Editing Pope Adrian IV (section)

==Political background==
[[File:Plan of Rome in the Middle Ages - Historical Atlas by William R. Shepherd, 1923.jpg|alt=map of medieval rome|thumb|Medieval Rome; the [[Leonine City]] is to the northwest of the city, outside the Leonine Wall (in blue)]]
Discussing the broader political context of the time, the historian [[Anne Duggan]] argues that "the Pope was not master of his own house".{{sfn|Duggan|2003a|p=109}} Likewise, [[Walter Ullmann]] has argued that the age was a radical one, in which the [[temporal power of the Holy See|temporal power]]—specifically, the "educated lay element"—was encroaching upon traditional spiritual realms.{{sfn|Ullmann|1955|p=233}}

{{blockquote|text=The age in which Adrian took office was one that witnessed profound changes in all spheres of life, and change always brings in its train restlessness, crises, stress and tension, caused by the attempted displacement of the old by the new. New forces were released which had hitherto had no opportunity of asserting themselves and which challenged the traditional scheme of things vigorously.{{sfn|Ullmann|1955|p=233}}}}

Eugenius had died in July 1153.{{sfn|Barber|1992|p=99}} His successor, [[Anastasius IV]], had been already elderly when elected to succeed him,{{sfn|Maxwell-Stuart|1997|p=97}} and only ruled for a year.{{sfn|Sayers|2004}} Comparing the two, the [[popular historian]] [[John Julius Norwich]] comments that the former "was old and ineffectual, concerned chiefly with his own self-glorification"; Adrian, though, was "a man of very different calibre".{{sfn|Norwich|1970|p=172}} Anastasius died on 3 December 1154,{{sfn|Sayers|2004}} and by which time, Breakspear had returned to Rome.{{sfn|Sayers|2004}} Even before the death of Eugenius, argues Barber, "a new and formidable figure had appeared" on the political scene. The [[Hohenstaufen]] [[Frederick Barbarossa]] had been elected [[Holy Roman Emperor]] on 4 March 1152.{{sfn|Barber|1992|p=101}} Barbarossa and Eugenius had contracted, at the [[Treaty of Constance]], to unite against both William of Sicily and the Roman Commune.{{sfn|Barber|1992|p=101}}{{Refn|However, the contemporary chronicler of 12th-century Popes Boso, noted that—notwithstanding the hostility of Rome to the Pope at this time—these elections were peaceful and unanimous, although Boso did describe the election of Eugenius III as taking place in "unexpected harmony".{{sfn|Robinson|1996|p=78}} Sicily, a Papal fief in name only, provided its theoretical Papal lords with neither status nor income.{{sfn|Loud|2004|p=465}} Adrian's predecessor, Anastasia, had possessed a good grasp of the intricacies of Roman politics and had used his knowledge to maintain peaceful relations between all factions where possible.{{sfn|Maxwell-Stuart|1997|p=97}}|group=note}}

Ullmann has identified four major areas of concern for Adrian at the beginning of his pontificate: the city of Rome under Arnold of Brescia, the new emperor who was marching towards Rome for his coronation, his counterpart in the east whose army had recently invaded southern Italy, and restlessness among the Pope's own vassals in his patrimony.{{sfn|Ullmann|1955|p=235}} By the time of Adrian's consecration, the city of Rome was a major player in Papal-Aristocratic regional politics.{{sfn|Wickham|2015|p=446}} Under the governance of a republican commune since 1144,{{sfn|Twyman|2003|p=49}} Pope Eugenius had recognised it the following year. While the city was usually happy to acknowledge the feudal lordship of the Pope, it was—even compared to other Italian [[city states]]—both "unusually self-aware, and also unusually idiosyncratic" compared to others.{{sfn|Wickham|2015|p=446}}{{refn|The Roman commune's idiosyncrasies included creating its own [[Carolingian minuscule|minuscule script]], a unique [[calendar era|dating system]] and its own [[Seal (emblem)|seal]] and [[Chancery (medieval office)|chancery]]. Wickham calls the Roman project both radical and unparalleled.{{sfn|Wickham|2015|p=446}}|group=note}}  The commune was hostile to the Papacy. 
The Papacy was weak in the city of [[Rome]].{{sfn|Sayers|2004}} The [[heretic]], [[Arnold of Brescia]], had ruled since 1146{{sfn|Baumgartner|2003b|p=31}} and was popular. He also had the support of the [[Commune of Rome|Roman Commune]]. The popularity of Arnold directly translated into hostility towards the popes.{{sfn|Sayers|2004}} [[Chichele Professor]] [[Chris Wickham]] describes the relationship between the Pope and the lords of his Patrimony as one in which, because "their lords did not by any means all look to Rome [they] had to be coaxed back or brought back by force".{{sfn|Wickham|2015|p=39}} Papal politics was beset by problems at home and abroad.{{sfn|Robinson|1996|p=78}} The election of Adrian IV as Pope, comments the papal scholar [[Ian S. Robinson]]—and, indeed, the elections of his immediate predecessors—"took place in the shadow of the communal revolution in Rome".{{refn|A student of [[Abelard]]'s at the [[cathedral school]] of [[Notre-Dame de Paris]],{{sfn|Norwich|1970|p=173}} Arnold has been described by the [[Church history|ecclesiastic historian]], [[Philip Schaff]], an "unsuccessful ecclesiastical and political agitator, who protested against the secularization of the Church"{{sfn|Schaff|1994|p=119}} with what Ullman terms a "fiery call for a return to apostolic poverty", says Ullmann.{{sfn|Ullmann|1955|p=234}}|group=note}}

