Annale 2017 - BraDypUS...court (1415), Magna Carta (1215) and the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), events that are much better known in English-language scholarship. It is especially

BraDypUS.netCOMMUNICATING

CULTURAL HERITAGE

Annale 2017

http://storicamente.org

Progetto grafico BraDypUS Editore

Abbonamenti È possibile attivare abbonamenti con l’editore della durata minima di tre anni. Ai volumi venduti in abbonamento viene applicato uno sconto del 25% del prezzo di copertina. Per maggiori informazioni si prega di contattare l’editore: BraDypUS. Communicating Cultural Heritage indirizzo: via Oderisi Da Gubbio 254. 00146 Roma web: http://bradypus.net email: [email protected]

ISSN: 2282-6033ISSN-L: 1825-411XISBN: 9788898392773DOI: 10.12977/storCopyright: Senondiversamentespecificato,ilcopyrightdeisingolicontributi appartiene ai rispettivi autori. Quest’opera è stata rilasciata con licenza Creative Commons Attribuzione - Non commerciale - Non opere derivate 4.0 Internazionale. Per leggere una copia della licenza visita il sito web http://creativecommons.org/ licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0. Contenuti (immagini o testi) con licenza diversa verranno segnalati all’interno degli articoli dove sono contenuti.

2018 BraDypUS Editorevia Oderisi Da Gubbio 25400146 RomaCF e P.IVA 14142141002http://bradypus.nethttp://[email protected]

Finito di stampare nell’aprile 2018

ANNALE2017

BraDypUS.netCOMMUNICATING

CULTURAL HERITAGE

Roma 2018

Direzione Marica Tolomelli

Co-Direzione Tiziana Lazzari

Coordinatore di redazione Vittorio Caporrella ([email protected])

Redazione AliceBencivenni,ClaudioBisoni,PaoloCapuzzoMariaPiaCasalena DavideDomenici,MircoDondi,CristianaFacchini,VitoFrancesco Gironda,MariaTeresaGuerrini,GiovanniIsabella,LucaJourdan, RaffaeleLaudani,ElisaMagnani,CliziaMagoni,GaetanoMangiameli ManuelaMartini,KarinPallaver,MatteoPasetti,PaolaRudan

Comitato scientifico GianPaoloBrizzi(UniversitàdiBologna),AlbertoDeBernardi (UniversitàdiBologna),MassimoDonattini(UniversitàdiBologna), MarcelloFlores(UniversitàdegliStudidiSiena), JohnFoot(UniversityCollege,Londra),GiovanniGeraci(Universitàdi Bologna),MassimoMontanari(UniversitàdiBologna),MauroPesce (UniversitàdiBologna),LourenzoPrieto(UniversitàdiSantiagodi Compostela),PaoloProdi(UniversitàdiBologna),DominicRathbone (King’sCollege,Londra),MariaSalvati(UniversitàdiBologna), FrancescaSofia(UniversitàdiBologna)

Redazione web BraDypUS Editore ([email protected])

Peer review Tuttiisaggiscientifici(sezioni“Dossier”e“StudieRicerche”)sono sottoposti a double-blind peer review. Per ulteriori informazioni e per consultare la lista dei referee: http://storicamente.org/peer_review.

Contatti e proposte Storicamente,DipartimentodiStoriaCultureCiviltà,Universitàdidi articoli Bologna,PiazzaSanGiovanniinMonte2,BolognaI-40124, Italy. Indirizzo e-mail: [email protected]

Questo volume è l’edizione annuale a stampa di una selezione di articoli apparsi sull’e-journal Storicamente,realizzatoconilcontributodel Dipartimento di Storia Culture Civiltà - Alma Mater Studiorum - Università di Bologna.

Direttore responsabile Gian Paolo Brizzi

Autorizzazione Tribunale di Bologna n. 7593 del 9 novembre 2005.

DOSSIERMatilda 900: Remembering Matilda of Canossa Wide World, a cura di Valerie Eads e Tiziana Lazzari

Valerie Eads, Tiziana LazzariRaising Matilda from the Footnotes 11

John DempseyMatilda of Tuscany as Episcopal Patroness 21

Alison CreberWomen at Canossa. The role of royal and aristocratic women in the reconciliation between Pope Gregory VII and Henry IV of Germany 43

Eugenio RiversiMatilda and the Cities: Testing a “Figurational” Approach 87

David HaySilensis and Aferesis in the Vita Mathildis: How Donizo’s Marginalia Explain the Battle of Tricontai (1091/1092) 125

Francesca GuerriNihilTerrenum,NihilqueCarnaleinEa: Matilda of Tuscany and Anselm of Lucca during the Investiture Controversy 155

ANNALE 2017INDICE

Tiziana LazzariMatilda of Tuscany: New Perspectives about Her Family Ties 191

Robert HoughtonReconsidering Donizone’s Vita Mathildis (again): Boniface of Canossa and the Emperor Conrad II 217

Giorgio MilanesiLa cattedrale romanica di Reggio Emilia: il ruolo dei vescovi e dei Canossa 251

Valerie Eads, Edward Coleman, David Hay, Robert Houghton, John Oastler Ward, Penelope Nash, Helen NicholsonMatilda of Tuscany-Canossa: Commemorating the 9th Centennial of the Great Countess, IV 279

STUDI E RICERCHE

Pietro PinnaLa fascistizzazione dei migranti italiani in Francia e Brasile: una comparazione 305

Stefan LaffinGaining a Foothold in the Weimar Republic: Giuseppe Renzetti’s Activities in the years 1925-1927 337

COMUNICARE STORIAMusei, traumi, memorie del novecento, a cura di Ilaria Porciani

Ilaria PorcianiMusei, Traumi, Memorie del Novecento. Introduzione 377

FONTI E DOCUMENTI

Francesco Moratti“Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli”. Il manoscritto di Alessandro Molini (BUB, ms 2466) 385

DIBATTITI

Paolo TomeiLe società post-romane in Occidente e Oriente. Storici a confronto per una nuova ‘grande narrazione’ 405

Angela De BenedictisL’eredità di Lutero: come si può raccontare la storia politica dello ‘Stato moderno’ 423

DOSSIERMATILDA 900:

REMEMBERING MATILDA OF CANOSSA WIDE WORLD

In2015,inordertocommemoratetheninthcentennialofthedeathoftheGreatCountessMatildaofCanossa,foursessionsandaroundtablediscus-sion were organized under the rubric Matilda 900. These sessions took place at the 50th International Congress on Medieval Studies (University ofWesternMichigan,Kalamazoo,MI)intheUSandtheLeedsInterna-tionalMedievalCongress(UniversityofLeeds)intheUK.PaperswerereadbyscholarsfromAustralia,Canada,Ireland,Italy,theUKandtheUSA.TheKalamazooCongressistheworld’slargestgatheringofscho-larsoftheMiddleAges,and,althoughanumberofpaperswerereadovertheyears,therehadbeennosessiondevotedtoMatildainthepreviousthirtyyears,ifever.TheLeedsCongressattractsmoreparticipantsfromEuropeancountries,butthesessionsheldatthe2015conferencewerethefirstdevotedtoMatilda,asnearlyascouldbedetermined.Thus,amajorgoal of Matilda 900 was to ensure that the Great Countess’ ninth centen-nial did not pass without notice alongside the commemorations of Azin-court(1415),MagnaCarta(1215)andtheFourthLateranCouncil(1215),events that are much better known in English-language scholarship. It is especially gratifying that scholars from Italy joined the sessions.

Raising Matilda from the Footnotes

ValeRie eads, Tiziana lazzaRiSchool of Visual Art, New York

Univ. Bologna, Dipartimento di Storia Culture Civiltà

Storicamente 13 - 2017Dossier

12

Amongthefunctionsofcentennialcommemorations,astapleofscho-larlycommunicationsincethemid-nineteenthcentury,istoprovideanopportunity for scholars working on a single person or event to report the status quaestionis,topresentrecentandongoingwork,andtosetout plans for future projects. These centennial sessions had the further aimofpresentingthefigureofMatildaofCanossatoalargerscholarlycommunity.Indeed,despiteconsiderableactivityinsuchareasasgen-der,feministstudies,femalelordshipandmilitaryhistory–alongwithstudiesinmedievalismthatcouldfindthecountess’extensiveNachleben ofconsiderable interest– the standardEnglish-languagebiographiesof Matilda remain what they were when the eighth centennial of her deathwasmarkedin1915,asWorldWarIraged1.Whilethemeninherlife,PopeGregoryVIIandEmperorHenryIV,havefoundtheirbiographers,Matildahasnot2. The only English-lan-guage monograph on Matilda published in the eight succeeding de-cades of the twentieth century was Robert Hollister Rough’s study of theMatildaGospel, an illustratedworkpresentedbyMatilda toSanBenedettoPointhelateeleventhcentury,nowresidingintheMor-ganLibraryinNewYork(theLibrarydidnotseefittomarkMatilda’sninthcentennialinanywaybecause«wealreadyexhibitedtheMatildaGospelsafewyearsagoaspartofourEastRoomrotations,anditistoo soon to show it again»3)[Rough1973].Thetwenty-firstcenturysawthefirstoverviewofMatilda’sentiremilitarycareer,DavidHay’sstudy of Matilda as a military leader4. If the survey of the literature is expandedtoincludearticlesdevotedtoMatilda,thecountesshasonly

1 SeeDuff1909;Huddy1906andNell’VIII centenario di Matilde 1915.2 SeeCowdrey 1998; Robinson 1999. Indeed, popular readersmay be ahead ofscholarsasfarasMatildaisconcernedthankstoanadroitandveryreadablemixofbiography,travelguideandnovel,seeSpike2004.3 EmailfromWilliamVoelkle,CuratorofMedievalandRenaissanceManuscriptsatTheMorganLibrary,April25,2014.4 SeeRough1973; Hay 2008.

VAlerie eADS, TiziANA lAzzAriraising Matilda from the Footnotes

13

a slightly larger footprint in anglophone scholarship5.Matildahasnot,ofcourse,beenentirelyleftout.ThebiographiesofPope Gregory VII and Emperor Henry IV perforce include much about Matilda,butonlyasheractionsrelatetothemenwhoarethesubjectofthoseworks.MatildafiguresprominentlyinworkstreatingsuchtopicsasthepolemicoftheInvestitureControversy,asignificantportionofwhichoriginatedinhercircle,orthelifeandworkofAbbotDesideriusofMontecassinowhomMatildasupportedasPopeVictorIII,aswellastheinfluence,orlackthereof,ofMatildainarthistory6. While Matilda isnotastrangerinarticlestreatingarangeoftopics,thecountesshasalesserpresenceonthelargerstage[Bisson2000,101-113].Infeministandgenderstudies,ithasbeenrecognizedthatifeachpo-liticallypowerfulandmilitarilyeffectivewomanistreatedassomehowexceptional,a sampleofone, the inclusionofeven intensely-studiedwomen in the broader historical narrative is inhibited, and some ofthe papers published here note thatMatilda ofCanossa has sufferedfrom being treated as sui generis [LoPrete2014,55-110]. A number of womenrelativelyclosetoMatildaintimeandstatus–Adela,countessofBlois;Ermengarde,viscountessofNarbonneandMatilda’ssecondmother-in-law, JudithofFlanders,DuchessofBavaria–have foundtheirbiographers in the twenty-firstcentury7. It seems that,as farasEnglish-languagescholarshipisconcerned,Matilda’spresenceisreco-gnized,buthersisasupportingratherthanaleadingrole.ThesituationiscompletelydifferentinthehistoriographyoftheEuro-peancontinentwherestudiesofMatildaandtheCanossans,especiallyintheworkofItalianandGermanand,mostrecently,ofFrenchre-searchers,hasresultedinalargeoutputthathasbeenconsistentover

5 SeeReynolds2002,1-13;Healy2005,49-56;Eads2010,23-68;Verzar2010,73-90. 6 SeeRobinson1978;Cowdrey1983;Glass2010.7 SeeCheyette2001; LoPrete2007;Dockray2015.


14

time,withsomepeaksinparticularcircumstances.Thiswouldinclude,ofcourse,2015,whentheInternationalCenterforStudiesontheEarlyMiddle Ages (CISAM) in Spoleto organized an entire meeting dedica-ted to Matilda and her times8.Onsomeoccasions,anniversariesseemskillfullymultipliedtohaveapretexttotakeupagainathemethatstillsustainsalivelyinterest.Matildaandhertimesis,however,atopicthatis very popular, evenwith a non-academic public, as the success oftheexhibitionsthathavebeenmountedoverthepasttenyearsonthissubject,accompaniedbycatalogsthatcollectsometimesverytechni-calspecialistcontributions,shows9.But,thecirculationofthisworkislargely limited to specialized historiographical circuits that only rarely confronteachother.Thefirst,inorderofisolation,isundoubtedlythelocal historiography that has long seen Matilda as a sort of tutelary dei-ty,theundisputedheroineofthelandscape,ofreligiosityandofnume-rouspopulartraditionsofthePoValleyandApennineterritories,com-prisingthepresentdayprovincesofReggioEmilia,Modena,Mantuaand Ferrara10.Thesecondcircuit,then,dealswithstudiesoftheformsof power and the organization of the territory of the Italian kingdom fromthetenthtotwelfthcenturies.Thisisaresearchfieldthat,overfiftyyearsofanalmostexclusivelyItalianhistoriographictradition,hasachievedresultsofgreatinterpretativerefinement,butwhichfinds,un-fortunately,adecidedlymarginalresponseinotherhistoriographies11. Finally, the third is thecircuitof studies linked to thereformof the

8 Theproceedingsofthefour-dayconferencearepublishedinMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo 2016.9 See Stiegemann,Wemhoff 2006; Calzona 2008; Salvarani, Castelfranchi 2008;Golinelli 2008.10 Itisimpossibletocitehereatitlesummarizingthetrulyvastlocalhistoriographicproduction;forasystematicaccountwithaveryfullbibliographyseeRinaldi2003.11 ThefortunesofMatildaandtheCanossaareframedinthemostgeneralcontextof the political history of the kingdom of Italy in the tenth and eleventh centuries by Sergi 1995 and by Cammarosano 1998.


15

Churchintheeleventhcentury,inwhichMatildaissurelyseenamongthe protagonists. And that, despite the inevitable universality of thetheme,ispreciselythecontextinwhichthedifficultcommunicationbetween thehistoriographies of different languages and traditions ismost evident. Starting from the fundamental Italian historiography of the1960sand1970s,mainlyrepresentedbyOvidioCapitaniandGio-vanniMiccoliandtheirschools,itisinconceivableintheItalianaca-demiccontexttousesuchanexpressionas«Gregorianreform»,which,alongwithitsinterpretiveassumptions,isstillquitestronginEnglishand French historiography.12Recent years have seen some research approach the theme of Matilda and the Canossa according to fresh perspectives which focus on ei-thertheiconographicandtextualanalysisofthesourcesmostdirectlyrelated to her political and personal action, taking into account thesymbolic readings of power and of its communication13,oronherfa-mily tiesandherrole in thecontextof the thematicperspectivesonfamily structures14 and also on the political role of women15 opened by gender studies, albeitwith results that donot always converge.Re-garding the established historiographic traditions, these studies haveattempted a combining of themes and a larger sharing of the works of national historiographies based on a blending of research rather than onlanguage.Itiscleartobotheditors,however,thatreciprocalcom-municationamongthevarioushistoriographictraditions,especiallytheAnglo-Saxon,reallyneedsalinguisticvehicle,English.Itisforthisre-asonthatwehavechosentopublishthiscollectionofworksinEnglish,butinanItalianjournalandeditedbytwohands,achoicethatshould

12 AmongtheverynumerousworksofOvidioCapitani,weneed tomentionatleast:Capitani1966;1984;1990;Miccoli1966.13 SeeLazzari2006,57-92andGolinelli2003.14 SeeLeJan2009,105-120andLazzari2012,225-242.15 SeeLazzari2016,35-55;LeJan,inpress.


16

beinterpreted,therefore,asaconcreteattempttoopenaconstructi-vedialoguebetweenhistoriographiesthatstillfacegreatdifficultiesinworking with and even knowing one another. Thepapersandcommentspresentedhereareamixofoldandnew,oftraditionalandrevisionist.JohnDempseyrevisitsthetime-honoredto-picofMatildaasecclesiasticalpatron,butwiththeaimofshowingthat,whilesheconsistentlysupportedreformers,herpolicycouldincludeabroad range of ideological positions and was always consistent with her political and strategic goals as well as her ideological agenda. Alison Cre-ber’s study returns to Canossa with the goal of foregrounding the role oftheelitewomenwho,alongwithMatilda,exercisedtheirintercessoryandmediatoryfunctions,adecidedlyupdatedviewofaneventwhichhasheretoforebeenpresentedlargelyintermsofthemaleprotagonists,HenryIVandGregoryVII,althoughneithercametoCanossaalone.EugenioRiversiexploresanequallyvenerabletopic,thatoftherelationsbetweenMatildaandthecitiesinherdomain,usingaconfigurationalandcomparativeanalysisthatbringsmultipleagentsintoplayandque-stions the traditional historiographical view of a confrontational dyad when interpreting the emergence of the Italian city communes. Donizone of Canossa’s Vita Mathildis has been read and re-read many timessinceitwasfirstpublishedinthesixteenthcentury,andnofewerthan three of these papers return to that source. The digital publication oftheoriginalmanuscripthasallowedDavidHaytoexaminethemar-ginalia and to determine that they hold the clue to clarifying Donizo-ne’saccountofanarmedencounteratTricontaiintheVeneto(1091),anengagementthatresultedinagravedefeatforMatilda’stroops,whi-leRobertHoughtonfindsthatDonizone’sinfluencehasdistortedtheperception of the relationship between the emperor Conrad II and Ma-tilda’sfather,MarquisBonifacio.FrancescaGuerriexaminesDonizonealongside the vitaeofAnselmIIofLucca toexplore the relationshipbetween Matilda and her spiritual guide and to evaluate Anselm’s in-fluenceonherpoliticalandreligiousprogram.


17

The renewed consideration of Matilda’s family continues with Tiziana Lazzari’sanalysisofthesarcophagusofBeatriceofLorraine,asecond-centuryrepresentationofthelegendofPhaedraandHippolytus,surelya disturbing topic for Matilda to select for her mother’s tomb. Gior-gio Milanesi’s analysis of the comparative roles of the bishops and of Matilda’s family in the long history and numerous rebuildings of the RomanesquecathedralofReggioEmiliaextendsthereconsiderationofphysical resources. Astowhatthefutureholds,theroundtablediscussion,“TheGregorianReformandBeyond,”presentsasimilarmixoftraditionalandrevisio-nist. Edward Coleman suggests revisiting the topic of the communes to compare again the reactions of Matilda and of Henry IV and Henry V and to consider that Matilda’s support of church reform facilitated theriseofthecommunes.ValerieEadsrevivesasuggestionfirstmadethirtyyearsago,i.e.,flippingtheexceptionalwomanparadigmtocon-sider that the assumption that women could perform military functions is built into the male-normative view of medieval warfare. This would requirefeministscholarstoengagemorefullywiththepracticalitiesofwarfare.Eadsfindsthat,eventhoughgenderstudiesandfeministscho-larshiphaveshowngreatinterestinfemalelordshipandagency,thereremains a decided scholarly bias that favors the image over the amazon. DavidHayreexaminesacentralquestion,“AreweoverestimatingtheinfluenceofMatilda?”andpresentsanumberofissuesthatneedtobereconsidered. The investigation would incorporate a combination of newtechnology,computermodeling,withold-fashionedarchaeology.RobertHoughtonraisesanumberofthesamepoints,butextendsthediscussion to the other Canossans and to the pro-reform episcopacy as well.Inthisview,Matildaisindangerofbecominganalmoststockfi-gure precisely because she has been much-studied. The proposed steps include a more careful re-reading of the known sources and a more thoroughexaminationofrelativelyneglectedsourcessuchascharters,including thoseother thanMatilda’s, to redress someof the inaccu-


18

racies of the narrative sources. Penelope Nash discusses the changing fortunes of Matilda over the ages and presents a number of reasons why sheisneglectedinanglophonescholarship,ascompared,forexample,toJoanofArc,butNashalsoconsidersthatDonizonemaybemorereliable than the previous speakers suggest. Basedontheseobservations,wecanlookforwardtoawaveacontinu-inginterestinMatildaofCanossaamonganglophonescholars,presentandfuture,whichwillincludebothsomefineoldwineinnewbottlesand a few stylish old bottles holding a young vintage of scholarship.

Bibliography

BissonT.N.2000,Princely Nobility in an Age of Ambition (c. 1050-1150),inDugganA.(ed.)2000,Nobles and Nobility: Concepts, Origins, Transformations,Woodbridge(SFK):Boydell&Brewer,101-113.

CalzonaA.(ed.)2008,Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa tra castelli, monasteri e città. Catalo-go della mostra (Reggio Emilia, 31 agosto 2008 – 11 gennaio 2009),CiniselloBalsamo(Milano): Silvana Editoriale.

CammarosanoP.1998,Nobili e re. L’Italia politica dell’alto Medioevo,Roma-Bari:La-terza.

CapitaniO.1966, Immunità vescovili ed ecclesiologia in età pregregoriana e gregoriana. L’avvio alla restaurazione,Spoleto:CISAM.

— 1984, L’Italia medievale nei secoli di trapasso: la riforma della chiesa (1012-1122),Bologna: Pàtron.

—1990,Tradizione ed interpretazione: dialettiche ecclesiologiche del sec. XI,Roma:Jou-vence.

CheyetteF.L.2001,Ermengarde of Narbonne and the World of the Troubadours,Ithaca(NY): Cornell University Press.

CowdreyH.E.J.1983,The Age of Abbot Desiderius: Montecassino, the Papacy and the Normans in the Eleventh and Early Twelfth Centuries,Oxford:ClarendonPress.

— 1998, Pope Gregory VII: 1073-1085,Oxford:ClarendonPress.

Dockray-MillerM.2015,The Books and the Life of Judith of Flanders,Farnham(SRY):Ashgate.

DuffN.1909,Matilda of Tuscany: la gran donna d’Italia,London:Methuen&Co.


19

Eads V. 2010, The Last Italian Expedition of Henry IV: Re-reading the Vita Mathildis of Donizone of Canossa,«JournalofMedievalMilitaryHistory»8,23-68.

GlassD.2010,The Sculpture of Reform in North Italy, ca. 1095-1130: History and Pa-tronage of Romanesque Façades,Farnham(SRY):Ashgate.

GolinelliP.(ed.)2003,I mille volti di Matilde: immagini di un mito nei secoli,Milano:Mondadori.

— 2008, L’abbazia di Matilde. Arte e storia in un grande monastero dell’Europa benedettina. Catalogo della mostra San Benedetto Po, 31 agosto 2008 – 11 gennaio 2009,Bologna:Pàtron.

HayD.J.2008,The Military Leadership of Matilda of Canossa, 1046-1115,Manchester:Manchester University Press.

HealyP.2005,Merito nominetur virago: Matilda of Tuscany in the polemics of the Investi-ture Contest,inMeekC.,LawlessC.(eds.),Victims or Viragos,Dublin:FourCourtsPress,49-56.

HuddyM.E.1906,Matilda, Countess of Tuscany,London:JohnLong.https://archive.org/details/matildacountesso00hudd

LazzariT.2006,Miniature e versi: mimesi della regalità in Donizone,inIsabellaG.(ed.)2006,Forme di potere nel pieno medioevo (secc. VIII-XII). Dinamiche e rappresentazioni,Bologna: CLUEB.

—2012,Goffredo di Lorena e Beatrice di Toscana,inCantarellaG.M.,CalzonaA.(eds.)2012,La reliquia del sangue di Cristo. Mantova, l’Italia e l’Europa al tempo di Leone IX,Verona:Scripta,225-242.

—2016,I poteri delle donne al tempo di Matilde,inMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo: atti del XXI Congresso internazionale di studio sull’alto Medioevo in occasione del IX centenario della morte (1115-2015): San Benedetto Po – Revere – Mantova – Quattro Castella, 20-24 ottobre 2015,Spoleto:CISAM,35-55.

LeJanR.2009,Mémoire, compétition et pouvoir. Le manuscrit de la Vie de Mathilde de Toscane (Vat. Lat. 4492), inCottier J-F.,GravelM.,RossignolS. (eds.)2009,Ad libros! Mélanges d’études médiévales offerts à Denise Angers et Joseph-Claude Poulin,Montréal:LesPressesdel’UniversitédeMontréal,105-120.

— Memory, gift and politics: Matilda of Tuscany and her donations to St Peter,inMélanges en l’honneur de Chris Wickham,inpress.

LoPreteK.A.2007,Adela of Blois: Countess and Lord (c.1067-1137),Dublin:FourCourts Press.

—2014, ‘The Lady Vanishes’: Medieval Texts,Modern Historians and Lordly Women,«QuaestionesMediiAeviNovae»,19,55-110.

Matilde di Canossa e il suo tempo2016,Matilde di Canossa e il suo tempo,XXICon-gressointernazionaledistudiodelCISAM(SanBenedettoPo,Revere,Mantova,QuattroCastella,20-24ottobre2015),Spoleto,CISAM.


20

MiccoliG.1966,Chiesa gregoriana. Ricerche sulla Riforma del secolo XI,Firenze:LaNuova Italia.

Nell’VIII centenario di Matilde 1915, Nell’VIII centenario di Matilde di Canossa: 24 luglio 1915. Scritti varii,ReggioEmilia:Bassi.

ReynoldsR.J.2002,Reading Matilda: The Self-Fashioning of a Duchess,«EssaysinMe-dievalStudies»19(1),1-13.

RinaldiR.2003,Tra le carte di famiglia. Studi e testi canossani,Bologna:CLUEB.

RobinsonI.S.1978,Authority and Resistance in the Investiture Contest. The polemical literature of the late eleventh century,Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

—1999,Henry IV of Germany, 1056-1106,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

RoughR.H.1973,The Reformist Illuminations in the Gospels of Matilda,Countess of Tuscany. A Study in the art of the age of Gregory VII,TheHague:Nijhoff.

SalvaraniR.,CastelfranchiL.(eds.)2008,Matilde di Canossa il papato l’impero. Storia, arte, cultura alle origini del romanico,CiniselloBalsamo(MI):SilvanaEditoriale.

SergiG.1995, I confini del potere. Marche e signorie fra due regni medievali,Torino:Einaudi.

SpikeM.K.2004,Tuscan Countess. The life and extraordinary times of Matilda of Canos-sa,NewYork:VendomePress.

StiegemannC.,WemhoffM.(eds.)2006,Canossa 1077. Erschütterung der Welt. Ge-schichte, Kunst und Kultur am Anfang der Romanik,Munchen:Hirmer.

VerzarC.2010,Picturing Matilda of Canossa: Medieval Strategies of Representation,inMaxwellR.A (ed.) 2010,Representing History, 900-1300,University Park (PA):PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress,73-90.

Countess Matilda of Tuscany played many different roles over the course of her long public career. One of her more important roles was that of patroness and protector to a number of reform minded churchmen. In the turbulent years of the so called Investiture Contest, the countess provided much needed material aid and physical protection to the reform popes and to their episcopal allies in Italy. Though she was genuinely committed to the reform agenda, Matilda’s support for it and for its ecclesiastical exponents was not devoid of political cal-culation or of a healthy concern for the stability of her patrimony. An examination of her relationships with two very different reform bishops, Bonizo of Sutri and Daibert of Pisa, reveals this important aspect to her activities on behalf of ecclesiastical reform.

One of the most important roles played by Matilda of Tuscany over the course of her long and noteworthy political career was that of patroness to reform minded candidates for the episcopal sees of central and nor-thern Italy. Her sponsorship of these clerics constituted an important service to the reform papacy in its seemingly life and death struggle with Henry IV of Germany. Scholars have long recognized that in the turbulent period of 1076-1094 Matilda’s court served as a vital refuge for the many clerical reformers driven from their posts in Germany and

Middle age, History, Matilda of Tuscany, Bonizo of sutri, daibert of Pisa

JoHn deMPseyWestfield State University,

History Department


22

ItalybythehostilityoftheGermancrown[Robinson1973,185].1 A numberoftheseclericalexiles,inturn,parlayedthecountess’hospita-lityintosuccessfulbidsforepiscopalseeswithinandorapproximatetoherpatrimony.Nevertheless,Matilda’ssupportforsocalledGregorianepiscopal candidates was not driven simply by ideological considera-tions. Her activity as episcopal sponsor also advanced her own inte-rests as a landed magnate in a region where urban populations were growing in wealth and military power. While Matilda’s commitment tothereformagendaisbeyonddispute,sheattemptedtopromoteitinways consonant with the sustainability of her rule in her own domain. Contrary to thecontemporary imperialistpolemic, thecountesswasnot the dupe of the reform papacy.AnexaminationofMatilda’srelationshipwithtwoofthoseclericswhofoundrefugeinherterritoryintheperiod1085-1089illuminatesquitewellthecomplexityofherroleasepiscopalpatroness:namely,BonizoofSutriandDaibertofPisa.Thepairdifferedgreatlyinmanyways.Bonizo,forhispart,wasacommonerPatareneclericfromCremonalikely elevated to the see of Sutri sometime in 1078 by Gregory VII [Berschin1972, 5-6].2Thus, in ideological terms,Bonizo’s pedigreeandcredentialswereimpeccable.Daibert,conversely,beganhiseccle-siasticalcareerasanimperialist,whohadreceiveddiaconalordinationatthehandsoftheimperialchancellor,ArchbishopWeziloofMainz.Nevertheless,despitehisquestionableideologicalcredentials,afterDai-bertenteredMatilda’scirclesometimeinthelate1080shiscareerflou-rishedunderher tutelage. In1088,hewaselectedbishopofPisa and

1 Robinson citesBook II vv. 266-280ofDonizoofCanossa’sLife of Matilda of Tuscany as the original source for this designation of Matilda as a protector of reform clerics.DonizoofCanossa,Vita Mathildis carmine scripta,V.2,65.2 ThePataria was an often violent urban popular reforming movement that origi-natedinMilaninthelate1050sundertheleadershipofthedeacon,ArialdofVarese.FromMilan,themovementspreadacrossLombardytoothercities.Formoredetailson the history and nature of the Pataria see Golinelli 1984.

JohN DeMpSeYMiddle Age, History, Matilda of Tuscany, Bonizo of Sutri, Daibert of Pisa

23

consecratedbyPopeUrbanII.Bonizo,ontheotherhand,profitedverylittlepersonally fromhisassociationwiththe«mostexcellentcountessMatilda».3 Although a member of her clerical entourage since 1085 or evenperhapsfromabitearlierdate,Bonizofailedtowinanymaterialsupport from her in a bold bid to secure the bishopric of Piacenza for himself in 1089 or 1090. Whereas Daibert eventually went on to become anarchbishop,papalconfidant,andLatinpatriarchofJerusalem,BonizowasphysicallydisfiguredbyhisopponentsinPiacenzaandforcedintomonastic retirement from whence he continued to write and to corre-sponduntilhisdeathafewyearslater[Berschin1972,14n.46].ThispaperwillarguethatDaibert’selevationtothePisansee,viewedfromanecclesio-politicalperspective,wasfarmoreconsonantwithMa-tilda’sneedsinthelate1080sthanBonizo’squixoticattempttosecuretheepiscopal throneofPiacenza. Italsofit intoapre-existingpatternof behavior between the countess and thePisans.Thus, despitewhatmusthavebeenherideologicalaffinityforthePatareneclericwhohadwonGregoryVII’sfavor,Bonizo’sspecificambitiondidnotmatchtheexigenciesofhersituationasalandedpotentateoperatinginanageofurban revival. She was not prepared to commit herself politically and/or militarily to a dispute beyond her territory and fraught with controversy. Likeanycompetentpolitician,shehadtochooseherbattlescarefully.

The situation of the Reform Party following the death of Pope Gregory Vii

AtthedeathofGregoryVIIon25May1085inhisSalernoexile,thepa-pal reform party seemingly faced a most desperate situation. The move-ment,ostensibly,wasleaderless.Thepapalpartisans,whohadbeenabletomakeittoGregory’scourtinexile,werelargelyphysicallyseparated

3 BonizoofSutri,Liber ad amicum,IX,620.


24

from their comrades north of Rome in central and northern Italy and beyond the Alps. After having received his imperial coronation in Rome atthehandsofhisownanti-pope,ClementIII,theformerArchbishopGuibertofRavenna,HenrywasevidentlyascendantinhisownGer-man kingdom and unchallenged as well in his Italian territories.TheworkofH.E.J.Cowdrey[1983]andValerieEads[2000],none-theless,hasdemonstratedthattheapparentlydesperatesituationofthepapal party was something other than what it seemed. The party faced seriouschallengesforsure.But,itscircumstancesweremorefavorablethanmost scholars have imagined.Most significantly, in the periodafterGregory’s death,Matilda enjoyed a revival of hermilitary po-wer.Thepreviousfourorfiveyearshadbeenverytryingonesforthecountess.OntheeveoftheGermanking’sfirstItalianexpedition,hisLombard allies under the command of one of his illegitimate sons dealt hermilitaryforcesaseriousblowon15October1080atVolta,whichlay near Mantua just below the main road to the Alpine Brenner Pass. The Matildine cities north and south of the Po River soon reacted to her defeat with insurrections against her authority. A successful revolt inthestrategicTuscancityofLuccadrovethearch-Gregorian,AnselmII,outofhissee.WhenheenteredItalyinAprilof1081,Henryaccu-sed Matilda of treason for opposing his allies at Volta and commanded hertoforfeitallherLombardandTuscanlands[Cowdrey1998,215].Forthenexttwoyearsorso,thehostilityoftheGermankingandhisItalian allies largely restricted the countess’ movements to between her Apenninefortifications[Eads2003,397-398].Sheremained,regardless,athorninthecollectivesideofheradversa-ries. So successful were her small-scale military operations against her Henrican neighbors that they petitioned Henry in 1082 to lift his siege of Rome and campaign against the countess instead [Eads unpublished manuscript].Inthissameyear,Matildaalsomanagedtodeliverasub-stantial amount of gold and silver donated by various local churches to thebesiegedpopeinRome,whileprovidingrefugetoexiledreformers


25

like Bonizo and Anselm. Valerie Eads4 has further observed that the pace of the central Italian leg of Henry’s retreat from Rome shortly af-ter his imperial coronation by the antipope Guibert/Clement on Easter Sunday1084 reveals the effectivenessofMatilda’smilitary resistanceeven in the bleakest hours of the reform papacy. Based on the dates of thechartersthatheissuedalonghisreturnjourneytoGermany,Eads[2000,179]haspointedoutthatHenry’spacenoticeablyquickenedashe passed through Matildine territory. Eads [2000, 191], furthermo-re,hasremarkedthatMatilda’sdefeatofanarmyofLombardHenri-cansatSorbaraon2July1084servednoticetoHenry’s ItalianalliesthatthebackingofadistantemperorinGermanywasnotsufficientto guarantee them success on their own soil. Bernold of St. Blasien’s Chronicon entry for the followingyear,1085,adds to the impressionthatthecountessremainedaformidablefigure.Inhisremarks,BernoldattributestheappointmentofCatholic(idest,reform)bishopsthatyearinModena,Reggio,andPistoia,toMatilda’srecoveryofherpower5.The countess also made common cause with the monastery of Monte-cassino,whichhademergedasaleadingcenterofGregorianactivityfollowing the pope’s death. She worked very closely with the Roman cardinal-priest and abbotofMontecassino,Desiderius.AfterAnselmII’sdeathon18March1086,Desiderius,foravarietyofreasons,beca-metheleadingcandidatetosucceedGregoryVII.On24May1086,almostayeartothedayofGregory’sdeath,afactionofRomancardinalclergyelectedhimVictorIIIinRome.However,becauseofthehostili-ty of the Apulian Normans and the resurgence of the Roman Guiberti-stasundertheleadershipoftheaforementionedWeziloofMainz,De-siderius/Victorquicklywithdrewfromthecitywithouthavingbeenconsecrated[Cowdrey1983,196-197].WithMatildaofTuscany’sas-sistance,Desiderius/Victorengagedinarecruitingcampaignoverthe

4 Unpublishedmanuscript.5 Bernold,Chronicon,a.1085,443,.SeeEads:2000,192.


26

followingyearamongNormans,Lombards,andotherstostrengthenthe political and military positions of the papal party to the point where heor another reformcandidate couldeffectivelygovern theRomanChurch[Cowdrey1983,198-200].This reversalofpolitical andmilitary fortunesaside, thepapalparty,includingMatilda,lackedthenecessarystrengthtoprevailonitsownagainst the combined forces of theGerman emperor, his anti-pope,and the imperialist leaning aristocracy of northern Italy. For Matilda herself,oneofhermainprioritiescertainlymusthavebeentorepairher relationship with the cities of her patrimony. Henry’s Italian forays had created a good deal of mischief for the countess in these places. Interestingly,Victor’ssuccessor,UrbanIIalsocastastrategiceyeonthe cities of Italy as potential weak spots for Henry IV and his Italian partners in thewar between papacy and empire.By the late 1080s,therefore,bothpopeandcountesslookedforwardtoforgingententeswith the emerging urban powers of central and northern Italy. Each undoubtedly saw these new powers as potentially valuable pieces in their chess match against the imperialist party.

Bonizo of sutri: Popular activist in the Tuscan Court

During Henry IV’s first Italian expedition, the king’s forces droveBonizo from Sutri and subsequently captured him outside ofRome[Berschin1972,9].Somehowheregainedhisfreedomandendedupin the entourage of the countess of Tuscany by 1085 or 1086 at the latest. One sure piece of evidence for this supposition comes in the formofBonizo’shistoryofpapal-imperialrelations,theLiber ad ami-cum(composedcircalate1085orearly1086)[Berschin1972,23].Inparticular,theperorationthatconcludesBonizo’shistorytiesittotheorbitofthecountess.Itsconclusion,indeed,constitutessomethingofamini-panegyrictoMatilda.Hereheextolsherasamodelholywarrior


27

whom all the soldiers of God should imitate. She is a new Deborah who willsurelytriumphoverSiseraandJabin(i.e.HenryIVandGuibert/Clement) once again.6Bonizo’swords,infact,createdaminorliterarytradition that cast the countess as a second Deborah. As Walter Ber-schin[1972,42]shrewdlyobservedlongago,throughouthishistory,Bonizocarefullyweavestogethertheindividualhistoriesofthepapacy,theHouseofTuscany/Canossa,andhisownmovement,thePataria.While scholars [Robinson 1978] have characterized the ad amicum as a piece of Gregorian polemic connected to the war of words that erup-tedbetweenpapacyandempirefrom1076onwards,andevenasabio-graphyofGregoryVII[Robinson2004,36],itisfundamentallyaPa-tarenetext[Dempsey2010,395].TheexiledbishopofSutrihopedtore-invigoratehispopularmovement,whichhadbeen largely inactivesince the murder of its lay leader the Milanese knight Erlembald Cotta in 1075,byconvincinghisideologicalamici to return to the barricades so to speak in defense of the deceased Gregory VII’s cause in imitation of his protector,thecountessofTuscany[Dempsey2010,395-397].Bonizoclearly anticipated a revival of the Pataria’s violent confrontation with the ecclesiastical establishments of the Lombard cities and their allies.Matilda,toanextent,certainlyassociatedherselfwiththecontroversialpopularreformingmovement.InadditiontoBonizo,thecountessalsosponsoredHerman,thePatareneRomancardinal-priestofSSQuattroCoronati.In1087,withMatilda’said,HermanwaselectedbishopofBresciaandservedasUrbanII’slegateinLombardy[Huls1977,202].ThankstothereportingoftheexiledconservativebishopofAlba,Ben-zo,weknowthatBonizoandHermantookadvantageoftheprotec-tionaffordedthembythecountesstoattempttodowhatBonizohadcalled for in the ad amicum: revive the Pataria.Benzo,inchaptertwenty-oneofBookIofhisAd Henricum IV impe-ratorem libri VII, relates to the emperor that threedemons,Bonizello,

6 Bonizo,Liber ad amicum,XI,620.


28

Armanello,andMorticiello,havebeencausinggreatconfusionbyusur-ping ecclesiastical functions in twodifferent locales.Hefirst lamentsthat Bonizello is engaged in a great sham or deception in Piacenza.7 He preaches there diabolical sermons to the people and he has condemned and consecrated churches.8AccordingtoSchwartz[1913,191],Piacen-za’slongservingbishop,thearchconservativeDennis,diedsometimebetween1082and1085.Hissuccessor,theMilanesenobleAribert,isknownonlybyonedocumentdated1April1086[Schwartz1913,192].We know further from the twelfth century Collectio Britannica that at someundisclosedtime,maybein1088orperhapsin1089,afactioninPiacenza electedBonizo bishop [Somerville,Kuttner 1996, 50].Theremnant of the city’s Patarene faction was undoubtedly responsible for what was certainly a rump episcopal election. Rump episcopal elections weresomethingofaPatarenehallmark[Dempsey2006,63].Piacenza’sPatarenespresumablysummonedtheexiledbishopofSutrifromMa-tildine territory to their city either before the aforementioned Aribert couldestablishhimselfinthecityor,morelikely,afterhehaddied.Benzo,inBooktwenty-twoofhistome,additionallyruesthefactthatArmanello and Morticiello were simultaneously causing great trouble in the vicinity of the diocese of Alba.9HansSeyffert[1996,161n.332],themostrecenteditorofBenzo’swork,haspointedoutthat,asdescri-bedbyBenzo,Herman’sactivity stronglyresemblesaPatarene stylepreachingcampaign.TheexiledbishopofAlba,mostimportantly,bla-mesthisPatareneplagueforthesorrystateofhisownaffairs10.OfthetwoenterprisesdenouncedbyBenzoabove,thebishopofSutri’swas clearly the more audacious. By all accounts (including Bonizo’s ad amicum),Piacenza’sPatarenebranchhadneverbeenabletogainthe

7 Benzo,Ad Heinricum IV imperatorem libri VII,I,ch.21,160.8 Ibidem, 160.9 Ibidem.10 Ibidem,ch.22,162.


29

upper hand in the city.11BishopDennis,theinveteratefoeofGregoryVII,maintainedhisauthorityinhisdiocesethroughouthisownentirepontificate[Schwartz1913,191].Thecity,moreover,wasasuffraganseeofRavenna,thehomebaseoftheanti-popeGuibert/Clement.All of the direct information about Bonizo’s gambit in Piacenza comes fromthreeshorttextsfromUrbanIIcontainedintheCollectio Britannica: namely,CB5,7and8.Thefirstofthesetexts,CB5,isaddressedbythepopetoBonizohimself.Theothertwotexts,CB7and8areaddressedtoUrban’slegateinLombardy,theaforementionedHermanandtoan‘M’respectively.Thethreetextsobviouslybelongtothesametimepe-riod,butitisnotclearwhenUrbancomposedthem[Berschin1972,12;Somerville,Kuttner1996,51]. GiventhesignificanceofLombardyinthecontestbetweenempireandpapacy,onewouldimaginethatUrbanwould not have waited very long to address a crisis in Piacenza.ThetextsmakeitclearthatBonizofacedseriousresistanceinPiacenzato his election and they were almost certainly composed in response toarequestbyBonizoforpapalconfirmationofhiselection.InCB5[Somerville,Kuttner1996,50],UrbantellsBonizothat«Wehavehe-ardandthusaresaddenedthatmanypeople,bothclericsandlaityhavedissented from your election to the bishopric of Piacenza and had taken an oath against you»12.Inthefaceofthestiffoppositiontohim,thepopeofferedBonizoonlythe most tepid support. Urban concluded his very brief message to Bo-nizo with the following pledge «If in any way it can be accomplished canonicallyandpreservingthepeaceoftheChurch,wewishanddesi-rethatyourelectionstands,and,asfaraswecan,toconfirmit»13.

11 Bonizo,Liber ad amicum,VI,598.12 «Audivimus unde contristamur plurimos videlicet tam clericos quam laicos de electione tua in Placentinum episcopatum dissentire et contra te iurasse».13 «Volumus enim et amamus, si fieri ullo modo canonice et pace ecclesie potest, electionem tuam permanere, et quantum in nobis est confirmare».


30

The pope’s words hardly constitute a ringing endorsement of Bonizo’s candidacy.UrbanessentiallyleftBonizotofindhisownwayoutofhisdifficultsituation.InCB7and8[Somerville,Kuttner1996,51],thepope basically repeats the same message which he delivered to Bonizo inCB5.InCB7,hetellsCardinalHermanthateventhoughhewasneither unanimously elected nor elected by «the better clergy and bet-terlaity»,BonizocanstayinPiacenzaprovidedhispresencetherecanbe established canonically and peacefully.14Ifthiscanbeaccomplished,heapprovesofBonizo’selection.Undoubtedly,«thebetterclergyandbetterlaity»thatisthenobleclergyandlaity,weretheoneswhohadsworn an oath against the commoner Patarene.Thepopelikewiseinformed‘M’thathewishedBonizo,«whoissaidtohavelaboredmuchintheChurch»,tobeenthronedinPiacenzaprovi-ded it could be accomplished peacefully.15RobertSomerville[1996,51]hasremarkedthatthereisnoobviousclueastowhom‘M’refers.Hehassuggested,however,thatMatildaofTuscanywasalmostcertainlythe recipient of the pope’s message.It stands to reason that Bonizo would have turned to his fellow Patare-ne,Herman,andtothepotentatewhohadrescuedhimfromcaptivity,Matilda,forhelpinwinningUrban’sapprovalofhiselection.Yet,fromMatilda’s perspective as a territorial ruler who understood how hostilely localcommunitiescouldre-acttointerventionsintheiraffairs,Boni-zo’sdaringforayintoPiacenza’sdomesticaffairsfailedtoserveherownpurposes. Her active intervention on behalf of a sectarian episcopal can-didate would have contradicted the impression that she may well have wished to create amongst her own townspeople that she respected the

14 «Si potest fieri ut in Placentino episcopatu permaneat Bonizo, quamvis non ab univer-sitate illius aecclesie neque a melioribus tam clericis quam laicis electus sit, salva reverentia ecclesie canonice et cum pace, laudamus».15 Ibidem,52:«Sutrinus episcopus, qui multum in ecclesia laborasse dicitur, si cum pace et cleri populique concordia fieri potest, volumus et pro eius reverentia desideramus ut in epsi-copatu Placentino, sicut olim electus est, sollempniter intronizetur».


31

rights and aspirations of urban communities. Whatever her sympathies forBonizo’sideologywere,«themostexcellentcountessMatilda»couldnotcommitherselftohisenterprise.Bonizo,asaresult,continuedhiswork in Piacenza without any outside support. His opponents eventual-ly assaulted him and rendered him physically unable to perform any pu-blic ministry. He likely retreated to his native Cremona and died there somefiveorsoyearslater[Dempsey2006,67-69].Divisiveideologicallychargedactions,suchasBonizo’s,alsodidnotfitUrban II’s formula for advancing the reform agenda in Italy’s cities and towns.Thepope,fromtheverybeginningofhispontificate,playedupGregoryVII’sofferofforgivenesscontainedinhislasttestamenttoallHenricans,includingtoHenryandGuibert/Clement,fortheirsinsif they sincerely repented. He also consistently portrayed the German emperor and the anti-pope as the true agents of the discord and inter-necineconflictthathadplaguedtheempiresince1080.Urban,evertheastutepolitician,understoodthatHenry’spenchant for triumphalismand his orchestration of Guibert/Clement’s election deeply concerned manyofhisItaliansubjects.HeunderstoodquitewelltheItalianpre-dilection fordistantabsenteeemperors.He,consequently,pursuedadétente policy with the ecclesiastical establishments of northern Italy fromtheearliestdaysofhispapacy.Ofparticularsignificance,hema-naged to engineer a rapprochement betweenRome andMilan, thebirthplace of the Pataria. The culmination of the reconciliation betwe-en the two great Italian sees came in 1088 with the public bestowal ofthepalliumontheerstwhile imperialist,ArchbishopArnulfIII, inMilanitself.ItwasbestowedonthearchbishopbyUrban’slegate,Her-manofSSQuattroCoronati[Cowdrey1968,287].Informulatinghisdétentepolicy,thepopemayverywellhavebeenfollowingthecounselofMatilda.Asthispaperwillargue,thecountesshad recently collaborated with Pope Victor III on the joint Pisan-Ge-noesemilitaryexpeditionagainst theMuslimportofMahdia,whichhelpedreconcilePisawiththereformpapacy[Cowdrey1977,17].It


32

wasamilitaryundertaking,infact,thathadrepairedapapal-Pisanal-liance that she herself had previously helped forge between the city and GregoryVIIinthe1070s.Matilda,asanexperiencedruler,hadlearnedhow to play the game of Italian urban politics.

daibert of Pisa: erstwhile Henrican Turned Papal and Matildi-ne Favorite

Sometimein1088,ashewasrepairingpapalrelationswithMilan,Ur-ban II personally re-ordained the subdeacon Daibert to the diaconate andthensoonafterwardsconsecratedhimbishopofPisa.Justfourorfiveyearsearlier,however,asstatedabove,thenewPisanbishophadbeenfirstordainedtothediaconatebytheexcommunicatedHenricanarchbishopofMainzand imperialchancellor,Wezilo[Matzke1998,35-36].BasedonMichaelMatzke’s[1998,11-36]investigation,itap-pears that Daibert belonged to one of the many northern Italian epi-scopal and municipal delegations that followed Henry IV back into Germany after his imperial coronation in the hopes of obtaining an imperial privilege. That he received ordination at Wezilo’s hands de-monstrates Daibert’s initial desire to climb the clerical cursus honorum as a Henrican or Guibertista. It is not unimaginable that he hoped at some future time to parley his ordination at the hands of one of Henry’s epi-scopalfavoritesintoabishopric.However,notlongafterhisordination,Daibert evidently forswore his allegiance to the emperor and crossed backintoItaly.Matzke[1998,33-35]hascommentedthathissubse-quentelevationtothePisanseestronglyhintsthatwhenhedefectedtothe papal camp Daibert entered the circle of clerics surrounding Matil-daofTuscany.Pisalaywithinherpatrimony,andasweshallexplainbelow, shewas associatedwithhis last twopredecessors there,Lan-dulfandGerard.Furthermore,justayearbeforeDaibert’selectionandconsecration,Matildahadco-sponsoredwithPopeVictorIIIthejoint


33

Pisan-GenoesemilitaryexpeditionagainsttheMuslimportofMahdiainmoderndayTunisia[Cowdrey1977,16-17].Theflotilla’sspiritualleader,abishopnamedBenedict,wasalmostcertainlyBenedictofMo-dena, anotheroneof thecountess’ episcopalclients [Cowdrey1977,16-17].Matilda, therefore,probablydidindeedintroduceDaiberttothepopeandthattogether,thecountessandthepopepresentedhimtothe Pisans as a candidate for their then vacant episcopal see.Thepoliticalandmilitarybenefitsofthefriendshipofarisingpowerlike Pisa for pope and countess were obvious to all onlookers. Urban’s actionswithregardstoDaibert,nonetheless,sentshockwavesthroughthe papal camp in Italy. The most direct evidence that we possess of these waves is the letter that the pope addressed to Bishop Peter of Pi-stoia(abeneficiaryhimselfofMatilda’spatronage),CB30,inthefallorwinterof1088[Somerville,Kuttner1996,105-109].Urban’slanguagemakes it clear that he was responding to an earlier message from Peter in which he had complained about both his promotion of a repentant heretic to a rank higher than the one he had held prior to his defection andhisre-ordinationofDaiberttothediaconate.WhileUrbanexcu-sed his promotion of Daibert on the basis of Daibert’s outstanding per-sonalqualities,hejustifiedhisre-ordinationofDaiberttothediaconateon the basis of Cardinal Humbert of Silva Candida’s rigorist argument that a heretic (i.e., the simonist Wezilo) cannot validly bestow the sacra-ments. It was the same theological line that the pope had taken at the Synod of Quedlinburg (20-26 April 1085) which he had presided over asGregoryVII’slegateinGermany[Matzke1998,31].Itwouldappear, then, thatonthethornyquestionof thevalidityofthe sacraments of heretics (i.e., simonists),UrbanIIwasa theologicalhardliner.Matzke [1998, 32], nevertheless, has remarked that a po-litical motive lay behind the pope’s declarations about the nullity of Guibert/Clement and of his ecclesiastical lieutenants’ consecrations and ordinations. The political goal was to strike at the spiritual authori-ty and prestige of the Henrican party. His re-ordination of Daibert


34

in1088,therefore,maintainedtheecclesio-politicallineestablishedatQuedlinburg and advanced the campaign to undercut the spiritual au-thority of the Henrican party and its anti-pope.Paradoxically,atthesametime,thepope’sre-ordinationofDaibertsi-gnaled his readiness to welcome back into the papal fold all those who hadstrayedintotheHenricancamp.AsMatzke[1998,32-33]hasputit,UrbanemployedarigoristtheologicalargumentinDaibert’scaseinorder to achieve a moderate political goal. He used a radical rationale to justify détente with an erstwhile Henrican. Such a gesture was in perfect keepingwithhisMilanesepolicydiscussedabove.InhislettertoPeter,Urban makes sure to mention that Daibert had told him personally of hisordinationbythesimoniacWezilo;butUrbanalsocarefullyaddsthat Daibert received his orders non-simoniacally. 16 The pope then of-fersthevaguejustificationforDaibert’sre-ordinationthattheneedofthe Church demanded it.17 He assures his readers that Daibert has forsa-ken the heretics in body and spirit and that he has been laboring hard on the Church’s behalf.18Mostironically,thepressingneedthatdemandedDaibert’s advancement involved the restoration of a papal-Pisan alliance firstdevisedbyGregoryVIIandMatildain1076-1077.In1076,theyearofthefirstmajorbreachbetweenGregoryVIIandHenryIV,bothmenanxiouslydesiredtoshoreuptheirstrategicposi-tionontheItalianpeninsula.Oneofthefirstcitiestoattracttheiratten-tionwasPisa.InAprilof1076,thePisanseewasvacantandthepopeand Matilda immediately set about to bind the city closer to themselves [Matzke1998,51].WithapossibleGermaninvasionofherterritoriesonthehorizon,thecountessrecognizedtheimportanceofsecuringPi-

16 Somerville,Kuttner1996,106: «Porro Daibertum ab eo, licet simoniaco non simoniace, eiusdem confessione, comperimus in diaconum ordinatum».17 Ibidem: «Et ex integro necessitate ecclesiae ingruente diaconum constituimus».18 Ibidem: «Daibertum, ab hereticis et corpore et spiritu digressum atque utilitate ecclesiae pro viribus insudantem».


35

sa’sfidelity.Thesubsequentupheavalinhercitiesin1080demonstratesthe soundness of her instincts. What resulted was an ecclesio-political alliancethatbenefitedpope,countess,andthePisancives alike.SometimebeforeAugustof1077,thePisanselectedtheMilanesecleric,Landulf as their bishop. Because Gregory immediately embraced him andbecauseofMatilda’ssubsequentpenchantinthefutureforprovi-dingthecitiesofherpatrimonywithreformmindedbishops,thereisevery reason to believe that the pair had presented Landulf to the Pisans asacandidatefortheirvacantsee[Matzke1998,51].Itseemsthatpartof thepayoff to thePisans foracceptingLandulf came inAugustof1077.JustsevenmonthsaftertheshowdownatCanossabetweenpopeandking,thecountessdonatedanumberofvaluablecurtes of land at key points along the Tuscan-Emilian Appenines to Pisa’s bishop and cathedralchapter[Matzke1998,51].Thecharterofdonationstipula-ted that the properties could not be sold and that the cathedral canons had to live communally and chastely [Matzke 1998, 51].Moreover,the charter practically gave the Pisans a supervisory role over the joint usufruct of the properties by the bishop and cathedral chapter. In Sep-temberof1077,GregoryfurthersweetenedthepotforthePisansbynamingLandulfpapalvicarforCorsica.Ayearlater,Gregoryperso-nally consecrated Landulf and bestowed upon him a papal privilege for theprotectionofthegoodsofthePisanChurch.Theprivilege,howe-ver, stipulatedthatLandulf’s successorshadtobecanonicallyelectedand consecrated, faithful to theRomanChurch andwilling to helprecover the lost portions of the terra sancti Petri.Matzke[1998,51]seesin this last stipulation and in other aspects of Gregorian policy towards Pisa an implicit promise of papal co-operation with the Tuscan city’s designsonthemineralrichislandofSardinia,whichoncebelongedtothe papal patrimony.UponLandulf’sdeathin1079,thenativePisan,Gerardsucceededhim.Like his predecessor,Gerardwas aGregorian loyalist and the popepersonally consecrated him.Despite the great difficulties created for


36

Gerard in Pisa by the second breech in papal-imperial relations in 1080 andHenry’ssubsequentItalianincursions,heremainedfaithfultothepope and the countess. With the defeat of Matilda’s forces at Volterra inOctoberof1080,PisaostensiblywentintotheHenricancolumn.It seems that the cathedral chapter stood out as the center of the most enthusiasticsupportfortheGermanmonarch[Matzke1998,53].Inanattempttodrawthemaritimepowerclosertohimself,Henryformal-lyabolishedMatilda’sauthorityinPisa,surrenderedsomeofhisownprivileges there, freedupbothmargraviteandroyal landoutsidetheold city, and issued adecree for themaintenanceofdomesticpeace[Matzke1998,54-55].Nonetheless,Matzke[1998,55]hasdemonstratedthat,forallofHenry’sconcessionstothePisans,thecitywasnotstaunchlyHenrican.Inthisregard,hepointstothetellingfactthat,unlikeAnselmIIofLucca,Ge-rard never had to abandon his see. He remained active there throughout the years 1080-1084. When the emperor’s release of margravite and royal land outside the old city ignited a civil war over the control of the-separcels,Gerardsteppedforwardandnegotiatedasettlementbetweenthewarringfactions,whichwasreferredtoastheLodo di Gerardo.WithGerard’sdeathon8May1085,Pisalostitsgreatauthorityfigure,andMatzke[1998,56]hasspeculatedthatthecity’sleadingmenbegantosearchoutforanotherleader,whocouldhelpmaintainthepeaceinPisa.MatzkebelievesthatthePisanleadershipfinallyoptedtorevivethepapal-Matildineallianceand that theMahdiaexpeditionof1087signaledPisa’sofficialreconciliationwithitsformerpartners.Infact,hebelievesthatforthePisanstheexpeditionwasapenitentialactinato-nement for its sins against the papacy in the years 1080-84. We know from the Carmen pisano,aliterarycelebrationoftheassaultwrittenwellaftertheeventitself,thatmanyofthecampaignersmadeapilgrima-getoRomepriortotheflotilla’sdepartureforNorthAfrica.Wealsoknow from this same source that Pope Victor III received a portion of theexpedition’splunderandatributepaymentfromtheMuslimemir.


37

Theflotilla’s spiritual leader,BishopBenedict,wasagainalmostcer-tainlytheMatildinefavorite,BenedictofModena19.According toMatzke [1998,100],Urban II’s personal re-ordinationof Daibert to the diaconate and his consecration of him as Pisan bi-shop confirmed the reconciliationwith Pisa andmarked the formalresumption of the agreement first established during Gregory VII’spontificate.Tosaythe least,UrbanemployedanuncharacteristicallyGregorianmeasure to rescue aGregorianpolicy. In a strange twist,Daibert’s shady background made him especially valuable to the pope and countess vis à vis the Pisans. How more clearly could Urban and Matildahaveconveyedtothecity’sHenricanholdouts,particularlytothose in the cathedral chapter, that thepastwas in thepast, than torehabilitateandpromoteDaibert?MatildaalsotookanumberofstepsherselftodemonstrateconcretelyhergoodwilltowardsPisa.She,in-creasingly,abstainedfromherrightsandprivilegesinthecity.In1103,she went so far as to donate her residence at the Church of St. Nicola tothecathedralcanons[Matzke1998,59].ForMatzke[1998,57],thenewbishopwasnotonlyalivingsymbolandguarantorofPisa’srenewedobediencetoRomeandrenewedfide-litytoitsseigneur,Matilda.Hewasalsoaguarantorofdomesticpeacewithintheburgeoningcity.Hisnewflockalmostcertainlyexpectedhim to reprise the peacemaking role formerly played by Gerard. In this respect,hisHenricanbackgroundwasespeciallyvaluabletothePisansthemselves. He was a living symbol of reconciliation.

19 MatzkehasmadetheintriguingsuggestionthatgiventhecloseproximityintimebetweentheMahdianadventureandhiselectionandconsecrationasPisanbishop,Daibert may have accompanied Benedict to North Africa. His participation in this enterprisewouldhavefamiliarizedthePisanleadershipwithDaibertandtherefore,hewouldnothavebeenanunknownquantitytothemin1088.Recallthatinhislet-ter of 1088 to Peter of Pistoia Urban writes that Daibert had worked on the Church’s behalf after his renunciation of the Henrican cause. Matzke has surmised that Daibert rendered this service as part ofMatilda’s clerical entourage. If he is correct, then,Daibert could have participated in the countess’ negotiations with the Pisans and GenoeseabouttheMahdiacampaign.See1998,57.


38

Conclusion: The Road (Back) to Piacenza

A year after Daibert’s meteoric ascent to the Pisan see Matilda engaged in a still more controversial ecclesio-political enterprise that almost cer-tainlywentagainstherpersonalandspiritualinclinations.Bernold,inhis Chroniconentryfor1089,announcedthatthecountess,thedaughterofBonifaceandwidowofGodfrey(theHunchback),hadmarriedWelfV,theheirtotheduchyofBavaria.20 Bernold assured his audience that Matilda had re-married not out of concupiscence but in obedience to theRomanpontiffsoastobettersupporttheRomanChurchagainsttheexcommunicated,idest,theemperorandhisanti-pope21.Bernold’s suggestion that the decision to re-marry was not born of Ma-tilda’s own personal feelings rings very true. There is the obvious fact that the union between the forty-three-old countess and the sevente-en-year-old Welf V lasted for only a few acrimonious years. There is alsothestrongevidencethataftertheassassinationofherfirsthusband,GodfreytheHunchback,thecountesshadtakenanoathofholywi-dowhood[Dempsey2011,238-239].CinzioViolante[1972,682-683,n.324]pointedoutlongagothatinItalianreformcirclesthereexistedthe idea that widowers or unmarried male aristocrats could best serve the church by leading pious lives outside of the monastery and acti-vely opposing with arms the enemies of ecclesiastical reform. Robinson [1973,170]similarlynotedthatGregoryVIIbelievedthattheupperranks of the laity had a positive duty to defend ecclesiastical interests in secular politics and to wield the sword on behalf of the church.Frombothapoliticalandmilitaryperspective,however,theunionofthehouses ofCanossa andWelf theoreticallyofferedgreat advanta-gestoallthepartiesinvolved,includingtothepope.WelfIVrebelledagainst Henry in 1089 probably in part as a calculated risk that he had

20 Bernold,Chronicon,a.1089449.21 Ibidem.


39

a far greater chance of wresting control of his ancestral land in Este from his half-brother Fulk as a papal ally than as a dutiful subject of an emperor suspicious of ambitious princes. The successful merger of the dynasties also would have created a powerful principality stretching from Tuscany to southern Germany that would have also placed both sides of the Alpine Brenner Pass system into anti-imperial hands.22 This development, like thedefectionofMilanandPisa fromthe imperialcamp,wouldhaveimpededHenry’sabilitytocommunicatewithanddefend his anti-pope and his other Italian allies and thus it would have improved considerably Matilda and Urban’s strategic positions.ThegravelywoundedBonizo,writing fromhis refuge inhisnativeCremona,esotericallyexcoriatedhisformerpatronessMatildaforhersecondmarriageinhishighlypolemicalcanonicaltreatise,theLiber de vita christiana[Dempsey2011,218].Accordingtothesidelinedpopularactivist,widowsshouldnotpossessmilitarycommand.Theyshouldat-tend rather to domestic duties. They certainly should not don makeup and consort with curly haired boys.23Inhistreatise,healsoesotericallycastigates Urban II for his deviations from Gregory VII’s stances (or fromwhatBonizobelievedthosestancestohavebeen).Thereis,ad-ditionally,evidencethatheattributesMatilda’sscandalousdecisiontore-marrytotheperniciousinfluenceofthepopeandofDaibertofPisa[Dempsey2011,245-250].Therealcrime,inhiseyes,ofcourse,thatthecountesshadcommitted(andbyextensionthepopehadcommittedaswell)andthatDaibertpersonified,washerfailuretore-ignitethePataria’sbattlesofthe1060sand1070sashehadwantedhertodo.Asaresponsibleterritorialruler,however,Matildacouldnotcomplywithhiswishes.While sheun-

22 FortheargumentthatUrbanmayhaveproposedthemarriagewhenhedidoutof fear that the southern German princes might presently come to terms with Henry IVseeRobinson2003,280.23 Bonizo,Liber de vita christiana,VIIch.29250


40

doubtedly sympathized with the Patarene bishop and almost certainly lobbiedUrban II onhis behalfwith regards tohis situation inPisa,thecountess faced theurgentneedoffindingaway topreserveherpatrimony. The barricades that she was interested in putting up were between herself and the emperor and not between citizens of the same cities and towns of central and northern Italy.ThemarriagealliancetowhichBonizoobjectedsostrongly,infact,al-most brought ruin upon both houses and the reform papacy. The nup-tialsinducedHenrytolaunchyetanothermilitaryexpeditionintoItaly(1090-1097).Thecampaign,initially,wentverywellfortheemperorandoncemorethecountesswasdesperatelyfightingforherpoliticalsurvival.Then,inOctoberof1092,Matilda’sforceswereabletoscoreagreat victory over the emperor’s troops as they lay siege to the countess’ castle at Canossa. Aided by a thick blanket of fog that had settled over theimperialcampatCanossa,Matilda’sgarrisonsatCanossaandthene-arby castle at Bianello were able to launch a surprise coordinated attack onHenry’stroops,drivingthemacrossthePoRiver[Eads2000,202].In thewake of this unexpected andhumiliatingdefeat,manyof theemperor’s Italian allies deserted him and together with Matilda the cities ofMilan,Cremona,PiacenzaandLodi formed thefirst anti-imperialLombardLeaguein1093.ForthenextfourlongyearsHenrywaspin-neddownbelowtheAlpscutofffromhisGermankingdom.The dramatic turn of events in the fog at Canossa made possible Urban II’s triumphant tour of 1095 that brought him through central and nor-thern Italy and over the Alps to the famed council at Clermont. His most important stop prior to Clermont was in Piacenza in March of 1095. There,inthecityofBonizo’sgreathumiliation,Urbanconvenedama-jor reform council that condemned simony and nicolaitism. Among the many important prelates in attendance were Herman of SS Quattro Co-ronati,thebishopelectofBrescia,andDaibertofPisa.Amongthelaypotentates invited to witness this most public vindication of the reform agendaandgrandcelebrationofvictoryovertheempirewas,ofcourse,


41

the patroness of the two aforementioned prelates and Bonizo’s one time protector,MatildaofTuscany[Somerville2011,11n.62].

Bibliography

Primary sourcesBenzoofAlba,Ad Heinricum IV libri VII,SeyffertH.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniae

Historica, Scriptores Rerum Germanicarum, Hannover: Hahnsche Buchhandlung,1996.

BernoldofSt.Blaisen,Chronicon,PertzG.H.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistori-ca,Scriptores V,Hannover:HahnscheBuchhandlung,1844.

BonizoofSutri,Liber ad amicum,DummlerE.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistori-ca, Libelli de LiteI,Hannover:HahnscheBuchhandlung,1891.

BonizoofSutri,Liber de vita christiana,PerelsE.(ed.),Hildesheim:Weidmann,1998.

DonizoofCanossa,Vita Mathildis carmine scripta a Donizone presbytero qui in arce ca-nusina vixit,SimeoniL.(ed.),V.2,Bologna:Zanichelli,1930.

Collectio BritannicainSomervilleR.,KuttnerS.1996,Pope Urban II, The Collectio Bri-tannica, and the Council of Melfi (1089),Oxford:ClarendonPress,.

Secondary sourcesBerschinW.1972,Bonizo von Sutri: Leben und Werk,Berlin:WalterdeGruyter.

BischoffB.1948,Der Canticumkommentar des Johannes von Mantua für die Markgrafin Mathilde,inStammlerW.(ed.)1948,Lebenskräfte in der abendländischen Geistesge-schicte. Festschrift Walter Goetz,Lahn:Simons-Verlag,22-48.

CarratoriL.,HamiltonB.1985,Daiberto,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,vol.31,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaItaliana,679-683.

CowdreyH.E.J.1968,The Succession of the Archbishops of Milan in the Time of Pope Urban II,«EnglishHistoricalReview»,LXXXIII(CCCXXVII):285-294.

—1977,The Mahdia Campaign of 1087,«EnglishHistoricalReview»,XCII(CCCLXII):1-29.

—1983,The Age of Abbot Desiderius: Montecassino, the Papacy, and the Normans in the Eleventh and Early Twelfth Centuries,Oxford:ClarendonPress.

—1998,Pope Gregory VII 1073-1085,Oxford:ClarendonPress.


42

DempseyJ.A.2006,Bonizo of Sutri: Life and Work,Ph.D.Dissertation,BostonUniversity.

—2010, Ideological Friendship in the Middle Ages: Bonizo of Sutri and His Liber Ad Amicum, in Classen A., SandidgeM. (eds.) 2010,Friendship in the Middle Ages and Early Modern Age: Explorations in a Fundamental Discourse,Berlin:WalterdeGruyter,395-428.

—2011,From Holy War to Patient Endurance: Henry IV, Matilda of Tuscany, and the Evolution of Bonizo of Sutri’s Response to Heretical Princes,inClassenA.,MargolisN.(eds.)2011,War and Peace: Fundamentals of Medieval and Early Modern Culture,Berlin:WalterdeGruyter,217-252.

EadsV.2000,Mighty in War: The Campaigns of Matilda of Tuscany,Ph.D.Disserta-tion,CityUniversityofNewYork.

— Matilda of Tuscany,inPenningtonR.,HighamR.(eds.)2003,Amazons to Fighter Pilots: A Dictionary of Military Women Volume 1,WestportConnecticut:Greenwo-odPress,397-398.

GolinelliP.1984,La Pataria: Lotte religiose e sociali nella Milano dell’XI secolo,Novara:Europìa.

HulsR.1977,Kardinäle, Klerus und Kirchen Roms 1049-1130,Tubingen:MaxNie-meyer Verlag.

MatzkeM.1998,Daibert von Pisa: Zwischen Pisa, Papst und erstem Kreuzzug,Sigma-ringen:JanThorbeckeVerlag.

NicoliniU.1971,Bonizone,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,vol.12,Roma:Isti-tutodell’EnciclopediaItaliana,246-249.

RobinsonI.S.1973,Gregory VII and The Soldiers of Christ,London:MacmillanandCo.

—1978,Authority and Resistance in the Investiture Contest: The Polemical Literature of the Late Eleventh Century,Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

—1999,Henry IV of Germany 1056-1106,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

—2004,The Papal Reform of the Eleventh Century: Lives of Pope Leo IX and Pope Gre-gory VII,Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

RonzaniM.1996,Chiesa e Civitas di Pisa nella seconda metà del secolo XI. Dall’avvento del vescovo Guido all’elevazione di Daiberto a metropolita di Corsica (1060-1092),Pisa:ETS.

SchwartzG.1913,Die Besetzung der Bistümer Reichsitaliens Unter Den Sächsischen Und Salischen Kaisern Mit den Listen der Bischofe 951-1122,Leipzig/Berlin:B.G.Teubner.

SomervilleR.,KuttnerS.1996, Pope Urban II, The Collectio Britannica, and the Council of Melfi (1089),Oxford:ClarendonPress.SomervilleR.2011,Pope Urban II’s Council of Piacenza,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

ViolanteC.1968,I Laici Nel Movimento Patarino,Milano:VitaePensiero.

—1972,Studi sulla cristianita medioevale: società, istituzioni, spiritualità,Milano:VitaePen-siero.

Modern historians rarely mention the presence of royal and aristocratic women at Canossa in January 1077. Yet contemporaries emphasised the important roles played by several women, including Matilda of Tuscany, Adelaide of Turin, Empress Agnes and Queen Bertha. This paper seeks to re-appraise royal and aristocratic women’s actions at Canossa in the light of gender studies, and also of recent scholarship on political diplomacy and mediation, in order to emphasise their centrality to political events in the eleventh century.

Canossaisasmallwordwithagreatdealofresonance.Itrefers,firstandforemost,toaplace:acastleintheApennines.InthelateeleventhcenturythiscastlebelongedtoMatildaofTuscany,whoruledthemark(ormarch)ofTuscany(r.1076-1115).ThetermCanossaisalsoused,inanarrowsense,torefertoeventsthattookplacethereinJanuary1077:KingHenryIVofGermany(r.1056-1106),whowasundersentenceofexcommunication,stoodinthesnowbeforethegatesofCanossa,bare-footanddressedasapenitent,askingPopeGregoryVII(r.1073-1085)forabsolution.Henrydidthisforthreedaysinarow(25–27thJanua-ry)afterwhich,followingtheinterventionofaristocraticwomen,andothers,hewaspermitted to enter the castlewhereGregory releasedhim fromexcommunication.Finally, ‘Canossa’ isused toencompassthewider implicationsof thismeeting.The literatureonthis isvast,

Women at Canossa. The role of royal and aristocratic women in the reconciliation between Pope Gregory Vii and Henry iV of Germany

alison CReBeRKing’s College london,Department of History


44

and focuses in particular on the meaning of these events for papal and royal authority1. This work links with the broader historiography of theso-called‘InvestitureControversy’:the«struggleforrightorderintheworld»[Tellenbach1940,1]betweenpapacyandempireinthelateeleventh–andearlytwelfth–centuries2. Modern accounts rarely men-tion royal and aristocratic women at Canossa. Yet numerous contem-porariesemphasisedtheimportanceofwomen,particularlyMatildaofTuscanyandAdelaideofTurin,inthereconciliationbetweenHenryandGregory.This paper investigates the involvement of these, andotherwomenatCanossa.Whatdidcontemporaries,writingwithinadecadeoftheseevents,makeoftheirpresence?Andwhataretheimpli-cationsofthisforwomen’sparticipationinmedievalpolitics?

Women at Canossa

Matilda of Tuscany and Adelaide of Turin (c.1014/20-1091) played cru-cialrolesintheeventsatCanossainJanuary1077,andarerecognisedas doing so by contemporaries. Three other women were more pe-ripherally involved: the dowager Empress Agnes (c.1025-1077),QueenBertha (c.1050-1087), and Beatrice of Tuscany (c.1020-1076). With theexceptionofBertha(whowasmarriedtoHenryIVofGermany),these royal andaristocraticwomenwere allwidowswithexperienceofruling.Beatrice,MatildaandAdelaidewereprincelywomen(fromprinceps,meaningapre-eminentnon-royalruler).Theywereheiresses,who–althoughtheysometimessharedtheirpowerwithothers–ru-ledlargedomainsandexercisedsupra-regional,trans-Alpineinfluence.Afterthedeathofherhusband,BonifaceofTuscany,Beatriceruledhis

1 Reuter2006a;Robinson2000,esp.143-170;Cowdrey1998,129-166;Golinelli2013;Fried2012.2 Miller2009;Airlie2013;Körntgen2013.

AliSoN CreBerWomen at Canossa

45

lands–themarkofTuscanyandcounties inEmiliaRomagna–un-tilherowndeath(r.1052-1076)[Goez1995;Bertolini,1970].Beatricesharedpowerwithherdaughter,Matilda,duringthelastyearsofherlife(1071-1076);thereafterMatildaruledindependently(r.1076-1115).3 Adelaide ruled themark ofTurin formore than fifty years (r.1036-1091),andthecountyofSavoyfromthedeathofherthirdhusband,OttoofSavoy(d.1057/60),onwards.4Agnes,wifeofHenryIII(r.1039-1056)andmotherofHenryIVofGermany,actedasaregentforhersonduringthefirstyearsofhisminority(1056-1062).ShethentookreligiousvowsandretiredtoRome,butremainedinvolvedinimperialpoliticsfortherestofherlife[Bulst-Thiele1933;Black-Veldtrup1995].Thesewomenwerelinkedbykinship,friendshipandpolitics,bothtoeach other and to Henry [Genealogical table]. Beatrice and Matilda were Henry’s cousins (and thus related to Agnes by marriage). They wererelatedviatwosisters:Beatrice’smother,MatildaofSwabia,and

3 Hay2008;Golinelli2004;Goez2012.4 Previté-Orton1912,165-251;Sergi1995,chs.3-5;Creber2016.


46

Henry’spaternalgrandmother,GiselaofSwabia.Henryacknowled-ged their kinship in his letters and diplomata.5 Matilda was also Ade-laide’s second cousin (via Prangarda of Canossa: Matilda’s great-aunt andAdelaide’sgrandmother),butcontemporariesdonotremarkuponthis relationship. Adelaide and Agnes were also related by marriage: Adelaide’sdaughter,Bertha,wasmarried toAgnes’ son,Henry; andAdelaide’sson,Peter(c.1046-1078),wasmarriedtoAgnes’niece,alsocalled Agnes (d. after 1089). These women nurtured their kinship con-nectionsbycorrespondingwitheachother, and sometimesmeetingface-to-face [Golinelli 2011]. Modern accounts rarely allude to the presence of women at Canossa. Adelaide,AgnesandBerthaarementionedbriefly,ifatall.6 Matilda is present in one of the key images of Canossa: a miniature from Donizo of Canossa’s Vita Mathildis (Life of Matilda),completedc.1115 (which is not the focus of this article).7 There is thus more discussion of Matilda’s role at Canossa8,butsheisoftenmarginalised,too.Atmost,scholarstend to note that Matilda and Adelaide acted as intercessors at Canos-sa,withoutconsideringthewiderimplicationsofthis.9AnexceptionisTimothyReuter,whoarguesthattheritualsperformedatCanossawere carefully worked-out in advance and therefore that the interme-diarieswhonegotiatedtheterms–womenaswellasmen–playedacrucialrole[Reuter2006a,161,165].ThispaperaimstobuildonReu-

5 Die Urkunden Heinrichs IV, 379 (11th January 1086); 385 (14th January 1086):«Mahtilda nostra neptis»;Gregorii VII. registrum, III.5 (11thSeptember1075),whichincludesanextractfromalostletterofHenryIV’s,referringto«mea amita Beatrix». 6 Cognasso1968,115-116isunusualinemphasisingAdelaide’sactiveparticipationin these events. 7 Donizo,Vita Mathildis,II.1,esp.vv.89-103.Ontheminiature:Verzar2010,78-80;Lazzari2006,esp.69.8 Struve1995,42-44;Goez2012,102-107;Hay2008,67-70;Golinelli2004,214-224.9 Cowdrey1998,155-156;Althoff2006,152;Weinfurter2006,17;Previté-Orton1912,239-240.


47

ter’simportantinsight.Equally,PaoloGolinelliisunusual,intwobriefoverviews,inemphasisingthatseveralofthesewomen(Adelaide,Ber-thaand,particularly,Matilda)werepresentatCanossa[Golinelli2011,260-261; 2016, 3-4].Despite emphasising thesewomen’s importantcontribution atCanossa,Golinelli does not investigate howorwhythiswasthecase,norwhatcontemporariesmadeofthis.Instead,Go-linelli’sargumentsarebasedonold-fashionedessentialism:atCanossa,Matilda took on the «traditional role of woman as peacemaker» (il ruolo tradizionale della donna pacificatrice), and supportedGregoryVII «forreasonsofidealism,orreasonsoftheheart,[…]atypicallyfeminineor‘gendered’choice»(!).10The general absence of women from scholarship on Canossa is part of a wider trend: there are still too many important medieval sources which have not been studied from the perspective of women and gender [Lo-Prete 2014;Earenfight 2008]. In part, this omission is the legacyofnineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturyhistorians’definitionofpoliticsanddiplomacyasthesphereofmen[Stuard1987a,66-67].Historio-graphy,andparticularlythetendencytowards‘splithistoriographies’,alsoplaysarole.Studiesontherolesofqueens/empressesasintercessorsand as consors regni,11forexample,havenotbeenfullyintegratedintowiderstudiesofmedievalpoliticsorconflictmanagement[Goez2007,161;Zey2015,19-20].InrelationtoCanossascholars,understanda-bly,havefocusedprimarilyonHenryandGregory,andtheoutcomeoftheirmeeting,whileotherfigures(notjustnoblewomen,butalsoAbbotHughofCluny,andothertemporalprinces,suchasMargraveAdalbertAzzoIIofEste),whoareperceivedasextraneoustothe‘story’ofCanossa,areside-lined.WorkonCanossathusoftenfailstoconnect

10 Golinelli2016,17:«per le ragioni ideali, o del cuore, […] una scelta […] tipicamente femminile, “di genere” direi». 11 Muller-Wiegand2005;Fößel2000;Althoff1989,32-33;Baumgärtner2004.


48

withcomplementaryresearcheitheronintercessionandmediation,oron royal and aristocratic women. The omission of women and their diplomatic efforts fromCanossacontributes to misconceptions about the political activities of noblewo-meninthecentralMiddleAges.Takentoitsfurthestextreme,JoAnnMcNamaraarguedthat‘Canossa’wasemblematicofacrisisingenderrelations in the eleventh century which led to the erasure of women from public life.12 In McNamara’s view the «struggle for right order in theworld»atCanossawasnotbetweenChurchandState,asGerdTel-lenbachargued[Tellenbach1940],butbetweenwomenandmen:the«men who headed the hierarchies of religion and politics cooperated andsupportedoneanotherin…legitimisingthegendersystemthatallottedpublicspacesolelytomen»[McNamara2005,118].McNamara’s view of Canossa dovetails with her work on elite medie-valwomenandpowermoregenerally.Acrossseveralinfluentialarticles(publishedfrom1973onwards),McNamaraarguedthatintheearlierMiddleAgespowerwaslocatedinthehousehold,andpoliticswasfa-mily-based13. Women were thus able to play key roles in gaining power forthemselvesandtheirfamily.Fromtheeleventhcenturyonwards,therewasasubstantivechangeintheexerciseofpower,whichshiftedfromthepersonalanddomestictothepublicandinstitutional(exem-plifiedforMcNamarabyCanossa).Thereafter,inMcNamara’sview,womenwereexcludedbothfromthepublicsphereofpoliticsandlaw,andfromparticipationinChurchaffairs[McNamara2005,105-113;McNamara1994].McNamara’sthesiswas–andis–attractivetomanyscholars,14becauseitcomplementsotherinfluentialstrandsofeleventh-century historiography, including the Church reform movement,

12 McNamara2005.Onthe‘crisisofmasculineidentity’whichMcNamarathinksprecipitated this: McNamara 1994. 13 McNamara,Wemple1988;McNamara1994;2003.14 e.g.Stuard1987;Erler,Kowaleski1988,4-6.


49

changesinthestructureofnoblefamiliesandtheso-called‘feudalre-volution’.15 More recent work has, however, questioned the timingandextentofelitemedievalwomen’sexclusionfrompoliticalpower.

Some scholars argue that women’s power was often more limited in the early Middle Ages than McNamara suggests16. Others demonstrate that many elite women were politically active in the central Middle Ages.17 Aboveall,theconceptofbinarypublic/maleandprivate/femalesphe-reshasbeenheavilycritiquedandrevisedregardingitsapplicabilitytomedievalpolitics,andtowomen’sroleinthepoliticalsphere.18 Some scholars argue for the existenceof something approaching amedie-valpublicsphereinrelationtopublicopinion[Melve2007;deJong,Renswoude2017],but themedievalpolitico-legaldomainwasquitedifferentfromthemodernpublicsphere.Medievalpoliticscontinuedtobecentredonelitefamiliesandtheirhouseholds,whichmeantthatmedievalnoblewomen«couldinterveneauthoritativelyand‘publicly’inpoliticsevenastheirpowers,likethoseofmalelords,weregenerallyconstruedas‘private’whencontrastedwiththoseofrulersinmodernStates»[LoPrete2012,145].McNamara’s emphasis on Canossa as representative of a «womanless space» [McNamara 2005, 104] is particularly problematic, as this isemphatically not the view presented in eleventh-century sources. Nu-merouscontemporariesemphasisedtheinfluenceofseveralroyalandaristocraticwomen,particularlyMatildaandAdelaide,ontheeventsat

15 Theseconceptshavebeenheavilyrevised–ifnotoutrightrejected–inrecenthistoriography:Cushing2005;Leyser2016;Stafford1998a;Little,Rosenwein1998,107–210;West2013,esp.1–9.16 Nelson,Rio2013;Stone2013;Drell2013.17 Evergates1999;Johns2003;Goez2007;LoPrete2007;LoPrete2014;Bowman2014;Zey2015.18 Nelson1990;Baumgärtner2003;Meriggi2004;LoPrete2007a,esp.1924-1926;LoPrete2012;McLaughlin2010,3-5,221-230.


50

Canossa.19 Matilda and Adelaide are included in Gregory VII’s own ac-count:aletterwrittenattheendofJanuary1077totheGermanprincesandbishops,informingthemofwhathadtranspiredatCanossa.20 Ade-laide is also mentioned in three other accounts written within a decade ofthemeetingbetweenHenryandGregory;21 and Matilda is named in two further early accounts.22 This paper focuses on three of these early accountsinparticular–GregoryVII’sletter,theAnnals of Lampert of Hersfeld (written c.1077);andtheChronicle of Berthold of Reichenau (written c.1080)–astheydiscussMatildaandAdelaideinthemostde-tail.23Othereleventh-centuryworks,includingbyArnulfofMilanandCardinalDeusdedit,areusedtocontextualisetheseaccounts.MatildaisreferredtomoreoftenthanAdelaideinrelationtoCanossa,particularly by Italian contemporaries.24Evenauthors, suchasArnulfofMilanandBenzoofAlba,whorefertoAdelaideelsewhereintheirwork,25tendnottomentionherinconnectionwithCanossa.Inpart,this is because Italian authors do not write about Canossa in the same kindofdetailasnorthernauthors[Golinelli2006].ItisalsoareflectionofMatilda’sstatusasaliterarypatron,andthecloseconnectionsbetwe-

19 Foroverviewsofcontemporaryaccounts:Zimmerman1975,89-104,134-163;Golinelli2006,592-594.20 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12(lateJanuary1077).21 Berthold,Chronicon, a.1077, 258; Lampert,Annales, a.1077, 289-290; Pseudo-Bardo, Vita Anselmi,c.16,18.22 ForaccountsofCanossawhichmentionMatilda:nn.20-21above;Arnulf,Liber,V.8,227-229;Bonizo,Liber,VIII,610.23 Ontheseaccounts:Zimmermann 1975,139-145,148-150.24 Anexceptionis:Pseudo-Bardo,Vita Anselmi,c.16,18.25 Arnulf,Liber,III.7,173-174;Benzo,Ad Heinricum,IV.42(13),432-436;V.9(10)-13(14),482-498;VI.4,544-545.OntheiromissionofAdelaide:nn.26,30below.


51

enMatildaandcontemporaryauthors,includingBonizoofSutriandArnulfofMilan,whichassuredherprominenceinthesources.26The sources on Canossa are also split along partisan lines.27 The majo-rity of the accounts which mention Adelaide and Matilda were written by pro-papal authors.28Bycontrast,workswrittenbypro-imperialau-thors rarely include either Matilda or Adelaide.29 These authors tended toviewCanossaasthesceneofHenry’shumiliation;theythusmen-tionedCanossaasbrieflyaspossible,ifatall.30After1085,whenithadbecomeclearhowlittle theeventsatCanossahadactuallyachieved,there was a similar tendency to downplay Canossa in accounts written bypro-papalauthors.Fromthelateeleventh-centuryonwards,Adelai-de is present only in works which closely follow (or include) Gregory’s own account.31 Adelaide is not mentioned in other accounts written at thistimebyMatilda’sadherents,suchasDonizo’sVita Mathildis,whichnaturally emphasised Matilda’s role.32 From the mid twelfth century MatildaisincreasinglyomittedfromaccountsofCanossa,too[Goli-nelli2006,595-601].Theomissionofwomenfromtheseaccountssu-

26 Arnulf,Liber,V.8,227-229;Bonizo,Liber,VIII,610.ArnulfwaspartofaMilane-selegationtoGregoryshortlyafterCanossa(V.9,229-230).SinceGregoryremainedwithMatildauntilmid-1077,Arnulfnaturallyfocusedonherrole.Equally,Bonizocomposed the Liber ad AmicumwhileatMatilda’scourtinMantua:Berschin1972,10,23-24.27 Onthispolemicalliterature:Robinson1978;Melve2007;Hay2008,ch.5;Witt2012,ch.4.28 Anti-imperialaccountswhichomitAdelaide/Matilda:Bruno,Saxonicum bellum,chs.89-90,83-85;Bernold,Chronicon,a.1077,409-410.29 Königsberg Fragment,189-190;PetrusCrassus,Defensio Henrici IV,I.6,446;Beno,Gesta Romanae ecclesiae,II.1,374;Liber de unitate ecclesiae conservanda,I.6,191-193; Vita Heinrici imperatoris,ch.3,16;Benzo, Ad Heinricum,I.24,166-167.30 This iswhyBenzoofAlba–whodiscussesAdelaide indetailelsewhereinhiswork(aboven.25)–doesnotmentionAdelaideinherrelationtoCanossa.31 Paul,Vita Gregorii VII,c.84,524;Hugh,Chronicon,II,445.32 Donizo,Vita Mathildis, II.1, 127-143;Ranger,Vita metrica s. Anselmi, esp. vv.3157-3164.


52

perficiallycoincideswithMcNamara’stimelineforwomen’sexclusionfromthepublicsphere.Yet,asweshallsee,thereweremanyreasons–unrelatedtoMcNamara’sthesis–thatwomenwerewritteninto,andoutof,contemporaryaccountsofCanossa.

negotiations before Canossa

GregoryVIIbecamepopeinApril1073,andinheritedadifficultsi-tuationwithHenryfromhispredecessor,PopeAlexanderII(r.1061-1073),whohadexcommunicatedseveralofHenry’sclosestadvisors.33 Tensions over the appointment of a new archbishop in Milan further inflamedthesituation[Cowdrey1968;Zey2006].Therewereseve-ralphasesintheconflictbetweenHenryandGregory[Struve1991].In thefirst phase (1073-1076) their relationship initially appeared toimprove,beforeworseningagain in1076.Threewomen–Matilda,hermother,Beatrice,andEmpressAgnes–wereactivelyinvolvedininitiatives which aimed to reconcile Henry and Gregory during this period.34 Their actions indicate that Matilda’s and Adelaide’s activities atCanossawerenotanomalous,andthatintheeleventhcenturyelitewomenoftenplayedimportantrolesinconflictresolution.PartofthereasonBeatrice,MatildaandAgnesactedasmediatorswithsuchregularityisbecausetheywererelatedtoeachother,andtoHen-ry,bybondsofkinship;andwerealsoconnectedtoGregorybybondsoffriendshipand‘spiritualkinship’.35AccordingtoGregory,«hismost

33 Robinson2000,ch.3;Althoff2006,IV.1;Cowdrey1998,3.2.34 Struve1995,42-44;Goez2012,92-93;1995,170;Bertolini1970,359;Black-Veldtrupp1995,378-380;Cowdrey1998,91-98;Golinelli2004,188.35 ForGregory’s letterstoandaboutBeatriceandMatilda:Gregorii VII. registrum,I.19-21;I.25-26;I.40;I.47;I.50;I.77,III.5;Golinelli1991;Goez1995,165-172;Stru-ve1995,42-43;Goez2012,92-93;andAgnes:Gregorii VII. registrum,I.19-21;I.85;II.30;III.10;III.15;IV.3;Bulst-Thiele1933,97-98;Black-Veldtrupp1995,99,312,


53

beloved daughters» (filiae karissimae),Beatrice,MatildaandAgneswereamong his most important advisors in the attempt to bring about «the unity of concord» between «priestly and imperial powers».36 (Gregory makesnomentionofAdelaide in this regard, althoughotherdocu-ments indicate that he was on good terms with her.37) Henry also va-luedthesewomen:accordingtoGregory,HenryaskedBeatriceandMatilda to intercede with Gregory on his behalf.38 These women were not only involved in letter-writing campaigns: Agnes39 and Beatrice40 travelled to Germany to negotiate with Henry face-to-face. Gregory praisedthesewomenfortheirefforts,particularlyBeatriceandMatilda,whowere«altogetherbackinguptheRomanChurchand…strivingfirmly to unite [Gregory’s]mindwith the king’s».41 When Gregory received conciliatory letters from Henry in 107342andagainin1075,43 heascribedthistotheinterventionofBeatrice,MatildaandAgnes.44 AlthoughtherelationshipbetweenGregoryandHenrybrieflyappe-ared to improve, itworsened again: the secondphaseof the conflictbetween them (1076-1080) encompassed the deposition of Gregory at theAssemblyofWormsbybishopsfavourabletoHenry(January1076);Gregory’sexcommunicationofHenryattheLentenSynod(February1076);andanothertemporaryreconciliationbetweenthetwomenat

378-380.For spiritualkinship inpapal letters towomen ingeneral:Lubich2012,149-152.36 Gregorii VII. registrum,I.19(1stSeptember1073);Cowdrey(trans.)2002,22.37 Below,nn.64-66.38 Die Urkunden der Markgrafin Mathilde 1998.39 Gregorii VII. registrum,I.85(15thJune1074);McLaughlin2010,119-120.40 Goez1995,145,170-171,Reg.46b-c,47.41 Gregorii VII. registrum,I.26(9thOctober1073);Cowdrey(trans.)2002,31.42 Die Briefe Heinrichs IV,no.5(1073).43 Die Briefe Heinrichs IV, no. 7 (before August 1075). 44 Gregorii VII. registrum,I.26(9thOctober1073);I.85;Goez1995,Reg.43b.


54

Canossa (January 1077).AtWorms, theGerman bishops specificallycriticised Gregory for allowing the «whole world of the Church» to be administered by a «new senate of women».45Thiswas anobliqueattack on precisely the women who had been trying to heal the breach between Gregory and Henry.46Gregoryrespondedbyexcommunica-tingHenry(22ndFebruary1076),whichcompletelyunderminedHen-ry’sabilitytorule[Golinelli2004,208-209;Robinson2000,148-149].

At Tribur in Autumn 1076 the German princes gave Henry an ultima-tum:eitherhemustbeabsolvedfromexcommunicationbyFebruary1077,ortheywouldelectanewking[Cowdrey1998,150-155;Ro-binson2000,156-157].AtaboutthistimeAgnesandMatilda,alongwithAbbotHughofCluny(r.1049-1109),becameinvolvedinanotherinitiative,whichaimedtoreconcilenotjustHenryandGregory,butalsoHenryandtheGermanprinces[Fried2012,161].Theycounselledthat a general assembly should be held between the German princes and Henry and Gregory «for the sake of peace and justice» (pacis ac iustitie causa).47 This assembly was supposed to be held at Augsburg in early1077,butwassupersededbyeventsatCanossa.48 Agnes,BeatriceandMatildawereinvolvedinattemptsatreconcilia-tionbeforeCanossa,butonlyMatildawaspresentatCanossainJanua-ry1077:hermother,Beatrice,diedinApril1076;andAgnes’wherea-boutsinJanuary1077areunknown.49Atthesametime,Adelaide–and

45 Briefsammlungen der Zeit Heinrichs IV,no.20(24thJanuary1076),46:«per hunc femninarum novum senatum totum orbem ecclesiae administrari».46 Hay2008,63-64;Cowdrey1998,116-117;Goez2012,108-109.47 Arnulf,Liber,V.8,228.48 OntheplannedassemblyatAugsburg:Fried2012,esp.42-44,100-102,122-124.49 AgneswasinRomewithGregoryinDecember1076(Bonizo,Liber,VIII,610);and at Piacenza with Henry by mid-February 1077: Die Urkunden Heinrichs IV, 286 (17thFebruary1077).Cf.Bulst-Thiele1933,102-103;Black-Veldtrupp1995,56,99,307,312,378-380;MeyervonKnonau1894,761,767.


55

toalesserextent,Bertha–whowerenotpartoftheseearlierinitiatives,become more prominent in the sources.

The journey to Canossa

MatildaandAdelaide,whobothruledlandsofhugestrategicimpor-tance[Goez2012,92;Previté-Orton1912,237],playedcrucialrolesinthejourneytoCanossa.Severalcontemporaries,includingGregoryhimself, indicate thatMatilda encouragedGregory to travel north.50 GregoryleftRomeon1stDecember1076,andmetwithMatildainFlorence. Thereafter Matilda provided Gregory with an escort as he travelledintoLombardy[Struve1995,44;Hay2008,68-69].Accor-dingtoLampertofHersfeld,MatildawaswellplacedtoaidGregory,since «a great part of Italy obeyed her authority and she possessed an abundanceofall theproperty thatmortalsmostprize (…)whereverthepopehadneedofherhelptherefore,shewastherewithallspeedandzealouslyservedhim,asafatheroralord».51By8thJanuary1077MatildaandGregoryreachedhercourtatMantua,whereGregorywasexpectingtobemetbyanescorttoAugsburgfromtheGermanprin-ces.Theescortdidnotarrive,52 but the news that Henry was in Italy did,andMatildaurgedGregorytoreturnwithhertoherfortressofCanossatowaitforHenry[Golinelli2004,214-223].AdelaidewasequallyinstrumentalinHenry’sjourneytoCanossa,butthere are several misconceptions about her actions in modern accounts. Lampert of Hersfeld is the only contemporary to emphasise Adelaide’s

50 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12;Pseudo-Bardo,Vita Anselmi,c.16,18;Donizo,Vita Mathildis,II.1,vv.66-73.51 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,287-288;Robinson(trans.)2015,349.AlsoArnulf,Li-ber,V.8,228.52 Gregorylateracceptedtheprinces’apologyforthis:Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12.


56

role in this regard.53 Whether or not women were included in contem-poraryaccountsofCanossawasdeterminedbyseveralfactors,oneofwhich is their personal connection with the author. Gregory VII had long-standingrelationshipswithMatildaandAdelaide,sohenaturallyreferred to them in his work.54(Berthold,whoseaccountfollowedGre-gory’s, thus includedMatildaandAdelaide, too.)Similarly,Lampert’sfocusonAdelaideisattributabletoherdaughter,Bertha’s,extendedstayatHersfeldin1073-1074,whereherson,Conrad,wasbornandbapti-sed.55EvenifLampertdidnothaveanypersonaldealingswithBertha,thisconnectionpresumablyputher–andthusAdelaide–onLampert’sradar.OtheraccountsdonotmentionAdelaidebyname,evenwhenthey describe Henry travelling to Italy via Adelaide’s lands in Turin.56 Inmid-December1076HenrytravelledtoBesançon,wherehespentChristmas.57ThenHenrymetAdelaideandherson,AmadeusIIofSa-voy(d.1080),atCivis.VariousSavoyardlocationshavebeenidentifiedas Civis,mostcommonlyGex(followingOswaldHolder-Egger,whoedited Lampert’s Annals58),butalsoCoise,Chignin,and«nearGeneva».59 Ifso,thiswouldbeoneoftheonlytimesthatAdelaideisdocumentedin Savoy. Other scholars suggest that Civis is a misreading of Cinis,andthat Lampert was thus referring to the Mont Cenis pass.60 This location corresponds with Lampert’s assertion that Adelaide and Amadeus «enjo-

53 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,285-286.54 ForGregory’sconnectionswithMatildaandAdelaide,seenn.34-35,64-66.55 Lampert,Annales,a.1074,174;Buhler2001,49-50.56 e.g.Berthold,Chronicon,a.1077,288.57 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,285;Berthold,Chronicon,a.1077,255.58 Lampert,Annales,285,n.2(whoarguesthatCivis is a scribal error for Iais,whichheidentifiesasmodernGex).59 Robinson2015,345;Previté-Orton1912,237;MeyervonKnonau1894,748-750;Giesebrecht1876,1138;Cognasso1968,115;Eads2000,45.60 Kilian1886,74;Sergi1981,59;Ripart1999,309.


57

yedoutstandingauthority,themostamplepossessionsandthegreatestrenown in these regions».61 Since Adelaide possessed no lands in nor-thernorwesternSavoy,thisstatementfitsbetterinrelationtotheMontCenispass,whereAdelaide’slandsandpowerwereextensive[Previté-Orton1910,521].ItalsomakessenseinthecontextofLampert’ssta-tement that Henry needed to enter Italy via Adelaide’s lands because his opponents had blocked other Alpine passes in an attempt to prevent himfromreachingGregory,andthat‘immediately’ after securing his passage,HenrybeganthedifficultcrossingoftheAlps.62 Thesourcesdonotstatethisexplicitly,butHenrypresumablyhopednotonlyforsafe-passage intoItaly,butalso forAdelaide’son-goinghelp:forhersupportashetravelledsouth;hermediationwithGregory;andtoensurethathehadalineofretreat,ifneeded[Cognasso1968,116].YetaccordingtoLampert,AdelaideandAmadeuswere«notatallinfluencedeitherbyconsiderationsofkinship,orbycompassionatsowretchedasituation»andatfirstrefusedtohelpHenry.63 Ian Robinson suggests that Adelaide was unwilling to support Henry because she «stood high in Gregory VII’s favour and may therefore have been out ofsympathywiththeking»[Robinson2000,160].Certainly,Adelai-dehadcultivatedcloselinkswithGregory,whowrotetoAdelaidein1073 calling her his «most beloved daughter» (filia karissima);64 Gregory issued a bull taking Adelaide’s foundation of Santa Maria in Pinerolo intohisprotection the followingyear;65 andcountedAdelaide’s son,Amadeus,amongthosewhomhehopedtorecruitforhisplannedex-

61 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,285;Robinson(trans.)2015,346.62 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,285. 63 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,285;Robinson(trans.)2015,346.64 Gregorii VII. registrum,I.37(7thDecember1073).65 Cartario di Pinerolo,no.10(4thApril1074).


58

pedition to the Holy Land.66(Adelaide’seldestson,Peter,isnotmen-tionedeitherinconnectionwiththisexpedition,norwithCanossa67).Ofcourse,anotherreason–notmentionedbyRobinson–thatAdelaidemay have been «out of sympathy» with Henry is that his attempted re-pudiationofherdaughter,Bertha,in1069stillrankled[Cognasso1968,115;Tellenbach1988,35].YetAdelaide’srefusaltogiveHenryherun-conditionalsupportwaspoliticalasmuchaspersonal.First,AdelaidewasbeingcarefultoalienateneitherHenrynorGregory;andsecond,itwassimplygoodbusiness that ifHenrywantedsomethingfromAdelaide,she should get as much as possible in return. As the «price of his passage» AdelaideaskedHenrytogranther«fiveofthebishopricsofItaly,nei-ghbouring [her] own possessions».68Shedidnotreceivethis:instead,af-termuchdeliberation,HenryagreedtogiveAdelaide«acertainprovinceinBurgundy,verywellsuppliedwithpossessionsofallkinds».69Adelaide’sdaughter,Bertha,wasHenry’s trumpcard in thesenego-tiations. Despite the fact that it was a particularly harsh winter [Meyer vonKnonau1894,750-751],Henrybroughthiswife,Bertha,andtheiryoungson,Conrad,withhimonhisjourneysouth.70 This was a move which was calculated to appeal to Adelaide: the presence of her daughter and grandson was a visible reminder of the dynastic reasons for hel-pingHenry.Berthaisusuallyseenaslackinganypoliticalinfluence,71

66 Gregorii VII. registrum,I.46(2ndFebruary1074).67 PetermayhaveremainedinTurintoadministerthemarkinAdelaide’sabsence.ItislikelythatPeterliveduntil1078,butPrevité-Orton1912,241n.3suggeststhathe may have died before Canossa. 68 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,286;Robinson(trans.)2015,346.69 Lampert,Annales, a.1077, 286; Robinson (trans.) 2015, 346. The Burgundian province has variously been identifiedasBugey,Chablais,Waadt,WallisandTaran-taise:Hellmann1900,24;MeyervonKnonau1894,749-750;Giesebrecht1876,396;Cognaso1968,115-116;Previté-Orton1912,238.70 Lampert,Annales, a.1076, 283; Bruno, Saxonicum bellum, c. 88, 83; Berthold,Chronicon,a.1077,255.71 Tellenbach1988,351;Jäschke1991,143-144;Zey2008,73-74.


59

and few modern historians have emphasised the intermediary role that BerthaplayedbetweenHenryandhernatalkin[Cowdrey1998,155;Buhler2001,50-51].Yet,byherpresencealone,ifnothingelse,Berthaincreased the likelihood that Adelaide would support Henry. The locationof thismeeting is significant, too. IfAdelaide travellednorthoftheAlpstomeetwithHenryatGexorCoise,thenitwasaforegone conclusion that she would help him: why else would she have travelledtoSavoy(especiallyduringaharshwinter)?If,ontheotherhand,AdelaidemetHenryattheMontCenispass,thenheraidcouldnot be taken for granted: Adelaide could have barred the pass if Henry didnotagreetoherterms.Yetoncetermswereagreed,Adelaide’ssup-port for Henry was considerable: she not only granted Henry safe-pas-sageintoItaly;sheprotectedandsupportedhimenroutetoCanossa,where her presence (and that of the Lombard army) increased Henry’s bargainingposition;andatCanossa,Adelaide,alongwithMatilda,andothers,mediatedbetweenHenryandGregory.

Mediation at Canossa

Traditionally it is argued that at Canossa Gregory released Henry from excommunication following the intervention of noblewomen, andothers,includingAbbotHughofCluny.72JohannesFriedhasrecentlyargued that what was negotiated at Canossa was not Henry’s absolu-tion, but a long-planned peace treaty betweenHenry andGregory[Fried2008;2012].Thisviewisfarfromuniversallyaccepted.73 Mo-reover,evenifthiswerethecase,itwouldnotaltertheargumentpre-sented here about the important roles played by women at Canossa: if anything,itwouldfurtherunderlinetheirpoliticalcentrality.Ineither

72 e.g.Schneidmuller2006;Zimmermann1975.73 Cushing2013;Zey2013;Becher2013;Goetz2013;Körntgen2013a.


60

case,therewereextensivenegotiationsbetweenHenryandGregorybefore Canossa in which the form of Henry’s submission and the type ofconcessionshewastomake,aswellasGregory’sresponse,weredi-scussed and settled in advance.74Recent literature emphasises the role of consensus in high medieval politics [Schneidmuller2000;Patzold2007], includingconflict reso-lution[Brown,Górecki2003;Althoff,2013].Medievalconflictswereoften resolved (if not permanently settled) through the intervention of thirdpartiesactingasintercessors,mediatorsorarbiters(authoritativenegotiators).75 Women as well as men participated in these processes of deliberationandconsultation,whichcannotbeclassified«inthecon-ventionalway,aseither‘public’or‘private’»[White2001:12].ModernaccountsindicatethatMatilda–andmorerarelyalsoAdelaide–actedas intercessors at Canossa.76 There was a degree of overlap between intercession,mediationandarbitration,but therearealsodifferencesbetween them and at Canossa Matilda and Adelaide were not acting as intercessors but mediators.77 Intercession is petitionary in nature: the in-tercessor pleads with someone (usually the king78) on behalf of someone

74 ForCanossaasstage-managed:Althoff2006,152-160,Cowdrey1998,157-167;Reuter2006a;Robinson2000,160-165.Foranelementofsurprise:Weinfurter2006,17-26;Goez2000.Onnegotiatedritualsingeneral:Althoff2016;2003;1997.75 Fordistinctions–andsimilarities–betweentheseroles:White2001,5-8,11-12;White1987,65-70;Cheyette1970,291-296;Geary1994;1996.Onconflictresolu-tioningeneral:White1986;Wickham1996;1997;Reuter2006b;Innes2000,129-140;Davies,Fouracre1986;1995.76 Reuter2006a,161;2006a,384-385;Zimmermann1975,134-136;Struve1995,44-45.77 On intercession/mediation: above, n.75;Gilsdorf 2014;Garnier 2008;Muller-Wiegand 2005;Kamp2001;Althoff2011.Kamp2001,esp.11,22-25,80ff.arguesthatintercessionandmediationarelocatedatoppositeendsofthesamescale;morequestionably,Kampalsoarguesforahistoricalprogressionfromintercessiontome-diation to arbitration. 78 Therewerealso instances inwhichtherulermightpetition,rather thancom-mand,orinwhich–asatCanossa–hewashimselfinneedofintervention:Kamp


61

else.Mediators,bycontrast,usetheirpowerandprestigetoplayanac-tiveandindependentroleinthesettlementofconflicts.Inotherwords,intercessorsmodifydecisionswhicharemadebyothers,butmediatorsplay a key role in the decision-making process. While intercession is unilateral (primarily concerned with the relationship between interces-sorandpetitioned),mediationisbilateral(themediator’srelationshipwith bothpartiesiscrucial)[Kamp2001,13,99,180].Explanationsofhowmedievalintercessionandmediationfunctionedemphasise the importanceofpersonal ties,andthat themosteffecti-ve intercessors/mediators had Königsnähe (access to the king) [Gilsdorf 2014, ch.3; Kamp 2001, 81-110]. For this reason, bishops, abbots,queens,andotherhigh-statuswomenfrequentlyactedasintercessorsand mediators in the Middle Ages.79Althoughqueensoften acted asintercessorsinthetenthandeleventhcenturies,neitherHenry’smo-ther,Agnes,norhiswife,Bertha,arerecordedatCanossa.80 This may havebeenbecausequeenstypicallyintercededwith the ruler on behalf ofothers,whileatCanossaitwastherulerhimselfwhowasinneedofintervention.InAgnes’scase,sincesheisdocumentedattemptingtoresolvetheconflictbetweenHenryandGregorybeforehand,andlaterconfirmedHenry’soathatCanossa,81 it may simply have been that she was unable to travel to Canossa in time.Thekeyroleofmediatorsinpeace-makingisgenerallyacknowledged,mostrecentlybyGerdAlthoff[Althoff2016],buttheimportanceofMatilda’s and Adelaide’s intervention at Canossa has not always been

2001,esp.76-77,82-84;Garnier2009.79 For bishops as intercessors/mediators:Gilsdorf 2014, ch.4;Kamp 2001, 92-93,173-183;White1978,esp.207-209,220,254.Forqueens:above,n.11;Gilsdorf2014,esp.116-124;Kamp2001,64-76,93-94,155-160;Stafford1998,44-45,99-101.80 SinceBerthaisnotrecordedatCanossa,Goez2012,105-106thinksthatshere-mainedinTurin,butFried2012,67arguesthatBerthaprobablytravelledtoCanossaasshehadtoundergopenanceforherassociationwithherexcommunicatedhusband.81 Below,n.109.


