Pope Saint Silverius (536-537)

The pope crushed between two empires

Silverius is not simply a pope victim of a court quarrel. He governs Rome at the moment when Italy ceases to be a relatively stabilised space under the Ostrogoths to become the battlefield of the Justinianic reconquest. In 536, Theodahad wants a pope who will not deliver Rome to Constantinople; Theodora wants a pope capable of reopening the Anthimus dossier; Belisarius wants to hold a huge city militarily with few men; the Roman clergy wants to preserve the unity of the Church.^[14][15]

This situation gives his pontificate the value of a borderline case. The papacy is not faced with a single hostile power, but with two dangerous protectors: the Goths, who can impose a candidate, and the Byzantines, who can depose a pope in the name of military security and imperial policy.

A witness to Chalcedon after Agapetus I

The doctrinal issue comes directly from the previous pontificate. Agapetus, in Constantinople, had rejected Anthimus and consecrated Mennas, confirming the faith of the Council of Chalcedon.^[16] Theodora, favourable to anti-Chalcedonian circles, then seeks to place Vigilius on the Roman see, with the promise that he would rehabilitate Anthimus, Theodosius of Alexandria and Severus of Antioch.^[17]

In this context, Silverius is not persecuted for a private spirituality. He is targeted because a Roman pope, even politically weak, remains a doctrinal obstacle when he refuses to turn ecclesial communion into a bargaining chip. The dossier is therefore a direct continuation of Agapetus.

A lesson on legitimacy and violence

His election is irregular in its context, but it is then accepted by the Roman clergy "for the unity of the Church and of the faith" according to the Liber Pontificalis.^[18] This point is important: Silverius is not an antipope in Catholic memory. He is a legitimate pope whose elevation was marred by Theodahad's intervention.

His case avoids two simplifications. We must not idealise the conditions of his election; they were probably marked by Gothic constraint. But we must not either turn this constraint into an automatic nullity: the reception by the clergy and the official list of the Holy See keep him as the 58th pope.^[19][20]

Table of witnesses

The dossier is more difficult than that of some neighbouring popes, not because sources are lacking, but because the sources answer each other polemically. The Liber Pontificalis wants to save both the memory of a persecuted pope and, partially, the figure of Belisarius; Liberatus blackens Vigilius; Procopius reduces the affair to a security problem during the siege; Treccani stresses that all versions are biased.^[21]

The Holy See and the minimal chronology

The official sheet of the Holy See gives Silverius as 58th pope, born at Frosinone, with a pontificate begun on 8 June 536 and ended in 537.^[22] Treccani, on the basis of Liberatus and critical editions, confirms the elevation to the pontificate on 8 June 536, after the death of Agapetus in Constantinople on 22 April.^[23]

The date of death is more delicate. The Liber Pontificalis gives 20 June as the day of burial ("buried in that place, June 20", Loomis p. 152), not as an established date of death; Treccani retains death by starvation on 20 June 537 on the island of Palmarola or Ponza, while noting the difficulties of localisation and reconstruction.^[24][25] But the year remains debated, beyond even "537 or 538": the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia holds the year of death to be unknown^[26], while the hagiographical tradition taken up by Butler gives 20 June 538^[27].

The Liber Pontificalis: two views of the same pope

The notice of the Liber Pontificalis is particularly precious because it reveals the fracture of Roman memory. Its first part insists on Theodahad's intervention: Silverius, subdeacon and son of Hormisdas, would have been imposed through fear, then accepted by the priests only after ordination to preserve unity.^[28]

The second part changes tone. It shows Silverius receiving Belisarius, refusing the rehabilitation of Anthimus, falling into a trap, stripped of the pallium, clothed in a monastic habit and sent into exile.^[29] Duchesne, taken up in Loomis's notes, saw there two sources or two redactions: one contemporary, hostile to the pope as "creature" of Theodahad; the other more favourable, centred on persecution.^[30]

"Now I know that this matter has put an end to my life." — Silverius, reading the request to rehabilitate Anthimus according to the Liber Pontificalis^[31]

Liberatus: the ecclesiological version

Liberatus of Carthage tells the dossier within the framework of the Nestorian, Eutychian and Chalcedonian controversies. With him, the centre of gravity is not the Gothic War, but Theodora's attempt to obtain a pope more favourable to the opponents of Chalcedon.^[32]

His account gives details absent or less clear elsewhere: the name of two supposed authors of the false letters, Marc the scholastic and Julian the praetorian; the flight of Silverius to Saint Sabina; the successive summonses to the palace; the exile to Patara; the intervention of the bishop of Patara with Justinian; finally the handing over of Silverius to men of Vigilius, then his death by starvation at Palmaria.^[33][34]

Procopius: the military version

Procopius, in the Gothic War, gives a dry version. During the siege, a suspicion arises against Silverius, "high priest of the city", accused of negotiating with the Goths; Belisarius sends him to Greece and then installs Vigilius.^[35]

This brevity is instructive. Procopius writes as a historian of Justinian's wars, close to the military ground. He develops neither the question of Anthimus, nor the promise of Vigilius, nor the role of Theodora. His silence does not refute Liberatus; it only shows that, for a military observer, the affair could be presented as a security measure.

