A letter from Hugh bishop of Die, archbishop of Lyon ()

Translated letter:

Hugh, servant of the holy church of Lyons to his beloved sister in Christ, Matilda, the richest grace of divine consolation. Compelled by how many letters of the holy Roman church and of blessed Anselm [of Lucca] of most revered memory, and your legations as well as letters, I came to Rome, and how long I remained in Italy against the purpose of my office, your prudence does not need to be taught. The election of the abbot of Cassino, before I came to Rome, you have heard about sufficiently. I and certain of my brothers, sons of the holy Roman church, loving the glory of men more than of God, gave our assent for weakness of time. However, after delaying somewhat in the duchy of Rome, when we came to Montecassino to which he had preceded us, we learned more copiously than necessary from his intimate talks with us, when he did not blush to boast of his most unspeakable acts into the ears of bishops and cardinals, how intolerably we had offended God by his election. Who would ever have believed, had he not heard it from his mouth, that he gave his faith to king Henry, that he would faithfully help him to obtain the crown of the Roman empire? who would have accepted the accusation against such a man except that he, ascribing it almost to the height of his glory, told us that said king would never have come to Rome to invade the lands of St. Peter except by his counsel and persuasions? Would he not seem delerious who babbled that that elect of the Romans, after being absolved by blessed pope Gregory, was excommunicate, if he had not presumed to preach in our audience that Atto, cardinal elect of Milano, publicly excommunicated by said pope with that abbot subscribing, was not only blessed, but that he himself prayed for a future glory no different from his? To all this, we call as witness our most beloved brothers, cardinals H and B, who we think are with you, who either heard themselves from his mouth or heard it reported by good men they can believe without question. How many times he disapproved the decrees of his lord pope Gregory and of other holy fathers, not only openly by word, but also afterwards destroyed by clear actions; in how many and which places he publicly refuted his election, asserting that it was not accomplished according to God but hastily, that he never acquiesced or affirmed that he would acquiesce under terrible testimony/pressure; and which persons, if the election were rescinded, he said would be suitable for the church to elect as Roman pontiff, among them, as he wrote you at the advice of certain people, Hermann of Metz. Since these things are in great part known to you, and exceed the mode of letter writing, we leave them out. Now, truly, when we seemed to breathe at length after such foolishly assumed labor with the election rescinded and given back to the church and, supported by divine grace and your counsel and aid we hoped to act freely in the next one, he called a council in Capua, as apostolic vicar of those parts, to elect the Roman pontiff. To which I and the abbot of Marseille and the archbishop of Aachen who were staying at Salerno with the bishop of Ostia and prince of Salerno, came, obeying the invitation from Conciano on the part of the vicar of Rome and the Roman church to bind the Roman pontiff by common counsel. The duke also came, youthfully enticed by certain deceptions of prince Jordan [of Capua]. When we disposed to treat the proposed matter, the abbot began to incite his partisan bishops and the prince to compel him, with certain soft and denying gestures. His craftiness however was revealed when the foresaid compelled him as if reluctant to his reinstatement; we previously named with the bishop of Ostia and the monk Witmund and certain others, took counsel to see how we might counter his cunning. When he was ready, therefore, to resume the insignia of the pontificate and twist back again to the election refused so many times, by the counsel of the foresaid, we rejected such levity and fickleness in the man and said in the hearing of all that we would never assent unless there was first a canonical examination of certain things against his reputation and the dignity of the office, which were made known to us after his election. He took this indignantly and publicly affirmed that he would never submit to examination nor would he ever accept election. So, having given us licence once again to elect whom we would, shaking his arms, he began to withdraw, at which point Witmund, on the advice of the bishop of Ostia, publicly declared that a person under accusation should not be elected to the Roman pontificate nor ordained/invested when it was clear that he would undoubtedly be accused since indeed he had sustained excommunication from the lord Pope Gregory for a whole continuous year, without canonical penance moreover. So with the assembly dissolved and since night was approaching, we left and the duke remained with him, keeping also the bishop of Ostia and other Roman bishops and cardinals. When the duke then insisted that a certain Alfano be consecrated bishop of Salerno but Ostia objected, the abbot did not dare do the duke’s will, since Alfano had been convicted of manifest ambition, so the duke left them, gravely indignant. When the abbot was deprived of his [the duke’s] grace, since he despaired of aspiring to the Roman pontificate without him, in deepest night while all were asleep he sent a legation to the duke; the duke came back to the abbot and the abbot made an agreement with the duke that he would become pope and the duke obtained what he wanted from the abbot, that Alfano was consecrated on the next day, Palm Sunday, by order of the abbot with all concurring. That same day, after dinner when the abbot, duke, and prince arose from their midday sleep, with the sun declining but wine increasing — alas the sorrow! — the abbot as reward for his infamous consecration, supported by the authority of the duke, imposed the cope on himself, without Ostia or us knowing or being consulted. When these things were accomplished, the bishop of Ostia who had concurred with us in all things, as he saw that the abbot intended to go to Rome to be consecrated through the power of the prince Jordan, fearing perhaps that he would be deprived of his position, if the consecration of the first hand were carried out by another, converted in time of war. Forgetting the purpose and the promise we had made, shameful to say, he made peace with the abbot and gave reverence to him in all things as pope. But how or in what way he intends to go to Rome we judge it useless to write, since the bearer of the presents and any pilgrim who went through Capua after they left us saw what was being prepared, or learned it from others, and can tell you more fully.

