SEDE VACANTE

November 29, 1268—September 1, 1271

Pope Clement IV (Guy Foulques), because of the hostile conditions in the city of Rome [See E. Jordan, Études d' histoire du Moyen-Age dédiées à Gabriel Monod (Paris 1896), 333-336], resided first in Perugia and then in Viterbo in Tuscany. His finances had been in a perilous state for years. In Epistle 116 (August 1, 1265) he writes to King Charles of Anjou (Gieseler, 122 n. 2; Epistula 52 Thumser p. 35):

Thesaurus apud nos nullus latet, nec nos eum multiplicare proponimus illis modis, quibus multi homines vellent. Vide partes orbis concussas, et scire poteris causas inopiae. Anglia adversatur, Almannia vix oboedit, Francia gemit et queritur, Hispania sibi non sufficit, Italia non subvenit, sed emungit: et unde potest Romanus Pontifex, si Deum timet vel reveretur homines, sibi vel aliis in militia vel pecunia subvenire?

Clement also confessed to King Charles in a letter of September 22, 1266 [Epistles 260 (ed. Thumser); Martene-Durand Thesaurus novus anecdotorum II (Paris 1717), no. 380, p. 407] that he was also constrained by the views of his cardinals (habitis fratrum nostrorum consiliis), whose prudence he defers to in preference to his own opinions:

Crede, fili carissime, jam nobis saepe contingit in hac sede, cui licet immeriti praesidemus, ut habitis fratrum nostrorum consiliis, quamquam contrarium crederemus utilius eorum tamen sententias sequebamur, ubi tale erat negotium, quod sine peccato fieri poterat vel omitti; et movebat nos ista ratio, quia temerarium censebamus tot prudentium judicio sententiam nostri capitis anteferre.

In order to improve his financial situation, his legate in France, Cardinal Simon de Brie (Brion) was actively working to collect the 10% levy owed to the pope by the clergy in France as well as a subsidy for a contemplated crusade in the Holy Land (Epistulae 55, 69, 99, 101, 112,114, 115, 168, 176, 208, 248, etc. Thumser). Clement died in Viterbo on November 29, 1268.  At his request he was buried in the Dominican church, S. Maria di Gradi, though his body was transferred, during the Sede Vacante, to the Cathedral of S. Lorenzo [Pinzi Storia di Viterbo II, pp. 243-249].  The vacancy in the Holy See lasted two years, nine months and two days.  After the Election had taken place, on November 23, 1271, the Cardinals ordered an inquiry into the removal of the Pope's body, and placed Cardinal Guillaume de Bray of S. Marco and Cardinal Uberto of S. Eustachio in charge. The Cardinals ordered the return of the body to the Dominicans.

The Hohenstaufen dynasty of German emperors had finally come to an end: Frederick Augustus died in 1250; his son Conrad IV in 1254, and his bastard Manfred in 1266. In the Fall of 1267 the supporters of Conradin, Frederick's grandson, raised a revolt in Sicily while Conradin marched south; he entered Rome on July 24, 1268, but in August he was forced to flee by King Charles. Conradin was captured at Genoa and executed in Naples on October 29, 1268, a month before the death of Pope Clement. This should have given the popes the chance to begin rebuilding a Guelf party in northern Italy.

But they also had to contend with the ambitions of Louis IX's brother, Charles of Anjou, who entered Rome on May 23, 1265, where he was made Senator and was proclaimed king of Sicily. Pope Clement wrote to King Charles (Epistulae, 121 [ed. M. Thumser]: December 20, 1265) that if he would come to the pope at Viterbo, Clement would crown him himself:

...Ecce nos, sicut sepe iam scripsimus, prompti sumus et fuimus committere alii hoc officium, ne ipsorum offensam incurras, et, licet decentius videretur, quod a nobis coronam reciperes comminus constitutus, non sic sumus honoris avidi, quin malimus tue necessitati consulere quam honorem nobis in hoc negotio cum tuo vel tuorum periculo reservare. Illud ergo pro certo teneas, quod, quicquid tuis instillent auribus, qui sunt tecum, quicquid tibi suggerant, qui nobis-cum, fixa est apud nos ista sententia, quod hoc tempore cum multorum publico preiudicio curiam non turbabimus, nec peccare nos credimus, si ad tempus preferimus orbem Urbi, quamvis eam pre ceteris orbis partibus caritatis sincere brachiis amplectamur. Si ergo veneris, tuus erit nobis et nostris fratribus gratus nimis et iucundus adventus, et tuo capiti coronam regiam imponemus. Quod si tuum adventum impediat vel necessitas vel voluntas, mittere tibi proponimus unum ex episcopis cardinalibus, duos presbyteros et vel unum vel duos diaconos cardinales, et tu alium tecum habes, ut sic celeriter et celebriter coronatio tua fiat. Et, si tibi defuerit impositio manus nostre, cordis appositio numquam deerit Domino concedente, quod applicabimus ex affectu ad ea, que tui respicient commodi vel honoris augmentum....

