘synodus palmaris’, to 502, although its editor for the M.G.H., Theodore Mommsen, supplied 501.
11 The best general account of the schism is that of Caspar, E., Geschichte des Papsttums, ii, Tübingen 1933, 87–129Google Scholar.
12 M.G.H., Auct. Ant. xii. 420 1. 19; 422 11. 8, 11.
13 Ibid. 422 1. 24 (papa); 423 1. 13 (pontifex).
14 Ibid. 432 11. 4, 6.
15 Ibid. 426 1. 10; 431 1. 11.
16 Cf. ‘dictae sedis antistitem’: ibid. 427 1. 4.
17 ‘Papa Symmachus’: M.G.H., Auct. Ant. 426 11. 10, 15:4271. 12; 428 1. 6; 432 1. 10; ‘Symmachus papa’: 428 1. 14; 431 1. 11. For the sake of completeness I list the other occurrences of the word papa: 427 1. 6; 429 11. 1, 10; 432 1. 4.
18 The Laurentian fragment of the Liber pontificalis describes him as ‘visitator ecclesiae Romanae’ (Liber pontificalis, ed. Duchesne, L., 2nd edn, i, Paris 1955, 45Google Scholar); compare the description of him in the ‘official’ life of Symmachus as ‘invasor sedis apostolicae’ (ibid. 260).
19 M.G.H., Auct. Ant. xii. 438–55.
20 Ibid. 447 11. 14, 20; 449 1. n. Mommsen prints at the beginning of his text of the proceedings ‘Exemplar constituti facti a domno Symmacho papa de rebus ecclesiasticis conservandis’, in accordance with an eighth-century manuscript. One is a little surprised to find the name before the word ‘papa’, but Mommsen's critical apparatus shows considerable manuscript support for expressions in which papa precedes the name, and in any case there would seem to be no reason to believe that any of the formulae go back to the pontificate of Symmachus.
21 M.G.H., Auct. Ant. xii. 445 1. 6.
22 Ibid. 447 II. 8–10.
23 I cite from the edition of Vogel, M.G.H., Auct. Ant. vii, in which the libellus is edited 48–67.
24 Perhaps mention should be made of a theory that Ennodius was to the papacy what Cassiodorus was to the Ostrogothic monarchy, and was responsible for the drafting of documents: Townsend, W. T. and Wyatt, William F., ‘Ennodius and Pope Symmachus’, in Jones, L. W. (ed.), Classical and Mediaeval Studies in Honor of Edward Kennard Rand, New York 1938, 277–91Google Scholar. But the evidence is scarcely compelling.
25 ‘Papa Symmachus’: M.G.H., Auct. Ant. vii. 57 1. 23; ‘Symmachus papa’: ibid. 63
26 ‘Successor’: ibid. 61 1. 38; cf. 62 1. 9; ‘sedis apostolicae praesul’: ibid. 53 11. 16f; 6t 1. 37. Ennodius’ thought has been discussed by Ullmann, Walter, ‘Pontifex romanus indubitanter efficitur sanctus: Dictatus Papae 23 in retrospect and prospect’, Studi Gregoriani, vi (1959–61). 229–64Google Scholar.
27 Indeed, he seems to avoid using the word of any bishop, preferring such terms as antistes, pontifex, sacerdos and even votes. But occasionally he does use it, as in the expression ‘sanctus Athanasius Alexandriae urbis episcopus’ (M.G.H., Auct. Ant. vii. 55 11. 23f) and in a letter to one Luminosus, which mentions both Luminosus’ unnamed bishop and the pope (ep. 3.10.3).
28 Ibid., ‘Dominus papa noster’, ep. 4.31.2; ‘dominus papa’, epp. 5.13.2; 6.33.2; 7.28.4; ‘sanctus papa’, ep. 3.10.4f; ‘venerabilis papa’, ep. 5.24.2. Here and elsewhere I ignore the headings at the top of letters found in the manuscripts, it being unknown when they were supplied.
29 ‘Sedis apostolicae praesulem’, ep. 5.13.3. As he does in the libellus, Ennodius elsewhere uses the word ‘praesul’ to suggest the power of the bishop of Rome: ‘apostolicae sedis praesulem et omnium paene ecclesiarum gubernacula trac tan tern’ (M.G.H., Auct. Ant. vii. 12 1. 30). Nevertheless it must be acknowledged that he once brings this word into connection with papa: ‘apostolicae sedis beati Petri vel praesulis eius papae auctoritate’ (ibid. 13 1. 18).
