Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T00:18:35.048Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Roman Church During the Laurentian Schism: Priests and Senators

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 July 2009

P. A. B. Llewellyn
P. A. B. Llewellyn
Affiliation:
Mr. Llewellyn is professor of history inthe University College of North Wales, Bangor, Wales.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The interest of the Laurentian schism, which broke out on the death of Pope Anastasius II in November 498, lies not in any doctrinal content but rather in the tensions with Rome that it reveals and the contribution it made to papal ideology and historiography by the propaganda it stimulated. The papal break with Constantinople in 483, the Acaian schism, has been advanced as an external factor in the schism because it caused many of the senatorial nobility of German-ruled Italy to look back with nostalgia toward the Empire and to oppose papal stands on doctrine. Furthermore, senatorial discontent did not die down during the pontificates of the masterful and contentious Gelasius (492–496) or the weaker Anastasius 11(496–498) who, the caput senatus Festus assured the Emperor, would be brought to sign the Henotikon. Attention has been directed towards the internal roots of the schism, among them the late-developing interest of senators in church affairs, specifically through their claims to influence in papal elections and over church revenues, drawn for the most part from endowments from their own class and families, just as a century earlier their predecessors had sought to retain control over the revenues of the pagan cults. These claims had been put forward on the death of Pope Simplicius in 483 at a meeting of the senate with a group of bishops under the presidency of the praetorian prefect Basilius but they had been rejected once by Gelasius, an opponent of several senatorial traditions and a reorganizer of the church's property administration, and again by Symmachus in March 502.1

Type
Research Article
Information
Church History , Volume 45 , Issue 4 , December 1976 , pp. 417 - 427
Copyright
Copyright © American Society of Church History 1976

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. On these various aspects of the Laurentian schism, see Cessi, R., “Lo Scisma Laurenziano e le origini della dottrina politica della Chiesa di Roma.” Arehivio della Reale Deputazione Romona di Storia Patria 42 (1919)Google Scholar; Picotti, G. B., “I sinodi romani nello scisma laurenziano,” Studi storici in onore di G. Volpe, vol. 2 (1958)Google Scholar; Pietri, c.. ‘Le Sénat. le peuple chrétien et les partis du Cirque à Rome sous le pape Symmaque’. Mélanges d'Archéologie et d'Histoire 78 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar The Roman Senate of the late 5th century has been studied by Wes, M. A.. Das Ende des Kaistertums im Westen des römischen Reichs (‘s-Gravenhage: Staatsdruckerien, 1967),Google Scholar on which see the review by Brown, P.. no in Religion and Society in the Age of St. Augustine (London: Faber and Faber 1972), pp. 227–234Google Scholar and by chastagnol, a., Le Sénat romain sous le règne d'Odoacre, (Antiquitas, 3rd ser., fasc. 3, Bonn: Habelt, 1966).Google Scholar The pressures on an increasingly secluded aristocracy to find areas of patronage and funds were emphasized by the holding of high and expensive dignities: the Decii, the Laurentian leaders in 501–502, had recently held a series of these: Decius Maximus Basilius, who as praetorian prefect and agens vices regis Odoacris at the meeting of March 483, was cos. 480; two brothers were coss. 484 and 486; his sons Theodorus and Importunus were coss. 505 and 509, and two other sons, coss. 493 and 501 (Chastagnol, p. 83).

2. A general summary of the schism's propaganda is given by Townsend, W. T., “The Socalled Symmachian Forgeries,” Journal of Religion 13 (1933): 165–174.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

3. Cononian: post annos vere IIII zelo ducti aligui ex clero et aliqui ex Senatu incriminant Symmachum; Felician, : Post annos vero IIII zelo et dolo ducti aliqui ex Senatu incriminant Symmachum (Duchesne, L., Le Liber Pontificalis (henceforth Lp), 2nd ed., Paris, 1955, vol. 1, p. 96).Google Scholar On the two recessions, Vielliard, R., “Les titres romains et les deux editions du Liber Pontificalis,” Rivista di archeologia cristiana 5 (1928): 89–103.Google Scholar

4. Tuno presbyteri et diaconi necnon reliqui clericorum quos secum deduxerat adeunt regem et sine sua conscientia Symmachum fugisse testantur; Later, Symmachus accusatur etiam ab universo clero Romano quod contra decretum a suis decessoribus observatum ecclesiastica dilapidasse praedia. … (Lp 1: 44–46).