62

recognised.82 This is partly due to historians’ focus on the disputants (HenryandGregory),ratherthanthemediatorswithoutwhom,ho-wever, thenegotiationscouldnothave takenplace.Perhapsuncon-sciouslythedefinitionofMatilda’sandAdelaide’sactionsas‘interces-sion’,ratherthanasmediationordiplomacy,hasfurtherdevaluedtheirrole. Although intercession is not necessarily gendered there is a ten-dency both in some medieval sources and some modern scholarship to see‘intercession’asa‘womanlyvirtue’.83Inotherwords,aspecificgen-dered model is added to a more general understanding of intercession.Thecommonmedievalmotifof‘womanlyinfluence’hadrootsinan-tiquity,andwasalsoinfluencedbybiblicalprecedents[Cooper1992;2007].Accordingtothistrope,womenweretousetheirphysicalbe-autyand‘persuasivevoices’tocurbmen’sexcesses[Farmer1986;Nel-son 2007]. This gendered model of intercession plays on traditional feminineimages–ofthenurturingmother,orthevirtuouswife;oftheVirginMary,andthebiblicalQueenEsther.84 It provided men with a way of reversing their decisions without undermining their authority.85

‘Womanly’intercessionhasalsobeenseenasameansbywhichwomencould retain informalpower,particularly after theywere supposedlymarginalisedfromthedirectexerciseofpowerfromtheeleventhcen-turyonwards[Farmer1986,521-526;Huneycutt1995].Thismodelthus reinforces gender hierarchies, and promotes the view thatme-dievalwomen’sactivitieswereprivateandinformal,whilemen’swerepublic and political. In relation to Canossa it re-inscribes Matilda’s and

82 See,e.g.Althoff2016,esp.175-176onintermediariesatCanossa,withoutrefe-rence to women.83 Seee.g.above,n.10.84 Gilsdorf2014,esp.120;Strohm1992,96-99;Huneycutt1995;Parsons1995,esp.153-158;Parsons1996.85 Parsons1995,147,161-162;1996,53-54;Strohm1992,103-105.


63

Adelaide’simportantdiplomaticactivityas‘feminine’andancillary:assomething that modern historians can ignore.Contemporaries rarely depicted Matilda’s or Adelaide’s intervention asmediators in gendered terms, and instead emphasised their statusas rulers.86 According to Berthold of Reichenau, Henry sought the«mediation and help [interventu et auxilio] of Margravine Matilda [of Tuscany],ofhismother-in-law,Adelaide[ofTurin],likewiseamar-gravine, andof the abbot ofCluny [Hugh], […] and also of those,whoevertheywere,whomhecouldattracttohisside».87 In addition toMatilda,AdelaideandHugh,LampertofHersfeldaddsthatHenryalsosentAmadeusII(Adelaide’sson),AdalbertAzzoIIofEste(Ade-laide’smaternalcousin),and«someothersof the foremostprincesofItaly,whoseopinion[Henry]didnotdoubtwouldcarrygreatweightwith the pope» to intervene with Gregory.88Inotherwords,Henry’smediators were made up of both temporal and ecclesiastical princes.89 MatildaandAdelaidewerenamedfirstbecausetheyweretheprinceswiththehigheststatus,atleastintheeyesoftheGermanaudiencestowhom Gregory and Berthold were addressing their work. The names of the king’s mother-in-law (Adelaide) and the king’s cousin (Matil-da)werefarmoremeaningful–andthusreassuring–totheGermanprinces than a list of clerics or other Italian princes would have been. These princely women were perfect intermediaries: they were trusted becauseoftheircloseconnectionswithHenry,witheachother(theywere cousins), and with Gregory [Golinelli 2004, 236; Goez 2012,

86 Forwomen’sintercessionasformalandpolitical,seealso:Mulder-Bakker2003;Geaman 2010. 87 Berthold,Chronicon,a.1077,258;Robinson(trans.)2008,159-160.88 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,290;Robinson(trans.)2015,352.89 Whiletemporalprinces,abbotsandbishopsallhadaroletoplayatCanossa,ab-besses did not.


64

103]. Adelaide’s and Matilda’s political dominance also meant that they were able to underwrite an agreement between Henry and Gregory.The process of mediation was typically conducted in private and is thus rarely described in detail in medieval sources. Yet in relation to Canossa severalcontemporariesdepictedsomeofthebargaining,brow-beating,anddecision-makingwhichtookplacebetweenHenry,Gregoryandtheirmediators, includingMatilda andAdelaide.Thedetailsof thesedeliberations were included by authors who wished to criticise Henry for later breaking his agreement with Gregory. Although polemical in purpose,theseaccountsareneverthelessrevealingaboutcontemporaryexpectationsconcerningthewayinwhichmediationwascarriedout,andbywhom.InBerthold’saccount,Henry«sentenvoystobringtohim the aforementioned mediators [interventores][…][who]hastenedto meet the king at the agreed place and for a long time they discussed among themselves with many words the case concerning which they hadgatheredtogether,weighingtheargumentswithhimfromeverypoint of view and with mature deliberation».90 Although the mediators suspectedthatHenrywasnotentirelysincereinhispromises,theyne-vertheless returned «and gave the pope a full account». Lampert simi-larly depicts the mediators returning to Gregory «laden with prayers and promises».91SinceGregorywasatCanossa,andHenrywasproba-blyatBianello(anothercastlebelongingtoMatilda,c.6km north of Ca-nossa),themediatorshadtotravelbackwardsandforwardsthroughthesnow-coveredmountains[Hay2008,67].Itwasthusaphysical,aswellasadiplomaticchallenge.Addedtothis,forMatilda,wasthedifficultyofhousingandprovisioningallthesepeople[Goez2012,103-105].IncontrastwithBerthold’saccount,andthatofGregoryhimself(di-scussedbelow),LampertdescribesfurtherconsultationsbetweenGre-gory and the mediators once they returned to Canossa: Gregory’s ini-

90 Berthold,Chronicon,a.1077,258-259;Robinson(trans.)2008,160.91 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,290;Robinson(trans.)2015,352.


65

tialresponsewasthatHenryshouldmeetwithhim,andtheGermanprinces,atAugsburgasplanned.92 The mediators replied that because of the ultimatum made by the princes at Tribur (that Henry must be absolved before February 1077) Henry could not wait until then. Gre-gory, «overcomeby the insistenceof thosewhourgedhimand theweightoftheiropinions»,respondedthatifHenrywastrulypenitent,«as evidence of his true and heartfelt repentance, let him resign thecrown and the rest of the royal insignia into our power».93 The me-diatorscounteredthatthisrequestwas«tooharsh»,andthey«earnestlypressed [Gregory] to moderate his decision».94Finally,Gregory«waswithgreatdifficultyprevailedon»tomeetwithHenry,andagreedthat–ifHenry’srepentancewassincere–hewouldbeabsolved.95Gregory–andBerthold,whofollowsGregory’saccount–omitsthesediscussions.KnowingthatmanyoftheGermanprinceshadhopedthathewouldnotabsolveHenry,Gregoryattemptedtopre-empttheircri-ticism by emphasising that he was obliged to absolve Henry.96 In a letter written to the German princes and bishops immediately after Canos-sa,GregoryexplainedthatwhenHenryenteredItalyhesent«suppliantmessengers»toGregory,askingtobeabsolved,butthatGregory«hadlong delayed this by many deliberations and sharply reproved [Henry] for his transgressions through all the messengers who passed between us».97 Yet Gregory makes no further reference to negotiations before Ca-nossa,andinfactdoesnotmentionanymediatorsbyname.InsteadGre-gory emphasises that Henry spontaneously came to Canossa and perfor-

92 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,291.OnAugsburg,abovenn.47-48.93 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,291-292;Robinson(trans.)2015,354.94 Ibidem.95 Ibidem.96 Gregorii VII. registrum, IV.12;Zimmermann1975, 139-141, 160;Althoff2006,156-157;Golinelli2006,592.97 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12;Cowdrey(trans.)2002,221.


66

medpenance,andthathisactionsmoved«allwhoweretherepresent»to«great pity and merciful compassion».98 This unnamed audience at Ca-nossa(whichpresumablyincludedAdelaide,MatildaandHugh)inturnput pressure on Gregory to absolve Henry: «under pressure of [Henry’s] compunction and overcome by such great supplication from those who weretherepresent,weatlengthreleasedthebondofanathema».99 Althoughtheyarenotalwaysacknowledgedbyname,theseaccountsindicate that Matilda and Adelaide played important roles at each stage of the high-level political negotiations which led to Henry’s reconci-liationwithGregory in January1077: theywere among thosewhohelpedtomaintaincommunicationsbetweenHenryandGregory,andthey were actively involved in shaping a settlement which was accep-table toboth sides.They consulted, andbargained, and also appliedpressure when necessary. Despite the criticism of the «new senate of women»madeatWorms,100notjustHenry,butalsoGregory,soughtout,andreliedupon,MatildaandAdelaideasmediators:thereconcilia-tion at Canossa could not have taken place without them.

Confirmation of Henry’s promises

AfterreceivingabsolutionfromGregory,Henryconfirmedthepro-misesthathehadalreadymadethroughtheinterventionofMatilda,Adelaide and other mediators: he promised that he would address the grievancesoftheGermanprinces,andassuredGregory’ssafetyifheventurednorthoftheAlps[Fried2012,117-119].Thereis,however,someconfusionastothewayinwhichthispromise–alsoreferredtoby

98 Ibidem;alsoBerthold,Chronicon,a.1077,259.99 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12;Cowdrey(trans.)2002,222.Fortheviewthatpublicpenancecompelsforgiveness:Kamp2001,70-72.100 Aboven.45.


67

contemporaries as an oath101–wasmadeandsecured.Thisisduebothto the variation in contemporary accounts and (as Reuter emphasises in relation to Henry’s submission) to the way in which the rituals perfor-med at Canossa deliberately blurred the boundaries between religious andsecular,andpublicandprivate,actions[Reuter2006a:157-165].Aseriesofverbal,writtenandgesturalmeasureswereemployedbothby Henry and by others. Certain facts are clear: Henry did not make hispromise toGregory inperson;102 two bishops made it on his be-half.103 This promise was then written down and circulated throughout the empire.104 The promise was further secured by the intervention of others,manyofwhomhadactedasmediatorsbeforeHenry’sabsolu-tion.ThedifficultyliesinascertainingexactlywhoconfirmedHenry’spromise,andexactlyhow(andwithwhatdegreeofformality)theydidso.Dependingontheaccount,differentconfigurationsofecclesiastics,malereligious,aristocraticlaymen,and–lessfrequently–laywomenaresaidtohaveconfirmedHenry’spromises.Theseindividualsareva-riouslysaidtohaveplacedtheirhandsinHenry’s,orinGregory’s,ortohaveswornanoathonrelics,orsimplytohavepledgedtheirfaith.Becauseofthedisagreementinthesources,modernhistoriansoftenfailtomentionwomen’sinvolvement.YetbothGregory(inhisfirstaccount

101 Earlyaccountsrefertosolemnpromises(securitates);lateronestoanoath(sacra-mentum, iuramentum):thisincreasedHenry’spersonalinvolvement,andthushisguiltwhenhebrokehisword:Fried2012,129-130.Onoaths ingeneral:Waitz1896,474-493;Munzel-Everling2008;Goez1986.102 IntheeleventhcenturyGermankingsdidnothavetoswearformaloathsaftertheyhad taken theircoronationoath:Waitz1896,474-476,487;Siegel1894,47;Goez1986,esp.523-524.103 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12;V.7;VII.14a;Lampert,Annales,a.1077,294-295;Berthold,Chronicon, a.1077, 259-260. The bishopswereGregory of Vercelli and(probably)EberhardNaumberg:Weinfurter2006,20-21;Robinson2000,161;Stru-ve1995,45.ForBennoofOsnabruckasthesecondbishop:MeyervonKnonau1894,761;Goez1986,524.104 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12a(28thJanuary1077).


68

of Canossa) and Berthold include women as well as men in their ac-counts.TheyalsoindicatethatallofthosewhoconfirmedHenry’spro-mise,whethermaleorfemale,religiousorlay,didsointhesameway.WritingtotheGermanprincesimmediatelyafterCanossa,Gregoryex-plained that he had taken «solemn promises» (securitates)fromHenry;heincluded a written copy of these promises with his letter.105 In contrast withthefirstpartofhisletter,inwhichhedidnotidentifythemediatorsbyname,GregorystatesthatHenry’spromiseswereconfirmed«throughthehandsoftheabbot[Hugh]ofCluny,andalsoourdaughtersMatil-daandCountessAdelaide,andofotherprinces,bishopsandlaitywhoseemed to us useful for this purpose».106 The precise legal meaning of thisconfirmatoryhandgestureisunclear,butitseemstoindicatethatsomekindofpromiseorpledgewasgiven[Siegel1894;Schempf2011].Those who helped to secure Henry’s promise at Canossa are someti-mesreferredto–incorrectly–asoath-helpers.107Instead,Hugh,Matilda,Adelaide, and the unnamedotherswhowere present,were acting asfideiussores (sureties),whoservedaswitnessestothefactthatanoathhadbeensworn,andsharedtheresponsibilityforensuringthatthattheoath-swearer (in this case: Henry) adhered to his/her promise.108 Gregory is the only contemporary who refers to Matilda and Adelaide byname,butBertholdofReichenaualsoindicatesthatwomenwerepre-sent.AccordingtoBerthold,Henry’soath(sacramentum) was solemnised «in the hands of those mediators [interventores] who were already [at Ca-nossa],andalsooftheempress[Agnes],whowasnotyetpresent».109 Here

105 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12(lateJanuary1077).106 Gregorii VII. registrum, IV.12;trans.Cowdrey2002,222.107 Robinson2000, 161;Fried2012, 129-131;Cowdrey1998, 157.Oath-helperswere a kind of character witness used to prove the justice of a defendant’s case: Da-vies,Fouracre1986,Glossary,s.v.“oath-helping”;Weitzel2008.108 Mediae Latinitatis lexicon minus,2nded.,s.v.“Fideiussor”;Davies,Fouracre1986,Glossary,s.v.“Fideiussor”;s.v.“Sureties”.109 Berthold,Chronicon,a.1077,259-261;Robinson(trans.)2008,161.


69

we can infer that Matilda and Adelaide were included with the mediators whoconfirmedHenry’spromises;wealsohavefurtherconfirmationofAgnes’importance,eventhoughshewasnotatCanossa.Other contemporaries imply that only men were present when Henry’s promisewasconfirmed–eveniftheyhadalreadyemphasisedMatilda’sandAdelaide’skeyroleasmediators.LampertofHersfeld,forexample,referstoawholeapparatusofcrowds,oathsandrelicstosecureHen-ry’spromise,butmakesnomentionofMatilda,Adelaide,orAgnes:«aftertherelicsofsaintshadbeenbrought»severalbishops,AdalbertAzzo II of Este and «the other princes [principes] who had made this agreement also confirmed on oath that the king [Henry]would doas he promised».110 Cardinal Deusdedit similarly omits any reference to Matilda and Adelaide in the version of Henry’s oath (iuramentum) preserved in his collection of canon law (written in the mid-1080s). In contrast with the version preserved in Gregory’s Register,111 Deusdedit includes an extensive list of cardinals, archbishops, bishops, deacons,subdeacons,andabbotsinwhosepresenceHenry’soathwastaken;thelist also indicates that «many noble men» (multi nobiles viri) were present ontheking’sside,althoughtheyarenotnamed.112Some contemporaries referred to Matilda and Adelaide by masculine titles,113 so it is possible that they were implicitly included amongst Lam-pert’s«princeswhohadmadethisagreement»,andperhapsevenamongDeusdedit’s «noble men». Yet Lampert and Deusdedit always used female terminologywhenreferringtoAdelaideandMatilda,114 and there is a cle-

110 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,294;Robinson(trans.)2015,357.111 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.12a.112 Deusdedit,Collectio canonum,IV.421,597-598.Fried2012,131arguesthatthiseschatocol is a later construct. 113 ForAdelaideasdux and princeps:n.25above.OnMatilda’s titles:Goez1991;Reynolds2002,4-6.114 ForLampert,aboven.88;Deusdedit,Libellus contra invasoresII.12,330.


70

ar,andgendered,contrastbetweencontemporaries’willingnesstonameMatildaandAdelaideasmediators,andtheirreluctancetomentionthemin relation to Henry’s promise. Those contemporaries who omitted re-ferencestowomenoftenemphasisedtheformal,legalnatureofthecon-firmation.LombardandRomancivillaw,aswellascanonlaw,allplacedrestrictionsonmedievalItalianwomen’sabilitytoactatlaw,especiallyin relation to witnessing and acting as sureties.115 Lampert described the oath taken by the princes as an iusiurandum: this is a formal term used to describe a solemn oath pronounced as part of a religious and/or legal act.Lampertalsodistinguishedbetweentheoathswornbytheprinces,andAbbotHugh’sactions:becauseofhismonasticvows,Hughdidnotswear the oath and instead «pledged his faith» (fidem suam interposuit).116 Althoughhedidnotrefertothemassuch,Lampert’sprinceswereactingas fideiussores,andinLampert’smind,women–andAbbotHugh–wereexcludedfromthisrole.DeusdeditdescribedHenry’soathbeingtaken«in the presence of» (presentibus)theseindividuals,whichsuggeststhathesawthemaswitnesses,ratherthanguarantors.FromDeusdedit’scanon-lawperspective,thosewhowitnessedHenry’soathatCanossawere,bydefinition,men.In contrast withGregory’s and Berthold’s accounts, which indicatethatwomentookakeyroleinpublic,politicalevents,includingtheswearingofoaths,Lampert’sandDeusdedit’saccountsmightseemtoprovidealimitedconfirmationofMcNamara’sviewofCanossaasin-dicative of the erasure of women from public life.117Certainly,forsomecontemporaries, the traditional viewofwomen as ‘intercessors’me-antthatpresentingAdelaideandMatildaas‘mediators’atCanossawas

115 Wickham1997,200-201;1986,111;Arjava1996,233-245;Brundage1995,99-100,161.116 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,294-295.Onmalereligiousmakingpromisesoffide-lity,ratherthanoaths:Waitz1896,488-489.117 Above,n.12.


71

moreacceptablethansuggestingthattheyhadplayedaformal, legalrole as a witness or fideiussor. Yet in many cases these legal restrictions werenotanewphenomenon,andinpracticeitisclearthatnoblewo-menwerenotexcludedfromthesekindsoflegalaction.118 The aversion of some contemporaries to women acting as witnesses or suretieswasnotprimarilyalegalissue,butrathera‘documentary’ one abouthowmale, clerical authorspresentednoblewomen’s actions intheirtexts.Thisongoingproblemwasbroughtsharplyintofocusbythefrequentlymisogynisticrhetoricofeleventh-centuryreform,119 and bytheattacksonsexualmoralitywhichwereafeatureofthepolemicalliterature of the InvestitureControversy [McLaughlin 2011;Patzold2009]. In this context,presentingMatilda’s andAdelaide’s actions atCanossa,especiallyGregoryVII’srelianceuponthem,wasproblematicfor some contemporaries. This was true not only for reform-minded clerics,suchasDeusdedit,butalsoGregoryVIIhimself.The omission of Matilda’s and Adelaide in relation to Henry’s oath re-lates back to the criticisms made against Gregory by German bishops at theassemblyatWorms:ofhisrelianceona«newsenateofwomen»;120 andalsoofhisrumouredsexualimproprietywithMatilda.121 This was theflip-sideofthetropeof‘womanlyinfluence’:alongsidethepositiveviewofthevirtuouswife/motherasintercessor,laytherecurringfearthatwomencouldusetheirsexualitytogainunduepoliticalinfluen-ce.Accusationsofthisnaturewereaneffectivemeansofunderminingcelibatemen;Gregorydistancedhimselffromwomeningeneral,andMatildainparticular,afterCanossa[Hay2008,63-64;Goez2012,108-

118 For(near)contemporarynoblewomenactingasfideiussores in northern France: LoPrete2007,250,263,329,436-437.119 Cushing2005,ch.6;Elliott2005:136-145.Leyser1998arguesthatthisrhetoricwas really about competition between men. 120 Aboven.45.121 Lampert,Annales,a.1077,251-261.


72

109]. Although Gregory ascribed a central role to Matilda and Adelaide inhislettertotheGermanprincesinJanuary1077,thiswastheonlytimehedidso:inlaterreferencestoCanossaingeneral,andHenry’spromiseinparticular,Gregoryomittedanymentionofthem.WritingtoArchbishopNehemiahofGran,Gregoryreferredbrieflyto«promi-ses[taken]uponoathbyKingHenry».122 In a letter to Bishop Udo of Trier,Gregoryindicatedthatthisoathwasgiven«throughcertainof[Henry’s] fideles,afterhehadgivenhisownhandinthatoftheabbotofCluny [Hugh]».123IntherecordoftheLentensynod,heldafterHenry’ssecond excommunication in1080 (atwhichpointHenry’s promiseswereobviouslynullandvoid),GregoryreferredsimplytothepromisesHenry had made «upon oath through two bishops» at Canossa.124 As with Gregory’s earlier omission of the names of the mediators be-foreCanossa,hisdecisiontoconcealMatilda’sandAdelaide’srolehereisnotonlyabouttheiractions,orevenentirelyabouttheirgender,somuch as about Gregory’s ownagenda.Thisrelates,first,tohisinten-dedaudience:writingtoecclesiastics,ratherthantheGermanprinces,GregorymadenomentionofAdelaideorMatilda. (Similarly,whileDeusdeditlistedtheholdersofvariousclericaloffices,hedidnotmen-tion any laymen–letalonelaywomen–byname.)Second,andperhapsmore important,Gregorywasconcernedabouthowhis relianceonMatilda and Adelaide might be used against him by his opponents. So although women had obviously played an important role at Canossa –onewhichGregory acknowledged at the time– thereafter itwasevidently considered risky both byGregory, and by pro-Gregorian

122 Gregorii VII. registrum,IV.25(9thJune1077);Cowdrey(trans.)2002,239.123 Gregorii VII. Registrum,V.7(30thSeptember1077);Cowdrey(trans.)2002,252.ThisreferencetoHenryplacinghishandsinAbbotHugh’sissometimesconflatedwithGregory’searlierreferencetotheconfirmationhereceived«throughthehandsof»AbbotHughandothers,butFried2012,129thinksitreferstoanearlierstageofthe negotiations.

124 Gregorii VII. registrum,VII.14a(7thMarch1080);Cowdrey(trans.)2002,343.


73

contemporariestoadmitquitehowimportanttheywere.Becauseofthe fear that pro-imperial authors might use these women against Gre-gory,referencestothemweredropped,andtheirpresencewasglossedover,leadingtothemodernviewofCanossaasa«womanlessspace».

Conclusion

The attempts ofBeatrice ofTuscany,Matilda ofTuscany andEm-press Agnes to reconcile Henry IV of Germany and Gregory VII in the period 1073-1076 were acknowledged by contemporaries. Similarly contemporary authors, particularly thosewritingwithin adecadeoftheeventsatCanossa,emphasised the importantpolitical anddiplo-matic roles played by Matilda of Tuscany and Adelaide of Turin in the reconciliation between Henry and Gregory at Canossa in 1077. They intervened between Henry and Gregory because of their kinship con-nectionsandsocialnetworks(bothwithHenry,witheachother,andwithGregory); andalsobecause theywerepowerful Italianprinces.MatildaandAdelaideaccompaniedandprotectedHenryandGregory,respectively, to themeetingatCanossa;Adelaide’sdaughter,Bertha,playedakey,ifminor,roleinsecuringAdelaide’ssupportforHenry.AtMatilda’sfortressofCanossa,bothMatildaandAdelaideparticipatedactivelyinthenegotiationswhichledtoHenry’sabsolution;andthiswas not ‘womanly’ intercession, but high-level political diplomacy.TheythenwitnessedthemeetingbetweenHenryandGregory;andfinallyconfirmedHenry’soath,asdidAgnes.The important roles played by these women at Canossa have often been over-lookedbymodernscholars,inpartbecauseofaninfluentialviewofthe eleventh century as a time when royal and noblewomen were incre-asinglyexcludedfromtheexerciseofpublicpolitico-legalpower.Thisview–basedonafalsedichotomybetweenpublicandprivatespheres–isdemonstrablyincorrectinrelationtothewomenatCanossa.Matil-


74

da’s and Adelaide’s activities in 1077 were part of a wider framework in whichtheinterventionofroyalandaristocraticwomeninpublic,politi-calaffairswasbothregularandunremarkable.Thefactofthesewomen’sinvolvementatCanossaisnotindoubt,butthepresentationoftheirac-tions was sometimes problematic for some contemporaries. Matilda’s and Adelaide’sactivitiesasmediatorswereoftendiscussedmatter-of-factly,but contemporaries sometimes found their role as guarantors of Henry’s promisestobetroublesome.Thishadlittletodowiththeexistenceofapolitico-legalspherefromwhichwomenwereexcluded.Insteadauthorsincludedoromittedwomenfromtheiraccountsforavarietyofreasons,includingtheirpersonalconnectionswiththesewomen,theirpoliticalaffiliation,andtheirintendedaudience.The omission of women from accounts of Canossa is also related to concerns about the perception of clerical men’s reliance upon women. Gregory,inparticular,emphasisedorobscuredMatilda’sandAdelai-de’s roles to suit his aims and intended audience. In situations in which Matilda’s andAdelaide’sgendercouldbeusedagainsthim,Gregorymaskedtheirpresence.Thisindicatesthat,despitetheirstatus,genderwas an ongoing issue for princely women like Matilda and Adelaide. Nevertheless, it isclearthattheinterventionofroyalandaristocraticwomen in public, political affairs,was expected and encouraged bycontemporaries. More than this: it was deeply necessary. The reconci-liation at Canossa could not have occurred without them.


75

Bibliography

Primary sourcesArnulfofMilan,Liber gestorum recentium,ZeyC.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHi-storicaScriptoresrerumGermanicarum67,Hannover:Hahn,1994.

Beno,Gesta Romanae ecclesiae contra Hildebrandum,FrankeK.(ed.),MonumentaGer-maniaeHistorica,Libellidilite2,Hannover:Hahn,1892,366-422.

BenzoofAlba,Ad Heinricum imperatorem libri VII,SeyffertH.(ed.andtrans.),Mo-numenta Germaniae Historica, Scriptores rerum Germanicarum 65, Hannover:Hahn,1996.

BernoldofConstance,Chronicon,inRobinsonI.S.(ed.),Die Chroniken Bertholds von Reichenau und Bernolds von Konstanz, 1054-1100,MonumentaGermaniaeHistori-ca,ScriptoresrerumGermanicarum,NovaSeries14,Hannover:Hahn,2003.

BertholdofReichenau,Chronicon,inRobinsonI.S.(ed.),Die Chroniken Bertholds von Reichenau und Bernolds von Konstanz, 1054-1100,MonumentaGermaniaeHistori-ca,ScriptoresrerumGermanicarum,NovaSeries14,Hannover:Hahn,2003.

BonizoofSutri,Liber ad Amicum,DummlerE.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHisto-rica,Libellidelite1,Hannover:Hahn,1891,568-620.

Briefsammlungen der Zeit Heinrichs IV,ErdmannC.,FickermannN. (eds.),Monu-mentaGermaniaeHistorica,BriefederdeutschenKaiserzeit5,Weimar:Böhlau,1950.

BrunoofMerseburg,Saxonicum bellum,in LohmanH.E.(ed.), Brunos Buch vom Sa-chsenkrieg,MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,DeutschesMittelalter,KritischeStu-dientexte2,Leipzig:KarlW.Hiersemann,1937.

Cartario di Pinerolo fino all’anno 1300, GabottoF.(ed.), Biblioteca della Società Storica Subalpina2,Pinerolo:TipografiaChiantore,1899.

Deusdedit,Libellus contra invasores et simoniacos et reliquos schismaticos,SackurE.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Libellidelite2,Hannover:Hahn,1892,300-365.

— Collectio canonum,invonGlanvellV.W.(ed.),Die Kanonessamlung des Kardinals Deusdedit,Paderborn:Schöningh,1905.

Die Briefe Heinrichs IV, Erdmann, C. (ed.), Monumenta Germaniae Historica,DeutschesMittelalter,KritischeStudientexte1,Leipzig:KarlW.Hiersemann,1937.

Die Urkunden Heinrichs IV,vonGladissD.,GawlikA.(eds.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Diplomata 6, 3 vols.,Berlin-Weimar-Hannover:Weidmann-Böhlau-Hahn,1941-1978.


76

Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde von Tuszien,GoezE.,GoezW.(eds.),Monumenta Germaniae Historica, Laienfursten- under Dynastenurkunden derKaiserzeit2,Hannover:Hahn,1998.

DonizoofCanossa,Vita Mathildis,inGolinelliP.(ed.),Vita di Matilde di Canossa,Milano:JacaBook,2008.(Ied1984.)

Gregorii VII. registrum,CasparE.(ed.),Das Register Gregors VII. Monumenta Germa-niaeHistoricaEpistolae.4,Epistolaeselectae2,2vols.,Berlin:Weidmann,1920-1923.

HughofFlavigny,Chronicon,PertzG.H. (ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)8,Hannover:Hahn,1848,288-502.

Königsberg Fragment,inHolder-EggerO.(ed.),Fragment eines Manifestes aus der Zeit Heinrichs IV,«NeuesArchivderGesellschaftfurälteredeutscheGeschichtskunde»,1906,31:183-193.

LampertofHersfeld,Annales,inHolder-EggerO.(ed.),Lamperti monachi Hersfelden-sis Opera,MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,ScriptoresrerumGermanicarum38,Hannover:Hahn,1894.

Liber de unitate ecclesiae conservanda,SchwenkenbecherW.(ed.),MonumentaGerma-niaeHistorica,Libellidelite,2,Hannover:Hahn,173-284.

PaulofBernried,Vita Gregorii VII papae,inWatterichJ.M.(ed.),Pontificum Romano-rum vitae,vol.1,Leipzig:Engelmann,1862.

PetrusCrassus,Defensio Henrici IV regis, de HeinemannL.(ed.),MonumentaGerma-niaeHistorica,Libellidilite1,Hannover:Hahn,1891,432-453.

Pseudo-Bardo, Vita Sancti Anselmi Lucensis episcopus a Bardone scripsit,WilmansR.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)12,Hannover:Hahn,1856,13-35.

RangerofLucca,Vita metrica s. Anselmi Lucensis episcopi, SackurE., SchwartzG.,SchmeidlerB.(eds.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)30/2,Leipzig:KarlW.Hiersemann,1934,1152-1307.

Vita Heinrici imperatoris,EberhardW.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistoricaScrip-toresrerumGermanicarum58,Hannover-Leipzig:Hahn,1899.

Secondary sourcesAirlieS.2013,A View From Afar: English Perspectives on Religion and Politics in the

Investiture Conflict,inKörntgenL.,WassenhovenD.(eds.)2013,Religion und Poli-tik im Mittelalter: Deutschland und England im Vergleich,Berlin:DeGruyter,71-88.

AlthoffG.1997,Spielregeln der Politik im Mittelalter. Kommunikation in Frieden und Fehde,Darmstadt:PrimusVerlag.


77

—2003,Die Macht der Rituale. Symbolik und Herrschaft im Mittelalter,Darmstadt:Primus Verlag.

—2006,Heinrich IV, Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

—(ed.)2011,Frieden stiften. Vermittlung und Konfliktlösung vom Mittelalter bis heute,Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft.

—2013,The Rules of Conflict Among the Warrior Aristocracy of the High Middle Ages,inEsmark,K.,etal(eds.)2013,Disputing Strategies in Medieval Scandinavia,Leiden:Brill,313-332.

— 2016,Kontrolle der Macht. Formen und Regeln politischer Beratung im Mittelalter,Darmstadt: Wissenschaftlicher Buchgesellschaft.

ArjavaA.1996,Women and law in Late Antiquity,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

Baumgärtner I. 2003,Lebensraume von Frauen zwischen ‘privat’ und ‘öffentlich’. Eine Einführung,inBallofR.(ed.)2003,Geschichte des Mittelalters für unsere Zeit,Stuttgart:FranzSteinerVerlag,125-137.

Baumgärtner I. 2004,Fürsprache, Rat und Tat, Erinnerung: Kunigundes Aufgaben als Herrscherin,inDickS.,Jarnut,J.,Wemhoff,M.(eds.)2004,Kunigunde — consors regni. Vortragsreihe zum tausendjahrigen Jubilaum der Kronung Kunigundes in Paderborn (1002-2002),Munich:WilhelmFink,47-69.

Becher M. 2013, Johannes Fried: Canossa, «sehepunkte» 13 (1). http://www.sehe-punkte.de/2013/01/21981.html

Berschin,W.1972,Bonizo von Sutri. Leben und Werk,Berlin-NewYork:DeGruyter.

Bertolini,M.G.1970,Beatrice di Lorena, marchesa e duchessa di Toscana,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,vol.7,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaItaliana,352-363.http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/beatrice-di-lorena-marchesa-e-duchessa-di-toscana_(Dizionario-Biografico)/

Black-Veldtrupp M. 1995, Kaiserin Agnes (1043-1077). Quellenkritische Studien. (Münstersche historische Forschungen),Cologne:Böhlau.

BowmanJ.A.2104,Countesses in court: elite women, creativity, and power in northern Iberia, 900-1200, «JournalofMedievalIberianStudies» 6(1):54-70.

BrownW.C.,Górecki,P.2003,What conflict means: the making of medieval conflict studies in the United States, 1970–2000,inBrown,W.C.,Górecki,P.(eds.)2003,Conflict in Medieval Europe. Changing Perspectives on Society and Culture, Aldershot: Routledge,1-35.

BuhlerA.2001,Kaiser Heinrich IV und Bertha von Turin – Eine schwierige Ehe im Spie-gel der Urkunden,«ArchivfurKulturgeschichte» 83 (1): 37-62.

BrundageJ.A.1995,Medieval Canon Law,London-NewYork:Longman.

Bulst-Thiele,M.L.1933,Kaiserin Agnes,BeitragezurKulturgeschichtedesMittelal-tersundderRenaissance52,Leipzig:Teubner.


78

CheyetteF.L.1970,Suum cuique tribuere,«FrenchHistoricalStudies» 6(3):287–299.https://www3.amherst.edu/~flcheyette/Publications/files/Suum_cuique.pdf

CognassoF.1968,Il Piemonte nell’età sveva,Turin:Deputazionesubalpinadistoriapatria.

CooperK.1992,“Insinuations of Womanly Influence”: An Aspect of the Christianization of the Roman Aristocracy,«JournalofRomanStudies»82(1):150-164.https://www.jstor.org/stable/301289?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

CooperK.2007,Poteri invisibili: la matrona cristiana tra obsequium e autorità legittima all’epoca di Sant-Agostino,inlaRocca,C.(ed.)2007, Agire da donna. Modelli e prati-che di rappresentazione (secoli VI-X). Atti del convegno (Padova, 18-19 febbraio 2005),Turnhout: Brepols 11-22.

CowdreyH.E.J.1968,The Papacy, The Patarines and the Church of Milan,«Transac-tionsoftheRoyalHistoricalSociety», 18(1):25–48.

— 1998,Pope Gregory VII, 1073–1085,Oxford:ClarendonPress.

— (trans.)2002,The Register of Pope Gregory VII (1073-1085),Oxford:OxfordUni-versity Press.

CreberA.2016,Mirrors for Margraves: Peter Damian’s Different Models For Male and Female Rulers,«HistoricalReflections/RéflexionsHistoriques»42(1):8-20.

CushingK.G.2005,Reform and the Papacy in the Eleventh Century,Manchester:Man-chester University Press.

— 2013, Johannes Fried: Canossa: Entlarvung einer Legende. Eine Streitschrift , «Ger-man Historical Institute London Bulletin», 35:2: 94-98. http://www.recensio.net/rezensionen/zeitschriften/german-historical-institute-london-bulletin/vol-xxxv-2013/2/ReviewMonograph906468538

DaviesW.,Fouracre,P.(eds.)1995,Property and power in the Early Middle Ages,Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.

— 1986,The Settlement of Disputes in Early Medieval Europe, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

DeJongM.,VanRenswoude, I.2017, Introduction. Carolingian cultures of dialogue, debate and disputation,«EarlyMedievalEurope» 25 (1): 6-18. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/emed.12183/full

DrellJ.2013,Aristocratic economies: women and family,inBennett,J.M.,Karras,R.M.(eds.)2013,The Oxford Handbook of Women and Gender in Medieval Europe,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,327-344.

EadsV.2000,Mighty in War: The Campaigns of Matilda of Tuscany,PhDDissertation:City University of New York.

EarenfightT.2008,Highly Visible, Often Obscured: The Difficulty of Seeing Queens and Noble Women,«MedievalFeministForum:AJournalofGenderandSexuality» 44 (1): 86–90.


79

ElliottD.2005,The Priest’s Wife. Female Erasure and the Gregorian Reform,inHoffmanBermanC.(ed.)2005, Medieval Religion: New Approaches. Rewriting Histories,NewYork-London:Routledge,123-145.

ErlerM.,Kowaleski,M.1988, Introduction, inErler,M.,Kowaleski,M. (eds.)1988,Women and Power in the Middle Ages, Athens(GA):UniversityofGeorgiaPress,1-17.

EvergatesT.(ed.)1999,Aristocratic Women in Medieval France,Philadelphia:Univer-sity of Pennsylvania Press.

FarmerS.1986,Persuasive voices. Clerical Images of Medieval Wives,«Speculum»61(3):517-543.

FößelA.2000,Die Königin im mittelalterlichen Reich. Herrschaftsausübung, Herrschaf-tsrechte, Handlungsspielräume,Stuttgart:JanThorbeckeVerlag.

FriedJ.2008,Der Pakt von Canossa: Schritte zur Wirklichkeit durch Erinnerungsanalyse,inHartmann,W.,Herbers,K.(eds.)2008,Die Faszination der Papstgeschichte: Neue Zugänge zum frühen und hohen Mittelalter,Cologne:Böhlau,133–197.

— 2012,Canossa: Entlarvung einer Legende. Eine Streitschrift,Berlin:AkademieVerlag.

GarnierC.2008,Die Kultur der Bitte. Herrschaft und Kommunikation im mittelalterli-chen Reich,Darmstadt:WissenschaftlicheBuchgesellschaft.

— 2009,Der bittende Herrscher – der gebetene Herrscher. Zur Instrumentalisierung der Bitte im endenden 11. Jahrhundert,inAlthoff,G.(ed.)2009,Heinrich IV,Ostfildern:JanThorbeckeVerlag,189-218.

https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/vuf/article/viewFile/17898/11706

GeamanK.2010,Queen’s gold and intercession: the case of Eleanor of Aquitaine,«Me-dievalFeministForum:AJournalofGenderandSexuality»,46(2):10-33.http://ir.uiowa.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1802&context=mff

GearyP.J.1994,Living with conflicts in stateless France: a typology of conflict management mechanisms, 1050-1200,inGeary,P.1994,Living with the Dead in the Middle Ages,Ithaca(NY):CornellUniversityPress,125-160.

— 1996,Moral Obligations and Peer Pressure: Conflict Resolution in the Medieval Aristo-cracy, inDuhamel-AmadoC.,LobrichonG.(eds.)1996,Georges Duby: L’écriture de l’Histoire, Brussels:DeBoeck,217-222.

GiesebrechtW. von 1876,Geschichte der deutschen Kaiserzeit: Das Kaiserthum im Kampfe mit dem Papstthum,Braunschweig:C.A.SchwetschkeundSohn.https://archive.org/details/geschichtederdeu05gies

GilsdorfS.2014,The Favor of Friends: Intercession and Aristocratic Politics in Carolingian and Ottonian Europe,Leiden:Brill.

GoetzH-W.2013,Johannes Fried: Canossa ,«sehepunkte»13(1),http://www.sehe-punkte.de/2013/01/21982.html


80

GoezE.1995,Beatrix von Canossa und Tuszien. Eine Untersuchung zur Geschichte des 11. Jahrhunderts,Sigmaringen:JanThorbeckeVerlag.

— 2007,Ein neuer Typ der europäischen Fürstin im 11. und frühen 12. Jahrhundert?,inSchneidmullerB.,Weinfurter,S.(eds.)2007,Salisches Kaisertum und neues Europa. Die Zeit Heinrichs IV. und Heinrichs V.,Darmstadt:WissenschaftlicheBuchgesell-schaft,161–194.

— 2012,Mathilde von Canossa,Darmstadt:PrimusVerlag.

GoezW.1986,“...iuravit in anima regis”: hochmittelalterliche Beschränkungen königlicher Eidesleistung,«DeutschesArchivfurErforschungdesMittelalters»42:517-554.

— 1991,“Mathilda Dei gratia si quid est”. Die Urkunden-Unterfertigung der Burgherrin von Canossa,«DeutschesArchiv furErforschungdesMittelalters»47:379-394.

— 2000,Canossa als deditio?, inThumserM.,Wenz-HaubfleischA.,Weigand,P.(eds.) 2000, Studien zur Geschichte des Mittelalters. Jürgen Petersohn zum 65. Ge-burtstag, Stuttgart: Theiss, 92-99. http://www.mgh-bibliothek.de/dokumente/a/a096370.pdf

GolinelliP.1991,Prima di Canossa. Considerazioni e notazioni sui rapporti di Gregorio VII con Beatrice e Matilde,«StudiGregoriani»,14:195-206.

— 2004,Matilde e i Canossa,Milan:Mursia.

— 2006,Die Rezeption des Canossa-Ereignisses und das Bild der Margrafin Mathilde in Italien,inStiegemannC.,WemhoffM.(eds.)2006,Canossa 1077. Erschütterung der Welt. Geschichte, Kunst und Kultur am Anfang der Romanik. Vol. I: Essays,Munich:Hirmer,592-602.

— Nonostante le fonti: Matilde di Canossa donna,inPioB.(ed.)2011,Scritti di Storia Medievale offerti a Maria Consiglia De Matteis,Spoleto:FondazioneCISAM,249-266.

— 2013,Canossa 1077: ‘pausa oggettiva’ o ‘Erschütterung der Welt’?,indeMatteis,M.C.,Berardo,P.(eds.)2013,Orientamenti e tematiche della storiografia di Ovido Capitani, Atti del Convegno di studio Bologna, 15-17 marzo 2013, Spoleto: Fondazione CI-SAM,95-114.http://www.paologolinelli.it/1/upload/capitani.pdf

— 2016,Matilde:ladonnaeilpotere,inMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo. Atti del XXI congresso internazionale di studio Sull’alto Medioevo, Spoleto:FondazioneCISAM,1-34.

HayD.J.2008,The Military Leadership of Matilda of Canossa 1046-1115,Manchester:Manchester University Press.

HellmannS.1900,Die Grafen von Savoyen und das Reich: bis zum Ende der staufischen Periode,Innsbruck:Wagner.

HuneycuttL.1995,Intercession and the high-medieval queen: the Esther topos,inCar-penterJ.,MacleanS.B.(eds.)1995,Power of the weak: studies on medieval women,Urbana-Chicago:UniversityofIllinoisPress,126-146.


81

Innes,M.2000,State and Society in the Early Middle Ages: The Middle Rhine Valley, 400-1000,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

JäschkeK.U.1991,Notwendige Gefährtinnen. Königinnen der Salierzeit als Herrscherin-nen und Ehefrauen im römisch-deutschen Reich des 11. und beginnenden 12. Jahrhunderts,Saarbrucken:Dadder.

JohnsS.M.2003,Noblewomen, Aristocracy and Power in the Twelfth-Century Anglo-Norman Realm,Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

KampH.,2001,Friedensstifter und Vermittler im Mittelalter,Darmstadt:Wissenschaf-tliche Buchgesellschaft.

KilianE.1886,Itinerar Kaiser Heinrichs IV.,Karlsruhe:FriedrichGutsch.

KörntgenL.2013,Der Investiturstreit und das Verhältnis von Religion und Politik im Frühmittelalter,inKörntgen,L.,Wassenhoven,D.(eds.)2013,Religion und Politik im Mittelalter: Deutschland und England im Vergleich,Berlin:DeGruyter,89-115.

— 2013a, Johannes Fried: Canossa, «sehepunkte» 13 (1). http://www.sehepunkte.de/2013/01/21983.html

LazzariT.2006,Miniature e versi: mimesi della regalità in Donizone,inIsabellaG.(ed.)2006,Forme di potere nel pieno Medioevo (secc. VIII-XII). Dinamiche e rappresentazioni,Bologna:Clueb,57-92.

LeyserC.1998,Custom, Truth and Gender in Eleventh-Century Reform,inSwansonR.(ed.)1998,Studies in Church History 34: Gender and Christian Religion, Woodbridge: BoydellandBrewer,75–91.

— 2016,Review article: Church reform – full of sound and fury, signifying nothing?,«EarlyMedievalEurope»,24(4),478-499.

LittleL.K.,RosenweinB.H.(eds.)1998,Debating the Middle Ages: Issues and Readings,Oxford:Blackwell.

LubichG.2012,Frauen in der Briefen der frühen Päpste. Bild und Function der Frau nach der päpstlichen Epistlographie zwischen Gregor I. und Gregor VII., inWeinfurter S.(ed.)2012,Päpstichle Herrschaft im Mittelater. Funktionsweisen – Strategien – Darstel-lungforschungen,Ostfildern:Thorbecke,129-152.

LoPreteK.A.2007,Adela of Blois, Countess and Lord (c.1067–1137), Dublin: Four Courts Press.

— 2007a,Women, Gender and Lordship in Medieval France,«HistoryCompass»5(6):1921-1941.

—2012, ‘Public’ aspects of lordlywomen’s domestic activities in France, c.1050–1200,inNelsonJ.L.,ReynoldsS.,JohnsS.M.(eds.)2012,Gender and historiography. Studies in the history of the earlier middle ages in honour of Pauline Stafford, London: InstituteofHistoricalResearch,145-158.http://www.academia.edu/17522765/Pu-blic_Aspects_of_Lordly_Womens_Domestic_Activities_in_France_c._1050-1200


82

— 2014,The Lady Vanishes: Medieval Texts, Modern Historians, and Lordly Women,«Qua-estionesMedii Aevi Novae», 19: 55-110. http://www.academia.edu/16866389/_The_Lady_Vanishes_Medieval_Texts_Modern_Historians_and_Lordly_Women

McLaughlin M.2010,Sex, Gender and Episcopal Authority in an Age of Reform, 1000-1122,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

— 2011,“Disgusting Acts of Shamelessness”: Sexual Misconduct and the Deconstruction of Royal Authority in the Eleventh Century,«EarlyMedievalEurope», 19 (3): 312-331.

McNamaraJ.A.,WempleS.1988,The Power of Women through the Family in Medieval Europe, 500-1100,inErlerM.,KowaleskiM.(eds.)1988,Women and Power in the Middle Ages, Athens(GA):UniversityofGeorgiaPress,83-101.

McNamaraJ.A.1994,The Herrenfrage. The Restructuring of the Gender System, 1050-1150,inLeesC.A.(ed.)1994,Medieval Masculinities: Regarding Men in the Middle Ages, Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesotaPress,3-29.

— 2003,Women and Power through the Family Revisited, in ErlerM., KowaleskiM.C.(eds.)2003,Gendering the Master Narrative: Women and Power in the Middle Ages, Ithaca(NY):CornellUniversityPress,17–30.

— 2005,Canossa and the Ungendering of the Public Man,inHoffmanBermanC.(ed.)2005, Medieval Religion: New Approaches. Rewriting Histories,NewYork-London:Routledge,102-122.

MelveL.2007,Inventing the Public Sphere. The public debate during the Investiture Con-test (c.1030-1122),Leiden:BrillAcademicPublishers.

MeriggiM.2004,Privato, pubblico, potere,inCalviG.(ed.)2004,Innesti. Donne e genere nella storia sociale,Rome:Viella,39-51.

MeyervonKnonauG.1894,Jahrbücher des Deutschen Reiches unter Heinrich IV und Heinrich V, vol. 2: 1070-1077, Leipzig: Verlag von Duncker und Humblot.

MillerM.C.2009,The Crisis in the Investiture Crisis Narrative,«HistoryCompass»,7(6):1570–1580.

Mulder-BakkerA.B.2003,Jeanne of Valois: the power of a consort,inNolanK.(ed.)2003, Capetian Women, Basingstoke:PalgraveMacmillan,253-269.

Muller-WiegandD.2005,Vermitteln - Beraten - Erinnern. Funktionen und Aufgaben-felder von Frauen in der ottonischen Herrscherfamilie (919-1024),Kassel:KasselUni-versity Press.

Munzel-Everling D. 2008, Eid, in Handwörterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte. Zweite Auflage,Berlin:ErichSchmidtVerlag,vol.1,1249-1261.

Nelson J.L. 1990,The Problematic in the Private, «SocialHistory», 15 (3): 355-364.https://www.jstor.org/stable/4285872?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

— 2007,Queens as converters of kings in the earlier Middle Ages,inlaRoccaC.(ed.)2007,Agire da donna: modelli e pratiche di rappresentazione (secoli VI-X): Atti del con-vegno (Padova, 18-19 febbraio 2005),Turnhout:Brepols,95-107.


83

NelsonJ.L.,RioA.2013,Women and laws in early medieval Europe,inBennettJ.M.,andKarras,R.M.(eds.)2013,The Oxford Handbook of Women and Gender in Medie-val Europe,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress,103-117.

ParsonsJ.C.1995,The Queen’s intercession in thirteenth-century England,inCarpenterJ.,MacleanS.B.(eds.)1995,Power of the weak: studies on medieval women,Urbana:UniversityofIllinoisPress,147-177.

— 1996,The Pregnant Queen as Counsellor and the Medieval Construction of Motherho-od,’inParsonsJ.C.,WheelerB.(eds.)1996,Medieval mothering,NewYork:Gar-landPublishing,39-61.

Patzold, S. 2007, Konsens und Konkurrenz. Überlegungen zu einem aktuellen For-schungskonzept der Mediävistik, «FruhmittelalterlicheStudien»,41:75–103.

—2009,Die Lust des Herrschers. Zur Bedeutung und Verbreitung eines politischen Vorwurfs zur Zeit Heinrichs IV.,inAlthoffG.(ed.)2009,Heinrich IV,Ostfildern:JanThorbe-cke Verlag, 219–253. https://journals.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/index.php/vuf/article/viewFile/17899/11707

Previté-OrtonC.W.1910,A point in the itinerary of Henry IV, 1076-77,«EnglishHi-storicalReview»,25:520-522.

— 1912,The Early History of the House of Savoy (1000-1233),Cambridge:Cambrid-ge University Press. https://archive.org/details/earlyhistoryofho00prevuoft

ReuterT.2006a,Contextualising Canossa: excommunication, penance, surrender, reconci-liation,inReuterT.,NelsonJ.L.(ed.)2006,Medieval polities & modern mentalities,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,147-166.

— 2006b,Peace-breaking, feud, rebellion, resistance: violence and peace in the politics of the Salian era,inReuterT.,NelsonJ.L.(ed.)2006,Medieval polities & modern mentali-ties,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,354-387.

Reynolds R.J. 2002,Reading Matilda: The Self-Fashioning of a Duchess, «Essays inMedievalStudies»,19:1-13.

Ripart L. 1999,Les fondements idéologiques du pouvoir des premiers comtes de Savo-ie (De la fin du Xe au début du XIIIe siècle), PhD Dissertation, Université deNice-Sophia Antipolis. http://www.academia.edu/6766287/Les_fondements_id%C3%A9ologiques_du_pouvoir_des_comtes_de_la_maison_de_Savoie_de_la_fin_du_Xe_au_d%C3%A9but_du_XIIIe_si%C3%A8cle_Th%C3%A8se_Universit%C3%A9_de_Nice_1999_dir._Henri_Bresc_

Robinson I.S. 1978,Authority and Resistance in the Investiture Contest: the polemical literature of the late eleventh century,Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

— 2000,Henry IV of Germany, 1056–1106, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

— (trans.) 2008, Eleventh-Century Germany: The Swabian Chronicles, Manchester: Manchester University Press.


84

— (trans.)2015,The Annals of Lampert of Hersfeld,Manchester:ManchesterUniver-sity Press.

SchempfH.2011,Handschlag,inHandwörterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte. Zweite Auflage,Berlin:ErichSchmidtVerlag,vol.2,748-749.

Schneidmuller,B.2000,Konsensuale Herrschaft. Ein Essay über Formen und Konzepte politischer Ordnung im Mittelalter,inHeinig,P-J.(ed.),Reich, Regionen und Europa in Mittelalter und Neuzeit. Festschrift für Peter Moraw,Berlin:Duncker&Humblot,53–87.

—2006,Canossa – Das Ereignis,inStiegemannC.,WemhoffM.(eds.)2006,Canossa 1077. Erschütterung der Welt. Geschichte, Kunst und Kultur am Anfang der Romanik. Vol. I: Essays,Munich:Hirmer,35-46.

SergiG.1981,Potere e territorio lungo la strada di Francia. Da Chambéry a Torino fra X e XIII secolo,Naples:Liguori.

— 1995,I confini del potere. Marche e signorie fra due regni medievali,Turin:Einaudi.

SiegelH.1894,Der Handschlag und Eid nebst den verwandten Sicherheiten fuer ein Ver-sprechen im deutschen Rechtsleben. Eine Untersuchung,Vienna:CarlGerold’sSohn.

StaffordP.1998,Queens, Concubines and Dowagers: The King’s Wife in the Early Middle Ages,London-WashingtonD.C.:LeicesterUniversityPress(Ied.1983).

— 1998a,La Mutation Familiale: A Suitable Case for Caution,inHillJ.,SwanM.(eds.)1998,The Community, the Family, and the Saint: Patterns of Power in Early Medieval Europe,Turnhout:Brepols,103-125.

StoneR.2013,Carolingian domesticities,inBennettJ.M.,KarrasR.M.(eds.)2013,The Oxford Handbook of Women and Gender in Medieval Europe,Oxford:OxfordUni-versityPress,229-245.

StrohmP.1992,Queens as Intercessors,inStrohm,P.1992,Hochon’s Arrow: the social imagination of fourteenth-century texts,Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress,95-119.

StruveT.1991,Gregor VII. und Heinrich IV.: Stationen einer Auseinandersetzung,«StudiGregoriani», 14 (2): 29-60.

— 1995,Mathilde von Tuszien-Canossa und Heinrich IV. Der Wandel ihrer Beziehungen vor dem Hintergrund des Investiturstreites., «Historisches Jahrbuch»,115 (1):41-84.http://www.mgh-bibliothek.de/dokumente/z/zsn2a031288.pdf

StuardS.M.1987,The Dominion of Gender or How Women Fared in the High Middle Ages,inBridenthalR.,KoontzC.,StuardS.M.(eds.)1987,Becoming Visible. Women in European History, 2nded.,Boston:HoughtonMiffflin,129-150.

— 1987a,Fashion’s Captives: Medieval Women in French Historiography,inStuard,S.M.(ed.)1987,Women in Medieval History and Historiography,Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress,59-80.


85

Tellenbach,G.1940,Church, State and Christian Society at the Time of the Investiture Contest,trans.R.F.Bennett,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.(FirstpublishedinGerman,1936).

— 1988,Der Charakter Kaiser Heinrichs IV. Zugleich ein Versuch über die Erkennbarkeit menschlicher Individualität im hohen Mittelalter, inAlthoffG.,GeuenichD.,OexleO.G.,WollaschJ.(eds.)1988,Person und Gemeinschaft im Mittelalter. Karl Schmid zum 65. Geburtstag,Sigmaringen:Thorbecke,345-367.

VerzarC.B.2010,Picturing Matilda of Canossa: Medieval Strategies of Representation,inMaxwellR.A. (ed.) 2010,Representing History, 900-1300: Art, Music, History,UniversityPark:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress,73-90.

WaitzG.1896,Deutsche Verfassungsgeschichte von der mitte des neunten bis zur mitte des zwölften jahrhunderts,vol. 6.,Berlin:WeidmannscheBuchhandlung.

WeinfurterS.2006,Canossa. Die Entzauberung der Welt,Munich:C.H.BeckVerlag.

WeitzelJ.2008,Eideshelfer,inHandwörterbuch zur deutschen Rechtsgeschichte. Zweite Auflage,Berlin:ErichSchmidtVerlag,vol.1,1261-1263.

West C. 2013,Reframing the Feudal Revolution. Political and Social Transformation Between Marne and Moselle, c.800-c.1100,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

WhiteS.D.1978,Pactum . . . legem vincit et amor judicium: the Settlement of Disputes by Compromise in Eleventh-Century Western France,«AmericanJournalofLegalHisto-ry»,22(4):281-308.

— 1986,Feuding and peace-making in the Touraine around the Year 1100,«Traditio»,42: 195-263.

— 1987,Inheritances and legal arguments in Western France, 1050-1150,«Traditio»43:55-103.

— 2001,From Peace to power: the study of disputes in medieval France, inCohenE.,deJongM.(eds.)2001,Medieval Transformations: Texts, Power and Gifts in Context,Leiden:Brill,203-218.

WickhamC.J.1986,Land Disputes and their Social Framework in Lombard-Carolingian Italy, 700-900,inDaviesW.,FouracreP.(eds.)1986,The Settlement of Disputes in Early Medieval Europe, Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,105-124.

—1997,Justice in the Kingdom of Italy in the Eleventh Century,inLa giustizia nell’alto medioevo, secoli IX-XI,SettimanedistudiodelCentroitalianodistudisull’altome-dioevo44,Spoleto:CISAM,179-255.

WittR.G.2012,The Two Latin Cultures and the Foundation of Renaissance Humanism in Medieval Italy,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Zey C. 2006, Im Zentrum des Streits. Mailand und die oberitalienischen Kommunen zwischen regnum und sacerdotium, in KarthausN., Jarnut J.,WemhoffM. (eds.)2006,Vom Umbruch zur Erneuerung? Das 11. und beginnende 12. Jahrhundert,Mu-nich:WilhelmFink,595-611.

— 2008,Frauen und Töchter der salischen Herrscher. Zum Wandel salischer Heiratspolitik in der Krise, inStruveT.(ed.)2008,Die Salier, Das Reich und der Niederrhein,Köln:Böhlau,47-98.

— 2013, Johannes Fried: Canossa, «sehepunkte» 13:1. http://www.sehepunkte.de/2013/01/21869.html

— 2015,Mächtige Frauen? Königinnen und Fürstinnen im europäischen Mittelalter (11.-14. Jahrhundert) – zur Einführung,inZey,C.(ed.)2015,Mächtige Frauen? Königinnen und Fürstinnen im europäischen Mittelalter (11.-14. Jahrhundert),Memmingen:JanThorbeckeVerlag,9-33.

ZimmermannH.1975,Der Canossagang von 1077. Wirkungen und Wirklichkeit,Mainz:Akademie der Wissenschaften und der Literatur.

Matilda and the Cities: Testing a “Figurational” approach

euGenio RiVeRsiUniv. of Bonn, institut für Geschichtswissenschaft,

Abteilung für Mittelalterliche Geschichte

The relation between Matilda of Tuscany and the cities of the Italian Kingdom has to date often been the subject of short case studies or of overly general considerations, such as the op-position between ‘feudal’ and ‘communal’ power. The article aims to propose an interpretation of this relationship based on a ‘figurational’ approach, i.e., one that focuses on an entanglement of interdependencies and interactions between multiple actors (prince, bishops, cathedral chap-ters, urban monasteries, lay groups). This figurational view confirms the complexity of the context of the emergence of city-communes.

introduction1

ThecountessMatildaofCanossa(1046/1047–1115),thelastinapo-werfulnobleline,wastherulerofacomplexandextendeddominionintheKingdomofItaly(seeFig1)inpoliticallytensedecadesduringtheso-calledinvestiturecontroversy(1076–1122).Inthiscontext,therela-tionship between the countess and the cities has often been interpreted according to an idealist dialectic as being between ancient feudalism

1 Iwould like thankAlbertoCotza,GiorgioCremonesi,EnricoFaini andChrisWickham for their words of encouragement and their advice. I would also like to thankAlheydisPlassmann,GwendolinGoldbloomandTakeoWatanabe for theirhelp.


88

and modern city com-munes. Such an inter-pretation is still more or less widespread,despite recent rese-arch on the genesis of the communes which hasmodified the pre-dominant teleological model. Consequentlya new model of inter-pretation seems neces-sary. This is the aim of this short article,which tries to suggest a more complex wayof imagining the re-lationship between Matilda’s domus and the groups and insti-tutions active in the urbancontexts.DuringaprestigiousseriesoflecturesonMatilda,presentedinBolognain2015tomarkthe900-yearanniversaryofthedeathofthecountess,Professor Maria Giuseppina Muzzarelli of the University of Bologna once again addressed the problem of the relationship between Matilda andthecities,which,shemaintained,hadoftenbeenrepresentedsim-plistically as a «misunderstanding» or an «incompatibility»2. The basis of

2 Celebrazioni per il IX centenario della morte di Matilde di Canossa (1115) e della nascita del Comune di Bologna (1116): Muzzarelli’s lecture dealt with the comparison between Matilda and other women of the High Middle Ages («Le grandi donne della storia»).Later,RossellaRinaldigavealectureaboutthissubjectinthesameseriesthat

Fig. 1. Matilda’s domains in central and northern Italy (Eugenio Riversi, 2016)

eUGeNio riVerSiMatilda and the Cities: Testing a “Figurational” Approach

89

this«misunderstanding»,inherview,wastheideathatMatildaandthecitiesbelongedtotwodifferent«worlds»or«cultures»,the«feudal»andthe(pre)-«communal»respectively,which,inanimplicitidealistvisionof history,were opposed and consecutive.This view is also expres-sed,forexample,intherepresentationofMatildabyVitoFumagalli,who published fundamental studies about the power wielded by the countessandherancestors.Hecouldaffirm:«Eranellalogicadellecosesidirebbeoggi;certotuttoquestoobbedivaalmovimentodiemanci-pazione delle città dal dominio del ceto feudale tradizionale»3.Althoughrepeatedlyquestionedandelaboratedon[Romagnoli,Ricci2008,153-155],thisviewhasneverbeensupersededbyanothermo-del.ThetimenowseemsripetoexplicitlyproposeanewinterpretativepatternofthespecificrelationshipbetweenMatildaandthecities.Thismodelaimstodeconstructboth“actors”,Matildaandthecities,inordertoavoidthembecoming,moreorlessunwittingly,theprotagonistsina“plot”oftheItalianMiddleAges:thatoftheriseofthecitycommunes.DeconstructingmeansfirstofallrecognisingthecontradictionswithintheestablishedpatternofMatildabeing“feudal”andthecities“(pre-)communal”.Thesecontradictionshavebeenpointedoutandoverco-me time and again by historians in their concrete analysis of case stu-dies which took advantage of the new description of the communal society4.Indeed,therelationsbetweenMatildaandtheurbansocieties

stressed the continuity of relations between Matilda’s dynasty and the cities (Matilde, i Canossiani e le città). On the occasion of this anniversary conference Glauco Maria Cantarella has repeatedly stressed the need for reviewing this historiographical pro-blem.ForhisviewsonthiscontextseeCantarella2015,243-258;ontheEuropeandimension of that transformation: Cantarella 2011.3 Fumagalli2008,245,whostressedthatMatildawouldhaveunderstoodthedisso-lutionofher“state”:«Malagrancontessacapìqualeeralastradadaprendere,qualeeral’evoluzionedellecose,ilcorsodellastoriafavorevoledatempoineluttabilmenteal trionfo delle città». Fumagalli’s representation of Matilda’s awareness is clearly an assumption that depends on the idealistic model. Fumagalli’s overview of the dynastic power: Fumagalli 1981.4 Forinstance,seeBordini’srecentandexcellentinterpretationofamultiple-case


90

arecharacterisednotonlybyconflictsbutalsobytypesofcollaborationandevensharing,i.e.byhavingconnectionswiththesamegoods,thesame institutions and the same individuals or groups. As has been esta-blished,citiessuchasPisa,FlorenceandMantuacaninsomewaysevenbe considered dynastic residences5.The last of the three,Mantua is usuallydescribedwithgood reasonas being a source of conflict, although this presupposes that largelyconflict-freecoexistenceandlastingcollaborationbetweenthepowerof the dynasty and some of the urban actors was possible6. This was

study(Parma,Reggio,Modena)that,ontheonehand,deliberatelyshowsthecom-plexinterrelationsbetweenMatilda’sruleandtheactorsfromthecities («perchéiduemomenti–l’etàcanossanael’etàcomunale–sembranosvolgersisenzasoluzionedicontinuità.Purnonspingendosiasostenere,delrestoerroneamente,chel’unafudirettaemanazionedell’altro,dovremo,però,osservareche,nellazonapresaacam-pione,lanovitàdelregimecomunalefucollegataadoppiofiloalpassatocanossano»[Bordini2011,138]);yet,ontheother,doesnotproposeanewmodel:despitethedetailedreconstruction,themodelremainsdichotomic(Vassallità canossana e istitu-zioni comunali: due universi a confronto, 142).5 Cf.theknownepisodeofthemagnificentEastercelebrationinPisa(1074),whereBeatrice and Matilda with their entourage appeared as powerful rulers («quasi cuiusdam dominationis praefecturas»): Chronicon Sancti Huberti,583-584;seeRonzani1996,133–135.6 Duringtheinvestiturecontroversy,MantuawasbesiegedbyHenryIVforalongtime(1090-1091).Thelongresistance–beforethe“betrayal”–isproofofaworkingpartnership between the domus,ledbyMatilda’shusbandWelfV,andtheurbanac-tors,particularlythemilitia.Despitehispolemicalattitude,Donizo’srepresentationoftheinteractionbetweenthe“characters”ofMatildaandMantuainhisVita Mathildis (1111-1115)impliesasynergythatthe“city”hadrefused(noteonceagainthesigni-ficantreferencetoMatilda’scustomarystayinthecityduringtheEastercelebrations:a typical feature of a residence): «Catholicis plena dudum celebrare solebas/ Pascha Dei Christi, cum splendiferaque Mathildi,/ Curia cuius erat dapibus donisque repleta./ […]/ Conscilium dignum cape, lugeto scelus istud./ Iura licet prisca corrruperis et nova scripta,/ Plange tamen pure, plebs omnis plangat in urbe,/ Communi vero voto revocare studeto/ Cultricem Christi, vestram dominamque Mathildim./ Hinc restaurabis leges, et honore mica-bis;/ Urbes vicinae laudabunt te sat opime;/Ac fore secura tamen haud aliter potes unquam» [Donizone,Vita di Matilde, II525-527;542-549].TheintereststhecountesshadinMantua were strengthened by the burial of Anselm II of Lucca in the cathedral and bythehagiographicalpromotionofhiscult(1086-1087;seeVita Anselmi),aswellasthe foundation of a hospital for the poor: Urkunden67,200-203;Dep.65,433-434.


91

true of the cities that fell under her delegated and lordly powers as well as those that did not. The restitution of the castle of Sambuca to the cathedral chapter of Pistoia (1104) and the restoration of the road toCopermioforthebenefitofthechurchofParma(1106)areactsonMatilda’s part that demonstrate the possibility of an agreement between themanyurbanandnon-urbanactors–acomplexfigurationinbothcases–involved7.Inordertobetterunderstandsuchsituationsingeneral,wemustgoonestepfurtherandreplacethepreviousframeworkwithamorecomplexmodel,inwhichbothMatildaandthecitiesarenolongerhypostati-zations;not“individual”actors,butstructuredsocialformations,con-stitutedbymanyindividuals,groupsandeveninstitutions.Thismodelcanbeconceived througha “figurational” approach,whichhaspre-viouslybeenusedtoinvestigatepre-modernandspecificallymedievalsocieties,too,withtheaimofconceptualisingcomplexanddynamicinterdependencies inpowerrelations.Thefigurations,asmobileandprocessualsocialstructures,aremadeupofmultipleactorsinmutualdependence,which cannot simply be absorbed under general labelsfollowingidealistplots.Thismeetsthecurrentneedforcomplexityinhistoricalexplanationandinterpretation8.

Theconflictduring theyears1091-1114 is confirmedby the scarcityof contacts,mostofwhichwerepunitive;butseetheinterestingcontextinwhichBishopHugoof Mantua granted tithes to the dynastic abbey of Polirone (Urkunden,80,231-233).7 Urkunden,81-82,234-239(Pistoia);96,264-266(Parma).8 Torre1996,199-201,referringtothebishopsintheoldregime.ForanexampleofuseintheHighMiddleAges:Fiore2010,131-238.Thefigurationalapproachisderived from the sociological theory of Norbert Elias (and of Georg Simmel): for the wide range of uses see a clear summary in: Figurational Studies. In the present context,theseconceptshavebeenadoptedandreworkedconceptuallytoarriveatanattempt at applying them when describing the power structures in medieval society. Moreover,afigurationalanalysisrepresentsamorequalitativeapproachcapableofresolvingsomeproblemsencounteredinnetworkanalysis,thequantitativerequire-mentsofwhichcannotbefulfilledinmanymedievalcontexts;cf.Hitzbleck/Hubner014.Regardingthecomplementarityanddifferencesbetweentheseapproachescf.


92

Thusatthattimethe“city”wasonlyoneoftheidentifiableactorsinthesocialandpoliticalprocesses,atfirstnota frequentone,butgraduallybecomingmorevisible.Inotherwords,weshouldnotalwaysassumethe“city”asacollectiveactorwithwhichindividuals,groupsandinstitutionscould primarily identify themselves. We should instead imagine an urban “stage”or“context”fortheactionsofthesevariousinstitutions,groupsand individuals who do not necessarily act for the political autonomy of theircity,butrathertodefendandimprovetheirindividualpositions.Tobeclear,thisdoesnotmeandenyingtheriseofthecommunesbetweentheeleventhandtwelfthcenturies;itactuallyacknowledgesonceagainthegradualandcomplexnatureofthedevelopment9. None of Matilda’s “counterparts”couldbeidentifiedasacitycommune.The same might also be said for the other partner in the relationship: the countess herself10.Thereisariskofreducing“Matilda”,too,toanindividual actor, even though it is evident thatwe are looking at adomus,i.e.acomplex,verticalandatthesametimemulticentricstruc-ture–whichisalsointurnmadeupoutofmanyindividuals,groups,andinstitutions.Moreover,applyingaMarxistoridealistlabelsuchas“feudal” isnotadequateforthisplural formation,whichwasdefinedasa“diverseconglomeration”(coacervo) and aptly described more than

Willems2010.ForarecentexampleofnetworkanalysisofamedievalcontextseeGramsch 2013.9 ThereisnowagreementonapossiblereturntoTabacco’scomplexreflectionsonthesocialstructuresofthecity,withinwhichthecommunalgovernmentarose:Ta-bacco1989,182-236;recentlysee:Pio,DeMatteis2011;Caciorgna,Carocci,Zorzi2014;Wickham2014;Wickham2015.Regardingtherelationshipbetweenmarqui-sesandcitiesinthetenthandeleventhcenturiescf.Sergi1995,328-343.10 RegardingMatilda’sdomus seeRiversi 2013, 450-469,with further references.Theanalysisofthedecision-makingintheassemblyofCarpineti(1092),althoughweseeitthroughDonizo’seyes,allowsustoobservetheparticipationofdifferentactors,evenwithinstitutionalsignificance(e.g.thebishops),inMatilda’simportantdecision to continue the war against Henry IV. Regarding the assembly of Carpineti cf. Riversi 2015.


93

twenty years ago as «the powers of the Canossa»11.Inasimilarvein,itisnotadequatetousethelabel“reform”inanab-stractGregoriansenseinthiscontexttodescribethepoliticsofMatil-da’s domus:it,too,isasimplebutmisleadingconcept.Thislastconsi-derationissignificantbecauseitplaysapartintherepresentationoftherelationship between Matilda and the cities12. One only has to read the firstchaptersoftheHistoria Mediolanensis by Landulf of St Paul for this chronicler’spolemicalandironicalnarrativetoexplainthecomplexityofthereligiousfieldanditsinstitutionalstructuresatthedawnofthetwelfth century in Milan and Lombardy13.Oneconsequenceofthisfirstattemptatdeconstructionisthat,whendescribing the relationship between Matilda’s domus and the urban so-cieties,othercitiesthanthosewithinherdelegatedpowersalsocometotheforeground–forexampleMilan,whosepoliticalcollaborationwiththe domus of the countess through some urban and non-urban actors has mostly remained in the shadows so far14.Finallyitshouldbeaddedthat,forthetheoreticalpurposesofthisar-ticle,aninternalchronologyofeventsandactorsisleftasidehere.An

11 SeetheincisiveanalysisofSergi1994,whodevelopedtheresearchofVitoFuma-galli.SeealsoBertolini2004a,42-43.Regardingthecomplexityofaristocraticpowersee now Lazzari 2008.12 Forexample,seeFasoli’sinterpretationoftherelationshipbetweenMatildaandthecities:«Matilde[…]nonamavamoltorisiedereincittà,equestolerendevamenofacilelacomprensionedellamentalitàedellenecessitàdeicentriurbani,ancheinrela-zione al problema centrale della sua politica: la vittoria degli ideali gregoriani» [Fasoli 1978,57].ButatthesameconferenceCapitani1978,371-376,assessedthemotivesofMatilda’sconductdifferently.13 LandulphusdeSanctoPaulo,Historia Mediolanensis:Matildaappearsinthefirstchapters:1-8,3-7.14 Matildawas a «protagonistadiscreta, eppure incisiva, delle vicendemilanesi difineXIeinizioXIIsecolo,sebbenequestotemarisultipiuttostotrascuratonellari-flessionestoriograficasullacontessaesuMilano»[Lucioni2003,150].OnMilaninthesedecadessee:Wickham2015andDartmann2012,33-120,withreferencestothewidepreviousliterature;regardingthecontextofthe1090sinwhichMatildawaspoliticallyinfluentialseeparticularly:Lucioni2011.


94

inquiryintoapossible“evolution”oftherelationshipbetweenMatildaandthecitiesoverapproximatelyfortyyearswouldrequireadeeperandbroaderdescriptionofthecontextsthanispossiblehere15.

Bishops

The highest-ranking actor on the urban stage is certainly the bishop. Inthiscasetheunravellingisquiteeasy,evenifthehistoriographicalpattern of the sintesi between the bishop and the (pre-) communal cities remainsatthesametime,andwithgoodreason,avalidinterpretationmodel16.However,thebishoplendshimselfwelltobeingreformulatedconceptuallyintermsofa“figurational”approach,whichistosayinawebofdynamicinterdependenciesinvolvingnotonly“Matilda”andtheurbanactors,butalsotheking,thepope,otherbishopsandregionalpowers. The diocesan schisms caused by the investiture controversy showthisquiteclearly:thecaseofLucca,andespeciallythatofAnselmIIandhisimperialopponentPeter,issignificantinillustratingthebi-shops’complexnetworkofinterdependencies,whichobviouslyrequi-remorethana“city”storylineasanadequateexplanation17.Withregardtotheseurbanactors,whowereofprimaryimportancein,andatthesametimefundamentalpivotsof,thekingdom,Matil-da and her domus advanced a claimbasedon thedynastic influence

15 ForanexemplaryanalysisofthecaseofLuccasee:Bertolini2004b.16 Tabacco1989,321-344; seeTabacco1979;Francesconi2001;moregenerally:Pellegrini 2009.17 RegardingLuccasee:Schwarzmaier1972,401–410;andaboveallSavigni1994,Savigni1996,Savigni2001,andhisforthcomingarticleinCalzona,Cantarella2016;seealsoPuglia2013,especially1-23;andEldewik2012,127-138,165-175.Unfortu-natelythereisnocomparativestudyofthediocesanschismsintheItalianKingdomduringtheinvestiturecontroversy,whichmightbedevelopedaccordingtoa“figu-rational”approach.


95

she inherited from her ancestors18:obviously, thisentailedmorethansimply grants and donations19. The hyperbolic image of the chronicler CosmasofPrague,whocomposedhisworkbefore1125,accordingtowhichthecountesshadaholdovermorethan120bishops,isasigni-ficantperceptiona posteriori of the relationship between them and the dynasty’s power20. This perception may well correspond to the actual position held by the bishops in Matilda’s entourage during the investitu-recontest–afigurational(inter-)dependency–,althoughtheycouldinturnplaytheroleofinfluentialadvisersandeven,inthecaseofAnselmII,assumesomefunctionsofthe“male”headofthedomus according to the representation of the anonymous author of the Vita Anselmi21.

18 TheinterdependencybetweenthebishopsandthehouseofCanossahadbeenstructurallyfundamental–asagreementaswellasopposition–eversincethefirstgeneration of the dynasty.Donizo’s poemoffers an interesting perception of thisdurablefeatureofdynasticpower;forexample,seethispassageonBoniface,fatherofMatilda,inwhichsuperiority,emulationandrespectaremixed:«Pontifices sacros habuit quam maxime caros:/ Ipsis donabat quae censuit fore grata;/ Psallebant semper ca-pellani reverenter/ Horas nocturnas sibi cotidieque diurnas;/ Nemo cappellam super ipsum praesul habebat»[Donizone,Vita di MatildeI,1072-1076].SeeCaterinaCiccopiedi’sforthcoming study on the relationship between Matilda and the bishops in Matilde di Canossa e il suo tempo, 2016.19 Urkunden:23,87-92(LandulfofPisa);24,93-94(Volterra);28,104-107(Lucca);108, 289-290 (DodoofModena); 115, 304-306 (Landulf of Ferrara); 40-41, 133-136(UbaldusofMantua);96,264-266(churchofParma);108,289-290(DodoofModena); 115, 304-306 (Landulf of Ferrara); 131, 336-338 (Manfred ofMantua);132,338-340(BernardofParma);136,347-349(churchofMantua).Judgmentsandjurisdictionaldecisions:5,44-47(churchofLucca);13,66-68(LeoofPistoia);14,68-70(AnselmofLucca);20-21,81-85(AnselmofLucca);26,97-100(AnselmofLucca);31-32,112-116(GratianofFerrara);52,158-161(RangeriusofLucca):58,181-182(RangeriusofLucca);63,190-192(churchofPisa);65,195-196(churchofReggio); 77, 226-227 (Laurentius of Populonia); 97, 266-269 (DodoofModena);106,285-287.20 «Mathildis potentissima domina, quae post obitum patris sui Bonefacii tocius Longobar-diae simul et Burgundiae suscepit regni gubernacula, habens potestatem eligendi et introni-zandi sive eliminandi 120 super episcopos»[Cosma,Chronica,II,31,126].RegardingtherepresentationofMatildainthischronicle:Wolverton2015,161-169.21 Thepresenceofbishopsasparticipants invariouswaysinMatilda’sactions(inthis casenot as recipients, forwhich seenote17 above):Urkunden 8, 52-54 (An-


96

BernoldofConstance’s chronicle,written at the timeof the events,confirmsthis:herelateshow,thankstoMatilda’sintervention,thebi-shopsofModena,ReggioandPistoiawereordainedin1085.Bernoldalsoreferstoasignificantfailure:afewyearslater,thecatholici of Pia-cenzawhoappointedBonizoofSutri–aformermemberofMatilda’sentourage–asbishopprobablyreceivednosupportfromthecountess,andthefamousreformerpaidtheconsequencesofthisisolation22.One case in which Matilda and her domus intervened to support a new bishop,andoneforwhichfarbetterrecordsareavailable,iscertainlythatconcerningParma,acityontheborderofherdelegatedandsei-gneurial powers23.Here,intheurbansociety,loyaltytothekinghad

selmofLucca);42,136-139(UbaldusofMantua);44,142-143(UbaldusofMantua,HeribertofReggio);50,154-156(PeterofPistoia);57,178-180(PetrusofPistoia);59,183-184(RangeriusofLucca);67,200-203;80,231-233(HugoofMantua;Bo-nusseniorofReggio);81-82,234-239(DodoofModena);89,251-252(BonusseniorofReggio);93,258-260(HugoofMantua);97,266-269(PeterofPistoia,BernardofParma);100,274-276(HugoofMantua);101,276-277(HugoofMantua,DodoofModena); 109, 290-292 (Dodo ofModena); 114, 302-304 (Landulf of Ferrara,BernardofParma,HugoofMantua);115,304-306(BernardofParma);132,338-340(BernardofParma,BonusseniorofReggio,ManfredofMantua);134,342-344(Bernard of Parma). It is probably no coincidence that the bishops’ presence increased after1090.Moreover,thisformofinterdependencymostlyconcernedthebishopsofthenorthernsees,whowerenotinfrequentlypresenttogether.SeeagainDonizo’srepresentation of Matilda: for instance in the reference to her support to the bishops: «Vestibus e sacris multos haec nota ducatrix/ Patres catholicos vestisse quidem reminiscor;/ Inter quos fulsit reverendus episcopus urbis/ Lucensis, lucens Anselmus, maxime prudens» [Donizone,Vita di Matilde,II279-282].Onthe“leadingrole”playedbyAnselmofLucca in Matilda’s domus see above all: Vita Anselmi,particularlychapter19.ConsideralsothecaseofFrogerius,chaplaintoBonusseniorandlaterMatilda,whosecareerdevelops between the two entourages.22 «Sicque eius prudentia Mutinensi aecclesiae et Regiensi atque Pistoriensi catholici pasto-res ordinati sunt»[Bernoldus,Chronicon,454].OnBonizoofSutrisupportedbythePlacentini catholici: 477.23 The dynasty had had important links with Parma from the very first: thus anephewof its founder, Sigefred II, became bishop of Parma.Donizo also reports(Donizone,Vita di Matilde,I,846-870)thedecisiveinterventionofBonifaceinPar-ma,whichhadrebelledagainsttheemperorConradIIin1037.Certainly,thecityconstitutedadialecticpoleofdynasticpowerduringBishopCadalus’termasPope,


97

livedonamongtheeliteforalongtime.Evenso,asaconsequenceofthemountingpoliticalcrisisduringthereignofHenryIV,someoftheelite invited the legate forNorthern Italy,CardinalBernard, abbot-generalofVallombrosaandMatilda’sclosecollaborator, toParma in1104.Bernard–andhisgreatwealth–wereusedasa“picklock”togaincontrolofthisstrategicbishop’sseat.However,thisdidnothap-penwithoutconflict(1104-1106),whichwasapreludetoalongbutprobably turbulent episcopate (1106-1133)24.Thedifficultiesencounte-red by Bernard show not so much the sintesi as the dialectic discrepancy betweenurbansocietyandthebishop,whosepositionwasdeterminedbythecomplexinterdependenciesofclustersofgroups–andaboveallRome–,whichcannotbeeasilyreconstructed25.MilanoffersanotherprimeexampleofMatilda’sinterventionwithre-gardtobishopsandurbancontexts.Indeed,accordingtothepreviouslymentionedchroniclebyLandulfofSt.Paul,thecountessplayedama-jorroleintheelectionoftwoarchbishops,AnselmIVofBovisio(1098)and Grossolano (1102)26.Shewasabletoinfluencethedecisionthanks

and it is no coincidence that one of the leaders of the city troops who clashed with thoseofMatildainSorbara(1084)wasthebishopofParma,Everard.OnthisParmacontextsee:Schumann1973,Albertoni2010,Greci2010;and,withspecificfocusonthe connection with Matilda: Nasalli Rocca 1964.24 Donizonarratedthisepisodeinsomedetail,portrayingitasagreatvictoryforMatildaandthepartysupportingthePope:Donizone,Vita di Matilde,II955–1022.The rapid intervention of Matilda’s vassals: «Atque sui fortes athletae iussit ut omnes/ Adversus Parmam deferrent insimul arma;/ Fines tunc nempe retinebant hanc Motinenses./ Ut volucer velox cito pergens haec pia vero,/ Parma die terna prope sensit eam, timet ex qua,/ Nobilibus vassis illius reddere statim/ Inuste captum [sc. Bernard] studuit supra titulatum» [1010–1016].Concerning thecontext seeAlberzoni2010:291-295; Silanos2005;and forthcoming Riversi 2016a.25 Bernard’sconferringofthestandard(vexillum) oncitizensduringthefirstcon-flictswithother cities seems a rationalization in the later hagiographical traditionconcerningthebishop.ConcerningthecontextseealsoSchumann2004,Greci2005,Greci 2009 and the methodologically promising comparative essay by Bordini 2011.26 Landulf,referringtotheelectionofAnselm,usestheexpressiontwice:«Matildis comitisse favore»[LandulphusdeSanctoPaulo,Historia Mediolanensis,2,3].Onthe


98

to the supportofcertainmembersof theelite, suchas the capitaneus ArialdoofMelegnano,whowasveryclose to thecountess, andhercollaborationwiththelegateArimann,bishop-electofBrescia27. More so,inthecaseofAnselmIV,thechroniclernotedthatthearchbishopobtainedthepastoralstafffromMatilda,presumablynotasasimplegift,but more probably as a symbolic present that replaced the investiture28.The latter is one of the clues that suggest that Matilda and her husband WelfVofBavaria,aslordofthedomus,assumedtheroleofthehigherlayauthorityinNorthernItalyduringtheconflictwithHenryIVinthe 1090s: at least for individuals as well as groups and institutions who opposedtheemperor’ssupportersinthedifferentcontests;somethingakin to Bishop Anselm II of Lucca and Cardinal Bernard’s vicariate for

initiativeofCardinalBernard,theconfirmationofGrossolanuswasdecidedonatthecourtofMatilda;Bernard,withthepallium,reachedMilanwhereGrossolanuswasenthroned. «Ibique Grosolanus stola indutus; et abbas, in suo tempore remuneratus, quievit et recessit, et post paucos dies in gratia predicte comitissae Matildis idem abas Parmensem episcopatum suscepit» [LandulfusdeSanctoPaulo,Historia Mediolanensis ed. cit. (n. 98),8,7].Landulf’saccountiscriticalandironic,intertwinedasitiswithallusionstoirregularexchangesandproceduresimplicitly,butclearly,“simoniacal”.27 Regardingthecontext:Lucioni2011;concerningArialdoofMelegnanoinpar-ticular:109-115,137-138.OnthepointofviewofLandulfofSanPaolo seealso:Rossini1968;Capitani1989;theworkinthecontextoftheurbanhistoriography:Busch1997,41-50.28 IntheaccountArimannwasopposedtothechoiceofLandulfofBaggio,decidedby a nobilis multitudo, towhichthevulgus was violently averse: «Corona unde vulgi, gratia Romane ecclesie et Brisiensis ac Matildis comitisse favore putans, illum fore virum reli-gionis, mox ubi sensit, illum Armanum huic electioni abesse, cepit adversus ipsam electionem insanire, et clericos et sacerdotes pugnis et fustibus vehementer lacerare».Then,ArimannhadAnselmofBovisio,provostofthecollegiatechurchofSanLorenzo,elected:«Hic [sc. Anselm] vero, ut se sensit ellectum a Brisiensi illo Armano et populo impetuoso con-laudatum, illico cathedram archiepiscopatus ascendit et sedit. Et deficientibus sibi sufraganeis episcopis, omnes ecclesiasticos ordines usque ad presbiteratum, ordinationem quoque episco-patus ab extraneis episcopis suscepit. Virge quoque pastorali per munus comitissae Matildis adhesit; stollam autem, per legatum domini Urbani pape sibi delatam, induit. Deinde homo iste, effectus prudens, neglexit Obertum agnomine Baltricum, qui propter investituram Bri-siensis episcopatus, quam a rege suo Henrico susceperat, Armano repugnabat; et Armanum, qui se in archiepiscopum elegit, in episcopum Brisiensem ordinavit» [Landulphus de Sancto Paulo,Historia Mediolanensis,2,3].


99

Lombardy.ThustheyoccupiedapivotalpositioninthefigurationsoftheKingdom29.

Canons of the cathedral

Nothingismoredifficulttounravel,ontheotherhand–eveninthisfigurationalapproach,and in theabsenceofmonographic studiesorsurveys–thanthecanonsofthecathedral.Thecomplexityofthein-stitution“cathedralchapter”consistsinitsintricateinterdependencies,whichcanbebrieflysummarisedinadoubleaspect:ontheonehandthe canons could either act as an autonomous ecclesiastical institution orrepresentthewholeurbanchurch(withorwithoutthebishops);ontheotherhandtheywereabodywhosemembersbelongedtodifferentpartsoftheéliteoftheurbanandnon-urbansociety,mediatingbetwe-en and representing different interests regarding not only themainchurch and its estates in the diocese but also the cities30. We mentioned above the restitution of the castle of Sambuca and the court of Pavana tothecathedralchapterofPistoia(1104):inanimpressiveandcomplex“figuration”therecipientswerethe«canonici sancti Zenonis de Pistoria, venerabiles clerici Bonutus archipresbiter et Ildebrandus primicerius, cum qui-busdam civibus ex melioribus civitatis»31.Moreover,thecathedralchapterwasastructuralcounterweighttothebishop,althoughthisdoesnotnecessarilymean–inthelogicoftheinterdependencies–thatitwasopposedtothebishop.TheprivilegesgrantedbyHenryVtothecathedralchapterofParmainMay1111,

29 Thiscouldbeasignificantelement–oflegitimation–intheinterpretationoftheinterdependencies between Matilda’s domus and the urban actors in cities which did not fall under the delegated powers of the countess. See more broadly: Riversi 2016b.30 Fora specificexample seeSavigni2001onLucca;ageneraloverviewmaybefoundinKeller1977.31 Urkunden,82,237.OnSambuca:Rauty2006,especially283.


100

without intervention on the part of Bishop Bernard and after the agre-ementofBianellobetweenMatildaandtheemperor,areinthemsel-vessignificant:theycouldbeinterpretedaccordingtoa“figurational”approachasanactofbalancingpowerintheurbancontext,regardlessof whether imperial intervention was achieved in agreement with Ber-nard or with the approval of the countess32.The direct relations between the dynastic ruler and the cathedral chap-ters are not as well documented as those with the bishops and other religious urban institutions. The countess made donations or other concessions:forexampletothecathedralchapterofBologna33(1105);or sheacted inher judicial function, i.e. for thecathedralchapterofVolterra(1075;1107)34.InthecaseofdonationstothecanonsofBologna,wecanalreadyseea significant element of interdependency betweenMatilda and the-se urban institutions: the liturgical commemoration35. It’s well known thatMatilda’sparentswereinfactburiedinthebuildingcomplexoftwocathedrals,inMantuaandPisa,twocitiesthatwereinsomede-gree dynastic residences. This shows a strong connection between the countessandtheseurbaninstitutions,whicharethereforereciprocallyinvolvedinsignificantexchanges36. The case of Pisa is particularly inte-

32 Le carte degli archivi parmensi del secolo XII,31,29-30(1111maggio26).33 Urkunden89,251-252(DonationofthechurchofSanMicheleinArgelato).Fur-therdonations:10-11,58-63(Mantua);23,87-92(Pisa);27,100-104(Mantua);74,217-220 (Pisa).34 Urkunden17,76-77;104,281283.Otherjudicialandjurisdictionaldecisions:18,78-79(Lucca);56,176-178(Florence);61,186-188(Pisa);65,195-196(ReggioE.);81-82,234-239(Pistoia).35 It isperhapsnocoincidence that thechurchMatildagranted to thechapterofBolognawasdedicatedtothearchangelMichael,towhomherfatherBonifacehadprobably been especially devoted: «do, cedo, offero pro remedio anime mee et parentum meorum in perpetuum» [Urkunden 89,251].36 OnthecathedralchapterofMantua:Urkunden 10,58-61;11,61-63;136,347-349(thecourtdonatingPacengotothechurchofSanMicheleinthebuildingcomplex


101

resting;here,thecountessprotectedthechapterandfinancedthecon-structionofthecathedral,oneofthemostrelevantbindingfeaturesinthe emerging political identity of a collective urban actor37.InModena,inanurbancommunitythatwaswithoutabishopatthetime,theur-banclergy,i.e.firstofallprobablythecanonsofthecathedral,engagedwith the other urban groups in the project of rebuilding the cathedral and made Matilda the privileged partner38.WhatwecannotgaugedirectlyisMatilda’spossibleinfluenceontherecruitment of members of the cathedral chapter. We can only infer in-direct relationships with those canons who belonged to family groups closetoMatilda.Buttheserelations,whichmusthavealreadyexistedatthetime,arefrequentlyattestedonlylater39.Certainly, the relation between the chapter andMatildamight giverisetoconflict;especiallyifthelattersupportedinitiativesof“reform”whichconcernedthehabitsandpropertyofthecanons,thevita com-munis40. In this case we have a most remarkable piece of literary eviden-ce,thatoftheVita AnselmibyRangeriusofLucca(about1096–1099).Rangerius gives an account of the clash that arose in the Tuscan city betweenthecanonsontheonehandandthebishop,thepopeandMa-

of the cathedral).37 OnthecathedralchapterofPisa:Urkunden 23,87-92;61,186-188;63,190-192(«curam quondam cum nostris [fidelibus hab]eremus eiusque domum miris tabularum la-pideis ornamentis incoeptam, qualiter ad effectum perducere dignis possemus auxiliis»;«ad operam perficiendam vel ad aliquam restaurationem»);74,217-220(«ad explecionem operis [ecc]l[esi]e sancte Marie»).38 Seenote51.39 See scattered specificexamples in thementionedmonographsabout theurbansocieties and churches concerned. 40 Therearealreadyreferencestothisaspectintheabovementioneddocuments.Forexample,clearly:«ut medietas predictorum bonorum sit in sunptu et usu predicti episcopii, altera vero medietas ad usum et sumptum predictorum canonicorum communiter et caste viventium»;«et si canonici canonice non vixerint, predicto usufructu careant, usque quo ad communem et castam redierint vitam, et similiter in potestate civium deveniat» [Urkunden 23,91].Notethislattershiftfromchaptertocitizens.


102

tilda on the other. The resulting schism shows not only the split of the localurbansociety,butalsoindicatestheexistenceof“greyareas”inthe elites of the city and the march who gave their opportunistic con-sensustotheleaderofthecanons,Peter:thisillustratesthedynamicofthe interdependencies between urban and non-urban groups and the citychurchandexternalactorssuchasMatildaandHenryIV41.TherepresentationinRangerius’poemrequiresmorein-depthanalysis.However,itisimportanttopointoutaparticularnarrativeconstruc-tion:thefutureimperialbishopPeter,theleaderoftherebelsamongthecanons,givestwoconsecutivespeeches.Thefirst,addressingthesmallergroupofthecanons,aimstojustifytheinterestsanddefendthepositionofmembersofthechapter:inthisway,Rangeriusstagedtheeffectiveinterestsofthosepartsoftheurbanélitethatcontrolledthecathedral chapter. The second speech to the citizens shows a sweeping and idealistic vision seeking to create a large civic consensus supporting the interests of the smaller group of canons42.Moreover,infrontofanaudience of citizens Peter presents a very negative view of the lordship oftheCanossas inLucca,whoaredepictedas seigneurialoppressorsof the libertas of the cives. By defending the interests of the canons of thecathedralchapterasinabroadsensethoseofmembersoftheelite,Peter interpreted the interdependency between the city and Matilda as oppositionandclaimed–inthisfiction–acollectiveidentification[ofthecanons]withthecity,whichwasnotinfacttheprincipalreason

41 Rangerius,Vita metrica Anselmi;particularlyregardingtwodifferentmembersoftheélite,TadoandCountUghiccio,whoactedas“Nicodemites”.HesaysonTado’sposition: «Adsunt, qui sapiunt, sed pia corda tegunt;/ De quorum numero subtilis ad omnia Tadus,/ Rem simulat Petri, sed comes est fidei»[5254-5256,1266].Ughicciowastheonly one of the Tuscan counts who did not like the imperial bishop Peter: «Hugicio, vir magnanimus, se spondet in arma,/ Sed Petri fraudem non amat»[4799–4798,1257].Regarding the relationship between kings and cities see Struve 1997 (about Henry IV);Ronzani2012.42 Ontheotherrebelcanons: (Rangerius,Vita metrica Anselmi1833-1876,1195-1196); tothepeopleofLucca:seethebeginning«cives et socii»[1879-1910,1196-1197].Thetwodifferentmeaningsoffreedominthetwospeechesareworthnoting.


103

for their actions43.ThefigurationalapproachallowsustoimaginethattheconflictinRangerius’polyphonicnarrativeismuchmorecomplexthanthedialecticcontrastbetweenfeudalpowerandcityfreedomor–notwithoutcontradictions–reformandnotreform.

urban monasteries

Anotherpivotal aspectof theconfigurationof the relationsbetweenMatildaandtheurbansocietieswerethemonasteries,whichwereableto create considerable social coherence and garner support as they were

43 Rangerius,Vita metrica Anselmi1892–1910.Peterputstheoppositioninahisto-rical perspective: «Quem [sc. Henry IV] si non fuerit victoria laeta secuta,/ Quas vobis strages saeva leena dabit?/ Maiores nostri pro libertate tuenda/ Oppressere duces et sine rege suos» [1903–1906].OnRangerius’ representation see:Savigni1994;Savigni1996,345-376;cf.Riversi2016.

Fig. 2. Hypothetical ‘figuration’ of the relationship between ‘Matilda’ and the ‘cities’ (yellow area = generative social area of the political autonomy of the cities). – (Eugenio Riversi, 2016)


104

theguardiansofcollectiveremembrance,andbygrantinggoods,inco-mes and lands. And here we are not only referring to the urban mona-steries,butalsotothoseinthediocese,whichhadsignificantinterestsinthecities,too44.The donations urban monasteries received from Matilda were certainly a form of religious devotion45. But it is probable that these donations as well as favourable judgments46 also allowed her to establish relations or further contacts with other groups that were active in the city and linked with the monastery. This interdependency permits us to glimpse parti-cularfigurations.Forexample,Matilda’scollaborationwiththeGuidiinFlorence(1100)wastiedtotheircomplexrelationshipwiththeabbeyofVallombrosa,whichatthetimewasledbytheabovementionedabbot-general Bernard. The active role of the monks of this congregation in urbancontextsandespeciallyinshapingtheopinionsofsomegroupsofthe local population (Teilöffentlichkeit) is well known47.

44 Generallysee:Trolese1998;particularlyonthecitiesmentionedhere:Golinelli1998andKurze1998.45 Urkunden1,31-35(Sant’AndreainMantua);6,47-49(SanProsperoinReggio);8,52-54(SanZenoinVerona);9,55-57(SanPaoloinParma);19,80-81(SanSistoinPiacenza);33,116-119(SanProsperoinReggio);51,157-158(SanPonzianoinLucca);70,207-208(SanSistoinPiacenza);99,272-274(SanPaoloinParma);118,310-313 (San Pietro in Ciel d’Oro in Pavia). Note also the privilege to Montecassino throughwhichtheabbeywasexemptedfromcommercialdutiesinPisaandLucca(62,189-190);seetheprotectionofthemonasteryofSanGorgonioanditschurchSanVitoinPisa(124,322-324).46 Urkunden:7,49-52(SanSalvatoreandSantaGiustinainLucca);12,64-66(SanPonzianoinLucca);16,73-75(SanProsperoinReggio);93,258-260(SanSalvatoreinPavia);95,263-264(SanProsperoinReggio).47 «Quapropter predicti sepius memorabiles viri in Tuscie partibus nostre dignitatis clemen-tiam pro superius relato negocio precibus adeuntes, postularunt a nobis super hac re institutio-nis scriptum fieri, nostra auctoritate suffultum multorumque testimonio comprobatum. Quare eorum dignis petitionibus una cum consensu et voto predictorum comitum [sc. Guido Guerra and his father] annuentes, dum in Florentino palatio presidentes cum nostris militiarum et aliorum fidelibus de diversis et huiusmodi negociis tractaremus, quod iuste postulabant, in-cunctanter fieri iussimus» [Urkunden57,178-180].ThisFlorentinefigurationsuggestsmany interdependencies that concerned broader power relations and perhaps the end


105

Urban monasteries could also provide balancing forces to the cathedral chapters and the bishops. Matilda’s presence in the monastery of San Prospero in Reggio Emilia in 1072 and in 1080 and her further rela-tions with this community are a case in point48. This evidence could be significant,whenweconsiderthewell-knownclaim to incomes and goods declared simultaneously by the bishop and the canons of Reg-gio,whichMatilda’sancestorshadusurped.Moreover,BishopGandolfbecamea supporterofHenry IV.This couldbeanotherexampleofthecomplexinterdependenciesbetweentheurbaninstitutionsandthedynastic ruler warranting further investigation49.WhilethemonasteryofReggiowasbenefitedbyMatildainacom-petitionbetweenurbaninstitutions,theimportantoneofSant’AndreainMantua,whichhadreceivedthefirstdonationfromMatilda(1072),waslatersubjectedtoasignificantpunitivemeasure50. In a further in-terestingandcomplex“figuration”(1101),thelegateandcardinalBer-nard took the control of the urban hospital founded by Matilda near the city walls away from Sant’Andrea. On this occasion the issue was not onlythecondemnationofthemismanagementofthehospital,butalsothe rejection of the claims to the urban hospital made by the canons of

oftheruleofConrad,sonofHenryIV.Ontheurbanexpansionofthecongrega-tionofVallombrosa,see:MonzioCompagnoni1999.Cf.the“provocative”roleofamonkinLuccaduringtheschism:Rangerius,Vita metrica Anselmi 5153-5176.48 Urkunden 6, 47-49; 16, 73-75 (with a significant interdependency around thecourtofNasseta);33,116-119;65,195-196;95,263-264;A7,482-484;A10,491-492Rombaldi1982;onabroadercontext:Tincani2012.49 Le carte degli archivi reggiani,IX,15-17.OnthecomplexcontextofurbansocietyinReggioEmilia:Golinelli 1980;Cantarella 2012 (about the evolutionunder thebishopscloselyconnectedtoMatilda);Golinelli2012;andfocusedonthelaygroupsinrelationwiththebishopandtheotherchurchinstitutions:Rinaldi2001;Rinaldi2012.Thereligious–institutionalfieldofthechurchofReggiohasyettoundergobroadandexhaustiveresearch.Theprospectispromising:seetheforthcomingcon-tribution by Nicola Mancassola in Matilde di Canossa e il suo tempo and Cantatore’s MA thesis.50 Urkunden 1,31-35.


106

thecathedral,whohadjoinedtheschismaticbishopConon.Thus,topenalize the rebelling institutions and the associated groups of the ur-bansociety,Bernardtransferredcontrolofthehospitaltothedynastic(not urban) monastery of San Benedetto Polirone51.A development in the relationship between an urban monastery and Matilda–inaveryinterestingcontextof interdependenciesbetweenurbanandnon-urbanactors–canbeseeninthecaseoftheimportantconventofSanSistoinPiacenza,too.Herethedonationsarelinkedtothe religious life of the nuns and therefore to the community’s manage-mentoflandsandgoodsandoftherelatedvassalbonds,suchasinthestrategic court of Guastalla (1102). Their mismanagement was the rea-sonforanotherinterventiononthepartofMatilda,whoseemstohavepromoted the dissolution of this community in order to support a male oneinanurbancontext.Thisdecision,too,wasendorsedbythepope52.

Matilda and urban lay groups

Asiswidelyknown,muchoftheavailableevidenceprimarilyconcernstheaffairsofecclesiasticalandreligiousinstitutions,andabovealltheir

51 Urkunden 67,200-203;seealsoGardoni2002.Onthecanons:«Deinde quibusdam ex Mantuane ecclesie clericis, qui huic deffinitioni intererant, causantibus hospitii curam et providentiam iuxta commendationis scriptum canonicis beati Petri debere transferri, quia omnes simoniaci et excommunicati Cononi invasori et excommunicato participantes et obe-dientes extiterant, ne interim expectando catholicos hospitium funditus deperiret eiusque sub-stantiam providentia neglecta dilapidaret, eis pariter tam presentibus quam futuris bene vel male in canonica conversantibus, omnem audienciam de hoc ulterius agendo negocio sub excommunicatione etiam interdiximus».52 Urkunden 19,80-81(investitureofCortenuova);70,207-208(concessionofthecastle of Guastalla). In his document pope Paschal II stressed Matilda’s initiative: «Quam ob rem sapientium ac religiosorum virorum consilio provisum est, agente precipue illustris memorie Matildi comitissa, ut in eodem monasterio pro feminis viri ponerentur, quatinus et religio illic eiusdem, id est monastici ordinis, servaretur et monasterii possessiones, que iam diu distracte fuerant, per eorum restituerentur industriam»[Kehr,PapsturkundenV,297-299,3].


107

assets. It ismoredifficult toobserve therelationsofMatildaandherdomus with lay individuals and groups whose activities were based in the city.First of all, it canbe said that therewas rarely anurban communityactingasaloneentityinitsdealingswithMatildaand,evenwhenthisdidoccur,italmostneverrepresentedaunifiedpoliticalstructure.No-netheless,animpressiveexampleoftherelationshipbetweenanurbancommunity–deliberatelyrepresentedinaninclusiveway–andMatildais that of Modena. In the so-called Relatio aedificationis (ca.1106–1110) thewholecommunityofthechurch,withthesignificantexceptionofthebishop,becameMatilda’spartnerintheissueoftherestorationofthecathedral and the transfer of the relics of St. Geminianus53.ClearlyitispossibletofindfurthercasesinwhichalltheinstitutionsofacityappeartobeinconflictwithMatilda:forexample,throughafewversesofDonizo,weknowoftherevoltofFerraraagainstthecountess–acitythatwaspartofthedynasty’sdomain.Wedonotknowpre-cisely who led the revolt at the time of the siege (1102). According to Donizo,thecountesswassupportedbytroopsfromRavenna,whichparticipated in the repression together with those of many other cities54.

53 Relatio aedificationis et translationis1,1310:«non tantum ordo clericorum, sed et uni-versus quoque eiusdem ecclesie populus inter se vicissim conferre ceperunt, quid consulendum quidve sit inde agendum. Tandem divina disponente providentia, unito consilio non modo clericorum, quia tunc temporis prefata quidem ecclesia sine pastorali cura agebatur, sed et civium universarumque plebium prelatorum seu etiam cunctorum eiusdem ecclesie militum una vox eademque voluntas, unus clamor idemque amor totius turbe personuit: iam renovari, iam rehedificari, iam sublimari debere tanti talisque patris nostri ecclesiam. Quod quidem consilium ubi ad aures Mathildis Dei gratia egregie comitisse pervenit, qui fari possit, quanto qualique gaudio exilarata, quanta in laude firmata, quantis amminiculis sit obstinata». On thecontextofModena:Bonacini2001;Golinelli2006.54 Donizone,Vita di Matilde, II 930-939: «Qui venit, duros in quo Ferraria muros/ Obsessos sensit, fuerat quia facta rebellis/ Ipsa ducatrici, nec ei servire cupivit./ Contra quam gentes numero sine duxit et enses,/ Tuscos, Romanos, Longobardos galeatos,/ Et Ravennates quorum sunt maxime naves./ Circumstant equidem multae maris atque carinae,/A duce preclaro transmissae Venetiano./ Considerans demum Ferraria ne superetur,/ Optavit pacem magnae Mathildis amare». Ferrara had probably been the place where Matilda’s troops


108

Donizo’s work more than once indicates an urban provenance of the troops during themilitary conflicts betweenMatilda andHenry IV.Andnotonlyofonekind,namelyarmedcives against the countess and hervassals,asinthecaseofthebattleofSorbara55.Itissignificantthatthe confrontation between Matilda and Henry IV over the castle of No-gara was supported respectively by troops from Modena and Verona56: armed civeswereprobablyabletojointhecountess,too,asinthecaseofRavennamentionedabove.Inthisepisode,whichconcernstheconflictbetween Matilda’s domusandHenryIV,wefindadynamicurbaninter-dependencythatforeshadowsfuturecompetitionbetweencities–andparticularlybetweentheirelites–forthecontrolofstrategicterritoryand the readiness of the urban militias to engage in plundering57.Thepolitical significanceof themilitarycontributionof thecities isshown by the well-known reference to a league between the cities of Milan,Lodi,PiacenzaandCremona,ledbyWelfVofBavaria:aleaguewhose inception Bernold of Constance dated to 1093. The groups of theurbaneliteinthesecitieswouldhaverecognised–probablyafterthedefeatofHenryIVintheAppenninesinthewinterof1092–thesuperiorityoftheDuke,Matilda’shusband,throughouttheKingdom,disregarding at the same time that of Henry IV58. Significantly the-

had assembled against the archbishop of Ravenna twenty years earlier (1080): Urkun-den 31,112-113.OnFerrara:Castagnetti1985;Castagnetti2001c,437-455.55 AtSorbaraurbantroopswereledbythemarquisObertoandbythebishopsofParma and Reggio: «Urbibus ex multis cives hoc tempore multi/ Insimul armati, clipeis et equis falerati,/ Principe cum celso, prudenti prorsus Oberto,/ Ducunt Parmensem, Reginum pontificemque»[Donizone,Vita di Matilde,II338–341].56 Donizone,Vita di Matilde, II 779-783: «Civibus accitis secum Veronensibus, ivit/ Vallavit castrum Nogarae forte vel amplum./ Hoc discunt aures Mathildis, novit ut autem,/ Mox accersitos Motinenses corpore firmos,/ Eridanum transit».57 Regardingthesefundamentalmilitaryfeaturesinthedifferentfigurationsofur-bancontextssee:MaireVigueur2004;seealso:Grillo2014.58 Bernoldus,Chronicon,501:«Civitates quoque de Longobardia, Mediolanum, Cremona, Lauda, Placentia, contra Heinricum in XX annos coniuraverunt, qui omnes praedicto duci


109

se cities didnotbelong to thedynastic domain,which corroboratesthe suggestion that Matilda’s authority might have replaced that of the king in Northern Italy during the investiture controversy.We have assumed that the consensus was driven by the urban élite. For example,theepisodeofthedestructionofthecastleofRivaltabytherebellingMantuain1114showshowtheélite,facedwiththethreatofmilitaryrepressiononthepartofMatilda, imposedamoreappeasingattitude towards Matilda on the iuvenes–whoareprobablytheurbanmilites whose lifestyle was characterized by plunder and booty. Donizo’s accountofthisurbanpoliticalconflict–includingthe“smallergroup”thatexpresseditsintentiontoleavethecity–,ofitspoliticalresolutionandofthesubsequentappeasementbetweenMatildaandMantuaiswi-thout doubt the best evidence we have of a politically structured action toward the countess on the part of the many social groups in a city iden-tifyingthemselvesmoreorlessasacomplexwhole59.In fact there is more evidence of direct relations between Matilda and membersofthearistocraticurbanélite,particularlythosewhowerethemost important vassals, sometimes referred to asproceres or capitanei: thatwasthecase,forexample,oftheabovementionedArialdoofMe-legnanoinMilan;orofthedeErmengardagroupinBologna-Ferrara.But we may also suppose that there were growing interdependencies betweenMatilda’smost importantvassals and the cities, interdepen-denciesthat,inthenexttwogenerationsafterthedeathofthecountess,becameaformofinfluentialinvolvementandauthoritativeprotagoni-smintheurbanpoliticaldynamic:forexamplethedaCornazzanoin

fideliter adheserunt».59 Donizone,Vita di Matilde,II,1327-1339:«Urbs avibus dives, degit sed gens ibi tri-plex;/ Ocius explorant quid agant simul atque laborant./ “Bellum ferre libet” pars quaedam dicit inique,/ “Nostis nos usos fore sat defendere muros”./ Pauperior quaedam se pergere pars ait extra./ Talia iactantes dictis, ac stulta putantes,/ Pars melior surgit iuvenes affatur et urbis: “Vos iuvat o pueri rapto seu vivere predis,/ Sed pudeat pueri nos obsidione teneri;/ Advena vult miles nostras incidere vites,/ O iuvenes fortes fugiat discordia longe./ Pars eat ad veniam nostrorum, supplicet illam/ Nos omnino decet cui latius esse fideles”».