30 Quoted by Vogel, op. cit. 400; s.v. ‘papa’. Sirmond's suggestion seems to lie behind some odd assertions, such as the statement in the New Catholic Encyclopedia that Ennodius urged that the title papa be restricted to the bishop of Rome (v. 444); there is no evidence for this. The most recent discussion is that of Lumpe, Adolf, ‘Die Konzilien-Geschichte Bedeutung des Ennodius’, Annuarium Histoiiae Conciliorum i (1969), 15–36 at pp. 25–7Google Scholar.
31 Vita Epiphani, M.G.H., Auct. Ant. vii. 91 (95 1. 25).
32 Op. cit. Carmen 1.9.
33 Op. cit. 400. On the date of the opusculum, consult Sundwall, J., Abhandlungen zur Geschichte des ausgehenden Römerturns, Helsinki 1919, 13fGoogle Scholar.
34 M.G.H., Auct. Ant. vii Libellus 11 (501. 11); 81 (601. 12). The second example occurs in a document prepared by Symmachus’ enemies which Ennodius quoted for purposes of refutation.
36 ‘Non tu es papa noster, et tu presbyter?’, Passio S. Perpctuae 13 (ed. Robinson, J. A., Cambridge 1891, 82Google Scholar). Juvenal employs the word in the form ‘papas’, apparently meaning ‘teacher’ (Satyricon 6.633), while a tradition of using papae as an exclamatory interjection or mild oath, which can be documented in Terence and Plautus (e.g. Menaechmi 918, Eunuchus 229), was alive in the times of Jerome (ep. 125.13) and Boethius (Philosophiae consolatio 1.6.6, 4.2.1). But this tradition is not directly linked with ecclesiastical usage.
36 Epistola ad Augustinum 7 (cf. ‘domine papa beatissime’, ibid. 9).
37 For example, above nn. 1, 21; at the Council of Ephesus the Roman legate Philip referred to Celestine as πάπας μν (Acta conciliorum oecumenicorum, Schwartz, E. (ed.), i. 1. iii, Berlin 1927, 53 1. 27Google Scholar). As de Rossi pointed out, it is an ‘affectuosa e riverente formola’ (Bullettino di archeologia cristiana, 3rd ser. i (1876), 21Google Scholar).
38 This is in a libellus by John of Constantinople (C.S.E.L. xxxv. 609 1. 17; Giinther's index 836 s.v. ‘Leo’ gives all references). But note that Symmachus, in a letter not preserved in the Collectio Avellana, twice employs the form ‘Leo papa’ (Thiel, Epistulae, 722f).
39 Papa Felix’ (Liber pontificalis 252 11. 7, 10; note the more formal ‘Felix archiepiscopus sedis apostolicae urbis Romae’ 1. 5); ‘papa Symmachus’ (260 1. 8; note in the same line ‘factus est praesul’; one is not ‘made’ a papa but a praesul); ‘papa Hormisdas’ (270 11. 2, 5 (the first reference to a ‘pa pa…sedis apostolicae’), 17; 271 1. 16).
40 In addition to’papa Iohannes’ (op. cit. 2751.16,27611. 1,6, 11) and ‘Iohannes papa’ (275 11. 7, 10, 14), note the forms ‘Iohannes venerabilis papa’ (276 1. 4) and ‘beatissimus Iohannes, cpiscopus primae sedis, papa’ (276 1. 7).
41 ‘Bonifatius papa’ (Liber pontificalis 281 1. 13), ‘Agapitus papa’ (287 1. 13, 288 1. 4), ‘beatissimus Agapitus papa’ (287 1. 14, 288 11. 1f), ‘beatus/beatissimus/sanctus papa Agapitus’ (287 11. 19, 20, 288 1. 3).
42 I have checked this by reading all sixth-century material.
43 On the origins of the Liber pontificalis, see the classic discussion of Duchesne in the introduction to his edition (vol. 1, xxxiii-xlix), with the comments of Vogel (2nd edn, vol. 3, 7–9). The more recent treatment of Bertolini, O., ‘Il “Liber Pointificalis”‘, La Storiografia altomcdievale (Settimane di studio del Centra Italiano di Studi sull'Alto Medioevo, xvii), Spoleto 1970, 387–455Google Scholar breaks no new ground on this issue (see 388).
44 Commonitorium cap. 6, 22 (ed. Moxon, R. S., Cambridge 1915, 24, 130–2Google Scholar). Note too a similar practice among the correspondents of Bishop Desiderius of Cahors, who persistently styled him ‘Desiderius papa’ (see below n. 77)
45 ‘Sanctissime papa Vigili’, epistola ad Vigilium 1.3 (cf. the addressing of his work’ papae Vigilio’); ‘patri egregio…papae’, epistola ad Parthenium, 1.87. I cite from the edition of Arator by A. P. McKinlay, C.S.E.L. lxxii.
