Symony Declensions of a Lemma. The Florentine Case

Abstract: This paper aims to examine how diferent forms of the accusation of simony\r\nevolved within a specifc context, namely Florence, during the eleventh century, which\r\nwitnessed a violent clash between the followers of Giovanni Gualberto, a monk, and\r\nBishop Pietro Mezzabarba, who was accused of simony. The papacy became involved\r\nin the confict, with Pier Damiani acting as a legate, albeit unofcially, of the Petrine\r\nSee. In Florence, during this period there were at least three key actors who had very\r\n\r\ndiferent interpretations of simony coexisted during this period: Pier Damiani, the epis-\r\ncopate, and the Gualbertian monks. For each of these actors, the paper attempts not\r\n\r\nonly to reconstruct the use and evolution of the term simony within the contempo-\r\nrary context and after the confict (particularly through the biographies of Giovanni\r\n\r\nGualberto, the so called „Vitae“) but also to explore the relational networks that in-\r\nfuenced these uses and evolutions of the term. The monks viewed simony as a form\r\n\r\nof real heresy, following the point of view of Umberto di Silva Candida, which they\r\nbelieved afected the faithful and required purifcation through Settimo’s „ordeal“ by\r\nfre. In contrast, the episcopate found it difcult to rely solely on the term simony and\r\nsought alternative interpretations. Two clerics associated with the Marquis, who were\r\nclose to Mezzabarba, proposed a unique interpretation of simony, which involved the\r\nseparation of ofcium (ecclesiastical ofce) and benefcium (church benefce), allowing\r\nthe exchange of money for the purchase of benefces. Pier Damiani’s intervention in\r\nFlorence attempted to bridge these two perspectives. On the one hand, he sought to\r\nalign the bishop’s judgement with Roman norms, and on the other, he communicated\r\nhis interpretation of simony, which, although condemned, did not necessarily imply the\r\n\r\ninability to administer Grace. The fnal part of the paper analyses the later develop-\r\nments in this story, in particular by examining the three „Vitae“ of Giovanni Gualberto\r\n\r\ncomposed between 1090 and 1113. In these „Vitae“, the use of the term simony by those\r\n\r\nresponsible for preserving Gualbert’s memory becomes problematic. The radical inter-\r\npretation of the term caused a certain discomfort, and in the „Vitae“ we witness a loss of\r\n\r\nthe disruptive meaning that the word had acquired during the Mezzabarba accusation.