110

Parma60. The previously mentioned donation to Vallombrosa during a judicial session in Florence illustrates how Matilda and this aristocratic elite were able to take the urban stage61.Unfortunately, little informationisavailableonMatilda’sdirectrela-tionshipwith the “middle” strata of urban society.Nevertheless, theepisode of the rebellion of Mantua tells us that the lay groups characte-rised by a warrior and predatory lifestyle (iuvenes) were highly signi-ficantandprobablyconstitutedthebulkofthecity’stroopsinvolvedintheconflictbetweenMatildaandHenryIV:infact,inalllikelihoodthey had a vested interest in prolonging it. But Benzo of Alba recalled that the king’s Italian troops would have preferred plundering Matilda’s domainstothemilitarymanoeuvresexecutedbyRome62.Weshouldalsobrieflymentionthecomplexgroupoftheiudices and other legalexperts,whocouldbeeithermembersor“coequals”of theafore-mentionedsocialstrata,orbelongedtothediversegroupoftheotherci-ves63.ConsiderforexamplethejudgeFlaipertusinLucca,whowaslinkedto Matilda’s parents. In the case of many of those who collaborated with Matildaandcamefromandoperatedinanextra-urbancontext,wecan

60 Castagnetti2001a;Cortese2014;fortheTuscancontextseeCollavini2001andCortese2007;onthemembersofthefamilygroupDeErmengardaasMatilda’svas-sals:Lazzari1994;ontheinvolvementofthemainvassalfamiliesseetheexampleofModena:Rölker1994;comparetheconsiderationofBordini2011,142-146,aboutEmiliancases;andBordini2012a.Butseealsothebroaderliteratureonthedynasticvassals,whichisinneedofrenovation:seetheforthcomingstudybyFontanainMa-tilde di Canossa e il suo tempo.61 Urkunden 57,178-180.OnthecontextofFlorenceseegenerally:Cortese2007,231-248;andFaini2010.AnotherappearanceofMatildawithhermilitia («princeps Mathildis cum suo exercitu») in the urban stage (Modena): Relatio aedificationis et tran-slationis,3,1312.62 Benzo,Ad Heinricum,VI,Praef.,516: «quod magis valeret reditus ad devastandam Mathildam». For the interesting case of Bologna see Lazzari 2004.63 Onthecomplexidentityofthisurbangroup:MaireVigueur1994;seealso:Men-zinger,Vallerani2014;accordingtoGrillo2014,171,theywere«il più significativo elemento di stabilità nella lunga transizione che fu alle origini del comune».


111

presume the same growing interdependencies with the other actors and institutionsof thecities, relations thatwouldbecome increasinglyclearafterMatilda’sdeath;oneinstancebeingtheirdecisiveroleintheabove-mentioned restitution of Sambuca and Pavana to the church of Pistoia64.The remainder of the cives – actually a collection of disparate andcomposite urban groups that could include the already mentioned lay groups–washighlydiversifiedandplayedanincreasinglyimportantrole in the dynamics of the urban society.However, in the sourcesonMatilda,thissocialstratumremainsinthebackground:depictedasthosefarthestfromestablishingdirectrelationswiththecountess,theyare often included in the collective identities of the urban community. Forexample,theyareapartofthecives that were the recipients of the well-known privilege that Matilda accorded to the urban community ofMantovain1090onthebasisoftheroyalmodels–afurtherforesha-dowing of the king being replaced by Welf and Matilda in the 1090s65.Itisdifficulttosaywhetherthisbroaderanddiversegroupofcives is included in the ceteri homines ofCremona,who– in awell-knownsourceabouttherelationshipbetweenthecitiesandMatilda–hadto(militarily) serve the countess if the capitanei refused to do so: perhaps it referred to the milites.Inanyevent,inreturnthecountessinvestedthreemen fromCremona in1097with theconspicuousbeneficeofthe insula Fulkeria: «homines Cremone, scilicet Gotefredus de Bellusco et Moricius seu Cremoxano Aldoini a parte sancte Marie Cremonensi ecclesie seu ad comunum ipsius Cremone civitatis».Inthisdocument,itseemstorefertocollectiveidentityoftheurbansocietydefinedaschurchand

64 Urkunden 81-82,234-239.See Fried1974;onthecaseofReggioEmilia:Bordini2012b.OnthelegalexpertsandMatilda:RoversiMonaco2007;Goez2006,324-329.65 Urkunden 43,139-141:«qualiter nostri fideles Mantuani cives nostram adierunt cle-mentiam quorumdam suorum concivium oppressiones relevari petentes». It is not possible to contextualize this famousprivilegehere.On theurban context ofMantua see:Fumagalli1987;Gardoni2007;Gardoni2011;andtheforthcomingcontributioninMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo;onthepreconditions:Gardoni2012.Onthespecificaspect of arimanni: Castagnetti 1987 and more broadly: Castagnetti 1996.


112

as–thewordoccurs–comunum.Although,asisgenerallyknown,atthe timethewordmeant“collective”anddidnot refer toapoliticalregime,thedocumentisoftenconsideredanearlysignofaconscious(pre-)communal urban community. Disregarding some doubts about apossiblelaterforgery,thisisnottheexceptionthatprovesthe“rule”,orthe“storyline”ofthe“misunderstanding”andthe“incompatibility”betweenMatildaandthecities,butoncemoreanexampleofthecom-plexfigurationsinvolvingthearistocraticdomusaswellasthediversecollection of actors that constituted the urban communities66.

Conclusion

However,hereweseeagainthesubtlepowerofthestorylineofthe“citycommunes”.SuchanarrativeeveninfluencedtheperceptionofthecaseofBologna,despitetheexcellentstudiesonthe(pre-)commu-nalperiodthatrevealedthecomplexityofthiscontext67. Even in this case,thecontactsbetweenMatilda’sdomus and the urban groups and institutions encouragesus to test theproposedfigurational approachwith its implicit comparative view.ThisapproachallowsustoconsiderMatildaas the“apex”ofacom-plexsocialformation,whichasawholeorthroughitsin(ter)dependentparts couldhavemultiple formsof access to institutions,groups andindividualslocatedinthecities,makingthecentreoftheiractions.Lessfrequently, thecitiesbecameMatilda’spartnersascollectiveactors,afact that is actually documented in a few historical accounts describing conflictsituations.Thelatterevidencecontributestothecommonmi-

66 Urkunden 48,150-151;Tabacco1989,321-322;Menant2004,133;Romagnoli,Ricci2008,155-163;Coleman2012,particularly25-29.67 Lazzari1998;ontheemergenceofthecommune:Pio2007;Vasina2007;Greci2011;seealsotheforthcomingstudybyEdoardoManarinionaristocraticruleintheterritory of Bologna in Matilde di Canossa e il suo tempo.


113

sconception of the “incompatibility” or “misunderstanding”, whichonly scholars informed of the true complexity of these contexts areabletoavoidentirely.Eveninthesecasesofconflict,astheexamplesofMantua,ParmaandLuccashow,thereareactuallysignsofdiverseattitudesandbehaviourswithwhich theactorson theurban“stage”respond to their aristocratic domus.Inshort,thecommonfeatureoftherelationsbetween“Matilda”andParma,Milan,Pisa,Lucca,Mantua,Modena,ReggioEmilia,Cremo-na,Florence,Bologna,andFerrara isnottobefoundeither intheiropposition or in their support, but rather in the complexity and si-gnificanceofthemultipleinterdependenciesandinteractionsbetweenthedynastic“domus” and the many urban institutions and groups not consciouslydrivenbytheaimofestablishinga“communalcity”.This attitude has recently been described by Chris Wickham as being akintothemovementofsleepwalkers:aneffectivemetaphorthatseeksto resolutely contrast with our deep-seated teleological and idealistic imagesofthetransformationofthepoliticalstructureoftheItalianKing-dom between the tenth and twelfth century. It is only by adopting a complexperspectivethatwecanavoidtheoppositionbetweenfeudal/signorial and communal and better understand the emergence of new political structures in close interaction with Matilda’s inherited rule: tho-semorehorizontalcivicinstitutionsthataredistantandquiteunfamiliarancestorsofmodernrepublicanregimes.Pursuinga“figurational”ap-proachtotherelationshipbetweenMatildaandthecities,asproposedhere,wouldconstituteamajorstridetowardgraspingthatcomplexity68.

68 This complexityof the emergenceof city communes,whichhistoriographicalsurveysandessayshavediscussedforyears(MaireViguer2004;Keller2007;Grillo2009;Vallerani2011;Wickham2014;Wickham2014),hasalreadybeenmediatedby recentcontributions: see forexampleMilani2005;Faini,MaireVigueur2011;Menant2011.Theawarenessofthecomplexityanddiversityisnowpartofthenewresearchattitude:seeforexampleFaini2010;Faini2013,Faini2014andhisforthco-ming study: Firenze nell’età comunale. Una complessità originaria. But see also Hart-mann2013,whichreveals theimportanceofthears dictandi for the elaboration of


114

Bibliography

Primary sourcesBenzoAlbensis,Ad Heinricum IV. Imperatorem libri VII,SeyffertH.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,ScriptoresrerumGermanicaruminusumscholarumLXV,Hannover,1996.

Bernoldus,Chronicon,inDie Chroniken Bertholds von Reichenau und Bernolds von Kon-stanz, 1054-1100,RobinsonI.A.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scripto-resrerumGermanicarum,n.s.,XIV,Hannover,2003,383-540.

Chronicon Sancti Huberti Andaginensis,BethmannL.C.,WattenbachW.(eds.),Mo-numentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)VIII,Hannover,1848,565-630.

CosmaPragensis,Chronica Boemorum,BretholzB.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHi-storica,ScriptoresrerumGermanicarum,n.s.,II,Berlin,1955.

Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde von Tuszien,GoezE.,GoezW.(eds.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Laienfursten-undDynastenurkundenderKai-serzeit,II,Hannover,1998.

Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,GolinelliP.(ed.),Milan,2008.

KehrP.F.,Papsturkunden in Italien. Reiseberichte zur Italia pontificia,I-VI,(ActaRo-manorumpontificum,1-6),CittàdelVaticano,1977.

LandulphusJuniorsivedesanctoPaulo,Historia Medioelanensis ab anno MXCV usque ad annum MCXXXVII,CastiglioniC.(ed.),RerumItalicarumScriptores2V/III,Bologna,1934.

Le carte degli archivi parmensi del secolo XII,DreiG.(ed.),Parma,1950.

Le carte degli archivi reggiani (1051-1060),TorelliP.,GattaF.S.(eds.),ReggioEmilia,1938.

Rangerius, Vita metrica S. Anselmi Lucensis episcopi,SackurE.,SchwartzG.,SchmeidlerB.(eds.),inMonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)XXX/2,Leip-zig,1934,1152-1307.

Relatio aedificationis ecclesiae cathedralis Mutinensis et translationis sancti Geminia-ni, BresslauH. (ed.), inMonumentaGermaniaeHistorica, Scriptores (in Folio)XXX/2,Lipsia,1929,1308-1313.

Vita Anselmi episcopi Lucensis auctore Bardone presbytero,WilmansR.(ed.),inMonu-mentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)XII,Hannover,1856,1-35.

thenewpoliticalcultureofthecities,whichrelativizedthefunctionofformallegalknowledge;seealsoHartmann2015.


115

Secondary sourcesAlbertoniG.2010,Il potere del vescovo. Parma in età ottoniana,inGreciR.(ed.)2010,

Storia di Parma, III, t. 1, Parma medievale: poteri e istituzioni,Parma:MonteUniver-sitàParma,69-113.

AlberzoniM.P.2010,La chiesa cittadina, i monasteri e gli ordini mendicanti,inGreciR.(ed.)2010,Storia di Parma, III, t. 1, Parma medievale: poteri e istituzioni, Parma: MonteUniversitàParma,261-322.

BertoliniM.G.2004a,I canossiani e la loro attività giurisdizionale con particolare riguardo alla Toscana,inBertoliniM.G.,CapitaniO.,GolinelliP.(eds.)2004,Studi Canos-siani,Bologna:PàtronEditore,41-84(Ied.1994).

—2004b,Enrico IV e Matilde di Canossa di fronte alla città di Lucca,inBertoliniM.G.,CapitaniO.,GolinelliP.(eds.)2004,Studi Canossiani,Bologna:Pàtron,85-132(Ied. 1992).

BonaciniP.2001,Capitanei e ceto dominante a Modena nei secoli XI-XII,inCastagnettiA. (ed.)2001,La vassallità maggiore del Regno Italico. I capitanei nei secoli XI-XII,Roma:Viella,263-284.

BordiniS.2011,Un processo comunale alquanto lineare in Emilia. Annotazioni sui contesti politico-istituzionali di Parma, Reggio e Modena nei secoli XII e XIII,inDeMatteisM.C.,PioB.(eds.)2011,Sperimentazioni di governo nell’Italia centrosettentrionale nel processo storico dal primo comune alla signoria, (Atti del convegno di studio, Bologna, 3-4 settembre 2010),Bologna:BUP,133-160.

—2012a,Sulle tracce di una dinastia reggiana d’età comunale: prime ricerche sui da Sesso (secc. XI-XIII), inDavideM. (ed.) 2012, Identità cittadine e aggregazioni sociali in Italia, secoli XI-XV, (Convegno di studio, Trieste, 28-30 giugno 2010),Trieste:CERM,175-214.

—2012b,Poteri politici, insegnamento superiore e cultura giuridica a Reggio Emilia: uno sguardo panoramico sui secoli XI e XII,in PaoliniL.(ed.)2012,Il Vescovo, la chiesa e la città di Reggio in età comunale,Bologna:Pàtron, 41-82.

BuschJ.W.1997,Die Mailänder Geschichtsschreibung zwischen Arnulf und Galvaneus Flamma. Die Beschäftigung mit der Vergangenheit im Umfeld einer oberitalienischen Kommune vom späten 11. bis zum frühen 14. Jahrhundert,Munchen:Fink.

CaciorgnaM.T.,CarocciS.,ZorziA.(eds.)2014,I comuni di Jean-Claude Maire Vi-gueur. Percorsi storiografici,Roma:Viella.

CalzonaA.(ed.)2008,Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa tra castelli, monasteri e città,Mila-no: Silvana Editoriale.

CalzonaA.,CantarellaG.M.(eds.)2016,Dalla res pubblica al Comune, (Atti del Con-vegno internazionale di studi, Mantova, 3-5 Dicembre 2014),Verona:ScriptaEdizioni,forthcoming.


116

CantarellaG.M.2012,I vescovi, i Canossa. Dalla riforma ecclesiastica alla lotta per le in-vestiture,inCostiG.,GiovannelliG.(eds.)2012,Storia della diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla,Brescia:Morcelliana, 515-542.

—2015a,Alle origini delle autonomie politiche cittadine in Europa. Qualche appunto su un paio di casi,inDeMatteisM.C.,PioB.(eds.)2011,Sperimentazioni di governo nell’Italia centrosettentrionale nel processo storico dal primo comune alla signoria, (Atti del convegno di studio, Bologna, 3-4 settembre 2010), Bologna:BUP,241-263.

—2015b,Manuale della fine del mondo. Il travaglio dell’Europa medievale,Torino:Ei-naudi.

CantatoreF.M.A.2015,La pieve di Campiliola dalle origini al 1272,MasterDegreeThesis2014/2015(UniversityofBologna),tut.:Prof.PaolaGaletti.

CapitaniO.1978,Canossa: una lezione da meditare,inStudi Matildici, Atti e memorie del III convegno di Studi Matildici : Reggio Emilia, 7-9 ottobre 1977,Modena:AedesMuratoriana,359-381.

— 1989,Da Landolfo Seniore a Landolfo Iuniore: momenti di un processo di crisi, inAtti dell’XI Congresso internazionale di Studi sull’alto medioevo: Milano, 26-30 ottobre 1987,II,Spoleto:CISAM,589-622.

—(ed.)2007,Storia di Bologna. 2: Bologna nel Medioevo,Bologna:BUP.

CastagnettiA.1985,Società e politica a Ferrara dall’età postcarolingia alla signoria estense (sec. X-XIII),Bologna:Pàtron.

—1987,I cittadini-arimanni di Mantova (1014-1159),inGolinelliP.etal.(eds.)1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture, (Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986),Bologna:Pàtron,169-193.

—1996,Arimanni e signori dall’età postcarolingia alla prima età comunale, inDilcherG.,ViolanteC. (eds.),Strutture e trasformazioni della signoria rurale nei secoli XI-XIII, (Atti della XXXVII Settimana di Studio dell’Istituto italo-germanico, Trento, 12-16 set-tembre 1994), Bologna:IlMulino,169-285.

—2001a(ed.),La vassallità maggiore del regno italico,Roma:Viella.

—2001b,Introduzione,inCastagnettiA.2001a(ed.),La vassallità maggiore del regno italico,Roma:Viella,7-23.

—2001c,Da Verona a Ravenna per Vicenza, Padova, Trento e Ferrara,inCastagnettiA.2001a(ed.),La vassallità maggiore del regno italico,Roma:Viella, 345-491.

ColemanE.1999,The Italian communes. Recent work and current trends, «JournalofMedieval History» 25 (4): 373-397.

—2012,Bishop and commune in twelfth-century Cremona: the interface of secular and eccle-siastical power,inAndrewsF.,PincelliM.A.(eds.)2012,Churchmen and Urban Go-vernment in Late Medieval Italy, c. 1200-c. 1450,Cambridge:CambridgeUP,25-41.


117

Collavini S.M. 2001, I capitanei in Toscana (secoli XI-XII). Sfortune e fortune di un termine,inCastagnettiA.(ed.)2001a,La vassallità maggiore del regno italico,Roma:Viella,301-324.

CorteseM.E.2007,Signori, castelli, città,Firenze:Olschki.

—2014,Aristocrazia signorile e città nell’Italia centro-settentrionale (secc. XI-XII),inCa-ciorgnaM.T.,CarocciS.,ZorziA.(eds.)2014,I comuni di Jean-Claude Maire Vi-gueur. Percorsi storiografici,Roma:Viella,69-94.

CostiG.,GiovannelliG.(eds.)2012,La storia della Diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla,I,Brescia:Morcelliana.

DartmannC. 2012,Politische Interaktion in der italienischen Stadtkommune, XI-XIV Jahrhundert,Ostfildern:Thorbecke.

DavideM. (ed.) 2012, Identità cittadine e aggregazioni sociali in Italia, secoli XI-XV, (Convegno di studio, Trieste, 28-30 giugno 2010), Trieste: CERM.

DeMatteisM.C.,PioB.(eds.)2011,Sperimentazioni di governo nell’Italia centrosetten-trionale nel processo storico dal primo comune alla signoria, (Atti del convegno di studio, Bologna, 3-4 settembre 2010), Bologna: BUP.

EldewikJ.2012,Episcopal Power and Ecclesiastical Reform in the German Empire. Tithes, Lordship, and Community, 950-1150,Cambridge:CambridgeUP.

FainiE.2010,Firenze nell’età romanica (1000-1211). L’espansione urbana, lo sviluppo istituzionale, il rapporto con il territorio,Firenze:Olschki.

—2013,Le tradizioni normative delle città toscane. Le origini (secolo XII-metà XIII),«Ar-chiviostoricoitaliano»,171:419-482.

—2014,Società di torre e società cittadina. Sui pacta turris del XII secolo,inDiacciatiS.,TanziniL.(eds.)2014,Società e poteri nell’Italia medievale. Studi degli allievi per Jean-Claude Maire Vigueur,Roma:Viella,19-39.

FasoliG.1978,La realtà cittadina nei territori canossiani,inStudi Matildici, (Atti e me-morie del III convegno di Studi Matildici, Reggio Emilia, 7-9 ottobre 1977),Modena:AedesMuratoriana,66-78.

Figurational Studies: Some Concepts, Principles and Major Research Areas,accessed16July2016,http://www.norberteliasfoundation.nl/network/concepts.php.

FioreA.2010,Signori e sudditi. Strutture e pratiche del potere signorile in area umbro-marchigiana (secoli XI-XII),Spoleto:CISAM.

—2012,Norma della città e norma del territorio: una relazione complessa (1000-1200 c.),inDavideM.(ed.)2012,Identità cittadine e aggregazioni sociali in Italia, secoli XI-XV, (Convegno di studio, Trieste, 28-30 giugno 2010), Trieste:CERM,55-80.

FrancesconiG.(ed.)2001,Vescovo e città nell’alto Medioevo: quadri generali e realtà to-scane, (Atti del Convegno internazionale di studi, Pistoia, 16-17 maggio 1998), Pistoia: Centro Italiano di Studi di Storia e d’Arte.


118

FriedJ.1974,Die Entstehung des Juristenstandes im XII Jahrhundert: Zur sozialen Stel-lung und politischen Bedeutung gelehrter Juristen in Bologna und Modena,Köln-Wien:Böhlau.

FumagalliV.1978,I Canossa tra realtà regionale e ambizioni europee,inStudi Matildici, (Atti e memorie del III convegno di Studi Matildici, Reggio Emilia, 7-9 ottobre 1977),Modena:AedesMuratoriana,27-37.

—1987,Mantova al tempo di Matilde di Canossa, inGolinelliP. et al. (eds.) 1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture, (Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986), Bologna:Pàtron,159-167.

—2008,Il poema di Donizone nel codice Vaticano Latino 4922, inDonizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,GolinelliP.(ed.),Milano:JacaBook,241-251(Ied.1984).

GardoniG.2002, Due monasteri benedettini della città di Mantova: Sant’Andrea e San Giovanni Evangelista nei secoli XI-XV. Un primo sondaggio, inAndennaG.,SalvaraniR. (eds.)2002,La memoria dei chiostri, (Atti delle prime giornate di studi medievali, Castiglione delle Stiviere, 11-13 ottobre 2001), Brescia:Marietti,119-148.

—2007,ÉlitescittadinefraXIeXIIsecolo:ilcasomantovano,inCastagnettiA.,Cia-ralliG.,VaraniniG.M.(eds.)2007,Medioevo. Studi e documenti,Verona:Libreriauniversitariaeditrice,281-350.

—2011,Famiglie viscontili mantovane (secoli XI-XIII),inBassettiM.et al. (eds.)2011,Studi sul Medioevo per Andrea Castagnetti,Bologna:CLUEB,185-218.

—2012, Impero, Papato e poteri locali: Mantova al tempo di Leone IX,inCalzonaA.,CantarellaG.M.(eds.)2012,La reliquia del sangue di Cristo. Mantova, l’Italia e l’Eu-ropa al tempo di Leone IX,Verona:ScriptaEdizioni,169-192.

GoezE.2006,Mathilde von Canossa – Herrschaft zwischen Tradition und Neubeginn,inJarnutJ.,WemhoffM.(eds.)2006,Vom Umbruch zur Erneuerung? Das 11. und beginnende 12. Jahrhundert – Positionen der Forschung,Munchen:Fink,321-339.

GolinelliP.1980,Culto dei santi e vita cittadina a Reggio Emilia (sec. IX-XII),Modena:Aedes Muratoriana.

—(ed.)1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture, (Atti del Convegno inter-nazionale di Studi, Mantova, 23-25 maggio 1986), Bologna: Pàtron.

—(ed.)1994,I poteri dei Canossa, (Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Reggio Emi-lia–Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992), Bologna: Pàtron.

—1998,Monasteri e comuni a Modena, Reggio e Mantova,inTroleseF.G.B.(ed.)1998,Il monachesimo italiano nell’età comunale, (Atti del IV Convegno di studi storici sull’Italia benedettina. Abbazia di S. Giacomo Maggiore, Pontida, Bergamo, 3-6 sett. 1995), Cese-na:BadiadiSantaMariadelMonte,445-464.

—2006, Modena 1106: istantanee di Medioevo,inRomanica. Arte e liturgia nelle terre di San Geminiano e Matilde di Canossa,Modena:CosimoPaniniEditore.


119

—2012,Prima del Comune. Reggio Emilia nella lotta per le investiture,inPaoliniL.(ed.)2012,Il vescovo, la chiesa e la città di Reggio in età comunale,Bologna:Pàtron,29-40.

GramschR.2013,Das Reich als Netzwerk der Fürsten. Politische Strukturen unter dem Doppelkönigtum Friedrichs II. und Heinrichs. (VII.) 1225–1235,Ostfildern:Thorbecke.

GreciR.(ed.)2005,Il governo del vescovo. Chiesa, città, territorio nel Medioevo parmense,Parma: Monte Università Parma.

—2009,L’avvio delle istituzioni comunali,inGreciR.(ed.)2009b,Studi sul Medioevo emiliano. Parma e Piacenza in età comunale,Bologna:CLUEB,3-16.

—(ed.)2009b,Studi sul Medioevo emiliano. Parma e Piacenza in età comunale,Bologna:CLUEB.

—2010a,Origini, sviluppi e crisi del Comune,inGreciR.(ed.)2010b,Storia di Parma, III.1. Il medioevo. Poteri e istituzioni,Parma:MonteUniversitàParma,115-168.

—(ed.)2010b,Storia di Parma, III.1. Il medioevo. Poteri e istituzioni,Parma:MonteUniversità Parma.

—2011,La specificità di Bologna,inDeMatteisM.C.,PioB.(eds.)2011,Sperimenta-zioni di governo nell’Italia centrosettentrionale nel processo storico dal primo comune alla signoria, (Atti del convegno di studio, Bologna, 3–4 settembre 2010),Bologna:BUP,161-180.

GrilloP.2009,La frattura inesistente. L’età del comune consolare nella recente storiografia,«Archiviostoricoitaliano»,167:673-700.

—2014,Cavalieri cittadini e comune consolare,inCaciorgnaM.T.,CarocciS.,ZorziA.(eds.)2014,I comuni di Jean-Claude Maire Viguer: percorsi storiografici,Roma:Viella,158-176.

HartmannF.2013,Ars dictaminis: Briefsteller und verbale Kommunikation in den italie-nischen Stadtkommunen des 11. bis 13. Jahrhunderts,Ostfildern:Thorbecke.

—2015,Herrschaftslegitimation im Diskurs: Kontingenzen am Beginn der italienischen Stadtkommune (12. Jahrhundert),«DasMittelalter»,20(1):62-79.

HitzbleckK.,HubnerK.(eds.)2014,Die Grenzen des Netzwerks 1200–1600,Ostfil-dern: Thorbecke.

KellerH.1977,Origine e formazione del clero cattedrale dei secoli XI e XII nella Germania e nell’Italia settentrionale, inLe istituzioni ecclesiastiche della “societas Christiana” dei secoli XI-XII: diocesi, pievi e parrocchie,Milano:VitaePensiero,136-186.

—2007,Die Stadtkommunen als politische Organismen in den Herrschaftsordnungen des 11.-13. Jahrhunderts,inAndennaG.(ed.)2007,Pensiero e sperimentazioni istituzionali nella ‘Societas Christiana’ (1046–1250),Milano:VitaePensiero,673-703.

—2015,Die Erforschung der italienischen Stadtkommunen seit der Mitte des 20. Jahrhun-derts,«FruhmittelalterlicheStudien»,48:1-38.


120

KurzeW.1998,Monasteri e comuni in Toscana,inTroleseF.G.B.(ed.)1998,Il mo-nachesimo italiano nell’età comunale, (Atti del IV Convegno di studi storici sull’Italia be-nedettina. Abbazia di S. Giacomo Maggiore, Pontida, Bergamo, 3-6 sett. 1995),Cesena:BadiadiSantaMariadelMonte,507-528.

LazzariT.1994,Vassalli matildici a Bologna: Pietro d’Ermengarda e la sua discendenza,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1994,I poteri dei Canossa, (Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Reggio Emilia–Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992), Bologna:Pàtron,239-251.

—1998,“Comitato” senza città: Bologna e l’aristocrazia del territorio. Secoli IX-XI,To-rino: Scriptorium.

—2004,Società cittadina e rappresentanza cetuale a Bologna (secoli X-XII),«Bullettinodell’IstitutoStoricoItalianoperilMedioEvo»,106(2):71-103.

—2008,Aziende fortificate, castelli e pievi: le basi patrimoniali dei poteri dei Canossa e le loro giurisdizioni,inCalzonaA.(ed.)2008,Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa tra castelli, monasteri e città,Milano:SilvanaEditoriale,96-115.

LucioniA. 2003,L’arcivescovo Anselmo IV da Bovisio e la società milanese alla fine dell’XI secolo,inAndennaG.,SalvaraniR.(eds.)2003,Deus non voluit. I lombardi alla prima crociata (1100-1101). Dal mito alla ricostruzione della realtà,Milano:Vitae Pensiero: 121-217.

—2011,Anselmo IV da Bovisio arcivescovo di Milano (1097-1101). Episcopato e società urbana sul finire dell’XI secolo,Milano:VitaePensiero.

MaireVigueurJ.-C.1994,Gli «iudices» nelle città comunali: identità culturale ed espe-rienze politiche,inToubertP.,ParaviciniBaglianiA.(eds.)1994,Federico II e le città italiane,Palermo:Sellerio,161-176.

—2004,Cavalieri e cittadini. Guerra, conflitti e società comunale,Bologna:IlMulino(Ied.2003).

MaireVigueurJ.-C.,FainiE.2010,Il sistema politico dei comuni italiani (secoli XII-XIV),Milano:BrunoMondadori.

Matilde di Canossa e il suo tempo 2016,Spoleto:CISAM(forthcoming).

MenantF.2004,Cremona in età precomunale: il secolo XI,inAndennaG.(ed.)2004,Storia di Cremona. Dall’Alto Medioevo all’Età Comunale,Cremona:Bolis,106-197.

—2011,L’Italia dei comuni (1100-1350),Roma:Viella.

MenzingerS.,ValleraniM.2014,Giuristi e città: fiscalità, giustizia e cultura giuridica tra XII e XIII secolo: Ipotesi e percorsi di ricerca,inCaciorgnaM.T.,CarocciS.,ZorziA.(eds.)2014,I comuni di Jean-Claude Maire Viguer: percorsi storiografici,Roma:Viella,201-234.

MilaniG.2005,I comuni italiani,Roma-Bari:Laterza.

MonzioCompagnoniG.(ed.)1999,L’Ordo Vallisumbrosae tra XII e XIII secolo. Gli sviluppi istituzionali e culturali e l’espansione geografica (1101-1293), (Atti del Conve-gno, Vallombrosa, 25-28 agosto 1996), Vallombrosa: Edizioni Vallombrosa.


121

NasalliRoccaE.1964,Parma e la Contessa Matilde,inStudi matildici, (Atti e memorie del Convegno di Studi Matildici, Modena e Reggio Emilia, 19-20-21 ottobre 1963), Modena:AedesMuratoriana,53-68.

PaoliniL.(ed.)2012,Il vescovo, la chiesa e la città di Reggio in età comunale,Bologna:Pàtron.

PellegriniM.2009,Vescovo e città. Una relazione del Medioevo italiano (secoli III-XIV),Milano: Bruno Mondadori.

PioB.2007,Fermenti religiosi, riforma ecclesiastica e riforma gregoriana. Conti e vescovi a Bologna nell’età della Riforma fino a Gregorio VII,inCapitaniO.(ed.)2007,Storia di Bologna. 2: Bologna nel Medioevo,Bologna:BUP,359-385.

ProveroL.2005,I luoghi di Donizone,inGreciR.,RomagnoliD.(eds.)2005,Uno storico e un territorio: Vito Fumagalli e l’Emilia occidentale nel Medioevo,Bologna:Clueb,161-173.

PugliaA.2013,“Beata filia Petri”. Matilde di Canossa e le città della Toscana nord-occi-dentale tra XI e XII secolo, Pisa: Edizioni il Campo-Arnus University Books.

RautyN.2006,Sambuca, inNelliR.,PintoG.(eds.)2006,I comuni medievali della provincia di Pistoia dalle origini alla piena età comunale,Pistoia:FondazioneCassadiRisparmiodiPistoiaePescia,275-298.

RicciA.,RomagnoliD.,2008,Matilde e le città,inCalzonaA.(ed.)2008,Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa tra castelli, monasteri e città,Milano:SilvanaEditoriale,153-163.

RinaldiR.2001,A Reggio. Una città di forte impronta vescovile,inCastagnettiA.(ed.)2001a,La vassallità maggiore del regno italico,Roma:Viella,233-262.

—2012,Ricerca di equilibri tra Chiesa, comune e gruppi familiari. Note sulle testimonianze del pieno e tardo secolo XII,inPaoliniL.(ed.)2012,Il vescovo, la chiesa e la città di Reggio in età comunale,Bologna:Pàtron,83-104.

RiversiE.2013,La memoria di Canossa. Saggi di contestualizzazione della Vita Mathil-dis di Donizone,Pisa:ETS.

—2015,“Si fieri possit pax iuste, dicere poscit”: Matilde di Canossa e il processo decisionale nel colloquium di Carpineti,inLenziniF.(ed.)2015,Castello di Carpineti: mille anni di storia nella pietra,Firenze:Alinea,85-104.

—2016a,Da Vallombrosa a Roma, da Canossa a Parma. Bernardo degli Uberti e le trame di inizio XII secolo,inCalzonaA.,CantarellaG.M.(eds.)2016,Dalla res pubblica al Comune, (Atti del Convegno internazionale di studi, Mantova, 3-5 Dicembre 2014),Verona:ScriptaEdizioni,forthcoming.

—2016b,Maiorem se facit Italia: la questione della legittimazione del potere di Matilde nelle fonti narrative e trattatistiche,inMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo (Atti del XXI Congresso internazionale di studio sull’alto medioevo in occasione del IX centenario della morte (1115-2015) San Benedetto Po-Revere-Mantova-Quattro Castella, 20-24 ottobre 2015),Spoleto:CISAM.


122

—2016c,Res tam nodosas. Die literarische Darstellung des Investiturstreits in der Vita metrica Anselmi des Bischofs Ranger von Lucca,inHartmannF.(ed.)2016,Brief und Kommunikation im Wandel. Medien, Autoren und Kontexte in den Debatten des Investi-turstreits,Cologne-Weimar-Wien:Böhlau,193-242.

RölkerR.1994,Adel und Kommune in Modena. Herrschaft und Administration im 12. und 13. Jahrhundert,FrankfurtamMain:PeterLang.

RombaldiO.1982,Il monastero di San Prospero di Reggio Emilia,Modena:BancoSanGeminiano e San Prospero.

RonzaniM.1996,Chiesa e «Civitas» di Pisa nella seconda metà del secolo XI. Dall’avvento del vescovo Guido all’elevazione di Daiberto a metropolita di Corsica (1060-1092),Pisa:Pacini.

—2012,L’affermazione dei Comuni cittadini fra impero e papato: Pisa e Lucca da Enrico IV al Barbarossa (1081-1162),inPintoG.,TanziniL.(eds.)2012,Poteri centrali e autonomie nella Toscana medievale e moderna, (Atti del convegno di studi, Firenze, 18-19 dicembre 2008),Firenze:Olschki, 1-57.

RossiniR.1968,Note alla Historia Mediolanensis di Landolfo Iuniore,inRaccolta di studi in memoria di Giovanni Soranzo,Milano:VitaePensiero,411-480.

RoversiMonaco F. 2007, Il “circolo” giuridico di Matilde: da Bonizone a Irnerio, inCapitaniO.(ed.)2007,Storia di Bologna. 2: Bologna nel Medioevo,Bologna:BUP,387-411.

SavigniR.1994,La diocesi lucchese e i Canossa tra XI e XII secolo,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1994,I poteri dei Canossa, (Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Reggio Emilia–Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992), Bologna:Pàtron,163-187.

—1996,Episcopato e società cittadina a Lucca: da Anselmo II (†1086) a Roberto (†1255),Lucca: San Marco.

—2001,Episcopato, capitolo cattedrale e società cittadina a Lucca nei secoli X-XI,inFran-cesconiG.(ed.)2001,Vescovo e città nell’alto Medioevo: quadri generali e realtà toscane, (Atti del Convegno internazionale di studi, Pistoia, 16-17 maggio 1998), Pistoia: Centro ItalianodiStudidiStoriaed’Arte,51-92.

SchwarzmaierH.1972,Lucca und das Reich bis zum Ende des 11. Jahrhunderts. Studien zur Sozialstruktur einer Herzogstadt in der Toskan,Tubingen:MaxNiemeyerVerlag.

SchumannR.1973,Authority and the commune, Parma 833-1133,Parma:Deputazionedi Storia Patria per le Province Parmensi.

—2004,Famiglie cittadine a Parma e il nascente comune,«Archiviostoricoperlepro-vinceParmensi»,56:709-778.

SergiG.1994,I poteri dei Canossa: poteri delegati, poteri feudali, poteri signorili,inGo-linelliP. (ed.)1994, I poteri dei Canossa, (Atti del convegno internazionale di studi, Reggio Emilia–Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992), Bologna:Pàtron,29-39.

—1995,I confini del potere. Marche e signorie fra due regni medievali,Torino:Einaudi.


123

SilanosP.2009,Il contributo del vescovo alla formazione della coscienza comunale citta-dina,inGreciR.(ed.)2009b,Studi sul Medioevo emiliano. Parma e Piacenza in età comunale,Bologna:CLUEB.29-56.

StruveT.1997,Heinrich IV. und die fideles cives der stadtischen Kommunen Oberitaliens,«DeutschesArchiv»,53:497-553.

Studi Matildici I 1964,(Atti e Memorie del convegno di Studi Matildici. Modena - Reggio Emilia 19–21 ottobre 1963), Deputazione di Storia Patria per le antiche Provincie Modenesi–Biblioteca,n.s.,2),Modena:AedesMuratoriana.

Studi Matildici III1978,Studi Matildici. (Atti e memorie del III convegno di Studi Matil-dici. Reggio Emilia, 7-8-9 ottobre 1977),(DeputazionediStoriaPatriaperleanticheProvincieModenesi–Biblioteca,n.s.,44),Modena:AedesMuratoriana.

TabaccoG.1979,Vescovi e comuni in Italia,inMorC.G.(ed.)1979,I poteri temporali dei vescovi in Italia e in Germania nel Medioevo,(Atti della settimana di studio, 13-18 settembre 1976),Bologna:IlMulino,253-282.

—1989,The Struggle for Power in Medieval Italy. Structures of political rule,Cambrige:Cambridge UP (1 ed. 1974).

—1993,Sperimentazioni del potere nell’alto Medioevo,Torino:Einaudi.

TincaniA.2012,Le istituzioni ecclesiastiche dalle origini al concilio di Trento,inCostiG.,GiovannelliG.(eds.)2012,La storia della Diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla,I,Brescia:Morcelliana,309-392.

TorreA.1996,Il vescovo di antico regime: un approccio configurazionale,«Quadernisto-rici»,91:199-216.

TroleseG.B.(ed.)1998, Il monachesimo italiano nell’età comunale,(Atti del IV Con-vegno di Studi Storici sull’Italia Benedettina, Abbazia di S. Giacomo Maggiore, Pontida, 3-6 settembre 1995),Cesena:BadiadiSantaMariadelMonte.

ValleraniM.2011,Comune e comuni: una dialettica non risolta,inDeMatteisM.C.,PioB.(eds.)2011,Sperimentazioni di governo nell’Italia centrosettentrionale nel processo storico dal primo comune alla signoria, (Atti del convegno di studio, Bologna, 3–4 settem-bre 2010),Bologna:BUP,9-34.

VasinaA.2007,La città e il contado dagli albori del Comune alla pace di Costanza (1116-1183),inCapitaniO.(ed.)2007,Storia di Bologna. 2: Bologna nel Medioevo,Bolo-gna:BUP,439-476.

WickhamC.2014,The feudal Revolution and the Origins of Italian City Communes,«TransactionsoftheRoyalHistoricalSociety»,24:29-55.

—2015,The Emergence of Italian City Communes in the Twelfth Century,Princeton:PrincetonUP.

WillemsH.2010,Figurationssoziologie und Netzwerkansätze,inStegbauerC.,HäußlingR.(eds.)2010,Handbuch Netzwerkforschung,Wiesbaden:Springer,255-268.

Wolverton L. A. 2015, Cosmas of Prague: Narrative, Classicism, Politics, Washington (DC): The Catholic University of America Press.

This article shows how marginalia in the Vita Mathildis (Vat. Lat. 4922) explain the mea-ning behind Donizo’s account of the Battle of Tricontai (1091/1092). I argue that the mar-ginalia were intended to guide readers to appreciating the location of the battle and the extent of Matilda’s losses at it. As a simultaneous dissection of a medieval battle and a medieval manuscript, this article could appeal to both military historians and students of literature.

introduction

The year 2015 marked the 900th anniversary of the death of Matilda of Tuscany as well as the rough date of the completion of the principal sourceforherlifeandachievements,thepoetDonizoofCanossa’sVita Mathildis.Unfortunately,noneofthepoem’scriticaleditionsadequately

silensis and aferesis in the Vita Mathildis: How Donizo’s Marginalia explain the Battle of Tricontai (1091/1092)

daVid HayUniversity of Lethbridge, History Department

*AnearlyversionofthepaperwaspresentedattheInternationalMedievalCongress,UniversityofLeeds, in2015.Myspecial thanksgotoDavidTownsendandJohnWard for their very useful feedback regarding my interpretation of Donizo’s poem. Any errors in what follows are entirely mine. My thanks also to Sarah Wilk.Vatican City,BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,MSVat.lat.4922.Unlessotherwisenoted,allLatinquotationsaretakenfromthismanuscript(withthepunctuationmarksmoder-nized),whileallEnglishtranslationsaremine.


126

addressthemarginalnotesthatappearoppositesixchallengingpassagesintheauthoritativemanuscript,Vat.lat.4922.1 L. A. Muratori refrained fromnoting thesemarginalia in theeditionheproduced for thefirstseries of the Rerum Italicarum Scriptores in 1724 (republished by Migne in the Patrologia Latina in 1853).2 Ludwig Bethmann transcribed only threeofthesixintheeditionhemadefortheMonumentaGermaniaeHistorica in 1856.3 Luigi Simeoni mentioned none of the marginalia when he wrote what has since become the standard edition of the poem for the second series of the Rerum Italicarum Scriptores in 1931 (publi-shed 1940).4Infact,Simeonideclinedtoconsiderthemarginaliaeveninhisextensivefootnotes,wherehespeculatedonthemeaningsofpas-sages towhich they explicitly refer.The facsimile edition thatPaoloGolinelli published in 1984 reproduces the marginalia as they appear in Vat.lat.4922,buthiscorrespondingLatintranscription–aswellasthefacingItalianandGermantranslations–disregardthem.5 Other transla-tioneditionsexhibitequaldisinterestinthemarginalia6.These six neglected notes are nevertheless crucial to understandingDonizo’s poem–not least because thehand thatwrote themappe-

1 Vat.lat.4922itselfisnowviewableonline,courtesyoftheVatican’sdigitizationproject: http://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.lat.4922.2 Donizone,Vita Mathildis comitissae, celeberrimae principis Italiae,Muratori L.A.(ed.)1724,V,335-397;Donizone,Vita Mathildis comitissae, celeberrimae principis Ita-liae,J.P.Migne(ed.)1853,coll.939-1036.3 Donizone,Vita Mathildis,BethmannL.(ed.)1856.4 Donizone,Vita Mathildis celeberrimae principis Italiae: Carmine scripta a Donizone presbytero,SimeoniL.(ed.)1940.OntheearlierandlessreliableeditionsofTengna-gelandLeibniz,seeSimeoni(Donizone,Vita Mathildis,1940),xix-xx.5 Donizone,La Vita di Matilde di Canossa, Codice Vaticano latino 4922,GolinelliP.(ed.andtrans.),1984;GolinelliP.(ed.),JaneckA.(trans.),Zurich:BelserVerlag(Germanedition);Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,GolinelliP.(ed.andtrans.),2008.6 E.g.Donizone,Matilde e Canossa: Il Poema di Donizone,BellocchiU.,MarziG.(eds.) 1970.

DAViD hAYSilensis and Aferesis in the Vita Mathildis

127

arstobethatofDonizohimself.Thetext,context,andcodicologicalfeatures of Vat. lat. 4922 provide ample evidence that Donizo was di-rectly involved in producing this manuscript.7Tobeginwith, ithasan unimpeachable provenance: Vat. lat. 4922 is the lavishly illustrated presentationcodexfromwhichallextantcopiesdescend.8 The script isalsoinformative,sinceitistheproductoftwohands:thebodywaswrittenconfidentlyindarkblackink;butitwasfrequentlycorrectedby a less regular though coeval hand writing in weak brown ink. On fol.80v,thislatterhandevensuppliestwomissinglinesthatthefirsthand omitted entirely.9 The corrections then appear to be Donizo’s au-tograph. Further evidence of Donizo’s involvement is provided by the brief panegyric that the poet appended to the poem shortly after Ma-tilda’sdeathin1115.Inthisaddendum,Donizodetailedthemeasureshetooktopreparethefinalmanuscriptforher,notingthathewasfini-shing the indices when he learned she had died.10 This epilogue in fact remainsboundtotherestofVat.lat.4922inafinalquire,whichbearscodicological features distinct from those of the rest of the manuscript (such as having 24 lines per page as opposed to 19).11 Medieval scribes alsoacknowledgedVat.lat.4922’sauthority,andatleastonenotedthe

7 Bethmann(Donizone,Vita Mathildis,1856),348-349;Simeoni(Donizone,Vita Mathildis,1940),viii;FumagalliV.,Il Poema di Donizone, nel codice Vaticano Latino 4922,inGolinelliP.(Donizone,VitadiMatildediCanossa,2008),250;Ghirardini1987,108.8 Donizone,Vita Mathildis, 1856,348;Donizone,Vita Mathildis, 1940,vi.For asummaryoftheprovenance,seeGolinelli’sintroductiontohis2008edition(Doni-zone,VitadiMatildediCanossa2008),xv.9 SeealsoVat.lat.4922,fol.64r,whereonelinehasbeencorrectedtotwo.10 Vat. lat.4922,fol.86r.ThispostscriptwasaddedtothemaintextshortlyafterHenryV’sarrivalinItalyin1116,andispublishedinallrecenteditions:e.g.Donizo-ne,Vita Mathildis,1856,BookII,ll.1402-1409.11 Vat. lat.4922, fol.86r-89v.Ontheuniquenessof thefinalquire, seeGolinelli(Donizone,La Vita di Matilde di Canossa,1984),n.211,239.


128

marginaliaaswell.In1234,whenthemonksofFrassinoro12 wanted to makeareliablewitnessofthetext,theyborrowedVat.lat.4922fromDonizo’s monastery of Sant’Apollonio at Canossa.13 This careful copy –now the secondoldestmanuscriptofDonizo’spoemextant–pre-servesallsixofVat.lat.4922’smarginalia.14 The monks then returned theoriginal toCanossa,whereitresidedat leastuntil thefourteenthcentury,when thecopynowpreserved inReggioEmiliawasmadedirectly from it15.What could Donizo have been hoping to accomplish by intervening in themarginsofhisownpresentationcodex?Hewasnotsimplycorrec-tingerrors,becauseheandthescribefixedthosebyerasureorinterline-arnote;afterall,Donizohadaccesstothetextbeforeitwascompleted.Norwashemakingmundane,lexicalglosses,becauseagain,interlinearnotessufficedforthose.Thewordswritteninthesidemarginsarethe-reforesomethingelse.Thesesixnotabiliaareinfactsignpostscallingthereader’sattentiontofiguresofspeech(i.e.«silensis»,«aferesis»),andthey serve as Donizo’s personal map for navigating the poem’s literary flourishes.Theserhetoricaltropescharttheauthor’struecoursethrou-gh some of the enigmatic verses for which the Vita Mathildis has now

12 Matilda’smotherBeatricehadfoundedFrassinoro,whichisroughly30kmsouthofCanossa,in1071.13 Themanuscript isnowLucca,BibliotecaStatale (olim Governativa),MS2508.Bethmann (Donizone, Vita Mathildis, 1856, 349) and Simeoni (Donizone, Vita Mathildis, 1940,x) transcribe thenote that recountshowthemonksofFrassinoroborrowed the manuscript from Canossa.14 Lucca2508,foll.4r,6v,8v,37v,38r,45v.15 Reggio Emilia, Biblioteca Comunale “Panizzi”, MS Turri E 52 (availableonline at http://digilib.netribe.it/bdr01/visore/index.php?pidCollection=Vita-Mathildis:1064&v=-1&pidObject=Vita-Mathildis:1064&page=000_r ). The Reggiomanuscript also makes reference to the monastery of Sant’Apollonio (1r) and copies theminiatures fromVat. lat. 4922: see Simeoni (Donizone,Vita Mathildis, 1940),xi-xiv.


129

becomeinfamous[Ghirardini1987,37-57]16.ThesignificanceofthemarginaliacanbeprovenbyfocusingonDo-nizo’sotherwisevexingdescriptionoftheBattleofTricontai(1091/2).Thescansionoftheselines,theirmedievalproseepitomes,andthemi-litary maneuvers and topography they describe make sense only in light of themarginalia. Collectively, these factors compel us to reject themost recent translations of these verses and to revise our understanding of the course and outcome of the battle. They enable us to appreciate the way in which Donizo deployed the marginalia to light the path for his readers through some of the most obscure passages of his poem.

The Battle of Tricontai

Donizo’s account of the Battle of Tri-contaihaslongvexededitorsandtran-slators alike. The passage in questionoccurs during Donizo’s description of King Henry IV’s second military ex-pedition to Italy (1090-1097), whichmarked an important moment in the Investiture Wars. After his famous hu-miliation before Pope Gregory VII and Matilda at the countess’s castle of Ca-nossain1077,17 Henry had returned to Italywith an army in 1081, spendingthenextthreeyearsattackingtherefor-

16 ForacurrentintroductiontoDonizo’swork,seeRiversi2013.17 Thewell-knownilluminationinVat.lat.4922,fol.49r,depictsascenefromtheconfrontation,withHenrykneelingbeforeanenthronedMatildaandAbbotHughof Cluny.

Hugh of Cluny, Holy Roman Emperor Henry IV, and Matilda of Tuscany, Vat. lat. 4922.


130

mers.By1084,hehadtakenmostofRome,installedhisownappointee(ArchbishopGuibertofRavenna)asPopeClementIII,andbeeninve-stedwiththeimperialcrown.Soonafter,Gregoryhimselffledthecity,onlytodieinexileinSalernothefollowingyear.In the wake of the Emperor’s apparently triumphal withdrawal to Ger-manyin1084,however,Matildaandherallieswereabletorallythere-formers.ThecountesswonasignificantmilitaryvictoryoverHenry’sLombardalliesattheBattleofSorbaralaterin1084[Hay2008,95-117].Intheyearsthatfollowed,MatildaworkedtirelesslytoinstallreformistcandidatesinthediocesesofcentralandnorthernItaly,andhelpedtoarrange the elections of two successive reforming popes (Victor III and Urban II).By1090,18 shehadalso solidified the reformers’waveringmilitary alliance by marrying the young son and heir of Duke Welf IV of Bavaria. Welf IV had previously led the south German opposi-tion to Henry and was the founder of the German branch of the house ofEste,whosenamewouldeventuallybecomesynonymouswiththepapal party itself in Italy (i.e. Guelph). The alliance between the dyna-sties of Welf and Canossa thus represented a threat the emperor had to confront:eachpossessedextensivelandsastridethemainpathstoRomeandapedigreeofrebellionagainstthecrown.Andso,inthespringof1090,HenryenteredItalyinforceforasecondtime.19 His main target nowwasnotthepopebutMatilda,whohadproventhereformparty’sstaunchest defender.TheemperorfirstinvestedMantua,thechiefcityofthehouseofCa-nossaonthePoplain.Afternearlyayearofvigoroussiege,Henrysuc-ceededincapturingit,togetherwithmuchofthesurroundingregion,

18 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde von Tuszien, Goez andGoez(eds.)1998,no.42,136-139.Fordiscussionofthedateofthemarriage,seeHay2008,125-126.19 Forrecenttreatmentsofthisphaseofthewar,seeHay2008(esp.59-159)andEads 2010.


131

although a few of Matilda’s other garrisons north of the river held out.20 Thewinterof1091/2markedaseasonallullinthefighting,asthecom-batants were momentarily separated by the waters of the Po. While the emperor consolidated his gains north of the river and rested his troops inpreparationforaspringpushintotheheartofMatilda’sterritory,thecountessfortifiedherpositionssouthofthePoandinvitedHenrytooverextendhimself21.This relative pause was interrupted when the countess learned that the emperor had dismissed the bulk of his forces and crossed the Adige Ri-ver.Atitsclosestpoint,theAdigebendstowithinabout40kilometresofMantua,tothecity’snorthandeast.22 Donizo describes how Matilda resolved to seize the moment:

Nam postquam magna fuit arx minervia capta, Tempore rex hiemis athesis trans flumen abivit, [570] Principibus vacuus tunc, militibus neque fultus. Hoc didicit nempe prudens comitissa, repente Mille viros fortes numero plus, iussit ad hostem Pergere bellandum, campi certamine tantum.

ForafterthegreatfortressMinerviawascaptured,23 DuringthewinterthekingcrossedtheRiverAdige, Freeoftheprinces,andnotsupportedbyknights. ThewiseCountesslearnedthiswithcertainty; Shesuddenlyorderedbravemen,morethanathousandinnumber, Togotofighttheenemy,butonlyintheopenfield.

KnowingthelocationofMinerviawouldhelpfixtheEmperor’sposi-tionbeforethebattle,sinceDonizostatesthatHenrycrossedtheAdige

20 Donizone,Vita Mathildis,II.4-6,ll.453ff.;Hay2008,128-131.21 Donizone,Vita Mathildis,II.6,ll.554ff.22 TheAdigerunssouthwardandtheneastward,fromtheAlpsnorthofMantua,throughVerona,andacrossthenorthernhalfofthePobasinintotheAdriatic.23 DonizohasalreadymadeclearthatHenryconqueredMinerviainthesummer(l.559),andthatMatildawascloselywatchinghismovements(ll.566-568).


132

after capturing it. Was the emperor carelessly advancing into disputed territorysuchasthesouthernpartofthecountyofMantua,orwashewithdrawing for the winter into the friendlier regions to the east of the Adige,inthecountiesofVerona,Vicenza,andPadua?24Unfortunately,theidentificationoftheMinerviahasbeenamatterofdisputeatleastsincetheeighteenthcentury,whenMuratoriobservedthattherearecandidates on both sides of the Adige. Eads argues that Manerbio (just south of Brescia) and Manerba del Garda (on the eponymous lake) are themost likely locations [Eads 2010, 36-37].These are both to thenorth of Mantua and west of the Adige. Another piece of evidence that shouldbeconsidered,however,istheEpitome Canossiana,aprosesum-mary of the Vita Mathildis that appears with Donizo’s poem in the Reg-gioCodex,writtenintheearlyfourteenthcentury.TheEpitome states thatMatildasentherthousandbravementorecoverMinerviaspecifi-cally («ad recuperationem minervii»),andthatshedirectedthemtowardsthe site of the fortress («et eos dirigeret ad locum illum»).25 This might givefurthersupporttotheidentificationofMinerviawithManerbe,fourkilometers to theeastof theAdige.AsEadsobserves,Manerbeis«suggestivelyclosetoTricontai»,beingonlyafewkilometersfromtheknownsiteofthebattle[Eads2010,36].TheEpitome Canossiana isaquestionablewitness,however.ItssummaryoftheVita Mathildis is bothcarelessandgarbled,and,asEadsnotes,thereisnocorroboratingevidenceofacastle,muchlessa«great»one,atMinerbe[Eads2010,

24 Thethreebishopsinthisareawereallstaunchimperialists.OneofHenry’sfirstacts on arriving in Italy in 1090 was to give Milo of Padua comital rights over his city: Die Urkunden Heinrichs IV., GladissD.,GawlikA.(eds.)1941-78,no.414,551-553.FormoreonMilo,seeSchwartz1993,58.ForthebishopofVicenza,seeSchwartz1993,73.ForthebishopofVerona,seeEads2010,30n.27,40.25 Reggio Emilia, BibliotecaComunale “Panizzi”,MSTurri E 52, fol. 97v.TheEpitome Canossiana unfortunately remains unedited, but the manuscript is vie-wable online via the communal archive: http://digilib.netribe.it/bdr01/vi-sore/index.php?pidCollection=Vita-Mathildis:1064&v=-1&pidObject=Vita-Mathildis:1064&page=000_r.


133

36].Themostthatcanbesaid—butindeedthecrucialpointtomake,aswill be discussed below—is that all the potential locations for Minervia are north of the Po.Donizo’s phrase «campi certamine tantum»isalsosomewhatenigmatic,but it might make more sense if his «tantum» is read as tantumodo («only» or«merely»),asmostItaliantranslatorshaveinterpretedit.Bythephra-se,Donizo is indicating thatMatildacautionedher soldiers toavoidany fortified enemy positions even as she ordered the strike againsttheemperor.Hercautionmade sensebecauseon the strategic level,Henryhad anumerical advantage andwas steadilygainingground;the countess could not allow her forces to get pinned down in what was rapidly becoming enemy territory. Her troops would risk disaster iftheystoppedtolaysiegetocastlesorwalledtowns[Hay2008,131-132],andsimilarlyiftheyattemptedtoforcetheirwayacrossdefendedbridges or fords such as the main crossing of the Adige at Legnano (which was then held by the imperialist bishop of Verona).26 Matilda therefore instructed her soldiers to attack only if they could catch the enemyintheopenfield–ideallybysurprise,astheyhaddonewithgreat success at Sorbara in 1084.Thenextsentenceisthemostproblematicone.ItexplainswhyHenrywas able to recall his troops and surprise Matilda’s forces on the battle-field.Abriefsurveyofhoweditorsandtranslatorshaveapproachedthispassage intheyears sinceBethmannproducedhis justifiablyadmirededitionin1856revealsthesignificantchallengesthelinehasposed.Thefull passage reads thus in Vat. Lat. 4922 and its earliest medieval copies:

26 Legnanowaswherethemainroadinthevicinity,anextensionoftheoldRo-manViaAemilia,crossedtheAdigeonthewaytoPadua.Forastrategicmapoftheregionanditsroads,seeHay2008,xv.Forthebestmapoftheimmediatevicinityofthebattle,seeEads2010,42,whoalsodiscussesseveralotherpotentialcrossingsoftheAdigeintheareaofTricontai,aswellasthedangersinusingthem(40).Foradetailed study of the human and physical geography of the high medieval county of Padua,includingtheshiftingroutesoftheAdigeandtheremainingRomanroads,see Rippe 2003.


134

Cumque padi latices, athesis necnon vada sissent, [575] Insidiis plenus rex, ipsos octo diebus Vitavit, tardans proprias revocando phalanges27.

Bethmann modernized the capitalization and removed some of Doni-zo’spunctuation,butotherwisetranscribedthelineinessentiallythesame way:

Cumque Padi latices Athesis necnon vada sissent, [575] Insidiis plenus rex ipsos octo diebus Vitavit, tardans proprias revocando phalanges28.

ThefirstItaliantranslationsofthispassagefollowedBethmann’sedi-tion. They took the subject of line 575 to be Matilda’s troops (who werementionedinthepreviouslines),andtheyreadtheverb«sissent» as «transissent»: since her soldiers «crossed» the waters of the Po and indeedthefordsoftheAdige,thekingwasforcedtoresorttotrickstoavoidthem,andhedidsoforeightdaysuntilhewasabletorecallhisarmy.ThiswasforexampletheessenceofthetranslationsbyFrancescoDavoli in 188829 and Natale Grimaldi in 192830.A fewyears later, however, Simeoni produced anewLatin edition,which offered a rather different transcription and punctuation, andwhichwasfurnishedwithfootnotes inItalianthatexplicitlyrejectedGrimaldi’s translation. Simeoni’s Latin read:

Cumque Padi latices, Athesis, non vada sissent, [575]

27 Vat. lat. 4922, fol. 63r;Lucca,BibliotecaStatale (olimGovernativa),MS2508;Reggio,BibliotecaComunale,MSTurriE52,fol.55r.28 Donizone,Vita Mathildis,1856,II.6,ll.575-577.29 «Ed essi, avendo valicate le acque del Po, e i guadi del’ Adige, per otto giorno tesero al re di molte insidie; ma egli le schivò tutte, in quella che indugiava a richiamare le proprie falangi»:Davoli(Donizone,VitadellagrandecontessaMatilde,1888),II.6,187.30 «Come costoro ebbero passato i flutti del Po e i guadi dell’ Adige, per otto giorni il re pieno di insidie riuscì ad evitarli, indugiandosi a richiamare il grosso delle sue truppe»: Gri-maldi(Donizone,IlCantorediMatilde,1928),95.SeealsoGrimaldi’sexplanationofthemilitarycontextinhisnotetotheselines,191-192.


135

Insidiis plenus rex, ipsos octo diebus Vitavit tardans, proprias revocando phalanges31.

Simeoni’s editorializingwas significant because it reversed themea-ningofthepassage: itrenderedtherivers impassable,at least fortheeight days before the battle. The change consisted of several parts. The firstwasnewpunctuation: Simeoni added a commaafterAthesis tochallengeanyassociationbetween«fords»and«Adige».Tohim, the«latices» («waters») of the Po andtheAdigeweretheverb’ssubject,andthe «vada» («fords») its direct object. Incidentally, he also shifted thecomma that appears after «Vitavit» in line 577 to appear after «tardans». Nextwasanewinterpretationof theverb«sissent». Whereas Davoli and Grimaldi had translated it as «[tran]sissent» (the pluperfect subjun-ctiveof«tocross»),Simeonireaditasthepluperfectsubjunctiveofsino («toallow»),inthesyncopatedform«sissent» (for «sivissent»).32 Simeoni indicated this by adding a somewhat ambiguously worded note to the linethatreads,«Athesis…. vada sissent,avendopermessoiguadi,non:ebbero passato».33Finally,Simeonimadeperhapshismostradicalalte-rationbychangingline575’sintensifierintoanegative:herenderedDonizo’s «necnon» as a simple «non».InSimeoni’seditionoftheline,thewatersofthePoandtheAdigedeniedMatilda’sforcesanycrossing,and their impassibility was what provided the emperor eight days to recall his own troops.The editions and translations published after Simeoni’s edition have

31 Simeoni(Donizone,Vita Mathildis,1940),74.32 Considered in isolation, «sissent» is a reasonable conjecture.Livy, for example,uses both «sissent» and «sivissent» interchangeably: Titi Livi ab urbe condita libri,Weis-senbornW.andMullerM.(eds.)1966,III.18.6andXXXV.5.11.33 Simeoni (Donizone,Vita Mathildis, 1940), 74, note to l.575. Simeoni’s «ebbero passato»isnotanindicationthatMatilda’stroopshadcrossed,asEadsreadsit[2010,35n.49],butarefutationofGrimaldi’stranslation,whichhadbeenpublishedonlyafewyearsearlier.SimeoniexplicitlyrejectsGrimaldi’stranslationatotherpointsaswell(e.g.Simeoni’snotestoII.6,ll.578-579and583).


136

generallyacceptedhisreading,whichhasbecomethestandard.Latereditors and translators have nevertheless sometimes made further alte-rationsthatseemdesignedtofitDonizo’stextintoSimeoni’ssense.IntheintroductiontotheirLatinverseandfacingItalianproseedition,Bellocchi and Marzi mentioned that they had to take measures to cor-rect some errors they found in Simeoni’s text.34 They thus returned the comma Simeoni had moved in line 577 to its rightful place after «Vitavit».35Nevertheless,BellocchiandMarzirenderedline575inthesamewaySimeonihad, retaininghiseditorialcommaafter«Athesis» and truncating Donizo’s «necnon» into a simple «non»: «Cumque Padi latices, Athesis, non vada sissent». Bellocchi and Marzi also gave an Italian translation of the passage that is similar to Simeoni’s reading.36The most recent attempt to make critical sense of the line was that of Paolo Golinelli. The lavish suite of editions he introduced in 1984 includedafacsimileofVat.lat.4922,aLatintranscription,andfacingItalianandGermantranslations(thelatterbyAxelJaneck).37 While the facsimilereproducedthepassageexactlyasitappearsinthemanuscript,theLatintranscriptionofferedstillanotherversionoftheline.Golinellichanged the comma Simeoni inserted after «Athesis» into the enclitic «-que» and separated Donizo’s «nec» from his «non»:

Cumque Padi latices, Athesisque nec non vada sissent, [575] Insidiis plenus rex, ipsos octo diebus Vitavit, tardans proprias revocando phalanges38.

34 Bellocchi,Marzi(Donizone,Matilde e Canossa,1970),12.35 Ibid.,214.36 «Poichè le acque del Po e dell’Adige non avevano consentito di utilizzare i guadi, il re, trovandosi a mal partito, ruscì ad evitare per otto giorni i soldati di Matilde, differendo in tal modo la chiamata delle proprie truppe»:Bellocchi,Marzi(Donizone,Matilde e Canossa,1970),217.37 Golinelli,Janeck(Donizone,La Vita di Matilde di Canossa,1984).38 Golinelli(Donizone,La Vita di Matilde di Canossa,1984),166.CouldDonizo’s«nec» be paired with his «que»,ina«neque… que»construction,asGolinelliseemstobe


137

Despitethesechanges,theGermanandItaliantranslationsbaseduponGolinelli’s transcription remained very much in the mold of Simeoni39.Thesealterationstestifytotheongoingdifficultiesmodernreadershaveexperiencedinunderstandingthetextandmeaningofthispassage,atleastsincethepublicationofSimeoni’sedition,andtheyalsoraisesomethornyinterpretivequestions.Therearehowevereasierandbetterso-lutions to the problems line 575 presents—solutions that allow the line to revert to the form Donizo originally intended it to have. To under-standthese,onemustappreciatethefullrangeofmetrical,military,andpaleographical complications the recent editors’ changes to the passage entail,aswellasconsiderthecontextofferedbythepoem’smedievalproseepitomes.Butmostofall,onemustreadDonizo’stexttogetherwiththemarginaliathatappearinVat.lat.4922,becausethemarginaliaare the author’s guides to traversing precisely these sorts of passages.

Meter

Thefirstissuethatmustbeconsideredisscansion.Asignificantpro-blem the recent editorial alterations create is that they disrupt the po-

suggestinghere?ThesuspicionthatDonizohasquixoticallyjuxtaposedhissyllablesisnotentirelyunwarranted,especiallygiventheintricatewordgamesofotherItalianauthors of the period (see Vignodelli 2011 and 2016). As Donizo’s other editors have noted,theCanossanpoetsometimesdissectsandtransposeshiswordsinunusualandunexpectedways[Bethmann(Donizone,Vita Mathildis,1856),348;Bellocchi,Marzi(Donizone,MatildeeCanossa,1970),39].Online767ofBookII,forexample,hebisects «heresiarch» with three other words [«Ac heresi papae Guiberti scilicet archae»],whileonline1312ofbookIhesplits«Pentecost»inhalf,theninvertsthehalves,andinserts a preposition between them [«Costes in Pente Romam testor veniet Rex»]. As I showbelow,however,thereareeasiersolutionstotheproblemsline575presents.39 Janeck’sGermantranslation(Donizone,Vita Mathildis,1984,169)is:


138

em’s meter.40 The disruption is all the more problematic because Do-nizo seems to have given line 575 his personal imprimatur: in Vat. lat. 4922,thecorrector’shandhasamendedthescribe’sinitial«Cunq;» to the proper «Cumq;» (for «Cumque»).41 The fact that the corrector che-ckedthislinequitecarefullyobligesmoderneditorstodoeverythingpossible to make good sense of it before they alter it.Yet,theonlyversionofthelinethatscansproperlyintoheroichexa-meteristheonefoundinVat.lat.4922.Itactuallyscansquiteeasily:

CūmqŭePă/dīlătĭ/cēs,║Ăthĕ/sīsnēc/nōnvădă/sīssēnt,42

ThechangesSimeoniandGolinelliintroduce,bycontrast,spoiltheli-ne’s scansion. Simeoni’s removal of Donizo’s «nec» creates an erroneous fifthfootwithtwoshortsyllables:

CūmqŭePă/dīlătĭ/cēs,║Ăthĕ/sīs,nōn/vădă/sīssēnt,

Golinelli’s addition of a «que» after «Athesis» merely shifts the problem to thefourthfoot,whichbecomesanunacceptablecretic(long-short-long):

CūmqŭePă/dīlătĭ/cēs,║Ăthĕ/sīsqŭenēc/nōnvădă/sīssēnt.

The argument from scansion alone is not conclusive, however, for

«Da nun die Wasser des Po und der Etsch keine Furten besassen, listenreich hat nun der König dieselben für acht lange Tage nicht überschritten, um Zeit zu gewinnen zum Rückruf der Truppen». Golinelli’sItaliantranslation(Donizone,Vita Mathildis,2008,167),reads: «Poiché l’acque del Po e dell’Adige non si lasciavan guadare, il diabolico re li evitò per ben otto giorni, e approfittò di quel tempo per richiamar le sue truppe».40 OnDonizo’smeteringeneral,seeBellocchi,Marzi(Donizone,Matilde e Canossa,1970),36-42.41 Vat.lat.4922,fol.63r.Thescribemadethiserrorfrequently:twiceonfol.58v,forexample,andnolessthansixtimesonfol.59r.Donizowassolicitiousincorrectingitintheseinstancesaswell,however.42 Donizo’scharacteristicassonancebetweenthetwovowelsoundsbeforethecae-sura and the two at the end of the line ensures that the scansion of l. 575 is relatively simple.


139

Donizo is known to have made metrical errors. Bellocchi and Marzi observethatl.900ofthefirstbookhasonlyfivefeet,whilel.1128ofthe second book has seven.43 Errors of meter occur even in the lines that Donizo appears to have corrected personally: the same hand that chan-ged «Cunq;» to «Cumq;» in II.575 has also corrected the word «sumptu-que»inI.900,apparentlywithoutrealizingthatthecorrectedline900still lacks an entire foot.44 While much of the modern criticism of Do-nizo’spoemiswelldeserved,then,hismetricalerrorsareneverthelessrare,atleastwhenconsideredinabsoluteterms;thevastmajorityofhislinesscancorrectly.Readersshouldthereforeamendhistextonlywiththe greatest caution.

The location of Tricontai

There are corroborating reasons to prefer the original manuscript’s re-ading as well. One of these is the location of the Battle of Tricontai. Asnotedabove,recenttreatmentsofline575renderboththePoandthe Adige impassable for at least eight days. Yet we know that Matil-da’stroopsdidintheendcrossbothrivers,forintheversesthatfollowline 57545,Donizopicksupthestory:afteravoidingMatilda’sforcesforeightdays,theemperorwasfinallyabletoreassembleanarmy.AidedbyatraitorwithintheCanossanhost,whoassuredMatilda’ssoldiersthat thekingwas still unprepared tofight them,Henrywas able tolaunch a surprise attack of his own at a place Donizo calls «Tres Comita-tus»[l.585].Caughtunawareintheopenfield,Matilda’sarmybroke,with the scattered survivors retreating in dejection to Canossa.WhilethelocationofMinerviamightbecontestable,thatof«Tres Co-

43 Bellocchi,Marzi(Donizone,Matilde e Canossa,1970),37-38.44 Vat.lat.4922,fol.33v.45 Donizone,Vita Mathildis,II.6,ll.576-595


140

mitatus» is not. Since at least the time of Muratori’s edition of the Vita Mathildisin1724,ithasbeenidentifiedasTricontaiinthecountyofPadua.46 A recent article by Valerie Eads elaborates that Tricontai was notavillageorcastlebutamorevaguelydefinedareaborderingsomewoods just to the east of the Adige. Its name came from the fact that it wastheplacewherethethreecountiesofVerona,Vicenza,andPaduamet[Eads2010,34andn.47].EadspointsoutthatDonizohimselfcalls«Tres Comitatus» a «pagus»[II.6,l.585],whilecontemporarychartersofthe Este dynasty (which ruled the region) refer to it as a «locus» or «terra» [Eads2010,34and38].ThusacharterwritteninnearbyMontagnanain the year 1100 records a donation of lands held «in comitatu Pataviensi et Veronensi et inter Tres Comitatus et silvam Caracedi».47 The location of TricontaiisconfirmedbytheparticipationofprominentmembersoftheEstelineintheconflict.DonizostatesthatthetraitorwithintheCanossan ranks was Hugh of Maine.48ThisHughcanbeidentifiedasyoungersonofAdalbertoAzzoII(Azzod’Este,d.1097),theMargraveofMilan,CountofPadua,andfounderoftheHouseofEste.Notcoin-cidentally,Hughwasalso(throughAzzo)thehalf-uncleofMatilda’snewhusbandWelf (the futureDukeWelfVofBavaria).Moreover,Matilda’s diplomas record that she had just endowed Welf with lands in the nearby county of Mantua (in 1089 or 1090).49 Matilda’s young husband himself might even have been present in the Canossan host

46 Muratori(Donizone,Vita Mathildis comitissae,1724),371,n.95.47 AmorerecenteditionofthedocumentEadscitesisGloriaA.(ed.),Codice Diplo-matico Padovano: dal secolo sesto a tutto l’undecimo,1877,n.336,358.Otherrelevantcharters from ibid.arenos.233(p.260),314(pp.338-339),and325(pp.347-348).48 «Proditor e manso fuit hugo nobilis alvo»: Vita Mathildis, II.6, l. 586.Hughwas«of Maine» because he spent much of the years 1090-1093 in Maine. He ruled that countyuntil his positionbecameuntenable, atwhichpointhe soldhis claimandreturnedtoItaly:OrdericVitalis,The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis,MarjorieChibnall(ed.andtrans.),1969,VIII.11.49 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde von Tuszien,1998,no.42,136-139.


141

atTricontai,togetherwithhistreacheroushalf-uncleHugh.50Hugh,forhispart,isrecordedswearingfealtytohisolderbrotherFulk(yetanother of Azzo’s sons) in the same area in 109551.The location of Donizo’s «Tres Comitatus» is thus secure: it is immedia-telyeastoftheAdige,andwellnorthofthePo.Thispresentsanobsta-cle to reading line 575 as Simeoni and the more recent Italian transla-torsdo,however.Forifbothriversremainedimpassable,whydidtheemperor need to resort to «tricks» [«Insidiis»],andindeed,howdidabattleoccuratall?WhetherMinerviawastotheeastorthewestoftheAdige,andwhether theEmperorhadexposedhimselfbyadvancingcarelessly into the county of Mantua or by withdrawing carelessly into thecountyofPadua,Matilda’sforcesintheendhadtocrossnotonebut both rivers to get to him at Tricontai. The line does not seem to be sayingthattheriverswereinsurmountable;itissayingsomethingelse.

«sissent»

AfurthercomplicationwithSimeoni’seditionisthatitfailstoexplainwhy previous translators had read «sissent» as «[tran]sissent». This omis-sion in a way sets its own trap for those seeking the truth about Tricon-tai. Eads noted that Simeoni had removed line 575’s «nec»,whichhadappearedinallpreviouseditionsofthepoem,althoughshefoundthelineremained«obscure,evenwhencorrected»[Eads2010,35n.49].PromptedbyamarginalnoteinBethmann’sedition,Eadsindependen-tly tried to make sense of the verb by «construing sissent as a compound of eo withtheprefixtruncated(s-issent)»[Eads2010,35n.49].Eads’

50 Eads2010,39;Hay2008,131.NotethereisanalternativetheorybyKatrinBaa-ken,mentionedbyEads(38n.67),thatHughwasnotactuallypresentatthebattle.He may have been merely a convenient scapegoat for Donizo.51 Gloria,Codice Diplomatico Padovano,n.314,338-339.


142

articledidnotspecifywhichprefixshehadinmind,butinapersonalcommunicationtothepresentauthorsheexplainedshewasthinkingof trans- or pertrans-. She based this astute conjecture on the Epitome Polironese,aprosesummaryoftheVita Mathildisfromthefifteenthcen-tury,whichsuppliesthemissingprefix:«Qui cum Padum et Athicem per-transissent, eos diebus octo imperator sua astutia evitavit».52 Eads therefore translated line 575 into English in a manner similar to the way Davoli andGrimaldihadrendereditintoItalian:«So,theycrossedthefords,thewatersofthePoandoftheAdige;thecraftykingevadedthemforeightdays,delayingandrecallinghisowntroops»[Eads2010,35].Suchaconjecturemightseemtenuousuntiloneexaminesthemanu-scriptofVat.lat.4922directly.Inthemarginoffol.63r,inthesamelessassured hand and weak brown ink that historians have long suspected tobeDonizo’s,appearstheword«aferesis». This literary term was well knowntolateantiqueandmedievalgrammarians(includingtheau-thoritative Donatus): from the Greek aphaeresis(«totakeaway»),itme-ans the removal of the beginning of a word.53IntheVaticancodex,54 twoadditional,identicalmarks(«..»)inthesameink–onetotheleftofthe marginal «aferesis» and the other above «sissent»–confirmthepai-ring of the two words. Although editors and translators from Simeoni onwardshaveignoredthismarginalnote,Bethmannhadtranscribeditinhis1856edition;indeed,itwasthepresenceofBethmann’snotethatfirstpromptedEadstoposittheremovaloftheprefix.55 Eads was ontherighttrackthen;theonlymistakeshemadewasinassumingthe

52 TheEpitome Polironese appears before another copy of the Vita Mathildis in Man-tua,BibliotecaComunale,MS. 243 (B.IV.17). It is transcribed in full by Simeoni(Donizone1940),113-127.Thequoteisonp.122.53 «Aphaeresis est ablatio de principio dictionis contraria prosthesi, ut mitte pro omitte et temno pro contemno»:DonatusA.,Ars maior: Donat et la tradition de l’enseignement grammatical,HoltzL.(ed.)1981,661.54 Vat.lat.fol.63r.55 Bethmann(Donizone,Vita Mathildis,1856),391;Eads2010,35n.49.


143

marginal note was Bethmann’s. In fact it was Donizo’s.A translation of the passage that takes the marginalia into due account might therefore read:

Andsince[they]crossedthewatersofthePo,andindeedthefordsoftheAdige, Theemperor,fulloftricks,avoidedthemforeightdays, Delaying while recalling his battalions.

TheothermarginaliainVat.lat.4922confirmthisreading.Thevastmajority of the second hand’s numerous interventions in the manu-script are simple corrections by erasure or interlinear glosses. Thus it writes «ut» above «quo»[39vand46v],«scutum» over «parmam»[34r],and «padus» over «Eridanum»[51r].On44vthesamehandclarifiestheantecedent for a «quos»,on34vitcorrectsanentireline,whileon80vit supplies two additional lines that the scribe had omitted entirely. The marginaliaofthesortonefindson63r,however,aremuchfewer,andtheyserveadifferentpurpose.Infactthereareonlysixsuchmarginaliainthemanuscript(includingtheoneopposite line575),andeachofthem is instructive.Twoofthefiveremainingmarginalia(viz.foll.63vand74v)containanother word: «silensis». One might be tempted to read this as «silentis» (the genitive of silens, «silent»),but thecontextandusage,aswellasDonizo’sdocumentedinfatuationwithGreekwords,clarifythatwhathe meant is «syllepsis».56FromtheGreekfor«takingtogether»,syllepsiswasvariouslydefinedbyancientgrammarians,butgenerallyitinclu-dedfiguresofspeechthatuniteddifferentclausesbyasinglewordthatpertained,strictlyspeaking,onlytooneofthoseclauses.Donatuspro-vided an illustration from the Aeneid in which Vergil allowed a singular and a plural subject to take the same (singular) verb: «hic illius arma, / Hic currus fuit».57 Medieval grammarians added further cases of syllepsis

56 Othermedievalspellingsincludesilemsis, sillepsis,silepsis,andsyllempsis.57 «Syllempsis est dissimilium clausularum per unum uerbum conglutinata conceptio, ut


144

occurringinsenseaswellasinthewrittenword,andsometimesde-fineditmoregenerallyastheconfusionofsingularandplural.ThusJulianofToledo(642-690)explainedthatitwassyllepsiswhenVergildescribedtheTrojanhorsebeingfilled«witharmedsoldier»(«armato milite»),sinceofcourseVergilmeantmanysoldiersratherthanone.58 BedeaddedaChristianexample:

Syllepsisalsooccursinsense,thatis,whenoneisgivenformanyormany for one. Oneformany,asin:“Hesentthedog-flyagainstthemanditconsu-medthem;thefrog, anditdestroyedthem,”eventhoughhedidnotsendoneflyorfrogto destroy the Egyptians,butinnumerableones59.

Thefirstmarginal«silensis»inVat.lat.4922appearsonfol.63v,nexttoapassagedescribingtheoutcomeoftheBattleofTricontai.Thetextof the poem depicts the Canossan soldiers being ambushed by the em-peror’s reassembled army.60 The corrector’s hand has added a marginal «silensis»besideoneoftheselines,withpairedmarksthatpointtotheverb «capitur»:

A turba regis miles capitur sed inhermis. [583] Plures evadunt, fugiunt per devia saltus.

“hic illius arma, / hic currus fuit”. hoc schema ita late patet, ut fieri soleat et per partes ora-tionis, et per accidentia partibus orationis»:DonatusA.,Ars maior,664.ThereferenceistoVergil,Aeneid,I.16-17.58 «Nam ubi et pro multis unus et pro uno multi ponuntur, syllemsis est. Pro multis unus est, ut: “uterumque armato milite conplet”, cum non pro uno, sed pro multis militibus dice-retur»:JulianofToledo,Ars Iuliani Toletani episcopi,ed.M.MaestreYenes,1973,197;Vergil,Aeneid,II.20.59 «Fit enim syllempsis in sensu, id est, ubi pro multis unus uel pro uno multi ponuntur. Pro multis unus, ut: “Inmisit in eis muscam caninam et comedit eos; ranam, et exterminauit eos,” cum non unam ad exterminandos Aegyptios muscam uel ranam, sed innumeras inmitteret»: Bede,De schematibus et tropis,KendallC.B.(ed.)1975,I.iiii,145.ThereferenceistoPsalm 77:45.60 «Traditor istorum regem dicebat, eorum


145

But [only] the unarmed knight is captured by the throng of the king. Moreescape,theyfleethroughthelonelyplacesoftheforest61.

Themarginalnoteexplainsthattheauthorisusingafigureofspeech:that the one «miles» here stands for many62.WhywouldDonizo feel thisneeded tobeexplained?Thefigureofspeechhastobeidentifiedbecauseafewlineslater,whenrecountinghowMatilda’ssoldierseventuallyregroupedandretreatedtoCanossa,Donizo describes the captives in the plural:

Tandem collecti, remeaverunt retro, mesti De sociis captis parvis pariter quoque magnis. [590] Inter quos captus manfredus erat probus altus Filius alberti, super ipsum contio regis Maxime gaudebat, comitissae contio flebat.

Finallygatheredtogether,theyreturnedback,grieving Fortheircapturedcomradesgreatandsmallalike; AmongstwhomwascapturedthevaliantManfred, NoblesonofAlbert,aboutwhomthearmyoftheking Rejoicedgreatly,thearmyoftheCountesswept.

Thefullpassage,understoodtogetherwiththemarginalia,thusindi-catesthatattheBattleofTricontai,theCanossansoldiers(plural)whowerenotabletoarmthemselvesormountupintimewerecaptured,

Nolle spatis iungi, deerat quia posse reiungit. Talia credentes, securi stant et inhermes. En subito spendent regis vexilla ferentes, Qui super hos currunt, pars ceditur utraque multum.»:Vat. lat.4922, fol.63v(Vita MathildisII.6,ll.578-582).61 Vat.lat.4922,fol.63v(Vita Mathildis,II.6,ll.583-584).Donizo’suseof«saltus» herelikelyreferstotheforestthatlayjustsouthofthebattlefield.SeeEads2010foramap(p.42)anddocumentationofthewoods(p.40andn.79),whichiscorroboratedby modern place names such as Boschi Sant’Anna and Boschi San Marco.62 ThescribeofLucca2508(fol.38r)makesthisexplicitbyplacingthenotedirectlyabove «capitur».


146

whiletheremainderfled.Themorerecenteditionsofthetext,bycon-trast,donotexplainthisverywell.AfootnotetothelineinSimeoni’sedition argues that more than one soldier had to have been captured—here again Simeoni criticizes Grimaldi’s more literal translation—but without indicating the presence ofDonizo’smarginal note that ex-plains to the reader that the captives were indeed plural63.The other instance of «silensis»occursseveralchapterslater,whenDo-nizoisdiscussingadifferentsubject:namely,thecaptureofSt.Bernarddegli Uberti during the revolt in Parma in 1104. Bernard was the abbot ofVallombrosa,papallegate,andMatilda’scandidatefortherecentlyvacatedbishopricofthecity.OnarrivalinParma,hebegancelebratingmass,buthisaudienceconsideredhisreformistsermoninsultingtotheemperor. Donizo describes how the citizens interrupted the ceremony anddraggedBernardoutsidethecathedral.ThetextonVat.lat.4922,fol.74v,reads,

Iniecitque manum super ipsum civis avarus, Et foris asportant, heu missa relinquitur orta, [1000]

Andthegraspingcitizenlaidhanduponhim, And they carry [him] outside. Alas the mass once begun is aban-doned!

Hereagain,amarginalnoteguidesthereaderthroughthepassage.Di-rectlytotheleftofline999,thecorrector’shandhaswritten,«silensis id est singularis pro plurali»64.Unfortunately,thehandhasnotleftanyvisi-ble marks to refer the reader to a particular word in the line (though the scribe of the Lucca manuscript settles the issue by moving the «silensis» to directly above «Iniecitque»).65 The note in Vat. lat. 4922 does at least

63 Simeoni(Donizone1940),notetoII.6,l.583,75.64 Vat.lat.4922,fol.74v.65 Lucca2508,fol.45v.


147

clarify that this is a syllepsis of sense: the singular «citizen» here stands for multiple citizens (and perhaps a single «hand» for multiple hands as well),justasearlier,inDonizo’sdescriptionoftheBattleofTricontainotedabove,one«knight»stoodformanyknights.Thisexplainswhythe verb «asportant» in the following line is plural66.Modern editors and translators have not always fully appreciated the in-tent of the marginalia accompanying this line. While Bethmann tran-scribedthemarginalnotetoline999,67 and Davoli’s translation made theavariciouscitizenplural,68 later editors and translators generally de-clinedtoreckonwithDonizo’ssyllepsis.FollowingMuratori,Simeonilooked instead to the Epitome Parmense’s prose adaptation of the line for clarificationofthemeaning;hesuggestedthatasinglecitizenhadbothseized Bernard and dragged him outside.69 Golinelli’s edition presented further challenges to both sense and meter by incorrectly rendering the punctuation mark that follows «asportant» as an «i»70.These two instances of syllepsis are nevertheless keys to understanding Vat. lat.4922’smarginalia.Aboveall, theyprovethat themarginaliaare not corrections. Corrections in this manuscript have been made by erasureandinterlinearnote;apheresisandsyllepsis,bycontrast,didnotneed to be corrected because they are not errors per se. They could be tolerated,andevenconsideredlaudable,especiallyinpoetry.Donatushad suggested asmuchwhenhe had defined syllepsis as a figure of

66 Theverb«asportant»alsolacksadirectobject,butthefactthatthecorrectorspeci-fied«singularis pro plurali» indicates that this is not the sort of syllepsis he had in mind.67 Bethmann (Donizone 1856, 399) also indicated the Reggio codex’s variant,«asportat».68 «E quegli avari cittadini gittarongli le mani addosso, lo trasportarono fuori»: Davoli (Donizone,VitadellagrandecontessaMatilde,1888),217.CompareGrimaldi(Do-nizone,IlCantorediMatilde,1928),112.69 Simeoni(Donizone1940,89)citedMuratori’sobservationthattheEpitome Par-mensereads,«Unde unus de civibus avarus iniecit manum super dictum Cardinalem, et foris de dicta ecclesia eum asportavit».70 Golinelli(Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,2008),II.14,l.1000.


148

speechandlisteditamongstotherrhetoricalvirtues;hehadmadethepointexplicitinthecaseofapheresis,whichhedescribedasachangein spelling (metaplasm) that could occur for the sake of either meter or ornament.71CommentatorsonDonatus’sworksuchasServiusexplai-ned the theory in still more detail: what distinguished virtue from vice inthesecaseswas intent.Performedunknowingly,adeparturefromgrammaticalnormswastobeavoided;performedknowingly,thesamedeparture could be commended.72 The marginalia in Vat. lat. 4922 thus broadcastDonizo’sintent.Theysignalnotjustthatheisusingafigureofspeech,butthatheisconsciouslyusingafigureofspeech–afactthatisworthmentioninginthemarginsevenofapresentationcodex.Hismarginaliathenarenotcorrections,butliterarysignpoststhatchartthetrue path through his poem’s rhetorical landscape. When these margi-naliaareneglected,thatpathbecomesobscured.Each of the remaining three marginalia in Vat. lat. 4922 points out a furtherinstanceofaferesis.Oneoccursinthefirstchapterofthefirstbook of the Vita Mathildis(fol.13r),whichdealswiththeheroicdeedsof Matilda’s ancestors. The passage describes how Queen Adelaide of Lombardy escaped from Berengar of Ivrea in the year 951. Seeking a refuge,AdelaideinstructedherfaithfulchaplainMartintopetitionthebishopofReggioforhelp.Martincautiouslyapproachedthebishop,whoinquiredaboutthestatusofthequeen:

Presul ut agnovit, de regina rogat, o quid [186] Est factum? quaeso michi narra, discere spero.

Thebishoprealizedthis:heasks,«Owhathappened Tothequeen?Tellme,Ibeseechyou,Ihopetolearn».

Thelinesareadmittedlyawkward,inDonizo’ssignaturefashion,but

71 DonatusA.,Ars maior, 660-661 (apheresis) and 664 (syllepsis).72 Servius,In Donati artem maiorem,HeinrichKeil(ed.),1855-1880,vol.4,421-448;The Fourth Grammatical Treatise,CluniesRossM.,WellendorfJ.(eds.)2014.,xxvi.


149

the pertinent word for present purposes is «rogat». Paired marks beside it and the «aferesis»inthemarginoffol.13rconfirmthataprefixhasbeenexcisedfromthisverbaswell.IntheVita Mathildis asawhole,theonlyprefixusedbeforeanyformoftheverbrogare is «inter-»,anditonlyappearsonce.Itisfoundinaparallelconstructionsixteenlineslaterinthesamechapter,inwhichMatilda’sgreat-grandfatherAdal-berto Azzo asks Martin about the fate of Queen Adelaide in a very similar fashion:

Verbo quem largo princeps interrogat Atto [203] Quid de regina factum sit, quo73 sibi dicat.

Prince Atto asks him at length Whathappenedtothequeen,thathemighttellhim.

The distinction between rogat and interrogatmightseeminconsequen-tial,whichmaybewhyBethmanndeclinedtotranscribethismargi-nal note. Donizo however might have wanted to distinguish rhetorical questioningfrominterrogation,especiallysincethechaplainishidingsomething.ForMartininitially lies—firsttothebishopandlatertoAzzo—bysayingthatAdelaideisdead,inordertoverifyhisquestio-ners’sincerity.OnlyafterMartinseestheirtearsflowdoeshetellthemthetruthandrevealtheplightofthefugitivequeen[Vita MathildisII.1,ll. 186-208].Bethmann either failed to notice or simply disregarded the remaining twomarginalnotesinVat. lat.4922,andothermoderneditorshavedone the same. They are admittedly faint and easy to overlook. But the careful copyist who produced the manuscript for the monks of Frassi-noro(nowLucca2508)in1234noticedthem,andanexaminationofbothaffirmsthattheytooarerhetoricalsignposts.Eachofthetwoinvolvesanothercaseofaferesis.Thefirstappearsin

73 Thecorrectorglossesthe«quo» with «pro ut».


150

theprologue,line53,asDonizoisextollingMatilda’sgoodqualities.74 The passage begins with an enumeration of the cardinal and theologi-calvirtues,afterwhichthescribehaswritten,

Ista legit totas probitatis iure coronas.

Donizo however has written «aferesis est» in the margin, indicatingthat the verb «legit» has been subjected to aferesis. The verb intended is obviously «collegit»,because–asinDonizo’sothercasesofaferesis–thefull verb can easily be found in the nearby lines: it appears in the future tense («colliget») only three lines earlier (l. 50). In light of the marginal note, the linebecomesmuchsimplerandeasier tounderstand than itsometimes appears in modern translations. Donizo is merely saying this:

She justly collected all crowns of righteousness.

The sameverb is also the subjectof the lastofDonizo’smarginalia,which appears on fol. 16r of the Vatican manuscript. The setting of this passage is that Otto the Great has marched into Italy and defeated the rebelkingofItaly,BerengarofIvrea.Thescribewrites:

Gens Alemanna capit Berengerium, superatis Tunc Longobardis, campum legit Otto, retraxit Illico frena retro, gaudens de rege retento.

Donizo’s very faint marginal note indicates that the line contains ano-thercaseofaferesis.Onceagain,theverb«collegit» has been shortened to «legit»inordertofitthemetre:

74 Vat.lat.4922,fol.9r.


151

TheGermannationcapturesBerengar, Then,withtheLombardsovercome,Ottobrokecamp, Hepulledhisbridlesbackfromthere,gladtohavecapturedtheking75.

Conclusions

What light then do Donizo’s neglected notations shed on the Battle ofTricontai?Somedetailsoftheencountermustremainobscure,butothersfinallycomeintofocuswhenoneconsidersallthemanuscript’smarginalia, togetherwithbattle’sphysical andhumangeography,aswellasthepoem’sprosodyandproseepitomes.Collectively,thesein-dicatethatwhicheverwayHenrytraversedtheAdigeRiver,Matilda’sforces crossed both it and the Po to get to him. This is the point Donizo is making with his crucial «necnon»,andthepointthatisunfortunatelylost in the editions of the poem that truncate this word and neglect the marginalia. Matilda’s soldiers chased the Emperor across the Po «and even»theAdige.ThisalsoexplainswhyMatilda’stroopsweresoner-vous that they had to be reassured by a comrade native to the region –whounfortunatelyforthemturnedouttobeatraitor–thatthekingdid not have the means to meet them there in battle. Traversing the fords of the Adige was more dangerous than crossing the wider waters ofthePobecause,especiallyafterthefallofMinervia,theAdigeessen-tially marked the natural limit of Matilda’s military power. To soldiers fromCanossa,itwastheRubicon.Vat. lat. 4922’s marginalia both merit and reward careful attention. In

75 Vat.lat.4922,fol.16r.TheLuccamanuscript(2508,fol.8v)repositionstheword«aferesis» above «retraxit»,andindeedinVat.lat.4922,thelatterwordappearsinab-breviated form as «retrax».However,themetreandassonanceofthelineclarifythat«legit» rather than «retraxit» is the subject of the aferesis.


152

addition to explaining the two armies’maneuvers leadingup to thebattle,theyrenderotherpassagesinthepoemmoreintelligibleaswell,revealing for example thatMatilda’s forces sufferedmore than a to-kencasualtyattheBattleofTricontai,andexplainingtheprecisecir-cumstances of Bernard’s ejection from the cathedral of Parma. Perhaps mostimportantly,themarginaliaprovethatDonizowasmoreawareofhispoem’sobscuritiesthanthestandardeditionofhistextsuggests.Appreciationofthisfactmaynotrehabilitatehisreputationasapoet,but those who ignore the beacons he left behind to guide us can hardly blame him when they become lost in the depths of his rhetoric. Donizo left us these marginalia in order to light our path through that darkness.

Bibliography

ManuscriptsLucca,BibliotecaStatale(olimGovernativa),MS2508.

Mantua,BibliotecaComunale,MS243(B.IV.17).

ReggioEmilia,BibliotecaComunale“Panizzi”,MSTurriE52.

VaticanCity,BibliotecaApostolicaVaticana,MSVat.lat.4922.

Primary sources and TranslationsBede,De schematibus et tropis,KendallC.B.(ed.),CorpusChristianorum,SeriesLa-tina123A,Turnhout:Brepols,1975,142-171.

Die Urkunden Heinrichs IV., GladissD.von,GawlikA.(eds.),MonumentaHistoriaeGermanica,Diplomata6:1-3,WeimarandHannover,1941-78.

Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde von Tuszien,GoezE.,GoezW.(eds.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Laienfursten-undDynastenurkundenderKai-serzeitII,Hannover:Hahnsche,1998.

DonatusA.,Ars maior: Donat et la tradition de l’enseignement grammatical: Étude sur l’Ars Donati et sa diffusion (ive-ixe siècle) et édition critique,HoltzL.(ed.),Paris:Cen-treNationaldelaRechercheScientifique,1981.


153

Donizone,Vita Mathildis comitissae, celeberrimae principis Italiae, Rerum ItalicarumScriptoresV,Muratori L.A. (ed.),Milan:Ex typographia societatis palatinae inregiacuria,1724,335-397.

Donizone,Vita Mathildis comitissae, celeberrimae principis Italiae,Patrologiaecursuscom-pletus,SeriesLatinaCXLVIII,coll.939-1036,MigneJ.P.(ed.),Paris:Migne,1853.

Donizone,Vita Mathildis,MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica, ScriptoresXII, 348-409,BethmannL.(ed.),Hannover:Hahnsche,1856.

Donizone,Vita della grande contessa Matilde di Canossa,Davoli F. (trans.),ReggioEmilia:StabilimentotipograficoelitograficodegliArtigianelli,1888.

Donizone,Donizone, Il Cantore di Matilde e dei Principi Canusini,GrimaldiN.(trans.),ReggioEmilia:Bizzocchi,1928.

Donizone,Vita Mathildis celeberrimae principis Italiae: Carmine scripta a Donizone pre-sbytero,SimeoniL.(ed.),RerumItalicarumScriptores,nuovaedizione5.2,Bolo-gna:NicolaZanichelli,1940.

Donizone,Matilde e Canossa: Il Poema di Donizone,BellocchiU.,MarziG. (eds.),Modena:AedesMuratoriana,1970.

Donizone,La Vita di Matilde di Canossa, Codice Vaticano latino 4922,PaoloGolinelli(ed. and trans.),Milan: JacaBook (Italian edition);Golinelli P. (ed.), JaneckA.(trans.),Zurich:BelserVerlag(Germanedition),1984.

Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,GolinelliP.(ed.andtrans.),Milan:JacaBook,2008.

GloriaA.(ed.),Codice Diplomatico Padovano: dal secolo sesto a tutto l’undecimo,Monumen-tistorici,Deputazionevenetadistoriapatria,ser.1,Documenti,no.2,Venice,1877.

JulianofToledo,Ars Iuliani Toletani episcopi: Una gramática Latina de la España Visi-goda,ed.M.MaestreYenes,Toledo:InstitutoProvincialdeInvestigacionesyEstu-diosToledanos,1973.

Livy,Titi Livi ab urbe condita libri,WeissenbornW.andMullerM.(eds.),Stuttgart:Teubner,1966.

OrdericVitalis,The Ecclesiastical History of Orderic Vitalis,MarjorieChibnall(ed.andtrans.),Oxford:ClarendonPress,1969.

Servius:MaurusServiusHonoratus, In Donati artem maiorem, inGrammatici Latini,HeinrichKeil(ed.),Leipzig:Teubner,1855-1880,vol.4,421-448.

The Fourth Grammatical Treatise,CluniesRossM.,WellendorfJ.(eds.),London:Vi-kingSocietyforNorthernResearch,2014.

Vergil:PubliusVergiliusMaro,Bucolics, Aeneid, and Georgics,J.B.Greenough(ed.),Boston:GinnandCo.,1900.


154

Secondary sourcesEadsV.2010,The Last Italian Expedition of Henry IV: Re-reading the Vita Mathildis of

Donizone of Canossa«JournalofMedievalMilitaryHistory»,VIII:23-68

GhirardiniL.L.1987,La voce immortale di Canossa: Studio critico sul celebre monaco poeta Donizone,Modena:AedesMuratoriana.

HayD.J.2008,The Military Leadership of Matilda of Tuscany, 1046-1115,Manchester:Manchester University Press.

RippeG. 2003,Padoue et son contado (Xe-XIIIe siècle), Rome: École Française deRome.

RiversiE.2013,La memoria di Canossa: Saggi di contestualizzazione della Vita Mathil-dis di Donizone,Pisa:EdizioniETS.

SchwartzG.1993,Die Besetzung der Bistümer Reichsitaliens unter den sächsischen und salischen Kaisern mit den Listen der Bischöfe, 951-1122,Leipzig,1913;reprintSpole-to: Fondazione Centro italiano di studi sull’alto medioevo.

VignodelliG.2011,Il Filo a piombo: Il Perpendiculum di Attone di Vercelli e la storia politica del regno italico, Spoleto: Fondazione Centro italiano di studi sull’alto Me-dioevo.

VignodelliG.2016,Politics, prophecy and satire: Atto of Vercelli’s Polipticumquodap-pellaturperpendiculum«EarlyMedievalEurope»,24(2):210-235.

This article investigates the relationship between Matilda of Tuscany and her spiritual advi-sor Anselm of Lucca during the tumultuous period of the Investiture Controversy. The con-temporary sources – two Vitae of Anselm of Lucca and Donizo’s Vita Matildis – highlight both the spiritual and the secular dimension of this friendship. Furthermore, the bishop of Lucca’s five Prayers written for the countess uncover a new aspect of Anselm and Matilda’s relationship. In these texts Anselm, while expressing a novel devotion to Christ and to the Virgin Mary, shows the origin and goal of his fatherly direction for Matilda. Anselm’s novel devotion seems to have been triggered by the life and mission of Countess Matilda, generated by their common obedience to Gregory VII, and influenced by the Eucharistic Controversy, with which Anselm was associated.

introduction

«As Jesusdyingon thecrosshadentrustedhismother tohisdiscipleJohn,thusPopeGregory[VII]entrustedthelady,CountessMatilda[ofTuscany] to Anselm [of Lucca]».1 Of the countless people recorded in

1 Vita Mathildis,2,vv.284-286,385.Unlessotherwisenotedalltranslationsaremyown.

Nihil Terrenum, Nihilque Carnale in Ea: Matilda of Tuscany and anselm of lucca during the investiture Controversy

FRanCesCa GueRRiUniversity of Houston, History Department


156

Donizo’s Vita Mathildis,AnselmofLuccaranksasoneofthemostsi-gnificant.Hewasnotonlythefriendbutalsothespiritualadvisorofthecountess during the tumultuous period of the Investiture Controversy. Thecontemporarysources–twoVitae of Anselm of Lucca and Doni-zo’s Vita Matildis2–highlightboththespiritualandtheseculardimen-sionsofthisfriendship.Furthermore,thebishopofLucca’sfivePrayers written for the countess reveal various aspects of Anselm and Matilda’s relationship.InthesetextsAnselm,whileexpressinganoveldevotiontoChristandtotheVirginMary,3 shows the goal and origin of his fatherly directionforMatilda.ButwhatwasMatilda’spolitical,spiritual,andide-ologicalprogram,andhowwasitinfluencedbyAnselm’sspiritualgui-dance?WerethePrayers designed specially for Matilda’s personality and needs?WhatwasitthatenabledAnselmtodevelopthesenewideas?Inordertoanswerthesequestions,itisessentialtoinvestigatethebishopofLucca’s education and background and to read his Prayers and the other aforementionedsourcesagainstthelargerculturalsetting,involvingnotonly the Gregorian but also the Anglo-Norman tradition. I argue that the comparison between the Virgin Mary and Matilda developed by the two Vitae and by Donizo was encouraged by Anselm himself and firstarticulatedinhisPrayers;atthesametime,Anselm’snoveldevotionseems to have been triggered by the life and mission of Countess Ma-tilda,generatedintheobediencetoGregoryVII,andinfluencedbytheEucharisticControversy,withwhichAnselmwasassociated.The relationship between Anselm and Matilda began and developed during the critical periodof open conflict betweenEmperorHenryIV and Pope Gregory VII (1076-1086). The evidence for their rela-tionshipisscatteredinvarioussources.ThefirstVita Anselmi episcopi Lucensis was commissioned by Matilda and written anonymously in

2 Vita Anselmi,13-35;Vita metrica, 1152-1307;Vita Mathildis,348-409.3 AnselmIIofLucca,Prayers,inWilmart1938.

FrANCeSCA GUerriNihil Terrenum, Nihilque Carnale in Ea: Matilda of Tuscany and Anselm of Lucca

157

prose one year after Anselm’s death in 1086.4 The writer’s aims were both to describe Anselm as a strenuous defender of reform and to obtain his canonization.5For the same reasons,Rangerius,bishopofLucca after Anselm (1087-1112) dedicated to Matilda Vita metrica san-cti Anselmi Lucensis episcopis,writteninverse,probablybetween1096and 1099 [Saverino 1992, 223-272;Amari 2015].Rangerius followsthe previous Vita, eventhoughheexpandsandenrichesitwithnewfacts [Cushing 1998,3-4]. Finally,thecountess’sbiographer,Donizo,wrote Vita Mathildis between 1112 and 1115. The illuminated manu-script,written in leonine hexameter, provides amoralizing descrip-tion of the life of the countess and her ancestors. Donizo recounts the achievements of the Canossa dynasty and praises the countess as being responsible for the survival of the reforming ideas [Golinelli 2008]. A more personal and emotional tone emerges inAnselm’s fivePrayers writtenforMatilda,6 and in a passage of Anselm’s Book against Wibert.7 It is important to analyze these sources taking into account the broader culturalsettinginwhichMatildaandAnselmlived,inordertocom-prehend their motivations and contribution to the events of their time.

Matilda and her family

To better understand the relationship between the pope’s canonist and thegrandcountess,itisessentialtolookatthebackgroundofMatilda’s

4 Formoredetailsregardingthisworksee:Pasztor1960,1-33;1992,207-222;Go-linelli1987,16-26;1988,118-155.5 ForthestructureofthisworkseeGolinelli1988,117-155.6 AnselmIIofLucca,Prayers,inWilmart1938.7 AnselmIIofLucca,Liber contra Wibertum.


158

family,especially itspolitical andreligious tradition.8 Countess Matilda of Tuscany (1046-1115) was the daughter of Boniface of Tuscany and BeatriceofLorraine.HermotherwasthedaughterofMatildaofSwabia,sisterofEmpressGisela,andFrederickII,dukeofUpperLorraine[Barto-lini1965].EmperorHenryIIIandHenryIVwereMatilda’sfirstandse-condcousins[Golinelli2007,84-94].9 Her father was the heir to the great Canossadynasty,celebratedbyDonizoinhispoemdedicatedtoMatilda.ThefortunesofAttoofCanossa,theprogenitorofthefamily,beganwithhisloyaltytoEmperorOttoIofGermany,analliancethatallo-wedAttotoextendandenhancehispower.Indeed,Atto’sacquisitionof thetitleofcountover threeterritories–ReggioEmilia,Modena,andMantua(January962)–coincidedwiththeriseoftheemperor’spowerinItalyin961[Fumagalli1971,74-77].10Atto’sson,Tedaldo,supported the rise of Emperor Henry II of Germany and by this means acquired Ferrara and founded themonastery of Polirone inMantua[Golinelli 2007, 50-56].11 Tedaldo’s son, Boniface, Matilda’s father,continued the tradition of the family and received the title of duke ofTuscany fromEmperorConrad II.WithBoniface, thecentersofthe Canossa’s territory became Mantua and the monastery of Polirone [Golinelli2007,65-69;Bartolini1970,108].The partnership between the Canossa family and the papacy became animportantfeatureofthispowerfuldynasty,thankstothereligiousconviction ofMatilda’s mother. Indeed, through Beatrice, Bonifacebecameclosetothekeyfiguresofthenewecclesiasticalreformingpar-ty:PopeLeoIX,PeterDamian,HumbertofSilvaCandida,andGuido

8 FormoredetailsaboutthelifeofMatildaofTuscanysee:Golinelli2015;2009;2007;Fumagalli1996;Duff1909;Huddy1906;Tosti1859.9 Vita Mathildis,1,vv.781-794,367;vv.1140-1206;374-376.10 FortheoriginsoftheCanossafamilysee:Robinson2004,48-49;Golinelli2008IX-XVI,241-251;2007,19-64;SergiG.1994,29-40;Fumagalli1971.11 Ibidemvv.439-443,361.


159

ofPomposa[Golinelli2007,32-36;Fumagalli1999,15-18;D’Acunto1999,298-305].Inthisperiodthepope,togetherwiththepapalreformmovement,wasclosetoEmperorHenryIII,whowasconsideredanimportant ally in the advancement of the ideals of the reform against si-monyandclericalmarriage.Likewise,hispowerwasneededinordertofreetheChurchfromthethreatofthearistocraticRomanfamilies,whoused to manipulate the election of the popes in their favor [Cowdrey 1998,1-37].TheharmonybetweentheempireandtheCanossalinea-gewasupsetwhenBonifacediedin1052,andaftertwoyearsBeatricemarriedGodfrey theBearded,dukeofUpperLorraine,without theemperor’s knowledge. The powerful duke was an enemy of Henry III whopromptlyimprisonedBeatriceinGermany;shewouldbereleasedonlyatthedeathofHenryIII[D’Acunto1999,305].Theemperor’syoungson,HenryIV,wasunabletoprovideassistanceandprotectiontotheChurch,andforthisreason,thereformingpartywasforcedtopursuenewsupporters,andGodfreyofLorrainewasperfectlyfitforthis task. This change in the political alignments of the German empire favoredtheCanossa-Lorrainelineage,whichbecamethemosttirelessprotectorandallyof thepapacy[Golinelli1991,199;Lazzari2012].Itisnotbychancethatthereformedpopes,StephenIX(1057-1058),Nicholas (1058-1061), and PopeAlexander II (1061-1073),were alltiedtothenewmargraveofTuscany,owingtheirelectiontothiscon-nection[Cowdrey1998,37-59;Robinson2004,4-5,10]. At Godfrey theBearded’sdeath,BeatricereplacedherhusbandasmargraveofTu-scany,andunderherjurisdiction,theconnectionbetweenthepapa-cy and the powerful dynasty became stronger [Robinson 2004,10-17;Golinelli2007,151-157].Between1069and1073,althoughtheystillsoughttheapprovaloftheemperor,BeatriceandMatildafosteredtheadvancementoftheidealsof the reform movement. Matilda and Beatrice were both vassals of the Germanemperor and related tohimbybloodbut at the same time,they were close to the reform movement and the papacy. Beatrice and


160

Matilda served asprudentmediators,mainlyduring thefirstyearsoftheconflictbetweenyoungEmperorHenryIVandPopeGregoryVII,a role that was facilitated by the strategic location of their domains in centralItaly[Golinelli1991,195-206].Forexample,thenewlyelectedpopeaskedthemtowork,togetherwithEmpressAgnes,topersuadetheemperortoremovetheexcommunicatedcounselorsfromhiscourtsand make peace with Rome.12 Beatrice and Matilda also mediated on be-halfofthepapacy,intheongoingconflictbetweenthePatariaandthearchbishopofMilan[Robinson2004,14-15;Golinelli2007,151-157].

anselm and his background

The strong alliance between the reform papacy and the Canossa-Lor-raine familywould connectMatilda andAnselm II, bishop of Luc-ca(1040-1086).Certainly,BeatriceandGodfreytheBeardedbecameclosetohisuncle,AnselmIofLucca–laterPopeAlexanderII–whentheysupportedhisstruggleforthechairofSt.Peter,whichhadbeenchallengedbytheantipopeCadalusofParma,theappointeeoftheim-perial court [Cowdrey 1998, 49-53].13 The details of Anselm’s early life,hisfamily,andhiseducationaremostlyunknown;thefewknownfactsaredisseminated invarious sources.Born inMilan in1040,hisfamily was part of the city’s nobility.14 It was probably his illustrious unclewhotookresponsibilityforAnselm’seducation,directinghim,

12 FortherelationshipbetweenMatildaandPopeGregoryVIIandMatilda’sroleofmediatorbetweenpopeandemperorsee:Golinelli1991;also,GregoryVII’sRegi-strum, in Cowdrey 2002.13 BonizoofSutri,Book to a Friend,inRobinson2004,196-219.14 Vita Metrica, vv.1-12,1157;Violante1961;Cushing1998,43-44,Keller1992,29-34;FormoredetailsonAnselm’slifesee:Rota,1773;Pasztor1960;1964;1987;1992;Golinelli1987;Violante1992;Cushing1998;Brunelli2008.