46 This is so even in the case of Leo: Gregory, Epistolae (M.G.H., Epistolae, i) 265 1.4, 360 1. 5, 382 1. 7 (but note the form ‘papa Leo’ in a letter written in the name of Pope Pelagius 11 (vol. ii, 443 1. 36); cf. above n. 37 on the overwhelming earlier preference for ‘papa Leo’. So Gregory's letters employ for other popes the forms ‘Iohannes papae’ (vol. i, 212 1. 3), ‘Pelagius papa’ (ibid. 151 1. 23), ‘Vigilius papa’ (ibid. 151 1. 15, cf. vol. ii, 1471. 9, as well as in a letter of Pelagius 11, ibid. 4551. 7). Similarly in the Dialogues Gregory writes ‘Iohannis papae’ (3.8.1 with 3.31.4); his one use of the form ‘papa Pelagio’ (3.16.1) may answer to his personal relationship with this man, his immediate predecessor as pope.
47 In letters written during his periods as quaestor palatii (507–11) and magister afficiorum (523–7) Cassiodorus had little occasion to deal with the affairs of the Church of Rome, although we find in the Variae the expressions ‘beatae recordationis… Simplicius’ (M.G.H., Auct. Ant. xii. 3.45.1) and ‘beatissimi papae iudicium’ (8.24.4).
48 Ibid. 10.19.4; 10.25.2; 12.20.1; it may be significant that the first two of these references occur in letters to Justinian.
49 Hence 8.24.4 t o the Roman clergy; 9. 16. If to the prefect of the city; 9.15.3 to a pope (!); 10.20.3 in a letter to Theodora, in the expression ‘sive beatissimus papa sive senatus amplissimus’. By only citing the last of these letters, and failing to take account of context, de Labriolle, ‘Une Esquisse’ 218 is misleading.
50 ‘Sanctissimus papa Bonifatius’ (Variae 9.15.3); ‘apostolicus papa Iohannes’ (9.17.2); but on the other hand ‘sanctus Agapitus urbis Romae papa’ (12.20.1).
51 O'Donnell, J.J., Cassiodorus, Berkeley 1979, 203Google Scholar.
52 ‘Agapitus papa urbis Romae’ (pref.), ‘Vigilius vir beatissimus papa’ (1.1.8); ‘sanctus Gelasius papa urbis Romae’ (1.8.1). But in his Expositio psalmorum Cassiodorus addressed Vigilius as ‘pater apostolice’ (praef., C.C.S.L. xcvii. 6).
53 ‘Papa Symmachus’, 65; ‘papa Iohannes’, 89 (immediately after a reference to him as ‘sedis apostolicae praesul’); but cf. ‘Iohannes papa’, 93. On the composition of this work, Adams, J. N., The Text and Language of a Vulgar Latin Chronicle (Anonymous Valesianus II), London 1976, 7fGoogle Scholar.
54 M.G.H. Epistolae, iii. 440 11. 25f, 400 441 11. 8, 30.
55 E.g. 439 11. 5, 9, 12, 16; so too with Leo, 439 1. 9.
56 ‘Datius episcopus’: 440 11. 19, 26, 40f; 441 1. 30. ‘Episcopus Datius’: 441 11. 8, 33.
57 Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum, xi. 272, 273, 285, 304.
58 Ibid. 297. This inscription belongs to the time of Bishop John of Ravenna (Agnellus qui et Andreas, Codex pontificalis ecclesiae Ravennatis, ed. Rasponi, A. Testi, Bologna 1924, 246Google Scholar) who seems also to have addressed Gregory as ‘apostolicum papam’ (ibid. 228); his Roman origin is discussed ibid. 243 with n. 2.
59 P.L. lxv. 528D.
60 C.C.S.L. xcA. 111.
61 M.G.H., Auct. Ant., xi, e.g. sub an. 557.1, 558.
62 Schwartz, Ada, ii. v, Berlin 1936; e.g. 103 1. 11; in l. 26; 120 l. 4.
63 E.g.’ condemnatus…a Agapito papa Romano et Menate Constantinopolitano’, 138 ll. 19f.
64 I quote the important phrases: ‘Silverium subdiaconum Hormisdae quondam papae filium elegit ordinandum…flagitavit ut si papa fieret…ut papa ordinaretur… invenit Silverium papam ordinatum’ (136).
65 He had been sent to Rome, along with two bishops, by Reparatus of Carthage during the pontificate of Agapitus (535–6) (P.L. lxv. 45C).
