The historiography overall agrees that the move of the papacy to Avignon opened a new period not only in the history of the medieval Church, but also in the history of Anglo-papal relations. Historians have debated the nature of Anglo-papal relations after the election of Pope Clement v and his legacy, especially because of his Gascon background, his allegiances as a former subject of the English Crown and his international role as mediator between England and France.Footnote 1 Likewise, the issue of continuity in Anglo-papal relations has been raised when considering the aftermath of Clement v's death on 6 April 1314 at Roquemaure and the lengthy procedure that finally led to the election of Pope John xxii on 7 August 1316. As Robert Wright put it,
the numerous strong ties between Clement and Edward ii have often been discussed, and with certain modifications this close relationship between pope and king continued throughout the reign of John xxii. What had been established during the pontificate of Clement v could continue under that of his successor at least partly because they were both dealing with the same English king for the major parts of their pontificates.Footnote 2
Wright challenged previous arguments put forward by Frederick-Thomas Tout and William Pantin, who had emphasised the weakness and conciliatory attitude of Edward ii before the papacy, and supported the conclusions of May McKisack, who had focused on the assertive nature of Edward ii's rule vis-à-vis the Church, especially as far as ecclesiastical taxation was concerned.Footnote 3 In a similar fashion, more recently, Patrick Zutshi has highlighted that, despite some moments of friction, Edward ii overall received important financial favours from the papacy, while Peter Heath has remarked that the Church lost more ground in England under Edward ii than under his father, especially with regard to taxation, jurisdiction, provisions, patronage and vacancies.Footnote 4
What makes the question concerning continuity in Anglo-papal relations between the 1310s and 1320s even more remarkable are arguably the efforts of the English Crown to secure a suitable candidate who could succeed to the Apostolic See after Clement v's death. As Seymour Phillips has recently argued, the papal vacancy in fact coincided with very troublesome years for Edward ii, who had to negotiate the aftermath of his devastating defeat at Bannockburn on 23–24 June 1314, along with adverse economic conditions, prompted by the Great Famines of 1315, 1316 and 1317, and the political opposition in the Westminster Parliament of January–March 1315. Furthermore, in these two years uprisings in Ireland (summer 1315) and Wales (1315–17) and the rebellion of Thomas, earl of Lancaster, during autumn 1315 threatened Edward ii's rule.Footnote 5 Accordingly, between 1313 and 1316 English control over the duchy of Aquitaine represented a main concern for Edward ii. The Anglo-French war between 1294 and 1298, which resulted in the French occupation of the duchy of Aquitaine until May 1303, had in fact prompted Edward i to discharge his debts and obligations towards his loyal Gascon vassals and to grant them compensations and reparations for their war losses in the first decade of the fourteenth century, overall reinforcing Gascon loyalty to the Plantagenets and underlining the fragile authority of the French Crown over this region.Footnote 6 While, in Malcolm Vale's words, between 1314 and 1316 the French Crown considered the Anglo-French negotiations on Aquitaine as ‘part of a lawsuit between unequals’, the French campaigns in Flanders put Edward ii in a strong position.Footnote 7 This state of affairs was addressed through fresh Anglo-French negotiations in 1313, the mission of Queen Isabella to the French Crown in 1314 as well as the earl of Pembroke and the bishop of Exeter's embassy to France in May 1315.Footnote 8 Arguably, securing the election of a favourable candidate to the Apostolic See after the death of the Gascon pope Clement v, who had demonstrated his allegiance to the English Crown on several occasions, was therefore crucial to Edward ii's policy in the region.
The latter point is even more relevant in light of the fact that between 1314 and 1316 the Gascon cardinals, ultimately born as subjects of the English Crown, represented the leading faction in the conclave. Equally, at the death of Clement v in 1314 the English Crown was unable to influence directly the election of his successor through its own cardinals, since the only English cardinal promoted under Clement v, the Dominican Thomas Jorz, had died in 1310 and had not been replaced with another Englishman.Footnote 9
Regardless of the English Crown's critical influence within the European political milieu between 1314 and 1316, historians have not systematically investigated the involvement of Edward ii in the negotiations that led to John xxii's election, apart from a few brief and scattered mentions.Footnote 10 This is mainly due to the fact that the literature has overlooked the rich dossier of diplomatic documents which were dispatched from England to the papal curia between May 1314 and the end of August 1316. This dossier includes a total of sixteen documents, found among the Chancery records in The National Archives in London. These are a number of petitions, enrolled in the Roman rolls, which Edward ii mainly addressed to the cardinals during the vacancy;Footnote 11 one letter sent from Carpentras to the English king after the Gascon attack on the Italian cardinals during the summer 1314;Footnote 12 and, finally, two letters dispatched from France to England by the English representatives at the papal curia.Footnote 13 The importance of this dossier is even more remarkable if compared with the well-known documentation dispatched by the diplomatic envoys of the Aragonese Crown at the papal curia, which has been studied in depth and is renowned as a seminal source for the study of diplomacy during the papal vacancy of 1314–16, although it only includes fourteen documents published by Heinrich Finke in 1908.Footnote 14 This essay will therefore try to remedy this neglect, looking at the surviving Anglo-papal diplomatic correspondence for the years 1314–16 and assessing the effectiveness of Edward ii’s political influence in the election of John xxii.
As is well-known, the sixty-two-year-old Provençal cardinal Jacques Duèse was elected as Pope John xxii after two long years of vacancy and the concrete possibility of a schism. The election of John xxii took place in three distinct phases: a first phase, from 1 May 1314, when the cardinals met at Carpentras, to 24 July 1314 when Gascon mercenaries attacked the conclave and the Italian cardinals were forced to flee the town; a second phase of papal vacancy between August 1314 and June 1316, when several diplomatic attempts were made by the English, Aragonese and French Crowns to agree on the timing and location of the new conclave; and finally, a third phase, when the conclave was summoned to Lyons on 28 June 1316 and eventually agreed on Pope John xxii's election on 7 August.