A birth in southern Latium

The Holy See indicates Frosinone as place of birth.^[36] Treccani nuances this by speaking probably of Fondi or lower Latium, perhaps in a milieu linked to the Cecilii, and notes that not all family links can be established with certainty.^[37]

This geographical detail matters little in itself, but it places Silverius in a papacy still very Italian, rooted in the families of Latium and in a Roman clergy where advancement passes through concrete offices: notaries, deacons, subdeacons, administrators.

The son of a pope

Silverius is the son of Pope Hormisdas, but this does not mean that a pope had a child after his ordination. New Advent specifies that Hormisdas had been married before becoming a member of the higher clergy.^[38] The point is important to avoid an anachronism: in late Antiquity, several clerics have a family history prior to their entry into major orders.

Treccani reports that Silverius composed the epitaph of his father, where he summarised the great stages of the pontificate of Hormisdas.^[39] The filiation is therefore not only biological. Silverius belongs to the Roman memory of the end of the Acacian schism and of the Formula of Hormisdas.

A subdeacon made pope

At the time of Agapetus's death, Silverius is only subdeacon.^[40][41] His direct elevation to the Roman see surprises the sources. New Advent stresses that the choice of a subdeacon as bishop of Rome was unusual; Loomis's notes judge probable an external pressure in favour of a candidate whom Theodahad could believe to be safer.^[42][43]

The initial hierarchical weakness of Silverius, however, does not tell the whole story of the man. His refusal concerning Anthimus shows that he is not merely a manipulable candidate. Theodahad perhaps hoped for an anti-Byzantine pope; Theodora wanted an anti-Agapetus pope; Silverius ends up being useful to neither.

Agapetus dies far from Rome

Agapetus dies in Constantinople on 22 April 536, after having rejected Anthimus and consecrated Mennas.^[44] Rome must therefore elect a pope while the Gothic War is beginning and Agapetus's embassy has failed politically. The situation is bad: Justinian pursues his reconquest, Theodahad has lost the initiative, and the Roman clergy knows that the election will be read as a diplomatic signal.

Liberatus simply says that the city of Rome chose Silverius, subdeacon and son of Hormisdas.^[45] The Liber Pontificalis adds a harsher version: Theodahad, corrupted by gifts, would have terrorised the clergy and imposed the ordination.^[46] Treccani refuses to decide brutally: Gothic intervention is plausible, but the details of corruption remain difficult to establish.^[47]

Acceptance by the clergy

The most decisive passage of the Liber Pontificalis is not the accusation of pressure, but the conclusion: after the ordination, the priests accept Silverius for the unity of the Church and of the faith.^[48]

This reception explains why Silverius remains in the list of popes. The election is politically wounded, but it is not rejected as schismatic. The Roman clergy prefers to recognise a questionable pope in his conditions of elevation rather than deliver the Church to a rupture at the moment when Rome is threatened by war.

Theodahad, a protector already lost

Theodahad hardly benefits from his intervention. A few months after the election, he is overthrown; the Goths regroup under Witiges.^[49] Silverius then loses the political protector who, according to the hostile version of the Liber, had facilitated his election. He finds himself facing a new reality: the Byzantines enter Italy, and Rome must decide how to avoid the bloody fate of Naples.

The shock of Naples

The Byzantine reconquest passes through Sicily and then Naples. The Liber Pontificalis describes the capture of Naples as a brutal massacre, with pillage and profanation.^[50] Its notes recall that Procopius attributes the excesses above all to the Massagetae of the Byzantine army, while indicating that Belisarius sought to restrain them.^[51]

This memory weighs on Rome. When Belisarius approaches, the city knows that prolonged resistance can cost very dearly. Treccani indicates that Silverius's intervention favoured the surrender of the city and the opening of the gates to the Byzantines on 9 December 536.^[52]

The entry of Belisarius

The Liber Pontificalis says that Belisarius entered Rome on 10 December and that the Goths left the city in the night.^[53] Procopius specifies that Belisarius entered through the Porta Asinaria while the Goths left through the Porta Flaminia.^[54] A variant to note: Treccani, following Procopius, gives the opening of the gates to the Byzantines on 9 December 536, while the Liber gives Belisarius's entry on 10 December — a one-day gap between two traditions, without historical consequence.^[55][56]

Silverius receives Belisarius with courtesy.^[57] At that moment, he does not act as a Gothic agent. He participates in Rome's passage into the imperial orbit to spare the city a disaster. This is precisely what makes the later accusation of treason more difficult to accept without caution.

The siege of 537

Witiges returns with a large army and begins the siege of Rome in February 537.^[58] Procopius describes a city under tension, where Belisarius organises rationing, guard of the walls, evacuations and security controls.^[59] It is in this climate that the accusation against Silverius becomes militarily exploitable.

A letter supposedly addressed to the Goths would have invited him to come to the Porta Asinaria near the Lateran, with a promise to deliver the city and Belisarius.^[60] Liberatus attributes these letters to Marc the scholastic and Julian the praetorian.^[61]

Why Anthimus returns to the centre

Anthimus of Constantinople had been set aside by Agapetus because he irregularly occupied the see of Constantinople and because he refused to give the necessary doctrinal guarantees on Chalcedon.^[62] For Theodora, his rehabilitation remains a political and theological objective. She does not want only a change of person in Rome; she wants to bend the Roman line.

The Liber Pontificalis reports that a letter asks Silverius to come or to restore Anthimus to his place.^[63] The account is perhaps dramatised, and Liberatus does not mention exactly the same correspondence. But the two traditions converge: Silverius is expected to yield on the question of Anthimus; he does not yield.

A sentence that sums up the pontificate

The refusal reported by the Liber Pontificalis is brief and strong — the one quoted as epigraph of this article: Silverius will not recall a heretic already condemned.^[64] The article does not need to make it a romantic scene. The meaning suffices: the pope may be politically fragile, but he cannot undo by opportunism the doctrinal condemnation of his predecessor.

"The pope trusted in God and in the blessed apostle Peter." — Liber Pontificalis, at the moment of the refusal concerning Anthimus^[65]

The link with Chalcedon

Liberatus says that Theodora asked Vigilius, if he became pope, to annul the synod where the two natures of Christ had been maintained and to write to Theodosius, Anthimus and Severus to confirm their faith.^[66] Even if the detail of Vigilius's promise must be read in a polemical source, it shows the Catholic perception of the dossier: the deposition of Silverius is not only an episode of war; it touches Rome's fidelity to Chalcedon.

The summonses

Treccani stresses that sources diverge on the number and form of Silverius's summonses to Belisarius.^[67] The Liber Pontificalis gives above all the decisive scene: Silverius is called to the palace of the Pincian, the clergy remains at the doors, the pope enters alone with Vigilius; Antonina, wife of Belisarius, accuses him of wanting to betray the Romans to the Goths.^[68]

Liberatus adds a first phase: Silverius would have withdrawn to Saint Sabina, judged safer than the Lateran too close to the walls; Photius, son of Antonina, would have convinced him to come to the palace under oath of safety.^[69]

The stripping of the pope

The Liber Pontificalis then recounts the symbolic gesture: John, subdeacon of the first region, removes the pallium from Silverius's neck, strips him of his pontifical garments, puts a monastic habit on him and hides him; then Xystus, subdeacon of the sixth region, announces to the clergy that the pope has been deposed and has become a monk.^[70]

The violence is not only physical. They try to turn the pope into a monk to give the deposition the appearance of a change of state. The procedure is theologically and canonically dubious: a bishop of Rome does not cease to be pope because a subdeacon removes his pallium in a palace room.

Vigilius installed

The next day, according to Liberatus, Belisarius summons priests, deacons and clerics and asks them to elect another pope; despite hesitation and resistance from some, Vigilius is ordained with Belisarius's favour.^[71] New Advent summarises the affair neatly: Silverius is arrested in March 537, clothed in a monk's habit, sent into exile, and Vigilius consecrated in his place.^[72]

The canonical situation is therefore troubled until Silverius's death. Vigilius occupies Rome, but his predecessor still lives and implicitly contests the deposition. This is one of the reasons why the final fate of Silverius becomes indispensable to the peaceful recognition of Vigilius's pontificate.