From Eugenius, Adrian inherited what Walter Ullmann has called a "mutual assistance pact" with the Emperor, the Treaty of Constance, signed the year of Eugenius' death. For the popes, its most important aspect was the stipulation that the crowning of the next emperor was contingent on expelling Arnold of Brescia from Rome.{{sfn|Ullmann|2003|p=50}} It also assured each party of the other's support against both King William in Sicily and the Byzantine Empire when necessary.{{sfn|Tabacco|2004|p=430}} The treaty was confirmed by Adrian in January 1155.{{sfn|Magdalino|1993|p=58}} Eugenius was a believer in the [[Pope Gregory VII|Gregorian doctrine]] of [[Papal supremacy]], stating that Christ "gave to St Peter the keys of the kingdom of heaven, the power of both the earthly and the heavenly empire".{{sfn|Robinson|2004|p=322}} From the beginning of his reign, Barbarossa sought to present himself as the heir to a long, established line of Roman Emperors, and likewise that his empire was a continuation of [[Roman Empire|theirs]]. The historian Anne A. Latowsky explains how this was the cause of tension in the European polity:{{sfn|Latowsky|2013|p=140}}

{{blockquote|text=Despite grandiose allusions to the German inheritance of the universal dominion of Augustus, the Roman Empire continued to be, as it had been for centuries, a primarily theoretical concept based on an idealized notion of the protection of all Christendom...such claims often clashed with papal pretensions to the primary role as guardians of a unified and universal Christendom{{sfn|Latowsky|2013|p=140}}|}}

Norwich argues that, by now, whatever the public statements of either Papal or Imperial party, they were mutually antagonistic, and had been for many years. Even before Adrian's pontificate, he says, no peace treaty was strong enough to unite them for long: "The days when it had been realistic to speak of the two swords of Christendom were gone—gone since Gregory VII and Henry IV had hurled depositions and anathemas at each other nearly a hundred years before".{{sfn|Norwich|1970|p=181}} The situation, suggest Duggan, was "a minefield", for the Pope, and Adrian had to negotiate it.{{sfn|Duggan|2003a|p=109}}

It was the ambition of the Emperor of the Eastern Empire, Manuel I Kommenus, to reunite both Empires under one crown, and, as such, he wished to be crowned by the Pope in Rome, as Western emperors were.{{sfn|Vasiliev|1973|p=476}}{{refn|The German historian Walter Norden argues that Manuel was{{blockquote|text=Hoping with the help of the papacy to rise to dominion over the west and thereupon over the papacy itself; the popes were dreaming with the support of the Comneni of becoming the masters of the Byzantine church and thereupon of the Byzantine Empire.{{sfn|Norden|1904|p=101}}}}|group=note}} The death of Roger II presented Manuel with an opportunity he could not afford to let by, argues Professor [[Paul Magdalino]].{{sfn|Magdalino|1993|p=58}} The Kingdom of Sicily had been recognised by [[Innocent II]] in 1143, notes the Italianist [[Graham Loud]], but "relations with the Papacy remained fraught".{{sfn|Loud|2012|p=37}} The previous King of Sicily, [[Roger II of Sicily|Roger II]], had ruled his kingdom with an iron fist, and his nobility chafed,{{sfn|Wieruszowski|1969|p=29}} particularly the large number he had effectively dispossessed.{{sfn|Birk|2016|p=211}} His son was less interested than his father in the minutiae of government, and when Roger died in 1154 they took advantage of the new king and rebelled. This was of interest to the Papacy as the rebels were willing to ally themselves with anyone for their purpose.{{sfn|Wieruszowski|1969|p=29}}