Last updated 09/07/24: 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: 29 July 2016
The figure of Louis IX of France is frequently surrounded by an aura of the unreal. Since he has been honored by the Church and succeeding generations as St. Louis, the tendency has often been to place him on a pedestal and to make of him a plaster statue rather than the vigorous king who ruled France for 44 eventful years in the midst of the thirteenth century. Above all, it is often imagined that a saint-king would surely be something of a pawn in the hands of the clerics, and especially the papacy.
1 It has been edited by Luard in his edition of the Chronica Majora. See Matthaei Parisiensis, Monachi Sancti Albani, Chronica Majora (ed. Henry Richards Luard, London 1882) 6.99–112. The document is contained in British Museum Cotton MS Nero D. I, ff. 127–129. (Modern foliation. I am indebted to the Keeper of Manuscripts of the British Museum for providing me with a microfilm of this manuscript.) Google Scholar
2 The writing was originally done with a stylus and is now almost completely illegible. Google Scholar
3 Élie Berger, Saint Louis et Innocent IV (Paris 1893) 270–271 n. 1. Google Scholar
4 His conclusions are summarized in his important work, Matthew Paris (Cambridge 1958) 35. In private correspondence, dated July 23, 1958, Dr. Vaughan has assured me that not only the text but also the title and the sentence added at the end are in Matthew's own hand. Google Scholar
5 Ibid. 85.Google Scholar
6 Probably a reference to the delegation sent to Innocent IV on May 2, 1247. See Matthew Paris, 6.131–133. Google Scholar
7 The reference to canon law is contained in the second part af the Decretum Gratiani, C. 23, q.8, c. 22 (Friedberg I 961): ‘Tributum in ore piscis piscante Petro inuentum est, quia de exterioribus suis, que palam cunctis apparent, tributum ecclesia reddit. Non autem totum piscem dare iussus est, sed tantum staterem, qui in ore eius inuentus est, quia non ecclesia dari inperatori, non pontificalis apex, qui in ore capitis ecclesie preminet, subici regibus potest. Sed sane, ut diximus, quod in ore piscis inuenitur pro Petro et Domino dari iubetur, quia de exterioribus ecclesiae, quod constitutum antiquitus est, pro pace et quiete, qua nos tueri et defensare debent, inperatoribus persoluendum est.’ In the Decretum this is attributed to ‘Urbanus Papa’; Friedberg notes that it is not found in the extant letters of Urban II. Google Scholar
8 Matthew Paris, 6.101. Google Scholar
9 Cf. the 26th homily of Gregory the Great on the gospels: ‘Ipse ligandi atque soluendi se potestate priuat qui hanc pro suis uoluntatibus, et non pro subditorum moribus exercet.’ Decretum Gratiani, C. 11 q.3, c. 60 (Friedberg I 660). Google Scholar
10 The history of the conflicts between the emperors and popes is given with considerable detail. Various factual errors crept into this treatment, but it is obvious that the author was anxious to build support for his case that past popes did not use their difficulties with the emperors as an excuse for exactions of money and papal provision of ecclesiastical benefices. Google Scholar
11 Matthew Paris, 6.110–112. Google Scholar
12 There are two canons in the first part of the Decretum Gratiani from which this section seems to have been taken almost verbatim. (Friedberg 1.241). Dist. 63 c. 12. ‘Imperator ius habet eligendi Pontificem. Item ex Historia Ecclesiastica.’Google Scholar
‘Adrianus Papa Romam uenire Karolum regem ad defendendas res ecclesiae postulauit, Karolus uero Romam ueniens Papiam obsedit, ibique relicto exercitu in sancta resurrectione ab Adriano Papa Romae honorifice susceptus est. Post sanctam uero resurrectionem reuersus Papiam, cepit Desiderium regem; deinde Romam reuersus, constituit ibi sinodum cum Adriano Papa in patriarchio Lateranensi in ecclesia S. Saluatoris, que sinodus celebrata est a CLIII episcopis religiosis et abbatibus. Adrianus autem Papa cum uniuersa sinodo tradiderunt Karolo ius et potestatem eligendi Pontificem, et ordinandi apostolicam sedem. Dignitatem quoque patriciatus ei concesserunt. Insuper archiepiscopos et episcopos per singulas prouincias ab eo inuestituram accipere diffiniuit, et ut, nisi a rege laudetur et inuestiatur episcopus, a nemine consecretur, et quicumque contra hoc decretum esset, anathematis uinculo eum innodauit, et nisi resipisceret, bona eius publicari precepit.’
c. 23. ‘Electio Romani Pontificis ad ius pertinet inperatoris. Item Leo Papa.’