161

atfirst,towardtheCathedralofMilan,15 where he studied grammar and dialectic.16The subsequentprogressofAnselm’s education ishard topinpoint,andisasubjectofdiscussionsamongscholars.However,hispath and career probably followed the pattern of many northern Italian scholars of the eleventh century, likeLanfrancofPavia andAnselmofAosta,who, asCowdrey argues,began their educations inMilanandtheninvolved«traveltodistantlands»,inordertocontinuetheirstudyorfindavocationthatwouldhavebeendifficulttofindinItaly[Cowdrey1972,115].KathleenCushingargues:«Anyattempttoun-derstand the world in which Anselm grew to maturity is caught up in the larger problem of determining what precisely was occurring in northernItaly,especiallyintermsofintellectualdevelopments».17 ThefirstevidenceconnectingAnselmtoNormandyandBecisthefactthathisuncle,PopeAlexander II,hadhimselfbeenLanfranc’spupiland that they worked closely and harmoniously during their lifetimes [Cushing1998, 46-48;Cowdrey2003, 21-23;Vaughn,Rubenstein,2006, 341].There are also some suggestions thatAnselm II himselfcouldhavebeenLanfranc’sstudent;however,thesourcesarenotcon-clusive on this matter.18 We also know that Anselm had been in contact withWilliamIofEngland,throughaletterthathewrotetothekingin 1085 asking for military support for the Church and Gregory VII. In this letter Anselm refers to the presumed help that the Norman king hadrepeatedlyprovidedhiminthepast:«However,Iammindfulofthebenefitsthatyourbenevolencehadbestowedonme».19 Despite this evidence,theexactlinkbetweenAnselmIIandtheNormanworldis

15 Vita Anselmi,c.74,33;Violante1961;Cushing1998,43-44.16 Vita Anselmi,c.2,13.17 Cushing1998,45.18 For thisdebate see:Borino1956,361-374;Keller1992,27-50;Cushing1998,45-48;Cowdrey2003,19-24.19 AnselmIIofLucca,lettertoWilliamIofEngland,1085.


162

hard tonail down;however, froman investigationof thebishopofLucca’sworkandthefewsourcesforhislife,itwouldseemlikelythatAnselm was in contact with the new intellectual ideas developed at Bec by Lanfranc and by Anselm of Canterbury. Anselm’scareerasaGregorianbishopbeganwhenhisuncle,PopeAle-xanderII,nominatedhimashissuccessorinthebishopricofLuccain1073.20ThiscitywasthecapitalofthedomainsofBeatriceandMatilda,andassuchplayedapivotalroleintheexerciseoftheirpower.Theytherefore felt an urgency to place a loyal bishop in the seat of Lucca and pressed thenewpope,GregoryVII, to appointAnselm.21 When the popeandtheemperorreconciledatthebeginningof1074,Anselmre-ceived permission from Rome to accept the investiture from the hands of the emperor.22 HewasconsecratedbythepopeinSeptember1074,butsoonthereafter,GregoryVIIprohibitedlayinvestituresduringtheLentenSynodof1075.Subsequently,inMayofthesameyear,Anselmregretted his imperial obedience and decided to withdraw from the worldtotheabbeyofSt.Gilles.Thepeaceofthecontemplativelife,forwhichhehadyearned,didnotlastlong.Attheendof1075,Gregoryrecalledhimandconsecratedhim,ex novo,bishopandmonk.23 At the beginningof1076,hereturnedtohisepiscopalseeinLucca.BothVi-tae emphasize Anselm’s unconditional obedience to Pope Gregory VII.

20 ForAnselm’scareerseealso:Violante1992; Golinelli 1987; Pasztor1960;1992;Cushing1998,55-63.RegardingAnselm’sinvestituresee:Vita Anselmi,cc.3-9,14-15;Vita Metrica,1176-1179;Violante1961;Fiorentini1756,140;Cushing1998,48-55;GregoryVII,Registrum,I,21,inCowdrey2002,25-26;Violante1961.21 GregoryVII,Registrum 1,11,inCowdrey2002,11-12.22 Vita Anselmi,c.3,14; Cushing1998,49-52.23 Vita Metrica, vv.1443-1446, 1187.


163

Pope Gregory Vii, Countess Matilda, and anselm during the investiture Controversy

This obedience held the countess and the new bishop together through themostcriticalmomentofthewarbetweenHenryIVandGregory,whichbeganwithGregory’sunexpectedexcommunicationanddepo-sition of the emperor in 1076.24Inthesameyear,Matilda’smotherandherhusbanddied,andthecountessinheritedavastdomainstretchingfromtheregionofLatiumtonorthernItaly,whichsheruled inherownright.Thepope’ssignificantchangeofdirectioninthehistoryofchurch reform led to a total rupture in his relationship with Henry and compelledMatildatoabandonherroleasmediator;sheembracedenti-relythecauseofthereformingparty,thusdepartingfromthepoliticaltraditionofher family.During thisdifficult time,Matildadidn’t actinisolation;onthecontrary,shewasassistedbyherspiritualdirectorAnselmII,whowasentrustedtoherbyGregoryVII[Golinelli1991,205;2007,232-239;Wilmart1938,23-48].Indeed,afterthereconciliationofCanossain1077,Anselmbecameaman of crucial importance in the development of the ideals of the re-formandavigorousallyofthepope;itwasinthisperiodthathewasappointed permanent legate of the Holy See in Lombardy [Cushing 1998,44-63].Atthesametime,Anselm,asbishopofLucca,triedtoimpose thepracticesof chastity, communal life, and renunciationofpersonal property on the secular clergy of the city.25GregoryfullysupportedAnselmandhismission,andhewenttoLuccain1076 toexhort thecanons toobey theirbishop; in1077-1078hereproachedtheclergyfornotobeyingthepapalstrictures,andexcom-municated them in 1079 for plotting against Anselm and for their per-sistentdisobedience.Likewise,Matildawasworkingwiththebishop

24 Simeoni1947,353-372.25 Formoredetailsonthissubjectsee:Pasztor1987;Cushing1998, 43-63;Golinelli2007,232-239;Puglia2013, III-21.


164

ofLuccainhisefforttoreformhisdiocese.Toaccomplishthisintent,between 1077 and 1080 the bishop attempted to reorganize the bi-shopricandtoreacquireitspropertythathadpreviouslybeenusurpedby the episcopal tenants.26 He received from Matilda numerous terri-tories plus military and moral assistance.27 Even though Matilda used her army and her spiritual authority to ensure the success of Anselm’s mission,thebishopofLucca’sprojecttoreformthecanonsendedinfailure.Moreover, theyear1080provedtobeextremelydifficult forboth Matilda and the papal party. InMarchGregoryexcommunicatedHenryIVforthesecondtime,andthekingpromptlyrespondedbyelecting the anti-popeClement III, the bishopofRavenna,Wibert.These dramatic events followed the famous battle of Volta Mantovana in1080,inwhichthetroopsoftheschismaticbishopsinnorthernItalydefeated Matilda’s army.28Atthesametime,inGermany,theanti-kingRudolfofSwabia–electedbyHenry’senemiesandanallyofthepope–diedinthenotoriousbattleontheElsterRiver.HenryenteredLuccaonJuly25th,1081,andwhilegrantingitscitizensnumerousprivileges,declaredCountessMatildaguiltyofhigh treason and confiscated allherdomains.Thecanons,alliedwiththetroopsofthenewanti-popeClementIII,defeatedthecountessandexiledAnselm,whotookrefugewith Matilda’s entourage. The other cities of Tuscany and the Lom-bardvassalsfollowedLucca’sexampleandrebelledagainstthecountess.Numerous contemporary sources identify Anselm as the most diligent imitator of Gregory VII. An important evidence of this discipleship can be found in the Collectio Canonum,writtenbyAnselmatthebehestofthepopeandconceivedastheofficialdefenseoftheGregorianar-guments concerning the relationship between regnum and sacerdotium.

26 Onthismattersee:Spicciani1992,65-112;Fonseca1992,51-64;Cushing1998,58-61.27 Vita Anselmi,cc.6-10,15-16;Vita metrica,vv.1443-1763,1187-1193.28 Ghirardini1987,229-240;Eads2000,129.


165

InspiredbytheholyfathersoftheChurch,Anselmdefendedthepo-werandtheprimacyofthepopeoverthewholeofChristendom;ac-cordingly,hestressedtheconceptofobedience,adutyowedbythefaithful,fromwhichunitydepended.Anselm’sconclusionforesawde iusta vindicta;i.e.,theseverepersecutionandcorrectionofdisobedien-ce,whichbecamethemoral justification for theuseofviolenceandwar in religious controversies. The concepts laid out by Anselm were the cornerstone of the Gregorian ideals.29

Matilda and the Virgin Mary

InthesourcesIexamined,MatildaisdescribedasthebrideofChrist,andher life is compared to Mary’s. Ropa and Golinelli have analyzed this crucialcomparisoningreatdepth,andtheirvaluableargumentswerecrucial for my research. They focused mainly on Anselm’s and Matil-da’sofficialbiographerstoexaminethiscomparison.Myinvestigation,whilepayingdueattentiontotheworkofthebiographers,relatesthe-se Marian images to the content of Anselm’s Prayers. For the analysis of the Prayers IdrewmainlyfromtheworksofCantelliandFulton,whose important studies focusedprimarilyonAnselmand identifiedhim as a great innovator in the tradition of Marian devotion and doc-trine.However,theydidnotlookintotheoriginofAnselm’sinnova-tion and the role of Matilda in this accomplishment. By analyzing the aforementionedsources,togetherwiththelargerbackgroundofboththeGregorianandtheAnglo-Normanworlds,Iarguethatthiscom-parisonbetweenMaryandMatildawas inspiredbyAnselmandfirstexpressedinhisPrayers;Anselm’snoveldevotionseemstohavebeentriggeredbythelifeandmissionofCountessMatilda,generatedby

29 FormoredetailsontheCollectio Canonum see:Stickler1947, 235-285;Pasztor1964,91-115;Robinson2004,354;Cushing1998,43-142.


166

theircommonobediencetoGregoryVIIandinfluencedbyAnselm’sinvolvement with the Eucharistic Controversy. Aswehaveseen,thecloserelationshipbetweenAnselmandMatildabegananddevelopedduringthecriticalperiodofopenconflictbetwe-en Emperor Henry IV and Pope Gregory VII (1076). As Paolo Go-linelli has argued, itwas probably at this criticalmoment, inwhichMatilda found herself alone after the loss of both her mother and her husband,thatGregoryentrustedhertothecareofAnselm.Accordingto Vita Anselmi:

Andsothat[Matilda],alone,wouldnotsuccumbshewasentrustedtothespiritualandcharitablecareoftheaforementionedbishopofLucca,Anselm:amostfaithfuldiscipletoamosttrustworthyteacher,aswhenJesus on the cross entrusted his virginmother to his virgin disciple,saying:“Woman,behold,yourson!”andtothedisciple,“Behold,yourmother”.30

Likewise,Donizosays:«[...]AsJesusdyingonthecrosshadentrustedhismothertohisdiscipleJohn,PopeGregory[VII]entrustedthelady,Countess Matilda to Anselm [of Lucca]».31 This passage referring to theGospelofJohn[1:27] introducesakeyaspectoftherelationshipbetween Anselm and Matilda and can be read on various levels. The directparallelsbetweenJesusandGregoryVII,MaryandMatilda,andJohnandAnselmiscrucial[Golinelli1987,48].InobeyingGregoryVII,MatildaandAnselmobey Jesushimself.Matilda iscompared totheVirginMary,motherofJesus,motheroftheChurch,andmother

30 «Atque, ne tanquam sola deficiat custodienda commendatur praescripto Lucensi episcopo sancto Anselmo, commendatur, inquam, omni diligentia et affectu charitatis, commendatur a beatissimo magistro fidelissimo discipulo, sicut in cruce Christus matrem virginem virgini discipulo commendavit: Mater, inquiens, ecce filius tuus; ad discipulum autem: Ecce mater tua […]»: Vita Anselmi, c.12,17.31 «Gregorius presul Romanus, ut egit Iesus In cruce qui moriens dat discipulo genitricem, Commisit dominam sic Anselmo comitissam»: Vita Mathildis,2,vv.284-286,385.


167

ofallChristianity[Ropa1979,25-51].Inthisway,GregoryentruststoMatilda the defense of the Church and of the Christians. My argument will be that the new role and prominence of the Virgin introduced by Anselm II in his Prayers was mainly inspired by the life ofthecountess.Matilda,liketheVirgin,hadanactiveroleinhistory,effectedbyher«yes»toGod(inthepersonofGregoryVII),bywhichshesavedtheworldfromevil.Matilda’scrucialrolesofintercessor,pro-tectorofallpersecutedChristians,andtirelessdefenderofthechurch,was indeedcomparable toMary’s roles as intercessor,protector, andlovingmother. Indeed,Anselmmentions theabove-citedpassageoftheGospel of John three times in hisPrayers forMatilda,where hedescribes the Virgin as a mother and Christians as «adopted children».AsSilviaCantelli andAndréWilmart argue,Anselmwrote threeofthe PrayerstoprepareMatilda’ssoultoreceiveHolyCommunion,andtheothertwotofosterthecountess’sdevotiontotheVirginMary,ina faithful response to the pope’s indications.32Inaletterdated1074,thepopeurgesMatilda:«YoushouldfrequentlyreceivetheLord’sbody,and I have directed that you should wholly commit yourself to sure confidence in theMotherof theLord […]».33 In thefirst prayer forcommunion,Anselm,inauniqueway,encouragesMatilda,thedevoutreader,tobecomeonewiththeVirgin;throughanexerciseofiden-tification,AnselmleadsMatildathroughthemostimportanteventsinthe life of Mary. Matilda is placed in Mary’s room at the moment of the Angel’s annunciation: «I like to see with the eye of the soul the angel GabrielprofferinghismostkindgreetingandannouncingtoyoutheforthcomingoftheHolyInfant; [I like] to hear the admirable response of your humility».34 Similarly,Matilda ispresentduring thenativity:

32 Wilmart1938,28; Cantelli1987,290-299.33 GregoryVII,Registrum,I,47,inCowdrey2002,51-53.34 «Delectat me videre interior oculo Gabrielem angelum te officiosissime salutantem et santum nasciturum annuntiatem, audire admirabile responsum tue humilitatis, Oratio vene-


168

«[Iliketoadmire]thefirstmanifestationsofthebaby[…]lyinginamanger».35Anselm,throughthisprayer,expresseshisastonishmentandvenerationinfrontofGod,theunfathomablemystery,whodecidedto become a man in the womb of a woman and submit to human laws and needs.36Matilda,thereader,isalsoledtoadmireMary’saffectionateintervention during the wedding of Cana. Anselm then leads her to the sceneofCalvary,inwhichJesusaddresseshismotherforthelasttime,commendinghertoJohnandthediscipletoher:«Jesusrecommendedhisblessedmothertohisdiscipleandhisdiscipletohismother–Mary,hesays,hereisyourson;apostle,hereisyourmother».37 According to Anselm,itispreciselyinthismomentthatMarywasentrustedwiththeprotectionofallChristians.Cantelliexplains,referringtothispassage,thatitisthefirsttimeintheChristiantraditioninwhichthespiritualmaternity of Mary is associated with Calvary. Because of this inno-vation,FultondescribesAnselm’sPrayers: as «one of the most impor-tant eleventh-centurycontributions to subsequentMariandoctrine»,[Fulton2002, 225].InthethirdprayertotheVirginMary,MatildaisagainpresentattheAnnunciation,atthelossoftheboyJesusinthetemple,attheCrucifixion,andattheAssumption.Alsointhisprayer,the moment of Calvary takes on a special meaning: «[Mary] adopted usaschildren[…]Sheinclinestoindulgencetowarduswiththeloveofamother,whichsurpassesinrichnessandsensitivityanyotherhu-man feeling».38 In this prayer Matilda is even more intensely involved

rabilis Anselmi»:inWilmart1938,51-52.35 «[Libet admirari] paruli rudimenta […] in presepio iacentem,Oratio venerabilis Anselmi»:Wilmart1938,51-52.36 «[…] in nostra natura divinitatis potentiam,Oratio venerabilis Anselmi»: Wilmart 1938,51-52.37 «Oratio venerabilis Anselmi»:Wilmart1938,53.38 «[…] subrogavit nos in filios […] ut tanto proclivior fieret ad indulgentiam quanto materne caritatis viscera super omnemcarnis affectum habundantia pietatis exuberant,Oratio Venerabilis Anselmi Episcopi ad Santcta Mariam»:Wilmart1938,63-64.


169

inCalvarythaninthefirstone–underthecrossofJesus,Matildatakespart inMary’s and John’s suffering for the redemptionofhumanity:«sharingyourimmensesuffering».39 Matilda could feel what Mary felt. Anselm’s prayers have an element of novelty in respect to the tradition ofhistime[Cantelli1987,294-295;Fulton2002, 195-243]:ChristisnolongerthetriumphantanddistantGodoftheLastJudgment;onthecontrary,heisperceivedasthetenderbabyofthenativity.TheimageofMary,asenvisionedbyAnselm,isnolongerthedetachedQueenofHeavenbutagrievingandaffectionatemother.WhatwasitthatenabledAnselmtodevelopthisuniqueconceptionofMary?ThenoveltyofAnselm’sdevotionisinhisunderstandingofthemotherhoodofMary,aconceptthatappearstohavebeensuggestedbythelifeandpersonalityofthecountess.Certainly,Matildahadaveryimportant role as mediator during the controversies between emperor andpope,and,asDonizowrites,shebecametheprotectorofallperse-cuted Christians:

Only Matilda’s spacious home was pure./This [home] was truly a safe place,aharborforbelievers:/Theonesthatthekingcondemned,expel-ledorstripped/bishops,monks,clerics,ItaliansandevenFrenchpeople/Theyallran,confident,tothelivingfountain,/TotheLadyofbenevo-lentmind./Theyfoundnearheralltheywerelongingfor[…].40

Indeed, because Gregory commended to Matilda the leadership ofChristians,AnselmcomparedMary’smissiontoMatilda’s.ThespiritualclosenesstoMarytowhichthecountesswascalled,developedthroughtheseprayers,enabledhertobecomeonewiththeVirginMary.Matil-

39 «[…] compaciens immenso dolori consoler te donec,Oratio Venerabilis Anselmi Episcopi ad Santcta Mariam»:Wilmart1938,63-64.40 «Munda domus sola Mathildis erat spaciosa./Catholicis prorsus fuit haec tutus quasi portus:/Nam quos dampnabat rex, pellebat, spoliabat/Pontefices, monachos, clericos, Italos quoque Gallos,/Ad vivum fontem currebant funditus omnes,/Scilicet ad dictam dominam iam, mente benignam./ Quaeque requirebant, apud ipsam repperiebant […]»: Vita Mathil-dis,2,vv.269-275,385.


170

da was seen by Anselm as the living embodiment of the Virgin in the wayshelivedoutherlife.Anselm,withthesePrayers,instructedhertolive according to this image.

Come, my Bride, my Beloved, my dove – Matilda Bride of God

The important parallel Anselm established between Mary and Matilda is also supported by the numerous references to the Biblical Song of Songs in Anselm’s Prayers.41 Anselm uses the term sponsa,todenotethebride Matilda:

Youwillintroducemeinmygroom’schamber,bringingmewithyou[Mary],youwillshowmetheOne,whommysoulyearnedforandIwilldeservetohearHisbelovedvoicethatwillsay:Come,mybride,mybeloved,mydove;hewillkissmewiththekissofHismouth,andIwillbefullofgrace,[Iwillbe]imbuedwithsweetness.42

This passage of the Song of Songs was the source of the eleventh century traditionfortheliturgyofthefeastoftheAssumption,inwhichtheVirgin Mary is «transformed» from mother to bride. I relied on Fulton’s investigation for the tradition and liturgy of the feast of Assumption in theeleventhcentury;however,shedoesnotconnectthistraditionandliturgy with Anselm’s Prayers forMatilda[Fulton2002,244-288].This passage was read as a dialogue between the Virgin and Christ and the words veni sponsawere,accordingtothistradition,pronouncedbyChristashecametoleadhismotherintoheaven[Fulton2008,195-243;2009].Anselmintroducedthetermsponsa Dei in order to foster

41 Song of Songs,1,3;2,8;5.42 «In cubiculum sponsi mei, post te trahens, introducas et ostendas mihi quem concupivit anima mea, ut desideratam vocem ejus audire merear. Veni sponsa mea, dilecta mea, columba mea, et osculetur me osculo oris sui, gratia plena, suavitate inclita, Oratio venerabilis Ansel-mi»:Wilmart1938,54;refersto,SongofSongs,1,3.


171

Matilda’sidentificationwiththeVirgin.43Thistermlaterbecame,notbychance,acommonappellativegiventoMatilda[Ropa1979,25-51;Maccarini1979,53-66]:44

Butsinceevilwasincreasing,[Matilda]isforcedtodefendthechurch,andwelcomeAnselmasacounselorandteacher,who,asaguide,canteachherthesacredwaysand,asagroomsmanofChristtheLord,canshowherthehonorsandrichnessofthefather,andenabling[her]toconverthumanloveintodivinelove,toadornthematrimonialbedandthebridalchamberwithflowers,andwatchfulhecanteachhertokeepthelamplit,until the coming of the groom who will welcome her for himself.45

Matilda is presented as a privileged bride willing to give her whole soultohergroom,God.ItisevidentthattheseimagesusedtodescribeMatilda were inspired by Anselm’s descriptions in his Prayers. Anselm isdefinedashercounselor(monitorem) and teacher (magistrum),andheisalsothe«groomsman»ofChrist,theonewhoaccompaniesthebrideintothechamberofthegroom,ametaphorofconjugal love,whichdescribestherelationshipbetweenMatildaandChristasthepersonifi-cation of the relationship between Mary and Christ.Thiskindof“politicalallegory”,i.e.,theinterpretationoftheScripturesby referring to current political events and by associating their prota-gonistswithscripturalcharacters,originatedpreciselywiththepolemi-cists of the Gregorian reform. The evidence that Anselm adopted this methodisalsoprovidedbyhiscommentaries,whichwerecommissio-

43 Theterm«brideofChrist»wasalsousedoftenasmetaphoroftheChurch,seeMcLaughlin2010,51-91.44 JohnofMantuainhisIn Cantica Canticorum et de Sancta Maria Tractatus ad Comi-tissam Mathildam.45 «Sed iam iamque malis increbrescentibus istis/ Ad deffendendam cogitur aecclesiam./ Suscipit Anselmum monitorem sive magistrum,/ Qui doceat sacras signifier ipse vias/ Et Christy Domini tanquam paranimphus honores/ Illius exponat diviciasque patris/ Atque in languorem sanctum convertat amorem,/ Exornet talamum floribus atque thorum,/ Pervigil accensam doceat servare lucernam,/ Dum sponsus veniat, qui sibi suscipiat./»: Vita Metrica,vv.3565-3574,1232.


172

nedbyMatilda.Indeed,inAnselm’scommentarytothePsalter[II.2-3],hecomparedGregoryVIItoJesus,HenrytoPilate,andtheanti-popeClementIIItoBarabbas;hiscommentaryonMatthew’sCleansingoftheTempleisanexpressionofthepoliticalprogramoftheGregorianreform.46TheofficialbiographersofAnselmandMatildalaterrenew-edandexpandedthecomparisonbetweenMatilda’smissionandMa-ry’s but their intent was more strictly eulogistic in the promotion of their patroness’ loyalty to the pope and reform: they were composed at Matilda of Tuscany’s court and commissioned by the countess. Her entouragebecame, in fact, a secure refuge for all those intellectuals,polemicists,monks,andclergywhowereexpelledordeposedbytheking[Robinson2004,49-59;1978,100-103].

anselm and John the evangelist

Justas importantasthecomparisonbetweenMatildaandtheVirginMaryistheassociationofAnselmwiththeapostleJohninVita Ansel-miandinDonizo’saccount.BecauseofJohn’sunconditionalloveforJesus,hewaschosenbyhismastertobetheguardianofMary’s life.Anselm’sexceptional interpretationof theapostle JohninhisPrayers probably led Donizo and the unknown author of the Vita to associate AnselmwithJohn,thepersonificationoffriendshipandvirginity.BrianMcGuireexplainsthatintheeleventhandtwelfthcenturiesJohnacquiredaprominentroleduetohisexceptionalfriendshipwithChri-st.PeterDamiencelebratedJohn’svirginityandoffereditasthemainexplanationforhisuniquerelationshipwithChrist;AnselmofCanter-buryusedtheevangelistasthehighestexampleoffriendship;andfi-

46 Anselm’scommentaryonthePsalterisinPaulofBernried,Vita Gregorii VII,inRobinson2004,355-356;Matthew’scommentaryispublishedinRough1973,32-33.For«politicalallegory»seeRobinson1983,Cantelli1985;Amari2015;McLau-ghlin2010,6;RopaG.1979.


173

nally,GoscelinofSt.BertinportrayedJohnasJesus’friendwhen,atthecrucialmomentonCalvary,theLord,becauseofthiscompanionship,entrusted his mother to him. McGuire suggests that this model of love could have been one of the factors that fostered a generally increased interest infriendshipduringthisperiod[McGuire1988, xxviii,208-209, 219-220]. John is an example of friendship and unconditionallove and at the same time the paradigm of purity and chastity. Ac-cording to the anonymous author of Vita Anselmi, Anselm’s life and extraordinaryrelationshipwithGregoryVIIsummarizedperfectlytwocharacteristicsattributedtoJohn:«virginity»and«discipleship».Thesetwo themes were the most urgent concerns of the Gregorian reform at thatmoment.Regarding«discipleship»,Anselmwascertainly,amongtheintellectualsatMatilda’scourt,themostinfluentialdiscipleandthemost rooted in the Gregorian tradition.It is not a coincidence that in his Life ofGregoryVII,PaulofBernriedintroduces Anselm of Lucca in this way:

It seems appropriate to introduce here the foremost follower and heir ofhis[GregoryVII’s]virtues,theblessedAnselm,bishopofthechurchofLucca[…]LikewisewhenGregorywasabouttodepartfromthismortal life, he sent toAnselm a symbolof papal power,namely themitre from his head.47

Anselmwasthepope’smostfaithfuldisciple–somuchsothatGre-gory wanted to designate Anselm as his successor.48Virginity,anothercharacteristicattributedtoAnselm,wasthefoundationoftheGrego-rian reform movement and therefore promoted during the Investiture Controversy as an attempt to renew the entire church according to monasticideals.Allofthesereasons,andAnselm’sextraordinarypor-trayal in his Prayersof theapostle JohnduringthesceneofCalvary,probably led Donizo and the anonymous author of Vita Anselmi, to

47 PaulofBernried,Vita Gregorii VII,inRobinson2004,354.48 Vita Anselmi,c.32,22-23.


174

compareJohntoAnselm,establishinghimasanexampleoffriendshipand virginity.

Anselm’s Novel Devotion and the Eucharistic Controversy

Aswehaveseen,AnselmofLucca’sencounterwithMatildaandhisobedience to Gregory VII allowed him to develop a new spiritual de-votion to the Virgin in his Prayers. In order to fully understand the originofthisnovelty,itisessentialtoconsiderAnselm’sinvolvementwiththeEucharisticControversy.Inthissection,IwillarguethatAn-selm’spersonalcontributiontothisdebateisstronglyreflectedinhisPrayers,inwhichhedrewfromLanfranc’stheologytoexpresstheno-tion of the power of the presence of God in the Host and the mystery oftheEucharisticphenomenon.AccordingtoFulton,oneofthehisto-rical reasons for this new elaboration of the devotion to Christ and the Virgin Mary may have been the profound impact that the Eucharistic Controversyhadinthemindsofscholars,theclergy,andthelaity.49 The Eucharistic Controversy originated in the monasteries of northern France,andpittedBerengarofTours,whoquestionedtherealpresen-ceof thebodyofChrist in theEucharist,againstLanfranc,abbotofBec,whovehementlyaffirmedtherealpresence.Berengar’spositionand the polemic that it generated undermined the very nature of the Churchitselfand,asFultonnotes,inevitablyforcednewdevelopmentsin the practices of devotion to Christ and the Virgin Mary.50 The con-troversybeganinthemiddleoftheeleventhcentury,wasaddressedinRomeforthefirsttimebyLeoIX,andreceivedcontinuingattentionfrom Nicholas II and Gregory VII. Anselm’s attendance at the Lenten

49 Fulton2002,60-141.50 FortheEucharisticControversysee:Fulton2002,118-141;Radding,Newton,2003,1-31;Cowdrey2003, 59-74.


175

synodof1079inRome,whereBerengarwasdefinitivelydefeatedandcondemnedbyGregoryVII, showshis involvementwiththedispu-te[Radding,Newton2003,104].51 The dispute allows us to connect AnselmofLucca,hispersonalityandthought,tothebroaderculturalmilieuofBec,Lanfranc, andAnselmofCanterbury, andpermits anunderstandingofanewandunexploredaspectofbothhisfaithandhisrelationship with Matilda. One important piece of evidence of Anselm’s profound association withthedebateisapassageofJohnofMantua,ofMatilda’sentourage,inhisworkdedicatedtothecountess,Tractatus in Cantica Canticorum. WhilespeakingabouttheillustriousmenatMatilda’scourt,Johncom-plimentsoneoftheminparticular,whosenameheprefersnottomen-tionfor fearand inreverenceofhisauthority.Themysteriousman,Johnsays,rejectedhumanglory,andmostofall,helpedtoeradicatethe Berengarian heresy:

Indeed,byyou,thereissomeonewhosenameIamafraidtomentionsincehefleesworldlyglory,onewhobymeansofhiswords,withtheotherholybishops,aCatholicstronghold,destroyedtherepugnanthe-resy of Berengar and brought back in the holy bosom of the Church the confessed author of that same heresy.52

Theman’s identity can be inferred from the description that, in thesameparagraph,JohnprovidesaboutthespecialrelationshipthismanhadwithMatilda:«He,whogrievingwithyouthewoundsofreligion,

51 Radding,Newton2003,1-31,LanfrancofBecwouldrejectBerengar’sconvic-tions regarding sacramentum and res,arguingthattheveryfleshofChristwaspresentin theHostvisiblyand spiritually;Lanfranc,On the body and blood of the Lord, inVillancourt 2009.52 «Apud te enim est, quem, quia mundi gloriam fugit, nominare timeo, qui Berengariam haeresim his sententiis repugnantem cum aliis sanctis episcopis catholico destruxit praesidio et eiusdem haeresis auctorem confessum sancte matris ecclesiae restauravit gremio, […]»: Bischoff,Taeger1973,49.


176

always fought to the end the common struggle of the church».53 This sta-tement suggests that the mysterious person might be Anselm of Lucca. Anselm’s refutation and assistance with the condemnation of the Eu-charisticteachingofBerengarisevidentinthefiveprayers,inwhichhe reaffirms the fundamental principles of theCatholic faith. In theabove-mentioned first prayer, written in order to prepare MatildafortheHolyCommunion,Matilda,thereader,professesherfaithbysaying: «I believe indeed and I confess: this most sacred host has the na-tureandgloryofyourvivifyingflesh».54Thesameconceptisexpressedinthefifthprayerforcommunion,whichisanimpassioneddialoguebetween the reader and the Eucharist:

ButwhoamI,tobewillingtoseeyouandtouchyou,andmoreover,whoam I tonotflee theoccasionof eatingyou?For Iknow,eventhoughmyeyescannotseeit, thatyouaretheblessedbodythattheVirginMaryhasgeneratedandcarriedwithaweonherarms[…]anditispreciselyyou,andnotanother,thatnowIamnotafraidtograbwithmyteethandtouchwithmyfleshofshame.55

The recurrence of the words: «tangere»,«videre»,«dentibus»,«conprehen-dere»,and«caro» in the above passage emphasize and defend the idea of God’s incarnationandthepresenceof thehumanGodinreality,upto the point of being able to be seen and eaten.56 The prayer goes on to say that it is because of our sin that we are not able to perceive this

53 «[…] qui tecum gemens religionis damma communem eccleasiae semper pertulit pug-nam,JohnofMantua, In Cantica canticorum»:Bischoff,Taeger1973,49.54 «Credo enim et confiteor hanc sacratissimam hostiam vivifice carnis tue naturam habere et gloriam,Oratio venerabilis Anselmi»:Wilmart1938,56.55 «Sed ego, que sum que te tallem videre et tangere, eciam manducare non fugio? Scio enim, licet oculi mei teneantur ne te sicut es videam, quod es illa benedicta caro quam genuit et reverenter baiullavit virgo Maria… Te ipsum portare, te ipsum, et non allium, nunc dentibus conprehendere et carne turpitudinis tangere non aborreo, Oratio Beati Anselmi ad Corpus Christi»:Wilmart1938,70.56 ThisnotionisalsoinLanfranc,On the body and blood of the Lord,inVillancourt2009,52-64.


177

wondrouseventinourlife:«Wondrouschange!Thesoulislessthanthebody.Thebodyseesyou;thesoul isblind.Thebodycantouchyou;thesoul,whichismadeinyourownimage,isalientoyou».57 The primary issue for Lanfranc of Bec and also for Anselm was to recognize themysteriouseventoftransubstantiation,notwithreasonandintel-lect but with faith.58This,accordingtoAnselm,wastheonlywaytoaccessGod’spresenceinthislife.Denyingthisprincipaltruthmeant,forAnselm,denyingtheentireChurch:«IfIdon’tbelieve,Ihavetodenythewholechurch,onearthandinHeaven,andIhavetodenyevenYou,theveryessenceofTruth».59 Anselm’s remedy for the sinful stateofthesoulisanappealtotheVirgin.Indeed,thebodyofChrist,wasconceivedinthewombofMary;shefirsttouchedhim,sawhim:

ButIbelieveandIknowandIamcertainofyouthat–Iseewiththeeyesofmyflesh,whichareimpededtoreceivethetruth–YouaretheonethattheVirgin,evenifshewashismother,nevertouchedwithoutreverence,neverperceivedwithoutmagnificence,neverthoughtaboutyouwithoutjoyfulexultation.60

MarygavebirthtoJesus,andforthisreason,shewasthewaythroughwhich humanity could recover a true relationship with God.61 This is also the reason why Anselm insists that Matilda have a passionate de-

57 «Mirabilis commutatio. Inferrior est corpore anima. Corpus te videt; anima ceca est. Cor-pus te tangit; mens, similis tibi, a te aliena existit,Oratio Beati Anselmi ad Corpus Christi»: Wilmart1938,71.58 Radding,Newton,2003,35-85;Lanfranc,On the body and blood of the Lord,inVillancourt2009,30-35.59 «Si non credo, toti ecclesie in celo et in terra ipsique tibi, qui es veritas per essentiam, contradico,Oratio Beati Anselmi ad Corpus Christi»:Wilmart1938,71.60 «Sed credo et scio, et certa sum de te, – quem corporeis ocullis, licet ad veritatem impeditis, video, – quod es ille quem virgo, licet mater, nunquam tetigit sine reverential, nenquam sensit sine magnificentia, nunquam de eo cogitavit sine exultation iocunda,Oratio Beati Anselmi ad Corpus Christi»:Wilmart1938,71.61 ThesameconceptisexpressedbyLanfrancin,On the body and blood of the Lord,inVillancourt2009,66-71.


178

terminationtobecomeonewiththeVirginMary,whofirsthadtheprivilegetotouch,nurture,clothe,andlovethehumanGod.Thepur-pose of the prayers is to make the reader see and feel the same things the Virginfelt,inordertoexperienceGodintheflesh. The prayers demonstrate that Anselm’s piety was familiar with Lan-franc’s ideas and the new spiritual developments emerging from the Anglo-Normanworld.This specific cultural setting induced thebi-shop of Lucca to seek new approaches to devotion to Christ and the VirginMary.Atthesametime,forAnselm,thereceptionofthesenewspiritual ideals was facilitated by his encounter with Matilda. This en-counterledhimtoelaboratetheseconceptsinapersonalanddifferentway.Indeed,themostremarkableaspectofAnselm’sPrayers is the fact thattheyappeartohavebeenwrittenspecificallyforthelife,persona-lity,androleinhistoryofMatildaofTuscany.

The Meaning of Friendship

The mystery of the Incarnation and the new attention toward the hu-manity of God is at the origin of a new concept of friendship as well. This new spiritual idea stems from the perception that if God beca-meaman,ourrelationshipwithGodcoincideswithourrelationshipwith a companionship of brothers and sisters who share the desire to experienceandfollowHimineveryaspectofreality.Thenewvalueplaced on friendship by men and women of the eleventh and twelfth centuries is another aspect of the novel devotions to Christ and the Virgin.AcompletelynewwayofexpressingfriendshipisattestedtoinNorthernEuropebythecopiousletters,prayers,andvitae from this pe-riod,whicharetheevidenceofaspiritualfriendshipbetweenmenandwomen as a means of leading their brothers and sisters closer to Christ. The medieval writers who renewed and revitalized the idea of frien-dshiplookedtotheclassicaltraditionaswellastheBible.Adefinition


179

byGregorytheGreat,whichMcGuirerecordsinhisbook,Friendship and Community,62 perfectly summarized the meaning and scope of this rediscovered friendship and perfectly applies to the relationship betwe-en Matilda and Anselm.63Bythisdefinition,afriendisacustos animi,responsibleforhisfriend’shappinessandsalvation[McGuire1988,xv].

Inaddition,thelifeandworksofafewspiritualmenlikeGoscelinofSt.Bertin[Otter2004],theunknownauthorofThe Life of Christina of Markyate[Fanous,Leyser2008],andthegreatinnovatorAnselmofCanterbury[Vaughn2002],illustrateanincreasedattentiontospiritualrelationshipswithwomen.Remarkably, someof thesewomenwerebothpoliticallyveryinfluentialanddevotedtoGod,andhenceabletoact,attimes,asteachersfortheirmalefriends.Thesenewideaswerepromoted and enhanced in the cultural milieu of the Anglo-Norman world;thedescriptionofthefriendshipbetweenAnselmandMatildasharesmanythemes,images,andrhetoricalfeaturesincommonwiththeidealsmentionedabove.However,whilenormallyawomanentru-stedhersoultoawiseandauthoritativeteacher,thefriendshipbetweenAnselm and Matilda originated from their common obedience to Pope Gregory VII. The pope commended Matilda to Anselm as a guide for herlife,bothforherspiritualandtemporalaffairs.Thisfactplacedtheunion of the two participants in a privileged position because they both believedtheunionwaswilledbyGodinordertofulfillhispurposes.Indeed,themainfocusoftherelationshipbetweenAnselmandMatildawasto love God and the Church. As attested by Rangerius in the passage alre-adydiscussedabove,thegroomsmanAnselmenabledMatildatoconvert

62 InMcGuire1988,theauthorlocatesthefundamentalaspectsoffriendshiponlywithin themonasticworld, seeing friendshipas something thatwaspracticedanddeveloped predominantly within relationships between men. 63 SeealsoCanatella2010,wheretheauthorarguesthatthisspiritualfriendshipcanbe enjoyed by both men and women.


180

human love into divine love.64 It is worth noting another passage from Ran-geriusthatidentifiesAnselmasthecauseofthecountess’sspiritualgrowth:

Often[Matilda]associateswithAnselm,shehangsoneverywordhesays/ and diligently she serves him as a lord./She never fails to attend to Anselm’sofficeatnightorduringtheday,andsheprayswhenheprays,weepswhenheweepsandsufferswhenhesuffers;shetakestheshapeof the disciple and of the servant.65

The relationship between master and disciple usually involved an im-balance of power between them [Vaughn, Rubenstein 2006, 1-18;Tinsley2010,477-482],aswehaveseen,thefriendshipbetweenAn-selm and Matilda was based on obedience. Vita Anselmi insists that the bishopofLuccawas far frombeingonlyMatilda’s spiritual advisor;onthecontrary,theanonymousauthordeclaresthatAnselmwastheleader and the mind behind her government: «[Matilda] was inspired byamother’spiety,[…]hepracticedtheartofgoverning;shewieldedpower,[…]heruled;sheissuedordersandhegavecounsel».66 Yet, reciprocal support was also an important aspect of their rela-tionship. Matilda is often both a guide for and a disciple of Anselm. WhenAnselmregrettedhisimperialobedience,beforetakinghisplaceasbishopinLucca,hefacedapainfulcrisiswhicheventuallyledhimto withdraw from the world. Both Vitae describe this episode. In Vita Anselmi,theanonymousauthorhighlightsthesecretnatureofhisdeci-sion:«[Anselm],withoutinformingfamilyandfriends,becameamonk

64 For thisnotion see:Vaughn,Rubenstein2006,1-18;McGuire1988,180-230;Classen,Sandidge2010.65 «Anselmum celebrat, Anselmi pendet ab ore/Et tamquam domino sedula servit ei./Eius ab officio nocturne sive diurno/Numquam discedit cumque legente legit; Ploranti applorat et cum patiente laborat, Formam discipulae suscipit et famulae»: Vita Metrica,vv.3687-3692,1234.66 «Illa pro pietate matris solicitabatur, ille gubernandi artem meditabatur; illa potestatem exercebat, ille regebat; illa praeceptum et ille dedit consilium»: Vita Anselmi, c.20,19.


181

according to the rule of St. Benedict».67Interestingly,BishopRangeriusin Vita Metrica informs the reader not only about Matilda’s knowledge of Anselm’s decision but also describes her reaction. Rangerius uses this episodetointroduceMatildaforthefirsttimeinthepoemandqualifiesheras:«Thesacredservantofthesacredreligion…theterrorofperfidy,defenderofthefaith,andsolicitousnurturerofthepiouspontiffs».68 In the dialogue that follows Matilda beseeches Anselm not to leave the city and herself sine patre69inthemidstofdangerousthreats.Moreover,thecountesscomfortsAnselmoverthesinhecommittedandexhortshimnottoabandonhispeople.SheaskshimtofollowtheexampleofSt.Peter,who,eventhoughhealsobetrayedtheLord,wasentrustedwith the keys of Heaven.70Inthiscase,Matildaactsasthemulier fortis,71 invested with the responsibility for showing Anselm the correct path. This moving dialogue illuminates a special aspect of their relationship: reciprocalsupportduringdifficulttimes[Tinsley2010,477-500].Thisreciprocal support and harmony between Matilda and Anselm was also thesupremeexampleoftheidealrelationship,inboththeprivateandthepublicspheres,betweenregnum and sacerdotium [Pasztor 1964]. Certainly,spiritual friendshipandpolitical idealscouldbeassociated.ForGregoryVII theapexof caritas was to serve the Church and its missionintheactivelife.Matildafollowedthisprinciple,and,accor-dingtoherbiographerandtotheintellectualsinherentourage,was

67 «[…] et nescientibus qui cum ipso erant parentibus ac fidelibus, fit subito monachus, regulae sancti Benedicti et Cluniacensium consuetudini subiectus»: Vita Anselmi,c.4,14.68 «Sacrae sacra vernula religionis, Perfidiae terror, subsidium fidei, sedula pontificum nu-trix...piorum»: Vita Metrica,vv.953-955,1177.69 Vita Metrica,vv.957,1177.70 Matilda’smonologue:Vita Metrica,vv.953-996,1177-1178.71 Vita Metrica,v.3700;thepassage,Vita Metrica3699-3954,isanexegesisoftheProverbs,31:10-31, inwhichRangeriusdescribesMatildaasSponsa Dei and Mulier fortis; formoredetailsontheseconceptssee:Amari2015,9;Ropa1979,25-51;Mac-carini1979,53-66.


182

readytosacrificeherworldlygoods,herpower,andevenherlifeforthe triumph of righteousness. Furthermore,despiteherdefeat in thebattleofVoltaMantovana, inwhich she was forced to retreat to her hidden castles in the Apenni-nes,MatildacontinuedtodefendthepopeandtheChurch.Becauseof this resistance, theHenrician polemicists accused the countess ofbeing brainwashed by the Gregorian ideas concerning Christian war-fare.TheimperialpolemicistBenzoofAlba,inhiswork,To Emperor Henry IV, blamed Anselm and Matilda for having «stripped»72 the mona-steries of Nonantola and St. Apollonio in order to wage war against the emperor.73However,themostinfluentialpolemicistamongtheempe-ror’scirclewasWibertofRavenna,whoaccusedAnselmofdeceivingMatilda with the false promise of eternal life.74 The bishop of Lucca’s writtenresponse,intheBook against Wibert,75explainsnotonlytheverynature and purpose of his relationship with Matilda but also its corre-spondence with the will of God and the Church’s mission:

[…]you[Wibert]beseechmeinJesus’name,nolongertodeceive,de-ludeanddupethemostnobleofwomen;butIcallonGodasmywitnessthat there is nothing in her earthly or carnal nor do I desire suchlike from her[…]byprotectingherIamserving,dayandnight,myGodandmyholymotherchurch,bywhoseordershewasentrustedtome.76

72 «Facie exterminati nudant»: BenzoofAlba,Ad Heinricum IV,663;AnselmandMa-tilda donated the treasure’smonasteries to the pope,whowas surrounded by theking’stroopsinRome:Ghirardini1987,239.73 Formoredetails,seeBenzoofAlba,Ad Heinricum IV,663;Vita Mathildis,2,vv.302-303,385;Ghirardini1987,239.74 Thisrecord,writtenbyWibertofRavennatoAnselmofLucca,islost;however,asRobinsonexplains(2004,46),theanti-pope’sargumentscanbededucedbyAn-selm’s response to him in Book against Wibert, which was written for the purpose of confuting Wibert’s accusations.75 AnselmIIofLucca,Liber contra Wibertum.76 «Quod autem obsecras per Iesum, ne nobilissimam feminarum amplius circumveniam , deludam , et fallam , Deum testem invoco , nihil terrenum , nihilque carnale in ea vel ab ea ex intentione concupisco , et sine intermissione oro ut ab hoc seculo nequam cito eripi me


183

AnselmexplainsthatMatilda’schoicetoremainatthepope’ssidewasnotunconsideredorirrational,butwasratheraheroicactoffaith:

[…]shedoesnot,asyouclaim,wasteherpossessionsinvain,butratherlaysupforherselfanunfailingtreasureinheaven,where,neitherthievesnorburglarssteal;sheispreparednotonlytosacrificeallearthlycon-siderationsforthesakeofdefendingrighteousness,butalsotostruggleeven to the shedding of her own blood to bring about your confusion andforthesakeofreverenceforthegloryandexaltationofholychurch,until the Lord delivers His enemy into the hands of a woman.77

ThispassageclarifiesthenatureandthegoalofthisfriendshipinAn-selm’sownwords.AccordingtothebishopofLucca,thechurchhandedover to him the responsibility of instructing the life of Countess Matil-da in both spiritual and temporal matters. This commendation besto-wed on their union a special mission they believed to have been willed byGod,inevitablyforcingthemtosolemnlythinkaboutthemselvesand their roles in new ways.

Conclusion

ThesourcesdefinethefriendshipbetweenAnselmandMatildaasori-ginatingintheirobediencetoPopeGregoryVII.Certainly,AnselmofLucca was one of the most loyal partisans of the pope and the most roo-tedintheGregoriantradition,buthisintellectualdevelopmentwasnotonlytheproductoftheculturalmilieuoftheItalianreformmovement;onthecontrary,hiseducationwasalsoinfluencedbythenewintellec-

rear , nimio affectus taedio , quia incolatum meum prolongari video , serviens die ac nocte in custodiendo illam Deo meo , et sanctae matri meae ecclesiae , cuius praecepto mihi com missa est , et spero quod multa mihi retributio per gratiam Dei in eius custodia excrescat»: Anselm IIofLucca,Liber contra Wibertum,527.77 AnselmIIofLucca,Liber contra Wibertum,translationinRobinson2004,46-47.


184

tual ideas emanating from northern Europe connected with Anselm of Canterbury,Lanfranc,andtheschoolofBec.Indeed,newwaysofpracticingdevotion toChristandhis suffering,and the attention paid to and the discovery of the fundamental role of hiscompassionateandgrievingmother,werefirstdevelopedinthemo-nasteries of northern Europe over the course of the eleventh century. These developments were triggered by the Eucharistic Controversy and reachedtheirapexwiththespiritualityofAnselmofCanterbury.Themost striking evidence of Anselm of Lucca’s reception of these new ideasisreflectedinhisPrayers,whichrevealnotonlyanewaspectofAnselm and Matilda’s relationship but also the bishop’s way of concei-ving of the historical presence of God. In these Prayers,Maryisacom-passionatemother,trulyconcernedwiththesalvationofallheradoptedchildren,andAnselm’sencounterwithMatildaallowedhimtoabsorband elaborate in a personal way the new spiritual concepts. Anselm’s human description of the Virgin Mary and her loving mission was desi-gnedspecificallyforMatilda,whoAnselmsawasalivingembodimentof God’s mother and bride. Anselm instructed Matilda to live according to this image,andhe taughther to thinkaboutherselfas sponsa Dei, bride of Christ. Matilda embraced these ideals and dedicated herself to thedefenseoftheChurchandofChristians.Furthermore,shefosteredthedevelopmentoftheseconcepts,commissioningthebiographiesandotherworks,thatprolongedandexpandedAnselm’svision.The new attention toward the humanity of God is at the origin of a new conceptoffriendshipaswell.Astheauthorsofthefirstvitaeremindus,the pope commended Anselm as Matilda’s guide in both spiritual and temporalaffairs.Theydescribetherelationshipasstructuredaccordingtothemedievalprincipleoffriendshipbetweenmasteranddisciple,firstattestedtoinNorthernEurope.However,theauthorsofthevitae saw the relationshipbetweenAnselmandthecountessasunique.Thisunique-ness was embodied by the fact that their friendship was believed to have beenwilledbyGodHimselftofulfillHismissiononearth.God,forthese


185

friends,wasnolongerdistant;onthecontrary,Hewaspresentinrealityinthepersonofthepope,thelivingembodimentofChrist;inHisfaithfuldisciple,AnselmofLucca;andinHislovingmother,CountessMatildaof Tuscany. These re-presentations are the catalyst and the origin of the active involvement of Anselm and Matilda with the reality of their time.

Bibliography

Primary sourcesAnselmIIofLucca,Liber contra Wibertum,BernheimE.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,LibellideLiteimperatorumetpontificum,1,Hannover,1891,517-528.

— Letter to William I of England, ErdmannC., FickermannN. (ed),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Epistolae[Briefe],BriefsammlungenderZeitHeinrichsIV,5,Hannover,1950,15-17.

BenzoofAlba,Ad Heinricum IV, imperatorem libri VII,PertzG.H.(ed),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio),11,Hannover,1854,591-681.

BonizoofSutri,Liber ad amicum,DummlerE.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistori-ca,LibellideLiteimperatorumetpontificum,1,Hannover,1891,568-690.

DonizoofCanossa,Vita Mathildis,BethmannL.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHi-storica,Scriptores(inFolio)12,Hannover,1856,348-409.

GregoryVII,Registrum,CasparE.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Epistolae Selectae2,Berlin,1920-1923.

HughofFlavigny,Chronicon,PertzG.H. (ed),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio),8,Hannover,1848,288-502.

RangeriusofLucca, Vita metrica sancti Anselmi Lucensis episcopi, HofmeisterA.(ed.),Mo-numentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio),30/2,Lipsia,1934,1152-1307.

Vita Anselmi episcopi Lucensis,WilmansR.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio),12,Hannover,185613-35.

Edition of primary sourcesAmariR.(ed.)2015,Rangerio. Il poema di Anselmo, vescovo di Lucca,Pisa:PisaUni-

versity Press.

BischoffB.,TaegerB.(eds.)1973,John of Mantua In Cantica canticorum et de Sancta Maria tractatus ad comitissam Matildam,Freiburg:Universitatsverlag.


186

CowdreyH.E.J.(ed.)1972,The Epistolae vagantes of Pope Gregory VII,Oxford:Cla-rendon Press.

—2002,The register of Pope Gregory VII, 1073-1085: an English translation,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

GolinelliP.(ed.)2008,Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,Milano:JacaBook.

FanousS.,LeyserH.(eds.)2008, The life of Christina of Markyate,Oxford:OxfordUniversity Press.

OtterM.(ed.)2004, Goscelin of St. Bertin: The book of encouragement and consolation,Woodbridge:Boydell&Brewer.

RobinsonI.S.(ed.)2004, The papal reform of the eleventh century: Lives of Pope Leo IX and Pope Gregory VII,Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress,(TranslationofBonizoofSutri,Book to a Friend),158-261.

VaillancourtM.G.,(ed)2009,Lanfranc,On the body and blood of the Lord,Washing-ton: Catholic University of America Press.

WilmartA.(ed.)1938,Cinq Textes De Prière Composés Par Anselm De Lucques Pour La Comtesse Mathilde,«Revued’ascétiqueetdemystique»,19,23-72.

Secondary sourcesAndreolliB.1987,La gestione delle res ecclesiae nel territorio mantovano al tempo della

lotta per le investiture,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture: Atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986),Bologna:Pàtron,195-205.

AntonH.H.1987,Primi stadi della riforma ecclesiastica: tendenze e valutazioni,inGoli-nelliP.(ed.)1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture: Atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986).Bologna:Pàtron,269-279.

BartoliniM.G.1965,Beatrice di Lorena, marchesa e duchessa di Toscana,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,vol.7,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaItaliana,352-363.

—1970,Bonifacio, marchese e duca di Toscana,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,vol.12,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaItaliana,108.

BlumenthalU.R.R.1988, The investiture controversy: Church and monarchy from the ninth to the twelfth century,Philadelphia:UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress.

BorinoG.B.1956,Il Monacato e l’investitura di Anselmo vescovo di Lucca,inBorinoG.B.(ed.)1956, Studi gregoriani per la storia di Gregorio VII e della riforma gregoriana, vol. 5,Roma:AbbaziadisanPaolo,361-374.

BrunelliR.2008,Anselmo di Lucca: consigliere di Matilde, patrono di Mantova, Mantova: Postumia.


187

CanatellaH.2010, Scripsit amica manus: Male-female spiritual friendship in England and France ca. 1050-1200,Ph.D.Dissertation,UniversityofHouston.

CantelliS.1985,Il Commentario al Cantico dei Cantici di Giovanni da Mantova, «Studi medievali»,3(26):101-184.

—1987,Le preghiere a Maria di Anselmo da Lucca,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1987,Sant’An-selmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture: Atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986),Bologna:Pàtron,290-299.

ClassenA.,SandidgeM.(ed.)2010,Friendship in the Middle Ages and early modern age: Explorations of a fundamental ethical discourse,Berlin:WalterdeGruyter.

CowdreyH.E.J.1972,Anselm of Besate and Some North-Italian Scholars of the Ele-venth Century, «TheJournalofEcclesiasticalHistory», 23, 2: 115-124.

—1998, Pope Gregory VII, 1073-1085,Oxford:ClarendonPress.

—2003, Lanfranc: Scholar, monk, and archbishop,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

CushingK.G.1998, Papacy and law in the Gregorian revolution: The canonistic work of Anselm of Lucca,Oxford:ClarendonPress.

D’AcuntoN.1999, I laici nella chiesa e nella società secondo Pier Damiani: Ceti dominanti e riforma ecclesiastica nel secolo XI,Roma:IstitutostoricoitalianoperilMedioEvo.

DuffN.1909,Matilda of Tuscany: La Gran Donna d’Italia,London:Methuen.

EadsV.2000, Mighty in war: The role of Matilda of Tuscany in the war between Pope Gre-gory VII and Emperor Henry IV,Ph.D.Dissertation,CityUniversityofNewYork.

FiorentiniF.M.,MansiG.D.(eds.)1756,Memorie della gran contessa Matilda restituita alla patria lucchese, da Francesco Maria Fiorentini. Seconda edizione illustrata con note critiche e con l’aggiunta di molti documenti appartenenti a Matilda ed alla di lei casa da Gian Domenico Mansi,Lucca:G.Batini.

FonsecaC.D.1992,Il Capitolo di San Martino e la riforma canonicale nella seconda metà del secolo XI,in ViolanteC.(ed.)1992,Sant’Anselmo vescovo di Lucca (1073-1086) nel quadro delle trasformazioni sociali e della riforma ecclesiastica,Atti del convegno in-ternazionale di studio (Lucca 25-28 settembre 1986),Roma:IstitutoStoricoItalianoperilMedioEvo,51-64.

FumagalliV.1971,Le origini di una grande dinastia feudale Adalberto-Atto di Canossa,Tubingen:M.Niemeyer.

—1984,Economia, società e istituzioni nei secoli XI-XII nel territorio modenese, in Barbolini M.A.(ed.)1984,Lanfranco e Wiligelmo: Il Duomo di Modena,Modena:Panini,7-12.

—1984a,Il poema di Donizone nel Codice Vaticano Latino 4922,inGolinelliP.(ed.)2008,Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,Milano:JacaBook,241-251.

—1987,Mantova al tempo di Matilde di Canossa,159-167,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture: Atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986),Bologna:Pàtron.


188

—1996, Matilde di Canossa: Potenza e solitudine di una donna del Medioevo. Bologna: Il Mulino.

FultonR.2002, From judgment to passion: Devotion to Christ and the Virgin Mary, 800-1200,NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.

—2009,“Quae Est Ista Quae Ascendit Sicut Aurora Consurgens?”: The Song of Songs as the Historia for the Office of the Assumption”,«MediaevalStudies»,60(1):55-122.

Ghirardini L L. 1987,La Battaglia di Volta Mantovana, inGolinelli P. (ed.) 1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture: Atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986).Bologna:Pàtron,229-240.

GolinelliP.1978, Culto dei santi e monasteri nella politica dei Canossa nella Pianura Padana,inGolinelli,P.(ed.)1988,Indiscreta sanctitas: Studi sui rapporti tra culti, poteri e società nel pieno Medioevo, Roma:IstitutostoricoitalianoperilMedioEvo,9-29.

—1984,Cultura e religiosità a Modena e Nonantola nell’alto e pieno Medioevo,inBarbo-liniM.A.(ed.)1984,Lanfranco e Wiligelmo: Il Duomo di Modena,Modena:Panini.

—1987,Dall’agiografia alla storia: le “Vitae” di Sant’Anselmo di Lucca, in Golinelli P. (ed.)1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture: Atti del convegno interna-zionale di studi (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986).Bologna:Pàtron,27-61.

—1988,Una agiografia di lotta: le “Vitae” di Sant’Anselmo da Lucca,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1988,Indiscreta sanctitas: Studi sui rapporti tra culti, poteri e società nel pieno Medioevo, Roma:IstitutostoricoitalianoperilMedioEvo,118-155.

—1991,“Prima di Canossa. Considerazioni e notazioni sui rapporti di Gregorio VII con Beatrice e Matilde”,inStiklerA.M.(ed.)1991, Studi gregoriani. 14: Per la storia della Libertas ecclesiae.Roma:LAS,195-206.

—(ed.)1999, Matilde di Canossa nelle culture europee del secondo millennio: Dalla storia al mito: atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Reggio Emilia, Canossa, Quattro Ca-stella, 25-27 settembre 1997),Bologna:Pàtron.

—2003, I mille volti di Matilde: Immagini di un mito nei secoli,Milano:F.Motta.

—2007, Matilde e i Canossa,Milano:Mursia.

—2009,Matilde di Canossa, in Dizionario Biografico degli Italiani,vol.72,Roma:Isti-tutodell’EnciclopediaItaliana,114-126.

—2015, L’ancella di San Pietro: Matilde di Canossa e la Chiesa,Milano:JacaBook.

HayD.J.2008, The military leadership of Matilda of Canossa, 1046-1115,Manchester:Manchester University Press.

HuddyM.E.1906,Matilda, countess of Tuscany,London:JohnLong.

KellerH.1992,Le origini sociali e famigliari del vescovo Anselmo,in Violante C. (ed.) 1992,Sant’Anselmo vescovo di Lucca (1073-1086) nel quadro delle trasformazioni socia-li e della riforma ecclesiastica,Roma:IstitutoStoricoItalianoperilMedioEvo,27-50.


189

LazzariT.2012,Goffredo di Lorena e Beatrice di Toscana,inCantarellaG.M.,CalzonaA.2012,La reliquia del sangue di Cristo: Mantova, l’Italia e l’Europa al tempo di Leone IX,Verona:Scripta,225-242.

MaccariniP.A.1979,Aspetti della religiosità di Matilde di Canossa,inBadiniG.(ed.)1979, Convegnodistudimatildici,Reggiolo medievale: Atti e memorie del Convegno di studi matildici: Reggiolo, 9 aprile 1978.ReggioEmilia:Bizzocchi,53-66.

McGuireB.P.1988, Friendship & community: The monastic experience, 350-1250,Ka-lamazoo,Mich:CistercianPublications.

McLaughlinM.2010,Sex, gender, and episcopal authority in an age of reform, 1000-1122, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

PasztorE.1960,Una fonte per la storia dell’età gregoriana: la “Vita Anselmi episcopi Lu-censis” in Bullettino dell’Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medioevo 1960,Bullettino 72. (1960), Roma:PalazzoBorromini,1-33.

—1964,Sacerdozio e Regno nella “Vita Anselmi Episcopi Lucensis”, «Archivum Histo-riaePontificiae»,2: 91-115.

—1987,Lotta per le investiture e ius belli: la posizione di Anselmo di Lucca,inGolinelli,P.(ed.)1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture: Atti del convegno in-ternazionale di studi (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986),Bologna:Pàtron,375-421.

—1992,La “Vita” anonima di Anselmo da Lucca. Una rilettura,inViolanteC.(ed.)1992,Sant’Anselmo vescovo di Lucca (1073-1086) nel quadro delle trasformazioni sociali e della riforma ecclesiastica,Roma:IstitutoStoricoItalianoperilMedioEvo,207-222.

PugliaA.2013, Matilde di Canossa e le città della Toscana nord-occidentale tra XI e XII secolo,Pisa:EdizioniIlCampano,11-39.

RaddingC.,Newton,F.,Albericus,2003, Theology, rhetoric, and politics in the Eucha-ristic controversy, 1078-1079: Alberic of Monte Cassino against Berengar of Tours,NewYork: Columbia University Press.

RobinsonI.S.2004, The papal reform of the eleventh century: Lives of Pope Leo IX and Pope Gregory VII,Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

—1983, ‘Political Allegory’ in the Biblical Exegesis of Bruno of Segni,«Recherchesdethéologieancienneetmédiévale»,l:69–98.

—1978a, Authority and resistance in the Investiture Contest: The polemical literature of the late eleventh century,Manchester:ManchesterUniversityPress.

—1978b,The friendship network of Gregory VII,«JournalofEcclesiasticalHistory»,63(207): 1-22.

RopaG. 1979, Intorno a un tema apologetico della letteratura “Matildica”: Matilde di Canossa Dei Sponsa,inBadiniG.(ed.)1979, Convegnodistudimatildici,Reggiolo medievale: Atti e memorie del Convegno di studi matildici: Reggiolo, 9 aprile 1978,Reg-gioEmilia:Bizzocchi,25-51.


190

RotaA.1733,Notizie istoriche di S. Anselmo, vescovo di Lucca, e protettore di Mantova,Verona: Per Pierantonio Berno librajo nella via de’ Lioni.

RoughR.H.1973,TheReformistIlluminationintheGospelofMatilda,CountessofTuscany,TheHague:Nijhoff.

SaverinoG.1992,La “Vita Metrica” di Anselmo da Lucca scritta da Rangerio. Ideologia e genere letterario, in ViolanteC.(ed.)1992,Sant’Anselmo vescovo di Lucca (1073-1086) nel quadro delle trasformazioni sociali e della riforma ecclesiastica,Roma:IstitutoStoricoItalianoperilMedioEvo,223-272.

SergiG.1994,I poteri dei Canossa: poteri delegati, poteri feudali, poteri signorili,inGo-linelli,P.(ed.)1994,I Poteri dei Canossa, da Reggio Emilia all’Europa: Atti del conve-gno internazionale di studi (Reggio Emilia-Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992),Bologna:Pàtron,29-40.

SimeoniL.1947,Il contributo della contessa Matilde al papato nella lotta per le investiture,inBorinoG.B.(ed.)1947,Studi Gregoriani per la storia di Gregorio VII e della riforma gregoriana,Roma:AbbaziadiSanPaolo,353-372.

SpiccianiA.1992,L’episcopato lucchese di Anselmo II da Baggio, in ViolanteC.(ed.)1992,Sant’Anselmo vescovo di Lucca (1073-1086) nel quadro delle trasformazioni sociali e della riforma ecclesiastica,Roma:IstitutoStoricoItalianoperilMedioEvo,65-112.

SticklerA.1947, Il potere coattivo materiale della Chiesa nella riforma gregoriana secondo An-selmo da Lucca,inBorinoG.B.(ed.)1947,«StudiGregoriani»,1,Roma:1947,235-285.

TinsleyD.F.2010,The Spiritual Friendship of Henry Suso and Elsbeth Stagel,inClas-senA.,SandidgeM.(eds.)2010,Friendship in the Middle Ages and early modern age: Explorations of a fundamental ethical discourse,Berlin:WalterdeGruyter,477-500.

TostiL.1859, La contessa Matilde e i romani pontefici,Firenze:Barbera–Bianchi&C..

VaughnS.N.2002, St. Anselm and the handmaidens of God: A study of Anselm’s corre-spondence with women,Turnhout:Brepols.

—2010,Saint Anselm and His Students Writing about Love: A Theological Foundation for the Rise of Romantic Love in Europe, «JournaloftheHistoryofSexuality», 19 (1): 54-73.

VainiM.1987,Sant’Anselmo nella vita religiosa e culturale di Mantova nel basso Me-dioevo,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1987,Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le investiture: Atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986),Bologna:Pàtron,63-79.

VaughnS.N.,Rubenstein, J. (eds.)2006, Teaching and learning in Northern Europe, 1000-1200,Turnhout:Brepols.

ViolanteC. (ed.) 1992,Sant’Anselmo vescovo di Lucca (1073-1086) nel quadro delle trasformazioni sociali e della riforma ecclesiastica,Roma:IstitutoStoricoItalianoperil Medio Evo.

—1961,Anselmo da Baggio,inDizionario biografico degli Italiani,vol.3,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaItaliana,399-407.

Beatrice of Lorraine, marchioness of Tuscany – and mother of the more famous Matilda of Tuscany – died in Pisa on April 18th 1076. Matilda arranged the details of her mother’s burial and Beatrice was entombed in the same Tuscan city, in an ancient sarcophagus dated by art historians to the second century AD, representing the legend of Phaedra and Hippolytus. The article analyses multiple evidences, trying to understand why Matilda of Canossa chose a so disturbing subject – the only case of feminine incest in ancient mythology – for the burial of her mother

introduction

Beatrice of Lorraine,marchioness of Tuscany – andmother of themorefamousMatilda–diedinPisaonApril18th10761. She died alone after a short illness: her daughter was not at her bedside. It was however Matilda who arranged the details of her mother’s burial and so Beatrice

1 Goez1995;Bertolini1965.EventhelemmaBonifacio marchese e duca di Toscanais,ofcourse,veryuseful:Bertolini1971.

Matilda of Tuscany: new Perspectives about Her Family Ties

Tiziana lazzaRiUniv. Bologna, Dip. Storia Culture Civiltà


192

wasentombedinthesameTuscancitywhereshedied,inanancientsarcophagus dated by art historians to the second century AD2.

ThistombistodaylocatedintheCamposantoatPisa,towhichitwastransferred at the very beginning of 19th century3:originally, itwaslocated near the south wall of the Cathedral of Santa Maria. The choi-ce of a Roman sarcophagus started what later became a real custom: Matilda’schoicewasthefirstofitskindinPisa,soontobetakenupby

2 Acompletedescriptionofthesarcophagusandtheeventsthatinvolvedit,itsori-ginallocationandthesubsequentmovementsthatitsuffered,canbereadinTedeschiGrisanti1995,withacompletepreviousbibliography.3 Atthebeginningof the14thcentury,duringtheconstructionofgradule (thestepsof theparvis), the sarcophaguswasmovedfirst inside thecathedraland thenbackoutside,inthefourthblindarchofthesouthsideofthegrandstand,wherenowis the epigraph that remember it. For a newhypothesis, not entirely convincing,aboutaprimitiveplacementinfrontoftheepiscopalpalace,seeCalzona2008,49,note 107.

Fig. 1. Pisa, Camposanto, sarcophagus (II century A.D.)

TiziANA lAzzAriMatilda of Tuscany: New Perspectives about Her Family Ties

193

manyotheraristocrats,andwasachoicesteepedintheculturalmoresoftheperiod.Inthesecondhalfofthe11thcenturytherewas,inpointoffact,atasteforantiquityandtheclassicthatforeshadowedthesmallRenaissance of the 12th century and which involved political langua-ge,are-evaluationofJustinianlawandtheformsofarchitectureandplastic arts [Claussen 2008]. The sarcophagus that Matilda chose for his motheralsoacted,as it iswell-known,asamodel forNicolaPisanowhenhehadtocarvethemarblepulpitoftheBaptisteryofPisa,inthemiddle of the 13th century [Tedeschi Grisanti 1995].

But what interests us now is not the artistic success enjoyed by Matil-da’s choice. The purpose of this paper is instead to analyse her choice fromthepointofviewoftherelationsbetweenthetwowomen,mo-theranddaughter,andthepossiblesignificancethattheimagecarvedonthatantìquemarble–thelegendofPhaedraandHippolytus–mayhave had for Matilda herself.

The moment of the choice

Inthisperspective,thefirstproblemthatwefaceisthatofbeingsurethat we can ascribe to Matilda the choice of the sarcophagus. We know that the decision to leave Beatrice’s body at Pisa was not appreciatedbythemonkDonizowho,layingasideforamomenthiscourtlymanners, at the endof thefirst bookofhis poemdedicatedto the forebears of the countess, appended someverses complainingthat Canossa had been deprived of the earthly remains of Beatrice by asqualid,filthycityteemingwith“marinemonsters”:thatis,withpa-gans,Turks,Libyansandsuchlike4.Apparently,arrivalsbyseaevoked

4 Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,120,vv.1368-1372:«Dolorhicmefunditusurit/Cumteneturbsillamquaenonesttambenedigna./QuipergitPisas,videt


194

acertainanxietyeveninthosedays5.Pisa,inshort,wasunworthyofsafeguardingthoseearthlyremains,whichwouldcertainlyhavefounda much more commendable resting place on the pure white crag of Canossa6. Matilda’schoiceofthesarcophagusisconfirmedbythreeevidences,allfromPisa:theyare,inorder,animmunityprivilegegrantedinfavourof the canons of the cathedral of Pisa in 11007,adonationdecidedbyMatilda for the episcopate in the same year8 andfinallyanepigraph,nowlost,datingimmediatelyaftertheCountess’sdeath9.Beforebeginningtheexaminationofthedocuments,twoshortnotesabout the situation in Pisa when Beatrice died. The city was devoid of the bishop: Guido da Pavia had died a few days beforeBeatrice,onthe8thofApril.MatildasupportedPopeGregoryVIIinthechoiceofLandolfo,whocamefromMilanandwastheabbotof themonasteryofNonantola. InAugust1077, inPoggibonsi, shestrengthenedhersupportwitha large,andabitpuzzling10,donation

illicmonstramarina./Haecurbspaganis,Turclis,LibicisquoqueParthis,/Sordida!Chaldei sua lustrant litora tetri».5 AboutthemaritimedimensionofthemarchofTuscanyandtheMediterraneanprojectionofitsmarquis,seeCeccarelliLemut2016.6 Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,120:vv.1373-1375:«SordibusacunctissummundaCanossa!Sepulcri/Atquelocuspulchermecum!Nonexpediturbes/Quae-rereperiuras,patrantescriminaplura».7 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde,n.61,186-188.8 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde,n.63,190-192.Thedocumentisdatedbythepublishertheyear1100,betweenJanuary1andSeptember24.9 Aboutthisepigraph,seebelow,notes19and20.10 TheywereallassetsplacedinthedioceseofBologna:over600mansi,organizedin a number of curtesandacastle,all locatedontheBologneseApennines,whichweregrantedhalftotheelectedbishopLandolfo,andtheotherhalftothecathedralcanons,aslongastheylivedtogetherandchastely.Forarecentanalysis,whichhelpstoclarifythecomplexstrategyofMatilda,seeManarini2016.


195

of assets to the Pisan church11, [TirelliCarli1977;Ronzani1991], inwhich was asked to celebrate a mass per year for her mother12.The direct intervention in the March of Tuscany ofHenry IV,whosupported the cives of Pisa in their claim for broad autonomies from themarquispower,keptawayforalongtimeMatildafromthecity13,although,from1084onwards,thevicecomesshehadappointed,Ugo,returnedtoPisatoexercisehisfunctions.MatildathensupportedtheelectionofBishopDaiberto(1088),notapure“Gregorian”,butamanwhocouldleadtoconcordinthecity[Ronzani2001,131-132;Cicco-piedi2016,385-386].DuringhisabsencefromPisa(from1098:Dai-bertoparticipatedinthecrusadeandbecamethefirstLatinpatriarchofJerusalem),Matildagrantedtothecanonstheimmunity14 and gave the episcopacy a vast land belonging to the March15,inordertosubsi-dizetheCathedralofSantaMaria,underconstruction,definedinthedocument domum miris tabularum lapideis ornamentis incoeptam. In this donation,thededicationcombinestheloveforMary,motherofGod,

11 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde,n.23,87-92.12 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde,n.23,91:«Insuperetanccon-dictionemsupradictotenoreepiscopoimponimus,utannualiteranniversariummatrismeeBeatricishonorificecelebretpromercedeanimepatrismeimatrisquemeeetmeesine omni mea et heredum ac proheredum meorum contradictione vel repetitione».13 OnthesituationofPisainthatcourseoftimeseeRonzani1997,131-136.14 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde,n.61,186-188.15 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde,n.63,191:«Dumaddeihono-remeiusquepięgenitricisMariaegloriosumtriumphumPisanęecclesięcuramquon-damcumnostris[fidelibushab]eremuseiusquedomummiristabularumlapideisor-namentisincoeptam,qualiteradeffectumperduceredignispossemusauxiliis,sedulamentisintentioneanimocotidievolveremus,tampronostraquammatrisnostręibiquiescentisanimaconcessimusilliusecclesięadoperamperficiendamveladaliquamrestaurationempostperactumopusforte[...]faciendamcampumiurismarchięiuxtapalatiumsitum,cuiuscaputameridieinArnumfluviumterminatur,secundumlatusaborientestrataintercurrensterminat,terciumveroterraBaruncelli,quartumautemterramarchię,eovidelicetmodo,utcampusdebeathabitariethabitantiumpensioetalicuiushonoris [red]ditio adopus fabricę construendumvel restaurandumdebeatsimiliter annue persolvi et dari».


196

ob pium amorem beatę matris domini nostri sanctę Marię,withthesuffra-geforthesoulofBeatrice,ob remedium animę matris meę beatę memorię Beatricis,andallherrelatives,genericallyunderstood.While the document in favor of the canons was issued in the marchio-nal curtis of Pappiana, in the lowerValdiserchio,betweenLuccaandPisa,thedonationfortheconstructionofthecathedraldoesnotpre-serve the datatio topica,buttheunderliningoftheaestheticaspectthatwasassumingthecathedral,alongwithabriefnotation“Nuper presentia nostra in civitate Pisę posita, delatum ad nostrę potestatis est...”,containedin a donation in favor of Montecassino made at the same time16,makeusthinkthatforthefirsttimeafterthedeathofhermother,some24years later,Matildaeventuallyfoundherself inPisa,whereshecouldpersonally arrange the choice of the sarcophagus in line with the style of the classicist lapideis ornamentis of the new cathedral17.Atthatmoment,attheverybeginningofXIIcentury,thesarcophaguswas locatedagainst theexteriorwallof thecathedral. In1302itwasmoved into the interior of the edifice18, and subsequentlymoved toitsdefinitivelocationintheCamposantoin1810.Twoyearslater,in1812,AlessandrodaMorrona,aneruditecitizenofPisa,publishedaninscription,todaylost,dated1116,thatcommemoratesMatilda’sdeathand how she had arranged her mother’s burial and richly endowed the church that received her mother’s remains.

16 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde,n.62,188-190,190.17 I think it is unlikely thatBeatricehadchosenherself the sarcophagus forherburial,as there isnoBeatrice’sdonation in favorof thePisanchurchforherownsuffrage.Atthetimeofherdeath,thecathedralwasalreadyunderconstruction.18 ThetextoftheplaquethatremembersthetranslationisalreadyreportedbyVa-sari,Le vite de’ più eccellenti pittori,1,98:«AnnoDominiMCCCIII.subdignissimoOperarioD.BurgundioTadioccasionegraduumfiendorumperipsumcircaeccle-siamsupradictamtumbasuperiusnotatabistranslatafuit,nuncdesedibusprimisinecclesiam,nuncdeecclesiainhunclocum,utcernitis,(excellentem)».Theuseofthe“Pisanstyle”inthedatingoftheinscriptionrequiresattributingitto1302.


197

Thefirstpartoftheepigraph,accordingtoOttavioBanti19,isacopyofatextwrittenshortlyafterthedeathofMatilda:“IntheyearoftheLord1116,ontheninthdayofthecalendsofAugust,diedLadyMatil-da,Countessofblessedmemory,whichforthesoulofhermother,thevenerableLadyCountessBeatrice,whorestedinthistombworthyofhonor,magnificentlyendowedthischurchwithassetslocatedinmanyplaces.Theirsoulsrestinpeace” 20.

The Phaedra Question

QuiteapartfromDonizo’scomplaints–whoprobablyhadneverlaideyesonthattomb–whatisperplexingtoourcontemporaryeyesisthechoice of subject reproduced on the sarcophagus Matilda chose for her mother. The story depicted on the surface of the sarcophagus concerns theyoungHippolytuswithwhomPhaedra–hisstepmother–fellinlove,accordingtoEuripides’versionofthestory,takenupagainwithsome important variants by Lucius Annaeus Seneca. Variants so signi-ficantthatclassicalphilologistswhohavededicatedthemselvestotheproblem,maintain thatSenecabased iton thenow lostversionofatragedybySophocles,towit–Hippolytus [Degl’Innocenti Pierini R. et al. (eds.) 2007]. IntheversionbySeneca,Phaedra,wifeoftheKingofAthens,Theseus,fallsmadlyinlovewithHippolytus,thesonthatTheseushadhadbyhisfirstwife,thequeenoftheAmazons.Encouragedbythenurse,PhaedrarevealsherlovefortheyoungmanandanindignantHippolytusflees

19 Banti1996,nn.38-39,49-50.20 Morrona1812,vol.II,316:«AN.DNI.MCXVI.KLASAUG.OBIITDNA/MATILDA FELICIS MEMORIE COMITISSA / QUE PRO ANIMA GENETRI-CIS SUE DNE / BEATRICIS COMITISSE VENERABILIS IN HAC / TUMBA HONORABILI QUIESCENTIS / IN MULTIS PARTIBUS MIRIFICE HANC / DOTAVIT ECLAM QUARUM ANIME / REQUIESCANT IN PACE».


198

fromthekingdom.Phaedra,woundedbyhisrefusal,decidestotakerevenge and tells her husband that Hippolytus has tried to take advan-tageofher.AfuriousTheseusbringsdownacurseuponhisson,whodiesinaghastlyway,dreadfullygoredduringaboarhunt–thatbeing,as son of an Amazon,his great passion. When Hippolytus’ corpse is brought back to the pa-lace,Phaedraissoangui-shed that she confesses her crime to Theseus and kills herself. In the sarcophagus bas-relief we find this storyexactlynarrated.Wecansee that the scene is divi-dedintotwo:ontheleft,the figures of Phaedra,the splendid queen sur-rounded by her handmai-dens, andofHippolytus,arobustyouth,arelinkedby thefigureof thewetnurse, the matchmaker.Below, the twoputti re-present two differentkinds of love: conjugal charity and Eros or carnal passion. On the right in-stead, the splendid sceneof thehunt and, evidentintheforeground,theboarthatwillgoreHippolytus.

Fig. 2. Phaedra surrounded by her handmaidens, Hippolytus and, in the middle, the nurse.

Fig. 3. The hunt and the boar.


199

a sin of incest?

TheburialofBeatriceisaccompaniedbyaninscription,remadeatthetimeofthe19thcenturyre-location[Franceschini2000,p.208],butwhichisalreadyattestedatthetimeofitsfirsttranslation–in1302,asIsaid–whenitwastranscribedinaPisanchroniclepreservedintheState Archive of Lucca21anddatedtothefirsthalfofthe14thcentu-ry22.Theepitaphreads«QuamvispeccatrixsumdomnavocataBeatrix/in tumulomissa iaceoquae comitissa» andmaybe translated in thisway:«ThoughIamasinnerIwascalledLadyBeatrice.I,whowasaCountess,nowlieinthistomb»23. The second emistich of the second verse is otherwise handed down as «quamquam fuerim Comitissa»,withtheadditionofathirdverse:«Quilibetergopaternoster,detpromeaanimater»,thatis«WhoeverwishesmaysaythreeOurFathersformysoul»[Bertolini1965,361].Not that there is anything wrong in recalling on a tombstone epitaph that the deceased was a sinner24: but the adjective in Latin rhymes with thenameofthecountessandthestrongassonance,togetherwiththechiasmusoftheconstruction,confersastrongemphasistotheepitaph.Verydifferent,bycomparison,thesmallepitaphimpressedontheillu-minationofBeatriceonthethroneinthemanuscriptofDonizo:“MayGodgrantthatyoudwellinthecelestialhalls,Beatrice”25.

21 ArchiviodiStatodiLucca,ms.54,c.24r.22 Franceschini2000,p.208andnote17aboutthedatationofthechronicle.23 Banti2000,n.2,17-18: «†/QUAMVISPECCATRIXSUMDOMNAVO-CATABEATRIX/ INTUMULOMISSA IACEOQUAECOMITISSA/A(nno)D(omini)MLXXVI».24 Althoughitisnotcustomary:aquicksearchforthelemma“peccat*”intheva-rious volumes of the MGH Antiquitates collection shows that the term never occurs intheepitaphs,andveryrarelyinrecordingsofLibri memoriales.25 Ms.Vat.Lat.4922,c.30v:«DetDeusinclariscameristibistareBeatrix».


200

But,ifshehadindeedbeenasinner,ofwhatcrime was Beatrice guilty? If the sarco-phagus in which she was buried was chosen in the full awareness ofwhatitrepresented,Beatrice’s sin was in-cest.In a way of thinking farremotefrom–butstill clung to – ours,in the 11th century Phaedra clearly re-presented incest in its uniquemythicalfemi-nine profile26. Phaedra in fact, though shehad no blood ties with Hippolytus,haddaredtothinkofmixinginherwombtheseedoftwomenwhowerefatherandson,thusriskingtosubvertthepatrilinealorderofthegenerationand,furthermore,riskingtogivebirthtoamonstrousbeing,fruitoftheconvergentgenerativecapacityoftwodifferentseeds.Theriskofproducingdeformedoffsprings if therulesof sexualmoreswerenotrespected,waswellunderstoodinthe11thcentury.PeterDamian,inaletter27of1064senttotheabbotDesideriusofMontecassino,recounts

26 OnthemeaningofFedra’sguiltandontheconceptionofincestintheRomantradition,seeBettini2002,221-238.27 Die Briefe des Petrus Damiani,III(1989),n.102.

Fig. 4. «Det Deus in claris cameris tibi stare Beatrix». Ms. Vat. Lat. 4922, c. 30v.


201

thewickedmarriagethatthekingofFrance,Robert(996-1031),hadcontractedwithBerta,widowofEudeofAnjou,andhis relativebyblood. The two had generated a deformed son «anserinum per omnia collum et caput habentem»–whohad,thatistosay,theneckandheadofagoose–andboth,RobertoandBerta,hadbeenexcommunicatedbyalmost all the bishops of Gaul28. The monumental tomb dedicated to Beatrice has always been inter-pretedasanextraordinarytribute tohermotherbyMatilda29. Matil-da,afflictedbysorrowat the lossofheronlypointofreferenceandhermodel,bythisburialwouldhavemadehermotherintoa“reallytrue symbol of a cultural heroine”30 with a sarcophagus symbolizing her“queenshipandsacrality”[Franceschini2004,209].And,indeed,itwasamajesticburial,anextraordinarytributetobeseen,butonlybythosenotabletoreadthesombrestorygraventhere.DidMatilda,whocommissionedthesepulchre,knowPhaedraandherstory?Tothisquestionwecanreplywithafairmarginofprobability:yes,Matilda,whowasacultivatedwoman,asmanyattestationsshow[Go-etz1994],couldhaveeasilyknownaboutPhaedra,andpreciselySe-neca’s version of Phaedra’s story. The tragedies of Seneca were copied throughouttheearlyMiddleAges,buttheoldestmanuscriptconservedisan11thcenturycodexprobablyproducedinthePoValleyandtran-scribedbefore1093,whenitwaslistedamongthemanuscriptspresent

28 DieBriefedesPetrusDamiani,III(1989),n.132:«NamRobertusGallorumrex,avusistiusPhilippi,quiinpaterniiurissceptrasuccessit,propinquamsibicopulavituxorem,exqua suscaepitfilium,anserinumperomniacollumetcaputhabentem.Quosetiamvirumscilicetetuxorem,omnesfereGalliarumepiscopicommunisimulexcommunicaveresententia».29 See,withrichearlierliterature,therecentFranzoni2008,85-87.30 Franceschini2004,207-208:«l’utilizzazionedellosplendidosarcofago,cheinau-gura la tradizione delle sepolture eccellenti, e la pubblica celebrazione annuale diBeatrice,fannodiquestaunafiguradieroeculturaledellacittà».


202

in the library of the Monastery of Pomposa31. Seneca seems to have been anauthorfamiliartothecultivatedpublic:PeterDamian,forexample,indifferentpassagesofhisworks,demonstratesthatheknowswelltheSeneca tragedies32.

The reuse of ancient sarcophagi

The fact that Matilda could easily know the story of Phaedra as told by Seneca is only a piece of our reconstruction. Another important element is the fact that her choice of re-using an ancient sarcophagus forhermotherfollowedarelativelyrecentusefortheItalickingdom,importedforthefirsttimeinthepeninsulabyPopeLeoIX,theLo-renese Pope who used to call Beatrice «nepta nostra» because of their ties by blood33.ItwasinfactLeoIXthePopewhochoseforhimselfaburialmodelnewtothebishopsofRome,whountilthenhadbeeninhumated,choosingapilo marmoreo that was well in sight in the Va-ticanbasilica,attheRavenousdoor[HerklotzI.2001,142-144].Thereis no clear information about the burials of his successors until Gregory VII,who,aswellknown,diedinSalerno,wherehewasburiedinthecathedralofthecity,inamarmoreum tumulum [HerklotzI.2001,144-

31 InthelatestcriticaleditionofSeneca’stragedies(Pisa2007),curatorGiancarloGiardinarecallsthattragedianSenecahasatraditionofover397codes,atraditionthatisdividedintotwobranches,EandA.The oldest manuscript of E is the Laurentianus plut.37.13(E),acodeofXIcenturyexeunte(ante1093).Hisdiscoverer,J.F.Gronov,calleditFlorentinusbecausehefinditinFlorence,andisnowcommonlyreferredtoasEtruscus,althoughthisisa‘mi-snomen’,asstatedbyMacGregor,1190,n.154,whereheidentifiestheLaurenziano37.13 with the manuscript present in Pomposa before 1093. 32 OnthesuccessoftragedianSenecaintheMiddleAges,seeTrillitzsch1978,126-127 about Peter Damian.33 Bertolini1965,171:«Il19luglio1050LeoneIXconcesselaprotezionedellaSedeapostolicaall’abateBonattodeimonasterodiS.Salvatoredell’Isola(diocesi,diSiena),“inclinatiprecibustuisetmaximeneptisnostraeBeatricisducatricis”».


203

146].ThenewstyleofmonumentalburialintroducedbyLeoIXem-phasized,evenafterthedeathofthePopes,thepapalprimacy(thesameprimacytheypursuedforcefullyinthosedecadesoftheXIcentury),and attributed a royal connotation to their remains by recalling the fu-neralusesoftheCarolingianssinceatleastCarloman,Pippin’ssonandbrother of Charlemagne. The custom to redeploy sarcophagi from the Roman period for the burials of kings was born in fact with his funeral34 andcontinuedwithoutinterruption,exceptonlyforLouisII,whodiedinItaly,andwasburiedintheBasilicaofSaintAmbroseinMilan.Notalways,however,asinthecaseofCharlemagne,suchsarcophagi,cho-seninadvanceandtransportedtoAachenfromItaly[Dierkens1991,166],remainedvisibleaftertheburial:thesarcophagusofCharlemagnewasburiedbelowtheground,beneaththewestentrancetotheAachenchurch[Dierkens1991,175-178;Nelson2000,145-151].Regardlessofwhetherornottheyremainedvisible,onethingiscer-tain: those sarcophagi were not randomly chosen and the sculptures carved on the marble had to emphasize those characters that the Ca-rolingian kings considered the most suitable to represent them in their last resting place. ThusthechoicewasalreadyclearinthecaseofCarloman,whosesar-cophagus,dating to the4thcentury,was thatof Jovinusconsul andrepresented the consul himself and a «vivid depiction of a lion-hunt» [Nelson,144-145].SuchimagesperfectlysuitedtherepresentationofakingwhowantedtobeseenastheheiroftheRomanauthorityand,atthesametime,ofhisfatherPippin’smilitarycapabilities,embodiedby hunting.ThesarcophagusofCharlemagneshowstheabductionofProserpina,interpreted by the Christian faith as the image of the soul rising to he-aven.Hisson,LouisthePious,hadchosenareligioussubject,which

34 Nelson2000,143-145,145:«BurialinareusedRomansarcophaguswasaninno-vation,asfarasweknow,forFrankishroyalty».


204

representedMoses’flightfromEgyptthroughtheRedSea:WalafridStrabohadalreadyacclaimedhimasanewMoses,leadinghispeopletowardsfreedom.NexttoMoses,MiriambecametherepresentationofthewifeofLouisthePious,Judith[Nelson,156].Inshort,theimagesofthesculptureswerereadinthe9thcenturyinaniconological manner: they were reinterpreted and adapted to the con-temporarycontext35 and to the subject that was to be commemorated. Their re-use thus shows a cultural operation of great awareness.MatildaherselfhadchosenthesarcophagusofSt.Anselm,whodiedinMantuaonMarch18,1086,a5thcenturysarcophagusthatrepresentsthesceneoftheTriumphofChristacclaimedbytheapostles,andthusrightly placed Anselm - that Matilda would have liked to become Pope -amongthenewapostles[Calzona2008,42-43].Finally,MatildahadcarriedmarblearchestoCanossa,toofferproperburialtoherancestors36.Regardinghermother’s sarcophagus, it is important tonotethat thechoice of Matilda was not necessarily limited to the Pisan archeological remains.As Arnold Esch had observed twenty years ago37, the analysis of thestylistic forms and materials makes it possible to establish that many of the spoliaintheTyrrheniancoastalcitieshadaremoteorigin,namelytheywerechoseninRome,Paestum,Pozzuoli,andthentransported-with relative comfort - by sea.

35 Againstaniconographicreading,instead,Franzoni2008,87.36 Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa, 2, 5-10: «Cumad clarorumprincipummausoleumiamperquinquelustranostraresiderethumilitas,nullamqueexeisvideretmemoriamquodapicumcommendaretperpetuitas,acciditquandonupervestriho-noris sublimitas Canossam deduci arcas iussit marmoreas ad tumulandum dignius eo-rumcorporauteaquaeexeisasenibusetveracioribusnostristemporibusviris,nostraaudieratparvitas,ferventizelocarmineheroiconostratemptaveritcarazareimperitia,netantorumheroumlaterentactafortiaetillustrissima».Aboutthesesarcophagi,seeFranzoni2008,88-89.37 IntheopeningpaperoftheXLVISettimanadelCisam:Esch1999,82-83.


205

InthespecificcaseofPisa,aninscriptionre-employedintheconstruc-tion of the cathedral of Pisa names the College of Naval Blacksmiths of Ostia[Esch1999,83,note16]andthefigurativecapitalsofthecathe-dral were taken from the thermal baths of Caracalla or from the Basilica NeptuniinRome[TedeschiGrisanti1990,119-120].Thesarcophagus,selectedinthevastRomanreservoirforitsfinewor-kmanshipandforthestoryittoldinitsbas-reliefs,couldhavefoundaplace in one of the transports towards the construction site of the cathe-dral.Afterall,asIsaidabove,Matildahadhad24yearsforchoosingit.

The Hunt

IfMatildaknewthestoryofPhaedra,whywouldsheputitasaperpe-tualmemoryonhermother’stomb,togetherwithaninscriptionthatemphasizedacloserelationbetweenthelady’sname,Beatrix and the epitaph peccatrix?Maybetherewasaverygoodreason,suchasthefactthatthestoryout-lined on the sarcophagus had many references to real incidents in the lifeofherlatemother.Inthissense,letusrecollectawellknownfactthatinthiscontextcanbeseeninanewlight.Beatrice’sfirsthusband,Boniface,actuallydiedduringahuntingpartyin1052atSanMartinodell’Argine,ormorepreciselyinthewoodofSpineda[Bertolini1971].AntonioFalce,theauthoroftheonlybiographyofthemargrave[Falce1927],believedthatithadnotbeenanaccidentandthatneitherHen-ry III, norGodfrey theBeardedwere completely extraneous to thisincident [Falce 1927, II, n. 82, 151-156].Among the contemporarysources,however,only somenarrations in theGermanarea, suchas


206

the Annales Altahenses38 and Hermannus Augiensis39,attributethedeathofBonifacetoanambushbysome“milites”.Othercontemporaryau-thors such as Lambert von Hersfeld40,BonizoneofSutri41 and Donizo42 himselfspeakonlyofhisdeathwhilehunting,withnocommentaboutthe possible culprits.ThedeathofBonifaceopenedanewchapter:fromthatmomenton,it is no longer correct to speak of the house of Canossa in a dynastic sense,beingbettertocallitCanossa-Lorraine[Lazzari2012],adeno-mination that best describes the new order that strove to take over the dominions that had been ruled by Boniface. Two years after Boniface’s death,Beatriceremarried–thistimehercousinGodfreydukeofLor-raine [Marrocchi 2002]. The marriage was considered by the Emperor HenryIIIanactofopenrebellion:GodfreyofLorrainewasaquarrel-some rebel who had even dared destroy the city of Verdun in order to obtainducalcontrolofthewholeofLorraine,inthefaceofthewishesofhisking[Marrocchi2002].Moreover,hemarriedthewidowofthemargraveofTuscany,thuscreatingaterritorialandpoliticalaxisunderthecontroloftheHouseofArdennesthatfromLorraineextendedasfarasRome,andculminatedintheelectionofLeoIXtotheChairof

38 Annales Altahenses,48:«BonifaciusmarchiodeItaliainsidiiscuiusdammilitissuiocciditur».39 HerimanniChronicon,131:«Bonifacius,ditissimusItaliaemarchio,immotyran-nus,insidiisaduobusexceptusmilitibussagittisquevulneratusetmortuus,Mantuaesepelitur».40 LampertiOpera,Annales,64:«MarchioItalorumBonifaciusobiit;cuiusviduamBeatricemduxGotefridusaccipiens,marchametcaeteraseiuspossessionesconiugiipretextusibivendicavit».41 BonizonisLiber ad Amicum,590:«HuiuspontificistemporemoriturinclitusduxetmarchioBonifacius,parvulosrelinquensheredes».42 Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,373-374,vv.1123-1127:«Sedcomplerenequit,quiamorsnonhocsibicedit,/IpsediesextaMadiipostquippeKalendas/Deseruit terram;quemChristusducatadethram./Quandodefunctus terraedatusestquesepultus,/tuncquinquagintaduotemporamilleDeistant».


207

StPeter–hehimselfamemberofthesamedynasty.Itwasanewterri-torialorderthatdirectlythreatenedtheimperialpower,andHenryIIIwas not slow in realizing it [Lazzari 2012].

Notonlywasthemarriageviolentlyopposedbytheemperor,butitwasalso considered illegitimate under Canon Law: Beatrice and Godfrey wereinfactcousins,relationstothe4thdegreeaccordingtoGermaniccomputations,thatisthemethodadoptedbyCanonLaw.In a letter that Peter Damian addressed in 1057 to Beatrice excellentis-simae duci43,enthusiasmisshownatonce,intheveryfirstlines,forthepublic choice made by the married couple to keep their union chaste: a choicethatimpededthemfromcommittingthesinofincestbutalso,inrealterms,fromhavinglegitimatedescendants[Lazzari2012].Butasisknown,evenifPeterDamiandidnotmentionit,theyprovidedfor the continuity of their union over time by arranging a sponsalicium,thatisanengagement,betweentheirrespectivechildren,MatildaandGodfrey[Lazzari2012,note67].

an unfortunate daughter

The union between Matilda and the son of her stepfather (likewise namedGodfrey, theHunchback), apparentlycaused fewerproblemsfrom the point of view of the canonic regulations compared to that

43 Die Briefe des Petrus Damiani,II,n.51,132:«Demisterioautemmutuaeconti-nentiae,quamintervosDeotesteservatis,diumefateorduplexopiniotenuit,utvi-rumquidemtuumarbitrarerhilariterhocpudicitiaemunusofferre,teverogignendaeprolis desiderio non hoc libenter admittere. Sed cum gloriosus idem vir nuper michi ante sacrosanctum corpus beati apostolorum principis intimasset sanctum desiderium tuumetpudicitiaeperpetuoconservandaepropositum, fateor:Laetatus suminhis,quaedictasuntmichietexultavivehementer.Iamsiquidemsolutumestinteilludantiquaemaledictionis elogium,quoprimaemulieridictumest: Subviripotestateeris,etipsedominabiturtui».


208

of their respective parents: the two were indeed comprivigni, that is,step-children,andneitherthecanonicnormnorthecivilcodeforbadeunionsofthiskind[Lazzari2012].But,thechildrenoftwocousins,inanycaseremainedrelatedbyafamilialrelationshipofthe5thdegree,toocloseforthenormsthattheLateranCouncilof1059hadsetdown,which forbade unions up to the 7th grade44computed“per genicula” 45. Forthetwoprotagonists,thisunionproveditselftobeanlucky.Theyoungcoupleremainedengagedfor14years,anextremelylongtime,especially considering the normal employ of the full reproductive pe-riod of women at the time: Matilda and Godfrey could marry only at VerduninDecemberof1069,whenthedeathofGodfreytheBear-dedhaddissolvedtherelationbetweentheirparents,[Bertolini1965].Matilda at the time was 23 years old. She stayed in Lorraine with her husband while her mother returned to the Italic kingdom where she undertook in person the government of the dominions of the House of Canossa-Lorraine. Beatrice assumed immediately the role of dux of Tuscany,legitimizedbytherecognitionofPopeAlexanderIIwho,on13January1070–andGodfreyhaddiedjustamonthbefore–intheact of taking the Monastery of Santa Trinità di Torri in the Siena area underhisprotection–declaredthathewasdoingsoespecially“inter-ventu Beatricis ducatricis”[Goetz1995,214].Matilda’smarriageonlylastedashorttime:shehadadaughter,anun-fortunatebabywhowasgiventhenameBeatrice,andwhodiedshortlyafter birth. It was after that delivery and the death of the baby that Matilda returned to Italy and never wished to meet her husband ever

44 Nicolai II Synodica generalis,548:«11.Utdeconsanguinitatesuanullusuxoremducatusqueadagenerationemseptimamvelquousqueparentelacognoscipoterit».45 Theseventhgrade,calculated“bygenicula”,isequivalenttothefourteenthac-cording to the Roman calculus. The council took up the arguments voiced against theRomancalculusbyPierDamiani,De gradibus parentelae,coll.191-204.


209

again.Hardlytwoyearsafterthemarriage,therecordsalreadyattesthispresence in Mantua46.

The separation

Thereasonforsuchanunusualanddefinitiveseparationhasbeentheobjectofmyriadconjectures,yetitissurelydestinedtoremainshrou-dedinmystery.Certainly,itdoesnotseemcrediblethatawomanbe-longing to the highest aristocracy of the empire would have deserted herhusbandsimplybecausehewasdeformed,asithasbeenrepeatedmanytimes.NorthatMatildahaddifficultyinadaptingherselftotheconjugalrelationshipinwhatshefeltwasahostileambience,asithasbeen recently asserted47: there is no data to substantiate such hypotheses and it is hard to understand why the lady should have considered ho-stileanambienceinwhichshehadlivedformanyyears,andinwhichshe had been raised.

I should like topropose ahypothesis that, even though still difficulttoprove,triestoputtogethertheevidencethatIhavepresentedhere.Ibelievethattheexplanationcanbefoundinwhatwerebelievedtobethegrievoustransgressionofincestanditsdramaticconsequencesfortheoffspring.Matildadidnotrejectmarriage,butseparatedfromherhusbandonlyafterthebirth–andimmediatedeath–ofthebabydaughterthatshehadborneandthatpossiblywasnotsufficientlywell-formed to survive. In the Chronicon of Saint Hubert48,acontemporary

46 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde,n.1,31-35.47 Golinelli 2008: «Furonomesimoltoduriper ladifficoltàdiM. ad adattarsi alrapportoconiugaleinunambientechesentivaostile,percui,appenalefupossibile,fuggìetornòpressolamadre».48 Chronicon sancti Huberti Andagimensis,583.


210

Lorrainesource,itisexplicitlystatedthattheladyfromthenonwardsrefusedGodfreyhis“maritalem gratiam”,inaword–sexualintercourse.

Godfrey tried to join her in Italy in 1073. He was welcomed by Bea-trice[Golinelli2008],butforthisreasonMatildadistancedherselfde-finitivelyfromhim,andfromhermother.Wemaydrawstillfurtherevidence of Matilda’s state of mind and her relations with her mother fromthecorrespondenceofGregoryVII.InearlyJanuary1074,thepope urged Matilda come to Rome together with her mother: an invi-tation which the lady did not accept49.Also,heaskedhernottoembra-ce the monastic life: the role to which she was called in the world was quiteanother50. In a letter written just a month later51,Gregoryexhor-tedher“ne illos desereres”,nottoabandonhermotherandherhusbandand,withgreataffection,thepopeurgedMatildatoreturntotakingcommunion,acureforthesoulshesimplycouldnotdowithout52. And hecounselledhertotrustherselftoHolyMary,who“altior et melior

49 Gregorii VII registrum,I,n.40,62-63,1074,January3:«Quaproptersicontige-ritgloriosammatremvestramhoctemporeRomamredire,totocordeammonemusimmorogamusclaritatemvestramadvisitationemapostolorumcumeademvenire,nisifortealiquidinstet,quodvosnonpretermittendanecessitatedetineat».50 Gregorii VII registrum,I,n.40,62-63:«Sednoveritprudentiavestrahonestisin-ceptisreligiosisqueinchoationibusopusessehonestioriperseverantiaatqueDeoopi-tulante religiosissima consummatione».51 Gregorii VII registrum,I,n.47,71-73,1074,February16,71:«Tutamen,sipen-sarenonneglegis,utreor,animadvertis,quiaprotantistuicurammeoportethabere,pro quantis te caritatis studio detinui, ne illos desereres, ut tuę solius animę salutiprovideres».52 Gregorii VII registrum,I,n.47,72:«Sedquiaintercętera,quaetibicontraprinci-pemmundiarmaDeofaventecontuli,quodpotissimumest,utcorpusDominicumfrequenteracciperes,indicaviet,utcertęfiducięmatrisDominiteomninocommit-teres,precepi,quidindebeatusAmbrosius,videlicetdesumendocorporeDomini,senserit,hisinlitterisintimavi».Andthen,later,73:«Debemus,ofilia,adhocsingu-lareconfugeresacramentum,singulareappeteremedicamentum.Hęcideo,karissimabeatiPetrifilia,scribereprocuravi,utfidesacfiduciainaccipiendocorpusDominimaior tibi accrescat».


211

ac sanctior est omni matre”,isgreater,betterandsaintlierthananyothermother53.“Ipromiseyouwithoutanydoubt–thepopeendstheletter–thatyouwillfindherreadierthananearthlymotherandmoreaffec-tionateinherloveforyou”54. Matildafinallyacceptedthepope’sinvitationtodrawclosertohermo-ther, but not to her husband, as it is demonstrated by thewelcomethatthetwowomensharedtogether,acoupleofmonthslater,ontheEaster of that same year55,toTheodoricII,abbotofthemonasteryofSt.HubertintheArdennesandtoHerman,bishopofMetz,whoac-companied him. The chronicle of the monastery of St. Hubert tells that the two men were going to Rome to gain Gregory VII’s support in thedisputethatopposedthemtoGodfreytheHunchback,reluctanttogiveeffecttothedonationsthathisfatherhaddecidedinfavoroftheabbey shortly before his death56.Beatrice and Matilda invited the abbot and the bishop of Metz to go to Pisa57,wheretheyweregreetedwithgreatpomp,andtogetherwith

53 Gregorii VII registrum,I,n.47,73:«DematreveroDomini,cuiteprincipalitercommisietcommittoetnuaquamcommittere,quousqueillamvideamus,utcupimus,omittam,quidtibidicam,quamcęlumetterralaudare,licetutmereturnequeant,noncessant?Hoctamenproculdubioteneas,quia,quantoaltioretmelioracsanctiorestomnimatre,tantoclementioretdulciorcircaconversospeccatoresetpeccatrices».54 Gregorii VII registrum,I,n.47,73:«Poneitaquefineminvoluntatepeccandietprostratacoramillaexcordecontritoethumiliatolacrimaseffunde.Inveniesillam,indubitanterpromitto,promptioremcarnalimatreacmitioremintuidilectione».55 Easter,whichin1074correspondedtoApril20.56 Chronicon Sancti Huberti Andaginensis,583:«Coactustandemabbasdeeodespe-rare,uteratamicissimusdominoHerimannoMetensiumepiscopo,disposuitcumeoRomamire,volensdeeventurerumpapamGregoriumVIIconsulere,etintereun-dum de eisdem agere cum marchissa Beatrice. Ingressi viam Romae pasca celebrare certabant, sedtardantibuseosquibusdam,quiobsoniaepiscopocertatimimpende-bant,adLunensemportumperveneruntmaiorishebdomadaeferiaquinta».57 Chronicon Sancti Huberti Andaginensis,583:«Ibioccurrit illis legatusmarchissaeBeatricis,cumprecibusetiamfiliaeeiusMathildis,utPisasdiverterent,utapudeasproximumpascasollempnizarent».AboutthisepisodeseeRonzani1997,133-135eCeccarelliLemut2016,357.


212

sevenotherbishops–amongthemSt.AnselmofBaggio[Ceccarelli2016,357]–celebratedtheEastersolemnities58.But the relationship between mother and daughter seems hopelessly spoiled,forwhatwecanguessfromdocumentaryevidences,whichseetheydriftingapart,andevenmore,theirencounteropportunities.WhatwasthentheblamethatMatildaattachedtohermother?Thatofhavingfirstwishedandpromoted,andthensupported–evenagainsttheclearevidenceoftheerror–anillicitmarriage,underminedfromtheoutsetbythefartoocloseconsanguinitybetweenthetwospouses.Werecallthat,onthebasisofGregoryVII’sletter,Matildanolongertookcommunionand the pope used all his persuasive power and all his doctrine to persua-de her to resume religious practice: it is evident that the young woman felt stained with such a serious sin that she could no longer receive the sacrament. Religion in the hardest years of the reform of the Church weighedheavily–wesawthatthroughPierDamian’stestimony59–onunions considered unlawful. Even if her marriage had the pope’s full blessing,thebiologicalresultofthatunionmusthaveshownMatildathattherewassomethingamiss,andthefactsspokeforthemselves.In the lastyearofBeatrice’s life,motheranddaughtermetverysel-dom60,andBeatrice–aswementionedatthebeginning–diedinPisa,alone.InthesarcophagusthatMatildaplannedforher,thedeathofthefatherwhilehuntingfeaturedasthebeginningofatragedy,markedbythecurseofincest,whichBeatriceherself–likePhaedra–committed

58 Chronicon Sancti Huberti Andaginensis,583-584:«SicdivertentesPisashonorabi-litersusceptisuntamatreetafilia,satiseminentioresceteriscurialibushabitiinea-demcuria.Inexsolvendispascalibusofficiisconvenerantibiseptemepiscopi,hiisqueomnibus postpositis celebritas missarum dominicae resurrectionis oblata est agenda HerimannoMetensiumepiscopo.Viderespraetersaeculariumconfluentiummulti-plicesglorias,clericorumdiversiordinisfrequentiam,ecclesiasticiministeriivasaaurietargentiquamplurima,diversiapparatusvestesperegrinas,BeatricemetMathildemprocedentesquasicuiusdamdominationispraefecturas».59 Seenote29.60 SeeBertolini1994,103-104,note17.


213

bymarryinghercousinGodfrey,butdidnotconsume,leavingittoherdaughtertobeartheconsequences,andpaytheprice.

Bibliography

Primary sourcesAnnales Altahenses maiores,GiesebrechtW.,vonOefeleE.L.B.(eds.),MGH Scripto-

res rerum Germanicarum,4,Hannover1890.

BantiO.2000,Monumenta Epigraphica Pisana saeculi XV antiquiora,Pisa,2000(Bi-bliotecadel«BollettinoStoricoPisano».Fonti,8).

Bonizonis Sutriensis Liber ad Amicum,E.Dummler(ed.),MGH,Libelli de lite,Han-nover1891,pp.568-620.

Chronicon Sancti Huberti Andaginensis, Bethmann L.C.,WattenbachW. (eds.), inMGH Scriptores in Folio,8,Hannover1848,pp.565-630.

Donizone,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,GolinelliP.(ed.),Milano:JacaBook,2008.

Die Briefe des Petrus Damiani, ReindelK. (ed.),MGH,Epistolae, II:Die Briefe der deutschen Kaiserzeit,4.I-IV,Munchen1983-1993.

Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde von Tuszien,GoezE.,GoezW.(eds.),MGH,Laienfürsten- und Dynastenurkunden der Kaiserzeit,2,Hannover1998.

Le epigrafi e le scritte obituarie del Duomo di Pisa,BantiO.(ed.),Pisa,1996(Bibliotecadel«BollettinoStoricoPisano».Fonti,5).

Gregorii VII registrum,CasparE.(ed.),MGH,Epistolae selectae in usum scholarum,II/2,Berlin 1923.

Lamperti monachi Hersfeldensis Opera,Holder-Egger,O.(ed.),MGH,Scriptores re-rum Germanicarum,38,Hannover1894.

Herimanni Augiensis Chronicon,PertzG.H.(ed.),MGH,Scriptores in Folio,5,Han-nover1844,67-133.

Nicolai II Synodica generalis,WeilandL.(ed.),MGH,LegumsectioIV,Constitutiones et acta publica imperatorum et regum,1,Hannover1893,546-548.

PierDamiani,De gradibus parentelae,inPatrologiae cursus completus. Series Latina,Mi-gneJ.-P.(ed.),Paris1853,CXLV,coll.191-204.

GiorgioVasari,Le vite de’ più eccellenti pittori, scultori, et architettori, 1-2, Firenze:Giunti,1568.


214

Secondary sourcesBantiO.1996,Leepigrafi e le scritte obituarie del Duomo di Pisa,Pisa:Pacini.

BertoliniM.G.1965,Beatrice,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,VII,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaItaliana,352-363,orainBertoliniM.G.2003,Studi canossiani,O.Capitani,P.Golinelli(eds.),Bologna:Patron,2003,169-183.

—1971,Bonifacio marchese e duca di Toscana,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,XII,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaItaliana,96-113,orainBertoliniM.G.,Studi ca-nossiani,O.Capitani,P.Golinelli(eds.),Bologna:Patron,2003,184-208.

