Pope Romanus (897)

The pope of a violent interstice

Romanus does not have the doctrinal weight of a Nicholas I, the diplomatic scope of a John VIII, nor even the clearer restorative impact of his successor Theodore II. His importance comes from his position. He is the pope placed between the posthumous trial of Formosus by Stephen VI in January 897, followed by the deposition and then the violent death of Stephen VI in prison, and the formal rehabilitation of Formosus.

This brief interstice is enough to show that the Formosan crisis was not a mere isolated scandal. The Cadaver Synod did not end with the strangling of Stephen VI. It continued in the following elections, in rapid depositions, in annulments of acts, then in the counter-annulments of Sergius III. The story of Romanus forces us to see the papacy not as an ideal succession of great names, but as an institution that God preserves also through men crushed by circumstances greater than themselves.

A short pontificate, but not an empty one

The ancient and modern notices are sober, but they do not say "nothing". They record three administrative dossiers: the pallium and privilege for Grado, then the confirmation of the possessions of the Hispanic sees of Girona and Elne.^[7][8] These acts lie far from the Roman uproar: the Adriatic, Catalonia, Septimania. They recall that the pope, even besieged by the factions of Rome, remains the authority sought out by peripheral Churches.

This point is important for a Catholic reading of history. The Roman crises of the 9th and 10th centuries are real, sometimes distressing for the faithful, but they do not abolish ordinary ecclesial activity: confirmations of rights, pallia, privileges, relations with dioceses, continuity of the chancery.

A witness to institutional survival

Romanus defined no dogma, convened no great council and left no famous theological text. That is precisely why he is useful in Ignispedia. He shows that pontifical authority does not depend on the continuous personal greatness of each holder. For four months, the person is weak, the sources are poor, Roman politics is marked by factional violence; yet the succession of Peter continues, administrative acts subsist, and the Church does not disappear.

Very thin documentation

The dossier of Romanus is one of the thinnest in the medieval papal series. The official file of the Holy See gives only his number, his origin and the general dates of the pontificate.^[9] The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1912, written by Horace K. Mann, itself stresses the extreme poverty of certainties: unknown date of birth, unknown exact dates of consecration and death, information that is above all administrative.^[10]

The most useful scholarly synthesis is that of Vito Loré in the Enciclopedia dei Papi and the Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani of Treccani. It gathers the known data, discusses the attitude of Romanus towards the Formosan party, and judges unlikely the late report that he himself pronounced sentences against Stephen VI.^[11]

The ancient witnesses named

Treccani cites several indispensable witnesses or critical instruments: the Liber Pontificalis edited by Louis Duchesne, the Regesta Pontificum Romanorum of Jaffé, the appendix of Auxilius in defence of the ordinations of Formosus, and the poem of Flodoard of Reims, De Christi triumphis apud Italiam, Book XII, Chapter 6.^[12]

The presence of Auxilius is significant. This priest, defender of the Formosan ordinations, writes precisely in the context of the quarrel opened by the Cadaver Synod. He does not give a complete "life of Romanus"; he shows that the pontificates of 897 must be read within a burning canonical controversy: were the ordinations conferred by Formosus valid despite the posthumous condemnation imposed by Stephen VI?

The caution of Mann and the correction of Treccani

Mann writes at the beginning of the 20th century with the instruments available: Duchesne, Jaffé, his own work on the popes of the early Middle Ages. He mentions the possibility that Romanus was deposed, because tradition says he "was made a monk", a formula that may denote a forced deposition.^[13]

Treccani goes further in caution. The article by Vito Loré considers it difficult to make Romanus a pure anti-Formosan, because Stephen VI has just been overthrown by the opposing party, and because Romanus comes from Gallese, like Marinus I, an ally of Formosus. But it also judges it unlikely that Romanus was the great restorer of the Formosan memory: that action is much more clearly attributed to Theodore II.^[14]

The right conclusion is therefore not: "Romanus annulled everything." It is more nuanced: Romanus was probably chosen in a climate of reaction against Stephen VI, but he seems to have been set aside because he did not settle the Formosan question quickly or strongly enough.

Formosus, Stephen VI and the wound of 897

The pontificate of Romanus is incomprehensible without the posthumous trial of Formosus. In January 897, Stephen VI had the corpse of his predecessor exhumed, set on a judgment seat, condemned him, annulled his acts and ordinations, then had the body thrown into the Tiber. The affair shocked even a Rome accustomed to factional violence.^[15][16]

The stakes were not merely macabre. If the ordinations of Formosus are invalid, then priests, bishops, acts of government and perhaps local successions become suspect. The crisis therefore touches the sacramentality of Order, the canonical stability of the Church and confidence in hierarchical transmission.

The fall of Stephen VI

Stephen VI did not long survive his act. Supporters of Formosus rose up, deposed him and he died strangled in prison, probably in the summer of 897.^[17][18] Romanus was elected in this climate. It is not known whether he was carried by an already organised group or by a compromise between factions; contemporary sources say nothing directly about his political attitude.