Long papal vacancies were not unprecedented in the history of the twelfth- and thirteenth-century papacy. In 1059 Pope Nicholas ii had already tried to reform the procedure for papal election, reserving to the cardinals the right of electing the pope.Footnote 15 However, between 1119 and 1178 two major papal schisms broke out (1130–9 and 1159–77). In 1179, at the opening of the Third Lateran Council, it was therefore left to Pope Alexander iii, whose pontificate had seen three anti-popes between 1159 and 1177, to issue a new decree, Licet de vitanda, concerning papal elections. Alexander iii's decree acknowledged the unlikelihood of a majority among the cardinals during papal elections and therefore supplemented previous rulings, especially Nicholas ii's decree of 1059, establishing that the new pope should be elected by a two-thirds majority of cardinals’ votes.Footnote 16 The procedure of elections was further addressed in canon 24, Quia propter, of the Fourth Lateran Council (1215), although without any direct reference to papal elections. Quia propter in fact decreed that elections could take place in three ways: electio per scrutinium, where three trusted members of the electoral college counted the secret ballot and published the outcome of the election in writing; electio per compromissum, when the election was delegated to a commission of arbiters (generally three); and finally electio per inspirationem, when there was an agreement of the electoral college on one candidate.Footnote 17 As Agostino Paravicini Bagliani has pointed out, these different procedures were all adopted in papal elections in the first half of the thirteenth century. For instance, after the death of Honorius iii in 1227 the cardinals initially agreed per compromissum on Conrad of Urach, cardinal-bishop of Porto, who refused, and then elected per inspirationem Gregory ix – Ugolino of Ostia.Footnote 18
All in all, these rulings concerning papal elections were largely successful and between 1179 and 1271 the Apostolic See was only vacant for about four years.Footnote 19 On 1 November 1274, at the Second Council of Lyons, Pope Gregory x, who had been elected after a thirty-three month vacancy, ruled on papal elections and more specifically on the conclave in the constitution Ubi periculum. This decree gave very detailed indications of the place, timing and procedures of the conclave as well as the income of the cardinals during papal vacancies. Arguably, Gregory x's decree on papal elections represented a very stern procedure for the deliberations of the conclave, aiming at shortening the time of papal vacancies and eliminating secular influences on papal elections. In practice Gregory x's decree encountered a lot of resistance and in the first two decades after its appearance it was only applied in the two papal elections of 1276, which elected Innocent v and Hadrian v. John xxi, elected on 2 September 1276, suspended Ubi periculum on 30 September 1276 and this decision was followed by three papal vacancies which lasted for more than six months.Footnote 20 Finally, on 5 July 1294, Celestine v reinstated Ubi periculum, followed during the election of Boniface viii, which was decided per scrutinium after only one day of conclave on 24 December 1294. Boniface viii further endorsed Ubi periculum and had it included in his collection of decretals promulgated in 1298, the Liber Sextus.Footnote 21 Once more, Ubi periculum's legacy was short-lived and in the early fourteenth century the decree was overruled in practice. In 1305 the conclave for the election of Clement v in fact lasted eleven months.Footnote 22 Therefore, at the end of this pontificate, at the Council of Vienne (1311–12), Clement v tried to avoid the recurrence of the same problems through the publication of a new constitution on papal elections, Ne Romani, which further focused on the location of the conclave, and the protocol for administering the Apostolic See during papal vacancies.Footnote 23
As Guillaume Mollat put it, the practices followed in the election of John xxii ought to be understood within the development of the canonical procedure for papal elections in the second half of the thirteenth century.Footnote 24 On 1 May 1314, in accordance with Ubi periculum, ten days after Clement v's death at Roquemaure on 20 April 1314, the cardinals were summoned to the conclave at the episcopal palace of Carpentras, which was situated about 30 km from where the pope had died. The harshness of the conclave at Carpentras is described in the so-called Vita Prima of John xxii, which is contained in the Memoriale historiarum of John, canon of St Victor in Paris (1327–51), and was probably written before 1326.Footnote 25 John of St Victor indeed remarked on the withdrawal of food from the cardinals apart from bread, wine and water as well as the decay of the cardinals’ households owing to the suspension of any payment from the Apostolic Chamber – both these practices had been decreed in Ubi periculum in order to shorten the duration of conclaves.Footnote 26
From the very beginning the cardinals were divided into three parties: the Gascon cardinals, who were ten in number and represented the majority under the external control of two nephews of Clement v, Bertrand de Got, viscount of Lomagne and Auvillars, and Raimond Guilhem de Budos; the Italian party, which comprised seven cardinals and was itself divided into factions; and the French-Provençal party, which included six cardinals from Languedoc, Quercy and Normandy.Footnote 27 The Italian and Provençal parties initially favoured the election of the Provençal Guillaume de Mandagout, cardinal-bishop of Palestrina, but they encountered the opposition of Bérenger Frédol, who was cardinal-bishop of Tusculum and major penitentiary and had aspirations to the Apostolic See himself. Likewise, the Gascon cardinals preferred a Gascon pope to succeed Clement v. These divisions made it impossible to agree on a two-thirds majority, as prescribed in Licet de vitanda. A very interesting insight into the on-going negotiations during the conclave is provided in a letter sent to Philip iv, king of France, by the Italian Napoleone Orsini, cardinal of St. Adriano, in defiance of Ubi periculum, which decreed very strict rules on the cardinals’ enclosure during the conclave. In his letter Napoleone Orsini blamed Clement v and his rule for the conclave's inability to reach a two-thirds majority at Carpentras. In Napoleone Orsini's view, Clement v was ultimately responsible because of his patronage and nepotism towards his Gascon peers, especially the appointment of Gascons to the ranks of cardinal, which had bad repercussions on the current conclave in 1314, and the move of the papal curia to France, which had devastating consequences for Rome, Italy and the Church.Footnote 28 It is most interesting that the same view of Napoleone's influence on Clement v's election was shared in the contemporary letter that Dante Alighieri addressed to the Italian cardinals during the first phases of the conclave in Carpentras (May–June 1314), a letter also known to Giovanni Villani, who mentions it in his chronicle in the chapter dedicated to Dante.Footnote 29 The historiography has mostly read such remarks as Napoleone's admission of responsibility, since he had been one of the main advocates of Clement v's election at Perugia in 1305.Footnote 30 Napoleone further maintained the current intention of the Italian cardinals to elect a pope, good in words and deeds, who could return the Apostolic See to Rome and reform the Church from simony and corruption.Footnote 31 Napoleone Orsini finally emphasised that the Italian cardinals had endorsed the election of the Provençal Guillaume de Mandagout, who had an outstanding reputation among the clergy and the faithful as well as among his peers. To their surprise, the Gascons had however rejected Guillaume's candidacy.Footnote 32 Therefore, in utter defiance of Ubi periculum, Napoleone Orsini openly asked Philip iv to intervene with the Gascon cardinals in order to secure a prompt papal election.Footnote 33