5. As by Theodorus Lector, writing in Constantionple about 530 (cited by Duchesne, , LP 1: 263, n. 3)Google Scholar

6. Llewellyn, Peter, “Le indicazioni numeriche del Liber Pontificalis relativamente alle ordinazioni del V secolo,” Rivista di Storia della Chiesa in Italia 29, 2 (07–12, 1975): 439–443.Google Scholar In summary, the ordination rate, for both priests and deacons, remains steady through the fifth century, untill the last quarter of the century, when the rate for priests rises sharply and that for deacons declines, suggesting a holding on to their more influential rank by the deacons. Further, Symmachus’ ordination rates for priests is far higher than the fifth century norms which, with other evidence, suggests the necessity of replacement after considerable (perhaps 50 per cent) abstention or suspension; Symmachus' successor, Hormisdas, shows a lower than normal rate, suggesting reinstatement of dissenting priests. On the Symmachan supporters, see Llewellyn, Peter, “The Roman Clergy during the Laurentian Schism (498–506): A Preliminary Analysis,” Ancient Society 8 (1977) (forthcoming).Google Scholar

7. de Gaiffier, B., “Un prologe hagiographique hostile au Décret de Gélase?” Analecta Bollandiana 82 (1964): 341–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

8. Mombritius, B., Sanctuarium seu Vitae Sanctorum (2nd ed., Paris: A.Fontemoing, 1910) 2: 390–391, 353–354.Google Scholar I have kept to the more usual Pudentiana in place of the occasional Potentians, and have preferred t. Pudentis to the occasional t. Pudentianee.

9. Dufoureq, A., Etudes sur les Gesta Martyrum romains, (Paris: A. Fontmoing, 1904–1910), 1: 127ff.Google Scholar; LP 1: 132.Google Scholar nn. 2 and 4.

10. T. Pudentis may also have been known, briefly and colloquially, as Pastoris, T.: cf. Gesta Stephani (Mombritius, ed. cit. 2: 495–500),Google Scholar and Passio Donati (ibid., 1: 234–235); the latter is associated with the Esquiline legends in that Donatus was a pupil of Pimenius.

11. Constitutum Sylvestri, in Mansi, J. D., Sacroroum Conciliorum Nova et Ampissima Collectio 2, (Florence, 1759), p. 622.Google Scholar The Phrase Concludente autem mense decimo is difficult, for late February (ten months from the Victorine Easter) and late October, do not provide significant dates: it is possible that, as the reckoning is Alexandrine, the Alexandrine year-beginning of August 29, is understood, bringing us to Novatus’ feast-day.

12. The control and division of diocesan revenues had become an issue in the late fifth centurv: see Jones, A. H. M., “Church Finance in the Fifth and Sixth Centuries,” Journal of Theological Studies 11 (1960): 84–94.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

13. Cf. Peter, . builder of Sabina, S.. Presbuyer urbis (LP 1: 236,Google Scholar n. 17); the epitaph of Andreas of Formiae (CIL. 10: 6218); Gesta de accusatione Polychronii, Petrus, Archidamius and Demetrius, Presbuteri urbis Romae. (and also, Leo and Lollianus, diaconi, cives Romani) (constant, P.. Epistulae Romanorum Pontificum, Vol. 1 (Paris: L.D. Delatour and A. U. Coustelien, 1731), append. pp. 117–124.Google Scholar By 530 sanctae Romance ecclesiae appears to be normal for priests (LP 1: 285, n. 1).