This silence is itself a datum. Instead of a written programme, we have only peripheral acts and a few clues: his origin from Gallese, his possible link with circles close to Marinus I, his rapid deposition, then the fact that Theodore II succeeds him and more explicitly rehabilitates Formosus.

The Formosan question

The "Formosan question" has three levels. First a personal level: Formosus had been accused of ambition, of illicit translation from Porto to Rome, and of political manoeuvres. Then a canonical level: can the ordinations and acts of a pope condemned post mortem be annulled? Finally a political level: which Roman party controls the Lateran after the fall of Stephen VI?

Romanus seems caught between these three levels. If he is too close to Stephen, he becomes unacceptable to the Formosans. If he rehabilitates Formosus too quickly, he risks rekindling the opposing faction. If he does not do enough, he is replaced by a more resolute pontiff. This is the most sober hypothesis proposed by Treccani.^[19]

Gallese and the memory of Marinus I

Romanus was born in Gallese, near Civita Castellana, in the Roman territory north of the city. His father was named Constantine.^[20][21] Gallese is not an isolated detail: it is also the city of Marinus I, pope from 882 to 884, associated with the rehabilitation of Formosus after the sanctions of John VIII.

This geographical proximity does not prove kinship. Some late notices or modern syntheses evoke a possible kinship between Marinus and Romanus, but solid sources do not allow it to be made a certain fact. It is better to say that Romanus comes from the same regional milieu as Marinus I, and that this origin makes a simple adherence to the party of Stephen VI less plausible, without turning the clue into a genealogy.

San Pietro in Vincoli

Before his election, Romanus was cardinal priest of the title of San Pietro in Vincoli (Saint Peter in Chains).^[22][23] The Roman basilica, linked to the memory of the chains of Saint Peter, is not mere decoration. In the system of Roman presbyteral titles, a cardinal priest is rooted in a specific Church of the city and participates in the liturgical, pastoral and political structure of the Roman clergy.

Being cardinal priest of San Pietro in Vincoli does not tell his whole career, but it places Romanus within the urban clergy of Rome, not as an outsider parachuted in. He probably knew the city, its families, its deaconries, its titles, its conflicts, and the heavy atmosphere left by the pontificates of John VIII, Marinus I, Adrian III, Stephen V, Formosus, Boniface VI and Stephen VI.

An election at the end of summer 897

Treccani places the election of Romanus around the end of July or the beginning of August 897, noting that he was probably already in office on 20 August 897.^[24] The file of the Holy See gives the beginning of the pontificate in July or August of the same year.^[25]

This uncertainty is normal for the period. Registers are fragmentary, pontifical lists do not always agree on days, and political violence interrupts the regular preservation of data. For a serious article, dates that are too precise must therefore be refused when they do not rest on a clear primary source.

Girona and Elne

The most solid acts of the pontificate concern the sees of Girona and Elne. The bishops or representatives of these Churches ask Rome for confirmation of their possessions; Romanus confirms the goods of their sees.^[26][27] Treccani refers here notably to the study by J. Morera, Los papiros de la Catedral de Gerona, which publishes as an appendix a bull of Formosus and a bull of Romanus.^[28]

The fact is modest, but it says a great deal. Ecclesiastical Catalonia still looks to Rome to guarantee its rights. In a Europe where civil powers are unstable, pontifical confirmation provides a title of protection and a juridical memory. Even a pope of a few months receives this type of request and answers it.

Grado and the Adriatic

The Catholic Encyclopedia also mentions the pallium granted to Vitalis, patriarch of Grado, as well as a privilege for his Church.^[29] Treccani speaks more prudently of a document in favour of the Church of Grado.^[30]

Grado lies at the crossroads of the Adriatic, of nascent Venice, of the Aquileian heritage and of rivalries with Lombard and Frankish powers. A pontifical document in favour of Grado is therefore not only a local favour: it participates in defining ecclesial authority in a zone where Rome, Ravenna, Aquileia and civil powers meet.

The coins of Romanus

Mann reports, via the Catholic Encyclopedia, that the coins of Romanus bear the name of Emperor Lambert and the pontifical monogram accompanied by "Scs. Petrus".^[31] This numismatic datum is interesting: it still places the papacy in a relationship with the Italian imperial authority stemming from the House of Spoleto.

A coin must not be over-interpreted. It does not prove an entire policy. But it shows the official language of power: the pope governs in the shadow of an imperial reference, and his own authority is placed under the name of Saint Peter.

What can be said

The question is decisive, but it cannot be resolved by a slogan. Romanus succeeds Stephen VI after the violent death of the latter. He comes from Gallese, like Marinus I, ally of Formosus. He is then deposed, and his successor Theodore II more explicitly rehabilitates Formosus. These clues make it difficult to classify him among the hard anti-Formosans.^[32]

It can therefore be said prudently: Romanus does not appear as an energetic continuator of Stephen VI. His election probably occurred in a reaction against the excess of the Cadaver Synod. But he is not documented as the great repairing pope of Formosus.