Arguably, Napoleone Orsini's appeal to Philip iv does not represent the only occurrence when reserved information leaked out of the conclave in Carpentras. Hitherto overlooked evidence, preserved in The National Archives in London, shows that in 1314 Edward ii was already worried that the papal vacancy could affect the delicate political balance in Gascony and Aquitaine. As early as 27 May 1314 he therefore activated his diplomatic channels, dispatching to Carpentras his envoys Alexander, bishop of Dublin, Raymond Subirani and Andrea Sapiti. Edward directly addressed their letter of credence to Bérenger Frédol, who was major penitentiary and regent during the papal vacancy, while copies of the same letter (littere a pari) were also sent to the other cardinals and to Clement v's nephews, Bertrand de Got and Raimond Guilhem de Budos. As Edward ii clarified in a second letter, dispatched on 26 May 1314 to one of his envoys at the papal curia, Raymond Subirani, he was especially worried that a prolonged papal vacancy would affect the payment of arrears owed to the English Crown for the duchy of Aquitaine, which Pope Clement v had facilitated through a loan in 1312.Footnote 34 One month later, on 29 June 1314, worried about the inability of the conclave to reach a decision, Edward ii again addressed the cardinals, and Béreger Frédol directly. In his letter to the cardinals Edward ii expressed his concern for the prolonged vacancy of the Apostolic See, which had deprived the Church of its leader, and asked for a prompt election, since the vacancy endangered the organisation of the crusade to the Holy Land, launched at the Council of Vienne in 1311–12 and planned for 1319.Footnote 35 In his subsequent letter to Bérenger Frédol, Edward ii addressed its recipient more directly, asking that the cardinals pursue any lawful means to agree on a canonical election of the pope as quickly as possible.Footnote 36 Finally, on 18 July 1314, Edward ii wrote to the Gascon cardinals Arnaud d'Aux, Raimond Guilhem de Fargues and Arnaud de Pellegrue, along with Clement v's nephew Bertrand de Got, asking for their endorsement of the petitions of his Gascon subjects, Oliver of Bordeaux and his brothers, who requested 400 silver pounds in compensation and to retain as bailli the bastides of Monflanquin and Castillonnès in the Agenais.Footnote 37 Obviously, despite the prolonged papal vacancy, ordinary affairs needed to move on, especially in the duchy of Aquitaine, and this was undoubtedly Edward ii's principal concern.Footnote 38
However, a few days later, on 23 and 24 July 1314, riots broke out in Carpentras between the Italian curialists and members of the Gascon cardinals’ households. Ultimately, with the excuse of restoring order in the town, Clement v's nephews, Bertrand de Got and Raimond Guilhem de Budos, and their mercenaries stormed Carpentras, slaughtering the Italians, assaulting the residence of the Italian cardinals and the headquarters of the Italian banking-companies. Finally, the Gascons attacked the conclave. This is once more well-documented in the English diplomatic correspondence thanks to an original letter sent by the five Italian cardinals to Edward ii on 10 September 1314.Footnote 39 In their letter, the Italian cardinals openly denounced the Gascon attack and, in very vivid language, they manifested their intention of establishing the truth of what had happened beyond any rumour.Footnote 40 In accordance with Napoleone Orsini's letter to Philip iv, the Italians maintained their intention of supporting a candidate who could reform the Church, neglecting their individual preferences and agendas – this candidate was the Provençal cardinal Guillaume de Mandagout, who however is not explicitly mentioned in the letter.Footnote 41 Nevertheless, the Gascons, under the command of Clement v's nephews, believing that they had hereditary rights over the Apostolic See, had stormed Carpentras, killing some Italian curialists, sacking the Italian cardinals’ households and ultimately attacking the episcopal palace, where the conclave was held.Footnote 42 Yelling ‘we want a pope, kill the Italian cardinals’, they finally entered the episcopal palace, and the Italians only managed to escape through a small hole in the back wall, fleeing from Carpentras to different places and ultimately repairing to Valence, from where they wrote to Edward ii.Footnote 43 Indeed, the choice of Edward ii as the addressee of the Italian complaints against the Gascon attack seems very appropriate, since the English king after all ruled over part of Gascony, while it is interesting that a copy of the same letter, dated on 8 September 1314 was also sent to the Cistercian mother houses and general chapter through Gunther de Vilestenheim, chaplain of Speyer.Footnote 44 In all likelihood, the Italian cardinals also addressed the letter to Jaime ii, king of Aragon, who replied on 20 October 1314, offering his support for a conciliatory solution.Footnote 45
The riots at Carpentras marked the opening of the second phase of papal vacancy, which was characterised by intense diplomatic negotiations. The Gascon cardinals had in fact gathered at Avignon, while the Italians declared that the papal election ought to take place in their presence, threatening to proceed to a papal election without the Gascons, if necessary. Indeed, according to John xxii's Vita Prima, not withstanding Ubi periculum, which decreed that papal elections should take place where the pope had died, the Italians even thought of moving the conclave back to Rome.Footnote 46 From the very beginning of this second phase, Edward ii further engaged in on-going correspondence with his envoys, who were constantly updating him on the evolving situation in the South of France. One letter, addressed to the king on 31 August 1314, shows that the English Crown's envoys at the papal curia, Andrea Sapiti and Raymond Subirani, kept Edward ii informed on two main issues: the agreement reached with Bertrand de Got in September 1314 on the arrears in Gascony;Footnote 47 and the reluctance of the Italian cardinals to