Charles was crowned, however, in Rome on January 6, 1266. Pope Clement IV, who was unwelcome in his own city, had appointed five cardinals to carry out the coronation ceremony in St. Peter's Basilica: Riccardo Annibaldi, Raoul de Grosparmy, Ancher Pantaleoni, Matteo Orsini, and Goffredo da Alatri (Tomassetti, Bullarium Romanum Turin edition III, pp. 748-763; cf. Clement IV, Epistulae, 135 [ed. M.Thumser]; cf. Sternfeld, 65). According to the terms of the Investiture, Charles was to pay Clement 50,000 ounces of gold, but Charles was in even greater need of money than the Pope.

 In 1269, Charles I made considerable efforts to consolidate the Guelf party in Lombardy in the absence of a pope [Saba Malaspina V. 5-8, Muratori, RIS VIII, cols. 863-865]. A parliament was held at Cremona, which won the cooperation of Piacenza, Cremona, Parma, Modena, Ferrara, and Reggio. However, the Imperialist party was also reorganizing, with allegiance from Milan, Como, Vercelli, Novara, Alessandrina, Tortona, Torino, Pavese, Bergamo, Bologna, and the Marchese of Montferrat.   The cities of Milan, Piacenza and others, however, soon went over to Charles (Muratori, 322-325, from the Chronicle of Piacenza). Pisa and Lucca made peace and joined Charles' side in 1270 (Muratori, 329). Charles and his Angevins made friends, but also many lasting enemies, as the Sicilian Vespers of 1282 testify. There was also the problem of reclaiming the Papal States from civil war, and Rome from the hands of the Roman nobility. The electors in the conclave, therefore, were deeply divided with respect to their loyalties and their expectations for the next reign.

Eodem tempore maxima discordia erat inter cardinales Romae qui erant XVII. Undecim ex ipsis videlicet dominus Richardus de Annibaldis, dominus Octavianus, dominus Ubertus de Coconaria et alii fovebant partem Imperii, alii scilicet dominus Ioannes de Gaytanis, dominus Octobonus de Fisco et alii fovebant partem Karoli et erant in Viterbio ita discordes: una pars volebat pastorem de ultramontanis partibus, scilicet illa Karuli, alia volebat pastorem Ytalicum et imperatorem ut unus in spiritualibus et alius in temporalibus mundum, sicut just postulat, gubernaret. (Annales Placentini Ghibellini, MGH SS XVIII, 533).

The Podestà of Viterbo, from March 1, 1270, was Alberto da Montebuono Aretino [Arezzo] [Pinzi II, p. 268].  Raniero (Rayniero, Renier, René) Gatto, thrice Captain General of the Province of the Patrimony of St. Peter, was again the Captain of the People of Viterbo [died in 1270, between August 22 and September 25: Pinzi II, p. 279 n. 1]. The Gatti were the leading family in Viterbo, having provided a bishop in the previous century, and regularly providing the Captain of the People down into the fifteenth century. The family figures prominently in the Cronaca di Viterbo of Niccolò della Tuccia. Both Alberto and Raniero were followers of King Charles. It was Raniero Gatto who built the Episcopal Palace at Viterbo, also called the Papal Palace, beginning in 1266 (Cristofori, 11). It was in this palace (below) that the longest conclave in papal history would take place.

The Episcopal Palace in Viterbo

Conclave: Beginning

Pope Clement IV died on 29 November 1268 in Viterbo.  There is no indication of when the Conclave of 1268-1271 began, or what the nature of the opening ceremonies were. On June 6, 1270, according to a notation in the Register of a Notary named Bassus [Pinzi II, p. 272 n. 2], the Chamberlain of the Apostolic See caused to be read in public in the Cathedral of Viterbo, a letter from the Cardinals, in which they instructed the Podestà and Commune of Viterbo not to molest the Cardinals in Conclave (ne molestarent et arctarent Cardinales in conclavi existentes).  This was, in fact, the document that laid the penalty of excommunication on the public officials of Viterbo and the Interdict on the entire commune.   In the same Register, under the date of January 8, 1270 [Pinzi II, p. 267 n. 2], the Podestà of VIterbo at the time, until March 1, Conradus de Abiano, the predecessor of Alberto de Montebuono, is excommunicated quia Cardinales arctavit in palatio.  Much depends upon the exact meaning of arcto (arto), it is obviously the Cardinals' choice of words, as the later document indicates.  Did he "confine" them, or "oppress" them, or "harass" them?  The action was, in any case, sufficiently dramatic as to incur excommunication.  If it is an effort at sequestration, then it is not to Raynerio Gatto that the credit should go for inventing the idea of a Conclave. 

In the Spring of 1270, around Pentecost (June 1, 1270), under the influence of St. Bonaventura (or so the fable goes; cf. Cristofori, p. 351), Raynerio Gatto, the Captain of the People, locked the cardinals into the Episcopal Palace, next to the Cathedral.  The Cardinals certainly protested the effort to circumscribe their actions. The details of the document indicate that the Cardinals were anxious to allow two of their number, Simon of S. Cecilia and Riccardo Annibaldi of S. Angelo, who were ill, to leave the area of their confinement and seek lodging in houses suitable for their ailments.  It appears that there was also a problem with sanitary facilities in the Episcopal Palace—the complete absence thereof.  The cardinals and their attendants had to leave the palace for such purposes, and their way was being impeded.  It was demanded that a door be provided: intra terminum supradictum aperiant ostium, et viam liberam et expeditam dimittant ad eundem tam nobis quam familiaribus n(ost)ris ad requisita nature.   To add insult to inconvenience, the Cardinals and their attendants were being subjected to verbal and physical harassment on their way to the Apostolic stools:  quantum in eis fuit mortis exposuerunt periculis, et super presumptione vie [?] ad locum deputatum ad requisita nature et quam super aliis injuriis et contumeliis verbis, et factis, vel per varios arctationis modos pene importabiles, alias multipliciter irrogatis, n(ost)ris precise mandatis pareant, satisfactionem.   For these and more general reasons, the Cardinals hurled a very extensive set of anathemata against the Podesta, Captain of the People, Officials, Council, and People of Viterbo, visiting upon them both the excommunication and the interdict.  It nonetheless took an additional sixteen months to bring the conclave to an election (Cristofori, 13).

It must be stated that, although the Cardinals had been detained, they were not incommunicado. They continued to receive visitors and to engage in correspondence. During the first half of 1270, for example, King Louis sent two Franciscans to the Cardinals at Viterbo, Eustachio and Lamberto, as his nuntii. They explained that Louis had been in touch with Emperor Manuel Palaeologos both by letters and ambassadors (Martene, 214-217).

Murder of Henry of Cornwall

During the Conclave, on March 13, 1271 (Walter, 22), the ciiy of Viterbo witnessed the murder of Henry of Cornwall, son of Richard of Cornwall and nephew of Henry III of England, by Guido de Montfort, son of Simon de Montfort, in an act of revenge:

Porro Rex Siciliae cum nepote suo rege Francorum .... Remeantes quoque per Campaniam, Cardinales, qui tunc in Viterbio morabantur, una cum Domino Henrico filio Regis Alemanniae, similiter remeante, decreverunt consultum esse et honestum si forte discordantes in electioni futuri Pontificis inducere possent ad electionem concorditer faciendam. Dum autem essent Viterbii, super praedictis mutuo tracturi, Cardinalium votis, iam paene concorditer adunatis, ut eorum adiuti consilio et assensu Romanae Sedis, multo tempore Pastoris solacio viduate, de idoneo praesule providerent; ecce protinus, instigante humani generis inimico Simon de' Monteforti, cum Guidone fratre suo, necnon Comite Rufo, cuius filiam duxerat in uxorem, non sine assensu credi poterit Aymerici fratris eorundem, quodam die satis mane, non modica loricatorum stipatio caterva subito ingredientes ecclesiam quandam civitatis eiusdem ubi Dominus Henricus (Regis) Romanorum primogenitus, eorum ex avunculo cognatus, peractis iam Missarum sollemniis, quas audierat orationi devotus incubebat, evaginatis gladiis inhumaniter irruerunt in ipsum, proditorem, ac potius interfectorum eum, licet mendaciter proclamantes, ut ipse nimirum tam tumultuoso clamore perterritus velociter ab oratione prosiliens cucurrit ad altare, super quod paulo ante Deo Patri Unigenitus Filius Redemptor mundi fuerat immolatus. Sed lictores crudelissimi consanguinitatis foedere violato, spreta loci sacri, ac temporis reverentia, adherentem altari mucronibus confodientes, inflictis vulneribus, letiferis inhumanissime peremerunt, vulnera vulneribus imprimentes, donec spiritum exhalaret. Facta quidem fuit haec inaudita sceleris perpetratio die Veneris, crastino S. Gregorii, videlicet tertio Idus Martii (in) civitati Viterber, in ecclesia Sci. Blasii; praesentibus tunc in eadem civita tota coetu Cardinalium; Rege Siciliae et nepote suo Philippo in Regem Francorum protinus promovendo.... (Thomas Wykes, Chronica, in MGH SS XXVII)

This took place in the Church of S. Sylvester in Viterbo (or the in the Cathedral of S. Lorenzo: Cristofori 59, or, as above, in the Church of S. Biagio), in the presence of the cardinals (who were sequestered in Conclave, whatever that meant), of King Philip III of France, and of King Charles of Sicily. (Cristofori, 6-7, 56). Gregory X himself believed that it had taken place in a parish church, not in the Cathedral (Rymer Foedera II, p. 5). Some sources (among them Giovanni VIllani) give a date of 1270. Charles' itinerary, however, indicates that the date had to be 1271.  From October 13, 1269, he was at either Capua or Naples steadily until he left for Palermo in July, 1270 and from there for Tunis. The sources that speak of "the future King Philip" at Viterbo, therefore, are wrong. They are trying to fix the chronology to suit their viewpoints. The correct date is equally apparent from a letter which Charles sent immediately to Prince Edward, son of King Henry III of England, dated March 13, 1271  [Rymer Foedera I, p. 118].

The Chronicler is certainly right, whether by inference or by certain knowledge, that Charles and Philip had come to Viterbo to put pressure on the Cardinals to settle the matter of the papal succession. He is surely wrong, however, in thinking that the cardinals were on the point of reaching a conclusion, though he may well be right that the murder of Henry of Cornwall complicated matters rather than resolving them. Charles certainly wanted a resolution, by the production of a pope who would sanction his "crusade" against Constantinople rather than one against Jerusalem, and who would reject Manuel VIII's offers of church union. He was to be disappointed.

[Note: According to Paul Durrieu, Étude sur les registres angevines du Roi Charles Ier Tome second (Paris 1888), King Charles' itinerary (pp. 168-176) brought him to Viterbo: in 1268: April 4-30 (He was at Trani when the Pope died); in 1269: not at all; in 1270: not at all; in 1271 on March 10, 12-17, 20-31, and April 1; in 1272: not at all; he is attested at Rome from March 29 to June 4, 1272.]

Possibly in consequence of the murder, possibly because of the long Sede Vacante, King Edward I of England suspended payments on dues owed to the Roman See.  The receipt of eight years of overdue payments, in the amount of 8000 marks sterling, is acknowledged by Pope Nicholas III on February 23, 1278 [Potthast II, 21271]. The charge was 1000 marks per year [Bliss, Calendar of State Papers I, p. 455 (August 1, 1278)].  This was not the "Peter's Pence" [cf. Bliss, p. 447].

Guy de Montfort was handed over by Pope Gregory X to Cardinal Riccardi Annibaldi of S. Angelo in Pescheria and Cardinal Giovanni Gaetano Orsini of S. Nicola in Carcere, to be imprisoned in some castle in the Papal States and to be guarded under the supervision of King Charles of Sicily [Bliss, Calendar of State Papers I, p. 446 (Lyons, November 29, 1273)].

Cardinal Electors

At the time of Clement's death, there were twenty or twenty-one cardinals, though

• Raoul de Grosparmy [Norman], of the Lords of Beuville and of Flers; former Dean of S. Martin of Tours, Chancellor and Custodian of the Seal of France (1253-1259), bishop of Évreux (1259-1261), Cardinal Bishop of Albano (December 24, 1261), did not attend the Conclave of 1268-1271.   He had set the crown on the head of Charles I of Sicily on January 6, 1265.  He had been in southern Italy as Papal Legate in 1266 and 1267. On May 9, 1267, Pope Clement IV informed him that King Louis of France and three of his sons had taken the Cross on March 25 [Epistolae 325 (ed. Thumser)]. In late October, 1267, Pope Clement anticipates him travelling to Sicily [Epistles 397 (ed. Thumser)]. In January of 1268 he was back in south Italy, dealing with affairs in Benevento and Venusio. In 1268, he was in France, acting as Papal Legate to King Louis IX and parts of Gaul, and likewise Legationis officium in partibus Transmarinis. As a longstanding friend of the king and his former Chancellor, he accompanied Louis on his ill-fated Crusade, which departed from Marseille on March 1, 1270 for Tunisia, where the Cardinal died on Thursday, August 16, 1270, of the plague. King Louis died on August 25 [Guillaume de Nangis, Chronicon, sub anno 1270, in H. Geraud (editor), Chronique latine de Guillaume de Nangis nouvelle edition I (Paris 1843), p. 236; Gesta Sancti Ludovici, in Bouquet (ed. Daunou & Nauder), Recueil des historiens des Gaules et de la France 20 (Paris 1840), p. 456]. Though he did not attend the Conclave of 1268-1271, the Cardinal was in correspondence with the Sacred College, on the subject (inter alia) of the embassy of Michael VIII Palaeologus to Louis IX. (Setton, 106-108), and the Sacred College was receiving envoys and exchanging letters with King Louis (Martène, 214-217) during 1270.
  
  
  
  sed libenter pro ipsius salubri consummatione apud eamdem sedem, ad quam id pertinet, instaretis, ne idem negotium cuius expeditio, si eam concedat Altissimus, tot animarum discriminibus obviat, eisque viam aperit ad salutem, in prosecutione defectum aliquem patiatur a nobis quibus, eadem nunc sede vacante, cum alius qui hoc possit, tempore vacationis huiusmodi non supersit, incumbit in talibus providere, humiliter per eosdem vestros nuncios postulastis, ut negotii executionem eiusdem venerabilis fratris Episcopi Albanensis apostolicae sedis legati [Raoul de Grosparmy] sollicitudini committere curaremus.
  
  See: Lucas Wadding, Annales Minorum 4 (Romae 1732), 294-296; 303-306 (May 15, 1270). Cardinal Odo of Châteauroux was also in correspondence with Theobald II , the King of Navarre (1253-1270), who was with King Louis on his crusade in Africa (Giovanni Villani Croniche fliorentine VII. 37 [tr. Selfe, 248]). Theobald died at Trepani on December 4, 1270.
  
  
• Bernard Ayglier, OSB, former abbot of Lerins and Abbot of Monte Cassino (1263-1282) during the Sede Vacante, the only (alleged) creation of Clement IV, did not attend. He is addressed only once in a letter from Pope Clement IV ( #531, July 28, 1268), but, unlike all the other cardinals, who received numerous letters from the Pope, he does not appear in connection with Curial business or papal diplomacy. Clement does remark to Cardinal Raoul Grosparamy, however, that he has summoned the Abbot of Montecassino, the brother of the Archbishop of Naples, to the Curia, bringing with him the 200 soldiers whom he has who are in the papal pay [Clemens IV, Epistulae 312 (ed. Thumser), February 15, 1267]. He is mentioned by Pope Clement in another letter to Cardinal Raoul on April 12, 1268 [Epistles 478 (ed. Thumser)]: Quod si militiam Campanorum, de qua tibi scripsimus, non vidisti, non miretur tua fraternitas. Nam excogitata fraude impedimentum eiusdem extitit in Campania procuratum, prout dilectus filius abbas monasterii Casinensis tibi plenius enarrabit. Bernard is consistently addressed only as the Abbot of Montecassino (cf. Winkelmann, p. 22-23, for the proper formulary for a cardinal or for an abbot). Cristofori (p. 39) provides a list of cardinals who subscribed to papal bulls under Clement IV; every cardinal who was present at the election of Clement IV signed at some time or another; Bernard Ayglier's name is not on that list. His alleged cardinalatial titulus and rank, if any, is unknown.
        A possible explanation for the awarding of the title Cardinal to Abbot Bernard may lie in the fact that Montecassino was directly dependent upon the Pope, without any intermediaries, in other words the Abbey was "cardinalatial".
        He was a strong partisan of King Charles of Anjou, and his brother was Archbishop of Naples. In 1269, Bernard acted as Charles' ambassador to Venice (Tosti, 15), and then in 1270 worked to arrange the marriage of King Charles to the sister of the King of Hungary, Ladislaus V (Tosti, 16-17; 67-68); on December 27, 1270 he was back in his monastery at Montecassino (Tosti, 80). He did finally arrive in Viterbo in November of 1271, but it was two months after the election of Gregory X (Tosti, 18; 69). After the reunion of the eastern and western churches at the Lateran Council, he was sent by Gregory X as legate to the Emperor Michael Paleologus (Tosti, 30-31). Gregory's letters to Bernard (Martène, p. 236 and p. 244) refer to him as Abbot of Monte Cassino, not as cardinal of some titulus. He died on April 3, 1282 (Tosti, 32). Neither Tosti himself, nor the documents written by Bernard which he cites, ever refer to Bernard as a cardinal; indeed the letter from Viterbo says, "Sani sumus per Dei gratiam, et opera nostra in oculis Domini papae sunt et omnium dominorum nostrorum cardinalium gratiosa, bene procedunt, scilicet negotia, et procedent." It seems very strange, moreover, that Charles, who had a great interest in the outcome of the Conclave at Viterbo, did not send one of his most loyal supporters there to vote. There is good reason to doubt that Bernard was a cardinal at all.
  
  A well-known Internet site for the College of Cardinals states:

  When Clement died there were twenty-one living cardinals, of whom one, Bernard Ayglier, O.S.B., Clement IV's sole creation, remained entirely absent from the election. This absence, in the heated circumstances of such a long vacancy, caused some later historians to doubt that he had been created a cardinal at all, but modern scholarship has established that Clement IV did raise him to the College, although the date of the creation remains uncertain.

  The evidence offered to demonstrate this point consists in a list of authors who simply repeat what each had found in his predecessors. The one actual modern scholar cited, Father Conrad Eubel, who, in his investigations in the Vatican Archives and elsewhere, was unable to find a single cardinal created by Pope Clement IV— who allegedly made Bernard a cardinal at some unattested consistory (whose date, despite what the author of the site says, is not 'uncertain'; it is 'unknown'.). It is apparent, then, that this is an argument ex auctoritate, and cannot stand. Should one insist nevertheless on citing authorities, it should be noted that, in addition to Eubel, Panvinio (Epitome, 170), Ciacconius (Chacon), Cardella (321-322), Roy [Nouvelle hsitoire des cardinaux francois V (Paris 1788)], and Massarelli reject Bernard's cardinalate (Cristofori, 40); as does likewise Pinzi (Storia della città di Viterbo, p. 266 n. 1).

  
  

There were, therefore, nineteen electors present in Viterbo:

The Sedis Apostolicae Camerarius in succession to Cardinal Otho, Bishop of Tusculum, was Peter, who was elected Archbishop of Narbonne in 1272  [Pinzi II, p. 244 n.2, from a bull of Gregory X, dated July 31, 1274; see also p. 250, a report of two cardinals of a hearing on November 23, 1271, in which Petrus Apost. Sedis Camerarius et Notarius was present].

Cardinal Enrico of Ostia

Of Cardinal Enrico de' Bartolommei, the celebrated canonist known as "(H)Ostiensis", it is said, "Being in the conclave after the death of Clemens IV., he became sick by mere ennui, and renounced his right of election; but having left the place, he became better (H. Rose, A New General Biographical Dictionary [1857] 274, on the authority of Ciacconio, Vitae Pontiff et Cardin. See Cartwright, 19).  The date of his departure was June 8, 1270, according to a document in the Archives of Viterbo (Ceccaroni, 3; Cristofori, 21 n. 5), and it was with the permission of seventeen cardinals.

Nos miseratione divina ep(iscop)i, p(res)b(yte)ri, et diaconi Sacros(an)c(ta)e Roman(a)e eccl(es)i(a)e card(ina)les infirmitatem venerabilis fr(atr)is n(ost)ri H(enrici) Ostiensis et Velletren(sis) Ep(iscop)i, fraterno compatientes affectu, Vobis Alberto de Monte Bono Potestati, et Raynerio Gatto, quo pro Capitaneo Viterbiensium te geris, et Communi Viterbiensi tenore presentium, sub debito fidelitatis, quo nobis, et Ecclesi(a)e Roman(a)e tenemini, districte precipiendo mandamus quatenus cum idem Ep(iscop)us iuri et voci, sibi competentibus in electione Romani Pont(ificis), renunciaverit coram nobis, quantum ad presentem vacationem dumtaxat, volens ut, non obstante eius absentia; sine ipso hac vice libere procedamus ad providendum Roman(a)e Eccl(es)i(a)e, de Pastore ratam habiturus et gratam, electionem, seu provisionem, quam de Romano Pontifice, absque ipso et eius requisitione, duxerimus faciendam, ac instanter petierit vobis mandari ut de Palatio in quo sumus inclusi, ipsum permicteretis exiere eundem Ep(iscop)um de ipso palatio statim egredi libere permictatis, nec ipsum de cetero aliquatenus detineatis invitum. Datum Viterbii in Palatio discooperto Ep(iscop)atus Viterbien, VI id(ibus) Iun(iis) ann(o) D(omi)ni MCCLXX, Ap(osto)lica sede vacante.

The cardinals are apparently very unhappy about the possible ramifications of going forward with the electoral process without the presence of the Chamberlain of the Holy Roman Church and senior Cardinal Bishop of the Sacred College, and so they exact from him a specific renunciation of his right to speak and vote, so that they can continue in his absence. But there is also a document from the Vatican Archives, in which the citizens of Viterbo, led by their Podestà and Captain, are required to swear to respect the Conclave and not molest the entourages or property of the cardinals. The document is dated August 22, 1270 (Cristofori, 343-344, from Felice Contelori (†1644), Felicis Contelorii Collectanea de Romanis Potificibus, et S. R. E. Cardinalibus Volume II, 53-56), and Cardinal Enrico of Ostia was present:

Anno D(omi)ni MCCLXX, XI Kalendas Septembris [August 22, 1270], indictione XIII, Sede Romana vacante.
Per p(raese)ns publicum instrumentum appareant universis quod R(everendissi)mus P(ate)r O(tho) E(pisco)pus Tusculanus S(anctae) R(omanae) E(cclesiae) Camerarius ex parte sua et totius collegii R(everendissi)morum P(atr)rum d(omi)norum Card(ina)lium, videlicet:
S(tephani) Prenestini
I(ohannis) Portuen(sis)
H(enrici) Ostien(sis), E(pisco)porum
S(imonis) S(an)c(t)i Martini
A(ncheri) S(an)c(ta)e Praxedis
G(uidi) Sci Laurentis in Lucina
G(uilelmi) Sci Marci
Simonis Sce. Cecilie et Annibaldi Basilice XII Ap(ostol)orum, P(resbyter)orum
O(ctaviani) Sce Marie in Via Lata
Ioh(ann)is. Sci. Nicolai in Carcere Tulliano
O(ctoboni) Sci. Adriani
I(acobi) Sce. Marie in Cosmedin
G(odefridi) Sci. Georgii ad Velum Aureum
V(berti) Sci Eustachii
M(athei) Sce. Marie in Porticu, Diaconorum Cardi(na)lium
apud Viterbium in consistorio majori Palatii congregato, ac etiam ex parte Rmi. Pris. dni. Ricardi Sci. Angeli Diaconi Card(ina)lis in dicto consistorio non existentis, precise et espresse mandavit d(omi)no Alberto de Montebono Potestati et Raynerio qm Raynerii Gatti Cap(ita)neo Civitatis Viterbien(sis) p(raese)ntibus, et astantibus coram ipsis d(omi)nis Cardinalibus, sub debito fidelitatis....

de mandato d(omi)norum Card(ina)lium coram ven(erabi)li viro d(omi)no Petro de Montebono Ap(osto)lice Sedis Camerario et notario praestiterunt, a coartatione nuper facta per eosdem Potestatem, Cap(ita)neum, consilium et Co(mmun)e civitatis Viterbii in personas dictorum Card(ina)lium in dicto Papatio desistant....

This document appears to indicate that Enrico, Bishop of Ostia, is still participating in the activities of the Cardinals in Conclave on August 22, in other words, that he returned to the Conclave. He did not leave the conclave permanently on June 10, 1270. Nonetheless, he did not participate in the electoral compact of September 1, 1271, that instituted the compromise committee. It should also be noted that the Hungarian Cardinal Stephen, Bishop of Palestrina, is still alive on August 22, 1270, and participating, despite notices of his earlier death [See, e.g., J. Maubach, Die Kardinäle und ihre Politik um die Mitte des XIII. Jahrhunderts (Bonn 1902), p. 39; following Von Hampe, Neues Archiv 23, 614, who puts his death on July 9, 1270]. He does not, however, participate in the creation of the compromise committee in September, 1271. The reason for the absence of Riccardo Annibaldi on this occasion is unknown, though it may be recalled that he was one of the two cardinals who sought to leave the Conclave on June 6, 1270 because of illness.

On October 25, 1270, Cardinal John of Toledo, Bishop of Porto and Santa Rufina, conducted an admission of nuns into the community he had founded at the Monastery of Santa Maria de Paradiso in Viterbo. The document attesting to the admissions indcates that Cardinal John was existens in palatio episcopali Viterbensi, una cum aliis dominis Cardinalibus s(an)c(ta)e Romanae Ecclesi(a)e, pro substituendo Romano Pontifice.   Also present was the papal Notary Fratellus, who drew up the document, as well as a bishop, the provisor of the monastery, a cleric of the bishop, and Lord Visconte, son of Raynerio Gatto (Cristofori, Tombe 422). The cardinals may have been confined, but they certainly were not isolated.  The use of the word 'conclave' has to be carefully circumscribed.

Conclave myths

It is said, on the authority of Bartholomew of Pisa (Conformitates, I. 8. 2—written ca. 1385, more than a century after the events), that Saint Bonaventura, General of the Franciscans, who had come to Italy from Paris in 1271 to attend a General Chapter of his Order, visited the Cardinals at Viterbo and harangued them on the urgency of electing a pope. That may be true. The cardinals so appreciated his reputation that they empowered him to nominate himself or any other to the Papal See, promising at the same time to ratify his selection. (cf. Cristofori, 13 n. 1; 16, n.2).  That is certainly false.  It is he who was said to have nominated Theobald of Piacenza.  Bonaventure's biographer, Fr. Laurence Costelloe, OFM (1902), remarks that  "This incident must be regarded as quite authentic, for reference is made to it in the process of our saint's canonization (p. 87)"—profound thinking perhaps, but not sound historical reasoning. Cardella (p. 4) notes the incredulity of many writers (and see Ceccaroni, 2-3). The story makes nonsense of the assertion that the cardinals were locked up in conclave, and ignores several canonical rules as to who was entitled to be present and who was entitled to vote. Bonaventura was not entitled to be present at a scrutiny, and he was not entitled to name a candidate.  The Cardinals were not empowered to alter the Constitution of Alexander III, which governed the Conclave, and required a two-thirds affirmative vote of the Cardinals for a valid election; nor that of Nicholas II, which had given the lead in elections to the Cardinal Bishops.  The story of S. Bonaventura is hagiography, not history. Monastic chronicles and biographies are full of anecdotes about "the great refusal".   One may also note that S. Bonaventura is given credit for giving Rainerius Gatto the idea of locking the Cardinals up.   But that event happened in June of 1270, not 1271 when Bonaventura was in Italy, and therefore Bonaventura's part appears to be an unsupportable anachronism. In any case we are assured by Cristofori (p. 339 n. 2) that the saintly doctor could not have participated in any violence against the Cardinals and thus could not have inspired Gatto's actions.  What incredible nonsense.

A similar story is told about this same conclave of 1268-1270 and St. Philip Benizi, the General of the Servites, direct competitors of the Franciscans. (Moroni 24, 295; Montor, 30; Cristofori, 10 n., 15; Cardella, 1.2, 283-284)  He was so impressive to the Cardinals that they actually elected him pope, and sent Cardinal Ottobono Fieschi, the Cardinal Protector of the Servites (and perhaps a second cardinal) to offer him the papal crown ["Legenda Beati Philippi", in Monumenta Ordinis Servorum Sanactae Mariae II.(Bruxelles 1898), p. 75; cf. "Ystoria del Beato Filippo da Fiorenza", ibidem, p. 100]:

Pervenit autem fama ad aures populorum, necnon per totam Curiam Romanam apertissime resonabat. Et a quibusdam cardinalibus Ecclesiae Sanctae Matris, Apostolica Sede vacante, ipsum dignum pontificatus officio exclamabant. Inter quos fuit venerabilis pater Octavianus de Ubaldinis venerabilis cardinalis atque reverendissimus [ - - ]. Cardinales audientes huius leprosi continuam sanitatem aliaque plurima miracula facta meritis beati Philippi, in unam vocem exarserunt, virum hunc pontificatus offitio dignissimum suadendo...

However, when Saint Philip heard what the cardinal(s) had in mind, he fled to the mountains and avoided their call to office, according to the Servite Filippo Ferrari:.

Dum Viterbii Cardinales Clemente IV. P.M. vite functo de successore eligendo dissiderent, nonnullis Philippum proponentibus illa re cognita clam inde recedens (quod maximae humilitatis argumentum fuit) apud Montem Tuniatum delituit          

This too is hagiography, not history. It hardly conforms to the rest of the information we have about the complete stalemate in the conclave that eventually required a selection by compromise. Additionally, the newer mendicant orders were not looked upon with favor by some in the Curia, and it is unlikely that the General of the Servites would appeal to them. In 1274, the Second Council of Lyons ordered the suppression of all religious orders which had not yet received papal approval, including the Servites, and in 1276 Pope Innocent V (Pierre of Tarantaise, OP) sent a letter to Philip Benizi ordering the suppression of his order.

In addition, there is a tale to the effect that Cardinal Vicedomino de' Vicedomini, a Franciscan tertiary, was elected pope and died on the same day, September 6, 1276—another fiction, made the more remarkable when one notes that the pope who actually was elected by the Cardinals, on September 8, John XXI (Peter Julian of Lisbon) was remarked to be unfriendly to the religious orders (Cristofori, Tombe, 185-203).

It might also be noted that a few years later a Dominican, Fra Giovanni da Vercelli, OP, the sixth Master General of the Order of Preachers, was allegedly elected pope in 1283 but died before he received notification (Mortier, II 37 n.1, quoting unpublished material from the Archives of the Dominican Order):

dum esset ultra montes, electus est in Papam a D(omi)nis Cardinalibus; sed antequam electio ei fuisset presentata, apud Montempessulanum diem clausit supremum, anno Domini 1283 (Jacques de Soest)

There was no election in 1283, however; Pope Martin IV (Simon de Brie) was in the middle of his reign (1281-1285). Efforts to repair the date, making it read 1280, must fail. There actually was a General Chapter of the Order of Preachers in 1283 at Montepulciano; the meeting place for the next Chapter was fixed for Bologna, but the Acta Capitulorum Generalium (Reichert, 226) has the following note:

Isto anno, scilicet .mo.cco.lxxxiiiio [1284], non fuit celebratum generale capitulum, quia magister ordinis felicis ac dulcis memorie venerabilis pater frater Johannes de Uerzellis, verus Israelita, migravit ad dominum Ihesum Christum in conventu Montispessulani. Vir fuit magne perfectionis atque sanctitatis, et rexit ordinem per magnum tempus, scilicet per decem et novem annos et dimidium in magna sanctitate.

Despite efforts to repair the date, then, and to suggest that Giovanni da Vercelli was the recipient of votes in 1280, but not elected, the story must be considered a complete fiction. Though it is reported in Volume 13 of Cardinal Baronius' Annales Ecclesiastici, edited by Abraham Bzovius, who was a member of the Order of Preachers (sub anno 1281, no. 1, column 918), it is rejected by Cristofori (Tombe, 191); by Novaes IV 3 note c; and by all responsible authors. It is a Dominican monastic fantasy.

Another version of the same story can be found in the Brevis historia Ordinis Praedicatorum [sub anno 1281, in Martène-Durand, Veterum scriptorum et monumentorum amplissima collectio VI (Paris 1729), p. 369]:

Anno MCCLXXXI electus est in papam Martinus IV.  Ante istum Martinum reor magistrum Johannem Vercellensem magistrum ordinis nostri sextum fuisse electum in papam.

This story puts the election in 1281, not in 1283,  but the word  reor  says so very much about what even the Chronicler was prepared to accept.

There is another story, retailed in a monastic life of Cardinal Conrad von Urach, O.Cist., once Abbot of Villers and Abbot General of the Cistercians (1217-1219), which the writer claims he heard what Cardinal Conrad himself had said (or does he mean that he had heard that Conrad had said?):

Eo tempore mortuo domno papa, cardinales consentire non valentes in electionem, compromiserunt in duos cardinales, et in hunc reverendum patrem; ipse electus ab hiis duobus, "absit," inquit, "quod dicatur quod ego elegerim me in papam", et sic alius electus est. Cum autem morti appropinquaret hic homo Dei, audi(i) quid dixerit. 

The Cardinals were not able to agree on an election (Sede Vacante of 1227). They therefore entered into a compomise, granting the power to elect to two cardinals and Cardinal Conrad von Urach. He was elected by the other two, but he refused the election. And so someone else was elected. The monk-author tells another story he heard from Abbot William of Villers that Cardinal von Urach was able to light candles by pointing at them. This is hagiography, not biography, and certainly not history. The story of Conrad von Urach's election to the Papacy, and his Great Refusal, is obviously incompatible with what is known from official sources, and must be rejected. The someone else who was elected was Ugo dei Conti di Segni (Gregory IX), whose electoral manifesto puts a lie to the Cistercian fantasy of an election by compromise.

None of these 'popes' appears in any official list of the Bishops of Rome.

The Compromise

When the cardinals, fifteen of them (the Bishops Stephen, Enrico and, John were not present), could not come to an agreement, they appointed a committee of six cardinals to make the choice ( 'by compromise' ). The Annales Placentini give the names, but with Ottobono Fieschi instead of Giacomo Savelli):