What cannot be said

A late tradition, reported by a 15th-century pontifical catalogue, claims that Romanus pronounced sentences contrary to Stephen VI. Treccani judges this report unlikely, because the true rehabilitation of Formosus is attributed by the sources to Theodore II, not to Romanus.^[33]

The error would be to turn Romanus into a clear hero of posthumous justice. Justice will come above all after him: Theodore II transfers the body of Formosus to Saint Peter's; John IX confirms the rehabilitation in synods; Sergius III will then overturn this line. Romanus is rather the transitional pope, the one who reveals that the crisis is not settled.

Why would he have been deposed?

Treccani proposes a simple hypothesis: Romanus would have been removed by the same party that had placed him, because he had not acted energetically enough on the Formosan question.^[34] The Catholic Encyclopedia keeps a more open formula: it is possible that he was deposed by one of the factions agitating Rome; the mention that he was "made a monk" may denote this type of forced deposition.^[35]

The two readings do not entirely contradict each other. They express two levels of caution: Mann notes the possibility of a deposition; Loré more precisely identifies the most probable political scenario.

November 897

The pontificate ends in November 897.^[36][37] No detailed narrative recounts the scene. It is not known whether Romanus was arrested, forced to withdraw, taken to a monastery or simply replaced after political pressure. Sources speak of a probable deposition, not of a clearly attested death in office.

This documentary poverty obliges a rare sobriety. A poorly held apologetic article might romanticise the scene: nocturnal conspiracy, armed faction, imposed monastery, obscure death. The serious historian stops before that. The only certain fact is the end of the pontificate in November, followed almost immediately by the election of Theodore II.

The monastic habit

The formula "made a monk" requires explanation. In the early Middle Ages, forcing a bishop or pope to take the monastic habit could serve as a juridical or quasi-juridical means to remove him from power without necessarily killing him. The Catholic Encyclopedia notes that this expression, in the language of the time, often denotes a deposition.^[38]

But caution remains necessary: Treccani specifies that the subsequent fate of Romanus is not known with certainty, even if the forced monastic habit is probable.^[39] The monastic retirement must therefore not be presented as a personal religious vocation or as a freely chosen spiritual choice.

Theodore II and the clearer reparation

Theodore II succeeds Romanus for an even shorter, but more legible pontificate. Sources attribute to him the public rehabilitation of Formosus and the translation of the body into the basilica of Saint Peter.^[40][41] This contrast perhaps explains the fall of Romanus: he did not do quickly enough what the Formosan party expected.

The succession Romanus — Theodore II — John IX shows a dynamic: first an unstable passage after Stephen VI; then a liturgical and memorial reparation; finally a synodal attempt at stabilisation. The crisis, however, does not close definitively, since it will be relaunched by Sergius III.

The papacy is not the impeccability of popes

The late 9th century is one of the best antidotes to a naive view of Church history. Popes there are sometimes courageous, sometimes weak, sometimes prisoners of factions; some die assassinated, others are deposed, others leave few traces. Romanus belongs to this grey zone.

Catholic doctrine has never taught that each pope would be personally holy, politically strong or historically admirable. It teaches that the successor of Peter receives a real charge in the Church, and that the Holy Spirit preserves the Church as a whole, without abolishing the sins, errors of government or miseries of his ministers.

Scandal as a paradoxical proof of continuity

The case of Romanus is paradoxically consoling. If the Church survived 897, it did not survive because conditions were favourable. It survived in a city traversed by hatreds, after the trial of a corpse, amid a succession of minuscule pontificates. Catholic continuity is not the absence of storm; it is the permanence of the ship despite pilots sometimes swept away by the political sea.

This observation does not justify crimes. It only forbids turning scandal into a simplistic argument against the Church. The enemies of the papacy have often cited the "bad popes" to attack the Catholic faith. History answers more deeply: precisely, a purely human institution should have died from such crises.

A small pope for a great historical lesson

Romanus was not a great pope. He must not be made into what he was not. But he is a good Ignispedia article because he highlights a truth of scale: secondary figures document the real texture of history. Without them, only summits are seen; with them, the terrain is understood.

Romanus shows the Rome of 897 at ground level: a presbyteral title, a violent city, a chancery confirming possessions in Catalonia, an Adriatic Church seeking a privilege, a probable deposition, a successor who will have to repair more clearly.

• Pope Formosus (891-896) — the pope whose memory triggered the crisis of 897.
• Cadaver Synod — the posthumous trial of Formosus under Stephen VI.
• Pope Stephen VI (896-897) — predecessor of Romanus and author of the Cadaver Synod.
• Pope Theodore II (897) — immediate successor of Romanus and more explicit restorer of the memory of Formosus.
• Pope John IX (898-900) — pope who tried to stabilise the Formosan crisis synodally.
• Pope Marinus I (882-884) — another pope from Gallese, linked to the Formosan dossier before the explosion of 897.