rejoin the conclave at Carpentras after the Gascon attack in July.Footnote 48 Andrea Sapiti also maintained that negotiations on the timing and location of a new conclave were taking place between one representative of the Italian cardinals, one representative of the French cardinals and Nicholas de Fréauville, cardinal of St Eusebio, emphasising the Italians’ preference for Lyons or another town in the kingdom of France as a location for the new conclave to be summoned on 1 October 1314. In the same letter the English envoy finally informed Edward ii about the possible runners for papal election, hinting at Nicholas de Fréauville as the most likely candidate, possibly securing the two-thirds majority, since he enjoyed the support of the French Crown, the cardinals from northern Italy (Lombardi) and Guillaume de Mandagout, cardinal-bishop of Palestrina.Footnote 49 In a second letter addressed to Edward ii only few days later, on 7 September 1314, Andrea Sapiti returned to the on-going negotiations for the summoning of the new conclave between Nicholas de Fréauville, cardinal of St Eusebio, Niccolò Albertini da Prato, cardinal-bishop of Ostia, and William Testa, cardinal of St Ciriaco in Thermis. Once more Andrea Sapiti stated that the date for the conclave had been moved forward to 1 November and emphasised the Italians’ preference for Lyons or another town in the kingdom of France, while the Gascons favoured Bruges. Indeed, he informed the king that a meeting between Niccolò Albertini and Iacopo Stefaneschi had been arranged in the following weeks in order to discuss the location of the conclave. Finally, the envoy mentioned Philip iv's pressure on the cardinals to proceed quickly to the election of Nicholas de Fréauville, asking Edward ii if he wished to support openly the same candidate.Footnote 50
Most interestingly, Sapiti's reference to Philip iv's appeal for a prompt papal election is further supported by a letter of the French king addressed to Bérenger Frédol and the Gascon Arnaud de Pellegrue probably in September 1314, evidencing the good quality of the English Crown's intelligence in Avignon.Footnote 51 In this letter Philip iv offered his protection to the new conclave to be summoned in the kingdom of France as soon as possible, since the prolonged papal vacancy was affecting the Church and the organisation of the crusade. The French king hence emphasised that he had engaged in correspondence with the Italian cardinals, after consultation with his legal advisers, who had sympathised with Italian concerns over joining a new conclave in Carpentras or Avignon given recent events. Equally, Lyons had emerged as the most suitable place for the new conclave, given its safety and its former association with the Apostolic See: two general councils had been held in the town during the thirteenth century. In Philip iv's words, Lyons was also favoured by Nicholas de Fréauville, cardinal of St Eusebio, whom the French king openly supported as a suitable candidate for the Apostolic See. Finally, Philip iv strongly reprimanded the Gascon cardinals for their open obstruction of his plans and dispatched his envoy for further negotiations.Footnote 52
Notoriously, Philip iv's pressure on the cardinals in September 1314 did not achieve any result. Indeed, as negotiations on the summoning of the new conclave ground to a halt after Philip iv's death in November 1314, the Franco-Flemish war and Gascon affairs occupied the English political discourse during the first part of 1315.Footnote 53 However, between September 1314 and August 1315 Edward ii was still very involved in the negotiations for the convocation of a new conclave, effectively managing this matter together with business concerning the duchy of Aquitaine. Arguably, what has so far misled the historiography, mostly unaware of Edward ii's involvement in this phase of the papal vacancy, has been the current organisation of the English diplomatic correspondence for these years, which was divided into different collections at the end of the nineteenth century. Indeed, when the English Chancery records were moved from the Tower of London to Chancery Lane some membranes of the Roman rolls (C 70), which contain the majority of the English Crown's petitions concerning Anglo-French and Gascon affairs, were detached from the enrolments and put together with other relevant Chancery documentation regarding French and Gascon matters in order to create the artificial series of chancery enrolments known as Treaty rolls (C 76). This was especially the case of membranes 7 and 8 of C 76/9, which were originally attached to C 70/3 as membranes 11 and 9.Footnote 54 The reconstruction of C 70/3 as it was originally assembled in the fourteenth century allows us to shed new light on the correspondence addressed by Edward ii to the cardinals in 1315, showing how Edward ii tried to secure a prompt solution of the schism. On 19 November 1314 Edward ii's petition addressed to the Gascon cardinals Arnaud d'Aux, Raimond Guilhem de Fargues and Bernard de Garves asked for release from the pending payment owed to the Apostolic Chamber for the visitation of Walter Reynolds, who had been translated to the archbishopric of Canterbury in 1313 and freed from any financial burden by Clement v.Footnote 55 Two weeks later, on 4 December 1314, Edward ii once more wrote to the cardinals, asking for a prompt solution of the papal vacancy and announcing the dispatch of his envoys to France, Antonio Passagni and Gilberto Pecche, whose mission was also recommended to the new French king, Louis x.Footnote 56 In the first part of 1315 Edward ii was in fact involved in fresh negotiations with Louis x, who secured English support against Flanders in return for substantial concessions in Aquitaine thanks to the mission of the earl of Pembroke and the bishop of Exeter.Footnote 57 When, in September 1315, his envoys returned to England from their French mission, Edward ii again addressed the cardinals, complaining about the long vacancy of the Apostolic See and exhorting the cardinals to unity. Indeed, the situation at the papal curia was affecting the plan for the crusade and ecclesiastical appointments in England.Footnote 58 This was especially so in the case of the election to the archbishopric of York, which had been secured by William Melton on 21 January 1316. Most interestingly, faced with the prolonged papal vacancy, on 13 February 1316 Edward ii urgently demanded the confirmation of William Melton's appointment, after granting him a safe-conduct to travel to the curia on 8 February.Footnote 59 On this occasion, the English chancery had to draft a petition addressed to the ‘pope’ without specifying a name, since the conclave had not yet been summoned.Footnote 60