—1994,I Canossiani e la loro attività giurisdizionale con particolare riguardo alla Tosca-na,inGolinelliP.(ed.),I poteri dei Canossa. Da Reggio Emilia all’Europa,Attidelconvegnointernazionaledistudi(ReggioEmilia–Carpineti,29-31ottobre1992),Bologna:Pàtron,99-141,orainBertoliniM.G.,Studi canossiani,O.Capitani,P.Golinelli(eds.),Bologna:Patron,2003,41-84.

BettiniM.2002,Fedra e il corto circuito della consanguineità,in«Dioniso»1,88-99,orainBettiniM.2009,Affari di famiglia. La parentela nella letteratura e nella cultura antica,Bologna:IlMulino,221-238.

CalzonaA.2008,L’altercatio tra Mantova e Canossa: immagini ‘diverse’ al servizio della Riforma, inCalzonaA.(ed.),Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa tra castelli, monasteri e città,Milano:SilvanaEditoriale,20-49.

CeccarelliLemutM.L.2016,La dimensione marittima della marca di Tuscia,inMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo,AttidelXXICongressointernazionaledistudiosull’altoMedioevoinoccasionedelIXCentenariodellamorte(1115-2015),SanBenedettoPo-Revere-Mantova-QuattroCastella,20-24ottobre2015,Spoleto:CISAM,355-370.

ClaussenP.C.2008,Scultura e splendori del marmo a Roma nell’età della Riforma ec-clesiastica nell’XI e XII secolo,inCalzonaA.(ed.),Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa tra castelli, monasteri e città,Milano:SilvanaEditoriale,202-2115.

CiccopiediC.,Matilde e i vescovi,inMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo,AttidelXXICongressointernazionaledistudiosull’altoMedioevoinoccasionedelIXCente-nariodellamorte(1115-2015),SanBenedettoPo-Revere-Mantova-QuattroCastella,20-24ottobre2015,Spoleto:CISAM,371-390.

Degl’InnocentiPieriniR.etal.(eds.)2007,Fedra: versioni e riscritture di un mito classi-co,Firenze:EdizioniPolistampa.

DierkensA.1991,Autour de la tombe de Charlemagne. Considérations sur les sépoltures et les funérailles des souverains carolingiens et des membres de leur famille, in Dierkens A.,SansterreJ.-M.(eds.),Le souverain à Bysance et en Occident du VIII au X siècle, «Byzantion»,61,156-80.

DierkensA. 2003,Les funérailles royales carolingiennes, inDierkensA. andMarx J.(eds),La sacralisation du pouvoir. Images et mises en scène(=Problemesd’HistoiredesReligions,XIII/2003).Bruxelles:Éditionsdel’UniversitédeBruxelles,45-58.


215

DierkensA.2004,Ad instar illiusquodBeseleelmirocomposuit studio.Éginhardetlesidéauxartistiquesdela«Renaissancecarolingienne»,inSansterreJ.-M.(ed.),L’autorité du passé dans les sociétés médiévales.Rome,ÉcoleFrançaisedeRomeetBruxelles, InstitutHistoriqueBelgedeRome(Collectionde l’ÉcoleFrançaisedeRome,333;=Bibliothequedel’InstitutHistoriqueBelgedeRome,LII),339-368.

DierkensA.2009,Quelques réflexions sur la présentation des sarcophages dans les église du haut Moyen Âge, inAlduc-LeBagousseA.(ed.),Inhumations de prestige ou prestige de l’inhumation? Expressions du pouvoir dans l’audelà (IV-XV siècle), Caen:C.R.A.H.M.,265-302,inparticolarepp.279-87

EschA.1999,Reimpiego dell’Antico nel Medioevo: la prospettiva dell’archeologo, la pro-spettiva dello storico,inIdeologie e pratiche del reimpiego nell’alto medioevo,AttidellaXLVISettimanadelCISAM,Spoleto:CISAM,73-108.

FalceA.1927,Bonifacio di Canossa, padre di Matilde,Reggio-Emilia.

FranceschiniF.2004,Beatrice e Matilde di Canossa. Tra il sarcofago di Fedra e il Purgato-rio Dantesco. Su una “bizzarra” interpretazione di Francesco da Buti,in«RivistadiStudiDanteschi»,IV,205-216.

FranzoniC.2008,Arcaemarmoreae: le antichità nel tempo di Matilde,inCalzonaA.(ed.),Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa tra castelli, monasteri e città,Milano:SilvanaEdi-toriale,84-95.

GoetzE.1994,Matilde di Canossa e i suoi ospiti,inGolinelliP.(ed.),I poteri dei Canos-sa. Da Reggio Emilia all’Europa,Attidelconvegnointernazionaledistudi(ReggioEmilia–Carpineti,29-31ottobre1992),325-333.

—1995,Beatrix von Canossa und Tuszien. Eine Untersuchung zur Geschichte des XI. Jahrhunderts,Sigmaringen:Thorbecke.

GolinelliP.2008,Matilde di Canossa,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,72.

HerklotzI.2000,Gli eredi di Costantino. Il papato, il Laterano e la propaganda visiva nel XII secolo,Roma:Viella.

HerklotzI.2001,“Sepulcra” e “Monumenta” del Medioevo. Studi sull’arte sepolcrale in Italia,Napoli:Liguori.

LauwersM.,TreffortC.2009,De l’inhumation privilégié à la sépulture de prestige. Con-clusions de U table ronde, inAlduc-LeBagousseA.(ed.),Inhumations de prestige ou prestige de l’inhumation? Expressions du pouvoir dans l’audelà (IV-XV siècle), Caen: C.R.A.H.M.,439-50.

LazzariT.2012,Goffredo di Lorena e Beatrice di Toscana,inCantarellaG.M.eCalzonaA.(eds.),La reliquia del sangue di Cristo. Mantova, l’Italia e l’Europa al tempo di Leone IX,Verona,pp.225-242.

Les sarcophages de l’Antiquité tardive et du haut Moyen Age : de la fabrication à la diffusion, Actes des XXXe journées Internationales d’Archéologie Mérovingienne (Bordeaux2-4octobre2009),acuradiI.Cartron,F.Henrion,C.Scuiller,supplémentàlarevueAquitania,Bordeaux,àparaître2013.


216

MacGregorA.P.1985,The Manuscripts of Seneca’s Tragedies. A Handlist,in«AufstiegundNiedergangderrömischenWelt»,II32.2,1135-1241.

ManariniE.2016,Ai confini con l’Esarcato: proprietà, possessi e giurisdizioni dei Canossa nel Bolognese orientale,inMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo,XXIcongressointerna-zionaledistudiodelCISAM(SanBenedettoPo,Revere,Mantova,QuattroCastel-la,20-24ottobre2015),Spoleto,459-482.

MarrocchiM.2002, Goffredo il Barbuto, duca di Lotaringia e marchese di Toscana, inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,LVII,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaItaliana,pp. 533-539.

MorronaA.1812,Pisa illustrata nelle arti del disegno,Livorno.

NelsonJ.L.2000,Carolingian royal funerals,inTheuwsF.,Nelson J.L.(eds.)Rituals of power: from late antiquity to the early Middle Ages,Leiden-Boston-Köln:Brill(TheTransformationoftheRomanWorld,8),pp.131-183.

RonzaniM.1991,Pisa fra Papato e Impero alla fine del secolo XI: la questione della “Selva del Tombolo” e le origini del monastero di S. Rossore,inPisa e la Toscana occidentale nel Medioevo: a Cinzio Violante nei suoi 70 anni,I,Pisa,173-230.

—1997,Chiesa e «Civitas»diPisanella secondametàdel secoloXI.La situazioneinternaedirapporticonilPapato,l’ImperoelaMarcadiTusciadall’avventodelvescovo Guido all’elevazione di Daiberto a metropolita di Corsica (1060-1092),Pisa.

—2001,Vescovi e città a Pisa nei secoli X e XI,inVescovoecittànell’altomedioevo:quadrigeneralierealtàtoscane,AttidelConvegnointernazionalediStudi(Pistoia-16-17maggio1993),Pistoia:Societàpistoiesedistoriapatria,93-132.

TedeschiGrisantiG.1990,I marmi romani di Pisa. Problemi di provenienza e di com-mercio,inDolciE.(ed.),AttidelseminarioIl marmo nella civiltà romana,Lucca,pp.116-125.

TedeschiGrisantiG.1995,Il sarcofago della marchesa Beatrice di Toscana,inPeroni,A.(ed.),Il Duomo di Pisa,Modena,592-594.

TirelliCarliM.1977,La donazione di Matilde di Canossa all’episcopio pisano,inBollet-tino storico pisano,46,139-159.

TrillitzschW.1978,Seneca tragicus — Nachleben und Beurteilung im lateinischen Mitte-lalter von der Spätantike bis zum Renaissancehumanismus,in«Philologus.ZeitschriftfurantikeLiteraturundihreRezeption»,122/1-2,120–136.

This article investigates the relationship between Boniface of Canossa and the Emperor Conrad II and counters the standard narrative which presents the two figures as close allies throughout Conrad’s reign. This article argues that this version of events is based too heavily on the account of Donizone of Canossa and on a handful of ambiguous references by other authors, all of whom held ulterior motives for portraying Boniface as a loyal and exceptio-nal imperial subject. By looking instead at the charter evidence for the interactions between Boniface and Conrad the article will demonstrate that the interests of these two individuals only coincided in the final years of Conrad’s lifetime and that it was only in these years that Boniface moved into a place of influence within the imperial court.

introduction

BonifaceofCanossawasthemostpowerfulsecularfigureinNorthernItalyduringhislifetime.HeheldtitlesandlandsacrossEmilia,Lom-bardyandTuscanybasedonacorearoundMantua,Reggio,Modenaand Canossa itself.1 Like his father Tedald and grandfather Adalbert Atto,Bonifaceisalmostuniversallyportrayedasafirmsupporterofthe

1 Golinelli2001,511;Sergi1994;Tincani1994;Zimmermann1994,413-19.

Reconsidering Donizone’s Vita Mathildis (again): Boniface of Canossa and the emperor Conrad ii

RoBeRT HouGHTonUniv. Winchester, Faculty of Humanitie

and Social Sciences


218

German Emperors.2 This relationship is often portrayed almost as an alliancebetweenequalsratherthanahierarchicalconnectionbetweenlord and vassal and is seen to reach its zenith under Conrad II (1024-1039) when Boniface participated in a series of campaigns within and beyondItalyinsupportofhisemperor,3 before collapsing dramatically and entirely under Henry III (1039-1054) and Henry IV (1054-1105) leading to open conflict betweenCanossa and imperial forces.4 The mainconsequenceofthisallianceisportrayedastheextensionofBo-niface’s rights and landholdings demonstrated most especially through his installation as duke of Tuscany.5However,thestrengthanddistin-ctiveness of this Cannosan-Imperial connection is generally overstated. The supposed alliance between Boniface and Conrad is not as clearly definedasisusuallysuggested.ThereislittletosuggestthatBonifacewas particularly favoured by Conrad and several factors that indicate that the emperor took active steps to counter Boniface’s power. Boni-facewassimplyoneofmanyseveralpowerfulfigureswithintheimpe-rialrelationshipnetwork,keptinbalancethroughtheempowermentof other members of this network.Boniface’s exceptional rolewithin imperial politics described in thetypical narrative stands at odds with typical structures of rule and au-thority deployed by the German emperors within Italy and the Empire more generally. The Ottonian and Salian systems of itinerant kingship demanded theexistenceofacarefullybalancedrelationshipnetworkineveryregionoftheempire,whosememberswererelianttoalargeextentonaconnectionwiththeEmperorforthelegitimacyoftheir

2 Bertolini1971,97;Golinelli2001,510-11,1991,17-22;Sergi1994;Zimmermann1994,414.3 Bertolini1981,118-19;1971,99-104;Tabacco1989,82;Violante1952,167-172;Zimmermann1994,416-417.4 Bresslau1967,105-7;Fumagalli1971;Golinelli2001,512;Weinfurter1999,106;Zimmermann1994,416-17.5 Bertolini1981,118-119;1971,99-100;Fumagalli1978,31;Sergi1994,36.

roBerT hoUGhToNReconsidering Donizone’s Vita Mathildis (again): Boniface of Canossa and the Emperor Conrad II

219

authority[Bernhardt1993,50-51].TheneedtomaintainsuchasystemisapartialexplanationfortheempowermentofItalianbishopsunderthesedynasties;doingsoprovidedtheemperorwithanothermeanstoinfluencethestructuresofpowerintheregion[Fumagalli1979,70-81]. This system of balanced relationships held in creative tension had beenamainstayofFrankishrule[Nelson1992;Wood1994;Rosen-wein1999],andwascontinuedbythepost-CarolingianrulersofItaly[Rosenwein1996a;1996b].TheapparentinstallationofBonifaceasanimperialviceroyinItalyonthebasisofauniquebondwiththeempe-ror is a substantial departure from this system and therefore demands more careful attention.TherelianceofBonifaceandhisfamilyonthelargesseoftheemperors,bestowedasaresultoftheirexceptionalloyalty,hasbeenoverempha-sised. Although the Canossans obtained some of their lands and rights throughimperialconcessions,thisonlyformedasmallpartoftheba-sisoftheirpower.Thefamilyhadprogressivelyexpandedtheirlands,wealth and authority through several methods which did not rely on imperial support and many of these alternative sources of power wor-kedatoddswiththegoalsoftheemperors.Mostblatantly,Boniface’sconstruction of a palace in Mantua from which he issued judgements represented a claim to public authority and jurisdictions and challenged therightsoftheemperor[Fumagalli1976,47;Marani1987,215-216;Houghton2015,399-400].Beyondthis,thewidespreadandwelldo-cumented usurpation of Church property by the Canossans [Fumagalli 1987,162;Golinelli2001,513-514,1991,82-85]isafurtherexampleofanalternatesourcefortheirexpansionandalsounderminedtheim-perial policy of empowering and protecting these institutions.6 Boni-face’sabilitytoexpandhispowerattheexpenseoftheChurchshouldnotbeseenasanindicationofImperialacquiescencetohisactions:in

6 Fumagalli1987,162,1976,44-45;Gardoni2006,224-26;Houghton2015,399-400;Mor1964,82-85.


220

severalcases,aswillbedemonstratedbelow,ConradactivelysoughttoempowerbishopsasacountertoBoniface’sgrowinginfluence.Boni-face’sexpansioninthismannerwasenabledbyimperialabsencewhichleftthesebishopsexposed,akeyexampleofthisishisseizureoflandsfromthebishopofMantua[Fumagalli1976,47;Gardoni2006,224-226]. Likewise,marriage intomajor Italian families greatly extendedCanossan lands over several generations without recourse to the em-peror[Houghton2015,398-400;Lazzari2008,107].Boniface’sfather,Tedald,expandedhis influenceandholdings inTuscanythroughhismarriagetothedaughterofHugh,MargraveofTuscany[Lazzari2008,109].BonifacehimselfacquiredvastlandsinLombardy(Brescia,Cre-monaandMantua),Veneto(Verona),andEmilia(ReggioandFerrara)asaresultofhismarriagetoRichildeoftheGisilbertini[Anton1972,533;Rinaldi1997,74-76].Thismarriagedidlittletofurtherimperialinterests: it did nothing to secure the support of the Gisilbertini who re-mainedcloselyassociatedwithArduinofIvrea,themainrivalofHenryIIinItaly[Lazzari2008,109;Houghton2015,398-400].Bonifaceandhisfamilywerenotdependentontheemperorfortheirpower,andinfactmuchoftheirexpansionrancountertoimperialinterests.ThecomplexitiesoftherelationshipbetweenBonifaceandtheempe-rors have been highlighted by several authors. The chronology of the rising tensions between Boniface and Henry III have been discussed extensively.7 More recently Boniface’s supposed alliance with Henry II hasbeenchallenged[Houghton2015].Ofmostrelevancehere,Boni-face’sloyaltytoConradIIhasbeenquestioned,particularlyintheearlyyearsofConrad’sreign[Anton1972,556].However,thismorenuan-ced consideration has had little impact on the common presentation of Canossan-imperial relations.A key reason for this disconnect is the selection of sources on which

7 Fumagalli1978,35-36;Golinelli1990;Gualazzini1933;Violante1952,175-176;Zimmermann1994,416-419.


221

the typical narrative is based. There are three core narrative sources for Conrad’s relationship with Boniface. Donizone of Canossa in his Vita Mathildis provides details of several events connecting the two in elabo-rate detail.8 Arnulf of Milan in his Liber gestorum recentium mentions both Conrad andBonifacebriefly andgives some further indicationof theconnectionbetweenthetwofigures.9 Wipo’s Gesta Chuonradi II imperato-rispresentsanimperialperspectiveofConrad’srule,includinghisexpedi-tionsintoItaly[Wipo1978].However,asAnton(1972)notes,mostmo-dern work on Conrad and Boniface has focused on the account given by Donizone.Thisisproblematic,asDonizone’sgoalsfrequentlyledhimtoexaggerateorevenfabricateeventstobettersuithiscarefullyconstructednarrative. This has led to a misrepresentation of the relationship between Conrad and Boniface in much of the modern literature.In order to redress this over-reliance on Donizone it is necessary to reconsidernot justhis aims inwriting,but also thoseofArnulf andWipo.Allthreeauthorsweredrivenbyspecificgoalswhichledthemtopresentdifferentversionsofevents,omitting,includingandfabri-catingdetailsinordertofittheirnarrative.Thisinturnhasinfluencedmodern accounts of the relationship between Conrad and Boniface. Afteranalysingthebackgroundandaimsoftheauthors,thispiecewillreconsider the events of Conrad’s reign through three key periods: 1) Conrad’s initial expedition into Italy and its aftermath (1026-1032).2) Conrad’s campaign for the Burgundian crown (1032-1034). 3) ThefinalyearsofConrad’s life, includinghis secondcampaign intoItaly(1035-1039).Througheachoftheseperiods,BonifacehasbeenpresentedasaloyalallyoftheimperialcauseandaprominentfigurewithinConrad’s systemof rule.However, these case studieswill be

8 Donizone,Vita Mathildis,GolinelliP.,FumagalliV.(eds.),2008.9 Arnulf,Liber Gestorum Recentium,ZeyC.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistori-ca,ScriptoresRerumGermanicaruminUsumScholarumSeparatimEditi67,Han-nover:HahnscheBuchhandlung,1994.


222

used to construct an alternative narrative of the relationship between Boniface and Conrad and to demonstrate that for much of Conrad’s lifetime Boniface did not hold any particularly special connection with the emperor and instead Conrad consistently took steps to balance Bo-niface’s growing power.

The sources

Riversi,throughapainstakingstudyofthetext,hascorrectlyidentifiedadeliberatemergingofhistoryandfiction,oraprogramma di veritá,within Donizone’s poem Vita Mathildis[Riversi2013,260-264].Do-nizonehad readnumerousmedieval, classical and sacred texts,10 and used the methods of rhetoric employed within these works as the basis for an account which presented events in a manner which suited his grandnarrativeoftheCanossanfamily,oftenalteringdetailsorfabri-cating events in the process.11TheubiquityandsubtlyofDonizone’sprogramma di veritánecessitatesafirmunderstandingofthepoet’sgoals.ThemostobviousaimwastoaggrandiseMatildaand,byextension,herfamily,12 but Donizone also set out to glorify his monastery at Ca-nossa [Golinelli2008,x,1992,201;Riversi2013,194-197].Bothofthese overt goals were connected to and driven by a more subtle aim: to legitimise Matilda’s control of her lands and counter the ongoing rebellions against her in the 1110s when Donizone wrote [Fumagalli 1978,32-33;Golinelli2001,515;Haverkamp1988,91].Donizone’seffortsto legitimiseMatilda’s landholdingextendedintothechaptersdealing with her ancestors who were depicted as close allies of the em-

10 Golinelli 2008, ix, 1992, 201;Houghton 2013;Riversi 2013, 251-259;Vecchi1963,364.11 Houghton2013;Riversi2013,262;Simeoni1927,24-25;Vecchi1963,364.12 Fasoli1971,38-39;Golinelli1999,29-31;Nobili1978;Simeoni1927,63.


223

perors[Riversi2013,251-259],andthepoetwentoutofhiswaytominimisetheconflictbetweenHenryIIIandBoniface.13 The construc-tionoftheCanossansasanidealised,loyalfamilywhichhadreceivedits lands lawfully and rightfully from the German emperors as a re-sult of their unyielding support was absolutely central to Donizone’s programma di veritá [Riversi2013,251-259].ThroughthisDonizonesought to demonstrate Matilda’s legitimacy to Henry V (1105-1125) and the rest of the Empire.Arnulf of Milan was the grand-nephew of archbishop Arnulf of Milan (998-1018)[Fasola1980,1020;Fliche1912,599].HisLiber gestorum recentium,written infivebooks, charts thehistoryof theChurchofMilan and its archbishops from 925-1077. Arnulf’s central goal was to uphold the glory and power of the archbishops of Milan [Violante 1971,282]andtheircapitaneivassals,includingArnulf’sfamily[Fasola1980,1020;Stock1983,163;Violante1971,281-282].WhenArnulfwaswriting,hecompletedhisfirstthreebooksin1072[Violante1971,282],thepowersandprivilegesofthearchbishopwereunderseriousthreat from the reforming popes but also from within in the form of the Paterene movement.14 Prompted by these challenges to the status of Milan,andasacorollarytothiscoregoal,Arnulfsoughttosecurealliesfor the archbishopric. This included the Canossans: Boniface of Canos-sawaspresentedasoneoftwo“LightsoftheKingdom”(duo lumina regni) alongside Aribert of Milan.15 This praise was designed to secure the support or at the neutrality against the reform papacy of Boniface’s widow,BeatriceofCanossa,andhisdaughter,Matilda,andresultedinArnulf’s emphasis of the importance of Boniface within Italy.

13 Anton1972,552-553;Bertolini1971,105-108;Golinelli2001,512;Houghton2015,396.14 Cowdrey1968,33-36;Fasola1980,1020;Stock1983,163-174;Zumhagen2002,31-34.15 Arnulf,Liber,152-153.


224

Wipo’s Gesta Chuonradi II Imperatoris is often ignored in studies of theCanossans, not least because Wipo makes no mention of Boniface whatsoever.However, thiswork still provides an important parallelview of Conrad’s rule in Italy and the supposedly pivotal events in his relationship with Boniface from the perspective of the German court. Wipo served as a chaplain to Conrad II and was present at his corona-tionandseveralotherkeyevents[Mommsen,Morrison1962,42].Healso claimed a close connection to the young Henry III: Wipo remained attheimperialcourtIIIafterhisConrad’sdeathin1039[Mommsen,Morrison1962,43;Wolfram2006,26].Theextanteditionofthetextis likely based on a revision in or after 1046 with changes made to emphasise the role ofHenry III [Mommsen,Morrison1962, 43-44;Wolfram2006,26].ThislatedateofcompletionhasledWolframtoarguethatWipoalteredeventstofittheneedsofhisnarrative[Wol-fram2006,26].Thisiscertainlythecase, likeDonizoneandArnulf,Wipo had several good reasons to distort his account. Wipo sought to glorifyConrad and, by extension,Henry.He also set out to ju-stifyConrad’sruleandaimedtoinfluenceHenry’sactions[Weinfurter1999,47].Inparticular,WiposoughttoinstructHenryinthepropertreatmentofhisclergy,goingsofarastoopenlycriticiseConradforhisattemptstoremovebishops,includingAribertofMilan,fromtheirpositions[Weinfurter1999,47].ThesegoalsledWipotoproduceanidealised account of Conrad’s rule designed to elevate not just the em-peror,butalsohisclergy.Theseaimsalsomeantthat,unlikeDonizoneandArnulf,WipohadnoneedtoinflatethepositionofBoniface:todosowouldnotservehisnarrativepurpose.Assuch,whileBoniface’spresence in the Gesta would certainly be a strong indicator of an au-gmentedrole,hisabsencesuggests thatBoniface’sconnectiontotheEmperorwasnotremarkableintheeyesofWipo,theGermancourtorConrad himself. The Gestaisthereforeavaluable,ifoverlooked,sourcefor the relationship between Canossa and the emperor.Beyond these narrative sources Conrad’s charters are an important re-


225

source for the study of his connections with Boniface of Canossa and his mannerofruleasawhole.ThesedocumentsallowedConradtoexertandexpresshisauthorityinseveralways.Theywereastatementofhisrighttointerveneinanarea[Keller2011,104-105].Theyunderlineda claim to legitimacy of rule by drawing on the traditions of previous kings and emperors through the use of established phrases and formats [Goldberg2009,213;Guyotjeannin2001,17-35;Keller1998,431-435].Theyprovidedapoliticalconnectionbetweentheemperor,therecipientandanywitnessesorpetitioners,tyingtheirintereststogether[BartoliLangeli2002,205-206;Bresslau1967,193-204;Koziol1992,47-54].Atthemostbasiclevel,theysuppliedameansfortheemperortoempowerhisvassalsthroughgrantsoflandsandrights[Keller2011,78-79].Thesecharters are important as they can provide an outline of political networ-ks within Italy and clarify Boniface’s position within these networks in greater detail and with less rhetoric than the narrative sources.

Conrad’s First Italian Campaign and Aftermath (1026-1032)

In1026,havingsecuredhisruleinGermany,ConradenteredItalyinpursuit of the Lombard and Imperial crowns.16 We are told that he enjo-yedthesupportoftheItalianbishops,mostnotablyAriberttheArchbi-shopofMilan,andBonifaceofCanossabutwasopposedbytherestofthenobilityledbyUlrichManfredofTurin,whoofferedthecrownofItalytoRobertIIofFranceandthenWilliamVofAquitaine.17 Conrad alsocameintoconflictwiththecityofPavia,whichdestroyeditsim-perialpalaceonthedeathofHenryII[NasaliRocca1955,288;Wein-furter1999,47].MostofConrad’sopponentsprovidednoresistance

16 Fumagalli1978;Golinelli2001,511;Weinfurter1999,45;Wolfram2006,95-102.17 Anton1972,535;Bertolini1971,99;Golinelli2001,511;Weinfurter1999,45.


226

when he arrived in Italy and were welcomed back into the imperial fold.TheexceptionswerethecityofPaviawithitsallies,AdalbertoftheOtbertenghiandWilliamoftheAledramids[Wolfram2006,99],which maintained resistance to Conrad until early 1027 [Schumann 1973,33-34;Wolfram2006,102],andRainerdukeofTuscanywhoheld out in Lucca in February and March of 1027 before submitting [Anton1972,535;Bertolini1971,99].WhilePaviawasabletonego-tiateareconciliationwithConrad[Wolfram2006,102],wearetoldthat Rainer was stripped of his duchy which was awarded to Boniface ofCanossainreturnforhissupportoftheemperor[Fumagalli1978;Golinelli2001,511;Rinaldi1997,64].Itis importanttoplacetheseeventsinthecontextofCanossa’srela-tionship with previous German emperors. The Canossans had enjoyed several moments of clear alliance with some of Conrad’s predecessors. Adalbert Atto supported Otto I in opposition to Berengar II.18 Tedald fought Arduin of Ivrea in favour of Henry II.19However, this rela-tionship was under strain in the early years of Boniface’s rule as de-monstrated by his absence from the charters of Henry II combined with the installation and empowerment by the emperor of numerous groups and individuals at odds with Boniface in and around his lands [Houghton 2015]. At the death of Henry II there is little reason to believe that Boniface was a strong supporter of the German emperors.Boniface’s alleged position as a supporter of Conrad in 1026 must the-reforebequestioned.ThemainevidenceforthisloyaltyisBoniface’sinstallationasdukeofTuscany.However,Boniface’ssupposedacqui-sitionoftheduchyin1027isproblematic.AdocumentofJacob,bi-shopofFiesole,producedon16March1032istheearliestsurvivingreference to Boniface as duke and margrave of Tuscany (dux et marchio

18 Anton1972,531-533;Fumagalli1994,17;Golinelli1991,17-22;Zimmermann1990.19 Anton1972,531-533;Arnaldi1962,59;Bertolini1971,97;Vasina1990.


227

Tusciae).20However,thisnewtitlecouldnothavebeenacquiredbyBo-niface in 1027. The dispositioofadocumentofthebishopofFlorence,Lambert,producedinJuly1028praysforthesalvationandredemptionof the souls and the health and safety of the dukes or margraves of Tuscany and for the safety of the margrave Boniface (pro salute et reme-dio animarum ducum seu marchionum Tusciae et pro salute et incolumitate clarissimi marchionis Bonifatii) [Falce 1927, II.7, 28].AsAntonnotes,this document clearly distinguished between the dukes or margraves ofTuscanyononehandandBonifaceontheother,thereforeBonifacecould not have received the duchy of Tuscany by this point [Anton 1972,537].ThismeansBonifacebeganusingthetitleafterConradhadleftItaly(Conradappears inBrixenon31May1027(DDK2;101))and implies that Rainer was not deposed in 1027 but remained ruler of TuscanyuntilJuly1028atleast.Rainer’s retention of his position in spite of his rebellion is consistent with Conrad’s broader behaviour towards his former opponents. Acts of reconciliation in the form of rituals of clementia and iustitia formed a core part of Conrad’s strategy of rule: by embracing and formali-sing these Carolingian and Ottonian rituals Conrad was able to pre-senthimselfastherightfulheirtotheseearlieremperors[Althoff2008,77-79]. This strategy is evident in Conrad’s willingness to restore his opponentstoimperialfavourevenafterextendedperiodsofrevolt.De-spitehisrepeatedattemptstosecureaFrenchkingofItaly,UlricMan-fred was not directly punished and by the end of Conrad’s life he was closelytiedtotheemperor[Bertolini1971,103].Paviaultimatelyre-conciledwithConraddespitethecity’slengthyrevolt[Wolfram2006,102].ConradwelcomedBosoandWido,thesonsofArduinofIvrea,HenryII’sgreatopponentforItaly,backintotheimperialfoldthrou-ghacharterconfirmingtheir rights in1026 (DDK2;67).Northofthe Alps this forgiveness and reconciliation was also common practice.

20 Anton1972,536;Falce1927,II.8,30;Zimmermann1994,416.


228

Forexample,Conrad’smainrivalfortheGermanthrone,ConradtheYounger,unsuccessfullyintriguedtooverthrowConradII[Wolfram2006,73-74].HeretainedhistitlesandwaslatergrantedtheduchyofCarinthia[Wolfram2006,75-76].Itisthereforecompletelyinkeepingwith Conrad’s method of rule for Rainer to retain his position.If,assuggestedabove,BonifacedidnotreceiveTuscanyin1027,the-re is no reason to assume he was a particularly active supporter of the emperor. None of the narrative sources identify Boniface working in concertwithConradatthispoint–evenDonizoneissilent.Meanwhi-leArnulfandWipoplacedAribert,thearchbishopofMilan,attheheadof the pro-German contingent but made no mention of Boniface.21 Boniface’s absence from Arnulf’s account is particularly noteworthy. Arnulf’s desire to strengthen the connection between Milan and Ca-nossaandhissubsequentreferencestoBonifacealongsidethearchbi-shopofthecity,itissurprisingforhimtomissanopportunitytopraiseBoniface here. These accounts are supported by a charter produced on 23March1026byConradinMilanwhichconfirmedthefoundationof a monastery in Milan by Aribert and demonstrates an immediate linkbetweenthetwo(DDK2;58).Aribert’ssupportofConradiscle-arlyvisible,whileBonifacecannotbeseenatall.AlthoughBonifacecannotbeplacedfirmlyamongConrad’ssupporters,hecanbeconnectedtofigureswhoactedagainsttheemperor.FromthetextofUlrichManfred’scorrespondencewithWilliamofAquitaine,itisclear that Manfred was the ringleader of a group of Italian magnates: in a letterofmid1025conveyinghisdesiretoabandontheexpedition,Wil-liamreferstoManfredas“themostillustriousMargrave”(M[aginfrido] marchioni clarissimo).22 the identity of the other members of this group is less clear. The Otbertenghi counts of Luni were connected to Manfred

21 SeeArnulf1994,bk.2chap.2;Wipo1978,chap.7.22 Fulbert,The Letters and Poems of Fulbert of Chartres,BehrendsF.(ed.),1976,no.110


229

throughmarriage,hiswifeBerthawasthedaughterofOtbertII[Previté-Orton2013,166],andtheOtbertenghiweresubsequentlyconnectedtotherebellionofPavia[Wolfram2006,99]sotheirinvolvementhereislikely. Boniface held a pair of close family connections with Manfred: Boniface’saunt,Prangarda,wasManfred’smother[Bertolini1971,98];Boniface’sfirstwifeRichildewasthedaughterofManfred’ssister[Ber-tolini1971,97].BonifacehadalsocampaignedalongsidetheOtberten-ghi towards the end of the reign of Henry II and was connected to them furtherthroughhismarriagetoRichilde[Bertolini1971,97-98].WhilethisiscertainlynotenoughevidencetodemonstrateBonfiace’sdirectoppositiontotheemperoritdoeshighlightthecomplexityoftheItalianrelationship networks and illustrates that his connection with Conrad is less certain than is usually assumed.Theimperialchartersproducedaroundthetimeofthisexpeditionpro-vide further insight into Conrad’s actions and goals. A large proportion of these documents adjusted the balance of power in Italy in order to counterthestrengthofConrad’sopponents.Anearlyexampleofthisisadocumentissuedon10June1025whichgrantedextensivelandsand rights to the bishop’s Church of Novara including control over thenunneriesofS.SalvatoreandS.FelixinPavia(DDK2;39).Thisserved as a statement of Conrad’s authority within Pavia and formed partofhisbroaderconflictwiththecity.Further,thebishopofNovarahadbeeninvolvedinarecentconflictwithUlrichManfredofTurin[Bertolini1971,98].Byemphasisingtheimperialconnectionwiththebishopricandempoweringthisinstitution,Conradsoughttobalancethe power of Ulrich Manfred in the region.There are several further examples of Conrad using his charters tocounter threats tohispowerbetween1025and1028.Mostnotably,Conrad produced an unusually large number of charters for institutions andindividuals inTuscanyincludingmonasteriesinLucca(DDK2;25,55,76),Capolona(DDK2;63),Amiata,(DDK2;79)andPerugia(DDK2;85),thecathedralchapteratArezzo(DDK2;74),alandhol-


230

dernearPisa(DDK2;77),andthebishopsofFiesoleandLucca(DDK2;78,83).This surge inproductionwasconnected to theconflictbetween Conrad and Rainer of Tuscany: even before Rainer barred the gatesofLuccatoConrad,Conradattemptedtounderminehisvassal’spositionbyempoweringotherfiguresintheareaandstatingtheim-perialrighttointervene.Conradlikewisereaffirmedlinkswithaseriesof religious institutions within Pavia in 1026 and 1027 as a counter totherebellionofthecity(DDK2;59,63,75).AgainstUlrichMan-fred,themonasteryatFruttuaria,atraditionalandpowerfulbalancetosecularpower in theregion,receivedconfirmationof its rights (DDK2;70,88),andbishopLeoofVercelli,hadtherightsofhiscathedralconfirmed(DDK2;84).ThroughoutItaly,butespeciallyinTuscany,Conrad took steps to assert his authority and undermine that of the figureswhohadopposedhim.However,Rainer,UlrichManfredandthecityofPaviawerenottheonly targets of Conrad’s statements of power and reorganisation of po-litical networks. Conrad also used his charters to emphasise his right and abilitytointerveneacrossCanossanterritory.AkeyexampleofthisisConrad’s empowerment of the bishops of Reggio and Modena. On 1 May 1027 Conrad conferred the role of legate (missus) within a radius of fourmilesofReggioonbishopTeuzo(DDK2;89).Thiswasajurisdic-tionally important and prestigious role: Teuzo was empowered to act with the authority of the emperor in legal disputes within this area. The earlierconfirmationoftherightsandprotectionsofthebishop’schurchinModenaon19June1026(DDK2;65)wasprimarilyareiterationofolderrights,butdidincludeapairofinnovations.Firstly,thisdocumentprovided a new list of the property of the church which was now un-dertheemperor’sprotection.Thislistincludedchapels,landsandotherpossessions across Canossan territory. Not only was this document a sta-tementofConrad’srighttointerveneinoneofBonfiace’skeyholdings,butitunderlinedhisabilitytodosoacrossCanossanlands.Secondly,thecharterextendedthebishopofModena’srightsofjurisdictiontoa


231

three mile radius of the city. Both of these documents represent major statements of imperial authority at the heart of Canossan territory and mirror the strategy used against the Canossans by Henry III and Hen-ry IV.23Inbothofthesedocuments,Conradassertedcontrolofpublicrights over and above those held or assumed by Boniface.BeyondthecoreCanossanlands,Conradissuedanumberofchartersto bishopswithinBoniface’s sphere of influence.Conrad confirmedandextendedthelandsandrightsofthebishopofBergamo(DDK2;56,90)andthecanonsofh.Vincenzointhesamecity(DDK2;60).HelikewisesupportedthemonasteryofLeno(DDK2;100),locatedtotheSouth-WestofBrescia,anareaofCanossanexpansion.Conrad’scharters of 24May 1027 confirming the rights and property of themonasteryofS.ZenoinVerona(DDK2;95)andthecathedralchap-terofthesamecity(DDK2;96)displayedhisabilitytoactinanotherarea ofCanossan interest. In a similarmanner, his grant of lands inVeronaandFerraratobishopJohnofVeronaon8June1031(DDK2;167)wasproducedasastatementagainstBoniface’sexpansionintheseareas.ThisisparticularlynotableasJohnandhisfamily(includinghisbrother,thecountofVerona,andfather,thecountofGarda)hadheldastrong connection with Henry II and their empowerment by Conrad’s predecessorformedpartofanearlierimperialefforttobalanceBonifa-ce’sgrowinginfluence[Houghton2015,404].Conrad’s early charters also demonstrate his attempts to empower some of Boniface’s main rivals. This included the bishop of Parma who had hisrightsconfirmedandextendedinapairofchartersin1027(DDK2;98,99)andthearchbishopofRavennawhoreceivedaconfirmationofhisrightsandpropertyin1028(DDK2;119).ThispairwereamongthemostpowerfulbishopsinItaly,havingreceivedextensivelandsandrights from previous emperors. They also represented the main obsta-clestoCanossanexpansiontotheeastandwestrespectively.In1029

23 Bertolini1971,109-110;Castagnetti1985,44;Colorni1959,46;Morselli1992,54.


232

Conrad issued a further pair of charters to the bishop of Parma. The firstofthese,producedon12June1029,simplyconfirmedtheexistingrights of the bishop’s church, including those granted in 1027 (DDK2;142)demonstratingtheongoingconnectionbetweenthebishopofParmaandtheemperor.Moresignificantly,theseconddocument,issuedon31December1029,agreedthatthebishopofParmawouldreceive the comital jurisdiction (comitatus) throughout the diocese on thedeath(withoutmaleheir)ofBernard,thecurrentcount(DDK2;144). This was a major and unprecedented concession to the bishop andrepresentsanattemptbytheemperortoproduceafigurecapableofwithstandingCanossanexpansion.Thegoalofcreatingaprominentpower inParma isunderlinedby the installationofHugh, a formerimperialchancellor,asbishopofthecityin1027[Pelicelli1936,106-130;Santifaller1964,27-43;Schumann1973,97].ConradempoweredapotentialrivaltoBonifacewhiletyingthisfigureandhisofficemoreclosely to the imperial court.BonifacecannotbeidentifiedasaclearsupporterofConradIIduringthe period 1026-1032. None of the narrative sources identify his invol-vement in Conrad’s campaigns and there is no evidence that Boniface wasgivencontrolofTuscanyatthispoint.Instead,Bonifacecanbetiedto Conrad’s opponents through marriage connections and previous al-liances.Moreover,thecharterrecorddemonstratesthecarefulconstruc-tionofacompleximperialrelationshipnetworkdesignedtocounterandrestrictCanossanexpansion.Withinhischarters,Conrad’streatmentofBoniface was most similar to his treatment of Rainer of Tuscany: in both cases although the emperor made no overt moves against his vas-sals,hedidnothingtofavourthemandmuchtocountertheirinterests.Although there is no sign that Boniface actively participated in rebellion orintrigueagainstConrad,itisclearthatBoniface’spositionwithintheimperialrelationshipnetworkwasnotexceptional:heshowednounu-sualloyaltytoConrad,wasnotaparticularlyfavouredvassalandhislordtook active steps to undermine Boniface’s position.


233

Conrad’s Burgundian Campaign (1032-1034)

Conrad’sconquestofBurgundybetween1032and1034wasthecul-minationoflongstandingdiplomaticeffortsbytheGermanemperorswhich had secured the agreement of Rudolf III of Burgundy that on hisdeath thekingdomwouldpass toConrad [Wolfram2006,239].However,whenRudolfdied inSeptember1032OdoofBlois inva-ded the kingdom to press his own claim.Conrad, after concludinghiscampaigninPoland,enteredBurgundywithGermanandItalianforces,defeatedOdoandincorporatedBurgundyintohisempire.ThisexpansionoftheempirewassignificantforItalianpoliticsasitsecurednewroutesintothekingdomfromGermanyandrepresentedthefirsttime that Italian troops were used en masse in an imperial campaign outside the peninsula.Donizone presents Boniface in a leading role in this campaign.24 Althou-ghthepoetincorrectlyplacestheexpeditioninthereignofHenryIII,25 he associates Boniface with the siege of the last stronghold of Odo of Blois at Miroaltum.26Arnulfprovidesonlyabriefaccount,butisequallyenthusedbyBoniface’srole.HeidentifiesAribertofMilanandBonifaceas thetwoleadersof theItalianforces,describingthemas“twolightsofthekingdom”leadingtheotherItalianmagnatesthroughthepassatBard in the Aosta valley: «Vicino autem Italie cum optimatibus ceteris electi duces incedunt presul Heribertus et egregius marchio Bonifacius, duo lumina regni, explorantes accessus illos, quos reddunt meabiles precisa saxa inexpugna-bilis opidi Bardi».27 These two accounts form the basis for the presentation ofBonifaceasaleadingparticipantinthiscampaign,anarrativewhichis often supported through Boniface’s installation as duke of Tuscany

24 Donizone,Vita Mathildis,bk.1,ln.887-978.25 Ibid.,bk.1,ln.888.26 Ibid.,bk.1,ln.890.27 Arnulf,Liber,152-153.


234

by1032.SuperficiallyBoniface appears toemergeas a leading Italiansupporter of Conrad early in the 1030s and this loyalty seems to be asso-ciated with the allocation of an important title by his lord.However,WipoprovidesaratherdifferentaccountoftheleadershipoftheItaliancontingent.Heplaces“thearchbishopofMilan,Aribert,andthe other Italians under the leadership of Count Humbert of Burgun-dy”archiepiscopus Mediolanensis Heribertus et cateri Italici ductu Huperti comitis de Burgundia[Wipo1978,chap.32].IncontrastwithArnulf’saccount,BonifaceisnotmentionedatallandAribertisreducedtoapositionbelowthatofHumbert.Wipo,withhisconnectionstoBur-gundy and the imperial court [Mommsen,Morrison 1962, 42],wasbetter placed than either Arnulf or Donizone to describe this campaign. Wipohadhisownagenda,whichdidnotincludetheaggrandisementofBoniface,buthisaccountsuggeststhatBonifacedidnotoccupyaparticularlyprominentpositionintheItalianarmy.Attheleast,Boni-face’s absence from the Gesta highlights the fact that his position was notviewedasextraordinarywithintheGermancourt:Conraddidnotsee his relationship with Boniface as special.Furthermore,Arnulf’sreferencetotheoptimates indicates the presence ofotherItalianmagnatesonthisexpedition,identifiedbyBertoliniasthelordsofEsarcato,GebeardoofRavennaandUgocountofBologna[Bertolini1971,101].Givenhispowerbaseinthenorth-westofItalyandhis improving relationshipwith theemperor, it isprobable thatUlrich Manfred of Turin was also present on this campaign [Bertolini 1971,101].Arnulf’spromotionofBonifacefitswithhisdesiretoim-proveMilan’srelationshipwithCanossaandthisgoalalsoexplainsthereferencestoBonifaceas“outstanding”(egregious).28 The reference to Bonifaceasalightofthekingdomwaslikewiseusedtoflatterhisheirs.Thephraseshouldnotbetakentoindicatehisfidelitytowardstheem-peror as it was used to describe not only Boniface but also Aribert who

28 Ibid.


235

became Conrad’s main opponent in northern Italy in the last years of hislife.ArnulfinflatedtheroleofbothAribertandBonifaceinorderto further his own goals.While the grant of Tuscany to Boniface does demonstrate a connection with theemperor, the significanceof this appointment shouldnotbeoverstated.There isno indication thatRainer,Boniface’spredecessor,enjoyed any connection with Henry II beyond his receipt of the duchy. His promotion was simply part of broader imperial attempts to balance thepowerstructuresoftheregion.Furthermore,asdemonstratedabove,Conrad’schartersduringhisfirstexpeditionintoItalyhaddonemuchtodecay the authority of the duke of Tuscany. Numerous institutions had been empowered and placed beyond the jurisdiction of the duke. The titlewasstillimportant,butBonifaceandhissuccessorswouldexpendagreatdealofeffortattemptingtoreclaimtheducalrightswhichhadbeen dispersed during Conrad’s reign: in combination with the family’s relativelysmallallodialpossessionsinTuscany[Fasoli1978,65],thisfac-torcontributedtowardsMatilda’sdifficulties incontrollingtheregion[Fasoli1978,66;Golinelli2001,515].IntheabsenceofotherconvincingevidenceforConrad’ssupportofBoniface,theCanossanacquisitionofthe duchy of Tuscany should be seen as part of the broader imperial strategy of balancing power and asserting authority in Italy rather than evidenceforauniquebondasdescribedbyDonizone.Further doubts about Boniface’s personal connection with Conrad du-ring the Burgundy campaign are raised through a consideration of the imperial charters. A pair of documents suggest that Conrad continued his programme of balancing Boniface’s power during his campaign in Burgundy.On30April1034,ConradgrantedthearchbishopofRa-venna the comitatusinFaenza(DDK2;209).Thisstrengthenedthepo-sitionofthearchbishopandcounteredCanossanexpansioneastalongtheViaEmilia.Thiswasfollowedon6June1034bytheconfirmationof the foundation of a hospice at a monastery in Florence by its Abbot Peter (DDK2; 210).Thedocument shows a continued relationship


236

betweentheAbbotofthismonasteryandtheemperor,thecontinuedempowermentandprotectionoftheinstitutionbytheemperor,andtheexclusionofBonifacefromthisrelationship.Themonasterywasafairly powerful entity in a strategic position within Boniface’s domain and so its close and ongoing relationship with the emperor represents a balance to Canossan power.This period in the middle of Conrad’s rule may represent a strengthe-ningofhisrelationswithBoniface,butthisisfarfromcertain.Bonifa-ce was probably involved in the Burgundian campaign: the inclusion of German and Italian elements in the imperial army suggests one of thelargestmobilisationsofConrad’sreign[Bertolini1971,101],andBoniface’sabsencefromthehostasaprominent,ifnotnecessarilypar-ticularlyfavoured,magnatewouldbeunusual.However,hispositionwithinthearmywasalmostcertainlyinflatedbybothDonizoneandArnulf for their own ends. Conrad’s charters suggest a continuation of his earlier policy of balancing Boniface’s power by building rela-tionshipswithfigureswhocouldopposethemargraveandstrengthe-ning the political,military and jurisdictional position of these indi-viduals. The evidence for this period is less conclusive than that for Conrad’sfirst expedition into Italy,butonbalance it seems that thesituationdidnotchangesignificantlyduringthiscampaign.BonifacewasstillapowerfulandimportantfigureinItalyandwasnowinte-gratedintotheimperialrelationshipnetwork,buthedidnotenjoyaposition of particular favour with the emperor and the emperor conti-nued to take steps to counter Boniface’s power. This is not to say that ConradwasovertlyhostiletowardsBoniface,butthismorenuancedrelationshipisverydifferentfromthevisionpresentedbyDonizone.EvenasheexpandedBoniface’srightsinTuscany,Conradsoughttomaintain abalanced relationshipnetwork in Italy,not topromote asinglefiguretoapositionofdominance.


237

Conrad’s Second Italian Expedition (1035-1039)

In the last years of Conrad’s life the political balance in northern Italy changeddramatically.AribertofMilan,adominantpowerinthere-gionandthetraditionalsupporterofConrad,becamethemainoppo-nentofthecrown[Anton1972,541;Reynolds1997,199;Salvatorelli1940,21].Thisconflictcausedprofoundpoliticalshifts,includingtheformalconfirmationoftherightsofthevalvassores across Italy through a charter of Conrad on 28 May 1037 known commonly as the Consti-tutio de Feudis (DDK2;244).BeyondtheeventsinMilan,theemperorwasinvolvedinotherconflictsincludingariotinParmaatChristmasin 1037 and a brief campaign into the south of the peninsula. It is no coincidence that this is the point at which Boniface appears closest to the emperor not only in Donizone’s narrative but also in the charters: the crisis with Aribert led Conrad to rebalance the structures of power in Italy extensively andBoniface, alongside severalother individualsandinstitutions,benefitedfromthisreorganisation[Anton1972,542-543;Salvatorelli1940,21]. Itwasonlyat this latepoint inConrad’sreign that strong evidence suggesting a prominent role for Boniface in theimperialrelationshipnetworkfinallyemerged.Nevertheless,the-re are several indications that this relationship was still not as close or exceptionalasDonizoneandthosewhofollowhisnarrativeimply.Donizone devoted a chapter to Boniface’s involvement in Conrad’s secondItalianexpedition.Thissectionofthepoet’sworkfocusesonthe riot in Parma at the end of 1037 while Conrad celebrated Christmas in the city. After detailing the arrival of Conrad and the start of the uprising,29 Donizone brings Boniface into his narrative:

ThemadnesswaspurifiedthroughthewisdomofCaesar, Heimmediatelysenthisarmedandhelmetedguardstothewalls, HeorderedourexperiencedlordBoniface,

29 Donizone,Vita Mathildis,bk.1,ll.843-853.


238

Asfarashecould,tobreakthefoolishcity.30

Boniface,heredistinguishedasthefriendoftheking,isthendescribedassaulting the city:

Havingswiftlygatheredhissquadronsofcavalryandinfantry, The friend of the king hurried to the ruin of the city.31

TheapproachofBonifaceterrifiedtherioters,whosubmittedtoConrad:

Havingseenthis,thecitizenswereafraidandreflectedontheirde-struction; Theysoonapproachedthefeetoftheking, And together they opened up the gate to the city.32

Bonifaceispresentedastheleaderofthearmy,thefriendandsaviouroftheemperor,andavassalofspecialimportance.Thecharterevidence,foronce,broadlysupportsDonizone’saccountofaclose relationship between Conrad and Boniface. Shortly before Conrad’s entranceintoItalyBonifacemadehisfirstdefiniteappearanceintheim-perialcharters.On5July1036(DDK2;231),Bonifaceislistedalongsidethechancellor,Pilgrim,andHermannthearchbishopofCologneasape-titionerrequestingthatConradtakethemonasteryofS.SistoinPiacenzaunderhisprotection.Bonifaceisdescribedhereas‘ourbelovedmargrave” (nostri diecti marchionis) claiming a close bond to the emperor.ThisconnectionwascontinuedafterConradenteredItaly.On10July1037BonifaceagainappearedasapetitionerforacharterrequestingtheconfirmationoftherightsofthecathedralchapterofFlorence(DD

30 «Proluit unde furor mage Cesaris, ilico muro / Applicat armatos custodes ac galeatos / Mandat hero nostro Bonefacio bene docto, / Quatinus accurat, iuvet urbem frangere stultam». Donizone2008,bk.1,ll.854-857.31 «Qui subito sumptis equitum peditum quoque turmis, / Urbis ad excidium properavit regis amicus».Donizone2008,bk.1,ll.858-859.32 «Quo viso cives trepidant reputantque perire: / Absque tenore pedes adeunt mox regis, et edes / Ac portas urbi reseraverunt sibi cuncti».Donizone2008,bk.1,ll.860-862.


239

K2;246),thistimealongsideConrad’swifeGisela.Bonifaceisagainpresented in glowing terms, this time as “ourmost faithfulmargra-ve”(nostri fidelissimi marchionis).Then,on22February1038,Bonifaceappeared in two court sessions both held in his casa at Uiuinaria (DD K2;258,259)bothdealingwiththechurchofLucca.Thesetwodocu-ments present Boniface in the role of a loyal vassal and position him in closeproximitytotheemperor.Thedocumentsgooutoftheirwaytohighlight Boniface’s role as host for these sessions. This role for Boni-face is particularly notable as Conrad typically made use of ecclesiasti-cal possessions for his adjudications and on his itinerary. In combina-tion,thesefactorsdemonstrateaveryvisibledisplayoftheconnectionbetween Boniface and Conrad.Boniface’s sudden appearance and prominence within Conrad’s charters coincided with two key developments in his connection to the em-peror.Firstly,followingthedeathofRichildebytheendofFebruary1036,BonifacemarriedBeatriceofLorraine,amemberofafamilywithclose ties to the emperor. This was one of a series of marriages linking prominent Italian magnates with German families close to the emperor undertakenwithConrad’sapproval ifnot support [Anton1972,543;Bertolini1971,103;Fumagalli1978,31].Secondly,Bonifacewaspre-sent at the wedding in Nijmegen of Cornad’s son Henry to Gunhilda ofDenmarkinJune1036[Anton1972,540].This is significantas itdemonstrated a link between Conrad and Boniface which went beyond Italian affairs. These two events fit the broader pattern of closer tiesbetween Conrad and Boniface described in the Vita and the charters.However,evenatthispointofcrisis inItalyBoniface’sproximitytoConrad should not be overstated. Nobili has convincingly suggested that Donizone’s account of Boniface’s rescue of Conrad was dictated by the poet’s integral presentation of theCanossans as loyal vassals,questioningwhetherBonifacewasinvolvedintheincidentinthewayDonizone suggests [Nobili 1978, 272].Boniface’s role in the riot atParma is mentioned only by Donizone and the sources which follow


240

him.Wipo,despiteavividaccountoftheevent,doesnotindicatethatBonifacewaspresent[Wipo1978,chap.38].Arnulfiscompletelysi-lentwithregardstotheevent,maintainingafocusoneventsinMi-lan.Theothersourcestomentiontheriot,theAnnales Hildesheimenses [1839],theAnnales Augustani[1839],andtheAnnales Parmenses mino-res [1863] also emphasise the imperial role and do not mention Boni-face.WhileBoniface’sabsencemaybeexplainedbyalackofinterestinItalianaffairsonthepartoftheGermanannalistsandchronologicaldistanceinthecaseoftheParmesechroniclers,Donizone’sversionofeventsisneverthelessisolated.EvenifBonifacewaspresentattheriot,Donizone surely elaborated his role.Donizone’sownaccountof the riot raises somequestions regardingthe position of Boniface in relation to the emperor. Boniface is placed withtheimperialhost,hencecampedoutsidethecity.Thismeanshewas absent from the feast and celebrations themselves. Donizone spins Boniface’sguarddutyintoanhonourableandvaliantposition,butthefact remains that this is not where a loyal and prominent supporter of theemperorwouldbeexpectedtobefound.Courtsessions,feastsandother public events provided the opportunity for the maintenance and developmentofrelationshipsbetweenlordsandvassals,butthisreliedonthephysicalpresenceof thesevassals [Nelson1987,166-172;Al-thoff1993,27-28;Arnold1997,170].Moreover,theriotinParmawasnotthepivotaleventofthisexpedition.Boniface’sparticipationinthesiege of Milan or campaign in the South is not recorded in the Vita,anyoftheothernarrativesources,or inthecharters.Boniface’sapparentabsencefromthesecentralelementsofConrad’sexpeditionillustratesthe limits of the connection between the two.That Conrad chose to celebrate Christmas in Parma is also telling. As demonstratedabove,ConradrepeatedlyempoweredHugh,bishopofParma,andHughremainedakeybalancetoBonifaceinthelate1030s.By spendingChristmas,oneof thekey festivalsof theChristianca-lendar,inParmaConradmadeaveryvisiblestatementofhissupport


241

for the bishop of the city. This was designed to cement the bishop’s positionagainstthearchbishopofMilan,butalsounderlinesConrad’songoing support for one of Boniface’s traditional rivals.Although Boniface’s appearances in Conrad’s charters in these years de-monstratethedevelopmentofacloserrelationship,thesedocumentsalsoshow that Conrad continued to empower groups and individuals within and around Canossan territory as a counter to Boniface. On 15 February 1036 Conrad reiterated the transfer of the comitatus to the bishop of Parma (DDK2;226),highlightinghiscontinuedsupportforthisfigure.Thiswas followedbyconfirmationsof the rightsof themonasteryatLeno(DDK2;227),monasteryofSZenoinVerona(DDK2;247),bishop’schurch inBrescia (DDK2;248),cathedralchapterofPistoia (DDK2;256),cathedralchapterofArezzo(DDK2;263)andmonasteryofSNa-zaroandCelsonearVerona(DDK2;274).Alloftheseinstitutionswerelocated in areasofCanossan landholding,manyof themhad receivedcharters from Conrad earlier in his reign and Boniface is not mentioned in any of these documents. While Boniface was now positioned closer to theimperialcourt,ConradstillsoughttokeepCanossanpowerbalanced.This imperial intervention was not restricted to the peripheral areas of Boniface’s holdings. On 31 March 1037 Conrad produced two charters forthebenefitofbishopHildolfofMantua.Thefirstofthese(DDK2;235)confirmedthebishop’sexistingrights,butwentintogreaterde-tail than previous documents in specifying the property of the Church whichwasunderimperialprotection.Thesecond(DDK2;236)reite-ratedtheimperialprotectionforthebishopandhischurchandexten-dedthisprotectiontotheabbotofSRuffinoinMantua.Throughthesetwo documents Conrad again underlined his right and ability to in-tervene in theveryheartofCanossan territory[Gardoni2006,221-224]. Mantua was the most important of the Canossan cities and most centraltotheirpower[Fumagalli1987;Gardoni2006;Marani1987].Conrad’s intervention here demonstrates that even as Boniface began toplayamorecentralroleinimperialruleinItaly,hewasbynomeans


242

affordeduncheckedpowerwithinhiscorelands.InthelastfourorfiveyearsofConrad’slife,andinsharpcontrastwiththerestofhisrule,thereisanundeniablepoliticalconnectionbetwe-entheemperorandCanossa.Bonifaceappearedfrequentlyandpro-minently within imperial charters. He travelled to Conrad’s court in Germany. He married into a powerful German family with strong ties to the emperor. Conrad held court within Boniface’s palace. Howe-ver,evenatthiszenith,Boniface’spositionwithintherelationshipnet-worksofnorthernItalyandtheempiremoregenerallywerecomplex.Conrad continued to build connections with groups and individuals within and around Canossan territory who could counter Boniface and who had traditionally opposed him. Boniface was empowered to acertainextentandstartedtoplayamoreprominentandvisiblerolewithintheimperialrelationshipnetwork,butthisisfarfromtheunila-teral image of designated responsibility presented in the Vita Mathildis. DonizoneexaggeratedBoniface’sinvolvementinConrad’sexpeditionand the participation of the margrave in key sections of the campaign cannot be determined. Boniface was certainly of importance to the emperorinthisperiod,andtheglowingportrayalofhiminthechar-ters demonstrates a desire to at least present a close relationship on the partoftheimperialcourt,buthisprominenceshouldnotbeoverstated.

Conclusion

Boniface’s position within the imperial relationship network in Italy during the reign of Conrad II has been overstated. Before 1032 there is noevidenceofanyremarkableconnectionbetweenthetwo,muchlessauniqueandstrongrelationshipofthetypedescribedbyDonizone.BythetimeoftheBurgundiancampaignalinkmayhavedeveloped,but there is little evidence that Boniface enjoyed a particularly unusual relationship with the emperor at this point. It was only during the pre-


243

parations for Conrad’s second Italian campaign that Boniface emerged asanimportantfigurewithclosetiestotheemperor,andthiswasonlyever in the contextof a carefullybalancednetworkof relationships.Our understanding of this connection has been oversimplified by areliance onDonizone’swork, but by consulting the other narrativesources and the charter record it is possible to identify a much more nuancedrelationship.Bonifacewassimplyoneelementinthecomplexsystem of political connections maintained by the emperor. He was not,andwasneverintendedtobe,animperialviceroyinItaly.Boniface’s sudden prominence at the end of Conrad’s life was prompted notbyaspecialrelationshipbetweenthetwo,butbytheshiftinthepolitical environment in Italy in the 1030s. Aribert of Milan’s fall from favour was the most visible of these changes. Aribert’s power and his traditional support for Conrad left the emperor with the need for sup-porters in the region in order to bring his unruly archbishop to heel. To this end the emperor empowered several bishops and the valvasso-res.However,thedeathofUlrichManfredin1034leftBonifaceastheonly powerful secular magnate who could support Conrad. Boniface’s marriage to Beatrice of Lorraine in 1036 may represent an early start inthisshift–ConradappearstohavebeenpreparingtomoveagainstAribertpriortohissecondItalianexpedition.Inanyevent,itwasthesechangingcircumstanceswhichledtoBoniface’sempowerment,notadramatic show of loyalty in the form of a rescue at Parma.Thisalternativereading,combinedwithpreviousanalysisontherela-tionshipbetweenBonifaceandHenry II [Houghton2015], and longstandingstudiesintotheconnectionbetweenBonifaceandHenryIII,33 demonstrates that Boniface was only close to the imperial court for a rather brief period at the end of the life of Conrad II. Boniface’s overt support for theGerman emperorswas therefore the exception rather

33 Fumagalli1978,35-36;Golinelli1990;Gualazzini1933;Violante1952,175-176;Zimmermann1994,416-419.


244

than the rule. This is in direct opposition to the narrative presented by Donizone,whowenttogreatlengthstopresentBonifaceasaconsisten-tlyloyalandprominentvassalofHenryII,ConradIIandHenryIIIinordertoportrayMatilda’sconflictwithHenryIVasanisolatedincidentcompletelyjustifiedbythefailuresandillegalactionsoftheemperor.This reassessmentalso raisesquestionsaboutwhenandhowBonifacebecame margrave or Duke of Tuscany. Boniface appears with the tit-ledukein1032,but isonlyacknowledgedinthe imperialcharters in1036.Eventhen,inConrad’sdocumentsBonifaceonlyeverappearedas margrave and was never associated with Tuscany. The issue needs moredetailedconsideration,but the transferof the titlewas certainlymorecomplexthanisusuallyallowed.Thenatureofthistransferisofparticular importance for the study of the control of Tuscany by the later Canossans.IfthisgrantwasnotwidelyacknowledgeditcouldexplainthedifficultyMatildahadinclaimingtheducalrightsintheregion.Fur-ther,itwouldpartlyexplaintheapparentrefusalbyHenryVtoconfirmMatildaintheserights,despitetheirreconciliationin1111andthere-storationofherauthorityinLombardy[Golinelli1994,2001,517-519].Moregenerally,thisreconsiderationunderlinesthecomplexitiesofthepolitical networks of northern Italy and Europe as a whole. It is insuf-ficient topresent individualsandgroupsas loyalor rebelliousvassals.Bonifaceisastrikingexampleofafigureimmersedinacomplexandchanging political relationship network whose allegiance cannot be simplifiedinthismanner.RainerofTuscanyreceivesonlytokenconsi-deration in most accounts of this period. He is presented most typically asarebelliousfoilforBoniface’sloyaltytotheEmperor.However,thecharterevidenceandConrad’stypicalmannerofrulesuggestabrieflyrebelliousfigurereturnedtotheimperialfoldwithonlytypicalsanction.UlrichManfredofTurinreceivesmoreattention,butislikewisealmostuniversally presented as a rebellious contrast to Boniface. His family ties withBonifaceandhisreconciliationwithConradandsubsequentem-powerment by the emperor are generally ignored. Even Aribert of Mi-


245

lanwhosecomplexandchangingconnectionwiththeimperialcourthas been considered in some depth is nevertheless often presented in an oversimplifiedmanner.Inparticular,thearchbishop’sconnectionwithBonifacebeforeandduringhisconflictwithConradneedsfurthercon-sideration. It is possible to gain a better understanding of their goals and motivations through a closer investigation of these systems.Finally,thisanalysishighlightsthenecessityofmoderatingchroniclesandothernarrativesourceswithcharterevidence.Donizone,ArnulfandWipo all present very clean narratives, simplifying,modifying,ignoring and fabricating events to produce an account which suppor-ted their goals. Accounts such as these are very attractive as they pre-sentagraphicanddetaileddescriptionoftheirsubjects.However,theseaccounts are almost invariably incomplete and overreliance on them can lead to critical misunderstandings of the political and social systems in which they wrote. While charters are also vulnerable to distortion bythegoalsoftheirauthorsandpatrons,theyprovideaninvaluablebalance to these more dramatic sources.

abbreviations

“DDK2”=Die Urkunden Konrads II, Mit Nachträgen zu den Urkunden Heinrichs II,BreslauH.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Diplomata,4,Hanover,1909.

Bibliography

Primary sourcesAnnales Augustani,PertzG.H.(ed.),inAnnales, chronica et historiae aevi Saxonici,Mo-numentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)3,Hannover,1839,124-136.

Annales Hildesheimenses,PertzG.H.(ed.),inAnnales, chronica et historiae aevi Saxonici,MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)3,Hannover,1839,90-115.


246

Annales Parmenses minores,PertzG.H.(ed.), inMonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores(inFolio)18,Stuttgart,1863,662-663.

Arnulf,Liber Gestorum Recentium,ZeyC.(ed.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,ScriptoresRerumGermanicaruminUsumScholarumSeparatimEditi67,Hanno-ver:HahnscheBuchhandlung,1994.

Donizone,Vita Mathildis,GolinelliP.,FumagalliV.(eds.),Bibliotecadiculturame-dievale823,Milano:Jacabook,2008.

Fulbert,The Letters and Poems of Fulbert of Chartres,BehrendsF.(ed.),OxfordMedie-valTexts,Oxford:ClarendonPress,1976.

Wipo1978,Gesta Chuonradi II Imperatoris,inTrillmichW.,BuchnerR.(eds.)1978,Fontes saeculorum noni et undecimi historiam ecclesiae Hammaburgensis necnon imperii illustrantes,Darmstadt:WissenschaftlicheBuchgesellschaft,507-615.

Secondary sourcesAlthoffG.1993,Demonstration und Inszenierung: Spielregeln der Kommunikation in mit-

telalterlicher Öffentlichkeit, «Frühmittelalterliche Studien», 27: 27-50.

—2008,The Variability of Rituals in the Middle Ages,inAlthoffG.,FriedJ.,GearyP.J.(eds.)2008,Medieval Concepts of the Past: Ritual, Memory, Historiography,Cambrid-ge:CambridgeUniversityPress,71-88.

AntonH.H.1972,Bonifaz von Canossa, Markgraf von Tuszien, und die Italienpolitik der frühen Salier, «Historische Zeitschrift», 24 (3): 529-556.

ArnaldiG.1962,Arduino, re d’Italia, in Dizionario biografico degli Italiani,4,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaitaliana,53-60.

ArnoldB.1997,Medieval Germany, 500-1300: A Political Interpretation, Toronto-Buf-falo: University of Toronto Press.

BartoliLangeliA.2002,Private Charters,inLaRoccaC.(ed.)2002,Italy in the Early Middle Ages: 476-1000, The Short Oxford History of Italy,Oxford-NewYork:Ox-ford University Press.

BernhardtJ.W.1993,Itinerant Kingship and Royal Monasteries in Early Medieval Ger-many: C. 936-1075,CambridgeStudiesinMedievalLifeandThought,4thser.,21,Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bertolini M. G. 1971. Bonifacio, marchese e duca di Toscana, in Dizionario biografico degli Italiani,12,Roma:IstitutodellaEnciclopediaitaliana,96-113.

—1981,Note di genealogia e di storia canossiana, in I ceti dirigenti in Toscana nell’età pre-comunale, Atti del 1o Convegno di studi sulla storia dei ceti dirigenti in Toscana, Firenze 2 dicembre 1978,Pisa:PaciniEditore,111-149.

BresslauH.1967,Jahrbücher des deutschen Reiches unter Kaiser Konrad II, Berlin: De Guyter.


247

CastagnettiA.1985,Società e politica a Ferrara dall’età postcarolingia alla signoria estense (sec. X-XIII), Rome: Pàtron.

ColorniV.1959,Il territorio mantovano nel Sacro Romano Impero. I, periodo comitale e periodo comunale (800-1274),Milano:Giuffré.

CowdreyH.E.J.1968,The Papacy, the Patarenes and the Church of Milan, Transactions of the Royal Historical Society 18: 25.

FalceA.1927,Bonifacio di Canossa, padre di Matilda, Reggio-Emilia: Bizzocchi.

FasolaL.1980,Arnulf von Mailand, Chronist, in Lexikon des Mittelalters,1:1020,Mun-chen:LexMA.

FasoliG.1971,Rileggendo la Vita Mathildis di Donizone,inBertuzziG.(ed.)1971,Studi matildici, Atti e Memorie del II Convegno di Studi matildici (Reggio Emilia, 1-3 maggio 1970),Modena:AedesMuratoriana,15-39.

—1978,La realtà cittadina nei territori canossiani,inBertuzziG.(ed.)1979,Studi ma-tildici, Atti e Memorie del III Convegno di Studi matildici (Reggio Emilia, 7-9 ottobre 1977),Modena:AedesMuratoriana,55-78.

FlicheA.1912,Arnoul, chronographe milanais (XIe siècle),inDictionnaire d’histoire et de géo-graphie ecclésiastiques,inEncyclopédie des sciences ecclésiastiques 4,Paris:LetouzeyetAné.

FumagalliV.1971,Le origini di una grande dinastia feudale Adalberto-Atto di Canossa, Tubingen:M.Niemeyer.

—1976,Terra e società nell’Italia padana: i secoli IX e X, Torino: Giulio Einaudi.

—1978,I Canossa tra realtà regionale e ambizioni europee, in Studi matildici, Atti e Me-morie del III Convegno di Studi matildici (Reggio Emilia, 7-9 ottobre 1977),Modena:AedesMuratoriana,27-37.

—1979,Il potere civile dei vescovi italiani al tempo di Ottone I, in Mor C. G., Schmidinger H. (eds.) 1979, I Poteri Temporali dei Vescovi in Italia e in Germania nel Medioevo,Bo-logna:ilMulino,77-86.

—1987,Mantova al Tempo di Matilde di Canossa,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1987,Sant’An-selmo, Mantova e la lotta per le Investiture: atti del convegno internazionale di studi, (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986),Bologna:Pàtron,159-167.

—1994,Discorso di Apertura,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1994,I Poteri dei Canossa, da Reggio Emilia all’Europa: atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Reggio Emilia-Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992),Bologna:Pàtron,15-20.

GardoniG.2006,Vescovi e città a Mantova dall’età carolingia al secolo XI, in Andenna G.,BrogioloG.P.,SalvaraniR.(eds.)2006,Le origini della diocesi di Mantova e le sedi episcopali dell’Italia settentrionale, IV-XI secolo,Trieste:Editreg,183-246.

GoldbergE.J.2009,Struggle for Empire: Kingship and Conflict under Louis the German, 817-876, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.


248

GolinelliP.1990,Una prerogativa dei Canossa: il “Paparum ducatus”, in Canossa prima di Matilde. Atti del Convegno di Reggio Emilia,Milano:Camunia,199-214.

—1991,Matilde e i Canossa nel cuore del medioevo,Milano:Camunia.

—1992,Donizone, in Dizionario biografico degli Italiani,41,Roma:IstitutodellaEnci-clopediaitaliana,200-203.

—1994,Matilda ed Enrico V,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1994,I Poteri dei Canossa, da Reggio Emilia all’Europa: atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Reggio Emilia-Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992),Ilmondomedievale,Bologna:Pàtron,455-471.

—1999,Le origini del mito di Matilde e la fortuna di Donizone, in Golinelli P. (ed.) 1999,Matilde di Canossa nelle culture europee del secondo millennio: dalla storia al mito: atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Reggio Emilia, Canossa, Quattro Castella, 25-27 settembre 1997),Bologna:Pàtron,29-52.

—2001,L’Italia dopo la lotta per le investiture: la questione dell’eredità matildica, «Studi Medievali»,42(2):509-528.

—2008,Donizone e il suo poema per Matilde,inGolinelliP.,FumagalliV.(eds.)2008,Vita di Matilde di Canossa,Milano:JacaBook.

GualazziniU.1933,Per la storia dei rapporti tra Enrico III e Bonifacio di Canossa, «Ar-chivio storico lombardo», 19: 67-83.

GuyotjeanninO.2001,Ecrire en chancellerie,inZimmermannM.(ed.)2001,Auctor et auc-toritas: invention et conformisme dans l’écriture médiévale : actes du colloque tenu à l’Université de Versailles-Saint-Quentin-en-Yvelines, 14-16 juin 1999,Paris:Ecoledeschartes,17-35.

HaverkampA.1988,Medieval Germany, 1056-1273,Oxford:OxfordUniversityPress.

HoughtonR.2013,Donizo,inThomasR.F.,ZiolkowskiJ.M.(eds.)2013,The Virgil Encyclopedia, Chichester: Wiley Blackwell.

— 2015,Reconsidering Donizone’s Vita Mathildis: Boniface of Canossa and Emperor Henry II, «Journal of Medieval History», 41 (4): 388-408.

KellerH.1998,Zu den Siegeln der Karolinger und Ottonen: Urkunden als “Hoheitszeichen” in der Kommunikation des Königs mit seinen Getreuen, «Frühmittelalterliche Studien», 32: 400-441.

—2011,The Privilege in the Public Interaction of the Exercise of Power: Forms of Symbolic Com-munication Beyond the Text,inMostertM.,BarnwellP.S.(eds.)2011,Medieval Legal Process. Physical, Spoken and Written Performance in the Middle Ages,Turnhout:Brepols,75-108.

KoziolG.1992,Begging Pardon and Favor: Ritual and Political Order in Early Medieval France, Ithaca: Cornell University Press.

LazzariT. 2008,Aziende fortificate, castelli e pievi: le basi patrimoniali dei poteri dei Canossa e le loro giurisdizioni,inCalzonaA.2008,Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa: tra castelli, monasteri e città,Milano:Silvana,95-115.


249

MaraniE.1987,Topografia e urbanistica di Mantova al tempo di Sant’Anselmo, in Go-linelli (ed.) 1987, Sant’Anselmo, Mantova e la lotta per le Investiture: atti del convegno internazionale di studi, (Mantova, 23-24-25 maggio 1986),Bologna:Pàtron.

MommsenT.E.,MorrisonK.F(eds.)1962,ImperialLivesandLettersoftheEle-venthCentury,NewYork:ColumbiaUniversityPress.

MorC.G.1964,Dalla caduta dell’Impero al Comune, Verona: Istituto per gli Studi Storici Veronesi.

MorselliM.1992,Le origini di un comune cittadino: analisi di alcuni documenti del liber privilegiorum comunis mantue, Modena: Università degli studi di Modena.

NasaliRoccaE.1955, Il patriziato piacentino nella eta del comune e della signoria, in ViscontiA.1955,Scritti storici e giuridici in memoria di Alessandro Visconti,Milan:Ist.ed.Cisalpino,185-306.

NelsonJ.L.1987,Carolingian Royal Ritual, inCannadineD.,PriceS. (eds.)1987,Rituals of Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies,Cambridge:Cam-bridgeUniversityPress,137-180.

—1992,Charles the Bald, London-New York: Longman.

NobiliM.1978,L’Ideologia Politica in Donizone, in Studi matildici, Atti e Memorie del III Convegno di Studi matildici (Reggio Emilia, 7-9 ottobre 1977),Modena:AedesMuratoriana,263-279.

PelicelliN.1936,I vescovi della chiesa parmense,Parma:OfficinaGraficaFresching.

Previté-OrtonC.W.2013,Early History of the House of Savoy: 1000-1233, Cambrid-ge: Cambridge University Press.

ReynoldsS.1997,Kingdoms and Communities in Western Europe, 900-1300, Oxford:Clarendon Press (2nd ed.).

RinaldiR.1997,Da Adalberto Atto a Bonifacio. Note e riflessioni per l’edizione di un Codice Diplomatico Canossano prematildico, «Bullettino dell’Istituto Storico Italiano per il Medio Evo e Archivio Muratoriano», 101: 13-91.

RiversiE.2013,La memoria di Canossa: saggi di contestualizzazione della Vita Mathildis di Donizone, Pisa: Edizioni ETS.

RosenweinB.H.1996a,Friends and Family, Politics and Privilege in the Kingship of Berengar I, inKlineCohn S., Epstein S.A. (eds.) 1966,Portraits of Medieval and Renaissance Living: Essays in Memory of David Herlihy,AnnArbor:UniversityofMichiganPress,91-106.

—1996b,The Family Politics of Berengar I, King of Italy (888-924), «Speculum», 71 (2): 247-289.

—1999,Negotiating Space: Power, Restraint, and Privileges of Immunity in Early Medieval Europe,Ithaca,N.Y.:CornellUniversityPress.

SalvatorelliL.1940,L’Italia Comunale dal secolo XI alla metà del Secolo XIV, Milan: Mondadori.

SantifallerL.1964,Zur Geschichte Des Ottonisch-Salischen Reichskirchensystems, Vien-na:HermannBöhlausNachf.(2nded.).


250

SchumannR.1973,Authority and the Commune, Parma 833-1133, Parma: Presso La Deputazione Di Storia Patria Per Le Province Parmensi.

SergiG.1994,I poteri dei Canossa: Poteri delegati, poteri feudali, poteri signorili, in Golinelli P.(ed.)1994,I Poteri dei Canossa, da Reggio Emilia all’Europa: atti del convegno interna-zionale di studi (Reggio Emilia-Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992),Bologna:Pàtron,29-39.

SimeoniL.1927,La “Vita Mathildis” e il suo valore storico,Modena:Societàtipograficamodenese.

StockB.1983,The Implications of Literacy: Written Language and Models of Interpretation in the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries,Princeton,N.J.:PrincetonUniversityPress.

TabaccoG.1989,The Struggle for Power in Medieval Italy: Structures of Political Rule, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

TincaniA.1994,Le corti dei Canossa in area Padana,inGolinelliP.(ed.)1994,I Poteri dei Canossa, da Reggio Emilia all’Europa: atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Reg-gio Emilia-Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992),Bologna:Pàtron,253-278.

VasinaA. 1990,Tedaldo di Canossa e Ferrara, in Canossa prima di Matilde: atti del Convegno internazionale di studi Canossa prima di Matilde: origine della potenza dei da Canossa, svoltosi a Reggio Emilia il 19-20 giugno 1987,Milano:Camunia,167-176.

VecchiG.1964,Temi e Momenti di Scuola nella “Vita Mathildis” di Donizone,in Studi Matildici. Atti e memorie del Convegno di Studi Matildici (Modena e Reggio Emilia, 19-20-21 Ottobre 1963),Modena:AedesMuratoriana,210-217.

ViolanteC.1952,Aspetti della politica italiana di Enrico III prima della sua discesa in Italia (1039-1046), «Rivista storica italiana», 64: 157-176.

—1971,Arnolfo, Proniponte del fratello dell’arcivescovo di Milano Arnolfo (I), in Diziona-rio biografico degli italiani, Rome: Istituto della Enciclopedia italiana.

WeinfurterS.1999,The Salian Century: Main Currents in an Age of Transition, Phila-delphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.

WolframH. 2006,Conrad II, 990-1039: Emperor of Three Kingdoms,KaiserD.A.(transl.),UniversityPark:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress.

WoodI.N.1994,The Merovingian Kingdoms, 450-751, London-New York: Longman.

ZimmermannH.1990,Canossa e il matrimonio di Adelaide, in Canossa prima di Matil-de. Atti del Convegno di Reggio Emilia,Milano:Camunia,141-155.

—1994,I Signori di Canossa e l’Impero (da Ottone I a Enrico III), in Golinelli P. (ed.) 1994,I Poteri dei Canossa, da Reggio Emilia all’Europa: atti del convegno internazionale di studi (Reggio Emilia-Carpineti, 29-31 ottobre 1992),Bologna:Pàtron,413-419.

ZumhagenO.2002,Religiöse Konflikte und kommunale Entwicklung: Mailand, Cremo-na, Piacenza und Florenz zur Zeit der Pataria,Köln:BöhlauVerlag.

The episcopate of Reggio Emilia was the reference one of the Canossa Castle. Recent works and excavations in the complex of the Cathedral of Reggio Emilia led to the publication of numerous contributions which in many ways brought to a new readings of the building. In the light of the new data, we wonder if Matilda of Canossa, or her mother Beatrice, as local Lords and as a kind of armed wing of the so-called reformed papacy, about the choice of images too, had a special role in the construction of the cathedral of Reggio Emilia.

introduzione

Dal2004al2009lacattedralediReggioEmilia(fig.1)estataoggettodiuna lunga fase di lavori che ha riguardato il recupero funzionale e con-servativo degli alzati e contemporaneamente è stata interessata da una estesacampagnadiscaviarcheologicisulsagratoeall’interno,inparti-colare all’altezza della prima campata da ovest e in cripta. Ne è scaturita unamoleconsistentedidaticheeinmassimaparteconfluitainunvo-lumeapiùmani[CantinoWataghinetal.2014]conilqualesiecerca-todidarecontoinmodoproblematicodialcunequestioniemersedaisorprendenti elementi venuti alla luce. Un numero consistente di stu-

la cattedrale romanica di Reggio emilia: il ruolo dei vescovi e dei Canossa

GioRGio MilanesiUniv. parma, Dipartimento D.U.S.i.C.


252

diosi è intervenuto su molteplici aspetti connessi ad epoche anche moltolontane,dallestrutturero-mane con relativi mosaici ritrova-teincripta[Curina2014a;Canti-noWataghin2014],allastrutturacircolare (fig. 2) emersa sotto ilpavimento della navata centrale [Calzona2014;Curina2014b;oraanche CantinoWataghin 2017],all’architettura e all’apparato de-corativo di epoca medievale [Mi-lanesi 2014; Lomartire 2014] emoderna[Mussini2014],alpatri-monio scultoreo e figurativo delXVI-XVIIIsecolo[Mazza2014].Nell’ultimo lustro sono stati anche pubblicati importanti volumi che hannosvolto, seppure supercor-si paralleli, un ruolo altrettantoimportante: una storia della dio-cesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla [Costi,Giovannelli 2012a;Costi,Giovannelli 2012b] con cui si è cercato di fare il punto della situa-zione in materia di storia eccle-siasticaedecclesiologica,ealcunivolumi che raccolgono gli atti di convegni tenutisi a Reggio Emilia [Orselli2009;Paolini2012;Ruini2014] o contributi con i quali sie dato conto quasi in tempo re-

Fig. 1. Reggio Emilia, cattedrale, facciata.

Fig. 2. Reggio Emilia, cattedrale, rotonda occi-dentale sotto la prima campata, foto di scavo.

GiorGio MilANeSila cattedrale romanica di reggio emilia: il ruolo dei vescovi e dei Canossa

253

aledellescoperteedeilavoriincattedrale[Grassi,Severi2007;2009;2012].Infine,benchénotidatempo,nonpossonoesseresottaciutigliimportanti e consistenti brani di mosaico pavimentale medievale con-servatiaiMuseiCivicidiReggioEmilia, inbuonaparteprovenientidallacattedrale,lacuiqualitàeilcuistilenonomogeneiobbliganoapensareadatazionidiverseperisingolinuclei.Ancheinquestocaso,dobbiamo rimandare agli studi più recenti per la loro disamina.1Poichéinquestasedesarebbeinutileripercorreretuttelefasidellacat-tedrale reggiana, e sarebbe ugualmente pleonastico dare conto dellabibliografiaspecificarelativaalcomplessovescovilediReggioEmilia,il riferimento ancora una volta corre obbligatoriamente ai saggi e al puntualeresocontostoriograficodelvolumedel2014[Morisco2014].Miconcentreròpiuttostosulla fabbricadelduomolimitatamenteallafasemedievale,einparticolarequellaromanica,faseimportanteperchécoincidedifatto,comevedremo,conl’impiantoplanivolumetricoat-tuale,tenutocontodellenumeroseaddizioniomodifichechetrapocoindividueremo. In tempi recentissimi, peraltro, sono stati pubblicaticontributivoltiaoffrireunquadrodisintesidell’architetturaromanicaitaliana[Tosco2016]einparticolaredelSettentrione[Lomartire2016;Vergnolle,Tosco2016]utiliperunacontestualizzazionestoricamenteestoriograficamenteaggiornata;adessidobbiamorimandareperl’E-miliaRomagnaingenerale[Calzona,Milanesi2016]eperirapportiarchitettura/committenzacanusina[Piva2011;Mancassola2016].

la struttura della cattedrale

Vadettochechiunquesisiaavviatoallostudiodelduomoreggianoeincappato in un enorme e per ora inesorabile ostacolo: contrariamente

1 Cfr.Calzona2006;Ghizzi2008a;Ghizzi2008b;Quintavalle2008;BarraliAltet2010.


254

adalcunedellecattedralidiepocaromanicageograficamenteecrono-logicamentepiùvicine,pensoperesempioaModena,aCremona,aPiacenza,aFerrara,aVerona,aPisa,aBergamo,nessunatipologiadifonte scritta consente il benché minimo appoggio documentario. Per-sinolacattedralediParma[Luchterhandt2009;2016],chepurenonhaconservatoattidifondazioneomaterialianaloghi,hatuttaviaalcuniappiglisucuifare,perquantocautamente,leva,vuoilaconsacrazionedipapaPasqualeIIinviaggioalnordItalianel1106ricordatadaDonizo-ne nel De principibus Canusinis,vuoilenotizie,seppurtrecentesche,re-lative al terremoto del 1117. Per Reggio Emilia non conosciamo al mo-mento nulla di paragonabile e pertanto solo la analisi stilistica delle parti medievali ancora esistenti in alza-to e dell’appa-rato scultoreo e musivo consen-tono di formu-lare alcune ipo-tesi.Ladifficoltàmaggiore nella lettura del cor-po di fabbrica della cattedrale di Reggio Emi-lia deriva dalle continue super-fetazioni che nel corso dei secoli si sono susseguite,diciamo fino alXVIIIsecolo.Per tale motivo, Fig. 3. Planimetria della cattedrale di Reggio Emilia, IV periodo (XII/

XIII secolo) [da Haec Domus surgit tibi dedicata 2014].


255

alfinedirendereapprezzabileecomprensibilelalettura,equindiforseutile compiere il primo passo procedendo per sottrazione degli ele-mentiavulsidallafabbricadiepocaromanica:eccodunquechetuttelecappellelateralirisultanoesserediepocamoderna,cosìcomel’allunga-mentoel’allargamentodellazonapresbiterialeeffettuatiapartiredalXVsecolo.Inoltre, l’interaattualeprimacampatadaovest,coinvolgendoanchelenavatelaterali,etardoduecentescaenonequindicontestualealla fasearchitettonicaalcentrodiquesto intervento.Si tengacontopoi che il sistema di copertura attuale è di tarda epoca moderna a sua voltainsostituzionediunsistemadicoperturaquattrocentescodicuirimangono evidenti tracce nel cleristorio e sopra la prima campata della navatella setten-trionale. Infine,la cripta che ve-diamo oggi è l’e-sito di numerosi ingrandimenti e rimodulazioni in rapporto alle tra-sformazioni della zona presbiteria-le e alla soppres-sione e apertura di nuovi accessi tanto che solo i recenti scavi hanno consenti-to di formulare una restituzione più fedele della cripta tardome-dievale. Natural- Fig. 4. Planimetria della cattedrale di Reggio Emilia, III periodo (XI/

XII secolo) [da Haec Domus surgit tibi dedicata 2014].


256

mente,occorretenerepresentelafaciestardo-modernainterna,talmen-teonnicomprensivaemimetizzantecheArthurKingsleyPorter,avevaconcluso che ci sono «notable remains of fresco decoration, but is otherwise entirely without archeological interest» [Porter 1915-1917, III, 307].Lostudioso americano si riferiva ai grandi brani a fresco di proporzioni monumentalioraconservatinelMuseoDiocesanochefinoallametàcircadelsecoloscorsoarricchivanoilfrontonedellafacciatadell’edifi-cio.Comeanticipato,l’analisifilologicaunita,inquestocaso,adalcuniappiglidocumentari,consentedidatarealpienosecoloXIIIlafacciatae la torre che la sovrasta, in coerenza strutturale con l’allungamentodi una campata della fabbrica della cattedrale romanica: in sostanza,primadellacostruzionedell’attualefronte,espungendoovviamenteintalmodoanchelesculturediBartolomeoSpanidiinizioCinquecento,dobbiamo immaginare una facciata di epoca romanica arretrata di una campataversoest.Siegiunticoncordementeaquestasoluzioneinra-gionedeidatifornitidagliscaviall’internoeall’esternodell’edificiopercuisirimandanecessariamentenellospecificoalvolumedel2014.Daquestiscaviealtresìemersaunadellesoluzionipiùoriginalipresentinelpanorama architettonico medievale padano. Si tratta di una struttura circolare inplanimetria,probabilmentecilindricaopseudo-cilindricain alzato, posta sulla fronte occidentale anteriormente al rifacimentoduecentescodunqueinaggettorispettoalfilodellafacciata.Talestrut-tura,munitadiduescaleachiocciola laterali,e larisultante,a livellodi fondazione,diduecorpidi fabbricaadiacentisull’asseest-ovest inmodochel’absidedellachiesachesisviluppavasull’attualesagrato,diepocapaleocristianaoalto-medievale,estatariutilizzatacomepartediunaprobabile torrecircolareoccidentalediunedificiodella secondametàdelXsecolosucuisiimposteràsuccessivamentelafabbricaro-manica.Concentrandociorasuglialzati,leprimedifficoltàsiincontranoosser-vando i paramenti murari del cleristorio meridionale e della testata oc-cidentaledeltransettorelativo(fig.5).Sinotanoinfattigrandiaperture


257

inserite in rottura in setti murari già interessati da precedenti interventi connessiall’inserimentodellevoltediXVsecolo.Ciòsignificacheilparamentolateriziodiepocamedievalesilimita,all’esterno,aglispazitragliestradossidelletamponaturedegliarchieallesuperficipiùvicineallalineadigrondadeltetto,incorrispondenzadellateoriadiarchetticiechi. Decisamente meglio conservato è il paramento della testata sud deltransettomeridionaleadiacentealcontiguoBroletto,sucuisipos-sono notare grandi specchiature individuate da sottili lesene desinenti inmodoregolareinunafiladiarchetticiechicheseguefedelmenteilprofilodellafaldadeltetto.Ilcleristorioeiltransettosettentrionale(fig.6),osservabilidirettamentedaunafinestraalpianoaltodelPalazzoVescovile,offronounaproble-matica lettura a causa di ancor più numerosi addossamenti e rifacimen-ti. Siamo in gra-do di osservare dall’esterno di-rettamente solo il setto occiden-tale dell’incrocio

Fig. 5. Reggio Emilia, catte-drale, cleristorio meridionale e prospetto occidentale del transetto meri-dionale.

Fig. 6. Reggio Emilia, cattedrale, cleristorio settentrionale.


258

tra cleristorio nord e la fronte occidentale del relativo transetto. Dati decisamente importanti si ricavano invece da una perlustrazione diretta deisottotetti,cuisiaccededallatomeridionale,dalpianosopraelevatodel Broletto.Percorrendolescalemodernediaccessoalsottotetto,realizzateinade-renzatralospigolodellatestataorientaleequellameridionaledeltran-setto antico e il tamburo di contenimento della cupola che sormonta la CappellaRangonarealizzatasulfiancomeridionaledelpresbiterio, sinotano alcune riseghe verticali e orizzontali che devono essere messe in relazione alle grandi specchiature che descrivono i setti murari medie-valideltransettomeridionalevisibiledall’esterno.Nericaviamodunqueche i perimetrali esterni del transetto medievale sono rintracciabili con sufficienteprecisioneversoovestesud(visibilidall’esterno)maancheversoestbenchécelatidaisottotettidellestruttureaggiunte.Aquestosisommaunaltroelementoimportante,osservabilealivellodelpianodicalpestio del sottotetto del transetto meridionale. Mi riferisco alla teoria diarchettipensili(fig.7)inprecariostatodiconservazione,maanco-ra leggibilinella lorofatturadiepocaromanica,cherisultanoinassecon il setto m u r a r i o o r i en t a l e del transet-to. Tenuto conto che l ’ a l t e z z a di questia r c h e t t i indica ov-v i amente anche l’al-tezza del-la gronda

Fig. 7. Reggio Emilia, cattedrale, sottotetto settore occidentale, in evidenza tracce di archetti ciechi.


259

della fabbricamedievale,possiamoconfermarenonsoloche lavolu-metria dell’attuale transetto, benché fortemente interessatoda super-fetazioniche lohannoquasiraddoppiatonellospazio,corrispondaaltransettomedievale,ma anche che l’altezza attuale dell’edificiopossaindicare con buona approssimazione l’altezza della chiesa romanica perlomeno nel settore presbiteriale.Dal sottotetto del transetto meridionale attraversiamo il sottotetto del presbiterio in aderenza alla parte esterna del tiburio che insiste sull’in-crocio,egiungiamonelsottotettodeltransettosettentrionale:quinonsiamo in grado, a causa deimassicci rifacimenti, di individuare conprecisione brani risalenti alla fabbrica romanica. Individuiamo tuttavia alcuni elementi di epoca tardo medievale (un capitello e alcuni archetti molto pronunciati diversi dagli archetti ciechi del sottotetto meridiona-le)cheapronoallapossibilitàdiverificarelapresenzadiungrandecan-tierediaggiornamentoincoerenzaconlepartidiXIIIsecolodelsettoreoccidentale cui abbiamo fatto cenno poco fa. Abbiamo conferma di tale cantiere duecentesco anche analizzando il paramento murario del sot-totettodellanavatamaggioreperquasituttalasualunghezza.Inquestazonainfattisipuòosservareunsettocontinuorealizzatoconlestessearcheggiature che abbiamo visto nel sottotetto del transetto settentrio-nale(fig.8),archeggiaturecheadunaattentaanalisirisultanosoltanto

Fig. 8. Reggio Emilia, catte-drale, sottotetto della navata centrale, arco tardoromanico.


260

addossate al perimetrale. Si tenga conto inoltre che una delle mensole chereggelearcheggiatureinquestostessosettoreestatainseritanellatamponaturadiunaprecedenteapertura(fig.9),contuttaprobabilità,

una mono-fora del s i s t e m a preceden-te alla rea-lizzazione delle ar-cheggiatu-re. Questo comporta che il cle-ristorio e il setto con le archeggia-ture non

sianocontestualiechequindiunoprecedal’altro.Dalmomento,evi-dentemente,chelearcheggiaturenecessitanodiunmurosucuivenireaddossate,dobbiamoconcluderecheisettoripiùelevatidelcleristoriodella navata centrale della cattedrale di Reggio Emilia sono composti da duestratidifferenti,dicuiquellopiùesternodeveessereilpiùantico.Le archeggiature trovano confronto con analoghe soluzioni dell’attuale torredifacciatadatabilealXIIIsecolo,obbligandocosìaritenerechelachiesa non avesse alcun tipo di copertura a volta nel Duecento perché tali soluzioni furono pensate per essere viste dall’interno della chiesa. Ancorainquestazonaepossibileosservareperaltrolapresenzadiungrande arco traverso che unisce i due cleristori sopra la navata centrale all’altezzadellacampatamediana(tralaterzaelaquartanellospecifico),secondo modelli già presenti in epoca ottoniana o proto salica [Vesco-vi2012,262-266]:l’esempiopiùnotoemeglioconservatoinItaliae

Fig. 9. Reggio Emilia, cattedrale, sottotetto della navata centrale, in evidenza una mensola tardoromanica ubicata in una monofora della fase precedente.


261

quellodellabasilicadiSantaMariaMaggioreaLomello(PV),databi-lealsecondoquartodelsecoloXI[Schiavi2010;DeMarchi,Palazzo2014],emergenzanellaqualeperaltrotrovariscontroanchel’aperturaritrovataneisottotettidellacattedralediReggioEmiliasituata,infun-zionedialleggerimento,nell’estradossomeridionalediciòcherimanedell’arco traverso.La prova che tale arco traverso appartenga alla fase precedente all’ag-giunta delle grandi archeggiature sui cleristori interni della navata maggiore è data dalla loro interruzione in corrispondenza dell’attacco dell’arcostessoeconfermataalcontempodalladecorazionepittorica,decorazione pittorica su dominanti bianco e rossa che è una cifra carat-teristicadell’interocantieretardomedievaledelXIIIsecolodalmomen-tochelasiritrovaqui,nellatorre/tiburiodifacciataequaelàsuimuriinterni delle navate e della cripta liberati dalle superfetazioni moderne [Autenrieth2012;Lomartire2014].Nonostantealcunitentatividiriconosceretraccedicripteantiche,da-gliscavieffettuatinonsieingradoinrealtàdiaffermareconcertezzase fosse esistita una confessione anteriormente ai decenni a cavaliere del XIIeXIIIsecolo.Talepossibilecronologiaderivainquestocasodaunseppur labile appiglio documentario rappresentato dalla comparsa nei documenti a partire dal 1211 di una «Ecclesia Sancti Grisanthi de Domo»,documento che è stato collegato al rilancio del culto dei santi cittadini avvenutoafineXII-inizioXIIIsecolo,2 e soprattutto alla presenza della primacriptadellacattedrale.Aquestacampagnadi lavoridellazonapresbiteriale relativi al 1211 deve essere logicamente e cronologica-mente connesso per via stilistica l’apparato scultoreo proveniente dalla recinzione presbiteriale ora diviso tra il Museo Diocesano di Reggio Emiliaeistituzionimusealistatunitensi[Vescovi2008a]eaquestastes-sa fase devono appartenere anche i leoni stilofori di cultura antelamica

2 Cfr. Saccani 1929, 103; Golinelli 1980, 149-151; Golinelli 2009, 138;Mussini1969;Monducci,Nironi1984,43.


262

ora in posizione spuria sul portale del perimetrale meridionale [Vesco-vi 2008b]. Oltre ai pezzi che compongono la recinzione presbiteriale databiliallafinedelXII-inizioXIIIsecolo,negliultimidecennisonovenuti alla luce anche altri brani che appartenevano all’arredo liturgi-co: la lastra con il Pantocratore e i simboli evangelici e una frammentaria Madonna con Bambino[Vescovi2008c;Vescovi2008d]lecuicronolo-gievannoportatealmenoalsecondoquartodelXIIIsecolo.Inquestasituazionecomplessa,percomprendereciòcheaccadenelsettorepre-sbiteriale della cattedrale di Reggio Emilia occorre tenere presente un ultimodato,dinaturadocumentaria inconfutabile.All’anno1223 (o1228)lecronachereggianeregistranoilcrollodellatorre,presumibil-mentedi facciata,cheobbligaa intervenire seriamente sulla fabbrica[Milanesi2014].AllafinedelsecoloXIIdunque,inconcomitanzaconilrilanciodelcultodeisanticittadini,sidecidedirealizzareunacripta(attestataappuntonel1211),probabilmentesoloincorrispondenzadel-lanavatacentrale.Aquestafaseappartengonoileonistiloforidelfiancomeridionale e le lastre con i santi della recinzione presbiteriale. Il crollo dellatorrepocopiùdidieciannidopo,evidentementenonprevedi-bile,comportal’aperturadiunnuovocantiere,questavoltadigrandidimensionienonlimitatoalpresbiterioche,duranteilunghiepisco-pati diNiccolò de’Maltraversi (1211-1243) eGuglielmodaFoglia-no(1243-1281),conduceaungeneraleaggiornamentocheculmineràcon l’allungamento di una campata per la realizzazione dell’attuale torre di facciata (documentatadal1269)erelativiaffreschiancora inparteconservati,conl’inserimentodellearcheggiaturedelsettorepiùelevatodellanavatacentraleedinfineconunadecorazionepittoricaomoge-nea su dominanti bianche e rosse dell’interno e con l’implementazione dell’arredo liturgico presbiteriale di cui si sono conservati la lastra con il Pantocratore e la frammentaria Madonna con Bambino cui aggiungere la lastra con i Re Magi [Vescovi 2008e] molto probabilmente collocata sulla nuova facciata duecentesca.Ilavoridirestaurodiquestiultimiannihannodunqueavutoilgrande


263

merito di porre all’attenzione degli studiosi una serie di elementi su cui ragionare per ipotizzare una cronologia della fabbrica anteriore ai grandi lavori duecenteschi. Partiamo dai setti murari più antichi che abbiamo individuato nel sottotetto della navata maggiore e nei transetti e compariamoli con altre fabbriche padane. L’uso insistito di materiale di reimpiego frammentato e frammisto a materiale lapideo con alti letti di malta e stilature marcate trova confronto nella Valle del Po con i cleristori e con i setti murari meno restaurati della parte occidentale del Sant’AntoninodiPiacenza[Segagni2009],ascrivibilealprimoquartocircadelsecoloXI,oppureconlecoevecortinemurariedellabasilicadiSantaMariaMaggiorediLomello,epiùsignificativamenteconal-cunicampaniliravennatidelprincipiodelsecoloXIcirca,o,inmododecisamentepiùpuntuale, con le absidi di SanMicheleArcangelo aNonantola [Milanesi 2012;Gelichi 2013], edificio questo avvicinatogià da Roberto Salvini al campanile dell’abbaziale di Pomposa che una ben nota epigrafe consente di datare con certezza al 1063 [Russo 2012].Tenutocontodelladifficoltàedellerelativenecessariecautelechede-vonoaccompagnareilraffrontoformaletraelementididecorazionear-chitettonica,allasecondametàdelsecoloXIinparticolareconduconoanche gli accostamenti che è possibile proporre per gli archetti ciechi esterni.AReggioladifficoltàedoppiadalmomentocheesistonodif-

Fig. 10. Reggio Emilia, catte-drale, cleristorio meridionale, in evidenza gli archetti ciechi.


264

ferenzeformalitragliarchettidelcleristorioequellideltransetto.Lacomposizionedegliarchettidelcleristorioepiùregolare(fig.10),conpeducci a mensola e piccoli laterizi curvi realizzati ad hocinfornace;gliarchettideltransettomostranomaggiorirregolaritàcompositiva,ipe-ducci hanno la forma di una goccia e la curvatura non è data da laterizi sagomatiperloscopo,madapiccoliframmentipostiditaglio.Sequestitrovano confronto in area padana con il complesso chiesa-battistero di VelezzoLomellina,conilcleristoriodellacattedralediMantova,conilSant’AntoninodiPiacenza,iprimimostranofortissimaparentelacongli archetti del cleristorio di Santa Maria Maggiore a Bologna [Russo 1972-1973,101-102] e col coronamentoabsidaledella chiesadiSanMicheleArcangeloedelcampanilediPomposa,anch’essipoc’anziri-cordati. La cronologia ai decenni centrali della seconda metà del seco-loXIsembrapoteressereconfermataperReggioEmiliaanchedaunaltro elemento: mi riferisco ad alcuni pezzi che compongono la bifora sulperimetralemeridionaledellacattedralereggiana.Talebifora–unastranasoluzionediepocaimprecisabile,masicuramentepostmedieva-le,comedimostral’originalemo-nofora retrostante – e il risultatoevidente di alcuni pezzi erratici ricomposti in una zona di compli-catissimo accesso sopra la falda del tetto della campata minore. Ciòche a noi interessa segnalare è il capitello corinzieggiante che reg-ge il pulvino decorato con motivi schematici fitomorfi e zoomorfi(fig.11).Ilcapitello,didimensio-ni contenute, si presenta su dueordini, l’inferiore dei quali conotto steli resi in modo sintetico,collocati verticalmente in modo Fig. 11. Reggio Emilia, cattedrale, capitello in

posizione spuria sul perimetrale meridionale.


265

regolaresullasuperficieepiccolicaulicolidiraccordonellapartesupe-riore.Lamedesimatipologiadicapitellosiritrovainaltritrecontesti,tutti e tre di area emiliana: il capitello con numero d’inventario 115 del MuseoCivicodiModena[Branchi1991];duecapitellinonantolani,ilprimocollocatonellacurvaabsidaledell’ex-abbazialediSanSilvestro,il secondo osservabile nelle foto di Lidia Bianchi che documentano i capitelli della cripta di San Michele Arcangelo prima della dispersione [Bianchi1937];infine,inunazonadicomplicatoaccesso,nellaquadri-fora meridionale del campanile pomposiano esistono due semicolonne sormontate da semicapitelli con il medesimo pattern del capitello della pseudo-biforareggiana,diModenaediNonantola.Ladatazionedeibraniplasticipomposianie scivolatafinoalVI/VII secolonellacon-vinzione che siano pezzi di reimpiego di epoca tardo-bizantina [Salmi 1966,97-98;Novara1999,164-170].AllalucedeinuoviconfrontieinveceragionevoleritenerechenellasecondametàdelsecoloXIunamedesima cultura figurativa accomunava alcuni importanti cantieridiocesani e monastici dei settori settentrionali e centrali dell’arcidiocesi diRavenna.Cisonodunquesufficientielementiperpoterconfermareuna cronologia della fase romanica della cattedrale di Reggio Emilia al terzoquartocircadelsecoloXI,unafaseromanicachepossiamorico-struire ora piuttosto bene.

la fase romanica

Sitrattavadiunedificioatrenavatecontransettocontinuoaltodesi-nenteinuncoroabsidato,concoperturaacapriate,conarcotraversomediano e un sistema di sostegni con scansione di tipo ottoniana o “dattilica” (due pilastri deboli e un pilastro forte, in sequenza).Nonsiamo ancora in grado di stabilire con certezza come fosse la fronte oc-cidentaleinalzato,sappiamoconsicurezza,comeabbiamoanticipato,che era arretrata di una campata e che con tutta probabilità mostrava


266

una struttura circolare sul modello delle chiese a doppio coro o absidi opposte oppure con Westbau circolare [Piva2013;Calzona2014].Aquestoproposito,nonostantelaconsistentemassadidatiraccolti,ean-coradifficilepropendereperunasoluzioneol’altra,ancheinrelazioneaiproblematici rapporti tra la faseromanicaequella tardocarolingia.L’esistenzadellacriptaaestnonedimostrabileperl’XIsecolo,sieinve-ce certi per via archeologica di una struttura ipogea sottostante il corpo occidentale preposta con molta probabilità alle sepolture privilegiate. Infine,isettimuraridelcleristoriosopralearcatedipassaggiotranavemaggiore e naviminori erano alleggerite damatronei, anzi, poichénonedimostratanessunacoperturadellenavatelleequindinessunpia-nodicalpestio,eranopiuttostocaratterizzatidapseudo-matroneinoncalpestabilisulmodellodelSanCiriacoaGernrode(960circa),inItaliaper la prima volta probabilmente realizzati sul cantiere della Ss. Trinità diMilano(poiSanSepolcro[Schiavi2005]).Daquantodetto,emergeinsomma l’esistenza a Reggio Emilia di una chiesa i cui modelli di rife-rimento possono essere rintracciati in area imperiale ottoniana e salica.NaturalmentesitrattadiunaconclusionechepuòforsemeravigliaredalmomentochesappiamocheReggioEmilia,conilvicinocastellodiCanossacostituivailcuoredeiterritoricanossiani.Madaquestodatooccorreoraripartirepercercaredicomprendereinchemodounedifi-ciocomequellocheabbiamodescrittosiinseriscanelrapportovescovi/Canossa.Nonabbiamo,come si evisto,unadataprecisa;dobbiamolimitarciaipotizzareunaforbicecronologicaincuimuoversi,forbiceche,cautamente,eopportunotenerelargatrail1060eil1080circa.Èpossibileverificareseinqueidecennivifosserocondizioniopportu-ne per la ricostruzione di una cattedrale su modelli imperiali un secolo dopolafabbricaottonianarintracciatanegliscavi[Calzona2014]?Po-stainquestamodo,larispostaataleinterrogativoapparequasiscontataperché basta scorrere l’elenco dei vescovi a cavallo della metà del secolo XIperaccorgersifacilmentechelaChiesadiReggioEmiliaeraintima-mente connessa al sistema della Reichskirkche [Giovanelli2012;Cenini


267

2012].Sigefredo,Conone,Adalberone,WolmaroeGandolfosonove-scoviperfettamenteinseritineiquadriimperiali,addiritturaAdalbero-ne (vescovo tra il 1053/54-1063) prima di assurgere alla cattedra reg-giana,fuprepostotraicanonicidiZurigo[Schwartz1993,196-197].Separallelamenteconsideriamocosaaccadde,ancheinmodosuperfi-ciale, sulversantedella famigliapiùpotentee influentedelladiocesi,ovviamentequelladeiCanossa,potremmotrovareun’altraapparentefacile spiegazione per la scelta di un modello imperiale per la cattedrale reggiana: come noto, la secondamoglie di Bonifacio diCanossa fuBeatrice,donnaprofondamente inseritaneiquadri imperiali [Lazzari2012].FigliadiFedericoducadiLorenaeMatilde,figliadelducadiSvevia, lagiovaneBeatrice fuallevataallacortediCorradoII, lacuiconsorteinterzenozze,Gisella,erasuaziainquantosorelladelpadre.DifattodunqueBeatricediLorena,lamadrediMatildediCanossa,eranipote dell’imperatore Corrado II e divenne cugina di primo grado con ilfigliodiquestiEnrico,ilfuturoimperatoreEnricoIII.Quandofuce-lebrato il matrimonio di Bonifacio con Beatrice nel 1037/38 (concluso nel1052conlamortediBonifacio),lafamigliadeiCanossaentròapie-no titolo nella grande vassallità imperiale europea. Se aggiungiamo che i primiCanossa provenivano dalla vassallità episcopale reggiana, giàinseritaaqueltempo–manonpotevaesserediversamente–,nelRei-chskirchensystem,potremmotrovaretuttelecondizionisocio-politicheideali per spiegare la scelta del modello di immagine per la cattedrale di Reggio Emilia.