Original letter:

Hugo sanctae Lugdunensis aecclesiae servus, dilectissimae in Christo sorori Mathildi divinae consolationis uberrimam gratiam. Quot et quantis sanctae Romanae ecclesiae litteris, et reverentissimae memoriae beati Anselmi, et vestris tam legationibus quam et litteris coactus, Romam venerim, quantoque tempore in partibus Italiae contra officii mei propositum moratus sim, prudentia vestra doceri non indiget. Electionem vero Cassinensis abbatis antequam ego Romam venerim factam ,sufficienter audistis, cui tam ego quam et ceteri fratres mei sanctae Romanae ecclesiae filii, diligentes magis gloriam hominum quam Dei, pro temporis infirmitate assensum praebuimus. Postquam autem ad montem Cassinum, quo ipse iam praecesserat, Romae aliquamdiu morati, ipsius ducatu pervenimus, ex eiusdem familiaribus nobiscum colloquiis, dum videlicet nefandissimos actus suos in auribus episcoporum et cardinalium iactanter recitare non erubesceret, copiosius necessario deprehendimus, quam intolerabiliter Deum in ipsius electione offenderimus. Quis enim, nisi ex ipsius ore audisset, umquam crederet, Heinrico dicto regi fidem eum dedisse, ut de optinenda Romani imperii corona fideliter eum adiuvaret? Aut cuius accusatio contra talem virum reciperetur, nisi ipse quasi ad cumulum gloriae suae adscribendo nobis narrasset, praedictum regem ad invadendas terras beati Petri nunquam, nisi suo consilio et persuasione animaretur, Romam transisse? Numquid non delirans videretur, si quis Romanum electum post absolutionem a beatissimo papa Gregorio susceptam, excommunicatum garriret; nisi ipse Attonem cardinalem Mediolanensem electum a praedicto papa eodem abbate subscribente publice excommunicatum, et sine penitentia defunctum, non solum beatum in communi nostra audientia praedicare praesumeret, verum etiam se ipsum non in alia, nisi in qua ille est, gloria futurum oraret? In quibus omnibus dilectissimos fratres nostros He. et B. cardinales, quos vobiscum esse putamus, testes advocamus, qui vel ipsi de eius ore audierunt, vel bonis viris, quibus indubitanter credunt, referentibus, se audisse dixerunt. Quotiens decreta domini sui papae Gregorii aliorumque sanctorum patrum non solum verbo aperte inprobaverit, verum etiam manifestis operibus postea destruxerit, in quot et quibus locis electionem suam non secundum Deum, sed tumultuarie factam asseverans, publice refutaverit, et numquam se adquievisse, vel in perpetuum adquieturum, sub terribili attestatione affirmaverit; quasve personas electionem reddendo aecclesiae idoneas eligi in Romanum pontificem dixerit, inter quas quendam vobis ex nomine, Mettensem scilicet Herimannum quorumdam consilio scripsit, quoniam vobis magna ex parte manifesta sunt, et epistolarem modum scripta excederent, ex ordine scribere omittimus. Nunc vero, cum iam tandem post tantum laborem inaniter insumptum respirare videbamur, et electionem totiens refutatam, et aecclesiae redditam, divina gratia, et vestro fulti consilio et auxilio, in proximo libere facere sperabamus, sub occasione eligendi Romanum pontificem concilium in Capua sicut illarum partium apostolicus vicarius congregavit. Ad quod ego et abbas Massiliensis atque archiepiscopus Aquensis apud Salernum commorantes, ab episcopo Ostiensi et principe Salernitano et Cenciano Romano ex parte vicarii et Romanae aecclesiae invitati, ut communi consilio Romanum pontificem eligeremus, veniendo obedivimus. Dux etiam quibusdam circumventionibus a Iordano principe iuveniliter illectus, illus venit. Cum ergo de proposito negocio tractare disponeremus, abbas quibusdam mollibus et gestuosis repulsionibus fautores suos episcopos et principem ad compellendum se provocare coepit. Comperta autem versutia sua, cum praedicti ad restitutionem sui quasi invitum eum