Despite his domestic problems in 1315, and his urgent concerns about political affairs in Gascony, Edward ii therefore carried on lobbying the cardinals in order to achieve a prompt solution to the papal vacancy. However, the historiography has traditionally argued that from early 1315 Louis x, king of France, Robert, king of Naples, and Jaime ii, king of Aragon alone took over a mediatory role in the management of the papal vacancy.Footnote 61 In particular, while France and England were occupied with the Flemish war and Gascon affairs, the Aragonese Crown resumed its diplomatic initiative in France. On 4 January 1315 William, bishop of Gerona, was sent to Avignon and addressed to Jaime ii a dispatch concerning the rumours about the negotiations for the summoning of the new conclave, while, as a result of this diplomatic mission, the Italian cardinal Giacomo Colonna and the Gascon Arnaud de Pellegrue wrote to the Aragonese king in early 1315, explaining their respective positions.Footnote 62 In his letter to Jaime ii, dated 24 February 1315, Arnaud de Pellegrue explained that the French cardinals had approached the Italian cardinals, asking them to put forward the name of a candidate for the Apostolic See and to choose a ‘safe’ place for the conclave either in France or Provence. However, he blamed the Italians for the delay, since they had only put forward one candidate and insisted on summoning the conclave to a location which would be under imperial control or beyond the Alps.Footnote 63
Accordingly, in December 1315 English and Aragonese diplomatic efforts were matched by those of the French Crown, when Louis x dispatched Philip, count of Poitiers, on a new diplomatic mission to Avignon.Footnote 64 Both John of St Victor and Bernard Gui especially praised Philip of Poitiers's embassy to Avignon in the first part of 1316, although, as Mollat put it, they were after all the official historians of the French monarchy.Footnote 65 According to the Istore et chroniques de Flandres, during his mission Philip travelled around the residences of the cardinals in Provence in order to gather some support.Footnote 66 He finally met Arnaud de Pellegrue, who endorsed the French plan, and Francesco Caietani, who nevertheless opposed it. Ultimately, at a meeting held at the Franciscan convent in Avignon, Philip allegedly tried to bribe some cardinals and made false accusations of sorcery against Francesco Caietani in order to discredit him. However, the promises made to Philip on this occasion were again not followed up by any action.Footnote 67
According to the almost contemporary accounts of Matthias von Neuenburg and Ferreto Ferreti of Vicenza, in the first part of 1316 Robert, king of Naples, alongside Jaime ii and Louis x, took over a vital mediatory role, finally securing the summoning of the conclave to Lyons which led to the election of his candidate, Jacques Duèse.Footnote 68
The Capetian and Angevin missions arguably achieved the desired effects and allowed the summoning of the new conclave to Lyons in June 1316. This was also prompted by the sudden vacancy in the kingdom of France, after the death of Louis x on 5 June 1316, which had left a pregnant queen and Philip of Poitiers as regent. Already in March 1316 the Aragonese ambassador at the papal curia, John Lupi de Guorga, had informed Jaime ii that the cardinals were on their way to Lyons for the conclave.Footnote 69 On 28 June 1316 the conclave met in the Dominican convent at Lyons and began its deliberation under the armed guard provided by the count of Poitiers, who pressured the cardinals to reach a decision.Footnote 70 In his dispatch to Jaime ii, John Lupi further remarked that, in accordance with Ubi periculum, the cardinals were not to leave the conclave until they had reached a decision and that they were dubiously guarded by Philip of Poitiers along with Arnaud de Comes, count of Forez, who had allowed only one chaplain and two servants to accompany each cardinal in the conclave.Footnote 71 On 20 July 1316 another Aragonese envoy, Arnald de Cumbis, further described in some detail to Jaime ii the conditions of the conclave and the space used by the cardinals: they had to share connected rooms among two or three of them; they enjoyed outdoor facilities during their stay, such as the convent's cloisters and gardens; and they could eat what they wished, in defiance of the papal decrees. Remarkably, the Aragonese envoy mentioned here that the count of Forez guarded the enclosure and that the conclave was only loosely run in accordance with the ruling of Ubi periculum, although he questioned whether the constitution applied in such case, since the place of Clement v's death and the audientia litterarum contradictarum were both located outside the district where the conclave had ultimately met, namely Lyons.Footnote 72 The Aragonese envoy also explained that the king of France and the count of Poitiers had previously consulted some theologians on this point and they had decided to go ahead for the common good (‘propter bonum publicum’) and to avoid a schism. Finally, the Aragonese envoy hinted at the count of Poitiers's plot against the election of the Gascon Arnaud Novel, cardinal of St Prisca, who had been opposed by four cardinals acting on his behalf as well as some French cardinals, who dreaded Arnaud's sympathies for Jaime ii and the king of Majorca. Indeed, the envoy concluded that the count of Poitiers preferred the election of a pope favourable to the will of the French Crown rather than the choice of a good and rightful man. In his opinion, the conclave was therefore ultimately divided into three factions: the Italians favoured the election of either Guillaume de Mandagout, cardinal-bishop of Palestrina, or Arnaud Novel; of the remaining seventeen cardinals, the French supported Bérenger Frédol, cardinal-bishop of Tusculum, and refused the election of a candidate outside the conclave, while the Gascons and the count of Poitiers preferred Arnaud de Pellegrue.Footnote 73 Finally, the Aragonese ambassador reported on the political uncertainty in France owing to Louis x's death and the regency of the count of Poitiers.Footnote 74 As the Aragonese envoy records, on 29 July 1316 this deadlock in the conclave was eventually overcome owing to a common agreement (tractatus in communi), strongly prompted by the growing pressure of Philip of Poitiers, who wished for a quick papal election, given his imminent journey to Paris and the uncertainty about the succession to the French Crown.Footnote 75 As the Aragonese ambassador explained in a last dispatch, dated on 7 August 1316, the choice ultimately fell on Jacques Duèse, the elderly cardinal of Porto, because of disagreement between the Colonna and the Caietani cardinals.Footnote 76 In a second dispatch, sent on 11 August, the Aragonese envoy John Lupi further explained that a difference had arisen between Napoleone Orsini and Pietro Colonna, breaking up the Italian party and eventually favouring the election of Jacques Duèse, who was Robert of Naples’ candidate, supported by Arnaud de Pellegrue, the Caietani cardinals and Napoleone Orsini.Footnote 77 Equally, Giovanni Villani recounted that the Gascons supported the election either of Bérenger Frédol or Arnaud de Pellegrue, while Italians, Provençals and Napoleone Orsini put forward Jacques Duèse, who was eventually elected.Footnote 78
