to monks. “He greatly loved the clergy: he restored the priests and the clergy to their original places,” says the Liber Pontificalis about his successor Adeodatus I. Adeodatus was an old man – and, unusually, a priest
– by the time of his election. He had worked his way steadily up the clerical ladder in Rome, so it is hardly surprising he should then promote his colleagues over the recently arrived monks. Not only that, he left each of the priests a year’s salary in his will, as did his successor, Boniface V. Clearly the antimonastic party was in the ascendant.
It did not last. In one of those changes of fashion which frequently mark the preferences of papal electors, Boniface V’s successor, Honorius I, was monastically inclined. He employed monks rather than the priests of the city and also turned his home into a monastery. Honorius was also confirmed in o ffi ce remark- ably quickly, presumably because the imperial exarch was in the city at the time of the election, but Severinus, who came next, had to wait a particularly long time because the emperor wanted him to agree to a doctrine which the pope regarded as heretical. There was a stando ff which lasted from October 638 to August 640, when Severinus was finally consecrated. But there may have been more to it than that. Severinus bluntly refused to pay the wages of the imperial army which was quartered in Rome. The exarch’s patience finally snapped. He took the money by force, so the Liber Pontificalis reports, and sent it o ff to the emperor. As a result of this quarrel over papal funds, Severinus formally governed Rome for very little more than two months.
The confl between pope and emperor continued over the next several pontifi even though one of those elected (John IV, in succession to Severinus) was the son of the legal adviser to the exarch himself, which might have suggested that he would be
32 The Conclave
more favorably inclined toward the religious policies of the emperor. John IV’s own successor, Theodore I, was a Greek, and possibly not even a member of the Roman clergy but the son of a patriarch of Jerusalem and, most probably, an exile from the East precisely on account of the religious policy of the emperor. If that is so, it demonstrates a remarkable determination on the part of those electing him to have no truck with the emperor’s heretical ideas.
Martin I, though from a noble Tuscan family, was of the same mind as Theodore. He had been papal ambassador to Constantinople, which had clearly not left him with a favorable impression. After his rather delayed election he had himself con- secrated pope without bothering to wait for confirmation from either the exarch or the emperor. Martin was such a fervent adver- sary of the imperial heresy that the emperor sent the exarch to arrest him. This backfired. The exarch was won over by Martin and proclaimed himself emperor – though he did not survive long. When an imperial representative again came to arrest the pope, he arrived with a large army. Martin was taken o ff to Constantinople, humiliated, condemned as a traitor, and sen- tenced to death. This was commuted to lifelong banishment, dur- ing which he died; the Romans regarded him as a martyr, the last pope to be so styled.
While Martin was still alive, though condemned, the Romans elected Eugene to replace him. As Martin had not resigned his o ffi ce he was deeply distressed, particularly, perhaps, because it seemed that the new, but aged, pope might do a deal with the emperor. He might well have done so, but the clergy of Rome, who may have elected him because they hoped he would be able to improve relations with Constantinople, prevented him taking the only step which would placate the emperor: adopting his – to the Romans heretical – views on the nature of Christ. The emperor was furious and threatened Eugene with the same fate that had befallen Martin, but Eugene died before it could be carried out.
The End of Empire