Beatrice e Matilde di Canossa e le immagini della cattedrale

Ma la storia non procede attraverso fatti, date od avvenimenti con-trappostioconnessisecondounaequazionedifferenziale.Comelapiùaggiornatastoriografiasuggerisce,ledinamichesonosemprepiùcom-plesse e il rapporto episcopato reggiano/Canossa è una cartina di torna-


268

soleinquestosenso.Basti pensare ai polittici delle malefatte riferiti a Bonifacio a danno della Chiesareggiana,oalla interpretazionestoriograficasecondo laqualenell’XIsecoloinareareggianalacittàafferivageneralmentealvescovoeilcontadoafferivaaiCanossa,inparticolareproprionegliannidiBo-nifacio[Rinaldi2001].Taleschemaeperfettoinunquadrototalmen-tesgombrodaqualsivogliaattritoecontrasto.MaleprevaricazionidiBonifaciosonorealiedocumentate,pertantoquelquadroidilliaconelqualesieintesotalvolta,ottimisticamente,dividereleareediinfluenzadei vescovi reggiani e dei Canossa non ha mai funzionato [Cantarella 2012].QuandomuoreBonifacio,essendoifigliomortioancoratrop-pogiovani–Matildeavevasoloseianni–lagestionedell’immensopa-trimonio canusino passa in totonellemanidellamoglieBeatrice,laqua-le,sullascortadeidocumentichecisonopervenutisembramanifestareun certo disinteresse per la città di Reggio Emilia e per il suo episcopio perchéfocalizzatamaggiormentesuiterritoritoscaniedunquesuPisa.Dopo il 1052 si è conservato solo un documento e si tratta peraltro di unapiccoladonazioneaSanProspero(nel1072);nonecertopossibilesulla scorta di questo dato collegare ilmodello ottoniano-salico del-la cattedrale di Reggio Emilia a eventuali intrusioni di Beatrice nelle dinamichedicommittenzavescovile,dinamichecheviaggianosuvieindipendenti per la maggior parte dei casi e appaiono connesse soltan-toalle specificheesperienzeeculturedei singoliprotagonisti [Tosco2011]. Il disinteresse di Beatrice per la città di Reggio Emilia è solo apparentemente banale e si palesa in modo ancora più emblematico semplicementeconsiderandochequando lamadrediMatildemuorenel1076sidecidechevengaseppellitaaPisa, lontanodallesueterrenatie lorenesi, lontanodai duemariti (Bonifacio sepolto aMantova,GoffredoilBarbuto,sposatoinsecondenozzenel1054,mortoesepol-to a Verdun nel 1069) e lontano anche dal castello di Canossa e dalla cattedrale cui faceva riferimento. Non potremo mai sapere se la scelta di essere seppellita nel complesso della cattedrale pisana fosse dettata da


269

motivi esclusivamente di opportunità politica oppure anche da motivi legatialprestigiodiunedificiocheeranonsolonuovo(fufondatonel1063) ma anche innovativo e rivoluzionario nel panorama del romani-coeuropeo.RimaneilfattocheBeatrice,confermandoquantofeceilprimomaritoBonifacioeisuoiaviprimadilui,ecomefaràdelrestosuafigliaMatilde[Badini2012],nonebberapportiidilliaciconlacittàdiReggioEmilia.D’altraparte,nelpoemacelebrativodellafamigliadeiCanossa,afronteperesempiodellenotiziefornitesullaconsacrazionedella cattedrale diParma,Donizonenon fanessun cennoperquellareggiana, anzi, inunodiquei rarissimicasi incui sinomina lacittàl’accezione è o neutra o negativa (per esempio il ruolo di assistenza nei confronti di Corrado dopo la battaglia di Coviolo). Arrischiamo-ci a dire che se i Canossa avessero avuto un ruolo determinante nella costruzionedella cattedrale reggiana,Donizone avrebbe avutobuongioco,forse,nelricordarlo.Proviamoinveceaconsiderareunelementofinorapassatosottotracciachepuòforserivelarsiutilepercomprendereilquadrostoricoincuicollocarel’avvioelosviluppodelcantieredellacattedrale.Allalucedeiconfronticheabbiamoproposto,seperlacatte-dralepossiamoipotizzareuncantiereavviatonelterzoquartodelseco-loXI,ivescovatidiAdalberone(1053-1060),Volmaro(1062-1065)eGandolfo (1065-1085) appaiono momenti possibili di committenza di unedificiobasatosumodellicariallaChiesaimperiale[Vescovi2012].Esisteperòunaltropersonaggio, legato, anzi legatissimoallaChiesaimperiale e che svolse un ruolo da protagonista assoluto nella secon-dametàdelsecoloXI.L’arcivescovoGuiberto,notosoprattuttocomeGuibertodaRavenna,incaricadal1073finoallamortenel1100,eraalsecoloGuibertodaCorreggio,ovverounodeimassimiesponentidel-legrandifamigliedell’areaparmigiano-reggiana,imparentataperaltrocon la famiglia dei Canossa. Guiberto è ricordato solitamente a partire dalla sinodo “enriciana” convocata aBressanonenel 1080durante laqualefueletto(anti)papaeassunseilnomediClementeIIIinopposi-zionedapprimaaGregorioVII,mapoiancheaVittoreIII,UrbanoII


270

ePasqualeII.Unrecenteconvegnoromano[Longo,Yawn2013]neha indagato i molteplici aspetti ma anche in tale occasione il ruolo di arcivescovoeancoraprimadicancelliereimperialeapartiredal1058,epassatoquasitotalmentesottosilenzio.Credoinvececheilsuoruolodimetropolitadellasederavennateapartiredal1073,nonsiastatosenzaconseguenze, almeno indirette, nella sua areametropolitica, special-mente durante i suoi primi anni di reggenza e negli anni di più duro scontroconlaparteriformataromana,annicoincidenti,comeormailacriticapiùaggiornatariconosce,soloconilpontificatodiGregorioVIIfinoall’esiliosalernitano[Cantarella2005].IlruolodiGuibertoeperaltro strettamente connesso a quello del suo predecessoreEnrico,sullacattedraarcivescovileravennatefinoal1072,dopoaverricevutoilpalliodaLeoneIXnel1053[Frison1993;Zimmermann2003].Lavitadegli arcivescovi ravennati non doveva essere semplice: Enrico, cheebbebuonirapporticonPierDamianieappoggiòapertamenteCadalo–l’(anti)papaparmigianoOnorioII–,fuscomunicatodaAlessandroIImaebbeancheseriattriticonlacorteimperiale.LostessoGuiberto,comearcivescovo,cioedal1073al1080,dovetteadottareunastrategiaaccortaeattenta,daabileequilibristapolitico,perchésalivasullacatte-dradiunasedecolpitadainterdetto.Puòdimostrarloincontroluceiltentativo iniziale di instaurare con lo stesso Gregorio VII un rapporto di reciproca collaborazione nelle faccende ecclesiastiche locali.Torniamo alla cattedrale di Reggio Emilia. Nei decenni centrali della secondametàdel secoloXI abbiamovistoquantopoco fossero inte-ressate Beatrice e Matilde al capoluogo della diocesi del loro castello difamiglia;abbiamoaltresìvistoqualieranoivescovi,tedeschioco-munque perfettamente inseriti nellaReichskirche. Infine, in linea conlatradizioneravennatedall’epocaottonianainpoi,tantol’arcivescovoGuiberto,quantoilpredecessoreEnricofuronoesponentidellaChiesadell’Impero.Daquestoquadroemergecheilprogettodiunedificiochetradiscemodellid’immagineottoniano-protosaliciedunquebencom-prensibile.Tuttavia credoche la riflessionevadaportataunpocopiù


271

oltre,ancheallalucediunatendenzadistudichestaavendoinSpagnae in Francia una certa risonanza [Franzé 2015]. Mi riferisco all’annoso problemadelle scelted’immagineconnesseallaquestionedellacosid-dettaRiformagregoriana,secondoilqualegliesponentidellaChiesaedell’Impero,tralasecondametàdelsecoloXIeiprimidecennidelseco-losuccessivo,nonsisonoaffrontatisolosuicampidibattagliaoacolpidilibellisticaretoricamentecostruita,maancheattraversoleimmagini,come forma di propaganda e contropropaganda visiva.3 Ma alla luce di questoparadigma,come spiegare la cattedralediReggioEmilia?TraXIeXIIsecolononfuronopresuli“imperiali”Eriberto(1085-1094)eBonseniore(1098-1118)–pernoncitarelostessoAnselmodaLucca–che furono invece vicinissimi a Matilde e al papato romano negli anni immediatamentesuccessivi,ragionevolmente,allacostruzionedellacat-tedrale romanica che abbiamocercatodidelineare inquesta sede. Sedavvero la cattedrale era il segno del partito imperiale e dei vescovi sci-smaticicheavevanogiuratofedeltàaidue(anti)papi“emiliani”OnorioIIeClementeIII,perchéEribertooBonseniorenonsonointervenutimodificandoo ricostruendo lacattedralecomed’altraparteeraavve-nutoaModenaeaCremona?Eriberto, innanzitutto,visseper lopiùaCanossa,protettodaMatilde,segnoevidentedellascarsafiduciacheriponevaneisuoifedelireggianiesoprattutto,forse,delclerocittadino;inoltre,aldilàdelleambiguevicendechelovedonocoinvoltoaRomanel1111[Cantarella2012,540-541],nemmenoBonsenioregodevadiunrapportofelicissimoconlacittà[Lucioni2011,150-153].Ma,aldilàdiquesto,eancorapossibileporrelaquestioneinquestitermini,dopoleaperture recenti sul rapporto Modena/Nonantola al principio del secolo XII[Calzona2011]odopoleriflessionisugliaffreschidellachiesain-feriorediSanClementeaRoma[Wickham2013,408-417;D’Onofrio2016,35-41],ilcuicommittentefuprobabilmenteproprioClementeIII

3 Cfr.Quintavalle1964;Quintavalle1991;Quintavalle2006;Toubert1990,ancheperlabibliografia.


272

(anti)papa,ovveroGuibertodaCorreggio?SesiavràconfermachegliaffreschidiSanClemente,perdecenniconsideratiunoperadigrandeimportanzaper individuare l’immaginedellaRiforma[Toubert1990;Romano2006],sonolegatiallacommittenzadiGuibertodaCorreggio(anti)papaimperiale,credocheilproblemadellesceltediimmaginenel-laValledelPotraXIeXIIsecolodebbanecessariamenteessererimessoin discussione attraverso nuovi parametri.

Bibliografia

AngelelliW.,PomariciF.(eds.)2011,Forme e storia. Scritti di arte medievale e moderna per Francesco Gandolfo,Roma:Artemide.

AutenriethH.P. 2012,Le decorazioni pittoriche medievali della Cattedrale di Reggio Emilia,inPaoliniL.2012,Il Vescovo, la Chiesa, la Città di Reggio Emilia in età comu-nale,Bologna:Pàtron,245-292.

BadiniG.2012,La città di Reggio Emilia nell’epoca matildica,inCostiG.,GiovannelliG.(eds.)2012a,Storia della Diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla,Brescia:Morcelliana,543-563.

BianchiL.1937,La Pieve di San Michele a Nonantola,CittàdelVaticano:PontificioIstituto di Archeologia cristiana.

BranchiM.P.1991,Scheda 4. Capitello vegetale, inQuintavalleA.C.,CalzonaA.,BianchinoG.,ZanichelliG.1991,Wiligelmo e Matilde: l’officina romanica,Milano:Electa,345-346.

CalzonaA.2006,“Pavimentumcuriosum,quodestinecclesia[…]penitusevertatur”. Cattedrali e mosaici pavimentali a Reggio Emilia, Cremona, Pavia,inQuintavalleA.C.(ed.)2006,Il Medioevo delle Cattedrali. Chiesa e Impero: la lotta delle immagini (secoli XI-XII),Milano:Skira,291-334.

—2008,Matilde e il tesoro dei Canossa tra castelli, monasteri e città,Catalogodellamo-stra(ReggioEmilia,31agosto2008-11gennaio2009),CiniselloBalsamo:SilvanaEditoriale.

—2011,L’abbazia di San Silvestro a Nonantola tra ideologia e filologia,inAngelelliW.,PomariciF.(eds.)2011,Forme e storia. Scritti di arte medievale e moderna per Francesco Gandolfo,Roma:Artemide,197-210.

—2014,La cattedrale di Reggio Emilia e l’Europa. La struttura a pianta centrale ritrovata sotto la facciata occidentale attuale e la cattedrale dal X al XIII secolo, inMoriscoC.2014,CantinoWataghinetal.(eds)2014,197-223.


273

CalzonaA.,CantarellaG.M.(eds.)2012,La reliquia del Sangue di Cristo, Mantova, l’Italia e l’Europa al tempo di Leone IX,Verona:Scripta.

CalzonaA.,MilanesiG.2016,L’Art Roman en Émilie et Romagne. État des questions,«BulletinMonumental»,174(1):69-88.

CantarellaG.M.2005,Il Sole e la Luna. La rivoluzione di Gregorio VII papa. 1073-1085,Roma-Bari:Laterza.

—2012,I vescovi, i Canossa. Dalla riforma ecclesiastica alla lotta per le investiture,inCo-stiG.,GiovannelliG.(eds.)2012a,Storia della Diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla,Brescia:Morcelliana,515-541.

CantinoWataghinG.2014,Dal foro romano al castrum episcopale: la sancta Regiensis ecclesia e il divenire urbano tra tarda antichità e alto medioevo,inCantinoWataghinG.etal.(eds.)2014,133-151.

—2017,La cattedrale altomedievale di Reggio Emilia: una nota sulle scoperte recenti,inSchiaviL.C.,CaldanoS.,GemelliF.(eds.)2017,La lezione gentile. Scritti di storia dell’arte per Anna Maria Segagni Malacart,Milano:FrancoAngeliEditore,165-178.

CantinoWataghinG.,MussiniM.,ProdiP.(eds.)2014,HaecDomussurgittibide-dicata. La cattedrale di Reggio Emilia, studi e ricerche,Milano-Ginevra:Skira.

CassanelliR.,PivaP.(eds.)2010,Lombardia Romanica I,Milano:JacaBook.

CastagnettiA.(ed.)2001, La vassallità maggiore del Regno Italico. I capitanei nei secoli XI-XII,Roma:Viella.

CeniniV.2012,I vescovi della diocesi di Reggio Emilia coinvolti nel sistema feudale,inCostiG.,GiovannelliG.(eds.)2012a,Storia della Diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastal-la,Brescia:Morcelliana,465-513.

Congressointernazionaledistudiosull’altomedioevo2016, Matilde di Canossa e il suo tempo, AttidelXXICongressointernazionaledistudiosull’altomedioevoinoccasionedelIXcentenariodellamorte(1115-2015),SanBenedettoPo-Revere-Mantova-QuattroCastella,20-24ottobre2015,Spoleto:CISAM.

CostiG.,GiovanelliG.(eds.)2012a,Storia della Diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla,I.Dalle origini al medioevo,Brescia:Morcelliana.

—2012b,Storia della Diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla,II,Dal Medioevo alla Riforma del Concilio di Trento,Brescia:Morcelliana.

Curina R. 2014a,L’evoluzione architettonica alla luce delle indagini archeologiche, inCantinoWataghinG.etal.(eds.)2014,49-63.

—2014b,La città romana e il passaggio all’alto Medioevo,inCantinoWataghinG.etal.(eds.)2014,101-131.

D’OnofrioM.2016,Per un profilo della committenza artistica dei papi a Roma nel Me-dioevo,inD’OnofrioM.2016,La committenza artistica dei papi a Roma nel Medioevo,Roma:Viella,7-49.


274

—2016,La committenza artistica dei papi a Roma nel Medioevo,Roma:Viella.

DeMarchi P.M., PalazzoM. (eds.) 2014,La Basilica di Santa Maria Maggiore di Lomello: l’architettura e il ciclo decorativo in stucco. Ricerche, restauro e valorizzazione, Firenze:Edifir.

Dolcini C. 2000,Clemente III, antipapa, inEnciclopedia dei papi, Roma: Treccani,http://www.treccani.it/enciclopedia/antipapa-clemente-iii_%28Enciclopedia-dei-Papi%29 (consultato il 01/06/2017) .

FestantiM.,GherpelliG.(eds.)1987, Storia illustrata di Reggio Emilia,4voll.,Repub-blica di San Marino: AIEP Editore.

FranzéB.(ed.)2015,Art et Réforme grégorienne en France et dans la péninsule ibérique,Paris: Picard.

FrisonC.1993,Enrico,inDizionario Biografico degli Italiani,42,Roma:Treccani(online).

GelichiS.2013, La pieve di San Michele: storia di una chiesa e storia degli scavi,inGe-lichiS.,LibrentiM.2013,Nonantola 4: l’abbazia e le sue chiese, Borgo S. Lorenzo: All’insegnadelGiglio,93-116.

GelichiS.,LibrentiM.2013,Nonantola 4. L’abbazia e le sue chiese,BorgoS.Lorenzo:All’insegna del Giglio.

GhizziV.2008a,Scheda 30. Mosaici della cattedrale di Reggio Emilia, inCalzonaA.2008,436-443.

—2008b,Scheda 30.I. Disegno del mosaico della cattedrale,inCalzonaA.2008,443-444.

GiovanelliG.2012,La chiesa di Reggio nelle metropolie di Milano e di Ravenna (secc. IV-XV),inCostiG.,GiovanelliG.(eds.)2012a,Storia della Diocesi di Reggio Emilia-Guastalla,I.Dalle origini al medioevo,Brescia:Morcelliana,187-209.

GolinelliP.1980,Culto dei santi e vita cittadina a Reggio Emilia (sec. IX-XII),Modena:Aedes Muratoriana.

—2009,Vescovo, città e cattedrale tra X e XII secolo. Il caso di Reggio Emilia,inOrselliA.M.(ed.)2009,Il vescovo, la città e la cattedrale. Prolegomeni al caso reggiano,attidellaIIgiornatadistudiosullacattedralediReggioEmilia(ReggioEmilia,16-17giugno2006),Bologna:Pàtron,121-138.

GrassiG.,SeveriM.2007,Restauri alla cattedrale di Reggio Emilia. Prime risultanze delle indagini sulle strutture murarie in alzato,«Taccuinid’arte.RivistadiArteeStoriadelterritoriodiModenaeReggioEmilia»,2:45-63.

—2009,La cattedrale di Reggio Emilia. Ipotesi e dati sull’evoluzione strutturale dell’edificio in età medievale,inOrselliA.M.(ed.)2009,Il vescovo, la città e la cattedrale. Prolego-meni al caso reggiano,attidellaIIgiornatadistudiosullacattedralediReggioEmilia(ReggioEmilia,16-17giugno2006),Bologna:Pàtron,187-205.

Jarnut J.,KöbA.,WemhoffM. (eds.) 2009,Bishöflisches Bauen im 11. Jahrhundert. Mittelalter Studien des Instituts zur Interdisziplinären Erfonrschung des Mittelalters-Paderborn,Munchen:WilhelmFinkVerlag.


275

KitzingerE.1972,The Gregorian Reform and the Visual Arts: a Problem of Method,«TransactionoftheRoyalSociety»,12:87-103.

LazzariT.2012,Goffredo di Lorena e Beatrice di Toscana,inCalzonaA.,CantarellaG.M.(eds.)2012,La reliquia del Sangue di Cristo, Mantova, l’Italia e l’Europa al tempo di Leone IX,Verona:Scripta,225-242.

LomartireS.2014,Complementi pittorici all’architettura medievale della cattedrale di Reg-gio Emilia,inCantinoWataghinG.etal.(eds.)2014,239-271.

—2016,The Renovation of Northern Italian Cathedrals during the Eleventh and Twelfth Centuries: The State of Current Research and Some Unanswered Questions, inBotoVarelaG.,Kroesen J.E.A.2016,Romanesque Cathedrals in Mediterranean Europe Architecture, Ritual and Urban Context,Turnhout:Brepols.

LongoU.,Yawn,L.(eds.)2012,Framing Clement III, (Anti)Pope, 1080-1100, «Reti MedievaliRivista»,13(1):1-119.

LuchterhandtM.2009,DieKathedrale von Parma. Architektur und Skulptur im Zeitalter von Reichskirche und Kommunebildung,Munchen:HirmerVerlag.

—2016,Architettura matildica? Le cattedrali padane tra nobiltà, Chiesa e Comune: il caso di Parma,inCongressointernazionaledistudiosull’altomedioevo2016,665-699.

LucioniA.2011,Anselmo IV da Bovisio arcivescovo di Milano (1097-1101). Episcopato e società urbana sul finire dell’XI secolo,Milano:VitaePensiero.

MancassolaN.2016,Pievi, chiese e monasteri al tempo di Matilde di Canossa,inCon-gressointernazionaledistudiosull’altomedioevo2016,549-617.

MazzaA.2014,Dal Cinquecento al Settecento: la pittura,inCantinoWataghinG.etal.(eds.)2014,321-373.

MilanesiG.,2012,Il monastero di Nonantola al tempo di Leone IX,inCalzonaA.,Can-tarellaG.M.(eds.)2012,La reliquia del Sangue di Cristo, Mantova, l’Italia e l’Europa al tempo di Leone IX,Verona:Scripta,273-293.

—2014,La cattedrale di Reggio Emilia e l’Europa. La fabbrica di Santa Maria e San Pro-spero dal X al XIII secolo,inCantinoWataghinG.etal.(eds.)2014,225-237.

MonducciE.,NironiV.1984,Il Duomo di Reggio Emilia,ReggioEmilia:Bizzocchi.

MussiniM.1969,Il ritrovamento della lastra antelamica e la vicenda del duomo di Reggio Emilia, inQuintavalle A.C. 1969,Romanico padano, civiltà d’Occidente, Firenze:Marchi&Bertolli,169-172.

—1982,Pievi e vita canonicale nei territori matildici. Architettura e riforma gregoriana nelle campagne,inQuintavalleA.C.(ed.)1982, Romanico padano, Romanico europeo,Par-ma:Istitutodistoriadell’arte/Centrodistudimedioevali,28-53.

—2014,La cattedrale in età moderna: mutamenti e protagonisti, inMoriscoC.2014,275-319.


276

NovaraP.1999,La chiesa pomposiana nelle trasformazioni medievali trai secoli IX e XII,in SamaritaniA.,Di FrancescoC. (eds.) 1999,Pomposa. Storia Arte Architettura, Ferrara:CorboEditore,153-175.

OrselliA.M.(ed.)2009,Il vescovo, la città e la cattedrale. Prolegomeni al caso reggiano,attidellaIIgiornatadistudiosullacattedralediReggioEmilia(ReggioEmilia,16-17giugno2006),Bologna:Pàtron.

PaoliniL.(ed.)2012, Il Vescovo, la Chiesa, la Città di Reggio Emilia in età comunale,AttidellaIVgiornatadistudiosullacattedralediReggioEmilia(ReggioEmilia,13-14giugno2008,Bologna:Pàtron.

PivaP.2011,I Canossa e gli edifici di culto (da Adalberto Atto a Matilde),inAngelelliW.,PomariciF. (eds.)2011,Forme e storia. Scritti di arte medievale e moderna per Francesco Gandolfo,Roma:Artemide,91-104.

—2013,Chiese ad absidi opposte nell’Italia medievale (secoli XI-XII),Mantova: SAPSocietà Archeologica.

PorterA.K.1915-1917,Lombard Architecture,NewHaven/London:YaleUniversityPress/HumphreyMilford-OxfordUniversityPress.

QuintavalleA.C.1964,La Cattedrale di Modena. Problemi di romanico emiliano,Firen-ze: Bassi.

—1969,Romanico padano, civiltà d’Occidente,Firenze:Marchi&Bertolli.

—1982, Romanico padano, Romanico europeo,Parma:Istitutodistoriadell’arte/Centrodi studi medioevali.

—1991,Wiligelmo e Matilde. L’officina romanica,Catalogo dellamostra (Mantova,FruttierediPalazzoTe,15giugno-10novembre1991),Milano:Electa.

—2006,Il Medioevo delle Cattedrali. Chiesa e Impero: la lotta delle immagini (secoli XI-XII),Milano:Skira.

—2006a, Il Medioevo delle Cattedrali. IV Officine medievali e Riforma Gregoriana in Lombardia, inQuintavalleA.C. (ed.) 2006, Il Medioevo delle Cattedrali. Chiesa e Impero: la lotta delle immagini (secoli XI-XII),Milano:Skira,79-126.

—2006b,Il Medioevo delle Cattedrali. V Immagini della Riforma e dell’Impero in Lom-bardia,inQuintavalleA.C.(ed.)2006,Il Medioevo delle Cattedrali. Chiesa e Impero: la lotta delle immagini (secoli XI-XII),Milano:Skira,127-224.

—2006c,Il Medioevo delle Cattedrali. VII. Figure della Riforma in Occidente,inQuin-tavalleA.C.(ed.)2006,Il Medioevo delle Cattedrali. Chiesa e Impero: la lotta delle immagini (secoli XI-XII),Milano:Skira,239-290.

—2008,Mosaici pavimentali come immagine del mondo. L’ideologia della Riforma a Cre-mona, Pavia e Reggio Emilia,inAA.VV.2008,Storia di artisti. Storia di libri. L’editore che inseguiva la bellezza. Scritti in onore di Franco Cosimo Panini,Modena/Roma:FrancoCosimoPanini/Donzelli,3-32.


277

RacineP.(ed.)2009,Storia della Diocesi di Piacenza, II, 2, Il Medioevo. Dalla Riforma gregoriana alla vigilia della Riforma protestante,Brescia:Morcelliana.

RinaldiR.2001,A Reggio, una città di forte impronta vescovile (secoli X-XII), inCa-stagnettiA.(ed.)2001, La vassallità maggiore del Regno Italico. I capitanei nei secoli XI-XII,Roma:Viella,233-262.

RomanoS.(ed.)2006,Riforma e Tradizione. 1050-1198. Corpus Volume IV,Milano-Roma:JacaBook-Palombi.

RomanoS.,RiccioniS.2006,Le pareti e i pilastri con storie di San Clemente e Sant’A-lessio nella chiesa inferiore di San Clemente,inRomanoS.(ed.)2006,Riforma e Tradi-zione. 1050-1198. Corpus Volume IV,Milano-Roma:JacaBook-Palombi,129-150.

RuiniC. (ed.)2014,VereDignum. Liturgia musica apparati,Attidella IIIGiornatadistudiosullaCattedralediReggioEmilia(ReggioEmilia,13-14ottobre2006),Bologna: Pàtron.

RussoE.1972-1973,Ricerche sulla Bologna paleocristiana e medievale: la chiesa di S. Maria Maggiore,«Bullettinodell’IstitutoStoricoItalianoperilMedioEvo.ArchivioMuratoriano»,84:21-123.

—2012,Il ruolo di Pomposa nell’XI secolo,inCalzonaA.,CantarellaG.M.(eds.)2012,La reliquia del Sangue di Cristo, Mantova, l’Italia e l’Europa al tempo di Leone IX,Ve-rona:Scripta,421-437.

SaccaniG.1929,VIII - I sotterranei del Duomo,«Miscellaneastorico-reggiana»,101-119.

SalmiM.1966,L’abbaziadiPomposa,Milano:AmilcarePizziEditore.

SamaritaniA.,DiFrancescoC.(eds.)1999,Pomposa. Storia Arte Architettura,Ferrara:Corbo Editore.

SchiaviL.C.2005,Il Santo Sepolcro di Milano. Da Ariberto a Federico Borromeo: genesi ed evoluzione di una chiesa ideale,Pisa:ETS.

—2010,Santa Maria Maggiore di Lomello,inCassanelliR.,PivaP.(eds.)2010,Lom-bardia Romanica I,Milano:JacaBook,69-81.

SchwartzG.1993,Die Besetzung des Bistümer Reichsitaliens unter des sächsischen und salischen Kaisern, mit den Listen des Bischöfe 951-1122,Spoleto:CISAM(Ied.1913).

SegagniA.M.,Arte, fede, società. Romanico e Gotico nella diocesi di Piacenza. Parte prima. L’arte romanica,inRacineP.(ed.)2009,Storia della Diocesi di Piacenza, II, 2, Il Medioevo. Dalla Riforma gregoriana alla vigilia della Riforma protestante,Brescia:Morcelliana,225-246.

ToscoC.2009,La committenza vescovile nell’XI secolo nel romanico lombardo,inJarnutJ.,KöbA.,WemhoffM.(eds.)2009,Bishöflisches Bauen im 11. Jahrhundert. Mittelal-ter Studien des Instituts zur Interdisziplinären Erfonrschung des Mittelalters-Paderborn,Munchen:WilhelmFinkVerlag,25-54.


278

—2016,L’architettura medievale in Italia. 600-1200,Bologna:IlMulino.

ToubertH.1990,Un art dirigé. Réforme grégorienne et Iconographie,Paris:LesÉditionsdu Cerf.

VasinaA.(ed.)1993,Storia di Ravenna. III. Dal Mille alla fine della signoria polentana,Venezia: Marsilio.

VergnolleE.,ToscoC.2016(eds.), L’art roman en Italie septentrionale. État des que-stions,«BulletinMonumental»,174(1),numeromonografico.

VescoviM.L.2008a,Scheda 126. Cattedrale di Reggio Emilia, recinzione presbiteriale,inCalzonaA.2008,559-562.

—2008b,Scheda 127. Leoni del pulpito della cattedrale,inCalzonaA.2008,562-564.

—2008c,Scheda 129. Lastra con Pantocratore e simboli evangelici,inCalzonaA.2008,564-567.

—2008d,Scheda 128. Lastra frammentaria,inCalzonaA.2008,564.

—2008e,Scheda 137. Lastra con due Re Magi,inCalzonaA.2008,576-577.

— 2012, Committenza episcopale e architettura tra Parma e Reggio Emilia negli anni di Le-one IX,inCalzonaA.,CantarellaG.M.(eds.)2012,La reliquia del Sangue di Cristo, Mantova, l’Italia e l’Europa al tempo di Leone IX,Verona:Scripta,253-272.

WickhamC. 2013,Roma medievale. Crisi e stabilità di una città. 900-1150, Roma:Viella.

ZimmermannH.2003,Nella tradizione di città capitale. Presenza germanica e società locale dall’età sassone a quella sveva,inVasinaA.(ed.)1993,Storia di Ravenna. III. Dal Mille alla fine della signoria polentana,Venezia:Marsilio,1007-128.

list of contributors

Valerie Eads(VE)isamemberofthefacultyofHumanities&SciencesattheSchoolofVisualArts,NewYorkCity,USA.Sheisalsotheor-ganizer of the Matilda 900 sessions at the 50th International Congress onMedievalStudies,WesternMichiganUniv.,KalamazooMI,USA(May14-17,2015)andtheLeedsInternationalMedievalCongress(6-9July2015)wherethesepaperswerepresented.Edward Coleman(EC),UniversityCollege,Dublin,Ireland.David Hay(DH),UniversityofLethbridge,Alberta,CanadaRobert Houghton(RH),UniversityofWinchester,UKJohn Oastler Ward(JOW),Medieval&EarlyModernCentre,Uni-versityofSydney,AustraliaPenelope Nash(PN),Medieval&EarlyModernCentre,UniversityofSydney,AustraliaHelen Nicholson(HN),SchoolofHistory,Archaeology&Religion,CardiffUniversity,Wales,UK

Matilda of Tuscany-Canossa: Commemorating the 9th Centennial of the Great Countess, iV

ValeRie eads, edWaRd ColeMan, daVid Hay, RoBeRT HouGHTon,

JoHn oasTleR WaRd, PeneloPe nasH, Helen niCHolson

Valerie eads School of Visual Arts,Faculty of Humanities & Sciences, New York, USA


280

Leeds International Medieval Congress – July 6-9, 2015

session 918: Matilda of Tuscany-Canossa: Commemorating the 9th Centennial of the Great Countess, IV – The Gregorian Reform and Beyond

Participantsdiscusstheresultsofapplying‘newmethodologies’tosomeveryoldquestionsandsuggestnewquestionstobeaddressed,possiblyby using some very old methodologies.

Edward Coleman:Onthethingthatismyownparticularareaofinterest,theaspectoftheinterestingtimesinwhichMatildalived–thisis,ofcourse,theperiodoftheemergenceofthecommunesinItaly,afundamentalchangeinthe government and political regimes of all the major cities in northern Italy,includingthose,ofcourse,underMatilda’srule.Andthatwashap-pening arguably for much of her lifetime if you think that the commu-nescanbedatedfrom,say,the1080s.Itcertainlywaswellunderwayforthelasttwodecadesandmoreofherlifetime,thefirsttwodecadesof the12thcentury.AndI thinkMatilda foundherself inaposition,andagainit’saninterestingcontrasttobedrawnhere,ofbeing–howwouldoneputit–maybe,atthereceivingendoftheemergenceofthecommunesbecausewhatthecommunalmovementdid,itoperatedoreffectedashiftinpower,adevolutionofpowerawayfromtheover-archingmonarchicalormarquisalauthoritythathadpre-existedtowarda much more localized collective authority invested in the cives of the variouscities.Andsointhatrespect,Ithink,MatildaofCanossafoundherself,ironically,inapositionsimilartoHenryIVinherrelationshiptothecitiesandtheemergenceofthecommunes.Howdoyou,asthecentralauthorityorpower-holder,howdoyoureacttothiscallfor–oftenaquiteforcefulmovement–greaterlocalautonomy?

V. eADS, e. ColeMAN, D. hAY, r. hoUGhToN, J. oASTler WArD, p. NASh, h. NiCholSoNMatilda of Tuscany-Canossa: Commemorating the 9th Centennial of the Great Countess, IV

281

So interesting work could be done; no one has done this to myknowledge;scholarshavetalkedabouthowtheEmpire,howHenryIV in particular, reacted to the communalmovement, but notMa-tilda. There are plenty of documents so that type of study could be done.AndanumberofcitiesinwhichMatildawasmuchincontrol;Pisa,e.g.,wouldbetheearliestcommunalcity,andtheCanossaweremuchincontrolofpropertyatthistime.So, itwouldbeinterestingto compare and contrast the reaction of Matilda to the response of the Empire,oftheimperialauthority, totheriseofthecommunes.Andtheresponse,thedefaultresponseoftheimperialauthoritywastomakeconcessionsintheformofdiplomastothecitizenbodies,thecives,so-metimestotheirrepresentatives,theconsuls,asHenryIVdidtoPisa,thefirstone,themajoroneinthenorthandthentomanyothercities.Thetrade-offinthesedocumentswasalmostalwaysthesame,whichwasthattheimperialauthoritywouldgrantawaycertainrights–ofjustice,orfiscalrights,sometimesparticularpiecesofland,therighttonominatetheirownofficials–inreturnforacknowledgementoftheirauthority. It seems to me in many respects the matildine reaction to the rise of the communes was very similar. If one thinks of the grants to citiessuchasPisaorMantuathatMatildamade,itdoesseemthatwhatisoccurringisthetrade-offbetweenagrantofrightsandrecognitionof authority over the city.TheotherthingIwouldsayinrelationtothis–obviouslyonecan’tenterMatilda’smindandknowwhatshemadeofthisnewmovement,thecommunalmovement–andinEugenio’spaperreferencewasmadetoChrisWickham’sbook,Sleepwalking into a new world,theideathatpeopledidn’tactuallyrealizethattherewasabigchangehappening;itonlybecameapparentlater[Riversi2017;Wichkam2015].Ithink,ifanything,onemightsay,consciouslyornot,Iwouldsayagain–withthecaveatthatIhaven’tlookedintothisindetailordepth–neverthe-less,consciouslyornot,Matildainsomerespectsfacilitatedtheriseofthecommunes.How?


282

Well ifyou thinkofoneofhermajor,and this isagoodexampleofwherepoliticsandecclesiasticalissuesoverlap,oneofhermajorachieve-ments,onemightsay,wasthepromotionofpro-reformbishopsthrou-ghoutherlands.Invariousemblematiccases–AnselmofLucca...wasacontestedone shortlybefore that;asEugeniomentionedMilanwasacontestedone,[AnselmIVofBovisio]ledthecrusade[of1101],andDodoofModena–thesebishopswerealleffectivelytherebecauseofthesupport Matilda gave them. And one of the key elements in the rise of thecommunesisthetransferofpowerfrombishopstocommunes.So,inasense,byunderminingthelaypower,themilitarypowerinparticular,ofthetraditionalimperial-appointedbishop,shewasconsciouslyorun-consciously almost helping the establishment of the communes.

Valerie Eads: MatildaofCanossa–andweareherecommemoratingthe9thcen-tennialofherdeath–atthetimeofherdeathwasincontrolofalargepatrimony in Italy,fivecounties andamarquisatebya conservativeestimate.Ashasbeennoted,shehadnoheir;thiswassomethingthathad been apparent for some time as when she died she was 69 or 70 yearsold.Shehadbeendeposedin1081bytheemperorHenryIV,andsincemostofthesetitleswereofimperialoriginthiswasasignificantact.And,finally,ashas justbeenexplained insomedetail, thecom-muneswererising.Inotherwords,theworldinwhichshelivedandoperatedwaschanging.Andyet,foraslongasshelasted,shewasabletokeepcontrolofall thisterritory,andithasbeencalledwithsomejustificationthematildinestate.Shewasactuallygoverning.Howdidshemanagetodothis?Sheleftbehindheragood40-yearrecord of various actions thatwere undertaken at different times insupport of the papacy or against those who were trying to depose her. Ifone looks foramilitaryaction,anythingexcepta set-piecebattle,onefindssomerecordofitintheknownactsofMatilda.Thesethingshavebeenoutlinedveryneatly,chronologically,sincethenineteenth


283

century. And yet for those of us who interest ourselves in Matilda’s militarycareer–Ithinkitissafetosaythatallofthescholarsinterestedinthistopicareherepresent–thistomeisamatterofsomeconcern,and not only for Matilda. There are a great many other women whose recordislessextensive,butwhoarenonethelesswell-documented.E.g.,Comingup in September [2015] atOhioStateUniv. there is aconferencetitled“BeyondExceptionalism.”TheonlyreasonIwillnotbe there is that I will be presenting a paper at the Congresso in Italy1. I am firmlyintheopinionwe-have-far-more-exceptions-than-we-need-to-(dis)prove-the-rule camp. So we really need to start looking at women whoexercisemilitarypowernotasexceptions,butaspartofthepackage.Inmypaperpresentedatthe20thBarnardConference,Ifloatedthehypothesis that instead of occasional anecdotes of women defending castlesbecausethemenwereawaydoingsomethingelse,weshouldflip that to sayingthat themenwereable tobeabsentbecause theyknew they could rely on the women to carry out the defense2. I don’t meanonlythatspecificaction,defensivesiegecraft,butthatthecapaci-ty of women to undertake some military action was taken for granted. Themostspectacularcase,RobertGuiscard,oneofthemostcompe-tentpredatorsofhisgeneration,definitelyreliedontheabilityofhiswifetobackhimupinthefield[Eads2005].Now,wearenotgoingto make a combatant out of Sichelgaita of Salerno who was at the time a middle-aged woman with ten children. This is not someone who is goingtospendherdayspracticingmartialskills,yetshewaseffectiveinthefield inat leastonerecordedinstancewhensheturnedtroops

1 Beyond Exceptionalism, 18-19 September 2015, The Ohio State University,Mansfield;XXICongressointernazionaledistudioMatilde di Canossa e il suo tempo (SanBenedettoPo,Revere,Mantova,QuattroCastella,20-24ottobre2015).2 WarandPeaceintheMiddleAgesandRenaissance,6December2006;ValerieEads,“Means,Motive,Opportunity:MedievalWomenandtheRecoursetoArms,”http://deremilitari.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/09/Eads-MeansMotivesOpp.pdf,accessed27June2016.


284

whoweremovinginthewrongdirection–inotherwords,sheissuedacommand in themiddleof anaction in thefieldandwasobeyed.Shealsocommandedatleastoneoffensivesiegeonherownwhenherhusbandwaselsewhere.Sowehavethesethings,andweneedtogetawayfromthiskindofexceptionalism.Whichleadsmetoanotherthought:therehasbeenalotofcomplextheorizingtoexplicaterecalcitranttexts,andpeoplearehavingsomuchfun with this that we are getting away from the nuts-and-bolts basics of the distance between point A and point B. Where did this woman gethertroopsand,bytheway,whataretheyfightingabout?Ifthereisanarmyinthefield,giventheterrainandthepeopleinvolved,howweretheygoingtogoaboutsettlingit?Ifthereisafortifiedpositionpresent,whowasoccupyingitandhowwouldonegoabouttakingit?Wasthereanyartilleryinuse,meaningofcourse,rock-throwing?I haven’t yet moved forward into the age of gunpowder. All sorts of thingslikethat.Meaningmap-in-hand,feetontheground,nutsandbolts–obviouslyifyouhaveagoodGPSI’mnotgoingtoarguewiththat–butthatsortofthing.How does one deal with these reports of women waging war in the MiddleAges?IpresentedabasicapproachattheSocietyforMilitaryHistoryoverthirtyyearsagointheformoftwoquestionstoposecon-cerningthesesources.Andthefirstquestionis,“Doesitquacklikeaduck?”Inotherwords,doesitsound likeareportofamilitaryaction,recognizing that medieval sources were seldom intended to be logical descriptionsofsuchactions?Ifitquackslikeaduck,onewouldwanttoconsiderthatitmightactuallybeaduck.Thesecondquestionis,“Doesitwalklikeaduck?”Cantheactionbeplottedintermsofgoalsandthemeansofachievingthosegoals:availabletroops,thetimeinvolved,theterrain,availablesupplies,allofthebasicissues?Ifthisresultsinanac-ceptablescenario,ifthesourcebothquackslikeaduckandwalkslikeaduck,theburdenofproofisonthosewhowouldmaintainthatitisnotin fact a duck. And so I think what we want is more attention to those


285

details,eventhoughtheattentionwearepayingtorhetoric–andto-daytherewassomediscussionaboutscansion–isanobviouslyvaluabletool since we can’t get anywhere without knowing what the source is actuallysaying.But,wedoneedtobeabletomaptheaccountsanddiscuss the actions within the parameters of warfare. And that is what people are largely reluctant to do. WehavetoomanyimagesandnotenoughAmazons,andthismakesme nervous. When women talk about women waging war they are frequentlytalkingaboutimages,andwhenmentalkaboutmenwa-ging war they are talking about bloodshed and guts on the ground. We need to be careful not to re-ghettoize ourselves. I think there are a couple of reasons for this, and here I have to go back to remini-scing.WhenIwasstillagradstudent,Iparticularlyrememberonede-partment meeting where a new student described her research interests asslaveryandsexuality.ThereasonthatIrememberthisisbecauselaterinthemeetingwhenthedepartmentchairannouncedthat,duetoanimpendingretirement,wenolongerhadsufficientfacultytosupportmilitaryhistoryaseitheramajororminorfieldshewasoneofthosewhogavesmugself-satisfiedsmilesasthoughthedepartmenthadbeenpurified.Nowthesewerenotpeopleoldenoughtorememberthedaysofanti-Vietnamprotests,andwhenthatstudentannouncedaninterestinslaveryandsexualitynoonehad lookedatheras thoughshehadjustannouncedadesiretoownandsexuallyabusehumanbeings.So,there is that old cliché out there that those who study military history must somehow be in favor of organized violence and think it is the way coolest thing to do. Then,ofcourse,thereisthegenderthing.Wearealltalkingaboutwo-men’sequalityandsoforthandsoon,butnoonewantstogetintothedetailsofhowthewomanwearetalkingabouttoday,forwhateverre-ason,didcausethedeathsofalotofpeople.Shewagedwar.Ifyoureadinparticular,andrightnowI’mreadingRangerioofLucca,hispointisclear. He does think this is way cool. He describes Matilda joyously cle-


286

ansing her hands in blood and gloats about the number of the dead left unburiedonthefield3. There’s lots of blood. And so we’ve got to deal withthis,andifweeverwanttointegratewomenintotheordo militaris we’vegottopayattentiontowhattheyweredoing.Soapboxaway!

David Hay: Forsomeperspective,Iwouldlikeustoconsiderthequestion,“HowinstrumentalwasMatildatothemajordevelopmentsofhertime,andhowmuchcreditorblamecanshereasonablybeassignedforthem?”.Itmight be useful on this anniversary to pause and consider whether we have underestimated or overestimated her role in the following matters: I’mnotsureifyou’veallreadDorothyGlass’sbook,The sculpture of reform in north Italy.Interestinglyenough,shearguesthat«thereisnosurviving,substantiveevidencethatMatildawasamajorpatronofanyofthecathedralsormonasterieserectedduringherlonglifetime,saveforSanBenedettoPo»[Glass2010,1-2].Andshefurtherarguesthatwehavetofightthedesiretoattributeallsignificantpoliticalandreli-giousactsoftheagetoGregoryandMatildaandallsculpture,atleastatModena,toWilligelmo.IsGlassright?Formyownpart,Iwouldnote that the chapel that was destroyed in Parma in the riot of 1104 had been endowed by Matilda. Secondly, Iwouldcall attention to thediploma fromtheyear1100,when Matilda contributed to the building of the cathedral of Pisa (be-gun1063,consecrated1118).ThedocumentnotesthatMatildacontri-buted both land in the city (near the palace) and revenues for the buil-ding and restoration/upkeep of the cathedral4. Glass does not mention PisabecauseherfocusisontheareanorthoftheApennines…butifMatildawasdefinitelypatronizingcathedralsinTuscany,andachapel

3 Rangerius of Lucca,Vita Anselmi Lucensis episcopi, ll. 3786, 6560-62, 6613-14;1236,1293,1294.4 Die Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde von Tuszien,no.63,190-192.


287

inParma,isitreallyfairtosaythatthereisnosubstantiveevidencethatshewasamajorpatronofanyofthecathedralserectedinherlifetime?Andso,discuss:Issheright?Now,Ihaveafewargumentsagainstthat,andmaybeifwedotalkaboutthatI’ll[gointothem],butthecentralquestionI’maskingis,“Areweover-estimatingtheinfluenceofMatil-da?”Shouldwebeguardingagainstthat?Onasomewhatrelatedpoint,wemightalsoask,wereParma’swallsac-tuallypulleddownin1037,asthesourcesallege,butRobertHoughtonhasrecentlydenied[Houghton2012]? Idon’tknowthestateof thearchaeologyofParma’swalls,butIthoughtthismightbesomethingthatnewtechnologies–combinedwithold-fashionedarchaeology–should be able to help with. ContinuingwiththewiderquestionthatDorothyGlassraises,Iguessintermsofnewquestionsthereis,“TowhatextentwasMatilda’svic-toryovertheemperorduetoherowninitiatives,character,etc.,andtowhatextentwasittheresultofotherfactors?”Sometimesscholarshavefoundamanbehindthewoman–IhavearguedagainstArduinodellaPaludeasthetacticalmindbehindMatilda’svictories[Hay2008,35-36].–butasforotherpossiblefactorsthatmayhaveledtoMatil-da’ssuccess,ElkeGoezseemstosuggestthatitwasmorethefortunesofwar.Shewritesthatevenaftertheemperor’sfailureatCanossa,theCanossanarmywasdejectedanddemoralized,andMatildaonlywithdifficultyconvincedhersupporterstofightonatCarpineti–notethatthe council at Carpineti actually occurred before the engagement at Canossa–butthen,fromthatpointon,luckinwardesertedtheSa-lians so spectacularly that it was viewed by many as providential [Goez 2004,371-373]5.Again,IwouldarguethatthisinterpretationisunfairtoMatilda,wholabouredmightilytobringaboutHenry’sdefeat.A more serious argument is that the victory was primarily a political ratherthanamilitaryone,duetothingslikepapaldiplomaticefforts,

5 Seealso,althoughwithoutapparatus criticus,Goez2012.


288

especiallyofUrbanII,andmoretheproductofeventslikethedefec-tionofMilan,Piacenza,CremonaandLodiintheearly1090s,aswellas the defection of the emperor’s wife and elder son in the aftermath oftheemperor’sretreatfromCanossain1092.Andsothosequestionsneed to be revisited. Were these the things that really turned the tide ofthewar,ratherthananythingMatildaherselfconsciouslydid?Thatwouldignore,Ithink,themanyinitiativesthatMatildahadtakentomakesuchdefectionspossible,suchassendingthesquadronthatfreedHenry’swife[Hay2008,144-146].Another issue iswhatexactlyhappenedat thecrucialmilitaryenga-gementatCanossain1092,andIthinkValerieEadsandIrepresentthe twomain camps: thatMatilda’s forces did or did not execute apincer movement against Henry’s army. I do not believe there was a pincermovementatCanossa,because if therewere,howdidHenryget toBibbianowithoutpassing throughMatilda’s army?AndwhathappenedtoMatildawhenitdid?HenrywouldhavehadtohavegonethroughtheforceMatildawasleadingfromBianello.Maybethereis,however,asolution.Inher2010articleonthisexpedition,Eadsrefe-rences the use of computer modeling to virtually reconstruct to recon-struct lost castles. Could we also use computer modeling technology to reconstruct the roads that would allow us to more clearly understand themovementsaroundCanossain1092[Eads2010,46]?Wouldthisperhapssettlethequestion?Scholars have generally seen Matilda as the force that kept the commu-nesincheck.Isthispurespeculation?Conclusion: Matilda’s LegacyInthefinalanalysis,then,IthinkthecaseforMatildabeingoneoftheprimemoversoftheeventsofhertimeremainsquiteastrongone.Ina1999article,JeanTruaxaskedwhethertheAnglo-Normancountessesshewasstudyingshouldbestbeseenas‘valiantsoldiers,prudentstrate-gists,orcharismaticleaders’[Truax1999,111-125].WhatifweweretoapplythisquestiontoMatildaofTuscany,whohasbeendescribed


289

asallthree?Iwouldarguethatthereisnofirmevidenceshewasasol-dier,andthathercharismawaspartlycircumscribedbythe limitsofwomen’sdecorum,aswecanseewiththechargesleveledagainstherat the Synod of Worms and in the polemical literature. It is instead as a strategistthatshewasmosteffective,andthusmostappropriatelyap-preciatedandremembered;indeed,shewasoneofthemostsuccessfulcommanders of her time.

Robert Houghton:I’m going to build on one of the things that David has just said. The workingtitleofthissectionwas‘I’mheretoburyMatilda,nottopraiseher’. By this I mean that I think there’s been too much emphasis placed on Matilda’s role in social and political change during and after her lifetime.Thismaybeunexpectedgiventhenatureofthisstrandandindeed this round table and I want to emphasise that I’m not trying to denytheimportanceofMatilda.Nevertheless,thisisapointthatneedsto be made: the myth of Matilda is in danger of becoming the entire story for this period.Tostartwith,asDavidandDorothyGlasshavedemonstrated,thereisa tendency to ascribe every religious monument in northern Italy to either the court of Matilda or the court of Gregory VII. This wasn’t the case,butit’sveryofteneasyorinterestingtoassumeinvolvementofeither or both of these individuals. They were certainly both very acti-veinthisarena,buttherehavebeenseveralsuchmonumentscreditedtothispaironveryflimsypretexts.Thisoverstatestheirinfluenceandbuilds their myth to the detriment of a more nuanced understanding of the political and social structure of northern Italy.We can take this much further though. We can see that in a lot of the narrative sources Matilda was presented as the driving force for many of the events of the Investiture Contest and that this has been carried over into several modern accounts. I think that we’ve taken Matilda’s importanceheretoomuchforgranted,particularlywhenweconsider


290

events which only appear in Donizone. We need to rethink why these events are mentioned and why they are represented in this way rather than accepting Donizone’s account so readily.It’snotsoblatant,butMatildaalsooftenappearsinthesecondarymate-rials as a major element in the emergence of the communes. This is ge-nerally either through her use of the nascent communes to support her ownpower,empoweringthemintheprocess,orelsesheispresentedas a major retarding force against the construction of the communes as her central power prevented them from gaining strength in the way theydidoutsideofherdomain.However, I thinkwe’reputtingtoomuch emphasis on Matilda’s role here. She certainly played an impor-tantroleinsomecities,butotherfactorsmustalsobeconsidered.Matilda’ssupposeddominancehasbeenextendedtotheroleofrefor-ming bishops in the Italian cities. The argument that Gregorian and Matildinebishopsinevitablysoughttorelinquishtheirsecularpowerdoes not hold water. These bishops could be just as worldly as their imperialcounterparts,butwetoooftenpresentthemasreformerssim-ply by virtue of their association with Matilda and the pious imagery attachedtoherbyDonizoneandothers.Again,thesituationwasmorenuancedthanthis,butwassimplifiedtofitDonizone’snarrativeandthissimplificationhasbeenretainedbymodernauthors.Insum,MatildaandtheCanossanshavebeengiventoomuchpromi-nence in discussion of the political situation in Italy which was much morecomplexthanisnormallyacknowledged.I suggest three main reasons for this:Firstly,we often rely too heavily onDonizone.His is an attractivesource,evenifseveralsectionaredifficulttoread.And,aswe’veseentoday,wenolongerhaveanyexcusenottouseDonizoneaswehavea very good scan of the Vita Mathildis now available online. The Vita Mathildis is without doubt a vitally important resource but because of the nature of Donizone’s writing he inevitably presents Matilda and her family in a prominent role.


291

Wealsohave the survival andcodificationofMatilda’s charters in avery convenient (and widely available) volume from MGH. This pro-videsanunparalleledresourceforthecourtofanItalianmagnate,buthasthesideeffectofpresentingMatildaasapoliticalentityonaparwith theGermanEmperors– themore typical subjectof theMGHseries.ThiseasyaccesstoMatilda’sdocumentsmeansthattheunique-ness of Matilda’s court and her role in the politics of the period has been overstatedattheexpenseofothersecularmagnatesandofthebishops.Finally,Matilda’sprominencehasbeenexaggeratedbecausesheisin-teresting.Herlifeisanexcitingstoryandisentangledwithimportantfiguresandevents.ThevisionofherstandingfirmagainsttheHenryIVandhisvasthost,defeatinghiminthefogatthegatesofherhome,is just one of a plethora of narratively attractive incidents. She’s a well-resourcedcasestudyofanItalianmagnate–arareandusuallypoorlydocumented breed. She’s a very useful paragon of a woman taking on verytraditionallymaleroles.She’sadeepveinformilitaryhistorians,arthistoriansandChurchhistorians.However,aconsequenceofallofthisis a disproportionate focus on Matilda’s role in the period in general. VerybrieflyI’dliketosuggestafewthingswecandotoredressthis.First of all: we can read the sources more thoroughly and return to the originalmanuscripts.AsDavidhasshown,bygettingtogripswiththeactual document Vita Mathildis,wecanuncoverquitealotofnuancethat isn’t immediately apparent from the transcriptions. Secondly: we needtoaccept thatDonizoneiswrong,orat leastmisleading,moreoftenthanwewouldlike.Hewroteforveryspecificreasons.Hehadagreatdrivetoachievevariousgoalsforbothhispatron,Matilda,andhishomemonasteryatCanossa.ThisaffectedhowherepresentedMatildaandherfamilyandtheworldasawhole–afactwhichisfrequentlyacknowledged but seldom fully incorporated into analysis. Finally: I’d liketoencourageustolookatthecharters(imperial,papal,matildineandepiscopal)morethoroughlytocorroborateorconfirmtheeviden-ceinthenarrativesources.Moreover,thechartersshouldbeusedasthe


292

foundation of our narrative on Matilda and the period as a whole. The-sedocumentsarefarfromimmunetothetypeofrhetoricwefindinthenarrativesources,butthey’venotbeenusedasthoroughlyastheycouldbe.ThesemethodsdonotunderminetheimportanceofMatilda,butplacehermorefirmlyinhistoricalcontext.

Penelope Nash:Iknowwhythisgroupissmall,andittiesinwithwhatI’mgoingtosay;they’veallgonetoseetheJoanofArcfilm.My ideas tonight have arisen from some words written by Diane Owen Hughes,andsomeofyoumayhavereadthem[OwenHughes1987,25-57;quotes35-36].AndIwillquoteherbriefly.

TheRisorgimento[themovementwhichledtotheunificationofItalyas an independent state with its capital at Rome in 1870]... did not allow space to aristocratic women who had made a mark on the history of their age: for their power was based in family privilege and their virtue –whentheypossessedit–hadbeenshapedmorebyecclesiasticalthanbycivicideas.MatildaofTuscany,oneofthemosteffectiverulersinpost-CarolingianEurope,hadbeenadifficultheroine for the towns,which,eveniftheyhadreceivedconcessionsfromher,tookadvantageof the power vacuum created by her death to assert their sovereignty.

Shesaysmore,andIwillpickupsomeofherideas.CountessMatildawas a renowned supporter of church reform in the late-eleventh and early-twelfth centuries. She supported seven popes unstintingly. Many people either acclaimed or feared her during her lifetime.Marchio-ness,countessanddux (leader) of territory stretching from Garda in the northtoTarquiniasouthofRome,shewascalledinpraise‘mostpru-dentleaderandmostfaithfulwarriorofSt.Peter’,‘daughterofSt.Peter’and‘virago’inherlifetime.Whetherherfriendsorenemies,themanywho wrote about Matilda either in her lifetime or shortly thereafter acknowledgedherasaformidableleaderandruler,whowaseffectivein turning the tide of battle in support of church reform against the opposing German king/emperor Henry IV.


293

Opinions aboutMatilda havefluctuated over the past nine hundredyearsfromextravagantheroworshiptodeepdislikeor,indeed,toherdisappearancefromawarenesstoagreatextentintheEnglish-speakingworld.Sheisnotsowell-known,unlikeJoanofArc,andwehavetoaskwhy,asDianeOwenHughesasked.Thetwowomenhave,atleastsuperficially,similarcharacteristicsinthattheyareheroines,theyaremilitary,theyaredifferent,theyaredespised,theyareliked.EveryonehasheardofJoanofArc;nottoomanypeopleintheEnglish-speakingworld have heard of Matilda. Whyisthis?TheeasilycomprehendedreasonastoMatilda’sabsenceandJoan’spresenceinthepopularunderstandingofEnglishspeakersisthatJoan’svictoryanddefeatinvolvedtheEnglishmonarchy.DianeOwen Hughes provides a few ideas that I think are interesting. The Risorgimento assumed that «women were insensitive to the self-sa-crificeneededtorestoretheRepublic»and«aristocraticwomenwhohad made a mark on the history of their age [had] their power based in familyprivilegeandtheirvirtue–whentheypossessedit–hadbeenshaped more by ecclesiastical than by civic ideas. Matilda... had been a difficultheroineforthetowns,which,eveniftheyhadreceivedcon-cessions fromher, took advantage of the power vacuum»when shedied.«Shewasrarelyaccordedasignificantplaceintheirhistories,andher life attracted little independent attention.» However,let’scometotheRenaissance.IntheRenaissancestatesweare looking again at dynastic rather to republicanprinciples, and soMatilda’s life really resumes here. And we have to remember that this isthetime,fourhundredyearsafterherdeath,whenthepopesenthismessengerstoSanBenedettoPotostealherbody,andsheisnowoneofthefivewomenburiedinSt.Peter’sbasilicainRome.AndthisistheRenaissanceidea,she’scomingback.[Scipione] Ammirato wrote his Istorie fiorentine at about this time becau-sehewaslookingatthegrandduchyoftheFlorentineMedicileaders,whohadcommissionedhiswork.Forthepost-Tridentinechurch,she


294

was«aresplendentstar,thefriendofallvirtuesandtheenemyofeveryvice»6. Donizone’s biography of Matilda was edited in the eighteenth century by [Lodovico Antonio] Muratori in the Rerum italicarum scrip-tores. «Anecclesiasticwhowroteunder thepatronageof theEstensi,Muratori had no trouble appreciating the central role played by that aristocraticstateswoman,militaryleader,andruleroflandsandcitiesintheimperial-papalstrugglesoftheGregorianAge».AndI’llquoteOwen Hughes again here because I think her words are very good:

But just as the communal growth of the twelfth century had deprived Matildaofpoliticaldescendants,sothedevelopmentofanantiaristocra-tic,anticlerical,nationalideologyinthenineteenthcenturydiminishedherplaceinthehistoryofanewnation.UnliketheMaidofOrleans,afemale leader whom republicans could accept as a genuine savior of the nationevenafterFrancehadcutitstieswitharoyalandChristianpast,Matilda of Tuscany was for nineteenth-century Italian reformers the embodimentofthatpastfromwhichtheysoughttoextricatetheirnewnation.JoanofArc,freeoffamilyandabandonedbythechurch,couldbemoldedintoasecularsaintbythefiercelyrepublicanJulesMichelet.Matilda,loyaldaughterofthepopeandupholderoftheinterestsofherhouse,necessarilyfoundnoequivalentRisorgimentohagiographer.

SoI’llleavethatasitis,andIwouldliketocomment,whileImay,onDonizone.Ithinkyou’reright.Weneedtostudythecharters–andI’velookedatthechartersquitealot–Ithinkthat’sverytrue,butIthinkit’sunfairtodismissDonizone.Yes,hewasbuildingupthehouseofCanossa,that’strue,butlet’slookatWidukindofCorveybuildinguptheSaxonhouseorThietmarofMerseburg,protectinghisbisho-pric,buildingupthehouseofHenryII.Theywerealldoingthat,andI don’t think we need to be more careful of Donizone than we are of theseotherpeople.He’softencriticizedandsometimes,Ithink,unfai-rly.That’sme!

6 OwenHugues1987,36,quotingBenedettoLucchino(1592).


295

Helen Nicholson:OK,wehaveabouttwelveminutes–thatclock’sslightlyfast–fordiscussion,andatthispointI’dliketothrowitopentothefloorforanycomments,althoughobviouslythepanelmayalsospeak.Please,though,noteverybodyatonce!Anythoughtsyou’dliketocontribute?

John Oastler Ward:Afewthingsoccurredtome,theanswersmaybesimple.Justanasideonwhetheranybodywhostudiesweaponsbe-lievesinkilling,mypseudo-son-in-lawisatremendousfanoftanks,there’snothinghedoesn’tknowabouttanks,buthewon’teventreadonacockroach.Butthinkingaboutthethingsthatweresaid–andtheanswersareprobablyall inthebooksIhaven’tread–butonewon-dersinwhatwaysdidthecitiescontributemoniestotheiroverlords?HowwasMilangovernedinthisperiod?Idon’trecallanyreferencestocommunes.AndwhatwereMatilda’smajorsourcesofincome?Didit come from renting lands or agricultural produce or overlordship of citiesorwhat?VE:AsignificantchunkofitwasthetradealongthePo...anyplaceyouwantedtotieupyourboatanddobusiness,andallofthecitiesalongthetributariesshealsocontrolled.Rivertradewasveryimportant,andbasically everything she had a hold of was a trading port. This is one ofthethingsDonizoneemphasizes,thatshe«guardedtheroadofthePo».Inmyarticle,thatDavidhascommentedon,IapproachedthingsfromHenry’spointofview,hisobjectiveinhislastcampaignagainstMatilda,andconcludedthathewastryingtocutoffherrevenuesbysystematically quarteringher territory andoccupyingof these reve-nue-producing points. JOW:Andtakingthemoneyhimself?VE:Basicallycutting itofffromher;hewasprobablyhavingtodi-stributeittoothers,butwithoutthoserevenuesshewasn’tabletopaytroops. Another corollary is that a great many of her troops were paid.JOW: She must have had a considerable bureaucracy running all this.


296

VE:Yes,herchancery.Weknowmuchmoreaboutherchancerythanabout her castellans. JOW:Whataboutlandowning,theactuallanditself,thefivecounties?Didshemakemoneyfromjuststraightagriculturalproduce?Didte-nantspayrentordocorvée?VE:Shecouldcollectallkindsofrents;shehadveryfavourablecon-tractsforlandthatsheherselfheldinfief;thiswasthesortofthingthatherfatherwasinfamousfor,theemphyteuticcontract,likethebuck-a-monthrent,andsheinheritedallthat;andwhenitwassafeforhertodososhestartedundoingitquitesystematically.Thenumberandlocationofplaces thatwereherproperty,and in thenineteenthandearly-twentieth century scholars went to brickbats over what were her allodsandwhatwereherfiefs,andshehadlargechunksofit.JOW:Theknightswouldhavebeenlandedvassalsofhers;theyheldlands in return for service. VE:Yes,theproblemwasthatifalotofthemheldofherinheroffice,ascountofMantuaorFerraraorwhatever,whenHenrydispossessedher she was in a very precarious position. One of Pope Gregory’s letters comments on this. JOW:That’sallfascinatingand,again,youbegintowonderhowotheroverlords managed and Henry himself. These are all things I should know,andthey’reverynittygrittybasicthingsthatyouoftenforgetortakeforgrantedandyetthey’reterriblyimportant.Presumably,HenryIVwasinthesameposition.Whenhewasverylow,hewasverylow.Andalloftheseproperties,ports,lands,fiefsandsoonwereviewedasrevenue-producing,andwhoeverhadthemgottherevenue.Many: Yes. EC: A great many of them came under the term regalia. And that covers all thatkindofthing–thecommercial tolls, judicialfines, the[pro-ceeds]ofoffices,thecourts–thewholerangeofthingsthatyouweretalkingabout,andthosewerealmostallhistoricallyduetothecrownthroughthecrown’srepresentative,andthat’swhattheargumentwas


297

about.Andthatiswhythecommunewassoimportant,becausethatisusurpingthem,takingawayfromtherightfulrulerandredirectingtherevenuestothecitiesthemselves.Andthatis,ultimately,whatFre-derick Barbarossa is trying to do later on when he comes to Italy and proclaims the Diet of Roncaglia. It is a war of regalia. He presents a big list of regalia–theseareallthethingsthatareallduetome,and[theemperors]haven’tbeengettingthemfortwogenerations–anditwasthesamewithMatilda,forexample,intheMarchofTuscany,theCa-nossa were getting all this. VE: Some of the churchmen who supported the reform could be counted on to continue to pay their duties to her. It was important. JOW:Andpresumably, somebodymade reference tobishops rulingtheircities,theywouldhavepossessedregalia too. EC: The administrative regalia,onbehalfof thecrown; thatwas thedeal. VE:TheproblemhereisthatHenry,beinganexcommunicate,whatweretheirdutiestohim?Andthiswasalargechunkoftheexcuseforsimply ignoring his rights. People considered who was going to come out on top. The whole point of all this was to bring Henry back into obedience and back into the fold meaning that he could resume his rule,and,ifyouhadtreatedhimasanon-personwhenhewasexcom-municated,whatdoyouthinkhewasgoingtodowhentheyallmadeup?Therewasalotofthat.JOW:Now,mylastpoint,Milanatthisstagewasruledbythearchbi-shop.Many:Whichstage?JOW:Well,I’mjusttryingtothinkofthefirstreferencetoacommu-ne in Milan...Many: 1117. DH:Nottheactualword;(commune)isnotuseduntillater.EC:Theworditself isveryrarelyused.Again,andit’sagreatstudyof this from the point of reference of the whole issue of communal


298

origins,ChrisWickham’sbookwhichhas justcomeoutsurveystheemergence of the communes in northern Italy. There’s a case study of PisaandtheCanossaandofMilan;there’sawholechapteronMilanwithallyouneedtoknow.AndRomeaswell,actuallyenough,hein-cludes Rome in the communal movement which is very rarely thought to be part of that or discussed in terms of the communal movement. It has a very interesting chapter comparing the smaller cities in Tuscany7. Justtogettotherulershipissue,inallcitiestherewasatransitionperiodbetweenepiscopalorarchiepiscopalandcommunalrule,ofteninpa-rallel,sometimesinconflict.InthecaseofMilanitseemstohavebeenlargely in parallel because the archbishops were immensely powerful intheearly,intheeleventhcenturyand,despitealltheinterruptionsto the office, in the transition periodwhichwould probably be thefirsttwodecadesofthetwelfthcenturywhatonebeginstoseeistheemergence of new institutions of civic governance which weren’t the-re before. Which are variously called parliament or [arengo] or assembly ofthecitizens.InthecaseofMilanin1117,oneofthefirsttimesthisismentionedinMilan,theysetuptwostandsorbenches.Ononesidesitthearchbishopandhisadvisors,thecanons,andontheothersidesitwhatarecalled«themenexpertinlaw»,thecivicofficials,andtheyareclearly working in tandem. JOW: I see. That clears it up. And of course this means that Gregory isplayingwithfirebecausethesebishopswhomhewishestowrenchfromthecontrolofHenryIVhaveextensiveregalia. Many: Yes.HN: We’ve been talking about ten minutes without mention of Ma-tilda!ThisactuallynegateswhatyoujustsaidRob,thatwespendtoomuch time talking about her. RH:Ithinkwe’vemademarvelousprogress!

7 Wickham,Sleepwalking cit n. 1.


299

VE: Seriously, I think this is a really importantpointbecausewhensomeone is made too important I think they are made into a cliché. It’s like trying to getminority students – and this is in theU.S. ofcourse–topayanyattentiontoSojournerTruthbecauseshehasbeenmadeintothestandardfigureofABlackWoman.Youngpeoplewhohaveneverreadherspeechjustsay,«Ohyeh,weknowallaboutthat»,which they don’t. And we do risk doing the same thing if we make MatildaofTuscanythestandardbearerofmartialwomen,nobodywillpay any attention to this. PN:Shouldn’tshebereplacingJoanofArc?VE:Joaniscompletelydifferent;Joan’sappealisthatshe’sdead,agoryheroicfigurewhodied,acompletelydifferentanimal.HN:She’sbecomethismedievalfemalewhosuffersterribly,thedar-ling of black-and-white movies... whereas Matilda is a strong woman... VE:... who has never had a good movie. EC: That would be Eugenio’s point as well. Trying to deconstruct Ma-tildarequiresgettingawayfromthinkingofMatildaasasinglepersonand instead thinking of her domus, her court, themonkswhom shepatronized,thevariousmonasteries,herbishops,hervassalsandsup-porters. All of these people are not singing from the same hymn sheet all the same time. I think it is an important point that they all have their own interests. RH:SpeakingtowhatPennysaid,you’reabsolutelyright,Donizoneisfarfromtheonlypersonwhoispraisinghispatroninthismanner;thatdoesn’t undermine any of what I’ve said though. PN:No,butyouwerepickinghimout.RH:So…TherehavebeenacoupleofnamesmentionedsoIreallyneed to catch up on what has been said about Matilda. I have it in my head that they didn’t say as much as Donizone and... this fantastic ima-geofthiswarriorqueen,basically.ButI’msureit’smorethanwhatI’mallowing for so I’ve fallen into the trap that I described.


300

JOW: Henry IV must have felt that he had suzerainty or a legitimate claimtoitinItalyalmostasfarasyoucouldgoand,therefore,hemusthavefeltthatMatildawastherefore,what’stheword...PN: a thorn in his side...JOW:Well,yes,butalsoavassalwhoisnotdoingwhatvassalsoughtto do.VE: In her case what she should have been doing is sitting there wai-tingforcousinHenrytotellherwhomtomarrynext.JOW:Yes,aswellastopassonallrevenuesandsoon.PN: And that wasn’t going to happen. HN: And thank you everybody. The bells have just rung...VE:...andwecangodrinktoMatildainthepub!


301

Bibliography

Primary sourcesDie Urkunden und Briefe der Markgrafin Mathilde von Tuszien,GoezE.andGoezW.(edds.),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Laienfürsten- und Dynastenurkunden der Kaiserzeit,2,Hannover,1998.

RangeriusofLucca,Vita Anselmi Lucensis episcopi auctore Rangerio Lucensi,SackurE.,SchwartzG.andSchmeidlerB.(eds),MonumentaGermaniaeHistorica,Scriptores,30.2,Hannover,1934.

Secondary sourcesEadsV.(2005),Sichelgaita of Salerno: Amazon or trophy wife?,«Journalofmedievalmilitaryhistory»,3:72-87.

—(2010),The last Italian expedition of Henry IV: re-reading the Vita Mathildis of Doni-zone of Canossa,«Journalofmedievalmilitaryhistory»,8:46.

GlassD.F.(2010),The sculpture of reform in north Italy, ca 1095-1130: history and pa-tronage of Romanesque façades,Farnham:Surrey.

GoezE.(2004),Welf V. und Mathilde von Canossa,inWelf IV. Schlüsselfigur einer Wen-dezeit: regionale und europäische Perspektiven,BauerD.andBecherM.(eds.),Mu-nich,371-373.

-(2012),Mathilde von Canossa,Darmstadt.

HoughtonR.(2012),Representations of collective action in Mantua and Parma, c.1000-c.1120,PhDDissertation,UniversityofSt.Andrews,2012.

HayD.J.(2008),The military leadership of Matilda of Canossa, 1046-1115,Manchester.

OwenHughesD.(1987),Invisible madonnas? The Italian historiographical tradition and the women of medieval Italy,inWomen in medieval history and historiography,MosherStuardS.(ed.),Philadelphia.

RiversiE.(2017),Matilda and the Cities: Testing a “Figurational” Approach,«Storica-mente»,13:no.16.

TruaxJ.A.(1999),Anglo-Norman women at war: valiant soldiers, prudent strategists or charismatic leaders?,inKagayD.J.andVillalonL.J.A.(eds),The circle of war in the Middle Ages: essays on medieval military and naval history,Rochester,NY,111-125.

WickhamC. (2015),Sleepwalking into a new world: the emergence of the Italian city communes in the twelfth century,Princeton.

STUDI ERICERCHE

The aim of this paper is to compare the process of fascist penetration in the Italian immigrant communities of Brazil and France. Through the fasci italiani all’estero and the Organizza-zione Nazionale Dopolavoro’s sections, the fascistization of newspapers and associations and the construction of a system of alliances, the fascism obtained a good success in both France and Brazil. The comparative method helps to better understand the fascist ability to spread abroad propaganda and to gain the consensus of the masses of Italian immigrants.

introduzione

La penetrazione del fascismo nelle comunità italiane all’estero è stata perlungotemposottovalutatadallastoriografia,tantoinItaliaquantonei paesi d’arrivo. L’idea che il regime potesse aver ottenuto un suc-cesso anche al di fuori del territorio nazionale sembrava contraddire la visione a un tempo vittimistica ed elogiativa dei migranti italiani all’estero, costretti alla fugadaunpaese ingratoedaun regime illi-berale. Sebbene tutti gli studiosi abbiano sempre concordato sul fatto che solo una minoranza degli italiani avesse aderito alle organizzazioni antifasciste all’estero, simpatiemussolinianevenivano attribuitequasi

la fascistizzazione dei migranti italiani in Francia e Brasile: una comparazione

PieTRo PinnaUniv. Bologna, Dipartimento di Storia Culture Civiltà

Storicamente 13 - 2017Studi e ricerche

306

esclusivamente ai connazionali residenti negli Stati Uniti. Nel corso degliultimidecenni, tuttavia,gli studi sul fascismoall’estero si sonomoltiplicati,prendendoinconsiderazioneanchecontestidifferentidaquellonordamericano.Dapprimaglistoricisisonoconcentratisuifascid’esportazione,sottolineandospessolalorodebolezzaelalorodifficoltàa imporsi come strumento del regime [Fabiano 1983;Gentile 1995;Bertonha2002a;Franzina-Sanfilippo2003].Aquestistudisisonoaf-fiancati,piùrecentemente,saggidedicatiallapropaganda,chehannodimostrato la forte volontà del governomussolinianodi conquistareilconsensodegli italianiall’esteroedi incunearsinelle societàospiti,in nome della vocazione universalistica attribuita al fascismo da alcu-niesponentidelpartito[Garzarelli2004;Cavarocchi2010].Ilregime,piùprosaicamente,cercòdisfruttarelapresenzadeimigrantineipaesiospitisoprattuttoperfarepressionesuigoverni,alloscopodiottenerevantaggi e sostegni internazionali1. La storia del fascismo all’estero si è inoltrearricchita,nelcorsodeglianni,didiversicontributichehannoricostruito la penetrazione del regime in svariati contesti nazionali e regionali.Raramenteglistoricidelfascismoall’esterosisonodedicati,invece,aunapprocciocomparativosiatracontestiregionaliall’inter-nodellostessopaese,siatrapaesidiversi.L’eccezionepiùrilevante,inquestosenso,equelladiJoãoFábioBertonhache,partendodall’analisidelladiffusionedelfascismoinBrasile,hacondiversicontributipro-vatoamostrarelaproficuitàdelmetodocomparativo[Bertonha1999;Bertonha2001b;Bertonha2002b]. Inparticolare, secondo lo storicobrasiliano,lostudiodelfascismoedell’antifascismofuoridall’Italiarap-presenterebbeunnuovoorizzonteperlastoriografia,capacedirestitu-ireilcaratteretransnazionaledeifenomenimigratori,anchenellalorodimensione politica [Bertonha 2003]. Nell’ambito della storiografiaitaliana, il contributo recente più interessante appare quello diMat-

1 La«diplomaziaparallela»del fascismo,comevienedefinita,estatastudiataconparticolareattenzioneperquelcheriguardagliStatiUnitieipaesilatinoamericani[Luconi2000;Bertonha2001c].

pieTro piNNALa fascistizzazione dei migranti italiani in Francia e Brasile: una comparazione

307

teoPretelliche,avvalendosideglistudisinoaquelmomentocompiutidaricercatoriitalianiestranieri,hapropostounasintesideiprincipalinucleidiricerca,cercandodisottolinearelesfumaturepresentineidi-versi contesti nazionali [Pretelli 2010]2.L’obiettivodiquestosaggioe,dunque,quelloditentareunacomparazionedellafascistizzazionedellecomunitàitalianeinduecontestiparticolarmentedifferenti.IlBrasilee, infatti,concordementeritenutounodeipaesinelqualeil fascismoottenne imigliori risultati,mentre,perquelche riguarda laFrancia,doveimportantefulapresenzadiantifascisti,laforzadelregimeestatariconosciuta con maggiore reticenza. Il tentativo di comparazione si basa sulla convinzione che il fascismo all’estero non fu un monolito e che,malgradolafortevolontàdelregimediuniformarel’atteggiamen-todeipotericonsolarineidiversicontestid’azione,ledirettivegiunteda Roma furono variamente interpretate secondo le necessità locali.

Gli strumenti del fascismo all’estero

Ifasciitalianiall’esteroassunsero,inFranciaeBrasile,unruolodipri-missimo piano nel corso degli anni Venti. Nati alcuni mesi prima della marcia su Roma anche grazie all’azione di precedenti organizzazioni di stamponazionalista,furono,inprincipio,piccolinucleidireducidellaGrande Guerra spesso guidati da intellettuali e giornalisti come Ca-millo Pellizzi a Londra o Nicola Bonservizi a Parigi. La gran parte dei fascivide,tuttavia,laluceinEuropaenelleAmericheimmediatamentedopolaconquistamussolinianadelpotere:così,giànel1925,ben20eranoigruppifascistinelpaesetransalpino[DeCaprariis2003,7].Nelcontinente sudamericano fu a Buenos Aires che sorse la prima sezione fascista, seguita,nelmarzo1923,daquelladiSãoPaulo,nata su ini-

2 Traglistudichehannocercatodianalizzareinchiavecomparata,seppurealivelloregionale,leesperienzedelfascismoedell’antifascismoall’estero,cfr.Pinna2012.


308

ziativadelcontroversoEmidioRocchetti.IlBrasiledivenne,inbrevetempo,ilpaeselatinoamericanocolmaggiornumerodifasci[Trento2003,154-155;Trento2005,15-17].Lastoriadeigruppifascisti,anchea causa della forte personalità del primo segretario generale dei fasci all’esteroGiuseppeBastianini,fusegnatadagrandiambiguità,similiaquellechenellaprimafasedelregimecontraddistinseroirapportitrastatoepartito,generandoforticontrasticonlerappresentanzeconso-lari soprattutto in Francia. Solamente grazie all’opera di fascistizzazione delcorpodiplomatico,intrapresadaDinoGrandi,letensionisembra-ronoviaviarientrare.ConPieroParini,divenutosegretariodeifasciall’esteroallafinedel1927,sigiunsealladefinitivacessazionedell’au-tonomiadellesezionifasciste,nell’ambitodellacomplessivariorganiz-zazione della politica migratoria italiana che concentrava tutti i poteri nellaDirezioneGeneraledegli Italiani all’Estero,guidatadallo stessoParinipresso ilMinisterodegliEsteri[Gentile1995,910-916e950-956;DeCaprariis2003,15-19].La volontà normalizzatrice che aveva portato al ridimensionamento politico del ruolo dei fasci non fu solo il portato dello scontro interno tra esponenti statalisti efascistirivoluzionari,maancheilfruttodiunascelta consapevole di realpolitik da parte del governo mussoliniano. La FranciadellametàdeglianniVentifu,infatti,attraversatadaunalungasciadiscontrieviolenzetrafascistieantifascisti,inauguratadall’assassi-nioaParigi,nel1924,diNicolaBonservizi[Milza1983,431-432].Talieventi coinvolsero diversi dirigenti e persino prelati accusati di essere complicidelregime,tracuidonCaravadossi,uccisoaJœuf,inLorena,nel1928[Pinna2012,195-196].ANizza,nelsettembre1929,siebbel’episodiopiùsanguinoso,conl’assassinioditremembridell’Associa-zione Nazionale Combattenti colpiti da una bomba lanciata da uno sconosciuto [Schor 1991, 140]. L’opinione pubblica francese guardòcon ostilità a tali accadimenti e all’ostentazione con cui alcuni fasci-stisceglievanodimanifestarelapropriavicinanzaalregime.Così,ungrossoscandaloscoppiòaTolosaquando,nelfebbraio1926,alcunimi-


309

litantiindossaronolacamicianera,provocandoleiredelsindacodellacittàÉtienneBillieres,socialistaenotoamicodegliesiliatiantifascistidella regione, e unadura polemica che coinvolse le autorità locali enazionali[Teulieres2002,97-98;Pinna2012,214-216].Ancheinse-guitoaquestifatti,ilMinisterodell’Internofrancesevietòaglistranieri,con la circolare n. 5 del 5 ottobre 1926, dimanifestare con simbolie divise che potessero indurre a contromanifestazioni o incidenti3. La violenza squadristae laviolenza rivoluzionariaerano stated’altrondeelementi fondativi dello scontro tra fascismo e antifascismo nel corso deglianniVenti.Leaggressionireciproche,chespessovideroall’esteroun ribaltamento travittimeecarnefici rispettoall’Italia, rappresenta-vanounelementodiforterafforzamentodell’identitàpolitica,manonportavano alcun vantaggio alle organizzazioni contrapposte. I giovani fascisti che parteciparono agli scontri sembravano voler recuperare in qualchemodounatradizionediarditismo,chetaloraneppureavevanovissutoinpatria,mentrenegliantifascistiprevalevanoilsentimentodivendettae,soprattutto,lavolontàdidimostrareche,nonostantel’esilio,essi non si sentivano vinti. La stessa formazione culturale di alcuni diri-gentifascisti–cheeranostatisquadristinellamadrepatriaechespessovivevanolamilitanzacomeunabattaglia–favorivalapropensioneallaviolenza:ilfondatoredelfasciopaulistaEmidioRocchetti,adesempio,giunseaSãoPaulodopoaveruccisoilsegretariodelpartitocomunistadiMacerata.InBrasile,tuttavia,lasituazioneapparvedecisamentepiùtranquillarispettoallaFrancia.Laviolenzarimaseunfenomenosostan-zialmentemarginalenelpaeselatinoamericano,dovenonsiverificaro-noscontrisignificativiancheperlagrandedebolezzadelmovimentoantifascista.Ciononostante,anche inBrasilegliesponentidelleélitessostennero ilprocessodinormalizzazionecheavrebbepotutooffrire

3 Rapportdu20novembre1926parleMinistredel’IntérieurauPréfetdelaHaute-Garonne,ArchivesNationales(AN),F7 13458.


310

maggiorecredibilitàalleorganizzazionifascisteequinditutelareme-glioilorointeressi[Trento2005,15-17].La pressione normalizzatrice del regime portò, negli anni Venti eTrenta, alla perdita della carica politica universalista e rivoluzionariacheiprimifondatoriavevanovolutodareaifasciall’estero,maancheauna loro moltiplicazione. Nel 1927 i gruppi fascisti in Brasile erano 52 enel1934già82,dicui35nelsolostatodiSãoPaulo[Trento2003,155]. In Francia la situazione era ancora migliore per i seguaci di Mus-soliniseeveroche,nel1938,ifascieranoaddirittura274,circalametàdiquellipresentiinEuropaeunquartodeltotale[Milza1993,248].Lanormalizzazione coincise anche con la progressiva fascistizzazione del corpo diplomatico. L’inserimento dei cosiddetti consoli fascisti da parte delregimeagevolò,inmanieraapparentementeparadossale,ilritornoaunasituazionedimaggioretranquillità.Difattosistabilivaoracheera-noiconsolati,divenutiilcentrodell’azionedipropaganda,adetenereil potere decisionale. I fasci all’estero assunsero sempre più un carattere ausiliare,dedicandosi,pursenzaperderecompletamentelapropriavo-cazionemilitante,all’assistenzaealsostegnodellecomunitàimmigrate.L’impegnodeiconsoliportòottimirisultatiefuparticolarmenteevi-denteinalcunerealtàche,finoaquelmomento,avevanocontribuitoall’accrescimentodelnumerodei soci inmisurapiùmoderata, comeaccadde a Porto Alegre grazie all’opera del console Manfredo Chio-stri[Bertonha2001a,218-223].InBrasileilprincipaleprotagonistadiquestanuovafasefu,però,ilconsolediSãoPaulo,SerafinoMazzolini,vicesegretariodelPNFfrail1924eil1926,chesidedicòcongrandecuraalladiffusionedelfascismonellostatopaulistasecondoleindica-zioniprovenientidaRoma[Trento1994,257-258].Anche inFran-cia,inparticolareincittàcomeMarsiglia,dovedivenneconsoleCarloBarduzzi,exsegretariodelPNFtrentino,oaNizzaenelNord-Pas-de-Calais,l’arrivodeinuovirappresentantidiplomaticidiedemaggiorvigoreaifascicittadini[Temime1986,566-567;Schor2011].


311

Ilnumerodiiscrittialleorganizzazionifascisteapparedifficiledasta-bilire. Secondo Angelo Trento i fasci in Brasile non superarono mai la cifradi5.000-6.000soci,granpartedeiqualiconcentratinellaregionepaulista,suquasimezzomilionediimmigratiitaliani,mentreinFran-ciamenodel2%degliitalianipresentiecircail2,2%diquelliarrivatinel paese tra il 1911 e il 1939 avrebbe aderito alle organizzazioni fasciste [Trento2003,155;Vial2003,31;Maltone1998,119].PierreMilzahaavanzato,inoltre, l’ipotesidicirca10.000-12.000iscrittiaifascitran-salpiniperil1937-1938,suquasi800.000italiani,acuiandavanosom-mati,però,gliaderentialleorganizzazionidopolavoristicheegiovanili[Milza1993,249].Nel1930isocidelfasciosarebberostaticirca3.000aParigi,benchésolo500-600potesseroconsiderarsirealmenteattivi,e1.000aNizza,dovepoisarebberoaumentati sinoaraggiungere laconsiderevolecifradi2.200nel1938[Milza1995,95;Schor2011].Allostessomodo,eoranotocheinalcuneareeperiferichefrancesicomela Lorena e il sud-ovest i fasci avvicinarono alcune migliaia di perso-ne,benchélefonticonsolarinonpossanoconsiderarsicompletamentedegnedifede.Complessivamente, ladebolezzael’assolutaincertezzadeinumerihannofattosìche,permoltotempo,sisiaipotizzataunasostanzialeincapacitàdeifascistidiconquistareimigranti,catalogandoidifferenti strumentimessi in attodal corpodiplomaticoedalleor-ganizzazioni fasciste come grotteschi tentativi dagli scarsi risultati. La presenzacapillaredeifasci,tantoinFranciaquantoinBrasile,nondeveinveceesseresottovalutata.Leorganizzazionidelregime,infatti,noneranopresentisoloneigrandicentricomeSãoPaulo,RiodeJaneiro,ParigioMarsiglia,maebberounacapacitàdipenetrazioneatrattisor-prendente.Così, piccoli gruppi riunivanogli italiani aObidosnellostatodelParàoaSobralPintonelMinasGerais,innomediun’apparte-nenzaetnicaprimaancorachepolitica[Trento2003155-156;Trento2005,17].ARecifeilfascio,sortonel1924,riuniva,allafinedeglianniTrenta,centoitalianisuicinquecentoresidentinellacittà,conunaper-centualedigranlungasuperioreaquellaraggiuntadall’organizzazione


312

fascistadiSãoPaulo[Bertonha1998,197].Allostessomodo,fascinac-queroneicentriisolatidellecampagnedellaFranciasud-occidentale,dove gli italiani erano giunti numerosi a coltivare terre ormai abbando-natedaifrancesi,einmoltivillaggidegliitalianinelleregioniminerariedell’est[Maltone1998,122-123;Pinna2012,204].Lacapacitàfascistadiincunearsinellecittàeneivillaggisembradunqueridimensionare l’importanzadeinumeri, anche inconsiderazionedelfatto che i fasci rappresentarono solo uno degli strumenti utilizzati dal regimeperraggiungereeconquistareimigranti.TralafinedeglianniVenti e i primi anni Trenta si assistette alla costruzione di un vero e pro-priosistemafascistadiinterventoneidifferentipaesistranieri,cheman-tenevaalcunitratticomunipurdifferenziandosiasecondadeicontestineiqualisitrovavaaoperare.Lastrategiafascistaperlapenetrazionenellecomunitàimmigratesibasòsutrefondamentalipilastri:ilcontrol-lodelleattivitàassistenzialiericreative,lapropagandaelacostruzionediunsistemadialleanze.Giànel1925–almenosecondol’incaricatod’affarifranceseaRoma–ilduceavrebberichiestouna«azionespecificad’assistenzaeconomica,moraleepatriotticaailavoratoriemigrati»conunaparticolare attenzione «all’educazionefisica, sportiva, all’insegna-mentogeneraleeprofessionale,allapropagandamoralecontrol’alco-lismoelemalattie,all’assistenzaeconomicaemorale,allapropagandaaffettiva e culturale italiana»4. La nascita dell’Ond (Opera Nazionale Dopolavoro) all’estero e delle Ogie (Organizzazioni Giovanili degli Italianiall’Estero)–poidivenuteGile (Gioventù ItalianadelLittorioall’Estero)–sembraronorispondereatalinecessità.Ildopolavorofuilpernoprincipaledell’organizzazione fascistaall’estero; secondoquan-to sostenne lo stessoMussolini in una circolare del 1929, conservatapressogliarchivifrancesi,ilcompitodell’Operaneipaesistranieriera

4 Copiedurapportn.553du9décembre1925parM.Roger,Chargéd’affairesdelaRépubliquefrançaiseàRomeàM.lePrésidentduConseil,MinistredesAffairesEtrangeres,inArchivesduministeredesAffairesEtrangeres(MAE),Correspondance politique et commerciale (Corr.), Série Z Europe 1918-1929, b. 185.


313

costituitodauna«azionemultiplaequasiindefinibilecheedestinataalegare lospiritodeicompatriotipersottrarlialle influenzenegativeeportarliversounfinepatriotticosottol’influenzapositivadellospiritod’educazione, dello spiritod’associazione edello spiritodi emulazio-ne».L’educazionefascistaprevedevadunqueche,nelleorganizzazionidopolavoristiche,siproponesserocorsidilingua,dimusica,trovasserospaziobiblioteche,sisvolgesseroconferenzeeproiezionicinematogra-fichemaanchefesteecerimoniepubbliche,sorgesserogruppiteatraliemusicalie,soprattutto,fossepossibilepergliitalianipraticaresport5. Lacrescitadelleorganizzazionidopolavoristichefuimpressionante,seevero che vi sarebbero state 244 sezioni all’estero nel 1937 e 332 nel 1939 [Bertonha2001a,45].LaprimasedebrasilianafuinaugurataaRionel1929,mentresidovetteaspettareil1931perchél’Ondaprisseunapro-priafilialeaSãoPauloegliannisuccessivipervederelamedesimaca-pillaritàneicentrigrandiepiccoligiàregistratanelcasodeifasci.ASãoPaulo,secondoalcunefonti,gli iscritti sarebberostaticirca2.200nel1932,quasi6.000nel1934,7.000unannodopoeaddirittura–maquilacifraapparedavveroimprobabile–40.000nel1938.AdifferenzadiquantoaccadevainFrancia,leOndbrasilianeattrasseropersonediogninazionalitàe,dopoil1932,ibrasilianipoteronopersinoaccedereallecariche direttive anche se a occupare gli incarichi più prestigiosi venne-ronormalmentechiamatiitalianinaturalizzati[Trento2005,23-24].Leattivitàdeidopolavorospaziavano,secondoleindicazioniprovenientidaRoma,dall’organizzazionedifesteeiniziativericreativesinoallaco-struzionediunaretedisostegnoallapopolazione,basatasuattivitàcheunivano inscindibilmente assistenza e politica come la befana fascista o glialberidiNatale,instrettacollaborazioneconiconsolatieifasci.InBrasile le sezioni dopolavoristiche si impegnarono anche per celebrare

5 CopiedelaCirculairen.38duMinisterodegliAffariEsteriDirezioneGeneraledegliItalianiall’Estero,inRapportn.975S.C.R.2/11du3mars1929parleMinistredelaGuerreauMinistredesAffairesEtrangeres,MAE,Corr., Série Z Europe 1918-1929 Supplément,b.375.


314

ilcarnevale,dimostrandounagrandecapacitàdiassorbireletradizionilocaliedisfruttarlealorovantaggio[Guerrini,Pluviano195,526].Leorganizzazionifascisteall’estero,comerichiestodalregime,diederoinoltre largo spazio alle attività sportive,prestandoparticolare atten-zioneallapartecipazionegiovanile.Losportassunse,all’internodell’i-deologiafascista,unforteruolopedagogicoededucativonellacostru-zione dell’umanità nuova anche all’estero e divenne un fondamentale strumentodidisciplinaecontrollo,confermandoquellacheVictoriaDeGraziahadefinito«unaveraepropriaossessione»dapartedelre-gime[DeGrazia1981,249].L’indicazionedelleattivitàsportivecomeunodeiprincipalicompitideidopolavoroproveniva,comericordatoinprecedenza,direttamentedaMussolini,chesostenevaenfaticamenteil dovere degli immigrati di difendere i colori e la bandiera della patria6. L’organizzazionedisquadrecalcistichenazionalidoveva,inparticolare,essere favorita non solo per l’amore tipicamente italiano nei confronti diquestosport,maancheperchégraziealcalcio,secondoilduce,sipotevano incitare i connazionali alla competizione nei confronti de-gli elementi locali e favorire l’omogeneità interna al gruppo. Proprio perquesto,ilfascismononsiprodigòsolamentenell’organizzazionedigruppisportivitraimmigrati,mautilizzòapertamentelosport,calcioeciclismoinprimoluogo,comestrumentodipropaganda.Lepartitedicalcioamichevoligiocatedaimportantisquadreitalianenellecittàfrancesi e brasiliane furono uno dei principali esempi dell’ambizione fa-scista,suscitandoungrandeentusiasmotraimigranti.Ciononostante,anche altri sport furono ampiamente praticati all’interno dei dopolavo-ro,dallalottaliberaaBeloHorizonte,alping-pongaBarretos[Guer-rini,Pluviano1995,525],alloscinelleareemontuosedellaFranciaoalnuotoinquellemarittime.

6 CopiedelaCirculairen.38,cit.,inMAE,Corr., Série Z Europe 1918-1929 Sup-plément,b.375.


315

la rete propagandistica

Lospiritodiconquistaneiconfrontidellospazioricreativoeassisten-zialeprovocòalcunicontrasticonleassociazionicoloniali.InBrasilelapresadellevecchieassociazionicheriunivanoinotabilinonsembrò,in realtà,particolarmentecomplessa, almenodopo il1928[Bertonha1998,129-131].LostoricoCircoloItalianodiSãoPaulocapitolòrapi-damente,divenendosindal1925unostrumentonellemanidelregime[TucciCarneiro2010,446].Complessivamente,tralafinedeglianniVentieiprimianniQuarantasiassistetteaunacrescitanonindifferentedelleassociazioni,specialmentequellemutualisticheeconparticolareintensitànellostatopaulista,chefuronoagevolmenteassimilatedalpo-tere consolare. L’unica eccezione fu rappresentata dalla Lega Lombarda diSãoPaulo, sinoagli anniTrenta «roccaforte antifascista», secondola definizione di Angelo Trento, prima di essere anch’essa assorbitanella reteconsolare fascista [Trento2005,26-27].Anche inFrancia,nelcorsodeglianniVenti,ilnumerodellesocietàdimutuosoccorsoedelleassociazioni italianesimoltiplicò.Nel1927,secondoilcensi-mentodegli italiani inFranciavolutodalMinisterodegliEsteri,nelpaesetransalpinosicontavanoben237societàdibeneficenza,ricreati-ve,educative,culturali,sportiveedeconomiche,lamaggiorpartedellequaliconcentratenellecircoscrizionidiMarsiglia,ParigieNizza.Traessenonfiguravano,naturalmente, leassociazionidichiaraimprontaantifascista7.DiversamentedaquantoaccadutoinBrasile,isodalizifu-rono progressivamente costretti a scegliere se entrare nell’orbita del re-gimeoopporreunaresistenzacheinFranciaapparivadifficilemanonimpossibile.Così,lasocietàdimutuosoccorsoIlBelPaesediVillerupt– fondatanel1910nell’estminerariodellaFrancia,dove risiedevanomigliaiadiitaliani,eprestodivenutaunadellepiùgrandiassociazionidellaregione–dovettecombattereun’asprabattagliaperl’autonomia,

7 RecensementdesItaliensàl’étrangerau30juin1927publiéparleMinistereita-liendesAffairesEtrangeresen1928,MAE,Corr., Série Z Europe 1918-1929, b.185.


316

riuscendopermoltianni,anchegraziealsostegnodiesponentisocia-listi, a salvaguardare lapropria indipendenza [Pinna2012,274-275].Complessivamente,tuttavia,lalibertàdelleassociazioni–cheperaltroancheneglianniprecedentiilconflittononeramaistataassoluta,vistiiprofondilegamiconlareteconsolare,conlaChiesaoconilnascen-temovimentosocialista–andòlentamenteperdendosinelcorsodeglianniTrenta,quandotuttelesocietàfuronocostretteascegliereilre-gimeoisuoiantagonisti.Ifascistimostrarono,inalcunicasi,uncertogrado di creatività e una buona capacità di adattamento nel tentativo di controllare le masse immigrate attraverso le associazioni. Accanto alle tradizionalisocietàmutuali,cheesistevanosoprattuttoneigrandicen-triurbani,eallesocietàsportive,iconsolatieleorganizzazionifascistesperimentarono,infatti,formediassociazionismodifferenteasecondadeicontestineiqualisitrovavanoadagire.Così,seinunaregionedifrontiera come la Lorena furono le associazioni combattentistiche a es-serefortementepotenziate,nelsud-ovestagricolodellaFranciafuronocreati consorzi e sodalizi che riunivano i contadini per rispondere alle loronecessitàpratiche.L’incapacitàdeidirigentifascisti–spessodav-veroquelle«fascistichenullità»dicuiparlavaCamilloPellizziriferen-dosi al caso parigino8–elespinteintegrazionistedellostatofranceselimitaronoprofondamente tali esperimenti, che, tuttavia, appaiono ilsegno di una interessante capacità fascista di cogliere le necessità delle diversecomunità italianenellequalioperavano. Il tentativodioccu-pazionedeglispaziricreativiediassistenzaattraversoildopolavoro,lareteconsolare,leassociazionieglistessifascigiovònonpocoalsistemadipoterefascista.Iltrionfoditaleprogettoche,immaginatoaRoma,veniva calatonei diversi contesti nazionali, avrebbedovuto essere lacentralizzazioneditutteleattivitànelleCased’Italia,luoghidicontrol-loepropagandadell’italianità. I risultati furono, inrealtà,abbastanza

8 CamilloPellizzi,“Ilfascismoel’estero”,Il Popolo d’Italia,2novembre1923,cit.in:DeCaprariis2003,9.


317

controversi perché leCased’Italia, edificate innumerosissimi centri,divennero spesso sedi burocratiche dallo scarso successo e la partecipa-zionealleattivitàsportiveericreativenonsitrasformòinquell’afferma-zione di italianità immaginata dal regime.Lavolontàdiconquistaregliitalianiinnomedellalorocomuneappar-tenenzanazionaleediunsensodinuovaitalianitàfascistarappresentò,d’altraparte,ilcentrodellapropagandadelregimenelcorsodeglianniVentie,soprattutto,deglianniTrenta.ComehasottolineatoMatteoPretelli «il fascismosiadoperòattivamentecontrogli stereotipidegliitalianicheall’esterovenivanospessoidentificaticomeappartenentiaunarazza“inferiore”,inquantoritenutiparticolarmentepropensiallaviolenza e alla criminalità […] facendo, al contrario, l’apologiadella“stirpeitalica”»[Pretelli2010,56].IlmitodiunanuovaItalia,cheri-prendevalegloriepassateeifastimoderni,iconicamenterappresentatidai voli transoceanici che larga eco ebbero inBrasile [Trento 2005,35-36;Zega2008],avevad’altrondeundupliceobiettivo.Lavolontàdimigliorare l’immagine dell’Italia all’estero si univa alla necessità di im-primereun’accelerazionealprocessodinazionalizzazionedeimigranti,chemoltospessoeranoitalianisolodinome,masisentivanopiuttostoveneti, piemontesi, emiliani o siciliani. Attraverso la costruzione delmitoitaliano,alimentatodallanostalgia,siintendevacosìsollecitareunprocesso che avrebbe garantito il mantenimento di un legame con la madrepatria,destinatoaltrimentiaperdersinellespiredell’integrazionealle società d’accoglienza. La propaganda fascista per la tutela dell’ita-lianitàebbemillerivoli,purdovendospessofareiconticonristrettez-ze economiche che ne limitavano la portata. Una grande importanza ebberocertamentelescuoleitaliane,realizzatespessoincollaborazioneconlaDanteAlighierifascistizzata[Cavarocchi2010,130-140]emol-todiffuseinBrasileeFrancia,chespessorappresentarono,specialmenteallafinedeglianniTrenta,unmotivoditensioneconglistatiospiti,in-teressati alla naturalizzazione dei migranti di seconda generazione e per


318

questoostiliaformedinazionalismoetnico9.NelRioGrandedoSul,inparticolare,acausadellavolontàdell’EstadoNovo varguista,alme-nodopoil1937,diprocedereallabrasilianizzazionedellepopolazionidioriginestraniera,italianemasoprattuttotedesche,lescuoleetnichefuronocostretteanazionalizzarsi,passandoall’insegnamentoinlinguaportoghesecheenfatizzavalabrasilianità,oppureachiudereibattenti[Beneduzi2009,125]10. Gli stessi media furono oggetto di grande attenzione da parte del re-gime, in particolare inBrasile. In Francia il foglio del fascio di Pa-rigi La Nuova Italia, fondato nel 1923 daBonservizi, non ebbemaiunadiffusioneenormenelpaesenonostanteglisforzidelregimeperlasuacrescita,raggiungendonel1942,inunaFranciaormaioccupa-taedevastatadalconflitto,5.600abbonaticonunatiraturadi18.500esemplari per settimana [Wiegandt-Sakoun 1986, 460]. Ben diversaeralasituazionenelpaeselatinoamericano,dovefogliitalianidigran-de successo esistevano già nel periodo precedente il primo conflittomondiale.Lafascistizzazionedel«Fanfulla»,giornaleborghesediSãoPaulo in lingua italiana fondatonel 1893 e che,giànel 1910, avevaunatiraturadi15.000copie,rappresentòun’indubbiavittoriadelregi-me.Lasuaconquista,nel1923,fucelere,comeharaccontatoFedericoCroci,e fuprobabilmente legataalledifficoltàeconomichedelgior-nale,chebenprestodivenneilfoglioufficialedelfascismoinBrasile,dando largo spazio alle notizie da Roma e celebrando con entusiasmo

9 Giànel 1929 l’ispettore inviato dalMinistero dell’Istruzione francese aTolosarimarcava come la scuola italiana istituita presso il Consolato non fosse altro che uno strumento di propaganda nazionalista e fascista. Rapport du 12 mars 1929 par le Mi-nistredel’InstructionPubliqueetdesBeaux-ArtsauMinistredesAffairesEtrangeres,MAE,Correspondance politique et commerciale, Série Z Europe 1918-1929,b.207.10 Leleggisullanazionalizzazionedellescuoledapartedelgovernofederalefuronoapplicateconmoltominorvigoreneglialtristati,cfr.Bertonha1998,125.Lapoliticadibrasilianizzazionedellescuolefu,inoltre,portataavanticonpiùvigoreneicon-fronti delle scuole etniche tedesche. Le scuole italiane continuarono la loro attività almenosinoal1942el’IstitutoMedioDanteAlighierifunazionalizzatosolonel1943,cfr.TucciCarneiro2010,462.


319

ilnuovoregime[Croci2008,174-175]11.Anche«IlPiccolo»,chepurenel1919avevaattaccatoduramenteilmovimentodiMussolini,fura-pidamente occupato dagli uomini del regime. Non furono solamente lepurimpellentinecessitàeconomicheefinanziarieaportareallafasci-stizzazionediquestigiornali.SecondoAngeloTrento,infatti,«alcunidegli aspetti più appariscenti del fascismo non potevano lasciare indif-ferentiquestifogli,primifratuttilastrenuadifesadell’italianità,lalottaaparticolarismi,regionalismielocalismi,masoprattuttolosbandieratoprestigiodellamadrepatriasullascenamondiale»[Trento2009,584]12. LasituazioneapparivaquasirovesciatatraFranciaeBrasile,poichésenelpaesetransalpinoeranogliantifascistiadaverequellacheMassimoLegnanihadefinitounafiduciaeccessivanellastampa[Legnani1980,261-262],nellanazionelatinoamericanaeranoifascistiascommetteresulruolodeigiornaliperconquistarelacomunitàitaliana.Dopoalcunetensioni provocate dalle aspre parole contro una giornalista brasiliana nel1928,iperiodicifascistirimaseroinvitasinoal1942,modificandoitoni ma mantenendo il ruolo di portavoce della nuova italianità fascista [Trento2009,586-587;Trento2011].Lapropaganda scelse, tuttavia, apartiredagli anniTrenta, il cinemacomestrumentoprivilegiatoperdiffondere ilproprioverbo.Lepel-licole,per lopiùdocumentarimaancheprodottidifinzione, furonofatte circolare in tutti i paesi europei e nelle Americhe. Le proiezio-ni,inizialmenteimmaginatecomeindirizzateaisolimigranti,furonosuccessivamente aperte anche ai simpatizzanti stranieri, propagandol’immaginediun’Italiafascistasospesatratradizioneemodernità,perrievocarel’immaginedelpaeselasciatodaimigranti,celebrandonein-siemeleprofondeinnovazionidicuilebonifiche–inparticolarequella

11 SecondoAngeloTrento,tuttavia,ancoranel1925ilgiornalecriticavaglieccessidelregime,inparticolareesecrandoleviolenzefascisteeleposizioniespressedaFa-rinacci,cfr.Trento1994,258-261.12 Sullafascistizzazionediquasituttiigiornali,conl’eccezionede«LaDifesa»(dal1931divenuto«L’Italia»)e«IlRisorgimento»,cfr.Trento2011.


320

dell’AgroPontino–eranoilprincipaleemblema.LaFranciafusenz’al-tro lametaprivilegiatadelleproduzionicinematografiche,ancheperla relativa semplicità con cui era possibile fare arrivare i materiali. Le pellicolefuronocosìpresentateintuttoilpaese,dallaLorenaminerariasino al sud-ovestpassandoovviamenteperMarsiglia eParigi, spessoricevendo ottimi riscontri di pubblico. Le proiezioni divennero occa-sione di celebrazione del regime e furono sovente accompagnate dai cantifascistiedaisalutiromani[Garzarelli2004,99-112].Gliitaliani–eanchealcunifrancesi–sembraronocomplessivamenteaccogliereconfavorequesteiniziative,accorrendonumerosiancheinunacittàdal-latradizionesocialistacomeTolosa,dove,aunaproiezionerealizzatapressouncinemanel1934,parteciparonopiùdi350persone13. Anche inBrasileisuccessidellapropagandacinematograficafurononotevoli,seeveroche siorganizzaronospettacoli itinerantinello statodiSãoPaulo in occasione della presentazione del documentario sulla visita di Hitler in Italia,proiettatopersino inunagrande fazendadiRibeirãoPreto[Trento2005,33-34].Lamancanzadifondielacompetizioneconaltrecinematografie,inparticolarequellastatunitense,resero,tut-tavia,assaidifficileunacircolazionedeifilmitalianiinBrasilealdifuoridei circuiti propagandistici [Bertonha 2015].L’apice del successo della propaganda fascista fu raggiunto con la guer-ra d’Etiopia e la proclamazione dell’impero. Mobilitazioni davvero sor-prendenti attraversarono le piazze e le strade anche dei paesi che aveva-no condannato l’impresa africana del regime. Le donazioni di fedi alla patriaealducesimoltiplicaronoinFranciacomeinBrasile,dove,pe-raltro,lasceltadinonaderireallesanzionifuaccoltacongioiadamoltiitaliani.ASãoPaulounagrandefollasiradunòil2ottobreperascoltarei discorsi provenienti dall’Italia e la viva voce di Guglielmo Marconi presenteincittà[Trento2005,40-41].Inalcunicentriminorileco-

13 Rapportn.29.631du10novembre1934parleCommissaireCentraldeToulouseauDirecteurGénéraldelaSûretéNationale,AN,F7 13466.


321

munità italiane organizzarono raccolte per inviare fondi nella madre-patria,festeecerimoniepercelebrarelavittoria.Legrandiparatefasci-stesieranoinrealtàdiffusegiàneglianniprecedenti,conl’istituzionedi feste come il Natale di Roma o la celebrazione della marcia su Roma cheprevedevanosfilateecortei,manullafuparagonabileaisuccessiot-tenuti tra il 1935 e il 1936. Nella regione del Rio Grande do Sul l’opera dicelebrazionedelleconquisteafricanefusvoltainparticolarmododalgiornale cattolico «StaffettaRiograndense», che, sindalprincipiodelconflitto,riprodusseledichiarazionidiMussolini,comunicòchemoltiitalo-brasilianieranoprontiadarruolarsiperlapatrialontanaesegnalòconvigoreledonazionidegliimmigrati[Beneduzi2011,104-110]. Gli entusiasmi si fecero sentire prepotenti anche in terra francese e non solo nellacapitale.Nellaregionelioneselacampagnad’Africarappresentòil«puntoculminante»dell’influenzafascista,cosìcomeaNizza,doveleraccolted’oroperlapatriafuronomoltofruttuose[Videlier1986,686;Schor1991,144].NellaLorenaoperaia,doveforteeralapresenzaco-munista,decinedifedifuronoraccolteinpiccolipaesicomeHayange,KnutangeeAlgrange,enelsud-ovestcentinaiadipersonepartecipa-rono alle manifestazioni per la vittoria e la proclamazione dell’impero aTolosa,Agen,Montauban14.Laconquistadelleterreafricanerappre-sentava d’altra parte un profondo motivo d’orgoglio per uomini che avevano talora vissuto la propria appartenenza nazionale come motivo divergognaeuncementoineguagliabileperilsensodifierezzaelospirito di dedizione alla patria. L’entusiasmo manifestato da molti italia-niinFranciaeBrasilesvelò,d’altronde,cheifascistinoneranoaffattouncorpoestraneo,machepotevanocontaresusolidirapporticonaltreforze presenti nelle comunità immigrate e nei paesi ospiti.

14 Telespresson.2686/108del20marzo1936dalConsolatodiMetzalMinisterodegliAffariEsterieall’Ambasciata,ArchiviostoricodiplomaticodelministerodegliAffariEsteri,Rappresentanza italiana in Francia (1861-1950),b.254e«IlCorriere»,7novembre1935,n.45.