It is of interest that, in his factious account, Villani stressed that John xxii's election was reached after following the correct procedure according to the decretals.Footnote 79 However, as Mollat put it, the sources evidently disagree on the protocol followed. While Giovanni Villani, Henry of Rebdorf, the Istore et croniques de Flandres and the Chronographia regum Francorum maintain that the election was reached per compromissum, it is likely that John xxii was in fact elected per scrutinium, as the Aragonese envoy also claims in his dispatch of 11 August 1316.Footnote 80 Mollat further speculated on the three members of the electoral college who counted the ballots, arguing that they were Napoleone Orsini, Niccolò Albertini and Nicholas of Fréauville, while the recount was done by Bérenger Frédol, Arnaud Fournier and William Longhi.Footnote 81 Quoting the chronicle of Ferretto Ferretti da Vicenza, which in part agrees with John Lupi's dispatch to Jaime ii, Mollat also maintained that the election of Jacques Duèse was strongly promoted by Robert, king of Naples, who sent his envoy to bribe Pietro Colonna and Napoleone Orsini.Footnote 82 Jacques Duèse's connections to the Angevin Crown were undeniably very strong: Jacques had been in the service of Robert's father, Charles ii, as chancellor and adviser since 1298 and promoted his cause against Jaime ii, king of Aragon. Likewise, the Provençal cardinals were generally in favour of Jacques's election as he had been bishop of Avignon between 1310 and 1312.Footnote 83
While no English diplomatic correspondence addressed to the cardinals during the conclave at Lyons survives, the English Crown was arguably well-disposed towards the election of Jacques Duèse too. Jacques was in fact originally from Cahors in the region of Quercy that had been for a long time under English control.Footnote 84 News of the papal election had already reached the king informally on 17 August through an agent of the Italian bankers, the Bardi.Footnote 85 Between 7 August, when John xxii was elected, and 5 September 1316, when he was consecrated, Edward ii quickly resumed his correspondence with the papal curia, addressing Arnaud de Pellegrue in late August 1316 on episcopal appointments and the payment of arrears in the duchy of Aquitaine.Footnote 86 Furthermore, on 5 September 1316, John xxii notified Edward ii of his election, while on 26 September, after the consecration ceremony, Edward ii again wrote to Arnaud de Pellegrue, confirming that the cardinal's envoy Durand had arrived in England to inform him officially about John xxii's election.Footnote 87 Finally, on 14 October 1316, Edward ii's chancery drafted a first petition directly addressed to John xxii, instructing the Crown's envoys, Richard Burton and John Binstead, to obtain papal support against the Scots.Footnote 88
As Seymour Phillips has argued, in November 1316, only few months after John xxii's election, Edward ii immediately set to work on the organisation of a major embassy to the papal curia, led by the Aymer of Valence, earl of Pembroke, and Bartholomew of Badlesmere, which had three main concerns: the repayment of the loan of 160,000 florins made by Clement v to Edward ii in 1314 in order to regain control over revenues in the duchy of Aquitaine; the delay in the king's departure for the crusade in the Holy Land and the collection of the crusading tenths; and, finally, the war against the Scots. Overall, this diplomatic mission achieved satisfactory results. It in fact secured a delay of the king's crusading vow, fulfilled the Crown's requests on the collection of the crusading tenths and ensured the partial payment of the English debt at the Apostolic Chamber as well as papal support against the Scots.Footnote 89
Arguably, the prompt and careful planning of the English embassy to the papal curia in late 1316 mirrors Edward ii's attentive approach to Anglo-papal relations, evidenced not only in the first seven years of his reign during the pontificate of Clement v, but also throughout the papal vacancy between 1314 and 1316. Indeed, as the English diplomatic documentation preserved at The National Archives undoubtedly shows, Edward ii dispatched his envoys to Carpentras as early as late May 1314 and engaged in a very intense correspondence with them and the cardinals both at the time of the conclave in Carpentras and during the difficult months of negotiations for the summoning of the new conclave between the end of July 1314 and early 1315. As evidenced in the diplomatic dossier uncovered at The National Archives, during the delicate phase of negotiations that followed the attack on the conclave at Carpentras in July 1314, Edward ii regularly received information from his envoys at the papal curia, Andrea Sapiti and Raymond Subirani. In particular, Edward's envoys carefully monitored the machinations of Philip iv, who openly supported the election of Nicholas Fréauville, cardinal of St Eusebio, and asked Edward ii if he wished to support the same candidate.Footnote 90 The content of such diplomatic dispatches perhaps shows that Edward ii was keen to be seen as an active agency in the negotiations for the election of the new pope in the second phase of the papal vacancy. This is even more remarkable given Edward ii's domestic problems in the autumn 1314, after the devastating defeat at Bannockburn, which may have prompted the king to re-establish his international profile and seek support abroad in order to face opposition at home. Furthermore, although Edward's contacts with the cardinals and the papal curia were only sporadic in the first half of 1315, and despite his domestic political and financial problems, his engagement with the papal curia in these months intersected with the difficult negotiations with the new French king Louis x on the Flemish war and Gascon affairs. The election of John xxii on 7 August 1316 was undeniably achieved thanks to the diplomatic efforts of the count of Poitiers and Robert of Naples. From August 1316 Edward ii promptly resumed his contacts with the papal curia, dispatching to Avignon the earl of Pembroke's embassy which marked a clear change in royal policy, as Seymour Phillips and Sebastian Zanke have argued.Footnote 91 While Edward ii and his envoys were ultimately aware of the lighter political weight that they were carrying within the international political milieu between 1314 and 1316, English diplomatic efforts arguably ensured that the English Crown was among the political interlocutors of the cardinals during the papal vacancy and secured a place for England on the European political scene in the second decade of the fourteenth century.
APPENDIX 1
Avignon, 31 August 1314
Letter of Andrea Sapiti, Representative of Edward II at the Papal Curia, Concerning the Negotiations on the Timing and Location of a New Conclave and Names of the Possible Candidates for Papal Election.
The National Archive, London, SC 1/55/47; Langlois, Documents relatives, 77–8 n. 2; Langlois, Le Fonds, 450.
Verso: ‘Excellentissimo ac serenissimo principi et domino domino Edwardo dei gratia regi Anglie illustri suo domino singulari.’