14. The growing hold of the deacons on the administration has been suggested above, n. 6. St. Jerome, a hundred years earlier, had pointed to deacons' ambitions, Ep. 146 Migne, J.-P., Patrologiae Cursus Completus, Series Latina (Paris, 1855) 22Google Scholar: Cols. 1194–1195. A Svmmachan text, the Constitutum Sylvestri, does seem to play down the priests, in its description of them standing in svnod with the deacons, behind the sitting pope and bishops. This is contrary to recorded Roman usage and to Jerome's own description, ceterum etiam in ecclesia Romae, presbyteri sedent, et stant diaconi (Ep. 146).

15. For example, the activities of the priest Leopardus, probably of t. Pudentis, early in the fifth century: Silvagni, Angelo, Inscriptiones Christianae Urbis Romae, Nova Series (Rome: Instituto Pontifico di archeologia cristiana, 1922), n. 974,Google Scholar and the sale of burial spaces by an anonymous priest of t. Praxedis (Diehl, Ernst, Inscriptiones Latinae Christianae Veteres (Berlin: Wiedmann, 1925), col. 3766A).Google Scholar

16. LP 1: 225, 235, 244–245, 249, 252, 258. Reekmans, L., “L'implantation monumentale chrétienne dans la zone suburbaine de Rome du IVe au IXe siècle,” Rivista di archeologia cristiana 44 (1968): 173–207.Google Scholar

17. Hoc tempore fuit tertium schisma, Eulalio antipapa per Honorium Caesarem eiecto, quod duravit annis duobus. (Migne, , PL 51, 592)Google Scholar Cf. also Bovini, Giuseppe, “Sant'Ippolito della via Tiburtina,” Rivista di archeologia christiana 19 (1942): 35–85,Google Scholar and esp. p. 45, for Pope Damasus' work on the site of Hippolytus' cemetery, in the context of reconciliation after schism.

18. Delehaye, Hippolyte, “Recherches sur le légendier romain: Le Gesta Polychronii” Anlecta Bollandiana 51 (1933): 40–42 and p. 72Google Scholar for the post-Prudentian date. By the late fifth century Roman memories of the historical Hippolytus had so blurred that Gelasius thought his theological works to be by a bishop of Bostra.

19. de Rossi, Giovanni Batista, Bulletino di archeologia cristiana (1867): 57.Google Scholar

20. On the connection between Hippolytus and Novatian, Hanssens, J.-M., “Hippolyte de Rome fut-il Novatianiste?” Archivum Historiae Pontificiae 3 (1965): 7–29.Google Scholar Identification of the tomb was made by Mohlberg, L. C., reported by Van den Eynde, D., “L 'inscription sópulehrale de Novatien,” Revue d'histoire ecclésiastique 33 (1937): 792–794.Google Scholar Other independent groups in Rome were: that of the via Prenestina cemetery, perhaps a family group from Cyprus, in the early 5th century: Ferrua, Antonio, “L'ipogeo cristiana sulla via Prenestina,” Rendiconti della Pontificia Accademia romana di Archeologia 38 (1965/1966): 157–171Google Scholar; the Tertullianist group of the lady Octavia, which held the church of SS. Processus and Martinlanus on the via Aurelia; and the Pelagians. See also P. Brown, “Pelagus and His Supporters: Aims and Environment”, op. cit., pp. 183–207. Hippolytus' association with Novatian was stressed by Damasus, whose inscription in Hippolytus' honour begins: Hippolytus fertur, premerunt cum iussa turanni, presbyteris acisma semper manisse Novati: (Rossi, de, Inscriptiones christianae, 2: 82)Google Scholar

