ted to enjoy the honor, or retain the authority of Emperor. Too weak to assert his rights, and too incapable to maintain them, he was deposed by an assembly of princes at Tribur, at the solicitation of Arnulph, the natural son of Carloman, who had himself raised to the Imperial throne (A. D. 888–899). Charles survived this disgrace only two months, and died A. D. 888.

Among the immediate consequences of the fall of the Carlovingian dynasty was the assertion of independence by the dukes of Italy and the margraves or governors of the border territories of France, each of whom, acknowledging no superior, and ambitious of the imperial dignity, necessarily involved the Popes in their quarrels. The most conspicuous of those who contended for the honor of becoming Emperor were Guido, or Guy, Duke of Spoleto, and Berengarius, Duke of Friuli. The former, after having gained two important victories—the one on the banks of the Trebia, and the other near the town of Brixen-called an assembly of the Lombard bishops at Pavia. IIere certain conditions were prescribed, which the bishops thought requisite to the right and lawful government of the Empire, and to these Guido subscribed, after which he was crowned Emperor. This ceremony was performed first by the bishops, and afterward (A. D. 891) by Pope Stephen, at Rome. Stephen died shortly after, universally revered for his zeal and boundless charity.

He was succeeded by Formosus (A. D. 891-896), who was obliged to crown (A. D. 892) Lambert, the son of Guido, who, though still a minor, shared with his father the government of the Empire.

After the death of Guido (A. D. 894), Lambert governed conjointly with his mother Agiltrude, a woman of excessive ambition, whose power shortly degenerated into tyranny. A portion of Upper Italy was still in the hands of Berengarius, who had not given up the hope of placing the imperial crown upon his own head. He now took advantage of the disturbed state of society, and the feelings of indignation entertained against Lambert and Agiltrude on account of the oppressiveness of their government, to assert his claims. War was accordingly declared, and the whole of Italy, not excepting

Rome, was divided into two conflicting parties, each equally zealous in defense of its champion. To put an end to this condition of things, the Pope called to his assistance the German King Arnulph, who, being a prince of the Carlovingian house, declared his intention to make good his right to the government of Italy.' He marched into Italy at the head of an army of Germans; took Rome, where Lambert's mother had sought refuge, by storm; liberated the Pope from confinement, and was crowned by him amid the joyful acclamations of the people (A. D. 896). The Romans took the oath of fealty to the new Emperor, with the condition, however, that their obligations to him should, in no way, interfere with the honor and loyalty which they owed to the Pope.2 Arnulph was quite equal to the task of maintaining himself in his new dignity, notwithstanding that Lambert, of Spoleto, and Albert, Duke of Tuscany, had formed a powerful league against him, with the purpose of putting an end to German dominion in Italy. Unfortunately he died in the third year after his coronation, and his son and heir, Louis the Child, was unable, owing to his extreme youth and the terrible inroads of the Hungarians into Germany, to successfully compete for the imperial crown. Here a lamentable and disastrous era opens upon the Apostolic See and the Roman Church.

3

Boniface VI., having been borne to the Pontifical throne by a disorderly assembly, made up chiefly of the partisans of the late Pope Formosus, survived his elevation only fifteen days. Upon his death, the opposite party succeeded in electing Stephen VI. (VII.) (a. d. 896–897), who, unmindful of the dignity

1 Formosi II. vita, epist. et decreta, in Mansi, T. XVIII., p. 99 sq. Harduin, T. VI., Pt. I., p. 423 sq. Cf. Auxilii libb. II., de ordinat. Fermosi. (max. bibl., T. XVII., p. 1 sq.) and dialog. super causa et negot. Form. (Mabillon, Annal., T. II., p. 28 sq.)

2 The oath is given in Muratori, Hist. of Italy, Vol. V., p. 254: Juro per hacc omnia Dei mysteria, quod salvo honore et lege mea atque fidelitate Domini Formosi Papae, fidelis sum et ero omnibus diebus vitae meae Arnulfo Imperatori, et nunquam me ad illius infidelitatem cum aliquo homine sociabo. Et Lamberto, filio Agildrudae, et ipsi matri suae ad saecularem honorem numquam adjutorium praebebo.

3 Dammert, Hatto I., Archbishop of Mentz, and Louis the Child, Freiburg, 1865 (Programme.)

of his office, and yielding to the instincts of hatred, called an assembly of bishops to give judgment upon the dead Pope Formosus, who, it was alleged, had violated the Canons in accepting the See of Rome. The ground of this charge was, that Formosus had, contrary to the discipline of the West, been transferred from the see of Porto to that of Rome. Accordingly, the body of Formosus was exhumed, robed in pontifical attire, set up in the hall of the assembly, and an advocate given him to plead his cause. Then Stephen VI. (VII.), addressing the lifeless form, said: "Bishop of Porto, why did thy ambition lead thee to usurp the See of Rome?” Sentence of deposition was then pronounced upon him; his election to the Papacy declared contrary to the canons, and his official Pontifical acts null and void. The body was then divested of the Pontifical robes; the three fingers of the right hand, which had been the instruments of his supposed perjury, cut off; and, after other indignities had been put upon the corpse, it was cast into the Tiber. Finally, all those upon whom he had conferred Holy Orders, were deposed. Some of them were afterward banished, and others re-ordained by Stephen.