Excellentissimo et serenissimo principi et domino domino Edwardo dei gratia regi Anglie illustri suo domino singulari suus fidelis servus Andreas Sapiti in Romana curia clericus et familiaris seipsum cum omni qua potest fidelitate ac reverentie et promptum omnibus famulatum. Serenissime princeps et domine, scripsi vestre regie maiestati omnia que per dominum Ramundum Sobirani et me facta fuerunt cum domino marchione, quondam domini pape nepote, per plures nuncios. Et sicut dominus Ramundus et ego debebamus communiter maiestati vestre scribere et significare predicta. Et dictus dominus Ramundus, asserens mihi se magnis negociis occupatum, dicebat quod adhuc scribere non poterat nec usque nunc potuit. Et responsio marchionis, prout per alias binas litteras scripsi vestre regie maiestati, quam dominus Ramundus et ego significare debemus et mictere, fuit in effectu et est talis: quod dominus papa oneraverat eum de (volunta)te sua de quibusdam negociis faciendis et per sacramentum, et quod eum oportebat habere dictam pecuniam quam citius posset ad dicta negotia expedienda. Tamen volens placere maiestati regie vult quod sibi assignentur proventus et redditus annui costume de Marmanda et alicuius vel aliquorum locorum in ducatu, ita quod infra octo sive novem aut decem annos proxime futuros sit sibi satisfactum de dicto debito, facto computo diligenti […]. Et si hoc fiat sibi alii erunt contenti et ipse cum eis de dicta assignatione et totus ducatus et proventus alii revertentur ad manus vestras et (successorum) vestrorum. Et de huiusmodi responsione sua cui effectum videre potestis dominus Ramundus et ego debemus vos certos reddere per nostras communes litteras quas mittemus maiestati vestre quando dominus Ramundus venerit ad partes istas de partibus Montispesulanis in quibus est pro negotiis domini regis Francie, ut dicit. Qui dominus Ramundus postea venit Avinionem post diem, quam assignaverat michi pro huiusmodi responsione facienda et ibidem fuit cum uno magno preceptore de ordine Hospitallorum, et cepit scribi facere litteras dirigendas vestre regie maiestati in die vigilie beati Bartholomei et illas una mecum debebat mictere mane sequenti per nostros duos communes nuncios maiestati vestre. Ipso autem mane se asserens diversis negociis occupatum, dixit quod eum oportebat ire cum quodam milite, domino Bertrando nomine, usque ad Aquam Mortuam, quem dicebat iturum pro negociis domini regis Francie ultra mare, et quod pro certo esset in Avinionem reversus die Martis proxime secutura in prandio. Nec ipsa die Martis nec Mercurii venit set die Iovis proxime misit mihi Francischinum familiarem suum, quod ipse venire non poterat Avinionem et quod micterem sibi unum nuncium, qui una cum uno de suis nuntiis maiestati vestre deferret licteras supradictas. De quo miror, quia ipse et ego illas debemus communiter mictere, et vult illas per se dirigere. Nichilominus vado ad eum ut dicta responsio non differatur ulterius et nuntium mictam cum suo, si sibi placuerit, secundum quod ipse ordinavit mecum. Nichilominus tamen effectum responsionis dicti marchionis scripsi maiestati vestre per alias licteras sicut per istas. Et cogitavi in meipso quod, si responsio marchionis vobis placeret, ad presens deberetis constituere (procuratores) vel quemdam procuratorem cum sufficienti mandato directo domino Ramundo, cuius consilio ducitur dictus marchio, quod ordinaret et notam faceret mandati ordinandi per vos in personam procuratoris vel procuratorum vestrorum quod assignarent costumam de Marmanda et aliquis alios reditus dicto marchioni, et totum alium ducatum et proventus quoslibet sine ulteriori dilatione reducerent ad manus vestre regie maiestatis. Et sic dixit se facturum. Dixit insuper dictus dominus Ramundus quod multa alia significabit maiestati vestre per vos utiliter in ducatu Vasconie peragenda. De quibus si significaverit, ordinabit circa illa prout ordinanda decreverit vestra regia celsitudo.
Nova et statum dominorum cardinalium et curie significavi per ordinem maiestati vestre et adhuc in eodem statu sunt. Nisi quod ipsi domini cardinales prorogaverunt primam diem Septembris qua omnes debebant recludi usque ad primam diem Octobris proxime futuri. Et dicta die prima debent recludi, et firmatum est inter eos quod eligantur duo ex ipsis cardinalibus, videlicet unus de cardinalibus Lombardis et unus de Citramontanis, qui duo sint cum domino fratre Nicolao cardinale ad providendum et firmandum de loco in quo debeant recludi, quia Carpentoratum est suspectum, et sic ab omnibus reputatur propter facinora ibidem commissa […] recludent se in Lugduno vel in aliqua alia villa regni Francie pro certo, ita quod dictus dominus frater Nicolaus erit electus secundum preces domini regis Francie. Nam volunt omnes Lombardi eum et dominum Penestrinum et placeret multum domino regi de dicto domino Nicolao. Nam apparet quia utraque pars cardinalium elegit eum pro tertio, et sic est communis opinion quod fiet papa. Propter quod scio et pro certo habeo, si verba promis […] si placeret maiestati vestre regie et utile esset quod ex […] precibus domini regis Francie, quia domini cardinales reintrabunt districtum, ita quod videretur electus ad preces vestras sicut ad preces ipsius regis Francie et ad hoc quod voluntatem dicti domini haberemus promptam pro predicationem crucis et alia opportuna contra illos Scotos […] pessimos proditores ad destruendum eos et dampnandum ac extirpandum de hoc seculo, ita quod nullus eorum nec ipsorum iniquitas valeat perpetua esse, prout per alias litteras plene scripsi vestre regie maiestati.
Igitur celsitudinis regia michi mandare dignetur quid facere de predictis debeam cum mandatum ipsum et alia […] posse […] perpetue indefessus […] tanquam servus fidelissimus et subiectus. Conservet altissimus vestramFootnote * maiestatem regiam […] prosperitati felici per tempora prospera et longeva.
Datum Avinione die ultima Augusti
APPENDIX 2
Avignon, 7 September 1314
Letter of Andrea Sapiti on the on-going Negotiations for the Summoning of the New Conclave and Mentioning Philip iv's Endorsement of Nicholas de Fréauville, Cardinal of St Eusebio, as a Candidate for the Papacy.
TNA, SC 1/34/176; Langlois, Le Fonds, 450–1
Verso: ‘Excellentissimo ac serenissimo principi domino domino Edwardo dei gratia regi Anglie illustri domino suo speciali’.