21. It is tempting to identify as the archpriest and leader of the schism the Laurence to whom Gelasius addressed a letter, of which only a fragment remains: ‘Gelasius Laurentio: Consideratio ecclesiatioae utilitatis hoo postulat, ex dispositions servandum testatoris arbitrium’ (Thiel, , Epistolae Romanorum Pontificum, 1: 500).Google Scholar The Laurentian-Hippolytan cycle could have provided a second reminder of the presbyterium and its leadership in time of crisis: the Felician version of LP records, following the execution of Xystns II, with his deacons, et presbyteri praefuerunt a consulatu Maximo et Gravione II usque Tusco et Basso cousolatu, which was taken into the final version (LP 1: 68, 155Google Scholar). But it is the deacons' martyrdoms which account for their absence; Cyprian, writing of the events following Fabian's death, included them in the direction of the Roman Church: presbyteris et diaconibus Romas cosistentibus (Delehaye, op. cit., p. 48).

22. Cecchelli, Carlo, Monumenti cristiano-eretici di Roma, (Rome, 1944), pp. 226–227.Google Scholar Another example of a legend attached to a titulus and couched in language suitable to an audience of specialized interest, is the Passio SS. Alexandri, Eventii et Theoduli (Mombritius, , ed. cit., 1: 44–49)Google Scholar which is concerned with the cult of St. Peter's Chains at the t. Eudociae (or t. Apostolorum) but also reveals an interest in the affairs of the nearby urban prefecture.

23. The Gesta Callisti represent pope Callistus as based in Trastevere (Symmachus' own base during the schism and the area of settlement, around S. Crysogono, of the North African refugees, his supporters: Llewellyn, forthcoming article, cit. above, n. 6), and as being killed by mob action and not an official order; this may have been an echo of mob violence in 501–502 (but as Pietri, art. cit., notes, Symmachus' passage from the Vatican to the Palatium Sessorianum, right across the city, for the synod of October 501, may have been intended as a provocation to his opponents; his route would have taken him very close to our Esquiline tituli. Gelasius, in his Adversus Andromachum, had already accused the Esquiline Senators of being able to mobilize the slum population of the Subura: viles trivialesque personas, abiectos et infimos.) The Gesta may well have been compiled, or edited, from a desire to emphasise Callistus' martyrdom, and match that of his rival Hippolytus (Dufoureq, , op. cit., 1: 115–116).Google Scholar Others of the Roman Gesta, especially the G. Eusebii and the G. Felicis Papae, both concerned with pope Liberius, treat of schism, probably against a late fifth century background.

24. Zeiller, Jacque, “Les églises ariennes de Rome à l'époque de la domination gothique,” Mélanges d'archéologie et d'histoire 24 (1904): 17ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar Also on the Esquiline was the basilica of Junius Bassus, given by Fl. Theodobins (Valila) to the Roman Church and consecrated by Simplicius in honour of St. Andrew; it probably acquired its later name cata barbara patricia from the daughter of Venantius, who had a palace nearby. Cf. also the repairs to the vicus Patricii near t. Pudentis undertaken by Rufius Valerius Messala, urban prefect late in the fifth century and probably a relation of the Laurentian leader Festus (CIL 4: 1775Google Scholar; Chastagnol, op. cit., pp. 80–81).

25. On the late fifth century celebration of the Lupercalia, see Holleman, A. W. J., Pope Gelasius I and the Lupercalia, (Amsterdam: Hakkert 1974),Google Scholar and Green, W. M., “The Lupercalia in the fifth century,” Classical Philology 26 (1931): 60–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

26. Delehaye, H., Etude sur le légendier romain: Les Saints de Novembre et Decembre (Subsidia Hagiographica 23, Brussels: Soeiété des Boilandistes, 1936), pp. 124–143.Google Scholar Dufourcq, op. cit., 1: 123 ff., suggests that Faustus, to whom Dafrosa was committed on her arrest and who attempted to win her back to paganism but was converted by her and fell dead at the Emperor Julian's feet, may be a reference to the senator Faustus, Symmachus' supporter—a Laurentian reference, initially hostile but allowing his final redemption. It is also worth noting that Anastasius II, son of the priest Peter, came from the caput Tauri, which may explain Festus' hopes of his signing the Henotikon (LP 1: 258)Google Scholar.