Exile in Lycia

Contrary to a simplified version that would make Silverius go directly from Rome to the Pontine Islands, Liberatus and New Advent indicate a first exile to Patara, in Lycia.^[73][74] The Liber Pontificalis itself, in Loomis/Duchesne's notes, recognises that these details of the last days were omitted by its main notice.^[75]

At Patara, the local bishop takes up the pope's defence. Liberatus lends him a strong argument: there are many kings in the world, but none is unique as the pope, who governs the Church of the whole world and has been driven from his see.^[76]

"There are many kings in this world, but there is not one like this pope, over the Church of the whole world, driven from his see." — Bishop of Patara, according to Liberatus^[77]

Justinian orders an investigation

Justinian, according to Liberatus, orders that Silverius be recalled to Rome and that the letters be examined. If they are authentic, Silverius will be placed as bishop in another city; if they are false, he will be restored to his see.^[78]

This imperial decision is capital. It shows that even in the anti-Byzantine account, Justinian is not presented as the conscious instigator of the whole affair. Treccani notes that the emperor is said to have declared he knew nothing of what had happened and that he ordered an investigation despite opposition from circles close to Theodora.^[79]

The return that frightens Vigilius

Silverius's return to Italy frightens Vigilius. Liberatus puts in his mouth a brutal formula addressed to Belisarius: hand Silverius over to Vigilius, otherwise he will not be able to accomplish what is demanded of him.^[80]

This sentence, if it indeed reflects the substance of the affair, reveals the political mechanism: Silverius alive and free makes the stabilisation of Vigilius impossible. The trial wanted by Justinian therefore does not go to its end. The deposed pope is transferred under the guard of men linked to Vigilius.

A debated localisation

The sources speak of the Pontine Islands, but the names vary: Pontiae, Palmaria, Palmarola or Ponza according to traditions and modern corrections.^[81][82] New Advent recalls that the Liber Pontificalis rather points to Palmarola, smaller and more desolate than Ponza.^[83]

We must therefore avoid too assured a precision. The most accurate thing to say is: Silverius dies in the Pontine Islands, probably in the orbit of Palmarola/Ponza, under the guard or responsibility of Vigilius's supporters.

Death in the Pontine Islands: two versions

The Liber Pontificalis says that Vigilius fed Silverius with "the bread of tribulation" and "the water of bitterness", that he fell ill and died as confessor.^[84] Liberatus is more direct: brought to Palmaria under the guard of two defenders and servants of Vigilius, Silverius died there by starvation — in Latin, "sub eorum custodia defecit inedia".^[85]

But Procopius, in the Secret History, gives a competing version: the pontiff is said to have been killed by a person of the entourage of Antonina, wife of Belisarius, named Eugenia by Butler (Eugenes in the Dewing edition followed by Verardi).^[86] Butler juxtaposes the two traditions without deciding: according to Liberatus, who writes from hearsay, Silverius died of hunger; according to Procopius, a living witness, he was murdered at Antonina's instigation.^[87]

The degrees are not equal: Procopius is a contemporary close to Belisarius's entourage, but the Secret History is a violent pamphlet against Justinian and his circle; Liberatus writes around 560, second-hand, in a source openly hostile to Vigilius. Treccani records both versions and retains, with caution, death by starvation on 20 June 537.^[88]

The Catholic tradition has retained this death as a martyrdom or confession of the faith. New Advent notes that he was afterwards venerated as a saint, his feast being recorded in the Roman Martyrology on 20 June.^[89]

Tomb and miracles

The Liber Pontificalis affirms that a multitude of sick people came to his tomb and were healed.^[90] New Advent adds that his remains were never transferred from the island.^[91] The memory of Silverius therefore remains less Roman than Pontine: he does not return triumphantly to Saint Peter's like Agapetus; he remains in the place of his humiliation.

This difference is spiritually strong. The Church keeps the memory of a pope who did not reconquer his see, did not obtain visible reparation, did not leave a great doctrinal text, but whose fidelity in failure has become a place of veneration.

Solid historical core

This table protects against two excesses. The first would be to write as if the whole narrative of the Liber Pontificalis were minutes of proceedings. The second would be to dissolve Silverius in scepticism: the accusation, deposition, exile and death are convergent facts, not a late legend.

Belisarius: guilty, cautious or instrumentalised?

The portrait of Belisarius varies according to the sources. Procopius shows him as a general taking a security measure.^[92] The Liber Pontificalis lends him a form of moral fear: he obeys, but he who overthrows Silverius will have to answer to Christ.^[93] Liberatus implicates him more frankly in the operation, notably through Vigilius's financial promises.^[94]

The most accurate synthesis is not to isolate Belisarius. He acts within a network: Theodora, Antonina, Vigilius, false letters, urgency of the siege and fear of treason. His responsibility exists, but the Catholic account sees above all a machination where the general becomes the executor of mixed ecclesiastical and imperial interests.

Vigilius: from intrigue to received pontificate

The article on Silverius must not settle the whole case of Vigilius, but it must clearly state the problem. Vigilius arrives in Rome with Theodora's support; he is installed while Silverius still lives; Liberatus attributes to him a decisive role in the last exile.^[95] Yet, after Silverius's death, Vigilius will be received as pope in the official succession.

This point recalls an important Catholic distinction: the final validity of a pontificate does not canonise all the human means that preceded it. The Holy Spirit protects the Church from destruction; he does not transform each election into a pure scene.

A saint without visible victory

Silverius leaves neither great council, nor corpus of letters, nor lasting reform. His heritage lies in a negative fidelity: he does not recall Anthimus, he does not yield to pressure, he does not enter into the game of a false doctrinal peace. Many saints are known for what they built; Silverius is known for what he refused.

This holiness is hard to narrate because it does not have the relief of a work. Yet it is very evangelical: to lose one's place, one's garment, one's reputation and one's life rather than sign a false reconciliation.

Peter's freedom in the face of protectors

The pontificate of Silverius gives a current lesson on the "protectors" of the Church. Theodahad protects Rome against Byzantium, but wants to choose the pope. Justinian protects the imperial faith, but his entourage wants to weigh on Roman communion. Belisarius protects Rome militarily, but can depose the pope in the name of security.

The successor of Peter can receive a political protection; he cannot become the property of a protector. It is precisely this line that Silverius reveals in failure.

A fidelity in confusion

The sources are confused, the dates debated, the responsibilities mixed. But holiness does not always require a historically simple scene. It can appear in confusion itself: a weak man, elected in bad conditions, becomes a witness because at the decisive moment he refuses to betray the faith.

"He prayed, commended his cause to the Lord, went out and came to the palace; having entered alone, he was no more seen by his own." — Liberatus of Carthage, on Silverius's last summons^[96]

Was Silverius really pope if his election was imposed?

Yes. The conditions of his election were probably marked by Theodahad's pressure, but the Roman clergy ended up accepting him for the unity of the Church.^[97] The Holy See lists him as 58th pope.^[98] A politically wounded election is not automatically non-existent.

Did he really betray Rome to the Goths?

The Byzantine military sources mention a suspicion, but Liberatus and the Liber Pontificalis speak of false letters and pretext.^{[99][100][101]} The fact that Justinian ordered an investigation and a possible restoration of Silverius if the letters were false reinforces caution towards the accusation.^[102]

Why did Theodora want his downfall?

Because Silverius did not give the expected guarantees concerning Anthimus and anti-Chalcedonian circles. Liberatus reports that Theodora had obtained from Vigilius a promise favourable to Anthimus, Theodosius and Severus.^[103] The Liber Pontificalis puts in Silverius's mouth an explicit refusal to recall Anthimus.^[104]

Is Silverius a martyr?

Tradition venerates him as saint and often as martyr or confessor. New Advent indicates that his feast is in the Roman Martyrology on 20 June and that his veneration is attested later.^[105] Historically, he dies in captivity in the Pontine Islands after a deposition linked to his doctrinal refusal and to political accusations — from privation according to the Liber and Liberatus, murdered at Antonina's instigation according to Procopius.^[106]

Saint Silverius is one of the most tragic popes of the 6th century. Son of Hormisdas, elected subdeacon in a Rome subject to Theodahad's pressures, he is at first suspect because his election seems Gothic. Yet, he facilitates Belisarius's entry into Rome and above all refuses to undo the doctrinal work of Agapetus against Anthimus.

His pontificate shows the papacy laid bare: without its own army, without legal security, without guarantee against intrigues, but with a responsibility that neither Theodahad, nor Theodora, nor Belisarius, nor Vigilius can absorb. The holiness of Silverius is not to have triumphed; it is to have remained a witness in a situation where every visible triumph was taken from him.

• Pope Saint Hormisdas — father of Silverius and pope of the reconciliation with Constantinople in 519.
• Pope Saint Agapetus I — predecessor of Silverius, defender of Chalcedon against Anthimus.
• Pope Vigilius — successor of Silverius, installed in very contested conditions.
• Council of Chalcedon — doctrinal definition at the heart of the Anthimus-Theodora-Agapetus-Silverius conflict.
• Pope Saint John I — another pope caught in the tension between Gothic power and Constantinople.
• Pope Saint Gelasius I — doctrinal reference on the distinction between sacerdotal authority and royal power.