INNOCENT II, POPE

Pontificate: Feb. 14, 1130 to Sept. 24, 1143. Born Gregory Parareschi, Rome. As cardinal deacon of Sant'Angelo, he was one of three, including Cardinal Lambert, bishop of Ostia, who preceded him as Pope Honorius II, who negotiated the Concordat of worms in 1122, which brought an end to the Investiture Controversy. However, Worms was not without controversy itself. At the papal election of 1124, the papal chancellor, Cardinal Aimeric, played a leading role in securing the election of Cardinal Lambert as honorius ii. When Honorius died in 1130, he moved quickly, along with his frangi pani supporters in Rome, to ensure the election of Cardinal Gregory. In doing so, he ignored the commission that had been established after the election of 1124 to prevent internal divisions from breaking out. A slight minority of the cardinals, which included six of the seven cardinal bishops, chose Gregory, while a small majority favored Cardinal Peter Pierleone, member of a distinguished Roman family and a strong supporter of the papal reform movement, as anacletus ii. Since numerical majority was not a determining factor in medieval electoral decisions, but had to be balanced by such considerations as the weightiness and merit of each side, the decision as to which candidate was pope remained unclear in the minds of many.

Behind this disputed election lay important differences within the reform party. Disappointment over the compromises made at Worms to secure an agreement was important, but so, too, was the reversal of the papal alliance

with the normans. Perhaps even more important was the worry shared by both sides as to the future security of the patrimony of St. Peter, viewed as the guarantee of papal liberty. The party of Aimeric should not, therefore, be regarded as villains, nor should the party of Peter be labeled as extremists. How to protect the settlement reached at Worms was a divisive question, but it was more a strategic one than a matter of principle. As one might suspect, support for Peter was chiefly in Italy, while Innocent received the support of northern European reformers such as norbert of xanten, suger of st. denis, peter of cluny, and bernard of clairvaux. Since Archbishop Walter of Ravenna and the Pisans cast in their lot on his side, he clearly had the support of the emperor. Anacletus turned to the Normans in the person of Roger II, count of Sicily and duke of Apulia, whose quest for a royal title he recognized. This act, sometimes viewed as a crass bid for support, conferred legitimacy on his major supporter, raising him to the level of those secular rulers who embraced Innocent II. Bernard of Clairvaux was only one voice, although certainly among the most influential, among those who criticized the alliance with Roger II, the tyrant king, and used his crimes to attack Anacletus.

This support was not enough. Deserted by the Frangipani and facing the opposition of the Romans, Innocent had to flee Rome and seek refuge in Pisa. He was not crowned until 1133, when the emperor, Lothar, led Innocent back to Rome, but he was unable to keep him there. Lothar returned in 1136, but was unable to restore Innocent. In fact, he and Innocent quarreled, as he began to reassert imperial claims in northern Italy. The fragility of the papal position was revealed when Anacletus II died on Jan. 25, 1138 and Roger II recognized his successor, Victor IV. Although Victor soon made peace with Innocent, Roger II remained in the field. When Innocent led an army, composed in part of disaffected Normans, againt him, he captured the pope, and in a scene reminiscent of Pope Leo IX and Robert Guiscard, negotiated an agreement that recognized him as king with the marvelously ambiguous title, "Rex Sicilie, ducatus Apulie, et Principatus Capue." It was interpreted by the papacy as confining the monarchy to Sicily, and by Roger and his successors as confirming their royal rule in southern Italy as well.

Innocent's major achievement was the Second lat eran council, which marked the end of the schism, but also reconfirmed his commitment to reform. The issues that had brought about the schism, however, remained alive, even as the circumstances changed, to create an aura of ambivalence in the relations between the papacy and secular powers.

Bibliography: l. duchesne, ed., Liber Pontificalis (Paris 1886–92) 2:379–85. l. jaffÉ, Regesta pontificum romanorum ab condita ecclesia ad annum post Christum natum 1198 (Leipzig 1881–88) 1:840–911; Patrologia Latina 179:21–732. f. j. schmale, Studien zum Schisma des Jahres 1130 (Cologne 1961). h. w. klewitz, "Das Ende des Reformpapsttums," Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 3 (1939) 371–412. e. mÜhlbacher, Die streitige Papstwahl des Jahres 1130 (Innsbruck 1876). p. f. palumbo, Lo scisma del MCXXX (Rome 1942). e. vacandard, Dictionnaire d'histoire et géographie ecclésiastiques, ed. a. baurillart et al. (Paris 1912—) 2:1408–1419. h. v. white, The Conflict of Papal Leadership Ideals from Gregory VII to Bernard of Clairvaux with Special reference to the Schism of 1130 (Ph.D. Diss., U. of Mich., Ann Arbor 1957). j. r. sommerfeldt, Consistency of Thought in the works of Bernard of Clairvaux (Ph.D. Diss.,U. of Mich., Ann Arbor 1960). c. morris, The Papal Monarchy: The Western Church from 1050 to 1250 (Oxford 1989) 182–185. w. maleczek, "Das Kardinalskollegium unter Innocenz II und Anacletus II", Archivum historiae pontificiae 19, 1981, 27–78. t. reuter, "Zur Anerkennung Papst Innocenz II" Deutsches Archiv für Erforschung des Mittelalters 39 (1983) 395–416. d. matthew, The Norman Kingdom of Sicily (Cambridge 1992) 34–54. w. maleczek, Lexikon des Mittelalters 5:433–4.

[j. m. powell]