‘In sinodo congregata Romae in ecclesia S. Saluatoris. Ad exemplum B. Adriani apostolicae sedis antistitis, qui domino Karolo, uictoriosissimo regi Francorum et Longobardorum, patriciatus dignitatem, ac ordinationem apostolicae sedis et inuestituram episcoporum concessit, ego quoque Leo, seruus seruorum Dei, episcopus, cum cuncto clero ac Romano populo constituimus, confirmamus, et corroboramus, et per nostram apostolicam auctoritatem concedimus atque largimur domino Ottoni primo, regi Teutonicorum, eiusque successoribus huius regni Italiae, in perpetuum sibi facultatem eligendi successorem, atque summae sedis apostolicae Pontificem ordinandi, ac per hoc archiepiscopos seu episcopos, ut ipsi ab eo inuestituram accipiant et consecrationem, unde debent, exceptis his, quos inperator pontifici et archiepiscopis concessit; et ut nemo deinceps cuiusque dignitatis uel religionis eligendi uel patricium uel Pontificem summae sedis apostolicae, aut quemcumque episcopum ordinandi habeat facultatem absque consensu ipsius inperator (quod tamen fiat absque omni pecunia), et ut ipse sit patricius et rex. Quod si a clero et populo quis eligatur episcopus, nisi a supradicto rege laudetur, et inuestiatur, non consecretur.’
Both of these canons were forgeries which date from the first years of the investiture contest between Gregory VII and Henry IV. Karl Jordan has discussed these forgeries in two articles: ‘Der Kaisergedanke in Ravenna zur Zeit Henrichs IV,’ Deutsches Archiv 2 (1938) 85–128; ‘Ravennater Fälschungen aus den Anfängen des Investiturstreites,’ Archiv für Urkundenforschung 15 (1938) 426–48.
13 Berger, , op. cit. 271 n.Google Scholar
14 Smith, A. L., Church and State in the Middle Ages (Oxford 1913) 149–151.Google Scholar
15 Buisson, Ludwig, König Ludwig IX., der Heilige, und das Recht (Freiburg 1954) ch. 4.Google Scholar
16 Roland, E. Les Chanoines et les élections épiscopales du xi e au xiv e siècle (Aurillac 1909) 136–137.Google Scholar
17 Barraclough, Geoffrey, Papal Provisions (Oxford 1935) 11ff.Google Scholar
18 Beugnot, Arthur, Essai sur les Institutions de saint Louis (Paris 1821) 422–438.Google Scholar
19 Paul Viollet, ‘Examen critique d'un ouvrage de M. Gérin sur la Sanction de saint Louis,’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 31 (1870) 192. Google Scholar
20 My own research in this regard is confirmed by the judgement of Dr. Vaughan who says in the correspondence referred to above: ‘I know of no one who has questioned its authenticity and I see no reason to doubt its authenticity. I would be prepared to go so far as to say that I think it almost certainly authentic, though it may have been “touched up” by Matthew Paris.’ Google Scholar
21 Dictionary of National Biography 15.209.Google Scholar
22 Cambridge History of English Literature (ed. Ward, Sir A. W. and Waller, A. R., Cambridge 1932) 1.179.Google Scholar
23 See the conclusions summarized in Vaughan, op. cit. ch. VIII. Google Scholar
24 Ibid. 131–135.Google Scholar
25 Historia Anglorum 2.503.Google Scholar
26 Dom David Knowles, The Religious Orders in England (Cambridge 1957) 291. Google Scholar
27 Vaughan, , op. cit. 13–18.Google Scholar
28 Ibid. 4–7.Google Scholar
29 Berger, , op. cit. 278–297.Google Scholar
30 For documents dealing with one of these leagues, see Layettes du Trésor des Chartes (edd. Teulet, A., etc.) 2, n. 3569; Huillard-Bréholles 6.1.468–469.Google Scholar
31 Wallon, H., Saint Louis et son temps (Paris 1875) I 244–245.Google Scholar
32 Teulet, 5, n. 324, May 17, 1227. Google Scholar
33 Les Registres de Grégoire IX (ed. Lucien Auvray) n. 155, November 13, 1227.Google Scholar
34 Les Registres d'Innocent IV (ed. Élie Berger) n. 2053, July 28 - August 9, 1246.Google Scholar
35 Ibid . n. 6067, November 4, 1252.Google Scholar
36 Les Registres de Clément IV (ed. Édouard Jordan) n. 1249, September 14, 1267.Google Scholar
37 H.-François de Laborde, ‘Instructions d'un ambassadeur envoyé par saint Louis à Alexandre IV à l'occasion du Traité de Paris (1258),’ Bibliothèque de l'École des Chartes 49 (1888) 633–634.Google Scholar