compellerent, nos praenominati cum Ostiensi episcopo et Witmundo monacho et quibusdam aliis consilium habuimus, qualiter astutiae illius contrairemus. Postquam ergo ipse iam paratus erat insignia pontificatus resumere, et electionem etiam in ipso conventu multoties refutatam iterum in se retorquere, praedictorum consilio, nos tantam hominis levitatem et propositi sui mutabilitatem inprobantes, in audientia omnium nos nequaquam assensum praebituros diximus; nisi de quibusdam contra famam suam et tanti ordinis dignitatem, quae post electionem suam nobis de eo innotuerant, primum canonice examinatio fieret. Quod ipse indigne ferens, neque ad examinationem venturum, neque electionem umquam suscepturum se, publice affirmavit. Sicque data nobis iterum licentia ab eo quem vellemus eligere, excutiens brachia sua, cepit a nobis recedere, cum Witmundus ex consilio Ostiensis episcopi publice exclamavit, infamem personam non debere in Romanum pontificem eligi vel ordinari, cum constaret eum indubitanter infamiam incurrisse, quoniam quidem exommunicationem domni pape Gregorii per annum integrum et continuum et eo plus sine canonica penitentia sustinuisset. Taliter itaque dissoluto conventu, et quia nox inminebat, nobis recedentibus remansit dux cum eo, retento secum Ostiensi cum ceteris Romanis episcopis et cardinalibus. Ubi cum diu rogando dux institisset, ut quendam Alfanum in Salernitanum episcopum consecraret, sed Ostiensi contradicente abbas voluntatem ducis inplere non auderet, quoniam de manifestissima ambitione Alfanus convictus fuerat, dux graviter indignatus recessit ab eis. Abbas igitur gratia destitutus, quoniam sine eo ad Romanum pontificatum aspirare desperabat, profunda iam nocte cunctis dormientibus legationem ad ducem misit, sicque duce ad abbatem redeunte, et abbas gratiam apud ducem ut papa fieret, et dux quod querebat optinuit apud abbatem, ut Alfanus consecraretur sequenti die, videlicet dominica in palmis, ex praecepto abbatis id se cunctis facere respondentibus. Eadem itaque die cum post prandium abbas, dux et princeps, uterque a somno meridiano surrexissent, sole declinante ad inferiora, set vino optinente superiora, heu! proh dolor! abbas pro mercede nefandissimae consecrationis, fultus auctoritate ducis, pluvialem sibi ipse imposuit, Ostiensi et nobis inconsultis, et prorsus ignorantibus. His ita gestis, cum Ostiensis episcopus nobiscum bene per omnia cucurrisset, ut vidit quod abbas per potentiam principis Iordani ad consecrandum se Romam ire intendebat, timens forte ne sui dignitate privaretur, si ab alio prima manus consecratio ei imponeretur, conversus est in die belli; et inmemor factus propositi et factae nobis sponsionis, quod dicere pudet, cum abbate pacem faciens, reverentiam ei per omnia sicut pape persolvit. Qualiter autem vel quomodo Romam ire disponat, quoniam praesentium lator et peregrini, quidquid postquam a nobis recesserunt per Capuam transeuntes de huiusmodi apparatu fieri viderunt, vel aliis referentibus didicerunt, plenius vobis referre poterunt, inutile iudicavimus scribere.

Historical context:

Hugh tells Matilda about the election of abbot Desiderius of Montecassino, as pope (Victor III) and his distressing moves to support the emperor, to ignore the previous pope’s position on excommunicated prelates, and to buy his office with a political favor to the duke of Apulia and Calabria. Hugh does not call it simony, but as he describes it he leaves no doubt. Hugh opposed Victor III before and after his election and was eventually excommunicated by him. See Uta-Renate Blumenthal, The Investiture Controversy (Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania, 1988), 163.

Printed source:

HGF 14, ep.11, p.788-89, and MGH SS8, Hugonis Chronicon, Liber II, 462-63.