[The parchment is badly damaged on the left side.]
Suo domino singulari suus fidelis servus Andreas Sapiti seipsum et promptum in omnibus famulatum.
Serenissime princeps et domine scripsi vestre regie maiestati nova et statum curie Romane de tempore in tempus usque ad electionem factam per omnes cardinales tam Citramontanos quam Ultramontanos de tribus cardinalibus, videlicet de domino Nicolao de Francia et aliis duobus, quorum unus est dominus Ostiensis et alius dominus Guillelmus Testa, ad providendum de loco et nedum convenerunt nec ordinaverunt, sed in regno Francie providere intendunt, quamvis Vascones recusent expresse Lugdunum et nominent civitatem Bituricensem prope Parisius ad XL leucas vel circa. De Francia venerunt littere continentes, quod ordinetur locus et electio differatur per aliquod tempus citra festum Omnium Sanctorum. Quia unus de filiis domini regis Francie et dominus Ingerandus de Marigniaco posito negotio Flandrie in aliquo certo puncto, quod asserunt esse debere in brevi, venient ad dominos cardinales et, si differetur, venient alii probi et magni viri, ita quod sine dilatione eligatur papa; et omnes Ytalici cardinales bene contentantur de fratre Nicolao et plures de aliis expresse et alii, qui nondum expresse consentiunt, videntur velle, quod rex Francie cognoscat plene, quod ad eius instantiam consentiant in eundem fratrem Nicolaum, in quem sine dicti domini regis precibus intimis nullatenus consentirent, ut ab eodem domino rege maiores grates reportent, ita quod dicti nuncii venturi ex parte dicti domini, ut pro certo creditur dictam electionem per preces predictas, quo ad illos, qui differunt eligere, ut rogentur, facient expediri.
Idcirco dignetur vestra regia celsitudo michi mandatum suum dirigere in eo, quod debeam de predictis facere, videlicet, si placet, quod pro dicto domino Nicolao insistam et concurram, ita quod videatur creatus in instantiam vestram, sicut domini regis Francie prefati et mandato vestro obediam nunc et semper ad posse, sicut alia scripsi de predictis vestre regie maiestati. Dominus Raymundus Sobirani scribit per suas proprias litteras responsionem, quam ipse et ego habuimus a dicto machione et ipsam mictit ista die maiestati vestre per nuntium suum, cum quo micto unum de meis, ita quod directe ducat dictum nuncium domini Raymundi ad pedes vestre regie maiestatis. Dominus Hostiensis prefatus rogavit consotios suos cardinales, quod placeret eis de seipsis ad eligendum de loco alium nominare, ita quod ipse vel dominus Jacobus Gaytanus mictetur ad predicta loco sui et convenient de septimana futura, ubi tamen nescitur adhuc, sed creditur, quod in Montiliis ad Mare aut in Sancto Spiritu vel in civitate Vivariensi.
Conservet altissimus vestram maiestatem regiam ipsamque augeat in honore et prospiritate felici.
Datum Avinione, die Sabbati in Vigilia beate Marie Virginis Gloriose.
APPENDIX 3
Lancaster, 13 February 1316
Petition of Edward II to the ‘Pope’, Demanding Confirmation of William Melton's Appointment as Archbishop of York.
TNA, C 70/ mem. 8.
Pape rex devota pedum oscula beatorum.
Sacrosancte Romane ecclesie, que disponente Domino omnium ecclesiarum optinet principatum, decet regimini perfidentem ad ecclesias pastoribus viduatas et que precipue immediate eidem Romane ecclesie sint subiecte, eo solercius oculos paternales, quo sit pastoris solacio destitute, calamitatibus et angustiis noscuntur periculosis subiacere vacante siquidem nuper Eboracensi ecclesia per mortem bone memorie Willelmi nuper archiepiscopi loci illius petitaque a nobis, ut est moris, eligendi licencia et optenta, decanus et capitulum eiusdem ecclesie ad electionem de summo pontifice procedentes ac ad personam predicti et familiaris clerici nostri magistri Willelmi de Melton, canonici eiusdem ecclesie, cuius vite et conversacionis mundiciam ac fidelitatem probitatem per ea que tam clare memorie .. genitoris nostri quam nostro lateribus assistende fideliter et utiliter gessit officia liquido cognoverunt ac vox subiecti nobis pepuli concordi preconio approbat et divulgat sue consideracionis intuitum dirigentes ipsum in suum archiepiscopum, concorditer elegerunt et nobis per suas patentes litteras presentarunt pro assensu nostro regio optinendo.
Nosque licet eiusdem electi presenciam propter ipsius circumspectionis et industrie probitatem in nostris dirigendis negociis perutilem videremus, sperantes tamen ex perfectione eiusdem in ecclesia supradicta non solum ipsi ecclesie set nobis et toti regno nostro uberiora commoda divina sibi suffragante clemencia affutura electioni huiusmodi nostrum assensum regium duximus adhibendum. Quamobrem, sanctitati vestre, votivis affectibus supplicamus, quatenus eiusdem electum virum utibus moribus pudicum, devocione conspicuum litterarum sciencia predictum in gubernacione spiritualium et temporalium industrium et probacionem et universa morum honestate preclarum, qui ad pedes vestre beatitudinis pro confirmacione electionis predicte ac consecrationis munere optinendum se divertit, habentes, si placet, nostri consideracione propensius commendatum ac adFootnote † periculosa dispendia, quibus eiusdem ecclesia multipliciter exponitur hiis diebus dampna, etiam que ex subiectione circumspectionis et consilii dicti electi, in quo in nostris et dicti regni negociis dirigendum, nostra fiducia precipue requiescit paterne consideracionis intuitum, dirigentes eiusdem electum eo graciosius et celerius iubere dignemini expediri, quo nostris affectibus intimius coniungitur et ex eius promocione tranquillitati et quieti regni nostri specialiter uberius consulendum et ut nos affectionis magnitudinem, quam ad nos et idem regnum nostrum innatam vestram clemenciam habere confidemus, ex ipsius expedicione celeri et votiva sentire operis efficacia valeamus, vestris exinde beneplacitis forcius perpetuo obligati ad exaltacionem et cetera.
Datum Lancastria, xiii die Februarii.