27. Besides the three priests, there are: bishops of Foronovo in 487, of Aquino in 499 to 502, of Salerno in 535 and 539, of Gabii in 465: to these might be added Austerius of Venosa in 493. Justinus is also a name from the Laurentian-Hippolytan cycle: a Justinus helped Hippolytus to bury the archdeacon (Delehaye, , art. cit., p. 43)Google Scholar and I can find no other Roman cleric of the name in the fifth and sixth centuries. T. Pudentis seems to have had a tradition of family associations in its clergy; besides the early fifth century priest Leopardus, we have a late fourth century Leopardus, Lector Pudentis, in an epitaph; a Hilarus, Lector Pudentis, who died in 528, may well have been related to the priest Hilarus of that title in 536–537. This occurs also in other tituli; pope Agapetus followed his father the priest Gordianus as a cleric of t. Pammachii.

28. Passio SS. Rufinae et Secundae (Mombritius, ed. cit. 2: 444–445)Google Scholar: Passio SS. Marii, Marthae et socc. (Ibid., 2: 241–244): the former were executed at the tenth mile of the via Cornelia, on the estate Buxus (modern Boccea), and the latter at the thirteenth mile. Boccea was the centre for the diocese of Silva Candida (or of Rufina and Secunda); at the synod of 499 a bishop signs himself ‘Adeodatus lorensis’ and reappears in 501 as episcopus Silvae Candidae.

29. Chastagnol, op. cit., p. 82. Cf. Tozzi, T., ‘II tesoro di Proiecta’, Rivista di archeologia cristiana 9 (1932): 279–314,Google Scholar on jewelry and a casket commemorating the marriage of the Proiecta for whom Pope Damasus wrote an epitaph in 383, and originally in S. Martino ai Monti (t. Equitii), to L. Turcius Secundus Asterius. Several inscriptions mentioning Proiecti have come from this church. The name (with its derivative Proiectitius) has a pattern of clerical uses similar to that of Asterius; the priest Proiectitius of 487–502: bishop Proiectitius of Foronovo in 499–503, and the bishop of Nepi in 487. Proiectus was also the name of the father of John-Mercurius (pope John II), who came from the similarly aristocratic Celian and was priest of t. Clementis, on the Esquiline, the first priest to reach the papacy since 432. The patterns raise the question of client-patron relationships between senators and clergy, extending to rural dioceses near Rome; who, for instance, were the bishops who sat with the senate in 483! On possible priestly withdrawals from Symmachus, (above, n. 6), it is interesting that, of the seventeen known titles of the thirty-seven priests (about half the full complement) at the synod of 502, none came from the titles of second (civil) region, the Celian, and none from t. Praxedis, Pudentis, Vestinae, and Eusebii, of the third and fourth regions, roughly Esquiline and Viminal.

30. Llewellyn, , “Roman Clergy” (forthcoming, n. 6).Google Scholar

31. In the 460s the Emperor Anthemius, under the influence of Philotheus, had attempted to Introduce a Macedonianist community, perhaps with a bishop, Into Rome; pope Hilarus compelled him to swear over St. Peter's shrine to desist. The revival in some late fifth century papal correspondence of the fourth century style episcopus sanctae catholicae ecclesiae was probably in reaction to the existence of other communities, especially the Arian.

32. Vielliard, R., Les origines du titre de saint-Martin aux Monts à Rome, (Studi di antichitd cristiana 4, Rome: (Istituto Pontifico Di Archeologia Christiana, 1931), pp. 56–58).Google Scholar In the second mention in the Vita Sylvestri, which does not derive from the LP arche type and is therefore probably a production of the early sixth century, the titulus is said to have been founded in the Baths of Trajan; it is these baths which are the scene of the synod in the Constitutum Sylvestri, another link in the Sylvestran nature of Symmachus' propaganda.