66 M.G.H., Auct. Ant. vi. epp. 9, 25, 29, 41.
67 C.C.S.L. cxlviiiA. 79f, Can. 4f.
68 Ibid. 88 11. 22f, 25; 91 1. 119.
69 Ibid. 187 1. 345, 190 1. 415.
70 M.G.H., Scriptores Rerum Merovingicarum (hereafter cited as Ss. rer. Mer.) i. 27 l. 7, Libri historiarum 2.27.
71 Ibid. 5.30 (235 1. 8).
72 Ibid. 2.1 (38 1. 18).
73 Ibid. 2.1 (38 11. 10, 20); 4.26 (158 1. 7); 5.20 (227 1. 20).
74 Ibid. 275.
75 Chadwick, Owen, ‘Gregory of Tours and Gregory the Great’, J.T.S., n.s. i (1949), 38–49Google Scholar.
76 Carmen 5.17.
77 M.G.H., Epistolae, iii. epp. 2.3, 2.4, 2.6, 2.7, 2.9, 2.11–2.17, 2.20, 2.21; with the exception of 2.9 and 2.17 all these letters were written by bishops.
78 M.G.H., Ss. rer. Mer., v. 213.
79 Marculfi formularum libri duo, ed. Uddholm, Ulf, Uppsala 1962, 8Google Scholar. Elsewhere, Uddholm has argued for 688–732 as the approximate date of composition (Formulae Marculfi. Éludes sur la tongue el la style (diss. Uppsala) 1953, 19–22Google Scholar).
80 M.G.H., Ss. rer. Mer., v. 323 1. 5.
81 M.G.H., Poetae, iii. 2 i g 1. 9; 224 1. 20; 225 1. 1; 226 1. 16; 233 1. 3. Note as well that in the ninth century Eulogius, later archbishop of Toledo, addressed Bishop Wiliesindus of Pamplona as ‘beatissime papa’ (P.L. cxv. 845B).
82 Bede, , Historia ecclesiastica gentis Anglorum, Plummer, C. (ed.), Oxford 1896Google Scholar. Thus ‘Gregorius papa urbis Romae’ (1.27); ‘papa urbis Romanae ecclesiae Bonifatii’ (2.10); ‘Bonifatii papae urbis Romae’ (2.11).
83 ‘Bonifatii papae urbis Romae’ (2.11); ‘Severinum papam’ (2.19); ‘Martini papae’ (4.17); ‘Sergio papa’ (5.17); ‘Agathone papa’ (5.19), 326.
84 ‘Gregorii papae’, Bede, Historia, praef. 6 (cf. ‘papae Gregorii’ twice on this page); ‘Caelestino papa’ (5.24 an. CCCCXXX); ‘Gregorius papa’ (5.24 an. DXCVI; cf. ‘papa Gregorius’ an. DCI).
85 ‘Sancti patris Gregorii’ (1.27); ‘beati papae Gregorii’ (1.28); ‘papa Gregorius’ (1. 29); ‘beatus pater Gregorius’ (1.30); ‘beatus papae Gregorius’ (1.32, 2.1); cf. above n. 36.
87 But see now Wallace-Hadrill, J. M., The Frankish Church, Oxford 1983, 110–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
88 A striking example of this is furnished by a passage in Gregory of Tours. According to this author, as the saintly Abbot Aredius of Limoges lay dying, a possessed woman cried out that saints and martyrs were coming together: ‘Here is Julian from Brioude, Privatus from Mende, Martin from Tours and Martialis from [Aredius’] own city. And here are Saturninus from Toulouse, and Dionysius from the city of Paris, and others who are now in heaven’ (Libri historiarum 10.29, M.G.H., Ss. rer. Mer., 525).
89 I quote from P.L. vi. 20, where the expression occurs in the false ‘Synodi Sinuessanae Gesta’.
90 Note the role of St Peter in the thinking of Ennodius: he makes a long speech in the libellus (96–120, M.G.H., Auct. Ant. vii. 62–5) and is referred to in connection with the termination of the Laurentian schism (ep. 9.30.4). Symmachus’ supporter Albinus built a church dedicated to Peter, and Symmachus himself conducted extensive building at St Peter's basilica as well as building hospices at the tombs of Peter, Paul and Laurence (Liber pontificalis, 262f).
91 See above, n. 42.
92 In particular W. Ullmann; see for example his Growth and A Short History of the Papacy in the Middle Ages, London 1972Google Scholar.
93 Among these scholars are Barraclough, G., The Médiéval Papacy, London 1968Google Scholar, and Richards, J., The Popes and the Papacy in the Early Middle Ages, 476–752, London 1979Google Scholar.