322

il sistema delle alleanze

Lagrandecapacitàdiinfiltrazionedelfascismotraiconnazionali,gra-zieallapropaganda,erastata,ineffetti,facilitataanchedallacostruzionedi alleanze nei diversi paesi d’arrivo dei migranti. La relazione tra il fascismoelaChiesacattolica,chesembròcondividerelargapartedelleposizioninazionalistedelregime,rappresentaunodeglielementichepiù hanno attirato l’attenzione degli studiosi. Riassumendo la situazio-ne in una frase, Bertonha ha sostenuto che «sebbene con conflitti eresistenze,lerelazionideimissionariepretiitalianiall’esteroconilfa-scismofuronopiùdicollaborazionechediconflitto»[Bertonha2003].Perquelcheriguardailcasobrasiliano,ineffetti,lacollaborazionesem-bròpiuttostomanifesta.Lebenedizionidellenuovesezionifascisteinalcuni piccoli centri e le grandi feste nelle città a cui presenziavano rap-presentantidellaChiesafuronofrequentinelBrasiledeglianniTrenta.Inparticolare,funelRioGrandedoSul,doveforteeralapresenzadicontadini provenienti da una regione profondamente cattolica come ilVeneto,che lapenetrazionedelleorganizzazioni fasciste fu favori-tadall’alleanzaconimissionari[Bertonha1998,166-167,342].Ilgiàricordatosostegnodella«StaffettaRiograndense»,organodell’Ordinedeifraticappucciniminori,alleimpreseetiopichedelregimesembraladimostrazione migliore dei legami tra i religiosi italiani e le organizza-zionifasciste.L’alleanzatracattoliciefascistiinquestaregionetrovòleproprieradicicomuninellaprofondaspintaanticomunista,antilaicistaeantimassonica,oltrechenellacondivisavolontàdidifenderel’italia-nità dei connazionali emigrati. Il rapporto positivo tra la Chiesa locale eilregimefu,tuttavia,messoindiscussioneallafinedeglianniTrentaquando, con l’avvento dell’EstadoNovo, ilmondo cattolico sembròcambiarealleato,aderendoallevolontànazionalistedelnuovoregimecheportarono,nell’agosto1939, all’imposizionedelportoghesenelleomelieenellecelebrazioniliturgiche[Beneduzi2009,128].Unasituazionenondissimile,malgradolafortedifferenzadicompo-sizione sociale della comunità italiana della regione francese, si poté


323

riscontrareancheinLorena.GérardNoirielha, infatti,giustificatoladiffusionedelfascismonell’estdellaFranciaproprioconl’acquiescenzadeimissionaricattoliciche,talvolta,comenelcasodidonCaravadossichepagòconlavitalapropriamilitanza,furonoaccesipropagandistifascisti[Noiriel1983,139-140].ComegiànelRioGrandedoSul,laforte avversionenei confrontidelleorganizzazioni comuniste,parti-colarmente attive traglioperaidellaLorena siderurgica, sembròce-mentarequestaalleanza.Lastoriografiacattolicaha,tuttavia,cercatodimitigareleaccusemosseallaChiesa,segnalando,adesempio,lepresedi posizione del capo dei missionari italiani in Europa mons. Costan-tinoBabinie isuoiscontriconPieroParini[Rosoli1998,191-192].Particolarmentecontroversaappareinquestosensolafiguradimons.NoradinoTorricella,giuntoadAgen,nelsud-ovestdellaFrancia,nel1924 e ritenuto da alcuni un oppositore del regime e da altri un tira-piedifascista.L’analisidelleposizionidiTorricella–edelsuogiornale«IlCorriere»–sembradimostrarel’esistenzadiun’ampiaconvergenzatra il monsignore e il fascismo su alcuni temi centrali per cattolici e fa-scisticomelalottacontrolenaturalizzazioni,considerateilprodromodellasecolarizzazione,eilcultodellapatria,ancheselemotivazionidifondoditaleconvergenzanascevanodadifferentiopzioniideali[Guil-laume2003, 384]15.Così ilmissionario egli altri preti presenti nellaregioneparteciparonoanumeroseiniziativeorganizzatedalconsolato,inparticolaredurantelecelebrazioniufficialienegliannidellaguerrad’Etiopia,eil«Corriere» diede sempre ampio spazio alle notizie riguar-danti l’AssociazioneNazionaleCombattenti,mantenendo invece uncerto riserbo, almeno in una prima fase, sulle iniziative dei fasci. Lapercezione complessiva che dell’opera dei missionari ebbe gran parte dell’opinionepubblicafucosìquelladiun’azionestrettamenteconnessaaquelladeiconsolatiedelleorganizzazionifasciste,edesoprattuttoper

15 L’autonomiadimonsignorTorricellaedifesadaRosoli,chericordaanchegliscontritraChiesaefascismo,originatipropriodall’azionedel «Corriere» nel corso del 1934,cfr.Rosoli1986.


324

questochesipuòritenereche,anchenelsud-ovest,imissionaricatto-licifinironoperfavorireilrafforzamentodelregime.Il sostegno al fascismo nascente non venne solamente dal mondo catto-lico.Lestesseélitesitalianepresentinellegrandicittà,aParigicomeaSãoPaulo,sembraronopocoincliniaunoscontrocolregime.Dapartedi molti non vi fu un’adesione convinta alle organizzazioni fasciste ma unsostegnoformale,chesiconcretizzòtalvoltaancheinunsupportoeconomicononindifferente.Così,adesempio,FrancescoMatarazzoegli altri grandi maggiorenti italiani in Brasile sostennero più o meno discretamentel’operamussoliniana,anchesenonmancòchimanifestòpiùesplicitamentelapropriaadesione,comeilmagnatedellozuccheroPietro Morganti divenuto segretario del fascio di Picicaba [Bertonha 2001a,168-173;Trento2005,9-11]16.Complessivamente,sipuòrite-nere che l’adesione crescente delle élites italo-brasiliane e dei ceti medi al fascismo fu sostenuta dalla visione nazionalista e dal crescente anti-comunismocheandòmaturandonelcorsodeglianniTrentanelpaesesudamericano.Talisentimenti,comunianchetraibrasilianidioriginenon italiana, avrebbero rappresentato,d’altronde, anche laprincipalesorgentedelmovimentointegralistafilofascistanelpaesesudamericano[Bertonha1999,116-117]17. La simpatia delle classi dirigenti nei con-

16 Matarazzomostròilproprioapprezzamentoperleconquisteafricane,offrendoiprodotti della propria fabbrica al regime e garantendo che i suoi dipendenti che fos-seropartitisoldatiperlaconquistadell’Africaorientaleavrebberopotutoconservareilloropostodilavoro,cfr.Beneduzi2011,107.IfuneralidiMatarazzo,peraltro,sisvolserorispettandola“coreografiadiregime”,concamicienereegagliardettifascisti,cfr. Trento 2011.17 Deveesseresegnalatocheanchenelmovimentointegralistalapresenzadiitalo-brasilianifusignificativa.SecondoidatiriportatidaFulviaZega,infatti,circail70%degli iscritti all’AIB sarebbero statidiorigine italianao tedesca, cfr.Zega2008. Ilpotenzialeconflittonell’acquisizionedelconsensodegliitalianiedegliitalo-brasilianitra fascismoe integralismo fu, secondoBertonha, sostanzialmente,disinnescatodaragionidinaturagenerazionale.Gli italianidinascita furono, così, più facilmenteattrattiversoilfascismo,mentrel’integralismotrovòisuoisostenitorispecialmentetralesecondegenerazioni,ancheseleragionidiquestedifferentiadesionisonoda


325

frontidelregimenonriguardòd’altrondesolamentegliitalo-brasiliani.Lapropagandafascista,voltaancheaconquistareconsensieappoggineipaesistranieri,sembròdareottimifruttiproprioinBrasile.Grazieaicontinuiviaggidiintellettualiorganizzatidalregime,ilcultodellacomune latinità fece breccia nel mondo intellettuale e politico brasi-liano,provocandounacertasimpatiachetrascendevalepureevidentiispirazioni che Vargas e i suoi uomini sembravano trarre dal sistema corporativoitaliano[Bertonha2003;Pretelli2010,77].L’evocazionedellalatinitàsembròottenerequalchesuccessoancheinFrancia.ANizzaenelleregionisud-occidentalidelpaese,ilrichiamoalleradicilatinerappresentò,nelcorsodeglianniVenti,unostrumen-to per avvicinare alcuni intellettuali attratti dalla retorica mussoliniana [Schor 1991, 149;Teulieres 2002, 70-72]. La nascita di associazionicomeilComitéFrance-Italie,cheriunivapersonalitàinvistapronteaenfatizzarelecomunioriginelatinedeiduepaesi,divenneronelcorsodegli anni Trenta ottimi strumenti di «diplomazia parallela» del regime fascista, pronto afinanziarli e a sostenere anche le loropubblicazio-ni.Taliraggruppamentirappresentarono,inparticolarenelcorsodelconflittoafricano,vocidissonantirispettoallacondannaespressadal-leautorità francesi[Maltone1998,125-126].L’attenzionealla latini-tàculturalesembròtrovareminorspazionell’estdellaFrancia,benchéanche nel bacino minerario a nord di Nancy fosse nato un raggruppa-mentochiamatoUnionLatine,dallechiaresimpatie fasciste,guidatodaunmissionario italiano.L’alleanzacon leclassidirigenti inquestaregionesembròpiuttostosfruttareilfortesentimentoantitedescopre-sentenellaLorena,specialmentenell’areadiMetzappenaritornataallaFrancia.Unruolodecisivogiocò,inquestosenso,l’AssociazioneNa-zionaleCombattenti Italiani,chequisidedicòprincipalmenteall’or-ganizzazione di manifestazioni franco-italiane in ricordo della comune

ricercarsi nel contesto politico degli anni Trenta e nelle modalità del processo di ac-culturazionedeiduegruppi,cfr.Bertonha2000,98-100.


326

partecipazione allaGrandeGuerra [Pinna2012,260-265].Anche inunpaesecomelaFrancia, inoltre, l’anticomunismoebbeunruolodiparticolare rilievo nell’avvicinare una parte delle classi dirigenti alle as-sociazioni filofasciste. InLorena furono, così, gli imprenditori locali–terrorizzatidallapossibilesindacalizzazionedeiminatoriitaliani–aspingereaffinchéfosserocreatiifascieaVillerupt,unodeiprincipalivillaggidegliitaliani,fuproprioall’internodiunlocaledelleAcciaierieMichevillechevidelaluceilfascio[Noiriel1983,142].Persinonellaregionetolosana,dovepure,soprattuttonelcorsodeglianniVenti,leautorità locali a maggioranza socialista si erano fermamente opposte a quellachevenivaconsiderataunasortadiinvasionefascista,siassistettea sbalorditiviaccostamenti.Così,nel1936,allamanifestazioneorga-nizzatadalconsolatoper laproclamazionedell’impero,nonostante lesanzioniimpostedallaFrancia,sedetterofiancoafiancoalcunidocentidell’Universitàcittadina,unrappresentantedelprefetto,generali,co-lonnelliealtipapaverifrancesi,adimostrazionedellagranderispettabi-litàacquisitadalregimeancheinunmomentodiparticolaretensione18. Lesimpatiefilofascistedialcuniambienti–enonsolamente,dunque,diassociazioniestremistecomel’ActionFrançaise, leCroixdeFeuel’AçaoIntegralistaBrasileira–giovaronoenormementealladiffusionedel fascismo nelle comunità degli italiani all’estero.

la crisi del fascismo

Ilconsensoottenutodalregimedovette,tuttavia,fareiconti,princi-palmenteinFrancia,conunacostanteespansionedelmovimentoan-tifascista.Ledifferenzetraiduepaesifurono,inquestocaso,piuttostoragguardevoli.Anche rispetto a paesi vicini, come l’Argentina, l’an-

18 Rapportn.14.151du25mai1936parleCommissaireCentralauPréfetdelaHaute-Garonne,ArchivesDépartementalesdelaHauteGaronne,196013.


327

tifascismo brasiliano fu particolarmente debole nel corso del venten-nio,ostacolatosiadaunclimageneralefavorevolealregimeitaliano,sia dall’autoritarismo crescente del governo di Vargas a partire dalla finedegli anniTrenta.Nonostanteunapenetrazione tutto sommatomodestatra leclassioperaiedellostatodiSãoPaulo,conideboliri-sultati della LegioneOperaia del Littorio creata nel 1937, il regimemussolinianosembrònontrovarefortiopposizionialpropriopredo-minio[Bertonha1999,117-118;Trento2007,196-197].LasituazioneeraprofondamentediversainFranciadove,comeebennoto,sindaiprimi anni Venti gli esuli avevano trovato casa e i partiti antifascisti avevano ricostruito le proprie strutture. Nel corso degli anni Trenta leorganizzazioniantifasciste,specialmentequelledimatricecomuni-sta, iniziaronouna sortadi competizionenello stessocampo fascista,cercandodi conquistare lemasse di lavoratori e anche alcuni settoridellaborghesiaattraversol’assistenza,laricreazioneelacostruzionedialleanze.L’UnionePopolareItaliana,conisuoi40.000socidichiaratielasuapervasivitànelterritoriofrancese,chenullaavevadainvidiareaquelladelfascismosostenutodaiconsolati,fuilsegnopiùevidentedei successi comunisti nel paese transalpino [Vial 2007]. Il trionfo del FrontePopolarefrancese,neglistessianniincuiVargasimponevalasuasvoltaautoritaria,rappresentòunmomentodiprofondadivergenzatraiduepaesi,ancheseglieffettifuronoparadossali.NelmomentoincuigliantifascistiitalianisembraronoottenereuneffimerotrionfoinFrancia,infatti,–bilanciatoperòdaun’immutataforzadelleorganizza-zioni fasciste che si giovarono delle garanzie democratiche del governo delle sinistre francese19– le forzeantifascistenelpaese sudamericano,

19 Nelluglio1936,adesempio,circa500bambiniitalianipartironoperlecoloniemarinedallagaredeLyonaParigi,indossandoledivisedabalillaeintonandocantifascisti,senzasuscitarealcunareazionetragliabitantidellacittà,cfr.Milza1983,448.LaforzadelfascismotragliitalianiinFranciafudimostrata,ancoraalprincipiodel1938,dallapartecipazionedi3.500personeallafestadelloStatutoaNizza,cfr.Schor1991,145.


328

giàprofondamentefiaccate,assistettero,nelcorsodel1937,alloscio-glimentodeipartitipoliticibrasiliani,cheanticipòdiqualchemeselamessa al bando anche delle sezioni fasciste italiane.La conquista fascista dellemasse immigrate si interruppe abbastanzabruscamente, inentrambi ipaesi,neimesi compresi tra lafinedeglianni Trenta e i primi anni Quaranta. In Francia le organizzazioni fa-sciste cominciarono a perdere aderenti e simpatie a causa delle tensioni politichecherendevanodifficileperimigrantiitalianiappartenereadassociazioni antifrancesi. L’ultima fase del fascismo italiano in Fran-cia fu marcata dagli sforzi in sostegno della Commissione Ciano per ilrimpatriodegliitalianiall’estero.Taleoperazione,chepureinquietòfortementeilgovernofrancese,sirivelòsostanzialmenteunfallimento:pochifuronoiconnazionalichescelserodirientrareinItalia,anchesetra loro possono essere probabilmente individuati i principali sostenito-ri del fascismo. Nell’aprile 1939 i fasci all’estero e le altre organizzazioni consolari si sciolsero per non sottostare alle nuove norme stabilite dalle autorità francesi per le associazioni straniere. Dopo la dichiarazione di guerraitalianaallaFrancia,il10giugno1940,alcunemigliaiadiitalia-nifuronointernatineicampidelsud-ovestfrancese,precedentementeapertiperraccogliereitransfughidellaguerradiSpagna,conl’accusadiesserefascistiocomunisti,ancheseiprincipaliesponentidelleorga-nizzazioni vicine al regime italiano si erano allontanati per tempo dal paese[Milza1995,101].Lafirmadell’armistizioqualchegiornodopo,tuttavia,portòalrimpatriodimoltidegliinternatioallaloroliberazio-ne.Finivacosì,inmanieradrammatica,l’esperienzadelfascismonel-laFranciademocratica,ancheseifascirinacqueromomentaneamentesottoilgovernodiPétain,godendo,secondoÉricVial,dibuonasalute[Vial2003,34-35].In Brasile l’infiacchimento fascista fu più lento, favorito dall’inizialeneutralitàdelgovernodiVargas.Nel1938,comericordatoinprece-denza, i fasci, a seguitodeldecreto legge383del18aprile,dovette-rotrasformarsiinentiassistenziali,dedicandosisolamentealleoperedi


329

beneficenza.Malgradoquestatrasformazione,almenoperalcunianni,lenuoveorganizzazionicontinuaronoasvolgere,inmanierapiuttostoevidente,attivitàpolitica.Così,ilprincipalefasciodiSãoPauloassun-se il nomediEnteAssistenzialeFilippoCorridoni,mentre altri fascifuronoassorbitidallaCasad’Italia,dovepure le iniziativedi caratte-repropagandisticononcessarono [Trento2007,204;TucciCarneiro2010, 450]. L’elementodimaggiore interesse – e in controtendenzarispettoaquantoeraaccadutoinFrancia–fulatrasformazionedelleorganizzazionidopolavoristicheche,perrestareinvitaecontinuareadaccoglierelesecondegenerazionidimigranti,optaronoperlapropriabrasilianizzazione:così l’OnddivenneOrganizaçãoNacionalDepor-tivo,mantenendo lo stessoacronimodegli annipassati,mamutandoprofondamentelapropriafisionomiaculturale.Sitrattava,delresto,diunasceltainevitabile,inunafasenellaqualeilregimediVargasinsi-steva con forza sulla necessità di una nazionalizzazione basata sull’idea che il Brasile dovesse essere composto da uomini e donne che parlavano portoghese,inrotturaconunatradizioneche,alcontrario,avevavistonei migranti europei un importante tassello nella lotta contro il metic-ciato[Beneduzi2009,117e120-123].Gliimmigratiitalianiegliitalo-brasiliani,tuttavia,furonoguardaticonminoresospettorispettoaicit-tadini di origine tedesca e giapponese e nei loro confronti le attenzioni del governo furono sempre piuttosto misurate. Solamente nel febbraio 1942,conl’ingressodelBrasileinguerracontrol’Asseelarotturadellerelazionidiplomatiche,lasituazionecambiòbruscamenteelatolleranzalasciòspazioaunacontenutarepressione[Trento2005,45-52].Laprincipalesconfittadelfascismo,inFranciacomeinBrasile,furap-presentata dall’aumento delle naturalizzazioni in entrambi i paesi. È interessantenotarechetalefenomenosiverificòtantoinunpaeseincui il processo di nazionalizzazione era stato innescato da meccanismi autoritariedivieti, come ilBrasile,quanto inunpaesedemocratico,comelaFrancia,dovepurelostatoavevacercato,sindallafinedeglianniVenti,difavorirelenaturalizzazionidegliimmigrati.Purstimolati


330

dalnazionalismofascista,difrontealletensionieaiconflitti,imigrantiitalianiscelsero,inentrambiicasi,leloropatried’adozione,quellenellequaliavevanotrovatolavoroeavevanocostruitolaproprianuovavita,abbandonandounamadrepatriache,permoltidiloro,erasololapro-iezione di un passato ormai lontano.

Conclusioni

Itrepilastridelsistemadipoterefascista–conquistadeglispaziricreativieassistenziali,propagandaealleanze–permiserounapenetrazionenel-lecomunitàimmigrateche,seppuresempreminoritaria,nonfuaffattotrascurabile.La risposta aquanti fosseroeffettivamentequesti fascistiapparedifficile,perchée forse laquestione stessa a esserepostanellaformasbagliata.Lepersoneinfluenzatedalfascismo oppureconquistatedalregimefuronosenz’altromigliaia,ancheseeimpossibileunaloroesattaquantificazione.GlistessifascistisembravanonelcorsodeglianniTrenta aver ormai accettato l’idea di controllare le comunità immigra-te,preferendolalorodiscretadominazioneaun’adesioneentusiastica,come avevano sognato i pionieri dei fasci all’estero come Bastianini. Perquesteragioni,BertonhahaconiatoperilBrasileunadefinizionecheapparevalidaancheperaltricontesti,quelladell’esistenzadiunfa-scismodiffuso.Iprotagonistidiquestofascismononeranoimilitanti,chepureesistetteroefuronopugnaci,mapiuttostouninsiemediper-soneche,piùomenoconsapevolmente,espresseroilproprioconsensoalregime,partecipandoallesuemanifestazioni,alleattivitàdeldopo-lavoroedelleorganizzazionigiovanili,sfruttandoicanalid’assistenzae gloriandosi di un’appartenenza che mischiava in misura del tutto ar-tefattanazioneefascismo[Bertonha2001a,233-234].Ilgradoditalediffusionefunaturalmentediversodapaeseapaese–moltofortenegliStatiUnitiepiùincertoinalcunipaesieuropei–eanchedaregionearegioneall’internodeglistessipaesiospiti,doveil fascismoottenne


331

talorarisultaticontrastanti.Apparedunqueevidentechelacapacitàdiinfiltrazionefascistafuassaipiùampiadiquantosolitamentesiritengae che anche strati sociali normalmente considerati immuni dal contagio neabbianoinrealtàsubitol’influenza.Icetimedirappresentaronocer-tamentel’ossaturadiquestofascismod’esportazione,spessoricoprendoruolidirigenzialineifascienelleorganizzazionidopolavoristiche,ma–grazieallamartellantepropagandaeall’utilizzodistrumenticonsi-deratimenopoliticicomel’associazionismosportivo–anchelemassepopolari urbane di São Paulo sembrarono rompere la propria indif-ferenzae sostenere, almeno inparte, ilnuovoregime [Trento2005,12-14]. InFrancia, allo stessomodo,non furono solamentebottegaie commercianti a rappresentare la spina dorsale del regime. Nel sud furonogliagricoltori–mezzadriepiccoliproprietari–arappresentarelabasedelfascismodiffusoenelleregionidell’estsiassistettepersinoaunosfondamento–perquantodicertominoritario–traglioperaichelavoravano nelle miniere e nelle imprese siderurgiche. Resta sospesa la questionedelladurevolezzadiquestoconsenso,seeveroche,comesiesegnalato,ilcedimentodelleorganizzazionifascistefurapido,special-mente in Francia. L’accostamento alle strutture gestite dai consolati fu effettivamenteassaiutilitaristicoenonappenaapparvechiarochetalevicinanzapotevaesseredannosa, l’enormemaggioranzadegli italianinonesitòadabbandonareigruppidiispirazionefascistaallorodestino.La comparazione tra l’esperienza fascista in Brasile e Francia sembra dimostrarelacomplessitàdeiprocessidifascistizzazioneall’estero,in-trecciata inestricabilmente alle politiche dei paesi in cui vivevano i mi-granti.L’efficaciaelacapacitàdiespansionedeivaristrumentimessiincampodalregimefascistadipeseinmanierasignificativadalleazionideigoverniospiti,dalcontestosocialeedalletradizionipoliticheecultu-ralilocali,costringendoilregimeaimmaginareformedifferenziatedipropaganda.Piùingenerale,l’assimilazionedegliitalianinonfuegualeintuttiipaesistranierie,allorointerno,intutteleregionie,proprioperquestoilfascismoassunsedifferentiruoliesignificatiasecondadei


332

diversicontesti.Inquestosenso,ladifferenziazionetrapaesianglofoni,germanici e latini proposta da Donna Gabaccia e ripresa criticamente da Bertonha[Bertonha2003],pureassaistimolante,rischiadinascondereleprofondediversitàpresentineglistessicontestinazionali,mentresa-rebbe auspicabile una comparazione interregionale. Appare soprattutto forte la necessità di studiare la fascistizzazione dei migranti consideran-dolaprofondainterazionetraledirettive,spessostringenti,provenientidaRomaeglieffettivirisultatisulcampo.Ilfascismoall’estero,uscitodall’oblio cui era stato condannato dal silenzio dei protagonisti e da unastoriografiapreoccupatadicontribuireaunasuacelebrazione,ogginon è più terra incognita,mastudiapprofonditisonoancoranecessaripercercare di comprendere la sua forza e le sue debolezze.

Bibliografia

BeneduziL.2009,Etnicità, immaginario sociale e caccia alle streghe: gli immigrati italiani e la politica di nazionalizzazione nel sud del Brasile (1930-1945),«DEP»,11:112-130.

—2011,Uma aliança pela pátria: relação entre política expansionista fascista e italianidade na comunidade italiana do Rio Grande do Sul,«Dimensões»,26:89-112.

BertonhaJ.F.1998,Sob o signo do Fascio: o fascismo, os imigrantes italianos e o Brasil, 1922-1943,TesedeDoutorado,UniversidadeEstadualdeCampinas.

—1999,Fascismo, antifascismo y las comunidades italianas en Brasil, Argentina y Uruguay: una perspectiva comparada,«EstudiosMigratoriosLatinoamericanos»,XIV(42):111-133.

—2000,Between Sigma and Fascio: An Analysis of the Relationship between Italian Fasci-sm and Brazilian Integralism,«Luso-BrazilianReview»,XXXVII(1):93-105.

—2001a,O fascismo e os imigrantes italianos no Brasil,PortoAlegre:EDIPUCRS.

—2001b,Fascism and Italian communities in Brazil and in the United States: a compara-tive approach,«ItalianAmericana»,XIX(2):146-157.

—2001c,Emigrazione e politica estera: la “diplomazia sovversiva” di Mussolini e la que-stione degli italiani all’estero, 1922-1945,«Altreitalie»,23(luglio-dicembre):38-60.

—2002a,I Fasci italiani all’estero,inPieroBevilacqua,AndreinaDeClementi,EmilioFranzina(eds.),Storia dell’emigrazione italiana. II. Arrivi,Roma:Donzelli,527-533.


333

—2002b,Fascism and the Italian Immigrant Experience in Brazil and Canada: A Compa-rative Perspective,«InternationaljournalofCanadianstudies–Revueinternationaled’étudescanadiennes»,25:169-196.

—2003,Italiani nel mondo anglofono, latino e germanico. Diverse prospettive sul fascismo italiano?,«Altreitalie»,26(gennaio-giugno).

—2015,The cultural policy of Fascist Italy in Brazil: the soft power of a medium-sized Nation on Brazilian grounds (1922-1940), inA.G.Magalhães,Modernidade Latina. Os Italianos e os Centros do Modernismo Latino-americano,SãoPaulo:MAC-USP.

CavarocchiF.2010,Avanguardie dello spirito. Il fascismo e la propaganda culturale all’e-stero,Roma:Carocci.

CrociF.2008,«Faccetta nera». Os primeiros passos da propaganda fascista em São Paulo 1922-1924,inTorgalL.R.,PauloH.(eds.),Estados autoritarios e totalitarios e suas representaçoes: propaganda, ideologia, historiografia e memoria,Coimbra:Universidadede Coimbra.

DeCaprariisL.2003,I Fasci italiani all’estero,inFranzinaE.,SanfilippoM.(eds.),Il fascismo e gli emigrati. La parabola dei Fasci italiani all’estero (1920-1943),Roma-Bari:Laterza,3-26.

DeGraziaV.1981,Consenso e cultura di massa nell’Italia fascista: l’organizzazione del dopolavoro,Roma-Bari:Laterza.

FabianoD.1983,I fasci italiani all’estero,inBezzaB.(ed.),Gli italiani fuori d’Italia. Gli emigrati italiani nei movimenti operai dei paesi d’adozione 1880-1940,Milano:FrancoAngeli,221-236.

FranzinaE.,SanfilippoM.(eds.)2003,Il fascismo e gli emigrati. La parabola dei Fasci italiani all’estero (1920-1943),Roma-Bari:Laterza.

GarzarelliB.2004,Parleremo al mondo intero. La propaganda del fascismo all’estero,Ales-sandria: Edizioni dell’Orso.

GentileE.1995,La politica estera del partito fascista. Ideologia e organizzazione dei Fasci italiani all’estero,«StoriaContemporanea»,XXVI(6):897-956.

GuerriniI.,PluvianoM.1995,L’Opera Nazionale Dopolavoro in Sud America: 1926-1941,«StudiEmigrazione»,XXXII(119):518-537.

GuillaumeP.2003,Les étrangers dans le Sud-Ouest,«HistoriensetGéographes»,384(octobre-novembre): 297-307.

LegnaniM.1980,La stampa antifascista 1926-1943, inTranfagliaN.,MurialdiP.,LegnaniM.(eds.),La stampa italiana nell’età fascista,Roma-Bari:Laterza.

LuconiS.,2000,La “diplomazia parallela”. Il regime fascista e la mobilitazione politica degli italo-americani,Milano:FrancoAngeli.

MaltoneC.1998,Les associations fascistes italiennes dans le Sud-Ouest de la France,inRouchM.,MaltoneC.(eds.),Sur les pas des italiens en Aquitaine. Actes du colloque international Talence-Bordeaux, 11-13 mai 1995,Talence:MSHA,115-150.


334

MilzaP.1983,Le Fascisme italien à Paris,«Revued’histoiremoderneetcontemporai-ne»,XXX(juillet-septembre):420-452

—1993,Voyage en Ritalie,Paris:Plon.

—1995,Le fascisme italien en France (1938-1943), inPeronaG.(ed.),Gli italiani in Francia. 1938-1946,«Mezzosecolo»,9:91-104.

NoirielG.1983,Le fascisme italien dans le bassin de Longwy pendant l’entre-deux-guer-res, inDumoulinM.,TrauschG.(eds.),Le rôle politique de l’immigration italienne dans les pays de l’Europe du nord-ouest (1861-1945). Actes du Colloque de Luxembourg des 4 et 5 mars 1983, «Risorgimento»,IV(1-2):139-145.

PinnaP.2012,Migranti italiani tra fascismo e antifascismo,Bologna:Clueb.

PretelliM.2010,Il fascismo e gli italiani all’estero,Bologna:Clueb.

RosoliG.1986,Santa Sede e propaganda fascista all’estero tra i figli degli emigrati italiani,«StoriaContemporanea»,XVIII(2):293-315.

—1998,Les missionnaires italiens dans le Sud-Ouest rural français,inRouchM.,Malto-neC.(eds.),Sur les pas des italiens en Aquitaine. Actes du colloque international Talence-Bordeaux, 11-13 mai 1995,Talence:MSHA,181-211.

SchorR.1991,Le fascisme italien dans les Alpes-Maritimes (1922-1939),«CahiersdelaMéditerranée»,XLII(1):125-165.

—2001,Les immigrés italiens en France et l’engagement fasciste, 1922-1939,«Parlement[s]Revued’histoirepolitique»,3:130-140.

TemimeE.,Les Italiens dans la région marseillaise,inMilzaP.(ed.),Les Italiens en Fran-ce de 1914 à 1940,Roma:EFR,547-575.

TeulieresL.2002,Immigrés d’Italie et paysans de France. 1920-1944,Toulouse:PressesUniversitaires du Mirail.

TrentoA.1994,Il Brasile, gli immigrati e il fenomeno fascista,inBlenginoV.,FranzinaE.,PepeA.(eds.),La riscoperta delle Americhe. Lavoratori e sindacato nell’emigrazione in America Latina, 1870-1970,Milano:TetiEditore,250-264

—2003,I Fasci in Brasile,inFranzinaE.,SanfilippoM.(eds.),Il fascismo e gli emigrati. La parabola dei Fasci italiani all’estero (1920-1943),Roma-Bari:Laterza,152-166.

—2005,«Dovunque è un italiano, là è il tricolore». La penetrazione del fascismo tra gli im-migrati in Brasile,inScarzanellaE.(ed.),Fascisti in Sud America,Firenze:LeLettere,1-54.

—2007,Organizzazione operaia e organizzazione del tempo libero. Gli immigrati italiani a São Paulo dalla Republica Velha all’Estado Novo,«QuaderniRassegnaSindacale–Lavori»,VIII(2):175-206.

—2009,Due secoli di giornalismo italiano in Brasile,«StudiEmigrazione»,XLVI(175):568-590.


335

—2011,La costruzione di un’identità collettiva. Storia del giornalismo in lingua italiana in Brasile,Viterbo:SetteCittà.

TucciCarneiroM.L.,Fascistas à Brasileira – Encontros e Confrontos,inTucciCarneiroM.L.,CrociF.(eds.),Tempos de Fascismos. Ideologia – Intolerância – Imáginario,SãoPaulo: Edusp.

VialE.2003,I Fasci in Francia,inFranzinaE.,SanfilippoM.(eds.),Il fascismo e gli emi-grati. La parabola dei Fasci italiani all’estero (1920-1943),Roma-Bari:Laterza,27-42.

— 2007, L’Union populaire italienne 1937-1940. Une organisation de masse du Parti com-muniste italien en exil,Roma:EFR.

VidelierP.1986,Les Italiens de la région lyonnaise,MilzaP.(ed.),Les Italiens en France de 1914 à 1940,Roma:EFR,661-691.

Wiegandt-SakounC.1986,Le fascisme italien en France,inMilzaP.(ed.),Les Italiens en France de 1914 à 1940,Roma:EFR,431-469.

ZegaF.2008,“Italiani alta la testa!”. La presenza del fascismo a São Paulo (1920-1940),Tesididottorato,UniversitàdegliStudidiRomaTre.

The article studies Giuseppe Renzetti’s activities in the Weimar Republic in the mid-1920s. Besides adding to Renzetti’s colorful yet often opaque biographical picture, this article seeks to contribute to studies on the dissemination and propaganda of Fascism abroad and to the political culture of the Weimar Republic. Likewise, actors such as the fasci italiani all’estero, the German Foreign Office (Auswartiges Amt) or German newspapers can be highlighted. Based on a thorough analysis of Renzetti’s personal papers and documents today stored at the Auswärtiges Amt, the article stresses how equally bustling and inauspicious Renzetti’s activi-ties were, revealing the process which led to Renzetti’s designation as political intermediary.

introduction

On10December1925,the«Tägliche Rundschau» ran an article which would evoke strong responses both in German journalistic and political circles. Under the title Italienisches Faschistenhaus in Berlin? [An Italian house of Fascists in Berlin?],theliberalnewspaperpublishedinformationconcerning the intended creation which was meant to accommodate theItalianchamberofcommerce,anItalianconsulate,thecentralof-

Gaining a Foothold in the Weimar Republic: Giuseppe Renzetti’s Activities in the years 1925-1927

sTeFan laFFinBielefeld Univ., Bielefeld Graduate School in History

and Sociology


338

ficeofthefasci italiani all’estero and a travel agency1.Thecentralfigu-rebehindthisprojectwastheFascistGiuseppeRenzetti,whowasby1925alreadyawell-knownfigureamongtheGermanjournalistandpolitical elite. The Italian planned to pool his widespread interests in this place as he was involved in all the above mentioned institutions to the end of advertising Fascism in the Weimar Republic. The plan of theItalianFascisthousetherebymarksafirst,albeitnotfinalpointofculmination for his activities. It can hence serve as a narrative reference to correlate the numerous ventures Renzetti pursued.GiuseppeRenzettihasbeenfirstintroducedtohistoriographybyRen-zo de Felice who shed light on the Italian’s acting as a go-between for Nazism and Fascism2[DeFelice1971].Moreover,FedericoNigliaexamined Renzetti’s actions in the connections between Berlin andRome[Niglia2002].WolfgangSchiederaddressedtheuniqueroleofRenzetti, therebymaking theprecisedistinction thathehad alreadybeenactingintheroleofanintermediarybythelate1920sand–evenmoreso–forthewholeGermanRightandnotonlyfortheNaziParty[Schieder 2005]3.In the followingpages, the interpretative frameworkofmicrohisto-ry combined with the biographical approach focusing on Giuseppe Renzetti will be applied [Renders 2013]. Tracing Renzetti’s activities between1925and1927,thearticlecontributestoourknowledgeof

1 Italienisches Faschistenhaus in Berlin (1925),«TäglicheRundschau»,December10.TheoverallargumentofthearticleisbasedonmyMA-thesis.SeeLaffin2013.Allquoteswere initially inGermanorItalianandhavebeentranslatedbymefor thepurposeofthisarticle.ForcommentsandgeneralremarksIwouldliketothankKri-stofferKlammer,CleoviMosuela,andDanielSiemens.2 WhenspeakingofFascisminthisarticle,ImeanItalianFascism.Thisshouldnotbe understood as an interpretation or contribution to debates on typology or theory of Fascism but only serves the readability. 3 RelevantinformationisalsoinCannistraro1982,452,DeFelice1974,DeFeli-ce1975(especiallychapter7),Woller1993,Woller2001.AnItaliantranslationofSchieder’sarticleisSchieder2006;italsogotrepublishedin2008.

STeFAN lAFFiNGaining a Foothold in the Weimar Republic: Giuseppe Renzetti’s Activities in the years 1925-1927

339

therelationsbetweentheGermanRightandFascism.However,Iwilldeal not so much with relational and transfer aspects between the Ger-manRight and Fascism, butwould like to point out the terms andconditionswhichmakeexaminingthoseaspectspossibleafterall.Forthispurpose, itscrutinizesthepreludetotheformalestablishmentofthe contacts nourished by one of its most crucial protagonists. It was during this period when Renzetti tried maneuvering his political ac-tivitiesintheWeimarRepublictofindanappropriateroleforhimselfin the socio-political landscape. Much of these endeavors provided the basis for his later function which Wolfgang Schieder rightly described as that of being a «shadow ambassador» for the German Right [Schieder 2005,29].Highlighting the years 1925-1927 illuminates his accomplishments as much as his failures and avoids ascribing the historical actor a ratio-nalitywhichpresupposesa logical sequenceofevents anddeliberatedecisions[Levi2013,91-93].ThisisnottodiminishhisimportanceinthesubsequentyearsinwhichGiuseppeRenzettigainedhis(infamous)relevance. Yet I will argue that it was precisely in this earlier period that he laid the ground for his later relevance and fame. Thereby it can also contributetomoregeneralfieldsofresearch.Thespotlighthencealsoturns to the Auswärtiges Amt (the German ForeignOffice)orthefasci italiani all’estero, thus not changing, but potentiallymodifying someestablishedhistoricalnarratives[Ginzburg,Poni1991;Renders2013,197-200].While Giuseppe Renzetti was not nearly as important as leading Fa-scistsinRomeortheprotagonistsoftheGermanRight,hewasfarandaway the most relevant intermediary between Fascism and the German RightandlatersolelyNazism.Inadditiontothat,weareinafortunatesituation to have available his personal papers stored at the German FederalArchiveinKoblenz,includingthereportsRenzettifurnishedto his Italian contacts and his memoirs. Repeatedly started over again butnevercompleted,thehandwrittenmemoirsposeamajorobstacle


340

as Renzetti usually did not indicate which of the many versions of the sameincidentthemostrecentonewas.Thenagain,thememoirsareheavily permeated by an apologetic whitewash which is why in this article I focus more on the source material available in the Political Ar-chiveoftheGermanForeignOfficeandthereportsRenzettidrafted.Basedonthesesources,themainfocusofthisarticleistoexamineGiu-seppe Renzetti’s activities in the years 1925-1927 while linking them totheoverallsocio-politicalcontexttoavoidthatthebiographicalnar-rowing turns into arbitrary storytelling4. Inmanyrespects,GiuseppeRenzettialsoresemblesaconceptwhichRogerGriffinelaboratedfora collective volume to describe persons of the Right in Central and EasternEurope. In the introduction to this volume,Griffin lays outcriteria for «personalities» and hence theorizes individual persons and howtheysucceededinbecomingefficaciousincertainmilieus[Grif-fin2011].Eventually,thiswaswhatRenzettihadinmind:tobecomesuccessfultothepointofgaining«influencewithinactivistcirclesormovementspursuingparticularpoliticalgoals»[Griffin2011,21f.].IwillfirstaddressthebiographicalbackgroundofGiuseppeRenzetti,highlightingwhyhewouldfindhimselflivingintheWeimarRepublicinthe1920sandprovidecontextonhislaterroleaspoliticalinterme-diary. I will then give a closer look to how he navigated his activities in themid-1920s,therebystressingtheItalianchamberofcommerce,theconsulate in Leipzig and his role as representative for the fasci italiani all’esteroinGermany.Inthislatteraspect,aparticularclosetreatmentofthe establishment of the fascio in Leipzig will be included as it is possi-ble here to trace how the policy of establishing fascist groups in foreign countries (fasci) worked. I will then proceed to demonstrate what cir-cumstancesenabledhimtoadvertiseFascism,highlightingtheallegedrelevance of Germany for any Italian foreign policy and the decision

4 Similarly,PierreBourdieuhasspokenofthebiographicalillusioninthatcontext.SeeBourdieu1986,69-72.


341

to propagate Fascism abroad more enthusiastically. By means of the in-tegrativebracketoftheItalianfascisthouse,IwillconcludethisarticlewithabriefinterpretationofRenzetti’sundertakings,emphasizingthepeculiarities and dynamics which made his remarkable development towards becoming a political intermediary possible.

Giuseppe Renzetti, a Biographical sketch

Renzetti was born on 4 November 1891 in Ascoli Piceno. After en-teringtheItalianarmy,heparticipatedintheItalianwarinLibyain1912.Fouryears later,hewasdeployed inVlora,Albaniawhereheremained until 1920 as a member of the Italian occupation forces5. Fol-lowingabriefreturntoItaly,RenzettithenbecameamemberoftheMilitary Inter-Allied Commission of Control for Upper Silesia [Schie-der2005,30]whereherosetotherankofpolicecommander[Renzetti1930].HealsometSusanneKochmanninGliwice,whomhewouldmarry in1927.Shewas thedaughterof the JewArthurKochmann,a long-standing member of the city council and honorary citizen of Gliwice[Birnbaum1981,62]6.Whenhisactivityinthecontrolcommissioncametoanend,Renzettidecided to stay in Germany and was thus confronted with the task of makingaliving.TheextenttowhichhisdisseminationofFascismwasameanstoanendtogainacomfortableincomeorwhetherthefinan-cial reason was ancillary to the ideological one must remain speculati-ve.Inanycase,RenzettiattendedtothepurposeofadvertisingFascism

5 SeeBundesarchivKoblenz(hereafterBArch/K)NL1235/16,Renzettimemoirs.Thedocuments in thepersonalpapersofRenzetti carryno specific title, so that IindicatedtheinformationinEnglish.Asforotherarchives,IleftthetitlesineitherGerman or Italian. 6 ArthurKochmannwasdeported toAuschwitzon28December1943 andwasmurdered there.


342

inGermany.Whatmakesthistrulyremarkableisthathe,afterallthatweknow,tooktheinitiativewithoutanysortofofficialorder.Forhisroleasanintermediaryitfirstneedstobeinvestigatedpreci-sely at what time Renzetti was acknowledged by the Roman authori-ties. Renzetti was seen as Mussolini’s liaison in Berlin already in 1926 as the reports in the Auswärtiges Amt and the journalistic coverage of thetimemakeclear;yetonlytheSeptember1930Reichstagelections,in which Renzetti predicted the huge increase in number of seats for theNaziParty,gaverisetothisposition7. Renzetti was summoned to RomewhereMussolinieffectivelyappointedhimaspecialemissaryforGermany8. This led to a further increase in prestige for Renzetti among hisGermancontacts; in a sense, thegloryMussolini radiated in theGerman Right transferred onto Renzetti himself9. Even before winning Mussolini’sfavor,ItaliandiplomatsprotectedRenzetti.Despitebeingatdaggersdrawnwiththem,hispoliticalnetworkwastoouniquefordiscounting him. This protection was very much in the self-interest of the diplomats since at times it bred ill blood when it came to light that the embassy was cultivating contacts with the German Right. By contrast,Renzettiwasatanadvantageashewasnotbelongingtothediplomatic corps and therefore his actions could always be repudiated since he was «not a member of the embassy but a free citizen»10. It can be safely assumed that by 1929 Renzetti devoted most of his time to act as go-between for the German Right and Italian Fascists. Intere-stinglyenough,upuntilthispointRenzettipaidaboveallattentionto

7 SeeBArch/KNL1235/9,ReportRenzetti.Unfortunatelytheexactdatecannotbe read.8 SeeBArch/KNL1235/2,ReportRenzetti,27September1930.9 SeethefirstentryconcerningRenzettibyJosephGoebbels:«LateintheeveningIhavetogotoMajorRenzetti,Mussolini’srepresentativeinBerlin»,Fröhlich2005,302 (11 December 1930).10 DocumentiDiplomaticiItaliani(hereafterDDI),Serie7,Vol.X,No.101,BaroniaGrandi,2March1931,158.


343

the Stahlhelm,theparamilitaryveteran’sorganization.Peopleliketheregional leader forBrandenburg, Elhald vonMorosowicz, orViccovonBulow-Schwanteintroducedhimtotheleadershipoftheveteran’sassociation and thereby enlarged his political network11. Even after the Nazis tookpower in1933,Bulowremainedaweightyadvocate forRenzetti due to his position as a leading diplomat in the Auswärtiges Amt. The narrative of an interpenetrative correlation between Nazism andFascism,which is an interpretation toomuch thought from theperspectiveofhowiteventuallyplayedout,canalsobecalledintoque-stion by focusing on Renzetti in this story. ThankstoHermannGöring,RenzettigotalsointouchwiththeNaziParty.Göring’saffinity for ItalyandRenzetti’smilitarycareer surelyplayedapartinthefriendshipbetweenthetwo.Göringemphasizedthe «manifold relations» between Fascism and Nazism and tried to makehimselfouttobeanexpertforItalianaffairs12. After having or-ganizedavisittoRomeinMay1930forGöringandJosephGoebbelsto«studyFascismthere»,theformerpresentedRenzettitobasicallythewhole Nazi leadership13.The Harzburg Front then marked pinnacle and disillusionment all at onceforRenzetti;ontheonehandhereportedinsolemnfashionthat«the Harzburg Front originated in my house»14.Renzetti,throughor-

11 FortheStahlhelm seethestudybyBerghahn1966,stillthebookofreferenceonthegroup’sorganizationalaspectsor,morerecent,Hoffstadt2013.SusanneRenzettimentionedvonMorosowiczyearslaterasagoodfriendofherhusband;informationbyWolfgangSchiederinapersonalconversationwiththeauthorinJuly2012.ForinformationonvonBulowseeConze2010,43ff.12 SeethethreearticleswrittenbyGöring1926abc,thequoteisinGöring1926b.13 BArch/KNL1235/2,ReportRenzetti,presumablyMay1930.14 BArch/KNL1235/12,ReportRenzetti,31January1933.TheHarzburgFrontwasapoliticalallianceofright-wingpoliticalforces,includingtheNSDAP,DNVP(Deutschnationale Volkspartei), and the Stahlhelm, to confront the Bruning go-vernment. The meeting in Bad Harzburg was the only meeting of this kind as rup-turesamongthedifferentpartiessoonbecameapparent.


344

ganizations like the Gesellschaft zum Studium des Faschismus which he helpedfounding[Wichmann2013],envisagedtheinstitutionalizationoftheunificationoftheGermanRight,orinotherwords:thestabiliza-tion of singular events like the meeting in Bad Harzburg. On the other hand,theimmediateaftermathoftheFrontsimultaneouslyprovidedreason to be disenchanted as especially the NSDAP reneged on any agreement15. Their political independence became blatantly obvious soon after. The show of force which the SA rally in Braunschweig onOctober17and18–andthusonlyoneweekafterBadHarzburg– accomplished, seemed to convinceRenzetti to bankon theNazistoachievepower[Woller1993,54]16. He left Braunschweig together with Goebbels with whom he would drive back to Berlin17.Likewise,Renzetti followed an invitation by Hitler to the Obersalzberg and spent twodaysinJune1931there18. Sure enough the ingratiation on the part oftheNazileadership,forwhichRenzettithankedHitlerjustonedaylaterinapersonalletter,certainlyhelpedswayingRenzettitofavortheNazipartyintheirquestforpower19.Tosomeextent,thismarkstheNaziadventtopowerapersonaltrium-phofRenzetti,too.Equallysymbolic–insofarasitwasanaffronttothediplomacy– and testifying to thepersonal esteem,Renzettiwascalled to the Reich Chancellery one day after Hitler’s appointment to

15 Soonafter,theNSDAPresumeditspolicyofdisturbingassemblagesoftheDNVPand attack theparty in theirnewspaper «DerAngriff». SeeGeheimes StaatsarchivPreußischerKulturbesitz(hereafterGStaPK),1.HARep77MinisteriumdesInnern.Tit.4043,n.302.16 RenzettiwasformallyinvitedtotheSArally.SeeBArch/KNL1235/3,invitationfrom 14 October 1931. 17 SeeFröhlich2005,128,19October1931.18 SeeBArch/KNL1235/10,ReportRenzetti,10June1931;seealsothetablelistingthemeetingsbetweenHitlerandRenzettiinSchieder2005,42-45.19 SeeBArch/KNL1235/4,RenzettitoHitler,19October1931.


345

theoffice20. Yet the function Renzetti assumed in the years leading up tothe30January1933wasnolongerneeded.Sincetheofficialdiplo-macycouldnowhaveopencontactswiththeNaziparty,Renzettionlysurfacedonspecialoccasions,wheneverGerman-Italianrelationsgottesty such as when the Nazis demanded the dismissal of Italian ambas-sador Vittorio Cerruti in 1935 [Petersen 1969].What is also true, however, is that after all those years acting as anItalian shadow ambassador to theGermanRight,Renzettiwasnowincreasingly perceived as the shadow ambassador of the German Right. ThiswasnevermoreobvioustheninJune1934duringtheincidentssurroundingthe«NightoftheLongKnives». Renzetti openly blamed Goebbelstobethedrivingforcebehindthepurge,probablytoprotecthisfriendGöring21. This view contrasted severely with the reports by theItalianembassy.Onoccasions likethese, itbecameapparentthatRenzetti’s value in providing information went astray. All this led to Renzetti’s redeployment as a General Consul in San Francisco22.The time in theUSdidnot last long.Roughly ayear later, inOc-tober1936,RenzettireturnedtoBerlinat theurgingofhisGermancontacts23.Certainly,thisdidlittletoassuageRenzetti’scareeristambi-tion;asgeneralconsulhewasnowpartofthestrictinstitutionalsettingwhichhesolongdidcompetewithsuccessfully.Renzetti,beingside-lined,stucktomostlyrepresentativeworkandreceivedvarioushonorsfrom the Nazi regime24. All this frustrated Renzetti greatly. His anger

20 SeeBArch/KNL1235/12,ReportRenzetti,31January1933.21 SeeArchivioCentraledelloStato(hereafterACS),MinisteroCulturaPopolare.FascicoloReportm.20GiuseppeRenzetti.ReportRenzetti,14July1934.22 SeeBArch/KNL1235/7,unknownauthor(presumablyvonBulow)toRenzetti,7January1936.23 BArch/KNL1235/6,GöringtoRenzetti,16May1936.24 RenzettireceivedtheOrderoftheGermanEagleon7September1937.


346

eruptedinadirectface-offwithCianointhespringof194125. As an immediateconsequence,Renzettiwasredeployedonceagain,thistimeas an envoy to Sweden26.Thereheservedasadiplomatuntil1944;se-cludedfromWorldWarIIandthefallofFascism,Renzetti’srelevancewas diminishing to the point of him being absolutely marginalized. In thissituation,hesidedwiththeBadogliogovernmentafterMussoliniwasdismissedbytheItalianGrandCouncilofFascism,whichledtoa riftwithhis formerGerman contacts [Scarano1996, 527].Disap-pointedpersonal career expectations andmental andgeographic re-moteness of the Fascist policy played its part in that decision. After the warhadended,RenzettiandhiswifereturnedtoItalywherehediedimpoverishedin1953.Oddlyenough,thiswasthefirsttimesince1920that Renzetti came back to his home country for a longer term. In this sense,heperceivedFascismasmuchfromtheoutsideashisGermancontacts,forwhichheservedasaninformaladvisorandshadowam-bassador,arolewhichwouldestablishhishistoricalsignificanceintheend.

The italian Chamber of Commerce

BasicallyuntilRenzetti’sfirstleavefromGermanyin1935,thecham-ber of commerce served as institutional basis for his later activities. Itwas founded in1923and thus ratherquicklyafterhis time in thecontrol commission had ended27.Evenbefore,Renzettiplayedapart

25 SeeFröhlich1998,546(21March1941).26 Theexequaturasgeneralconsulceasedon26March1941,seeRenzetti’spersonalfileinPolitischesArchivdesAuswärtigenAmtes(herafterPAAA),R119836.27 SeePAAA,R30285b,reportaboutthestatementsmadebyDalmoCarnevali,18October 1924.


347

in the preceding organization28.Atthesametime,RenzettienvisagedthefoundationofanotherchamberofcommerceinMunich,notleastbecause of the status of Munich as one of the centers of the German Right. This fell through initially before it worked out in 192629. Ren-zetti would be the president of the Vereinigung der italienischen Han-delskammern in Deutschland–asuperiorpositiontowardsothercham-bers of commerce. Havingfoundedthechamberdidnotprovideanimmediatefinancialremedyhowever.Tothisend,RenzettipublishedtheItaliannewspaper«La Cultura»forwhichhereceivedfinancialsupportthroughtheItalianembassy[Schieder2005,31];moreover,thenewspaper«Il Gagliardetto» wassupportedbytheItalianForeignOfficewith300Liremonthly30. Inadditiontothat,hecouldresorttohisarmydays.AsamajoroftheItalianArmy,hereceivedaso-calledwaitingpaywhichcouldbepaidto armypersonnelwhichwas expected to return tomilitary serviceatsomefuturetime.ThiswaitingperiodexpiredforRenzettiinJune1925asthemaximumdurationofthreeyearswouldendthen31. The-refore Renzetti was faced with the decision to either return to military serviceortoforgotheseearnings.Byallindications,oneofRenzetti’sconfidants inRome–presumably ItaloBalbo– intervenedandhel-pedextendthisperiod.Thisfinallyendedinlate1928whenRenzettiwouldalsoformallyquitmilitaryservice32. The revenue generated from

28 SeePAAA,R30285b,PreußischesInnenministeriumanAuswärtigesAmt,24December 1924. Both the Deutsch-Italienische-Handels-Aktien-Gesellschaft, founded in1920, andthelaterchamberofcommercewerelocatedintheMarkgrafenstraße55 in Berlin.29 SeePAAA,R72963,DeutscheBotschaftRomanAuswärtigesAmt,30Decem-ber 1926. 30 seeBArch/KNL1235/1,RenzettitotheItalianEmbassy,22April1926.31 SeePAAA,R30285b,DeutscheBotschaftRomanAuswärtigesAmt,23April1925.32 SeeBArch/KNL1235/1,WarMinistrytomilitaryairattachéinBerlinCamilloRossi,30November1928.


348

hiseditingworkaswellasfromhismilitaryservicewasnotsufficientenoughbyanymeansthough.ThismightexplainwhyRenzettiocca-sionallytriedtousethechamberofcommerceforhisownprofitwhichin turn led to grievances:

I approached the Italian chamber of commerce [for my personal bu-siness] and they promised me the greatest success. Such a success fai-ledtomaterializethough.Onthecontrary,RENZETTO[sic!]anddeMORI,whoapparentlyworkhandinhand,promptedmetotakeoverthesaleofItalian localproducts,andtofurther[…]sharetheprofitswith them33.

WhileitshouldservetheneedtooffsetRenzetti’slivingcosts,perhapsmostremarkable, thisgrievanceallowsustokeeptrackofRenzetti’sItaliannetwork.SaiddeMoriwas among the leadingfigures in theFascist propaganda in Munich. Apparently the two shared some sort of business before as well34.Inadditiontothisdubiousbusinessconduct,RenzetticonstantlytriedtopleadhiscaseforfinancialsupporttoItalianauthorities. By October 1925 Renzetti did not have to plead for money anymore.Afterall,thechamberofcommercereceived12.000Lireforrepresentationalpurposesastheofficialletterstated35.The position as the president of the chamber of commerce was more thanjustcamouflageforFascistactivitieshowever.Renzetticonceivedhimselfasanexpertoneconomic issues.Forexample, in1926Ren-zetti ran various articles in the Italian newspaper «Il Sole» that were concerned with distinct economic matters and made a point of giving Italians an understanding of the German economy36. Many presenta-

33 SeePAAA,R30285b,HansvonSchutzandasDeutscheGeneralkonsulatMai-land,3April1925.EmphasisinOriginal.34 SeePAAA,R72961,PolizeidirektionMunchenanStaatsmininsteriumdesÄuße-ren,13October1925.35 SeeBArch/KNL1235/1,commercialattachéoftheItalianembassyA.RiccarditoRenzetti,18October1925.36 SeeRenzettiG.1926a,Gli sforzi per la restaurazione economica tedesca,«IlSole»,27


349

tionsoneconomicquestions37 and book publications lend further cre-dence to that38.Beyond,Renzettiwascalleduponforhisparticipationin committees such as that of the Istituto Nazionale per L’Esportazione toprovidehisexpertiseontheexportofItalianfruitsandvegetables39. The Berlin police nevertheless openly described the chamber of com-merce as a «fascist organization» and assumed many of the employees to be former members of the control commission40. Whether or not thiscouldholdtrue,thechambergainedadoubtfulreputationamongGerman authorities. This was not least due to the report by Dalmo Carnevali,ananti-fascistinformant,inwhichheinformedtheForeignOfficeaboutactivitiesundertakenbythechamberofcommerce41. An intelligence service which Renzetti would operate collected relevant data which was pivotal both to economic and military espionage. Be-sidestheseclearillegalactions,officialinquiriesmadebythechamberwere also perceived as espionage42.Whilethisepisodebearsnogreatrelevanceinprinciple,tworamifica-tionsarenoteworthy.Itcanfirstshowhowwell-connectedRenzetti

May;RenzettiG.1926b,La situazione economica tedesca,«IlSole»,17July;RenzettiG.1926c,L’industria automobilistica tedesca,«IlSole»,24August;RenzettiG.1926d,La situazione commerciale e il mercato dei valori e del lavoro,«IlSole»,5September;RenzettiG.1926e,L’economia tedesca,«IlSole»,16September.37 RenzettigavelecturesattheDeutsche Herrenklub, the Gesellschaft zum Studium des Faschismus, ortheMilanchamberofcommerce,forinstance.38 SeeforinstanceRenzetti1934a,1934b,1934c.39 SeeBarch/KNL1235/1,LetterfromthePresidentofsaidInstitutetoRenzetti,26 August 1926.40 SeePAAA,R72962,PolizeipräsidentBerlinAlbertGrzesinski andenpreußi-schenInnenministerCarlSevering,19January1926.41 SeePAAA,R30285b,ReportaboutthestatementsmadebyDalmoCarnevali,18October1924.CarnevalihimselfapparentlylaterturnedtoFascism,too;areportby the SS-Gruppe OstmentionedthatinNovember1932,seeBArch/KNL1235/4.42 SeePAAA,R242193,VerlagsanstaltdesMesseamtsLeipziganAuswärtigesAmt,13 April 1926.


350

already was by the mid-1920s and moreover it supports the conjectu-re thatGermanstateauthoritiesdealt (orrather,notdealt)withhimin an oddmanner. In his reply, Renzetti not only denied any suchespionageactivitybutassuredthatneitherhenoranyofhisstaffmem-bers would concern themselves with politics and would consider it an «obligation of honor (Ehrenpflicht)nottointerfereintheinternalaffairsofthecountry,whichhastakenusinasguestsandwhichweesteemso highly.»43WhileRenzetti’sactualactivitiesridiculedthisstatement,more important is the way Renzetti introduced his letter: «It has come tomyknowledgethatacertainDalmoCarnevali,anItalianlivinginBerlin,madethefollowingstatements.»Certainlyenough,theAuswär-tiges Amt had no intention that Renzetti would learn of the report made by Carnevali. Either his network of former companions from the con-trol commission or another source must have informed him about that. Perhapsnotsurprisingly,theinvestigationsmadebytheForeignOffi-ce lead nowhere44.Making this episode evenmore astounding, one year laterRenzettiwas appointed responsible for Italian fairs in Leipzig in 1926. This po-sitionwasafittingofferforRenzettiandcombinedhismainobjectivesagain:itwasawelcomeopportunitytoextendhisnetwork,promo-te Italian products and help draw a more positive image of Italy all thewhilehappeninginafieldinwhichhewasclearlyanexpert.Theeconomicexpertisemusthave led tohisexcellent reputationamongGerman authorities, too.Despite the reportmadebyCarnevali, de-spitethesuspicionoftheespionageactivity,despitetheopinionthatthechamberofcommercewasaFascistorganization,Renzettiwasingood repute even in the Auswärtiges Amt.Otherwise it isdifficult to

43 See PA AA, R 30285b, Renzetti an Legationssekretär Thomsen, ItalienischeAbteilung,AuswärtigesAmt,10November1924.44 SeePAAA,R30285b,28November1924whereitwasstatedthat«Renzettimusthave somehow learned about the fact that German authorities have taken notice of him».


351

explainwhyRenzetti could assume the post at the Leipzig fair andorganizeItalianexhibitions.ThegeneralsecretaryoftheFiera di Mi-lano, FabioMajnoni,reachedouttotheLegationsrat in the Auswärtiges Amt,PaulSchwarz,todiscussthepossibilitytoanointaresponsibleforfairs (Messekommissar)45. But Majnoni was also aware of the fact that Renzetti had gained a dubious reputation; apparentlyword reachedhim that Renzetti would at times «get carried away». Schwarz gathered information from both the Auswärtiges Amt and the Leipzig Messeamt. Neither raised any doubts which amazes insofar as it were these institu-tions that discussed his alleged espionage activities. Instead of advising Schwarzofthat,nowitwasreportedthatRenzettiwould«safeguardthe German-Italian matters in a satisfying manner»46.Oddlyenough,LegationsratOster,whowasresponsibleforfurnishingtheparticularsabout Renzetti’s reputation in the Auswärtiges Amt,wastheverysamewhowouldponder thequestiononhowto justify the refusalofhisdiplomatic status as a consul in Leipzig some months earlier.Ultimately,thechamberofcommerceservedasthestageforGiuseppeRenzetti’s diverse political and propagandistic interests. By the same token, this shouldnot imply that itwasonly a cover for subversiveventures. Such a description would neither live up to the numerous economic articles and speeches by Renzetti nor to his collaboration in committees. It is nonetheless true that the commitment to the Fascist propaganda led to his withdrawal from the everyday operations in the chamber of commerce which was instead conducted by one his asso-ciates,Marchettini47.

45 SeePAAA,R241478,MaassanSchwarz,23October1925.Thefollowingquotecan also be found there.46 SeePAAA,R72962,AufzeichnungendesLegationsratOster imAuswärtigenAmt,8January1926.47 Likemanyothers,MarchettiniwasalreadypartoftheInteralliedControlCom-mission.SeePAAA,R72962,PolizeipräsidentAlbertGrzesinskiandenpreußischenInnenministerCarlSevering,19January1926.


352

Consul in leipzig?

His reduced involvement in the daily business in Berlin was mostly due to his activism in Leipzig. Again without having been instructed todoso,RenzettiopenedaconsulatethereinMarch1925,fromwhichfollowedthathewasneitherofficiallyacknowledgedbytheGermanauthoritiesnorbytheItaliandiplomacy.Theofficialusageincorre-spondence indicated that as he was described as administrator (Verwe-ser) of the consulate. Therefore he was not paid by the Italian Foreign Ministry48.Infact,openingtheconsulateinitiallythreatenedRenzetti’searnings even more as the Italian war ministry took the view that it would not have to account for the waiting pay any longer49. Strikingly enough,RenzettiremainedinthepositionofVerweser of the consula-teuntil1927.Itisthereforealsoconjecturalthathisfunction–whilenotofficiallysanctionedbyRome–wasnotcontraveningtheItalianwishes all too much.Inthemeantime,therefusaloftheexequaturforRenzettiposedma-jordifficultiesfortheAuswärtiges Amt. Albeit not in close touch with Mussoliniatthattime,RenzettiwasregardedasapersonalconfidantoftheFascistleader.Becauseofthat,itwasespeciallyimportantthatthe refusal was not to be perceived as a way «to harm the leader of the ItalianFascistorganizationsinGermanyandtheconfidantofMusso-lini» as the aforementioned Legationsrat Oster put it50. In order to not strain thepolitical relationswith Italy, itwas therefore important toavoidtheimpressionofamerevexatiousscheme.Theexplosivenatureresided in Renzetti’s reputation as a fascist propagandist which was not

48 Renzettidemanded togetpaid700Lirapermonth.SeeBArch/KNL1235/1,PromemoriaRenzetti,16August1925.49 SeePAAA,R30285b,DeutscheBotschaftRomanAuswärtigesAmt,23April1925.Eventually,thesettlementremaineduntouched.50 PAAA,R72962,AufzeichnungendesLegationsratOsterimAuswärtigenAmt,8January1926.Thefollowingquotesarealsothere.


353

easy to reconcile with the position of a consul. Eventually it was deci-ded to approach the issue dilatorily and to increase the monitoring of Renzetti:«BoththecirclesaffiliatedwiththeVorwärts and the German policewillturntheirattention[…]toMisterRenzetti.IfintheprocessmaterialagainstRenzetticomesabout,therefusaloftheexequatur[...]couldbeunassailablejustifiedbytheillegitimatepoliticalactivityofaforeign representative». In these words past dealings with Renzetti re-verberated even though the episode with the alleged espionage activity didnotseemtosufficefortheAuswärtiges Amttorefusetheexequaturonthesegrounds.Exacerbatingthesituation,theintendedsurveillanceofRenzettionlystartednow,aftertenmonthsofRenzettiposingasaconsul went by. This made any refusal more noteworthy which in turn requiredamorepersuasiveexplanation.It also needed careful reasoning as the German press put Renzetti in the cross hairs. The «Vorwärts»steadilyreportedabouttheItalian’sactivities,not failing to mention his self-appointment as consul and the lack of effortbytheAuswärtiges Amt to deal with that matter51.Eventually,thereport furnished by the Berlin chief of police convinced the Auswärti-ges Amttofinallyactandrefusethisveryexequatur52. Notwithstanding that the report could not prove any direct link between Renzetti and Germanpoliticalcircles,itotherwiseshatteredtheimpressionRenzettihad conveyed that he would not concern himself with political mat-ters53.Remarkablyenough,Renzettiseemedunfazed;hejustcontinuedcarrying on with the consulate after all.The loss of both prestige and scope of action was nevertheless palpable.

51 See Faschistenskandale überall (1925), «Vorwärts», May 26; Major Renzetti, der «Deutschenfreund». Faschistische Ausreden (1925),«Vorwärts»,December27;Faschisten-treiben in Berlin (1926),«Vorwärts»,September2.52 SeePAAA,R72962,GrzesinskianSevering,19January1926.53 SeeDas italienische Haus (1925),«TäglicheRundschau»,December25;PAAA,R30285b,RenzettianLegationssekretärThomsen,ItalienischeAbteilung,AuswärtigesAmt,10November1924.


354

InApril1926,andhence twomonthsafter theofficial refusalof theexequatur,RenzettigotintoconflictwithAlfredFriedrichBaß,apu-blisher based in Leipzig who had both founded the nationalist Deutschen Marken-Kunst-Verlag and the Bund der Sprachinselfreunde. Baß issueda stamp commenting upon one of the more sensitive matters in the German-Italian relations.The imprint– «Germans!Avoid Italy!Vi-sitSouthTyrol»–drovethepointabouthisintentionhome54.Again,Renzetti was well informed as he learned of this stamp despite the fact that itwas never distributed.Hewrote to the Saxon administrativebodies,expectingthemtoputastoptoBaß’sactivities.Whiletheau-thoritiestookaction,theyrefusedanyfurtherofficialcommercewithRenzetti «as long as he would not be at least provisionally authorized as aconsul».FortheSaxonauthorities,RenzettiwaslittleelsethananIta-lian Fascist living in Germany. Further correspondence stated that even moreexplicit.WhenRenzettiwroteagaintotheadministrativebodiestocatchuponthestepstaken,theLeipzigchiefofpoliceintervened,stating that the superior Italian authority would be informed about the proceedings55.Hisinterventionthereforeresultedinareprimand,fur-ther revealing how unsuccessful his tenure as a self-appointed consul wasasthemissingexequaturpreventedhimfromgaininganyscope.Renzetti,realizingthistoo,thereforereorganized.Inthesamemonths,inwhich theexequaturwas refused,he tried togain support forhisnomination as a consul general in Berlin56.ThepreviousofficeholderAnselmi was recalled as part of the dismissal of ambassador Alessandro de Bosdari. According to the «Vorwärts»,alettercirculatedintheItaliancommunity in which Renzetti asked his compatriots to sign. As this

54 SeePAAA,R72872,BerichtvonOberkriminalrat Junghans,April1926.Thefollowingquoteisalsothere.55 SeePAAA,R72872,AuswärtigesAmtanMinisteriumderauswärtigenAngele-genheitendesFreistaatesSachsen,6May1926.56 SeeWas plant der Faschismus in Deutschland?(1926),«Vorwärts»,March2.


355

didnotmaterializeeither,RenzettisettledfortheconsulateinLeipziguntil itsfinalclosureuponDinoGrandi’srequest inearly1927.Theundersecretaryintheforeignministry,opposingthefasci italiani all’e-stero,dislikedRenzetti’sbustlingactivitiesforalongtime.HedidnothidethatfactinhisconversationwiththeembassycounselorinRome,FriedrichvonPrittwitzundGaffron:

[U]ndersecretary Grandi disclosed privately to me that the administra-toroftheItalianconsulateinLeipzig,MisterRenzetti,hasretiredfromthe service of the foreign ministry. Renzetti had tried to thwart his en-visagedrelocationtoCardiffandhasmadeaneffortduringtherecentstayofundersecretaryBalbo inBerlin, to enforcehis furtherofficialassignment in Germany. Renzetti was a meddler [Wichtigtuer] and tries to push himself to the fore at every opportunity. He asked us to take note of the fact that the Italian government considers Renzetti a mere private citizen who is responsible for his own doings57.

The statement made by Grandi is worth closer consideration. Taken literally,welearnthatRenzettihadtoclosetheconsulateanddroppedout from thediplomatic service.With ItaloBalbo,heagain tried toactivatehispersonalnetworktoreachhisgoal–inthiscase,hisfurtheruseinGermany.Besidesthisimmanentreading,thereisalsoasecondlevel to it: the conversation between Grandi and von Prittwitz und GraffontookplaceinOctober1927.Theconsulatewasalreadyclosedby then. What we know is that at that point Renzetti was recommen-ded by the new general secretary of the fasci italiani all’estero inRome,CorneliodiMarzio,tothechiefofthepoliticalpolice,ArturoBocchi-ni,asasecretagent[Schieder2005,29].Setagainstthisbackdrop,itseems to suggest itself that Grandi wanted to take Renzetti out of the spotlight. Emphasizing that Renzetti was a «mere private citizen who is responsible forhisowndoings»,Grandianticipatedpotential fric-tions that Renzetti’s acting as a go-between could provoke. From this

57 PAAA,R119836,DeutscheBotschaftRomanAuswärtigesAmt,18October1927.


356

perspective,Renzetti’s relocation toCardiffwas amere redherring,an impression which is corroborated by the fact that other than in this report there is no mention of a potential relocation to Wales. One way oranother,thecharacterizationofRenzettiasa«meddler»waslikelyGrandi’s personal view. It can hold true for Renzetti’s reputation as a private diplomat in the Italian foreign ministry.His activities in Leipzig basically ended with the closure of the con-sulate.AlthoughRenzettitriedtoorganizethedailyaffairssimilartothose inBerlin– theconsulatewas ledby the secretarySavarioPa-squael–thepersonalgainforRenzettiremainednegligible.Forsomeyears Leipzig became one of the centers of Fascist activity in Germany as local fasci italiani all’estero-representatives met once a month at the premises of the consulate58. Once again a fusion of Renzetti’s activities could be observed. These meetings further on had to back up the con-cerns shared by the Auswärtiges Amtandseemedtoconfirmtherefusaloftheexequaturretroactivelyagain.Inthissense,Renzettiwasnotanisolated case as consulates were more strictly observed since German authoritieshad the impression that staffmembersofconsulateswereinvolved in espionage59.

Fasci Italiani all’Estero / Fascio di Lipsia

Coincidingwithhistimeasaconsul inLeipzigwashisofficeasre-presentative (fiduciario) of the fasci italiani all’estero[DeCaprariis2000;Mantelli 2003;Pretelli 2008;Pretelli 2010; Santarelli 1971] forGer-

58 SeePAAA,R72963,SächsischeMinisteriumfurauswärtigeAngelegenheitenanAuswärtigesAmt,3March1927.59 SeeGStAPK,1.HARep.77MinisteriumdesInnern.Tit.4043,n.111.Preußi-schesInnenministeriumanAuswärtigesAmt,15July1927.Atthispoint,Renzettiwas not consul anymore.


357

many60. At least since October 1925 Renzetti held this post because he wasparticipatinginthatfunctioninthefirst(andonly)fasci-congress in Rome61. The subordination of the fasci italiani all’estero under the traditional diplomacy which was made all but certain at this congress was hence also known to Renzetti62. In that function he also met for thefirsttimeswithMussolini,firstinDecember1925atthecongressand in December 1926 along with the fiducarifromChinaandJapanto discuss the achievements in the respective countries63. Therefore we are well informed about the organization of Fascist groups in Germany atthattime.AccordingtoRenzetti,fasciexistedinBerlin,Duisburg,Dusseldorf,Essen,Hamburg,CologneandMunich.Fascistgroups–meaningthose thatwerenotyet fullyconsolidated–were found inBreslau,Dresden,Elberfeld,Leipzig,Oberhausen,SiegenandWanne.ForChemnitz,FrankfurtontheMainandWiesbadensimilargroupswere sought to be established. Unfortunately further information per-taining to the fasci and what criteria they had to meet in order to be acknowledged as a proper fascio are searched for in vain. Those groups undoubtedly had a mere symbolic character however.The methodical approach to the Fascist course of action can also be deduced from the high degree of organization. The German State ter-ritorywassplitintofivezones–eitherbyRenzettihimselforahigherauthority inRome. In turn, these zoneswereputunder thecontrolof one representative so that Renzetti delegated his tasks as represen-

60 For thewritingsof theheads of theorganization:Bastianini 1939;DiMarzio1923;Parini1929.61 SeePAAA,R72961,DeutscheBotschaftRomanAuswärtigesAmt,23Decem-ber 1925. The report by Carnevali in 1924 did not mention this function. Had Car-nevaliknownaboutthis,hesurelywouldhaveraisedthissubject.SoRenzettimusthaveassumedtheofficebetweenOctober1924andOctober1925.62 See I comandamenti del Duce ai Fascisti italiani all’estero (1925), «Il Legionario»,November7;Alcuni compiti dei Fasci all’estero(1925),«Gerarchia»,October4.63 SeePAAA,R72963,DeutscheBotschaftRomanAuswärtigesAmt,30Decem-ber 1926.


358

tative.ForMunich,GuidoAlbarelliwasresponsible,fortheNorthofGermanyDr.Turi,fortheRhinelandandWestphaliaMarioRognoni,forSaxonyacertainIsandoro,andforSilesiaDr.VittorioChiusano.While Southern and Northern Germany only saw the founding of fasci in the respectivemetropolis–Munich andHamburg–, inWesternand Eastern Germany the dissemination was more widespread though it entailed problems as well.The fascioinEssen,forinstance,hadtobedissolvedasthegroupwasnot on good terms with the consulate in Duisburg. As if this dualism in institutions–whichMussolinihadsoemphaticallyadvisedagainstatthe fasci italiani all’estero-congressayearearlier–wasnotenough,theconsulinDuisburgwasalsoMarioRognoni,therepresentativefortheRhinelandandWestphalia.Atthecoreoftheissuewasthequestionwho disposed of greater competences; in practice thiswas all aboutwhether the consulate in Duisburg could issue instructions to the fascio in Essen64.Sowhile inonewayRognoniarguedwithhimself, itdi-splays that he predominantly considered himself a consul. As the fascio inEssenincessantlynegatedtheleadershipclaimbytheconsulate,thefascio was unsurprisingly dissolved. The statements made by leading Fascistsatthecongressin1925leftlittleforimagination;tooobviouswas the subordination of the fasciundertheconsulatesforthisquarrelover competences could have been concluded in any other way. The fasci remained relevant nevertheless as Rognoni was instructed to re-establish – presumably byRenzetti – a fascio in Essen. The peculiar constellation remained nevertheless intact. On the level of the fasci ita-liani all’esteroRenzettiwasthesuperiorofRognoni,yetatthediplo-maticlevelRenzettihadnoauthority,especiallysinceRognoniwasalegitimate consul. Due to his position in the fasci italiani all’estero and the attention that

64 SeePAAA,R72963,PolizeipräsidentEssenanPreußischesInnenministerium,12 February 1927.


359

RenzettiattractedinGermangovernmentandjournalisticcircles,wecan also reconstruct the founding of a particular fascio. The Fascio Italia-no di Lipsia was established in October 1926 at the behest of Renzetti65. Chairman of the fascioinLeipzigwasthelocalmerchantSerafinoCar-riere who was only insofar predestined as he was a convinced Fascist.The establishment of the fascio in Leipzig seemingly encroached on Renzetti’stime.AsearlyasOctober1925–andhenceayearbefore–Renzetti announced his intention to constitute it66. Attracting Italian citizens in Leipzig to join the fascio also proved to be arduous. The group’s membership consisted mainly of shopkeepers and merchants: «Only after intense recruitment and campaigning of the consul Ren-zettiitsucceededthatoftheover100ItalianslivinginLeipzig,30mer-chants and tradesmen could be organized to form the fascist group.»67 The powerful position Renzetti occupied as president of the chamber ofcommerceandasofficialforthefairsinLeipzigbasicallycompel-led local merchants to align themselves with the fascio if they did not want to be at risk that a non-membership would entail disadvantages. Inquitemanyways,exertingthiseconomicpressurewastheonlyop-tiontocoercethesepeopletoaffiliatewithFascism,astheywerenotdependentonanyprivilegesormaterialprofitsthatanendorsementofFascismcouldhavepotentiallyinvolvedotherwise.Beyond,memberssuch as Carriere or Francesco Mignani were owners of fruit import businesses. When we remember that Renzetti was appointed a mem-berof a committee that dealtwith the im- and exportof fruits andvegetablestwomonthsbeforethefoundationdescribedhere,itseemsconsequentialtoconjecturethathecouldsanctionthesepeopleaslong

65 SeePAAA,R72963,SächsischeMinisteriumfurauswärtigeAngelegenheitenanAuswärtigesAmt,3March1927.Thefollowingquoteisalsothere.66 SeePAAA,R72961,PolizeidirektionMunchenanStaatsministeriumdesÄuße-ren,13October1925.67 SeePAAA,R72963,SächsischesMinisteriumfurAuswärtigeAngelegenheitenanAuswärtigesAmt,3March1927.


360

as they were not willing to actively cooperate in the fascio. The remain-der were also prompted to join as the «Welt am Abend» noted: «Renzetti sent a request to the local Italians tofill out theFascistmembershipcardsunderthreatof–incaseofrefusal–strippingtheIDsandtosan-ction the relatives living in Italy»68. Even though the reference to the punishment of those relatives living in Italy was perhaps owed more tothe journalisticpresspolemic, thisapproachshowedtwodifferentthings.First,Renzettiappliedconsiderablepressuresincejoiningthefasciowasnotconsideredverypopular.Second,itmusthaveevenhadamoredisappointingeffectthattheresponsewasstillsomeagerandRenzettihencehadtorealizethathisintimidationwasexposedasmererhetoric. Membership in the fascioinLeipzig,sothisseemstosuggest,arose not from political opinion or belief but rather involved mostly those who were at Renzetti’s mercy. The members usually gathered intheLeipzigconsulate,afurtherevidencefortheinterplaybetweenconsulate and fascio.At the time of the founding of the Leipzig fascio,Renzettialsodealtwith the Fascist group in Munich which he wanted to organize anew together with Fernando Gramaccini69. Renzetti tried to vitalize for-mer contacts for that and as such it was an endeavor which yet again was based upon his personal network70.Similarly,afascio in Berlin was foundedinJuly1926;inafamiliarpatternthefoundationwascarriedoutatthepremisesofthechamberofcommerce[Schieder2005,37].

68 Mussolini oder Deutschland? Die Rolle des Gesandten Aldrovandi – Bespitzelung der Landsleute – Ueberall [!] faschistische Organisationen (1927), «DieWelt amAbend»,March 7.69 TheFascio di Monaco was dissolved in 1923 due to various irregularities. See PA AA,R72961,PolizeidirektionMunchenanStaatsministeriumdesÄußeren,13Oc-tober 1925. Gramaccini was responsible for the Fascist organization in Munich and reportedtotheGeneralSecretaryoftheFascistPartyinRome,RobertoFarinacci.GramacciniandRenzettikneweachotherfromWorldWarI;informationbyWolf-gangSchiederinapersonalconversationwiththeauthorinJuly2012.70 PAAA,R72961,RenzettianGramaccini,5October1925.


361

Meanwhile,thepivotalfigureintheBerlinfascio was Alfredo Stendar-do who caught the eye in another function: as correspondent for the «Giornale d’Italia» in Berlin whose benevolent reporting about Hitler annoyed German authorities71.Inaddition,hewassecretaryofthefa-scio inBerlin. Furthermore, hewas an employee of the chamber ofcommerce and was regarded as «ear and eye of the fascists» who would attend meetings and events of rightist parties and organizations72. Even morecurious,Stendardowas likewiseemployedbytheItalianCon-sulate General in Berlin73.Inlightofthisbundledactivities,itcanbeagain displayed how much the various activities of Renzetti were in-terconnected. As much as Renzetti was personally involved in the establishment of various fasci, the roleofbeing the representative for the fasci italiani all’esteroinGermanyfellshortofhisexpectations.Muchlikethosere-sponsible for the fasci inRome,atthesharpenditsfirstheadGiuseppeBastianini,Renzettienvisagedhisinvolvementintheorganizationtobe a springboard for a diplomatic career. While generally speaking the fasci italiani all’estero intended to substitute the traditional diplomats in foreign countries through an ideologization of the foreign policy in the longrun[Duranti2014], thoseplansessentiallywereshelvedbyMussolini at the already mentioned congress in October 1925. This was especially pivotal as the organization had not much other backing: initially not institutionalized and in 1923 directly subordinated to Mus-solini,theorganizationwasdealtaheavyblowwheninMarch1926oneofitsgreatestadvocates,RobertoFarinacci,resigned[DeCaprariis2000,154f.].GiuseppeBastianinimadealastattempttoregainrelevan-

71 SeeDDI,Serie7,Vol.X,No.132,208.BaroniaGrandi,15March1931.72 GStAPK,1.HARep.77MinisteriumdesInnern.Tit.4043,No.295a,10Fe-bruary 1931.73 SeeSüdtirols Henker kontrolliert Goebbels(1930),«DieroteFahne»,September2.


362

ce by urging Mussolini to send decisive fascists as consuls to Germany74. He did not fail to mention that those prospective consuls should de-monstrate a positive stance towards the actions taken by fasci-repre-sentatives. This plea did not resonate with Mussolini and Bastianini followed suit by resigning in late 1926. This was above all the admission to have lost the struggle for power within the Fascist party and the struggle over the power to represent Fascism abroad. In other words: the traditional diplomacy representing theStatewonovertheideologicalparty’sforeignpolicy,atleastwhenspeakingofthefirstdecadeofFascism.Aggravatingthisproblemwasthe impression the fasci italiani all’estero made on the respective host go-vernments so that Mussolini basically settled for a compromise which foresaw that diplomats needed to be Fascist believers and members of thePNF;thefasci now were only seen as an «organization of private ci-tizens» who were not supposed to «interfere in the slightest in the sphe-re of responsibility of the consulates»75.Thispolicy–thefascistizzazione oftheforeignpolicy–saw120newconsulscomingintoofficein1927[Gentile2003,155f.].Thefasci italiani all’estero which from their incep-tion on tried to help shape this very fascistizzazione were a mere onloo-ker to that development at this point. When Piero Parini took over the roleofheadoftheorganization,hewasbasicallyassignedtheirliqui-dation as the fasci wouldcomeundertheauthorityoftheforeignofficein 1928. Yet Renzetti came out this deadlock even more strengthened. Despitenumerousattemptsonpartofthetraditionaldiplomats,mostprominently Italian ambassador Alessandro de Bosdari who urged to eschewsending“unofficialagents”–anill-concealedreferencetopeo-plelikeRenzetti–onmissionstoGermany,ItaliandiplomatsinRome

74 SeeDDI,Serie7,Vol.IV,No.426,BastianiniaMussolini,15September1926,329.75 DDI,Serie7,Vol.IV,No.389,MussolinialConsoleaMelbourne,Grossardi,10August1926,301.


363

espoused Renzetti’s role76.AmedeoFani,StatesecretaryintheItalianforeignministry,instructedtheembassyinBerlinthat«relationstothe[German Right] were only to be maintained by Major Renzetti» who hence essentially monopolized his rank in the process77. Throughout the fascistizzazioneoftheforeignpolicy,thepositionofdelegateswasabolished.AtthattimeRenzetti–whoasrepresentativeforGermanyalsowouldhavetovacatehisoffice–alreadysawthewritingonthewall and turned his attention to recommend himself as a shadow am-bassador to the German Right.

The German Place in italian Foreign Policy and discussions about Fascist universalism

While the manifold activities of Giuseppe Renzetti were based on his own initiative and pursued the objective to establish himself in the WeimarRepublicasmuchforfinancialmotivesasforideologicalones,thesocio-politicalcontextoftheyearscontemplatedherecanfurtherelucidate these activities. Even though in hindsight only the chamber ofcommerceledtoasatisfyingresult,thedecisionstotrytosetupaconsulate and to live up to his role of a fasci-representative need to be seen against the backdrop of the mid-1920s when there were indeed signs pointing to those endeavors having a great strategic impact.Firstofall,thiscontextconcernstheoverallquality,orrather:theGer-man relevance for the Italian foreign policy. Whereas the Germans nourished a quite sentimental attitude towards Italy [Schieder 1996]whichfiguredprominentlyespeciallyintheNazidiscourse,nosimilarobservationcanbemadefortheItalianside.Ifatall,theplaceGermanyoccupied in the Fascist imagination in the early 1920s was negatively

76 DDI,Serie7,Vol.III,No.188.DeBosdaritoMussolini,13May1924,117.77 DDI,Serie7,Vol.VIII,No.478,FaniaBaroni,9April1930,585.


364

connotedwhichisquiteconsistentwiththefactthatanti-Germanre-sentments were still circulating following World War I. Yet the «ana-logue revisionist rise» had to lead to a special orientation towards Ger-many[Ara1984,137]. Inorder toamend, ifnot toflat-outreverse,certain terms of the Treaty of Versailles which was still surrounded by an aura of a perceived defeat in the collective fascist imagination (al-beitmostclausesclassifiedItalyasawinner),countrieswhichlikewisehadaninterestinamendingtheTreatynaturallyfiguredgreatlyintheforeign policy. This led to an enhanced steering towards the German Right78.For establishingandmaintainingcontacts, semi-officialper-sons were occasionally sent to Germany which more often than not provoked irate responses from the German government which is why by the late 1920s Giuseppe Renzetti was installed as a shadow ambassa-dor to the German Right.The orientation towards Germany also made sense if set against ano-therbackdrop:astheItalianzonesof influencewereimaginedtobeSoutheastEuropeandtheMediterraneanBasin,thispolicyhadtofallfoulofFrenchinterests[Rodogno2003,71-80].Inalotofwaysitwashence not a positive attitude but rather geopolitical concerns which led to a rapprochement with Germany. Since the Stresemann policy which was designed to reapproach France was bête noirefortheFascists,thisturntoGermanpoliticsconsequentiallymeanttofocusmoreonthepoliticalrightthanonthegovernment[Marsico1988,21f.].Therelevance of the German Right increased as the disgruntlement over German-French relations grew so that «the relations between Rome and Berlin in those years [mid-1920s] were for the most part a manife-stationoftherespectiverelationtoFrance»[Petersen1973,19].Those years also saw a more noticeable approach with regard to the pro-paganda for Fascism. After the consolidation of the Fascist regime and overcomingtheMatteotti-crisis,thedictatorshipwaswellestablished

78 JensPetersenspeaksofthe«revisionismwithoutrevision»:Petersen1973,139ff.


365

[Lyttelton1973].Withtheinternalconsolidation,theemphasisshiftedtopropagateFascismabroadmoreenthusiastically[Collotti2000;Cuz-zi2006,Fioravanzo2010;Ledeem1972].ThisdoesnotmeantospeakofastringentexportofFascistideologywhoseinstitutionalizedpillarswere the fasci italiani all’estero.While in the longrun failing,by themid-1920s Fascist universalism was a topic much discussed. This too secured the German Right a prominent place in Fascist conceptions. This Fascist universalism could convince people like Giuseppe Renzetti thattheireffortswereinlinewithoverallgoalsinRome.Ever since theMarchonRome, leadingFascists such as ItaloBalboor Roberto Farinacci pressed for the internationalization of Fascism. People like Giuseppe Bastianini urged the creation of a structure akin toaFascistinternational[Gentile2003,148].AnarticlewrittenbyRo-bertoForgesDavanzati,aFascistjournalistandmemberoftheGrandCouncilofFascism,maybeconsideredemblematic.Thearticle,appea-ring in the nationalist «L’Idea Nazionale», basically trialed the discussion concerning the universalization of Fascism79.Nevertheless,inlightofintensestrictureuponthisarticle,thewholediscussionwastermina-ted and hence lost steam. Mussolini refrained from joining the debate orstokingitupagain,notleasttoavertdamagefromItaly’sforeign-policy relations. This discussion framed for instance Renzetti’s unau-thorized founding of the consulate in Leipzig. It does not seem to be too far-fetched to assume that it encouraged Renzetti to proceed with hisactivities.Afterall, in1925boththeGermanrelevanceinFascistItaly’sconceptionandtheexportingoftheFascistideacarriedweightsothatpeoplelikeRenzettihadreasonableexpectationslinkedtotheirendeavors.

79 ForgesDavanzatiR.1925,Fascismo ed internazionalismo,«L’IdeaNazionale»,Fe-bruary 11. Forges Davanzati was one of four PNF secretaries between 1924 and 1925.


366

Conclusion

The historical relevance Giuseppe Renzetti occupies is due to his later role as a middleman between the German Right and Italian Fascism. Foraprofoundunderstandingofthis,itishowevernecessarytopointout the process and conditions leading up to his appointment as that middleman. Renzetti’s edge was to have been acting in that role from a secured institutional platform which was the chamber of commerce. GainingfinancialsupportfromRomefortheItalianchamberofcom-merce combined with his earnings from his position as a representative for the fasci italiani all’estero allowed him to dedicate his attention to Germanpoliticalaffairs.Alreadybackinthistime,eventhoughhewasnot yet in contact with StahlhelmorNazileaders,Renzettiwaseagertodisseminate his knowledge about Fascism and especially the economic policies it entailed. Highlighting Renzetti’s endeavors between 1925 and 1927 could also show howwell linked all these at first glance diverse activities hadbeen.Institutionallybundled,forinstancewhenthevariousfasci met inLeipzig,thisalsofounditsexpressioninthestaff.AlfredoStendardomightjustbe,exceptforRenzettihimselfofcourse,themostremar-kableexample. Ingeneral,Germangovernmentcirclesassumedthatemployees of the chamber of commerce and leaders of the fasci italiani all’estero were per se former members of the control commission. This wouldbeonefieldwhere future research could investigatewhetherthe Fascist propaganda networks were somehow based upon perso-nalcontactsalreadyacquiredinthecontrolcommission.FocusingonRenzetti seems to corroborate this hypothesis after all. Interestingly enough,allthesecontactsandtheItaliannetworkofRenzetticannotbe found anymore after he assumed the role of an intermediary around 1929/1930.Withthisnewrole,adecisivebreakwiththeheredescri-bedpastcameabout;onlythepresidencyofthechamberofcommerceandhis expertiseoneconomicmatterspersisted.While inhindsightRenzettihencesucceededtoestablishhimselfinthepoliticaldiscourse,


367

highlighting the mid-1920s makes also visible how much this hinged on contingency and the dynamics of events such as getting to know StahlhelmleadersorGöring.Morethananythingelse,thiswasthepi-votal breakthrough for Renzetti. It was also necessary inasmuch as the chamber of commercewas a personal success for the Italian Fascist,the other endeavors were certainly not. Both his time as self-appoin-ted consul and as representative for the fasci italiani all’estero proved a failure. This became never more emblematic than with the envisaged project of the Italian Fascist house which served as the opening for this article. Whenwordgotoutabouttheintentiontoestablishsuchahouse,itwas met with a divided response. The news went particularly viral in the German newspapers once it became known that the place should alsohousethecentralofficeofthefasci italiani all’estero. Renzetti had good reason to conceal this initially to not further amplify the im-pressionthatthishousecouldberegardedastheheadquartersforFa-scism in Germany. The coverage would ultimately reach such a level that Renzetti felt constrained to publish a denial of those allegations80. Perhapsnotsurprisingly,itwasonlythereportingbythenewspapersthat induced the Auswärtiges Amt to gather more information about Renzetti. Journalists seemed to be better informed than the officialsingovernmentcircles.Eventuallythisproject,perhapsevendiscussedwithMussoliniintheDecember1925audienceofRenzetti,failedasGerman authorities did not want to correlate the diplomatic immunity of a consulate with the Fascist activities housed in the very same place. ThedebatebackfiredevenmorewhenwerecallthattherefusaloftheexequaturforRenzettihappenedinthesameperiod.Aconnectiontothe polemics surrounding the Italian Fascist house seems apparent par-ticularly in view of the fact that the «Vorwärts» reiterated time and time

80 TheissuereverberatedevenintheBritishpress.SeeFascist Surveillance in Ger-many. An ‘Italian House’ - Mussolini’s Espionage in Berlin (1925),«ManchesterGuar-dian»,December11.


368

again that Renzetti was still allowed to act as a consul in Leipzig. The failure here – togetherwith the overall frustration regarding theoutlook of the fasci italiani all’estero–couldnotsatisfyRenzetti’sambitions.Aboveall,hewastoowellconnectedtonotrealizethesideliningofthefasci italiani all’estero as an organization in Rome. When their new head diMarzioeventuallyopenedanItalianhouseinBerlininOctober1927,Renzetti was not even present any more81. He now wanted to put himself forwardfortheroleasFascistsecretagent,actingasgo-betweenfortheGermanRightandFascism[Schieder2005,39].Thethoughtleadingtothis,however,remainedthatRenzettirealizedthatthefailureofthefasci italiani all’estero was in sight and that his other ventures did not lead to success. The role of the go-between seemed all the more promising.Surprisingly, thenameGiuseppeRenzetticameup inOctober1943again,thoughinatotallydifferentcontext:inthecourseoftheAlliedoccupationofSouthernItalyinWorldWarII,theAllieswereseekingItaliangovernmentofficialswhocouldbeentrustedwithpoliticaltasksin the Italian administrative apparatus82. Giuseppe Renzetti’s name was alsopartofthediscussion,thatisuntilthefirstreportabouthimcamein. When he was described as «one of the most outstanding cases of successduesolelytotheinfluenceofFascism[and]Nazism»whohad«strongpersonalconnectionswiththeNaziparty»,itwasobviousthatRenzettiwastobeleftoutofanypoliticalresponsibility.Indeed,thecharacterizationwas–especiallyconsideringitwasonly1943whenthereportwasfurnished–quiteprecise.The«bornopportunist»surelyleft his marks on the Nazi-Fascist relations and had a profound histo-ricalimpact,somethinghealwayslongedfor.Thisimpactwasshort-lived,however,andcamewithaheavyprice.

81 Thehouse itselfhad little leftofRenzetti’s ideas. SeePAAA,R72964,Lega-tionsrat ThomsenanDeutscheBotschaftRom,28October1927.82 NationalArchivesatCollegePark,CollegePark,MD,RecordGroup331,10263-115-20(2/2),Box5220.ReportbyMajorStephenJ.Spingarn,22October1943.Thequotescanalsobefoundthere.


369

archives

ArchivioCentraledelloStato,Rome

• MinisteroCulturaPopolare,Reports1922-1945.FascioloReportm.20 Giuseppe Renzetti: Relazioni sulla situazione politica in Germania e sul contenuto di suoi ab-boccamenti con Hitler, Goering ed altri ufficiali nazisti.

BundesarchivKoblenz,NachlassGiuseppeRenzetti

• NL1235/1,Korrespondenz1920-1929.

• NL1235/2,Korrespondenz1930.



• NL1235/6,Korrespondenz1934-1935.

• NL1235/7,Korrespondenz1936-1944,1947.

• NL1235/10,Berichte1931.

• NL1235/12,Berichte1933.

• NL1235/14,Berichte1937-1940.

• NL1235/16,Memoiren.

GeheimesStaatsarchivPreußischerKulturbesitz,Berlin

• 1.HARep.77MinisteriumdesInnern.Tit.4043,n.111.SpionageimAuftragfremderMächte1927-1933.

• 1.HARep. 77Ministeriumdes Innern.Tit. 4043, n. 295a.BeziehungenderNSDAP zum italienischen Faschismus.

• 1.HARep.77MinisteriumdesInnern.Tit.4043,n.302.BetätigungderNSDAPin Berlin 1930-1932.

PolitischesArchivdesAuswärtigenAmtes,Berlin

• R30285b,Politik15g–AgentenundSpionage,Bd.1,TeilII.

• R72872,Politik6A–SudtirolerFrage,Bd.14.

• R72961,Politik29:Nationalsozialismus,FaschismusundähnlicheBestrebun-gen,Bd.2.

• R72962,Politik29:Nationalsozialismus,FaschismusundähnlicheBestrebun-gen,Bd. 3.




370

• R119836,PersonenakteRenzetti,Bd.2,1929-1941.

• R241478,Handel31A–MailänderMessen,Bd.1.

Bibliography

EditionsCommissioneperlaPubblicazionedeiDocumentiDiplomatici1962,Documenti Di-

plomatici Italiani,Serie7(1922-1935),Vol.IV,15maggio1925-6febbraio1927,Rome:IstitutoPoligraficoeZeccadelloStato,LibreriadelloStato.

—1970,Documenti Diplomatici Italiani,Serie7(1922-1935),Vol.VIII,13settembre1929-14aprile1930,Rome:IstitutoPoligraficoeZeccadelloStato,LibreriadelloStato.

—1978,Documenti Diplomatici Italiani,Serie7(1922-1935),Vol.X,1gennaio-4settembre1931,Rome:IstitutoPoligraficoeZeccadelloStato,LibreriadelloStato.

—1994,DocumentiDiplomaticiItaliani,Serie8(1935-1939),Vol.V,1settembre-31dicembre1936,Rome:IstitutoPoligraficoeZeccadelloStato,LibreriadelloStato.

FröhlichE.1998(ed.),Joseph Goebbels. Die Tagebücher,partI,Vol.9,Munchen:Saur.

FröhlichE.2005 (ed.), Joseph Goebbels. Die Tagebücher, part1.Vol.2/I,Munchen:Saur.

Primary sources, Publications, Newspaper articles, and Me-moirs up to 1945 BastianiniG.1939,Gli Italiani all’estero,Milan:Mondadori.

Di Marzio C. 1923, Il fascismo all’Estero,Milan: Imperia “Casa editricedelPartitonazionalefascista”.

ForgesDavanzatiR.1925,Fascismo ed internazionalismo,«L’IdeaNazionale»,Februa-ry 11.

GöringH.1926a,Zum deutsch-italienischen Konflikt,«VölkischerBeobachter»,March3.

—1926b,Zum deutsch-italienischen Konflikt,«VölkischerBeobachter»,March6.

—1926c,Zum deutsch-italienischen Konflikt,«VölkischerBeobachter»,March9.

PariniP.1929,I fasci italiani all’estero,«IlDecennale.XAnniversariodellaVittoria.


371

AnnoVIIdell’erafascista»,Florence:Vallecchi,406-430.

RenzettiG.1926a,Gli sforzi per la restaurazione economica tedesca,«IlSole»,May27.

—1926b,La situazione economica tedesca,«IlSole»,July17.

—1926c,L’industria automobilistica tedesca,«IlSole»,August24.

—1926d,La situazione commerciale e il mercato dei valori e del lavoro,«IlSole»,Sep-tember 5.

—1926e,L’economia tedesca,«IlSole»,September16.

—1930,Italien und Deutschland,«DerTag»,November13.

—1934a,Italiens Finanzpolitik,Leipzig:MaxMöhring.

— 1934b Das “Dopolavoro“ in Italien,«KunstderNation»,4:2.

—1934c,Der korporative Staat,Leipzig:MaxMöhring.

I comandamenti del Duce ai Fascisti Italiani all’estero(1925),«IlLegionario»,November7.

Alcuni compiti dei Fasci all’estero(1925),«Gerarchia»,4(October),651-656.

Faschistenskandale überall(1925),«Vorwärts»,May26.

Fascist Surveillance in Germany. An ‘Italian House’ - Mussolini’s Espionage in Berlin (1925),«ManchesterGuardian»,December11.

Das italienische Haus(1925),«TäglicheRundschau»,December25.

Major Renzetti, der «Deutschenfreund». Faschistische Ausreden (1925),«Vorwärts»,De-cember 27.

Was plant der Faschismus in Deutschland?(1926),«Vorwärts»,March2.

Faschistentreiben in Berlin (1926),«Vorwärts»,September2.

Mussolini oder Deutschland? Die Rolle des Gesandten Aldrovandi – Bespitzelung der Landsleute – Ueberall [!] faschistische Organisationen (1927),«DieWeltamAbend»,March 7.

Südtirols Henker kontrolliert Goebbels(1930),«DieroteFahne»,September2.

ReferencesAra A. 1984,Faschismus und Nationalsozialismus. Mussolini und Hitler, TreueW.(ed.)1984,Deutschland 1933. Machtzerfall der Demokratie und nationalsozialistische “Machtergreifung”:eineVortragsreihe,Berlin:Colloquium-Verlag,136-155.

Berghahn V. 1966,Der Stahlhelm: Bund der Frontsoldaten 1918-1935, Dusseldorf:Droste Verlag.

Birnbaum M. P. 1981, Staat und Synagoge 1918-1938. Eine Geschichte des Preußischen Landesverbandes jüdischer Gemeinden,Tubingen:Mohr.


372

BourdieuP.1986,L’Illusion biographique,«ActesdelaRechercheenSciencessociales»,62 (1): 69-72.

Cannistraro,P.1982(ed.),Historical Dictionary of Fascist Italy,Westport:GreenwoodPress.

CollottiE.,LabancaN.,SalaT.2000,Fascismo e politica di potenza. Politica estera 1922-1939, Milan: La Nuova Italia.

ConzeE. et al2010 (eds.),Das Amt und die Vergangenheit. Deutsche Diplomaten im Dritten Reich und in der Bundesrepublik,Munich:KarlBlessingVerlag.

CuzziM.2006,Antieuropa. Il fascismo universale di Mussolini,Milan:M&B.

deFeliceR.1971,I rapporti tra fascismo e nazionalsocialismo fino all’andata al potere di Hitler 1922-1933: appunti e documenti,Napoli:EdizioneScientificheItaliane.

—1974,Mussolini il duce, Vol. 1: Gli anni del consenso, 1929-1936,Turin:Einaudi.

—1975,Mussolini e Hitler: I rapporti segreti 1922-1933,Florence:LeMonnier.

deCaprariisL.2000,‘Fascism for Export’? The Rise and Eclipse of the Fasci Italiani all’E-stero,«JournalofContemporaryHistory»,35(2):151-183.

Duranti S. 2014, La politica estera fascista. Fra storia politica e storia diplomatica,«StudiStorici»,1:257-270.

FioravanzoM.2010,Die Europakonzeptionen von Faschismus und Nationalsozialismus (1939-1943),«VierteljahresheftefurZeitgeschichte»58(4):509-541.

FondazioneFieraMilano2007(ed.),Facevamo la Campionaria. La Fiera di Milano at-traverso il suo Archivio Storico. 1920-1965. Con un’antologia di racconti d’autore, Milan: Libri Scheiwiller.

Gentile E. 2003, The Struggle for Modernity: Nationalism, Futurism and Fascism,Westport,CT:Praeger.

GinzburgC.,PoniC.1991,The Name and the Game: Unequal Exchange and the Hi-storical Marketplace,inMuirE.,RuggieroG.(eds.)1991,Microhistory and the Lost Peoples of Europe,Baltimore:TheJohnsHopkinsUniversityPress,1-10.

GriffinR.2011,Political Modernism and the Cultural Production of ‘Personalities of the Right’ in Inter-War Europe, inHaynesR.,RadyM. (eds.)2011, In the Shadow of Hitler. Personalities of the Right in Central and Eastern Europe,London:I.B.Tauris,20-37.

HoffstadtA. 2013,Eine Frage der Ehre – Zur ‘Beziehungsgeschichte’ von «Stahlhelm. Bund der Frontsoldaten» und SA,inMullerY.,ZilkenatR.(eds.)2013,Bürgerkriegsar-mee. Forschungen zur nationalsozialistischen Sturmabteilung (SA),FrankfurtamMain:Lang,267-296.

Laffin S. 2013, «Warum sind nicht Sie Botschafter, wo Sie alles mit so sicherem Blick durchschauen!?» Giuseppe Renzetti und die faschistische Paralleldiplomatie der Zwischenkriegszeit,MAthesis,Bielefeld University.


373

LedeenM.A.1972,Universal Fascism. The theory and practice of the Fascist International, 1928-1936, New York: Howard Fertig.

LeviG.2013,The Uses of Biography,inRendersH.,deHaanB.(eds.)2013,Theore-tical Discussions of Biography: Approaches from History, Microhistory, and Life Writing,Lewiston,Queenston,Lampeter:EdwinMellenPress,89-111.

LytteltonA.1973, The Seizure of Power: Fascism in Italy 1919-1929, London: Wei-denfeld&Nicolson.

MantelliB.2003,I Fasci in Austria e Germania, inFranzinaE.,SanfilippoM.(eds.),Il fascismo e gli emigrati. La parabola dei Fasci italiani all’estero (1920-1943),Roma:Laterza.

MarsicoG.1988, L’Italia e l’adesione della Germania alla Società delle Nazioni (1925-1926),Trieste:TriesteScientificPress.

NigliaF.2002,Il maggiore Roma-Berlino. L’attività di collegamento di Giuseppe Renzetti fra Mussolini e Hitler,«NuovaStoriaContemporanea»,6(4):69-81.

PetersenJ.1969,Deutschland und Italien im Sommer 1935: Der Wechsel des italienischen Botschafters in Berlin,«GeschichteinWissenschaftundUnterricht»,20(6):330-341.

PetersenJ.1973,Hitler-Mussolini. Die Entstehung der Achse Berlin-Rom 1933-1936,Tubingen:MaxNiemeyerVerlag.

PretelliM.2008,Il fascismo e l’immagine dell’Italia all’estero,«Contemporanea»,11(2):221-242.

—2010,Il fascismo e gli Italiani all’estero,Bologna:Clueb.

RendersH.2013,Biography, Life Writing and Microhistory, inRendersH.,deHaanB. 2013 (eds.), Theoretical Discussions of Biography: Approaches from History, Mi-crohistory, and Life Writing,Lewiston,Queenston,Lampeter:EdwinMellenPress,195-210.

RodognoD.2003, Il nuovo ordine mediterraneo. Le politiche di occupazione dell’Italia fascista in Europa (1940-1943), Turin: Bollati Boringhieri.

SantarelliE.1971,I fasci italiani all’estero (Note ed appunti),«Studiurbinatidistoria,filosofiaeletteratura»,1/2:1307-1328.

ScaranoF.1996,Mussolini e la Repubblica di Weimar. Le relazioni diplomatiche tra Italia e Germania dal 1927 al 1933,Naples:Gianniniefigli.

SchiederW.1996,Das italienische Experiment: Der Faschismus als Vorbild in der Krise der Weimarer Republik,«HistorischeZeitschrift»,262(1):73-125.

—2005,Faschismus im politischen Transfer. Giuseppe Renzetti als faschistischer Propa-gandist und Geheimagent in Berlin 1922-1941inReichardtS.,NolzenA.(eds.)2005,Faschismus in Deutschland und Italien. Studien zu Transfer und Vergleich,Göttingen:Wallstein-Verlag,28-58(republishedinSchiederW.2008,Faschistische Diktaturen: Studien zu Deutschland und Italien,Göttingen:Wallstein-Verlag,223-249).


374

—2006,Un italiano a Berlino. Giuseppe Renzetti, propagandista fascista e agente segreto (1922-1941)inCorniG.,DipperC.(eds.)2006,Italiani in Germania tra Ottocento e Novecento. Spostamenti, rapporti, immagini, influenze,Bologna:IlMulino,595-637.

WichmannM.2013,Waldemar Pabst und die Gesellschaft zum Studium des Faschismus (1931-1934), Berlin: Edition Organon.

Woller H. 1993, Machtpolitisches Kalkül oder ideologische Affinitat? Zur Frage des Verhältnisses zwischen Mussolini und Hitler vor 1933, inBenzW.,BuchheimH.,MommsenH(eds.)1993,Der Nationalsozialismus. Studien zur Ideologie und Herr-schaft,FrankfurtamMain:Fischer-Taschenbuch-Verlag,42-63.

—2001,Roma, 28 ottobre 1922. L’Europa e la sfida dei fascismi,Bologna:IlMulino.

COMUNICARESTORIA

MUSEI, TRAUMI, MEMORIE DEL NOVECENTO

Musei, Traumi, Memorie del novecento. introduzione

ilaRia PoRCianiUniv. di Bologna, Dipartimento di Storia Culture Civiltà

* L’intero dossier “Musei, Traumi, Memorie del Novecento” è consultabile sull’e-dizione online di Storicamente.org nella sezione “Comu nicare Storia” 2017

Negli ultimi decenni si è sviluppato un vivace dibattito sul modo in cui imuseirappresentanolastoria,esulruoloattivocheassumononellepolitiche della memoria.Da tempo l’idea del museo come puro luogo espositivo è stata comple-tamentesuperata.Dapiùparti,econdiversiapprocci,un’ampialettera-tura agli inizi circoscritta in primo luogo ad addetti ai lavori ed esperti di“studimuseali”hacominciatoadallargarsiancheadaltricampidi-sciplinari. E molte voci hanno cominciato a mettere in evidenza in quantimodiilmuseoesercitiunruoloimportanteedattivoanchenellacostruzione di storia. Inprimoluogosonoapparseevidentidaunlatolepotenzialità,edall’al-tro la problematicità degli oggetti e dei reperti che nella loro materia-litàefisicitàdi“cose”sonoavoltecapacidisuggerireimpattiemotivifortiedistimolareunariflessioneintensaecoinvolgente.Questoim-pattopuòprenderespuntodallamemoriavissutadegliindividuistessiodelgruppoalqualeessi appartengono.Puòstimolare l’intelligenzaemozionalee innescareprocessidiriconoscimento,apprendimentoedianalisicomplessi,cheevidentementenecessitanodiopportuniinter-

Storicamente 13 - 2017Comunicare storia

378

venti per andare oltre il piano della pura emozione.Insecondoluogoipercorsimusealifattidispaziedioggetti,esemprepiùapertiversol’esterno,quasiasimboleggiarelafinediun’epocaincui il museo era una torre d’avorio per i dotti o una cattedrale nella qualeentrareconunatteggiamentodisoggezione,hannoaccresciutolalorocapacitàdicoinvolgereampigruppisociali,classidietà,visita-torididiversaprovenienzaanchenazionale.Imusei–chesipresentinocome luoghi singoli o che si inseriscano invece consapevolmente in retiesifaccianodunquemuseodiffusosulmodellotracciatodaFrediDrugmann–sipropongonodunquecomeluoghicapacidiavvicinarealla storia pubblici non necessariamente abituati a leggere testi storici. Dopogliannidellariflessionesuiluoghidellamemoria,suusieabusidellastoriaesulladifficoltàdirappresentare,affrontareesuperaretuttiqueipassatiche“nonpassano”,l’attenzionesiedatempoconcentratasulmuseocomeluogocomplessoedavveroplurale.Nonpercaso,lanuova disciplina della public history sta dedicando una crescente atten-zioneaimuseicome luogodi incontro.Nonpercaso, tante sono levoci,provenientidacampidisciplinaridiversi,chesistannopronun-ciandosuquestitemi:quelladeglistoricinonecheunadiesse.Iltemadeimuseidistoriaecomplesso,ericchissimodiimplicazioni.Qui abbiamo voluto concentrarci sul modo in cui alcuni di essi trattano temicontroversiedifficili,esannoattrarreecoinvolgereanchecolorochenonprenderebberoinmanounlibro,enonsiavvicinerebberomaialmondodellericerche,pureintanticasidisponibili.Inparticolare,cisiamoconcentratisualcunicasisignificatividimuseichehannoachefarecontraumiprofondi–leguerre,ladittatura,laschiavitù,ilraccontodellaconquista.Loabbiamofatto,consapevolmente,chiamandoarac-coltavocieapproccidisciplinaridiversi,nellaconsapevolezzachepro-prio la multivocalità e la complementarietà degli orientamenti possano offrireun’utilechiavediletturaaunfenomenocheeancoralungidall’a-ver esaurito il proprio ruolo e dall’essere stato indagato nella sua totalità.Valelapenadimetterequestimuseidellasofferenzaedellevittimein

ilAriA porCiANiMusei, Traumi, Memorie del Novecento. Introduzione

379

rapporto con un’onda lunga che si è sicuramente aperta con i musei dell’Olocausto.Èapartiredallavolontàdimettereinmostraquellocheera inizialmente apparsocome l’indicibile, che incontestidiversi si eaperta la strada una nuova narrativa. Anche in molti musei nazionali recentiilpuntodivistadellevittimehapreso–inqualchemodoconorgoglio–ilpostodelraccontodeivincitori.Sonostatiicampidicon-centramentoedisterminio,alcunideiqualiapertialpubblicoimmedia-tamente dopo la guerra e poi il modello di Yad Vashem (1953) ad aprire questanuovastrada.Oggi,persinoneinuovimuseicinesicomequelliriorganizzati per l’anniversario della vittoria nella seconda guerra mon-dialeocomequellodedicatoallevittimedelmassacrodiNanchino,sieaffermatoundiscorsodiquestotipo,ribaltandoparadigmicheparevanoconsolidati.Nonpaiastranocitarecasitantolontanidaquelliquirichia-mati:diqualsiasimuseocisivogliaoggioccupareedifficilenontenerconto–almenosullosfondo–diunquadroglobalesianelleformedellamusealizzazionechedellanarrativa,nonconsiderareicontattieconti-nui richiami di esempi anche apparentemente tra di loro assai lontani. Nellanostraetàglobale,insomma,ancheilfenomenodeimuseidisto-ria edeimuseidei trauminonpuòessere letto senonall’internodiunambitoglobale,diprestiti,diibridazioni,discambiediriflessioniche da un lato coinvolgono il pubblico e la società civile di un singolo paese,etalvoltaspecificigruppiall’internodiessa,madall’altrofannopartediunakoinecomunechesarebbeimpossibileignorare,echesieimpostaconforzaconilfiniredellaguerrafredda.Isaggicheseguonoparlanodasoli.Essimettonoinluceaspettispecificidimuseiafricani,mesoesudamericani,europei:museirecentiincuista-toesocietàcivilehannogiocatoruolidiversi,ediversamenteintrecciati.Soprattutto,suggerisconol’esigenzadiandarecoraggiosamenteversoilsuperamentocompletodeglisteccatidisciplinari,peraprire inveceunutiledialogotraarchitetti,antropologi,semiologi,storicidell’arteesto-ricitoutcourtdell’etàcontemporaneaenon,disolitoidentificaticonspecificiambitidisciplinari,econspaziancorapiùdefiniti.