These proceedings so exasperated the party hostile to Stephen, that they seized him, and, having loaded him with chains, cast him into a dungeon, where he was strangled, in the month of August, A. D. 897.1 It is also probable that the two succeeding Popes-the pious Romanus and the upright Theodore (A. D. 897 and 898)-were murdered by the party friendly to Stephen, for having declared in favor of Formosus.

B.-DEPLORABLE CONDITION OF THE PAPACY IN THE TENTH CENTURY.

§ 187. The Roman Pontificate during its Disgraceful Dependence upon Tuscan Domination.

Luitprandi Historia rer. ab Europ., etc. (unreliable and harshly exaggerating.) Glaber Radulf. Hist. Francor., libri V. Flodoardi Chronicon, cf. ? 178. Mura

1

1 Stephant VI. vita et epist., in Mansi, T. XVIII., p. 173 sq. Harduin, T. VI., Pt. I., p. 461 sq. Muratori, Hist. of Italy, year 897, Pt. V., p. 263. Bonn Periodical of Philos. and Cath. Theolog., 1847, n. 3.

tori, Annali d'Italia, T. V. (Germ. transl., Vol. V., p. 266 sq.) Harduin, T. VI., Pt. I p. 467 sq. Mansi, T. XVIII., p. 190 sq. Dümmler, Auxilius, and Vulgarius Sources and Researches on the Hist. of the Papacy at the opening of the tenth century, Lps. 1866. Hefele, The Popes and Emperors in the Darkest Ages of the Church (Contributions toward Ch. H., etc., Vol. I., p. 227–278). Hergenrother, Contributions toward a Hist. of the Popes of the tenth century (Würzburg Cath. Weekly, nros. 1 and 2, year 1865). Darras, Ch. H., Vol. II.

After the death of Lambert (A. D. 897), and of Arnulph (A. D. 899), the supremacy of Italy was contended for with varying success by Berengarius of Friuli, and Louis III., surnamed the Blind, King of Provence.1 But, as if these struggles were not sufficient to fill the measure of the country's misery, the Magyars again burst in upon its fair fields and spread devastation wherever they went. To increase, if possible, this condition of affairs, the party of the margrave, Albert of Tuscany, of the infamous courtesan, Theodora the elder, and of her no less infamous daughters, Marozia and Theodora the younger, was all-powerful at Rome. Benedict IV. was elected to the papal throne in the year 900. He was succeeded, three years later (903), by Leo V., who was, in the same year, dethroned by Christopher and cast into prison.

Through the influence of Marozia, the sister of Theodora, Sergius III., her favorite, who, six or seven years previously, had been set up as anti-Pope against Romanus and John IX., was recalled from exile and placed upon the Papal throne (A. D. 904–911). Much has been said, upon the authority of Luitpraud, against the moral character of this Pope; but, before assenting to the grave accusations of this writer, we should bear in mind that his testimony is, if not nullified, at least greatly impaired by that of two contemporaries, viz., Deacon John and Flodoard, both of whom are witnesses to the unexceptionable life, to the virtues, the piety, and the zeal of Sergius. And their testimony is borne out by the words of his epitaph, which represents him as an "excellent pastor, beloved by all classes." He reigned seven years, during which time he conferred the pallium upon the archbishops.

1 Those desirous of avoiding confusion of the personages of this age, would do well to consult Höfler's genealogical tables (German Popes, Pt. I., App. 5), where the descent of Berengarius, Theodora, and others, is given..

of Hamburg and Cologne, and placed the bishopric of Bremen definitely under the jurisdiction of the former.

The last-named measure did much toward spreading the Gospel among the heathens of the North. It was during his pontificate also that the Council of Trosly, near Soissons, was held, the canons of which have more the character of exhortations than rules of discipline. Harvey, Archbishop of Rheims, presided, and in the opening discourse, which he delivered, gives a frightful picture of the general relaxation of discipline and depravity of morals in those times. St. Bernon contributed not a little to the restoration of monastic discipline and public morals by the foundation of the famous abbey of Clugny, whose light cheered and whose benign influence comforted the hearts of many in that age of tyranny and darkness. Sergius III. died December 6, A. D. 911, and, with the exception of approving the acts of Stephen VI. (VII.) against Pope Formosus, is probably guiltless of the other charges which have been brought against him by such writers as Luitprand.

It should be borne in mind, when speaking of these times, and of the prevailing corruption, that many of those who filled the papal chair were distinguished for purity of life and disinterested zeal in God's cause. Such were John IX. (A. D. 898–900), Benedict IV. (a. d. 900–903), Anastasius III. (a. D. 911-913), and Leo VI. (a. D. 928, 929). It is well not to lose sight of this fact, for persons are inclined, judging from the accounts they read of those times, to condemn, indiscriminately, all the occupants of the Holy See as equally unworthy and selfish.

Again, it is well known that the picture of John of Ravenna, the relative of Theodora the Elder, who ascended the papal throne under the name of John X. (A. D. 914-928), as drawn by Luitprand, is not pleasant to look upon, whereas modern writers have drawn it, if not in bright, at least in less offensive and more harmonious colors. This Pope had proved himself a man of good parts and capacity while still Archbishop of Ravenna; and even the panegyrist of Berengarius, who will assuredly not be suspected of any partiality for him, speaks of him as follows: