IMC 2012: Sessions

Session 122: The Pontificate of Innocent II, 1130–1143

Monday 9 July 2012, 11.15-12.45

Sponsor:Deptartment of History & Archaeology, University of Chester
Organiser:John Doran, Department of History & Archaeology, University of Chester
Moderator/Chair:John Doran, Department of History & Archaeology, University of Chester
Paper 122-aPope Innocent II and the Iberian Peninsula
(Language: English)
Damian Smith, Independent Scholar, Chelmsford
Index terms: Charters and Diplomatics, Ecclesiastical History, Monasticism, Politics and Diplomacy
Paper 122-bPope Innocent II and the Pallium
(Language: English)
Steven A. Schoenig, Department of History, Saint Louis University, Missouri
Index terms: Ecclesiastical History, Liturgy, Politics and Diplomacy, Theology
Paper 122-cThe Artistic Patronage of Anacletus II
(Language: English)
Dale Kinney, Department of the History of Art, Bryn Mawr College, Pennsylvania
Index terms: Art History - General, Ecclesiastical History, Political Thought, Sermons and Preaching
Abstract

The pontificate of Innocent II has long been regarded as a watershed in the history of the papacy. The schism occasioned by the election of a rival pope, Anacletus II, kept Innocent out of Rome for seven years. For Rome this was the beginning of a long period of marginalization as the traditional organs of local power were superseded by the college of cardinals and the consistory. For the Church, Innocent’s triumph was also that of the new religious orders of canons and the Cistercians, who had supported him from the outset. The Second Lateran Council, called to celebrate his victory, was an important stage in the consolidation of papal power in the 12th century. The schism had sent Innocent into exile in France and the Empire, reinforcing the development of the papal curia as an international organ of government, reflected in his involvement in the Iberian primacy dispute and the condemnation of Abelard. Yet Innocent’s success led to a return to Rome, where he had to confront the realities of papal power locally; in art he exaggerated while his pragmatism in politics revealed the true picture.