Storicamente 13 - 2017Comunicare storia

380

Isaggicheseguonoaiutanoinveceaporsidomandenuove,comequel-la sull’uso dell’arte (e della bellezza) per raccontare traumi e per intro-durreriflessionidelicate,rispettoseeprofondesurealtàdoloroseesutraumiancoratroppovicini.Suggerisconocosìdiragionareanchesullaindividualitàdelle“cose”,deglioggetti,delleimmaginiedellaloroin-terpretazioneedicoglierne la specificità (eavolte lemanipolazioni)allorchéessesianostateosianopresentatecome“oggettitestimoni”dimassacri,privazionedellalibertà,torture,edeidisastridellaguerra.Èdunqueimportanteavviareanchesullepaginediquestarivistaunariflessionechesieapertatrastudiosidivaricampidisciplinari:storiciattiviinvarisettori,comelastoriacontemporaneaequelladeiBalcanidell’Europadell’Est,dell’Africa,dell’Asiaedell’AmericaLatina,socio-logi,museologi,architetti,storicidell’arteche–ciascunodalpropriopuntodivistaeconipropristrumenti–affrontanounarealtàcheap-paredifficiledaafferraredaunaunicaprospettiva.Piùcheillustrareconqualcheparolaciascunodeisaggipreferiscodunqueconcluderequestasinteticaintroduzionesuggerendoquantosiaimpor-tante incrociare sguardi diversi per cercare di andare più in profondità.Equantosiastatoesiaancoraimportanteilfattochealcunimuseioluoghidellamemoriasappianofarsicollettoridimemorie,dioggetti,distorieoralieinterviste,dimaterialipersonalioartisticichediquestieventicostruisconoveriepropriarchivi,talvoltasalvandoqualcosachealtrimenti andrebbe irrimediabilmente perduto e sparirebbe nell’oblio. Senzadimenticare,peraltro,chesitrattadioperazionicomplesseenonsempreprivediequivoci,echeanche imuseipossonoessere luoghidiorientamentononsemprepositivodiun“turismonero”epossonofermarsiasollecitarepassionieemozionisenzascoprirefinoinfondotutte le implicazioni delle politiche che li hanno generati.

ilAriA porCiANiMusei, Traumi, Memorie del Novecento. Introduzione

381

indice di “Musei, Traumi, Memorie del novecento”

Gli articoli sono consultabili sull’edizione online di Storicamente.org nella sezione “Comunicare Storia” 2017

IlariaPorciani,Musei, Traumi, Memorie del Novecento. IntroduzioneRobertoPinto,Alfredo Jaar e la guerra in Ruanda: l’immagine negata come strategia di rappresentazione della sofferenza e degli eccidiMichelaFusaschi,FrancescoPompeo,Memorie vs memoriali: conflitti di attestazione e territori del trauma nel Rwanda del post-genocidioKarinPallaver,Monumenti, musei e il genocidio degli Herero e dei Nama in Namibia: uno sguardo storiograficoElisaMagnani, I luoghi della tratta degli schiavi in Africa tra memoria, identità e turismoDavideDomenici,Dimenticare l’aquila calpestata. La Conquista e il pas-sato precoloniale nel paesaggio urbano di Città del MessicoFrancescoMazzucchelli,Semiotiche dei confini e narrative spaziali della memoria in Bosnia Erzegovina: monumenti, musei, cittàCristinaDemaria,PatriziaVioli,Arte e memoria. Il Parque de la Memoria y de los derechos humanos di Buenos AiresLucaBassoPeressut,Rappresentare le guerre al museoMatteoPasetti,Memoriali iberici post-dittatoriali: la Valle de los Caídos e il Museu do Aljube

FONTI EDOCUMENTI

Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli. il manoscritto di alessandro Molini (BUB, ms 2466)

FRanCesCo MoRaTTi

* La trascrizione e la riproduzione integrale del manoscritto sono consultabili online all’indirizzo http://storicamente.org/masaniello-sollevazione-tom-maso-aniello-manoscritto-molini-moratti

This is a diplomatic-interpretative edition of the manuscript “Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli”, written by Alessandro (Fra’ Sebastiano) Molini in the 17th Century. The introduction highlights the importance of the engravings inserted in the codex by the au-thor. Since the end of the 19th Century many historians had been interested in those images because they depict main characters and places of the Neapolitan uprisings. The paper also offers a manuscript’s bibliography and the list of catalogues owned by Biblioteca Universi-taria di Bologna.

IlmanoscrittoseicentescodiAlessandro(Fra’Sebastiano)Molini,Sol-levazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,1 è stato sovente citato dagli sto-rici per una peculiarità che lo contraddistingue rispetto ad altre testi-monianze coeve ai tumulti napoletani di metà Seicento: la presenza di numeroseimmagini,siaincisionicheacquarelli,nelcorpodelvolume.

1 Comesiapprendedallac.3v,AlessandroMolininacqueaBolognail7gennaio1620. La data di morte non è indicata nel testo e non è stata resa nota da studi succes-sivi. Sempre a detta dell’autore (c. 4 r) il manoscritto fu redatto trentatré anni dopo laconclusionedeifattinarrati;dunquesipuòfarrisalireiltesto,indicativamente,al1680.

Storicamente 13 - 2017Fonti e documenti

386

IlprimoaesaminareilmaterialeiconograficoetestualefuBartolomeoCapasso. Nel 1884 stava infatti intraprendendo studi in tema masa-niellianoa seguitodel ritrovamento,dapartedell’alloradirettoredelMuseodiSanMartinoFeliceNicolini,diunatestadilegnodepositataneimagazzinidelmuseoe che, erroneamente, si presupponeva rap-presentasseilvoltodelcapopopolo.Inquell’occasioneCapassovennea sapere che nella Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna era conservata lacronacadiMolini,eNicolininecommissionòunacopiadainserirenellacollezionenapoletana,oltreadisporrel’inclusionedelleriprodu-zionifotografichedistampeedipintipresentinell’originale.Nelsaggiodel 1897 Masaniello ed alcuni di sua famiglia effigiati nei quadri, nelle figure, e nelle stampe del tempo,Capassodescrisseilmanoscrittocome«affat-tosconosciutoainostriscrittori»,esifeceinviarel’originalepressolaBiblioteca Nazionale di Napoli per poter meglio giudicare il materiale visuale[Capasso1993,158-160].Lostudiosononesitòadefinire leimmaginidasubito«figureallusi-ve»degliavvenimentinarrati,esiconvinsedelloroessereun’aggiuntasuccessivaavvenutainconcomitanzaallatrascrizione,databileattornoal 1680, degli appunti annotati trentatré anni prima dal frate.Negòanzi che fossero state tutte raccolte e conservate al tempo dei tumulti e asserìcheparecchieeranoinrealtà«appropriateagliavvenimentieaipersonaggi»dicuiparlaval’autore,perquantononvifosserealecor-rispondenza con «ciò che l’epigrafe appostovi dal copista pretendevaindicare» [162-163].Capassoriportòdiversiesempiasuffragiodellasuatesi.Adesempio,tac-ciòdinonautenticitàilritrattodiPerroneelariproduzionedelleduegalere;sisoffermòavalutarelaveraprovenienzadelleultimetreincisio-ni;sisorpresedell’operadiassemblaggiodipiùstampecherendonolac. 24 r un collageprodottoconmezziquantomaiartigianali.ConsideròpoialcuniprimipianidiMasanielloedellafamiglia,rilevandoneancheinquestocasolanaturaspuria.Alcontrario,perquantoconcernel’ac-quarellodiTommasoAniello,imezzibustidellamoglie,dellasorellae

FrANCeSCo MorATTiSollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli. Il manoscritto di Alessandro Molini

387

delcognato,nonnemiseindubbiol’autenticitàegenuinità,confermatecomeerano,asuoparere,dalla«napoletanitàdellefisionomiedelleduedonne»edallescritte,coerenticonl’argomentotrattatoneltesto,vergatesul memoriale impugnato dal cognato [164-173].ConcludevadunqueilCapasso:

perquantopoiriguardalaparteartisticatuttequestefiguresono,comechiaramentesivede, lavoridozzinaliincisi inlegnodaartistidipocovalore,forsenonnapolitani,machelavoravanopelpopolodesiderosodiconoscere o di tener ricordo del suo Capitan Generale. Esse per la poca abilitàdegliesecutori,nondannocheun’approssimativaideadelperso-naggio che intendevano rappresentare. Sembra inoltre che miseramen-tefinitalarivoluzione,sparisserodalcommercio,operchédistruttepertimoredegliSpagnuoli,operchépococuratedallepersoneintelligentiedacoloro,cheperaltrononavevanomancatodiraccoglierenotizieedinarrareifattidicuieranostatitestimoni.Epoichéniunadiesse,sitrova inserita nei tanti Mss. e nelle non poche raccolte di fogli volanti e distamperiguardantiquell’avvenimentiedappartenentiaquell’epoca,dobbiamoesseregratialbuonfraterocchettino,cheforastiereecuriosonondisdegnòdi raccogliereeconservarequesti singolari ricordichealtrimenti sarebbero andati al certo perduti [173-174].

Qualcheannodopo,nel1900,VittorioSpinazzola ribatté agli argo-menti di Capasso con l’articolo Masaniello e la sua famiglia secondo un codice del Secolo XVII.Mossodallavolontàdi«completare»,«rettificare»e«contraddire»quantosostenutodalcollegache,asuodire,eragiuntoa«conclusioniacute,quantononesatte»,Spinazzolasidedicòadunacapziosa e «più oculata ricerca» sulle immagini del manoscritto. Con l’intenzionedidefinireprecisecategorieinbaseallequalisuddividerelestampe,sichiesequalefossestatoilsistemautilizzatodaMoliniperse-lezionareedinserireleraffigurazioni.Suoscopoeraquellodistabilirneilvaloreinmodocorrettoeunivoco[Spinazzola1900,1-2].NellasuaripartizioneSpinazzolamettevalesetteincisionidialtaqua-lità delle cc. 5 r,24r,75v-76 r,103r,139v-143 r,supianidifferentirispettoallerestantiventitré,difatturapiùdozzinaleesicuramentediminor pregio artistico.


388

Perquantoriguardalaprimadelleacquefortidellaprimacategoria,c.5r,SpinazzolainterpretòquantononerariuscitoadecifrareCapasso,ov-verolascrittaaggiuntaaposteriori«T.A.Perr.F.S.T.Pescha»,scioltada lui nella didascalia esplicativa «T(ommaso) A(niello) P(errone) F(ra’) S(ebastiano) T(ommaso) A(niello) Pescha» [6]. A entrambi gli storici sfuggìperòl’originedellarappresentazione:lascenadelpescatorechesvolgel’attivitàpressounarivaeunrifacimento,nonpedissequo,dellasezionedidestradiun’incisionedell’artistafranceseJacquesCallot,Le petit port,appartenenteallaseriedeiPaysages gravés pour Jean de Mèdicis [Russel1975,298:fig.245].Ancora,rispettoallastampaottenutadal«mosaicodialtrestampe»dic. 24 r,SpinazzolaobiettòaCapassodinonavernotatocome«laparteinferioredel latodrittononvimanchi […]perconsunzioneoaltroaccidente,ma[…]fuproprioritagliatacosìcomeoggisivede,seguen-doneildisegno»[Spinazzola1900,6].Ledueseguenti,La deroute des Espaignols dans la ville de Naples a l’ar-rivee de M. le Duc De Guise, cc.75v-76 r, e il l’effigediCarlodellaGatta unita allamappa dell’assedio diOrbetello, c. 103 r, furono daentrambigli studiosiapprezzateper la lorofinezza,manonvenneroulteriormenteindagate.Sinotòcomefosserostateinseritesenzasubiremutamenti [8].Sono poi interessanti le correzioni apportate da Spinazzola al saggio di Capassoriguardoleultimetreacqueforticheoccupanolecc.139v-143 r.Riconobbegliautoridelle«trebelleincisionifiorentine»cherappre-sentano altrettanti scenari del tutto avulsi dalla Campania. Le prime due eranostatecompostedaOrazioScarabelli,mentrelaterzariportavain-vecelafirmadiStefanodellaBella.SpinazzolaebbequindiilmeritodiavermiglioratogliappuntidelCapasso,perilquale«laprima,lavorodiuntalFilippoSucchiellodaSiena,rappresentaunarsenale,forsequellodiVenezia […].La seconda,firmatadaOrazioScarabellifiorentino,rappresenta un torneo assai probabilmente organizzato a Firenze» [8]. Se,però,secondoSpinazzolaCapassononsieraaccortocheentrambe


389

leincisionieranooperadellostessoautore,eglistessononsireseasuavolta conto che nella prima non si era voluto rappresentare l’arsenale di Livorno,masierariprodottalaNaumachiaallestitaaPalazzoPittinel1589 in occasione del matrimonio tra Ferdinando I e Cristina di Lorena [GarberoZorzi2007,116-117].Nella stessa occasione si era celebrato anche il Torneo riproposto nell’immagineseguente,dovel’ambientazionefiorentinaetestimonia-ta dalla facciata della Chiesa di Santa Croce sullo sfondo.2Livornese,comedimostralastatuadeiQuattroMoripostanell’angoloasinistra,einveceloscenariodellastampadiDellaBella.Spinazzola,ancheinquestaoccasione,avvertìilettoridell’errorediCapasso,cheaveva parlato di una «nave veneziana» e non si era accorto dello stemma mediceo posto sui legni. Il titolo esatto è Uomini in piedi presso la riva di una galera,esicuramentenonrappresenta,comevorrebbefarcredereMolini nella sua prosa, il vascello francese affondato presso l’Isola diProcida nel 1648.3Delle altre ventitré immagini ripartite in gruppi Spinazzola disse che «originariamente eran tutte stampe colorate rappresentanti persone mol-toinvista,comeorasidirebbe,ocostumi».Capìchealcunediesseeranorimasteintatte,mentrelealtreeranostateoggettodiadattamenticom-piutidall’autoredelmanoscritto.Definìaddirittura«diabolico»illavoroeseguito da Molini per modellare le sembianze di personaggi e cavalli secondo le sue esigenze. Quello che «mago Molini» aveva intrapreso era statounassiduosusseguirsidiritocchiemascheramentialfinediotte-nereuna«riccaiconografia»partendodaunrepertorioinizialedipochestampe.Una«industrefantasia»avevaportatoquindiilfrate,semprese-

2 TramiteilsitodelMuseumofWesternArtdiTokioepossibileosservarelerap-presentazioni della Naumachia e del Torneo. Sebbene non si possa riportare il link preciso,laricercaefattibilealseguenteindirizzo:http://collection.nmwa.go.jp/arti-zewebeng/search_3_artistart.php.Sceglierelalettera‘S’allavoce«Browse by artist» e selezionare«SCARABELLI,Orazio»dall’elenco.3 MoliniA.sec.XVII,142r.


390

condoSpinazzola,ainventarestorieperinserireleimmaginiposseduteegiustificarle.«Egli,comenelsuoracconto,noncidàchel’impressionesua»e«nonebbeunsoloritrattoautenticoecontemporaneo»,maavevaacquistato le incisioni inunperiodo successivo agli eventi suqualchepiazzanonnecessariamentenapoletana[Spinazzola1900,9-19].SpinazzolariesaminòancheleraffigurazionidiPerrone,dellamoglie,della sorella e del cognato di Masaniello riconosciute come «genuine» da Capasso. Dopo averne messo in luce rimaneggiamenti e contraddi-zioni,concluseilsuosaggioconunragionamentointuitivo:

la verità è che se stampe di tal genere fossero state fatte dei personaggi diquellarivoluzioneessesarebberocertamentevenuteinpossessodelnostrofrate‘cercatore’,esesifosserostampateneavremmofraleado-peratedaluialcune,almenoalcunedellepersonepiùimportantidiessa:diMasaniello,disuofratello,didonGiulioGenoinoecosìvia.Invece,per Masaniello e Don Giulio egli fu costretto al supremo sforzo di far degl’interiacquarelli,pelcognatoeperglialtri,adusarestampediper-sonaggideltempoe,assaiprobabilmente,di‘costumi’[25-26].

I saggi di Capasso e Spinazzola rimasero per lungo tempo gli unici stu-di sul diario di Molini. Solocircaunsecolodopo,nel1994,l’editoreElioDeRosaattiròl’at-tenzionesull’importanzadelmanoscritto,inserendounagenerosase-lezione di immagini all’interno del secondo numero della collana Pro-tagonisti nella storia di Napoli. Grandi napoletani,curatodaAurelioMusiededicato,giustappunto,aMasaniello.Lestampefuronopostequiaillustrareisaggideidiversistudiosichecontribuironoalvolume,perquantonessunofacesseesplicitoriferimentoalmanoscrittobolognesené alla copia partenopea. Stessacosaaccadde,sesieccettuaunabreveesposizioneintroduttivaela trascrizione della c. 3 r,neidueprestigiosivolumipubblicatinel1998Masaniello nella drammaturgia europea e nella iconografia del suo secolo [DeSimone1998],eMasaniello[D’Esposito1998].Ancheinquesticasil’attenzionefudedicataallaparteiconografica,tralasciandopressochédel tutto il vero e proprio racconto.


391

Negliultimiannisisonointensificatiiriferimentialleillustrazionidelmanoscritto Molini.Nel 2009 il codice è stato di nuovo ricordato per i suoi «muchisimos di-bujos iluminados a la acarela»daMariaTeresaCacho[Cacho2009,324]. Nel 2011 Alain Hugon ha arricchito il libro Naples insurgé 1647-1648. De l’évenement à la mémoireconalcuneriproduzionidelleincisioni,perlequaliilmanoscrittoedefinito«superbe …illustré»[Hugon2011,281.Hugon2014,352].L’ultimapubblicazionecherichiamaalcunedellefigurecontenutenel-lepaginediMolinierecentissima,del2016.SitrattadelsaggiodiJoanaFragaeJoan-LuísPalosTrois révoltes en images: la Catalogne, le Portu-gal et Naples dans les années 1640 contenuto nel volume miscellaneo Soulèvaments, révoltes, révolutions dans l’Empire des Hasbourg d’Espagne XVIe-XVIIe Siècle [Fraga,Palos2016].

Adifferenzadialcuneimmagini,iltestodeldiariodiMolinieinvecepressoché sconosciuto. Le uniche eccezioni sono costituite da Bartolo-meoCapasso,cheavevasottolineatolasingolaritàdellaprosadell’au-tore «poco culto ma curioso all’eccesso» e delle sue «confuse e sgram-maticate parole», nonché la persistenza di unamarcata «subiettività»nel racconto [Capasso1993,160-161],emoltopiù recentementedaSilvanaD’Alessio,chehariportatointeribranidellacronacanellamo-nografiaMasaniello. La sua vita e il mito in Europa [D’Alessio 2007]. I riferimentialtestodiMolinisonoquiperaltrotratti,comesidesumedallabibliografia,dalmanoscrittonapoletano.

Ilvalorediquestafonteparedunqueinsitonellasuanaturadi‘compo-sitoorganizzato’,sommafinaledimaterialieterogenei:unasezioneinprosa4 e una in ottava rima5 che riassume e commenta gli avvenimenti

4 MoliniA.Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello,cc.3v-142 r.5 Ivi,cc.143r-176 r.


392

deinovemesidiconflitto;unacopiosaraccoltadibandi,avvisieletterestampateacquistatiin locoeapropriespesedaSebastianoMolini;non-ché,soprattutto,unampioassortimentoiconograficocheancoraoggistimola l’immaginario dei contemporanei.

Bibliografia del manoscritto

Abbreviazioni: BNN:BibliotecaNazionalediNapoli;

BUB:BibliotecaUniversitariadiBologna;

SNSP: Società Napoletana di Storia Patria.

Copie del manoscritto Molini A., sollevazione di Tommaso aniello di napoli, BUB, ms. 2466 (sec. XVII)

MoliniA.,Memorie della rivoluzione del 1647, SNSP,ms.XXVIC1,sec.XIX.Copiadelsec.XIXdelmanoscrittoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.IlmanoscrittonapoletanoecitatoinDiFrancoS.2007,Le rivolte del Regno di Napoli del 1647-1648 nei manoscritti napoletani, («ArchivioStoricoper leProvinceNapoletane»,CXXV),Napoli:SNSP,80-81,nr. 88.LostessomanoscrittoecitatoinD’AlessioS.2007,Masaniello: la sua vita e il mito in Europa,Roma:SalernoEditrice,62,76,88,173,317,322,325,330,343,344,374.Iltitolofornitonelleindicazionibiblio-graficheeperòdifferente:Racconto preceduto da Nova osservatione sopra il prodigioso mostro apparso in Polonia interpretato sopra li successi di Tom-maso Aniello d’Amalfi, occorsi nella città di Napoli l’anno 1647, lungo 35 piedi: largo 4 cubiti e mezzo: alto 10 cubiti e mezzo: con scaglie al collo e


393

alla coda: tutto il resto è rosso di color carne, e con faccia humana.CapassoB,appuntisullarivoltadimanodelCapasso(cartescioltenonnumerate),SNSP,ms.Capasso08.09,(I-III).Copia parziale del manoscritto Molini A., Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Manoscrittocitato inDiFrancoS.2007,Le rivolte del Regno di Na-poli del 1647-1648 nei manoscritti napoletani,(«ArchivioStoricoperleProvinceNapoletane»,CXXV),Napoli:SocietàNapoletanadiStoriaPatria,406,nr.88;423,nr.107.

Fonti manoscritte che fanno riferimento a Molini A., solleva-zione di Tommaso aniello di napoli, BUB, ms. 2466, o a copie dello stesso

Relatione del tumulto di Napoli principiato li 7 luglio 1647 essendone stato l’inventore Tomaso Aniello di Amalfi pescivendolo, copiato da me Gio. Bat-tista Denti in gran parte da quello scriveva persona, quale stava con Mons. Nuntio in Napoli a Mons. Governatore nostro di Forlì, e il medesimo govern., dava a me soprascritto Gio. Battista,BNN,ms.XVIII.130.Presente una riproduzione della Nova osservazione sopra il prodigioso mostro aparso in Polonia.ManoscrittoadespotocitatoinDiFrancoS.2007,Le rivolte del Regno di Napoli del 1647-1648 nei manoscritti napoletani, («Archivio StoricoperleProvinceNapoletane»,CXXV),Napoli:SocietàNapoletanadiStoriaPatria,397,nr.73;406,nr.88.Di Franco riporta solamente la prima parte del titolo: Relatione del tu-multo di Napoli principiato li 7 luglio 1647 essendone stato l’inventore To-maso Aniello di Amalfi pescivendolo.

GualandiM.1841,BibliotecadellaDeputazionedistoriapatriaperlaToscana,Lettereall’ASI,5,2017.LetteraaGiovanPietroViesseux,Bologna,5maggio1841,contenenteuna descrizione delmanoscrittoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso


394

Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Scheda tecnica del documento disponibile al link: http://manus.iccu.sbn.it//opac_SchedaScheda.php?ID=0000116121.

Studi che fanno riferimento al manoscritto Molini A., sollevazio-ne di Tommaso aniello di napoli, BUB, ms. 2466, o alle copie

CapassoB.1897,Masaniello ed alcuni di sua famiglia effigiati nei quadri, nelle figure, e nelle stampe del tempo,Napoli:Giannini.Ilsaggioeconfluitonellaraccoltadel1919:–1919,La casa e la famiglia di Masaniello. Ricordi della storia e della vita napoletana nel sec. XVII,Napoli:Giannini.La pubblicazione del 1919 è stata riproposta nelle seguenti edizioni:–1993,Masaniello. La sua vita e la sua rivoluzione,TorreL.(ed.),Na-poli:LucaTorre,136,158-174,181.–2013,La casa e la famiglia di Masaniello,143-156;191-197,figg.15-21, <http://www.liberliber.it/mediateca/libri/c/capasso/la_casa_e_la_famiglia_di_masaniello/pdf/capasso_la_casa_e_la_famiglia_di_masa-niello.pdf>. Ultima consultazione il 28/11/2016.Citati i manoscritti:MoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466,indicato col titolo La vera solevatione di Masaniello.Descrizionedelmanoscrittoeriproduzionifotografichedellecc.5v,15 v,22r,13v,21r,22v,23v;–Memorie della rivoluzione del 1647, SNSP,ms.XXVIC1,sec.XIX.

SpinazzolaV.1900,Masaniello e la sua famiglia in un codice del secolo XVII,«Flegrea.Rivistadilettere,scienzeedarti»,5dicembre,3-26.Citati i manoscritti:MoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Presentiancheriproduzionifotografichedellecc.5r,24r,136v,137r,26 r,126r,32v,13v,15v,126v,125v,22r,10v,23v,21r;— Memorie della rivoluzione del 1647, SNSP,ms.XXVIC1,sec.XIX.


395

FulcoG.1994,La fortuna letteraria, inMusiA. (ed.)1994,Masaniel-lo,Napoli:EliodeRosaEditore,(«ProtagonistinellastoriadiNapoli.GrandiNapoletani»,II),42-47:43,figg.81-84.RiproduzionifotografichetrattedaMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466,cc.22r,126r,15v,77r.

LeoneN.1994,La vita quotidiana nella città eccessiva,inivi,26-31:28,fig.56.RiproduzionifotografichetrattedaMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466,cc.75v-76 r.

MusiA.1994,Masaniello nella storia e nel mito,inivi,2-25:4-5,figg.6-10;9-11,figg.17-21;14-15,figg.26-30.RiproduzionifotografichetrattedaMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466,cc.5r,22v,21r,9v,23v;(c.nonpresentenelmanoscritto:9,fig.17),49r,3r;5v,1v,26r,44r,32v.

TraviS.1994,Masaniello tra oblio e rievocazione in alcune cerimonie na-poletane,inivi,48-51:49,fig.99.RiproduzionefotograficatrattadaMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466,c.8v.

BacchiM.C.,MianiL.1998,Vicende del patrimonio librario bolognese: manoscritti e incunaboli della Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna,inEmi-lianiA.,PepeL.,DradiMaraldiB.(eds.)1998,Pio VI Braschi e Pio VII Chiaramonti. Due pontefici cesenati nel bicentenario della Campagna d’Italia. Atti del convegno internazionale, maggio 1997, Bologna:Clueb,421,nr.271.CitatoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466,poichémenzionatoedescrittoin:Catalogo dei codici della biblio-teca di S. Salvatore, colla ricevuta dei commissari francesi,BUB,ms.4122,


396

sec.XVIII,c.31r,nr.271.De Simone R. et al.(eds.)1998,Masaniello nella drammaturgia europea e nella iconografia del suo secolo,Napoli:GaetanoMacchiaroliEditore,2,7,figg.4-5;55-56,figg.41-43;57,fig.45;64,fig.55;68,fig.63;69,fig.66;76-77,fig.76;78,fig.78;81,figg.83-84;83,figg.86-87;84,fig.88;101,fig.104;321.CitatoedescrittoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Riproduzionifotografichedellecc.1v,26r;21r,13v,22v;23v;5v;15 v;22r;3r;10v;7v,8v;6v,32v;9v;24r.

D’EspositoF.(ed.)1998,Masaniello, Roma:Editalia,22,44,59,60,73,76,80,96,101,113,114,120,121,141,143,145.RiproduzionifotografichetrattedaMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466,cc.22r (rappresentata sulla custodia rigidaeripetutaallepag.60,101,114,143,145),125r,32v,26r,9v,7 v;5v, 10 v;15v;21r,22v;44r,126r,77r.

AntoninoB.(ed.)2004, Tesori della Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna. Co-dici, libri rari e altre meraviglie,Bologna:BononiaUniversityPress,168-169.CitatoedescrittoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Riproduzionefotograficadellac.5v.

D’AlessioS.2007,Masaniello: la sua vita e il mito in Europa,Roma:Sa-lernoEditrice,317.CitatoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Ivi,62,76,88,173,317,322,325,330,343,344,374,ealtresìcitatoMolini A., Memorie della rivoluzione del 1647, SNSP,ms.XXVIC1,indicato da D’Alessio col titolo Racconto preceduto da Nova osservatione sopra il prodigioso mostro apparso in Polonia interpretato sopra li successi di


397

Tommaso Aniello d’Amalfi, occorsi nella città di Napoli l’anno 1647, lungo 35 piedi: largo 4 cubiti e mezzo: alto 10 cubiti e mezzo: con scaglie al collo e alla coda: tutto il resto è rosso di color carne, e con faccia humana.

DiFranco S. 2007,Le rivolte del Regno di Napoli del 1647-1648 nei manoscritti napoletani,(«ArchivioStoricoperleProvinceNapoletane»,CXXV),Napoli: SocietàNapoletana di Storia Patria, 397, 405-406,423.Citati e descritti i manoscritti:Relatione del tumulto di Napoli principiato li 7 luglio 1647 essendone stato l’inventore Tomaso Aniello di Amalfi pescivendolo, copiato da me Gio. Bat-tista Denti in gran parte da quello scriveva persona, quale stava con Mons. Nuntio in Napoli a Mons. Governatore nostro di Forlì, e il medesimo govern., dava a me soprascritto Gio. Battista,BNN,ms.XVIII.130;MoliniA.,Memorie della rivoluzione del 1647, SNSP,ms.XXVIC1;CapassoB,appuntisullarivoltadimanodelCapasso(cartescioltenonnumerate),SNSP,ms.Capasso08.09,(I-III).

CachoM.T.2009,Manuscritos hispánicos de las Bibliotecas de Parma y Bolonia: Biblioteca Palatina de Parma, Biblioteca Universitaria de Bolonia y Biblioteca del Archiginnasio de Bolonia,Kassel:Reichenberg,324-325.CitatoedescrittoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.

HugonA.2011,Naples insurgé 1647-1648. De l’évenement à la mémoire,Rennes:PressesUniversitairesdeRennes, IX,figg.X-XI;281,313-316:314,fig.8.DescrizionedelmanoscrittoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Riproduzionifotografichedellecc.21r,13v;5v.

VillariR.2012,Un sogno di libertà. Napoli nel declino di un impero 1585-


398

1648,Milano:ArnoldoMondadoriEditore,626.IlmanoscrittocitatoesicuramenteMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Tuttaviaestato,presumibilmenteacausadiunrefuso,riportatoconlasegnatura «Biblioteca Universitaria diBologna,ms.R.G.2231,f.H».

HugonA.2014,La insurrección de Nápoles 1647-1648. La construcción del acontecimiento, Zaragoza: Prensas de laUniversitad de Zaragoza,352;353,figg.3-4;394,fig.11;395,396,397.DescrizionedelmanoscrittoMoliniA.,Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli,BUB,ms.2466.Riproduzionifotografichedellecc.21r,13v;5v.

FragaJ.,PalosJ.L.2016,Trois révoltes en images: la Catalogne, le Portugal et Naples dans les années 1640, inHugonA,MerleA.(eds.),Soulèva-ments, révoltes, révolutions dans l’Empire des Hasbourg d’Espagne XVIe-XVIIe Siècle,Madrid:CasadeVelásquez,129,133,138.6

Cataloghi della Biblioteca universitaria di Bologna

Abbreviazioni:

BUB: Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna.

Cataloghi manoscritti.

Index codicum manuscriptorum Bibliothecae SS. Salvatoris, BUB, ms.2321,

6 Forsepererrore,apag.129,n.26,estataindicatalastampadic.76r,La deroute des Espaignols,comeappartenenteac.76v.Lastessaeaccostata,apag.138,alle«estampes de bandits très populaires parmi la plèbe» benché i soggetti rappresentati siano di altro genere.


399

1762,c.245v,nr.51.Citato come La sollevazione di Napoli da Tommaso Aniello descritta da Fra Sebastiano Molini Bolognese de’ Can(oni)ci Reg(ola)ri di S. Salvatore allora dimorante in Napoli, con i proclami, editti, manifesti e originali stam-pati che uscivano in quel tempo, a che rendevano più pregevole questa storia, perché altrove non si troverebbero.

Catalogo dei codici del Convento di S. Salvatore, BUB,ms. 4122, sec.XVIII,c.31r,nr.271.Citato come Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli descritta da Fra Sebastiano Molini.

CarontiA., Catalogo dei codici provenienti da S. Salvatore,BUB,ms.4118,sec.XIX,c.3v,nr.488.

Elenco dei codici della canonica di S. Salvatore trasportati in Francia nel 1796 e riavuti nel 1815, restituiti ai canonici di S. Salvatore nel 1828,BUB,ms.4119/1,c.10r,nr.271.Citato come Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli descritta da Fra Sebastiano Molini.

Elenco dei codici della canonica di S. Salvatore trasportati in Francia nel 1796 e riavuti nel 1815, restituiti ai canonici di S. Salvatore nel 1828(appendice),BUB,ms.4119/2,c.4v,nr.271.Citato come Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli descritta da Fra Sebastiano Molini.

CarontiA.,Indice per materie a schede dei codici della Biblioteca di S. Sal-vatore in Bologna, compilato da Andrea Caronti,BUB,ms.4123,sec.XIX,c. 58 v. Citato come Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli.


400

— Catalogo a schede dei codici della biblioteca di S. Salvatore,BUB,ms.4124,sec.XIX,nr.2466.Citato come Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli descritta da fra Sebastiano Molini.

Cataloghi a stampa.

FratiL.1915,Indice dei codici italiani conservati nella R. Biblioteca Univer-sitaria di Bologna,V,Firenze:Olschki,(«Inventarideimanoscrittidellebiblioteched’Italia»,XXIII),99-100.Citato come Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli.

DeTataR.1994,Tavole di concordanza fra le antiche e le nuove segnature dei manoscritti della Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna,Bologna[dattilo-scritto],155.

MoscatelliP.(ed.)1996,Catalogo delle provenienze dei manoscritti,Bolo-gna:BUB,49-50:50.

MianiL.2004,Sebastiano Molini,inAntoninoB.(ed.)2004, Tesori della Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna. Codici, libri rari e altre meraviglie,Bo-logna:BononiaUniversityPress,168-169.Citato come Sollevazione di Tommaso Aniello di Napoli.

Meritaquidiesserericordatoche, inoccasionedellavisitadell’alloraPresidente della Repubblica Giorgio Napolitano alla Biblioteca Uni-versitaria,il16marzo2007,traicodiciminiatievolumiantichipresen-tatialCapodelloStatofusceltoanchequellocontenentelaSollevazio-ne,comesipuòleggeredalresocontodell’incontro:http://www.bub.unibo.it/it-it/bublife/maggio-2007/accade-in-biblioteca/tutti-i-libri-del-presidente.aspx?idC=61692&LN=it-IT&stampa=1.


401

Bibliografia

AntoninoB.(ed.)2004, Tesori della Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna. Codici, libri rari e altre meraviglie,Bologna:BononiaUniversityPress.

CachoM.T.2009,Manuscritos hispánicos de las Bibliotecas de Parma y Bolonia: Biblio-teca Palatina de Parma, Biblioteca Universitaria de Bolonia y Biblioteca del Archiginnasio de Bolonia,Kassel:Reichenberg.

CapassoB.1993,Masaniello. La sua vita e la sua rivoluzione,TorreL.(ed.),conscrittidi Russo L. et. al.,Napoli:LucaTorre.

D’AlessioS.2007,Masaniello: la sua vita e il mito in Europa,Roma:SalernoEditrice.

De Simone R. et al. (eds.)1998,Masaniello nella drammaturgia europea e nella iconografia del suo secolo,Napoli:GaetanoMacchiaroliEditore.

D’EspositoF.(ed.)1998,Masaniello, Roma: Editalia.

FragaJ.,PalosJ.L.2016,Trois révoltes en images: la Catalogne, le Portugal et Naples dans les années 1640,inHugonA,MerleA.(eds.),Soulèvaments, révoltes, révolutions dans l’Empire des Hasbourg d’Espagne XVIe-XVIIe Siècle,Madrid:CasadeVelásquez,119-138.

GarberoZorziE.2007,L’Argonautica, battaglia sull’Arno per le feste nuziali del 1608,inFagioloM.,CoccioliG.(eds.)2007,Le capitali della festa. Italia centrale e meridionale,Roma:DeLucaEditorid’Arte,116-127.

HugonA.2011,Naples insurgé 1647-1648. De l’évenement à la mémoire,Rennes:Pres-ses Universitaires de Rennes.

–2014,La insurrección de Nápoles 1647-1648. La construcción del acontecimiento,Zara-gosa:PrensasdelaUniversitaddeZaragoza.

RusselH.D.,BlanchardJ.,KrillJ.1975,Jacques Callot. Prints & related drawings,JeffreyBlanchard theater section, JohnKrill technical appendix,Washington:NationalGallery of Art.

SpinazzolaV.1900,Masaniello e la sua famiglia in un codice del secolo XVII,«Flegrea.Rivistadilettere,scienzeedarti»,5dicembre,3-26.


402

Ringraziamenti

I primi ringraziamenti sono rivolti alla professoressa Angela De Bene-dictis e al professor Gian Mario Giusto Anselmi per aver suggerito l’og-getto della tesi di laurea magistrale7dallaqualequestoprogettonasce,eavercontributo,connumerosiinterventi,aisuoisuccessivisviluppi.Esprimo inoltre la mia riconoscenza alla professoressa Sonia Cavicchio-li,chehasaputosuggerireutilispuntipervalutarelaparteiconograficadel manoscritto.Un ringraziamento particolare a tutti i bibliotecari e al personale della Biblioteca Universitaria di Bologna che tra il 2015 e il 2017 mi sono stati di grande aiuto sia durante il periodo di trascrizione del testo di Molini che durante la fase di completamento delle riproduzioni e alla autorizzazione alla pubblicazione.LadottoressaMariaGabriellaMansi,responsabiledellasegreteriadelladirezione dellaBibliotecaNazionale diNapoli, e la dottoressaPaolaMilone,responsabiledellaBibliotecadellaSocietàNapoletanadiStoriaPatria,hannooffertoutiliinformazioniriguardantiimanoscrittinapo-letani citati.Grazie, infine,anchealdottorVittorioCaporrellaeallaredazionedi«Storicamente» per l’aiuto fornito durante le fasi di lavorazione della pubblicazione.

7 Insegnamento“Storiae racconto storicodell’etàmoderna”,corsodi laureama-gistrale inItalianistica,CultureLetterarieEuropee,ScienzeLinguistiche.ScuoladiLettereeBeniCulturali,AlmaMaterStudiorum,UniversitàDiBologna.Latesiestata discussa in data 11/11/2016.

DIBATTITI

The article aims to present a review-discussion upon recent monographs that contributes to a new common ‘great narrative’ about Early Middle Ages and the transformation of the Roman world in the West and in the East. The main contribution comes from Chris Wickham, but I will take into account, among others, Jean-Pierre Devroey and John Haldon’s works. I will present an historical narrative focused on the forms of state funding and the relationships between state and social fabric, with a special regard for elites, shedding light on social and economic changes, meeting points and differencies among the political and territorial bodies of the early medieval Mediterranean.

ChrisWickham,L’eredità di Roma. Storia d’Europa dal 400 al 1000,Ro-ma-Bari:Laterza,2014,780pp.

Jean-Pierre Devroey, Puissants et misérables. Système social et monde paysan dans l’Europe des Francs (VIe-IXe siècles), Brussels: AcadémieroyaledeBelgique,2006,727pp.

JohnHaldon,The Empire That Would Not Die. The Paradox of Eastern Roman Survival, 640-740, Cambridge-London: Harvard UniversityPress,2016,432pp.

le società post-romane in occidente e oriente. storici a confronto per una nuova ‘grande narrazione’

Paolo ToMeiUniv. pisa, Dipartimento di Civiltà e Forme del Sapere

Storicamente 13 - 2017Dibattiti

406

La nuova ‘grande narrazione’ di Wickham

Formulareparadigmi,costruirestruttureesplicativeentrocuiosservareil passato è la palpabile tensione che attraversa molta della produzio-nediChrisWickham,notoriamenteprolifica.Losforzo,tutt’altrochesemplice,didareordineeformaaundiscorsosinteticocherifuggadaletture teleologiche e false immagini preconcette è al centro anche del volume L’eredità di Roma. Storia d’Europa dal 400 al 1000 d.C.,edizioneitalianapubblicatanel2014acinqueannididistanzadall’originaleThe Inheritance of Rome. A History of Europe from 400 to 1000. Dopo una ponderosaricercaditagliocomparativo,Framing the Early Middle Ages. Europe and the Mediterranean 400-800,dataallestampepocopiùdiundecenniofa,Wickhamproseguenelsuocamminodiprogressivastesu-radiunanuova‘grandenarrazione’dell’altomedioevo,sganciatadalletradizionistoriografichenazionalieidentitarie,conunrespiroamplis-simo,piùeuroasiaticochemediterraneo.I tempi erano maturi per una ripresa delle tante cornici giustapposte in Framing the Early Middle Ages–operachehacostituitounveroepro-priospartiacquestoriografico–,inseriteinunquadrotematicamenteecronologicamentepiùampio,chegiungessesinoall’anno1000,inalcu-nedelleregioniconsiderateeffettivomomentodirotturapiuttostochespartiacqueconvenzionale,echetenesseinsiemegliaspettieconomici,politici,culturali1.L’opera siconfigura, insomma,comeunaspeciedifratello“moltomaggiore”diEarly Medieval Italy. Central Power and Local Society 400-1000,uscitonellontano1981,dopoleprimericerchesullesocietà toscane e appenniniche altomedievali. Per Wickham la sintesi chevirasuuntagliomanualistico–aisuoistudentidell’UniversityofBirminghamilvolumee,infatti,dedicato–eunatappafondamentale,incuidareespressioneinmanierachiaraenonbanale,adarchitetturecomplesse pazientemente assemblate nel corso degli anni con il proce-

1 Sulforte impattostoriograficodiFraming the Early Middle Ages e il concetto di ‘grandenarrazione’cfr.Fiore2015.

pAolo ToMeiLe società post-romane in Occidente e Oriente. Storici a confronto per una nuova ‘grande narrazione’

407

deredeglistudi.L’impegnonelproporreriflessionientrounpercorsodiriletturastoricaacutoefruibilenone,d’altrocanto,cessatocon L’eredità di Roma. Da ultimo è stata pubblicata la sua ideale estensione: Medieval Europe,operaincuilostudiosoinglesehaadottatolastessaotticaglobaled’indagine per osservare tutto il millennio medievale.Conspecificoriguardoall’altomedioevo,quale,dunque,ilnocciolodella‘grandenarrazione’diWickham?Inunapprocciocheponel’ac-centosullalungadurata,cornice,però,nonstatica,entrocuisicollocanoletrasformazioni,eglirendeesplicitealcunetendenzedicambiamento,soffermandosisegnatamentesuunaprimaefondamentaletransizione.Con lo smembramento inOccidente dell’impero romano, si ebbe ilpassaggiodaunostatofondatosulletasseamoltistatibasatisullaterra,secondounprocessochechiama‘derivaversolaterra’(Shift to Land). Si tratta di un cambiamento sostanziale, poiché le imposte fondiariesostenevano i pilastri dell’impero romano: esercito, amministrazione,ordinamentogiudiziario,movimentodimerci attraverso ilMediter-raneo.Imodellielerisorseromanesifrazionarono:iniziòun’epocadicreatività e sperimentazione in cui tali frammenti restarono per lungo tempo attivi e costituirono una pesante eredità. Il solo importante por-tato barbarico fu il «legame tra impegno militare e politica assembleare» [Wickham2014,97].Assistiamoalloraallasemplificazioneeallamili-tarizzazionedellapolitica:una‘politicadellaterra’incentratasullecortiqualicentrodiredistribuzionediricchezzaepotere.Con il venir meno della spina dorsale che aveva sostenuto la macchina stataleromanainOccidente,l’asseRoma-Cartagine,l’economiasiregio-nalizzòeanch’essasubìunaradicalesemplificazione.InOrientelacrisisiverificò,invece,piùtardi,mafupiùacuta.Larapidaavanzataarabaelaconseguenteperditadell’Egitto,riservadigranoperCostantinopoli,mi-seroingrandedifficoltàl’impero,cheriuscìasopravviveresolomutandoaspetto,grazieaunadecisaspintaversocentralizzazioneemilitarizza-zione. Agli albori del secolo VIII da uno scenario dominato da un’unica grandepotenza,l’imperoromano,sierapassatiaunassettodinamicoe


408

policentricoincuiilcaliffatoarabodegliOmayyadierainespansione;l’imperoromanod’Orienteindifesa;l’Occidente,unmosaicoframmen-tatoincuispiccavanotretessere:laFranciamerovingia,laSpagnavisi-gota,l’Italialongobarda.Gliorganismipolitico-territorialisonoelencatisecondouna scaladi forzadecrescente, inversamenteproporzionale algradodi‘derivaversolaterra’:unsistematributariocapillareedefficientedi matrice romana sopravvisse soltanto nel mondo arabo.Sigiunseaunnuovoequilibrionel IXsecolo,con l’affermazioneditreprincipalipotenze: iFranchi,chesotto ladinastiacarolingia, fre-giatisidel titolo imperiale,miseroinattoun’originale«prassipoliticadiesplicitocontenutomoralizzatore»[Wickham2014,620]instrettacongiunzione con le gerarchie ecclesiastiche; l’impero romano d’O-rienteche,potendotornarea fareaffidamento suunefficace sistematributario,conobbeunastagionedirinascita;ilcaliffatodegliAbbasidi,cheavevaspostatodecisamenteversoest,aBaghdad,ilbaricentroeco-nomico,politicoeculturaledelcontinente.Gliimperifrancoebizan-tinoebberounimpattofortissimosuipiùdebolivicinisettentrionali,popolazionidimatriceceltica,germanica, sclavena, turca:nelle Isolebritanniche, inScandinavia enell’Europaorientaleprogressivamenteemersero,auntempoperimitazioneereazione,strutturepoliticheesociali più solide che si coagularono in entità politico-territoriali robu-steericonoscibilisoprattuttoacavalieredelsecoloXI.Frattanto l’equilibriogeopoliticoeraancoramutato.Delle tregrandipotenze,ilcaliffato–digranlungalapiùforte–persenelcorsodelsecoloXl’unitàpolitica.Inassenzadiunmareinternochefacilitasselecomunicazioni,ilcoordinamentodiunorganismopoliticocosìvastoeradifficile.Nonsiverificò,tuttavia,uncrollostrutturale.Siformaro-no,piuttosto,sueriproduzioniinpiccolo,discalaregionale:fralepiùriuscite l’Egitto fatimide e la Spagna omayyade. Pressoché in contem-poranea avvenne anche la frantumazione dell’impero franco. Gli esiti furono,però,quibendiversi:gradualmente,conunacronologiadiffe-rentenellevarieregioni(alpiùtardi,comeinItalia,nell’ultimoscorcio


409

delsecoloXI)mutaronoiparametrielestrutturedibasedelpotere.PerWickhamandòalloraesaurendosiinOccidentel’ereditàdiRoma:una cultura della sfera pubblica quale fondamentale arenadell’agonepolitico. Negli stati post-romani «il mondo del potere regio era anche il mondo pubblico della collettività (dei maschi liberi) nel suo comples-so»[Wickham2014,628].Laconcezioneromanadipublicum era stata rafforzata,comedetto,dallaprassipoliticaassembleare, importatadalSettentrione germanico. Su tale aspetto lo stesso Wickham è tornato da ultimo con un denso articolo2.ConilpassaggioalsecoloXIIormaidovunque inOccidente ilmondopubblico, in cui regnavanovaloricomemunificenzaeostentazione,ospitalitàeconvivialità,eincuilagiustizia e l’ordine erano amministrati e rappresentati pubblicamente in assemblea,eratramontato3:«ladialetticatrasferapubblicae(quellochechiamiamo)interesseprivatoerascomparsa»[Wickham2014,630].Sitratta,abenvedere,diunassuntononscontato,checozza,inpartico-lare,conilraccontotradizionaledellamedievisticaitaliana,impegnataa rintracciare ed enfatizzare la presunta romanità dell’esperienza comu-nale4.Lacesurafutalmentenettadagiustificarel’utilizzodelleespres-sioni ‘rivoluzione feudale’, ‘mutamentosignorile’: linea interpretativarecentementeripresaesviluppatadamoltistorici;fraglialtri,CharlesWest [2013] e Alessio Fiore [2017]5.

2 Wickham2017.L’assembleaeutilizzatacomeutilespiaperlacomparazionedeisistemi politici altomedievali in Occidente. La pratica politica di base collettiva non sarebbeunelementoprecipuamentegermanico,macomuneancheadaltresocietànon romane di più semplice strutturazione.3 Sul tema della formalizzazione e costruzione rituale delle assemblee pubbliche(Inszenierung),riferimentoobbligatoeAlthoff1997.4 Cfr.Wickham2015.Icomunicittadinihannocostituitolaprincipale‘grandenar-razione’dellastoriografiaitaliana.5 Ildibattitosullamutation féodale,alungosopito,estatoriapertodaBisson2009.


410

in occidente: Shift to Land e Caging of the Peasantry

Questaparabolastorica,ricostruitaagrandilineesenzadarcontodellemolteplicisfumaturemesseinlucedaWickham,discendedaalcunias-siomi fondamentali. Tutto il discorso è fondato su leggi che lo studioso inglese espone chiaramente. Modello euristico di riferimento è ancora la société féodalediMarcBloche,inparticolare,l’‘impossibilitàdelsa-lario’: ilmancatofinanziamentoinmonetadellapoliticaedellostatonell’Occidente altomedievale [Bloch 1939-1940]. Tenuta ferma la rela-zionetransitivafraterra,ricchezzaepotere,esisterebbeunacorrispon-denzadiretta fra ricchezza aristocratica, sfruttamentodei contadini ecomplessitàeconomica.Unostatoeveramentefortesolosepuòbasarsisuunsistemaditassazionefondiaria.Se,comeinOccidente,avvienela‘derivaversolaterra’,sipuòparlaresoltantodiforzarelativa:isovranifuronodeboli in terminiassoluti– improponibilee ilconfrontoconl’Oriente–,mafortiinterminirelativi,apattochemantenesserounabase fondiaria consistente e molto maggiore rispetto agli altri soggetti politici.Gliaristocratici,piùpoveririspettoailoropredecessoridelpe-riodoromano,ebberocogentenecessitàdigravitareattornoallecortiper ricavarne terra, ricchezza, potere; conseguentemente i contadinifuronopiùautonomiegliscambipiùsemplicielimitati,giacchéprimadel 1300 ad alimentare l’espansione economica fu essenzialmente il po-tered’acquistoaristocratico.In un sistema in equilibrio basato sulla ‘politica della terra’ non c’e,dunque, strutturale opposizione,ma coinvolgimento fra re ed élites.L’assunto è stato dimostrato dallo studio di Matthew Innes sulle socie-tà altomedievali della media valle del Reno [Innes 2000]. Fra gruppi eminentieistituzionipolitichecentralizzatesussiste,infatti,unasomi-glianza strutturale: «in termini economici i governanti agiscono innan-zituttocomegrandiproprietari»[Carocci,Collavini,2012,14].Standoall’assioma,piùterrahailsovrano,piùpoterediattrazionegode,mapiùneconcede,menohadadarne. Ilgiocoe,pertanto,apotenzia-le somma-zero e ha un discreto tasso di rischio: se il potere centrale


411

nonhalaforzasufficienteperrecuperareo,comunque,rinegoziareleconcessionifondiarie,elaforbiceinterminidipossessofondiarioconl’aristocrazia si fa troppo sottile, l’intero sistemapuò crollare, poichéessaedivenutasufficientementericcaepotentesubaselocaledapotereconvenientemente rinunciare al patronato regio.Pertanto,nei secolialtomedievali, alfinedimantenereun «equilibrio fra spesae risorse»[Carocci,Collavini,2012,22],laprimarestòbassaeconservòunele-vatogradodielasticità.D’altrocanto,ilcapitalematerialeesimbolicoa disposizione dei sovrani non costituiva un insieme finito e statico[Fiore2006].Lerisorsemesseincircolo,anzitutto laterra,potevanoesserealbisognoaccresciute,puntandosiasullaquantità,siasullaqua-lità:accumulandonecioedinuove,medianteconquistaoconfisca,omigliorando la base fondiaria preesistente.Perattuareun’efficace‘politicadellaterra’era,dunque,necessariononsovraccaricare degli ingranaggi che potevano facilmente incepparsi: per costituire un autorevole e indispensabile centro erogatore di potere eprestigio,l’autoritàpoliticadovevaesseresempreingradodioffrirerisorse sotto la veste di favori (beneficia) che ricompensavano i servizi resi alla res publica.Atalfine,mantenerelacapacitàdirevocareeredi-stribuire concessioni di terra e cariche (honores) si rivelava un cruciale puntodi forza.CiòavvenneadesempioinToscana,regionedoveilmondo pubblico e le sue regole conobbero un’eccezionale sopravvi-venzafinoall’ultimoscorciodelsecoloXI.Fortunatamenteperisovra-nioccidentali,dopoilcrollodell’imperoromano,leélitespartironodaunabaseassaiesigua.Sidà,però,larilevanteeccezionedellaFrancia,doveilcollasso,giàavvenutoconilpassaggioalsecoloXI,fu,infatti,più precoce che altrove.L’applicazione di questi meccanismi esplicativi deve, tuttavia, tenerconto della loro solo apparente semplicità. Lo studio di una società,preludioomenoaunsuccessivotentativodicomparazione,nonpuòesimersi dall’interrogarsi sul suo grado di polarizzazione e distribuzione della ricchezza. Tale fattore ha un grande peso. La domanda aristocra-


412

ticapuòesserecomplessivamentealtasiainpresenzadiunelevatonu-merodimedipossessori(comeinToscana),siadiunristrettonumerodi grandi ricchi (come in Francia). Stando alle teorie di Wickham si danno allora due situazioni diversissime: nel primo caso il divario in ricchezzaepotere fracoronae tessutoaristocraticoepiùampio;piùlarghi saranno conseguentemente i margini di manovra dei governanti nelmettereinattola‘politicadellaterra’.Nelsecondocasomaggioree,invece,laforzadicontrattazionepoliticadeigruppieminenti6.Fra i termini della triade diWickham (ricchezza aristocratica, sfrut-tamentodeicontadini,complessitàeconomica)nonpersiste,poi,unarelazionecausale;piuttosto,un’interdipendenza.Alvariarediunodeitrefattori,mutanoancheglialtri.Leleggiespostedallostudiosoinglesenon pretendono di descrivere la realtà e spiegare semplicisticamente tutto,ancorpiùindividuandomotivazionimono-causali.Devonoes-sere intese come idealtipi weberiani: astrazioni utili per comprendere la variabilità delle situazioni regionali e operare delle comparazioni7. Così,peresempio,inOccidenteWickhamricostruiscedalsecoloIXi fenomeni scalari di arricchimento dell’aristocrazia, ‘incasellamentodeicontadini’,crescitaeconomica.Rimarcalacompresenzadiun’altravariabileinazione,unaprogressivaespansionedemografica,maresta,tuttavia,cautosullepossibilicauseremotediquestointrecciatocom-plesso di trasformazioni socio-economiche: suoi obiettivi sono indivi-duareelementidicontinuitàediscontinuità,similitudineedifferenza,eprovare a seguire su larga scala dei processi di trasformazione.Sulleradicidellacrescitaeconomicaeuropea,checonobbepienafio-rituraneisecolicentralidelmedioevo,ildibattitostoriograficoestatonell’ultimo decennio molto acceso. Dopo l’uscita di Framing the Early

6 LavariabileestatagiàrimarcatadaPetralia2015,14.Suimeccanismidifunziona-mentodellacornicepubblicatoscana,lamarcadiTuscia,elecaratteristichedelsuotessuto aristocratico mi permetto di rimandare a Tomei 2017.7 Sullanecessitàdiconsiderareanche lasociété féodale un idealtipo weberiano cfr. Wickham2000,34-37.


413

Middle Ages, questo e stato sicuramente il nodo più contestato dellaricostruzione. Solo pochi anni prima Michael McCormick aveva pro-postoun’altrariletturacomplessivadelprocesso,distampodecisamentepiùpirenniano,Origins of the European Economy. Communications and Commerce, A.D. 300-900, concentrandosi su fattori esogeni ai diver-si tasselli in cui si era frammentato l’Occidente post-romano: il ruolo degli emporia e dei commerci marittimi su lunga distanza. Non mi sof-fermosullaquestione,recentementesintetizzataediscussadaGiuseppePetralia [Petralia 2015]. Ricordo soltanto come le divergenze fra i mo-delli,abenvedere,nonsianoassolutamenteinconciliabili.Comune è il punto di partenza dei due storici: entrambi condividono il “paradigmafiscalista”cheindividuaunacesuraconilveniremenodelsistemaditassazioneromano.Forteel’influenzadellacosiddettaNew Fiscal History, corrente storiografica fiorita nella secondametà deglianniNovanta,ilcuirapportoconuna‘grandenarrazione’medievalecondivisa è stato da ultimo messo in luce da Sandro Carocci e Simo-ne Collavini8. Per larghi tratti perfettamente parallelo e non incidente e,inoltre,illoroprocederenellaricostruzione,chefaparlareperaltrofonti diverse9. McCormick non si occupa delle strutture agrarie e non siservedelleceramiche.Wickham,chetrascurascientementemoneteereliquie,neltrattarediscambiecomunicazioninelMediterraneo,purrivalutandone complessivamente il peso per il periodo altomedievale quale«efficacelevaeconomica»[Petralia2015,11],riprendenelsuopiùampioquadroidatieglispuntioffertidalprimo.Intendoquiindugiare,invece,unpocosuunpassaggiochiavedellapa-rabolastoricasopraripercorsa:ilprocessocheWickhamhadefinito,ri-elaborandoun’espressionediRobertFossier,‘incasellamentodeiconta-

8 Carocci,Collavini2012.BaseteoricadiriferimentosonolericerchediRichardBonneyeMarkOrmrod,cherielaboranomodelliecategoriediJosephSchumpeter.9 Peruntentativodiconciliazionefraiduemodellicfr.Wickham2008.Sulladiver-sa attitudine di McCormick e Wickham di fronte alla numismatica e all’archeologia cfr.Petralia2015,11.


414

dini’ (Caging of the Peasantry)10. Dall’età carolingia si assiste alla graduale esclusione della gran parte degli uomini liberi dal mondo dell’assemblea edell’esercito e dalla sfera pubblica, alimentata ancoradall’eredità diRoma.Ciòavvenneavantaggiodeipotentes: entro la cornice pubbli-ca–enonincontrapposizioneaessa–ildominioaristocraticosifecepiùforte,l’estrazionedirisorsetramiteillavorocontadinocrescente,iltessutosocialemaggiormentedifferenziatoecaratterizzatodaunamol-tiplicazione dei livelli di mediazione fra comunità dei liberi e autorità politica11.Testodiriferimentoperapprezzarequestedecisivemutazionidella struttura socio-economica è uno studio che non ha avuto gran-de eco nella medievistica italiana e meriterebbe maggiore attenzione: Puissants et misérables. Système social et monde paysan dans l’Europe des Francs (VIe-IXe siècles)diJean-PierreDevroey.Pubblicata nel 2006, l’anno successivo all’uscita diFraming the Early Middle Ages,l’operadellostudiosobelganoneunamonografiadisto-riaagrariaincentratasullavitacontadina,tematichechehannocono-sciutoinItaliaundecisocalodiinteressenell’ultimoquartodisecolo,bensìunaricercadipiùampiorespiro,attentaaldatoarcheologicoeprofondamenteinfluenzatadalleteoriesociologicheeantropologiche.Devroey ha voluto presentare un’immagine d’insieme della società ca-rolingia,scenarioincuiprendeforzal’‘incasellamentodeicontadini’,riflettendoprimasuisuoischemidiorganizzazioneerappresentazioneper poi analizzarne singolarmente le componenti12: un mondo ideal-

10 L’espressioneprendelemossedallanozionediencellulement. Cfr. Fossier 1987.11 Cfr.Cammarosano1998,97-134,151-163;Innes2000;Bougard,Buhrer-Thier-ry,LeJan2013.12 L’operacostituiscelarielaborazioneinformadimonografiaaccademicadiDe-vroey2003.Laricezionedeiduevoluminellastoriografiaitalianaestatamoltolimi-tata;noncosìinquellaanglosassone.NellasuarecensioneperEarly Medieval Europe,MariosCostambeysnehaconsigliatounaletturaparallelaaWickhameMcCormick,auspicandounconfrontodelletesidellostudiosobelga,incentratesulsettorenord-occidentaledelcontinenteeuropeo,conilcasoitaliano,einparticolareconlaTosca-na. Cfr. Costambeys 2011.


415

mente ordinato da un’autorità sovrana (dominus) e dai suoi agenti e ministri,cheesercitavapotestas perché vicaria di Cristo (Dominus),ri-cercava il consenso dei potentes,siattribuivailcompitodiproteggereipauperes,garantirepace,concordiaeiustitia,econdurretuttiisudditialla salvezza.Fuquestountornantedecisivoperlastoriamedievaleoccidentale,incuilaspesadelloStatocrebbeeaumentaronolerisorse–ancheumane–disponibili.Diciòsiavvantaggiarononotevolmenteigruppieminentidellasocietà,chegiocavanounruolocrucialeperl’esercitoel’ammini-strazione: la principale voce di spesa dei re alto e pieno medievali era «il trasferimentodirisorsealleélitespolitiche(laicheedecclesiastiche),pergarantirsene il sostegno. Per farlo si faceva ricorso alla terra (il bene più ambito),maancheacariche(perilaici),aimmunitàecessionididirittipubblici(perlechiese)»[Carocci,Collavini2012,22].Aseguitodelletrasformazionidietàcarolingia,sullungoterminefudifficileperigo-vernantimantenereunequilibriofraspesaerisorse:lamacchinastataledivenne più pesante e sempre meno elastica. Le capacità di estrazione disurplusdallaterraeranocrescenti,malimitatedall’ideologiapubblicadi concordia e iustitia su cui si fondava il consenso: non riuscivano ad adattarsiconefficaciaesistematicitàaimutatilivellidiproduttività.Ildivario in ricchezza fra l’autorità legittima centralizzata e le élites ten-deva a ridursi e le concessioni sovrane a farsi stabili ed ereditarie. Per altroverso,complessivamenteladomanda,chenoneraalimentatadallostato,madaiconsumiaristocratici,aumentavaeiltessutosocialeassu-mevaunaspettopiùstratificato.Inuna‘grandenarrazione’dell’altomedioevooccidentalepostaentrounacornicepubblica e scanditadaiprocessidi ‘derivaverso la terra’(Shift to Land)e‘incasellamentodeicontadini’(Caging of the Peasant-ry),unaquestionecentraleresta,però,consapevolmentesullosfondo.PoichélasopravvivenzaelafortunadellostatoinOccidente–sideveanche al contributo di Wickham il ritorno a un utilizzo seppur cauto e


416

consapevole della terminologia statale e pubblica13–sisarebbegiocatasulle capacità del sovrano di costituire un ineludibile polo di attrazione qualedispensatoredicapitalesimbolico,maancorpiùmateriale,quantaecomefugestitanellediverserealtàlaterrafiscale,la“benzina”dellamacchinastataleinOccidente?E,perrestarealtitolodiunadellesintesidellostudiosoinglese,fuquestaun’ereditàdiRoma?Staadire,quan-do e come si formò la base fondiaria pubblicanei singoli organismipolitico-territorialichesuccesseroall’impero?Opinionecondivisaoggidamoltistoriciecheilfiscosarebbecaratte-rizzatodaunadinamicafluidaemagmaticadiconcessioni-confischeimpossibiledastudiareenonsufficientementedocumentata.L’assuntoetantorecisoquantoindimostrato.Pertanto,negliultimissimiannisieaccesointeresseinItaliaperquestotema,alungotrascuratoeppurecruciale:alcuni studiosi, inprimabattutaTizianaLazzari,VitoLoré,SimoneCollavini,sisonomossiconprofittoinquestadirezione14. Se analizzateconcura, le fonticonsentono, infatti,dicondurre su scalaridottaaffondi fruttuosie trovarerisposte,profittandoanchedeldia-logo con l’archeologia. La ricerca è ancora largamente da compiere. Il tentativoescrivere,inmolticasiex novo,unastoriadelfiscoindiverseregionidellaPenisola,interrogandosisullasuaconsistenzaedistribu-zioneesullesuemodalitàdigestione.Cosìfacendo,saràforsepossibi-lemettererealmenteallaprovauna‘grandenarrazione’condivisacheattribuisceallaterra,lares publicanellasuaaccezionepiùconcreta,unruolo tanto importante per la politica altomedievale in Occidente.

13 Wickham2009,56-62.Unapportodecisivoegiuntodalla riflessionesul temadella Staatlichkeit.Cfr.Airlie,Pohl,Reimitz2006;Goetz2007,219-272;Pohl,Weser2009.14 Lazzari2012;Lazzari2017a;Lazzari2017b;Loré2013;Loré2017a;Loré2017b;Collavinii.c.s;Collavini,Tomeii.c.s.Sullasuppostafluiditàdelfiscocfr.West2013,62-63.


417

in oriente: Goldilocks Parameters

Sposto,inchiusura,losguardoaOriente.Nel2016,annodell’uscitadiMedieval Europe, e statadataalle stampe lanuovamonografiadi JohnHaldon,The Empire That Would Not Die. The Paradox of Eastern Roman Survival. 640-740.Lostudiosoinglese,adistanzadipiùdivent’annidalsuo precedente volume Byzantium in Seventh Century. The Transformation of a Culture,tornaarifletteresuunodeiprincipalipassaggidellaparabo-la storica altomedievale: le ragioni della sopravvivenza a Costantinopoli dell’impero romano e delle sue peculiari capacità di resilienza e adatta-mento. Haldon considera le società e gli organismi politici dei sistemi complessi adattivi.Siponeperciòalla ricercadegli elementidinamici,della giusta combinazione di condizioni che rese possibile la sopravvi-venzadellostato,dellasocietà,dellaculturaereligioneromanainOrien-te. Prendendo in prestito un’espressione tratta dal racconto per bambini The Three Bears,divenutacomuneamoltescienze–socialienaturali–,egli vuole individuare the Goldilocks principle: i peculiari parametri che rendono un fenomeno possibile15.Mettecosìinluceunintricodicin-quefattori,lecuiradicisonogiàrintracciabilinelperiodoantecedentealsecolo che vide l’impero bizantino fronteggiare l’avanzata araba. Sotto-postoapressioniesterne,lostatoromanositrasformòsecondounadellepossibililineedievoluzione,nonscontatanépredicibile.PerHaldonsirivelòfondamentalelacapacitàdell’imperodidarevitaaunsistemaideologicocoerente,diraggiungereun’ottimaintegrazionedeltessutosocialeconlostato:nellemasseenell’esercito,nellacapitaleeincampagna,forteeralasolidarietàideologicanellachiesaimperiale.Gli imperatoripromosserounapotente ideologia centralizzante,una“teologiapolitica”chesacralizzòlostato:qualevicariodiCristo,com-pito del sovrano era stabilire il dominio del Cristianesimo ortodosso nelmondo,diprevaleresuinemicieguidareilpopoloallasalvezzain

15 L’espressionethe Goldilocks principle è giunta alle scienze storiche con la mediazio-ne della Big History.Cfr.Spier2010,36-40,216.


418

vistadelgiudiziofinale.Inunasocietàfortementedifferenziata,dovepochiavevanoaccessoallerisorseprodottedaimolti,l’autoritàsifeceportatricediunmessaggiofilantropico,diassistenzaversoipoveri.Ladrammatica disparità in termini socio-economici fra le élites coinvolte nellamacchinastataleelapopolazioneruraleordinaria,cherischiavadiminareilconsensonellostato,fusuperatagrazieaunamiscelavariabilediforzafisica,vincoliideologici,legamiclientelari.Decisivoperlasopravvivenzadell’imperofu,inparticolare,lostrettorapporto di collaborazione e coesione allacciato con i gruppi eminenti in Anatolia, regione che rivestì grandissima importanza geografico-strategica. Le montagne del Tauro e dell’Anti-Tauro rappresentarono una barriera invalicabile per gliArabi, climaticamente e geografica-mente loro ostile. Per i segmenti eminenti e il popolo non c’era alterna-tiva conveniente all’impero romano. Troppo grandi erano gli interessi acquisiti con lo stato: esso doveva quindi sopravvivere.L’impero fu,inoltre,abileariorganizzarevelocementeilpropriosistemamilitareefiscaleperrispondereallasfavorevolecongiunturaclimaticaglobaleealleesigenzediunorganismopolitico-economicopiùpiccolo,peral-cuni aspetti regionalizzato eppure generalmente centralistico: doveva a un tempo strenuamente resistere in Anatolia e provvedere ai fabbisogni diCostantinopoli,immensospaziopubblicodiostentazionedelpotereimperiale.Con la contrazione delle grandi reti commerciali emerse,insomma,unastrutturapiùflessibileeresiliente,chepossedevaancoranotevolicapacitàorganizzativeeriuscìaconservareilsistemaditassa-zioneromano,ancheseunpocosemplificato.La ricostruzione proposta dallo storico inglese ben si adatta alla gene-rale cornicediWickham,cheha largamenteutilizzato leprecedentiricerchediHaldon epuò essere parimenti ricondotto alla cosiddetta‘BirminghamSchool’[Prigent2014].Ambedueseguonoil“paradig-mafiscalista”eprestanograndeattenzioneall’ereditàdiRoma:osser-vanoquantisimuovononellasferapubblicaequalirisorse,materialie culturali-sociali, sonoaccessibili inquest’ambito; studiano igruppi


419

dominanti,illororapportoconilpoterecentraleelamanieraconcuiessiinvestonoeconsumanoricchezza.Entrambirisentono,poi,dell’in-flussodiPeregrineHordeneNicholasPurcellcircal’importanza,nelmondopost-romano,delcostante‘rumoredifondo’mediterraneo(ciòvaleancheperMcCormick):ilsostratodiretilocalizzate,semiautono-me,mainterconnesseesovrapposteche,collegandoregionivicinedelMediterraneo,consentìdimantenereilfondamentaleassefraCostan-tinopolielaSicilia,nuovariservadigranoperl’imperodopolaperditadell’Egitto16.Condivisae, infine, lavolontàdiadottareunpuntodivistaampioeolistico,capaceditenereassiemestoriaistituzionale,economica,socialeeculturale,senzaperòrinunciareallacomplessitàeall’acumeanalitico.Nelfornireilpropriocontributoaunanuova‘grandenarrazione’,siaWickham,siaHaldonsisforzanodicostruiremodelliastrattidalvaloreeuristico per rileggere la molteplicità dei fattori in gioco e comparare lavariabilitàdeisingolicasidi studio.CosìaffermaHaldonnellasuaultima fatica: «one of the aims of my own work has been to rehistori-cizethestory,butwithoutlosingsightofthelargerpicture»[Haldon2016,8].PercitareunbelpassodiSantoMazzarino,«ognistudiosodistoria sache leprincipalidifficoltàdelladisciplina storicaconsistono,appunto,nellacontinuaesigenzadiconciliareanalisiesintesi,ricercaspecialisticaeintuizioneunitaria»[Mazzarino1970,20-21].Comenel-lafavoladiGoldilocks,ilsegretostaneltrovarelagiustaviaemisurafra gli estremi.

16 Horden,Purcell2000.Sull’influenzadiquest’opera–inItalianonancoratradotta–,ilsuorapportoconimodellidiMcCormickeWickham,el’importanzadellaSicilianelquadroeconomicoecommercialedelMediterraneoaltomedievalecfr.Petralia2015.


420

Bibliografia

AirlieS.,PohlW.,ReimitzH.2006,Staat im frühen Mittelalter,Wien:VerlagderösterreichischenAkademiederWissenschaften.

AlthoffG.1997,Spielregeln der Politik im Mittelalter. Kommunikation in Frieden und Fehde,Darmstadt:Primus.

BissonT.N.2009,The Crisis of the Twelfth Century. Power, Lordship, and the Origins of European Government,Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress.

BlochM.1939-1940,La société féodale,Paris:ÉditionsAlbinMichel.

BougardF.,Buhrer-ThierryG.,LeJanR.2013,Les élites du haut Moyen Âge. Identités, stratégies, mobilité,«Annales.Histoire,SciencesSociales»,68,1079-1112.

CammarosanoP.1998,Nobili e re. L’Italia politica dell’alto medioevo,Roma-Bari:La-terza.

CarocciS.,CollaviniS.M.2012,Il costo degli stati. Politica e prelievo nell’Occidente me-dievale (VI-XIV secolo),«Storica»,52,7-48.

CollaviniS.M.i.c.s.,I beni fiscali in Tuscia tra X e XI secolo: forme di circolazione e rica-dute sulle forme documentarie.

CollaviniS.M.,TomeiP.i.c.s.,Beni fiscali e “scritturazione”. Nuove proposte sui contesti di rilascio e di falsificazione di D. OIII. 269 per il monastero di S. Ponziano di Lucca.

CostambeysM.2011,Recensione aDevroey2003,Devroey2006, «EarlyMedievalEurope»,19,236-239.

DevroeyJ.-P.2003,Économie rurale et société dans l’Europe franque (VIe-IXe siècles). Tome 1: Fondements matériels, échanges et lien social,Paris:EditionsBelin.

—2006,Puissants et misérables. Système social et monde paysan dans l’Europe des Francs (VIe-IXe siècles),Brussels:AcadémieroyaledeBelgique.

FioreA.2006,Aristocrazia e stato: prospettive dall’alto e dal basso medioevo,«Storica»,35,159-184.

—2015,Grandi narrazioni e lettura comparativa: metodo e prassi in “Framing the Early Middle Ages” di Chris Wickham,«Storicamente»,11,1-13.

—2017,Il mutamento signorile. Assetti di potere e comunicazione politica nelle campagne dell’Italia centro-settentrionale (1080-1130c.),Firenze:FirenzeUniversityPress.

FossierR.,L’infanzia dell’Europa. Economia e società dal X al XII secolo,Bologna:IlMulino(ed.or.1982,Enfance de l’Europe, Xe-XIIe siècles. Aspects économiques et so-ciaux,Paris:PressesuniversitairesdeFrance).

Goetz H.W. 2007, Vorstellungsgeschichte. Gesammelte Schriften zu Wahrnehmungen, Deutungen und Vorstellungen im Mittelalter,Bochum:Winkler.

HaldonJ.1990,Byzantium in Seventh Century. The Transformation of a Culture,Cam-bridge: Cambridge University Press.


421

—2016,The Empire That Would Not Die. The Paradox of Eastern Roman Survival. 640-740,Cambridge-London:HarvardUniversityPress.

HordenP.,PurcellN.2000,The Corrupting Sea. A Study of Mediterranean History,Oxford:Wiley-Blackwell.

InnesM.2000,State and Society in the Early Middle Ages. The Middle Rhine Valley, 400-1000,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

LazzariT.2012,Dotari e beni fiscali,«RetiMedievaliRivista»,13,123-139.

—2017a,La tutela del patrimonio fiscale: pratiche di salvaguardia del pubblico e autorità regia nel regno longobardo del secolo VIII,«RetiMedievaliRivista»,18,99-121.

—2017b,La competizione tra grandi possessores longobardi e il regno: le leggi di Liutpran-do e il patrimonio delle donne nel secolo VIII,inAcquérir, prélever, contrôler: les ressources en compétition (400-1100),Turnhout:Brepols,43-60.

LoréV.2013,Beni principeschi e forme di potere nel Mezzogiorno longobardo,inItaly, 888-962: A Turning Point – Italia, 888-962: una svolta,Turnhout:Brepols.

—2017a,Monasteri, re e duchi: modelli di relazione fra VIII e X secolo,inMonachesimi d’Oriente e d’Occidente nell’alto medioevo,Spoleto:CISAM,947-983.

—2017b, Introduzione. Risorse materiali e competizione politica nell’alto medioevo, inAcquérir, prélever, contrôler: les ressources en compétition (400-1100),Turnhout:Bre-pols,7-20.

MazzarinoS.1970,IntroduzioneaBurckhardtJ.,L’età di Costantino il Grande,Roma:Biblioteca di Storia Patria (ed. or. 1853,Die Zeit Constantins des Grossen, Basel:Schweighauser’sche),7-44.

McCormickM.2001,Origins of the European Economy. Communications and Commer-ce, AD 300-900,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress(ed.it.2009,Le origini dell’economia europea. Comunicazioni e commercio 300-900 d.C.,Milano:VitaePen-siero).

PetraliaG.2015,Tra storia e archeologia: Mediterraneo altomedioevale e spazi regionali «italiani» (intorno al secolo VIII),«StudiStorici»,5-28.

PohlW.,WeserV.(eds.)2009,Der frühmittelalterliche Staat – europäische Perspektiven,Wien:VerlagderösterreichischenAkademiederWissenschaften.

PrigentV.2014,The Mobilisation of Fiscal Resources in the Byzantine Empire (Eighth to Eleventh Centuries),inHudsonJ.,RodríguezA.(eds.),Diverging Paths? The Shapes of Power and Institutions in Medieval Christendom and Islam,Leiden:Brill.

SpierF.2010,Big History and the Future of Humanity,Chichester:Wiley-Blackwell.

TomeiP.2017,Alle radici del potere. La struttura aristocratica del territorio lucchese (896-1096),tesididottorato,UniversitàdiPisa.

West C. 2013,Reframing the Feudal Revolution. Political and Social Transformation between Marne and Moselle, c.800-c.1100,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.


422

WickhamC.1981,Early Medieval Italy. Central Power and Local Society 400-1000,London:Macmillan(ed.it.1983,L’Italia nel primo medioevo. Potere centrale e società locale (400-1000),Milano:JacaBook).

—2000,Le forme del feudalesimo,in Il feudalesimo nell’alto Medioevo. Settimane di Studi del Centro Italiano di Studi sull’Alto Medioevo, XLVII, 8-12 aprile 1999, Spoleto:CISAM,15-46.

—2008,Rethinking the Structure of the Early Medieval Economy,inDavisJ.,McCor-mickM.(eds.),The Long Morning of Medieval Europe. New directions in Early Medie-val Studies,Aldershot-Burlington:Ashgate,19-31.

—2005,Framing the Early Middle Ages. Europe and the Mediterranean, 400-800,Ox-ford:OxfordUniversityPress (ed it.2009,Le società dell’alto Medioevo. Europa e Mediterraneo, secoli V-VIII,Roma:Viella).

— 2009,The Inheritance of Rome. A History of Europe from 400 to 1000, London:Penguin(edit.2014,L’eredità di Roma. Storia d’Europa dal 400 al 1000,Roma-Bari:Laterza).

—2015,Sleepwalking into a New World. The Emergence of Italian City Communes in the Twelfth Century,Princeton:PrincetonUniversityPress(ed.it.2017,Sonnambuli verso un nuovo mondo. L’affermazione dei comuni italiani nel XII secolo,Roma:Viella).

—2016,Medieval Europe,Yale:YaleUniversityPress.

—2017,Consensus and Assemblies in the Romano-Germanic Kingdoms: a Comparative Approach,inEppV.,MeyerC.(eds.),Recht und Konsens im frühen Mittelalter,Ostfil-dern:JanThorbecke.

L’eredità di Lutero: come si può raccontare la storia politica dello ‘Stato moderno’

anGela de BenediCTisUniv. Bologna, Dipartimento Storia Culture Civiltà

RobertvonFriedeburg,Luther’s Legacy. The Thirty Years War and the Modern No-tion of ‘State’ in the Empire, 1530s to 1790s,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress,2016,pp.441,DOI:https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781316282298.

HeinzSchilling,Martin Lutero. Ribelle in un’epoca di cambiamenti radicali,edizioneitalianaacuradiRobertoTresoldi,Torino:Claudiana,2016,pp.608.

Per il 2017

Nel 2017 si celebrano in tutto il mondo i 500 anni della Riforma protestante. Loscorsonovembre2016condecretoministerialeestatoistituitoil“ComitatoNazionaleperlaricorrenzadelquintocentenariodellaRiformaProtestante(1517-2017)”,ilcuicompito–comerisultadalsitodellaDirezioneGeneraleBibliotechee Istituti Culturali1–eovviamentequellodi«promuovere,preparareeattuarelemanifestazioniatteacelebrarelaricorrenza»tramite«pubblicazioni,incontripub-bliciinItaliaeall’estero,giornatedistudioedunarassegnacinematografica»,allo

1 http://www.librari.beniculturali.it/opencms/opencms/it/comitati/comitati/comitato_0009.html


424

scopo«dioffrireuncontributoscientificoepluridisciplinarefinalizza-toaraccontarealmondocontemporaneolapersonalitàelafiguradiLutero,lasuariforma,ilsuopercorsonellastoria,nelladottrina,nelleistituzioni,nellapolitica,nell’arteenellasocietà».Intuttoilmondoallostessocompitosieragiàprovveduto,almenoisti-tuzionalmente e ufficialmente, quasi sei anni fa, nel giugno del 2011,grazieall’incontroaGinevradeglialloracinquepartnerdellapiattaforma“Refo500”,cheadoggisonodiventaticentoventitracattolicieprotestanti2.Inquestiseiannisonostategiàprodotteunnumeroveramenteimpo-nentedipubblicazioniscientifiche,vereepropriericercheoriginalisiamonografiche sia collettanee (queste ultime essendo nella stragrandemaggioranzadeicasirisultatidiconvegnieseminariinternazionali),icuititolipossonoesserevistinellespecifichecollanededicatedadiversieditori (per fare solodueesempi,Vandenhoeck&RuprechtdiGöt-tingen3,eEvangelischeVerlagsanstaltdiLeipzig4). E molte altre sono naturalmente già in cantiere.Nello stesso periodo in cui in Italia veniva istituito il Comitato di cui sopra,qualchemesefa,uscivalatraduzioneitalianadiunarecentemo-nografiasuLutero,scrittadaunostudiosotedescogiànotoallastorio-grafiaitalianaperaltresueopere.NeestatapromotricelaSocietàdiStudiValdesi,chehacosìresopossibileperilpubblicoitalianodigiunodi lingua tedesca la lettura di un libro che, dalla sua prima edizioneoriginaledel2012,eora(2017)giuntoallaattualizzazionedellaterzaedizionedel2014:HeinzSchilling,Martin Lutero. Ribelle in un’epoca di cambiamenti radicali5.

2 https://www.refo500.com/en/partner-overview/3 Refo500 Academic Studies (R5AS): http://www.v-r.de/de/refo500_academic_studies_r5as/sd-0/4164 Leucorea-StudienzurGeschichtederReformationundderLutherischenOrtho-doxie:http://www.eva-leipzig.de/reihen.php?id=185 Schilling2016(edizionerealizzatainbaseaSchillingH.2013,Martin Luther. Rebell in einer Zeit des Umbruchs. Eine Biographie,2.durchgeseheneAuflage,Munchen:Beck).

ANGelA De BeNeDiCTiSl’eredità di lutero: come si può raccontare la storia politica dello ‘Stato moderno’

425

Per l’Autore non si e certo trattato di una biografia scritta per l’oc-casione, per quanto l’occasione la abbia indubbiamente favorita,maall’internodiprogettipiùgeneralivoltia‘inventariare’perilcinque-centenariodel2017ilsignificatoscientificoepoliticodell’ereditàdelRiformatoreMartinLutero.Lotestimoniava,adesempio,unconvegnosvoltosiaMonacodiBaviera,epromossodall’HistorischesKolleg,giànelnovembre2013,organizzatodallostessoSchilling[2014],chenecurava anche la pubblicazione degli atti nell’anno successivo.Nell’epilogodellabiografiaLutero e l’Età moderna: la dialettica tra fal-limento e successo[Schilling2016,529-541],leultimepaginesonode-dicate da Schilling al problema Stato e politica [539-541].Èquesta lapartesucuicisipuòsoffermareperintrodurre,insiemeaSchilling,unaquestionestoriograficadianticadata:quelladelcontributodiLutero,dellasuaRiforma,edelluteranesimosuccessivoallaformazionedelloStato e alle concezioni di autorità/obbedienza.Scrive,Schilling,cheincampotemporaleilportatodell’operadiLutero«fuinprimoluogoafavoredelloStatodellaprimaEtàmoderna,primanellezoned’Europaprotestanti,poi,ancheinmododifferente,ancheinquellecattoliche»[539].Questosignificòchenei«territorievangelicidellaGermanialeautorità,pocodopolamortediLutero,approfittaro-no dell’occasione che si presentava loro per asservire le chiese regionali da poco costituite ai loro interessi politici» [539] e che nella «gestione della chiesa a opera delle autorità territoriali del tardo luteranesimo si giunse non di rado a una strumentalizzazione della religione per scopi politici e sociali» [540]. Questa ultima evoluzione non corrispondeva peròinalcunmodo

ai principi fondamentali di Lutero di libertà e autodeterminazione del-la chiesa, sia della comunità sia del singolo cristiano. Il Riformatoresassonenonsarebbestatoaffattod’accordoconl’ideologia,dominanteinPrussianelXIX secolo,dell’alleanza fra ‘tronoe altare’.Questa inrealtà era dovuta soprattutto alle tradizioni del calvinismo di corte degli Hohenzollern. L’unione propugnata da singoli vescovi luterani e dai cristiano-tedeschi (Deutsche Christen) con i nazionalsocialisti del XX


426

secolo,nonavevanullaachefareconlasuadottrina.Tuttaviaanchequestafuunadellenefasteconseguenzedellasuadecisionediincaricareiprincipidiagirecomevescovidi“emergenza”perpreservarelapurez-zadell’evangelo,cheepartedellastoriadelsuooperato.Lostessosipuòdire per l’azione politica e la coscienza politica in genere: Lutero non era,personalmente,un servodeiprincipi.Permantenere lapacee ilbuonordine,eglifuafavoredell’obbedienzaneiconfrontidell’autoritàchesicomportalegalmente,maglieranocomunqueestraneispiritodisudditanza e obbedienza per l’obbedienza [540].

CiòcheaffermaSchillingapropositodellaquestioneautorità/obbedien-zanoneaffattoscontato,nénellastoriografianénell’opinionepubblica,come successivi accenni dello stesso studioso autorevolmente testimo-nianoapropositodelsignificatodiLuteroedellaRiformaperlasocietàcivile democratica e laica6.Noneuncaso,allora,chenellaintroduzioneal volume risultante dal convegno monacense del 2013 Der Reformator Martin Luther 2017Schillinginserisse“nell’inventario”ilcompitodide-costruiremitistoriograficisull’immaginediLutero,sullasuaRiformaesuisuoieffettiesostituirliconinterpretazioniscientificamentefondate7.

Quale autorità per quale obbedienza? L’eredità di Lutero

Inquesto sensouncontributo importante, edapiùpunti di vista, ecostituitodaunadensamonografiapubblicataloscorsoanno2016daRobertvonFriedeburg,Luther’s Legacy. The Thirty Years War and the Modern Notion of ‘State’ in the Empire, 1530s to 1790s: un libro che sin-tetizza le ricerche in tema degli ultimi tre decenni8,visiconfrontaele

6 Sattler,Schilling2015.RingrazioHeinzSchillingperavermiconsentito,giànel2015, la letturadel testodellaconferenzada lui tenuta inoccasionedelDeutscherEvangelisherKirchentag(Stuttgart,3-5giugno2015),alloraintitolata“Luther in sei-ner Zeit” – Luther und die Reformation-historisch gesehen.7 Schilling,MartinLuther1517/2017,inSchilling2014,VII-XVII:X.8 Lacuiportata(insiemeaquelladellefontiutilizzate)risultainFriedeburg2016,


427

discute,esullabasedellaaccortautilizzazionedifontididiversanatu-ra presenta le proprie nuove scoperte. Si tratta di una indagine meto-dologicamenteesemplare,dallaqualepossonovenirenumerosispuntidi riflessione anche aquella storiografia italiana– tardomedievisticaemodernistica–chesiededicataalproblemadellanaturadelloStatoriguardo gli stati italiani pre-unitari. Nonefacilesintetizzarelaricchezzadel libro,permaterialieperargo-mentazioni.Ognicapitolomeriterebbequasiconsiderazioniaséstanti,inalcuni casi anche per avvalorare i motivi sviluppati dall’Autore attraverso unconfrontoconlapiùomenorecentestoriografiaitalianaintema.Premesso che lo studio di von Friedeburg intende dimostrare come nei territori del Sacro Romano Impero della Nazione Tedesca la nozione di‘Stato’siaemersaperlerispettivestrutturepolitichesoloneglianni’70delXVIIsecolo,valelapenainnanzituttosottolineareche,perfarlo,von Friedeburg porta avanti una indagine in cui storia politica e storia delpensieropoliticosonoindissolubilmenteintrecciate,dalmomentochequesto intreccioestrutturalmentecostitutivodella ‘realtà storica’osservata e analizzata.Punto di partenza di von Friedeburg è una asserzione del classico studio diFriedrichMeinecke,L’idea della ragion di stato nella storia moderna (1924):«L’originariopensieropoliticotedescononeraaffattoinclinatoa riconoscere un diritto speciale alla ragion di stato e al machiavellismo. Lutero pretendeva che uomini cristiani costruissero uno stato cristia-no;unMachiavellisarebbestatoinconcepibilenellaGermaniadelXVIsecolo»9.Perl’Autorequestorimaneancoraoggilostatodellaricerca,dalqualebisognaripartireperrisponderealledomandesu

388-433 (Bibliography).9 NellatraduzioneitalianaFriedrichMeinecke,L’idea della ragion di stato nella storia moderna,Firenze,Sansoni,19772,401.Dall’originalelacitazioneeriportatadavonFriedeburg2016,8,Chap.I.Meinecke’s riddle: ‘reason of state’ and Reformation pruden-ce,1.Monarchy and state in historiography,8-41.


428

comeilconcettodi‘Stato’poteavereunsuccessocosìimmensoall’in-ternodiunastrutturapoliticaqualeil ‘VecchioImpero’,cosìstraordi-nariamenteframmentatanelladistribuzionedelpotere?Ecomeproprioiltermine‘Stato’,cosìradicalmentedenigratoinquantocattivaartedigoverno machiavelliana (specialmente in Germania) poté diventare pro-prio il nome di una entità in cui colti funzionari principeschi e persino numerositedeschidiognicondizionesocialeriponevanotantafiducia?10.

Perrispondereatalidomandebisognainnanzituttoaffrontarequestionidi concetto e terminologia11. Fin da una prima osservazione risulta che ilpensierotedescoprecedenteilXVIIsecolononusòmaiilterminenéconobbeilconcettodi‘Stato’nelsuosensomoderno,inquelsenso–cioe–associatoallapersonagiuridicacometitolaredell’ordinamentopubblico,inpossessodisovranità,edistintosiadagovernantichego-vernati.Nelsensoinbasealquale,inoltre,siintendeun’unitàdispaziostatale,dirittostataleesudditistatalie,finoauncertopunto,anchedimacchinaburocratica.Ilpensierotedescoaffrontava,invece,ilproble-ma del possesso e delle pretese delle dinastie principesche (come pure di conti e città libere) o dell’ordinamento civile (e dei suoi magistrati) in discorsiriguardantinontantolo‘Stato’,quantopiuttostoidirittiegliobblighidiprincipievassalliolefunzionidell’ordinamentocivile,tuttivariamentefondatisuunpuntodivistagiuridico,politicooteologico,o in base alla loro combinazione. E neppure il problema dello Stato ter-ritorialefuaffrontatodalpensierotedesco,intuttiisuoigeneriletterari,almenofinoadopolaGuerradeiTrent’anni.Eranostatiglistorici–sostienevonFriedeburg–aritenerechelacre-scenteattivitàdelgovernoprincipesco,unitaaunospaziosemprepiùampiodiintervento,avesseportatonaturalmenteenecessariamenteaideepiùastrattedelconcettodiStato.Inquestomodolastoriografiaavevaingeneraleimplicitamenteidentificatoargomentiutilizzatidallecasateprincipescheafavorediunaloropiùforteposizionegiuridica,

10 Friedeburg2016,8(traduzionemia).11 Chap.1,2.Concept and terminology,18-26.


429

siariguardo l’imperatoresiariguardoi lorosudditi,conargomentiafavore dell’esistenza di uno Stato in un senso maggiormente moderno. Dandoperscontatataleidentificazione,alungononfustudiatalaeffet-tiva evoluzione del concetto e della terminologia di Stato in relazione con il governo principesco. Sullabasedellepiùrecentiricerchequell’assuntosieperòdimostratofallace.Èemerso,invece,comeilpensierotedescofossestatocaratteriz-zatodallaconcezione,risalenteallacristianitàlatina,cheilbenecomu-ne era diverso dall’interesse privato e che ogni governante non doveva perseguirequest’ultimomaoccuparsidella res publica. La concezione era radicata troppo profondamente per consentire che l’ordinamento civilefosseintesointerminidimeraforza,tantocheinetàmedievalesidiffusel’usodeltermineuniversitaspersignificareilcorpodelpopoloche costituiva la res publica,echepotevaesercitareildirittodigoverna-re tramite rappresentazione12.Perquantolariformadellastrutturadell’Imperodel1495prima,e laRiforma luterana poi comportassero per i principi secolari un consoli-damentodeiloroprivilegieoffrisserolapossibilitàdiacquisiretantoilcontrollosullerisorseecclesiastichequantounapiùstabileposizionesuiterritori grazie alle loro pretese di essere protettori e organizzatori della chiesa;perquantolanuovanormativaprincipesca–laPolicey–fornisseuna potenziale legittimazione per un maggiore intervento del governo principesco, tuttociònoncomportòcomunqueche ilgovernodelledinastie principesche sulle loro varie terre le trasformasse in stati terri-torialichiusi,cioeindistrettispazialicoerenticonuncorpounificatodisudditi.Nonvieraneppureunterminespecificopertalientità.Ciòche contava erano i diritti goduti da una dinastia principesca e la con-dizione personale di un determinato principe13.

12 Chap.1.,3.The terminology of ‘state’ and public order in the Empire,26-41.13 Chap.I2.Royal rights and princely dinasties in late mediaval and early modern Ger-many, fourteenth to early seventeenth centuries,42-81.


430

Per osservare come potesse accadere che solo a partire dalla metà del XVIIsecolo ilmodernosignificatodi ‘Stato’cominciasseaemergeretraaltriancoramoltopresentieconcorrenti,lostudiodivonFriede-burg ritiene indispensabile presentare un accurato panorama delle idee quattro-cinquecenteschesull’ordinamentocivile.Dibattititeologici,riflessionipolitichefortementecontrassegnatedaicom-mentialleoperediCiceroneeAristotele,letteraturagiurisprudenzialeco-stituivano i materiali di costruzione del pensiero politico tedesco verso la metàdelXVIsecolo,edunqueanchedeicinqueelementifondamenta-lichesuquellabasesubironopoitrasformazionieinnovazioniapartiredall’ultimoventenniodelsecolofinoadarrivareallametàdelsecoloXVII.Primo, il feudoprincipescointesocomepolis da parte di un numero crescentedi consulenti, formatinelleuniversità, siadiprincipi siadigovernicittadini:equestoancoraprimadellaRiformaluterana.Lare-sponsabilitàdelgovernofeudalecosìintesoversolavitaspiritualedeisudditi fuunportatodellaRiformae trovòespressioneproprionellanormativa principesca della Policey, con i suoi sforzi potenzialmenteillimitati per dare forma alla società da parte dei magistrati. La Policey diventòrilevantetantopercattoliciquantoperprotestanti,perstatiim-perialitantolaiciquantoecclesiatici,daiprincipiaicontiallecittà.Fuinquestocontestocheemerselanuovadicotomiatraautoritàdeimagi-strati (Oberkeit)esudditicomerequisitofunzionaleilgovernopolitico.Secondo,l’enfasisullafunzionecomportòanchelaconcezionechelaPoliceyeilgovernoprincipescodovesseromirarealbenessere,spiritualeemateriale,dellacomunitàedeisuoicittadini.ItrattatidiPolicey sta-bilironounaconnessioneindissolubiletraciòcheleautoritàpotevanofareeciòchedovevanofareall’internodellalorofunzioneistituitadaDio per il governo della res pubblica cristiana. Terzo, la giurisdizione feudale comegoverno che comprendeva in-siemeiprincipieilorovassalli,nelsensochel’infeudazionecometalenondefinivailvassallocomeunsuddito,macostituivaunarelazionelimitata da contratti reciproci.


431

Quarto, il diritto naturale come catalogo di prescrizioni che dovevaessereconcretamentelegatoaldirittoromanoequindialdirittoparti-colarepositivo.Ciòportòalriconoscimentodiundirittonaturaleallaauto-difesa contro pericoli straordinari costituiti da feroci nemici della cristianità(adesempio,siaTurchisia‘papisti’)ancheneldirittopositi-vo,comenellaConstitutio Criminalis Carolina (1532),purnellachiaradistinzione tra difesa e vendetta. Quinto,ladistinzionetraufficideimagistratiinferiorieufficideima-gistrati supremi. Già in racconti storici sulla costituzione dell’Impero Melantone aveva insistito sul diritto degli Efori di censurare i magistrati supremi.Dopodiluicontinuaronoafarlo,ancheallivellodellostessofeudoprincipesco,tantogiuristilaiciquantoilnuovocleroprotestanteformatialleuniversitàperilserviziodelprincipe,sullabasedellateorialuteranadei‘trestati’14.

Apartiredaglianni’80delXVIsecolo,conlarecezionedell’operadiJeanBodineinbaseaicrescenticonflittipolitico-religiosinell’Impero,scuole diverse di pensiero cominciarono a considerare come governare ilfeudoinquantopolis. Da una parte alcuni autori insistevano soprat-tutto sulla gerarchia di ordine e sudditanza e sull’obbedienza dei sudditi versoilmagistratocomerequisitiindispensabiliperilfunzionamentodiogni res publica,nonchésullapossibilitàcheilprincipepotesselegifera-re autonomamente senza alcuna interferenza altrui. Ne conseguiva che nonsipotevaresistereaunprincipelegittimementegovernante,bensìsoloaunusurpatore;echepotereeeforzaeranonecessaripertenerela res publica bene ordinata.Dall’altra parte, altri autori concepivanola res publica come istituita e esistente prima e indipendentemente dal suosupremomagistrato,cheerasoloilsuoufficialecapoechedovevasottomettersi alle sue leggi. Attribuivano un ruolo centrale a magistrati inferiori e alle loro responsabilità e ai loro doveri per il mantenimento

14 Chap.3.Civil order and princely rights, 1450s to 1580s,82-167.


432

dell’ordinamento:perquestoscopoeranocittadinie‘patrioti’insieme.Definivano tirannochiunqueviolasse le leggidella res publica, com-prese le sue leggiparticolari,e trattassecrudelmente ipropri sudditi:l’esistenza di un antico territorio-patria con le sue proprie leggi era un corollario necessario per la rivendicazione di potere resistere a certe misure ingiuste del principe. Enfatizzavano il consenso come base della res publica,inforzadelleleggicheDioavevadatoagliuomini.Diffi-cilmente,comunque,ognunodiquegliautorisostenevatuttiimotiviin favore del principe oppure in favore della restrizione del potere dei principi. Il pensiero tedesco era caratterizzato da una pluralità di pro-blemiediapprocci,inunintrecciodiargomentazioni‘assolutistiche’e‘costituzionalistiche’.Loconsentivalasituazionedell’Impero,conlesuemolteuniversitàdidiverseconfessioni,econildiversificatopae-saggiocostituzionaledicittàimperiali,principatielettoraliecclesiaticie laici ereditari15.

PerquantonellaprimametàdelXVIIsecololaampiadiffusionedelleidee sulla ragion di Stato rendesse condivisa tra diversi autori l’opinio-ne che il maggiore nerbo dell’ordinamento pubblico dovesse essere la personanaturaledelmagistrato(ilprincipe),echel’obbedienzaaquelprincipe fosse al centro del funzionamento dello stesso ordinamento16,fu solo con la tremenda devastazione della Guerra dei Trent’anni che i vassalli cominciarono a considerare sistematicamente il governo del principecomecattivo,eaintenderlocomeunacospirazioneperpri-varli dei loro diritti come cittadini e come cristiani. Di fronte a tale cospirazione l’Impero rimaneva un muro difensivo per i loro diritti.

Inquellalungaedifficilecongiuntura,ancheilconcettodi‘patria’fu

15 Chap.4.The transformation of ideas on order and the rise of the ‘fatherland’, 1580s to 1630s: the re-ordering of the elements,168-207.16 Chap.5.The challenge of ‘reason of state’, 1600s to 1650s,208-236.


433

utilizzato in modo nuovo. Nel centrale capitolo dedicato alla catastrofe della Guerra dei Trent’anni e al collasso dei rapporti tra principi e vas-salli,vonFriedeburgprocedeadunaesposizionecheeinsiemecrono-logico-fattualeediopinionipolitichediffuse.Daitrattatiscientificisutasse e patria si passa alla storia pratica politica della piccola nobiltà nelle terredevastatedallaguerra,perpoiritornareagliscritticherifletteva-nol’esperienzadiguerra,edinuovoalmodoincuiiprincipieilorovassalli, durante i loro reciproci conflitti,usavano i trattati scientificiper sostenere inizialmente le loro pretese e poi aprire un contenzioso davanti ai tribunali imperiali non appena se ne presentasse l’opportunità elanecessitàloesigesse.Tuttoquestoeanalizzatosullabasediuncasoparticolare,quellodelramocalvinistadellaCasad’Assia,ilramoAssia-Kassel,edellasuaaspradisputaconisuoivassalli.L’Assia-Kasselfutraleareepiùcolpitedallaguerra.Perciòpuòesemplificarelerelazionitradevastazioni di guerra e disperati tentativi da parte dei vassalli di prova-reaintervenirenellaeacontrollarelapoliticaesteradelloroprincipe,nel complesso e intricato gioco delle alleanze politico-religiose. Il ramo calvinistadiAssia-KasselnegoziavainfatticonRichelieueMazzarino,coinvolto come era in una delle più dure dispute ereditarie dinastiche deltempo,avvelenatadallarivalitàconfessionaleconilramoluteranodi Assia-Darmstadt. Quest’ ultimo sosteneva a sua volta l’imperatore cattolico,che,dapartesua,diedeilbandoalprincipediCasseletentòdi trasferire il feudodel ramocalvinista, ilprincipatodell’Assia Infe-riore, al suo alleato luterano.Di conseguenza durante i negoziati dipacediMunstereOsnabruckilramocalvinistasitrovòinprimopianonei tentativi di rendere i principi tedeschi e i loro feudi il più possibi-leindipendentidall’Imperoedall’imperatore.Però,aguerraconclusa,con Mazzarino momentaneamente allontanato dalla Fronda e mancati i sussidifrancesi,lacasatadiAssia-Kasseldovetteallafinenegoziareconla nobiltà locale che si era opposta alla sua politica. È la documentazione lasciatadaquellenegoziazionichepermettediosservarelatrasforma-zionedelleargomentazionipolitiche.Nelconflitto,duratotrail1647e


434

il1654,sifronteggiaronovedutepolitichefondamentalmenteoppostesullanaturadelprincipato,macaratterizzatedaunosviluppodialogicodegliargomenti,unpamhpletrispondendoaquellodiunoppositore,el’oppositorerispondendoconuncontro-argomentoinunasequenzadiaccuse e contro-accuse17.

Fusoloaseguitodiquelleesperienzediguerra,diconflittidinastici,diliti giudiziarie davanti al Tribunale Camerale Imperiale che poté emer-gerelalanuovaconcezionedello‘Stato’comepersonagiuridicaedelprincipecomemagistratovincolatoall’internodello‘Stato’.AfornirlaperprimofuVeitLudwigvonSeckendorff,conilsuoTeutscher Für-stenstaat,cheebbedodiciedizionitrail1656eil1754.Tuttigliele-menti già individuati come variamente caratterizzanti il pensiero tede-scofuronolìriutilizzatiperfondarelanecessitàdellacollaborazionetraprincipievassalli,alloscopodiricostruireiterritoritedeschidipiccolascaladevastatidallaguerra.ApartiredaltrattatodiSeckendorff,peribisognicuirispondeva,ilconcettodi‘Stato’nelsensomodernosidif-fusetantonelpensieroprotestantequantoilquellocattolico18,eportòancheaunaridefinizionedelconcettodidispotismo.Ancheinquestocasolariflessionedegliautoritedeschisisvolse,necessariamente,inunconfrontocostanteconlariflessionediBodin,Hobbes,Montesquieu,findentrolaconcezionedelloStatomonarchicoprussiano19.

Europeo,quindi,ilpensierotedesco.Masel’ereditàdiLuteroconsi-stenella ‘germanicità’delconcettodi ‘Stato’–concludevonFriede-

17 Chap.6.The catastrophe of war and the partial collapse of relations between princes and vassals,237-312.18 Chap.7.The re-establishing of compromise and the new use of the elements: Secken-dorff, Pufendorf and the dissemination of the new concept of ‘state’,313-353.19 Chap. 8.Reading of despotism: the attack on ‘war-despotism’ between Bodin and Montesquieu,354-380.


435

burg20–,ciòdipendedalfattochelafurialuteranadilanciareinvettivecontro i principi e i loro cortigiani visti come segugi il cui desiderio eraquellodispargereilsangueinnocentedeilorosudditi(espressanel1535)corrispose,alloraepoi,ariflessionichevalutavanolafunzionedel governo civile per il benessere materiale e spirituale della res publica e dei suoi sudditi più dell’onore e della dignità delle casate dinastiche principesche.Laveraculladellamodernanozionedi‘Stato’inGerma-nia fu l’impegno morale a considerare gli uomini diversi dalle bestie e il conseguente disgusto nei confronti dei principi che agivano come massacratori degli uomini creati da Dio21.

dalla rassegna, qualche idea

Accennavo,sopra,all’interessecheillibrodivonFriedeburg,ancheinbaseallesuggestionifornitedalleriflessionidiSchilling,puòavereperlastoriografiaitaliana.Varisonoglispuntichequalsiasistudiosotardomedievista-modernistapuòscorgerenellasintesichehocercatodiof-frire. E credo che proprio gli studi sia di Schilling sia di von Friedeburg portinoaricordarelaricchezzadirisultatiacquisitigrazieall’impegnodiPaoloProdinell’affrontareilenel fardiscuteresulproblemadello‘Statomoderno’22,insiemeaPierangeloSchiera,durantelapluridecen-nale attività di ricerca da entrambi promossa e coordinata all’interno dell’allora Istituto storico italo-germanico in Trento. Lo testimonia-

20 Conclusion.Luther’s legacy: the ‘Germanness’ of the modern notion of ‘state’,381-387.21 Ibid.,387.22 Daluistessoevocatonelsaggiouscitopostumo,inizialmentepresentatoinoc-casionedelconvegnointernazionaleorganizzatodallaFondazioneBrunoKesslerdiTrento,“LaRiformaprotestanteinuncontestodistoriaglobale.Leriformereligioseeleciviltà”(28-29ottobre2016):Prodi2017,9-14(Chiese territoriali e Stato moderno).


436

no i volumi pubblicati nelle diverse collane dell’Istituto23, i cui titolirecano il medesimo comun denominatore «in Italia e in Germania». Dato il problema di fondo (l’impegno morale sottolineato anche da von Friedeburgnellesueconclusioni)l’importanzadiunaripresadiquellericerche,nel futuro,potrebbeessere ancheuncompitodiuna storiaglobale che voglia rimanere sulle spalle dei giganti.

Bibliografia

FriedeburgR.von2016,Luther’s Legacy. The Thirty Years War and the Modern Notion of ‘State’ in the Empire, 1530s to 1790s,Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

ProdiP.2017,Senza Stato né Chiesa. L’Europa a cinquecento anni dalla Riforma, «ilMulino»,(1):7-23.

SattlerD.,SchillingH.2015,Luther in seiner Zeit für unsere Zeit. Historische und The-ologische Perspektiven,inLecherS.,UeberschärE.(eds.)2015,damit wir klug werden. Die wichtigsten Texte des Stuttgarter Kirchentages,GutersloherVerlagshaus:Guter-sloh,167-190.

SchillingH.2014,Der Reformator Martin Luther 2017. Eine wissenschaftliche und ge-denkpolitische Bestandsaufnahme,Berlin-Munchen:DeGruyter-Oldenbourg.

—2016,Martin Lutero. Ribelle in un’epoca di cambiamenti radicali,ed.it.acuradiRo-bertoTresoldi,Torino:Claudiana.

23 Tutteedite,comeenoto,dallacasaeditriceilMulino(Bologna),eanchecon-giuntamente,inalcunicasi,dailMulinoedaDuncker&Humblot(Berlin).

ISSN 22826033ISBN 9788898392773DOI 10.12977/stor

Documents

Annale 2017 - BraDypUS...court (1415), Magna Carta (1215) and the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), events that are much better known in English-language scholarship. It is especially